Jump to content

Talk:Super Saiyan: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Majinvegeta (talk | contribs)
Majinvegeta (talk | contribs)
Line 67: Line 67:


seeing the change to the fourth paragraph of text for this article, the dates for all official parts should be included, or an article should be made specifically for both the anime and the manga. this should be done to all information that changes between the anima and manga or the content is biase to one side of the story and not remaining neutral --[[User:Ditre|Ditre]] 02:26, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
seeing the change to the fourth paragraph of text for this article, the dates for all official parts should be included, or an article should be made specifically for both the anime and the manga. this should be done to all information that changes between the anima and manga or the content is biase to one side of the story and not remaining neutral --[[User:Ditre|Ditre]] 02:26, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
:I don't believe it's biase, because it is what it is. I included the discrepencies a while ago, but someone decided that it should be erased and changed to the 30 year period, which according to the manga and the corresponding episode, the 30 year period is inaccurate. Also we should note that the manga is the higest level of canon (I know that we aren't supposed to talk about canon and non-canon here, but I firmly believe that this conversation warrents a mention of it), and Toriyama had direct connection to the manga, as opposed to the movies where he did not. Both the manga and corresponding anime episode (DBZ episode 2) states that Planet Vegeta was destroyed roughly 3 years before Raditz's arrival on Earth. And most of the movies aren't even consistent with the timeline of Dragon Ball, therefore I believe that the anime ''series'' date and the manga date should be used as dates and time periods are quite often mixed and tweaked in the movies. --[[User:Majinvegeta|MajinVegeta]] 22:05, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
:I don't believe it's biase, because it is what it is. I included the discrepencies a while ago, but someone decided that it should be erased and changed to the 30 year period, which according to the manga and the corresponding episode, the 30 year period is inaccurate. Also we should note that the manga is the higest level of canon (I know that we aren't supposed to talk about canon and non-canon here, but I firmly believe that this conversation warrents a mention of it), and Toriyama had direct connection to the manga, as opposed to the movies where he did not. Both the manga and corresponding anime episode (DBZ episode 2) states that Planet Vegeta was destroyed roughly 3 years before Raditz's arrival on Earth. And most of the movies aren't even consistent with the timeline of Dragon Ball, therefore I believe that the anime ''series'' date and the manga date should be used as dates and time periods are quite often mixed and tweaked in the movies. And this goes for all the Dragon Ball related movies, not only the ones in question. --[[User:Majinvegeta|MajinVegeta]] 22:05, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:07, 7 June 2007

Template:WikiProject Dragon Ball

Archive
Archives
  1. Archive 1
  2. Archive 2
  3. Archive 3


Archived latest SSJ discussion

The talk page was getting overly too long. If you would like to continue past conversations or have something to discuss about the current article, please do so below. Thank you. Heat P 06:44, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Bebi Vegeta or Baby Vegeta?

Which one to use? I've always used Bebi, not Baby. Baby for the main article is understandable because that's what most English speaking people know him as, but not in descriptions because I thought we use Japanese names as much as we could. The reason why I bring this up is because I recently changed Baby to Bebi, but a user reverted. --Majinvegeta 01:31, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

I reverted your edit for consistancy reasons. If the main article is Baby, then the most obvious name to use in all other articles is Baby. We use Son Goku and Son Gohan over Goku and Gohan on all Dragon Ball pages; we use Kuririn over Krillin; and we use Muten-Rôshi over Master Roshi. // DecaimientoPoético 01:53, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
~.^ Well......Shouldn't the page name be changed, since "Baby" is not his name, it's "Bebi". If what you say is true, then we should change the page name to Bebi because it is his original Japanese name, my example extends to the name of the Goku article, being that his Japanese name IS indeed Son Goku. So shouldn't the page name be changed to Bebi if we use the Japanese names on all others? --Majinvegeta 15:57, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I'll leave the name-changing to the rest of the community. I don't care much for what we name the articles, though I wish we could decide on one single language to name the characters from. // DecaimientoPoético 16:13, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
It was decided by consensus that we move the page to Baby. If you want it moved back to Bebi, start another move discussion--$UIT 18:48, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
I didn't know that there was a consensus. Oh well, guess we could keep it the way it is, I just thought it was odd because every other article has the Japanese name. It's not really a big issue though. --Majinvegeta 23:31, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
If I recall correctly, we go by consistency, so we should use the japanese name, since FUNimation has a way of translating things so that the translation loses its meaning. I say we use Bebi. It'll cause less confusion between the kid vegeta we see in flashbacks in DBZ, and the possessed Vegeta we see in GT. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.183.44.106 (talk) 18:11, 6 May 2007 (UTC).

Kid Vegeta was never called Baby Vegeta.--$UIT 19:30, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe not, but atleast when someone sees "Bebi vegeta" they know its not Vegeta as a baby.71.183.44.106 20:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Bebi is just how the Japanese pronounce Baby (I think... correct me if I'm wrong).--$UIT 03:13, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Why is there a dicsussion on Bebi or Baby on the Super Saiyan talk page? Move it to Baby/Bebi's article. When the problem is fixed there then go to other articles and fix the same problem then. Thank you. Heat P 05:53, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
The reason it's here is because it is "Baby Vegeta" under the Super Saiyan 4 section. I changed it to Bebi, but Poetic Decay reverted. That's why it's here, but I agree, it should be on the Baby page. --Majinvegeta 06:47, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
So is it going to be Baby or Bebi? If it isnt going to be Bebi, can someone explain to me why? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.183.44.106 (talk) 00:34, 12 May 2007 (UTC).

LSSJ

Does anybody have an actual source on this? Whenever I ask, the most I'm usually told on other sites is that the Daiz' uses the phrase "Densetsu no Supa Saiya-jin" (Legendary Super Saiyan). So what I want to know is if anyone has that page from the sourcebook and can translate it, cuz that phrase gets used alot in movie 8 to describe what Broly is as an individual (as opposed to a specific description of a transformation). Likewise, unless the Daiz' says it, the bit about his speed is original research. Aside from dodging that one flurry from Piccolo and Goku, he basically takes everything else on the chin with a laugh, and pretty much clotheslines and ki blasts his way through the fight. Trunks is said to suffer speed loss when he fought Cell, and in the first half of the fight he looks a hell of a lot faster than most anything Broly did. I'd just like to see a source on that section. Onikage725 01:51, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Well I do not have the Dai books with me in Iraq but I do have them and Densetsu in japanese mean tradition, legend, or folklore. So in translation, Densetsu no Supa Saiya-jin is translated into two titles, Super Saiyan of Legend(or Folklore) or Legendary Super Saiyan. Same as the SNES japanese game titled Supa Saiya-jin Densetsu is Super Saiyan Legend. So the title basically Vegeta and Paragus gave Broly is indeed Legendary Super Saiyan. As for the speed thing it is a iffy iffy thing. Broly does seem to move slow but when compared to the others in the fight who as well is fighting at what seems a slow pace Broly does seem to move at a faster pace them the others. But I understand you on wanting a source and sorry, if I was home I could give it but as me being out here I can't at this time but since I have looked over the book many times I can say that Densetsu no Supa Saiya-jin can mean one of the two titles, the most common the Legendary Super Saiyan or Super Saiyan of Legend. But as Densetsu no is before Supa Saiya-jin in Broly's title as it is used after in the SNES game then it is more likely that when translated it english they used the Legendary Super Saiyan translation as the title.Heat P 03:49, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree on the translation, its the context I question- that of Broly's SSJ state being given its own name. The term used is the one they use in the movie for Broly. However, they are saying "he is the legendary Super Saiyan," rather than "he has transformed into the legendary Super Saiyan form," or something like that. And for speed, Broly's style seems more akin to Super 13 (and noone ever says he got faster). In fact, Broly seems noticeably faster in his combat style, or at least more agile, before hulking out (when he attacks Goku at night, early movie 10 if I recall though it has been awhile).
PS take care of yourself in Iraq. Are you in the service?

Onikage725 21:51, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I'm in the service and thanks of the support we need it. Back to the subject at hand. I think I get what you are saying. But as the movie goes on they begin to say that when Broly transforms into that state or form that is titled LSSJ now. But Broly all together is the Densetsu no Supa Saiyajin not just that bulky form. We as well as most people, Fan and official folks alike. just use the title for the bulked up form. To show the difference between the actual normal super saiyan forms, Grade 2 and 3 to the Bulk LSSJ from, the Dai book I believe number 7 gave that form the title but only to show the difference. Broly as a whole is the Legendary Super Saiyan.
Speed thing, as I said that is a iffy iffy thing because I will agree that it does look like he is slower but there are times in the movie where he seems very nimble and agile. But if you had a form that was imperveace to nearly any of you ememys attack would use speed to bet them or power? See Trunks' Grade 3 (USSJ) form was strong enough to hurt Cell so that is why Cell to advantage of the speed factor but when you can't be hurt by any of your enemys attack (hell he took a seemly Chou Kamehameha inches away at full power without finching) even their speed would not help the factor out as seen when Vegeta finally attacked Broly. He used speed but Broly was unaffected. So as for the speed issues that is a hard depate there. Heat P 02:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Agree Heat, I actually don't really recall any info on LSSJ's speed. I myself don't have Diazenshuus, but I have talked to other people who do. I think the info about his speed should be removed until we find a source. PS: Be careful In Iraq Heat, okay? If you ever just wanna chat one on one: thesuperelitesaiyan@zoomshare.com. :). Heck! If anyone wants to talk, it's my email. Take care! --MajinVegeta 22:28, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Maybe you should contact User:Julian Grybowski. He is part of the daizex.com site we've been using to cite most of our articles. Julian and VegettoEX are on Wikipedia already but VegettoEX hasn't been active here for quite some time. I believe he can be reached at VegettoEX@aol.com or through the forums on his site. -- bulletproof 3:16 22:46, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Source Change

I think it would be wise to change the source of Super Saiyan Transformations, Daizenshuu EX has several flaws that I can note. First off, they refer to Giji (False) Super Saiyan as "Quasi" Super Saiyan, refer to original Super Saiyan as SSJ1, and they use anime info, and don't go by the manga info for transformation. I am thinking about changing the source as soon as I find a good Super Saiyan guide. Opinions? --MajinVegeta 01:37, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Saiyanredhair.jpg

Image:Saiyanredhair.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:41, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

dates

seeing the change to the fourth paragraph of text for this article, the dates for all official parts should be included, or an article should be made specifically for both the anime and the manga. this should be done to all information that changes between the anima and manga or the content is biase to one side of the story and not remaining neutral --Ditre 02:26, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't believe it's biase, because it is what it is. I included the discrepencies a while ago, but someone decided that it should be erased and changed to the 30 year period, which according to the manga and the corresponding episode, the 30 year period is inaccurate. Also we should note that the manga is the higest level of canon (I know that we aren't supposed to talk about canon and non-canon here, but I firmly believe that this conversation warrents a mention of it), and Toriyama had direct connection to the manga, as opposed to the movies where he did not. Both the manga and corresponding anime episode (DBZ episode 2) states that Planet Vegeta was destroyed roughly 3 years before Raditz's arrival on Earth. And most of the movies aren't even consistent with the timeline of Dragon Ball, therefore I believe that the anime series date and the manga date should be used as dates and time periods are quite often mixed and tweaked in the movies. And this goes for all the Dragon Ball related movies, not only the ones in question. --MajinVegeta 22:05, 7 June 2007 (UTC)