This is an old revision of this page, as edited by AnmaFinotera (talk | contribs) at 01:05, 8 July 2008 (→Update: reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 01:05, 8 July 2008 by AnmaFinotera (talk | contribs) (→Update: reply)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) | Anime and manga: Dragon Ball Start‑class | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
.png)
 Archives | |||
| |||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
From Talk:Dragon Boy
The information I present in this article come from two sources: Toriyama's World website and an interview with Akira Toriyama about Dragon Ball where he mentions Dragon Boy as a "trial run" manga for the later series. Toriyama's World lists only two chapters completed, but the manga does not "end" and there may have been more chapters-- but I don't think so as it would have been at least listed in his one-shot compilation. So, I present that this information is close to correct but may have gaps and that if anyone knows better to please update it accordingly. JRP 16:43, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- For all intents and purposes Dragon Boy was finished. Most of the manga published in Fresh Jump are often yomikiri or one-shot mangas that serve to test the idea for a possible serialization. If a pilot is successful, it may be picked up for serialization in the Weekly Shonen Jump. If not, the author can simply end the story with another one-shot or two. Sometimes, the serialized version are drastically different from the pilots and don't follow the same continuity. Jonny2x4 03:57, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Money
They made over 3 billion what? US Dollars? Please make this clear.
Zeni -Dark Dragon Flame 10:24, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Other film
What about this one, from 1996? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jX38JOO1lTY Brutannica (talk) 08:01, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Here's the Wiki: Dragon Ball: The Magic Begins Brutannica (talk) 08:04, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Dragonball (2009) film
I really don't think adding a link to the Dragonball (film) article, when the Dragonball article redirects to the disambiguation page, should be considered controversial in the least. The movie is named "Dragonball". I'd understand if it had some sort of subtitle, like the other films, but the simple fact is that typing the name of the movie takes you to a disambiguation page that doesn't include the movie directly, and requires a minimum of three more clicks to reach.
I also highly object to arbitrarily issuing any sort of vandalism warnings simply for editing the page without first discussing it on the talk page. I have a registered account, and I meet the requirements to edit the page as outlined in the semi-protected template on the page.WtW-Suzaku (talk) 23:38, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- Please calm down. That warning was to let you know that discussion is preferred over any instance. Now regarding the film, why only Dragonball (film) and not the others? Just because of a redirect? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:43, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- Dragonball is the name of the film. The others have subtitles, for example, Dragon Ball Z: Super Android 13!. If one wants to view the Dragon Ball Z: Super Android 13! article, they will be taken directly to it, with no redirects or disambiguations involved. However, if someone wishes to go to the article for the film called Dragonball, they have to navigate additional links to get to the film, which is exceptionally ironic, as none of the other official Dragon Ball media is even actually spelled that way.
- In fact, considering that, it might be better to move Dragonball (film) to Dragonball and include a "Dragon Ball" redirects here. For other uses, see Dragon Ball (disambiguation). in the article.
- Also, I'm perfectly calm, and I'd like to (politely and calmly) let you know that you should exercise more caution before telling someone to "calm down", as it can actually upset or provoke someone who isn't upset, despite perceptions (which can easily be mistaken when interpreting only text). WtW-Suzaku (talk) 00:16, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- That hatlink is inappropriate, as this page is titled "Dragon Ball". You have good reasons for Dragonball (film) to be listed on the dab. Guess it can be re-added. I'll undo myself. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 00:23, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Peer Review Alert
I've nominated a related page, Dragon Ball (manga) for peer review, and would welcome constructive criticism. --- Krezos (talk) 20:47, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Merge
I have proposed that Dragon Ball (anime) be properly merged back here to Dragon Ball (manga). I can not see a single valid reason these two should be separated. They are not significantly different in terms of characters, story, etc, and their separation like this violates WP:MOS-AM. This article also needs a massive clean up and rewrite to bring it inline with the MoS. Thoughts? -- ] (] · ]) 02:45, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- The thing is this: the anime adaptation of this manga is split in Dragon Ball and Dragon Ball Z. The DB articles were structured this way because it is easier for the editors involved (and the readers). If we're merging on the grounds that the plot and characters are the same, then Dragon Ball Z must be merged, too. Merging only Dragon Ball (anime) seems wrong because the DB TV series only adapts roughly half of the manga (again, the other half is adapted as DBZ).--Nohansen (talk) 03:14, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- Also, let me add that the DB articles seem poorly organized. I don't see why Dragon Ball is a disambiguation page when all articles mentioned (expect one) are DB-related. Dragon Ball should be the main article, not Dragon Ball (franchise), with a hatnote pointing readers to Freescale DragonBall. That's what I think.--Nohansen (talk) 03:31, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- Believe me, I agree there. The DB articles are a mess. Every series has 2, if not 3 episode lists, the all have a lot of excessive OR and redundant stuff, etc. You are probably right, and Dragon Ball Z should be included (and maybe Dragon Ball GT?). I'd also support putting the merged form at Dragon Ball with the appropriate hat note.-- ] (] · ]) 03:40, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- Unlike DBZ, DBGT is a separate production not adapted from Toriyama's manga. So I don't think it should be merged here.--Nohansen (talk) 03:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
- I agree with the merger, the removal of the disambiguation page, hatnote proposal, and that "Dragon Ball" should be used over "Dragon Ball (franchise)". Wouldn't it be best if we combined the Dragon Ball manga and anime articles (except for Dragon Ball GT) to the franchise page? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 01:08, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- That sounds about right to me. :) -- ] (] · ]) 01:48, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Col, could you update those merge tags to reflect my idea? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:37, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- All done. I pointed the discussion here since its already on going. -- ] (] · ]) 02:42, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. You sure are quick to handle these things ;) Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:50, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Well, things have certainly changed since I last commented. I'm not sure about merging the franchise, manga, and two anime articles... mainly because it seems kinda messy in my mind, can't picture it. But if there's a clean, organized way of doing it, count with my vote.--Nohansen (talk) 03:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- I believe similar changes will happen to the Sailor Moon articles. If you ask me, this is the best thing we can accomplish now. If anything gets bloated, unmerging is always possible. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:05, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- I think it can be done, relatively easily actually. Most of the articles seem to repeat the same stuff in slightly different ways. The merged article will likely need a little clean up and trimming, though if merged carefully, it shouldn't be to bad. If I can, I may try working on a merged version in my user space, to help if consensus is a go. -- ] (] · ]) 03:10, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- So Dragon Ball (manga), Dragon Ball (anime), Dragon Ball Z and Dragon Ball (franchise) should be merged together, but Dragon Ball GT be kept seperate? I think Dragon Ball GT should be part of the merger. It is part of the series, although only supervised, not actually written, by Akira Toriyama. --- Krezos Farland (talk) 08:02, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- I agree, from what I've read on the series. While it isn't based on the manga specifically, I couldn't tell that it was significantly different either? -- ] (] · ]) 08:45, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- Think it's safe to say that Dragon Ball GT should be merged too. When you think about it, this series is just another continuation, and it's too short (shorter than the previous works). What do you say Collectonian? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:46, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
- I can really see both sides. I'm still leaning towards a merge, though, as it is a direction continuation, and really no different from, say, the Gunslinger Girl seasons, with the second one done by a totally different company. I'm just not seeing that much unique information that would cause a size issue at all. -- ] (] · ]) 01:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
DBGT is too much. At least the DB TV series and DBZ are directly adapted from Toriyama's manga. But GT is a different beast altogether, a spin-off, created by Toei. I don't think merging GT is necessary or beneficial.--Nohansen (talk) 13:40, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
- I support the merge. The DBGT article lacks production and reception section and need a nice clean up.--Tintor2 (talk) 16:28, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
- DBGT is not an entirely different story, it is a continuation of DBZ. Akira Toriyama actually sstated that he liked GT's story. --- Krezos Farland (talk) 16:42, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
- I support the Merge of Dragon Ball GT, however, I noticed from the history page that the DBZ article has useful information before you just tore it asunder (Even those that are SOURCED). Are you actually SETTING things up for a merge, hmm?? ZeroGiga (talk) 20:38, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
- I think that if they are to be merged, EVERYTHING has to be put into it. Every single one of the articles mentioned. But the problem is, the 2008 version of the Dragon ball Z page is just too short, and I think that if it is reverted back to an earlier, longer, 2007 version, it will be too long to merge...so, if we expand the articles, no, if we leave them too short, yes. Ironic, but necessary. domkippy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Domkippy (talk • contribs) 18:28, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Update
I've done the first merge, of franchise, followed by a ton of clean up. I removed a lot of unsourced claims and obvious OR/personal opinions. Meanwhile, anyone want to tackle cleaning up the {{Dragon Ball}} template and merging in the {{Dragon Ball characters}} template? -- ] (] · ]) 18:48, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
- Not sure what you mean. Redirect cleanup? Alas, I'm more worried about the histories of the pages. We'll need to request history merges after this is all done. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:53, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
- Redirect clean up, and merge in the character sections. It will no more later, as the ep lists are also cleaned up. Not sure on the best way to fix it though to match the new article structure, though maybe it should wait till all done. But something to think about either way, to fix the organization. Yeah, at least a merge of the franchise history would be good. -- ] (] · ]) 19:03, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Manga article merge done. I've moved this discussion here with a redirect on the old talk page that will come straight here to keep the convo going. The rest of the discussions from that talk page have been archived to a named archive linked to in the new archive box above. -- ] (] · ]) 01:05, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Categories: