Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dragon Ball/Archive 6

message: Recentaly I visited a site called myfavorite games. This site may have many dragon Ball related images, but it also has something else: spyware. This site has enough spy ware to make your computer so slow it would take to an hour to type this sentence. So if you do not have reliable spyware protection, please do not go to myfavorite games, it may just mess up your computer. In fact it infected my computer so bad, I am typing this from school, and not from home as usual. This public service anouncement has been brought to you by DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 19:38, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Public Service Anouncement 

message: I was being bold and merged the Tenkaichi articles into a series page, as I did with the Saiyajin Zetsumetsu Keikaku articles. Many of you will be pissed with my actions, but I'm sure some other users with common sense will side with me. Now, I did mention at Talk:List of Dragon Ball video games that I'd be doing something to this effect, but the fact none of you noticed and commented isn't exactly my problem. If any of you have something to say in disagreement about this, please calmly and civily discuss it here or on the series page's talk page instead of reverting my edits and edit warring. // DecaimientoPoético 23:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In the Article Structure section, doesn't it say that all video games should have their own pages, or does this series not apply?--60 Delta 03:03, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It also suggests we make chapter/volume and episode pages, but that's just ludicris. Merging into a single article when possible is recommended. // DecaimientoPoético 18:35, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good job, having all these pages for each game was a bad idea. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 19:37, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I only wish I could do something about the character table, though. With as many characters as the series has seen, it's kind of hard to manage such a list in the article, and it has a severe toll on my computer. Still, on a whim I was gracious enough to keep the lists in the first place and took three hours of my time (not all in on shot, of course) to fix and adjust it. I'll work on a new format throughout the week if someone doesn't beat me to it. // DecaimientoPoético 02:00, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not pissed by your actions at all; even though I don't touch those articles, merging them is probably the best option. Also just having one  character list that shows which game the character was introduced in would probably be less stressful on your comp. --VorangorTheDemon 10:43, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Exactally, the Tenkaichi games are almost identical in terms of Gameplay, they don't have any significant roster changes, And the story is based off of an anime. The Tenkaichi Games are better merged because they can be merged and still have the same ammount of information than if there were seperate articles. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 19:41, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Why did you make a separate section when you could simply have replied above? Wikipedia is not a democracy. And it isn't really a vote, it's more or less a discussion, with people opposing and supporting something.--60 Delta 17:41, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The merging of the Tenkaichi articles 

message: Add * Support if you agree with this move. Add * Oppose if you disagree. Please provide a brief explanation, then sign your name. 16:52, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactally, the Tenkaichi games are almost identical in terms of Gameplay, they don't have any significant roster changes, And the story is based off of an anime. The Tenkaichi Games are better merged because they can be merged and still have the same ammount of information than if there were seperate articles. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 19:41, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vote on the merge

message: I am really annoyed by this move, and I think there are many others are like me. Sure there might be people out there that like it this new way, but I think you can see that at least 80% of people do not. So why keep it like this? You say that all the information is still there, yet when I try and find the individual page all I find is jumbled up information all around the place and did not find the information I needed. You have un-needingly turned 3 pages of information into 3 paragraphs. I think they deserve more than that, especially with information lost, I thought this was a site to get as much information as possible, not write as least as you can. I really cannot see why you changed it and kept it like this, I personally reckon that it was a pretty stupid move. I don't see why we have to put up with this because of you. You are the one that changed it, you. It isn't even democratic, sure we get to voice our opinion but there should be a poll done, because I am sure the majority would vote to change it back. I hope you see this, and I hope you reply, and I especially hope you change it back, otherwise you should be grateful for losing a lot of people.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brandox1 (talk • contribs) 13:53, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why did you make a separate section when you could simply have replied above? Wikipedia is not a democracy. And it isn't really a vote, it's more or less a discussion, with people opposing and supporting something.--60 Delta 17:41, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging of Tenkaichi Games 

message: I'm not sure if anyone brought this up before, but, as stated in the heading, Kuririn redirects to Krillin. Was there a discussion that suggested this? If so, the history for Krillin is messed up, a history merge should be done.--60 Delta 17:52, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since he just did a copy paste move, why not just revert both pages? I'm gonna go do that. (EDIT: Done.)Takuthehedgehog 18:09, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Kuririn]] redirects to [[Krillin]] 

message: I am sure most of us here have seen the terrible shape of the Dragon Ball Z Saga articles right? Well I DBZROCKS have proposed a change. This would include
* All Dragon Ball sagas would be merged into Dragon Ball (plot)
* Saiyan saga shortened drastically
* Namek Saga, Freeza saga and the Ginyu force saga unto  Freeza saga
* Android, Trunks, Imperfect/Perfect Cell sagas, Cell games saga into just Cell Saga
* Fusion, Tournament, And related sagas into just Buu Saga
* All Dragon Ball GT sagas into just Dragon Ball GT (plot)
* All sagas would have 3 or so paragraphs 
* Exept for filler sagas which would simply be merged into the respective anime pages
If you would like to help (please), please go to my sandbox. Thanks!! DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 22:41, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, it appears to be the work of newbies and sockpuppets that trash those pages. Why not have every single plot and saga in an article entitled Dragon Ball (narrative)? Seems more informative. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

text: I say no as well. start with 3 pages: Dragon Ball (plot), Dragon Ball Z (plot), and Dragon Ball GT (plot).  Then link to each saga individualy. We should concentrate effort on making the sagas more uniform and to the point.--Funkamatic (talk) 03:24, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Dark Warrior. However, I also wouldn't object to the important episodes getting their own articles, like the first episode of Dragon Ball, or another example, where Goku becomes a Super Saiyan; but that could be a nightmare if we decided to make an article for every episode, considering in all three Dragon Ball series combined, there's over six hundred of them. For other metaseries like Star Trek, some of their eps have individual pages, just to use an example, one of my fav eps: Past Prologue (DS9 episode). However, I also agree that it could become crufty pretty quick if they aren't maintained well, but then again, maybe distribution of information (as in having episode articles) could make the character articles easier to maintain. So instead of explaining the details of situations, we could just direct to an episode article, people can get the details that way. --VorangorTheDemon 16:35, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But they aren't that notable, why would we want individual episodes? DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 18:57, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

text: But what notable episodes are there? I can't think of any that are wildly referenced in pop culture or out of Dragon Ball. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 21:02, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

text: That information is in many articles already, I don't see how making an article about the episode would be needed. Example: Super Saiyan. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 21:39, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Articles about individual episodes will be hard to maintain within this project, not based on the episode's notability but because keeping them free of fancruft will prove a challenge. - Caribbean~H.Q. 21:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

text: All of that information and more is already in the Super Saiyan article. If its about the episode, why would we just have the details of the Super Saiyan transformation? DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 22:03, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

text: My point exactly. What about character and attack first appearences or noted fights? Like episode one of DBZ being noted for introducing Gohan to the series, or DBZ episode six being noted for Goku's death against Raditz and introducing Vegeta in the series? Perhaps Dragon Ball episode 13 being noted for introducing the Kamehameha? I'm simply saying since other series can get away with having entire articles for single eps (even completely unimportant eps), why can't we? Also instead of saying that "_____ was introduced early in the series" we could say "_____ was introduced in (DBZ episode whatever)" and have the link to the page. --VorangorTheDemon 22:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Episodes must contain sourced production and reception details in order to stand. There is no chance at all for this series, so please do not bother. TTN 22:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Calling all Project Members!!!!!! 

message: These Dragonball articles up for AFD are: Muten Roshi, Bulma and Kuririn. (Duane543 16:34, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  3 Dragonball articles up for AFD 

message: Hey there. I haven't edited Wikipedia lately. I need some help on some articles relating to all the articles. I could edit some of these pages, but I will need some advice on this problem. Any comments? Thanks. Greg Jones II 23:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Two comments: One, huh? and two, what is your problem exactally? DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 23:18, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My problems are that some articles are in an in-universe style and I want to cite references or sources per WP:CITE. Also, I need some help expanding articles if I can. Greg Jones II 23:22, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You claim to not have edited Wikipedia lately yet your contributions say otherwise. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:25, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, actually, I have been active. If that is the case, I apologize for a part of my comment above regarding my claim not to have edited Wikipedia lately. Greg Jones II 23:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No prob! If you haven't done so already, you may want to read this and this to know what's going on. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:33, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you very much for pointing out these facts, Lord Sesshomaru. I will go to these links you described above. Greg Jones II 23:50, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need some help 

message: Someone want to tell me what's been going on? Why has the MAIN article for DBZ been reduced to a stub and bloated with three lists? I know it needed more sources and some rewrites, but blanket deletion has NOT improved that article in any way. And lists aren't any better than plot summaries. Someone coming to Wikipedia to research DBZ can currently only find out what the opening/closing/insert songs where for the Japanese version and who the people who made or acted in the show are. Onikage725 23:46, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to let you know, Onikage725, see this and this to know what is going on. Thanks, Greg Jones II 11:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Main article

message: I looked over the Dragon Ball movie articles, and they are highly inconsistant with the rest of our coverage on Dragon Ball. To fix this I suggest the following changes.
* The undubbing of all of the Dragon Ball movie pages (Krillin --> Kuririn)
* Name changes of all dragon Ball movies to Dragon Ball Z movie 1 Dragon Ball Z movie 2 ect. This is because the japanese titles are too long.
* The changing of all Dragon Ball specials to Dragon Ball special 1, Dragon Ball special 2 ect.
* Having the English title on the bottom of the japanese title in the info box, so the english title is still part of the article.
Ok so put Support in bold or Oppose in bold if you disagree with this move along with your reason why (besides I don't like it). DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 22:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with your first point, but your second and third points are not good. Some people may not know what movies/specials are what by their number alone ("Dragon Ball Movie 8"). If you don't want to use a long Japanese title, then at least use a proper title that at least gives a hint of what the movie is about: the English title. "Dragon Ball Movie 6" or "The Return of Cooler"? Which one describes the movie the best? -- RattleMan 03:19, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Support, DBZROCKS, I think the Naruto articles do the same. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:13, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Oppose It's a dispute about whether to use the English names or not? It doesn't really matter. However, consistently refering to characters within English language articles by their Japanese names will confuse people unfamiliar with the subject material.--Marhawkman 14:51, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How exactally will it confuse them? DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 15:11, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

text: okay.... how and where?--Marhawkman (talk) 19:09, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Oppose Hi, according to the Official Guidelines that you just posted (Manual of Style: Japan-related articles), Japanese names and words should be written with their English equivalents (for example, Mount Fuji rather than Fuji-san). As a personal opinion, I'd love to change everything to its original Japanese name, but that's why the Japanese Wiki exists. Official English equivalents for DBZ names do exist, even if they're terrible, so they should be used. I agree with Marhawkman that people only familiar with the English anime would be confused by the Japanese names. --Egocentrism04 (talk) 17:35, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh, I see. I was confused because your original example (Krillin=>Kuririn) was an improper example. Anyway, WP: Tokusatsu follows the protocol that all names of techniques (such as the example you gave above, Rogafufuken) be translated into English. I don't know if WP: Anime has a similar policy, so I guess I vote for whatever the other anime pages do. --Egocentrism04 (talk) 14:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This project is part of WP:Anime and manga, and yes we are translating it into english. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 20:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dragon Ball Movies 

message: These are seriously out of hand. Each saga which is about 20 episodes has a 3 page summary! If we can merge the Saiyan Saga into three paragraphs, It think we can do the same for 3 small sagas. I suggest merging the Sagas with Dragon Ball GT. 
If you agree with the merge, put Suppport, Strong Support ect in bold along with a good reason why the Saga's should be merged. If you disagree, put disagree, strongly disagree, anti-support ect. in bold along with a good reason why they shouldn't be merged. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 22:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, there is not much on Dragon Ball GT right now, so I think it would be best merged. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 01:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, okay! {^_^} Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:09, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dragon Ball GT Sagas 

message: Ref: List of DBZ (dubbed) episodes
I am concerned about how the descriptions are worded and written. Many of the descriptions end in a "red herring" sort of manner which  seems irrelevant, due to the fact that it will inevitably be indicated in later episode descriptions. I believe it would make more sense to simply have proper descriptions. Thoughts? Kennedy (talk) 07:04, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubbed Episode Lists (esp. Dragon Ball Z) 

message: After perusing :Category:Lists of anime television series episodes, I noticed that the Dragon Ball, Z, and GT episode lists are separated by language, which is not necessary nor appropriate. See featured episode lists such as List of Naruto episodes (seasons 1-2) or List of YuYu Hakusho episodes (season 3), and the Japanese and English airing times are listed alongside each other, as well as both the English and Japanese titles. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 19:36, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: By all means, I support a rewrite. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 07:50, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Episode lists 

message: Not talking about the video games, but the world martial arts tournament.  It previously redirected to Papaya island on the Earth (Dragon Ball) page.  The tournament is one of the most important plot devices in the series and deserves it's own page.  I'm pretty new at this so the page needs some editing.  Also, if anyone feels as though it should be on another plot page, let's discuss it, but it definitely deserved more that hardly a mention on the Earth (Dragon Ball) page.  Also I think the page needs to be edited for more proper "In-Universe" lingo.  --Funkamatic (talk) 07:14, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tenkaichi Budokai page 

message: Does anyone have any suggestions to save this project? I seriously feel that it's doomed if we continue to edit with the priorities that we've set. I'll be blunt, I've been here for about a year and a half and the project has seriously gone downhill since then; well actually, it improved for a while, but then after it's improvement, it was hacked to pieces. I understand that several members are only editing as to follow the rules ("policies" and "guidelines"), however, most of the problems with this project stem from information that we all know exists, but is unavailable to cite (Like the Daizenshuu for example, which NO ONE has, or even Toriyama interviews). I purpose a new way of thinking: it's the lovely policy of WP:IAR, which is also a rule of Wikipedia. Thoughts? Suggestions? Is this the right course of action? If we continue on the path that we have set for ourselves, I will probably be leaving the project. There will be no way to save it; hell, we've tried to save it and we're no closer to that goal then we were six months ago, we've actually taken a step or two back. --VorangorTheDemon (talk) 12:01, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What's wrong with the project, exactly? I feel as if I missed something--C. ROSS 20:19, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Most of the articles have been hacked to pieces over the past seven or eight months. There are bearly any plot summaries (because they've been removed by certian members), or general information has been removed, and the most frustrating thing about it is that they remove it immediately, dubbing it WP:OR without even trying to find reference for the new information. The Dragon Ball Z main article was denied GA status primarily for the reason of people had removed the plot summary, calling it "fan cruft" and crap like that. The editing by remaining members here now is honestly getting rediculous. It's actually making the articles worse. I don't blame prominant members like Onikage, Heat, and SUIT leaving. They probably felt the same way I do right now, so they left knowing that it couldn't be fixed. --VorangorTheDemon (talk) 09:26, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Not a bad idea, go for it DBZROCKS. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 07:50, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Current Dragon Ball project: a hopeless cause?

message: For reference, I have placed merge tags on the various film articles. They do not seem to have the capability to become notable on their own, so one comprehensive List of Dragon Ball films seems like a better idea. TTN (talk) 20:53, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with TTN, a single article would be more informative, these movies simply do not have enough secondary information to stand on their own. Lets start a discussion for this. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 13:19, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: List of Dragon Ball films

message: Support I support this merge do to the Dragon Ball movie pages not really having enough information to stand on their own. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 13:19, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion 

message: I'd just like to inform members of this work group that per WP:FUTFILMS, Dragonball is shooting and therefore has its own article. I would like people then to try and track down redirects to Dragon Ball (franchise)#Live action film and correct them. Alientraveller (talk) 10:06, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I got some of the redirects but there may still be some lingering.  I also added some other links to the page (dragonball live action, ect.) I REALLY think we should start adding references from existing articles (and any new ones) to the new page when it's appropriate.--Funkamatic (talk) 03:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dragonball film now has its own article 

message: Yes right now many of you are going "No DBZROCKS, that's a terrible Idea it would be crufty and impossible to maintain". Well I have a plan that might allow this to go smoothly. Here goes:
*# Introduction- Introduce Chi as it appears in Dragon Ball and some of its aplications
*# Concept- Go into the concept such as what is chi, what does it do, what does it look like etc. 
*# Aplications- go into the aplications of Chi and discuss some of its more common uses (Bukujutsu would be a prime example). Also go into some of the more notable Chi techniques (Things like the Kamehameha and Genkai Dama, one time moves like Final Flash and Burning Attack would not be mentioned).
*# Power- Go into how Chi affects a beings level of power, Scouters would also be discussed 
*# In Popular culture- Go into how Chi as portrayied in Dragon Ball appears in other media.
Some other quick notes:
* I suggest that we do not create the page immediatally if this idea goes through, rather that we have it as a subpage so that it won't be so hard to edit with other edits from random IP's and people who are not familar with policy don't get to it immediatally. I am not suggesting that we hide it, just that we keep it on a subpage until it has reached a suitable point, like where most of the article is finished.
* There will be no power level list because that would just be CRUFT that would hamper the article.
Anyone agree with me here or am I crazy? DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 22:54, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm.  I like the idea that the page will be used by other franchises.  We may understand the concept from a Dragon Ball point, but it would only be appropriate to have Dragon Ball's Chi as a sub-header. I'm all for simply defining the concept in a short sentence and then making the Dragon ball subheading expanded and linked to by the rest of this project.--Funkamatic (talk) 22:30, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I created this exact page a long time ago, but it was merged into Dragon Ball. I am all for bringing it back, it would only improve this project.--VorangorTheDemon (talk) 13:46, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What would be the article's title? Chi (fiction)? Ki (Dragon Ball) wouldn't apply, I'm guessing. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:13, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No; if an article is made it would have to be at "ki". Nowhere in the entire anime do any of them ever say "chi" when referring to this concept. I can't vouch for the manga, though. -- RattleMan 03:58, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah but i think that DBZROCKS means that we make an article about chi in general and then have a dragon ball section in it.  I actually throw my vote for the ki (dragon ball) article.--Funkamatic (talk) 04:12, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The manga uses the term chi. I'd rather we vote for that. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 21:40, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In the fan-translated manga I have, it's referred to as both in different places. Fan-translation manga is unreliable in this aspect. I have no access to the original, untranslated manga, which is why I said I can't vouch for what it actually says in there. Are you looking at an untranslated manga? -- RattleMan 22:50, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, I actually own the Dragon Ball manga by Viz. In one instance during the battle between Son Goku and Piccolo Daimao for example, the demon king says chi. I'll see if I can find other pages. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 07:43, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I vouch for Sesshomaru.  I checked the manga and King Piccolo says "chi". I think wikipedia should have a all out chi page but perhaps there should be a stand-alone Chi (Dragon Ball) / Ki (Dragon Ball)article.--Funkamatic (talk) 01:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to disagree with this. Subs vary between translators, whether they're fan or officials, and the same goes for manga. Viz decided to translate it as chi while FUNimation translated it as ki in their subs on the anime. In reality, ki and chi are the same thing. But ki is the Japanese way of saying chi. So I'm 100 % against it for these reasons alone. And to be honest, I'm not a fan of Viz's translation of the manga, especially how they edited things out. And even the video games use the term ki also. (such as ki gauge). Some of you may not count the games as canon, because they're not, but the developers do use the anime/manga (mostly anime) for source material. Chi was only used in the english manga and nowhere else. Those are the facts I've layed down, since apparently, no one else knows any of this. --Ryu-chan (Talk | Contributions) 01:32, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that Ki should be the choice, that's how it's both said and spelled in Japanese. With Dragon Ball being a Japanese series, it only makes sense. If not, how about Energy (Dragon Ball)?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by VorangorTheDemon (talk • contribs) 12:56, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll go for Ki (Dragon Ball) or just Ki. Frankly I never even heard the word Chi before. But keeping the article as a sub would hinder its productivity. And I am also guessing that after a while, it would just be merged again like VorangorTheDemon said it was done before.   UzEE  (Talk • Contribs) 04:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chi article: Good Idea? 

message: I thought someone might be interested in knowing that another AF has arrived and its called FO. But I didnt want to jump to conclusions. Thats why I mentioned this here. Oh and the article is up for deletion.   UzEE  (Talk • Contribs) 21:13, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As "forum-y" as this topic is, thanks for notifying us of this article's creation. The article needs to be deleted, it's nothing more than another one of those psuedo Dragon Ball serieses that fanboys created in an attempt to revive the Dragon Ball franchise. Dragon Ball AF, Dragon Ball U, Dragon Ball X, Dragon Ball FO; they're all the same. --VorangorTheDemon (talk) 15:20, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I agree with VorangorTheDemon. delete it.--Funkamatic (talk) 07:11, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I did that already a couple of days ago, and reported the Vandal to ANI for HOAX. I think he also got indef block.   UzEE  (Talk • Contribs) 13:33, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Dragon Ball FO]]