Talk:9000 (number)

Goku's power level

Goku is Fighting Nappa during the saiyan saga and vegeta scans his powerlevel and it is indeed over 9000. Vegeta tells nappa this and he exclaims "over 9000!?!?!?"

I assume you've seen this?--67.168.68.91 05:36, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

That's YouTube. Can you give the episode title, or the volume and disc number? Anton Mravcek 18:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

if you think higher of Wikipedia than you do YouTube, this might be good enouhg for you: Dragon Ball Z (memes). Numerao 19:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Months later and still no one can give a title listed in List of Dragon Ball Z dubbed episodes. How do I know that YouTube clip isn't a fan production? Anton Mravcek 19:15, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

I can tell you for a fact it's either episode 21, "The Return of Goku," or episode 22, "Goku Strikes Back." Is that good enough? Jaimeastorga2000 04:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

That's almost good enough. If you're a fan of the show, you wouldn't mind watching those two episodes again and confirming one of them, would you? Please let us know so we can mention this in the article properly and put the vandalism of this page in the past. PrimeFan 22:39, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I think the 9000 vandals have exhausted our willingness to allow this ephemeral tidbit ("fancruft" according to some) into this article. It's embarrassing that a prestigious mathematician with Erdos number 1 has been drawn into such a menial revert duty. Anton Mravcek 18:45, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Allright, it happens in episode 21, "The Return of Goku." It happens after Goku is focusing his power so much rocks levitate off the ground. I just confirmed it. BTW, I am not really a fan of DBZ... I used to watch it when I was younger. XD Jaimeastorga2000 04:33, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, OK. That's good enough for me. If no one has any objections, I will add this tidbit to the article. PrimeFan 23:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

It could be written something like this: The number is also part of an internet meme, in which Nappa asks Vegeta about Goku's powerlevel, and it is shown to be 'over 9000'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.230.128.49 (talk) 18:48, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

case and point

It's a shame that wikipedia's concentration on dragon ball z has

and hybrid cars and corporate america AGH

What 9000?!

are we going to add this or not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.243.8.36 (talk) 06:32, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

L2ROMAN NUMERALS

You CAN'T (by law of roman numerals) have more than 4 of the same letter, clocks that you see that have IIII as 4... are because that clock maker was, quite frankly, a RETARD.

It is not true that romans used IV instead of IIII. IV are the first to letters of IUppiter's name, and therefore considered blasphemious to use. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.210.115.234 (talk) 16:14, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

OVER 9000

Are we going to add this or what?

This seems to check out with List of Dragon Ball Z dubbed episodes, so I guess we can't argue against adding it. Just make sure no one forgets this is Wikipedia and not a Dragon Ball Z fansite. Exclamations like "It's over 9000" don't belong except if they are direct quotes from the official episode. PrimeFan (talk) 22:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I came to Nine Thousand to actually find a link to the meme. It is by far notable enough to include, but there shouldn't be a war to do so. Maybe, under a micellaneous section, as stated above, put "9000 is also the number referenced in the internet meme featuring the Dragon Ball television series", and provide a link. --74.184.188.59 (talk) 21:04, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

This certainly far exceeds the necessary threshold for notability. I do not think it is unreasonable to add some sort of tasteful reference to the meme. It does not have to be a "fanboy pleaser" style reference, but there needs to be something. Jesterjester (talk) 04:46, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

can we keep it at this?

I just added "9001 - the first whole number that is over 9000". no need to change anything from here, this will keep the 4chan kids happy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trav1085 (talk • contribs) 16:34, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think we can use that. What happened to the ISO 9000/9001/9002 entries? — Arthur Rubin (talk) 17:31, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Pool's closed, Habbo Raid, mudkipz, Anonymous is Legion, etc.

This whole meme thing is stupid anyway. lol. 192.12.88.7 (talk) 21:28, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, but it's huge. 500000 google hits for "it's over 9000" with apostrophe and quotation marks. bigger than 90% of the obscura on wiki. Just cause its from the internet doesn't mean it isn't real. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.231.150.210 (talk) 07:54, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. It shoulds still be there, it isint mentioned any where else on wikipedia. Besides, what else is anyone going to search '9000' for? Mrpengo88 (talk) 01:51, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Over 9000 END OF STORY

We should keep over 9000 since ti is so big in popularity. do not delete it again 70.246.147.34 (talk) 01:52, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

It has been deleted again, and I will protect this article if it is reintroduced. Horologium (talk) 02:02, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

To 70.246.147.34: Just commanding other people to agree with your viewpoint is probably not the best way to find consensus. To Horologium: has consensus been reached yet? I see some requests here on the talk page, but no final consensus. Are you opposed to a solid, concise, encyclopedic reference? If so, please explain why. As far as I can tell, it meets notability requirements. I can understand that you don't want this to simply turn into an edit war, but let's at least have people's opinions out on the talk page. Calvinballing (talk) 04:50, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Over 9000, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 June 2#Over 9000 and Over nine thousand, and the log [1]. There are also two userspace pages about this meme User:Jeremjay24/Over nine thousand and User:Chzz/Over 9000, neither of which are ready for mainspace (the second is simply a userfied version of a deleted revision). Adding it to the article about the number is simply a way of trying to bypass the previous consensus. Horologium (talk) 21:02, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you that wikipedia does not need an article about the *meme* 'Over 9000'. However, if you want to know about the *number* 9000, the inclusion of this number in this widespread internet meme is one of the most significant things that has ever happened to the number 9000. Additionally, the meme is more widespread than at the time of that discussion. One of the participants stated that there were less than 9000 google hits for it. There are now more than half a million. (yes, I know, googling is not a standard of notability, but for illustrative purposes I think this points out that it is more popular now than it was then). The consensus that we do not need an article about the meme is only tangentially related to whether or not an inclusion is merited here. So again I ask, is there consensus that it ought not to appear in this article?Calvinballing (talk) 21:38, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Not without a reliable source indicating it's notability. (Ghits do not count toward notability). OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:52, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for commanding other people to agree with my viewpoint but there is really no reason that 'over 9,000' should not be included. G-hits may not count towards notability but you cannot just ignore about 9.74 million G-hits. They didn't just appear out of thin air you know. 70.246.147.34 (talk) 23:22, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

The search string "over 9000" (with the quotes) returns about 1.5 million hits, not all of which relate to the meme, and none of which are from reliable sources. Just because google finds something does not mean that it a) it is notable and b) the source that Google finds is reliable. Blogs, fan websites, anime discussion boards, YouTube, and other social networking sites are not reliable sources, and all of the hits I found for this meme are on such sites. Find a discussion of the meme in a newspaper, magazine, or reputable website, and then get back to us. Until then, there's no reason to push this meme on this article. Calvinballing asked if I am opposed to an encyclopedic listing; I'm not, but what I've seen so far doesn't qualify. Horologium (talk) 23:51, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I have found an article on 'Over 9,000!' on DragonBall Wiki and I think it seems reliable. Please let me know what you think. Here is the link:[[2]]