Talk:Super Saiyan

Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2

Archived

OK, I archived it. The discussions actively going on had nothing to do with the article. Don't bring them up again. Nemu 17:07, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

What the hell dude. DONT delete my last comment on there (in my "Broly is stronger than you guys think" thread) and then hide it and disable the editing tool so that I cant reply! This is pissing me off. I KNOW I am right! Jrapidfire 07:47, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

It was not deleted it was moved into Archive 2. If you feel so strongly about the subject. Just create a new one but make sure it has something to do with the article ok. Also stop getting upset, you are taking this WAY TOO personal. Trust me its not good, I know. So calm down and just restart the subject if you feel the need to.

Heat P 09:06, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean? It is relevant to the article. We ARE talking about Super Saiyans here are we not? Jrapidfire 08:17, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Read the fourth bullet in the first box and the full box right below it. Nemu 11:07, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Fixed Up descriptions

I fixed up the descriptions of the forms, they are fairly easy to read and are clear in the descriptions, hopefully you guys like them. Majinvegeta

Is "Quasi" the right word?

I've never heard of an incomplete Super Saiyan being referred to as "Quasi", Quasi is French and means "half", but still, is this word appropriate to use considering that Dragonball Z has nothing to do with the French language? Majinvegeta

Giji translates most commonly to quasi or psuedo from what I saw in the dictionaries. False was also there, but it was less common. Nemu 23:49, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

We should use A) The most popular name and B) Something English (or Japanese if it really needs to be) for it, not French.--KojiDude ^{(Contributions)} 03:30, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Giji means "false" just as much as it means "quasi" and "psuedo". Giji is used in the Daizenshuu. Giji fits with the theme. Giji has been in use for a long time on this article with no negative repercussions, and was only changed recently because one or two people are obssessed with changing it to what they want and revert any changes back to the original name. I believe we should stick with Giji, or, if "ZOMG WE HAVE TO USE ENGLISH B CUZ THIS IS ENGLISH WIKIPEDIA! ROFLMAO!!!!1!!11eleven" people really insist on it, "False".

Daishokaioshin 03:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree 100% with Dai. Giji is in the Daizenshuu, Giji is most commonly used, and Giji has been in use until now with no complaints.--KojiDude ^{(Contributions)} 03:48, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Agree!!!Heat P 09:10, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

It's not just about using English. It's also about making sense. Really I doubt people causally reading feel like looking up giji. That also brings up the fact that none of the other names take the Japanese names. Just because the name was never used in the movie, we should use one Japanese word out of eight others? I don't know if it's just me, but that looks silly. Until the article is named "sūpā saiyajin" leave it as an English word. I don't really care if it get put back as false, but don't change it back to giji because you find it to be more correct than some English word. Nemu 11:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Giji is used in the Daizenshuu. I'm pretty sure Quasi and Pseudo are fan-made terms. Giji Super Saiyan is also more commonly used than False (I don't think anybody really uses False anyway). I don't see any reason not to use it just because it's Japanese. This is the English Wikipedia, but if a Japanese word is used more tan the English one, what's the point in using the Eng one? Besides, it meantions all 3 other names as well.--KojiDude ^{(Contributions)} 22:52, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Densetsu no Sûpâ Saiyajin is also used by the Daizenshuu. Why don't we rename LSS to that? Because that translates to Legendary Super Saiyan? Giji isn't its own unique word with its own meaning that we're changing by translating it. It's a Japanese word that can mean quasi, pseudo, false or some other variants. To use it just because a few people think it's more proper to use it, doesn't mean we should. Why exactly is it more proper anyways? Nemu 22:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

And is false really the correct word to use? We're describing it as a half-way point or something that's sort of there. To say it's false is to say it's not really a Super Saiyan one bit. Quasi and pseudo fit more of the half-way/semi there part of it. Nemu 23:04, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks whoever changed it, It looks better and recognizable to a DBZ fan. If you really want to get technical with Purely English Names, I think the best description would be "incomplete Super Saiyan", because it is a half transformation, but the power is nowhere near half way (according to the Daizenshuu). But of course, "Incomplete Super Saiyan" is a name made by me. I agree, False isn't the right word to use. False in my best understanding, as pertaining to this means "imitation", and Giji Super SAiyan is not an imitation because it has only some of the characteristics of a true Super Saiyan. Majinvegeta

So, anyone plan on responding to me? Nemu 11:07, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

I'll respond Nemu. I see your point, but I don't think it should be used because it is not a common enough name, or at least not as common as Giji Super Saiyan. I think it is better if it is kept in the text or discriptions. The other names I have suggested changing too, but people have resorted, simply because the names I propose aren't common enough. I have suggested that "Full Power Super Saiyan" be changed to "Mastered Super Saiyan", because it explains the form entirely (controlled behavioral effects as well as total ki control), But as I said, the usage of that name is less common. I think we could debate your point, but then we would start debates about other anime names, one example of this already happening is the issue on the Naruto article about "Uzumaki Naruto," or "Naruto Uzumaki" (Personally I think it should've been changed to "Uzumaki Naruto", the official English mangas use the original Japanese context of the names, and those are the most accurate when it comes to canon references, but of course the lovely website called Wikipedia doesn't allow discussions of "canon" and "non-canon"). Majinvegeta

I really don't think the most common name applies to this. It's one word that means false. I really don't see why using giji makes it better. People use is because it sounds better. Just because it sounds better, doesn't mean it's correct. Also, your "Mastered Super Saiyan" idea doesn't apply. That's an original name. False, ect. aren't. They're just translations(something the people for giji don't seem to understand). Someone just answer, why only one Japanese name? Nemu

Stop obssessing over names.

Daishokaioshin 10:14, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I'm sick of people randomly leaving when they have decided that they've won without actually deciding anything. Nemu 13:43, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey just calm down. What they are trying to say is that Giji is the most commonly used name thats be used for years. Its used in nearly every offical and non offical sources on Super Saiyans world wide including France. We get where you are coming from but why change it to Quasi when its been that way all this time? I really think it should stay as it is now. Don't get heated over that man, don't let it get to you. Its just a name more commonly used for that form.

Heat P 04:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't think I'm acting angry or anything. I get sort of annoyed at how people can take a really long time to respond, but I'm certainly not fuming over it. So we're keeping it because fans like it? I doubt any real official source would use it. We should be appealing to the average reader and not some random fans. To leave it untranslated just because some people use it more seems silly. Nemu 23:50, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

It is in many offical places that mention that so call form. Plus it is used in the Diazenshuu with is offical material for Dragonball in Japan but i see what you mean about the translation problem since everything else has been translated. But until a english translation of the word comes just keep it for now. Because that french translation just doesn't go right. I go see if there is a true translation and i let you guys know and see what you say then but now let it stay. Thats cool? However when i hopefully find it and it does come out to mean as many said as Giji meaning false then its translated into what it says in the article, a False Super Saiyan. Heat P 16:22, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Well I Googled the word and I came up with so real interesting results, the word Giji has quite a few meanings when i transtaled it into English and believe it or not all of you guys and gals seem to be right but to some extent you are wrong too. Here's how. Giji means suspected (pref), quasi-, pseudo-, sham, and false from Japanese to English, and it also means character of questionable form and means questionable word(not that word but the meaning of other words). So Quasi Super Saiyan, False Super Saiyan, and Pseudo Super Saiyan all seem right when at first, however checking out the other words, I came up with some different results. False from English to Japanese means ese. So False Super Saiyan seems to be the wrong translation for that. Quasi a Italian word, not french word was put into English and means almost or nearly. So in Italy Quasi Super Saiyan is right but not in America. Pseudo, a Croatian word means bogus. So Pseudo Super Saiyan is close in Croatian but not in the English. So in reality Giji truly translated into English only means Suspected and Sham. However the prefered uses of Giji is Suspected. So in reality the translation for Giji Supa Saiyaijn is Suspected Super Saiyan. Does make more sense. If you wanna check it out yourselves Google the words as Giji, Translation togther and many sites will come up, but check out Eudict.com and you get translations I have explained. hope that help you out Nemu?Heat P 07:11, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

You did your reasoning and research somewhat wrong. Giji means all of those things. None of them is more correct or wrong than each other. Different words will mean different things. Some will translate into the same words. That doesn't make those any less correct. Also quasi has a Latin origin. Even if it was of Italian origin, it was adopted into the English language. That means it's a fully valid word. It’s the same with pseudo; it comes from a Greek word (pseudein). I am not an expert in language, but I'm pretty sure I'm correct. Nemu 11:11, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I did my research on a Tranlation site. A legit translation site. go check it out. So in a more common translation for the word giji the word suspected (again a more common translation) is a more buyable translation for it not quasi or pseudo despite quasi coming real close and pseudo meaning bogus in the english language. I gave you that site to check out. Did you or you wanna put you opinion on my research saying its wrong. yes giji means all those things as I said before but when i translated those word into english the other words came up with other meanings in the english language and i also translated them into japanese with the some of the same results. So despite the true origins for those word Quasi and being adopted by the english language, so you say. The word giji is more commomly translated to the words suspected and sham. Where did you translate the word? also i tried to translate the words Quasi from english to japanese and you know what? it said that word can not be found in the english language to translate. But Pseudo come up as giji, so i will give you that. So you say Quasi is vaild? maybe but as of the english, i shall repeat it to ENGLISH language giji is again more commomly translated into suspected and sham, maybe even pseudo but not Quasi as you would like to use.Heat P 12:01, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

But I will say this one more time, all those word are under Giji. However being this the English version of Wikipedia we need to use English wording, not the original Greek, not the original Latin, not Italian, not Croarian, not French, English translation and/or the original language wording that it came from, as seen in Giji being used in the article to title that form. So Giji is translated in English as False,Suspected,Sham, and Pseudo(I still do not think it should be used) and one of those names as false was used to title that form of Super Saiyan should be the one used as the translation.Heat P 12:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Did you use a random site like Babel fish that has very bad translations or some decent to good dictionary sites? I looked at around five of those a while back and most gave psuedo, quasi and false. I just think as long as an actual English word is chosen, it's fine. Mixing English and Japanese in the name (it should be either "Giji Sûpâ Saiyajin" or "whatever Super Saiyan", not a mix) and picking it just because fans think it sounds cool is stupid. Nemu 18:57, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Now i finally see what you mean. Instead of it being named Giji Super Saiyan it needs that english translation instead of what it says now? Got you. Well i do agree on that. But the Site I went to is called www.Eudict.com. Thats where i did the translation. I do disagree on using those two words. I say it has to be a more common english word. Not a word people that come to this site have to look up to figure out the meaning. But I do agree if it needs to be translated, that does need to be fixed. That japanese/english mix is not the right way. But until everyone can come to an agreement it seems it will say the way it is, or there will be a debate again and someone again getting threaten to get banded of the site. Heat P 10:25, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I have a question. Did Movie 4 come out before Goku did the actual Super Saiyan transformation in the manga or after? We all know that it came out before the anime version, but if it came out before the manga then it may help with the discussion you guys are having about the why the translation of the word giji. I mean if it came before then false is not the word to use since the movie came first, but if it came after then false maybe the word to use. SSD4

The movie Super Saiyajin Goku came out in March 19 1991. Manga volume 27 title Legendary Super Saiyajin came out in August 1991. But what you mean?Heat P 17:53, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

You said the movie came 1st. So it means false should not be used as it is now in the article next to giji super saiyan despite being one of the translated words. I agree with you and Nemu that either suspected or quasi or even pseudo should be used. If the movie came first then it should be believe that many fans thought the giji was the first real SS formed used until volume 27 came out where the author fix that problem. Despite it being a movie its not fake or is it false. It was suspected to be super saiyan at 1st until the real super saiyan came. Then it showed it to be a halfway point. So as i said you and Nemu are right. I say move false and put one or both the other translations on the article next to Giji Supa Saiyajin.SSD4

Ok so I wanna ask my fellow Dragonball Fans like myself a question. We have the translated words for Giji. So I ask you guys and gals do we keep it as such or go on and come to an agreement on which word to translate for the title of the GSSJ form? Should we keep it Giji Super Saiyan with False Super Saiyan translated in the desciption paragraph or title it with such translations as False SSJ, Suspected SSJ, Quasi SSJ, Pseudo SSJ, or "Questionable Form" SSJ or Questionable SSJ Form (Giji also means questionable form). Just wondering what you guys and gals think? Heat P 19:48, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

If you did change that Nemu I think I can live with that. Thats good we got a translation on the word and you got the other translated name along side it so people can understand what it means. Good job if it was you Nemu. Heat P 03:24, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Good Job Guys

I like the way this article is turning out, it is more sophisticated and detailed then the older one and it is highly accurate in descriptions. And even the original names of the forms are included in the text. Please continue with the cleanups and give yourselves a pat on the back! :) Majinvegeta

In popular culture section

Should we make one? It has been made fun of in various parodies. So far I can recall it being made fun of on Codename: Kids Next Door(Some episode, forget the deatails), Bobobo-bo Bo-bobo(Both in a special chapter and in the series in general), Neko Majin Z(obvious) and on a Saturday Night Live skit. Can anyone else remember some others? Should we also mention the story or whatever the Super Saiyan was based of off somewhere(opening or something)? Nemu 22:07, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeah, if we can find sources, maybe we should mention Super Sonic and I think a couple of other game series. We'll need definite sources seeing as they could just be based off of the folk tale or whater turning gold comes from(I think it's some sort of Japanese/Chinese folk tale or something). Nemu 22:11, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I can't find a source at the moment, but I thought I once read Trey Parker and Matt Stone say the scene in South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut where Cartman shorts out his V chip was a parody of Super Saiyans. Electricity flies around him, his hair stands on end, and as he shouts off swear-words he fires off Dragon Ball-esque energy attacks. Did Megas XLR ever do one? THey parodied just about everything else. Onikage725 01:55, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

FPSSJ

A note on the recent edit/revert. While Im inclined to agree that others mastered the form inthe next saga, nothing was really said on it in the manga or anime. In fact the form itself isnt really a new form. It was a certain level of mastery over the base SSJ form (as opposed to 2nd/3rd grade), and was only labeled in the Daizenshuu. So, given the lack of specific information, adding other characters would count as original research. Onikage725

Onio

Why include Onio? You reliaze it is just a self-parody. You won't find Onio in the manga of Dragonball Z or in the anime. Let's just stick to dragonball z and dragonball GT. What is next other super saiyan parodys will be included like No.4 from Kids Next Door and Bo-bobo?

Stop deleting it, it'll get you blocked, and it was already decided that we list Onio, okay?--SUIT 05:03, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Unlike those other parodies, Onio is a Saiyan. Neko Majin may be a parody, but it's by Akira Toriyama and the character is a Super Saiyan. Onikage725 21:18, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I argee. Being a Saiyan, Super Saiyan and a Akira Toriyama created character on a self parody created by AT, Onio is part of this article. Don't bring Bo-bobo or KND on this. They are created by different people and studios as well as THEY ARE NOT SAIYANS.Heat P 09:03, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. He is not in the manga or in the anime. Its just a joke since fat saiyans really can't go super saiyan in the manga and anime. Onio shouldn't be included. He also has a saiyan wife and there were no surviving female saiyans after Planet Vegeta was destroyed. The article is about real saiyans not fake ones.

What does the articles say that Onio is in? Saiyan and Super Saiyan. And if you wanna talk about real saiyans then Broly doesn't need to be here. In the Saiyan article Broly, Paragus, Tullece, And every saiyan in Bardock's special, except Bardock should not be in that article. As they are not in the actual anime or manga, but they are. Joke or not he is a Saiyan created by Akria Toriyama that is in a manga. These Saiyan articles is not direct articles on Dragonball despite them talking about Dragonball characters. Those are other articles. This and the other Saiyan article are articles directly about Saiyans. If the articles directly said something like Saiyans of Dragonball then thats a different story. But they say Saiyan and Super Saiyan. Leave it at that. Heat P 10:37, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

It should be left with the dragonball z continuity. After all you won't find neko majin Z thats been translated in your local store. We should stick to those who did become super saiyans in the manga, anime, and dbz movies. Next thing you know you would probably but Broly as a giji super saiyan since he looks like one in movie 7. Broly is more canon than Onio. Just leave Onio in the Neko Majin Z article not the super saiyan article. You won't find Onio in Budokia Tenkaichi 2 why? Because he is a parody not a character that is actually in the dragonball Z series.

We are not to discuss canonicity or keep or eliminate information based on canonicity within or for articles. Broly isn't "more canon" than Onio. He is completely and utterly non-canon. But that doesn't have any impact on whether he is included in this article or not. He is a Super Saiyan. He is thus included. Onio is a Super Saiyan. He is thus included. You thinking we "should" do something doesn't have any bearing on what we WILL do. We're including Onio. Please stop vandalizing the article by removing valid information.

Daishokaioshin 22:03, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

In response to the text you added: Videogames are as far from canon as you can get. Nothing that occurs within a videogame like Budokai Tenkaichi 2 or any other has anything to do with the actual series, either manga or anime. They have "what-if" storylines in which Zarbon turns against Freeza, and Raditz gets amnesia. So making an argument against including a "non-canon" Saiyajin by using a non-canon medium is inherently flawed. Also, there are a lot of characters that weren't in Dragon Ball Z: Budokai Tenkaichi 2. That doesn't mean they have any less or greater right to be included in articles. Brolli wasn't included in Dragon Ball Z: Budokai or its sequel, Budokai 2. Does that mean he shouldn't be included in this article? A character's presence or lack thereof within a videogame does not impact this article in any way, shape, or form.

Daishokaioshin 03:05, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I argee with Dai and your statement about Video games. You need to do your research because despite the Neko Majin characters not present in US Dragonball game because the manga hasn't been republished here, they have be present and in some cases playable characters in some japanese dragonball games such as Japan's Budokai 3.

Now you Broly GSSJ statement is wrong and has been discussed many times. The color he has while in SSJ form is because of the device Paragus had on his son which affect his control of his powers, which still had a color affect on Broly in his fully LSS transformed state. OH ya since you wanna bring games in this, When Broly is shown in his SSJ form in Budokai Tenkaichi 2 what does he look like, what form is he in, and what is its color? The same form with the same color as the one you wanna call GSSJ. So by BT2 and other real facts about Broly, that form is a SSJ1 form not GSSJ.

Do you read the archives up top. All this has been discussed, debate, and agreed appone. Onio stays because and again he is a Akira Toriyama Super Saiyan character. This is a article on Super Saiyan characters, not a article on the manga or anime of Dragonball. Onio is a SSJ. Broly is a full SSJ in movie 7 not giji. read and research please, read and research.Heat P 09:47, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Saiyans and super saiyans comes from the dragonball z series. You shouldn't include saiyans from works outside of the dragonball continuity. Onio doesn't fit in there anyways. There are other saiyan parodys that is not included. In movie 7 when Broly goes "SSJ" his hair isn't yellow. The movie doesn't explain why Broly hair is different when he is a "SSJ". Just because Onio is created by AT doesn't mean he should be listed. Well at least mention that Onio is just a sayian parody and does not exist in the dragonball Z continutiy is only in the magna parody of dragonball z. You are giving mix messages about who can become super saiyan when including Onio.

Stop going off topic about Broly (his hair was like that because of the device on his head, if you read the Broly article, you'd know that, and it's moie 8, not 7). And Onio, is a character made by Toriyama, so regardless, he's an official saiyan.--SUIT 03:31, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Onio is an unofficial saiyan. What made you change your minds anyways? You mispell movie by the way. You guys use to agree that it is irreverent to add Onio. Super Saiyans do exist outside of Neko Majin Z as well. Onio is only a joke thats all. Lets not go outside of the dragonball continuity. It wouldn't hurt to not include Onio. Theres already an article about Neko Majin Z anyways.

Onio is a saiyan. He is stated to be a saiyan in a manga by AT. No other parody has ever had one of the charaters call themselves saiyans. This is not limited to Dragon Ball. You should realize this by now. Nemu 04:43, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about calling Broly's 1st movie movie 7. Thats on me. My bad Suit. Now to the guy that as no IP. You seem to have you mind made up. However the rest of us discussing this sees Onio as a Saiyan that can and is included in the article. So I got a Question to you? How is Onio a unofficial saiyan? Like I closely said earlier up top if you wanna call him unofficial, false, fake, or a joke than all other saiyans that appear in movies and in Bardock's special other than Bardock himself should not be including in any article that involves saiyans. But they are. You keep trying to say things that just doesn't make sense. And despite again it being a joke it is part of Dragonball believe it or not. If it is not than tell us why AT included Goku, Vegeta and Buu in that manga? I see if he put those three in it that in itself makes it part of the Dragonball community.Heat P 19:13, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Also Onio is linked to Neko Majin page. If people wanna know more about him all they need to do is click on his name and it will go the Neko Majin's page and explain there. We do not need to put the parody or not part of dragonball z on this page. It explains all about him on Neko Majin's page. So it will not hurt to leave him in the article.Heat P 19:19, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

What I meant about Neko Majin being part of Dragonball community is despite it not being canon as some people feel GT is non canon as well as the movies, it involves Dragonball characters. So Neko Majin and NMZ are similiar to GT and the movies but manga wise. So even though it's a non canon manga it is part of the Dragonball community just as GT, the movies and even the Dr. Slump manga is.Heat P 19:35, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Onio shouldn't count as a super saiyan. It just doesn't seem to fit in. Does it directly say Onio is a saiyan or is implied?

Yes it does state and implies he is a Saiyan in the Neko Majin Z manga he appears in. I dont know the manga number off the top of my head. As well as Onio says he is a Super Saiyan. Also I wont edit it but while Googling the net I found out that it's possible that Onio's Saiyan wife was name Honey but I am not saying it for sure because i don't really believe myself. It my just be the common nickname a husband or wife gives to their spouse. Just something I thought I should mention. Does anyone really know her name by any chance? Heat P 05:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

True SSJ Form

I had heard once that because all the Saiyan characters in DBZ learned how to become Super Saiyans, that the legend about being a Super Saiyan was really talking about the fourth form seen in GT, but I didn't see anything about that in the article. Is it just a rumor? Gladrius 15:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

That's fan-theory and speculation. The legend was just a legend. It may have said that a Super Saiyan appears once every however many years, but since there was only ONE Super Saiyan prior to that, how would anyone know if there could be more than one? And what happens in Dragon Ball Z has nothing to do with Dragon Ball GT whatsoever. They are two seperate series. SSJ4 is something made up for GT and doesn't exist within the continuity of Dragon Ball Z.

Daishokaioshin 19:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the top part of what you said Daikaioshin, it is just a legend but how can you sit here and say that Dragonball GT has nothing to do with Dragonball Z whatsoever? Is Dragonball GT a anime spinoff of Dragonball Z? It's a series that takes place 10 years after Z, that has all to do with the stories Dragonball and Z gave us, right? Do not say its non canon either, we can not talk about fictional canonical here. If it is or isn't has no relevents here. Do not give a Original Reseach statement. The whatsoever part of your statement is your opinion. Yes it is. Argue if you want but do not say "And what happens in Dragon Ball Z has nothing to do with Dragon Ball GT whatsoever". It does. SSD4

You shouldn't say dragonball GT is not canon after letting Onio on the super saiyan list.

I didn't say it was non-canon. I said absolutely NOTHING about canonicity. I said they were two seperate series. And I can provide any opinions I feel like on the talk page. I just can't introduce such into the ARTICLE ITSELF. Super Saiyajin 4 does not appear in Dragon Ball Z. It does NOT EXIST in Dragon Ball Z. The highest Super Saiyajin stage seen is SSJ3, with a brief mention of an "SSJ Oozaru". As for GT, countless things that happen in DBZ, even if they are important plot points, are blatantly ignored. GT is not DBZ. It is a seperate series. If you feel this is original research, that's nice, but I couldn't care less. I will say whatever I wish to, whether original research or not, and unless I introduce it into the article itself, you have absolutely NO justification for throwing rules at me. Try using that lump of fat in your head called a brain before talking again, hmm? :)

Daishokaioshin 07:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

"Remember that article talk pages are provided to coordinate the article's improvement, not for engaging in discussion for discussion's sake." That includes opinions, personal outlashes, Original Research statement, and personal attacks but you seem to ignore the rule Wikipedia put on here just to put you SO-CALLED facts on this like you done may times before. This is not a discussion forum, It doesnt help fix or enhance the article. You have a nack for doing things like that i see. You need to read the rules and regulations on talk pages before something is done about it. This "If you feel this is original research, that's nice, but I couldn't care less. I will say whatever I wish to, whether original research or not, and unless I introduce it into the article itself, you have absolutely NO justification for throwing rules at me. Try using that lump of fat in your head called a brain before talking again, hmm? :)" statement is a prime example of how childish this 24 year old is. I have every RIGHT to throw a rule at you when you clearly break them. Nothing personal from or for me, it just business.

Now despite Dragonball GT being a so call seperate series it then dragonball Z it has just as much to do with Dragonball as anything in this encyclopedia that has Dragonball characters in it. You can't say something like GT has nothing to do with Z when it clearly does. Canon or not it is a anime spinoff of the orignal series of Dragonball and Z anime. Also what facts do toei clearly leave out or put in? The fusion of Gogeta. The black star balls? what?

When it comes to the legend NO there is no real truth to SS4 being the real super saiyan of legend. Only small clues but no truth to them. This is like any other legend. It's probably based on a one time event in Saiyan history. No one knows what the 1st Super Sayian looked like so no one knows the real truth behind the legend. So maybe for ANIME purposes SS4 could be or SS3? Maybe the Golden Oozaru is it? Or just the normal SSJ is the true SSJ of legend? No one on this side of the world knows the truth. SSD4

Dragonball GT is a sequel to Dragonball Z not spinoff. Broly is the Legendary Super Saiyan according to Movie 8.

Spinoff, sequel same difference. Broly is the so called Super Saiyan of legend in the movies. No i am not saying non canon or not. Just movies are not part of the actual series, it's just part of the DBZ contiunity. So again no one knows what the original SSJ looked like so no one can say if Broly is or Goku is. Goku in the anime in consider the legendary super saiyan, movie wise its Broly but no one knows for sure. SSD4

Okay. Look. Your opinion is that Dragon Ball GT is perfect, there's no incongruities, and you are completely justified in attacking me and throwing rules at me when I did nothing wrong. You have introduced your opinion into a talk page. You are guilty of what you just accused me of. Oh no. OR MAYBE you don't know what the hell you're talking about. You say I have done things "many times before" and "You have a nack for doing things like that i see." have no basis in reality, as you would know if you had actually observed things I have said in the past. I have attempted to get people NOT to treat Wikipedia as a forum, as you would know if you did ANY research whatsoever before making claims about people and what they "have a nack for". I did not launch any personal attacks. I recommended you use your brain before speaking, which you clearly have not. A brain is made of fat. I said to use the lump of fat in your head called a brain. How is that a personal attack? How is ANYTHING I said a personal attack? You calling me "childish" is the attack. You need to stop commenting on contributors and start commenting on the article. I have not introduced any original research or specualtion. You put words in my mouth with the canonicity thing, and you're putting words in my mouth further with all the crap you just said before.

Dragon Ball GT is NOT Dragon Ball Z. If Dragon Ball GT was Dragon Ball Z it would be called Dragon Ball Z and not Dragon Ball GT. It. Is. Commmon. Sense. Something you seem to have a distinct lack of. Stop going after me for your dillusions of rule breaking and start contributing to the article instead of being a dipwad. (Note, I'm not saying you ARE a dipwad, I am saying DON'T BE ONE as your commentary is dangerously close to making you seem like one).

Super Saiyajin 4 does NOT APPEAR IN DRAGON BALL Z. IT WAS CREATED FOR DRAGON BALL GT. Therefore, discussion in Dragon Ball Z about the Legendary Super Saiyajin, who was a Super Saiyajin Oozaru, could not have been talking about Super Saiyajin 4, because it is never shown or discussed or even hinted at in any way in Dragon Ball Z'. That is ALL I said. I answered the question of the person who asked it, which was only vaguely related to the article to begin with. If you want to tell people not to use Wikipedia as a forum, tell the first person, because I am NOT the one who started this rant about rule breaking, original research, and similar bullshit.

If it is related to the discussion, has evidence to support it, and a discussion is not being had about it which has nothing to do with the article, you have no right to pick apart what someone says and go, "OH FUCK! IT'S AN OPINION! RULES POLICE! RULES POLICE!" Mind your own business, and start being helpful, please.

Daishokaioshin 01:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

What in the heck is wrong with you people. SSD4 you should not accuse someone of rule breaking. You seem to have done it yourself. Dai, I know dogon well I can't lecture you on it because I done it in the past and you help me understand that it's wrong, but what do you think you are doing using PROFANITY!!!, turning it into a forum, and you are taking this WAY TOO PERSONAL!!! You need to stop that now. Both of you. So Dai before someone at Wikipedia see that statement you may need to erase it. The last one the starts "OH F___" and the BULLS___ one. Now the statement that SSD4 was talking about is that one that say Dai you imply that DBGT has nothing to do with DBZ? You maybe somewhat right in a way but that is an opinion. It is however not an original research SSD4. You should no better than to put that on here. I know I can't really lecture you like I said but its true. But SSD4 you are bringing up something that has nothing to do with this article on Super Saiyans. Yes it is something that can be talked about but on DBGT article or DBZ article. My God what are you two thinking putting personal attacks infront of everyone's eyes? I know I can't really talk as I said again but someone had to. Heat P 05:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh no. Profanity. It's the end of the world. Last time I checked there's no rule against the use of "profanity" if it is used sparingly, is not being used to attack anyone, and is not being used for the sake of using it. In this instance, I was using it to emphasize the ridiculousness of how this IP user that signs his posts with "SSD4" and doesn't log in (something you're not supposed to do, because it can be considered to be an attempt to falsely sign the name of someone else for one's own messages. GASP! A RULE BREAKAGE!) is freaking out over the fact that someone has an opinion he disagrees with. And that's what this is all really about. He, she, or it, is upset that someone would dare to imply anything negative about their precious Dragon Ball GT series, and thus has attempted to use the rules to attack me for a perceived slight when I said and did nothing wrong. It's not that I may have stated an opinion or not, it's that the anonymous user doesn't like my point of view and is thus acting poorly towards me. They need to grow up and learn that not everyone is going to agree with them on everything and being a spazz when someone disagrees does not help anything.

I propose that we terminate this conversation, as it has nothing to do with the article, was incredibly pointless, and doesn't contribute anything beneficial to anything in existence. Let's discuss the article, people. Not contributors. If you have any further comments or complaints, please take them to my talk page so I can ignore and delete them, because I don't care about comments and complaints, and am here to make Wikipedia a better place, not discuss pointless topics with people I don't know.

Daishokaioshin 05:35, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

1st off do not get on me ok. I feel you two are going way too far infront of eveyone that talks on this page. I do agree on termination of this talk but before that, go and look under Talk Page guildlines under Be polite (Wikipedia:Civility), Wikipedia:Assume good faith,Wikipedia:Profanity, and content page Should Wikipedia Use Profanity?. It is a violation of using profanity but I don't wanna argue over that. It's not the right thing to do. Remember good faith, no personal attacks and be polite. You do take things way too personal sometimes, but I agree on this "SSD4" person is using this as a way to attack you. Just be careful arguing with hardheaded fools. As for you "SSD4" Dai has all rights to put a opinion on here as long as Dai doesn't edit the article with opinion. Also its not a Original Reseach she said. Since you have no IP I have to tell you this here. If you have a issue with Dai, go to Dai's IP address and take it up with Dai there and not here. This article is about SSJ, not DBGT or DBZ or a depate or personal attack forum. So as of now this is the end of this edit summary discussion. Heat P 08:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok I can live with that Heat but I didn't attack Daikaioshin or I did not think it at the time. I disagreed with her statement on DBGT having nothing to do with DBZ. Which I am allowed to do right? Then Daikaioshin put that negative comment on here and I felt that Daikaioshin should not have done that and felt Daikaioshin attack me 1st. The Fatty thing statement is what I mean. I did not go at Daikaioshin or "attack her" as you say until that comment was made. Thats when I retaliated. I should not have done that but that's the only reason I said what I said. Oh I got a IP address. However I will end it as you suggested.

I still feel that since no one knows what the true 1st Super Saiyan really looked like, that it can't be said what the Super Saiyan true form looks like. I say if we go by the manga then Goku and the other Saiyans first form is the true Super Saiyan look. As far as the anime goes, which includes Dragonball GT, then the true Super Saiyan form is totally unknown now. SSJ, SSJ3, Golden Oozaru, SSJ4, LSSJ. No one knows.

SSD4 06:56, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, just to give this discussion my whole knowledge, the legend was that one day a Legendary Super Saiyan would rise again and usher in a new age. The LSSJ was Broly and by his birth an age of Super Saiyans arrived.

I'd say that LSSJ was the true form of Super Saiyan.

User:TheMadness 22:28, 9 Dec 2006 (GMT)

You guys are intitled to you opinion I guess. So I wanna know where the manga and true story comes in? You guys seem to be using movie character that have no existence in the manga or true anime storyline. Sure it says Legendary Super Saiyan Broly but using a character from a storyline that goes out of the true storyline doesn't seem right to put under what a true SSJ looks like. The same about the legend can be the said about Goku as in the anime he was the first to become a SSJ and the only one to hit every SSJ level other than that LSSJ only given to Broly in a movie not the anime. SSD4 03:16, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

"Latent Power Released" Gohan

I thought of something while reading the article. Would Gohan's "Latent Power Released" form -- the power form he used during the tail-end of the Majin Buu Saga where he was just as powerful as a Super Saiyan 2 but showed little-to-no aura and lacked a change of hair and eye color -- be considered part of the "Super Saiyan" thing? I read the semi-article in Gohan's article and it said anyone can undergo the "Latent Power Released" ritual, but it also said that "Gohan would go Super Saiyan but there would only be a very slight difference in appearence."(Or something to that degree.) ~ Joseph Collins (U)(T)(C) 10:40, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Son Gohan's ultimate form is no where near the power of a SSj2. While in his "ultimate" state, he was able to easily deal with Shin Boo, showing no use of effort whatsoever. And all attacks used for physical, meaning he had extremely great power. No SSj2 in the Boo saga could do that. Not Goku's SSj3. - Tyro_Kith