Talk:Goku/Archive 3

Goku´s training

I think it could be good idea to put and explain shortly the training evolution that goku has, like for example with Muten Roshi, delivering milk crosing a waterfall, six bottles in 6 kilometers, plowing a land farm with the hands, swimming with sharks, etc, until the last training by himself when he is boxing with 2 tons rock in his arms and legs, and as Supersaiyan West Kaio change it to 10 tons each. This is only a suggestion. 88.149.103.132 19:44, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

This could be an article too. The training that Goku did: - With master Roshi: Goku carry a box of Milk in 6 km., running, crossing close to a waterfall, crossing a canon, escaping dinosaurs, the last Km. is going upstairs a montain. Second training was plowing a land with the hands until breakfast, then was learning math, language and general culture; then eat lunch and take a nap. Then construction work, then swimming 10 laps with sharks, and finally tie to a tree with a rope and dodge bees all this using a 20 kilos turtle shell.

-The second training with master Karin, climbing the Karin´s tower twice, learning to read and anticipate the movements in his attemp to drink the "sacred water" that was just plain water.

-The third Training after the fight with his granpa Gohan, Roshi send him to train by himself, he perfect his techniques, and eliminate his weakness by training his tail.

-after defeat King Piccolo, training with Kami and Mister Popo, learning how to sense Ki, not using his eyes and ears, but sensing and using instinct, training his lungs, cause oxigen in Kamis palace was thin due the altitude and training his strenght with a 20 kilos boots, 20 kilos wrist and 20 kilos t shirt.

-With north kaio learning the kaioken and the spirit bomb, dominating his speed and streng with the heavy clothes 100kilos in 10 g x earth g, his body weight in 10 g is aprox. 600 to 700 kilos + the heavy clothes 1 ton more.

-Training by himself in 100 g, with dumbells his body weigth is 6 to 7 tons.

-training unknow in planet yardrat, perfecting Supersaiyan form and learning instant transmision.

-training: sparring with Piccolo and Gohan.

-Training in the room of spirit and time, 40 g, temperature 40 degres celsius in day and - 40 in nigth, learning to control his supersaiyan strenght as same that his base form.

-Training as dead unknow, fighting the strongest dead fighters, learning the fusion technique, only eating and training. he could kick and punch fast with 10 tons in his whole body at his normal base and 40 tons as supersaiyan 1.

-Training 10 years after defeat majinn Buu, unknow.

-Training: Teaching and sparring with Ubb.this is the last training in DBZ. 157.157.89.71 11:11, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

This is what made the difference between Goku and others superheroes.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Pegasusriusenken (talk • contribs)

I don't think that's a good idea. Large lists won't improve this article--$UIT 17:43, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree with SUIT, but is good information, make me remember why i like Dragonball Ykkifenix 20:45, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

I also agree with SUIT, large lists and long explanations is what made this article so confusing to read and bungled in the first place. All of us have worked so hard to get this article to the point of being as short as it is, and with a character like Goku, just cutting it this short is a task all itself.--Majinvegeta 05:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Goku´s age

I believe that Goku meets Bulma when he is 11, then train with Muten Roshi 8 months, and fights the first tournament at 12. Ykkifenix 23:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Good observation, but there's no evidence for that theory. --Majinvegeta 05:10, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, there is: He clearly states that he is twelve years old at the tournament when asked about his age. –71.244.215.137 01:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but we don't know how long the training was. He may have been 12 since the beginning--$UIT 02:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

A note here for you, Goku can't actually count his age by then, I recall in the first volume of the Dragonball Manga he tells Bulma he is 14 or 12. I'm not sure on which. So we have no guarantee how old he could be. - Hycanithe

Of course we can. The Daizenshuu states that Kakarrot was born in 737 A.D. He entered the 21st Tenka-ichi Budokai on May 7, 750 A.D. Thus, he was approximately 13 (depending on what day he was born). The S 07:55, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Goku was 12 in the beginning of DragonBall, and 19 in the end, he was 24 in the beginning of DBZ, and 45 (i think) at the end of DBz and 55 at the start of GT and 155 (or maybe 156) on the last ep JCno1fan 11:10, 29 Aug 2007

All Techniques needed?

I was just wondering if this extended list of Techniques is actually needed. I mean, it's important to mention the Kamehameha and the Instant Movement, but are techniques like Flying really neccisary? I'm just thinking, and I don't really see the minor, common techniques as important. Perhaps Kamehameha, Instant Movement, Kaio Ken, Rock Scissors Paper, and Genkai Dama are all that this article needs. Suggestions? --Majinvegeta 05:23, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

To me is more neccesary the techniques list than the games list, i dont see that other superheroes have like goku a game list, i suggest we put it in the dragonball article because is not only goku that apear in the games, is all the characters, or make it one link to a another article with the game list explain a litle better like what years they come out, some secrets or tips and a short explanation. Ykkifenix 08:47, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Keep it just because everyone can fly doesn't mean its not notable. DBZROCKS 22:05, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

quick question

What does the scouter say about his power level?

Sigh.. it's over 9000. Now discuss the article please--$UIT 19:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually its over 8000 :p

Silly Saban. Onikage725 13:20, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

The new image

Okay, he has wings in this one. How come we never have a "normal" image? One where he isn't dead or have wings?--$UIT 18:04, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Discussion continued on WP:DBZ. ~I'm anonymous

See New goku image uploaded below. Lord Sesshomaru

Move to Goku.

Naming conventions say to use the most common official English name. On top of that, "Dragon Ball" Goku -Son gets more hits than "Dragon Ball" "Son Goku", roughly 900,000. Being closer to the original title certainly does not make it the right title for English readers. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:39, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

No, because the names are not exclusive to the Funimation spellings. There is the Harmony Gold spelling and the Ocean spelling, therefore, many ages ago, it was decided to use the Japanese names, because those are the original and can't be disputed with. The same thing has been proposed on the Freeza Saga article, I assume you picked this discussion up from there? --MajinVegeta 09:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

You can't just decide to overlook naming conventions. Is there a purpose to using a name that's not recognizable by the English readers? No. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:33, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Not recognizable? Technically speaking if we were to rename the article to any given name it can be one of SEVERAL things. Gokou, Goku, Gokuh, or Gokuu. And to someone whose in Britian reading this article, THEIR common way of spelling the name is Gokou, not Goku. Do you see what I'm saying? Just because it's the way you spell it doesn't mean that it's the way someone else who speaks English spells it. Therefore I vote against this change, and not to mention "Goku" redirects to this article anyway. I'm pretty sure that they can figure out that his name is "Goku" in English, but his name in Japanese has the "Son" in front of it. That's not difficult to figure out if you didn't know his name was Son Goku.--MajinVegeta 22:15, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

So it's better to appeal to the smallest group of people? We don't use Japanese titles when there's an English title. No matter if there's more than one name you can use. The Googlehits tell us one thing - Goku is by far the most well-known name for him. "Dragon Ball" +Goku -Gokou gets 1,380,000 hits, "Dragon Ball" +Gokou -Gokou gets 18,300. The most well-known English name should be used - and even though Googlehits are anecdotal, there's a good reason why the NA name far outGoogles Gokou - it started in NA before EU, and it's far more popular in NA.

Besides this argument, it's irrelevant. The fact that there is more than one official name for the character in English does NOT mean that we should be like "That's it! Because of this, NEITHER of you get to be the title! Instead, your second cousin Son Goku gets it!" No matter which ENGLISH name is used, using Son Goku is something for fans of the show, and not for anyone who's researching the show. Wikipedia is not supposed to appeal to people with intricate knowledge - it's for readers who want to find information, not those who added the information. Therefore, can you give us a reason to give a title that is not going to assist in that? - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:37, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

The way I see it is that your asking us to pretty much re-write the whole article, not only change the name. The thing that the Dragon Ball Task Force focuses on is consistency on information presented in the articles. We (me being a member) don't want English names, with Japanese information, it just wouldn't make sense. And we aren't substituting original information (Japanese) for the Information in the dub because the dub is too inconsistent. That was why we decided on original information (including Spellings) in the first place. Unless you can get a bunch of people to dispute alternate spellings, then it shouldn't be changed. And no, it's best to avoid dispute and use the original names, because those spellings can't be disputed. The issue with Dragon Ball is that it's been dubbed, and re-dubbed so many times that original information is lost; this includes FOUR different dubs just for the English language alone! You need to discuss this with the Dragon Ball task force because they are in charge of editing the Dragon Ball articles on Wikipedia. I know that many of them would agree with me, because most of us are very serious about original information and name spellings, and are serious about what infromation gets put in the articles use the official Dragon Ball guide books called the Daizenshuus, which mainly summarize the facts in the Dragon Ball manga (and anime), facts that have been stated and authorized by the man himself: Akira Toriyama. And pardon my rudeness, but does this look like Google?--MajinVegeta 04:01, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

No need to be rude he clearly is just another one of the Funimation influenced users, now as far as the move goes I have to agree with Majinvegeta's points there is no official English pronuntuation for the name. -凶 04:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

So basically, you're not a fan of following basic guidelines? Yes, I'm sure everyone cares SO much that the editors of the articles - intended for the readers, NOT you - want it to be written a way that's made entirely for themselves and their fandom. Wikipedia is not aimed at fans. It's for teaching people about things. Seriously, do you understand who Wikipedia was created for? Don't even respond if you're just going to regurgitate the same statement "this is how the fans want it, so we don't care if it's not helpful!" If you want to make your own rules and guidelines, make your own Wiki. Don't decide that the DB project is special, and shouldn't have to follow the same quality guidelines. If you can't tell me why Son Goku is the best title for the sake of English readers, don't respond. What Akira Toriyama says is completely irrelevant to what's beneficial to English readers and non-fans. He also authorizes writing the series in English - and heck, you know what? I guess that the Latin alphabet is also against the DB WikiProject, huh?

You have failed to provide an argument that is supported by a single policy, guideline, essay, or even logic. And wow, Google isn't Wikipedia? Blow my mind why don'tcha! Wouldn't have figured that out. I guess the only place we can get evidence from is Wikipedia, right? Oh, by the way: Google is a collaboration of almost every English web site in the world. So technically, it is Wikipedia. A more than million hit difference is very relevant. Like I said - no policy or guideline even hints that it is acceptable to decide that instead of catering to one English region or another, we'll actually just cater to Japanese-speaking people on the en.wiki. What logic is that? That instead of choosing which region to make this article more convenient for, we'll make it less convenient for them both? Right - too bad you're not an admin! We need more people like you who aren't actually trying to HELP readers understand.

Also, it's not that I prefer the FUNi version, it's more that I prefer not confusing the Hell out of everyone. Calling him Son Goku will immediately keep this article from becoming featured, simply because there IS such a thing as the ja.wiki. You haven't explained why it's good to cater to one of the smalle viewership of the en.wiki over the two largest viewerships. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:00, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

This would be more successful on the Task Force's talk page, post it there and cool down there is no need for both of you to act uncivil, just in case some of the heat was directed towards me the part of Funimation influenced in my last comment wasn't intended as an insult. -凶 05:08, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Also, may I ask why it is not official? It is copyrighted by the company which owns the rights to release the series in North America by the company which created the anime. To say that is not official because it's English is just completely ignorant and is exactly what Japanophilia is. Tell me - why use Son Goku over Goku/Gokou besides your own preferences (an irrelevant factor, since Wikipedia wasn't created so that you could have fun with it - it was made for people who want to learn about varying subjects).

And, point? it doesn't matter, because it's obviously wrong, about as wrong as most of your statements. And I won't bring it to WP:DB until I see one rationale explanation as to why the DB project encourages editors to cater to the fans, who don't need to learn as much about the series? - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Just putting it simple there are several "official" versions coming from different English dubs, my suggestion to to post this on the Task Force's page is so a wider ammount of people can discuss it, don't take it personally and don't sugest I have anything to do with the current name since I wasn't still a user back then, this was discussed a while ago and a new thread might bring new and valid points but this conversation here is just between two users with different points, and it's going no where. -凶 05:23, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

The user who began all of this is obviously not taking the correct measures to solve the problem. An earlier statement by User:A Link to the Past was, "What Akira Toriyama says is completely irrelevant to what's beneficial to English readers and non-fans. He also authorizes writing the series in English - and heck, you know what? I guess that the Latin alphabet is also against the DB WikiProject, huh?" Such false opinionated statements should not even be worth mentioning. What A Link to the Past is doing is senseless. Way I see it, he is doing disruptive edits on purpose — this discussion is going haywire anyways. Lord Sesshomaru

Oh, and I bet you have good reason to believe that I'm only doing this to be disruptive. As long as you exclude:

The fact that I have never vandalized Wikipedia The fact that I have assisted in the featuring of many articles The fact that I devote much of my time to improving articles slowly but surely

The problem is that you put fans as your highest priority, not the people who know nothing of the series. This is no a fan site, this is an educational tool intended to increase the user's knowledge of a variety of subjects. - A Link to the Past (talk) 03:50, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm was just looking for info about dragon ball when i found this. I just have a question: I think that we should use official names here, but isn't Son Gokou the right one? I think I saw it in anime and japanese merchandise more often that son goku. Im just curious about that.

It's "Son Goku", not "Son Gokou". Ryu Ematsu

Don't the manga covers that have his name spell it "Son Gokuh?" Also, didn't his name badge on his space suit read "Gokuh" when he was on his way to Namek? I thought Goku Jr. was the only one between the two to spell it without the H.4.252.208.223 07:38, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

If the Monkey King is that widely known in Japan as Goku, why can't you rename this article "Goku (Dragon Ball)" (minus the "son") and then rename the redirect for Sun Wukong "Goku (Journey to the West)". Then move them to the Goku disambig page. This type of redirecting previously solved the same problem for two similarly named articles: Zhou Tong (Water Margin) and Zhou Tong (archer). Thoughts? --Ghostexorcist 00:55, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Krillin

I don't want to get involved with the Son Goku vs. Goku debate (as I think it's silly. Son Goku can just be considered his full name, while Goku, his given name.) However, I think it would be a good idea to put Kuririn's American name in parenthases following his original name, especially the first time he is mentioned. This is just so that American fans won't be confused. They might think Kuririn is a different person. I only figured it out because I knew of the Japanese l/r thing.

-- trlkly 06:28, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

In regard to your Son Goku vs. Goku comment, we historically don't use the full name unconditionally - see Bill Clinton, for example. - A Link to the Past (talk) 06:48, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

How can I put this but Son would be like his last name but for some reason in front of his first name or least that is what I have been told.

Japanese names are set-up differently then English names, in formal articles, the family name comes first and then the individual's name comes second (In this case, it's not Goku Son, it's Son Goku).--VorangorTheDemon 21:39, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

New goku image uploaded

200px

• What do you guys think? I think it reflects his personality better and the angle on his face is better then the other one. Also guess what?! He ISN'T dead in this one (gasp!). --VorangorTheDemon 22:43, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Do We still need an Image? I can redraw Goku to make a higher resolution, but the background would be a problem! How about a transparent Image? UzEE (Talk • Contribs) 04:39, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

That depends. You can draw it yourself, like the nicely made Image:Toribot.svg, but make sure the license says that it was created by you. Lord Sesshomaru 03:29, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I uploaded the New Image for Goku I made. I hope that this will do. Its 1200x900 in dimension. UzEE (Talk • Contribs) 23:55, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Wow, I didn't know that you could draw one and put it there. It's a lot easier to sort out the fair use and copyright. I think I'll do just that. Thanks Sesshomaru. --VorangorTheDemon 12:54, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

No, actually we cant draw it. The image is up for deletion. The problem is that no matter who draws Goku, his copyright holder is still Akira Toriyama because it was his design and concept. UzEE (Talk • Contribs) 00:20, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Goku wears his own symbol for "Go"?

Is this true? I have never heard this, and I can't find a reference for it. If a reference can't be provided, I suggest removing it. --VorangorTheDemon 17:59, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Never mind, I actually found a reference, My Favorite Games. However, it is not his own symbol, it is the same one that Kaiosama gives him before he returns to Earth from the other world. The symbol that Kaiosama gives him is indeed "Go", but "Go" stands for "enlightenment or "wisdom". --VorangorTheDemon 18:03, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

When did King Kai give Goku this outfit? Ryu

NVM. found it.Ryu

Move

I am prepared to get this move going. Based on WP:ANIME's guidelines stating that we should use the most common English name, and the fact that even if Son Goku is official in English regions, Goku is more common. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:11, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

O god, not this again. I don't think the Dragon Ball task force will be too happy with you. --VorangorTheDemon 21:17, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

And? Can you provide a more on-topic post for this discussion? Why should the less common name be used, I ask? - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:18, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps because all of us are sick of arguing this with you. Because it is his real name, that's why. What other reason do you need? "Goku" still directs here, "Goku" is used in the written text, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that "Goku" is "Son Goku" considering that his picture is right there when you open the article. Plus "Son Goku" to me sounds more official and professional. Why? Because it is more official and professional. --VorangorTheDemon 21:23, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, and many policies encourage articles to be based on their full title. OH WAIT! They don't. THey say to use the most common title - regardless of what their full name is. Bill Clinton and Mario follow this, why doesn't Goku? - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:33, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

since a consensus was already held on this and you pretty much lost since most people wanted "Son Goku", if you move it, I'd be more then happy to report you as a vandal. I was courteous with you by allowing your aggressive and uncivil posts on the talk page on WP:DBZ, but I think most of us can only take so much. --VorangorTheDemon 21:40, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I beg to differ, Link. More people know Ulquiorra Schiffer as Ulquiorra or Grimmjow Jeagerjaques as Grimmjow, yet we still use their last names in the titles. Just leave the first name, is it? It's not that big of a deal. // DecaimientoPoético 21:52, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

So you would prefer the article be damaged for the sake of adhering to Japanese naming conventions?

It's not required because guidelines can be interpreted differently. If you intentionally do not follow the guideline, the article cannot become even B quality, because guidelines are meant to be followed with limited exceptions - and this situation is not an exception. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:44, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

The "Son" in the title is not harming anyone, and I still don't see why you're making such a big deal over this little detail. Have you noticed that you're the only one making a fuss over a three character name, and that everyone else seems to think against you? Do you know why this is? It's because it has been agreed upon that Son Goku be used, and having his full name ("less common" or otherwise) doesn't make a difference because Goku still rediercts here. // DecaimientoPoético 21:52, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

By using Son Goku, I think it only enhances the reliability and encyclopedic value of the article, because it uses original information, not the stuff in the Dub. --VorangorTheDemon 21:58, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

If that "that title redirects here, so we can keep it here" argument worked, we wouldn't have this guideline in the first place. You still haven't explained why this is t he exception to the guideline. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:12, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

(outdent) Because "Son Goku" more directly links him to the monkey king of journey to the west. Also, because WP:ANIME is just a project, not a policy (or even guideline) page. Its guidelines can be ignored even moreso than real guidelines when consensus is against it. Bladestorm 22:23, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:ANIME's guidelines are based on the universal guidelines for naming conventions, which states the same thing. It's not advantageous to the reader to use a less common English name. For that fact, it won't pass as a GA until it fixes the title to be more user-friendly (among other things). This taskforce is going against both the parent project and the guideline itself. There's no good reason to use this title besides for the sake of showing the connection between the story he's based on, which is not supported by any guideline whatsoever no more than giving Bill Clinton his full name because "that's what he was born with". - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:35, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

The same parent project that instructs us to use articles like the Sailor Moon ones (which opt for the manga names over the dub ones) as good examples of what to do? Yeah I totally see where you're coming from. Can you at least pretend to research your points before shoving them in our faces? Onikage725

But you aren't talking about using his name informally. This isn't a case of 'Jimmy Carter' instead of 'James Carter'. This'd be like saying, "Dubya" instead of "George W Bush". I'm not saying it has to be 'Son Goku'. I'm just saying there are reasons to support it. And that the analogy isn't quite appropriate. Bladestorm 22:40, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Son Goku is never formally used in the anime - only subtly stated. You would have to have a noticeable interest in Dragon Ball to know the name. Goku IS his common name, Dubya isn't Bush's common name. Using Goku would be good because it's the most well-known name for him. It IS Jimmy Carter vs. James Carter because people identify him as Jimmy Carter. And similarly, because he's always known as just Goku in the anime, people know him as Goku. I've never seen anyone call him Son Goku unless they were fans. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:50, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

ALTTP, you're still making a big deal about something quite insignificant. The Dragon Ball taskforce, who's rules, qualifications, etc., you appear to blatantly disagree with, have already established the names (except for Broly's). You are alone on this supposed move and I advise you to cut it out, you lose. I've told you before to get others to support your case and none have you contacted as of yet, far as I know. Can you at least notify the WP:MANGA members about this? Something may happen if you get more to support you. That is all. Lord Sesshomaru

So basically, I lose in my fight to make the article good. Congratulations - you've succeeded in ensuring that the article can never be at its best. Naming conventions is on my side, the parent project of the DB Taskforce is on my side. All you have is your ideals which adhere to your Japanese bias. If you say that Son Goku is both the uncommon name and still the name that it should be, then you're intentionally going against naming conventions. Naming conventions exists to help the reader. Why are the readers helped by you using the less common name? If naming conventions says to use the most common English name, then use the most common English name. Clearly, you aren't voting in favor of Son Goku for it being the most common English name or for it being advantageous to the readers, but because it's the original name. Do you have policies or guidelines to back up your position? - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:29, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

We don't need policies and guidelines, it's his name, so it's more encyclopedic. And I almost fell from my chair when your wrote that he is rarely is called "Son Goku" in the anime, you obviously only watch the inconsistent dub. --VorangorTheDemon 00:38, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

(ec)

Have ya ever noticed that all the main characters from Final Fantasy VII are listed by their full names? Aerith Gainsborough? Cloud Strife? Seriously, who the heck says, "Cloud Strife"? I'm not even sure that all those full names are even directly included in the game's text. And yet, that's what we use. Contrary to how it might appear, that isn't against the rule of using the best-known name. It's simply that you don't always use just a character's first (or last) name, solely because they're often referred to by one name. 'Fry' from futurama isn't listed as "Fry (Futurama)", by the way. He's listed as "Philip J. Fry". Even though I can only remember them using his 'real' name three or so times across 72 episodes. Again, this isn't a contradiction. "Goku" and "Son Goku" aren't two separate names. One's just a shorter form. It isn't the same thing.

Incidentally, you really should stop acting as though the only two options in any dispute are your way and the wrong way. Just because you don't get your way all the time, that doesn't mean the articles can't still be "good". Bladestorm 00:41, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Bladestorm, and I think stating his full name is more encyclopedic. I think it only enhances the article, and not damage it. The point of having people who work on these articles is to eliminate fan cruft right? Why state something that people already know? Wikipedia is intended to educate the masses, not state things that they already know, otherwise what would be the point of having an article? That's why we don't use "Goku" "Spirit Bomb" and "Instant Transmission" ect, because people already know what it is. By doing "Son Goku" instead of "Goku", people are better informed by knowing what his original name is, then (through logic) they can conclude that "Goku" is his name in the English adaptation. --VorangorTheDemon 00:53, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Bladestorm that this "my way or the highway" attitude is insulting and damages the editing, debating, and consensus-building process of Wikipedia. Nothing actually gets done, as everything is dragged intonasty little arguments as every differing view is met with scorn and derision. Onikage725 04:47, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Here are the two WP:NAME guidelines at stake here:

1. WP:COMMONNAME
2. WP:MOS-JA#English words of Japanese origin

ALTTP, you should know by now that the DB taskforce is adhering the second guideline. Cease your rambling about this supposed move, really. You lose. One guideline is not stronger than the other. Lord Sesshomaru

1. Cloud Strife, Aerith Gainsborough Philip J. Fry is actually mentioned in the show. Son Goku is never mentioned in full in the anime, EVER. Son Goku is not Cloud or Aerith or Fry. He's William Jefferson Clinton, Mario Mario, and James Carter, while Goku is Bill Clinton, Mario, and Jimmy Carter. Son Goku is never used in the anime, just like no one who doesn't do research on Bill Clinton won't know him as William Jefferson Clinton.
2. A name never used in the most common medium ever created for the Dragon Ball series in any region outside of Japan being used does not help the reader. I'm sorry for interpreting an "unhelpful name" as being unhelpful.
3. I asked for clarification. MOS-JA does NOT support the Japanese name for fictional characters. So you fail both guidelines. Check out the talk page of MOS-JA. "I think we've also discussed on this talk page that it includes manga and anime release names. (one example: Sen to Chihiro no kamikakushi redirects to Spirited Away)." If animes and mangas don't apply to MOS-JA, the characters in them shouldn't either. - A Link to the Past (talk) 02:24, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh dear lord are you fricken SERIOUS???? I'm sorry for my tone, but this gets old. Let me say this as clearly as possible. Using Goku's surname in the title (what we would consider his last name, if it were to be written in western order) is not a case of Japanese vs English names. The dub has acknowledged his surname, however infrequently. The official English subs use it as often as it is spoken. The English manga (you DO remember those nice folks at Viz, right?) use it. If you want to argue differing languages, you need to show someone trying to name the article "Gokuu" or the like. Hell, the article and every other that mentions him uses "Goku," wheras most of the main characters in the Japanese version tend to call him "Son." Noone is trying to change all instances to reflect that, so you really can't argue a "JP bias" as you once tried to. But simply using his full name does not damage the article. It would be damaging and unencyclopedic to ignore his full name simply because one (out of multiple) adaptation doesn't use it much. By that logic, every article based on a real or fictional person should go by a shortened name. Most people don't commonly refer to anyone by their full name. The US president is most often referred to as "Bush" or "President Bush," but his article is George W. Bush. Most people refer to Kazuma Kuwabara of Yu Yu Hakusho simply as Kuwabara (everyone except his sister and occasionally Yukina), but we use his full name. Your position really doesn't live up to any pre-existing precedent, and your constant assertion that "Son" is strictly Japanese shows a limited and under-informed view (I can't even say "dub-biased," as the dub has used the last name on rare occasion and the last name is actually animated into the show, so it is visually there). Onikage725 02:59, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

BTW- #A name never used in the most common medium ever created for the Dragon Ball series in any region outside of Japan being used does not help the reader. I'm sorry for interpreting an "unhelpful name" as being unhelpful. Why don't we try, oh, NEARLY EVERY SINGLE VERSION OF DRAGONBALL excpet the English dubbed anime (including other official English sources). I think one other country got a crappy dub, and everyone else has been pretty faithful. Please stop insisting otherwise, as it shows both your own lack of knowledge on the matter and unwillingness to accept facts. That is not an opinion I just stated, it is a solid fact. If I need to scan pages from the Viz manga, take an audio sample from when the narrator used the last name in reference to the family in the dub (this was all of like once, but it still happend), find screen caps of "SON" written in the show, take a screen cap of the FUNi sub track using Son (on the AMERICAN DVDs), and find caps from other languages I will. Also, calling Spirited Away as such rather than Sen and the Spiriting Away of Chihiro is a different matter entirely. Unlike Goku's full name, the ONLY English licensed name for that film is Spirited Away. Likewise, calling William as Bill is utterly irrelevant to this question (again, that would be more appropriate for Goku vs Gokuu or Gokou or Gokuh, which absolutely noone is pushing for). Mario Mario, for your information, is not actually EVER used in a canon source. It is pure speculation based on the term "Mario Bros." It was used in the movie, and I think the cartoon. In fact, as far as NOA is concerned, Mario and his brother don't have last names. To add context, NOA named Mario in the first place, after their then-landlord Mario Segale. Miyamoto liked it enough to adopt it over Jumpman as the character's name in future games. So your Mario Mario comparison fails, as it technically does not exist to begin with. Onikage725 03:22, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

1. Official English subs, wow - which uses translations, not official English versions. And the manga - that's nice. You seem to be ignoring what I am pointing out "most common English name". Whether or not Son Goku is English is irrelevant - When there are multiple English names, use the most common one. Goku is the most common one. What is harmed by using the English title when all guidelines suggest this?
2. Using William Jefferson Clinton doesn't hurt the article - however, it doesn't matter. The guideline states that we should use the most common English name.
3. Um, no, the guideline never says "Don't use full names". It says "Don't use full names when it's bad to". And the difference is that Kuwabara's full name IS used on occasion. Son Goku isn't used on occasion, it's used once for every 150 episodes maybe.
4. Um, no. George W. Bush is the most common name for him. Bush is a nickname for him, and anyone who knows him as Bush or President Bush knows him as George W. Bush. People who know him as Goku do not necessarily know Goku as Son Goku.
5. Prcisely - "rare". Ie, NOT the most common English name. You can't argue that Son Goku is the most common English name, because it isn't, and yet you argue for it anyway. - A Link to the Past (talk) 03:13, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Kuwabara's name is used a handful of times in the entire series. His most common name, in series and in common talk about the series is Kuwabara. That's one. And two, will you stop acting like there are two different names? You keep doing that. Like with Freeza/Frieza, which was a minor spelling quibble that you blew into this whole "raging Japanophile want a different name" fiasco. Son Goku vs Goku is like calling Bill Clinton's article "Bill." Son Goku is not this utterly alien alternate name. "Son" is his surname. Goku is still Goku. Spelled 100% exactly the same way as you want it spelled without that surname. It is not some totally different thing. It isn't two different names, it is full name vs first name only. Oh, and can you explain to me how official subs are unnofficial? And what exactly is your basis for which version gets more play? Currently the dub airs very infrequently on weekends before Adult Swim, whereas the manga stocks the shelves of every major book store. The dub finished airing years ago, the manga just finished last year. Before that, it was even serialized in Shonen Jump, which you can find everywhere from book stores to video game stores to Stop & Shop. Onikage725 03:28, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Stop. All this is is me showing you guidelines and you saying "it's AN official name!". Why do you keep responding when you don't add anything to the discussion? The only way that Son Goku can be used is if you show that the name is the most common English name. Nothing you've done has gone to show that it is the most common English name. However, I have pointed out the fact that not only is the strongest English dub for Dragon Ball and the strongest medium for Dragon Ball calls him Goku, but all of the merchandising in North America does. And no, Son Goku vs. Goku is not Bill Clinton vs. Bill. He is not most commonly known as Bill, but Son Goku IS most commonly known as Goku. The most common English name is Goku, and I've provided an argument for that. This is not a discussion about what his real name is, it's about the most common name, and you have not gone and provided any argument for that. - A Link to the Past (talk) 03:37, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Boy, don't tell me to Stop. We're peers having a discussion. Don't forget that. I don't care how superior you may feel. And what you have failed to establish is how this is two different names. It is simply a question of using a character's full name. You repeatedly insist that one name is the "Japanese-only" name and thus damages an article, and when you are corrected you fall back on your "common" speculation. And that is all it is- speculation. As the series barely shows on TV anymore, the only main outlets are the DVDs and Viz manga. His full name sees play on both mediums. The casual reader unfamiliar with Dragon Ball isn't going to assume someone doesn't have a last name just because they don't know it. I asked two co-workers an hour ago if they'd heard of Naruto. They said yes, so I asked what his last name was and they didn't know. That was a "casual" response. They knew Naruto, but not Uzumaki. Should I go to Naruto Uzumaki and say that casual readers aren't familiar with his full name and thus it should be taken off? You cloak all of your arguments behind this veil of "what's good for the common reader," and yet all of your points and evidence are based soley on what fans of the FUNimation dub are familiar with. Onikage725 04:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

One last thing. WP:IAR and WP:CON. You can throw that guideline in our faces all you want, but it is stated here on Wikipedia that Guidelines are not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception. Likewise, the number one key policy states that Wikipedia works by building consensus. Consensus is an inherent part of the wiki process. Using common sense, consensus was built and a name for this (and related) articles was established, exception or no. You can't just storm through here, throwing a guideline and expecting everyone to bow down to your superior views. You also can't expect to win over people and re-establish a differing consensus when you meet every single differing view with utter contempt and arrogance. Onikage725 04:35, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

• sigh*

1. Neither are Bill Clinton and William Jefferson Clinton. However, we still have to pick between them.
2. Common speculation? Right - 100% of the merchandise released in North America (excluding anime and manga) uses Goku, not Son Goku. And the video games are based on the anime, not the manga. So merchandise, anime, and video games all use Goku over Son Goku. And the DVDs use Goku as well - they are DVDs of the English dub, not the sub. The subs are there as an additional feature.
3. Will you stop arguing that because other articles don't use the common name, that this shouldn't? All you're showing is that anime articles don't adhere to naming convention.
4. Inherent, but not the only part. Common sense, for instance. It's common sense that the most common English name is the right name. If you are forming consensus on nonexistent policies and guidelines, then it is not a part of the process - all you're doing is saying "Son Goku should be the title because it's an official title". Your argument is not backed by policy or guideline, and just because it says that guidelines are not set in stone does not mean you can arbitrarily ignore them. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:44, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not arguing this with you anymore ALTTP. If you decide to move it without gaining support for your side in consensus, then I am reporting you to both WP:AIV and WP:AN/I. Plain and simple.--VorangorTheDemon 04:37, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

You were arguing? I thought you were just strong arming so that this debate would end with you winning regardless of you lacking an argument. Son Goku is not the most common English name, and there's no reasoning that says that it should be the exception. - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:44, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

You're either incredibly confident, or incredibly stupid. Take your pick, I've taken mine. After your last comment, perhaps this is needed as a reminder. --VorangorTheDemon 04:58, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

1. Do you even know what that policy is? Apparently not, since you violated it in the same sentence that you referenced it in.
2. By the way, my VIZ Graphic Novel uses Goku, in addition to Son Goku. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

1. Just for clarity, the first thing you ever said to her on the wikiproject page was in yelling format and very uncivil. And you've maintained that same grating attitude ever since. Personally, I give her credit for lasting this long without straying over the line.

2. It also uses just "Son," as well as "Kakarrot." How he is referred to entirely depends on who is speaking, so I fail to see your point. What it does do at the start of every volume is give a bio, and in that bio he is labeled as "Son Goku." You are seriously going to have a hard time convincing me that Goku having a surname is this obscure uncommon thing when it is blatant on every DVD and manga I own (all of which are licensed by FUNi and Viz). Onikage725 05:11, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

• "Ignore all rules" means that one shouldn't follow written instructions mindlessly, but rather, one should consider how the encyclopedia is improved or damaged. (See: Wikipedia:Use common sense)

• "Ignore all rules" means that everything is considered on a case-by-case basis. (See: Wikipedia:Consensus#Consensus can change)

• "Ignore all rules" means that guidelines derive their power to compel, not from being written down on a page labelled "guideline", but from the consensus support that they enjoy. A consensus for a general rule is assumed to apply to a specific case, until it is clear that the consensus does not apply to the specific case. Wikipedia guidelines are not suicide pacts.

• "Ignore all rules" means that Wikilawyering doesn't work. Loopholes and technicalities do not exist on the Wiki. Wikipedia is neither moot court, nor nomic, nor Mao. The spirit of the rule trumps the letter of the rule.

• "Ignore all rules" means that Wikipedia's policies and guidelines tend to be descriptive as opposed to prescriptive, and that they sometimes lag behind the practices they describe. (See Wikipedia:Follow consensus, not policy)

The bottom line is that guidelines are not set in stone. Everything is looked at on a case by case basis, and the number 1 policy on the process is to build consensus. Consensus here was built. There are methods for attempting to re-asses consensus, and channels one can use to try and establish a broader outside consensus if you feel we are too narrow in our view. Not one single allowable or working method, however, is to storm onto a talk page and insult/argue with those who work on the articles simply because you feel differently. Your angry voice alone doesn not = new consensus, and if you don't feel like doing anything to change that then all you're doing is making noise. Onikage725

The fact that his surname is rarely ever mentioned in this 300+ episode anime and occasionally hinted at (how will people know that Son is his surname just by seeing it?).

Blatant? So you're saying that the buyer is required to view an alternate version (to them) of the anime? On the back and occasionally the front of some DVDs is the usage of Goku instead of Son Goku, and the primary version on the DVD is the English version, which uses Son Goku.

Consensus was built on... "no, we won't follow this guideline because we aren't forced to". You cannot establish why using Son Goku is helpful in any way to the reader, more specifically non-fans.

Not doing anything? I've established that all North American media uses Goku, and that only one North American medium uses Son Goku. Two if you count the lesser-of-importance version contained on the DVD. TCG? Goku. Manga? Son Goku and Goku. Anime? Goku. VHS? Goku. DVDs? Goku and to a lesser extent, Son Goku. Toys? Goku. Video games? Goku. How does this not show which name is most common? - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:24, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

How did my post violate the policy that I had in it? And as far as I'm concerned, this consensus is over, and you lost. Yet your feebly keeping it afloat by insulting people and repeating yourself. --VorangorTheDemon 05:20, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

...So you imply that implying someone is stupid fails the civility policy? Take a Wikibreak until you can figure out what violating WP:CIVIL is. - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:24, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Did I say I chose stupidity? --VorangorTheDemon 05:25, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Did you not read that there are no loopholes on Wikipedia guidelines and policies? - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey, Link. Consensus was reached. Your discussion here pretty clearly shows everyone disagrees with your attempt to change it. Seek outside help for a broader consensus if you feel that strongly about this. If you don't then kindly move along. Either way, this attempt to garner support has clearly not turned out in your favor and you appear to now be arguing for argument's sake. Onikage725 05:34, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

It'd be less annoying if people were opposing because a guideline legitimized their side. While I provide a well-respected and used guideline, you have not. All you've done is say "ignore all rules" (which doesn't allow you to say "well, no, I don't like that and so I'll ignore it cause it said I could"). I've shown that it's the most common English title, and all you can do is say that you're not obligated to follow that guideline. You aren't - if you can provide why Son Goku is an exception. Ignore all rules says "if a guideline gets in the way of improving Wikipedia, ignore it". If people could arbitrarily enforce and ignore guidelines, people would constantly do so to oppose a position or enforce a position. Goku is used in all mediums in NA, Son Goku is not. You are putting impossible standards on my part - if being used in all mediums that Son Goku is - and in mediums it isn't used in - is not good enough to show Son Goku to be far, far less common, then what would? - A Link to the Past (talk) 05:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Well I don't know- you cited the parent wikiproject as being "on your side" and yet as far as I can tell nearly every recognized article set up by that project by way of example opts for original names over adaptations. Numerous SM articles are cited as GA status, and all use names from the manga. I'd think Makoto over Lita is a more radical shift than Goku/Son Goku, yet you claim using Goku's full name will automatically keep this article from ever reaching GA status. The many examples on the parent project prove you wrong. If following in the footsteps of similar articles that have recieved recognition by following a similar convention doesn't count to you, that's your problem. I'm just sick of you acting like if you disagree with a point then that point is invalid. Onikage725 06:07, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

It's wrong because it's not backed by a guideline. I've pointed out that the parent project states that the most common English name should be used. Just because people do not follow these guidelines often does not mean that they do not exist. - A Link to the Past (talk) 06:11, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

And yet those articles are recognized, have achieved GA status, and are set up as examples to go by. But there you go with "it's wrong." Wikipedia itself says to build consensus and go case by case. You claim there is one blanket way to do things and any differing ideas are wrong. I'm tired of arguing with you about this. It's like talking to a brick wall. Let me put it this way. Your guideline is neat and all, but Wikpedia policy states to build consensus. Whether you agree with the current consensus or not, you have not yet established a differing consensus. If you feel this strongly about it, follow the appropriate prosedures for securing outside opinions on the matter and attempt to build a broad consensus. If you can't be bothered to do this, then stop this pointless argument. Don't respond to me with recycled points from above about why you think you're right. I've read your points. I get your position. Your typical response (like the ones above, after I said essentially what I just had to say again) are combative and unhelpful. You're basing your entire position on a devout love of the "rules," so go follow them. What you are doing now is not the way to build consensus, and policy outweighs guideline. Onikage725 06:24, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Well WEll WELL! What do we have here? Lets forget the guidelines for a moment and look at the name. If you (as many of you are) familiar with the japanese culture to where they surname (last name as we americans use it as) is the first part of the japanese full name. Now for the articles sake, like other the full name is on all articles. Son is Goku's surname thus making it his full name. Now because in the Funimation dub they do not say his full name and why would they. Goku is basically his first name to the american folks. Why would Funimation make characters say his full name when our culture is based on saying someones first or last name to address a person. Son has ben seen and heard in many episodes. And also if you Linky will stop trying to use funimation dub audio and use the Sub/japanese audio you WILL see that his Full name is meantioned more often then Goku and as Wikipedia is a worldwide sourse it is expected for us to put even information pertaining to Goku and his son (who by the way on there articles is titles with there full name) then it should be as such and not by Goku, Gohan, or Goten to title the article as it is only part of their name. i could say more but i gotta go and hopefully not get killed. have fun discussing it. laterHeat P 17:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

1. Why is it that you are the only one to claim that Son has been used in many dub episodes?
2. Why would I look at the subs? Since when are translations of the Japanese version a factor in determining what the English-speaking audience would know?
3. Wikipedia IS a worldwide source. En.Wikipedia, however, is an English source. We appeal to mostly English-dominant countries. The top countries on Wikipedia are the US, Canada, Australia, and the UK.
4. Tell me - if one does not buy DVDs or mangas or video games or TCG or toys, what does one have left? The anime. And in the US, the only name one will think Goku has is "Goku". So basically, one is either required to look up this info or buy merchandise in order to know the character as Son Goku. And since Wikipedia is designed for readers to gain knowledge of the character, not for fans of the series, we can't be APPEALING to the fans. We have to appeal to the people who want to LEARN about the subject. It says also to use the most common English name, which - based on the fact that the anime is the only thing people do not have to buy to watch - is Goku.

So we have:

• Goku is more common than Son Goku, Gokou, Gokuu, Gokuh, etc.
• Wikipedia is aimed at English-dominant countries
• Wikipedia is designed for those who have limited knowledge of the series

Put those three together and you have: We do not appeal to Japanese-dominant countries, we do not use a less common name, and we do not appeal to the fans. Son Goku is only known by fans, Son Goku is less common than Goku, and Son Goku appeals to Japanese-dominant countries. - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:40, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you take a look at the current discussion going on at WP:DBZ. That goes for all users. // DecaimientoPoético 19:45, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

(ec)

"Goku" is part of "Son Goku". The other guy was right. People do tend to call the current american president "Bush", rather than "George W Bush". Fry's whole name is mentioned very seldom across all the Futurama episodes. And the dvd subs are legitimate english content. If it's content, produced officially, and it's in english, then it's official english content. What's more, you aren't even arguing for what you feel is the most well-known source (the anime). You're arguing for an arbitrary subset of it! (The anime, but excluding DVDs?!? Not all regions even still air the bloody show on normal television anymore! The only two methods to see it are DVDs, or pirated copies off the net!) And why exclude the mangas? They're sold in legitimate bookstores and even stores that sell movies (you can easily find them at Chapters and FYE, to name businesses in Canada and the US, respectively).

Seriously, I must be missing the wikipedia policy pages that explicitly state that only cable and normal broadcast airings count as animes, but DVDs don't; or that official english-language mangas, readily available in numerous stores across Canada and the US, don't count specifically when a single editor doesn't want them to. Can you send me over to that section? Bladestorm 19:54, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

1. Are you implying that people who call him Bush do not know him as George W. Bush? People who call Son Goku Goku do NOT necessarily know him as Son Goku.
2. Will you stop bringing up examples of articles NOT following guidelines? It's like saying "hey, that guy got a not guilty despite being a murderer, I should be not guilty too!". Just because THOSE articles do not follow guidelines does not mean that the guideline is defunct.
3. Did you even READ what I said? Two reasons why DVDs and mangas are less of a factor - 1, they cost money. 2, because of this, only fans would buy them. So only fans would know his full name. And guess who we cater to? It's not the Japanese, and it's not the fans. - A Link to the Past (talk) 20:02, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

You bring up examples of articles that fit your interpretation. In addition to illustrating why your examples are invalid, I bring up other examples that fit our interpretation. If you don't want to refer to other precedents, then don't do it yourself. Get it? Good. Also, by what twisted logic can we not include people who have paid to make use of media? Does this then mean that we can't use character names from books that aren't public domain? (I guess a lot of characters from Stephen King novels are going to have to be renamed "that guy from that book! you know! that guy!" Because people have to pay to read those books; and only a person who's never bought them counts!) So we have to change Cloud Strife's name to "that guy with the spiky hair", because a person who've never paid to play the game, or see the movie, probably wouldn't know his name? Seriously, this is the most ludicrous argument I've read in a long time. Bladestorm 20:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

1. When you bring up articles that follow your interpretation, all you show is that people ignore naming conventions. There IS precedence to use this because it's a guideline that people are recommended to follow - and I assure you, the people who authored it created it for good reason. When I bring an example up, I'm showing an example of people listening to the guideline. When you bring an example up, you're showing an example of people not listening to it.
2. There are more people who have seen the anime on television than there are people who have read the manga or viewed the DVDs. And in the case of the DVDs, the person would also have to view the subtitles, and the group of people who have viewed the subtitles of the DVD are smaller in number to those who have viewed the dub version of the DVD. So guess what? Since the majority of people who own the DVD have seen the anime, and most of the people who own the DVD have seen the dub version on the DVD, Goku is more common. Some people don't care to WATCH the subtitles - I know from experience that many of my friends didn't even care about the Japanese version.
3. The difference is that DVDs are additional material. People were able to be exposed to the anime without having to purchase the DVDs, and not all of those people necessarily purchased them. Fact is that Goku is so much more common than Son Goku that it's not even funny. The anime is far more popular in English-dominant countries than the manga, and the dub is far more popular in English-dominant countries than the subs. All material excluding the manga and DVDs use Goku exclusively. By viewing the VHS tapes, the video games, TCG, action figures, or any recordings of the anime from television, they will not learn that his full name is Son Goku. - A Link to the Past (talk) 20:19, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

What did I tell you. This debate is going in circles, and yours is the only voice on your side. Please stop re-stating the same thing over and over and over again. You have made your point very clear. You've made your case. You don't need to re-make the same case every single time a new person voices their opinion. I'm not trying to attack you when I say that, but it can't be denied that this and the last conversation quickly went from debate to argumentative clusterfuck. The cycle has to end somewhere, and as I said there are more productive ways for you to try and get the results you want. Onikage725 20:24, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Anyways, it's true that some people who saw the english dub of the anime, who've never read the manga or bought a DVD would know him as "Goku". But isn't that what "anime name" is for? I think that the name of the article should go by the same name. Even in the Japanese anime, they do call him Goku (well in Bulma's case "Son-kun"), but as it was stated earlier, but his full and official name is Son Goku. Most of the people who watch the Dragon Ball series nowadays are people who either grew up with the Japanese dub or the english dub. It doesn't come on TV anymore, so to watch it they'd have to get the DVD's. But overall, Son Goku is more common now, even if it's not in the English dub. It's still in the English translated manga. Ryu Ematsu

Full, less common name. Additionally, to say that Son Goku is more common is OR. Goku is used exclusively in the primary version of the DVDs (English), Goku is used in all secondary merchandise (TCG, video games, toys, etc.). Why should we assume that a name used in one medium commonly and in the not-primary version of the DVDs is more common than a name which is used exclusively on the DVDs and in all merchandising based on the series? - A Link to the Past (talk) 20:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

This debate is over. It went nowhere and was at best inconclusive. Everyone just drop it. There are other ways of pursuing this or seeking outside assistance. This topic is a dead horse. Onikage725 00:13, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

It makes no sense not to use the common usage that the vast majority of English speaking fans and especially non-fans would know the character by. Wikipedia should not cater to Otaku, Japanophiles, etc. Perhaps this discussion could benefit from WP:RFC. --Toxicroak 10:52, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps it should. I've been suggesting that over continuing the fight this turned into. Also, I can't speak for the others who agree with me, but I don't take kindly to being labelled based on my opinion on a matter like this. I do not consider myself an Otaku, nor am I overly obsessed with Japan or have a JP bias. Again I would point out that "Son Goku" is not simply Goku's "Japanese name." It is his first name and his surname (his full name, like Bob Smith over just Bob), is used quite often in two out of the three primary English sources available, and maintains the accepted and familiar English spelling of Goku (over Gokuu/uh/ou). So be careful before stereotyping people because of a difference in opinion. Onikage725 12:47, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry Onikage but I have to address this and it might start another agruement but I must. Now Link and others wanting to move the name...please stop trying to change peoples minds about this subject. You want to put the common name rule, guidelines and polices at these people but as many have showed you and told you and let me put this in bold letters so you can see it clearly. Wikipedia is a website encyclopedia that is suppose to give the general/worldwide public the proper infomation on many subjects be it non-fictional or fictional, it is for (again) the proper info of and about people, places, things in its fullest, not in parts or pieces. Now do you think that Akira Toriyama would like us or rather my former and respect editors of this taskforce to only put parts of vital info in articles about his creations? I think not. So for fans and non-fans of Dragon Ball it is the right thing to do and put the RIGHT information in articles and as Toriyama gave his main character and sons the surname of Son then it is the right thing to do give the public the right info be it fans or non-fans. Yes it is the english version of Wikipedia but in still Wikipedia is a Worldwide Encyclopedia and not just a America common named based encyclopedia. Does it say just for the United States of America? NO it does not. Also as things dubbed for other uses means they are not the original and the original are a big and vital part of DB as well as everything, and the world not just the USA has the right to know the entire truth about things, places, and people be it fictional or non-fictional (yes i repeated myself but only so you see where I am getting at.) Remember USA is not the only english speaking country, England, Britain, Canada and other major countries main, major, top or secondary language is english. Be it spoken differently it is still english. Next let me speak on this merchandise like action figures, video games. and things. You trying to say Goku's toys and stuff that only show his forname is a buyable reason to help with you discussion on moving his name, Well a lot of other toy, merchandise and other stuff of other anime and cartoon characters such as Naruto, Sasuke, Ichigo, and others are only know on the merchandise boxes and video games by there forname. That is what they are commonly known as. However their full name is written on their articles. This website is not just for the USA it is for the entire world. Think about that. Oh hi to my pals. Just drop by to say hi and give some advice. take care folk. Heat P 13:59, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

You don't have to apologize to me. I just think this particular conversation turned into something horribly unproductive and should be ended. I also think as a ground rule no name-calling or generalizations for one side of the debate or another should be used. Two people have used the term Japanophile to basically describe "those who don't think we should use the FUNimation dubs name set." I doubt they are trying to say we are scholars of some aspect of Japanese culture, nor can they be using the casual "people who like things from Japan" sense (both are self-professed gamers and are spending a portion of free time on a website editing articles on anime and games). Which leaves us with the derogatory obsessive label the term is often used for. Even if that isn't the intent (though one user openly declared such, and uses such words as "raging" for emphasis), it is very easy to take it as such. Noone should be calling anyone names, even if no harm is meant. Onikage725 14:24, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

*sigh* This is a terrible and patently untrue argument. Wikipedia is a global web site, but there's a reason why it's called the "English Wikipedia" - because THIS Wikipedia caters to the English language, and conversely, caters to the largest English-speaking countries in the world - the US, Canada, Australia, Europe, New Zealand, etc. Just because Japan and Germany and France all have English as a common language does NOT mean that we have to cater to them. There's multiple Wikipedias for a reason - if you want to be Japanese-oriented, go to the ja.wiki. - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:29, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I still don't get that "Japanese oriented" comment. I *just* covered that. Noone wants to spell his name as Gokuu or Gokuh, so please stop insisting that anyone is trying to follow a strictly Japanese name set. It will go a lot further towards cooperation and a positive outcome if you actually read what people say. Really, I just said in the post directly above Heat's post, and all heat said was use the full name cuz that's how he's known worldwide. You can argue your point about common version of the two English spellings, but stop making this at all about a Japan-bias. Onikage725 19:08, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

It was he who ever brought up what Wikipedia is. I was correcting him - and he was the one who was implying that Son Goku was a Japanese name. - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:26, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Granted, but he didn't advocate an alternate spelling for Goku, just using his surname. Noone disputes that Son is Goku's universal surname, right? It's just a question of whether or not it is appropriate to use it in the article title. Correct me if I misunderstand your position, but that is my understanding of the issue at hand. And with that in mind, Son is used in manga, dub, and subs. The problem expressed is that in the dub it is infrequent and indirect. That's why it brings up the question of common names, recognizability, etc. But the "Japanese name" thing doesn't apply and this conversation has brought up the country of Japan and editors being biased towards them way too much when the Japanese don't use the spelling we have- Viz and Steve Simmons' sub track do. Onikage725 21:24, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know, I had an idea (a compromise, somewhat talked about once before), and when I get a sec I'm going to put it up on the task force page. Onikage725 14:31, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Just to correct something - DBZ IS still playing on Cartoon Network. It's on at this very moment (just started), albeit not the uncut version unfortunately. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

As of last week when I noticed that, if you check you'll see I've corrected my statements to say things like barely playing. As opposed to the "glory" days of the weekday Toonami block where there were two eps of DBZ, an ep of DB, sometimes an encore at night and more on the weekend. Then it graduated to unedited on Adult Swim. Now its one edited ep on the saturday Toonami lineup, leading into Yu-Gi-Oh GX and following Teen Titans correct? Onikage725 04:55, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

You seem one sided on this Englsih Wikipedia statement. Also you are reading my comment wrongly. As pointed out by myself it is the english version add it is suppose to cater to EVERYONE not just the USA. Now did I say anything about catering to Japan or anything related to Japan or Japanese-oriented other than how would you think if Toriyama the creator feels if we only used bits and piece of information? No, I did not. It is you putting or writing words into my mouth. Did I imply on using Son Gokuh or Son Gokuu or Gokuu? No. I implied to use his full and worldwide commonly known name which is Son Goku as the article title states. You are implying that every english speaking country is just using Goku all around with from what I can tell is pure speculation. And I will still bring it up that Wikipedia is and will always be a worldwide website. This version is not just for the United States or America. You going to say I implied that Son Goku is only a Japanese name? Where in my statement did I imply that? Again Toriyama gave the surname Son for Goku, Gohan, and Goten. The public has the full right to know that. That is what I implied. You read and see what you what to see. I will quote myself on something again with a little additions.

"So for fans and non-fans of Dragon Ball it is the right thing to do and put the RIGHT information in articles and as Toriyama gave his main character and sons the surname of Son then it is the right thing to do give the public the right info be it fans or non-fans. Yes it is the english version of Wikipedia but in still Wikipedia is a Worldwide Encyclopedia and not just a America common named based encyclopedia. Does it say just for the United States of America Wikipedia? NO it does not. It say English Wikipedia. Also as things dubbed for other uses means they are not the original and the original are a big and vital part of DB as well as everything, and the world not just the USA has the right to know the entire truth about things, places, and people be it fictional or non-fictional."

You have not corrected me on anything. Lets get that straight. Now part of that statment says not the original but the original is a vital part. Meaning translated that it has to be the biggest part of an article of Wikipedia. Funimation dubs has been wrong or incorrect on a lot of info. So it is best to use the translated version of things not dubbed stuff. yes dub is still part of article. but´the original is what is needed for atricle. If thats what you mean by I implied it be japanese sorry you read that wrong. It means that the original story with the original or translated names be used but be it the worldwide commonly known stuff not just the US, Canada, France, Germany or Japanese info. And commonly known worldwide his name in full is Son Goku and not just Goku. Heat P 01:55, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Nowhere did anyone say that Goku is the American name. I said it's the usage that the vast majority of English Dragon Ball fans and non-fans around the world use. US, Canada, Australia, etc., not just Americans. --Toxicroak 04:38, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd once more like to add that this is fairly common because it his first name. Most people refer to most other people by a single name. I've pointed out that I know a number of non-sci fi fans who wouldn't recognize the last name Kenobi (or anything SW related that didn't have the words Skywalker, Yodi, Jedi, or the Force involved). Hell, I know people who were die-hard SW fans from before most of us were born who I had to actually explain that Darth Sidious, Palpatine, and the Emperor were yes all the same person. That doesn't mean we should go and obscure all Star Wars articles based on what people who don't give a shit are most likely to have overheard from a sibling or friend. Doesn't sound very encyclopedic. Also, being a manga first, DB is technically a literary work (albeit an illustrated one). I don't normally see such things have articles named after an adaptation, even if it is more popular. For example, Journey to the West and related articles use the Chinese names, including Sun Wukong for the popular monkey king. Yet it seems to me that the Japanese adapt or parody the story more than anyone, and these products are adapted to other languages, so Son Goku is far more prevalent. When it comes to things like novels and religions, the original sources seem primary (if their are exceptions feel free to offer them upo, this is just the product of my own research) with adaptations either mentioned or given their own articles. Odin is more known than Wodan to us, but we have both with differences noted. The Roman hercules is more known to us than the Greek Heracles, yet we have a Heracles article as well. That's why I suggested on the project page that we seperate manga from anime, and each can internally deal with their notable English adaptations. Onikage725 05:17, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

No, it's fairly common because it is the official English name (Goku, Gokuu, Gokou). - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:53, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Do you just like arguing? Is there any real reason to come to a dead debate 3 days later and say something that contributed nothing? And his official English name is Son Goku, whether the dub used it often or not. They did state it, its all over the subs, and in the first page of every single edition of the Viz Manga. This is fact. Look it up, I'm tired of doing your research for you. Insisting otherwise a thousand times just makes you look ignorant. Your argument, should you still want to push this, would hold more water in the "Goku is a more commonly used version of his name" form that you used a couple of times. That actually makes a bit of sense and is worth discussing. But your rampant insistence that Goku doesn't have a surname in English is just plain wrong. Onikage725 20:36, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Why in the world do you keep saying "the Japanese version uses Son Goku, so that's the official English version!" The English subs TRANSLATE what they're saying. Unless FUNimation is lying, Goku is the official name. They do not use Son Goku at any point on any of the official web sites and he's never referred to as Son Goku or Goku Son in the anime besides in the translated subtitles of the Japanese version. Son Goku is AN official English name. Goku is the MOST COMMON official English name. The fact that Son Goku is treated as being official in English-speaking countries is highly irrelevant - It's not about what the full name is, it's what name will people most commonly know him as. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:28, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not arguing this with you again. At this point I could just copy/paste any number of my previous comments, but why do that work for you? If you want a reply, just go re-read anything I've said to you. You know where to go to pursue this further. I've suggested this to you before. This conversation has been horribly unproductive and is long over. Move on. Onikage725 00:38, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Will you explain why you are SO steadfast to ignore that the full name is only good when it's the most common name? The reason this is going around in circles is because I'm making an argument based on guidelines, while you are making an argument that's based on DB fandom and not naming conventions. - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:44, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Didn't I just say "I'm not arguing with you?" Go find someone else to vent to. You've stated your position is the letter of the guideline. I've stated that we should follow the spirit of the guideline, not the letter, as Wikipedia urges us to. I and others have stated why we feel using the full name would benefit the article. You've said you feel it would damage it. That puts us at a crossroads, but since you lack consensus in your favor that puts this discussion as over. There are places you can go to get outside assistance or to try and establish a broader consensus. I fully urge you to do so, if you feel that strongly about it. But you don't seem to care enough to do that. Until you do, kindly go somewhere else with your hypocritical "anger." I AM DONE. Onikage725 03:23, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Spirit of the guideline? The spirit of the guideline should not contradict a clear and concise statement IN the guideline. The spirit of the guideline is not "use the full name"/"use the fan-favorite name", and if it is, you've failed to show it. You've not shown that it would be inconvenient to the majority of people to follow this guideline, so Ignore all rules does not apply. Seriously, you can't oppose a guideline because you interpret it differently - there's no room for interpretation of "the most common English name". - A Link to the Past (talk) 04:27, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I've quoted MANY specific sections of articles on and relating to policies and guidelines to outline my position. You not caring about my position =/= I have failed to state my position. I'm not restating it. Go read my previous comments. Onikage725 05:10, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

A Link to the Past, get over it. The consensus policy did not go your way and never will if you keep arguing the way you do. You are again attempting to prove a point which has already been decided here in this survey that WP:WPDB will use official Japanese-translated-to-English (or Engrish) names. This isn't the same as the Pokémon-related articles, where they are using the English version names. Don't even think about using that (or anything in common with it) as your arguement. So as Deskana has said to you before, drop it. Lord Sesshomaru

Okay, so more people think that not using that guideline is better. Woopie. Doesn't mean that what they say is true. No one enforced ANY legitimate guidelines to say "well, we can go by this!". All anyone ever did was say "well, if all these other anime articles don't have to follow guidelines, then WE don't have to!" and "well, then I guess George W. Bush should be moved to Bush." (even though the word Bush means many more things than the President). You may have won the majority vote, but you didn't win the argument. I provided reasoning behind my argument. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:05, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

For the love of.... Both of you. Everyone. Stop it. This is beyond pointless. And for the record Link, your oversimplification of a number of different people's points into one disdainful sentence doesn't go very far towards assuming good faith towards others, or even remotely giving a damn about opinions other than your own. You're pissed about how this conversation went. I think everyone is. But we really need this cycle to end. I am once again asking, no begging. Onikage725 05:10, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Discussion is over with ok. No need to continue ok. Win or loss this agrument is going nowhere and needs to stop. Heat P 10:25, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

If you want to use his real name, use Kakarrot. Hehe.

Incorrect statements

I have taken it upon myself to change incorrect staements in this article. Wheover you are, I appreciate you have kep it short, but who told you that Majin Buu is Babidi's pet monster? Babidi didn't even know what Buu was like as he was created by Bibidi. Another thing, you keep using the word "warrior" to refer to the Z-Fighters. Why don't you just use the word "fighter" or better yet, "Z-Fighter"? It's good to note them as warriors but you've got to know enough is enough when using the word. Also Kid Buu's teleportation was learned from Goku, not Kaioshin, as Kid Buu requires a ki signal to teleport to places. Kaioshin or Kibitokai doesn't as shown when he teleported to a uninhabited planet. I have made the article a little long but you, whoever you are, have proven incapable of improving without putting correct information. Can someone clean up this page by using the facts, please? Uglyguy2006

Just to point something out, Buu couldn't have taken a technique from Goku, could he? He never actually absorbed Goku's abilities, if I'm not mistaken. Dan 18:10, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

1. I'll be brutally honest with you Uglyguy, your post quite frankly pissed me the f*ck off. Don't just waltz in and insult our edits (mostly mine), and back your views up with false, unsupported claims. It seems to me that you don't even know what you're talking about about because to me, it's extremely obvious that you are neither following manga guideline that we have all decided on, or that you have not even read a page of the manga at all. I apologize if that is incorrect. And it even states at the begining of the summary that we use Manga reference, not anime simply because the anime is riddled with plotholes because of filler sagas and implanted dialogue that was not in the original written context (especially the Dub). The manga states (vol 42, or DBZ volume 26) that Kid Buu learned the teleportation technique from "Kabito Kai" or whatever you want to call him (He is technically speaking still Kaioshin) (Vol 26, page 99: Goku states: "He saw the lord of worlds teleport. He learned it instantly!"). Buu ends up being Babidi's pet monster, instead of explaining that he wasn't at first and then he was later on, just keep it the way it is. The word warrior is more technical then the word fighter, and is the basic translation of "senshi", (as in "Z senshi" from the Japanese context) is warrior. I will suggest that you put in some references of your own before telling me that mine are incorrect. Good day to you. --VorangorTheDemon 18:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Be quiet, Vorangor. No one wants to deal with your flames. Don't make edits if you dislike criticism. - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:13, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

*Sigh* Everyone please settle down. UglyGuy and Vorangor, let's assume good faith and reach mutual conclusions. We need to keep it civil. And Link, let's not have the pot call the kettle black. Let's try to express ourselves in a constructive manner. Onikage725

The fact that I've BEEN uncivil does not mean that I lose the rights to tell someone to be civil. I am perfectly settle, and to criticize someone for giving a warning is uncivil in itself. - A Link to the Past (talk) 03:21, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with you telling anyone to keep it civil. Didn't I just do the same thing? I'm just asking you to be less aggressive when you say it. You said "No one wants to deal with your flames," not "remember to be civil." Hence my asking you to keep your comments constructive. "Be quiet" can be construed as a flame in and of itself. You can't uncivilly ask someone to be civil. That's like trying to put out a fire by pouring gasoline on it. Onikage725 10:03, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, people, cool it. This discussion isn't helping anything at all. It doesn't matter who was uncivil about what. I think it was, "Comment on the contribution, not the contributor"? Can we just leave each other alone, and discuss the project peacefully? Let's just stop this, please? Dan 05:03, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't even talking to Link and he just came after me. Like I said, if he wants to make uncivil comments to me, he should go to my talk page instead of taking up space on an article discussion page. Anyway, back to the subject: I'd like to have a more detailed description of what is so inaccurate about the edits that have been done. --VorangorTheDemon 02:21, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

On the ones brought up here? I don't see a problem. About Buu being babidi's pet, I think it is just semantics. Until he kills Babidi that is. Before that, he was created by Bibidi, belonged to the family, and followed Babidi's every order. I agree that warrior is a better translation, though it isn't necessarily worth fighting over. Aside from translation though, it is more fitting. By way of example- if you had a street thug, a boxer, a football player, and a marine in a room you would have 3 fighters (thug, boxer, marine) but two warriors (football player and marine). I added the football player because they (in the capacity of playing the game at least) are engaging in a simulated full contact war. The boxer and thug, on the other hand, engage regular in fights. The marine is trained for both. The Z Senshi would be more like that marine- they are constantly defending their world from destruction. By contrast, Mr. Satan or King Chappa would simply be fighters.

As for teleportation, Vorangor's right. I double-checked myself. Goku doesn't even get to use shunkan ido. He grabs Dende (and Mr. Satan/Bee in the process) to protect the Dragon Balls, then prepares to teleport to the others and away. However he realizes he doesn't have time to teleport twice. At the same time, Kaiobito (well Kaioshin, and for descriptive names I prefer the pre-dub one because it defers more to the god than his servant) shows up to give them his potarra. Seeing the situation, he takes Goku's hand and uses the kai-kai to teleport everyone to Kaioshinkai. (Vol 26, pages 85-87). On page 94, Kaio-shin adds "...but I can teleport from here to any other planet. It's Kibito's ability. You just saw it." On page 97, Buu searches for their ki, but he doesn't use it to teleport the way Goku does (two fingers to the forehead, concentration). He just simply goes there. He doesn't use ki signatures to teleport, but simply to decide where to teleport. Onikage725 14:02, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Uglyguy, read the manga. Son Goku states that Kid Boo copied Kibitoshin's Instantaneous Movement technique to get straight to the Planet of the Kai's. Unlike in the anime where he uses Goku's version (or so we are led to believe), and blows up planets on the way, However. Then it becomes a debate over which is 'correct' as such. The original Manga or the Anime, which is based off the Manga.

I agree that this argument is getting silly, and you know what, I'm sorry for for blasting Voragor, but you what, you can be very hot-headed and rude yourself. For a Wikipedian, you seem to have a judge, jury and executioner point of view of other editors of articles and even talk to them as if they're stupid, particularly those related to Dragon Ball, even to those trying to improve the article, which Wikipedia is essentially about. It almost seems who consider yourself as if you're the authority on Dragon Ball and is smarter than everybody else for even making an argument, forgetting that you may or may not know the editors and there are those who could have greater understanding than yourself. Please correct me if I'm wrong (And do it like a mature person), but that's what your statements imply. All I suggested is that you should use the word "warrior" less, because early in the manga (which i DO read by the way), the world was simply not used to describe the martial artists, until threats towards the Earth, and to a greater extent the Universe came about, and the argument that Babidi didn't know Buu's capabiltites or what he was like, and he had trouble controlling him. I just disliked someone writing as if Babidi created Majin Buu, negelcting to point out that it was Bibidi who did it. Hence the argument: it's not Babdi's pet monster, even if refers to Buu as such. Of course, this is my issue, but I saw so many incorrections, I simply thought of it as someone writing garbage, and unnessessarily removing my contributions, simply because he/she doesn't read manga, anime, whatever. That's what got me pissed. And even what who wrote afterwards got me even more pissed, but I'm going to let that pass since I started this silly argument. I think we all need to realise that this article is to discuss Son Goku, not how stupid this editor is, or how this guy is a dickhead for editing your words, or how you read what manga more than anybody else. The idea is help those you don't know, learn so we need to stop bashing each other, and just do the article. That's what we're supposed to do on Wikipedia. (P.S. If anyone feels the need to bash me again about my supossedly "false, unsupported claims", take it to a fresher article and please be sensible about it, especially since I did put references, if you look at the Kuririn article, Yes that was me). That's all. Also, I don't know who wrote the previous statement, but thanks for the heads up about Kid Buu's teleportation. Uglyguy2006

That's why I've been saying we should differentiate between versions instead of blending info from both manga and anmie as well as japanese and english versions. Noone else seems to agree. I'd plum forgotten that in the anime they changed the scene. Onikage725 17:33, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

All we're suggesting is that you read our preferences (as in name usages and such) and perhaps even some sources before you stomp in here telling us that we're all wrong. That's rude and offensive. And it doesn't matter who created Buu when writing about it in the Son Goku article, he's still Babidi's pet monster. Further info is considered WP:CRUFT --VorangorTheDemon 02:30, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Mhmm. On the subject of Buu, Bibidi is worth mentioning within his own article, in the saga articles, and of course Bibidi's own list entry. Fro Goku's article, Bibidi is not applicable. Goku was told of him long after even Babidi was dead. Onikage725 09:41, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

list of techniques

should we put a list of techniques for goku cos other ppl like veget and trunks have them so why shouldn't he? 15:18 1 August 2007 JCno1fan

He did have a list of techniques but they were removed. After a quick discussion, we realized that it was unimportant to mention them. The Kamehameha was the only one that could actually stay on the list because it was also OOU. The rest of the techniques fell under WP:CRUFT and were neither had encyclopedic value or notable importantance. When someone get's around to it, the lists from Vegeta's and Trunks's pages probably will also be removed. --VorangorTheDemon 11:16, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Son?

He's Bardock's son? Why is that part of his name? {{Tfd-inline|Unsigned3}}—The preceding comment is by 65.102.255.98 (talk • contribs) 65.102.255.98: Please sign your posts!

Easy, he was born "Kakarotto" on planet Vegeta, but was renamed "Son Goku" on Earth by martial artist Grandpa Son Gohan. Lord Sesshomaru 03:29, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Afterlife Section Added

I added the Afterlife section for Goku's History, but I dont have the manga to cite references. Could someone do that? UzEE (Talk • Contribs) 03:13, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

There is no manga to cite on that. We would need to cite episodes. That whole segment was filler. Onikage725 00:27, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I removed the entire section. It states at the top that it is the manga account, not the anime account. Also it's filler. --VorangorTheDemon 05:20, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Requested move per WP:MOS-JP#Names & WP:GOOGLE

I propose a move/rename to Son Goku, hence, eliminating the "(Dragon Ball)" title. Recently that article, a [superfluous?] popular culture page, was redirected to Sun Wukong, a Chinese character from Journey to the West to first hold the Japanese translated name, Son Goku. The aforesaid article was redirected due to not having any references and as such, was rather crufty. Although Sun Wukong is the first to hold the Japanese name variant, I think Son Goku should be the name of this page per being the most popular character of the name. Search results are on a google image search as well as this one.

Now here is why I'm asking for Son Goku (Dragon Ball) to be moved/renamed to Son Goku instead of the ever more familiar dub name, Goku — it was pretty much decided on the last two recent move requests that the English Wikipedia would utilise the character's original name given in the series. Skim through this section and this section for more information from those discussions. I now believe that I've made this request quite clear and well explained. Lord Sesshomaru 03:29, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Add * Support if you agree that the page should be moved to Son Goku based on the information provided. Add * Oppose if you disagree and/or have something else in mind. Please provide a brief explanation, then sign your name with ~~~~ Lord Sesshomaru 03:29, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

• Strong Support by my vote. Lord Sesshomaru 03:29, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
• Second choice Would rather move to Goku at this point. It's not a different name, it just excludes the family name, and more readers will understand what we mean. Failing that, drop the disambig title. -- Ned Scott 05:45, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment to Ned Scott and anyone else who choose dub names over original ones at this time: we've had few Wikipedians in the past insist that we use the English-only entitled names, preferably FUNimation's, for Dragon Ball-related articles. The problem with this is that WP:WPDB is attempting to use names everybody can agree with, not entirely all for the average reader. To a great degree, we're aiming for the most correct Japanese-translated to English names that are sensical. Naming the article "Son Goku" is advantageous for numerous reasons; one being that readers will become more familiarized with the fact that his creation is roughly derived from Sun Wukong, hence, comparably with the Japanese name for that character, which is "Son Goku". Using dub names mixed with data in the articles taken from the Japanese-audio English-subtitled anime and Viz manga (both quite different than the inconsistent "horrible" dubbed anime) would confuse the person reading these pages. These derivative names are in standard practice per the Dragon Ball WikiProject, and if we were to utilise the inconsistent English names now, every single Dragon Ball-related page on the English Wikipedia would have to be rewritten as the outcome of using dubbed over names for these particular characters. Goku can still redirect here, this is still the most famous figure to date named "Goku" and a google search can verify that. Lord Sesshomaru 07:26, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
  • For the last time, it's not his "dub name", it's his first name without his family name. I'm sorry you hate the dub so much, but get over it. It makes more sense to move the page to Goku. -- Ned Scott 05:44, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Support! I Support the Move. Its better than to move it to Goku and still will solve the problem. UzEE (Talk • Contribs) 00:36, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
• Support - And add a header that says:"Son Goku redirects here, for the character of Journey to the West see Sun Wukong." - Caribbean~H.Q. 00:04, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment I think the current dab should stay. If in the end this page is titled "Son Goku" then a redirect template that says Son Goku redirects to Son Goku would look a little wierd. Lord Sesshomaru 00:14, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
• Support - I wouldn't mind moving it to Son Goku. // DecaimientoPoético 00:36, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
• Strong opposition. Dragon Ball takes inspiration from the legend. Also, just a hunch, but isn't it obvious which side will win in the move debate if the editors of the Sun Wukong article aren't even made aware that this discussion is occurring? Calling bias on that one. - A Link to the Past (talk) 01:12, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - I'll admit you have a strong point on that, don't know why I didn't think of it, I'll summon some of those people right now. Thanks ALTTP. Lord Sesshomaru 01:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
• Support per a Poetic. It wouldn't hurt. -- bulletproof ^3:16 02:37, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose - There are other fictional characters called "Son Goku" besides the Dragon Ball "Son Goku" - You have "Son Goku" from Saiyuki as well. WhisperToMe 04:41, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose Literature/Mythology > Anime/Fad -- 我♥中國 (huge DBZ fan) 05:24, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - but the Son Goku from Dragon Ball is the most common persona of the topic nowadays. The Saiyuki character (and even the Chinese Sun Wukong) are not as notably pertinent as the Dragon Ball example. Take a gander at these google tests:
• Son Goku - wikipedia (54,700 google engine hits)
• Son Goku - wikipedia (3,750 google image hits)

Now here is another evaluation of two modern manga series: Son Goku (Dragon Ball) - 1,220,000 results VS. Son Goku (Saiyuki) - 64,700 results

It's plainly obvious which is the most researched subject for today's generation, hence, the most looked up "Son Goku". Lord Sesshomaru 05:44, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:NOT a popularity contest -- 我♥中國 16:41, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose - While I'm as big a fan as Dragon Ball as the next person, the literary/mythological Sun Wukong is what "Sun Goku" would most likely refer to in any reliable source you care to cite. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:25, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
• Support This is the english wikipedia. Most persons seeking Son Goku, or even Goku, would be seeking the DBZ character rather than a little known mythological character from the orient. If this fails, the Son Wukong article SHOULD contain a disamb link at top linking to this article at the very least. (Kinda sad how they stole top billing and people are lecturing HERE that we haven't notified them, eh?) Kyaa the Catlord 16:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose - A fictional character in a television series of niche populatiry should not take precidence over one of literary and mythological significance. Also, the google test is a VERY poor test to determine relevance and popularity. Google searches do not establish relative importance reliably when the items in comparison are not in the same genre. Anime characters typically get more attention on the internet than literary figures due to the demographic spread of major internet outlets. This does not in any way establish actual notability comparison. --Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 16:58, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
• Support One is a redirect and the other a well known cultural icon of the XXth century (no kidding!). If Son Goku was the original name of the chinese character, I would have given him instant preference for the name. In this case, however, it is utterly pointless to have such a well-known name used as a redirect. It should be one of the two, and as we use the original names, it cannot be Son Wukong. --SidiLemine 17:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment Not to be mean to anyone at all, but who actually thinks of Sun Wukong before anything else when the use of Son Goku or Goku is brought up? I would guesstimate that not many do. Sure, the first Saiyuki narrative / monkey king spawned a myriad of other works but like SidiLemine fabulously put it, this Goku is "a well known cultural icon of the XXth century". If Sun Wukong was instead originally named Son Goku (in Chinese), then I might not have started this survey in the first place. Lord Sesshomaru 19:16, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Precedence should be considered based on encyclopedic value and notability, not fancruft popularity. Popularity does not equate to level of notability.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 20:05, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose Son Goku (Dragon Ball) helps to not confuse it with the other Son Goku named characters, such as the Son Goku from Saiyuki. This alone should be a good reason to keep it the same. Also, though they have the same names, they're completely different characters. Enough said. Ryu
• Oppose Most of why I think so has been said. I think he should keep the series tag, and Son Goku's redirect should be moved from Sun Wukong to Son Goku (disambiguation). I don't see how we help the casual reader by taking out the series header. Onikage725 00:21, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose with exceptions. A disambig page can be created for "Goku". Then this page can be renamed "Goku (Dragon Ball)" and a redirect created for Sun Wukong called "Goku (Journey to the West)". --Ghostexorcist 01:12, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
• Support move to Son Goku per WP:NAMES as the Son Goku from Dragon Ball is by far the most commonly sought Son Goku. Son Goku should absolutely not redirect to Sun Wukong. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 02:43, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment It might be prudent to move the Goku redirect from this article to the disambiguation page. Unless in Saiyuki he uses his surname all the time (I haven't seen much of that series yet), which would mean that the DB character may be the only one to significantly go by his given name only at times. Onikage725 03:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
• Support Same reasons as listed. Takuthehedgehog 04:40, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose No matter how popular it gets, I see no reason of having a pop culture character going pass the disamb page of the original word. Although google searches show how famous the pop culture Son Goku is, The realated lit search gives a link to the original series and returned more lit. ref. than books about Dragon Ball. The google search got its numbers just because of the sheer number of toy merchant sites selling related merchandise and have no reference value as does doing an amazon search in the toys section. There are even books on the original mythological character about politics and the comic result even giving half of books not of the DB series. If the father of Japanese anime(手塚 治虫) can have 8 books published on the monkey god, it must carry much more respect on that category. MythSearcher^talk 14:37, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

P.S. The Japanese wiki got the DB char with the (Dragon Ball) wordings placed after it.

• Oppose - I can support make Son Goku redirect to Son Goku (disambiguation) but do not support move Son Goku (Dragon Ball) to Son Goku. For the majority of Japanese people (old and young in the past and the present), if they heard a name Son Goku, think first is Sun Wukong of course. The character of the same name, Son Goku, also will appear in the future Japanese creations because Journey to the West is loved by the Japanese people and the Japanese creators like to make the variant of the great story with respect. And they (Son Gokus) will not after Son Goku (Dragon Ball), will after Sun Wukong to the end. I am a fan of Dragon Ball and was one of a lot of Japanese children buying Weekly Jump everyweek to read Dragon Ball, but absolutely opposite to this proposal. --Morio 14:58, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose - But Son Goku should redirect to Son Goku (disambiguation). That way, people searching for either version will easily find it. Doceirias 19:17, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment I agree with everyone who says that this is not a popularity contest. This is Wikipedia and we need to give the user what they want and as fast as they want. I actually first try to enter an Article's URL directly and if that fails, then I resort to search. In any case its pretty obvios that the move should be made. Anyone looking at the above figures can do the simple math involved. At a minimum, at least 1.2 million hits to the Son Goku find out that they have to navigate to another page. Its not a battle between an Animie/Manga figure and a mythological character, its giving the user what they want first hand. And while on the subject, i would like to mention that before this, I never knew another Goku or Son Goku existed. Actually I never even paid attention to that Son Goku page and just clicked on the Dragon Ball link and moved on. I hope you people will now reconsider. UzEE (Talk • Contribs) 23:14, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
• Comment There looks to be major uncertainty in regards to whether the proper name (Son Goku) should be directed in a page by its own English-language dub popularity, historical value, Japanese-translated to English name, or just disambiguation. All of which are acceptable but only one of which is the most neccessary — the trouble is that some argue in favour of English speakers, viewers and/or true Dragon Ball fans (this is the English Wikipedia and we should have an article exclusively for just that), Chinese/Japanese culture reference (ie, Sun Wukong. The very first character gets to keep the name, but what about Cricket (sport) located at Cricket instead of this insect's article being at Cricket?), perhaps even having the name located at Sun Wukong in popular culture or Son Goku (disambiguation) (um, which one exactly?). Listen folks, how can we come up with something if we continue bringing up different ideals? Lord Sesshomaru 06:38, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment This is impossible. I would say that if everybody have different ideals, we will come to no consensus, and nothing will change. I fully understands that we are not making a vote here, but currently it stands at support:oppose = 10:11. Although it seems like a fair 50:50 competition, but the support from users DecaimientoPoético, bulletproof and Takuthehedgehog is pretty much just voting and have no comment whatsoever, while most of the opposers agreed pretty much on the same ideal, that popularity is not the only standard we should be considering here. The original story was so popular in Japan that earned its name in a lot of remake and retell of the story, and Dragon Ball being a very vague one of them. while the Google search returned so much results, we will always have to consider the effect of the merchants selling toys all around the world and thus those results are pretty much a mere copy of the same toys over and over and over again. MythSearcher^talk 09:51, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Neutral: I don't think it really matters. It looks better if you simply have "Son Goku" though. But then again, there are two other characters named Son Goku. However, usually when people are talking about "Son Goku", they are talking about the one from Dragon Ball. --VorangorTheDemon 12:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

I think this time the move should be made! What do you think guys? UzEE (Talk • Contribs) 00:36, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, I've said pretty much everything needed to say. I'm strongly in favour of this move because I'm sure that the Dragon Ball character is the most talked about and most regarded "Goku" and "Son Goku" figure. I mean, the visage of Sun Wukong, Alakazam the Great character Son Goku, Saiyuki Goku, or the Gokudo-kun Manyuki Son Goku does not usually come to mind when referring to those two names. People I know do not think of any other Goku aside from the Dragon Ball one, maybe also the Saiyuki character, but that's unimportant. Point is, if one decides to look up "Son Goku" or "Goku" on Wikipedia they'd expect to end up here. His persona is so well-known that even the first volume of Saiyuki (manga) references him. Lord Sesshomaru 16:46, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

yeah, Goku or Son Goku only reminds me of Kakarot. So there is no need of that Dragon Ball tag in the name. UzEE (Talk • Contribs) 23:12, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Lord Sesshomaru 05:44, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't mean to be offensive, but seriously - get a broader horizon, guys. This move request is like asking for Dorian Gray to be redirected to The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (film)#Dorian Gray. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:31, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

It seems like you hit the nail on the head. This is quite an overstep to change the name. Also, UzEE, you seem to claim there is a consensus in place already. That couldn't be farther from the truth I'm sorry to say, especially give the short time this has been about. Consensus must be allowed time to develop, so that all potential views are given equal chance to be presented. What you are proposing is More of a tacit vote of the first x number of people to happen to the page. --Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 16:58, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry. I didnt mean to punch my views through. I was just giving my opinion. The discussion is still pretty much active. UzEE (Talk • Contribs) 10:47, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Someone should have informed in Sun Wukong and Son Goku talk pages that this discussion existed at all. -- ReyBrujo 06:14, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Most certainly. I was going to do it, but it would probably be best to give the original poster a chance to show good faith by doing it himself in light of his (perhaps unintentional) attempts at votestacking here and here.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 13:51, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Added a section to Sun Wukong which is where Son Goku redirects to pertaining to this discussion. Kyaa the Catlord 14:01, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

It's kind of disappointing to see that Sesshomaru never left any notice at Son Wukong's page. Telling the Chinese WikiProject isn't adequate when you're telling the Anime project and the DB project, not bothering to tell the Japan project or the Son Wukong editors. - A Link to the Past (talk) 15:40, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree. In the interest of WP:AGF I haven't pushed it any further, but I am suspicious of his reasoning, and I hope it was simply a case of procedural forgetfulness. Anyway, the good news is even with that oversight, several those who would oppose to the proposal have still found their way here it would seem. After all the supposed "consenus" for a move has transformed into a relatively even split once the word got out. I would surmise that if this was handled correctly from the beginning we might already be seeing a fair majority of editors not falling for this fanboyism, for lack of a better term. On another note, the list Sun Wukong in popular culture, formerly a part of the Sun Wukong shows quite a few figures, including dragonball's Son Goku, that are either named for or a transposition of Sun Wukong. Why aren't one of them in the running for it? Why doesn't Apollo take me directly to Apollo Creed, or the Apollo space program, or one of the other dozens of articles listed on Apollo (disambiguation)? Anything to originate that many branches is clearly more culturally significant and deserving of the native name than it's branches. As for the "google test", just because people make fanpages and drone on and on about something on different forums, doesn't make it more significant or popular. The google test's scope is limited primarily to establishing something's relationship TO THE INTERNET and no further. --Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 15:59, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

He did put in a note in the WP:China talk page yesterday. MythSearcher^talk 16:28, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Allow me to cleanse my apparent role in this survey; I invited anyone (including similar WikiProjects) I was familiar with that viewed Dragon Ball-related pages and anyone else I saw around for that matter. I myself told A Link to the Past that I wasn't sure who else to invite, so he could assist in letting others know. To my surprise, he did not alert others and instead says a dickish comment about me, causing others to suspect my motives for this. I would call this an extreme act of bad faith on his part, he was well aware that I did not know about such existing projects and if I had known of WP:JAPAN & that Wukong fans are Dragon Ball fans, I most certainly would have let them know. I see A Link to the Past doing this on an act of revenge (he recently wanted this article renamed Goku (Dragon Ball), his request had failed, and has since held a grudge against WP:DBZ and all those who opposed him).

On another thought, perhaps moving Son Goku (disambiguation) to Son Goku would be more appropiate than having Son Goku (Dragon Ball) moved there. Does anyone have any other suggestions or can we agree on this? Lord Sesshomaru 17:03, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Now, although I have really bad experience with ALTTP, and what he did is pretty much assuming bad faith and dragged on a really long arguement of no reason at all, I must say that we should still assume good faith here. While the original page the redirect is linking to is pretty obvious to be the place you asked people to come. Let's prevent this from going into another unhappy situation and stick to what we must do. Notify the other projects suggested above and maybe noitfy the Mythology project as well, I forgot the myth project link. MythSearcher^talk 17:53, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I think changing the redirect to the disambig is more than enough. It is generally not preferred to have disambig pages without the parenthetical in the title, though I still feel the best course of action is to leave well enough alone. The disambig page is linked right at the top of the target for the redirect. I would also caution you in your accusations Sesshomaru. First of all, you're calling link "dickish" in his actions could be seen as a personal attack. At the very least it is not WP:CIVIL. Perhaps you should also consider while you are upset with the bad faith light your actions are being seen in that you are yourself viewing his in the same manner. You will also note that the cautions regarding votestacking and notifying the proper parties arose before link made any statements on this page regarding this matter. We are also faced with the possibility that he came here before reading his talk page, and was not aware of your prompting. On another hand, as the originator of this whole issue, it really is up to you to take the responsibility to notify the correct parties. I have a hard time beleiving you were not aware of WP:Japan, and you certainly were aware of the Sun Wukong page. Whether or not editors "on" the Sun Wukong page are dragonball fans is not really a matter of concern. The aim of the solicitation should be to invite anyone who might have a stake in it, be it fan, opponent, content expert, neutral party, or what have you into the discussion. On that note though, WP:FAITH is getting a little banged up here and I would propose we whipe the slate clean and stop with the accusations.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 17:48, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

• Comment to Oni Ookami Alfador: A Link to the Past knew that I was unsure of who else to contact, if you compare the timestamps then you'll know I asked him first to help before he decided to turn on me again (for no reason) after I thanked him. Believe me when I say that WP:JAPAN and WP:CHINA is brand-new to me and was only told about their existence after I began a clean invitation to those seemingly familiar with the subject. Ask yourself, why would I summon users who may not know anything about the Dragon Ball figure and make an idiot out of myself? Just now that I know that about every Wukong editor is particularly familiarized with Goku (DBZ). ALTTP's comment at the very least was unkind and my reaction to him wasn't a direct attack, simply I pointed out that his bad faith motif of having me as "the bad guy" in this situation is completely bias and, on top of that, plain wrong. Oni Ookami Alfador, maybe you should read about assuming good faith since you don't trust some my actions or what I've honestly said and yes, let's end this accusation brawl now and get back to the matter at hand, the redirect "Son Goku". Lord Sesshomaru 18:25, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I was not assuming any faith, I was merely pointing out that while you are taking issues with other's faith assumptions, you are making the very same asessments. Good faith is a two way street. When you begin accusing others, you open yourself up to it. As for Link's talk page, not everyone reads their talk page the instant a message appears. Just because it was there before the one here doesn't mean he read it. I don't see a response there. And like I said, it's rather inconsequential. Nothing he said resulted in any assumptions of bad faith so no harm done. If you look you will note that the initial objections to the limited canvassing came before Link made his post.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 18:42, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I was making the statement that you should have left a message on the talk page of Son Wukong, as anyone editing it would be immediately interested in the outcome of this debate. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:43, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Also, I made the statement after discovering that after I pointed out to you that you should have left noticed on more talk pages than you did, you did not leave any messages to those talk pages, one of which I KNEW you knew of. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:54, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Let's be civil here, I asked for your help and you instead decided to criticize my efforts and stabbed me in the back. I have already revealed that I didn't know WP:JAPAN and just before I had lost Internet connection did I find out of WP:CHINA and I let 'em know of this. Had I not lost connection I surely would have informed others, this is what we mean by assuming good faith. What I find slightly strange is this: if you knew that I forgot (or rather didn't have time) to leave an update about this move on Wukong's talk page or others why did you not let them know? ALTTP, this is exactly why you've been blocked many times, you hardly try to get along with other users, you do things to piss us off. If anyone ever asked something of me, I'd do all I can to help that person. Now that this has been discussed, let us see what we can do with this "Son Goku". Lord Sesshomaru 00:17, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

So basically, you somehow forgot about Sun Wukong? Or maybe you assumed that no one who edited the article cared? Also, yes, someone who refers to a comment made as a "dickish comment" is the first person I want to say that I'm not assuming good faith. What the Hell did you do on my talk page? You acknowledged me and then thanked me for making the comment. Yes, that is what I expected - acknowledgment and thanks, not that you do what I said you should do at a discussion page you were very aware of.

You are assuming bad faith. I responded to your lack of action, and more than just myself believed that you were not acting. Tell me - WHY didn't you alert Talk:Sun Wukong immediately after reading my comment? You either chose not to or could not. Which is it? - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:27, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

And here is why I was unsure of letting the Wukong members know. Lord Sesshomaru 08:23, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm just gonna stick my neck out here to ask, "Does it really matter anymore?" They've been notified by now right? Let's stop going in circles about a resolved issue and focus on what's important. Note- this is directed at everyone who's arguing, not any one party. Onikage725 00:34, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm also making the point that Lord Sesshomaru inappropriately brought up my block log to commit a - wait for it - personal attack against me. My block log is totally irrelevant, and is being used to attack me for attacking him. So basically, "he attacked me, so I should be able to attack him [even if it has nothing to do with the discussion]." - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:38, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Say what? Attack you? I said that my connection was lost shortly afterwards (was going veerryy slow, then failed) and yes I was unable to alert the Wukong talk page as a result of it. Can we please stop arguing now? Revenge never solves anything Link and I don't see why you can't be civil and think "something must have happened for him to invite others. I'll wait". Let's drop it, this discussion is driving me crazy. Lord Sesshomaru 00:54, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Let me be clear in that I don't particularly care. To sum up- Sesshomaru, you were a bit overzealous and missed some procedural steps, hence the crticism. Link, I don't know if it is your intent or not but come off as volatile when informing someone of an error or disagreeing with them in general. This usually leads to that person taking a similar tone with you, and so on. Both of you are currently assuming bad faith against each other. I very much doubt either of you means any harm, so can this just be dropped? If you must, answer me this, honestly. What will fighting on this talk page about a current non-issue solve? If the answer is just to vent, then please take it to your respective talk pages. Onikage725 01:25, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Alternate Solution

Why doesn't anyone propose that we make it redirect a disambig? I seems like the most respectful, appropriate thing to do. It would help reduce the number of times the words "more encyclopedic", "popular" and "cruft" are used, as they all start to get on my nerves.--SidiLemine 16:32, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, there are people proposing that up there, see the comments. MythSearcher^talk 16:54, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Making Son Goku the disambiguation page in some form appears useless. For example, why is Cricket at the sport and not at the insect, or the disambiguation page in this instance? Here is what I can make out of it: we need to stop thinking about ourselves and ponder on what non-Wikipedians would like. Would your average reader type "Son Goku" on the internet and normally expect to end up at some obscure figure from a truly influential tale? Most obviously not. To a high degree, can we just concur that redirecting "Son Goku" to the Chinese equivalent or to the disambiguation is redundant? Think about the readers & fans and use the Cricket arguement as the precedence. Also for the Dragon Ball articles we have here there is Son Gohan, Son Goten, and all we need now is a matching Son Goku in the place of Son Goku (Dragon Ball). There is no hard policy I'm scrupulous of that implies "WP:NOT a popularity contest" or anything likewise. There is WP:COMMONNAMES and instead of Goku use the second most popular and complete name for everyone to grasp fully and thoroughly, Son Goku. Any other ideas or concerns? Lord Sesshomaru 19:39, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

The basic issue here is really just what to do with Son Goku. it was previously a thoroughly redundant article on Sun Wukong that doubled as a glorified disambiguation page for characters like this one and the oft mentioned Saiyuki character. It's been nixed merged with Wukong and became a redirect to Wukong. The proposal here is basically to let this particular character take that place. The most sensible answer would be to change the redirect so that it went to the disambiguation page, which itself could use some exapnsion. I would wonder if Wukong itself ought to have the disambiguation page (since Goku is an adapted name after all), but Sun Wukong in popular culture seems to basically fill that role. And cricket should be at the insect or a disambig page, if you want my opinion. Onikage725 00:26, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Onikage725! Even I was unaware of that pop culture page and since it is technically serving as a sort of disambiguation page, then what reason is there to have Son Goku redirect there or to Sun Wukong, other than historical references and the like? I'm using Cricket as the perfect example for this one move/rename. Remember the common people that research "Son Goku" and think, where should they rightfully end up? Lord Sesshomaru 01:02, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

There is a discrepancy in the demographics of Wikipedia editors - especially editors who are dedicated enough to participate in polls like this - versus Wikipedia users - who are almost any members of the general public. I may be guilty of perpetuating a stereotype here, but I think everyone will agree that dedicated Wikipedia editors are predominantly male, young, and technologically literate - the very same demographic, in other words, as the main audience of manga/anime.

It should therefore come as no surprise that for most Wikipedia editors - myself included - Goku is the Dragon Ball Goku. However, we should recognise that this is a systematic bias produced by the demographic of Wikipedia editors. Likewise, Google results suffer from the same bias, since those creating internet pages (or posting on message boards, etc), are likely to be from the same demographic.

I think it is fairly obvious that "Jouney to the West" or "Monkey King" is better known among the general public than "Dragon Ball". A person who first encounters Jouney to the West/Monkey King from a Japanese source is likely to know the character as "Son Goku". I did a search for "Sun Goku" on JSTOR, and found no sources among the first 25 referring to the Dragon Ball "Son Goku" - all of them refer to Son Goku the mythological/literary figure.

I'm not saying JSTOR is the ultimate authority - but we really need to tread with caution and be aware of the systematic bias caused by the demographics of Wikipedia editorship. Given that Wikipedia lives on reliable sources, I think we should err on the side of caution and go according to the weight of reliable sources. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 01:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Just asking, what is a very reliable source in your opinion? I mean no ill-will but there are hundreds upon hundreds of reliable ones. No offense but I believe more people worldwide use google rather than JSTOR. As a matter of fact, I've never ever even heard of JSTOR, I trust many more would be in unison with me. You are correct on the Chinese protagonist being the first to hold the Japanese-titled name "Son Goku", however, I firmly digress that Jouney to the West is more famed by the majority of anyone or anything in the world than the Dragon Ball metaseries. Regarding that recent Cricket survey, I honestly don't think those whom opposed the rename to Cricket (sport) were bias at all. They are doing the right thing, they were thinking of what the people would want instead of what they wanted. We should do the same here and take it to heart; I implore you people to think of our readers of this generation and the next, what do they want? A monkey king from a story centuries beyond centuries of years ago? Or does one seek a more influential story character of today? Which gives artists, producers, etc., more inspiration, Journey to the West or the metaseries Dragon Ball? Give it some serious thought folks, let's not be selfish here. Lord Sesshomaru 01:45, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I have heard of JSTOR, it is a repository of "scholarly" research papers. I think it is far more reliable than a normal website with random info. --Ghostexorcist 01:49, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

JSTOR is new to me. And I would only like to point out again, what I said before. Assuming the fact that Journey to the West was popular, Dragon Ball IS popular now. Sure to the eastern audience, especially Japanese, its an old story now, but Dragon Ball has just penetrated the west, especially with the re-run of the Animie series on Cartoon Network and Toonami in most regions around the world, even a greater number of audience is interested in Goku from Dragon Ball than the Journey to the West character. So all I am trying to say is that we should be trying to secure the Future audience instead of the Past, simply because history is history and the future is yet to come. UzEE (Talk • Contribs) 02:29, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Journey to the West has been around for roughly 400 years, whereas Dragon ball has only been around for almost 25. How in the world do you know that an "even a greater number of audience is interested in Goku from Dragon Ball than the Journey to the West character"? Please provide a source for that statement. In addition, just because you've never heard of JSTOR doesn't mean that only a select few know about it. --Ghostexorcist 03:11, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

And Dragon Ball might stop being popular. Simple as that. - A Link to the Past (talk) 02:48, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict) - While it is "the thing nowadays" we should go with the flow. When Dragon Ball gets old (which I strongly doubt it ever will) then the article can always go back to Son Goku (Dragon Ball). I really wish I could go with another sample besides the Cricket arguement, but popularity utilising the most accurate information is the way to go. For now, Son Goku would have to be the name of this article, not the disambiguation name, and most definitely not a wasteful redirect for the less popular (at least for this century) Sun Wukong. My response to the person that brought up that whole JSTOR topic is this: the best repository/search engine which would be the one that everyone with Internet access normally uses are things like Google, Yahoo!, MSN, and/or Lycos. Using a program where most seem unfamiliar with (like JSTOR) isn't the way to go for popular research and results. Lord Sesshomaru 03:35, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand where these statements about Sun Wukong being "less popular" than Goku are coming from. Just because you and your buddies personally like Goku more than Sun Wukong doesn't mean the monkey king is less popular around the world. --Ghostexorcist 03:54, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Nobody implied that they liked it more, it's the familiarity with the name in this case. I actually tried to find a reference to cite what you said. Of course, none came up. FYI, I'm still judging the entire Son Goku bias on this google search and WP:UCN, not because I like it or love it. I don't doubt the sincerity of Google, but it is likely that according to those search results that more praise the Dragon Ball persona than any other. It is self-explanatory, afterall, that I can't provide more than this. I'm seeing that those opposing this move obviously aren't thinking about the common reader and that downright disrupts me. Again, must I repeat the Cricket arguement? Lord Sesshomaru 04:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

The problem with that is it again shows a bias in opinion. Worldwide, both of these topics (JttW and DB) are old. Obviously Journey is much older, but the fact is neither is new. DB in America is even past its prime. One episode aired on Saturdays is far from its glory days when between DB and Z we were getting 1 to 2 solid hours per day (depending on the month, the programming blocks were always changing). Likewise, claiming Journey to the West *was* popular is flawed. The last first-run episode of DBZ was in 2001. The same year that the Monkey King/Lost Empire TV mini-series aired on NBC. I find it seriously hard to swallow that more people are familiar with Toonami than NBC. If I'm not mistaken, the Saiyuki anime ran 'til '04. There is a live-action series Saiyuuki based on the novel that aired last year. I strongly feel that there is absolutley no precedent to think Dragon Ball is somehow newer or more popular than Journey to the West and its other derivative works. Just because it was a big deal to us during middle/high school doesn't mean the majority of the world gave a damn about afternoon Toonami. That's a niche demographic. Claiming otherwise is like claiming Romeo x Juliet has more worldwide influence than Romeo and Juliet, or even West Side Story. Onikage725 03:58, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Two points in response to all the responses to my earlier message (and thank you for your responses):

1. DBZ is not "new", nor is it "popular" among the general population in the way that, say, the Simpsons is popular. DBZ is old, and whether now or ten years ago it is popular only among a certain demographic.

2. JSTOR, for your information, is a collection of academic journals and other materials in the social sciences. The fact that some of the active participants in this debate haven't even heard of JSTOR just goes to illustrate what I said about the limitations and systematic bias produced by the demographic of editors - which, btw, cuts both ways: it would be wrong for me to assume everyone in the world knows about JSTOR, just as it would be wrong for you to assume that everyone else in the world watches anime or manga.

Please bear in mind WP:RS and the limitations of your own experiences and backgrounds. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:07, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

The title "Son Goku" may drawn some connotation in English as a cartoon figure, but it is also the exact name in Japanese romanization of the Chinese mythical monkey figure. The "(Dragon Ball)" title must stay to distinguish this. Son Goten and Gohan articles do not need this because the title solely represents the characters of Dragon Ball, and nothing else in literature.

If im to create a new cartoon with a central character name Mickey Mouse based on the Disney character 400 years later, and the show somehow became very very popular, and in certain demographics opinions are that my creation's popularity exceeds the Disney character, there still needs to be indication to distinguish the two.

Regarding cricket - if im correct, the history of the sport and its name has nothing to do with the insect. A recent discussion gained no consensus for the redirect. In contrast the title "Son Goku" has everything to do with Sun Wukong. Ian Kiu (hahaha...) 05:24, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I really don't understand this. There is an agreement to use the original character's names. Son Wukong is a chinese character, named Son Wukong. Son Goku is a Japanese character, named Son Goku. To use Ian Kiu's example, if the Brazilian translation of Son Wukong had been Mickey Mouse, should it take precedence there? Once again, I'd be satisfied with a disambig, but having a translated name redirect to a character over the original name of another is beyond me.--SidiLemine 10:07, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Son Goku is the Japanese pronunciation of Sun Wukong. Japanese sources are an important way through which English speaking audiences first encounter Sun Wukong and the Journey to the West.

The analogy to the Brazillian Mickey Mouse is inapt: we as English speakers never encounter Sun Wukong in the guise of its Brazillian name "Mickey Mouse".

A better analogy might be this: Michaelangelo redirects to Michelangelo, becuase it is the "Anglicised" spelling of the Italian artist's name. Now, among certain demographics (kids under 13, say), Michaelangelo is more likely to mean Michelangelo (TMNT) (being the original spelling used on that show). Should we change the redirect to the latter? --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:16, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I'm afraid you lost me. Which one is the correct spelling, and which ont the anglicised version? As for our subject, do you mean that most English language texts about Son Wukong use the name Son Goku?--SidiLemine 10:24, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Michaelangelo is "anglicised", Michelangelo is correct. Some (maybe not most) English language sources use Son Goku instead of Sun Wukong - try "Son Goku" in JSTOR. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:30, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

That's an excellent example. I'd go so far as to say TMNT's Mikey isn't just familiar to kids under 13. I'm 24 and I grew up with the old cartoon. I read the Eastman and Laird original comics, the Archie comics, played the arcade and Nintendo games, saw the movies, even dabbled in the newer series. The turtles have been impacting two generations of kids in a major way. But does that give one character from this fictional universe more weight than the artist? No way in Hell. Not even close. The turtles are fictional characters named after real artists of great historical importance. Likewise, say "Shredder" to any male 25 or under and chances are you instantly conjure an image of a metal-clad ninja in a cape with claws on his hands. Yet Shredder redirects to a disambig page on "shredding," which contains links to relevant articles (including the classic Turtles villain). Onikage725 11:02, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

SidiLemine, would it help to think of it like this? To western eyes, Sun Wukong and Son Goku look distinctive, but keep in mind that these are both romanized. The two are the Chinese/Japanese equivolents of each other. Think about certain names in English and Spanish. George to Jorge, John to Juan, Mary to Maria. The thing with Goku is that the Japanese seem to make works inspired by the novel more often than the Chinese. Therefore, more characters with names that romanize as Son Goku seem to come forth. Onikage725 11:12, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I completely forgot this- Sesshomaru, that search link you gave me really needs to be refined before it can count as evidence. It was just a search for "Son Goku." That's going to give you hits for every instance of the name, regardless of what "series" he belongs to. And, for that matter, information on male offspring (and if I'm not mistaken, Goku means emptiness or sky, and the search may include results here and there for those as well). It also fails to exclude things like, say, this debate (the first two links show this article and the one on Wukong). I recently made this mistake on a search myself. What appeared to be a supermajority in favor of a certain name was actually, when properly refined, a distinct minority. It may also be prudent to consider the weight of the sources. Just because at the height of the shows popularity in the states every kid had access to geocities doesn't mean the FrEiza's DrAgEn BaLl page should actually be considered relevant to this conversation (note- I dunno if that is specifically a page. Rather, that's the type of thing one comes across if they peruse DBZ fansites for any length of time). Onikage725 11:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

So, if I follow your Shredder example, does that mean you are in favor of a redirect to a disambig?--SidiLemine 14:36, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

That's correct. My position has mostly been to redirect Son Goku from Sun Wukong (as their have been a number of Japan-specific adaptations to warrant noting the difference) to the disambiguation page. That page should itself be expanded, because I believe it currently only has this Goku, the one from the Saiyuki anime, and a link to Wukong. I am against labeling this particular character as the "primary" Son Goku, as he is the product of a loose adaptation of a literary figure of great historical impact. Onikage725 21:08, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I am only opposing the nominator's initial proposal. I believe that is having "Son Goku" redirect to "Son Goku (Dragon Ball)", or renaming this current article to "Son Goku". But I am also agreeing the points made by Sesshomaru and Oni Ookami Alfador (if i read them right), that a disambig is somewhat useless, and it is more than enough.

Son Goku is Chinese characters read in Japanese romanization, so even in English, the title "Son Goku" still means the monkey king, equivalent to "Sun Wukong", "Syun Ng Hung", and "Sonogong". It is no coincidence that the creator use this title as the character name, and so is the skateboarding turtle. They are both named after another figure. The naming of cricket the sport and cricket the insect is rather unclear, the connection between the two is uncertain. This is not the case with Son Goku, Michelangelo, and Apollo. Ian Kiu (hahaha...) 21:52, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Finally I've come up with something other than the Cricket excuse:

1. What about the fact that Friends redirects to the TV show instead of Friends (disambiguation)?
2. Why does "Bobby Henderson" take you to Flying Spaghetti Monster and not the famous musician or this disambiguation?

This whole arguement is like saying Elvis should be directed at Elvis (given name) and not the most acclaimed Elvis Presley. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru 16:08, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Please, both (three?) sides, refrain from flinging examples trying to find jurisprudence. This is not the way wikipedia works: the examples may always be wrong, and policies may have changed. Let's think hard and try to find a solution that serves all the goals we put in the projects.--SidiLemine 16:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't fully agree if this redirects to a disambig, but I will not have immediate objections. Ian Kiu (hahaha...) 19:43, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Maybe someone has brought this up before, but just to emphasize I want to say what I made out. The current Son Goku redirects to Sun Wukong, which is the original name of the Chinese character. Son Goku is just the romanization of its Japanese translation. Right? Well, if Son Goku isn't his original Chinese name, then why are you using it? Why not set the page to redirect to Goku, whose original name IS Son Goku.

Its just a matter of principle. Lets say your name is Johny and there is another guy in your school whose first name is Allan but his middle name is also Johny. Well in the attendance register, who would get the name Johny? The original guy or the one whose secondary name is Johny. Think about it. I know its not a good example but I think you got the Idea what I am trying to say. UzEE (Talk • Contribs) 20:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Im no linguist, but if I believe correctly, Son Goku is the romanization of its Japanese transcription, not a translation from Chinese. Ian Kiu (hahaha...) 23:37, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I input the Chinese characters for Sun Wukong into a Chinese dictionary which also gives a description of each character in Japanese and Korean. The following is based upon Japanese Onji (please see "Japanese On" in the Pronunciation box):

Sun = Son

Wu = Go

Kong = Kuu

Onji is based upon the "sound" of the original characters. So, Sun Wukong was created some 375 years before dragon ball and the Onji name of Song Goku is based off the sound of the original Chinese characters. Therefore, Son Goku should stay the redirect for Sun Wukong! --Ghostexorcist 00:08, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll throw in my two cents. The original name of the character is 孫悟空, the Chinese pronounce that as "Sun Wukong" and the Japanese pronounce that as "Son Goku". Thus, Sun Wukong = Son Goku, one is not more "original" over the other nor is one more "secondary", as UzEE seems to be suggesting. In Japan where people actually say "Son Goku", they're likely referring to the literary figure and not Dragon Ball. If you think the literary figure is "an obscure character" compared to the Super Saiyan, you're just ignorant (I mean it in the most polite of terms). Plus, are we striving to become a scholarly encyclopedia or not? _dk 00:13, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Note to Uzee: Sun Goku is not the Japanese "translation" of Sun Wukong: it's the Japanese pronunciation. The name is written the same in both languages. It's a bit like how Paris is pronounced "paris" in English instead of "paree" - "paris" is not the English "translation" of the French name - it's just the English pronunciation. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 00:24, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I confirm. Still, Son Goku is the romanisation of the japanese pronunciation of a chinese name! I'm all in favor of Sun Wukong for the notability/scholarly interest debate, but I find giving him full advantage without even the use of a disambig a bit far fetched. Specially when the characters are so close, and it is possible to mistake one for the other.--SidiLemine 12:11, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

There is a Son Goku disambig page. I and some others are in favor of having Son Goku redirect to that (and leaving this one as Son Goku (Dragon Ball)). I think Wun Wukong is fine where it is. Come to think of it, the other media article for Sun Wukong and the Son Goku disambig page might benefit from a merger. Any adapted Son Goku character would be a Wukong adaptation by rights, and that article lists more of them than the current Goku disambig anyway. Onikage725 15:10, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

(unindent) Excellent suggestion. This all makes perfect sense, and will help put the DBZ character into perspective. Shall we restart the discussion on that basis?--SidiLemine 16:14, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I guess I'll settle for Son Goku (disambiguation) to be moved to Son Goku at this time. In case anyone is still holding their suspicions of me and this poll, never did I think that this move was that controversial and now that I know of WP:JAPAN and the users at the Wukong talk page, I will advise of such related moves from here on (if I don't, please assume that my Internet failed, as my DSL isn't perfect & I still have yet to purchase cable). Should I ask the supportive users of this survey comment here? Lord Sesshomaru 17:30, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I like how you imply that I should have known that something happened to prevent you from leaving a message. And because of your faulty assumption, you have become antagonistic and have threatened to ban me multiple times and have made several personal attacks. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:39, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, I must say that I can see how this works for Sesshomaru. My offices internet works really bad very often and when that happens, 9 times out of 10, it will stop me from loading new pages and sending out longer edits but I will still be able to do short ones like replies and fixing typos, especially when I try to save articles that are going through AfD, and I seriously considered either the computer or the network is cursed against me or something. I assume good faith on this one, at least for now. ALTTP, please, this is pretty much over, don't try to drag it on after someone who got their reasons to oppose you and finally agrees with you. I know that Sesshomaru is not assuming good faith up there, but you can still be civil enough to stop rubbing it in, right? MythSearcher^talk 18:04, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

By the fact that he has been threatening and insulting me on my user talk page, his user talk page, other users' talk pages, this page, and the Android discussion, it's not over by a long shot. It'll be over once Sesshomaru decides to stop harassing me or when he stops being able to. - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:09, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

On top of that, this is the only page he can't ignore my comments. He deletes them from his page, seems to have stopped discussing the Androids, and I doubt he'd pay attention to my talk page. So the only page he can't delete my comments and that he's participating in is this one. - A Link to the Past (talk) 18:27, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

If you guys feel you're being harassed, it would be a far better idea to request some form of arbitration. Carrying out an extended fight on article talk pages is counter-productive. It isn't what these pages are for and could very well lead to one or both of you getting blocked. Onikage725 21:53, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree. This is not helping our discussion. So I suggest that it should stop now. Everyone can have technical difficulties so there is no point blaming them. UzEE (Talk • Contribs) 02:24, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Conclusion

Back on the main topic of discussion, I would like to apologize for my bad comprehension on the Sun Wukong issue. I really dont know a thing about Chinese and Japanese, and even English is a secondary language to me.

I guess everyone agrees to make the Disambig now? I would like to sum up the discussion so far into the following three points:

• Sun Wukong stays as it is. No need to show a new disambig line on top.
• Son Goku (Dragon Ball) also stays at the same place. I think placing a link to the Disambig here wouldn't also do any good?
• Son Goku is redirected to Son Goku (disambiguation). Any other Sun Wukong and Son Goku inspired articles can be merged here and this would serve as an index to them all.

Now do we all agree on the above three points? Or is there a still better solution? UzEE (Talk • Contribs) 02:24, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, seems there is no better reason then to have it so. Lord Sesshomaru 20:19, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed.--SidiLemine 12:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed except on one possible point. I would caution on making the disambig page a merger of related pages. Ideally it would be a summary of each page and link to it, as 90% of the disambig pages do. It would most likely be served as a variation of the Won Wukong list. If no one objects I will however take the merge notice off of the article page as that portion of the discussion seems to be resolved.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 19:39, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

For the record, I plan to have Son Gokuu, Son Gokuh, Son Gokou, Son Gokū, and any other variations redirect to the disambiguation page. I assume we're clear on that? Lord Sesshomaru 16:23, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable to redirect every pronounciation variations to the same page. MythSearcher^talk 16:54, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Yup, sure, that's a go.--SidiLemine 18:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Its only logical. UzEE (Talk • Contribs) 02:10, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Language

The italic sentence at the top of the article says that "Son Goku" is a Chinese name, but it and everything else about the article sounds Japanese. Hallpriest9 (Talk) 00:32, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

The surname Sun is actually Chinese. Son Goku is a the Japanese pronunciation of the name Sun Wukong. Dragonball was loosely based on the Chinese classic Journey to the West. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 18:44, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

It is probably one of the most misunderstood part of the story, where everyone thinks it is a Japanese name merely because it is a Japanese anime. The name is actually Chinese. It is the author's intention to adopt a character with Chinese name. When you look at names in Asian countries, you don't just look at the English alphabet spelling, you look at the name in its native script, in this case 孫悟空, Japanese don't bear the surname "孫", only Chinese do. (See Sun (surname)) The name could be transliterated using different systems in different countries and hence its spelling varies (e.g. Sun Wu Kong, Son Go Ku, Suan Ng Hong), but it doesn't matter how it is spelled, they all derives from the name "孫悟空", the exact same name of the central character in the Chinese novel Journey to the West. International Common Editor (talk) 23:02, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Just when you think Son Goku is a Japanese name created for Dragon Ball, you may realise it does not only appear in Dragon Ball, it also appears in the Japanese translated version of Journey to the West ([1] p173) published some hundred years before Dragon Ball. The Japanese always pronounce the Chinese name 孫悟空 as Son Goku, it is Japanese romanisation but it doesn't mean the name itself is of Japanese origin. International Common Editor (talk) 23:02, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Moreover, in the Japanese wikipedia, the name 孫悟空 ("Son Goku" in Japanese romanisation) is directed to the central character of the Journey to the West, the first line of the article reads "it is a Chinese name" and its Chinese transliteration. The article of Dragon Ball's Son Goku is Son Goku (Dragon Ball) International Common Editor (talk) 23:21, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Also, in Dragon Ball (not its sequel Dragon Ball Z), number of attributes of Son Goku/Sun WuKong shows similarity with the Son Goku/Sun Wu in Journey to the West, most notably the re-sizable fighting stick and the flying cloud (筋斗雲) that Son Goku/Sun WuKong rides on. These are important cultural reference to the Journey to the West in Dragon Ball and is currently missing from the article, probably because when US started airing the series, they started from the sequel Dragon Ball Z, so most people are not award of the first half of the story?? International Common Editor (talk) 23:02, 30 July 2010 (UTC)