Is the Copy Vegeta arc canon?

[Peach]

It seems like this arc is never mentioned in fan discissions and what if videos. It doesn't look like it's acknowledged at all in Sparkling Zero either since Gryll and Copy Vegeta aren't playable. Just wondering if this arc is canon or not? And if it is, why is it so ignored compared to the arcs like the Universe 6 Tournament, Future Trunks arc, and Tournament of Power?

[Trouser]

It's not in the Super's manga even as a different variation of events, so it's pretty safe to assume that it's not "canon" and Toriyama had nothing to do with it.

And I'm fine with it being "non-canon" because it was an absolute crap.

[Grimlock]

Every time a new saga would debut, it was preceded by promotional material saying "written by Toriyama". That happened specifically for Universe 6 saga, Future Trunks saga and Universe Survival saga. From the little I saw, it didn't really feel like something by Toriyama. It screamed "filler" all over it, as in, something created by Toei entirely.

That being said, there is no canon in Dragon Ball so if you want to consider it canonical in your preferences and want to bring up that saga in discussions, you are entitled to it.

It is a bit weird that its contents never made to any game, though. But then again, False Super Saiyan and Bio-Broly also never made it, so...

[TobyS]

Every time a new saga would debut, it was preceded by promotional material saying "written by Toriyama". That happened specifically for Universe 6 saga, Future Trunks saga and Universe Survival saga. From the little I saw, it didn't really feel like something by Toriyama. It screamed "filler" all over it, as in, something created by Toei entirely.

That being said, there is no canon in Dragon Ball so if you want to consider it canonical in your preferences and want to bring up that saga in discussions, you are entitled to it.

It is a bit weird that its contents never made to any game, though. But then again, False Super Saiyan and Bio-Broly also never made it, so...

As a rough rule if it doesn't appear in the manga and anime ot wasn't in the toriyama outline or back and forth collaboration with toyo, so it's a toei embellishment.

[Koitsukai]

Not sure how to define canon, but this arc is just as "canon" or part of the "main continuity" as the post-Raditz Friendly Robot mini-arc. It could be mentioned or something by Toei (if the anime ever returns it's possible this gets a sequel), but it will be easily contradicted by the main story if it has to be.

While DBS has no official filler, this is one of those episodes/arcs that doesn't intersect with the manga at all, unlike the main arcs. So, filler.

[ZombieVito]

Yes.

To the anime continuity.

[Peach]

Every time a new saga would debut, it was preceded by promotional material saying "written by Toriyama". That happened specifically for Universe 6 saga, Future Trunks saga and Universe Survival saga. From the little I saw, it didn't really feel like something by Toriyama. It screamed "filler" all over it, as in, something created by Toei entirely.

That being said, there is no canon in Dragon Ball so if you want to consider it canonical in your preferences and want to bring up that saga in discussions, you are entitled to it.

It is a bit weird that its contents never made to any game, though. But then again, False Super Saiyan and Bio-Broly also never made it, so...

Vegeta mentions Planet Potaueu in the Future Trunks arc

[Grimlock]

As a rough rule if it doesn't appear in the manga and anime ot wasn't in the toriyama outline or back and forth collaboration with toyo, so it's a toei embellishment.

It might be the case for episodes or sagas, but it definitely isn't a "rule". The Namekuseijin Book of Legends, first mentioned in an episode of Dragon Ball Super (and ignored by Toyotaro), would later be revealed to be a Toriyama thing. Who knows what else is from Toriyama that one of them (or both of them) elected to ignore in their respective media.

Vegeta mentions Planet Potaueu in the Future Trunks arc

That doesn't mean much once we know that, even in these sagas, there are still scenes made entirely by Toei. Not everything you see and/or hear in Universe 6 saga, Future Trunks saga and Universe Survival saga are by Toriyama (needless to say, not everything you see in the manga is by Toriyama, there are Toyotaro stuff as well).

It makes sense for them to mention it since those events happened in the anime continuity. For example, Dragon Ball Super still shows that Trunks transforms into Super Saiyan after Gohan's death, because that's exactly what happened in the anime continuity. I would say Toei was being smart, using the fact that the anime isn't adapting the manga to sneak a mention to one of their creations. If they wanted to, they could mention the events of the Garlic Junior saga in the Cell saga too (it would be a filler scene in Cell saga), but that would be blatantly obvious to everyone in this case.

I'm pretty sure Dragon Ball Super bring up other filler contents in one of those three sagas, though nothing is coming up in my mind right now. In short, it's the anime following its own continuity.

[PerhapsTheOtherOne]

Something to note is that sometimes, details that seem like they're medium-exclusive end up being stuff that Toriyama came up with, and vice versa.

For example, the Namekian Book of Legends in the anime was actually a Toriyama detail, whereas SSB Vegito wasn't.

[Makaioshin]

It is part of the TV show and gets referenced again in the Future Trunks arc. So the simple answer is yes for the Super anime continuity.

If you want to get into Toriyama's notes, it is likely not from him but his notes aren't actually a full story you experience. He left that to others. Games don't have anything to do with the idea of canon though he is in Dokkan. They even made a little toy of him.

[GurixDr34]

Its Canon for the Anime of Super i think