This should be added to the fake power level page.

[dragon boss z]

[dragon boss z]

does nobody on Kanzenshuu even check these threads?

[dragon boss z]

Here is the source of the fake scan btw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neWZ5eurdYU

[VegettoEX]

does nobody on Kanzenshuu even check these threads?

What you posted was an image with no description, no context, no notes about anything about it whatsoever. Is this image actually prevalent? Does it cause regular issues? What or why? We aren't going to add some random one-off thing that someone made once an has no real traction anywhere.

Can you provide any of that?

[dragon boss z]

does nobody on Kanzenshuu even check these threads?

What you posted was an image with no description, no context, no notes about anything about it whatsoever. Is this image actually prevalent? Does it cause regular issues? What or why? We aren't going to add some random one-off thing that someone made once an has no real traction anywhere.

Can you provide any of that?

Well someone as prevalent as Seththeprogrammer has brought up this scan as if it was real before, so I would argue that's enough. There are also multiple threads across different websites about this. (I don't remember the exact video so I don't have a source for Seth claiming it's real)

viewtopic.php?t=42865

https://www.reddit.com/r/CharacterRant/ ... guidebook/

https://www.neoseeker.com/forums/88/t23 ... lion-jump/

someone on comcivine used it as evidence claiming it was from the chozenshuu

https://comicvine.gamespot.com/forums/b ... t-1990105/

The full context should be the video I posted was the original source (that guy posts droll videos on dragon ball) and it spread in the community and multiple people have been tricked by it being a possible real scan.)

Also, I posted it on another thread, but even if you don't want to add this, your battle power guide incorrectly lists ssj Goku, Frieza, and Cooler have power levels of 2.7 million in carddass, when it's actually 27 million, so that should definitely be changed, as it's just incorrect information.

[rweasp]

I don't think I've ever seen this scan or power level mentioned in modern Dragon Ball discussions aside from the almost decade old links you posted just now, and I've been quite active in the wider community during that time. Is it really prevalent enough to warrant any kind of attention or mention? I would think only the most egregious and notorious examples should warrant any kind of mention, otherwise it just opens up the possibility of giving attention to even the smallest and silliest nothingburgers. But I'm not against adding it if its proven to be enough of a problem.

[dragon boss z]

I don't think I've ever seen this scan or power level mentioned in modern Dragon Ball discussions aside from the almost decade old links you posted just now, and I've been quite active in the wider community during that time. Is it really prevalent enough to warrant any kind of attention or mention? I would think only the most egregious and notorious examples should warrant any kind of mention, otherwise it just opens up the possibility of giving attention to even the smallest and silliest nothingburgers. But I'm not against adding it if its proven to be enough of a problem.

It’s the second most infamous fake scan after the one that’s already posted, so it feels weird not to have it even if it’s rarely brought up nowadays. I mean, the 115 power level for Tao is mentioned, and I’ve never even once seen someone bring up that fake source. If it’s troublesome, then I would understand not wanting to add it, but wouldn’t it take only a couple minutes? I feel like there is no reason not to add it.

[VegettoEX]

I don't think I've ever seen this scan or power level mentioned in modern Dragon Ball discussions aside from the almost decade old links you posted just now, and I've been quite active in the wider community during that time. Is it really prevalent enough to warrant any kind of attention or mention? I would think only the most egregious and notorious examples should warrant any kind of mention, otherwise it just opens up the possibility of giving attention to even the smallest and silliest nothingburgers. But I'm not against adding it if its proven to be enough of a problem.

This is a perfect read and understanding on the subject. We're talking about: (1) a random troll, (2) with 55 subscribers on YouTube, (3) in a video that's ancient, (4) for a specific citation that really seems to have no modern traction, and (5) didn't really have any traction back during its contemporary attempts at propagation.

The portion I bolded above is the real meat and potatoes here: it's actually counter-productive to give undue importance to nothingburgers like this (because it elevates them as if they ever had any importance or notoriety), and gives every random troll on message boards and video accounts the impression that their little attempts at fooling somebody might someday get a major citation.

Don't feed them.

In fact, considering the image being used, the age of the materials, the fact that it was a banned user that posted it in a thread you linked... I'd be half-tempted to proposed here that you're just someone resurfacing looking to stir up nonsense, and/or even are the original person who fabricated the image in the first place!