It's more informative and reliable than the filler of that TV show, for one thing. So much for putting them both on the same level...desirecampbell wrote:Saying that a databook on a TV show is more informative than the actual TV show is ludicrous.
That's not what I'm saying.Just because you call it a 'databook' doesn't mean it's infallible.
Why would a book based off of a show be more reliable than the show?Olivier Hague wrote:It's more informative and reliable than the filler of that TV show, for one thing. So much for putting them both on the same level...
Well, what are you saying then?Olivier Hague wrote:That's not what I'm saying.
I already gave you an example earlier: the Daizenshû tell us that a Nameccian created the Earth's seven Dragon Balls, whereas the anime filler told us a different story.desirecampbell wrote:Why would a book based off of a show be more reliable than the show?
I'm saying that just because the Daizenshû weren't written by Toriyama himself, that doesn't necessarily mean they should be put on the same level as (or below) original stories made up by Tôei.what are you saying then?
No, that's a single example where the daizenshuu was correct where an episode was not correct. I can give many examples of completly Toei created material is not blatently wrong. How about this one: The dragonballs are still created by Namekkians in GT.Olivier Hague wrote:I already gave you an example earlier: the Daizenshû tell us that a Nameccian created the Earth's seven Dragon Balls, whereas the anime filler told us a different story.
So there. The book is more reliable than the show, here. I guess these things happen after all, huh?
No, that's not why they're lower than the anime, filler, and movies. I've explained why they're there. let's quote myself again.Olivier Hague wrote:I'm saying that just because the Daizenshû weren't written by Toriyama himself, that doesn't necessarily mean they should be put on the same level as (or below) original stories made up by Tôei.
Are you even reading my posts?The daizenshuu as a whole must be placed below what they, as a whole, are derived from. Just like how parts of the Bardock story are just as true and "canonical" as the manga, so are certain parts of the daizenshuu.
And, again, being a lower level than something else doesn't mean what it's saying isn't "true" (ie: Bardock), and just because something is a high level of canon, doesn't mean it's "true" either (ie: Dodoria's colour in the kanzenban). Everything should be looked at individually.
That still doesn't mean that everything in the book is correct. It's just that Toriyama wouldn't be able to compile all of the information himself. An intelligent fan could have done it just as well (or better?).omae no kaasan wrote:"This is the seventh and final volume of the daizenshuu, a Dragon Ball Encyclopedia. The staff who creates these for me go through an awful lot of trouble each time but this time I think they might just have gone straight through Hell, havent you guys? THANK YOU for your hard work. For me, "Mr. Amazingly Forgetful", even though I'm the author of the series, parts that I've lost touch with are in no short supply. I often fell into a lot of the problems during the series so if this massive encyclopedia was around back then, I would really have been saved...which is kinda embarrassing.
And so before I ramble on, Staff and fans of Dragon Ball, thank you so very much."
It's enough to show that things aren't as simple as you say.desirecampbell wrote:that's a single example where the daizenshuu was correct where an episode was not correct.
I wasn't trying to make a rule, I was just showing how your "rule" was easily refuted.A single example does not a rule make.
Why do you want me to answer that question when I showed you that it was moot anyway? Yes, a book based off a show can be more reliable than the show, and I just gave you an example.I asked "Why would a book based off of a show be more reliable than the show?"
Answer that question, instead of skirting the issue.
Yeah, you're considering the Daizenshû "as a whole". Convenient: that way, even the manga-based Daizenshû (volumes 1, 2 and 4) end up below the anime, by association.No, that's not why they're lower than the anime, filler, and movies. I've explained why they're there. let's quote myself again:I'm saying that just because the Daizenshû weren't written by Toriyama himself, that doesn't necessarily mean they should be put on the same level as (or below) original stories made up by Tôei.
"The daizenshuu as a whole must be placed below what they, as a whole, are derived from."
Heh...Are you even reading my posts?
Sure, but does that change anything? You still end up with the TV series being inconsistent, unlike the book. So that's one example of the book being more reliable than the TV series.Victator Supreme wrote:Later episodes of the show did it first.already gave you an example earlier: the Daizenshû tell us that a Nameccian created the Earth's seven Dragon Balls, whereas the anime filler told us a different story.
Again, I don't believe anyone's arguing that the Daizenshû are downright unfallible and perfect, here...Chibi Mystic Gohan wrote:That still doesn't mean that everything in the book is correct.
But would Toriyama supervize a fan's work, like he did supervize the Daizenshû?It's just that Toriyama wouldn't be able to compile all of the information himself. An intelligent fan could have done it just as well (or better?).
Arrrfgh! I hate it when you twist my words around. I did not say my canon levels were hard rules, I said...Olivier Hague wrote:It's enough to show that things aren't as simple as you say.
I wasn't trying to make a rule, I was just showing how your "rule" was easily refuted.
Yes, while it's good to have a clear set of guidelines, each piece of information must be considered individually, taking into consideration who wrote it, when it was written, what the intention was, what it contracts, and what kind of sense it makes.
And, again, being a lower level than something else doesn't mean what it's saying isn't "true" (ie: Bardock), and just because something is a high level of canon, doesn't mean it's "true" either (ie: Dodoria's colour in the kanzenban). Everything should be looked at individually.
It can be more reliable than filler, but that's only because it can be verified by higher levels of canon. I can do the same thing with the goddamn toys. "Hey, this action figure says that the dragonballs were created by Namekkians, that means toys are more reliable a source of information then the show, huh?"Olivier Hague wrote:Why do you want me to answer that question when I showed you that it was moot anyway? Yes, a book based off a show can be more reliable than the show, and I just gave you an example.
But if you really want an answer, the fact that the book was written after the end of the series obviously helped, for one thing.
Biased?! I've explained why I split up the anime the last time you asked.Olivier Hague wrote:Yeah, you're considering the Daizenshû "as a whole". Convenient: that way, even the manga-based Daizenshû (volumes 1, 2 and 4) end up below the anime, by association.
Never mind the fact you're not considering the anime "as a whole".
That sounds a lot like double standard to me. You're not biased, are you?
And you brought up those daizenshuu volumes before, and I said...Basically because it's easy to split up the anime into 'derived from the manga' and 'filler made by Toei' (just like how there's a level for the two manga productions - they could be put together, but because there's a clear distinction it's easy to separate them in canon levels). I feel confident in splitting the two up because it's clear that some parts of the anime were either 'based on manga' or 'based on nothing' because there were no other sources to derive content from when the anime was being made. With the daizenshuu and 'world books', they were written after everything else (manga, anime, filler, movies) so it's harder to determine where the information is derived from, some information could be from the manga, or the anime, or anime filler, or a movie, or a TV special.... That, coupled with the fact that there are so many books that we'd have to make entries for each one specifically, leads me to be content with 'books written after the whole of the series is complete' being underneath manga, anime, and movies.
All information produced after the run of the series concluded is suspect of being derived from any of these adaptations, the daizenshuu included.
Do you want me to merge my two anime levels in my canon list? Is tat what you're going for? I'll do it if it'll mean you'll shut the fuck up about it. It's easy to do, I'm not a hardcharger. I just don't see the point. If the levels were anywhere but right next to each other it'd be odd, but they're right next to each other - in practice they act as the same level of canon. I can't see making a listing for 'merchandise based on the series' and another for 'daiz 1, 2, and 4' put between the anime and the author notes. If you could explain why such a limited, singular canon level would be useful please explain.So these books should be pretty easy to validate and be held up as accurate information - because they can be verified by external sources.
Yes, the TV series, as a whole, is inconsistent. And the books that are based off of that and other adaptations of the manga cannot, I repeat, cannot be taken as more reliable then what it's taking it's information from.Olivier Hague wrote:Sure, but does that change anything? You still end up with the TV series being inconsistent, unlike the book. So that's one example of the book being more reliable than the TV series.Victator Supreme wrote:Later episodes of the show did it first.already gave you an example earlier: the Daizenshû tell us that a Nameccian created the Earth's seven Dragon Balls, whereas the anime filler told us a different story.
You really seem to be pushing that. The point most of us here are trying to make is that saying 'the daizenshuu says so' is not the be-all end-all to a discussion. People are taking the daizenshuu as a holy book instead of trying to figure out where the information contained there-in comes from, and if it is reliable.Olivier Hague wrote: Again, I don't believe anyone's arguing that the Daizenshû are downright unfallible and perfect, here...
Did Toriyama give the daizenshuu team any information? That translation from Omae no Kaasan says nothing about 1. providing any information, or 2. Toriyama checking anything. He says they did a lot of hard work. So did the GT team, whom he also praised.Olivier Hague wrote:But would Toriyama supervize a fan's work, like he did supervize the Daizenshû?It's just that Toriyama wouldn't be able to compile all of the information himself. An intelligent fan could have done it just as well (or better?).
Would Toriyama give some information to a fan, like he did give some information to the guys who made the Daizenshû?
Well, as long as you realize they're subjective...desirecampbell wrote:I did not say my canon levels were hard rules
Confirmations are welcome, but are they necessarily needed?It can be more reliable than filler, but that's only because it can be verified by higher levels of canon.
That means they can be, anyway.I can do the same thing with the goddamn toys. "Hey, this action figure says that the dragonballs were created by Namekkians, that means toys are more reliable a source of information then the show, huh?"
You said: "because it's easy to split up the anime into 'derived from the manga' and 'filler made by Toei'."I've explained why I split up the anime the last time you asked.
Sorry, but I don't see where you were going with that...So these books should be pretty easy to validate and be held up as accurate information - because they can be verified by external sources.
Er... We were talking about the Daizenshû, here. That's something else altogether.Do you want me to merge my two anime levels in my canon list? Is tat what you're going for?
That's two databooks... It's not that "limited", in my opinion.I can't see making a listing for 'merchandise based on the series' and another for 'daiz 1, 2, and 4' put between the anime and the author notes. If you could explain why such a limited, singular canon level would be useful please explain.
Why not? If they correct the inconsistencies, for example?the books that are based off of that and other adaptations of the manga cannot, I repeat, cannot be taken as more reliable then what it's taking it's information from.
Well, yeah. He did.Did Toriyama give the daizenshuu team any information?
Of course you won't do that: you can't.Godo wrote:Yet you seem to, strange enough.Again, I don't believe anyone's arguing that the Daizenshû are downright unfallible and perfect, here...
And no, I'm not gonna show you proof of what you have written by yourself, if you are going to reply that to me.
Ahh...you must not remember my Tenshinhan thread. You should know that I don't solely base it on the game, but it is however a part of it. You can say it's a game and you can't use it...But the fact here is that the provided information in the bios section is spot-on and perfectly correct with the manga, movies, specials and anime.desirecampbell wrote: Again, that information was probably taken from that daizenshuu. And, again, a videogame has got to be the worst place to get information from. Really, if your argument is "a videogame said it" I weep for you.
How is it that you guys think growing two extra arms is normal? Same with splitting into four living, breathing and fighting bodies? Piccolo, (once again a demon) couldn't even do those abilities. That's the very definition of 'implied'. Those aren't normal abilites for a monkey boy, a human, animal people, demons, or even God. It's implying that he isn't normal or 100% human and the Daizenshuu backs it up with a statement.Mr. Announcer wrote:never once mentioned or even implied that Tenshinhan is an alien or of alien descent in the cartoon or the manga.
Did you know that it is never once mentioned or even implied that Tenshinhan was human? I guess that means he isn't.Mr. Announcer wrote:that it is never once mentioned or even implied that Tenshinhan is an alien or of alien descent in the cartoon or the manga
Guess you didn't catch on but I was making fun of everything and anyone that has officially made me dumber for taking this thread to 4 pages.Guess you didn't catch on, but I was making fun of you. Anybody who says PWNED and are over thirteen years old should be punched in the nuts.
And since he sanctioned it and recognized their work and even went so far as to compliment them by saying he could have used it, anything incorrect should be considered his own mistake.That still doesn't mean that everything in the book is correct. It's just that Toriyama wouldn't be able to compile all of the information himself. An intelligent fan could have done it just as well (or better?).
The same goes for Bulma. Well, I guess that means she's not human either.Drunken Master wrote:Did you know that it is never once mentioned or even implied that Tenshinhan was human? I guess that means he isn't.
Yes... like I just explained... again.Olivier Hague wrote:Well, as long as you realize they're subjective...
Confirmations with higher level cannon are necessary. The only reason it wouldn't be necessary is if the daizenshuu were infaillable.Olivier Hague wrote:Confirmations are welcome, but are they necessarily needed?
You're apparently arguing they are, and I disagree.
I knew you would, that's why I explained it the first time. Then I quoted that text the last time, and here I'll quote it again.Olivier Hague wrote:You said: "because it's easy to split up the anime into 'derived from the manga' and 'filler made by Toei'."
Sorry, but I fail to see how it would be harder to split up the Daizenshû into 'manga-based volumes' and 'anime-based volumes'...
Bolded for emphasses. Please try reading it this time. This is getting ridiculous. The next time I'll just call you an idiot.Basically because it's easy to split up the anime into 'derived from the manga' and 'filler made by Toei' (just like how there's a level for the two manga productions - they could be put together, but because there's a clear distinction it's easy to separate them in canon levels). I feel confident in splitting the two up because it's clear that some parts of the anime were either 'based on manga' or 'based on nothing' because there were no other sources to derive content from when the anime was being made. With the daizenshuu and 'world books', they were written after everything else (manga, anime, filler, movies) so it's harder to determine where the information is derived from, some information could be from the manga, or the anime, or anime filler, or a movie, or a TV special.... That, coupled with the fact that there are so many books that we'd have to make entries for each one specifically, leads me to be content with 'books written after the whole of the series is complete' being underneath manga, anime, and movies.
All information produced after the run of the series concluded is suspect of being derived from any of these adaptations, the daizenshuu included.
Of course you don't. You keep saying 'the daizenshuu don't need to be verified by anything' and then claim you're not saying the daizenshuu are infaillable.Olivier Hague wrote:Sorry, but I don't see where you were going with that...So these books should be pretty easy to validate and be held up as accurate information - because they can be verified by external sources.
You keep bringing up that I've split the anime into two sections, and say I should do something similar to the daizenshuu.Olivier Hague wrote:Er... We were talking about the Daizenshû, here. That's something else altogether.
Two (or three) books out of a category containing more than a dozen? How is that not limited?Olivier Hague wrote:That's two databooks... It's not that "limited", in my opinion.
That would be good. The daizenshuu are good sources of information. They are not a better source of information than the series itself, which it is based on.Olivier Hague wrote:Why not? If they correct the inconsistencies, for example?
What, exactly, did he contribute? What exactly?Olivier Hague wrote:Well, yeah. He did.
Yes, doing unnatural things would back up the theory that he's not human. Of course, none of those instances by them selves point to him being an alien, just an exceptional fighter.Drunken Master wrote:How is it that you guys think growing two extra arms is normal? Same with splitting into four living, breathing and fighting bodies? Piccolo, (once again a demon) couldn't even do those abilities. That's the very definition of 'implied'. Those aren't normal abilites for a monkey boy, a human, animal people, demons, or even God. It's implying that he isn't normal or 100% human and the Daizenshuu backs it up with a statement.
Yes, I too believe the daizenshuu should be taken no more reliably than GT - for which he did the same thing.omae no kaasan wrote:And since he sanctioned it and recognized their work and even went so far as to compliment them by saying he could have used it, anything incorrect should be considered his own mistake.
"Great lengths"? One line? Yeah... "great lengths".omae no kaasan wrote:Why in the hell would they go to such lengths to make him an alien?
