Jump to content

Talk:Baby (Dragon Ball)/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Bebi/Baby

Why is this topic called "Bebi (Dragon Ball GT)"? Would "Baby (Dragon Ball)" not suffice instead? After all, Bebi is just Japanese phonetics for "baby". That would be like making topics on Piccolo and Trunks, and calling them "Pikkoro" and "Torankusu".... The S 03:57, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

The article name should probably be "Baby (Dragon Ball)" because the official English name of the character is "Baby". However, I think that name was used once and so we can't rename it without an admin. If you want to add it to Wikipedia:Requested moves, I'd second it. JRP 04:12, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

The name is fine how it is. It isn't hurting anything, and it's best to just leave it alone.

Daishokaioshin

My point is not getting it moved, only to figure out the reason why such a thing was done (it was posted as Baby (Dragon Ball) previously). The S 04:05, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

  • The US Dragon Ball GT DVDs' Japanese subtitles clearly show the name written as Baby, rather than Bebi as most fans adopted since VHS fansubs. Tsukento 00:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I am going to change it because it doesn't make any sense. Bebi is the japanese spelling and this is the english section of wikipedia, and since they spell it Baby in the show, it should and will be changed. Super 4 Vegeta 20:27, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Bebi Powers

When has Babi ever used Kuririn's Kienzan I haved a Dragonball GT box set and I never seen Baby used Kuririn's Kienzan nor Tenshinhan's Taiyoken. The moves that I only seen him copy was the Big Bang Attack and the Final Flash.

Answer: Bebi forms one during his fight with Uubu, but does not call out the name. Also, the article does not state that he copied the Taiyoken, only that the light he emits from his eyes is similar.

Vandalism and Names

I would appreciate it if others could assist in reverting the vandalism by that anonymous user. Kibitoshin is the Japanese name for the Fusion of Kaioshin and Kibito. Kibitokai is the English dub name for that same Fusion. I don't know why the anonymous user fails to understand something so simple, despite my attempts to explain it to them. Regardless, I am sure that the rest of you can comprehend this, and also know that my inclusion of the character's name isn't an attempt to make this article about anyone besides Bebi. After all, Goku's name is included in the article, is it not? Why does this anonymous user not object to this, and claim that the article is about Bebi and not Goku?

Daishokaioshin 07:15, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Excuse me, but your wrong too. The name "Kabitokai" are separated in the Funimation dub into Kabito Kai in both the Budokai(videogame) and Dragonball Z,GTs series. Also the notes about Goku is pertaining to the importance of those attacks, seeing as how these attacks are all used on Goku. You seem to have problem to noted to Tenshinhan.

Gundirk 12:49, 7 March

I am having difficulty understanding what you just said. If "Kibitokai" is seperated into "Kibito Kai" in the dubs, then fine. I don't care. The issue was not about Kibitokai/Kibito Kai. The issue is about the argument over whether the name Kibitoshin exists, why Kaioshin keeps on being reverted to an incorrect spelling, and whether Kibitoshin should be included in this article. If everyone thinks that all reference to Kibitoshin/Kibito Kai/Kaioshin should be removed from the attack names, then feel free. Just don't mispell the names if you DO include them, and do NOT claim that something doesn't exist when it DOES.

What was that last comment about? I never said anything about Tienshinhan. Also, I KNOW why Goku's name was included. Kibitoshin/Kaioshin was included for the same reason. That is why I do not see what problem there could possibly be in mentioning that character.

Saying I am "wrong" when nothing in my statements, or your own, would indicate I am wrong about anything, doesn't make sense.

Daishokaioshin 00:40, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Just FYI, Kibitoshin/Kibitokai/Kaibito/whatever is just referenced as "Kaioushin-sama" in Japanese The S 02:35, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Bebi's/Baby's Death Ball

Revenge Death Ball Final is indeed an offical non-fanon attack that is not pronounced out in Funimation's dub. If there is any doubts please check Dragonball GT volume 8 Salvation Episode: Baby Put To Rest with the Japanses sub on. If theres any reason why it shouldn't be listed then state your opinion. Gunsword 00:00, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

I'll hold off until I see the episode again, but I'm certain ti was x10. It appears as such in both Curtis Hoffman's translations, as well as the SUper 5 fansubs, but I'd have to hear him say it again (I haven't seen the show in years).
...Fansubs are not considered a valid medium for determining the names of techniques. Try ACTUAL subtitled versions.
Daishokaioshin 02:13, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

bebi soul

it says Bebi is the only villan not seen when the gateway to Hell was opened. It is possible that since he was an artificial life form he had no soul to be sent to the Afterlife. but cell was there and hes a artificial life form too.

Cell is a Bio-Android, made of human, Namekian and Saiyan cells.
Right. Cell was a living being. Bebi was some kind of organic metal, and wasn't actually born or even grown (like Cell) but was simply BUILT. Android 16 didn't appear in Heaven when he was destroyed because he was just a machine. He may have had a personality, but that doesn't seem to equate to a soul. It's complicated, and it may be best not to discuss the issue of souls, since it's a touchy subject with some people. It MAY be best to remove that part of the article entirely, unless others feel it is okay enough to remain without causing further confusion. ::Daishokaioshin 21:00, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Best to get rid of it. Toei included Android 19 (a machine model like 16) in Hell for no reason but a sight gag. Gero is still a cyborg, as is Dr. Myuu (though it's been so long since I've seen GT he might have been a full robot too). No one is supposed to be just strutting around in Dragon Ball's Hell anyway, it's a massive plot hole created by animation filler. Voice of Treason 22:15, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Bebi wasn't supposed to be released from Hell, and nor were the other villains. They were meant to have become evil spirits, too evil to have been allowed to keep their bodies. Jienum 19:29, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Hey, you can't torture somebody that doesn't have a body.--KojiDude 19:45, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Bebi did have a body. It was the one that liquified itself to take over other people's bodies. Remember Majin Buu, who had his own body and tried to take over Vegetto's? Jienum 15:24, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
What? I said that in answer to the "why dead evil people get their bodies" question.--KojiDude 02:02, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I've never really understood what happens to dragonball villains when they go to hell. Whenever you see dead souls at King Yemma's castle they always look like white blob things. However, when they're show in hell it seems as though they have bodies. I thought that in order to keep your body you had to be given special permision by one of the Kais. In fact, that was a major plot point in the namek saga, seeing as how Krillin, Tien, and Yamcha had to be transported to the check in station on earth because their physical bodies had been transported to King Kai's planet. I was especially confused by the other world tournament saga. From early on it was said that only a select few get to keep their bodies after death. However, only a few episodes into it, Cell and other villains are shown to be able to beat up some of the demon guys and Goku had to fight them in order to quiet them down. I realise it was only filler, but can the writers have been that stupid as to contradict themselves in the first few episodes. Is their something I'm missing or am I trying to read too deeply into something that was never really meant to be analyzed? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.157.17.245 (talk • contribs) .

Planet

Planet Vegeta, Planet Plant, and Planet Tuffle are all the same planet. Planet Vegeta is the new name the Saiyans gave to Planet Plant when they took it over, Planet Tuffle is Bebi's new name for it. So, technically, it is Planet Vegeta. (Just wanted to clear that up)--KojiDude 16:18, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Too long...

Who the hell did that to the article? What's the point? It was fine the way it was. Now it's just too stretched out and long to read. And the pics are too small. I leave for 9 days and I come back to see this? What the hell, guys?--KojiDude 16:01, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Please give more constructive comments, like what needs to be modified, added, removed, etc. Be specific, remember that not everyone editing here knows how a good article should look like. -- ReyBrujo 16:58, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, the extra titles are really pointless for one thing. The pics should be a little bigger, and one of them should be removed so we don't break the fair use policy. The information definitly needs to be trimmed down a bit. Any un-official names should be removed, too.--KojiDude 17:05, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, I think the titles, the picture of Baby and Majuub and the Power part can go, but that's just about the shortest way to describe Baby's biography (at least, that's what I think). Jienum 15:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

TJ

Listen, I told you why it isn't canon. You have yet to provide any proof or facts. What do you have to show that GT is canon, besides your opinion, that overules the facts I gave you? Nothing. In my opinon, everything after the point where Freeza uses his Death Ball on Namek (Androids Saga, Cell Saga, Buu Saga, everything) is non-canon, but I'm not going around changing articles to make it say that, am I? No, because it's my opinion, just like GT being canon is your opinion. Stop vandalizing.--KojiDude 21:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Please, stop. The reasons for GT being non-canon aren't opinions, TJ, they're facts. See fact and opinion. Nobody wants to argue with you, and nobody wants to see you end up blocked. You're a good contributor, but you're pushing your own opinion into an article, which is bad faith.--KojiDude 22:57, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Wow. You guys need to stop. Seriously. You've been going on for like hours, I've been quietly watching from my corner of the interwebz. If you don't stop, intervention is going to be required. I thought there was a rule which said no more than three reverts?

And you both keep on saying it's vandalism. Why don't you just make a section about it the controversy over being canon or not?

--Concordia 05:02, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Because if I made a section like that, he woudl vandalize it to say that it's debatable (which it isn't). I'm following WP:IAR and trying to keep the false information out of the article, and at the same time I'm trying to protect the person I'm edit warring with from being blocked. I'm trying my best to end this but he won't listen to the facts and only thinks of himself. I'm starting to wonder if I'll be able to go to sleep tonight without him vandalizing behind my back...--KojiDude 05:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I really don't know anything about DBZ personally. I used to watch it, but I stopped, so I can't really come to the aid. Perhaps you should cite the source(s) you have? If he cannot cite one yet he continues to edit in the manner which he currently is, then it's not your issue if he gets blocked or not. --Concordia 05:22, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, I consider him a friend, so it is my issue if he gets blocked, because I would feel guilty.--KojiDude 05:27, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I think you guys should get on gtalk, AIM, MSN, Yahoo! or whatever messenger you both use and sort this out. There's no point in constantly reverting, neither of you seems willing to stop, you both have approximately 40 reverts each, it's getting a tad out of hand. --Concordia 05:34, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
100%Agreed -- bulletproof 3:16 05:36, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I've done everything I can to get him to stop, but he won't. I doubt chating with him would help at all. Besides, the only one of those I have is MSN and I'm (patcheticly) more or less clueless as to how to sign on...--KojiDude 05:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Open Windows Messenger or MSN Messenger (whichever you have), type in your e-mail address/MSN passport, put in the associated password, and press sign in. If you need help with it still, leave a message on my talk page. I'd be more than willing to help you. --Concordia 05:42, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Over 50 reversions from each of you. Damn, you guys are really going at it... -- bulletproof 3:16 05:24, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
The reason I put that it's debatable is because no official source has stated whether it's canon or not, so it's something that fans of the show continue to debate. I am not putting in the article that he's canon, just that it's debatble. I have editors who agree with me and Koji has one(maybe more) that agree with him. Most websites consider GT canon but no official source has said if it is or not. For now I won't revert, but I did put up citation tags on the parts of it being non-canon so you have a opportunity to proove it. I suggest seeing what the people at Wikiproject: Anime and Manga think so we can reach a consensus. TJ Spyke 05:39, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Good man. I know this really wasn't my place to intervene, but even with how fast recent changes updates, I could see you guys constantly reverting and I was getting concerned. --Concordia 05:42, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Wiktionary:canon. Read the second definition. Canon is what is created by the original author, that is more than enough proof. (Try not to ignore what I say this time, please)--KojiDude 05:43, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
It says "particularly created by the author", that means things not created by the author can also be canon. Being created by the author will severely help something, but not being created by the author doesn't automatically make something non-canon. TJ Spyke 05:48, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
The way Dragon Ball's canon follows the rules of canon gets rid of the word "particularly" (which is why Filler is considered non-canon, and why the movies are considered non-canon, and why GT is considered non-canon).--KojiDude 05:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
You are the first person I have met who considers the filler non-canon. There is a difference between "canon" and "fanon/personal canon". TJ Spyke 05:56, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
No, I'm not, because everyone who contributed to List of Dragon Ball special abilities labels filler non-canon within that article.--KojiDude 05:59, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I said you are the first I met who thinks that, I didn't say you are the only person who thinks that. TJ Spyke 06:01, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm not the only one who thinks GT is non-canon either: List_of_Dragon_Ball_special_abilities#Jibaku--KojiDude 06:05, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

What makes this argument so amusing is that it is so incredibly trivial. It doesn't matter which of you it right because whether it's canon or not won't really affect anyone, anywhere, ever. However to make this post constructive I suggest you just remove the entire sentence relating to canon. Jargon 08:47, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

He might have a point there. If you can't clearly show one side or the other then just don't comment on the canon status and let the reader come to their own conclusions. -- Ned Scott 08:48, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
There are too many unintentional POVs in articles on Dragon Ball. I agree with Jargon. Remove anything that may suggest something as being canon or non-canon. Provide facts, and let the reader decide instead. -- bulletproof 3:16 22:18, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Just to make it clear,

The definition of Canon states that it needs to be considered authentic or created by a particular author. In this case, the particular author would be Toriyama. Also, authentic means genuine, which GT is not because it isn't based on the manga. Therefore, it would be non-canon. But, if you still don't want to listen to the facts, that's okay. You might as well put WP:NPOV up for AfD while you're at it.--KojiDude 23:17, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

No official source has ever said it's not canon, which means saying it's not canon is your opinion. TJ Spyke 23:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm not arguing about this anymore. My opinion doesn't matter at all, neither does yours. I've already proved it to be non-canon, so saying it is canon or saying it's debatable is your opinion. I really don't care if you guys want to violate WP:NPOV, so I'm just going to ignore the whoe subject.--KojiDude 23:48, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Err... That's a flawed argument if I ever saw one. Just because sources that an individual considers credible do NOT state something doesn't meant that an individual's particular beliefs are valid. That is a logical fallacy. If you cannot provide evidence that Dragon Ball GT IS canon, then you don't have a leg to stand on. Dragon Ball GT is considered non-canon by most people due to its many contradictions of facts, characters, and so on that have been established in Dragon Ball and Dragon Ball Z. It considered non-canon by most people because it is not based on any of the canon manga that Dragon Ball/Dragon Ball Z is based off of. It is considered non-canon by most people because it is poorly written, has bad characterization, and focuses almost entirely on a single character (Son Goku), giving little or no attention to any of the other characters. While the latter reason I provided may be debatable, the first two are NOT. They are facts. Dragon Ball GT is considered non-canon. Whether it is specifically stated that this is so by 'most websites' that 'consider it to be canon' is utterly irrelevant, because 'most websites' are not credible sources of information on this subject, nor are they authorities which can decide such matters.
The fact that Dragon Ball GT is non-canon doesn't need to be stated in the article, but arguing against it being such is a waste of everybody's time, especially when you break 3RR as badly as you and Kojidude have. Kojidude, I'm a bit disappointed in you. You should have just let TJ get banned temporarily. It might have granted him some time to think about what he was doing wrong. Entering into an edit war with him doesn't solve anything, and while I'm glad you've decided to drop the issue, you should have done it far sooner. Let others dig their own graves. You don't need to dig your own as well.
Daishokaioshin 00:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Requested move from Bebi (Dragon Ball) to just Bebi

I searched Wikipedia and technically, there's no article using the word "Bebi" to specify a character or other thing besides the "Bebi Saga" and "Bebi" himself. I don't see why there shouldn't be a move in the first place since King Cold (Dragon Ball), Majin Buu (Dragon Ball), Zarbon (Dragon Ball), Dodoria (Dragon Ball), etc., can just redirect to their own names respectively without the need for the parenthesis category. Know what I mean? Power level (Dragon Ball) 15:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I support this move. There's really no reason to keep the parentheses. // Sasuke-kun27 00:14, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Okay, then it's settled. I shall move it. Power level (Dragon Ball) 02:53, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
I DON'T Support. Because either way it's incorrect. The character's official name is Baby, not "Bebi". That's how the Super Battle Collection figure packaging spells his name. Jonny2x4 03:35, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Toys do not determine the correct name for anything unless the toys are the originator of the name. Bebi clearly existed prior to the Super Battle whatever so that's the name being used.
Daishokaioshin 04:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm talking about the official English/Romaji name, which is Baby. Every official DBGT merchandise in Japan I've seen uses the spelling "Baby". The Super Battle Colleciton is just one of the merchandises that I cited as an example. I've never seen the spelling "Bebi" used anywhere. I would like to see a counter-example though. Jonny2x4 05:29, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Trivia section

Why was this removed? Was this a spur-of-the-moment desicion, or something that was officially decided? Lordshmeckie 23:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Trivia sections are frowned upon at Wikipedia. When there are trivia sections the relevant information is supposed to be move into the correct heading and the actual trivial details are to be deleted. Jay32183 00:01, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus. Andrewa 16:19, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Bebi → Baby (Dragon Ball) — The character is obviously named Baby (as noted by the original Japanese merchandise of the show). Bebi is just the phonetic pronounciation. Jonny2x4 02:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Survey

Add  * '''Support'''  or  * '''Oppose'''  on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.
    • Comment - Actually, searching for "Baby 'Dragon Ball'" [2] got me more results than "Bebi 'Dragon Ball'"[3]. Naturally, writing "Bebi" alone is gonna get more Dragon Ball results than writing "Baby", but if you consider that logic, then we might as well move Cell to Seru. Jonny2x4 01:24, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose: You can't name an article based on what the merchandise says. If several different toy boxes read Gokua instead of Goku (which I have seen before), would we name the article Gokua? No. And we use Freeza instead of the licensed English anime's name Frieza, Coola instead of Cooler, Rou Dai Kaioshin instead of Elder Kai, etc. I had always thought that we were naming the DB articles by the names given in the English manga and even if I'm right, there is no manga to name Bebi after. The best option is to just keep it the way it is. // Sasuke-kun27 13:41, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment - Actually, the Japanese Bandai merchandise uses the spelling "Son Gokou", not "Gokua". I believe Gokou is just a different romanization than the standard Hepburn romanization, but don't quote me on that. Jonny2x4
As far as I can tell, we're just picking what we like instead of what we should use a lot of the time (which isn't a good thing to do). Nemu 13:48, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. We need to come up with some sort of system for naming DB articles instead of randomly selectng names as Nemu (or do you want me to call you TTN?) mentioned above. We could use the manga names, but not all characters are in the manga. We could use the English anime names, but there's more than one English dub. We can't just use the American names because the English Wikipedia is shared by all English-speaking people. Every system I can think of is flawed in some way or another. // Sasuke-kun27 16:32, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose The "official" English/Romanji name for Bebi is Bebi. I just checked on a number of English to Japanese translators, and "baby" is not and never has been how the word is spelled in Romanji. The accepted Romanji translations of "baby" include the following: "osanago, akachan, chinomigo, youji, akanbou, bebi." I don't see "baby" anywhere in the list, do you? If you can find somewhere where the translation of "baby" in Japanese (Bebi) equals "baby" in English, then please provide us with the information/address/etc. Otherwise, this is just the same old "I like this name over here so I'm going to make a fuss until people agree to it" schtick that has been thrown around so many times. Bebi is the name of the article, and I vote for it to remain such, based on the fact that Bebi is a Japanese word, and the original name, and "Baby" is not, merchandise be damned. -- Daishokaioshin 00:58, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment - Bebi is not a real Japanese word in this case, it's a phonetic pronounciation of the English loanword "Baby" (and in this case, a character's name). I checked Jeffrey's J/E Dictionary to be sure. [4] Jonny2x4 01:24, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


  • Comment - Is there proof that Bebi is supposed to be Baby? If it is just a romanization I might change my vote. Onikage725 07:55, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Not really. I don't think anything's been published about it. Other than a romanization of 'BABY' on a card [5], and some other merchandise [6]. Name puns aren't commented on in the show (with the exception being Broli in movie 8), but one could guess that it's a pun based on his small size (seems as likely as anything in GT), in combination with DR. Mu's name ('mu', as in μ, as in 'micro'?). It's not really much, but it seems right. -- DesireCampbell 09:48, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
      • Yeah, but I just don't put much stock in GT holding to any sort of name pun. I mean, technically, if AT had been writing, the character's name would have most likely been a parody of a type of fruit if anything. Onikage725 13:57, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
        • Heh, true. Toriyama (if he even remembers the Tsufrujin) would have probably used a better pun than 'baby'. I agree, it's lame - but it's all we've got. 'Baby' is a correct romanization, it's use on official merchandise, both English and Japanese. Whether or not it's popular is not a concern to me, but a Google test does seem to weigh in on 'Baby's favour. On the other hand, 'Baby' looks pretty stupid. :P -- DesireCampbell 19:48, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


  • Support The English Wikipedia is going to be viewed mostly by people who are watching English dubs. If the only English dubs out there use Baby, why the hell use Bebi?--KojiDude (Contributions) 18:31, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Support Convention seems to dictate that it should follow official naming, rather than popular naming. Move to Baby (Dragon Ball GT) since as far as I know this character is isolated to that series, otherwise to Baby.
    • Guidelines say we should use the standard romanization of the name unless another "acceptable" romanization is far more popular. The only time we wouldn't use a direct phonetic transliteration is when the name is based on an English word (like "Bebi-" probably is). These guidelines can be ignored, however, if such action would improve the article. The only matter of contention is if the name really is based on 'baby' or not. If there was any scrap of proof I think everyone would agree to the name change. -- DesireCampbell 23:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
      • Actually the guidelines for Japanese say to use official trade names first. The trade name is "Baby", as that is what is used by all the official dubs, video games, and other licenced media in the English speaking world. The fansubs using "Bebi" has no meaning. Jay32183 23:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
        • I thought that specific guideline refered to real people, not fictional characters. ?? -- DesireCampbell 00:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
          • Technically, you are correct and the Japan-related naming conventions don't seem to list fictional characters, point me to it if I'm wrong. I felt that the reasoning behind this guideline would be the same for fictional characters, even if it isn't specifically spelled out. I believe it's to keep a consistant manner for the average English speaker who isn't necessarily familiar with Japanese language and transliteration. Jay32183 01:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
            • I don't see why a different romanization would confuse those unfamiliar with Japanese. If anything, I think that romanizations like 'Baby' would confuse them more ("is he a baby? Is it a term of endearment?") than a 'strange looking foreign name'. That said, I think the name should reflect the most accurate romanization possible. If ベビー was transliterated from 'baby', then the romanization should be 'Baby' as well - just as is the WP:MOS-JA says. Further, if the name is changed (like Vegeta's ベジータ with a long ji instead of a short one, as in bejitaburu) then the romanization should reflect that as well. Perhaps the best option is to name the article 'Baby' and input a section detailing the name more deeply (in fact, this sounds like a good idea for all Dragon Ball characters). -- DesireCampbell 01:41, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Oppose - if there was a manga, VIZ would likely have his original name given, therfore, the character would famously be known as Bebi. Power level (Dragon Ball) 17:44, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Huh? That doesn't make any sense at all. Viz is pretty bad with keeping original names. 'Vegerot', 'Djinn' Boo, 'Hercule'. And such an 'if' doesn't matter - there isn't a manga. 'Bebi' is a direct romanization of the kana, but that kana could just as easily come from 'baby' - indeed 'baby' is a correct romanization of ベビー, just as 'bebi' is. The difference is 'baby' is used on official merchandise (Japanese and English), and is an official romanization of the name (in at least one English dub). That information is enough to warrant the name changed based on the MOS-JA for Japanese articles and the WP:Anime Wiki Project. But that's not my main goal here. I don't want to just enforce rules. I want to figure out what the proper name is. From the information we have, 'Baby' seems like the best choice. --DesireCampbell 18:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
The concept and creation section I added for the in-universe concern would be the perfect place to discuss how the character was originally named and if it was changed for English that reasoning can be explained there too. Jay32183 19:49, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/4058/cap004lv1.png It's not 'my names a pun on "baby"', but it's probably as close as we'll get. --DesireCampbell 21:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

Add any additional comments:

So is Bebi an actual name for him or is it just the prefered fan name? If it's the later, then it should be moved no matter how popular it is. Nemu 04:41, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I dunno, same thing with some other DB articles.--SUIT 04:52, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Then instead of just randomly voting, we try to figure that you. Why do we vote anyways? I always see "discuss, don't vote." Nemu 13:48, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Bebi is just the fan name. The official English with this character is the Funimation dub, in which he is called Baby. That's not just US, that dub goes to Canada and Australia as well. If the UK is different give the website of the official dub there, otherwise it's a meaningless claim.Jay32183 18:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Argument

Baby is not just the name present in all of the English dubs of the anime. It's the name present in every piece of DBGT merchandise released in Japan. Two evidence for this argument.

  • A Dragon Ball GT trading from the "VS Combo Collection" by Morinaga.[7]
    • Baby is clearly written on the card. Other cards from this collection features "Super Baby" and "Vegeta Baby".
  • The other piece of merchandise that uses the Baby spelling are the "Super Battle Collection" figures distributed by Bandai.[8]
    • Clearly it's "Baby" and not "Bebi" on the packaging.

I can understand if Baby was only used in the English dub of the anime (like Frieza), but clearly this is not the case. Baby is the official spelling used in Japan and outside. If there was any case where the spelling Bebi was used in a Japanese product, I would like to see it. This isn't a popularity contest. It's about determining the correct way to spell the character's name. Jonny2x4 01:24, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

How about instead of producing the same irrelevant and completely meaningless "evidence" over and over, you accept that merchandise is not going to be used to determine this issue. What I recommend you do, is go watch the Japanese episodes of GT, find an episode with Bebi's name in the episode's title, and translate out what the Kanji say. If the SHOW ITSELF SAYS THE CHARACTER'S NAME IS "BABY" then and ONLY then should we use it as the name. Otherwise, it has been a few days now, and the votes are overwhelmingly opposed to the move. There is a concensus, and that's for the article to remain where it is. As far as I can tell, this is over.
Oh, and don't just use subtitles saying it's "Baby" as your evidence either, incase you were thinking about that. The subtitles provide literal translations, not necessarily the spelling of original names.
Daishokaioshin 02:35, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
There is an official English spelling, and that is Funimation's dub. They use Baby. Show me the English where it says Bebi. The naming conventions on Wikipedia say to use the official English when one exists. You have not provided any evidence that it is Bebi in English. Jay32183 03:16, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
I haven't seen any evidence from you either. Bebi is the name that is going to be used. FUNimation is not and never has been the end all be all of character names. If you don't like that, too bad. We're using Bebi, Bebi is the name we have agreed on to use, deal with it.
Daishokaioshin 03:18, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Actually, they are. They own the licence for all English distribution, so it doesn't matter what you agreed on. Show me any English licence with Bebi, I have shown you an English licence with Baby. Jay32183 03:22, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
This shows a bit of ignorance in the Japanese language from "Daikaiohshin's" part. First of all, Bebi's name is written in katakana in Japanese, not kanji. Secondly, deciphering the episodes' titles into romaji does nothing. Translating a foreign word written in katakana in Japanese back to romaji does nothing, since we are merely providing phonetic pronounciation, not the actual spelling. Citing the Cell example from above, just because his name when romanized from katakana is Seru, doesn't mean Seru is the correct English spelling.
I've already provided evidence that the official English spelling in Japanese and English products is Baby and no one has provided a counter-evidence. Again, this isn't an argument for the most popular spelling, but rather the correct spelling.

Besides merchadises, the name is spelled ベビー in kana, with a long vowel at the end. This is how the English word "baby" is written in Japanese katakana.[9]Jonny2x4
Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.
See that there? Calling someone "ignorant" because they weren't thinking clearly at the time of writing something violates the no personal attacks rule. Please keep in mind in the future that you should comment on content not on contributors.
Daishokaioshin 10:00, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Not to butt-in, but I don't think Johnny meant any insult by it. He was merely trying to point out tat Dai wasn't thinking about something or didn't know (ie: was ignorant of). He could very well have been insulting him, but he also might not have been - so "assue good faith"?
There are good points on both sides. Japanese merchandise, Daimao's subs, (liberal) romanization - all show "Baby". But "Bebi" is a more standard romanization. -- DesireCampbell 10:14, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Exactly, I meant no offense by it. I'm just pointing that Baby's name is written in katakana and not kanji (something anyone who knows a bit of Japanese writing can tell you). Jonny2x4 18:15, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Isn't Romanized katakana what's known as Engrish? There was a similar discussion at Naruto about the English "Might Guy" versus the Engrish "Maito Gai". Jay32183 05:15, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


There's a really simple answer to this. Which name is used more often in English languege dubs? Figure that out and you have your name. Try to spend a little less time arguing and more time studying.--KojiDude (Contributions) 03:40, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

The only official English dub I'm aware of is the Funimation one, which uses Baby. If there is another one, please show us. Jay32183 03:42, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


If there's only one english dub, and it uses Baby, the article's name should be Baby. That one was kind of obvious...--KojiDude (Contributions) 03:46, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, actually, there's at least two English dubs (Funimation's Texas cast, and the International Blue Water dub) but that neither here nor there, we should be using romanizations of the original name. The name is just the word "baby" in kana. ベビー is "baby", that's it. There are other DragonBall names that are a bit ambiguous (like Burdock, or Vegeta), but there's nothing here to debate, really.

Personally, I like "Bebi" more, I've always used "Bebi", and think "Baby" looks weird - but that's the name. *shrug* -- DesireCampbell 05:19, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I said before it, I say it again. Wikipedia isn't aimed solely at the hardcore Dragon Ball fans, but at new or casual fans as well. Anyone who sees the DBGT dubs/subs by Funimation is going to see Baby, not Bebi. Likewise, the guy who buys the Bandai toys, is going to see Baby too. I can undertstand the argument if there were different spellings used by official sources, but pretty much every official source I've seen uses the spelling Baby. Bandai has been using the spelling Baby long before the series was dubbed into English. Jonny2x4 18:15, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Baby_(Dragon_Ball)/Archive_1&oldid=1136295887"