Talk:Tullece

This article was nominated for deletion on February 24, 2007. The result of the discussion was speedy redirect.

Dub Name Confusion

Why is "Turlus" mentioned as Tullece's dubbed name, when FUNimation's version (and related merchandise, such as the CCG) have referenced it as "Turles". Is this a dub name from a country other than America? If so, then both names should be accredited instead of replacing "Turles" (which was on the page previously) with "Turlus". The S

Sparking! NEO

All right, where has it been said that Tullece is in Sparking! NEO? Thus far, I've not seen screens or any other mention of him in the game. The S 06:37, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lookalike

I want to know why Tullece looks like Goku so much. Later!!! 205.188.117.74 20:19, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's right there in the topic, under Character History & Relations. The S 02:04, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Design

We can actually say that Akira Toriyama designed Tullece, because Tullece looks exactly like Goku, and Goku was designed by Toriyama. Jienum

Unfortunately not, because he didn't design everything there has to do with the character, unlike Bardock, a Goku clone Toriyama did design from the ground up Voice of Treason 04:14, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What I meant was, Goku and Bardock look exactly like Tullece, so it can be said that Toriyama did design Tullece, didn't he? Jienum 19:00, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, because he didn't. That's like saying if I drew a really good picture of somone who looks like Vegeta, then Toriyama is the one who came up with the character design. Just because the character was based on somone created by Toriyama, doesn't mean Toriyama did the design.--Koji Dude 19:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Write-up

The work put into it is commended, but the new text was not to the quality of the first, which can be seen as comparison. In addition to unencyclopedic prose, there's hyperbole, play-by-play, removal of links, and odd phrasing and content. The main reason it seems to have been done was to lengthen the section so a second picture could be added, which then interfered with the text below. Pics don't come before content. Voice of Treason 00:23, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. This is especially true since there are ample amounts of images of this character already on this page, not to mention spread across the internet. The S 02:32, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't revert to the melodramatic synopsis again. It's full of prose, hyperbole to the extent of being near parody, and play by play that belongs nowhere near anything claiming to be an encylcopedic reference. The arrangement is fine as well. Just because other DBZ articles are set up poorly doesn't mean this one uniformly has to be. Voice of Treason 07:15, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is the pure-Japanese title necessary in the section title? Can we just have the translated title (instead of "Chikyou Marugoto Chou-Kessen", we have "Super Deciding Battle for the Entire Planet Earth")? -- RattleMan 07:20, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. It's a proper translation, so that's certainly doable, and probably should have been set that way for a long while since its policy to provide those where available. So you're very right - the new title will also keep readers from mistaking the title of the dub as the translation for the original; it works out for the best for everyone. I think I'm wording myself as a bit of a jerk when I really don't want to be, but there seems to be a legitimate difference in quality between the two edits. To me and at least one other, anyway. Voice of Treason 07:30, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OVA

Saying that "Plan to destroy the Saiyajin" is video-game footage is as stupid and wrong as saying the entire DBZ series is not an anime but video-game footage from DBZ Budokai.

An OVA is an anime specifically made for the video market, which won't be shown on TV nor in the cinemas, only released in VHS/LD/DVD.

"Plan..." was released in VHS in August 1993 and was never shown on TV nor in the cinemas.

The Playdia video-game, wich used footage from this OVA, was released in August 1994, a year later.

Now, please think a little... How could "Plan..." possibly be "videogame footage" if the videogame wasn't released until a year after the release of the anime on VHS ?

As I said, in this case, the entire DBZ series could as well be labelled video game footage for the Budokai games, instead of being a TV series...

Moreover, and that's the final point, "Plan..." appears in an official listing of OVAs made by Tôei Animation in the 1990s : [1]

It's an OVA. Period. Folken de Fanel 09:12, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, it would be a OVA. But, you could have been just a tad bit nicer in presenting that (not trying to insult or critisize or anything, just saying...).--Koji Dude 20:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, maybe Voice of Treason could have avoided shouting "IT'S A VIDEO GAME" in his edit summary. That would have been a "tad bit nicer"... Folken de Fanel 22:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's emphasis, not TEXTUAL SHOUTING!!!. Though since you've long since made up your mind pertaining to me and what I do, I'll be giving you an online purple nurple any time now. I hardly ever edit anymore anyway, so your vitriol's especially wasted on me. You did ignore that you put all games under OVAs at first in your haste to put me in my place though... just FYI.

Wikipedia. Serious business. Voice of Treason 03:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently you've not yet understood that you're not the centre of the world. I contribute to Wikipedia in order to make the articles accurate, not to "put Voice of Treason in his place". I don't care about you. It's just that the Tullece article was inaccurate. So don't take it personal.

And my "vitriol" isn't "vitriol", it's an explanation for anyone believing "Plan..." is game footage.

We're on Wikipedia here, if your seeking attention, seek it in the real world, not on the internet.

By the way, I hope for you that your pitiful reaction wasn't merely your revenge on me for having proved you wrong. Folken de Fanel 10:05, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. So taking a comment personal is but a matter of course for me, after you get your knickers in a twist over a comment that was in no way inflammatory in the first place? Of course, you could choose to continue to back-bite and attack, as you've done well on that front 'til now, going as far as to continue fighting some "war" after attempts were made at levity (something, something purple & nurples).

I don't expect an apology, being you're in war-mode and all, but that's TWICE (that's meant for emphasis again) you've made assumptions about me, and poor ones at that. First in taking something written as a "tad not nice" attack when it was never meant in this way (and if you still believe it was meant in that fashion, I apologize), and now with this "center of the universe" diatribe and accusation of trollery. I don't know what your past Wikipedian experiences are (and at this point, don't particularly care to), but whatever they are, I hope they go a slight bit better in the future.

Don't be so quick to pull the trigger on people; you made your decision about me long before you and I ever spoke a word. Still, take care. I apologize for my part in things, if it assuages anything in the matter. I assume my pitiful reaction can at least amount to THAT. >_> Voice of Treason 11:12, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My god... "pull the trigger", "attack", "war"... I just explained was "Plan..." was an OVA, and now you think there's a flame-war... You are overreacting. And overacting.

All these insults just because I was right about "Plan..." ! You must be very lonely in real life so as to take Wikipedia so seriously that it's a matter of life or death for you to be right.

But that's your problem, not mine. Your child tantrum won't change the nature of "Plan...". You've lost, admit it.

And now stop trolling here, this is the talk page for the Tullece article. If you want to insult me, that's on my talk page. Folken de Fanel 11:48, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you feel I'm up in arms about the article, or am making attempts at "trolling" you in any way? What am I trying to win? I've already apologized to you over my potentially misleading edit summary, haven't edit-warred, and have listened to your OVA vs. VG comments. If I was as hard-headed as you say I'd of reverted on sight. I think you're being very hot-headed on this issue, and a casual observer reading it back might well think you're the one that's blown a gasket. Voice of Treason 11:58, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You still haven't apologized for your insults in the talk page. I'm not "hot-headed", it's you. Because you are the first to talk of "war", "vitriol", etc. And a casual observer reading it back might well think youre the one that's blown a gasket. Folken de Fanel 12:25, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The whole genesis of this is the misread intentions of the "VIDEO GAME" comment. Not because of some video game/OVA footage; I don't care about that. Actually, I shouldn't care too much about this either, but on occasion I get worked up over what's perceived as personal comments too. It's silly bickering with someone over a computer screen, especially with origins in subjects like this.

Please accept my words at face value before turning them back on me this time. I'm not Machiavellian enough to push some sort of agenda over Tullece, for goodness sakes. ^_^; Voice of Treason 12:37, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes, he could have avoided that, but there's no reason to yell back and call him stupid is there? 0=) --Koji Dude 22:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've not called him "stupid", I said "saying that is stupid". That's not the same thing. ;)

Folken de Fanel 22:59, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um, actually, you're all wrong. I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, but it's true. It is not an OVA, but where the Budokai thing came from, I don't know.

The footage was originally created as a visual guide for the Famicom game Dragon Ball Z Gaiden: Saiya-jin Zetsumetsu Keikaku. In other words, it was basically an animated strategy guide. There's an entire article dedicated to it at daizex.com. The S 03:25, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's an OVA, since it was created specifically for the video marked. That it served as an "animated walkthrough" doesn't change the way this anime was produced. Moreover, Tôei Animation officially recognizes it as an OVA : [2]

Folken de Fanel 08:16, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's an animated walkthrough, just like the S said. It was released for the video market for the fact that since it's a walkthrough, people are gonna buy it, right? Also, like the S said, an entire article can be found here [3]

No it's not an animated walkrthough. It's an OVA, serving as an animated walkthrough. It's an anime, it was released on VHS, so it has nothing special. It's an OVA. And for the 3rd time, read this official website listing "Plan..." as an OVA : [4] (how long are you going to ignore it ?). Daizex is wrong on this, that's all.

Folken de Fanel 10:05, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whether or not it's an OVA is irrelevant. I'm requesting that in this article "Plan to Destroy the Saiyan" be either referred to by it's title or be called a "feature" or something to that effect. There is debate over if it is or isn't an OVA, but 99.9% of DBZ fans will know what your talking about if you say "The DBZ OVA". I vote we either call it by it's proper title or use another word everyone can agree on other than "OVA", "Walkthrough," or "Video Game footage".GI Judd 19:44, 21 September 2006 (UTC)GI Judd[reply]

Well, the fact that it is officially called an OVA settles the matter, I think...Folken de Fanel 09:31, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I have no qualms on it being called an OVA, because that's what it is. However, would you please tell me when Toei officialy called it an OVA? I'm not doubting you, I'm just curious. GI Judd 19:51, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've already given the link at the beginning : http://www.toei-anim.co.jp/tv/ov1990.html

This page (in japanese) is a list of all the OVAs made by Toei in the 90s, which includes "Plan to destroy the Saiyajin", in the year 1993.

Folken de Fanel 00:14, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you provide a translation of some sort? Not only can I (or the average English speaker) not read Japanese, but I cant even get the characters to display as anything more than "??????". Also, I always thought they referred to it as an "OVG" or Official Game Guide? I also think the issue is touchy. I mean, Folken you have a point in that it fits the basic criteria. But OVA's are high-quality big budget productions. "Plan" not so much. It is, essentially, anime cutscenes made to go with an NES game. If the anime cutscenes in, say, Chrono Trigger were put on a disc for sale, it would not an OVA make. They actually do sell DVDs of cinema sequences from games like Final Fantasy and Xenosaga, and these aren't credited as OVA's. Metal Gear Solid 3 Subsistence has a bonus disc where the game's cinematics are stitched together with some explanatory dialogue and gameplay to make a movie that can serve as a walkthrough. A videogame can serve as a format for OVA. "The Day of Sigma" in Mega Man: Maverick Hunter X is an OVA. However, the ensuing cinematics (or the anime work done for MMX3 and 4 or MM8 that directly corresponds to the game) are not. I don't know...it's a tricky subject, and I could see it either way...

One last thing though. "As I said, in this case, the entire DBZ series could as well be labelled video game footage for the Budokai games, instead of being a TV series." That's a very flawed comparison.The Budokai series is based on the anime, wheras "Plan" is based on a Famicom game. If we're talking about what is based on what, the two examples are exact opposites of each other. Furthermore, the only Budokai game to even have in-game cutscenes was B1, and those were just recreation pieces from the series (whereas "Plan" is recreation scenes from the game). Apples and oranges here. Onikage725

Tullece as Bardock skin?

Does anyone have this fake image of Tullece as a costume for Bardock in Budokai 3 as mentioned in the trivia section? Takuthehedgehog 07:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It never happened. All it was, was simply the fact that in the iGuide, under Bardock, they showed a picture of Tullece. This caused people to think that he would be his alternate skin. The S 04:03, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

People, people, PEOPLE!

Why do users keep adding Tullece being Son Gokū's brother? There is absolutely NO evidence supporting this.

Repeat after me: Tullece is not Gokū's brother. Tullece is not Gokū's brother. Tullece is not Gokū's brother.

Thank you. The S 03:50, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Repeat after me: - Tullece is Gokū's brother. - Tullece is Gokū's brother. - Tullece is Gokū's brother. - - they not going to cover every translation word loophole in the siries tullece is goku's brother, and you missed two different scenes: when they talk about goku bing sent off planat vageta they show goku and radits together, and the conversation in the movie between tullece and gohan when gohan is unconsious. the creators of the show expect you to pick up stuff like this, thay should not have to point everything out so clerly(or maybe they ment this to be contravershal, but thats a big or) - - p.s. i allready know i am a bad speller i am dislecsic your comments arent needed on that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.153.55.4 (talk) 04:50, 6 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

the folowing user 3bulletproof16 deleted my article on discussion

thats not cool man this is a public discusion you have no write to do what you did

tullece is his brother the reson he does not show up on the list of gokus familly is the movies are disasociated from the show(excluding garlic jr.)

What you're saying is an example of Wikipedia:No_original_research. It is not explicitly said nor even hinted in the series or any official supplemental material that he is Gokū's brother. Thus, it cannot be said that Son Gokū and Tullece are even related. The S 16:26, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/3330/saiyajinfamilytreesba9.jpg - Image courtesy of Vegetto EX of Daizenshuu EX The S 04:03, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thats my point its not going to say it in the series bacause they are disasociated from the movies

When I say series, I mean the franchise as a total, not just the anime. But you're not even reading what I've said, obviously. Go back and watch Movie 3. There is no evidence whatsoever that they are related. Check any DB guidebook. None there, either. To say they are related, is speculation. That is not encyclopedic content. The S 03:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, there is no proof other than fan made family trees. If he was only discluded from that because of it being a movie, wouldn't it at least be in the Daizenshuu? Yea, didn't think so. Future_trunks_5084:00, 12 Decembeer 2006 (UTC)

Tullece tells Gohan something to the effect of "It's not surprising myself and Kakarrot look alike. There aren't many types of us lower class Saiyans." They all just look really similar. Chibi Gohan 18:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Goku and Tullece are not brothers (as far as we know). There is no proof that they are and saying so would be original research. Two people who look almost alike do not necessarily have to be related. Granted it would be highly unusual and almost impossible to find someone who looks just like you in the world who isn't related to you, but nonetheless it doesn't change the fact that two people who look alike aren't necessarily related. There's a kid in my school who I have never met before in my life until recently who has the same hair color, body type, is almost as tall as me, and is almost the same exact weigth as me. We also have the same facial features. Does that mean we're related? Of course not. This discussion is pointless. No more of this "Goku and Tullece are brothers" crap unless you can give us some real proof. Only then will I change my opinion on the matter. // Sasuke-kun27 20:55, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

someone please look at this link and tell my why tullece is on it http://www.planetdragonball.com/images/information/familytree1.jpg

Because it's probably some unofficial picture and the person who made it thinks that Goku and Tullece are brothers. It's still not official proof, though. Unless Toriyama himself states that they are brothers, they aren't. // Sasuke-kun27 22:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen that picture before, its just the unfortunate fan who can't translate good or tries to find an answer for mysteries. No one knows who Tullece's parents are, but unless canon proof comes out that Tullece and Goku are related, which isn't going to happen, we can't go putting fan-made excuses.//Future_trunks_508

Because it's French. Tullece is stated to be Goku's brother in the French dub.//Megatronacepticon 07:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am familiar with that image; in fact, that was the first time I had ever seen Tullece suggested as being related other than fanboy/girl chatter. But it can't be taken as any kind of canon. The big reason, there's never been any Japanese version seen of it. You'd think something as important as a canon relationship would be in at least ONE Japanese source. The S 04:11, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

an old frenchman's confessions

the thing is Thalès, awkward katakana translation of TARESU officially "TURLES" in the french dub version (that existed a decade before the english vers) was probably not said to be the brother of gokou (i saw it in the 90s can't remember) BUT, a DBZ guidebook labelled as "Bible", hence people thought it was official while it wasn't, was published in france. it was something like 1996, it was by the time DBZ budokai ultimate battle 22 (for 22 playable CHR) for PS1 and shin butoden (27 CHR, i think) for segasaturn were released in japan. what you have to know younglings, is this bible had a family tree were Thalès was presented as gokou's brother. hence every kids in france thought there were brothers (twins). actually if you look at them closely you'll notice they are different, different face, skin and haircut. i think it was toriyama's way to represent the saiyans and to show a character similar to gokou. remember this character was one of the first sayajin to be created. however the theory i've red here about the face being the same for all low-class saiyans is poor and false. just compare gokou's father with his teammates... they have nothing to do, one is bald, another is fat, another looks like one of tullece's sidekicks (except the latter is not a saiyan). claiming Thalès is gokou's brother is a mistake as big as trusting Videl is a relative to Seripa just because they are designed almost the same. it's just toriyama's character design similarities, as seen in dragon quest/chrono trigger or trunks and his clone ackman. once people outside japan thought ackman was trunks young (it was years before DBGT & chibi trunks). toriyama did flaws, like this theory that the saiyajinh haircuts are the same from the day they are born until the end (it was said in the french dubbed tv series), imagine nappa newborn... or gokou's father's bald teammate. mirai trunks' haircuts are different same goes for gohan during the cell game.

the following are scans from an official source, the original anime comics published in japan in 1990 (Jump Comics Selection collection) imported by me circa 1994/95:
tullece manga scan 1 (front dust cover)
tullece manga scan 2 (back dust cover)
tullece manga scan 3 (1st page w/"character guide" appendix mention)
tullece manga scan 4 (tullece in "character guide" appendix)
tullece manga scan 5 (tullece "character guide" appendix detail)
tullece manga scan 6 (manga excerpt)

as you can see people (and fellow citizen compatriotes) there is no mention about brotherhood between the characters. it's just the french adaptation and guide were not cannon to toriyama. tullece is a regular saiyajin not kakaroto's twin.

and now this is scan of the famous family tree available "DBZ bible" published in france in the mid 90s:
(the original french mistake: family tree feat. "THALES Twin of Son Goku" in the DBZ guide "bible")

notice the awkward spelling for "BADDAK", "RADITZ", "THALES". in the french dub version "Mr. Satan" is known as "Hercules" (Heracles) another non canonical adaptation that was inherited in the english dub version apprently. Paris By Night 22:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merger

Ok, who thinks that the page should be redirected to the list? Any thoughts? Power level (Dragon Ball) 00:59, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm personally against the merger, but I may be personally biased because it took me effing forever to write the original (much longer) article. But ig it does indeed become merged, I'd like his involvement in Gaiden at least mentioned. The S 04:09, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]