Talk:Human (Dragon Ball)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Merger

This article seems to offer no information that could not easily be--or is not already--covered at Saiyan or List of Humans in Dragon Ball. Metalrobot 14:41, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Do not merge ... 81.18.55.28 19:45, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Don't merge. If you want information about the humans in DragonBall Z, you shouldn't have to look on the page Saiyan or be redirected to the page Saiyan. That just doesn't make sense. RoempaZ 17:18, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Do not merge, Saiyans and humans are diffrent.Muchi 13:32, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Do not merge, if Saiyans and Namkeians have their own articles, why shouldn't Humans? Power level (Dragon Ball) 18:08, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Debate

Someone keeps redirecting this page to Dragon World without proposing a merge. As I look on this talk page, most people agree it should NOT be merged and that the article is fine. After all, articles on fictionalized versions of the human race are allowed, so long as they diffrent enough from the real human race. If suffiecient technological advancement is enough to warrent this, then surely being able to learn how to fly and shoot lazers from your hands is enough, something normal humans CANNOT do. Humans in the Dragon Ball world haveboth this AND advanced technology. Human (Babylon 5) is a sperate article than Earth (Babylon 5) and Human (Star Wars) is a seperate article than Coruscant. Several diffrent varients of the human race are listed here Category:Fictional human races. So I will being the debate again with a clear definition of what is wanted. Should thei article be merged with Dragon World or List of Humans in Dragon Ball? Animedude 17:29, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I vote Do Not Merge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Animedude360 (talk • contribs)

3bulletproof16, Nemu (and possibly others) are redirecting this page with Dragon World without even having a discussion or consensus about it. I, for one, oppose this merger because Human (Dragon Ball) and Earth (Dragon Ball) are similar but different articles. Human (Dragon Ball) emphasizes more on the human and inhuman appearances of characters and their abilities; such their powers, ki mastery, Saiyan-Human hybrids, etc. Dragon World talks more about the timeline, as well as the types of humans such as the anthropomorphic creatures, dinosaurs that roam the Earth, the technology, similarities to the real-life Earth and many more. I really don't understand why this article should even be merged with anything else since it seems okay. So I guess majority rules. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Power level (Dragon Ball) (talk • contribs)

If you would look jsut above your post, I stated everything you just said and even started a new debate for the merger, which you interupted. I take it you are against the merger, but please read all posts on the talk page to avoid redundancy next time. Thanks you Animedude 17:29, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] READ ME

If this article doesn't have enough information to warrant its existence and someone feels it should be merged, it would only be proper to "Talk" about it first.

If someone thinks the article sucks, then they should start improving it. If you think the subject is too meaningless, then discuss it before proposing a merge or deletion.


Personally, I don't think the article has enough information and the subject is not important enough to warrant its own article. But redirecting the page to Dragon World is just stupid. Why would anyone look up 'Humans (Dragon Ball)' and actually be looking for an article about the fictional universe that the series Dragon Ball happens in? Wouldn't it be vastly more appropriate to redirect to List of Humans in Dragon Ball? --DesireCampbell 16:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I think not. This article is about a race of fictional humans in a fictional story. List of Humans in Dragon Ball only shows a list of characters from Dragon Ball but not a detailed article about the types of humans. Power level (Dragon Ball) 16:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm not saying it should be merged with the list, I'm just saying that it is merged it should be with that, not with "Dragon World". Perhaps a merge with "Earth (Dragon Ball)" would be appropriate, but apparently that redirects to "Dragon World" too.sigh So much work to do. --DesireCampbell 16:50, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
It redirects to Dragon World because it's a race from "Dragon World." The article should be called Earth (Dragon Ball) instead of taking the name from the games(I think that's the only place it's from. Correct me if I'm wrong). Do you even know what the Dragon World article is about? It's about the Earth as I just stated. You should read more clearly.
We seem to agree that it doesn't need a page. It should be redirected to DW(which should be called Earth (DB)). Any reasons to oppose? Nemu 18:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
There are many reasons to oppose. For one thing articles on fictionalized versions of the human race are allowed, so long as they diffrent enough from the real human race. If suffiecient technological advancement is enough to warrent this, then surely being able to learn how to fly and shoot lazers from your hands is enough, something normal humans CANNOT do. Humans in the Dragon Ball world have both this AND advanced technology. Human (Babylon 5) is a sperate article than Earth (Babylon 5) and Human (Star Wars) is a seperate article than Coruscant.
It's allowed if it has content. I don't know why Babylon 5 has one, but the Star Wars one is good. It has conent directly about the humans. The technological advancement is not a defining point of the humans. It's a defining point of the planet. They aren't the only race on the planet. The only other thing they have is the powers. On the Earth page, that's summed up in one sentence. Nemu 18:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
The page for Saiyans doesn't redirect to Planet Vegeta, the page for Namekians doesn't redirect to Planet Namek. This is because one is an article about a species, and another is about a planet. There probably should be a page for Human (Dragon Ball), another page for Earth (Dragon Ball), and another page for the Dragon World. I have no idea why this page is called Dragon World but is about the Dragon World's Earth. "Dragon World" is rarely, if ever, used to refer to DragonBall's Earth. The planet is always referred to as "Earth". "Dragon World" is usually used to refer to the fictional setting of Dragon Ball (not just Earth, but the whole cosmos and afterlife).
I think this page needs a complete rewrite, so it describes the fictional setting, I think Earth (Dragon Ball) needs it's own article just like the other planets, and I think Human (Dragon Ball) needs it's own article too, but there might not be enough information to warrant that (in which case it should be merged with Earth (Dragon Ball)). But we should work on it instead of simply scraping it. --DesireCampbell 18:56, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Saiyans and Nakekians have things to describe. The only notable thing about humans is the ability to manipulate ki(one sentence). All of the other content is not specific to them. It's specific to Earth. Nemu 18:59, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps. But then again, perhaps there is. Was there anything on the page before it was redirected? Was there any consensus before redirecting it? Was there even a note about it being below standards? No? Someone just scrapped the whole page without asking the community first? That's not how things are done on Wikipedia.

Keep the page. There's no reason to scrap it without a consensus. --DesireCampbell 19:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Consensus only goes so far. If the page doesn't fit with certain guide lines, then it'll be taken care of no matter what the consensus is(ie. A bunch of fans want to keep a page for stupid reasons(not saying that's the case for this. It just an example.)). . Before I bother to cite some, I've reduced the page. Those are the only notable things about the humans in Dragon Ball. Does it really need a page now? Nemu 19:56, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
I agree, but one shouldn't just scrap a whole page without at least notifying the community. If you think that a page should be moved, merged, or deleted then bring it up on the talk page and find out if anyone can improve the page. If noone can improve it and there's no reason why it should be kept, then do it - but don't jump the gun on it. Give it time. --DesireCampbell 20:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Ok, whatever. This page is now an eternal stub if isn't fluffed up, so can it just be redirected now? Nemu 20:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
"Now" meaning "immediately without giving the community time to do anything"? No, give it more time. Someone might be able to make the article great, they might not, we don't know yet. "Now" meaning "the page is a stub"? No, stubs aren't evil, they need to be tagged as such so they can be improved. Unless I've missed a meaning of "now", I think we should leave the page where it is. --DesireCampbell 20:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Ok, now and forever then. The only content that's specific to humans that can be added is fluff. We can't add their lifestyles, personalities, or accomplishments because they are all shared by the other inhabitants of Earth.That's why it should be merged.Nemu 20:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps you're right. Perhaps there is no more relevant information to add. But I think we should allow time for the others invested in the topic to at least respond. Give it time. You seem to be rushing to get rid of this, and other, pages. Note that the page is under-developed, give some time for someone to respond or fix the page. Don't simply decide on your own to scrap a whole page and leave no note of it. --DesireCampbell 20:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

The page has existed for two and a half years. That's plenty of time to make it decent. Your solution is more geared towards newer pages. Trust me, we could put every tag possible, but nothing would get done. I'm not basing my redirects off of nothing. Look at the page's history. It's barely changed for a long time. Nemu 20:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

"Look at the page's history"
Okay. User:3bulletproof16 scrapped the page without notification on Sept 26. It was reverted back two months later and such was noted on the Talk page. The Talk page clearly shows support for keeping the page where it is, but was then scrapped by Bullet Proof again without warning or notification. That sparked off an edit war. The only way to solve an edit war is to discuss the change, not to ignore the community of people looking at the page, not to ignore the fact that it is getting better, not to be a Wiki Vigilante, not to decide on your own that there's no more information and thus the page is worthless. --DesireCampbell 21:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
I thought we were off that subject. I'll use my own discretion. Can you comment on my last comment? Nemu 21:38, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure what else there is to comment on. You purport that the page sucks, and it hasn't changed in quite some time, and thus it should be scrapped entirely without giving time to fix the criticisms. The article isn't perfect? Well, yeah -we know. No one disagrees with you there. It's just that 'scrap it before anyone has the chance to make it better' that we differ on. I believe that we shouldn't scrap it yet. I think we should allow time for whoever wants to improve it to do so. --DesireCampbell 23:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
(Try to keep the flow going when formatting)The page has been around for two and a half years with a two month absence. It's not getting better. Once again, your point is for new articles. This is old and has never improved. If this page was created two days ago, we could wait, but after two years, it's pointless Nemu 23:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
So we should merge it for now. If someone can somehow think of a way to make the article better without adding cruft, they csn bring it back. Otherwise, it's a lost cause. Nemu 00:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. The article has remained in the same poor condition with little usefull information. -- bulletproof 3:16 03:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mutations & Controversy

Since lack of content is apparently a problem, I added a whole 'nother section. As we all know, this is something that often comes up in discussions. But it is rarely acknowledged in the articles themselves, which often contain contradictory information. I thought it might be a good idea to clearly state the issue along with some relevant information regarding both sides of the argument. --Son Goharotto 22:22, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

It's a decent section, but unfortunately it's original research(isn't allowed), so it doesn't belong on the site. Nemu 22:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
All right then, how about I just remove all reference to the fan controversy? If it's limited to the fact that some of DB's "human" characters have unexplained mutations, that should fit into Wiki standards, right? --Son Goharotto 00:03, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Eh, it already mentions the differences in the paragraph. We really don't need to go into specifics. Nemu 00:12, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Isn't the whole point to expand the article into something worthwhile? Why should a passing mention be good enough? Tell you what: Give me another shot at making this work. If you guys still don't think it helps, then go ahead and revert the changes; I won't contest the issue further.
EDIT- I included a concise note about Saiyan/Human hybrids. I know this is covered more extensively in the Saiyan article, but it is implied in the series that a human parent is the key to the extraordinary power of a hybrid, so this is definitely worth restating. After all, if you want to learn about humans in Dragon Ball, you should be able to see it in this article and not have to go looking at the Saiyan article.
--Son Goharotto 01:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
An implication is hardly concrete evidence. It's still original research to draw any personal conlusions from the source material. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 01:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
If implication = original research, then I suggest someone go over the rest of the Dragon Ball articles with a fine-toothed come, because they're packed with opinions and speculation. XD
I removed the line about Toriyama's lack of planning. Without going into the specific mutations, it's completely out of context. Dragon Ball humans can have weird features and still be human. Nothing else is needed, right?
The whole article isn't long for this world anyway. Oh well, I'm not going to get bent out of shape about it. --Son Goharotto 03:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
I agree that the Dragon Ball articles are rife with speculation, but this is not my area of expertise and I wouldn't know everything to correct. As for the mutations, one is mentioned with the line, giving it context. People can have six fingers, six toes, a third arm (yes, this has actually happened), so why not a third eye? – Someguy0830 (T | C) 03:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I suppose it still works. I'm just afraid this won't be enough to save the article...
Man, I can't even tell you how many times I've tweaked the wording in a DBZ article to make it sound more professional, only to have it reverted by some guy who's overprotective of his own edits. I don't like to get drawn into arguments, which is why I haven't bothered making a Wikipedia account until now. XD
--Son Goharotto 21:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Age

What don't you people get? There are only three examples of living to a very old age. One is due to the fountain of life or whatever Roshi drank from. Baba is a witch that deals with the dead, so she doesn't count. The crane guy was just never explained. We have three very vague examples that can easily be special cases. You can't say that they seem to live longer just off of these. Nemu 20:33, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

The other guy said that it's not due to magic. That might be true. It might not. I don't know. What I can see, however, is that the sentence isn't saying that they "seem to live longer", which would imply that it's the norm, just that they are capable of it. If I'm reading correctly, humans are capable of ki as well, although it's not the norm. It seems to me that the slight difference in wording helps the assertion. Voretustalk 20:39, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
There's a difference between ki and life. Ki is a natural thing to them. Living longer isn't. There are also plenty of cases of using ki. Just because three people live to a very old age, it doesn't mean the rest can. If there were, say, ten+ cases, it could be mentioned. These are just three freak cases. Nemu 20:43, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Would it be better if the article mentioned that although humans are capable of living that long, it's not usual or normal? Voretustalk 20:47, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
It would be better if it's not mentioned at all. Unless it's a norm, it's pointless. As I said, if there were ten+ cases, it could be mentioned. These are three examples that are possibly not natural. We cannot base anything off of that. Would we say all humans are very intelligent because Bulma and her family are? Nemu 20:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
That's a pretty bad comparison. Here's how I see it:
If there was a person in the real world that had an IQ of 100,000 (yes, unlikely, but work with me), then I believe that a Wikipedia article should mention something such as IQs of up to 100,000 are possible, although abnormal. Not mentioning stuff like that at all seems sort of counter-productive.
Actually, a better example might be if three humans had ended up having sex with a horse and producing manhorses. An article on Wikipedia would most definitely mention that humans are capable of breeding with horses, although it would be abnormal. Voretustalk 21:01, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Even though he's an anthro-human, Karin is well over 900 years old at the end of Dragon Ball GT. --Power level (Dragon Ball) 21:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't think that's a very good example. Voretustalk 21:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

We're talking about something that may or may not be natural. Roshi drank something. Baba and the other guy could have also. We don't know, so we should not say that they can naturally live to that point. Nemu 21:11, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Whoa. Let's settle down here and look at this again.

  • Kame sennin, Baba, Tao Pai Pai, and Tsuru sennin are all hundreds of years old. There is no explaination as to why they are so old; they just are. There's no reason to believe this is due to any non-natural reason. Suggesting they are old for any reason would be 'original research'.
  • The line about Roshi taking a magic potion to give him eternal life was stated right before he said "that was a lie". Roshi did not take a magic potion.
  • Humans in Z are capable of doing things that "real life humans" can't do. These things should be included in the article.

--DesireCampbell 22:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

To form an opinion that it's a normal or even uncommon thing for humans to live that old is OR. We should not make any sort of guess on it. We do not make the assumption that it's normal or even uncommon for people to have three legs just because a few people have three legs. When did Roshi say it was a lie? Nemu 22:22, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
We know that there are humans in Dragon Ball that live hundreds of years. Nothing is ever said to suggest it is anything other than natural. Saying otherwise would be OR. You are assuming that it is not natural. Further, noone is saying it's normal, only possible. Flying around and bench pressing mountains isn't "normal", but it is possible.
Oh, and Roshi said he was lying about the potion two seconds after he said it. He's about to fight Piccolo Daimao and tells Ten not to worry about him since he'd taken an elixir of eternal youth (or somthing). Then he knocks Ten out and says he was lying about the potion.

--DesireCampbell 22:40, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

We know that three humans in Dragon Ball that live hundreds of years, nothing more. The problem is that we're using these to form the idea that more than just those humans can live for hundreds of years. That's the OR. We see various being use magic throughout the series. Because those beings can use magic, can all other use it also? Nemu 23:17, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
What the blue blazes are you talking about? Noone ever said "all humans in Dragon Ball live hundreds of years", that would be incorrect. What has been said is "Humans in Dragon Ball also seem capable of much greater lifespans [than their real-word counterparts]". Now, is there something in that sentence that is inaccurate? --DesireCampbell 00:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
The fact that you're saying "(all) humans in Dragon Ball also seem capable of much greater lifespans [than their real-word counterparts]." You're generalizing from three people. You're making up a theory. Nemu 00:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
And if you say some, you're still implying that more than those three have that ability. It could be unique to them, it could not. We don't know. Nemu 00:28, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Even if I said "humans in Dragon Ball are capable of lifespans much longer than their real-world counterparts", I would not be making anything up. Humans in Dragon Ball are capable of lifespans longer than what we would consider normal. How can that information be verified? We have some human characters that are, indeed, a few hundred years old. But so it doesn't seem like every human in DB lives that long (because it is unclear what an average lifespan would be in the series) we use the words "seem". We don't know why these humans live so long. Anything pertaining to that would be original research. But simply stating that humans in DB can live hundreds of years is not. --DesireCampbell 00:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Wrong. It speculation to state that because you make it seem as if people can just do it. If in real-life a drug existed that made people immortal with repeated treatment, saying that the human lifespan is extended without explaining why is factually inaccurate. Only these select individuals have shown the ability to live for ridiculously long spans of time, and one's a talking cat. Now, saying "a few humans have also been shown to life much longer than the average human lifespan" would be ok because that does no assume any human is capable of it. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 01:27, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Trying to explain why their life is longer than average would be purely speculatory. These characters are human. These characters are hundreds of years old. These characters have done nothing to unnatural to extend their lifespan (no magic, no medicine). Why would anyone assume that any human isn't capable of it? --DesireCampbell 04:52, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Last I checked, Tao = Cyborg, Roshi = Master of Ki, Baba = Siter of Roshi. No human is capable of doing what this select group does, so why do you assume they'd know how to live such lengths of time. It simply has no logical basis. By the very implication that any human could achieve such ridiclous ages, you are inserting original research. Humans should not be capable of it, therefore the assertions that anyone other than this select group of people has done so is original research. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 05:24, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Check again. Tao Pai Pai was about 290 when he fought Goku, Roshi is a "master of ki", perhaps, but what does that have to do with anything? And why would being his sister give Baba any advantage? I don't assume they know anything about why they live so long, all I'm saying is that they're human, they live long, and we have no evidence to suggest that they've done anything supernatural to achieve such lifespans. That's not OR, that's simple undeniable fact from the series. Why must I quote the lifespans of others to verify the fact these humans lived ths long? Noone said anything about "every human lives 400 years", all that's been said is "humans are capable of living hundreds of years". Nothing about that is OR. It's exactly the same as saying "humans are capable of channeling ki". Most don't, but anyone could. --DesireCampbell 05:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
We do not know that humans are capable of living hundreds of years. In fact, we are quite sure no normal human ever lives that long. That's original research. You know, drawing your own conclusion based on the source material without reliable secondary sources to support it? Does Krillin live that long? Chi Chi maybe? I'm assuming they're not present at the end of GT. Saying that humans can live hundreds of years is original research because no significant amout of humans can live for that length of time. A human's capable of being born with no arms, seven toes, and an exposed heart, but do we say humans in general might turn out like that? No, because the odds of it happening are ricidulously slim. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 05:55, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

"We do not know that humans are capable of living hundreds of years."

What? Kame sennin, Baba, Tao Pai Pai, and Tsuru sennin are all human and all live hella long and non of them have done anything unnatural to achieve this. So, humans are capable of living hella long. I don't see where you draw any ambiguity here.

"Saying that humans can live hundreds of years is original research because no significant amout of humans can live for that length of time"

Wha? How many examples would satisfy you? How many examples would satisfy you? The very fact that any human has, under his own poer, lived that long proves that humans are capable of it. Did it happen? Then that's proof. How many people need to benckpress 700 lbs before "humans are capable" of it?

"A human's capable of being born with no arms, seven toes, and an exposed heart, but do we say humans in general might turn out like that? No, because the odds of it happening are ricidulously slim."

And when did anyone say anything about Dragon Ball humans "in general might" live 300 years? Let's go back and read... nope. No one. In fact, I have told you four times that:
  • "Further, noone is saying it's normal, only possible."
  • "Noone ever said "all humans in Dragon Ball live hundreds of years", that would be incorrect. What has been said is "Humans in Dragon Ball also seem capable of much greater lifespans [than their real-word counterparts]". "
  • "But so it doesn't seem like every human in DB lives that long (because it is unclear what an average lifespan would be in the series) we use the words "seem". "
  • "Noone said anything about "every human lives 400 years", all that's been said is "humans are capable of living hundreds of years". "

Is that the problem? You think that someone is saying that all humans live hundreds of years? No, no, no. We have no evidence of that. We only have evidence of humans being "capable" of such long lifespans. Just like they're "capable" of flying around and mating with Saiyans and growing blue hair.

To repeat: humans (in Dragonball) can live hundreds of years. Not "do", just "can". --DesireCampbell 06:49, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

We don't know humans can live that long naturally. Baba can bring back the dead for a day. Can all humans possibly do that? To say humans can live that long is original research, because only three humans have ever done so and we do not know how they managed it. They've never said, "I just lived that long." Humans aren't capable of most of the tricks the main characters pull, so why is this life thing somehow different? Do you have any reason to suggest that normal humans can live this long? Explain that and you'll have a case. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 07:03, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Didn't I just go over this? Do you not read my postings?

"We don't know humans can live that long naturally "

Yes we do. Kame sennin, Baba, Tao Pai Pai, and Tsuru sennin all did. Nothing is said to even suggest the did anything unnatural to prolong their life (well, Tao Paipai became a cyborg, but he was nearly 300 at the time anyway).

"Baba can bring back the dead for a day. Can all humans possibly do that? "

I don't know. We don't really know how Baba does that. We know she uses magic (something that any human in DB is "capable" of) and apparently has some "connections" in the afterlife. Perhaps she does nothing more than calling in favours to Kami or Yemma. There's nothing to suggest that someone else couldn't do what she does, with proper training (or getting to know the gods). On a similar note: any human can become Kami as well (in case such information is relevant).

"Humans aren't capable of most of the tricks the main characters pull, so why is this life thing somehow different? "

Eh? Every human is capable of utilizing ki. That's made blindingly clear. Have you forgotten Gohan's training of Videl? He explains very clearly that every human can ustilize ki the same way the other human Z senshi do. Have you forgotten that Uub, Kuririn, Yamcha, and Choatzu (and maybe Ten) are all human? And they blow up planets? Remember Kame sennin, Tao Pai Pai, Tsuru sennin, Mutaito? And I'm sure I'm forgetting some humans who have use ki techniques.

"Do you have any reason to suggest that normal humans can live this long? Explain that and you'll have a case. "

Humans in Dragon Ball are "capable" of hundred year lifespans for the same reason humans in real life are capable of bench pressing hundreds of pounds. It's been done. That's proof. Do I attempt to explain "why"? No, that would be OR. I simply state that they can because they have.

--DesireCampbell 07:37, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I read your comments. Where do they say they lived that long naturally? Exactly where, because Roshi's lie to Tien doesn't count. Show me one place where they specifically say, "I've lived this long naturally," because all you've been doing is roundabouting the discussion about how these few humans can and there's no evidence given contradicting your belief. Ki is a different story. This is something confirmed to be available to every human. I'm not disputing that humans can't do that, thus "most", but I do point out that most humans will never be able to, and this is something the series supports. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 07:46, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

"Where do they say they lived that long naturally?"

When do the characters say that anything is natural? There are many "strange" things in Dragon Ball that are never explained or referenced as "being normal". There are anthropomorphic animals everywhere, wearing clothes and holding down jobs. Are they all magical? or genetic experiments? or aliens? Are we to assume that they are "unnatural" because no one ever says that they aren't? You're not adding anything to the argument. I've shown that there are humans who have hundred year lifespans that in no way is referred to as unnatural.

"Exactly where, because Roshi's lie to Tien doesn't count. "

Do you mean when Roshi said (aloud, but to no one) he "was lying about the elixir"?

"Show me one place where they specifically say, "I've lived this long naturally," "

Show me specifically where they say that the talking dog King is natural. Until then I, like you, will have to assume that he's a freakin' robot or a magical dog-man.

"Ki is a different story. This is something confirmed to be available to every human. I'm not disputing that humans can't do that, thus "most", "

Actually, you were just disputing that humans could use ki.

"but I do point out that most humans will never be able to, and this is something the series supports. "

Perhaps we're only arguing semantics here. The word "able" in this sentence suggest that 'humans are incapable of using ki. no matter how much training they receive, they will never be able to fly'. And such a statement is categorically untrue. We have this explained very clearly. Any, and all, humans have the capacity to focus, harness, and utilize ki. It only takes training.
The wording of the sentence added to the article "capable" suggests not that every humans will live hundreds of years, merely that it's possible. Just like the article says (or should say, I haven't checked) that humans can have blue hair, or be 3 feet tall, or breed with extra terrestrials - "most" won't, but anyone could.

Is that it? Is it merely a semantical mishap? What do you think "capable" means? --DesireCampbell 08:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Let me put it simply: is this ridiculous age indicative of the race as a whole, or merely unique to a group? Assuming that any average born human is even remotely capable of reaching such an age, can you honestly say they ever would? I extend this to ki. In general terms of probability, will any human in this series ever gain the ability to use ki? Now for my point. When discussing an article about a race as a whole, you do not count the exceedingly uncommon features of a select group as indicators of the normal capabilities of the race. The race in general cannot use magic, will never know of ki, and will not live several human lifetimes. To say they are capable of it is at best misleading and at worst an outright lie, because barring special circumstances the human race in general does not have access to the knowledge necessary to gain those things. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 08:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


The average human's lack of motivation to achieve greatness is not at issue. At issue is whether or not humans in Dragon Ball are capable of lifespans of hundreds of years. That is all that has been added to the article.

"The race in general cannot use magic, will never know of ki, and will not live several human lifetimes."

Here we have another disagreement that may simply be attributed to semantics. The "race in general" "can't" use magic in the same way I "can't" fly a plane. It's not beyond by capabilities, or an indication of defects in the species as a whole, but is simply something that may or may not happen depending on the individual. The exact same can be said of ki. This series isn't like Harry Potter, where some humans can use magic and others simply cannot - in Dragon Ball everyone can use ki, anyone can become Kami, anyone can have their wish granted by the Dragon Balls.

You seem to keep banging at the notion that there's some 'trick' to living hundreds of years. There are theories about why Roshi and the others are so old, but nothing has ever been proven. Likewise, such theories would be OR, and should not be included in the article anyway. All we know is that there are humans that are really old. We have no reason to suspect they've achieved this through any unnatural method that the another human couldn't replicate. There are no "special circumstances" that allowed Kame sennin to live 300+ years. He just does for one reason or another. That alone is enough to prove that "Humans in Dragon Ball also seem capable of much greater lifespans". --DesireCampbell 09:09, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

It's obvious I'm not going to change your mind, so I'm not discussing it further. That line in itself is original research because no significant group of humans has done it. Furthermore, those that have are all related in some form. There is no evidence to sugggest that any human can naturally achieve such ages. Until there is, which won't happen with an ended series, humans cannot be proven to be capable of it: simple as that. No amount of conjecture on your part will change that. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 09:16, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

You might change my mind. If you some how came up with a valid reason why Kame sennin, Baba, Tao Pai Pai, and Tsuru sennin don't count. They're all related in some way? Okay, why does that invalidate it? Few humans have cross-bred with saiyans, and they're all related to each other somehow, does that mean we can't say humans can cross breed with saiyans? --DesireCampbell 09:27, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Your continued use of conjecture as fact has made it fairly clear you won't accept the fact that we don't know how they got that old, but I'll at least show you why your reasoning is wrong. Breeding, at its base level, is simply a matter of matching genetic tiles (odd way to put it, I'll admit). Humans and saiyans are basically the same creature, meaning their genes match up. There's also the simple fact that independent saiyans have bred within indepent humans and produced multiple viable offspring.
Now, why does relation between the four your mention matter, you ask? Excluding any human Kami, who obviously get cool magic abilities after getting the position, the three humans all existed in more or less the same generation. Whatever has allowed them to dodge the age barrier would be known to all of them. That no one else can replicate the feat means whatever enables it is either not natural or the product of some seemingly elaborate diet (giving Roshi's drinking habits, I'm betting it's the former). In spite of my speculation here, the requirement for something to be even remotely possible for any oridnary human would be that they possess the necessary faculties to do it in the first place. While we can say this for breeding and ki, we can't for age (probably magic, too, but I'm not sure) because we don't know how they've managed it. The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence in this situation. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 09:44, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

We know nothing about how a lot of things happen in Dragon Ball, why is this extraordinary ability scrutinized so? We don't know how they shoot lasers from their eyes, how Namekkians regrow limbs or lay eggs or split off clones, we don't know how saiyans turn Super Saiyan, nor do we really understand how they transform into Golden Apes, we don't understand how Capsules work, we don't know why there are "animal people" everywhere, we don't know why dinosaurs roam the back woods. We don't know a lot, and we don't try to explain why, we just account that such things do happen.

And why is it you assume that there's some kind of 'trick' to living hundreds of years? Such a things is never even hinted at. Where does such an idea come from - if it's not the series, then it must be something you've made up: ant that would be Original Research. We don't use original research in Wikipedia articles. If you've got some kind of proof that there's anything "unnatural" about these character's lifespans? -- DesireCampbell 19:41, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

And do you have any proof they've done it naturally? See where I'm going with this? While I may not be able to prove there's some sort of trick behind it, you in turn cannot prove that any normal human is capable of living for such a time is naturally. These are not normal humans we're talking about here. As it is original research to assume they cheated, so too is it original research to assume any normal human could duplicate the feat. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 20:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

"And do you have any proof they've done it naturally?"
Yes! Yes I can. See how there are humans? See hoe they're hundreds of years old? See how they've done nothing unnatural to extend their life? Humans, live long, did nothing unnatural. There. Done. --DesireCampbell 20:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

See? That's your problem right there. You haven't proved anything. You're using the lack of any explanation as proof and you dont even see why that's wrong. They never say that they did nothing, you just assume it is so. Four people, all tied together no less, does not make precedent, it only makes an exception. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 21:03, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
You're using the lack of any explanation as proof that it's not natural and you dont even see why that's wrong. It should be assumed natural until proven otherwise. Voretustalk 00:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm not saying it's natural or unnatural, first off, I'm saying that drawing the conclusion one way or the other is original research. The article as it is reflects how it should be. It acknowledges the fact that these humans have accomplished this feat, but makes no presumption as to how or why. Second, to assume something is natural with no proof to that effect is original research. In a world where people can reach a stick into the heavens and fire energy blasts from their fingers, assuming an isolated event is a natural occurence is foolish. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 00:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

"I'm not saying it's natural or unnatural,"

Yes you are. You continue to say that these characters did not reach such ages naturally. You say this without any kind of evidence. One must assume that such things are natural. Do you not understand that? People do not go around talking about how things are normal. There are many things in Dragon Ball that could be attributed to unnatural phenomena, but nothing is ever said about them. One must assume that such things are natural, dinosaurs and other pre-historic beats; walking, talking, employed animals; why would you assume that such things are "unnatural" somehow?

The bottom line is we don't know how or why these humans achieved such long life. We simply know they did. That is (say it with me) evidence. Saying that "humans in Dragon Ball seem capable of lifespans much longer than their real world counterparts" is a verifiable claim. I see no reason why it would still be contested.

"In a world where people can reach a stick into the heavens and fire energy blasts from their fingers, assuming an isolated event is a natural occurence is foolish."

Uh, you do know that those feats are natural too, right? Ki and it's various uses are "natural" in that any human can do it, with proper training. Is it just that you don't know what "natural" means? "Natural" doesn't mean 'common', or 'average', it simply denotes what is possible without modification. Roshi and the others did nothing "unnatural" to achieve their age. --DesireCampbell 07:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm tired of this. We're getting nowhere. Someone else can continue arguing. If you haven't managed to grasp the obvious point both I and Nemu have tried to make, then you're never going to. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 07:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Can we please merge this now?

This has not reached past stub length even with some junk added to it. This will not get any larger, so can we just merge it to the inhabitants section of Earth (Dragon Ball)? If it happens to some how gain a lot of relevant information, this can be brought back. Nemu 20:10, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Why do you insist on merging it so badly? I don't see any junk added to the article. I don't understand why you still refuse to contribute to it in the first place. We're trying our best to expand the stub and you do hardly anything to improve it's quality, and continuously insist it's merger. I suggest you quit complainin' and start contributin'! P.S.: Don't bother (again) saying that there's nothing more to add to it. Use your brain! Think back to what else was said in the DB series... if necessary, cut the Humans info. from Dragon World itself and place it into this article. Ok? Power level (Dragon Ball) 00:30, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
I want to kill this notion that this subject deserves an article. This is a stub. It has been a stub for two and a half years. It'll still be a stub in two and a half more years. It's not even that notable in the first place. You seem to think there is notable content to add. How about adding it then? If it was really there, this article wouldn't be a stub, would it?
We should merge it to the other article, and if by some random chance there's some actual info, we can bring this back. Nemu 01:00, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
I agree wiith Nemu.--SUIT 20:32, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
That the only thing being proposed to be added is the notion that all humans are somehow capable of living several hundreds years shows that no decent level of information is ever going to show up. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 02:09, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
I could use the info from Dragon World and apply it to this article. What do y'all think? Power level (Dragon Ball) 05:18, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
What are you talking about? There's nothing there that can only be applied to humans that isn't already in this. Nemu 05:22, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
I have tried to expand the article a few times, and every time people have become anal-retentavie about it and removed the information. I added both about human technology and that it is suggested in the series that not all humans can use Ki, yet people keep removing it, as if to insist the merger of the page without allowing for what we are trying to do. —the preceding comment is by Animedude360 (talk • contribs) Animedude360: Please sign your posts!.

As I've said multiple times, the technology is not human specific. For all we know, the animals could have invented most of it. The line about ki is too ambiguous to have(plus, it seems to be from filler judging by the way it's set up). It could mean multiple things, so there is no reason to pretend we actually know what it means. Nemu 18:20, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Races (Dragon Ball)

To the person that moved the page; you realize that there will be a lot of redirects to fix upon all the DB articles, as well as main articles. A bunch of them have Human (Dragon Ball) to 'em and there will be many edits to do. That's all! Power level (Dragon Ball) 19:11, 19 December 2006 (UTC)