Talk: Spirit Bomb

If in full-power Super Saiyan, they are no longer in a rage, then wouldn't it be possible for a Full=Power Super Saiyan to use the Spirit Bomb?

Not all Powerful?

I'm just saying, is it really all that powerful, I mean, when you think about it, it only actually succeeded in killing the bad guy once in cannon. The other 2 were hurt, but not enough to put them out of commission, and the only time it did work, goku still needed to power up to actually finish of kid buu.--Elementite 23:36, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

An explaination of this is properly because for example, Frieza had the power to destroy Planet Namek and it might have been unlikely that the enviromental energy of the nearby planets would have killed Frieza. Other possiblity is that energy gathered by people might be more stronger than energy gathered by the enviroment of planets, so it might have been more likely that Frieza would die if Goku shared energy with the Namekians instead of the surrounding planets' energy. Unfortunately, that wouldn't happen as most of them were alreadly killed by Frieza and his soliders.

As for the Super Spirit Bomb against Kid Buu, Goku is alreadly exhausted from the previous fight with Buu and couldn't hardly hold the genki dama for long before Buu is able to push a bit of it back and it took a wish from the Dragonballs to give Goku back his strength in order to push it towards Buu further. Super Sayian421 00:43, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Did Yamcha use Spirit Bomb?

In Dragonball Z Episode 11: Showdown in the Past, Yamcha appears to use a relatively low-power spirit bomb against the two Saiyans who he, Krillin, Tien, and Chiaotzu encounter in the past. He actually says "Spirit Bomb" when he begins to gather power for the attack. The article makes no mention of this. 76.117.99.53 19:33, 10 June 2009 (UTC) Austin

That technique is called Spirit Ball and it was used before the Spirit Bomb in Dragonball when Yamcha fought Kami (in disguise) at the World Tournament so it's his own special technique. For more info, see Spirit Ball

Super Sayian421 21:16, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

What kind of energy does the Spirit Bomb use?

Does this attack use ki or chi? --SaiyanZ 01:28, January 10, 2010 (UTC)

First, ki and chi are the same thing, different versions of the same word from different languages. Second, the attack uses Genki, or roughly "Life Energy", from which the attack's Japanese name is derieved from.--The Devils Corpse 14:48, June 23, 2010 (UTC)

Denki gama and Genki dama?

The article says that Genki Dama is a pun upon Denki Gama. However, I am absolutely sure that it is not!

I am a native Japanese speaker born in Japan. I've never heard of such an idea before although I've got almost all books on Dragon Ball published in Japan. For me, it is completely impossible to connect Genki Dama with Denki Gama because their actual Japanese pronunciations are too different. While Genki Dama has no accent, Denki Gama has the accent on "Ga". Therefore, it is impossible for the Japanese to associate the two words.

You may think that Genki Dama and Denki Gama are similar becuase you usually use latin alphabets and write and read Japanese words in roman letters. Yes, Genki Dama and Denki Gama seems very similar in roman letters. However, Japanese people do not use roman letters. Genki Dama is 元気玉 or げんきだま. Denki Gama is 電気釜 or でんきがま. No Japanese could find any connection between the two.

Moreover, in Dragonball, although most characters' names are puns, most attacks' names are not.

Genki Dama is no pun upon anything. Genki means "spirit" or "energy" or something like that. Dama means "ball". It means Spirit Ball and has no connection with Denki Gama at all. It's very different from the names of characters like Ginyu or Recoome. It is just a coincidence that Genki Dama seems sililar to Denki Gama.

It is not true that Genki Dama is a pun on Denki Gama. I am absolutely sure.--大空翼 11:52, August 18, 2010 (UTC)

As I wrote on my talk page, many puns, such as Planet Meat, Raditz, and Galick Gun, work just fine using the Roman alphabet. I don't see why this is different. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 16:32, August 18, 2010 (UTC)

Do you think Japanese people use latin alphabets? You do not understand Japanese at all, do you? No Japanese think or write or read Japanese in alphabets, but in hiragana, katakana, and kanji.

In Japanese, Planet Meat, Raditz, Galick Gun and other puns are all written in katakana, which is usually used to describe foreign languages, that is, ミート, ラディッツ, ギャリック砲. It is no wonder that they work fine in Roman alphabets because those words are from English. But they are never written in Roman alphabets in Japanese. Those English spellings are made by Funimation, not by Mr. Toriyama.

元気玉 is completely different. While other puns such as Meat, Raditz and Galick have no meanings by themselves, 元気玉 has its own meaning. 元気 means spirit and 玉 means ball. It is absolutely impossible to say the name 元気玉is from 電気釜. It is unthinkable for the Japanese to make puns by changing the positions of Roman letters. Genki Dama and Denki Gama may seem similar in English, but they are completely different things in Japanese. It is just a coincidence. No Japanese could find any connection between the two.

If you consist that Genki Dama is a pun upon Denki Gama, what is your authority for saying that? As I've been saying, I am absolutely sure that Genki Dama is no pun and absolutely no Japanese could think of such an idea.--大空翼 04:49, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

Please do not make any assumptions of me, and please follow our policies by discussing issues on discussion pages, rather than edit warring. What I can tell you is that many of the puns from Dragon Ball extend beyond Japanese, and this appears to be one. The only way to know Toriyama's intent would be to ask him about this, but since we cannot do that, we'll have to live with the fact that it appears to be a pun to some, even if not everyone thinks so. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 22:11, August 19, 2010 (UTC)

>>What I can tell you is that many of the puns from Dragon Ball extend beyond Japanese, and this appears to be one.

Even if the puns make sense in English too, they are all originally in Japanese and make sense in Japanese. However, Genki Dama and Denki Gama cannot work as a pun in Japanese but only in English. As I repeatedly say, no Japanese could consider the two words as a pun. Don't you think it is strange for a Japanese manga writer to make a pun that Japanese people cannot understand?

The Japanese language has fewer sounds than the English language does. Therefore, it has a lot of words that have the same sounds and different meanings. For example, "Genki" can be "元気"（spirit), "元亀"(the name of a period. 1570-1573), "原器"(prototype), "源基"(the name of a Japanese lawyer" and some other words. "Dama" can be "玉"(ball), "弾"(bullet) and "魂"(spirit). Since we do not have as many sounds as English, many irrelevant words may appear to be puns even though they have nothing to do with each other.

If Genki Dama were a pun, it would be possible to say every single attack and every single character's name from Dragon Ball is a pun.

Ex.)

Makankōsappō: "Ma" means "Oh!", "kanko" means "sightseeing", "sappo" sounds like "Sapporo" (the name of a city in Japan). So it could mean "Oh, sightseeing in Sapporo!".

Kienzan: from "Kienze", which means "I'll never disappear."

Shunkan Idō: A pun upon "Udon Shinka", which means "udon evolution" (udon is Japanese food).

Goku: "Go" is from "Gohan", which means "meal". "Ku" means "to eat". So his name means "to eat meals".

Kaio: A pun upon "Keio" University in Tokyo.

Kami-sama: A pun upon "Kasi Mama", which means "candy mother".

Genki Dama: A pun upon "Ben-i Gaman", which means "to bear going to the toilet".

Anyway, your theory doesn't make any sense at all because "Genki Dama" and "Genki Dama" cannot be considered as a pun in Japanese. It is very strange to say they are a pun in English. Anyway,

>>The only way to know Toriyama's intent would be to ask him about this, but since we cannot do that,

So, you don't have any source that supports your theory that Genki Dama is a pun on Denki Gama.

>>we'll have to live with the fact that it appears to be a pun to some, even if not everyone thinks so.

Even if you think it is a pun, you have absolutely no source or anything that supports your idea. It is only your idea and not worth mentioning here. If it were OK to write my idea, "Makankosappo" would be "sightseeing in Sapporo", "Kaio" (King Kai) would be from "Keio University" in Tokyo, "Goku" would be "Eating Meals", and "Genki Dama" means "to bear going to the toilet". You are not supposed to write your theory without a source.

I am definitely going to remove the sentence if you cannot show me an information source that supports your idea that Genki Dama is a pun. If you do not have it, I really beg you not to try to keep the sentence. Actually, it is really annoying to me because "Genki Dama" can by no means be a pun upon "Denki Gama" in Japanese, and if it were a pun, it would be soooooo boring a pun that I cannot even bear.--大空翼 16:03, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

The only proof needed for something to be a pun is for the word to be similar to something else. In Dragon Ball, the puns are almost all food-related. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 06:35, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

>>The only proof needed for something to be a pun is for the word to be similar to something else.

No, it is not. As I said, it could be coincidence. If you are right, do you say America is a pun upon Kameari, a suburb in Tokyo? Does San Francisco have something to do with France? According to your theory, every single word that exist in this world would be a pun.

You need to know that in Dragon Ball, Most attacks written in kanji (Chinese characters) are not puns, such as 気円斬(Kienzan), 魔貫光殺砲(Makankosappo), 魔閃光(Masenko), 界王拳(Kaio-ken), 操気弾(Sokidan), etc... Why do you think only 元気玉(Genki Dama) is a pun? That does not make any sense.

Moreover, it is not true that the puns are almost all food-related. For example, King Piccolo and his men are named after musical instruments. The name of people on Planet Namek are derived from Japanese words for slugs or snails. Bulma, Trunks and their relatives are named after underwear. Hirudegarn was named in order to shock Mr. Hiruta, the producer of Dragon Ball Z anime. Janemba means evil radio waves.

There is no evidence that support your idea that Genki Dama is a pun upon Denki Gama. Do not write your own theory on the wiki. I am going to remove your theory from the wiki. PLEASE do not put it back without showing us evidence to support your theory. "They seem similar" is not evidence, you know.--大空翼 11:17, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

I have removed the sentence. Please do not try to put it back if you do not have anything to prove your idea.--大空翼 14:33, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

Do not act on your own opinions before a consensus is reached. You have done this many times now, and failing to follow this site's policies will result in loss of editing privileges. As for your comment on food-related puns, I said almost all, which is true. I'm not sure if you misread my comment, but your response did not make any sense in context. As for the issue with the alleged pun, it is a pun in my opinion, in the opinion of the user who wrote it, and in the opinions of the other users who re-added it after you removed it. On wikia sites like this one, the consensus is what decides what goes on pages, and in this matter you are simply outvoted. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 19:22, August 21, 2010 (UTC)

>>Do not act on your own opinions before a consensus is reached.

That's my line. Do not write your own opinion although you have nothing to support it.

>>in this matter you are simply outvoted

No way! When did we vote? No matter how many people think it is a pun, there is no evidence to support it. You said you don't know the truth, either, didn't you? Your opinion does not matter. It matters whether you have evidence or not, and you have no evidence, do you.

It is your comment that makes no sense at all because you keep saying the same thing without no information sources. As I said, I've read almost all DragonBall-related books published in Japan, but never heard of such an idea that Genki Dama is a pun. I also told you that Japanese has fewer sounds compared to English and many words unrelated to each other have the same or very similar sounds. Genki Dama and Denki Gama seems similar to you, but I cannot regard them as a pun when I think of them in Japanese (Why did Mr. Toriyama have to make a pun that cannot be understood as a pun in Japanese?). What is more, I said all most all the names written in kanji (Chinese characters) are not puns, 気円斬(Kienzan), 魔貫光殺砲(Makankosappo), 魔閃光(Masenko), 界王拳(Kaio-ken), 操気弾(Sokidan), 孫悟空(Son Goku), and etc... Genki Dama (元気玉) is originally written in kanji and it is very natural to put it one of them. I am very sure that the fact that Genki Dama sounds similar to Denki Gama is a mere coincidence. (Only in English, though. They don't sound similar in Japanese because of the difference of accents.)

I think I have to repeat again. What is the most import here is whether you have anything to support your idea or not. It does not matter how many paople are on your side and how many are on my side, although I am very sure that all the Japanese Dragon Ball fans, whose number may reach tens of millions, would be on my side if they were asked because it is impossible to think of the two words as a pun in Japanese.

You have no source. The only reason you think it's a pun is that they seem similar to you. That is not enough. You need some evidence or information sources to keep the sentence in the wiki. There is no reason to keep it here.--大空翼 06:18, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

I've placed {{fact}} tag there for the time being. I cannot let it be there without a source. If no one can add any sources in a week or two, I will remove the sentence.--大空翼 07:29, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

Do not edit the article any further before this issue is resolved. I have warned you that you must adhere to the policies of this site when editing it several times, and though you seem a reasonable person, this is your final warning before you will force me to block you.

Back to the issue, unfortunately for your side of the argument, the popular opinion of the users of the site is what ultimately matters. This is a standing policy used by all wikia sites, as well as wikipedia. While there has been no formal vote on the talk page, several editors have reverted your edit, an action which expresses disagreement with your own opinion. Regarding your request for proof, were there some master list of all existing puns, I would point out to you where this one stood. However, such a thing does not exist, and it is left to common knowledge to resolve such an issue. The best I can do is point out legitimate sources that can give you some idea of what a pun entails. Here is a popular English dictionary's entry for spoonerism, which is the type of pun used in the case we are examining. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 07:32, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

Do not remove the tag although you do not have any sources. It is not against any rules to add the tag but removing it IS agains the rules.

>>several editors have reverted your edit, an action which expresses disagreement with your own opinion.

No. It is not true. Only two editors including you.

>>However, such a thing does not exist, and it is left to common knowledge to resolve such an issue.

What you call "common knowledge" does not help us at all here. As I have said sooo many times, it is absolutely impossible to call the two words as a pun.

>>The best I can do is point out legitimate sources that can give you some idea of what a pun entails. Here is a popular English dictionary's entry for spoonerism, which is the type of pun used in the case we are examining.

If it is all you can do, please do not add the sentence ever again. That is really nonsense. That does not make Genki Dama a pun. If it did, America would be a pun on Kameari.

Anyway, why are you gonna use Enlgish dictionary to prove the two Japanese words are a pun? That makes no sense at all.

As I have said so many times, English language has absolutely nothing to do with puns from Dragon Ball because all of them are originally written in Japanese. Denki Gama and Genki Dama are both Japanese words and even if English-speaking people regard the two as a pun, no Japanese-speaking people can regard them so, but they all would regard them as just a mere coincidence. Since Japanese has fewer sounds than English, many words coincidently sound similar as I said above. More over, all the other names of the attacks written in kanji are not puns. Why should Genki Dama be?

There are several sources that prove Ginyu, Recoome, Frieza, Piccolo and many other names are puns, for example, Dragon Ball Forever published in Japan. Mr. Toriyama himself mentioned some of them. Oolong and Puare are example (Mr. Toriyama mentioned them in a graphic novel). However, there are no sources that prove Genki Dama is a pun. As long as you do not have any source, you cannot say it is a pun. You can only say you think it is, but it is not worth mentioning here. If you want to mention it here, you have to show some evidence. You have not show any evidence to prove your idea. What is called a pun in English or what you call "common knowledge" does not make them a pun.--大空翼 11:02, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

Galick Gun is a pun on the word Garlic, so your first point is false.I notice that you say Toriyama wrote some of them. This implies that he did not note all of the puns, probably including some that you yourself acknowledge as puns, making your second point irrelevant. Additionally, as I have noted on your talk page, you have been blocked for ignoring my many warnings about following the site's policies when editing it by repeatedly continuing to do whatever you like rather than to discuss the issue. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 19:43, August 22, 2010 (UTC)

Let me interrupt your discussion. It seems that you do not understand anything at all. Galick Gun is written in katakana in Japanese. And Galick itself does not mean anything. However, Genki Dama is written in kanji (Chinese characters) and it has its own meaning (Spirit Ball). Almost all the other attacks written in kanji are not puns. Galick Gun and Genki Dama are completely differet. Do you know what katakana and kanji are? Different from English, the Japanese language has three types of letters, hiragana, katakana, and kanji. Genki Dama is written in kanji and Galick Gun is written in katakana. They are different although the difference cannot be acknowledged in English. To talk about the Japanese puns in English is every strange and silly.

I wish 10XKamehameha could understand Japanese. If you could understand Japanese, such a silly discussion would never have happened because it is very strange to say Genki Dama is a pun. Spoonerism can seldom, rarely, almost never can be seen in Japanese. To say that Genki Dama is a pun on Denki Gama sounds really silly to me.

Additionally, there is nothing that says they are puns. They may be puns, but they may not be. It is unknow. So, you should not refer to it here because the truth is unknown. To say as if it is certain that they are puns is not good.--202.16.213.253 03:13, August 28, 2010 (UTC)

Please do not personally attack any user on this site including myself. Doing so will result in the loss of your editing privileges. I think you may be somewhat confused about what a pun is, due to your statement that, "They may be puns, but they may not be. It is unknow." It is easy to identify puns, rather they be through the symbols of written word or through the sound of spoken language. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 00:59, August 29, 2010 (UTC)

Now I am back.

It does not matter what you think a pun is. At least, Genki Dama cannot be thought to be as a pun on Denki Gama in Japanese. Even if it seems like a pun to you, I am very sure that Akira Toriyama never intended to make Genki Dama a pun. As I have said many times, it really is impossible to think of Genki Dama as a pun in Japanese even if it seems to be one in English. English definition on spoonerism does not mean anything here.

There is nothing to prove Genki Dama is a pun on Denki Gama. Only reason you think it is is that they are similar in Roman alphabets. But Akira Toriyama has never said it is a pun. It is not wise to mention it as a pun although there is no official comment that proves it is a pun. There are several sources that prove some of the puns in Dragon Ball. I've got many books on Dragon Ball but none of them says Genki Dama is a pun.

What is more, when I added {{fact}} tag, you simply removed it although you have no information sources. I do not understand why you think it bad to add the tag although I simply asked for a source because you keep saying Genki Dama is a pun with no evidence to prove it. Being similar is not enough. I think it is bad and against the rules to remove the tag without showing any sources. You had to show us some sources before removing it.

The speculation about the relationship between Genki Dama and Denki Gama is only a mere guess. Since you cannot prove it, it is no good to mention the guess in the article.--大空翼 05:30, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

There are many puns within Dragon Ball which have not been stated by Toriyama to be puns. Yours is not a valid argument. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 21:00, August 30, 2010 (UTC)

It is your argument that is invalid. Even if you think Genki Dama is a pun, I am very sure it isn't. As I said many many times, no Japanese would think it is. There are several reasons your argument is invalid and I have already mentioned them.

1. The definition of spoonerism in English has nothing to do with Japanese puns. Spooneris can almost never be found in Japanese. Do you find any other spoonerism in Dragon Ball? Of course you don't.

2. No other attack Goku learnt from King Kai is a pun and King Kai has nothing to do with rice. Why should Genki Dama be a pun upon Denki Gama? It doesn't make sense.

3. Other puns do not have any meanings. For example, Galick in Galick Gun has no meanings. But differently from other puns, Genki Dama means "Spirit Ball" by itself.

4. No other pun written in kanji is a pun. Being different from Roman alphabets, every single kanji has its own meaning. Anyone who has some knowledge of the Japanese language understand that it is almost impossible to make a pun that work in both in kanji and roman alphabets. It is absolutely impossible for the Japanese to regard 元気玉 as a pun on 電気釜.

5. Akira Toriyama has never said it is a pun.

Even if it seems like a pun to you in English, it does not mean it is a pun. Since you cannot prove it, it is nothing but a mere guess and is not worth mentioning here. Your argument is too self-righteous. Nothing should be mentioned in the wiki if there is no evidence. Being similar is not evidence because there is always something called a coincidence. As long as you cannot prove it is a pun and is not a coincidence, the theory should not be mentioned. This website is not made to spread groundless rumours. Those guesses should be mentioned somewhere else.--大空翼 02:45, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

No matter how sure you are, the consensus of the community is the only deciding facter here. As to your other points:

1. The definition of spoonerism applies to every language, so you are incorrect.

2. Goku only learned two attacks from King Kai, and one featured his name, leading us to believe that the other has significance as well.

3. Galick Gun is a pun on "Garlic." In some dubs, it is even called Garlic Gun, so you are incorrect.

4. There are many puns in Dragon Ball, you are incorrect, or worded your point here incorrectly.

5. He hasn't said many other puns are puns, so this does not matter.

As you can see, none of your arguments hold much weight, if any. The overwhelming evidence of the obvious, unmistakable spoonerism is 100%, indisputable fact, and cannot be overlooked. I have literally no idea why you continue to try and convince me that something so obvious is not true.

In conclusion, you have presented only the same few arguments over and over, each has been logically dismissed, and I am ending the conversation at this point. The only way this fact will be changed is a vote in favor of its removal, or a quote from an official source. Further comments from you on this topic, without one of these two things, should be disregarded by the community. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 03:56, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

>>1. The definition of spoonerism applies to every language, so you are incorrect.

No, it doens't. I don't understand on what ground you think so. Since the Japanese language do not use Roman alphabets, how it seems in alphabets does not mean anything. Jokes and puns vary from country to country and 元気玉 and 電気釜 cannot be considered as a pun in Japanese.

>>2. Goku only learned two attacks from King Kai, and one featured his name, leading us to believe that the other has significance as well.

I don't understand what you mean by "the other has significance as well". Why is the siginificance a pun on Denki Gama, which has nothing to do with King Kai? Genki Dama means spirit ball and has no other meanings at all.

>>3. Galick Gun is a pun on "Garlic." In some dubs, it is even called Garlic Gun, so you are incorrect.

I don't understand what you mean at all. Dubs don't mean anything. And Galick does not mean anything. Even if it is called Garlic Gun, Garlic means garlic and no other significant meanings. Why should Genki Dama have to have to meanings, Spirit Ball and Electronic Rice Cooker?

>>4. There are many puns in Dragon Ball, you are incorrect, or worded your point here incorrectly.

It is you who is incorrect and I am sure of it. The fact there are many puns in Dragon Ball does not mean Genki Dama is one of them. Your logic is completely messy. And as I said many many many many times, no other puns written in kanji are puns. Every single person who was born and grew up in Japanese society knows it is impossible to make a pun using both spoonerism and kanji.

>>5. He hasn't said many other puns are puns, so this does not matter.

Yes, it does. If it didn't, any mere guess would be OK to write here. For example, Big Ban as in Big Ban sounds like "Bikkuri" in Japanese, meaning "surprise". Is it Okey to say so in the wiki? Sappo as in Makanko-sappo sounds like Sapporo, the capital of Hokkaido prefecture, Japan. Is it Okey to wrote here?

And Akira Toriyama has said many puns are puns, especially names of characters. But the relation between Genki Dama and Denki Gama is only a mere guess. Not worth mentioning here at all.

>>As you can see, none of your arguments hold much weight, if any.

That's my line! Your argument has absolutely no weight at all. No evidence, no proof, no knowledge of the Japanese language, nothing at all.

>>The overwhelming evidence of the obvious, unmistakable spoonerism is 100%, indisputable fact, and cannot be overlooked.

No no no no no!! Absolutely not! Unmistalably it is not a pun! No spoonerism can be found. You say so only because you think only in Roman alphabets and you have no knowledge of Japanese. No Japanese could think it is a pun. To talk about Japanese puns in Roman alphabets or in English is absolutely absurd.

>>I have literally no idea why you continue to try and convince me that something so obvious is not true.

That's my line. It is so obvious that what you say is untrue. It is one of the worst idea I have ever heard of. Every single Japanes person would be on my side. Please talk back to me after learning Japanse, will you? If you learn Japanese, you would understand how funny your argument is.

>> conclusion, you have presented only the same few arguments over and over, each has been logically dismissed, and I am ending the conversation at this point. The only way this fact will be changed is a vote in favor of its removal, or a quote from an official source. Further comments from you on this topic, without one of these two things, should be disregarded by the community.

It is you who has been logically dismissed. You say it is a pun without no source. Why do you think you are right? The only reason why you think it is a pun is that they are similar in Roman alphabets. That does not prove anything and I am very sure I am right and every single Japanese fan would stand by me. If you have any Japanese friends, you should ask them.

I know it is impossible to quote from an official source because it is not a pun. Vote would be better than talking with you although I really do not like it because most people here are English-speaking people who do not understand Japanese. I really do not understand why you think it is a pun although you do not have any idea how Japanese people make puns.

I don't know how to start a vote. Can you tell me how? But I have to repeat once again. Every single person who has knowledge of Japanese would never ever say it is a pun.--大空翼 07:57, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

At least you have to let me add the tag {{fact}} because its being a pun has not proved yet.--大空翼 08:06, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

I am not confused at all about what a pun is. I know Genki Dama is no pun, but I mean it is not possible to prove that it is not a pun because the author would never take the trouble to say "oh, it is not a pun." The same can be said to you. It is not possible to prove it is a pun because no official announcement will never be made (of cource it won't because it is not a pun). Since we cannot prove whether it is a pun or not, the best way is not to say anything about it. "In dubio pro reo", that is, when we cannot prove it to be a pun, we musn't say it is a pun.--202.16.213.253 23:42, August 31, 2010 (UTC)

That argument is not valid in observable instances, such as whether or not something sounds like a pun. If it was, and Toriyama was never quoted saying that Goku has black hair, then we would have to leave it out. Don't get me wrong, in cases with no observable evidence, you have a point, just not in this instance. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 03:46, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

Excuse me? What are you talking about? Toriyama was never quoted saying that Goku has black hair? What do you mean by this?

There is no observable evidence that shows Genki Dama is a pun. The only evidence is that it SEEMS to be a spoonerism of Denki Gama IN ROMAN ALPHABETS", which the Japanese language do not use. I have to say it is not a pun at all and the author never intended it to be one. If he knew there was such a stupid rumour that Genki Dama is a pun on Denki Gama, I am sure that he would be really surprised and burst into laughter. The theory that Genki Dama is a pun sounds really stupid to the Japanese.

Your logic would never be accepted in wikipedia. If it were to be accepted, I have to say this website is nothing but a collection of mere guesses. Being similar doesn't mean it is a pun. For example, there is a Japanese anime song called "Sea Loves You."[1] The title is similar to a song by the Beatles, "She Loves You." Is "Sea Loves You" a parody of "She Loves You"? It may seem it is, but it may seem it isn't, too. Being similar does not mean anything.

You said "The only way to know Toriyama's intent would be to ask him about this". That's correct, although I know no Japanese would make up such a strange pun and that Toriyama is no exception. We cannot ask him (even if I asked him, you wouldn't believe it, anyway.), so we must not talk as if we knew his intent. To write that "Genki Dama is a pun" would give reades impression that the author intended it to be a pun. That's not correct. We don't know the author's intention, so we musn't write anything as if we did. Nothing that is not obvious should not be mentioned.--大空翼 06:08, September 1, 2010 (UTC)

I wonder why no one has referred to the fact that Electric Rice Cooker is not called Denki Gama in Dragon Ball. It is called Denshi Jaa (電子ジャー) (see the battle between Goku and Piccolo). So, if Toriyama had intended to make a pun on electric rice cooker, he would have made a one upon "Denshi Jaa", not "Denki Gama". This is another reason why Genki Dama is not a pun on Denki Gama.--202.16.213.253 02:24, September 3, 2010 (UTC)

I think removing the sentence is the best way, but it seems some won't agree and do not even try to start a vote (since I am a new comer here, I don't know how to start a vote). I think adding "Some fans think" is another way to solve this issue.--202.16.213.253 07:01, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

I disagree that it should be changed, and I have stated why in the lengthy conversation above. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 07:05, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

Your lengthy conversation sounds really nonsense to me. The only evidence you have is the fact they seem similar when written in alphabets. Since it is not possible for Japanese people to regard the two words a pun, it is not a pun.

You don't even allow "Some fans think" to be put before the sentence. I have to say your deed is no neutral or fair. The fact you think it is a pun does not mean it is a pun. So, "some fans think" should be put. I don't want this information to be stated as if it were true with no doubt. You think it is a pun. I don't think it is a pun. So, what's wrong with adding "some fans think" before the sentence? Some readers may believe you. Some may not. It's very neutral way to solve this problem. To keep the article as it is not neutral or fair at all.--202.16.213.253 23:58, September 6, 2010 (UTC)

If you do not want "some fans think" to be put, you should allow the {{fact}} tag to be put. If you don't even allow the tag to be put even though you have no evidence other than just the fact they are similar, it is too self-centered. Since you don't have any sources, the tag should be allowed to be put.--202.16.213.253 00:02, September 7, 2010 (UTC)

I've waited for a month, but no reply has been made. So, it means no one is against my idea. I will wait for a few more days and I am going to add the tag after that. Please do not misunderstand. Adding tag does not mean I am denying the sentence. I am not saying the sentence is true or false. Adding tag is not against the rules and I am the right to do it. Removing it is against the rules.--202.16.213.253 02:59, October 9, 2010 (UTC)

I officially disagree forever due to the lengthy conversation above. Do not tag. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 04:18, October 9, 2010 (UTC)

You are acting really childish. I feel as if I was talking to a three-year-old child. You just repeatedly say "It's a pun because it is a pun!" without no evidence. I'm afraid that your childish opinion is not worth taking seriously.

You say it is an obvious, observable fact. But it is not. I posted a question about this issue on the Japanese Yahoo! Answers and asked what they think of the idea that Genki Dama is a pun upon Denki Gama[2]. I have receievd four replies so far and all of them say it is rediculous. They say "まず考えられませんね" (It's impossible to imagine.), "電気釜なんて日本語は使わないです。普通は【炊飯器】か【電子ジャ－】" (We don't use the word Denki Gama. We usually use Suihanki or Denshi Jaa.), "電気釜なんて使ったことありません。思い込みで嘘を広めるのはやめてほしいですね。" (I've never said "Denki Gama". I want him to stop speading a lie.), "いや、ないと思いますよ…自分が正しいと思いこんじゃっているんですかね＞＜" (It's impossible. He somehow believes he is right.).

As you can see, no Japanese people would agree with you. It's not an obvious fact at all. The fact is that it is not a pun and it's obvious.

To say Genki Dama is a spoonerism upon Denki Gama is as rediculous as saying that "dog" is a spoonerism upon "god". "History" means "his story"? (It's actually from a Greek word "histor", meaning "learned, wise man".) "Asparagus" is from "Sparrow-grass"? They are called false etymologies and I'd like to read this article and learn what they are. To link Genki Dama with Denki Gama is as funny as to link asparagus with sparrow-grass.

Stop acting like a child. I know it is not a pun and Akira Toriyama would say it isn't if I asked him. I want the sentence to be removed. But I tried to compromise in order to reach a consensus. I gave up the idea of removing it and I am just trying to add a fact tag. I am trying really hard to compromise with you. But you have no intention to discuss the matter, let alone compromise with me. You just keep acting childish and bulldoze your idea. "It's a pun because it is a pun! I don't need any evidence because it is obvious!" How childish argument it is.

Be reasonable. I am not trying to remove the sentence but I'm trying to make a compromise, by just adding a tag. Although I have the rights to add the tag and you have no rights to stop me from adding the tag, I came here to discuss the matter with you. Try to act like an adult and compromise. I'm gonna add a tag there. No reasonable grown-ups would try to prevent me from doing so. I really tried hard to make a compromise. I'm not removing the sentence. But you have never even tried to make a compromise at all. Just try to be an adult. Let's make a compromise. I'm not removing the sentence. I'm just adding a tag. If you say you are not a child, PLEASE act like an adult and make a compromise by letting me add a tag. If you say no, you would be the most childish editor this website have ever had.--202.16.213.253 00:09, October 12, 2010 (UTC)

Your statement that "dog" and "God" may be a spoonerism tells me that you do not know what a spoonerism is. It is never the case that something may or may not be a spoonerism, rather some things are, and some things are not. If you would like to have this conversation, please go look up what a spoonerism is, thanks. Also, I have the right to remove unnecessary tags in articles because I have been appointed as a Sysop on this site. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:43, October 12, 2010 (UTC)

I think that Genki Dama could be a pun upon Denki Gama. Remember, the move was invented by King Kai, a guy with a strong sense of humour ;) Also, Japanese people could find the connection between the two: there is only one different symbol between the two names and both are pronounced nearly the same.. Jeangabin666 08:11, October 12, 2010 (UTC)

I came here, seeing the Japanese yahoo answers.

This argument sounds really stupid to me. Genki Dama can never be a pun upon Denki Gama. I am sure of it.

If King Kai had meant it to be a pun, why wouldn't he have said so? Even if it is a pun, it is one of the most stupid, unfunny, boring pun I've ever heard of. Most Japanese find Galic Gun, Ginyu, Vegeta, Nappa and other puns funny. But those who know Japanese very well would never find Genki Dama funny.

It is not true either that Japanese people could find connection between the two. I am very confident that no Japanese can find anything between the two. It is not true that the two names are pronounced nearly the same. In the Japanese language, accents are really important and those of Genki Dama and Denki Gama are not the same.

I was born in Japan and have lived in Japan for more than 20 years, and I can find no connection between the two. As you can see from the Japanse yahoo answers, no one has agreed with this stupid idea. I am very sure that no Japanese would agree with this stupid idea that Genki Dama is a pun. The Japanse language do not have the concept of distinguishing consonants and vowels since every single sound the Japanese language can make is with a vowel. It is beyond imagination for the Japanese to exchange D and G.

10xKamehameha says we have to learn what a spoonerism is, but the truth is, it is he who has to learn the Japanese language. If he had a good knowledge about the language, he would have noticed that spoonerism can be rarely seen in Japanese. Knowing the Japanese language, no one would say it is a pun.

To say it is a pun makes this website a crap. Removing this stupid sentence is the only way to make this wikia fine --Lupinthe3rd 09:34, October 12, 2010 (UTC)

Lupinthe3rd, I have edited your comment to remove all personal attacks, as we do not allow those on our site. Please do not do so again. Also, I am a little confused by the logic here, as you claim the Galick Gun is a pun, while 202.16.213.253 has stated that it is not. If you and he were to argue whether or not it is a pun, it would probably be a mirror of the Spirit Bomb argument, except with you in my place trying to explain what a pun is. If you think about this, perhaps you will see why I am sure of my stance, even though there is no quote- the reason is that there does not need to be one. I'd like to see the two of you figure that out before continuing the present discussion. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 10:21, October 12, 2010 (UTC)

You have no rights to edit other editors' comments. Do not manipulate them.

I never attacked anyone personally. Did I say you were stupid or anything? I said the idea that Genki Dama is a pun sounds really rediculous to me because it is beyoud the compass of the ordinary imagination of the Japanese people. No Japanese can imagin it is a pun because it is like, well, saying that "Harry Potter" is a pun upon "Hurry, porter." The pronunciation of Harry Potter and that of "Hurry, porter" is quite different, isn't it? The difference between "Genki Dama" and "Denki Gama" is far bigger to the Japanese.

I cannot see why you are so sure of your stance even though there is no quote. I am sure that no Japanese can. I wonder why you think your argument is convincing though you have never shown any reason. The only reason you think it is a pun is that you think it is a pun. That cannot be called an argument.

Do you speak Japanese? If you did, you would understand that it cannot be a pun. As you can see, no Japanese have supported your opinion so far[3]. Sticking to your stance without showing any evidence seems childish to me.

Even if it is obviously a pun to you, it is abviously not a pun to the Japanese people including me. That means whether it is a pun or not is doubtful, or questionable. At least it is not a decisive fact. No matter how many times you say it is a pun, it doesn't mean anything as long as you show us some evidence. We Japanese would never agree with the idea.

The fact tag can be placed "after statements that are doubtful or otherwise questionable"(Template:Fact). Though there are some who are against the statements, don't you think it is not fair not even allowing to place a tag?--Lupinthe3rd 14:45, October 12, 2010 (UTC)

10xKamehameha misunderstands my opinion. I hope he listen to others carefully. I never said Galick Gun is not a pun. Of course it is a pun upon garlic. I said "Galick itself does not mean anything." That means the word "Galick" is a meaningless word that the author made up from the word "garlic". No dictionary has such a word. Other puns, such as Saiyan, Namekian, Kakarot, Vegeta and all the others, never appear in any dictionaries. You can find some of the words like Piccolo in dictionaries of course, but it is only because the author didn't modify the words when he named his characters. The meanings in the dictionaries are different from those that you see in the manga and anime series.

However, the words "Genki" and "Dama" both appear in dictionaries because they have their own meanings. That is the definitive difference between Genki Dama and other puns. Genki Dama has its own meaning while no other puns do. You can't find Saiyan, Namekian and Kakarot in your dictionaries though you can find the words of their origin, yasai, namekuji and carrot. Your dictinary says a piccolo is a musical instrument, not an alien soldier. However, your dictionary says "Genki" means "spirit" and "Dama" means "ball". Then they make "Spirit Ball". How can it be a pun on Denki Gama? It does not need to be a pun since "Genki Dama" means spirit ball in dictionaries and it means the same in the manga. Kakarot never appears in dictionaries and Piccolo means a musical instrument in dictionaries and it means an alien soldier in the manga.

Can you see now? Genki Dama is completely different from all the other puns, which have no meanings themselves. Every single Japanese fan, let alone the author Akira Toriyama, would never agree with your idea. I have to say to say it's a pun even sounds like blaphemy. Who'd make such a boring, unintelligible pun?--202.16.213.253 03:25, October 13, 2010 (UTC)

There is clearly some sort of cultural difference here, because in most cultures calling someone's idea "stupid," "blasphemy," or unintelligible" is equivalent to saying those things about the person whose idea is was. I am very, very tired of this insensitivity and am going to start throwing blocks if we can't speak in a polite manner. To 202.16.213.253 and Lupinthe3rd, I am going to ignore the comments where the two of you try and speak for all of Japan, because you do not. Similarly, a few users in an online forum does not equate to a poll. Now if someone can somehow convince me that Genki Dama and Denki Gama is not a spoonerism, I will remove the line saying that it is a pun. However, I find this impossible. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 05:16, October 13, 2010 (UTC)

Yes, there is some sort of cultural difference here. It is clearly impossible to call Genki Dama a pun in Japanese no matter what you think of it. It is definitely unthinkable and no Japanese would agree this idea. If you have any Japanese friends, please try asking them. I am 100% sure that none of them would agree.

You say I am not speak in a polite manner but you are being impolite to say I am insensitive and you don't show any respect to Japanese culture. The phrase "in most cultures...." clearly insultuing Japanese culture by indicating that it is unusual and cannot be accepted by the rest of the world. Don't you think it is impolite? If you want me to talk to you in a polite manner, why don't you try to do so yourself?

You say I do not speak for all of Japan, but you do not speak for the author either. The only person who knows the fact is the author Akira Toriyama, but you talk as if you knew his idea by saying "it is clearly a pun," without showing any evidence. You are speaking for the author and it is far worse than what I've been doing because you are talking as if you knew his intention even though you do not, while we have some comments from Japanese and I am a Japanese man who knows much better about Japanese culture and the language than you do.

If you are still not convinced the Genki Dama is not a pun, you are just being childish, sticking to your idea without showing any evidence. Arguments without evidence cannot be convincing. I really wonder why you stick to the idea that it is a pun although you don't know well about the Japanese language. I don't understand why you think you are convincing even though you have never shown any evidence. I don't know where you are from or what your mother tongue is, but why are you so confident about a pun based on Japanese words when you don't have much knowledge about the language?

If the author had meant to make a pun upon electronic rice cooker, he would have made a pun upon "Denshi Jaa", not "Denki Gama". In Japanese, there are a few phrases meaning electronic rice cooker, "Denshi Jaa", "Denki Gama" and "Suihanki", but the word "Denki Gama" is not used in the series. An electronic rice cooker is called "Denshi Jaa" when it appeared in the King Piccolo Saga. Everyone who has enough knowledge of Japanese would realize this fact and lever think Genki Dama to be a pun.

The fact that Genki Dama is not a pun is as clear to the Japanese as the fact that "peach", "cheap", "dog", "god" are not puns is to English-speaking people. You say you will remove the line if you are convinced but I've given up convincing you because I know you wouldn't change your idea even if the author said it is not a pun just because you love the idea that it is a pun. I've read about the origin of Krillin's name, too, and you stick to the idea that it is a pun although the author says it is not. I don't understand why you are so stubborn about this issue although you don't know how to make puns in Japanese, but I don't think even the author can convince you.

So, you don't have to remove the line, but you have to let us add a tag. I have the right to add a tag when some people have doubt about the line, even if you don't like it. You have to allow me to add a tag or the word "might", which makes the line "Its name might be a pun of Denki Gama."

There are some who doubt about the idea that Genki Dama is a pun. That means the line is questionable. A "fact" tag can be placed "after statements that are doubtful or otherwise questionable". The line is undoubtedly doubtful even if you think it is not. If you think it is a pun, all you have to do it to find evidence. The author's comment, for example.

You don't have to remove the line. You don't have to admit that it is not a pun. But you have to admit the fact that it has not been verified yet. Ordinary people would admit it when there are some who have doubt and there is no evidence to support the idea. So please do not stop me adding a tag.--Lupinthe3rd 15:48, October 13, 2010 (UTC)

Again, please go look up what a spoonerism is. Those examples you gave are not spoonerisms, which leads me to believe you do not understand why it is a pun. Go look it up and you will see that the case here is definitely a spoonerism. Also, stop saying that you speak for all of Japan, you don't. I am not speaking for Toriyama, I'm just applying facts. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 22:08, October 13, 2010 (UTC)

No, you are not applying facts at all because they are not facts.

I am 202.16.213.253. I aquired my won ID.

I've been repeatedly saying that puns are different from culture to culture. Even if it seems a pun to you, it does not mean anything in other societies. Spoonerisms are rarely or almost never seen in Japan, and they cannot be a pun in Japanese. You quoted the English definition of "spoonerism" but it does not mean anything at all. Those which do not work in Japanese cannot be a pun. You talk as if the languages you understand could be understood in every society. Your sticking to spoonerism leads me to believe you don't understand what a pun in Japan is like, or at least, what a pun in Dragon Ball is like. Go look it up in a Japanese dictionary. You will see that the case here is definitely not a pun.

There are always coincidences. Just like "dog" and "God". Your idea of spoonerism can be understood only in Roman alphabets even thought the words are Japanese. What do you think if I kept saying "dog" is a spoonerism of "God"? This is just what you are doing.

I have to ask one thing. Are you saying the author intended it to be a pun? Or are you saying that whether it is a spooonerism or not does not depend on the author's intention? Are you saying that words can be spoonerims as long as they are similar to each other no matter what the author's intention is? If so, I can understand why you don't understand my argument at all, although I don't understand why we need the line, then. But if you are saying the author intended it to be a pun, you are speaking for Akira Toriyama as if you knew his intention, and it cannot be acceptable. You are not the author or any official commentator. The existing line gives the readers an impression that it was what the author intended, which is not verified. It cannot be accepted.--ZARD 04:45, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

Spoonerism is an English word for something which is absolutely not exclusive to the Roman alphabet. Also, dog and God is not a spoonerism. The fact that 2 months into this conversation, you don't even understand what the word that this is about even means is very frustrating to me. Until you can tell me why dog and God is not a spoonerism, I will not believe that you know what the word means, I will ignore your comments on this talk page, and the statement in the article will remain unchanged. Don't expect any responses until then. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 05:28, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, so you are running away. It's really irresponsible behavior. I'm afraid I have to say that your behavior is very childish. You are just repeating your idea without absolutely no evidence. All the evidence you have is the fact that they words seems similar when they are written in Roman alphabets, which is absolutely meaningless.

Spoonerisms may not exclusive to the Roman alphabets. It could work in any kind of alphabets that exist in this world, such as the Greek alphabets, the Cyrillic alphabets, the Armenian alphabets, and the Arabic alphabets. Maybe it could work even in Korean, whose letters called hangul have a similar system to that of European alphabets. In Japanese, however, spoonerisms are not to be found.

You can't swap D and G. In Japanese, they are spelled げんきだま and でんきがま. "Ge" as in "Genki" is written in only one letter, "げ", and "Da" as in "dama" is only one letter, too, "だ". Every single Japanese consonants are combined with a vowel and never used on its own, which means you can't separate the consonants fron the vowel it is combined to. It is unimaginable to us Japanese.

Therefore you cannot separate "GE" into "G" and "E", or "DA" into "D" and "A". If you want to make a spoonerims in Japanese, you have to swap "GE" and "DA", not "G" and "D". This is one of the reason why your theory cannot be true. Even if spoonerisms are not exclusive to the Roman alphabets, they are not applied to Japanese and Genki Dama cannot be one. If only you could understand Japanese, you would see why it cannot be a pun.

You can make up any idea by spoonerism due to the fact that the Japanese language does not have so many sounds as the English language does. Even if some words seem like spoonerisms to you, they may be just coincidences. For example, "Genki Dama" can be spoonerisms of....

"Gin Medaka", which means "silver killifish"

"Ink ga dame", which means "My ink is no good." May be the ink Akira Toriyama was using had gone too old to use. Well, this is a nice pun, don't you think?

"Mada Genki", which means "I am still fine".

"Dame Ginka", which means bad silver coins.

"Manga Deki", which means "I have finished drawing manga". Oh! This must be what the author always wanted to say!

"Gaman Deki(nai)", which means "I can't stand it".

"Ki de Gaman", which means "having patience using ki(chi)".

"Danke, Magi", whic means "Thank you, Magi," in German. Magi might mean Andrea Magi, an Italian boxer, and the author may have liked him.

"M(o) Genkai da", which means "Oh, I can't stant it any more!" The author may have been really tired.

"Gandi make", which means "Gandhi lost."

"Genda Maki" (玄田真紀), a Japanese name. Maybe one of Akira Toriyama's friends.

"Gia Denmak". "Gia" means "already" in Italian. So it means "I'm already in Denmark".

Can you see? Since the Japanese language has way fewer sounds than English, you can make up many words using only those alphabets, "g" "e" "n" "k" "i" "d" "a" "m" "a". Denki Gama is only one of them.

The name "Son Goku" is undoubtedly from Sun Wokong in Journey to the West. But if Genki Dama were a spoonerims of Denki Gama, then Son Goku could be a spoonerims of "Sogo-kun", which means "Mr. Sogo" in Japanese. Sogo is a family name you can find anywhere in Japan, so maybe the author has a friend named Sogo and he helped Toriyama draw the manga.

Saiya-jin is, of course, from Yasai, meaning vegetable in Japanese. But if you arrange the order of the letters a little bit, you can have a phrase "Sin-ja iya", which means "Please don't die!" in Japanese. Goku dies right after the first Saiyan soldier, Raditz, came to the earth. So may be this is the message from the author to the hero of the series.

As you can see now, you can make up many many theories using spoonerisms. I know all of them above are false and that Denki Gama is only one of them. Do you still keep saying it is not a coincidence and intended spoonerims?--Lupinthe3rd 13:43, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

Lupinthe3rd, this is your second warning about personal attacks. If you can't talk about a topic without insulting people, then please do so somewhere other than our site.

I see from the second paragraph that you did not read my last comment, which was short and not hard to read at all. Further, from your suggestion to mix the letters together and form spoonerisms, I am very convinced that you do not understand what a spoonerism is. I'm going to give you the same terms that I gave to ZARD. I look forward to continuing this conversation when everyone is on the same page, but not sooner. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 17:33, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

I do not mean to insult you but I just wanted to say it is not responsible behaviour to leave here without answering other editors' questions. And it seems to me that it is you who is violating the rules. The rules say "Use a reliable source", but you have never shown any source. You just keep saying "look up spoonerims". That is not a reliable source. You keep saying "it is an actual fact" but something not supported by a source cannot be called a fact. Besides, the rules also say "Do not only provide one point of view, but all relevant viewpoints as necessary". Seeing Genki Dama as a spoonerism may be one point of view. But not regarding it as a spoonerism is also a point of view, isn't it. It should be respected and provided in the article until we have some definitive reliable source such as official comments by the author. So, adding a fact tag is no aginst the rules but removing the tag is undoubtedly against the rules because it would result in provinding only one point of view. Though you are one of the editors of the rules, why do you not obey them?

If you want to keep saying something without evidence, please do so somewhere other than this site. Try writing it on wikipedia [4], and it will be removed in a second due to the lack of evidence. This website is an encyclopedia, which means this is something public, so your arbitrary interpretation is not worth mentioning here. Please make your own website and do it there.

You say ZARD's and my not understanding what spoonerism means is very frustrating to you. However, your sticking to that "spoonerism" thing is really really frustrating to me. As I have said, no Japanese would agree with you because it cannot be a pun in Japanese. Why would Akira Toriyama have had to use something that does not work in Japanese? The fact you talk about Japanese without knowing Japanese is very frustrating.

By the way. why do you say I do not understand what a spoonerism is? If Genki Dama can be a spoonerim of Denki Gama, why are the examples I showed you above not spoonerisms? You are a duty to explain it to me since you are the only one who uses the word "spoonerism" in this conversation. Actually, spoonerisms do not have anything to do with this topic from the beginning because Genki Dama is no spoonerism.

I want you to tell me two things. You have a duty to answer them.

One: Tell me why I do not understand the meaning of "spoonerism" and why the examples above are not regarded as spoonerisms. Denki Gama seems to me just like one of the examples I gave you above.

Two: Your response to the question by ZARD that you have neglected your duty to answer. Are you saying that the author intended the word to be a spoonerism? Or are you saying that it doesn't matter whether it was intended or not as long as they seem similar?--Lupinthe3rd 18:27, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

Look up the word spoonerism in Webster's dictionary, it is a very reliable source, and available for free online. Using words as they are defined does not require a citation here, and I have no interest in Wikipedia. The reason this site was created was because Wikipedia was so utterly terrible at compiling important information about Dragon Ball. I have tried to reason for two months, but no one even looked into what I'm talking about, so the issue is closed until my very reasonable condition is met. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 20:14, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

You keep ignoring my questions. It is very impolite. I can't believe it. You just repeat your idea without listening to others or answering others' questions. That's really irritating. Do your duty.

This dictionary says " a transposition of usually initial sounds of two or more words". OK. Both "dog" and "god" are one word. But Webster's dictionary says "a 'spoonerism' is a play on words in which corresponding consonants, vowels, or morphemes are switched". It says it is a "play", which means it must be intended. But on what ground do you say the relation between Genki Dama and Denki Gama was intended? This is just what I want to know.

The definition of spoonerism does not mean anything here. Of course Genki Dama could be a spoonerism of Denki Gama if it is intended. You've been saying that I don't understand the definition of spoonerism but it is you who don't understand what I've been saying. I've never denied the fact that Genki Dama could be a spoonerism of Denki Gama if it is intended. All I want to know is why you can say it is intended. I've been saying it is just a coincidence and the author never intended to be a pun because such a pun is completely out of the realm of the imaginatuion of ordinary Japanese people.

You have to answer the question you've been ignoring for two months. On what ground do you say Genki Dama is an intended spoonerism of Denki Gama although you've never asked the author about it.--ZARD 03:08, October 16, 2010 (UTC)

First of all thank you for finally looking this up. I truly appreciate the effort, albeit somewhat late in the game. The first link you put, Merriam Webster's, is the one I intended, as it is among the most reliable dictionaries used in the English-speaking world (this is not to say that the concepts within are limited to English, they are not). That second link was not the same, and I have never heard of it, so let's just ignore that if it's all the same to you. The "play on words" thing that it was talking about is not not something that a spoonerism is necessarily associated with, just the transposition of initial consonant sounds (so obviously dog and God is NOT a spoonerism). Because of this, intent is irrelevant. Either the consonant sounds are switched, or they are not. Whether or not Toriyama was thinking of this when he made it (it seems unlikely that something like that would get by such a sharp mind, but maybe you think less of him than I do), it is a spoonerism. Thus, the article does not say that the name originated to be a pun, or even that Toriyama intended it to be a pun.

To summarize, it is obviously a spoonerism, and it doesn't matter what Toriyama was thinking, though it is unlikely that he missed this. Please save yourself the effort and do not try and convince me otherwise, as I am quite familiar with spoken language, and will not be convinced that a spoonerism is not a spoonerism. The concept may be new to some editors here, but I have known of it for many years. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 07:24, October 16, 2010 (UTC)

It is still arbitrary way of thinking. Why do you think the dictionary you use it the only dictionary you can trust? Why isn't the other dictionary that mentions "a play" reliable?

Besides, If it does not metter what the author intended, why does it have to be mentioned here? If it is OK, you also have to add the information that Genki Dama is an anagram of "Gin Medaka", "Ink ga dame", "Mada Genki", "Dame Ginka", "Manga Deki", "Ki de Gaman", "Danke, Magi", "M(o) Genkai da", "Gandi make", "Genda Maki" and "Gia Denmak". They are not spoonerisms but they are anagrams. If the information that Genki Dama is a spoonerims of Denki Gama should be mentioned, the anagrams I made above should also be mentioned.

The information that Genki Dama is a spoonerism has nothing to do with Dragon Ball at all. Something that is not intended is not worth mentioning. If such things were to be allowed, this website would be a real mess filled with meaningless informations such as spoonerims and anagrams. No such things should be mentioned in an encyclopedia in order to keep it fine.--Lupinthe3rd 11:46, October 17, 2010 (UTC)

The difference is that anagrams are rarely jokes, and have to do with letters. Spoonerisms are usually jokes when used in media, and have to do with sounds. I'm really not going to change my mind without an official statement saying otherwise. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 20:47, October 17, 2010 (UTC)

Your statement is completely arbitrary and I cannot accept it. Whether you think something is a joke or not has nothing to do with this website. Even if it seems like a joke to you, it may not seems so to some other people. Even if it doesn't seem like a joke, some may think it does. Your explanation is so arbitrary that it does not tell at all why spoonerisms are OK and anagrams are not. Nothing should be mentioned unless it is intended.

If things that sound similar could be mentioned, well, something like "Rocket punch is a spoonerism of Pocket Lunch" (L and R exactly sound same to the Japanese), "There is a functional drink called VEGITAβeta in Japan and it sounds like Vegetaβeta", could be possible. Even if Denki Gama sounds similar to Genki Dama, they have nothing to do with each other and this information should not be mentioned in order to keep this website trustworthy.

Besides, the sounds that Genki Dama and Denki Gama make are not so similar in Japanese as you think they are. --Lupinthe3rd 19:25, October 18, 2010 (UTC)

It is too bad that you cannot accept this, because it is the case. It is not at all arbitrary, and if you think it is then you must have forgotten to read about 40 messages, because it's what the other users here and myself have been discussing. I don't mean to be rude, but it is totally outrageous for you to call the point of view "completely arbitrary." It says to me that you don't even care about anyone else's opinion, and makes me not want to discuss this with you at all. And don't tell me what I think about the Japanese language, because you do not know what I think, only I do. Just drop this argument unless you can provide evidence, like a legitimate dictionary definition, or a quote. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 23:45, October 18, 2010 (UTC)

Is the Spirit Bomb the strongest attack?

In the entire dragonball series the spirit bombs seems to be the one of the only moves that is able to destroy any enemy. For example Omega Shenron seems to be the strongest villian in all of the Dragonball series is defeated by a universal spirit bomb. The point is, throughout the show the spirit bombs is the only attack with the ability to destroy any opponent.

No. It couldn't destroy Vegeta or Frieza. Kaonohiokala 08:20, October 12, 2010 (UTC)

That's only because those Spirit Bombs weren't strong enough. The first one only got energy from Earth and the weakened Z Fighters. The second only got energy from dying Namekians and the dying Namek. So it is the strongest if enough energy is put into it. SonikFan112 18:19, October 15, 2010 (UTC)
It's arguably the strongest attack. Unlike other attacks its power relies soley on the genki (energy) of outside sources including the water, land, and all living things. The one used on Vegeta was pretty weak as A. Goku collected it in like a few seconds and b. lost half of the energy for it when great ape Vegeta struck him or something. The one on Namek was far far more powerful however so was Freiza. You're a bit incorect as to the sources of energy. Namek wasn't dying yet but all the Namekians were in fact dead at the time. As Goku could not get enough energy fast enough he began to draw on the energy of Namek's moons and I beleive he also drew power from some distant planets (which is why it took him much longer to make it). He was also being beaten around by Freiza so yeah. The spirit bomg that killed Buu sort of adds another angle to it. The Earth and its population did give enough energy for the Spirit Bomb to kill Buu, but in this case it's shown that in order to actually make it work the user must also have enough energy to push it onto the opponant. As such Goku couldn't really force it onto Buu without regaining his strength (whether he had to go SSJ or not I don't know;perhaps he was just being fancy). But overall you're pretty much right. With enough power in it Genki Dama can be called the most powerful technique. But at the same time its not since its strength depends almost exclusively on factors other than the user.Black kille 06:21, March 21, 2011 (UTC)

Solar Power?

In the old dub, Kaiousama made repeated references to the genki dama drawing power from, as he put it, "the golden sun". Then the huge one on Namek is explained as deriving from Namek's three suns. In the "Kai" version, the huge one on Namek drew power from living things in the surrounding planets (complete with footage that, I could swear, wasn't there before). Since the sun isn't alive, I'm inclined to think this was a dub change and not a Kai change, however all life energy does derive ultimately from the sun via photosynthesis and the food chain, so, can anyone check the original dialogue and clarify? Then add info in the article about dub changes.

Doesn't Genki Dama draw energy from the natural environment as well? Aside from living organisims I'm 100% certain that it's shown to draw energy from the sea and mountains as well. It IS thus plausible that it also draws energy from the sun.Black kille 00:25, April 2, 2012 (UTC)

Irony

Is it not irony of how the Spirit Bomb is regarded as the most powerful move in the series, and it is the only move which fails the most? Or maybe it would be better if I said it this way... The spirit bomb failed twice, ironically it suceeded twice as well. Ripto22475 00:48, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

If by "failed" you mean "didn't kill the enemy" then most moves failed every time they were used. -- 10X Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha ^.._.^.. _{talk .}^..._{. contrib}. 00:57, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

Well I'm sorry, I didn't really word it quite clearly. I mean as a finishing move, it did not really accomplish its goal, yet it did twice after. The spirit bomb is used as a last effort and the best effort to finish an enemy off. And the irony is that it did not defeat its target two of four times. Do you see what I am trying to say? Ripto22475 02:40, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

As the viewer, I see where you're coming from since you already know the the Spirit Bomb finishes some major villains, but like half the moves the Z Fighters do are intended as "finishing moves." Every Kamehameha, Galick Gun, Final Flash, Tri-Beam, etc. that they put "all their energy into," every Destructo Disk someone fires off, every Death Beam, every rapid volley of blasts that leaves the user exhausted, these are all intended as finishing moves and they all fail most of the time. Spirit Bomb is a move with varying power, which sometimes had enough to kill the victim, and sometimes didn't, just like all of the other "finishing moves." It was used as intended and doesn't strike me as being ironic in its effectiveness. -- 10X Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha ^.._.^.. _{talk .}^..._{. contrib}. 03:10, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

I'd say the spirit bomb was pretty good. Even if it didn't finish off the bad guy, it did significant damage each time it was used, and never once missed. In the movies it finishes off plenty of villains. I think the most fail attack in the series is the destructo disk - a move powerful enough to destroy Frieza but never does anything useful until the Buu saga (and even then has no lasting effect). Janemba4eva (talk) 18:56, October 19, 2012 (UTC)

Dragon Ball Heroes

The Majin "Hero" using the Spirit Bomb at 3:00 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Idr2biv1x1I and the Male Hero uses it several times here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMS0MTjFyxo JeangabinTalkContrib 15:23, December 24, 2011 (UTC)

Super Spirit Bomb

The first sentence claiming that Goku held back against Buu should be changed. Goku went all out from the start, and the reason he couldn't beat Buu was not because he wanted to let Vegeta have a chance, but because he couldn't gather enough energy due to having a living body. Only the dub states he held back. It should be changed to reflect the original, with perhaps an aside mentioning the dub. Any objections? Janemba4eva (talk) 18:51, October 19, 2012 (UTC)

Please read the Manual of Style. We include all official media in our articles, including the anime, which Toriyama helped produce. The only reason something would be removed would be if there is a contradiction, which is not the case here. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 00:53, October 20, 2012 (UTC)

There is a contradiction though, as it is implied that Goku was fighting all out from the start, which is the opposite of holding back. I'm not suggesting completely removing the dub information, but the facts from the original should definitely be presented. Janemba4eva (talk) 01:59, October 20, 2012 (UTC)

The manga and anime say the same thing, then the anime adds more. There is no contradiction. Just because anime filler characters weren't mentioned in the manga doesn't mean that they automatically don't exist with respect the the manga. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 02:12, October 20, 2012 (UTC)

I get that for the filler episodes between sagas, but this is an event that happened in both versions. Goku states he must go all out to have a chance, whereas in the anime he does not say this and then holds back in the fight. The anime doesn't just add a line of dialogue, but one that counters a line from the original. Janemba4eva (talk) 02:41, October 20, 2012 (UTC)

In the anime he says the same line during, he just adds the new one at the end of the fight. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 02:51, October 20, 2012 (UTC)

I still find it questionable. The manga makes it seem like Goku was trying to destroy Buu all along. The anime makes it seem like he was not actually trying to destroy Buu all along. Seems like a distinction should be made. Janemba4eva (talk) 02:59, October 20, 2012 (UTC)

That seems like an opinion to me, and it contradicts what Goku says during the fight in the anime. He literally says that he can't beat Buu alone, or even with Vegeta's help (without fusion). We have to respect quotes from the series over our own ideas. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 03:03, October 20, 2012 (UTC)

It's not my opinion. It's the fact that something is present in the anime that is notably different in the manga, and that the wiki info only represents one. But I guess leaving it the way it is now is consistent with the policy you've stated of manga vs anime edits, even if I do find it somewhat misleading. Janemba4eva (talk) 03:23, October 20, 2012 (UTC)

The core reason that Goku could not beat Buu was because he couldn't reach full power, and this was in turn a result of holding back to let Vegeta fight. I've made this change. No information has been removed. Janemba4eva (talk) 16:39, October 20, 2012 (UTC)

Please use the talk page to discuss changes. If you just make changes during a talk page discussion without getting a consensus, it's basically edit warring, since others may actively disagree with a present talking point. Goku's final point on the matter was not that he could not defeat Buu, it was that he could have, and the article needs to reflect official facts, not our opinions. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 20:20, October 20, 2012 (UTC)

I'm not stating my opinion, I'm stating fact. Goku states he could beat Buu if he can gather enough energy to do it, and then fails to do so. This happens in both anime and manga. The article page makes no reference to this significant event. Janemba4eva (talk) 21:01, October 20, 2012 (UTC)

While the comment is notable, it is a small enough detail in the context of the Spirit Bomb attack that it should not be mentioned here. A page dedicated to that particular episode or battle would benefit from the detail. Putting it here would add length to the article without adding to the clarity of what a Spirit Bomb is. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:47, October 21, 2012 (UTC)

I've never seen any version stating that Goku held back against Kid Buu. He said he held back when he fought the fat Majin Buu to let someone alive defeat him, not against Kid Buu. There must have been a confusion, probably because he revealed this to Vegeta during his battle against Kid Buu. What is actually written in the article is false and should be changed. JeangabinTalkContrib 01:58, October 21, 2012 (UTC)

There seems to be some confusion here. If we do not know which Buu Goku was referring to, then we need to find the time, text, and context of the quote. Jumping to conclusions and changing the article seems a little rash if we do not know what the details are yet. We are as likely to make it worse as we are make it better. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 06:03, October 21, 2012 (UTC)

Goku states he could have defeated Buu before, but held back to let the kids have a chance to fight him. This was in reference to fat Buu, the only time he fought him in the manga before Kid Buu. Against Kid Buu, Goku states that he could beat him if he could gather enough energy. In the funimation dub (maybe Japanese version too, not sure), Goku additionally states that he has been holding back against Kid Buu as well in order to give Vegeta the chance to fight him. What I'm saying is that the article pays no reference to the fact that Goku tried to gather the energy to defeat Kid Buu but failed to do so, which is why they had to resort to the spirit bomb. Does this make sense to everybody? Janemba4eva (talk) 09:01, October 21, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with Janemba4eva about the events and lines. Such a minute detail should be mentioned on appropriate chapter and episode pages, but not here since they are just isolated quotes that do not speak directly to the power of the Spirit Bomb. It is enough to say that it was Vegeta's idea and that it uses the energy of others. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 09:51, October 21, 2012 (UTC)

How about just changing it to "After seeing that Goku as a Super Saiyan 3 was unable to finish off Kid Buu, Vegeta came up with the idea to make a Spirit Bomb powered by the Earthlings." This is more accurate and removes the superfluous and misleading information. Janemba4eva (talk) 19:00, October 22, 2012 (UTC)

Your suggestion is extremely misleading. It might be taken to correctly mean that Vegeta observed something, but it is more obviously and incorrectly read as something being true, and that's what Vegeta saw. There is nothing misleading about the current version, though it may in fact be superfluous. That's the first time anyone has mentioned it being too much info though. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 22:42, October 22, 2012 (UTC)

I don't see how mine is misleading; it states only the facts. I think the current one should be changed because it is in fact misleading. Goku tells Vegeta (in the anime) that he held back to give him a chance to fight. Did Vegeta then suggest the spirit bomb? No, but that's what the current version implies. He instead tried to buy time for Goku to power up to destroy Buu, but Goku could not gather enough energy to do it. It was only after Goku tried to power up but failed that Vegeta suggested to use the spirit bomb. I don't think it's necessary for all this information to be included, but it is fact that at that point Goku simply was unable to do it, and that's what led to the spirit bomb. The version I have proposed is more factually accurate. Janemba4eva (talk) 23:49, October 22, 2012 (UTC)

You're still making the assumption about which Buu Goku was talking about. I was confused because I thought we had gotten past the fact that you need evidence to back up claimsthat you would like to add to the articles. Like I said before, if you want to do that we need to find the time, text, and context of the quote. -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:19, October 23, 2012 (UTC)

I figured that the general order of events was common knowledge and needed no explicit citation. From the translation available on manga park:

Right before Goku engages Kid Buu

Ch 510. Goku "When I fought Fat Buu, I could have beaten him... But I wanted to give the kids something to do."

Funi dub. "I probably could have destroyed the fat majin Buu when I was at super saiyan 3, but I wanted Gohan and the boys to try their hand at saving the world."

In the middle of the Kid Buu fight, right after Vegeta admits he would have no chance against Kid Buu

Ch 511. Vegeta "While at SS3 with full power, you can destroy him in an instant."

Goku "That's what I've been trying to do, but I haven't been able to do it yet. If I had a minute to gather my strength, I'd be able to defeat him."

Funi dub. Vegeta "You're a super saiyan 3. You should be able to generate more than enough power to destroy that monster."

Goku "Maybe I could have done it while I was fresh, but I let the fight drag on so you could have a shot...I should have done it. Darn it! Now I'm weak, I'll need time! If I even had one minute, just one minute with no interruptions..."

Kid Buu fights Vegeta, Mr. Satan, and Fat Buu while Goku charges

Ch 513. Goku "Shit! No way! This... can't be... power's going away..." reverts to base form "Damn, this never happened when I was dead. It takes up too much energy in this living body to sustain super saiyan 3. We're in trouble... big trouble."

Funi dub. Goku reverts to base form "I misjudged. Man, how strange. When I was training in otherworld, super saiyan 3 was easy. But this body, it chugs. I'll bet it uses twice as much energy."

From this we can gather that Goku held back against Fat Buu, Goku held back against Kid Buu to let Vegeta have a chance (anime only, manga implies that Goku has been trying all along), both Goku and Vegeta agree that Goku could destroy Kid Buu if he reaches full power as a SSJ3, and that Goku tried to reach full power as a SSJ3 but in fact ended up losing power as a result of his living body. Even after Goku admits he held back to let Vegeta have a chance, both saiyans still think SSJ3 Goku has a chance, but Goku is not able to capitalize on it. Vegeta suggests the spirit bomb in ch 515, after Goku failed at powering up. It makes more sense to say that the spirit bomb was used because Goku could not generate the power to destroy Kid Buu (or simply that Goku was unable to destroy Kid Buu), than because Goku held back to give Vegeta a chance to fight. Janemba4eva (talk) 03:12, October 23, 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for getting the exact quotes and order. I appreciate your effort and your desire to get the correct facts on the page. However, I cannot figure out the logic you are using to get to your concluding sentence above. It would be inaccurate to say that Goku is unable to defeat Kid Buu, since both the manga and anime agree that he probably could defeat Kid Buu. However, poor decision-making, specifically Goku giving the kids and then Vegeta a chance to fight, means that now they will need to use something other than Goku's SS3 power. I also think that the current article wording does not fully capture the moment, and I propose the following clarifying rewrite:

"In holding back against Buu's various incarnations to allow Vegeta and the other Z fighters a chance to protect the Earth, Super Saiyan 3 Goku exhausts his energy to the point that he alone cannot defeat Kid Buu. Vegeta reacts by coming up with the idea to destroy Buu with a Spirit Bomb powered by the people of Earth."

Thoughts? -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 00:01, October 24, 2012 (UTC)

My logic is that despite Goku's ability to beat Kid Buu before, by the time the suggestion was made to use the spirit bomb, Goku was too drained to stand a chance. They had to resort to the spirit bomb because, at that point, Goku was indeed no longer able to defeat Kid Buu on his own. But yeah, I think the version you've suggested provides a much better explanation of what lead up to the spirit bomb than the current one does, primarily that it was necessary and not simply because Goku wanted to let Vegeta fight (though this played a role). Janemba4eva (talk) 00:55, October 24, 2012 (UTC)

Okay great. It sounds like we have found something that will both express the fact that Goku could not win on his own at that point, and circumstances that ruled out Goku's full power as an option. Shall I edit the page now? -- .10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 01:39, October 24, 2012 (UTC)

Sure. Your version is fine by me. Janemba4eva (talk) 02:00, October 24, 2012 (UTC)

Ultimate Spirit Bomb

The first sentence claiming that it is the strongest variation of the Spirit Bomb should be changed. The Universal Spirit Bomb takes enegy from the entire universe while the Ultimate Spirit Bomb takes energy from Earth, many other planets, and Hell. i think it's the second strongest.  I am GokuBrolyVegeta.

15:45, August 23, 2013 (UTC)

I've read it. It was added by Neffyarious. I did not change because I want Jean to see it, he will know better what to do. He also added tons of stuff in some Shin Budokai 2 characters that I think it's wrong, but again I'll wait for Jean Sandubadear 15:51, August 23, 2013 (UTC)

Denki Gama

I'm curious as to why this is stated to be the name pun for Genki Dama when there isn't a source, and it doesn't even make sense as a name pun. I'm assuming the admin isn't fluent in Japanese so he wouldn't understand why that's nonsense. If you search Japanese websites, you'll find that none mention this "fact."  NubatamaNinja (talk) 11:10, November 26, 2013 (UTC)

Most puns on the site do not have a source, because puns are obvious. The technical term for this type is a "spoonerism". -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 06:41, November 27, 2013 (UTC)

Yes but a spoonerism of Denki Gama would be Ganki Dema, because Denki Gama is actually the characters DE-N-KI-GA-MA. You'd have to switch the DE and the GA. The type of wordplay you're claiming is in effect here simply doesn't work in Japanese. And like I said, no Japanese sites mention any relation of Denki Gama and the Genki Dama; ergo this "pun" is an invention of the English fandom. NubatamaNinja (talk) 08:15, November 27, 2013 (UTC)

The pun is inherent in the words used; it was not invented by anyone except Toriyama. I have never seen an official site listing all DB puns. All sites that do, including this one, are ultimately fan sites. Your notion that only puns explained in licensed publications is quite absurd. Your comment that only a fluent Japanese speaker can identify puns is simply wrong. Many DB puns can only be identified by fluent English speakers, such as the names of Namekians being instruments. Japanese letter equivalents are often used in Dragon Ball to approximate English word patterns. Wordplay using either English or Japanese rules is valid in these cases. Before you claim that something is "nonsense", you had best make sure that you are not being close minded about the issues at hand. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 09:50, November 27, 2013 (UTC)

Genki Dama is not a pun of Denki Gama

It's been debated numerous times but it seems the power of the admin prevails. After doing some research around the topic I decided to give my reasons on why Genki Dama is not a pun on Denki Gama

1) Spoonerism doesn't apply on the Japanese pronunciation or writing of both these words, while spoonerism could be applied if these were created using Roman letters it does not here. Genki Dama on kanji is "元気玉" or "げんきだま" while Denki Gama on kanji is "電気釜" or "でんきがま". It's immpossible to form the later words by switching symbols in the earlier ones.

2)  The words Genki, which means spirit or energy, and Dama, which means ball, can be found in the dictionary. Toriyama's usual puns are non-existent words which are formed from existent words you can find in the dictionary. Genki Dama is simply the union of two already existent words, it's as simple as that. I highly doubt the word "electronic rice cooker" came to Toriyama's mind at any point in the writing process.

3) As stated before no japanese person who knows about the matter has agreed that the word is a pun, and in fact, have called the claim absurd. Even if by some sick twisted logic it was a pun it would be the lamest pun ever made.

Every factor points out that the word is simply not a pun and Toriyama has never said it was one. The only reason I can think of is that in roman letter the words Genki Dama and Denki Gama (which is a very uncommon word used for electronic rice cooker) looks similar, but it's already been stated numerous times why it's invalid.

I simply don't understand why 10x Kamehameha still insists on saying that it is a pun. Very few people know about this matter but of those the only people I've seen who believe it's a pun is 10x Kamehameha and everyone who's been fooled by common internet media like didyouknow. Everone else I've met that knows about the matter says it isn't.

The deletion of the sentece won't change the quality of the article at all, but I believe that a statement that has no backup, has never been officially proved and has been proved false numerous times by people that actually know about the matter is still there is simply insulting to the reader and everyone who wants to know about Dragon Ball.

I simply cannot understand why someone would be so persistent on not having the sentence removed. Or just having a tag questioning it's credibility or adding the word "might". The only reason given by Kamehameha is that "it's obvious" and that everyone who says otherwise "doesn't know what spoonerism means".

Because of this, if any admin on this site has any respect for the Dragon Ball fanbase and wants a good wiki where you can learn about it. I request the sentence to be outright removed.

MatiuxFox (talk) 05:23, December 26, 2013 (UTC)

Each point you list above is flawed. In 1, you say "while spoonerism could be applied if these were created using Roman letters it does not here". Why not? You cannot just decide that grammar does not happen and expect us to go along with it. In 2, you say "Toriyama's usual puns are non-existent words which are formed from existent words you can find in the dictionary". That is completely false. Most character names that are puns are existing words. Piccolo, Pan, Garlic..... the list goes on. I think that watching more of the series may help you familiarize yourself with Toriyama's style. In 3, you really go out on a limb, claiming to know the opinion of "all Japanese people", which of course you do not, and never could. Sick, twisted, and lame is what I call an attempt to speak for a group as large as "all Japanese people". -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 06:09, December 29, 2013 (UTC)

Wow it sure took you time to respond

Spoonerism involves switching letter or symbols to create other words or utrn it into other existing words. The kanji spelling of Denki Gama cannot be turned to the kanji spelling of Genki Dama no matter how many symbol you switch, to the average japanese person both words are absolutely unrelated. Piccolo, Pan and Garlic are real words, no pun made. Don't tell me to watch more Dragon Ball when I'm clearly more familiar with it than you. I won't claim to know what every japanese person thinks but you've seen what happened when a previous user who discused this matter posted about on the japanese Yahoo: Eveybody tought it was absurd but somehow you know more about this than them.

There is absolutely no reason no believe the word is a pun, like I said, Genki Dama is the fusion of two already existing words, Spirt and Ball. I won't claim I know what Toriyama had in mind when he wrote the manga. But the most likely thing is that the word "electric rice cooker" never crossed his mind. The only site I've seen that says the word is a pun is this one, the only person I've seen defending this claim is you. Numerous people have proved you wrong but somehow you know more than:numerous people that have brought up many reasons why it is not a pun, numerous japanese persons and Toriyama himself. You have absolutely no proof whatsoever that the word is a pun other than "it's obvious" and "spoonerism applies here because I think so".

1) In the japanese vocabulary the words are completely unrelated, they don't sound or are written in a similar way

2) Genki Dama is a word itself so there's no reason to believe it was formed from another word

3) Denki Gama is a very rare word used to refer to an electric rice cooker

4) Many (not all, I'm referring to every japanese person I know that knows about the subject) japanese people have said it is simply absurd that someone would say such thing

5) Toriyama has never confirmed it

Why can't you accept it? You have no evidence and no source, in fact, there's enough information that shows it's not a pun, even if there was a 0,01% chance it was a pun, you shouldn't put anyways because you can't confirm it. It's pointless to have something like that in the article, you can't just add that because you think it might be true or because you feel like it, removing the sentence won't even change the article by much. I assume you are the one who discovered this "fact" because you're so fixated in defending it, I also assume you took a look at the romanji spelling of both words and taught "Hey this too words are written similar, it must have been spoonersm!" The least you could do is remove the sentence completely because it is frankly insulting to any Dragon Ball fan. When people try to please you and come to an agreement, like adding a fact tag or adding a "may be a pun" you don't accept that. The only reason the sentece is still there is because you managed to reach a high level in this site's hierarchy, so you're basicly untouchable.

P.S. You say that personal attacks are against the wiki's rules when you called my claims "sick, twisted and lame". MatiuxFox (talk) 20:07, December 31, 2013 (UTC)

You seem to have only rehashed your earlier statements without adding anything new of any substance. (1) They do sound similar, which is why a spoonerism is possible. (2) Seemingly irrelevant, maybe you can elaborate. (3) Irrelevant. (4) I did not post this pun to begin with, so at least one other person who speaks Japanese agrees that it is a pun. (5) He may never have confirmed that "Piccolo" is an instrument either, but it still is. Your point is irrelevant.

Your theory on me discovering the pun is totally fabricated, and you would do well not to make assumptions about what others are thinking. It only leads to misunderstandings, and makes you look like someone who is not open to ideas other than your own. The same is true when you make blatantly false claims about the opinions of every Japanese person or every Dragon Ball fan. You are either lying, or exaggerating without adding any validity to your claims. To reiterate, I did not discover the pun.

I called your claim that because you said the same of my logic. Though not quite a personal attack in either case, I thought you might empathize and see that your comment was just an opinion and had no affect on convincing anyone that what you said was true. In fact, it usually has the opposite affect, and insulting someone most often makes them disagree with you even more, regardless of the claim you have made. Since you did not pick up on my more subtle approach earlier, hopefully this more lengthy explanation will strike a chord. Stick to facts, ignore your opinions and feelings. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 20:10, January 1, 2014 (UTC)

spirit bomb deflection

I find it inconsistent that Goku tells Gohan that the spirit bomb wont hurt him if there is no evil in the heart and that he will be able to deflect it. How then was kid buu able to touch and deflect it with his hands when the page says Frieza failed trying the same because he was evil. Prassy90 (talk) 12:40, January 24, 2014 (UTC)

We see something similar to this with Destructo Disks. While they normally slice through anything, characters that are sufficiently powerful catch catch them with no problem. Spirit Bomb probably never hurts pure hearted good characters, but if you are powerful enough then you can deflect it either way. This is just me guessing though... -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 06:14, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

Yes but with the destructo disc, it is just power whereas with the spirit bomb it was linked with morality. I have adjusted the info accordingly that a strong person can deflect the bomb regardless of morality. The next controversy is that the page says the spirit bomb is capable of hurting anyone regardless of morality. Does that mean pure hearted persons can only deflect but they will get hurt if they stand and take the bomb head on or as stated, it altogether doesnt hurt a pure hearted person regardless of how powerful the spirit bomb is or how the person chooses to interact with the bomb? Prassy90 (talk) 08:19, January 27, 2014 (UTC)

I do not think it ever directly hurts a good person, nor does anyone say that it will. However, it might destroy the planet you are standing on. -- 10X.Ka^.me_.ha^.me_.ha^.._.^..talk_.^..._.contrib. 23:09, January 28, 2014 (UTC)

So do you think it is ok to say that the spirit bomb does not directly hurt a pure hearted person and add that info on the page? or should we only limit it to deflection? Prassy90 (talk) 08:04, January 30, 2014 (UTC)