Here on the Dragon Universe Wiki, we have Standards we like to uphold. We expect our users, sysops, and bureaucrats to adhere to these at all times.

Article Creation

  • Do not create "Stub" articles intentionally. If you are running out of time, and want to finish it later, place the {{Stub}} template on the page and finish it later.
    • This is also acceptable in the event that not enough content is present to make a full-sized article.
  • All articles should be created with proper grammar, punctuation, and sentence structure. See the Manual of Style.

General Editing

  • Check your spelling and grammar. Don't use internet slang (ex. "How r u?" or "c u 2nite"). If you're not 100% sure about the way a word is spelled, type it into Google or If you know that you're not the strongest speller, compose your edits in a word processor or web browser which has spell-checking (Firefox 2 and derivatives such as Lolifox, and Opera when ASpell is installed all work).
  • Don't "reply" to content others have posted. If you think a particular point warrants discussion, post on the article's talk page.
  • Reverts must have a reason! If you revert another user's edits, without leaving a reason in the edit summary, you will be at risk of being warned (or blocked if the behavior continues) for harassment. The only exception for this is blatant vandalism.

Neutral Point of View

The neutral point of view is a means of dealing with conflicting views. The policy requires that:

  • Where there are or have been conflicting views, these should be presented fairly, but not asserted.
  • All significant points of view are presented, not just the most popular one.
  • It should not be asserted that the most popular view or some sort of intermediate view among the different views is the correct one.
  • Readers are left to form their own opinions.

As the name suggests, the neutral point of view is a point of view, not the absence or elimination of viewpoints. It is a point of view that is neutral—that is neither sympathetic nor in opposition to its subject.

Debates are described, represented, and characterized, but not engaged in. Background is provided on who believes what and why, and which view is more popular. Detailed articles might also contain the mutual evaluations of each viewpoint, but studiously refrain from stating which is better. One can think of unbiased writing as the cold, fair, analytical description of all relevant sides of a debate. When bias towards one particular point of view can be detected the article needs to be fixed.


The Dragon Universe Wiki is primarily concerned with the recording and collation of canon information (by extension manga-based anime, anime-only, movies and games). Given the overall lack of knowledge about certain aspects of the Dragon Ball universe, speculation is inevitable, but should only be recorded on the wiki's forums.

Speculation may come from a few sources:

  • One source is conclusions derived from non-canon assumptions.
  • Unknowns are the ultimate source of speculation.
    • The number of things known about the Dragon Ball universe are vastly outnumbered by the things that are not known. For example, many characters and organizations have large "gaps" in their histories as they have yet to be elucidated upon in Dragon Ball.

While we do not want to discourage discussion, the reason for this is because going crazy with speculation can get out of hand. More often then not, throughout the franchise's history, these wild speculations in one way or another end up in articles or being pushed as talk points on official article talk pages: this is also the primary reason we split from Dragon Ball Wiki.

Acceptable Speculation

Speculation is defined as: "Reasoning based on inconclusive evidence; conjecture or supposition". On this site so as not to lead into crack theory and fan fiction, speculation should be limited to the idea of inconclusive evidence. This basically means speculation on the site requires some form of evidence presented from a indisputable source of information (canon material). If such evidence is found to be in dispute (either of its context, or otherwise) then the speculative content is invalid and will be removed.

ex: "Its possible that Son Goten may be capable of using the Super Saiyan 3. (This is alluded to in the series by his knowledge of the technique, whats required to attain it, and the fact that he and Trunks obtained it while fused into Gotenks).

Unacceptable Speculation

  1. Linking information and filling in holes with assumptions and opinion is not acceptable.
  2. In relation to the first point, by making connections or forcing content to fit by creating information that one cannot possibly know.
  3. Using misinformation or content taken out of context to make your point work.
  4. Crack theories (i.e. theories that are derived from baseless information that is not supported by the actual material). For example, "Vegeta is a Super Saiyan 3" has no bases in fact whatsoever for a number of reasons backed by factual materials. Hence, crack theories have no reason to be issued anywhere on the site at all, including in the speculation section. This form of information is not speculation and has no place in discussing what is actually happening with in the storyline.
  5. Fan fiction or fanon has no place on the site or anywhere in the speculation section. Fanon are inventions of fan fiction authors that for one reason or another appear to have taken the status of a canon within the Dragon Ball fandom. In other words, it is often believed that these ideas were put forward by Toriyama himself, which of course, is not the case. Basically, fanons are born when one fanfiction writer makes something up for their own fanfiction, which then gets picked up by other fanfiction writers and low and behold, unsuspecting Dragon Ball fans are convinced that little tidbit of information comes from Toriyama himself because they have read it in numerous fanfictions. Two major examples of this are Super Saiyan 5 and Dragon Ball AF.

User Communication

  • Be polite and kind to other users. This is a no-brainier.
  • Do not talk down to another user. This also applies to sysops. Just because they have a few extra buttons, doesn't make them any better than the new user that has only been here an hour.
  • If you sense tension or an argument building, disengage from the conversation.
  • If there is a certain user you don't get along with, and you know it, avoid them.
  • Do not go looking to stir up trouble just because you dislike someone or something written on the wiki. Remember, your opinion isn't the law, and you don't have to force it down someone's throat.
  • Be helpful. If something you read doesn't quite make sense, or you have a great idea that would compliment one a user is writing on, tell them, but tell them in a polite, considerate manner.

Sysop Communication

  • Do not forgo warnings. If a policy requires a warning, or even two warnings, before action is taken, give them out. Ignoring that step is reserved for only the most extreme cases.
  • Be helpful. As a sysop, users regard you automatically as someone authoritative. Always help them out whenever you can.
  • Avoid bias. Do not reprimand one user for breaking the rules, but then overlook your buddy's own rule breaking.
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.