Talk:Dragonball Evolution

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dragonball Evolution article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 2 months

This page is not a forum for general discussion about the film. Fan sites, forums, your personal theories, reviews, speculation, etc are unverifiable and/or original research and have no place in either the article nor on this talk page as Wikipedia is also not a forum. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about the film. Fan sites, forums, your personal theories, reviews, speculation, etc are unverifiable and/or original research and have no place in either the article nor on this talk page as Wikipedia is also not a forum at the Reference desk.

Dragonball Evolution was a Media and drama good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 25, 2012	Good article nominee	Not listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 25, 2007.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that development of the 2008 film Dragonball began in 2002, when 20th Century Fox acquired the rights?

Anime and manga Low‑importance

	Anime and manga portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime, manga, and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anime and mangaWikipedia:WikiProject Anime and mangaTemplate:WikiProject Anime and mangaanime and manga
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Film: Comic book / American

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm
	This article is supported by the Comic book films task force.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Comics: Films Low‑importance

	Comics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Comic book films work group.

Countries in infobox and lead

The AFI lists the film as a co-production between the U.S., the U.K., Australia and Hong Kong. However, several other secondary sources list it as an American film, while Lumiere lists this as an American-Hong Kong co-production. Given that, how should we format the countries in the infobox and lead? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 08:32, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please note MOS:FILMCOUNTRY " If the nationality is not singular, cover the different national interests later". We know it is not a singularly American production, so "American" doesn't go in the first sentence of the lead.

For the Infobox I was going off AFI,(diff) I have no reason to question the reliability of AFI and so I included/retained all the countries listed by AFI. I still see no reason to discount AFI. (I was skeptical of Moviefone, but AFI listed all the same information.)

The involvement of Ingenious Media would seem to make the United Kingdom a valid country to list. (Variety mentions "in association with Ingenious Film Partners"[1] at the end of the page.)

This article is vandalism magnet, so I was just trying to keep it stable. The way film nationality is defined based on the financing can get quite weird. I wasn't going to attempt to a deep dive or my own research to prove or disprove definitively which countries and financiers had sufficient involvement to be listed. Trusting that the reliable source was in fact reliable and including all four countries in the Infobox seemed appropriate and the path of least resistance. YMMV. -- 109.76.196.151 (talk) 23:18, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]