From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This article has many mistakes because of filler and misunderstandings, I think I will re-write most of it to fix these problems. Sasha Slutsker 23:35, Mar 28, 2004 (UTC)


His name is Vegito. The Alternate names are just from people who are idiots and dont know how to spell "Vegito" correctly.

Try again...his name is Bejiitou. Roughly translated, it's 'Vegetto'. Vegito is the name FUNimation gave him in the English dub of the original Japanese material. The Chibi Kiriyama
Actually it vegerot as stated in the manga-SSJ Gokan 18:02, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
No, it most certainly is not Vegerot. That's just a name Viz decided to make up for the English translation, in the same way Funimation made up Hercule instead of Mr. Satan. The accepted name as far as fandom and canon goes is Vegetto.--GeneralDuke 19:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
I know. Everytime I come here I type Vegito to get herr. Now that I think of it, where does the I come from?-SSJ Gokan 18:02, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
The "I" doesn't really come from anywhere. Kakarrot has no I, nor does Vegeta.--Suit-n-tie 17:23, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Hmm-SSJ Gokan 18:02, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
It's possible that the "I" comes from "Vegita" not "Vegeta", and the "o" comes from "Goku", but trying to make sense out of the things FUNimation does is impossible.--KojiDude (viva la BAM!) 20:59, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Agreed.--Suit-n-tie 21:21, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Real simple explanation- the fusion of Vegeta and Kakarotto. The dub Vegito doesn't make a lick of sense. The Viz manga Vegerrot makes sens in the context of the English spelling of Goku's original name as Kakarot. Onikage725

But he's more commony known as Vegetto or Vegito. I dont think people would find this article if it was changed to Vegerrot.-SSJ Gokan 12:01, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Why change to Vegerot? Vegetto is the correct name; Vegito's just some lame attempt at a nmae, and Vegerot is Viz's unnoficial translation. Leave it as Vegetto.--ASNTContributions 02:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, "unnoficial" (sic) translation? Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's not official. It might not be the correct translation of "Vegetto", but it does make sense given how "Kakarotto" had been Romanized since the first issue of "Dragon Ball Z", and is just as official as "Vegito" or "Vegetto".
Only what Toei and FuNi say is official. Though FUNimation screws things up.--SUIT42 22:06, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Nevertheless, I agree that it should remain "Vegetto". Magaroja 20:39, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

According to Viz Comics Shonen Jump Manga volume 26 (which I find more credible for translations then FUNimation) he is introduced as Vegerot.

Agreed-SSJ Gokan 19:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I was watching a few episode on youtube of the english dub and FUNimation didn't spell his name Vegito. And this can be proven in the two episodes Meet Vegetto and Vegetto... Downsized. If you don't believe me, you can check it out yourselves. So it should remain Vegetto. And besides, Atari translated his name as Vegito in their Budokai and Tenkaichi games; so that may have confused most of you. Kind of like how the Gill Missile should've been translated as Giru Missile. Ryu Ematsu

Special abilities[edit]

Shouldn't we remove a lot of those and leave it to only the ones he actually used? Thanos6 22:51, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

there is wrong. the name vegeto appears two times one correct and one in the alternate names. it should be renamed to vegeto

  • Wiki-star: His Anime name is "Vegito" but he does have alternate names. I'll try to enhance the article, but you should input you're contributions too! Don't be shy, just make sure the information is accurate and debateable!

Wiki-star 10:20, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Vegito's Strength[edit]

Well it is said that Vegito may be stronger that Gogeta because of the Fusion Dance; however, with Goku's tail removed, Super Saiyan Gogeta's power may have been nearly equal to Vegito's. As a fused Super Saiyan 4 Gogeta, there was no contest of power between the two. Vegito seemed to be far above that of an unfused Super Saiyan 4. Hmmm...I don't really know who's stronger since both powers demonstrate Old Kai's abilities. Smitheo1 21:15, 6 January 2006(UTC)

  • Wiki-star: According to the Old Kia, the power of the potara is stronger than Fusion Dance. Therefore, Vegito is allready superior to Gogeta is everyway.

However, Super Sayain 4 Gogeta's power is immensley paramount. I would agree he's much more powerful than Vegito.'s a debate!

Wiki-star 10:16, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok, number one, Vegito is the strongest person in DBZ. Gogeta is the strongest at the end of GT, which was not created by Akira Toriyama. Number two, If vegito went SSJ4, he could definitly out-rank SSJ4 Gogeta. KojiDude 21:19, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

How can you be sure?--Suit-n-tie 18:44, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Old Kai states that Potara Fusion is stronger than the Fusion Dance, so if Vegetto went SSJ4 and fought SSJ4 Gogeta, Vegetto would win.--KojiDude (viva la BAM!) 20:57, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, that, and the fact that Super Saiyan 4 Gogeta would be too cocky to use his devastating attacks.--Suit-n-tie 21:19, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Vegeta's dominance[edit]

It is often said that in Vegetto, Vegeta is slightly dominant, while in Gogeta Goku is the dominant one.

Maybe this explains why Gogeta is taller than Vegetto, and why Vegetto is more arrogant too.

It also explains why Gogeta is a mixture of the names of Goku and Vegeta, while Vegetto is a combination of Vegeta and Kakarotto, while the latter is never used by Goku but only by Vegeta.

What do you think? Evilbu 22:00, 1 March 2006 (UTC)



Gogeta and vegeto are the same height have you played budokai 3 shin budokai and tenkaichi, there heights the same. There at least as tall as goku if not taller.

I agree with Vegeta being dominant in Vegito. I distinctly remember being able to hear his voice over Goku's when they were fused. Also the arrogance was very apparent. [1[User:Lord Sephiroth|Lord Sephiroth]]04:06, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

That voice, was that the original Japanese voice or the English one? It matters because the original is always closer to the truth.Evilbu 08:37, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I think Vegeta is more dominant in face characteristics for both Gogeta and Vegito since his hair is more dominant in both fusions whereas Goku only has his bangs for both fusions.

I don't understand what you guys are talking about. Both Vegetto and Gogeta look nothing like Vegeta. [1] [2] [3] He looks alot more like Goku then he does Vegeta. The whole section about Vegeta being dominant should he removed.--KojiDude 17:26, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, if Vegeta were dominant, Vegetto wouldn't look so happy.--Suit-n-tie 17:28, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Article Enhancements[edit]

  • Wiki-star: I just finished cleaning, and editing the article. If anyone would like to enhance it they way it, by all means. But make sure that you enhance, and not eliminate. If you do eliminate, always provide a logical reason. Knowone will get down you're throat, at least you would've explain yourself. Thanks again!

Wiki-star 10:18, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Nice, I'm relatively new, but a minor hint : press "show preview" first, I see you have saved the page many times.

Evilbu 10:37, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey, Wiki-star, i really like what you've done with Vegetto. Perhaps you should refirbish more character pages, great job, i love the improvements

Brad92 4:28, 28 March 2006 {UTC)

If anyone has a picture of the Final Kamehameha, could you post it next to the Final Kamehameha's description...thnaks

Brad92 9:05, 28 March 2006 {UTC}

Works Cited[edit]

  • Wiki-star: Its always fun to share your knowledge and information about an article. However, the information needs to be backed up through cite. The technique called "Final Kamehameha" needs a picture or a cited page to be acceptable. If there are any questions please feel free to ask.

Thanks! Wiki-star 00:30, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

No it doesn't. Just because there isn't a picture or cited page doesn't make something "unacceptable". NOT everything needs a picture. Lots of pictures just abuse the Fair Use Policy of Wikipedia, and make the page slow to load. Stating when, where, and against who the Final Kamehameha is used should be sufficient information for determining whether it is valid or not.
Daishokaioshin 21:13, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Voice Actor[edit]

  • Wiki-star: If anyone could find Vegetto's voice actor, and insert it within the first paragraph of the article (where Vegetto is defined) that would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

Wiki-star 02:26, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

  • Mihangel: I happen to know the Japanese voice actor, but cannot find who it is that plays Vegetto in the English version. However, to me it sounds more like the combination of just both Goku and Vegeta voice actors speaking at once, so they both may recieve credit. However I have found no evidence of this, so I shall not edit anything until I find solid proof. Also, the Japanese voice actor is Ryō Horikawa who also played as Gogeta and Vegeta in the Japanese versions as well. --Mihangel 20:34, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
It's Sean Schemmel and Christopher Sabat at once.

Fair Use images[edit]

This page uses a rediciously amount of "Fair Use" images. Please try to cut back on them, the legallity of using so many copyrighted images is highly disputed within Wikipedia, but more then likely it's not allowed under US law. (and this IS a US website and encyclopedia). - TheDJ (talkcontribsWikiProject Television) 23:28, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Final Kamehameha[edit]

Is there any proof that the move listed is Final Kamehameha?

What do you mean "proof that it is Final Kamehameha"? If you mean the picture, then , yes. I took that screenshot myself. KojiDude (talk) 23:50, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

No, I mean is there any proof that the picture is of a Final Kamehameha? He never said Final Kamehameha in the anime and the way it's done in the games is different than that picture, so it seems to me that it's just a generic energy beam that you or whoever wrote the summary decided to call the Final Kamehameha. Starone 04:06, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Do you want to see the clip I got the picture from? It's done slightly different in the video games. I'm not sure where the name Final Kamehameha came from, but if so many people use it, why shouldn't we? It's the same as Mega Buu/Buff Buu names. They were never used in the anime, but we use them here.--KojiDude 22:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

The name isn't the problem. It's weather or not that picture is truly a Final Kamehameha or just a generic energy attack. And yes, I'd like to see this clip.

Starone 19:50, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Here you go. Pause it about 13-14 seconds in and you'll see that it's the same as the screenshot.--KojiDude 19:52, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't help. What I was to know is where's the proof that says that move is a Final Kamehameha?

Starone 16:23, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

...What? The same attack is used in the video games and refeered to as Final Kamehameha, so what's the problem?--KojiDude 23:20, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

But the attack used in the video games (at least the ones I've played and seen) is done differently. What makes this move a Final Kamehemeha?

Starone 15:09, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Because in the video games it's based on that attack.--KojiDude 16:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I really don't think you can say that without any proof. Is there anything official that says that? Starone 03:19, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

The video games and etc. are the only source that I know of, and the name is widely accepted among fans, so what harm does it do?--KojiDude (viva la BAM!) 03:54, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Again, I don't have a problem with the name, I have a problem with you calling the attack in that picture a Final Kamehameha since there's no proof that the attack is a Final Kamehameha.

Starone 17:40, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

There is proof. The attack in the games is based on the attack in the picture.--KojiDude (viva la BAM!) 21:08, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

So then where is the proof of that? Where is the proof that says the Final Kamehameha is based on the attack in question? Starone 03:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

...Dude... You said you've played the games... You've seen the proof.
Not to be rude or anything, but this is a really stupid convorsation. All you're doing is saying " But where is the proof that the picture is final kamehameha" to which I have responded by giving proof, that you ignore. I'm really kind of tired of this, so I'm discontinuing the convorsation. Thanks for understanding.--KojiDude (viva la BAM!) 03:52, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

You haven't given me any proof at all. You just keep saying "it's based on that attack" over and over again without presenting anything to back that up except a video that wasn't useful at all. That's the problem here, I have nothing to go on that would lead me to believe that it's true except your word and your word alone isn't good enough. You're basically expecting me to believe it's true just because you say it is. I'm a long time Dragonball fan and I've never heard of this explination before so I need a little more than a fan telling me it's true to believe it.

Starone 06:50, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

That is Final Kamehameha. Believe KojiDude. Take Spirit Cannon for example. In the anime, it is one continuous beam, but in the Budokai games, it is a ki wave launched from the hand similar to a regular energy ball.--Suit-n-tie 22:16, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

its called the final kamehameha but it should be called big bag kamehameha and the big bang kamehameha should be named final kamehameha because the final kamehameha looks and acts like it were made from the big bang attack and the super kamehameha more that than the final flash and super kamehameha. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:27, 23 January 2013 (UTC)


Ok, he is about as popular as Raditz by Google hits (less if you do + "Dragon Ball" or + "Dragon Ball Z") , and was around for around the same time. What makes him any more deserving of a page? Nemu 21:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but i believe that you do not base "statistics" on how a character should or should not have a page! Why did you redirect Vegetto? Gooden 19:32, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Let's Think before we act[edit]

Ladies and Gentlemen when we talk together and exchange knowledge, the information we gather as a team is ginormous! Please do not redirect the Vegetto page to a shorter, less informed section. If you believe this is the best way to go, discuss it first with the person or people who put forth the hard work to create the Vegetto article. Let's talk about it first!

Thanks! Gooden 20:12, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

It was already discussed on WP:DBZ. Nemu 20:15, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Could you more specifically direct me to the exact location of where this is being discussed. I appreciate the given link, but i've been looking everywhere! Gooden 20:23, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Here. Nemu 20:28, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Whew! I just got through reading all that jazz! So, after i finished reading that, i did not find a valid reason as to the justification of Vegetto's redirection. If you can tell me personally as to why you are redirecting this article, then that will be fine! Or, you can direct me to the person or people who are in charge, and let me talk to them. I believe this character is quite important, and he deserves his own article. So what do you choose to do? Would you like to talk it out right here, and come to an agreement? Or find some other way? The choice is yours my friend. Gooden 20:37, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
He was on the list of characters to be merged, nobody disputed it after. He was merged. The end. That's all. Please don't drag this on. Nemu 20:40, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
I have to drag this on. I don't see why you're doing this. You have yet to give me a valid reason as to your actions. I'm trying to talk with you on your reasoning. I believe i'm being fair. There are so many flaws in your case right now, it's not even funny anymore. I'm afraid if you do no provide a valid justification as to why you are redirecting this article, i'm going to use force. I do not want to go that direction. I'm a nice guy, just talk to me. Why are you doing this? Just because nobody said "hey, wait up" doesn't mean you should not stop! Please talk to me now! Thanks! Gooden 20:49, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Because, it was decided by WP:DBZ (about 20 regular people), that all characters on the merge list would be merged because of not being notable, having a small article, and various other reasons. This isn't a very hard concept. If you had actually read the discussion, you would know. Nemu 20:57, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes but WHERE! Where was this finalized? You're giving me a link to all this talking, all this disputes. To be honest with you, i don't give a dam about opinions. Give me the link to the blatant proof of this article being affirmed of redirection. THAT YOU HAVE SO FAR FAILED TO DO! And just what kind of MERGE LIST are you talking about? As far as i'm concerned, currently THERE IS NOTHING UNDER THE MERGE LIST. Once again, please tell or give me proof as to your actions! Gooden 21:06, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Are you sure you read the entire discussion? There was a list of articles to be merged, Vegetto and many others were on that list. And almost everyone was in favor of redirecting those characters to the various lists.--SUIT양복 21:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
This is a point where it was on the list[4]. If you had read it, you would know that they were taken off after being merged. Nemu 21:14, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Ok good! I understand that now. So Vegetto was a candidate on the merging list, fine. Now here is my next question: "Where is the verdict?" Where does it say that Vegetto will be redirected to a shorter less informed section because....? Because currently, i see more people against this action than for it. If you can provide justified proof of this, then i'm all yours! Gooden 21:20, 17 March 2007 (UTC) (P.S) I don't see what's taking you so long to just give me the finalized proof of this?? Just give me the link to the justified reasoning behind all this!!
You are annoying. Read the discussion. It clearly says all articles that aren't disputed at the end will be merged. Nemu 21:25, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Well you know what, I'M DISPUTING IT! And if you refuse to talk peacefully to me instead of degrading me, i'll have to take matters into my own hands. Thanks for the discussion! Gooden 21:31, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

The discussion is over. Nobody else disputed it. You're out of luck. Start a discussion on the project talk page asking for opinions. Nemu 21:36, 17 March 2007 (UTC)