Baby Is Still Canon Even If DBGT Retcon

[Devauzamaki]

How??? Well as you know Saiyans originated from Planet Salad.

They destroyed their world and moved to Planet Plant which were owned by The Tuffles.

They took over and renamed it Planet Vegeta.

baby was a Tuffle.

So even if DBGT was retcon Baby is still Canon in the dragonball Franchise Cause the tuffles did exist in the Canon DB franchise.

 

[Gerkak]

Tuffles might be canon but it is a stretch to say baby is.

 

[Itachi Edo]

Never was canon. The author himself said it was a side story, like the movies 1-13, which take place in an alternate timeline.

 

[Punk Hazard]

The species being canon doesn't mean Baby is.

 

[FoxesInWonderland]

The species being canon doesn't mean Baby is.

This ^ I wouldn't want him to be canon anyway

 

[Pyro NB]

The species being canon doesn't mean Baby is.

tis tis right here

 

[SumnNarutoRelated]

GT>Super

 

[HENI]

Saiyans are canon, but Broly isn't.

 

[Dark Sonic]

GT storyline makes better sense than DBS. :lol

 

[Meowazziel]

How??? Well as you know Saiyans originated from Planet Salad.

They destroyed their world and moved to Planet Plant which were owned by The Tuffles.

They took over and renamed it Planet Vegeta.

baby was a Tuffle.

So even if DBGT was retcon Baby is still Canon in the dragonball Franchise Cause the tuffles did exist in the Canon DB franchise.

The tuffles are canon. That doesnt have to make baby canon.

Turles isnt canon either, yet the saiyans are.
Broly isnt canon, yet the saiyans are.
Android 13, 14 and 15 arent canon, but some other androids like 16, 17 and 18 are.

Also baby isnt really a true Tuffle.
He is a parasitic experiment with some dna from the Tuffle king.