# Talk:Fuecoco

I don't know where I should start this convo, so I decided to start it here. Some of the pokémon articles feature evolutions/related pokémon as co-subjects. Shouldn't this be for at least a majority of the single subject articles for consistency? XCBRO172 (talk) 07:31, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

It's only really the case if there's a lot of discussion over Fuecoco as an evolutionary line. In the case of Magikarp and Gyarados, Gyarados was merged to Magikarp rather than redirected to the list because it was decided that Gyarados' notability was largely linked to the fact that pretty much all notability discussion about Gyarados was that it evolved from Magikarp. For Sprigatito and Popplio, there was a reasonable amount of commentary about Sprigatito and Popplio's evolutions and how they changed. For Fuecoco, there's a little bit of discussion on Skeledirge, but nearly enough to justify making the article about the evolutionary line. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 08:11, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Alright, thanks for explaining. XCBRO172 (talk) 08:49, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
No problem, happy to help - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 12:48, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

IF HE GETS AN ARTICLE AND SPRIGQTITO HET AN ARTICLE THEN WHY DOES QUAXLY NOT? I understand he’s not as notable as the other starters, but compared to the other ones, no one seems to care about him. Please make an article for Quaxly. Oh. And while you’re at it, make articles for all the starters from every generation and all their evolutions.
PRIORITIES
Decidueye
Incineroar
INFERNAPEINFERNAPE!!!
Cinderace
Inteleon
Feraligatr --PyukumukuAce (talk) 14:15, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

@PyukumukuAce hello. Firstly, please do not make demands on what editors should or shouldn't make. Editors have their own projects they work on in their own time, and while I cannot speak on if Quaxly has enough independent coverage for an article or not, a lot of the Pokemon you've listed above likely don't. Which Pokemon have articles is not something editors choose to include or not based on preference: it's based on the existence of coverage in independent, reliable sources, discussing them separately from the subject. It's a tricky thing to figure out, but as it stands, I would suggest familiarizing yourself with policies such as Wikipedia:GNG and Wikipedia:SIGCOV in order to figure out how we determine the "notability"- or in other words which subjects get separate articles or not- of a given subject. I hope this helps.  Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 17:04, 2 September 2024 (UTC)