# Talk:Bulbasaur

How come Bulbasaur and Squirtle have their own pages, but Charmander doesn't?
180.235.104.6 (talk) 23:38, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Because Charmander didn't have enough sources to support itself. Charizard eclipsed it in terms of reception to boot.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 11:10, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Per WP:SLASH, which states "Generally, avoid joining two words with a slash [...] because it suggests that the words are related without specifying how. Replace with clearer wording." which is what I have attempted to do. Despite other Pokemon related articles doing this, they probably should not and we should stick to the Wikipedia:Manual of Style on this. I know the games use the slash regularly for multi-typed Pokémon, but to anyone not familiar with the games, the slash could suggest that the types are interchangeable. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:17, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

For the purposes of the infobox typing should be fine to utilize the slash, as the MOS guidelines applies to text, not an instance like that. Now I do agree in the body of the text they should be separate, but maintain capitalization as they do in the games. This also seems to match consensus across the other articles.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 19:37, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Where is there any consensus? I'm sure people applied it, but just because they have does not mean it avoids the issues of capitalization and WP:SLASH. Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:12, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Well you've had 3 editors revert it now, so...--Kung Fu Man (talk) 17:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Yes but none of them have cited any rules on why they are capitalized other than "well we feel like it". In Red and Blue, they are in full capital letters. Per MOS:GAMECAPS, "Terms relating to trademarked sports, games, and activities are capitalized if they are usually capitalized in the context of this activity: ability scores in Dungeons & Dragons, card names in Magic: The Gathering, etc. However, generic terms such as hit point, victory point, or player character are not capitalized." However, this differs between the games, so what do we do in this case? I appreciate people trying to correct me, but no one has said anything beyond "this is just what we do". Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:47, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
type names in pokémon are consistently treated as proper nouns everywhere ever since gen 5
not really sure why gen 4 kept the all caps trend, but whatever, caps lock is cruise control for cool
and even ignoring what official media has to say, sources that don't include egregious errors (like pluralizing pokémon names, which is a federal crime in 39 continents) also treat type names like proper nouns
the issue, if one can even say there is one, is whether or not it should be referred to as "grass/poison" in the body, to which consensus seems to lean towards "no" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
I'm surprised we even talk about the typing in it, which is only mentioned in the lead and infobox and is not sourced or discussed anywhere in the article. It might be a bit MOS:INUNIVERSE and MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE which states " the purpose of an infobox: to summarize (and not supplant) key facts that appear in the article." In the long run, as it is not brought up anywhere within the prose outside the lead, how important is this typing? Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:05, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
important enough for a discussion this long, it seems
though when it comes to ingame info and how bulbasaur can be recieved based on it, i'd say it's not one of the 4 pokémon that can't be considered inseparable from its typing cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:13, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Significantly for the vast majority, enough that it weighs on reception more often than not in how the character is perceived from both a gameplay angle but also a character angle (i.e. Wooloo).--Kung Fu Man (talk) 18:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
I don't really appreciate comments like "important enough for a discussion this long, it seems", nobody is forcing you to keep up with it, so I suggest remaining civil. Either way, at this point, it is unsourced and its questionable we include this stuff in the infobox. But perhaps that can be brought up in talk page for the infobox instead. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:25, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
alright, my bad
that seems like a good idea, since it would also apply to all the other pokémon cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:29, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
It's handled through an additional parameter through the infobox, and that infobox is used for far more than just Pokemon. So I'm not seeing the purpose of opening a discussion there, let alone any good coming from it. It's also information that, unlike say a developer or voice actor, doesn't need a direct citation for its use in the infobox. If there was a consensus requiring that it'd been brought up across multiple GANs/FACs at this point.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 18:32, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
I'm not sure why it doesn't require a direct citation. If you haven't played the game, honestly, even if you've only seen the show or played the card game, the information does does not the same across the board. I'm pretty sure Bulbasaur is only grass in the card games as well, so it leads to further issues. I know it's not specific to here, but where should it be brought up? Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:04, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
the problem with that is that while the anime and tcg are undeniably "kinda popular", they're still based on the information presented in the games, and to my knowledge, secondary to them as far as articles on the pokémon are concerned. in addition to that, whenever nearly any form of official pokémon media writes anything, they use the specific writing style from the games
i don't think the tcg works as an argument at all, though, since pokémon (usually) only ever have one type there, some types don't exist, the fairy type was apparently removed from existence in gen 8, and sometimes, pokémon's typings are completely wrong (see blastoise δ being fighting/steel metal). this would also require assuming that someone somehow only knows about any given pokémon's typing from the tcg and thinks galvantula is pure electric (with one electric/grass card), and all coverage i found on the tcg seems to assume the average player is smarter than that
as far as direct citations go, uh, here's an official site saying meowscarada is grass/dark i guess. i'm not sure what exactly would work for a citation on how wording works in pokémon
to recap, i think trying to adapt to the anime and/or tcg wouldn't work because they'd either be pointless rewords of things the games, ads, sites, social media, and everything else have already done for ages with less total characters, or have to mention that rhydon was fighting/dark that one time cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:19, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
If it not being cited is an issue then I've gone and added a reference to it in the text. Not exactly glamorous and I could probably get a better source but it's whatever. In any case, the whole issue with "should it have a slash" seems a bit silly. Given it's in the infobox and has gone without issue across several Good Article reviews, as well as the fact that multiple editors have agreed with the consensus to use a slash in the infobox, I feel that the general consensus seems to indicate that the slash is alright and not exactly an issue. This is especially so given that the text clarifies that Bulbasaur has both; if you feel I can clarify it further in the text, then let me know, but I think any of the issues this could bring up are either resolved or negligible.  Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 20:24, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
oh, technical oopsie
i thought that was referring to an infobox specifically about pokémon
then it should probably stay here or go to a broader pokémon article (like the list of pokémon)
either way, my points stand
that words like "grass", when used in the specific context of referring to pokémon types, are considered proper nouns. so while it's lowercase in a sentence like "Slaking eats grass", it's a proper noun in a sentence like "Giga Drain is a Grass-type move"
and that while the slash is used in the specific context of separating pokémon types everywhere since gen 2-ish (unless type icons are used instead), i'd say separate it with a comma in the infobox, but not the body cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 19:05, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Doing a line break here, but Izno in the Wikipedia discord suggested "Grass and Poison" for the infobox, which admittedly I can live with a lot better than the comma.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:43, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

I'd be fine with adding that into both this and other articles should that be what the decision comes to Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 20:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Outside comment who saw the conversation on Discord: First, the MOS does apply to Infoboxes (as Izno noted), but I don't think the "slash" is being used as a normal slash would be, but rather as a "term of art".  So the question is whether this is something closer to a proper name that is merely repeated (say, Victor/Victoria) and the MOS doesn't control, or closer to running text.  IMO, it's a term of art.  So the slash is fine.  Agree "and" is the second-best option, but I don't think it's even necessary to do this.  (If hypothetically Bulbasaur was a "Grss + Poizn" type or something similarly silly, but that's how all the sources reported it, we should just shrug and repeat it.  But I'm very firmly a "trust the source, including for formatting" advocate.  If someone can show that secondary sources don't use a slash, though, go for it.)
Re the earlier comment on "how important is this typing?", the answer is "very".  I'd say it's on the level of mentioning that Gandalf is a wizard or Strider is a ranger, a core identity deal for Pokemon.  SnowFire (talk) 22:34, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Victor/Victoria is the title of the work and in the case, the names are being used interchangably in that work, which is what a slash for. In terms of Pokémon, they are not. Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:14, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
We say that it is important, but it's important from a gameplay perspective, which is not brought up anywhere in the article and isn't sourced and is not discussed in the reception either. So it is important for gameplay, but the article is predominantly about other things. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:32, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
the problem with this, i feel, is that information like pokémon's types is plastered everywhere so hard that it becomes a common element of reception that people just accept (unless it involves charizard). it's pokémon, everyone and their hypertraditionalist christian grandma knows pokémon, and news articles act like it, so i believe it can reasonably be referred to as a case of not needing to cite that the sky is sky-colored, or that pokémon types are separated with slashes
if you want to go a bit further, source 14 (picked at random with my eyes closed) has its typing as an entry, with bulbasaur's face on full display, and the first sentence in that entry explicitly mentioning that it's grass/poison, and source 10 is the pokédex, so if all else somehow fails, there's a primary source
and as of yesterday in my time zone, there is a source tied to the claim, and that's... coincidentally source 14
thanks, pokelego cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 15:40, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
I'm sure many people know about Pikachu. I'm sure if you asked your average non-video game player what type pikachu is, they'd just have to guess. So no, its not obvious, and it's even less obvious when you go beyond Pikachu. Believe it or not, some people have not played these games. I think a primary source is fine for this as its unique to the game, but I think I want to get back to the main point here on whether using the slash is against WP:SLASH or not, and nobody has suggested anything convincing otherwise. I'm happy to go with either commas or and & or an "and", but slash is probably not the best bet for the reasons I've stated above. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
@Andrzejbanas I've gone ahead and changed every Pokémon species article with a dual-type to now say "Type and Type" instead of "Type/Type" in their infobox. Hopefully this should assuage the issue.  Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:45, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
I think that is great! that's a lot of work so that is appreciated. Andrzejbanas (talk) 00:20, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

The redirect Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon/Bulbasaur has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 8 § Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon/Bulbasaur until a consensus is reached.  Web-julio (talk) 02:54, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

ANA B767-381 JA8578 Pokemon-Jet98.jpg
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:22, 16 June 2025 (UTC)