# Talk:Shiny Pokémon

I've removed two paragraphs mentioning the usage of algorithmic generation from the article, and figured I should explain myself on the talk page in case others want to discuss it. The only evidence provided for it is an X post from James Turner, which does not actually state that the colors were algorithmically generated, nor that all Pokemon designers were not designing shinies prior to Sun/Moon, only that he, personally, was not designing them prior. If anyone has robust evidence of the usage of an algorithm, they should add the section back in with sources, but I was not able to find any. If anyone wants to add a paragraph discussing the theory/belief that early shiny colors were algorithmically generated (such as the one on Bulbapedia's own page about shinies), I think that would be ideal, but I don't know Wikipedia's style well enough to write that myself. 98.218.240.75 (talk) 04:27, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

I have reversed these edits as you had neglected to mention the SI source, which you had removed when removing the paragraphs, with the article in question mentioning the algorithm. Granted the original link was dead however there was an archived version of the article that I have made the main link. CaptainGalaxy 11:56, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
I will also note we don't have any citations from reliable sources directly contradicting the claims of these articles, so there's not really much we can do to "rebuke" claims or anything similar. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 14:34, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
Genuine apologies for accidentally removing that source, but the SI source references the James Turner tweet, which I did address. The SI source does not provide a link to said tweet in the article, but it clearly mentions that James Turner is the source for their information, and that was the only statement I was able to find that James Turner made on the subject. According to the SI article: "The only word from someone inside Game Freak we have on this is from James Turner, who has been a Pokémon designer since the start of Gen 5. He stated that the first time he was allowed to choose what a shiny form looked like were the Ultra Beasts of Gen 7." And the tweet that I linked above is the only one I was able to find from James Turner that addresses the matter in any way, and is cited elsewhere as a source, which is why I believe it is the statement SI is referencing. How is a single tweet that does not actually mention an algorithmic generation considered a valid source for algorithmic generation? if there is another statement from James Turner that does validate the algo generation claim, SI certainly doesn't mention it, since like I said, it provides no links or sources. Is there any real definitive proof of the claim made in the SI article? I'm not going to revert b/c I'm pretty sure that's edit warring, but I think the article should follow what Bulbapedia did, and discuss the *theory* that there was algo generation, and possibly even include the SI article as a source, but not claim that there was definitely an algorithm when there is no solid evidence for that claim. If there's any solid evidence that there was an algorithm involved (outright statements from a designer, evidence found in code, etc) then that should be added as a resource. But I really don't think the SI article is substantial enough alone to hold up that claim. 66.44.95.66 (talk) 22:04, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
I've tried my hand at amending the wording to more accurately reflect the source's claims. Seems that was a mistake on my part when I was using the source initially, as I misremembered this as being stated as fact more than the extrapolation it actually was. Thank you for catching that. Regardless, as this is the only source we have discussing this subject, including Turner's involvement, I've kept some of the content from before, but made it more clear this is the author's thoughts on the subject, with the only hard fact being Turner's involvement. Let me know if I should amend this further.  Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 16:24, 18 April 2025 (UTC)
The paragraph under history and appearances looks good--thank you very much for amending it! The first paragraph of the page still says that the palettes were originally determined by coded algorithm, was that intentional? Either way, thanks for working with me. I know I'm not familiar with Wikipedia norms and blundered initially here. 66.44.95.66 (talk) 18:04, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
Oops, that's a mistake on my part. Thanks for the catch on the lead! Should be fixed now, let me know if it's all good. Regardless, thank you for pointing this out. You caught a mistake I hadn't even noticed, so the help is very appreciated. :) Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 18:17, 22 April 2025 (UTC)