Talk:List of Pokémon by National Pokédex number

message: Is Missingno even a Pokemon i thought is was a glitch changing it from Japanese to English??
:It's not a Pokémon. But IIRC, it needs to be there in order for the game to work. - A Link to the Past (talk) 06:12, September 9, 2005 (UTC)
:It's a Pokémon. But it needs to exist.
71.32.125.234 16:09, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No it's not. Read the page. DanPMK 21:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes it is! Missingno. is a Pokémon by definition! It's a Pokémon by the definition "A Pokémon is anything that can be caught in a Poké Ball in any of the Pokémon canon in which Poké Balls are used for the purpose of capturing Pokémon. This excludes objects small enough to fit into a Poké Ball, which may on occasion be absorbed into the Poké Ball, but will cause the Poké Ball to open upon absorption, revealing that the object is inside, in a non-energy format." Actually, it's multiple Pokémon. There are at least 28 subspecies in R/B alone; so presumably, there are actually 56 subspecies. (This includes the Ghost/Fossil Missingno., so excluding those, there are actually 50 subspecies, and it doesn't count 'M, the parent of Ditto. So if you count all of those, it's actually about 57...) So fix the article, or at least unprotect it. Please? I know that the admin can, so could you *addressing the admin* please unprotect it? 71.32.125.13 19:42, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's NEVER officially acknowledged as a Pokémon, nor does it appear in any sort of official Pokédex.—ウルタプ 21:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hah, by that definition, Pokéballs themselves are considered Pokémon. Haven't you every had the unfortunate pleasure of watching the first movie? There're over 100 "species" in R/B, all filler. Don't address this idiotic issue again. I'll revert it myself if I ever see any mention of a glitch as a Pokémon. DanPMK 03:45, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MISSINGNO- POKEMON OR GLITCH   

message: makes me lose the will to live. I just thought I'd mention that. - David Gerard 23:52, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't get it too. Hey, why don't we index all possible gums stickers? - Kirils 05:58, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  And why so? Ace ofspade 02:37, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

text: This article is also the only up-to-date authority on the officially Romanized Japanese names from my experiences, as well…—ウルタプ 03:44, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article's existence 

message: I think that a list with the real Japanese names (instead of just the romanizations) should be added. By "real", I mean "the romaji interpretation." For example, Freezer (Articuno) is the real interpretation of フリーザー, instead of the commonly used romaji, "Furīzā". I'd add it, but I need a complete list. Sigma X Virus 03:09, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Real Japanese names 

message: I am curious why the pages for Tamanta, Perappu, and Buizeru have been removed, when they are actual real Pokemon, not fakes. 
If anyone would take the time to recreate those three pages, please take note that Coro Coro has recently revealed their types:
Tamanta- Water
Buizeru- Water
Perappu- Flying
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.121.110 (talk • contribs) 
:Not sure what you’re talking about... the pages are still there, and they’re still on the list. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 10:14, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed 4th Generation Pokemon 

message: Why not arrange the pokemon like this:
No.	English Name	Japanese Name	Romaji transcription	Trademarked Rōmaji	Chinese Name
the chinese name is optional. -- ragnaroknike
I agree. While at it, how about putting images of the pokemon somewhere in the table. 
Sorry to interupt, how do you use the talk page? Well anyway, did someone get rid of the cool new pokemon in the list?
Btw, the Chinese names belongs to the chinese wikipedia unless Pokemon itself originated from china (which isn't and it actually originates from Japan). --fnfd 06:44, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table form? 

message: I put this on the Deoxys talk page as well, but I'm not sure how many people read that page, so I'm mentioning it here too.  When looking up info on Pokémon Diamond and Pearl, I came across an add showcasing new Diamond and Pearl colors for the DS Lite.  Down in the bottom left of the picture I found is, without a doubt, a shadow of a new fifth Deoxys form.  See for yourselves here .  I believe that this should be mentioned in the article. -SaturnYoshi 03:09, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This article? The one that doesn't make any distinction between the Deoxys forms? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:14, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, in the Deoxys article.  I wrote the same thing on it's talk page, but not many people read the talk pages of individual Pokémon.  I thought I would definately get a response if I added the topic here too. -SaturnYoshi 05:16, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest asking on the talk page of the Pokémon Wikiproject. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:19, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, I'll do that.  Thanks for your input. -SaturnYoshi 06:17, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind...  Appearently it's a hoax. -SaturnYoshi 06:33, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Deoxys Form 

message: What's the matter with having a note at the bottom at least acknowledging Missingno. and 'M's existance? Yes, they technically aren't official Pokémon, and there are many other glitches that occur in the same way Missingno. and 'M do, but then again, Missingno. and 'M are more well-known than most (you'll find an article about Missingno., but not an article about a lesser known glitch like the ones found in corrupted Hall of Fames). If they can't be put in the official list, they should at least be acknowledged somewhere on the page -- because even though they are only glitches in the Pokémon games, they can still be treated as Pokémon. It also seems as though others have also tried putting Missingno. on the list.
In case someone decides to put the tag bag on, this is the tag:
Note: Although technically not Pokémon, Missingno. and 'M have the ID #000 (proven when stats is seen). Their status as Pokémon is disputed because they and many other glitches are the result of game errors. However, they are necessary for the game to function.
One more note: In a Pokémon guide book, when they mention Missingno. they say "these Pokémon(!?) can distrupt the game", indicating that they weren't sure whether to classify them as Pokémon or not.
Latitude0116 07:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We do acknowledge their existence in many other articles. This article is a list of Pokémon, and error handlers in one set of games aren't Pokémon. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 07:28, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missingno. 

message: This list goes to 501 and then stops.  Has it been confirmed that there will be 501 Pokémon (we need a source!), or is this just speculation?  And if it's speculation, I suggest we remove all the slack at the end of the list so we don't suggest that there will be 501 Pokémon. --Brandon Dilbeck 05:38, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that it is just speculation based on the fact that 100 Pokémon were added to G/S/C and 135 were added to Rb/Sa/Em.  So, whoever put up to 501 is just assuming that at least 100 or so monsters will be added.  --SaturnYoshi 06:27, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What I'll do is hide the D&P list from the article.  I put it into a comment tag, but the list itself can still be edited, it's just not displayed.  When we're ready for it to be visable again (when the list is complete), all we have to do is remove the  at the end.  (I was thinking of moving the list to the talk page instead, but that got messy. --Brandon Dilbeck 16:03, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds fair enough to me.  --SaturnYoshi 21:15, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. At least the numbers won't need retyped. Nightwolf Nogitsune 04:30, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Goes to 501 

message: What exactly is the point of having this paragraph:
<I>The purpose of INSERT NAME HERE in the games, anime and manga, as with all other Pokémon, is to battle both wild Pokémon, untamed creatures encountered while the player passes through various environments, and tamed Pokémon owned by Pokémon trainers.</I>
...at the beginning of EVERY LAST ARTICLE on a specific Pokémon? Something like that belongs in the main Pokémon article, not repeated endlessly on the hundreds of individual species pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.162.51.124 (talk • contribs) 
:The point is to give the articles context in case someone runs across them without much prior knowledge of the series. --Sparky Lurkdragon 20:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting point.  See the Pokémon Collaborative Project's talk page for this discussion.  --Brandon Dilbeck 20:56, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For that matter, I don't really see the need for having a separate page for every single Pokémon. Needless fancruft, I say. It's not worth the effort to delete these articles, though, so I won't bother trying it. -Amatulic 03:23, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This was already discussed before anyway.  -SaturnYoshi THE VOICES 04:46, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While some Pokémon are arguably more notable than others (Pikachu, Meowth, Jigglypuff, and Mewtwo are a few notable ones), something can be said for every Pokémon, and all (or almost all) of them have appeared in several video games, at least one television episode, a trading card, perhaps in a comic book—Combining all the Pokémon into one article would create the longest, most difficult-to-navigate page in the entire Wikipedia. People would then begin to complain about that page.   At least take solace in the fact that you aren't required to visit and read every Pokémon species page. --Brandon Dilbeck 06:26, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly.  Why is it that people who don't even contribute to the Pokémon articles are the ones that have the most problems with them?  -SaturnYoshi THE VOICES 07:02, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The useless paragraph in ALL of the Pokémon species articles 

message: Alright, before everyone attacks me telling me how many rules I've broken, I'd like to explain my reasoning for putting the list of fourth generation Pokemon up. The reason? Diamond and Pearl came out today, and Serebii.net has the info, including sprites for all of them. Many new evolutions have been revealed, including the confirmation that Lucario and Manaphy are not legendary. Many Pokemon have "Name Unknow" for their name, this is because their name is unknown but there is a sprite of them. Please tell me what you think, and do it nicely-I tried to follow the rules...ShadowUltra 23:26, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The game is released on Thursday, and one of the Serebii editors has an early copy. I've reverted the addition of the Nat'l numbers until later in the week, when the game is generally released and we don't risk repeating any mistakes made by Serebii. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:30, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, Serebii and one of the editors (Coronis) have copies aand are vefiying each other. this article says the release date was today. However, you know much more about this article than I do, and you told me nicely, so I'll keep it as it is =D ShadowUltra 23:32, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone changed that, based on the fact that Serebii has a copy. -_- There's a ton of commentary on this subject on WT:PCP, including a bunch of articles to work on this week while we wait for confirmation on D/P stuff. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:37, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Where did this screenshot come from? A reliable source, or a random fansite? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:15, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe it was on Serebii, which is listed a a source about five times in a featured article, so I would assume that should be reliable enough. It's also based on the game data, and if that isn't reliable, I don't know what is. Nemu 23:22, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Serebii is not a reliable source in the case of extremely-new data; they get things wrong all the time. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:25, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How exactly do you get a picture with no signs of editing wrong? And is the game data, which has been on many different sites with basically no change not reliable? Nemu 23:28, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You put it over on a notoriously credulous fandom. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:34, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I've Added the Diamond/Pearl Pokemon-Feedback Please 

message: Serebii and Coronis have independantly recieved and confirmed all National dex numbers as seen here.  It would be appreciated if the article was formatted to include those.
:You know, Nintenfreak, no one is stopping you from updating the list yourself.  -SaturnYoshi THE VOICES 15:27, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Except that I don't have the skills required to update it.  I'm just a fact checker.--Nintenfreak 00:34, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, well...  Updated.  -SaturnYoshi THE VOICES 01:06, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alright, dammit, the National Dex is Accurate on Serebii.  Update. 

message: Can I please get a source on the official romanizations? I'm editing the Japanese name in the templates (which are supposed to contain the official romanizations) and I want to be sure I'm not going on somebody's bullshit guesses. Interrobamf 23:10, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Official romanization

message: Who put this up for deleation, we finally get a version we can agree on and it gets put up for delation! (As is the Johto Dex
NAY I SAY NAY!!Lego3400: The Sage of Time 21:51, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  OH NO! 

message: I got an idea why won't we have a part in the pokedex that says glitch pokemon.(Master King 21:13, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because this is a List of Pokémon by National Pokédex number. Only real Pokemon, and only if they have a national pokedex number. Period. DanPMK 22:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Glitch Pokemon 

message: WikidSmaht, what is you barrier against comprehensiveness? This article is a good consolidated list of english and japanese names, but you keep reverting additions to it. 24.154.222.178 16:48, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unown, Deoxys, etc. 

message: I thought I should point out that new Wikipedia technology could practically and unupsettingly make this article obsolete.  MediaWiki has introduced the ability to make lists sortable.  This would mean that we could basically merge the lists of Pokémon by name, stage, National Dex, Johto Dex, Hoenn Dex, and Sinnoh Dex all into one sortable list.
Recall a while ago that a few people wanted to delete most of these list articles because there were just so many of them, but the main argument against that was that each needed to be sorted separately.  But now that lists can be sorted by the viewers, all these problems can easily be solved!
Well, actually, there are still a few bugs to be worked out.  See the discussion at the Pokémon Collaborative Project's talk page if you want to see a few samples and discuss this.  --Brandon Dilbeck 20:00, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sortable list

message: Yes, I did it again, and I don't exactly have the patience, or the time, to give another full-fledged explanation of how to keep the page.  Go to Krystal's talk page for an explanation, because I did the same thing there (although, in that case, it was eventually reverted and protected.)  --Luigifan 12:23, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I agree with the users there that this isn't necessary. If people want to see the page as it was before, they're still going to have to dig through the history, so this doesn't serve any practical purpose. I'm reverting it. If you can give a viable reason for doing this, discuss it here instead of just doing it again please.—M_C_Y_1008 (talk/contribs) 21:10, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, my only beef with the other one is that it's not divided into the "generations" of Pokémon.  To be honest, it's probably a better list in every other way.  Perhaps somebody could divide the new list into segments the same way that this list was? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Luigifan (talk • contribs) 02:12, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If that was done, the list would unfortunately not sort correctly. I suppose ordering the Pokémon by their respective generations would generally give you those Pokémon at the top of the list, although there are usually other Pokémon from previous generations in each generation's Pokédex in addition to the ones introduced in said generation -- and the Sinnoh Pokédex doesn't even include various fourth-generation Pokémon. If one were to be looking for the Pokémon in each generation, though, they could always look at :Category:First-generation Pokémon, :Category:Second-generation Pokémon, :Category:Third-generation Pokémon, and :Category:Fourth-generation Pokémon.—M_C_Y_1008 (talk/contribs) 02:41, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, if the list were split up, it could only be sorted within each section. That’s why the intro specifies which Pokémon are from which generation, and those generation categories are linked at the bottom. --WikidSmaht (talk) 01:05, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: (Partial) Restoration