Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pokémon/Archive 15

message: Currently there are two proposals i guess.
;Merge Pokémon into lists of 20 or some other arbitrary number, worthwhile Pokémon have links to main articles :Each Pokémon gets fair treatment in this manner, but usability is potentially sacrificed and we should try to avoid arbitrary measures.
;Merge Pokémon by evolution line or implied connections :Some Pokémon will be leftover, either being grouped with Pokémon they really have nothing in common with, or remaining in lone articles. Additionally, great care will need to be taken to avoid subjective grouping and layout.
My idea is that we kind of do both.  Let's have these massive list articles but then only include the most basic information.  Each section would then have a main article which is the evo-line article, the redirects would then be pointing to these main articles.  For pokemon that don't have these evo-line articles their info can remain in the list with just a larger section, the redirects pointing to the list. we still need to really concentrate on firm style guidelines so we can have consistency.  UCantCMe! had made some suggestions on my talk page.  I actually propose that we create a complementary page to WP:PCP/S with agreed upon guidelines to refer people to when they ask why things are one way rather than the other (one example is to possibly order the pokemon by dex# rather than evolution; this can help give a visual history of that line's development and would allow things like Pikachu to be discussed first, rather than after Pichu).  Also considering this topic's length of discussion it might be best to have a devoted talk page. Should i just plain move this discussion there or should it be archived and then linked to from the other page? -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 13:16, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I like that idea. My original concern with the evo-line merging was that single-evo non-notable Pokemon like Mawile and Spiritomb would be unaffected, but this blend of two camps making such Pokemon enlarged sections on the Lists would square that away effectively. Maybe the discussion of that should be put on the List of Pokemon (1-20) talk page, because by your compromise proposal that page would remain in use. Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Laugh At) 20:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, so I started the relevant discussion about this proposal at the List of Pokemon (1-20)'s talk page. Hopefully something will come out of this this time. Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Laugh At) 01:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: A combination proposal

message: Just letting you all know Serebi went and revealed every English possible --DSDark 20:42, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably not going to be added, due to the content being exclusive to a fansite (and one that many people at this WikiProject do not trust). For all we know, it could even be an April Fools' joke. Ultraflame 20:50, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't get why Serebii isn't considered a reliable site, but I can see how it could be an April Fool's Joke. --DSDark 20:58, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's considered unreliable because it is run by one person, who thus is not accountable very much to their mistakes. -Amarkov moore cowbell! 20:59, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More Stuff from Serebii 

message: Lividore and I have reached a sort of compromise–I won't revert Serebii's names provided they're the ones that can be considered correct translations (i.e., Mitsuhoney's ability "Honey Collect" to "Honey Gather").  That alright with everyone?—ウルタプ 01:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really. There is no criteria for what is "more correct" than another. For example, who's to say that "Azelf" is incorrect while "Porygon-Z" is? For all we know, their names might be been "Agnom" and "1337Pory" respectively. You Can't See Me! 02:20, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attack/abilities 

message: ...I got to Dialga and it won't even let me reveal Pokémon anymore. o-o Although I suppose it doesn't matter too much, since Nintendo Power revealed everything on that site anyway.—ウルタプ 02:39, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dunno if this is significant, but [http://www.pokemon-games.com/pokemondandp/index.jsp Pokemon-games.com] 

message: is ading Serebii info.  I need some help, since I'm nearing the limit. -Jeske (v^_^v) 21:23, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like TBM got it already. hbdragon88 01:31, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, no problem at all. It should be few days now til the Diamond and Pearl will be in the United States. So then we will be able to unlock the rest of the unconfirmed pokémon, including Booburn. TheBlazikenMaster 22:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need help at Booburn 

message: I recently created List of Pokémon RPGs. I have now gotten it up to Featured List standards in my opinion. Because of this, I have nominated the list at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Pokémon RPGs. Funpika 22:55, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I'm going to copyedit it a little bit.  --Brandon Dilbeck 02:51, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Featured lists|Featured List]] nomination of [[List of Pokémon RPGs]]. 

message: As I'm sure you all know most, if not all Pokémon articles contain the following text: "are one of the 493 fictional species of Pokémon creatures from the multi-billion-dollar Pokémon media franchise—a collection of video games, anime, manga, books, trading cards, and other media created by Satoshi Tajiri. The purpose of Arbok in the games, anime, and manga, as with all other Pokémon, is to battle both wild Pokémon—untamed creatures that characters encounter while embarking on various adventures— and tamed Pokémon creatures owned by Pokémon trainers." with references shown at the bottom of the page.  Does anybody think it would be a good idea to create a template that displays this text.  I know that it wouldn't have very much use now, but if future  RPGs were created with additional Pokémon, it could help very much.--Tempest115 01:48, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Lol. They contain that text because there was a template, actually. It was deleted because templates are not supposed to be used to write article content, and introductions should not all be identical anyway. -Amarkov moo! 01:53, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this text is unnecessary. If people want to know information about the series, they'll look at the article. Character articles shouldn't describe what their series is about. - A Link to the Past (talk) 01:55, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 December 28#Template:Pokestart. --Brandon Dilbeck 02:26, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Template? 

message: Imakuni? is currently being considered for deletion. I'm no expert, but (according to Japanese sources) he seems to be a somewhat notable Pokemon musician and promoter, and apparently he appears as a character in a Pokemon game as well. The main reason for deletion is the sad state the article is in at the moment, and the lack of English sources. I have cast a vote at the VfD to have the article deleted unless someone more knowledgable shows up and volonteers to clean up the messy article and make it sound more credulous. TomorrowTime 12:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Imakuni?]] at VfD 

message: From Talk:Erlade (emphasis added):
::Just pointing out, Chatot and Electivire, you said they were officially confirmed by the anime, just saying before that, Serebii did EXCLUSIVELY reveal the names, just like they did with the others, and if all the names prove to be right, I will be petitioning Jimmy to make serebii a verified source because it has never been wrong, and just causes arguments that it isn't a useable source. Myzou 15:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe it's best to wait til Diamond and Pearl will be released in the United States. Besides, it will come this month. After twelve days, or seven weeks and five days. We can wait, can't we? TheBlazikenMaster 21:36, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not the problem, Blaze.  The problem is that IF everything from Serebii is confirmed to be on D/P, he's going to petition Jimbo Wales to have Serebii automatically become a reliable source, WP:RS's guidelines be damned.  That's why I brought it up here. -Jeske (v^_^v) 21:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Think about that. If Jimbo suddenly allowed this to happen, don't you think there'd be more of a precedent for a lot of OTHER articles and websites to try and get in too for this? Serebii.net isn't the only site on the internet to get their info uncited, anonymously and sometimes right, but when does anyone have the right to rally that site to be claimed a reliable source? The experienced of Wikipedia's editors would know what makes a cite reliable or not - you can't just change an entire view of many people. If Jimbo Wales is pushed for this, the guy might as well kill off the Reliable sources guideline. - Sotomura (Tetsuya-san) (yell : see) 23:08, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't mind at all for serebii to become a source. God knows, it would help a LOT. What other freaking sites would you use that cover that stuff in depth? They try to correct everything too. Anything new that comes out they try say if it's credible or not. Toastypk 23:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You know, it's not just of what you, or we care about. It's what the experienced editors care about. A site that doesn't meet the requirements to be claimed reliable (even with all the fixes made, note that it's ALSO MAINTAINED BY ONE PERSON and NOT an editorial) shouldn't be cited. We'd have to run a lot of things through other editors before we'd even come close to declaring SPP reliable. I mark it as unreliable, and so would other editors around Wikipedia. - Sotomura (Tetsuya-san) (yell : see) 08:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Let's also not forget that Serebii has been fatally wrong before. Not to say a lot of it isn't reliable. The opposite, in fact: Serebii is the most reliable Pokemon fansite out there. However, fatal mistakes such as Feint/Anticipate, Mighty Guard, and Legendary Blaziken (or, more recently, legendary Lucario) do occur enough for it to be a problem. You Can't See Me! 06:39, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it possible?? 

message: The history of since deleted page Wikipedia:WikiProject:pokemon has been merged in to this talk page, here in case anyone needs it. — xaosflux Talk 12:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't really get what you did. You care explaining? TheBlazikenMaster 13:51, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  History Merge 

message: Can you guys help me do something about this?—ウルタプ 16:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ask and ye shall receive. -Jeske (v^_^v) 17:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. D:—ウルタプ 17:39, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Club Masters]] 

message: Could someone talk to Pokemonlover56?  He just copy-and-pasted Mukuhawk over to Staraptor - and then reverted back to the c&p-moved version. -Jeske (v^_^v) 18:17, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pokemonlover56 

message: It is recommended that this project consider a rename to Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon or Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon collaborative.  Please discuss here. --NThurston 20:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Does it really matter? The merging will kill this project anyway. Though, I think WikiProject Pokémon should be good idea. TheBlazikenMaster 20:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I am fine with that. No harm can come of it by the look of it. Funpika 14:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: if someone watns to take the time to make the moves, fine.  But they'll also need to update all references to Pokémon Collaborative Project in instances where temporal relevancy is important (like categories, lists, portals, WP pages, templates) the redirects will be fine in talk pages.  honestly though, too much work for something that doesn't change anything. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 15:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I will take the time to make the moves. Funpika 16:26, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Brilliant, I can't move Wikipedia:Pokémon Collaborative Project to Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon. 4 edits on that redirect page. I will have to request the move. Funpika 17:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project rename 

message: I just thougt it might be a good idea to include pictures of the Pokemon while they're in the three-dimensional games (Pokémon Stadium, Pokémon Stadium 2, etc.) on each Pokemon's individual page.  I know it might take a while to get all of those pictures and put them in, but I thought I might ask about it here.  Opinions?Leprechaun Gamer 20:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know...--Tempest115 20:44, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is that really necessary? I don't think it really offers anything... -Sukecchi 20:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Even with sexual dimorphism running rampant in D/P, there's really no point to include the 3D image.  The 2D image with the Characteristics section is good enough, and besides, everything is being merged (See either above or the newest archive). -Jeske (v^_^v) 21:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh heh heh  hbdragon88 03:06, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you suggesting you want us to Lickilicky your Baltoy? BTW, the Baltoy is only several inches away from the Arseus... Put the two together and you get AIDS. Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Laugh At) 19:43, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Did you really need to add that?--Tempest115 20:33, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 'Course not. I just assumed he was making a joke by posting that link and was expecting an approproate (well, inappropriate) answer. I assume the comment can be outright removed if anyone finds it offensive, and I don't plan on making more comments like that unless asked. Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Laugh At) 00:58, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

text: i was actaully expecting you to be laughing at the old page serebii had that talked about the gender changes, it showed Scizor's abdomen growing larger and then smaller, over and over... i hope i'm not the only one who thought it looked a little nasty. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 22:20, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Lawl. – mcy1008 (talk) 22:51, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

text: rofl... hehehehe, thanks! -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 01:41, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Jeepers creepers, that never occured to me! Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Laugh At) 18:37, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  3-D 

message: I viewed Erik's example on how it might be on Pidgey evulution line, and I saw that there was no lost info. I apologise to anyone about my ignorance. But I know for sure, merging is no easy job. I should've viewed Erik's example on Pidgey evolution line before complaining. Sorry again, I now understand what it's all about. TheBlazikenMaster 16:54, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ha ha ha... while I am extremely humored by the sudden change in opinion, I should warn that that page was only a draft of an evo-line page that I slapped together in a short period of time from the other Pidgey line pages. I would expect the page gets loads of rewriting, editing, and talk page debate before it can be considered a model for other evolutionary line pages; that's why this was the only evo-line page that appeared thus far. In other words, my "example" is a pretty rough one that requires a lot of refining and discussion. Thanks again, Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Laugh At) 19:03, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: yes Blaziken PLEASE help us to improve it... we really can't move forward with this until we've reached a consensus on style guidlines for these new articles. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 21:56, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not very good in merging. Besides I don't know what to do. TheBlazikenMaster 01:19, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

text: well the current conundrum is what to do about TCG info... you can see the whole problem at the pidgey evo talk page.  I've also created a proposed layout guideline at WP:PCP/Layout, that will hopefully clear up some of the misconceptions. It might be a little different than what erik or amarkov were proposing so that is why i'd like as many people as possible to see it. this guidline would allow more than just Pikachu and Mewtwo to remain independent articles. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 05:42, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Erik's example 

message: Check out Pokemon games.com it confirms a hand full of name--DSDark 16:58, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we already had all those names. Funpika 20:42, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not Mothhim, Burmy, Wormadam, Chingling and Drifloon--DSDark 21:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Where are these on the site? (Btw, Burmy was confirmed by IGN a couple days ago.) – mcy1008 (talk) 21:59, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Mothim is right on the front page of the D/P page of Pokemon-games.com and the others are, click on Get Started, then learn more about sinnoh, and there keep clicking next, and the pokemon on the side changes.--DSDark 22:18, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, thank you. – mcy1008 (talk) 22:54, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Could you also tell me where you found Roark? – mcy1008 (talk) 23:08, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Alright, thanks. – mcy1008 (talk) 02:34, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pokemon-Games.com 

message: I nominated Pokémon for Wikipedia 0.7.. Hopefully it will make it! Funpika 02:28, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Pokémon]] nominated for 0.7.  

message: They revealed the names of a lot of Pokemon. Burmy, Glammeow, it's time to freaking move the pages. Toastypk 02:55, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Give it two days - AMIB's move-prots expire then, as do all the semi-prots. -Jeske (v^_^v) 03:37, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The new Pokemon Diamond/Pearl cartoon on Cartoon Network 

message: Look at the goddmaned move history. Jesus. Well now we've got five nosensical redirects and we can't move it to a good place anymore.Cabush?!—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ 18:10, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: None of them have any history, either, not even Beadull.  For the love of Schnee... -Jeske (v^_^v) 19:12, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's see. "Beabarel", "Bibarell", "Cabush" (what?), and "BIbarel". Off the top of my head.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ 19:20, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (Conflict) Looks like BIbarel (Capital "I") is the actual article, likly a typoed "Bibarel". -Jeske (v^_^v) 19:22, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I requested a move back to Beadull just a little bit ago. – mcy1008 (talk) 19:32, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

text: This is about something else entirely, Forgotten. Tell that to MCY on his talk page; this is about the quintuple-redirect that is Beadull, Bibarell, Cabush (wtf?), Bibrael, and Bibarel. -Jeske (v^_^v) 19:25, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Gah ha ha... What's really funny about that is that those five names, as of this comment here, are redirecting to each other: Bibrael -> Cabush -> Bibarel -> Beadull -> Bibarell -> Bibrael ad infinitum... Thank god multiple-redirects don't keep on redirecting automatically until it's at the final destination, if there is one; rather, a double redirect lands you on a redirect page rather than being redirected to the next page automatically. Otherwise, this series of pages would probably break our browsers. Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Laugh At) 21:25, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I...it's happening again...—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ 21:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Luckily that one was fixable. – mcy1008 (talk) 21:27, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Aaahh... well, I just speedy tagged the nonsense redirects. – mcy1008 (talk) 21:49, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dear god. 

message: So... when are we going to start letting people change the names since the games are out soon...? >.> I kind of don't feel like reverting them anymore. – mcy1008 (talk) 04:47, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, um, and what'll do we do with stuff like Arseus/Arceus, also? I mean, it's not like they can be found in the games legitimately at this time... – mcy1008 (talk) 05:05, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do the published game guides have all Pokémon listed?  Maybe I'll flip through one next time I'm at GameStop...Pokémon isn't really a game you need to buy a guide for.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 04:59, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Responded here. We just have to wait for the requested move I mentioned in that post. – mcy1008 (talk) 05:36, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: DP as sources

message: It appears to me that Legendary Pokémon requires massive cleanup. Massive. There are large amounts of unsourced claims including original research and original terms, loads of speculation (Darkrai may be the Rayquaza to Dialga and Palkia), and intermixed gameguide. I'm willing to help, but I 'd rather have someone agree with me first. You Can't See Me! 10:02, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Often, it's best to be bold and do the edits. It's usually anons who make the objections, but they shouldn't, of course. Best recommendation? I agree with you. Get out there, be WP:BOLD and snipe the evil that is gameguide. - Sotomura (Tetsuya-san) (yell : see) 10:24, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legendary Pokemon Cleanup 

message: Any objection to changing the articles for Fourth-Generation Pokemon to the correct names? It would make Category:Fourth-generation Pokémon simpler to navigate. -- Jelly Soup 12:12, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ... Um, I think we lost our Bibarel talk page. – mcy1008 (talk) 13:53, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I remember there being a big discussion about this about a month ago, but, for the life of me, I can't find it in the archives. I don't know what the end result was for the names. -- Jelly Soup 21:39, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Names

message: Though I am not a member of the PCP, I have created some userboxes for people's favorite Pokémon types.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
What do you think about them? ANDROS1337 02:42, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think they are unneeded, I at least have no use for them. My opninion. TheBlazikenMaster 13:12, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's critical to like all of them if you're going to do any good in the video game.  I suggest you use these three-letter abbreviations from the early games to better fit the boxes: BUG DRG DRK ELC FIR FLY FTG GHO GRD GRS ICE NRM PSN PSY RCK STL WTR --Brandon Dilbeck 14:58, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While a good strategy would be to use a variety of types, these userboxes are for your preferred type.  I am sure most Pokémon trainers have one type that they prefer. BTW the four-letter abbreviations fit well in the boxes; I wasn't able to think of a good abbreviation for the Steel-type, so it is the only five-letter one.  I guess STL is good enough. ANDROS1337 16:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think they're coo. They couldn't hurt. Totally putting fire and psychic on my page. Toastypk 16:16, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point, you're right, a lot of trainers have a pokémon type they use most. I, however do not, I use powerful ones like Tyranitar, Rayquaza, Salamence, Steelix, Blaziken etc. I use misc. types. But you're right though, a lot of trainers use a lot of the same type. TheBlazikenMaster 17:25, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And not to mention people just have their general favorite types. I use many types in battle, but my favorites are always fire and psychic. Toastypk 13:54, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Are color parameters supported though?  Note that on my userboxes, I gave each box their own colors, i.e. red/orange for Fire, blue/cyan for water, etc. ANDROS1337 15:10, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure you could, it's just a matter of finding out how to do it.  I for one was quite surprised ot see that  used a #switch paramater to switch images; I didn't know that existed.  m:Parser functions offers a lot of technical jargon that is difficult for me to process. hbdragon88 05:48, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and made the changes to your Normal template so that users just have to add the type to a parameter, you can put it into the template space urself, Happy Mother's Day! -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 16:52, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pokémon type userboxes 

message: I have a question, Bronzor is the only Pokèmon with the Sub rating on it. Does that mean that it is a stub with the template and all that, or is it just a name for an extremely badly written article. Coby 22:36, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The  template automatically adds the article to Category:Stubs. -Jeske (v^_^v) 22:38, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Bronzor Stub

message: Does anyone think the articles in these categories should be merged into Pokémon regions? The locations themselves obviously have importance inside Pokémon, but as for real-world importance they have ZERO notability. Although there might be a bit of real-world merchandise based on the locations, they don't seem to have unique notability. I know this argument could be applied to the Pokémon creatures themselves, but that's another story... what does everyone think? --Teggles 07:18, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: i think that by looking at the lists, a merged article would be WAY too long. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 16:52, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a merged article. Only the important information from each article is taken, not all of it. We don't need to bring up every single town and city... --Teggles 19:23, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

text: actually we do... each town (theoretically) plays an integral role in the video game, and potentially the anime.  Most towns contain gyms, or some other important aspect. these lists are actually the result of merges from town articles. so the should already only have the most pertinent info. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 21:18, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What I meant was we don't need to elaborate so much on the towns. They can be mentioned, they just don't need as much information as they have now. To add to that, I have serious doubts EVERY town plays an integral role. Most are visited upon, what, once or twice? --Teggles 04:23, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

text: deciding importance based on number of visits is fallacious. in the anime, they only visit almost EVERY town only once or twice. but they gain some extra notability by being in both main genres (and i suspect in the mangas as well), added to that there is something to say about about those towns that significantly affects gameplay (Fuscia is home to the Safari Zone, etc.) and most are signficantly involved in the story arc. (almost every town in the game has a gym... making it important to both genres)i don't see how two small paragraphs on a town is TMI. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 08:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: First off, the "visited upon" comment was not the direct basis, it implied that the towns have little focus. Of course these towns do affect some gameplay and storyline, but not all are focused upon. You'd have to be joking to claim something like Lavender Town significantly affects gameplay, which was why I made the comment to mention all of them, but elaborate on some - because some do have focus. When you have two small paragraphs on every location slightly affecting gameplay, it is excessive. Let me digress: this forms a bigger picture of unique real-world notability, something the Pokemon project as a whole fails to understand. For example, Torchic and Sceptile have been featured in many things, but they are not the feature of many things. Pokemon Cards, Pokemon Books, Pokemon Merchandise - these two creatures never have a focus, they are packaged along with every single other Pokemon. This means they have notability inside a list, but not as a sole article. Personally, only creatures like Pikachu and Mewtwo (etc.) should have their own articles. --Teggles 09:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I disagree with your example of Lavendar Town. It was the only place to get Ghost-types in RBY and was the scene for the rescue of Mr. Fiji who gave you the Pokeflute which was required to advance past Snorlax. Seems pretty integral to me.... And any Pokemon that has a show focused on it has been featured outside of its list. Thanks to Pokemon.com all the pokemon are now available in any type of merchandise.  But in the early stages of the franchise, only select pokemon were deemed popular enough to be made into plush or action figures. Is their special notability now only seen as part of a list because of the franchise's money-grubbing goals? It shouldn't be. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 15:52, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: All that happens in Lavendar Town is a plot obstacle. This plot obstacle does not affect later points in the game. Not once is Mr. Fiji or the Pokeflute ever mentioned again in the game. It's like saying a puzzle in Zelda is integral just because you have to do it to get past it. In regards to the Pokemon in each episode and the Pokemon action figures... you miss the key point in Wikipedia:Notability - "A topic is notable if it has received significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." This speaks for itself. --Teggles 06:43, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Okay, I have just merged the "List of X locations" articles into "X" articles (eg. List of Sinnoh locations into Sinnoh). I think this is something we can agree on, I haven't removed any information and the articles are not lengthy. --Teggles 07:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's a great idea. But the Hoenn article can't be on my watchlist though, as you may or may not know I only add things on my watchlist which I have read the entire page history on. But nevertheless, I agree with this idea. The list wasn't that long anyway, and in my opinion there were some places not notable enough to be on the list anyway. TheBlazikenMaster 15:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

text: ...did I miss the part when anyone said anything about that? --Teggles 06:34, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, no, you didn't.  I misread and thought that you merged Lavender Town into the List of X locations, when in reality you merged the List of X locations into the X article. hbdragon88 22:28, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:Pokémon_places]] and [[:Category:Lists of Pokémon locations]] 

message: "The purpose of Pokémon 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."
Is it really necessary to include this statement on EVERY page about a Pokémon?? Plough | talk to me 01:03, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: you know, that's actually a question that gets brought up a lot, and hopefully the merge will take care of that problem. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 01:21, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The revival of Pokestart won't help. I did try to get it speedy deleted (since it was a revival of Pokestart it could be deleted under G4), but I wonder if the administrator bothered to look at Pokestart (Can't admins see deleted stuff?). I will TFD it later. Funpika 18:31, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The purpose of... 

message: All Pokémon articles have a section which talks about their name origins.  Should this section start with "Its" or "The"?--Tempest115 19:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure that every Pokémon species article has a whole section devoted to name origin; I think you're referring to sentences like "The name Charmander is a portmanteau of...", right?  You could start with "Its name is..." or "The name Charmander is..." or "Charmander's name is..." and any of those would work just fine.  The important thing I want to point out, however, is to remember to include use-mention distinction in the sentence if the name itself is the subject of the sentence.  Since you're referring to the name and not the Pokémon itself, you have to put the name in quotation marks or italics (e.g. "The name Charmander is..." and NOT "The name Charmander is...").  The same goes for the words that the name is composed of—sometimes I've seen mentioning of a word emboldened ("...a portmanteau of char and salamander), but that is unorthodox and inappropriate.  You have to put it in quotation marks ("char") or italics (salamander)—either is fine.  I understand how this could be confusing, but it's important to get right.  --Brandon Dilbeck 20:29, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So basicaly you're saying it doesn't matter as long as the name is in quotes?--Tempest115 20:40, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: From what I see, quotes or italics, same for the words comprising the name. -Jeske (v^_^v) 21:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: and i beleive the WP:MOS states italics are preferred for consistency within wikipedia. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 23:09, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for pointing that out.  I never took the time to read the Manual of Style.  --Brandon Dilbeck 01:35, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pokémon articles 

message: I am not seeing a compelling reason for keeping Professor Rowan, Elm, and Birch as separate pages.  Per the gym leaders and Elite Four precedent, should we not merge them into an article titled Pokémon professors or something like that? hbdragon88 01:50, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If we have those as precedents, I don't see why not. Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Laugh At) 03:22, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A great idea, go ahead. I don't think any in their right mind would disagree.  --Teggles 04:55, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hooray for merging! You Can't See Me! 06:15, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How about Professor Oak? Shouldn't he be merged too? TheBlazikenMaster 09:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Oak should be left alone with a link to his page on the merged page.--Tempest115 19:58, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: All the professors are common in the series of their region. So why should Oak have a page while others do not? TheBlazikenMaster 20:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That is kind of a good question. While there's no doubt Oak is a lot more notable than the other professors, have enough reliable sources talked about Oak so that he can have his own page that can get to Good Article status and beyond? If not, he would be part of the Pokemon professors page, in which his section would probably be a good deal larger than the other three. Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Laugh At) 21:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Excellent work. While Oak's article status may end up being a debate later, for the moment there should probably just be a Main Article link to him in the merged Professors article. We might be able to decide on this if we brought Oak over to provide his opinion on the matter, but for the moment he only seems interested in grading my National Pokedex whenever I access his PC from my DS. :( Erik Jensen (Appreciate|Laugh At) 17:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I seriously don't think Oak has any opinion on this. He is a pokémon researcher, what would he know about Wikipedia? TheBlazikenMaster 18:29, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Depends on whether he's finished debugging Porygon2's source code, or if he's still busy debating whether half-breeds exist. -Jeske (v^_^v) 19:06, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Yeah, he always asks to check my Pokédex as well.  Not even interested in any small talk. hbdragon88 00:28, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Professors 

message: Somebody please stop this guy.--Tempest115 00:41, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: GAve him , but I'm tempted to reduce it to 2. Reverting his edits.  -Jeske (v^_^v) 00:48, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

text: EDIT - Lowered to 2 and told him about extraneous info and disambig'ing other languages (He disambiguated Sandshrew into Sand based on his Japanese name). -Jeske (v^_^v) 00:59, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good that you recuded and explained, you should assume good faith. For example, what he did on the edit of the first pokémon in the pokédex isn't much of a vandalism. It's just something someone new would do, you shouldn't give high level warning to a guy that's trying to help. TheBlazikenMaster 09:18, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I gave the warning after noting he has edits elsewhere, but reading over his edits, I opted to lower it - he just made an innocent mistake. -Jeske (v^_^v) 13:01, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I probably should've posted this as something other than "vandalism", but a was pressed for time and that's all I could think of.--Tempest115 19:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: The templates used as headers in Pokémon articles have been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sceptre (talk • contribs) 18:14, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: grr..... oh well... -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 23:14, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  TfD nomination of Pokémon header templates 

message: In the above mentioned TfD discussion, Zappernapper brought up the point that these things are useful for enforcing style guidelines. Since the templates seem to be headed towards deletion, I think it should be discussed whether or not we should have style guidelines that lay out what the section headers will be. My personal opinion is that style guidelines that give the exact format of what the page should be like are too restrictive. -Amarkov moo! 00:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello? -Amarkov moo! 18:18, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi. hbdragon88 00:00, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So, I take it nobody cares? -Amarkov moo! 02:33, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style guideline 

message: I came across this template today.--Tempest115 02:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not the first time that someone made a redundant template.  It's redundant with the category--there's already a category for that.  This is redundant, and the category already says all of it.  That said, not only is it unnecessary, but it's rather big and unattractive.  --Brandon Dilbeck 06:27, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, pokémon like Blastoise and Blaziken should be in the template, but that would make the template too big. I think it's time someone nominates it for deletion. TheBlazikenMaster 12:41, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I would, but I'm at a loss as how to do so.--Tempest115 13:28, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I already have. Click here. TheBlazikenMaster 13:41, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I always do that on redirects and articles, never done that to templates. I would do, but I simply forgot. TheBlazikenMaster 23:55, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a problem.  Just a reminder for next time. hbdragon88 00:00, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do we really need this?