Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pokémon/Archive 11

message: I archived the talk page, which was 81 KB. I kept FFA. Feel free to re-add any important topics. Alvin6226  talk  02:41, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Archiving

message: I inquired for a SuggestBot list yesterday, and I got it today. I trimmed down this list to only PCP articles:
;Stubs:
:Cleffa
:Whirl Islands
:Cherrygrove City
:Sootopolis City
:Verdanturf Town
;Cleanup
:Mossdeep City	
;Merge
:Gyarados
:Glitch City
;Add Sources
:Seafoam Islands
:Pallet Town
I can already see a couple problems here:
*All but two of those are location articles. Time to consolidate into four articles for four regions? Actually, Glitch City is not a location article by our standards, so make that three articles. Shin'ou's TTV (Futaba|Masago|Kotobuki) 00:57, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  SuggestBot 

message: I think the gym leader;s article could use a image of all the badges to date, but I'm not sure where to get such a thing.HoneymaneHeghlu meH QaQ jajvam 05:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  suggestion 

message: What is the reason for having this template? See Template talk:Pokenum#Necessary?. —Centrx→talk • 21:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wehn we first decided to have a standardized intro including the total number of Pokémon( something that now seems to be up for debate), that number kept changing due to the pending arrival of DP. Rather than manually changing it in hundreds of species articles plus the dozen or so that already included that #, we implemented a template. Now that the number has stabilized, it can be substed or removed as desired, provided someone is willing to have it undeleted and re-insert it when the next generation looms. --WikidSmaht (talk) 18:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but why would you want or need the total number of Pokemon to be repeated at the top of every article? —Centrx→talk • 09:52, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Template:Pokenum]] 

message: Lately, I've been seeing a couple comments that we're carving a niche too much and that Bulbapedia could better use our prose. Are we getting too niche for the general purpose of WP? Shin'ou's TTV (Futaba|Masago|Kotobuki) 01:15, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not entirely sure what the complaint is supposed to mean, so no. -Amarkov blahedits 05:34, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carving out too much of a niche? 

message: :Category:Pokémon article cleanup currently has forty-nine pages. We may want to focus on the following:
*Lucario (in light of the release of Diamond and Pearl)
*The game articles: WP:CVG can help
*Pokemon: Kanto (which is getting moved soon; talk about naming conventions)
*Team Rocket
This is TTV|talk|contribs|email (18:06, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's already a "Kanto (Pokémon)", isn't there? Also, "Pokemon: Kanto" doesn't have much of a history (seems to have been copied and pasted from "Kanto (Pokémon)").-- M C Y 1008 18:21, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I speedy tagged it. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 16:43, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talk about cleanup 

message: I’ve spent the last 10 hours or so updating the orphaned, miscategorized List of Pokémon Adventures chapters. All the English chapter names from VIZ volumes 1-7 and Chuang Yi Volumes 8-15 are now present. --WikidSmaht (talk) 18:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Well, Highway should be happy

message: Amarkov has put up Whismur up for AFD. I know this is already listed on the main project page, but it may need a better focus here.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 18:22, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor problem 

message: Hello, there. I've been meaning to join this project for the longest time now, and finally decided to. One major reason I joined was to try and help improve the articles of my favorite Pokemon, noteably Snorunt and Kecleon. To improve these articles, I'll need a few pictures that are hard for me to come about.
* I need pictures of both Snorunt and Kecleon in the videogames.
**For Kecleon: I'd prefer a screenshot of when you encounter one with a Devon Scope, if possible. I'd also like a screen of Steven giving the trainer (male or female, preferebly not from Emerald) the Devon Scope, or, even better, using the Devon Scope on one.
**For Snorunt: A battle scene or "Wild SNORUNT appeared!" screen of it in its natural "habitiat" (AKA Shoal Cave). Again, any gender, and preferably Ruby or Sapphire.
* I need TGC scans for both.
**For Kecleon: He only has one, I think. The Sandstorm one. I'd prefer one of decent quality that I can use.
**For Snorunt: The earliest one, which I think is Ruby and Sapphire EX.
* I'd like a screen of Kecleon from the anime. I'd prefer the one from the Johto episode involving the blimp; the name escapes me.
If anyone can help, it would be greatly appruciated. Jeri-kun 02:13, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You might also do well to post this in the talk pages for those two Pokémon articles, too.  --Brandon Dilbeck 02:32, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I will in a moment. The only reason I posted this here first is so I'd get some people looking at this. I doubt many people look at the Talk Page of these two articles. But, I will. Jeri-kun 12:24, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A few requests. 

message: How do you know ethmology of each pokémon's name? In Japanese Wikipedia, they are making issues of that now. Do you have any references?--Ræv 04:31, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say that it's much easier to make inferences that the names are as they are, even without known sources. A name like Dewgong for a sea lion makes sense when you think of dew and dugong.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:37, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But doesn't that count as original research? --The Raven's Apprentice (Talk|Contribs) 14:33, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

text: i think that taking apart blends so readers cn see them more easily is fine, you aren't actually doing real OR, you're just showing what makes up the word in cases where its obvious (the explanation fo Umbreon should stay, speculation on Celebi should be removed). phonetic references are obvious so i think it's safe to say something like, "Seel is named in reference to the Seal that it physically resembles."  But as much as I'd like to say that Oddish is named after a Radish I don't think we should unless we have something from a primary or secondary source.  As far as reliable sources go, I'm strongly of the opinion that as editors of Pokemon articles we have some knowledge of who a reputable source is, and fansites can be reputable.  If serebii or psypoke was to start offering etymologies on their sites it would be appropriate to say, "It is speculated that the name Celebi is derived from celestial and Bī, the Japanese word for beautiful."  This is a fact, it is veriafible.  One of these sites would theoretically be better than a journalist for TIME making an editorial supposition due to the experience level of each with the subject matter (but oddly enough, we're happy to post a reference to Carmen Miranda but argue about etymology being OR - in my hypothetical world).  WP:RS mentions Attributability, Editorial oversight, Replicability, Recognition by other reliable sources, Age of the source and rate of change of the subject, and Persistence.  Certain fansites meet these requirements, except for "Recognition" mostly because it is hard to find many reliable sources on a non-scholarly subject that refer to eachother, but these are not "must meet all" requirements like WP:FUC. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 16:27, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems to there are no source but non-reliable fansites. Should we remove descriptions about each pokémon's name origin?--Ræv 04:41, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that we should remove it. In my opinion, ignoring WP:OR just because we can isn't a good thing here. This thing really doesn't add much (if anything) to the articles, so ignoring the rules is pointless. -- The Hybrid wishes you a Merry Christmas 04:48, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know, I think the origins of the name is interesting. It maybe WP:OR but It's not as if it's a super major part of the articles.--HoneymaneHeghlu meH QaQ jajvam 04:57, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting, but it is, like you said, a small part of the articles; therefore, it isn't worth ignoring the rules to include them. -- The Hybrid wishes you a Merry Christmas 05:06, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I was thinking more in the other direction, it's not compermising the articles any to include the information :P--HoneymaneHeghlu meH QaQ jajvam 05:10, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

text: very true Hybrid - speculation of editors should be removed.  Do it now!  However, I think that blends could be regarded as descriptive rather than analytical.  But we should remove the idea that Celebi's name sounds like Celery.  Now... while specualtion of editors isn't allowed, is there any trustworthy, notable fansite that gives their specualtions on the etymologies?  I don't see anything wrong with, "Editors of serebii.net have suggested that Celebi could be a play on it's Japanese name of Serebii and the English word celebrity."  They are IMO a better source than TIME for quoting editorial opinions. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 01:12, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: oh yes, and we should also try to avoid wanting to call everything a portmanteau just because we like the word as much as Humpty Dumpty did. A good example is in a comment on Charizard's FAC review, where one editor complained of the fact we were saying the name was a portmanteau combining charcoal or charred (when char would have sufficed - but then it couldn't be a portmanteau, or blend, and we couldn't have linked it as such like we have an addicted habit of doing as much as possible). -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 11:23, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  etymology of name 

message: I would recommend an adoption agency be placed as a sub-page to this project so that, if members want a Pokémon article assigned to them, they don't have to post on the talk page.  Does that sound like a good idea? Joiz A. Shmo 21:54, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Going back to PAC style? I don't know if that would work. TTV|talk|contribs|email 03:23, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, we wouldn't make that the main focus of the Project like the PAC was or anything.  I just think it would be better to have a place specificly for people asking what they could do to help. Joiz A. Shmo 03:54, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why would people need to sign up like that to edit an article?  Can't people work on an article without assigning it to themselves?  I'm afraid this would lead to people thinking they own those articles.  --Brandon Dilbeck 05:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are no-doubt editor out there who work better when given something specific to focus on and then can count on getting immediate feedback on their work. Encouragement and guidance are important to some people. But that kind of dialogue would become distracting on this page or the main page. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 17:45, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe we could set up a PCP version of WP:ADOPT. -- THL 17:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adoption agency 

message: If so, the Mudkip article really needs that section expanded.  (In fact, most articles probably do, but...) Any help would be appreaciated.--Ac1983fan 00:25, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anybody who follows the pokemon adventures manga? 

message: We've progressed, too! And yes, most of us know about Torchic being a Front Page for a while now (image to remind us of this) - which showed just now. We should all congratulate ourselves (whether article contributors or background workers) for getting this far! Isn't this our second article to make it to the front page? Cheers. - Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 01:29, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Other Wikipedians are apparently taking note of this. Check this out. Cheers, The Raven's Apprentice (Talk|Contribs) 06:46, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, the Pocket Monsters are getting to be notable INSIDE Wikipedia now. XD - Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 07:36, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: this topic flew under my radar... thnx for the link Raven, i had a very good laugh :) -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 01:16, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remember to congratulate ourselves for getting this far~ 

message: FYI, although I am not a member of PCP, I have nominated Charizard as a FAC.  It definately qualifies as one.  Please feel free to leave comments.
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Charizard Andros 1337 21:15, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charizard FA nomination 

message: I will shortly be creating a merge proposal to merge the articles Pokémon Red and Blue and Pokémon Green and am alerting the Pokémon Collaborative Project of this. I suggest this merge for the following reasons:
* Although technically different versions, the games themselves are near identical in everything but name. They are simply regional variations.
* The article for Pokémon Green article contains little worthy of note that is not already included in the Red/Blue articles - the content is a near copy. Any version specific information is short and can easily be part of the main article.
* Pokémon Red and Blue has been assessed by Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and Video Games to be an article of Top importance, one of only 38 in this project, due to the fact it started a multi-billion franchise. However, Pokémon Green is intrinsically linked with the initiation of this series, but should instead be listed with Red/Blue.
* From what I understand, previous merge requests have simply resulted in the template being deleted with no proper discussion. The time is now right for a proper vote to be proposed.
Please discuss this merge on the Talk:Pokémon Red and Blue
--Mouse Nightshirt 16:59, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge of Red/Blue & Green articles. 

message: This discussion kinda just didn't happen. Does anyone have a good reason why it is necessary to include the number of Pokemon in each and every article? -Amarkov blahedits 04:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's used for when new Pokémon are revealed, such as when we didn't know the limits to Diamond and Pearl, that we would end up with 493 Pokémon total. I don't know the MoS that calls for it, but it's probably linked somewhere. I also know Centrx doesn't care for it.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:42, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You sidetracked around the question. Why is any number necessary? -Amarkov blahedits 04:44, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Forward compatibility, as stated on the project page.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:46, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the point Amarkov's trying to make is that no one cares for the total number of existing Pokémon. Cheers, The Raven's Apprentice (Talk|Contribs) 04:49, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is. -Amarkov blahedits 04:50, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm more concerned that every article contains the same huge intro paragraph--this pokenum number is one word in the huge paragraph that many people have complained about.  --Brandon Dilbeck 04:54, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

text: The intro paragraph is substed, and there was a FAC that could be interpreted to say it should be there. I see no such for this. -Amarkov blahedits 04:57, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why should we remove 493 but not all of Pokestart?  --Brandon Dilbeck 04:59, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because they are seperate issues. Pokestart has a reason for existence, grounded in a FAC, while  has no such reason. -Amarkov blahedits 05:01, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Where can I see the FAC discussion?  --Brandon Dilbeck 05:03, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Um... well, this is rather embarassing. It turns out that, after I think about it, I've never actually seen this FAC, only heard about it from two other people. Oops. -Amarkov blahedits 05:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I've gone ahead and nominated  for deletion; regardless of if background information is needed, it goes against every rule on good writing I've heard of to just copy an introduction from another place, just putting in a different name. -Amarkov blahedits 05:11, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Here's a link!!! --Brandon Dilbeck 05:19, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Pokenum too. -Amarkov blahedits 05:26, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hasn't  been up for TFD more than once?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:47, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. -Amarkov blahedits 05:55, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Huh?? I'm not sure I understand whatever you said, but it seems to me as if you're saying that the number of Pokémon needs to be mentioned in every Pokémon article because that's the total number to be collected. But that, instead, provides a further argument for removing it: Wikipedia isn't a gameguide, it's an encyclopedia! And it's supposed to be out-of-universe in perspective! Cheers, The Raven's Apprentice (Talk|Contribs) 06:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a bit difficult to explain, for example, every Pokemon figure you could buy (or so I remember) included that pokemon's number it's part of the mythos of the Pokemon franchise.--HoneymaneHeghlu meH QaQ jajvam 03:37, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{tl|Pokenum}} 

message: Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:59, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Report filed for projects WP:PCP and WP:TVS. «TTV»(talk|contribs|email) 23:02, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Day Awards 

message: is in need of repair... and a section on the pokeball  trainer cards in the card game. Blueaster 07:05, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: what specifcally did you have in mind in the way of repair?  this would be better to bring up on poke ball's talk page. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 12:42, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poké Ball article