Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:51, 5 February 2007

Archives
August 2005 – April 2006 1 May 2006 – 15 May 2006 15 May 2006 – 28 June 2006 28 June 2006 – 12 July 2006 13 July 2006 – 18 August 2006 18 August 2006 – 26 September 2006 26 September 2006 – 14 October 2006 15 October 2006 – 13 November 2006 13 November 2006 – 18 November 2006 18 November 2006 – 3 December 2006 3 December 2006 – 31 December 2006 Current Talk Other archives FFA archive 1

• ]

Future Focus Articles

Next Pokémon Creature Article

Did an update of all the noted articles, so people can fix what's wrong without having to ask what's wrong. If you complete something, just strike it out. Highway 17:42, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

• Blaziken - Rewrite characteristics, cover May's Torchic-->Combusken-->Blaziken (all the info can be found in the prior articles). Copy video games prose from Combusken. Referencing all round, Highway 17:42, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
  • This would actually complete an evolutionary family, our second that we could complete (the third is the Mudkip family with Swampert; the first is Bulbasaur's with the upgrade of Venusaur.) myTrackerTV (myTalk|myWork|myInbox) 23:39, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

• Houndoom - remove original research on design, merge controversy and appearance into the introduction. Split the intro into 3 paragraphs. Remove POV game guide remarks from video games, describe its availbity, change the Biology section title. Expand anime section, add generic headers for TCG and anime. Change the TCG to prose, check Serebii for manga appearances. Highway 17:42, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

• Venonat - implement {{Pokestart}}, expand on Koga's (or his assisstant's) Venonant, and expand greatly on Tracey's. Again, check the manga for Venonat, and rewrite the TCG section. Remove original research from Biology, and add better descriptions of Venonat locations. Highway 17:42, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

• Treecko - Write content on Ash's Treecko-->Grovyle-->Sceptile, and Wally's Treecko-->Grovyle. Highway 17:42, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

• Shuppet - Implement {{Pokestart}}, move appearance description to intro, fix the name etymology. Add the sectional headers for anime and TCG, check Ivysaur for them. Check manga for Shuppet appearances, and check Psypoke's Deck Dex for TCG appearances. Reference the Pokédex, the locations bit at Psypokes, and check Max (Pokémon) for more about its anime appearance. Highway 07:53, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

• Rapidash - Rewrite name def, cleanup citing there D: Cleanup whole of intro, per Ivysaur. Rewrite and properly cite Pokédex section, per Torchic. Cleanup video games per Cloyster, mention Pokémon Snap, and borrow the book cite from Bulbasaur. If you feel like digging, you can note that Rapidash is the only other Fire family in the Shin'ou dex, there's a Bulbanews article detailing this for "fan clarification". Implement, {{Pokeanime}}, and format the wash of text, per Ivysaur. Check Serebii for the manga, someone must have a Rapidash, look at Eevee, it's got the cite about the Electric Pikachu Boogaloo manga volume with the novelised version of the race. Format the TCG like Ivysaur, and prose it. *dies* Highway 09:29, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

• Anorith Yuk! —Celestianpower 23:34, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

• Banette - The "Characteristics" section is well done; the rest is a wreck, especially the jargon-loaded "In the Video Games" section. ~e.o.t.d~ 10:35, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

• Mewtwo - rm OR scattered throughout article, find sources for the rest; video game structure is special for Mewtwo but should still be restructured to follow precedence (i.e. GB game info first to introduce, other sections come after); general grammar and spelling. This could easily become a GA or even an FA that the general audience won't be so crabby about (like with Torchic). -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 19:40, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Next Miscellaneous Article

Cleaned out to gut old discussions. Archived FFAs. Shin'ou's TTV (Futaba|Masago|Kotobuki) 03:36, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

• Pokémon Red and Blue. It's one of the best-selling games ever, and WP:CVG has excellent style guidelines (And plenty of willing help) to help us get a featured article about something that exists in the real world. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 09:27, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
  • I agree. This, along with Ruby and Sapphire, should go straight to our next MA, but our current focus, our flagship, should be made an honorary focus so that this could cycle again. TTV (MyTV|PolygonZ|Green Valley) 21:47, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
    • I don't think this project can turn Pokémon into a proper FA or even a GA unless someone commits to doing the hard work of proper research. With Pokémon Red and Blue, that research still needs to be done; it's just less onerous. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:32, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Pokémon lists

We have over half a dozen Pokémon lists. These were fine a couple of months ago, but now MediaWiki has added the "sortable" class to lists. For example, I've taken the first 20 entries from List of Pokémon by National Pokédex number and made it sortable. By clicking on the arrow next to each column heading, the list becomes by name, by Romaji, by number or by any other field.

Therefore, I propose that all these tables be merged into a single table, which can then be sorted by whatever fields the user chooses. Laïka 09:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

second that one all the way! do we even need to wait for an offical consensus on that? -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 15:12, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I've created a full test version on my test page: User:Smurrayinchester/Template. I can't find any problems with it myself, but I'd like to see what others think of it first. Laïka 15:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Note however that it does not however work for Sinnoh Pokémon; I wrote a spreadsheet which automatically merged all the tables, but since official English names (and in some cases, official Rōmaji) have not yet been released, I can't run these through the spreadsheet, and the proliferation of ???s would wreak havoc with the sorting. Laïka 15:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Yay, it's about time we had sortable lists. Wouldn't this make it practical to merge all Pokémon into one list? We could have columns for each of the 4 games' Pokédex numbers, name variants, what generation the Pokémon is, and maybe even by COLOR! --Brandon Dilbeck 01:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Uh oh, I found an issue with Smurrayinchester's sample. If you tell it to sort by Johto Dex or something, the dashes precede the numerals (so that post-Johto Pokémon appear before Chikorita). We ought to avoid this! --Brandon Dilbeck 02:17, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I've come up with a solution, but it's a very ugly hack (an invisible 999 for every Pokémon with no data). I'll try to find a better solution. Laïka 10:27, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean by "invisible"? Is the font color changed to match the background? That would be annoying to people who want to copy and paste the list to find that it has a bunch of 999s in it. --Brandon Dilbeck 18:04, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Exactly; that's what I mean by ugly. I've posted a comment at village pump; maybe someone there can come up with a solution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smurrayinchester (talk • contribs)

i also requested help at the signpost talk page that refers to sortable. -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 01:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

(edit conflicted) User:Ais523 has come up with a good fix; adding # to the start of each number (eg #152) is completely inconspicous, yet fixes the table! So, now that it all works, what do people think of implementing the table? Laïka 15:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Common sense would suggest we replace the dashes with NA. --The Raven's Apprentice 15:25, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

No, it looks messy and the table still sorts wrongly. Laïka 15:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

it would apear the problem has been solved. "#" sorts after "-" so an appropriate, clean solution has been implemented. -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 15:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Right now, it looks like the default listing setting is by English name, but I think that's because that's the order in which they're typed in the source coding. I think we ought to arrange it so that the default sorting is by Nat'l Dex because there's nothing better than serial numbers! It just feels right to have Bulbasaur at the top. --Brandon Dilbeck 19:28, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorted! I'm tempted to add fourth-gen Pokémon to the list, but I think that the ???s would look out of place for now, given that they sort first in the list alphabetically. Laïka 21:55, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh man, as a person with OCD, this is my dream. We can finally go back to having one article labeled "List of Pokémon" with this sorting thing. Names, numbers, colors, heights, weights; everything could be added! DanPMK 09:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm interested in seeing if there's any progress with this. Did anyone say anything at the Village Pump? Can someone provide a link to the Village Pump discussion or any other relevant discussions? --Brandon Dilbeck 20:49, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, time for work. Someone copy-paste User:Smurrayinchester/Template into List of Pokémon, but make sure you add the Diamond/Pearl numbers first. And then get AMIB to delete all the other lists. Cheers, The Raven's Apprentice 16:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I think first, we should discuss what columns to put into the table. I'm going to begin a new discussion for this at the bottom of the page. --Brandon Dilbeck 23:17, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely. Raven’s, what the hell are you thinking? There’s no way we should just go ahead on implementing this and deleting several articles without a thorough discussion about the shape and content of the new master list. --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Just a note, though I think I’ve made this clear below: I see no reason to delete the other lists entirely, we can just redirect them, as the project is essentially a megamerge. --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:03, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Help Zappernapper with his current pet project, get a cookie

I've been overhauling Pokémon game mechanics and need some help as it's an exhaustive project. I know it was in a sorry state a few months ago, got nom'd for AfD, and Highway went through and tore out everything smelling of cruft just to please the masses (the PP thing was my fault, I merged it and never got back to it to fixing it). However we were left with a page that was the source from several redirects which no longer were covered by the topic, and other topics that would be expected to be covered on that page were on their own pages, without even a mention. I've gone through and added several stub sections that can be written about and even written a few (bet many of you thought Pokémon moves could never be much more than a crufty list). I really wish we could move away from having group foci on Crawdaunt and Quilava when Pokémon has a clean-up tag, Mewtwo is a broken GA, and a page like Pokémon game mechanics is so vital to lay-people understanding the game at its basic level. If you don't feel the urge to write a whole section, I'd like some copyediting help for grammar and clarity, because sometimes i wonder if i'm being unclear or confusing. see the talk page for more specific questions.

Of course the only kind of cookie I can promise you'll get is the kind on your computer and you must be logged in, but hey it's something right? Happy editing! -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 18:34, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I started an overhaul of that article in late November, but I only saved my work as drafts on my computer, I never applied any changes to the article. I am once again working from those drafts now, and finding it a bit difficult because I’m also trying to preserve the work you guys have done since - even though you went in a very different direction in some cases. If I wipe anything out, please don’t take it personally, and instead of reverting it, please help me find a way to blend my version with yours. --WikidSmaht (talk) 20:47, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Japanese

Many of the Pokémon articles have Japanese names in them. Is this really needed in the English Misplaced Pages? Tennis DyNamiTe 03:09, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the original name in the original language is important. -Amarkov _edits 03:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, as the names were all originally Japanese and the games are Japanese in origin. It's something stated at WP:MOS-JA as well as in what is more than likely a manual of style for this project.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay. I wasn't familiar with that guideline. Thanks! Tennis DyNamiTe 04:17, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Plural or Singular? Seriously, I think we need to reconsider this...

I'm guessing that it's accepted convention to write about all Pokemon in the plural sense. I'm also guessing that this convention was set after a group consensus was made. However, I think we should look at this again, as there is one deep flaw in this convention.

"Torchic (アチャモ, Achamo?) are one of the 493 fictional species of Pokémon creatures"

Every Pokemon article defines its subject as a species, right? But then we talk about the subject in the plural form, as if the article was about many individuals, and not the group. This is inconsistant and improper use of the word, "species". I think that, after the initial sentence, articles should refer to the Pokemon as "The ___", or "The ____ species". Of course, that second one makes me wince, since we should avoid applying scientific terms to the Pokemon world. But we should either change the intro to more correctly use "species", or stop (trying to) strictly talk about the Pokemon in the plural sense.

If you look at articles on animals, the name is always in the singular form, and the first paragraph usually refers to the animal as "The (animal)", and then when it presents facts about the subject, it talks about the animals. I think this is a good convention to follow, since it's less awkward, and it's not being "inconsistent" or anything, just simply clearer. It would also be great too, if, when describing anatomy and attacks, we could use singular, but when talking about social habits or generalizations about many individuals of the same species, we use the plural. What do you think? Blueaster 06:16, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Note that whatever we choose to do, the plural form is the same as the singular. That is shown in the series itself, so we can't do anything about it. -Amarkov _edits 06:18, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

We still have to use the words "they", "are" "were" "have", instead of "it", "is" "was" "has". So it makes a large difference, across all the Pokemon articles on WP.

in addition, the intro to each Pokemon article is still severely flawed. Every time I bring it up, everyone seems to focus on the non-problem parts... Blueaster 06:28, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

The singular/plural thing is just part of the problem. Much of HighwayCello's legacy needs to be pondered over again. Almost everyone wices at the sight of the long, comma-spliced, complicated intros plus the extremely long-winded and ridiculously scientific way of writing Pokémon articles. But what's the alternative?? --The Raven's Apprentice 06:53, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

How about...tossing the current intro, creating a new one that's clear, consise, and simply beautiful, voting on its approval, assigning articles to members of this project, and go ahead and place it on each and every Pokemon article on WP? Maybe bots and a template might play into this, but seriously, I have no idea how Torchic got FA status with the horrible intro and plural form constraints. Blueaster 07:18, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Simply because there aren't any grammatical errors in the intro. But as for the proposal-- who do we have who can write something like that?? Highway's done his bit, and I daresay that, if I was asked to write an intro, It'd turn out pretty much the same. Similar deal for everyone else in the Project, I guess But-- do we have any volunteers?? Cheers, The Raven's Apprentice 08:54, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I think that the intro could be alot more concise if it linked to the terms Pokémon trainer (like how the Caterpie article does) and Pokémon Battle, (which would be a centralized article containing info on battles in the anime/manga, videogames, and cardgames. It shouldn't be too difficult, although battles in the anime/manga might be hard to talk about in any verifiable way.). Blueaster 18:01, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Back to the plural/singular thing. Are you saying it would awkward reading "Dogs are carnivorous." rather than "The dog is carnivorous." ? I'm a little unclear about which side you're on because first you say:

"...after the initial sentence, articles should refer to the Pokemon as 'The ___'..." (emphasis added)

then in the next paragraph:

... articles on animals, the name is always in the singular form, and the first paragraph usually refers as 'The (animal)', and then when it presents facts ... it talks about the animals. I think this is a good convention to follow..."

could you clarify? -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 00:28, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

If we use singular form, we should go with the indefinite article, it sounds much better. So, for instance, "a Snorlax", "an Abra", etc. Or, we could just not care about the form. (How many debates over at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Cats do you think occur over whether articles should be written "A Siamese cat is" or "Siamese cats are"?) But either way, indefinite article is really much better. -Amarkov _edits 02:19, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

i think one reason why we may be inclined to speak of pokemon in the plural sense without articles is becuase that is how the pokedex and english translation of the anime tend to discuss them. Even Dexter uses this terminology, think back to the first episode where it tells Ash about Pidgey, Rattata, and Spearow. Easier to verify, look up some pokedex entries on serebii or psypokes. -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 04:32, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

This is funny

http://en.wikipedia.org/Pok%C3%A9mon_Trading_Card_Game

The TCG article has been listed as an article in need of cleanup.

This is just hillarious, seeing that it is now in a better position than it has ever been in before.

HAHAHA!!!

Okay.

Time to get serious. WHAT needs to be worked on with this article? I'm looking for ideas. Whatever you list WILL be done (eventually).

Spinach Dip 23:41, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Aside from the humongous, life-consuming task of applying citations and sources to the entire article, there's not much that looks wrong with it to me, personally. If there's any usages of "you" in the article, such as "you only play this card when you have four pokemon on your bench", those should be changed to something like "the player can only play this card with stuff on his or her bench". Erik Jensen 19:14, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Adding resources is going to make me cry. But I will get to it.

And BTW, there were some references to 'when you play this card...' but I removed tham all last night.

Anything else? Spinach Dip 22:13, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Random thoughts:

• Too much about how to play.
• Needs a picture of a more-recent card; we've been through two card redesigns (Neo, EX) with a new one (DP) on the way.
• Needs a major copyedit; lots of typos, misused of caps, etc.
• Nothing whatsoever about the creation of the game.
• Nothing whatsoever about the various controversies.
• Why is a banned list that hasn't been relevant for two years more than a footnote?
• References?

It needs a lot of work. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:29, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Very nice list, there. The 1 thing I have a problem with is the 'creation of the game', since it was created in Japan, and there are no resources about it at all.

I'll get to the rest of it whenever I have free time. Spinach Dip 09:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Nintendo Power has covered the creation of the card game. Plus, we can use Japanese sources. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:09, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

happen to know the month and year? -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 22:23, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

{{poke-cleanup}}'s new groove

Hah. Anyway, I added to the cleanup tag the ability to track the date of taggage (well actually, I compared the code to the new cleanup tag), so I should ask that, since Misplaced Pages itself doesn't want the generic cleanups without dates, and for the purposes of organisation for cleanup, that articles are tagged with their cleanup date (eg. {{poke-cleanup|January 2007}} ). - Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 06:15, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Chatot

Well... The name “Chatot” is - ugh - official now. I hope its annoying voice is slightly less set in stone, and I really wish it had been Parrap, seeing as it even did a rap in its first appearance. Anyway, anyone who is so inclined may now go through articles by hand or with a bot, replacing “<!--DO NOT CHANGE-->Perap<!--The name Chatot IS NOT OFFICIAL YET, no matter HOW sure Serebii and other fansites are. Until an OFFICIAL source like Nintendo.com, Pokemon.com, Nintendo Power, or a press release reveals the official English name, LEAVE IT AS “Perap”, the OFFICIAL romanization of the Japanese name.-->” with “Chatot”. --WikidSmaht (talk) 14:49, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Changed in the Chatot article. Cheers, The Raven's Apprentice 15:08, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Dark City (Pokémon)

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Dark City (Pokémon), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Misplaced Pages:What Misplaced Pages is not and Misplaced Pages:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Misplaced Pages or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 03:11, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

It's basically an episode summary of "Showdown at Dark City". I see no reason to keep this article if it's already summarized in the List of Pokémon episodes. --Brandon Dilbeck 06:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Pokefair

Template:Pokefair has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 12:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

the discussion was closed (perhaps prematurely) with a no consensus. I've updated the above link. -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 15:38, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Semi-Protection: List of Sinnoh Gym Leaders

I've asked for semi-protection of the Sinnoh Gym Leaders page because of IP edits that have been chaning the Japanese names with English names. I've asked them to stop but they have refused. -Sukecchi 14:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Update: It has been given protection....regardless of how little information is there, perhaps we should work on it a bit?-Sukecchi 19:35, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Need admin help

Er, there are still some admins in here, right? If not, someone please reply to this and let me know. Anyway...
Ugh, thanks for not telling me about the deletion of Template:pokerefs. I won’t bitch about it too much since there was apparently consensus, however compiling and listing those references took quite a bit of time, so could an admin please retrieve the text for me?( The edit text with markup, please, not just display text.) You can dump it to a subpage... I guess User:WikidSmaht/pokerefs will do. Oh, and the very thorough Mr. Titoxd deleted the talk page, too, so I would appreciate if you could dump that to User_talk:WikidSmaht/pokerefs since I listed some other useful things there that were not included in the actual template. --WikidSmaht (talk) 19:33, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

It would be a lot easier just to ask an admin directly...go ask A Man In Black, or something. Hbdragon88 00:16, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Sprites vs. real pictures...

Fourth generation being so new, certain articles only have game sprites for pictures, including the two new Eeveelutions. Ech, is there anywhere from which to get true pictures? Niki Whimbrel 16:51, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

By "true pictures", I assume you mean like Ken Sugimori's Bulbasaur. I don't know where the pictures come from, but I insist that if we don't have Sugimori's art for a Pokémon, we keep its sprite in the article instead. A while back, I think someone was removing the sprite images in anticipation of Sugimori's work even though it wasn't yet available. --Brandon Dilbeck 18:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

the pictures were found at pokemonelite2000.com as stated in their description pages, however pictures for the latest release aren't available. -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 01:02, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

List of Pokémon sortable table

I think we ought to discuss what columns would be appropriate to add to a sortable table (see WT:PCP#Pokémon lists). Now of course, names and Pokédex numbers seem like very reasonable additions. --Brandon Dilbeck 23:17, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Also, I'm not so sure about adding Pokémon stage. For one thing, I'm not sure why someone might need to sort by that, but I also still have a problem with the terms "Baby", "Basic", "Stage 1", and "Stage 2". Isn't it kind of confusing that Golem is a "Stage 2" Pokémon, even though it's the third evolutionary step (after Geodude and Graveler)? And then there's the whole Togepi problem... --Brandon Dilbeck 23:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Also!!! I think it might be a good idea to include which generation the Pokémon is, despite the fact that the Nat'l Dex number already kinda handles this. But currently, List of Pokémon by National Pokédex number has them grouped by generation, so I don't think it'd be a horrible idea. Also, I see an issue with sorting by type—namely, with dual-type Pokémon having two types to sort. --Brandon Dilbeck 23:27, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

And I thought I'd throw out a few more ideas as well. Height and weight? They seem a little extraneous for an encyclopedia, but the Pokédexes in the games have functions to sort them by height and weight. I thought I'd just present these ideas too to see what others think—I personally wouldn't include them, but I think it'd be selfish to keep the idea to myself. I'm brainstorming here. --Brandon Dilbeck 23:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... So, we’re looking at: National #, Kanto #, Johto #, Hoenn #, Sinnoh #, Ranger #, English name, Japanese name, Official Romanization, possibly type, height, and weight( we definitely want to use the {{height}} and {{weight}} templates if we add those). Maybe “color”, as given by the ’dex? Or foreign-language names, since some Pokémon will now have foreign ’dex entries available? I definitely think we should leave stage out of it, that list can stay seperate due to controversy, obscurity( it’s really a TCG thing), and confusion.

What I would like to see is some way to sort the whole damn list by evolution, with Pokémon families appearing in order of the first member of a family to be in a game, i.e.: normal list from Bulbasaur to Arbok, then Pichu, Pikachu, Raichu, normal to Nidoking, Cleffa, Clefairy, etc... Bellossom after Vileplume, Esp- & Umbreon, Leaf-, and Glacia after Flareon, respective babies and (new) evolutions before and after Electabuzz and Magmar( and later in the list, Roselia). That sort of thing. I have an idea as to how to do that, but I’d like to see if anyone has a better idea first.

We have two options for type: 1), we can put them with a slash, and let each type combination fall into sort order as it does. 2) “Type 1” and “Type 2” columns. This makes perfect sense to me, as it’s how the types are regarded in-game. Or I guess 3) leave it out because we have Category listings to take care of that.

We don’t have to worry about making the list too wide, in fact, wide is good, because we can no longer split it into side-by-side columns. As you can see by looking at the Johto list, which someone already modified, clicking the sort button on any column header only sorts the Pokémon in the half of the list falling directly under that header. --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

TOGEPI HATCHES FROM AN EGG!!! IT CANNOT LAY EGGS!!! Therefore, it is it not a Baby in itself?

Oh, and I agree with Brandon about how confusing the "STAGE 1/2" thingy is. - NP Chilla 16:07, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Of course it’s a Baby. However, some people refuse to acknowledge this because the TCG, where the idea of stages originated, treats it as a Basic Pokémon. Given that the only non-legendary Basic Pokémon that can’t breed is Unown( which, unlike Togepi, does not evolve into something that CAN) it’s pretty obvious. However, like we’ve all said, the controversy and confusion are good reasons to keep Stage out of the master list and leave it as a sub-article. --WikidSmaht (talk) 16:50, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I didn't intend to start a discussion about Togepi. About sorting by types, well, I'm not so sure it would work perfectly for people wishing to sort the list by type. It might be good if someone's sorted the list alphabetically and can scroll down the list to Manectric and see in the same row that it's an Electric type, but the dual-type Pokémon make it complicated to sort by type, whether we make the table have one or two columns for it. For example, our beloved Bulbasaur is a Grass/Poison type. Crobat is a Poison/Flying type. For Crobat, Poison is Type 1, but it's Type 2 for Bulbasaur. I hope it's obvious how annoying it would be to sort by type in this example. --Brandon Dilbeck 20:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

i think that numbers and names are fine. And regrettably, only japanese and english names should be included because this is an english encyclopedia (although i have a completely different opinion about the articles themselves, but that's another discussion) and japan is the country of origin. Using the sortable list to do types and stages is obviously going to be too complicated to be of any practical use and they are much better handled by the categories. Height and weight are quaint, but don't seem to have a practical application save for discovering the smallest and largest current pokemon (and the actual pokemon site handles that just fine). -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 22:21, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree, with one question: do we need the Ranger Browser numbers? Considering that those numbers aren't even listed in the species infoboxes, it seems a little extraneous.~e.o.t.d~ 00:04, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, DanPMK has suggested adding Ranger numbers to the species infoboxes at Template talk:Pokémon species#Adding Browser numbers. --Brandon Dilbeck 00:45, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

The case that Togepi is a basic is based on the argument that "stage" is a meaningless term outside of the TCG, and in the TCG Togepi is a basic.

I feel this way, but additionally I feel that stage is meaningless and unhelpful in the infobox.

Also, do we really need the Ranger numbers? We're already up to four without it, and the Ranger scheme seems unlikely to reappear in any later work. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:56, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, the Johto numbers are obsolete, and I doubt the Hoenn numbers would be used again either. I'd keep it in just for completeness sake. I agree Stage should be eliminated from pretty much everything, including the infobox. DanPMK 17:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Why not ditch all but National? It's the only scheme that covers them all. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:49, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Because the whole point of the sortable tables was to allow us to eliminate List of Pokémon by name, List of Pokémon by Johto Pokédex number, List of Pokémon by Hoenn Pokédex number, and List of Pokémon by Sinnoh Pokédex number without controversy( by merging them into the main list)! And while you would probably like to delete those anyway, if you tried to do it as things stand now, you would face significant opposition.( Guess which side I’d be on.) If we only include the National number, we might as well not make it sortable in the first place and just leave the collection of lists as-is, because, seriously, who needs to switch orders from National-ascending to National-descending? --WikidSmaht (talk) 06:22, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

AMIB's reading comprehension grade = F.

Feel free to sort by whatever number in the lists, sure. I still thinking ditching stage might be wise, though. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:35, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with you wholeheartedly on dropping the “Stage” column, and the general tone of this particular discussion seems to indicate a concensus for that. --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:03, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, with this discussion at the point it’s currently at, I’m about ready to go ahead and do it tomorrow. If anyone feels that the discussion is NOT settled, please say so. In terms of order, I was thinking Nat#, Eng name, Jap name, Romaji, ™ Roman, Kanto#, Johto#, Hoenn#, Ranger#, Sinnoh#. Again, any problems with that, please say so, as it will be a pain in the ass to change once done. --WikidSmaht (talk)

God, no, the discussion is not settled. Five numbering schemes is ridiculous. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:49, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Not half as ridiculous as having 6 or 7 seperate lists. And it’s not like the 5 numbering schemes are arbitrary, they are the schemes Nintendo/Game Freak has created. If you don’t like multiple numberings, complain to them. --WikidSmaht (talk) 06:22, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Heh, I’m glad that’s settled. I thought the mention of merging many superfluous articles into one might appeal to you. I took a break to rescue my Manaphy Egg since the code’s been revealed, but now I’ll get back to writing out the first 50 Pokémon or so as a private test. If there are no other major objections by tomorrow I’ll finish the other... 443... and post it to List of Pokémon, then redirect the others. --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:03, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Do we need both Rōmaji and Trademarked Romanization in the table? I personally don't care to have either, but am not righteously opposed to keeping them either. It's just that there's three columns for Japanese names, you know... --Brandon Dilbeck 18:13, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Well we need one or the other, for people who can’t read katakana. I prefer the trademarked romanization, but I really don’t mind leaving both. --WikidSmaht (talk) 18:32, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

i personally like having both, but it may make more sense to only have the Romanizations because this is an English wiki and we must be assuming that people will be only knowing english for practical purposes. -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 19:51, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

In case nobody noticed, WikidSmaht updated the List of Pokémon with the sortable tables. --Brandon Dilbeck 21:42, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, good. But what's the "evolution" column for?? It's completely blank, as of now. --The Raven's Apprentice 03:19, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

It just looks blank. Try clicking it. It sorts by evolutionary families, in order of the first representative of each to appear in the National Pokédex.( You have to read down the list a bit to find the first difference.) --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:29, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

WikidSmaht, it looks excellent. :) The "Evolution" column was definitely a good idea, although it might not hurt to add in a little note on what it does, for non-fans to whom it isn't obvious.~e.o.t.d~ 04:04, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I did find one problem with the table: when set to Japanese Name order, Houndoom was appearing at the top of the list. I fixed it, though, just a small kana issue. :) If anyone's interested in what it was exactly, I left anote on the discussion page. ~e.o.t.d~ 05:12, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

A glossary page proposal

Well rather than try and create this page and have it shot down (and because I was having a hard time coming up with content) I'm entertaining the idea of a Glossary of Pokémon terms, my admittedly lazy example can be found here. This page is in the spirit of pages like Glossary of American football and List of poker terms. You see more at List of glossaries. The most controversial aspect of these types of articles is a lack of sources, something even our regular articles become faced with so often that we resort to refbloating. neways, for an experiment, i'd like to invite everyone to edit the page in my sandbox and see if we could actually make a respectable list of terms for those who don't want to necessarily read through the whole in-depth article on Pokémon evolution or Pokémon game mechanics just to understand some basic concepts. -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 00:12, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

digging up the not-yet-dead horse, species uniformity

Well for those who'd like to read the original discussion, it can be found here. Basically it's a proposition for an attempt to create the kind of professional cohesion and uniformity found within an encyclopedia but decidedly lacking in this one. Examples can be seen in the differences between Torchic, Gloom (Pokémon), and Arbok. And examples of the idea in action can be found in Eevee and it's evolutions. A more thorough reiteration of the concept is outlined at Template talk:PokePage. Below is an attempt at an honest summary of the previous discussion. Editors who participated in the discussion are encouraged to correct any mistakes within this leading post.

• Pros
  • Creates a clean, professional look
  • Helps to encourage use of style guidlines both within project and the whole of Misplaced Pages
  • Saves large amounts of time when consensus is agreed for a new style guideline, applying changes to Template:Pokenum articles at once.
  • Uniformity makes locating information easier for users unfamiliar with the pages.

• Cons
  • Template vandalism
  • Drain on server resources (when templates are changed)
  • Ugly in edit window
  • No precedent
  • Uniformity doesn't matter, each article will have different content anyways
  • Standardizing one by one is simpler
  • Needless server demand

• Response to cons
  • Semi-protection is a reasonable safeguard to vanadalism, and the templates are vandalized far less often than the articles themselves.
  • Templates are unlikely to be changed often enough that they would drain the server resources
  • Prettiness in the edit window is a fine sacrifice for prettiness in the actual articles
  • Precedents include {{main}}, {{seealso}}, {{otheruses}}, etc.
  • All articles have content (or will in the near future, D/P) on things like the video games, anime, physical characteristics, and other media (TCG, mange, etc.) and so these sections should be similarly named.
  • Standardizing one by one doesn't work, as evidenced with the change from Biology and Appearance to Characteristics (many of the articles still contain the defunct headers).
  • Server demand would seem similar, and can be ignored when there is good reason for the change.

And so I open up the floor again to this unresolved discussion. -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 00:58, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

"Japanname" field

Me and Honeymane are having what is quickly becoming a spat/edit war, so just give me an answer as to whether the "Japanese name" field in the species infobox is for the Romanization (i.e. Sunnygo) or Roma-ji/katakana (i.e. Sanīgo/サニーゴ). The <!--warnings--> on all Sinnoh Pokémon pages just powerfully suggest Romanization only.—ウルタプ 03:26, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

From what I've gathered, trademark names can go into the Japan name box, where romanisation and pronounciation are kept to the article's start name. - Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 04:47, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I've suggested a change to the template to bypass this debate entirely here. ' 16:04, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Arseus and Moltres are examples. Any objections? ' 17:25, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Examples? How so? --WikidSmaht (talk) 21:49, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Userboxes

What about a small subsection on this page showing userboxes that people can put on their page, saying they're part of it, support it etc.? Cipher 22:59, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll add Template:User WikiProject PCP to the Templates section of our project page. --Brandon Dilbeck 23:20, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I lied. I put it under the Participants section. Someone please feel free to rewrite what I wrote or move it or whatever. I don't care. I also thought about adding the template to the page so people could see what it looks like, but didn't because it would add the project page to Category:Pokémon Collaborative Project members. So if someone knows how to add the template without adding the page to the category, do so! --Brandon Dilbeck 23:26, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

More fictional cat problems...

Akin to how Electabuzz got included in Wikiproject Cats, Vaporeon was recently put in the scope of the Cryptozoology wikiproject because it was listed as a type of merfolk. I've removed the cat and the tag from the article. Just leaving a note here in case anyone really thinks it should've been kept like that. -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 19:24, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Why the hell is Electabuzz in the fictional extraterrestrial category? X_x -Sukecchi 19:28, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd assume it's because of the plugs on the heads of its evolutionary family. :x - Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 22:02, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Aren't ALL Pokémon considered from "this" Earth outside of the whole "coming to Earth on the Moon Stone" thing? And I don't think Vaporeon counts as an acknowledged cryptid just because it's got a fish tail.
These other WikiProjects are getting kind of annoying…/swt—ウルタプ 22:36, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

And it is particularly annoying when anyone seems to think that WP:OWN doesn't apply to them, as seems to be the case here. Honestly, the purpose of categorization is to link related articles. If you all don't think that your characters should be included in categories that relate them to other entities, then it makes sense not to put them in those categories in the first place. If you do, then I can honestly think of no one else who deserves the criticism than the person trying to link something to something else, and then complaining when someone else actually does so. Badbilltucker 22:41, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I’m not sure who that was aimed at, but, assuming it was us: The point is that Electabuzz is NOT related to any cats or extraterrestrials, and Vaporeon is not related to merfolk. And it’s certainly not a cryptid, because no one claims it to exist in the real world( except maybe that one dude from a few months ago who kept writing that Jynx and Mewtwo had been sighted in the US and Europe), and its existence in the Pokémon world is well-known and documented. No one objects( at least I hope not) when Meowth or Skitty or Nyarmar are added to Fictional Cats, or when Deoxys is a Fictional Extraterrestrial, because those categorizations are correct and consistent with the internal reality. --WikidSmaht (talk) 23:12, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I think what is happening is that some people had long ago added these "Fictional X" categories and most of us either didn't notice them or didn't really care. I agree with BadBill, that we don't OWN thse articles, and if the Cat project would like to lend a hand they are more than welcome to, that's what a wiki is neways. The problems arose when articles of questionable categorization became added to other projects. I assure you that no one complaining here is someone who added Electabuzz to cats or Vaporeon to merfolk. It's just that these new projects have brought to light some awkward subjectivity and we are trying to deal with each of the 493 articles as they are brought to light. I also assure you, BadBillTucker, that this wikiproject is in no way trying to OWN any of the articles, we often share scope with the anime and CVG projects. -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 17:24, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

493 is a lot of articles, but clicking through to remove bad Categories shouldn’t take more than an hour or two, especially with the convenient National ’dex navigation. I would, but I’m up to my ears in Poképrojects already, what with finishing the sortable list and the Game Mechanics overhaul. --WikidSmaht (talk) 21:49, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

One of the things I am trying to do with the assessments and banner placement of all the projects that do assessment (and they all will do assessments, sooner or later :) ), on the Philosophy and Religion Project Directory page is straighten out the categorization there to remove the overlapping, so I can understand the frustration. Right now, unreal as it sounds, all of Category:Jainism falls in the Category:Jesus, and that's just one of the more obvious ones. Sorry for having been overcritical earlier. Going through particularly the cryptids was more than a little nerveracking. Were they biological, mythological, paranormal, or just causes of migraines? Thanks for your consideration, and my apologies again. Badbilltucker 01:34, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Tamanta to Mantyke

For some reason, I can't move the page. Is something wrong? TRKtvtce 14:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

No idea about why you can't move it, but the name's not officially confirmed. Keep your hands off the article!!! Cheers, The Raven's Apprentice 16:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

If you read WP:MOVE, you will see that you can’t move the page because Mantyke has an edit history. The move cannot be completed without an admin’s help. However, as Raven’s said, the name Mantyke is NOT offical, because Serebii.net is a FANSITE, NOT an official Nintendo source. That is probably the correct English name, but until it is OFFICIALLY CONFIRMED in the games, the anime, or an OFFICIAL Nintendo publication/press release, it will stay Tamanta on the Misplaced Pages, where we only deal with credible sources. --WikidSmaht (talk) 21:49, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Suggestions?

I've been working on Snorunt for a while now, and I've gone through a good deal of Good Articles and pulled format and used Torchic as a guide for a couple things. I've implemented Pokestart, and added in a lot of the starters for the TGC, Anime, and such. I also cleaned out some of the crap and added a huge chunk for the video game section, not to mention, I added every source there at the moment. I'd like to get this at least to be nominated for Good Article some time soon, but I'm not sure what this needs before I even bother considering doing that. Any suggestions on what to do?

P.S.: I still need a good few pictures for the article, which are listed on the Talk Page. If you could help me, I'd be much obliged. I'm going to see what I can do about a few of these, but whatever help I could get would be appruciated. Jeri-kun 01:16, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Honestly, your work is paying off - it looks a lot better to me than most of the other articles. The biggest thing I can see is that the first paragraph of the video game section is a bit on the cruftish side - the info about its XD appearance could probably go, as can the details of Shoal Cave's tides - but other than that, it looks like it's well on its way.~e.o.t.d~ 04:31, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Victory Road

Victory Road (Pokémon) is such a tiny, stubby article...I don't think it deserves an article (if this deserves one, then something like Rival's house would be justified as well). However, as this transcends more than one generation (it exists in R/B/Y and R/S/E), it can't easily be merged into any article. Suggestions? Prod, AFD? Merge into a new article titled List of notable locations in the Pokémon video games (which would encompass locations such as the Rival's house, player's house, the Pokémon lab in the player's hometown, and the big corporation that the evil organization wants to take over). Hbdragon88 03:36, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

In the games, it is the final dungeon before the Elite Four, right? Mabey it can get a paragraph there? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Spriteless (talk • contribs) 16:12, 25 January 2007 (UTC).

What is there to say about the rival's house that would warrant its own article? --Brandon Dilbeck 21:43, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Nothing, I think that’s the point. --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:29, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Merged into Elite Four. Thanks, Spriteless. Hbdragon88 07:17, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Help Here

I am a pokemon fanatic and I an name every pokemon, specis, ect. I would love to help! Can I? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Race99999 (talk • contribs) 23:43, 26 January 2007 (UTC).

Dude, just be bold and get cracking. We need all the help we can get, most of our articles yet have to receive GA status. Oh, and do mind your typos. Cheers, The Raven's Apprentice 03:14, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Ditto. In particular, please note that it is “Pokémon” with a capital P and an accent over the e, NOT “pokemon”. Ever. --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:29, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Another PokéMotto

Check this out. "493" (inserted using {{pokenum}}) links to Pokémon. Cheers, The Raven's Apprentice 07:34, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Hahaha, subtle but fun. Pi as well... Hehe. Cheers! - Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 08:19, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Another? There was one before? --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:29, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, this one. --The Raven's Apprentice 08:40, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

CFD notice

The related Category:Pokémon voice actors has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for Discussion page.

English name stufferabilia

This is something that's been on my mind lately. I've a lot to say about how English names are handled in Misplaced Pages, be it news from Serebii.net that requires a paragraph overlooking WP:V, nonstandard implementations merely to notify readers about how names are mistranslated (and WP:CVG suggests usage of Template:Future_game), and placeholders that simply don't work right with the style guides. I consider all these non-standard. What are we, and what would I, be supposed to follow? It urgently needs discussion (and it covers our scope). Cheers. - Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 22:53, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, WP:V says that information should be taken from credible sources, per WP:RS, which, as Raijinili pointed out, suggests use of common sense as an occasional overriding factor. Common sense indicates that, although Serebii is not reliable enough to change the whole article, after being correct about Chatot it should be taken seriously to some degree at least. Besides, that reversion was more about destroying instances of “Buizel” than about restoring the paragraph, though I do think the paragraph is necessary. As for the footnote, like I mentioned on the D/P talkpage, I only added it because I thought I read that someone objected to {{future_game}} once it was released in Japan( perhaps it was this edit summary?).--WikidSmaht (talk) 06:05, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I understand better now. I guess it wouldn't fail too much to reference him. As for Future Game, it's there to point out any changes. I think the editor might have noticed the template saying "in development". Now, it says "unreleased", which makes it a more appropriate template for this. Thanks for the clarifications. Cheers! - Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 06:25, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Power Plant

Where should Power Plant (Pokémon) be merged? It spans two generations as well, and is arguably separate from Lavender Town, the city/town closest to the location (as it's abandoned and nobody knows about it). Should we create a new article titled Route 11 (Pokémon), or should I just prod it? Hbdragon88 07:22, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Kill(prod) it, and if this user is the same one that created the Victory road thing, tell him to stop. Cheers, -- The Hybrid 07:24, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Alright, it isn't the same user. Having it deleted should send enough of a message. Cheers, -- The Hybrid 07:26, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

It's a huge problem, these articles about ridiculously small elements. In the past few days I've merged Jagged Pass, Mount Chimney, Lavender Tower, Petalburg Woods, among other things. There's still a slew of other small locations, like Mt. Silver, whatever woods in Johto, and other locations that I haven't gotten around to merging. Hbdragon88 07:29, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Jagged Pass?! I thought that TTV or I had merged that before. WTF is going on?! -- The Hybrid 07:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Wait, I was thinking of something else. Nevermind. -- The Hybrid 07:34, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps these should be merged into an article such as List of minor locations in Pokémon or List of miscellaneous locations in Pokémon?—M_C_Y_1008 (/_contribs) 15:56, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Maybe we could also merge it with Zapdos, but I think I like the idea of "List of minor locations in Pokémon". Shiny Umbreon 21:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Ehhh...some things just don't need articles. Some editors have already given thoughts to collapsing the city articles and merging them into the larger region articles, and I've found myself leaning towards that direction. Once you get rid of the unencyclopedic information (such as how-to information, like a paragraph describing whether the player should use the Escape Rope after delivering the letter to Steven in Granite Cave, lol), there isn't that much left. Hbdragon88 23:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

For places with Legendary Pokémon associated with them (Power Plant, Cerulean Cave, etc.), there could be a small mention of them within that Pokémon's article. But others, no. Personally, I think that such non-remarkable places should be mentioned, but not beyond a single sentence in a somewhat related article.

And yes, I do believe that the city/town articles need to go: I was <-- this close to mass-deleting the astonishingly crufty "Demographics" sections earlier tonight, and I think I might still. They deserve no more than one paragraph, or maybe two, for the relatively notable ones.

Seriously, isn't all this stuff what Bulbapedia is for?~e.o.t.d~ 04:46, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Trademarked 4th Generation Romaji

I've been seeing some back and forth switching of 4th generation names recently (such as the case with Yukikabli), so I've just been having doubts as to which are officially confirmed romaji and which are not. Is there a source for the official romaji or are the names just being changed based on "educated guesses"? Os-osiris 06:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the situation with Yukikabli was that fans interpreted "Yukikaburi" as that, then PCP came to the decision to use plain Hepburn, then "Yukikabli" ended up being official.—ウルタプ 06:03, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for the clarification. I can assume all the current 4th generation names listed are official then? Os-osiris 06:09, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, the ones with the "trademarked Romanization" column filled in here. The rest are straight Hepburn.—ウルタプ 06:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

That's just what I was looking for, thank you very much! Os-osiris 06:31, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

On a related note, does anyone know why six Pokémon (Korobōshi, Toritodon, Dōtakun, Fukamaru, Kabarudon, and Mojanbo) don't appear to have trademarked rōmaji names yet, while the rest do? Has the info-gathering just not been done yet, or are these names for some reason still unreleased?~e.o.t.d~ 04:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

request for clarification

I'm running into a disagreement as to how the language at serebii.net is to be interpreted regarding the new changes being made to the physical/special split. The page can be found here and the language I'm referring to is this:

"In Diamond & Pearl the Physical and Special Attacks are not done solely on type."

This led me to write in Pokémon game mechanics that phys and spec stats are affected also by the new mechanic rather than instead of. Another editor has disagreed with my reading of the article and has twice reverted the article. Perhaps the best way will be to mirror serebii's conclusion, that how this new mechanic will be implemented is not yet fully know - whether it is meant to replace to the old phys/spec split by type or merely work in tandem with it. -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 20:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I will agree that the word “solely” is potentially confusing. But Serebii.net is full of bad grammar and poor word choices. The same meaning could have been more clearly conveyed by “whether attacks are physical or special is not just based on type anymore”. The sentence that follows is “This time, the classification of each attack and what stats it affects on both your Pokémon and the opponent Pokémon, is determined from the attack itself.”. Note again the bad grammar, the whole sentence is ass-backwards, with the attacks suddenly affecting the stats. I am continuing to search for a non-forum source to clear this up, but I certainly don’t object to anyone else finding it for me. --WikidSmaht (talk) 23:47, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

"Previously, there was no actual way to tell if the attacks were Physical or if they were Special, except through the use of Guides and Websites. However with this massive change, now when you check the Pokémon's attack in the Status Screen, it will give you the classification including an icon to help determine this."-- leads me to believe that each attack is still only affected by one stat (i.e. either Attack or Special Attack, but not both). As for Serebii's conclusion that the mechanic is not fully known, that page was created months ago, when the game wasn't out yet in Japan, and Serebii most likely hasn't updated the page.—M_C_Y_1008 (/_contribs) 00:41, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I happen to know that only one stat can affect each attack, and that the damage mechanics were not substantially changed, but a source would still be nice. -Amark moo! 01:42, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you, Wikid, that the language is confusing and it could be construed either way. That's why I'm thinking we should create a blend of the two. Of course if Amarkov is right, then I'm wrong. I know we have quite a few people who read Japanese here and who've probably already obtained a copy of DP... can anyone attest to an explanation given in the rule books? -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 17:32, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Just FYI, Serebii's list of new Moves explains it more clearly.

Actually, if you look at the 3rd screenshot on the original link ZapperNapper gave (the screen for the attack Spark), there's a symbol which Serebii says means that the attack is Physical. I know Serebii's not exactly the definition of a reliable source, but I think there's almost enough evidence for this to be confirmed. ~e.o.t.d~ 05:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, no. I do think Serebii’s poor word choice is potentially confusing, but “confusing” is not the same as “open to interpretation”. Reading the rest of the page, I am sure “solely” was just that, a bad choice of wording, NOT an intentional means of implying that two stats are used for each attack. Plus, I am more certain now than ever, because I think Amarkov, while occasionally too hasty, knows better than to assert as knowledge something that has not been proven as fact. Amark, obviously the source of your knowledge isn’t citable by Misplaced Pages, or you would have done so; however, it would still benefit this discussion if you could explain to us how you “know” what the mechanic is. Zapper, according to your edit summary on the article, you came here to get “consensus opinion” in the absence of a reliable source either way. The consensus appears to be that each move is affected by either normal or special stats, not both, and that Serebii meant to say so but messed up. Of course, that definitely does not mean we should stop looking for a source to cite this fact. --WikidSmaht (talk) 15:36, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I think I found something in Serebii.net's archived news for July 2006 (July 26 update):

"Every Move is one of three different categories or Attack Natures; Physical, Special and Other. Physical & Special attacks derive themselves from the Physical & Special stats respectively while the Other category is used for the attacks that do not actually inflict damage"

It says "one" out of three categories, of which Physical and Special are two.—M_C_Y_1008 (/_contribs) 15:53, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

New infobox

I have created {{Infobox Pokémon City}} to replace the clunky wikitables currently being used. Hbdragon88 03:22, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Comment: The clunky wikitables were stolen from Bulbapedia. --The Raven's Apprentice 11:19, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

You need help?

Hey, I'm a Pokémon expert and was wondering if I could help. I'm a very experienced Wikipedian and am willing to help out. Do you need me because if you don't, I'm having a fit trying to make and edit Twilight Princess enemies and such. So if you don't need me, just say so. Pokemon Guy 17:00, 02 February 2007 (UTC)

Anyone's welcome, so go ahead and lend whatever expertise you have. We're big on WP:BOLD over here, so if you see a change that needs to be made, go ahead and make it. Welcome to ya!~e.o.t.d~ 05:01, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Heatran???

Is "Heatran" the official romanisation for Hīdoran or is it some made up fan romanisation? If the intended name really was "Heatran" wouldn't the katakana be "Hītoran" instead of "Hīdoran"? --Candy-Panda 05:51, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

It is indeed official (as far as I know). The thing is, in Japanese, the katakana symbols ト (to) and ド (do) are the unvoiced and voiced versions of the same letter. Parts of words can change from unvoiced to voiced depending on what goes before them. ~e.o.t.d~ 01:35, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, and it is confirmed at this Japanese trademark database; when you search for ヒードラン, it'll come up with a trademark application with the romaji "HEATRAN" accompanying it. To search, input the Japanese name, ヒードラン, in the top search field, then click the left button just below the search fields. After the next page loads, there'll be a line of text and two buttons appearing above the search fields while the rest will appear pretty much unchanged; click the left of these two buttons to see the results, which has the trademark application there.—M_C_Y_1008 (/_contribs) 01:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Here's the English version of the page. :) It doesn't work with katakana, but it's definitely useful to refer to while using the Japanese site.~e.o.t.d~ 02:16, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Template/copy-and-paste?

I notice some of the Pokémon pages have standard introductions in the Video Games and Anime sections. Problem is, they aren't standard in every Pokémon article, and sometimes they cause some strange issues.

For example, the Relicanth and Banette pages recently had the introductory paragraphs reinserted into the Video Games section, while Relicanth also has a paragraph for its Anime section. The paragraphs all have those footnote citation thingies, but they don't actually lead anywhere on the page, so they just sit there like gym socks on shower rods.

Since I'm a Misplaced Pages newbie, I don't actually know whether these paragraphs are coming from a template or whether someone's just copy-and-pasting them in, so it'd be great if someone could enlighten me on that (or tell me which pages to read). More importantly though, should these paragraphs be in the articles? In every article? And what should be done about the citations that don't go anywhere?

Thanks. Bhamv 06:20, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, they're just {{subst:pokeanime}} and some video game intro I'm not familiar with. The citations need a reference section to actually display the citation note, like this:

==References==

Try editing this page to see how it's done. Anyways, I'll be fixing it up on Relicanth and Banette. Cheers, The Raven's Apprentice 14:39, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I just hope nobody tries to add footnotes now... XD neways, you know this brings up the old discussion about building articles with templates and standard intros... Take Relicanth for example, now while Pikachu is arguably comparable to Mario, why should we be mentioning him on every other page as well?

They were originally in Japanese, but later translated into many other languages. Worldwide, the games and their sequels have sold over 143 million copies, making them one of Nintendo's most popular game franchises, second only to Mario.

The kind of introduction that is seen on these pages is informative but is is also extraneous and irrelevant. Someone who is seeking more information on Relicanth should not have to read through information that gets repeated on every single page, now while this may add to the "comprehensivenss" that FA articles require it creates a redundancy that is both unneeded, and, as evidenced by the many complaints lodged at this talk page, annoying. And it makes no sense for it to be on some articles but not others (except, as stated, perhaps Pikachu) so logically the choice is either none or all, and none is by far the more appealing choice. -ΖαππερΝαππερ _Alexandria 17:48, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Categorising TCG articles

When are the Trading Card Game articles going to be categorised regarding class and importance? If nobody else is going to do it, can I, or can only certain people do it? Cipher 16:29, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Wait, what?

I seem to remember that the participants list for the PCP was in chronological order of who joined. Should that still be the case, I do recall my number having been shifted from 5 to 6, and then recently, 6 to 7. What's this about? - Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 05:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

It appears User:Pikasneez27 added himself into the third slot within the past week. Interesting he didn't go all the way to displace AMIB and myself from our thrones as the Lords of Pokemon. ^_^ Erik Jensen 05:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

It's been chronological for a while now, so I've kept it consistent by shifting it. I swear I was fifth at one point. Can't be helped though.

And, way to credit yourselves. >:O - Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 05:58, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

And according to this, I was before you? You bad, bad "lords". >:3 - Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 06:02, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

And so I was 5th. Given the people who've left, wouldn't I be 2 or 3? Lords are you, classics am I. (That made no sense.) - Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 06:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Clearly, there's been a lot of shifting around of each other's user names by other users, and your name got moved below mine at some point in time. I have never touched the positioning of my name or anyone else's on that list, however, so imagine my surprise when I looked at the page recently and found myself at number 2. Based on what we've found out, however, that list is no longer chronological due to various bits of abuse applied to it by many users, so perhaps we are best off making it an alphabetized list. I wouldn't mind that, I haven't been doing all that much Pokemon work anyway. Note however that it would still keep A Man In Black at the top of the list alphabetically. Erik Jensen 06:18, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I recall reading quite a while ago, someone started a topic (before I joined) to see who was still actively participating in the PCP. People signed their names in the talk page, then those names, in that order, replaced the members list (and people who didn't sign were removed). The list was shortened from 83 to 25. Then the list continued to grow from there. I'd love to be higher in the list but don't think I should cut in line. We ought to keep in mind that perhaps many of the people currently in the members list may not necessarily watch or contribute to discussions here at WT:PCP, but instead make edits to the Pokémon articles instead. Editors don't have to talk here to be in this project. --Brandon Dilbeck 06:31, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I see; that's the reason I got to number 2. In that case, the list is indeed still chronological, so it can be kept as it is. Whew, I get to keep my office as vice president to the controversial president who does nothing but warring (Bush overseas, AMIB on many articles on Misplaced Pages). XD Erik Jensen 06:51, 5 February 2007 (UTC)