Jump to content

Talk:List of Pokémon/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

Only some pokemon have their own pages?

At first, I assumed only anime-relevant Pokemon got their own page, but apparently Probopass and Nosepass both get pages. What determines which pokemon get their own page? 210.5.70.76 (talk) 23:06, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

If the pokemon has a ton of info on it. Porygon-Z (talk) 17:12, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Please protect the page.

Resolved

Now that information from Generation V will be coming sporadically, I think it's time to protect the page for a set time. - MK (t/c) 09:02, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Agree. I was just about to ask about the two new Gen 5 Pokes. Problem is, these regulars are rather hesitant to protect it until vandalism happens approximately 56,000,002 times/msec. Also, they're likely to condemn the Gen 5's as "unconfirmed", even though they have been, even off the fansites. Just give it time. 2J Bäkkvire Maestro RQQ et al favorite haunts 13:14, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Right now showing the two Generation V Pokemon might confuse people. When more information on them is available, we may create a list of Gen V Pokemon. Until then, I don't think any Pokemon should be added to this list. Maybe we should create a separate list on this page for the Generation V Pokemon to show that they aren't out in games yet, and can not be caught. Blake (Talk·Edits) 14:27, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Zorua and Zoroark currently redirect to Phantom Ruler Z and should probably stay that way until enough information is known to integrate them into a list or to this page. Phantom Ruler Z is move and I believe semi-protected for the next few days until Coro-Coro is officially released. This page will probably remain unprotected unless people start hitting it, as 2D so eloquently phrased it, 56,000,002 t/msec. With the number of eyes on it right now, any additions will be removed fairly quickly. MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 16:24, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Redirect, good idea. This page likely won't need protection. However, if when a Gen V list does compile, we might protect that. 2J Bäkkvire Maestro RQQ et al favorite haunts 12:39, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to re-recommend redirection. We can add all the comment-based warnings we want, but as can be seen from the last 2 generations and already this one, people are going to edit the page anyway, and being Pokémon, vandalism will be rampant too. Additionally, let's not bite the heads off new people who don't see or understand the warnings or Wikipedia policy. Revert the changes to be sure, but remember sometimes they are just correcting things they think need to be corrected. - MK (t/c) 00:53, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Um, what? That is ludicrous! How can they edit the page and not see them? And if they don’t understand them, they probably can’t read English and should not be on this Wikipedia to begin with. I’m sure whatever language they speak has a Wikipedia, they can go be annoying there. --WikidSmaht (talk) 10:17, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

B&W Starters

Resolved

Found an image from the June issue.Fractyl (talk) 18:46, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

What use would that be? The image is zoomed in, and isn't a very good info, plus it is from PokeBeach, so we can't even use it. Blake (Talk·Edits) 01:27, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
It's a thumbnail of this. This leaked a while ago. - MK (t/c) 07:48, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Again-new Poke's

Resolved

It's exciting when new Pokemon are revealed by Coro Coro...but I don't know how to cite Coro Coro, since I read it off Serebii who got it from the magazine. If people start adding new Pokemon to the list, just correct them if they do it wrong. I can't believe nobody noticed yet! I must be an early bird. I'll add them for now. 2D Maestro User 2 14:01, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

The thing is, people get this information early by SCANS of the magazine. The actual magazine doesn't come out until days later. So you can not cite a magazine that hasn't came out yet. It would just be citing PokeBeach, or Serebii, or wherever you got the information. Blake (Talk·Edits) 14:37, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Oh, that's interesting, actually never knew that. When does it come out then? And can't you agree that if it's in the magazine, it's legit? 2D Maestro Serbia Suburbia 14:44, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
I am not exactly sure when they come out. It is generally accepted as a reliable source though. Blake (Talk·Edits) 14:59, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
I think it usually comes out on the 15th of every month, and is often leaked the week before. So, you can queue up the info in a user subpage or whatever, but don’t post it in any mainspace articles until the 15th arrives in Japan. --WikidSmaht (talk) 10:17, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
PS: there is a dropdown box to insert extra characters a little way below the edit summary box. Choose the Latin character set for latin characters with accents, makes it REALLY easy to write Poké correctly.

Invisible Japanese names

Resolved

Why are the Japanese names for Gastrodon, Bronzong, Gible, and Hippowdon shown as a dash and not their names? 2D Maestro Who's Jake? 20:08, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I am not sure. I think their names in that context was never revealed. Blake (Talk·Edits) 20:53, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
The visible info in that column is supposed to be the official, trademarked romanizations of the Japanese names. No reliable source has been given for the trademarked romanizations of トリトドン, ドータクン, フカマル, or カバルドン, so they are listed with an endash.

Gen V citations

Resolved

Um, where are the citations for all the various new Pokémon? And for that matter, for the romanizations of the starters and Zorua? Someone needs to figure out how to use the {{Cite}} and {{Cite episode}} templates to properly, or at least poorly, cite the various CoroCoro issues and Oha Suta episode(s), or I will have to scrub all but Reshiram and Zekrom( which have been revealed in English on Pokemon.com) from the article. --WikidSmaht (talk) 10:17, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

If the beta pokemon are listed as unnamed, except for Koromori, than did someone forget to read the Japanese names for the other 3 found below the pokemon?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.101.133.213 (talk • contribs) 19:03, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
If you were referrng to the bat-thin from the anime character sheet, since that was unofficial and mostly illegible, NO INFO rom there should be included. And don’t forget to sign your comments with 4 tildes( ~~~~). --WikidSmaht (talk) 12:15, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Well no one protested or fixed it, so I wiped out all the new Pokémon listed, except the 5 with proper sourcing( for which I had to remove the unsourced romanizations). --WikidSmaht (talk) 12:15, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

I added citations for all of the new Pokémon. --138.110.206.99 (talk) 17:00, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I need a citation. I decoded the Tsutarja evolution's name and it was Tsutakaaku. Also, before I decoded it, some artist read the blurry name and posted it on his art. If this is not confirmed, see you on Sep. 18. -- Oldman from PCM. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.101.239.19 (talk) 18:59, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Trademarked Japanese names / official romanizations

I think that all trademarked Japanese names/official romanizations (e.g. "Lizardo") should include a reference, not just the new Pokémon. However, the only source I know is Bandai's Kimewaza Pokémon Kids series, where 200 Japanese Pokémon names were given in Roman letters. Where do the other trademarked names of the older Pokémon come from? I did a few searches and could find no entries at the Industrial Property Digital Library.

Also, I think the IPDL references in the article should directly link to the trademark files (like this one for Reshiram) instead of the search engine – makes it easier for other people to verify the information (unless these query result pages are just temporarily created). Prime Blue (talk) 18:32, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

EDIT: Checked it again. Yes, these sites are only temporary. Meh. Prime Blue (talk) 22:11, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
How does one generate a trademark file results page? We should add instructions. --WikidSmaht (talk) 00:08, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
For the temporary sites, try archiving it manually. Melicans (talk, contributions) 00:26, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for that, Melicans. I was looking for this site a few weeks ago!
The search results (the page with the three frames) cannot be archived manually. However, the direct trademark file (the left frame) does seem to be permanent: I can still access it after deleting cookies. Hence, I'll update the references to link to these (these pages are also available in English, but they drop all of the important information for verification, like the companies that filed the trademark). Prime Blue (talk) 08:09, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
As it turned out, some trademarked Japanese names of older Pokémon were really just wrongly assigned official or fan translations, such as for Plusle ("Prasle"), Togepy ("Togepi"), Kaiorga ("Kyogre"), Jiguzaguma ("Ziguzaguma"). I now added all the trademarked Japanese names filed by Game Freak/Creatures where an official romanization was included (notes: The total number of all name trademarks is around 430 or so, many do not include official romanizations but just list the Japanese name in katakana – the latter can of course not be used as references. The Pokémon Company itself did not file any Pokémon names – I did not check if Nintendo filed some without Game Freak/Creatures, but I think it's unlikely).
I'll use that Bandai series with additional names as references for the other old ones, and will remove all remaining ones without sources after that.
Also, now that we know that not all of the Pokémon really have trademarked romanizations, shouldn't this better be called "official romanizations" or something along the lines?
One last thing: I also found references for Zorua[1] and Zoroark.[2] Since they are not included in the list, I will store the references here until they are used. Prime Blue (talk) 10:34, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Note: I have reviewed and allowed this edit but it does seem excessive that 28kb of an article's size is references when articles over 32kb struggle to load in some browsers. Is there any way in which this can be reduced? -- roleplayer 11:32, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately...it turned out those direct pages are temporary as well, just kept a little longer. So that time spent on looking them up was almost completely useless. There are two possibilities now:
1. Manually archive all the pages and link to those.
2. Give instructions on how to use the IPDL database.
Somehow, I am more comfortable with the former. Throwing a Japanese site at editors that want to verify information, instructions given or not, does not feel right to me.
Regarding the article size: I don't think size really matters anymore at this point, since the list itself was already thrice as big as the 32kb limit before the references were added. But could WP:REFNEST be used to cut repeated information in references down (work, publisher, accessdate)? Prime Blue (talk) 12:40, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
WebCite can comb a site and archive all the desired links. It doesn't seem to pick up the references, but if a temporary page were created with all the links, it could be combed to archive all the links in one pass. —Ost (talk) 13:02, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
To more easily add the archives to the refs, WP:CHECKLINKS could be run on the page. The "(info)" links provide buttons to link to the archive—and to create one if it doesn't exist. —Ost (talk) 13:13, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
(ec)I think that the trailing zeros can be removed from the links so that [1] is used instead of [2]. The refs can also be inserted in wikimarkup instead of using the citation templates. these wouldn't be huge reductions in text, but the latter would also reduce the number of template calls. —Ost (talk) 12:57, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Removing the zeros produces server errors on archiving. Combing the query results does not work either because of all the frames. I'll just do it manually. I've already put together a format for using it in the article and am currently working on it. Prime Blue (talk) 17:55, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
It's fine if you want to do it manually, but in case you it gets tedious I should clarify that I hadn't considered an external query results page and that I meant a page—most easily a userpage—listing the links that were already used in the refs. (They were only one frame, right?) If you were to remove the reference tags, the comb should find them even they were still in the templates, so a copy of page could be used after <ref> and </ref> are removed. I'm not sure why the page without trailing zeros would not not archive for you, though; since the pages load, I would not expect trouble and the above example archived fine. —Ost (talk) 18:22, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
The old direct links from the references are already down, so I couldn't use them – but thanks for the heads-up anyway! About the trailing zeros: I tried it a few times without and all that got archived was a server error message from IPDL, though the URL itself was working just fine. Don't know what the problem was...but anyway, I'm finished. :-) Basically, what I did was putting a reference in the references (so u can verify while u verify ^_~).
To-Do: Add official romanizations from the Bandai series, tag the remaining old ones with citation needed. Prime Blue (talk) 20:01, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Amazing work. This is starting to look like exactly the List I have always wanted to see, but been too lazy to fix it up that way myself. Keep it up and soon I can do a little work on the lede and we will make featured list!--WikidSmaht (talk) 00:25, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

No problem. I always found it strange how all these Japanese names were taken for granted without any references, and as it turns out, quite a few of them were elaborate guesses. Here's the things I've changed in the latest edit:
  • Plusle/Prasle: Given as Plusle in the trademark file and as Prasle on the card.
  • Kaiorga/Kyogre: Given as Kaiorga in the trademark file and as Kyogre on the card.
  • Beequeen: Given as "Beequen" on the card, I guess it's just a typo.
  • Sheimi -> Shaymin: Given as "Shaymin" on two cards. "Sheimi" unverifiable, thus removed.
  • Erlade -> Erureido: Given as "Erureido" on a card. "Erlade" unverifiable, thus removed.
  • Mumage -> Mumargi: Given as "Mumargi" on a card. "Mumage" unverifiable, thus removed.
  • Manmoo -> Mammoo: Given as "Mammoo" on a card. "Manmoo" unverifiable, thus removed.
  • Rampard -> Rampald: Given as "Rampald" on a card. "Rampard" unverifiable, thus removed.
  • Trideps -> Torideps: Given as "Torideps" on a card. "Trideps" unverifiable, thus removed.
  • Arseus -> Arceus: Given as "Arceus" on a card. "Arseus" unverifiable, thus removed.
  • Yukikabli -> Yukikaburi: Given as "Yukikaburi" on a card. "Yukikabli" unverifiable, thus removed.
  • Donkarasu -> Dongkarasu: Given as "Dongkarasu" on a card. "Donkarasu" unverifiable, thus removed.
  • Kabarudon -> Kabaldon: Given as "Kabaldon" on a card. "Kabarudon" unverifiable, thus removed.
I also changed "Trademarked Romanizations" to "Official romanizations" as the former doesn't really make sense with half of the names being trademarked sans romanizations (and I removed the upper case letters from the words katakana and rōmaji).
...edit conflict. I have reworked your big edits into the new revision, but excuse me for not removing all the spaces from the references...I'm just tired right now. :/ Prime Blue (talk) 02:05, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "第５３２９３７５号". 商標出願･登録情報. Industrial Property Digital Library. 11 June 2007. Retrieved 28 July 2010.
  2. ^ "第５３２９３７４号". 商標出願･登録情報. Industrial Property Digital Library. 11 June 2007. Retrieved 28 July 2010.

Ditto can't be hatched!

Resolved

It says ditto evolves from an egg, however ditto is in the no eggs group —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.43.48.130 (talk) 19:36, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Good catch! --WikidSmaht (talk) 00:08, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
@WikidSmaht-- It's super-effective! Sorry, couldn't resist. :D Venku Tur'Mukan (talk) 13:52, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
hey, ditto is in the ditto egg group and it's the only pokemon that is Valehd (talk) 20:26, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Cut it out

To the anon IP 138.110.206.XX ( I tried saying this on one of your talk pages but your exact IP keeps changing): stop reverting me! There are no sources given for the romanizations of Pokabu, Mijumaru, Zorua, or Zoroark, nor the English names of the latter. Therefore, those CANNOT BE IN THE ARTICLE. Mamanbō and Gigaiasu are not on the Japanese site yet, and CANNOT BE IN THE ARTICLE. The evolutions of Tsuarja and Mijumaru are also unsourced and CANNOT BE IN THE ARTICLE. Saying “Pokémon Sunday, 25 July 2010” is NOT GOOD ENOUGH. You must use {{Cite episode}} to use a TV show for a source. But why use Pokémon Sunday to source Bikutinei when it is on the Japanese website already? And leave Musharna after Munna, evolutionary families should go together.--WikidSmaht (talk) 00:08, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Pokabu: Trademark application number 2010-034788
Mijumaru: Trademark application number 2010-034789
Zorua: Trademark registration number 5329375
Zoroark: Trademark registration number 5329374
And if you think the episode's citation isn't formatted properly, fix it.
Mamanbō and Gigaiasu were shown on Oha Suta, which is another WP:RS. --138.110.206.100 (talk) 01:23, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
If those are legit, add the citations. I already DID fix the Victini citation by replacing it with a better one( web citations are better because anyone can check them). And what about the other things I fixed? Make your edits, but DON’T USE THE UNDO BUTTON when you are objecting to 4 or 5 edits out of 15! --WikidSmaht (talk) 01:33, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
If citations are broken, fix them! DON'T REMOVE MATERIAL THAT YOU CAN EASILY CITE! --138.110.206.100 (talk) 13:03, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
If it’s so easy, YOU cite them. --WikidSmaht (talk) 00:25, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I added citations for Zorua and Zoroark. --138.110.206.100 (talk) 13:08, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
On the same note, you should be careful when reverting edits: you re-added some errors (Prasle, Togepi, Kyogre, Ziguzaguma) and outdated reference formats I fixed. :/ Prime Blue (talk) 15:21, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Administrative announcement

Resolved

Due to this edit war the page has been placed on flagged protection for three days. Please try to better collaborate. Daniel Case (talk) 04:25, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I think that’s better than the semiprotection I was about to request anyway. --WikidSmaht (talk) 00:25, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Order/Isshu numbers

So, we know the Isshu numbers for several Pokémon through screenshots now, shall I go ahead and add the column, or do we wait until the games are released in Japan? And in the meantime, let’s discuss what the best order for the new Pokémon is. So far we have the starters at the beginning and legendaries at the end, but the middle is kind of a haphazard jumble, I don’t think it even conforms to the order they were revealed. I say we put them in the order they appear on the Japanese BW site that we are using as a ref, with the exception of keeping evolutionary families together. What do others think?--WikidSmaht (talk) 00:25, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

There'll be a whole lot of blank spaces till the games are released; I recommend waiting until they are so we can properly integrate it. It's not as if we have a particularly long time to wait, and I'd rather see it all done neatly, rather then in a patchwork manner. As for the order, I'd say by number where known and alphabetically after that. Melicans (talk, contributions) 01:09, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I preliminarily rearranged them into an order based on the order they first showed up on said website( with the exception of leaving legendaries near the end). In doing so, it turned out that we had over half a dozen that our hotheaded IP friend cited with that ref which don’t actually appear there yet. I put them at the end of the list( except for Hatooboo which is suspected to be the evolution of Mamepato), but I am tempted to once again delete them altogether if someone does not, in the very near future, cite them properly to the TV episodes or whatever where each was first named. --WikidSmaht (talk) 01:29, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Oha Suta

Resolved

In the trailer from June 27, I could not make out the names for Onokkusu and Burokko, so I re-added the citation needed template for those. Same goes for Gigaiasu and Mamanbō, whose names I could not see in the referenced clip from July 21 either. Maybe I watched the wrong video, can someone give a link to a YouTube upload? Prime Blue (talk) 14:22, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

As a issue has been raised, please get a clear consensus here, then we will decide we can add those references or not. — Tanvir 17:09, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Apparently, Onokkusu and Burokko came from an Amazon listing for a Play-Doh product called "プレイドー ねんどでポケモンつくっちゃおう!". The actual listing has been removed, but Google still has a cached version. This is nowhere near a reliable source, though – and the names don't seem to have appeared on Oha Suta either.
The names Gigaiasu and Mamanbō point me here, but I can't see the name anywhere in a video or a screenshot. Prime Blue (talk) 18:18, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
The new trailer on the most recent Oha Suta episode clearly showed their names, along with the names of two more Pokémon. --138.110.206.102 (talk) 12:50, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Edit war?

IP 138.110.206.XXX, your edits are starting to take a disruptive course. You revert edits without an explanation, you undo errors corrected, formatting work, and references added by others, and you accuse users of vandalism despite their edits being perfectly reasonable. Remember to assume good faith, and to explain your actions if you disagree with other users.

On my recent edit: The change from "romanization" to "anglicization" was based on the current rewording of MOS:JP, which I linked to. And while we give rōmaji ("Roman letters") after the katakana form, we more specifically give the Hepburn romanization – rōmaji is not synonymous to this term (to clarify: whole articles on Wikipedia are written in rōmaji, as it just means Roman letters). Prime Blue (talk) 21:23, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I was just about to say the same when my computer died last night, but less eloquently. To put it another way, 138, if I make changes A, B, and C, and you object to B, then using the Undo button is an abuse of the reversion feature because you don't account for A and C. In those cases you must MANUALLY undo B. --WikidSmaht (talk) 00:44, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Okay, before this is developing into a real fierce edit war: How about we keep that Japanese name in there but mention that it is not the English name (like in the rest of the column)? Something like...
Munna[1][2]
(English name TBA)
And for Minezumi, just keep the whole tooltip with the en dash:
–[3]
(English name TBA)
Would that be acceptable for you two? Remember, it really won't pay off to start an edit war over this, as the English name will be known in a few months anyway. Prime Blue (talk) 15:01, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I should have been reading here... Not really, no. I do not think the Japanese names should appear in the rest of the table, and I see no reason why Munna is a special exception and Zorua/Minezumi are not.( Not that I would support that either.) Even if I DID agree, it would STILL not be O.K. to put Minezumi in there because it is not confirmed that the two are related by evolution. Yes, it does seem obvious based on their appearance, but without a reliable source, we cannot put it in the table. Speaking of sources, I don't think a video qualifies as a transcript for the {{cite episode}}: Empty citation (help) template. Pretty sure a tranSCRIPT is written by definition. --WikidSmaht (talk) 22:05, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference BWPOKE1 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ Cite error: The named reference munna was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  3. ^ Cite error: The named reference ohasuta300710 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

Nincada, Ninjask & Shedinja

[No. 290-291-291] I think there should be a detail for them. Ninjask and Shedinja evolve simultaneously from Nincada. 113.22.144.178 (talk) 15:19, 4 August 2010 (UTC).

I can do that, but is there a particular reason why you think it is needed? --WikidSmaht (talk) 22:05, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Isshu Pokémon

Junichi Masuda confirmed that there are no pre-gen V Pokémon in the Isshu dex; therefore, national dex # = Isshu dex # + 494. --138.110.206.150 (talk) 19:09, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

We cannot assume that; for one thing, we have no idea if Victini will be before or after the rest in the National Pokédex. And they could always have them in a different order for no particular reason. --WikidSmaht (talk) 22:05, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Pocket Monsters Pinball

The Japanese version of Pocket Monsters Pinball uses the trademarked romaji names during main gameplay. That verifies all the names of the 151 first pokemon, I added a note for those missing one. AdamantBMage (talk) 00:29, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Went through the game and verified every name (there were a couple errors in the list, not sure how they snuck in - the trademarked names are quite well-known at this point, but I fixed those). Two spellings stood out, though - "Nidoqeen" and "Polygon". The articles sources the other, far more common spellings, and I've never seen these particular ones used officially before - guess they're just accidental spelling errors? AdamantBMage (talk) 02:11, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Whoops, did not read that before I added "Polygon". I'd take that as a genuine alternate anglicization (similar to other descriptive titles like "Ghost" and "Fire") and "Nidoqeen" as a misspelling (they do seem to have problems with the word "queen", see "Beequen" above). Prime Blue (talk) 21:27, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Also, it's a pity that Nintendo didn't call Kadabra "Ungeller" in Japan. Prime Blue (talk) 21:45, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh my god

Who the hell added in-line citations to every entry? Not only does it look ugly as all hell, but it's totally unnecessary. When you have such a long list, a citation at the end will suffice, just as it does right now for all the English names. Add notes for exceptions. The page is long enough already and is only going to get longer. - MK (t/c) 01:30, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I "the hell" added them. They will be removed along with the unreferenced official anglicizations if no one finds sources. Prime Blue (talk) 17:32, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Please do. Shame on you good sir D< - MK (t/c) 06:20, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Shame on me for what? Following WP:V? The errors uncovered above show that large parts of the official anglicizations column were fan translations, educated guesses far from anything official. In any case, tone your language down, there's no need to treat me like that. Prime Blue (talk) 01:56, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm not trying to attack you personally, just the awful idea itself. I'm fine with putting 'citation needed' in 100 places if need be, but not using actual in-line citations to reverse it. In much the same way as we have the games and other places (such as potentially this for the Japanese names in Japanese) to use as sources, we should be using sources for broad strokes, but not for individual entries. Find a way around it. I don't mean to sound like a dick or some bad guy you need to link Wikipedia policy to, but just... It's THAT bad. I'm sorry if I seemed over the top :P - MK (t/c) 04:58, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
The katakana and Hepburn romanizations are not the problem, the official anglicizations are. If there was a single source where all of the official anglicizations would be given at once, we could just put this one reference after the column title and that'd be it. But at this moment, we just have some 300 exceptions, coming all from different sources. The only "batch" citation so far is the Pokémon Pinball one. We could solve that by putting the reference just after Fushigidane and Mew, with a note after it explaining that all intermediate Pokémon (2-150) use the same source. Also, sorry, but if someone uses strong language and tells me to shame on myself, I can't help but feel attacked. ;-) Prime Blue (talk) 10:52, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, was having a bad day...week :x anyway on topic, yeah I was referring to the "official romanizations" that lack a lot of sources. Are they listed in, perhaps, a trademark database? or would that not be considered a reliable source? - MK (t/c) 10:44, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
All Pokémon that did have a trademark for their Japanese name have an IPDL reference pointing to the respective pages. However, there is no common trademark table where all of them are listed. For the names currently missing, additional sources will have to be found. Prime Blue (talk) 20:17, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Images as sources

Why are images being used as sources for the Japaneese names for the Pokemon? They show as being from imageshack. Also, I thought images were in no situation to be used as sources. Blake (Talk·Edits) 01:05, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

The Bandai card sets themselves are used as sources. The images were just linked to in the article so the names are verifiable for other editors. Prime Blue (talk) 20:10, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Well, I don't mean to be a problem, but those could easily be edited. Its like getting news from a fansite. Not saying they are edited, but they can't be used as sources. Blake (Talk·Edits) 20:36, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
To me it sounds similar to using {{cite sign}} or {{cite video game}}; if a screenshot were taken of the game or sign, the reference is the game/sign itself and not the image. I understand the hesitation, but the Wikipedia standard is verifiability; as long as the names can be verified (by finding an actual version of the card) and there aren't sources contradicting the image, I would think that it is ok. —Ost (talk) 21:32, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
I think the problem Blake has is that the use of {{cite web}} (which I used for lack of finding a more suitable citation template) makes it seem as if those web images are cited. {{cite sign}} might be more clear since it encompasses "other non-video visuals" and still includes a URL field. Prime Blue (talk) 21:46, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
I'd wait for Blake to confirm, but I think that its description makes "cite sign" a good candidate to use. Also, there is {{cite game}}, but it redirects to the video game template. —Ost (talk) 21:54, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
I am not sure "cite sign" would be the best thing to use to cite the cards. Maybe just cite the company's merchandise without the use of a template. Templates are just there to make things easier. They don't have to be used. Blake (Talk·Edits) 23:37, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Column for the Isshu dex numbers

I believe that the time has come to add the column for the Isshu dex numbers, as the release date for the Japanese Pokémon Black and White games has arrived in Japan. Would anyone object to the insertion of said column right now? --SoCalSuperEagle (talk) 21:07, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Since nobody's objected to this proposal, I will soon begin the process of adding the column to the table. This addition will take a little while to complete since several hundred table rows will need to be extended in the process. --SoCalSuperEagle (talk) 22:51, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
After you're done, I'd like to make the table easier to read by adding carriage returns (or I could do it now).—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:10, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Okay, the column insertion is complete. You may go ahead & add the carriage returns at this time. --SoCalSuperEagle (talk) 01:03, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Done.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:53, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

New Pokemon

A list of all of the new Pokemon can be found on Serebii here. These have been confirmed by multiple sources. Should I go ahead and add them under an endash? Darkrandomkid (talk) 19:31, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

No, you say they have been confirmed by multiple sources (reliable I hope). Let's see the reliable sources before you waste your time making a table. SpigotMap 19:33, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
If you want multiple sources you can go to Bulbapedia, Marriland, and LegendaryPokemon, along with the original Serebii list.Shiek276 (talk) 02:36, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
Those are all fansites and cannot be used.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:39, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
These are fansites, not reliable sources. Reliable sources include sites like IGN, Joystiq, 1UP.com, etc. Blake (Talk·Edits) 02:40, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
I find it somewhat weird that Bulbapedia is considered a fansite, but since it's specifically geared towards Pokémon I can see why this is so. Shiek276 (talk) 02:49, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
Fansites are websites written by random fans of the game. Reliable sources are of news sites written by paid staff members. Blake (Talk·Edits) 02:51, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Missingno.

I've removed Missingno. from the list. Missingno. is a glitch, not a Pokémon, even though it can be caught like one. Of course if we do include it because it can be encountered and caught like a Pokémon, we should include every Pokémon that fits that description. There are 23 other glitch Pokémon that fit that description, many of which share Pokédex numbers with other Pokémon. In fact, most glitch Pokémon in Red and Blue have a different Pokédex number in Yellow. Basically, it is ridiculous to count any glitch as an official part of the game. (source: http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Glitch_Pok%C3%A9mon) Archon Divinus (talk) 19:10, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

I have added it back for the following reason. "MissingNo. is on this list for several reasons. First, it was cited by Nintendo as being #000, and therefor is a listed Pokémon. Plus, this list serves as a directory, and should list all Pokémon with articles." Also, the people removing it are random editors and IPs. The people adding it are editors I see around a lot. So I trust their reasoning. Blake (Talk·Edits) 19:15, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
MissingNo. is the only glitch identified by Nintendo and Game Freak as existing. We have an article on the phenomenon here, so why should we not include it with all of the other Pokémon?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:45, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
And acknowledged glitches belong on a list of actual gameplay elements? Look, it's not a Pokémon, it's a glitch that acts like one, and it certainly was never cited as Nintendo as being #000. Nintendo said, quoted from the MissingNo. article, it was a "programming quirk" and they "warned against encountering it and removed it in Pokémon Yellow". Pretty clearly not officially 000, and pretty clearly not an actual Pokémon. Archon Divinus (talk) 22:51, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
This is a "List of Pokémon". Why shouldn't this element of the original games not be mentioned in a list of similar elements?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:03, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Because it's a "List of Pokémon" not a "List of Pokémon, and One Glitch". Archon Divinus (talk) 23:07, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
It's still a glitch Pokémon.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:35, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Can you cite one official source that says that it's a Pokémon? Archon Divinus (talk) 23:57, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
I think it is less about it being recognized as a Pokemon, and more about it having an article. I don't really agree with that. If there was a random Pokemon whose design never got implemented, and it became notable for an article, where would it be listed on this page? Some prose at the bottom? Maybe that is where MissingNo. should be mentioned, instead of being on the table. Blake (Talk·Edits) 00:20, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
I disagree with having it there as well. Missingo is not a Pokémon, has never been officially recognized as one, and has definitely never been recognized as "Pokémon #000" by anyone with a say in the matter. The only reason it's acknowledged by Nintendo as existing in the first place is because it's a potentially game-destroying glitch, and they want to warn people against causing it - something they do with other glitches, too. It has absolutely nothing to do on a "List of Pokémon". "Egg" is more of a Pokémon than Missingno is. AdamantBMage (talk) 22:15, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

There are several hundred thousand glitch Pokémon. Want me to start adding those? I think we also forgot the 2 billion or so Spinda. But in all seriousness, I am more shocked that this issue wasn't like, settled before. Wasn't there a note on the top/bottom of the article before, and that linked to the MissingNo. article? (Which is a good article, and should be mentioned whether or not MissingNo. is on the list.) But, let's not pretend it's an actual Pokémon. That's just trolling. — MK (t/c) 23:05, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

It has a number. It exists. And we cover it here on Wikipedia. There are not "several hundred thousand glitch Pokémon" and the different Spinda variations are not all different Pokémon. Why should it matter that a known entity in the games not be included on this list?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:42, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
All glitch Pokémon have numbers. And it's an issue because it isn't an official Pokémon, it's a glitch. Like I said before, give me one source that officially names it as a pokémon, but if you can't find one, it doesn't belong. Archon Divinus (talk) 00:36, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Well, MissingNo. needs to be listed somewhere. It's the only notable glitch Pokémon.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:49, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
This is a list of Pokémon, and Missingno isn't a Pokémon, just a glitch. If it should be listed anywhere, it's on List of notable video game glitches, or something similar. As has been said, you're not going to find anything official that labels Missingno as a "Pokemon species". Is Missingno notable? Yes. Does it deserve mention on Wikipedia? Yes. Does it deserve its own article? Possibly. But it's not a Pokemon, and has nothing to do on a list of Pokemon. AdamantBMage (talk) 02:23, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah. The Generation I Pokémon games have 104 glitch Pokémon alone. All the unused slots from the 151 used out of 255. Generation II adds a few more, but since Generation III the number of spaces has jumped due to the Pokémon, and so glitch Pokémon numbers have skyrocketted. There's 511 slots in Generation III. Generation IV? 65535. It's really sort of silly, since it sort of goes over the line as to what is content and what is random code going to the wrong places. I mean, the way you access these things is to get it to read the wrong info under a certain routine, at which point, well, every byte in the game could be a glitch. MissingNo. deserves its article, but it doesn't belong embedded at the top of this list. The only source we have on MissingNo. being referred to as a Pokémon in an official capacity is on a list of glitches Nintendo published, which hardly speaks to its stance as a Pokémon and more of a way to reference it. "I have a Pokémon #000, it's screwing up my game" leads Nintendo to add Pokémon 000 to its list of glitches, and to tell people it is a glitch Pokémon and to remove it. As far as I know, that is the sole official mention of it:

MissingNO / Pokémon 000

MissingNO is a programming quirk, and not a real part of the game. When you get this, your game can perform strangely, and the graphics will often become scrambled. The MissingNO Pokémon is most often found after you perform the Fight Safari Zone Pokémon trick.

To fix the scrambled graphics, try releasing the MissingNo Pokémon. If the problem persists, the only solution is to re-start your game. This means erasing your current game and starting a brand new one.

I think it's clear to everyone here what calling it "Pokémon 000" and "the MissingNo Pokémon" intended, as they explicitly say it is not a real part of the game, tho I can see it used as Verifiable vs True. I know for sure that *I* won't get involved in an edit war, I'll just help people understand the nature of the issue. — MK (t/c) 18:38, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Actually Missingno. WAS a pokemon, but it got cut due to Game Freak deciding to cut the now Gen II pokemon from the Gen I games. So can we put that in the articles? Porygon-Z (talk) 17:04, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

So, can't we just add all the new Pokemon yet?

The games have been out for a month, it should be source enough. Why keep pretending they aren't "officially revealed" yet? 134.129.203.20 (talk) 02:38, 10 October 2010 (UTC) Bah, when did I log out? AdamantBMage (talk) 02:39, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

I think we should leave out the 3 as of yet unreleased event legendaries (Kerudio, Meroetta, Genosekuto), but the rest should all be fine.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:27, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Considering that the List_of_Pokémon_(494-545), List_of_Pokémon_(546-598), and List_of_Pokémon_(599-649) pages now exist, I concur. --SoCalSuperEagle (talk) 21:08, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Hmmmmmm... Well, we can put up all the katakana for sure, and evolutions, and ’dex numbers, but obviously trademarked anglicizations will still need sources... Do we source the Hepburn or consider it a case of IAR? --WikidSmaht (talk) 04:39, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
If we only have the Hepburn, then by all means that's the official Japanese name when rendered in English characters.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:56, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
With this series of collectible medals packed in boxes of candy that Bandai is selling, I expect the majority of the Gen V pokemon to have known anglicizations eventually. We just have to keep an eye on that candy page. AdamantBMage (talk) 20:31, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
If there's no official romanization yet, just go with the Hepburn romanization.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:49, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
That was not at all my question and is a terrible idea that will lead us back to where we were before. --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:28, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Everybody talks about the weather...

...but hardly anybody does anything about it. Full list to come, as I get time here and there.
I will not include uncited names. Now that the games are out, though, they serve as the primary source for the existence and Japanese names of the Pokémon, citations for anything except trademarked anglicizations are no longer necessary. I leave all the citation stuff to the rest of you. --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:28, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

If names aren't accompanied by trademarks, just use the Hepburn romaji name or use common sense.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:02, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Here's a ton of new registered trademarks

Wee I suck and apparently can't add data without breaking the page, so I'll hand it over to you other guys. Have fun. AdamantBMage (talk) 08:05, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

It's not possible to view that page because of he nature of the IPDL website (it uses a cookie on your end).—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:58, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Ouch, sorry, my bad. I'll try getting them up after all, then. AdamantBMage (talk) 20:31, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Ugh, I've been trying to add data to the table, but I just end up breaking it no matter what. I'll add the names once someone who knows what they're doing updates the list to include all the known Pokemon from the individual lists. AdamantBMage (talk) 19:19, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Well, list the names here. We can put up references later.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:27, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
All right:

レパルダス - Lepardas

ヤナッキー - Yanakkie

バオッキー - Baokkie

ヒヤッキー - Hiyakkie

シママ - Shimama

ギガイアス - Gigaiath

オタマロ - Otamaro

モンメン - Monmen

チュリネ - Churine

ワルビル - Waruvile

ワルビアル - Waruvial

イシズマイ - Ishizumai

ズルッグ - Zuruggu

デスマス - Desumasu

アバゴーラ - Abagoura

アーケオス - Archeos

チラチーノ - Chillaccino

ゴチム - Gothimu

コアルヒー - Koaruhie

バニプッチ - Vanipeti

ギアル - Giaru

ヒトモシ - Hitomoshi

オノンド - Onondo

クマシュン - Kumasyun

コジョフー - Kojofu

クリムガン - Crimgan

キリキザン - Kirikizan

サザンドラ - Sazandora

ウルガモス - Ulgamoth

コバルオン - Cobalon

テラキオン - Terrakion

ビリジオン - Virizion

トルネロス - Tornelos

ボルトロス - Voltolos

ランドロス - Landlos

キュレム - Kyurem

In addition, we also got verification that "Hiyappu" is registered. AdamantBMage (talk) 21:32, 19 October 2010 (UTC) Go ahead and add these to this list where applicable, with citations and the in-depth list articles, as I will use those making the full list. --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:28, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Potentially Add Pictures for Each Pokemon

Though it would take a bit of time and effort, I'd be willing to help organize and start implementing them. I understand that adding them visibly into the article could make the Article extremely long, so potentially a Gallery with the Pokemon in order. If anyone is willing to do this, get in contact with me or post your support here! We'll need people to do: · A Set Pokemon 0-65 · B Set Pokemon 66-130 · C Set Pokemon 131-195 · D Set Pokemon 196-260 · E Set Pokemon 261-325 · F Set Pokemon 326-390 · G Set Pokemon 391-455 · H Set Pokemon 456-520 · I Set Pokemon 521-585 · J Set Pokemon 586-646

You would only have to get the pictures for the Pokemon that are actively in the Wikipedia table. One volunteer per set. Try to crop the images to be around 200x200 or 400x400, looking for official images rather than fan-made art.

Thanks!

Rhadamanthine (talk) 17:57, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

We don't not have the pictures because it would be hard to do. It is against the policy. The images are not fair use, and can only be used if necessary. The only way a Pokemon will have an image is if it has an article. The lists will not have images because you can't have 50 images on one page, and there would be no way to chose which ones get images. Blake (Talk·Edits) 18:46, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Would be acceptable if there was one single image released by Nintendo which shows them all. But I doubt something like this exists. And that it would make much sense at a low resolution. Prime Blue (talk) 12:11, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
There has to be an image that shows all of them per generation. Or perhaps we only feature ones used by the main characters in the anime?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:15, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
A photograph of someone's merchandising collection (figurines or something, like this) perfectly organized to fit the numbers would be our best bet. Unfortunately, it is hard to find any good ones released under a free license. Does the anime have an episode with a one-generation Pokémon group picture (one of the season openings perhaps)? Prime Blue (talk) 17:53, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
What about the video game sprite images organized per set?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:16, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Sesu Prime once mentioned that several non-free images edited into a single one still count as separate images, so I think one of those fan-generated sprite compilations is not an option. For the moment, I have added an official sprite image from Pokémon Stadium, until a better or free alternative is found. Prime Blue (talk) 22:45, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
I don't think that image counts because it's generated from a ROM.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:10, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
What do you mean? Prime Blue (talk) 03:24, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
If you are referring to the fact that it was taken with an emulator, then don't worry: There are no policies that forbid screenshots from emulators, and there are a variety of featured articles using emulator screenshots (such as Alleyway and Chrono Cross). But as I said, it is a temporary solution until a better or free alternative is found. Prime Blue (talk) 03:33, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
No, I mean that the image cannot be encountered in normal gameplay.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:49, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
You're mistaken there, it is a normal in-game screenshot where all of the sprites are shown at once. It is shown at the Victory Palace after pressing the start button. Prime Blue (talk) 04:06, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

All U.S. names for new black and white pokemon have been revealed!

All of the U.S. names of the new black and white pokemon have been revealed. Here is a very reliable source: www.serebii.net —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.48.169.154 (talk) 08:33, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Serebii is not allowed on Wikipedia as it does not qualify as a reliable source according to our policy.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:35, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Well they have all been revealed and this article needs to be updated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.48.169.154 (talk) 04:20, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

The names have not yet been confirmed by Nintendo or the Pokemon Company. Therefore, they are not official. DragoNNized (talk) 18:51, 18 February 2011 (UTC)DragoNNized

Please help. Quick fixes

I linked all the GenV species names, and I did it so quickly, I guess I made some mistakes. But whenever I try and fix it, my browser acts like a douche and freezes. Could somebody fix this? Thanks. Blake (Talk·Edits) 00:40, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:24, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism

This IP 79.167.23.81 from Greece is vandalizing this page and others.

Japanese names

Hey, I'm finding the spelling of the Romanji names to be somewhat questionable. Should it be written as it is, or what some people somewhat translate it to? i.e 'r' sounds to 'l' sounds, etc. I just find it irritating to see the japanese names written in English. Look at Flareon; the "Japanese" name is Booster. That is NOT Japanese, even considering Romanji pronunciation. Should it be written as it is, or as Būstuā? Plus, could someone (I'm willing) put the Jap names for all of them, not some. It looks quite patchy otherwise, and no-one likes a patchy wikipedia page, least of all the creators. Just a thought. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TotNoob102 (talk • contribs) 21:54, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

The Japanese names given on the table are the official romanizations used by Nintendo/GameFreak on Japanese merchandise. As expected, they can be a little Engrish. Hover your cursor over the name to see the original kana and the proper romanization. — MK (t/c) 11:17, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Better Composite

Has anyone considered using a better compilation image, in the vein of this? I don't think the blurry Stadium models quite cut it anymore, and last I checked the sprites from the games themselves were public domain for informational and/or promotional purposes. 71.212.109.43 (talk) 09:02, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

My correction on FALSE information around Lugia and Ho-Oh in GBA generation

Lugia and Ho-Oh are special cases which is only Illusory in GBA versions (which inaccessible by any means in Ruby/Sapphire/Emerald version and can only be obtained through events in Firered/Leafgreen Version




This is false! as both Lugia and Ho-Oh can both be obtained via Pokémon Colosseum (Ho-Oh) and Pokémon XD: Gale of Darkness (Lugia) and I have add this information to the page. You did not need to obtain them just through events and to say so is a false statement on our part. Swifty*talk 08:13, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Genesect

My apologies if I missed something, but why isn't Genesect listed? So what if it hasn't been officially recognized yet? It will someday. It's very misleading to say that there are 648 Pokémon, as there are 649, and Genesect is one of them. CuboneKing (talk) 00:43, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Because Wikipedia is not a cyrstal ball and for all we know Genesect may never be distributed by Nintendo and this has been a subject for quite sometime and it all boils down to this and all editors have to accept the community's decision to follow WP:CRYSTALBALL. Nintendo/GameFreak/The Pokémon Company International nor Pokémon.com have acknowledged the existence of Genesect and as an encyclopedia we have no proof of its existence other then fan based words. That is not enough for an encyclopedia. So that breaks the WP:Reliable source rules so pretty much there you have it, Wikipedia does not post fan speculations even if the people have been able to illegally get Genesect and know of its existence. It is not official and not recognized officially so we do not recognize it based on that. I hope this answers your question. Swifty*talk 22:55, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Was officially announced anyway, you were wrong because it was in the original coding anyway. Looking at the code it's in there. --Hinata talk 00:38, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

No it was not officially announced if so where is your source? ^_^ Swifty*talk 01:24, 27 July 2012 (UTC) It has been unanimously overruled that until acknowledged by Nintendo/GameFreak/Pokemon.com on the Pokémon talk page so bring it up there. All other talks about Genesect need to brought up there in the support or oppose way that is going on now. Until enough of the wikicommunity supports it and does not oppose as it is right now Genesect is not to be acknowledged. ^_^ Swifty*talk 01:27, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Swifty, it has been officially announced for two weeks now. I gave you a link on your talk page to the official Japanese website that has the press release. Just because you personally can't read Japanese does not mean we cannot include the information.—Ryulong (竜龙) 06:45, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Incorect

There is a final Pokemon that has not been officially revealed, but after looking at the coding ( and many others I might add,) There is a Pokemon called Genesect. Now, I am ready to discuss this, but there should be a note about Genesect, as this is a POKEMON, IN THE CODING, because no one should deny this, as many other sites state this is a real Pokemon. There's no denying Genesect is real. It's in the coding. --Hinata talk 01:52, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the GS Ball information.

The Celebi tooltip says " in the international releases of the games, although it could be found in the Japanese release of Crystal by using the Pokémon Mobile System GB, an accessory which linked a Game Boy Color to a player’s mobile phone, to obtain a special item"

This isn't entirely incorrect, though it does appear to claim that this "special item" (the GS Ball) could always be obtained by using this system, rather than what was actually the case - that it was downloadable for a limited period of time, just like all the wi-fi events we've had in generation 4 and up. The Pokemon Mobile System also offered other event Pokemon, not just this one item - again, just like the wi-fi gift system.

Just like how the Darkrai note says "Darkrai cannot be encountered and caught in the course of normal gameplay. It is officially only made available via promotional events, or transferred from spin-off titles under certain conditions." even though Darkrai can be found in Diamond, Pearl and Platinum by using wi-fi connectivity to obtain a special item, "Celebi cannot be encountered and caught in the course of normal gameplay. It is officially only made available via promotional events, or transferred from spin-off titles under certain conditions." should accurately summarize its availability. That it can be obtained by use of an item that's only available via promotional events is unnecessary to mention, and is not exclusive to Celebi. 80.213.200.199 (talk) 22:11, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

The localization fan underestimates an Japanese version.

They want to exclude a letter called "original" from an Japanese version.

The "localize version" destroys Japanese culture.

The "localize fan" underestimates Japanese version. Stupid spiral. 60.33.34.97 (talk) 08:11, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

What the fuck are you talking about? 92.7.25.236 (talk) 05:01, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

New Pokemon

Here are 3 new pokemon:

  • Pancham
  • Fletchling
  • Helioptile

Can someone please add them because I don't know how to

Citation

Here is where I got the info from:

Pokebub22 (talk) 00:39, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

List of Pokémon (numbered) pages

Is it really worth noting things such as anime appearances and name meanings on the individual List of Pokémon pages? I could understand if they had a significant role in the anime (such as Axew and Zorua) but I don't think that Beartic being owned by a rival is significant enough to be noted. I also bring up the name issue since many Pokémon appear to be using the meanings of their Japanese names instead of the English ones. --Helioptile: Fully charged! 20:07, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Anime appearances should be at least a major role in an episode, not a cameo, or one time appearance like "They were used by randomtrainer22 in tournament round 17". If a "rival" uses it in an important battle, I think it would be worth noting it is part of their party. As for the name meanings, it has mostly been done when they are split into full articles. As some got merged, a few retained that information. It is important in most cases, as the meaning of their name may describe their character, but if you feel it doesn't really help the reader understand the character, then sure, feel free to remove it.
Just note that really, we would strive for these list sections to be as complete as possible, and a lot should have more information, not less. Information should only be removed if it really does mean nothing for it to be there. Blake (Talk·Edits) 15:13, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Can someone copy-paste from Bulbapedia?

The new Pokémon for Generation VI are listed on Bulbapedia. http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/List_of_Pok%C3%A9mon_by_National_Pok%C3%A9dex_number Why is this not yet on Wikipedia? If citing a wiki is a problem, cite X and Y's Pokédex. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.5.171.254 (talk) 19:17, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

While Bulbapedia's list is accurate, you should not be copying from there because it is both a wiki (and thus unreliable) and licensed under a license incompatible with Wikipedia's (CC-BY-NC-SA 2.5 as opposed to Wikipedia's CC-BY-SA 3.0/GFDL). --SnorlaxMonster 09:20, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
I don't exactly know much about X and Y(I have only played a little bit), but I think since no Pokemon are part of multiple Kalo's Pokedex listings, can we not have them all in one column and put an icon or a tooltip stating which Pokedex that number refers to? I am sure we can come up with a smart system that relays important information without taking up 3 columns. If you put say "Ce010" instead of "10(ce)", it would sort correctly too(or there are other ways to make cells sort differently then they appear). Blake (Talk·Edits) 18:54, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
This is all dealt with now, though.—Ryulong (琉竜) 19:45, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Due to the session-based system utilized by the Japanese Trademark Database (http://www.ipdl.inpit.go.jp/Syouhyou/syouhyou.htm), a number of source links for official romanizations that link to this database have ended up dead (like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Pokémon#cite_note-158 etc). Can someone who knows how to use webcitation.org correct these to links to saved sessions (as in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Pokémon#cite_note-26 etc)? AdamantBMage (talk) 12:42, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Go to webcitation.org, fill out the information, make an archive link. Just be sure to use the title= field and the archiveurl= and archivedate= fields in {{cite web}} instead of just "URL" and "date". Just in case you need numbers, Floette is 2013-086538, Florges is 2013-086539, Espurr is 2013-086540, Pumpkaboo is 2013-086541, Slurpuff is 2013-086542, Aromatisse is 2013-086543, Phantump is 2013-086544, Bergmite is 2013-086545, Klefki is 2013-086546, Goomy is 2013-086547, and Noibat is 2013-086548.—Ryulong (琉竜) 21:48, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I got some instructions from Raykyogrou0 as well. I'll be going through them before too long. AdamantBMage (talk) 16:16, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Notability Discussion of Individual Pokémon

With the Sonic character notability discussion coming to a close, I thought that this would be a fitting time to discuss the character articles that are the most mentioned in notability discussions; Pokémon articles. We have many articles about Pokémon that don't, outside of the Pokémon fanbase, have any significant notability as a character, such as Ditto, Mr. Mime, and Ninetales. I propose discussions on whether to merge Ninetales, Koffing and Weezing, Gyarados, Ditto, Unown, Blaziken, Nosepass and Probopass, Absol, Luvdisc, Oshawott, Dewott, and Samurott, Vanillite, Vanillish, and Vanilluxe, and Klefki to their respective List of Pokémon articles. These are articles that (from my views as an editor and a Pokémon fan) are worth discussing. I am not claiming that I support to all of them need to be merged, but that they at least need to be discussed so that we can have consistency among video game character articles. Jucchan (talk) 18:05, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Every one of those articles has at least 10 citations to what the video game and pokemon wikiprojects deem reliable sources, so there's not much to do here.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 18:42, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Quality>quantity for citations. Following discussion, there was consensus to merge Blaze the Cat, Cream the Rabbit, and Wisp (Sonic) despite all of them being Good Articles with Blaze having 100 references, Cream 69, and Wisp 54. There is clearly something to do here. Jucchan (talk) 18:48, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
  1. Psyduck, Unown, Ditto - I have a number of sources that are yet to be implemented into the article.
  2. Luvdisc - Multiple sources refer to the Pokémon as one of or the worst Pokémon ever made. You cite Blaze and Cream, but the problem with those articles doesn't exist in this article (the idea of banal one-line mentions).
  3. Vanillite, Vanillish, and Vanilluxe, Klefki - A number of non-trivial articles that discuss the subject with a fair amount of detail.
  4. Oshawott, Dewott, and Samurott - I'm planning to refocus the article to only focus on Oshawott, while also expanding on sources used (as it is mostly pre-release and early-release reception that covers it).
  5. Abra, Kadabra, and Alakazam - The character was a source of a $100 million lawsuit and had accusations lodged against it of anti-Christianity. By your listing, you either didn't read the article or you think that the controversy section is all in-universe content. Seriously man.
  6. Gengar - The reception discusses his popularity among older male children, as well as featuring an accusation that it encourages occult behaviour.
  7. Mr. Mime - Lamest Pokémon, one of the most "fugliest", an in-depth mention in a book that is clearly not about Pokémon, and other non-trivial discussions of the charaacter.
  8. Nosepass and Probopass - Several sources that discuss its Easter Island inspiration, several inclusions in lists of bad Pokémon designs, etc.
  9. Haunter - The criticism from Christian groups alone is enough to demonstrate that it clears the gravity of WP:NOTE.

I get what you're trying to do, but the Sonic discussion didn't just shotgun every Sonic character article. All of the characters included in that discussion were included because of observed problems rather than potential problems. As demonstrated, a number of the articles in this list - most especially Abra, Kadabra, and Alakazam, Gengar, and Haunter - are definitely notable. I highly recommend that you examine the articles more thoroughly before you unfairly subject them to a notability discussion in which some will so clearly succeed. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 19:04, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

We've already been through this before, ever hear of the Pokemon test? Supernerd11 Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 19:11, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm aware of the Pokémon test, yes. A number of the articles brought up for discussion are notable for reasons other than "they're Pokémon, guys! Everyone knows them!" I'm not comfortable with self-destructing these articles or putting perfectly fine articles at risk of a merger just because they're Pokémon. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 19:15, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Whoops, sorry for the confusion, I was talking to Jucchan. Supernerd11 Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 19:31, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Oh, my bad. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 19:32, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
I'm going to clarify my statement, I never said that Abra, Kadabra, and Alakazam aren't notable, I agree that they shouldn't be merged. I listed more than I should have because I wanted to see if there was any strong opposition to some of them. I've amended my original suggestion to remove any Pokémon that would have a reasonable chance of meeting GNG. Jucchan (talk) 20:10, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
As for Haunter/Kadabra, I meant that they could be merged into a Pokémon controversies section. Jucchan (talk) 20:11, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Having just closed the Sonic thread, I urge you all to put this discussion on hold. What's needed, before WPVG gets any further into this, is a better sense of where to draw the line on issues like:
  • What constitutes substantial coverage versus passing coverage? Especially relevant: Do mentions, especially non-top or non-near top mentions in "Best of X" or "Worst of X" lists constitute substantial coverage?
  • How much first party sourcing is too much first party sourcing?
  • How do we treat coverage of character when it appears in coverage primarily about the game (as opposed to coverage specifically about the character)?
This discussion needs to happen in a central forum, and should ideally bring in people that are not normally WPVG participants, as (and most large WikiProjects suffer from this) WPVG occasionally forgets that it does not operate in a vacuum. Sven Manguard Wha? 19:49, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
The main issue here seems to be a backwards Pokemon test, in the vein of "waaaahh my sonic articles got merged so these Pokemon must be merged too for fairness!". There is no doubt that some of these articles may indeed be weak, but Hippie has already been working on merging them, so this discussion is just a WP:POINT argument, and should be closed anyways. Blake (Talk·Edits) 19:56, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Although please note that I may be missing the big picture. My main point is, the articles are already being merged and strengthened, and like Sven said, maybe a larger discussion on the concept of notability and what makes characters notable in the first place should be done. Blake (Talk·Edits) 20:05, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Fair enough, I agree that we need a larger discussion concerning notability, and I withdraw my proposal for discussion for now. It is evident from the Sonic Characters discussions that there are people on both sides for each point that Sven brought up, and that some people were upset by the result of the discussion. Sven, do you have any idea when and where this broader discussion could happen? Jucchan (talk) 21:14, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Jucchan - Where it happens isn't nearly as important as how much you get the word out. As long as you let people know about it through Wikipedia:Centralized discussion, you can put it anywhere. Dedicated subpage, on the WPVG talk, or on VP-Policy all would be viable locations. Sven Manguard Wha? 00:05, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Something big like this should probably be a subpage in WP:VG, since it seems like that's where most of these discussions would be covered at. If there's a lot more book characters and the like than I'm predicting would get involved in this, WP:CHAR might be better, but then it'll cut out stuff like Green Hill Zone, so I'm not sure. Supernerd11 Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 01:20, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Just curious. Why do Nosepass/Probopass, Blaziken, and Oshawott/Dewott/Samurott get individual pages? Mateussf (talk) 02:59, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Sources for Pokemon's existence

A lot of the sources for the gen 5 and gen 6 Pokemon date back to before the games came out, and simply act as a source that yes, this Pokemon exists. Since the games ARE out, these aren't particularly meaningful sources anymore, and besides causing clutter, they also make it confusing to tell whether an anglicized spelling of a Japanese name is sourced, or if the source simply points out that this Pokemon is a Pokemon that exists. Is it ok if I go in and delete these unneeded sources and clean up a bit? 88.91.193.109 (talk) 00:03, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

I think this is reasonable. With the exception of Generation VI Mythical Pokemon, there's no point having citations for existence when we can cite the official Pokemon site just once rather than a bunch of places where they were first announced. Particularly because of the romanization point the previous user raised. --SnorlaxMonster 11:13, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
It's better to have more citations than less, though. There's no harm in letting them stay.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 17:13, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
It'd be of use to find a catch-all citation if possible. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 17:22, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Following on from New Age Retro Hippie's point, in the citations section at the bottom we could just put [4] and [5] in the "references" section, instead of having all the inline references for each Pokemon's name. References for official romanizations would stay, of course. It wouldn't really be removing references as much as listing them efficiently. --SnorlaxMonster 02:01, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
The issue on sourcing is more on the romanicized Japanese names of Pokémon like "Lizardon" and "Gekkouga".—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 02:17, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
I think it's important to have citations for any official romanization, even if it's the same as Hepburn; otherwise it's just an assumption. (I think that's what you were suggesting—your message wasn't entirely clear.) --SnorlaxMonster 15:35, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Well I don't know what particular issues you have with the article's sourcing. Could you give an example of an entry in the article that you think doesn't require the source it currently has?—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 16:13, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
The references next to Malamar's English and Japanese names are simply there to prove Malamar exists and those are its English/Japanese names. Likewise, the reference next to Inkay's English name and the first reference next to its Japanese name are the same (but not the second, which is the citation for the official romanization of its Japanese name). Instead of having all these references in-line, and making it not immediately obvious that references next to the Japanese name are for the official romanization, we could just link the official English and Japanese site Pokedex sites in the "References" section. --SnorlaxMonster 07:00, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Okay. It's useful to remove links that were put in place during the buildup to X and Y. We should however retain links that establish that Malamar is called "Calamanero" in Japanese (rather than Karamanero).—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 07:06, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I was never referring to the links sourcing the official romanization - of course we should keep those (there's no link sourcing "Calamanero" though, and the name isn't listed in the article either). It's the sources for the English and katakana names that just create unnecessary clutter. As Snorlax Monster says, we can just bulk cite them all with links to the official English and Japanese Pokemon sites' Pokedex.85.164.49.237 (talk) 22:12, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Pokemon Data No. 115's pre evolved form

No. 115's preevolved form is a MissingNo. Clefairy's preevolved form is also MissingNo. --116.14.183.192 (talk) 13:06, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Glitches don't count.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 20:06, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

uhh

hoopa is #720 and VOLCANION is #721. also, that picture of the gen. 1 pokemon only has the pokemon included in the pokerap. mew is missing. Valehd (talk) 20:34, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Why is Volcanion not listed here as #721? Because he's currently unavailable? Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 19:05, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

better image

http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs71/i/2012/103/2/e/pokemon___generation_1_by_zappazee-d39q2th.jpg it's a better image since it has mew included Valehd (talk) 20:42, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Gallade's Hoenn pokedex entry

I was Playing Pokemon Alpha Sapphire, when I was battling Wally, the pokedex filled in Gallade which is Hoenn #032 which is after Gardevoir (#031). Surskit is #033. Can you fix this? (Watching page in mobile) Pikachu2568 (talk) 08:35, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Volcanion Announced

I have a Pokémon that has been announced by The Pokémon Company. It's Volcanion and it is a Fire/Water type Pokémon and has the ability to use Water Absorb. It has been listed as the 721st Pokémon. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 19:59, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Magearna Confirmed

Hello peoples, a new Pokémon was released, although not in the games. It's confirmed for the 19th Pokémon movie and it's Mythical. It's called Magearna[1], or Magiana, as it was called when leaked in CoroCoro. If you want to add it, that would be fine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheetahrock21 (talk • contribs) 00:37, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Rowlet, Litten, and Popplio confirmed

On May 10, 2016, the Pokémon YouTube channel uploaded a video that confirmed the three starters of Sun & Moon: Rowlet, Litten and Popplio. It also revealed the designs of the cover legendaries, possibly named Solgaleo and Lunaala. Please update the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheetahrock21 (talk • contribs) 20:19, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on List of Pokémon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:09, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

I tried several of the above links today (June 18, 2018) and they no longer appear to exist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lvirden (talk • contribs) 14:07, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

I'll just leave this here

PTCGO_localization_pokemon_01092016.7z — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.230.137.16 (talk) 15:15, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

In Regards to Notes on Mythical Pokémon

In the Notes section, there are quite a few notes about Mythical Pokémon that, at least in my opinion, do not seem to accurately reflect what a mythical Pokémon is.

First Note
i. ^ Marked as Mythical Pokémon for at least one game entry. These Pokémon cannot be encountered and caught in the course of normal gameplay, and do not affect the completion of Pokédex. They are officially only made available via promotional events, or transferred from a previous version or spin-off titles under certain conditions. Lugia and Ho-Oh are special cases in that are mythical only in Game Boy Advance (GBA) versions but legendary in other versions, where they can be obtained by normal gameplay.

As far as I know, no one considers Ho-Oh and Lugia to have been mythical Pokémon at any point in time. This may mean that the definition of a Mythical Pokémon in the above-quoted note might require revision. Also, it doesn't account for the fact that about a dozen Pokémon are usually considered both Legendary and Mythical (such as Mew, Arceus, and Darkrai). I may be wrong, which is why I have refrained from going ahead and editing the page myself.

Second Note
q. ^ Phione, as it is mythical, can only be obtained from eggs produced by breeding a Ditto with another Phione or a Manaphy, or by transfer from spin-off titles.

I think I'll just quote Bulbapedia on this one:[2]

Phione's status as a Mythical Pokémon is often disputed, with contradiction occurring even between official sources.

Could someone who knows how to really articulate Wikipedia wording edit this in? Thanks.

—98.110.213.123 (talk) 02:14, 29 October 2016 (UTC) (CsBlastoise on Bulbapedia)

P.S.

The following text:

With the release of Pokémon X and Y and its subsequent film campaigns, 72 new Pokémon have been unveiled,

Has the following note attached to it:

At the games' release, only 69 new Pokémon were made available through normal play. As of 14 January 2015, two of the hidden Pokémon added in the games was announced, bringing the total to 71.

Someone please edit this to account for Volcanion, the third Pokémon added to the Gen VI Pokédex after the release of X and Y.

—98.110.213.123 (talk) 02:14, 29 October 2016 (UTC) (CsBlastoise on Bulbapedia)

References

  1. ^ http://www.pokemon.com/us/
  2. ^ "Manaphy (Pokémon)". Bulbapedia. Bulbagarden.net. Retrieved 29 October 2016.
Just for the sake of posterity, the above content in this section, which was written almost a year and a half before I made my Wikipedia account, was in fact written by me, CsBlastoise. It's been so long since I wrote it that I had completely forgotten about it, but it's quite clear that the authorship is mine. In any case, the glaring errors have been fixed over time, thanks in part to extensive restructuring of the list.
While I'm here, I will point out that a few of my prior points still stand:
  • The article does not reflect the fact that many (if not most) mythical Pokémon are also considered legendary
  • Phione's status as a mythical Pokémon is disputed
However, these details are not exactly necessary, and the article is fine enough without them. I also doubt that anyone will see this section in the first place, let alone follow up on it, and that's fine.
—CsBlastoise (talk) 05:36, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
Also, to be honest, I can't figure out exactly why I cited the Bulbapedia article on Manaphy in my original post, especially why I did so without really going into the odd relationship between Manaphy and Phione. The version that existed back when I wrote that post did not expressly point out that Phione's status is disputed, and even the version available right now still doesn't mention it. The link I provided to the Phione article was, and still is, a much better source. —CsBlastoise (talk) 05:54, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Cyclonebiskit's lists of Pokémon

I was hoping that we could move @Cyclonebiskit:'s "list of Pokémon" over to the mainspace soon, to replace the current lists. See these examples: Kanto and Kalos. Currently, the last generation (Sun and Moon/Alola) isn't ready yet, but once that is done, the whole thing should be ready to move. Is anyone interested in helping out with the final list? Even the smallest thing helps. ~Mable (chat) 10:18, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Future of this list

Arguably the main part of this article is the large table of Pokémon, divided into seven collumns for the currently seven "generations". Eyeballing it, I can imagine an eigth collumn added to this table without any real issue, though I don't know how this would look on smaller screens. Regardless, a possible ninth generation would never fit on this table. We may eventually need to design a way to list nine generations, or even more. Though this issue is still a few years away, I'm sure, I invite people to think about what to do with this list when the time comes. An odd split into two tables, each listing four or more generations, would be a solution, albeit a sloppy one. Any better ideas? ~Mable (chat) 12:15, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

First 150 pokémon

The picture is of very low quality and therefore useless. You can't see any pokémon clearly. --83.135.97.133 (talk) 15:03, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

I can, but the image is indeed very small. If I were to suggest changes, I'd suggest the image be made larger. The level of detail wouldn't need to be improved upon, so that wouldn't affect its fair-use status. ~Mable (chat) 08:58, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
I made the image larger, so it should now be much easier to view. ~Mable (chat) 16:50, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

Pseudo... what?

Why is there a section of random normal pokemon tagged as pseudo-legendary? They're not legendary, they're just normal pokemon you can get as many as you want. Aluminium Colours (talk) 00:13, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

The term is indeed never explained. According to the fan wiki, it is a fan term with a fairly specific definition. The term is used by reliable sources [6] [7] [8], but the term really needs to be defined in prose if we want to use it in the table. I can't find a reliable source defining the term. ~Mable (chat) 09:03, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
If it's a fan term not acknowledged by Nintendo/Gamefreak, then it shouldn't really be part of the article. As for all intent, it is utterly meaningless.Aluminium Colours (talk) 10:01, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Whether it's a fan term or not is irrelevant; what is important is whether reliable sources use the term. That being said, since I haven't been able to find a reliable source defining the term, it's true that the term is practically meaningless from Wikipedia's perspective. As it stands, I do think it should be removed from the list, though I'd be happy to wait for someone to dig something up. ~Mable (chat) 15:06, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Well it's not irrelevant. Given that the page is dictating official Gamefreak numbering and classification of all Pokemon. And a fan coined class of legendaries has no part in that. Aluminium Colours (talk) 23:54, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
@Aluminium Colours: long overdue reply but I've removed "pseudo-legendary" as it's not an official term and this article does indeed follow what Game Freak has put forth. It was a fairly small grouping of Pokémon anyway so the list is hardly different without those highlights. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 07:59, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
ThanksAluminium Colours (talk) 03:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Status of the Detailed lists by generation section

It seems, to me, that there is some details of this table that are not correct. For instance, Gen 1 says there are no enhanced remakes of the games. Yet, when you go and read the page on FireRed and LeafGreen, it specifically states they were enhanced remakes of Red and Green. Likewise, HEartGold and SoulSilver wilipedia page indicates that they are enhanced remakes of Gold and Silver ... and the table says that there were no enhanced remakes.

Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire were enhanced remakes of Ruby and Sapphire - not X and Y.

Let's Go Pikachu and Eevee are not remakes of Sun and moon, but somewhat based on Pokémon Yellow.

I am hesitant to make changes to the table, because someone sure appears to have thought they knew the relationships, even though it appears they ignored the contents of the pages referenced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lvirden (talk • contribs) 14:05, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Gen 8

Other Pokemon are known. Shouldn't we put them in? Porygon-Z (talk) 03:31, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Supersonicxp99 keeps claiming that there are 19 Galar Pokemon so far, but as far as I'm aware there's only 17: Grookey, Scorbunny, Sobble, Gossifleur, Eldegoss, Wooloo, Corviknight, Drednaw, Yamper, Alcremie, Rolycoly, Duraludon, Impidimp, Obstagoon, Morpeko, Zacian, Zamazenta. So what are these other two Pokemon they keep referring to? Phantom02 (talk) 05:11, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Sirfetch'd, Cramorant, and Polteageist. Porygon-Z (talk) 17:29, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Mistake

I was adding Galarian forms as well as the Galarian Pokémon. I have seen my mistake and I will fix it. Supersonicxp99 (talk) 23:34, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Spam Pokémon on November 15

So we all know that November 15 is Pokémon sword and shield time so who is with me with spamming Wikipedia with every Pokémon I find? Not vandalism... Supersonicxp99 (talk) 23:37, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

"Pokemon card list" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Pokemon card list. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 23:58, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

"List of Stage 2 Pokémon" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of Stage 2 Pokémon. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 00:06, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

"Pokemon-Pets" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Pokemon-Pets. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 00:13, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

"List of generation IX Pokémon" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of generation IX Pokémon. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 00:24, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

"List of Basic Pokemon" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of Basic Pokemon. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 00:33, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

"List of Basic Pokémon" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of Basic Pokémon. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 00:34, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

"Sinnoh pokedex" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Sinnoh pokedex. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 00:41, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

"List of Pokémon by Sinnoh Pokédex number" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of Pokémon by Sinnoh Pokédex number. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 00:42, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

"Hoenn Pokédex" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Hoenn Pokédex. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 00:49, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

"List of Pokemon by Japanese Name" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of Pokemon by Japanese Name. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 01:30, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Blue Cross

Should the blue background and black cross also be used to label the evolved forms of the starter Pokemon? Primal Groudon (talk) 02:51, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Primal Groudon, no. Evolved forms are not considered starter Pokemon. Starter Pokemon are what you can first get. you cannot get Blastoise as a starter. Same goes for the black cross.

Pokemon That Might Need Their Own Pages

I think a few significant Pokemon need their own pages: Ditto, Rotom, Ho-oh, Zacian and Zamazenta, Zygarde, Kyogre and Groudon, Dialga and Palkia, Solgaleo and Lunala, Darkrai, and Zekrom and Reshiram.

Also, maybe Entei's page should be renamed "Entei, Raikou, and Suicune" and include information on Raikou and Suicune.

If there are Pokemon listed that aren't significant enough, fine. But these are the pages I think should be created. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.123.250.211 (talk) 16:07, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

"Complete List of Pokemon" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Complete List of Pokemon. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 24#Complete List of Pokemon until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 11:36, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Bellossom is missing!

I just cant find Bellossom Schoolkid2000 (talk) 16:42, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Use Ctrl + F and type its name into the box that pops up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.123.250.211 (talk) 22:50, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Nidoran

There are technically 897 Pokémon because of the Nidorans.

You do realize that Nidoran male and nidoran female are 2 different Pokemon right? UB Blacephalon (talk) 21:04, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
And their official names are Nidoran♂ and Nidoran♀ where the gender symbol is part of the name and not just a property. They also have different candy and so on. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:34, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

New Hisuian Pokémon

So I don't know if this should be implemented into the article or not, but there was a recent trailer for Legends: Arceus featuring the new Pokémon Wyrdeer and Basculegion. I don't quite know how this would be fitted into the article, but it would be great to have a Hisuian section in the future. Thanks! 23.28.31.25 (talk) 16:23, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

The new evolutions are included under the Generation VIII list on this page while the new forms are included only within the List of generation VIII Pokémon sub-list. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 16:31, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
Ah, I didn't see. Cool, you're ahead of me, Wikipedia! 23.28.31.25 (talk) 16:41, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Pokémon/Archive_3&oldid=1152612436"