Jump to content

Talk:Pokémon Black and White

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articlePokémon Black and White has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 10, 2010Good article nomineeNot listed
November 16, 2010Good article nomineeNot listed
October 22, 2014Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article

Pokémon Black and White 2

[edit]

So much for a new title, the latest episode of Pokémon Smash revealed that we will get a Remake of Pokémon Black and White for the 3DS. But I need some further confirmation on this one other than the official episode itself. As in a Magazine scan or something related?--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 23:31, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: Officially Confirmed by Nintendo now: http://www.pokemon.co.jp/ex/b2w2/ I can put this to rest.--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 23:37, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually for the DS per sources. Nevertheless, we can add it. Quite exciting considering all these spin-off game announcements lately. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 23:41, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this is completely unexpected news. This is sure to be a mess. Blake (Talk·Edits) 00:02, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
An official English-language announcement has been posted at Pokemon.com (details). The English-language titles have been confirmed to be Pokémon Black Version 2 and Pokémon White Version 2. --SoCalSuperEagle (talk) 00:40, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The official English titles of "Black" and "White" are "Black Version" and "White Version", but it's not going to become the common name.—Ryulong (竜龙) 03:26, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just want to correct you, it's a sequel, not a remake. Hence the "2" at the end. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.7.30.217 (talk) 00:31, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Release date in Japan is June 23, 2012, as per http://www.pokemon.co.jp/ex/b2w2/. Someone should edit this into the main article to provide more information than the vague "in June 2012". 210.86.1.151 (talk) 05:58, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So could someone please enlighten me why these games don't have their own article yet? They're their own entities and deserve their own article. 132.170.38.189 (talk) 05:01, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because articles shouldn't be made loosely about everything(like all the ~5 sentence E3-announced articles). When there is enough information to fill a reasonably sized article, it can be put out. Right now, it is of a decent size, but still could use a little more before that happens. What we have now is a paragraph or two of Plot and Gameplay, but no Development. If we had development information, it might would be substantial enough to be split. Blake (Talk·Edits) 14:51, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think part of the reason is because it doesn't have its own page. People are afraid to cram all of this info into B/W2 on a page that doesn't belong to the game. If it were to get its own page, then people would probably be more willing to put in more information. And it's not like this is just an expansion pack or something; these are brand new games. The fact that they don't have their own pages yet is just nonsense. 132.170.33.128 (talk) 21:45, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There just isn't enough content to put in there. Once the game is released in Japan soon, there will be more content of all types to add. Until then, just wait. Blake (Talk·Edits) 00:49, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
a) There's tons of content, just go lurk on Bulbapedia to see for yourself. b) So what, the day it comes out, we'll suddenly make a new page for it? 132.170.33.62 (talk) 18:15, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Bulbapedia is not a reliable source. They have no level of editorial control or preference. The game is coming out in one week, so we'll cover more about it then.—Ryulong (竜龙) 20:33, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Even Bulbapedia has very little information about it. Most of it, we already have mentioned here. Waiting a week or so for actual content won't hurt. Blake (Talk·Edits) 23:33, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The current content of that entire section should, surely by now warrant its own article, instead of needlessly making this one longer? ggctuk (2005) (talk) 16:24, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There is still the separate notability issue.—Ryulong (竜龙) 20:37, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, this has been out for weeks. Why doesn't this have its own page it? 76.108.249.169 (talk) 04:33, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because it has been out for weeks in Japan. That means, English news sources have yet to report on it, and we still know nothing more then we did before. The subject needs some development and reception information before being split. Blake (Talk·Edits) 04:40, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

図鑑

[edit]

It's Zukan, not Sukan. It's not a case of dakuten. It's always spelt like that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.28.147.193 (talk) 20:47, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Tell her father to give up looking for her father?"

[edit]

This line makes no sense. Check the Black and White 2 section. Somebody fix it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.227.159.150 (talk) 00:42, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New article for Black 2 and White 2

[edit]

As title suggests.

Black and White 2 are a completely new game, should related information not be on a separate article of their own? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mootootoo (talk • contribs) 09:01, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are not enough reliable sources to warrant a separate article, yet.—Ryulong (竜龙) 09:31, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely not. It's a cheap rehash that shares the same 649-Pokemon roster and 90% of the same overworld. Don't need a new article every time Game Freak craps out a remake/director's cut. 10:27, 29 September 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.210.60.236 (talk)

It's a sequel. The amount of Pokemon and the locations are not what separates sequels from the originals. Otherwise, Colosseum and XD should not have separate pages. The game has a large amount of new areas and an entirely new plot. It most definitely deserves a page more than Platinum does. 68.9.233.144 (talk) 03:14, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
New article please :) We don't need arrogance like that first guy had, research it first buddy it is new and improved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.45.45.98 (talk) 21:39, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It needs a new article. It is out and has been for a few days now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.26.2.60 (talk) 00:32, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's actuallyb een out for several months now, but there have not been any reliable sources to justify creating a separate article yet.—Ryulong (琉竜) 05:39, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There really are, they simply are not in the article. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 20:47, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Most everywhere should have reviews by this point, and there is an Iwata Asks for Development. Blake (Talk·Edits) 13:54, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It seriously needs a new article. Cross Pollination (talk) 19:56, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's not just a Director's Cut, but a sequel. It's irrelevant if it is very simmilar to its predecessor, therefore it needs its own article.--201.141.25.67 (talk) 21:21, 24 October 2012 (UTC)(Sorry, I forgot to login) --Darkeagle7x (talk) 21:25, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed! There seems to be enough material in this article now to justify having a separate one for the sequels. Yellow1996 (talk) 21:05, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]


News flash

[edit]

Heads up. A new article was copy-and-pasted from this one today, New Pokemon Black 2 and White 2. I can't say I'm a fan of the title. I tried to move it to Pokemon Black 2 and White 2, but that page is a redirect to this one, so we'll need an admin to delete the redirect before the move can be performed. This isn't my area of expertise; I haven't played Pokemon since Yellow. But if it meets WP:GNG then I think it can get its own article. Anyway, I thought I'd bring it up here because work will need to be done on this page if you end up forking content to a new article. Cheers. Braincricket (talk) 14:05, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, discussion here. Braincricket (talk) 14:18, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've redirected the page to here. It should not have been made at that particular title and in fact the author Alzeller1 broke several rules in its creation (it copied content from this page without attributing it as coming from this page). "New Pokemon Black 2 and White 2" is also the entirely wrong title, as well. It's just "Pokémon Black 2 and White 2", but new editors don't know that redirects can be edited over.—Ryulong (琉竜) 17:07, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough with the redirect. But just for the record, it was attributed – I included a {{copied}} template on the talk page of the new article. Braincricket (talk) 17:42, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It was still just a copy-paste of the content here which is formatted in a way that is not good for a standalone article. Once we gather some good reliable souces, we can take the redirect at Pokémon Black 2 and White 2 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) to make a standalone page.—Ryulong (琉竜) 17:44, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. In the mean time, I'll see if I can find some new sources we can use to establish notability. Braincricket (talk) 17:47, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why shouldn't there be a page for 2?

[edit]

Don't get me wrong, this page has great detail in information about both games, but how come the sequel has to share the page of its predecessor? --Matt723star (talk) 16:58, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Because there's not enough to satisfy having a separate article when it's simply an expansion of the originals.—Ryulong (琉竜) 17:03, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Then why have own articles for Pokémon Yellow, Crystal, Emerald and Platinum versions? After all, they differ from the initial versions even less than Black 2 and White 2 do from Black and White. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.149.216.106 (talk) 18:20, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I concur. It should be treated exactly the same as the other third versions (or in Yellow's case, fourth version). ggctuk (2005) (talk) 20:14, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Guys. No joke here. When you make the reception section have like 10 reviews, and 2 paragraphs of content, I assure you, it will be worthy to be split. Right now it has 2 reviews and a sales figure. Get working on it, and stop complaining. Blake (Talk·Edits) 03:08, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

[edit]

Wow, didn't see this coming; I guess there really is something to the concept of the VG GA drive. Alright, I have a test in an hour and 15 minutes so I'm not going to start the review, but one issue jumps out at me right away: Gameplay needs a lot more citations. Now, it's true that the core mechanics are so obvious they wouldn't likely be mentioned by reviewers (I've only tried IGN and didn't find what I was looking for), so perhaps the answer is to cite the manual or in-game text. I own Black (along with at least one main-series game from every gen and a bunch of the spin-offs), so I can use the manual for this when I'm done with the test and some other things if you'd like. Or if you have it, you can do it yourself. Tezero (talk) 15:44, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Tezero, I had Black but I recently sold it so I don't have the manual any more. However I have Black 2 for what it's worth, and no rush on the citation review. I'm kinda busy myself for a few days. Thanks for doing this and good luck on your test. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 16:01, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hrm, I think I'm also going to expand the first part of Gameplay section as it's rather incomplete to someone new to the series. I mean, there's nothing about Gym Leaders, what Trainers are, the PC, breeding, what stats are, natures, ... The manual will help with that, too. Tezero (talk) 20:35, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Eheh, I may have gone a little overboard in my recent expansion. Whatever; I think it covers the basics fine now and I might condense/add more citations later. Tezero (talk) 21:09, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I also wonder if the two subsections of Gameplay aren't a little rich in detail... Tezero (talk) 21:20, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hah, I can't review this now. I'm probably a major contributor at this point. Tezero (talk) 01:07, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your improvements made to the Gameplay section. I know the feeling of trying to not get too involved in an article of personal interest! I can take the Black and White 2 side of things as I still have the manual for that. Gameplay is nearly identical from the first so there would be little to mention there. The Plot section of Black and White 2 could be cut down, so I'll get to copyediting that half of the article soon. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 16:13, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't much of the gameplay aspects instead covered at Gameplay of Pokémon?—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 16:21, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As per a GA standard we would have to mention the gameplay (and changes to the gameplay) in every individual game. There were fewer changes made to Generation V than that of Generation IV so there wouldn't be much to mention here... I guess we could use some of the content from Gameplay of Pokemon into this article? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 16:24, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think any more content is needed here; I've realized that some of the stuff like natures is excessive detail for individual game articles and pared it accordingly, and more can still be done. That being said, it is important that every individual game article that utilizes the general system still contain the basic game mechanics, so that, among other things, features referenced later on (e.g. Gym Leaders, having six Pokémon on you) have some context to them. Actually, I think if anything the subsections of Gameplay could be trimmed a little, mainly the Dream World paragraph. Tezero (talk) 16:42, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hrm, Jaguar and Ryulong, what say you of the current length and level of detail? As well as expanding the main part of Gameplay, I've done a little copyediting and trimming of that (afterwards) and the subsections. Tezero (talk) 23:10, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Pokémon Black and White/GA4. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ProtoDrake (talk · contribs) 16:52, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Yes, I shall take this review. The very first time I have ever been involved with anything relating to Pokemon, so I can be properly impartial. Expect me to have something for you within the week. --ProtoDrake (talk) 16:52, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review

[edit]

Right, here we go. To start off, the sources are good and the image licenses seem alright. The rest of the articles (fairly minor) issues are mostly formatting and grammar.

Lead

  • "Black and White introduced 156 new Pokémon to the franchise, 5 more than the previous record holder Red and Blue, as well as many new features..." - Red and Blue should be italicized.

Plot

  • "One particular example of this is Castelia City, which served as the region's central metropolis.." - I think it should be "serves" rather than "served", as the rest of the sentence is in present tense when not talking about its inspiration.
  • Oh. ...Actually, I think I prefer it in the past tense, since it's referring to the original Black and White's events in Black and White 2. Eh, I'm fine either way; some way just has to be picked. Tezero (talk) 17:53, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree, I'm fine with it in past tense too! Maybe Black and White 2 would be more acceptable in present tense, but that being said there is no accurate timeline in any Pokemon generation... ☠ Jaguar ☠ 17:57, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm pretty sure they take place in sequential order. I know Gen 2 takes place after Gen 1, as attributed by people in the game referencing events from three years prior. At the very least, we know B/W2 are sequels to B/W1. Tezero (talk) 18:03, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion and release

  • For pre-order ticket holders, an alternate-colored Raikou, Entei, or Suicune was available for transfer to their Diamond, Pearl, Platinum, HeartGold, or SoulSilver games. At the theater, players would be able to download a Celebi to the same games. Both of these Pokémon would activate special events in Black and White involving Zoroark and Zorua, respectively." - Is there a reference to back this up?

Music

  • "Go Ichinose was in charge of directing all Pokémon voices for the game while Minako Adachi produced all sound effects." - Same as above?
  • Not to be lazy, but I wonder if that needs a citation. It could easily be found in the game's credits or manual - which I don't happen to have on me at the moment... Tezero (talk) 18:28, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

  • "Pokémon Black and White'' have received largely positive reviews by critics..." - Two too many italics on "White".

References

  • Refs 107 and 115 need archiving given the site's recent tendency to be down, and if possible Refs 81 and 107 need filling out a bit with the article author, publication date and such, if possible. Also some name arrangement issues: the author names should really be last-first, and I've seen first-last usage in Refs 32, 48, 55, 56, 106, 112, 115 and 116.
  • Tezero archived ref 107 and 115, and I think I've sorted out the author names in the rest of the references. I'm going to double check if anything needs fleshing out but for now I think that's it? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:16, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And.. that's it really. That's everything. When these issues are resolved or adequately explained, the article can pass. --ProtoDrake (talk) 17:40, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Right, all issues have been resolved, and as a second look-over doesn't show anything, I'll rank this as a Pass. --ProtoDrake (talk) 18:39, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review ProtoDrake! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:41, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. By the way, could either of you look at the Lightning FAC if you want to? It's got one support so far. I don't mean to sound like we're exchanging favors, but I don't want Lightning's FAC to go the same way as the Squall Leonhart one. --ProtoDrake (talk) 18:43, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I've got another FAC to look at so I'll leave some comments down on both of them tomorrow morning. It's always annoying when FACs get closed due to inactivity. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:47, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pokemon White box art and Pokemon Black 2 box art?

[edit]

Would it be appropriate to add these box arts? I feel like it might make the article more complete. Firework917 (talk) 22:21, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 26 external links on Pokémon Black and White. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:15, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spoiler Warning

[edit]

Let me add a spoiler warning to the story. Galefuun (talk) 15:13, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Pokémon X and Y Bailo26 15:17, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Basis

[edit]

The game had a lot of potential and has evidently been the last 2d pokemon game since 2012 of the release of the remakes black 2 and white 2 which boosted the fan base by an amazing amount 200,000 to be averaged — Preceding unsigned comment added by Odd eyes unicorn (talk • contribs) 15:53, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pokémon_Black_and_White&oldid=1243144289"