Talk:Pokémon Black and White/Archive 2
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Pokémon Black and White. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Kaledo, Meloetta, and Genesect
are found inside the game, and thus are confirmed. Why are you making this an issue? Raistuumum (talk) 20:30, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
- See Talk:List of Pokémon (599–646)#Keldeo, Meloetta, and Genesect.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:09, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Compatibility Section Creation
I have been searching the internet as to whether or not I can trade my pokemon out and recieve pokemon from my dex, or battle with black and white, using either pearl or diamond. I noticed this article does not include that information, it does however touch a bit on pal park from the old one and moving pokemon up, but doesnt list specificially which games pokemon can be moved up from.
As I do not have black or white yet, I was wondering if this information could be added to a Compatibility section possibly in the Gameplay section. It could start with a sentence explaining that black and white are/are not compatibile with pearl and diamond for trading/battling etc. Also including information regarding heart and soul.It could also include more specifics about moving pokemon up, IE: which games can be moved up from and a small sentence describing where and how to get to the place to do so.
As far as I can tell you can battle with pearl and diamond using black or white, and you can recieve their pokemon once you have completed the game and have the national dec(similar to in emerald/ruby/sapphire and firered leaf green). I think this information is very important to the game as it will dictate what games players can potentially use in conjunction with black and white.Jon Bonium (talk) 20:41, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
- This is not relevant to the coverage of the subject of the article.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:55, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
- DPPt and HGSS can only trade/battle each other. Black and White can only battle/trade with each other. DPPt and HGSS games can use DS download play to 1-way transfer Pokemon to Black or White. That is the compatibility. I think this is explained well enough in the article, but I will split the content into a new section, "Connectivity to other devices". Blake (Talk·Edits) 20:56, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
- It is not relevant Blake. Just because someone came here asking for video game mechanic device does not mean that we need to explain that Black & White do not have the Pal Park feature for transferring over Gen III characters.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:00, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
- DPPt and HGSS can only trade/battle each other. Black and White can only battle/trade with each other. DPPt and HGSS games can use DS download play to 1-way transfer Pokemon to Black or White. That is the compatibility. I think this is explained well enough in the article, but I will split the content into a new section, "Connectivity to other devices". Blake (Talk·Edits) 20:56, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
I did not come here asking for advice, I explained myself thoroughly. I believe the article is vague when explaining which generation can move up, and I have not been able to find the spcific information anywhere to date. It says "To transfer Pokémon between the older games and the new games,..." That is vague and should read either the exact names of the older games or the specific generations numbers. That way the information is there and relevant and clickable to research.Jon Bonium (talk) 21:09, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
- It is relevant, so please stop acting like a jerk. They aren't asking about how to transfer Gen3 Pokemon. They are saying that the current wording of the article doesn't adequately describe how Generation 4 and 5 interact. You have in there "To transfer Pokémon between the older games and the new games, two features have been placed in Black and White. For normal transfer, the Poké Transfer" It says "the older games to the new games", but doesn't say which games. I just fixed this. Blake (Talk·Edits) 21:13, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very much, that is far more clear. My only other complaint is that it says "between" which may imply back and forth I believe it should read "from the older games, to the newer games".Jon Bonium (talk) 21:19, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
- Fixed, along with a few other minor things. Blake (Talk·Edits) 21:26, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Suggested Reviews for Black and White
Hi All.
Check out our reviews for both Pokemon Black and Pokemon White.
Feel free add them to the reference section if you find them interesting and valid.
Pokemon Black - Nintendo DS Review http://www.capsulecomputers.com.au/2011/03/pokemon-black-nintendo-ds-review/
Pokemon White - Nintendo DS Review http://www.capsulecomputers.com.au/2011/03/pokemon-white-nintendo-ds-review/
Thanks MasterAbbott — Preceding unsigned comment added by MasterAbbott (talk • contribs) 10:12, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
- Hi, I don't think Capsule Computers is a reliable source per WP:VG/S. Even though, for video games that are on such a high scale like this, every single website has a review of these games. We can't list all of them. We will only list the most important and high quality reviews. Blake (Talk·Edits) 13:50, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Setting image
It has become a matter of contention over whether the image of Unova should be used, or if a combination of the image of Castelia plus an image of its inspiration Lower Manhattan should be used. I have made two sections for each proposal; if I made a mistake in your proposal, Ryulong, please correct. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 23:55, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
New Age Retro Hippie's proposal
Replace the setting image with the Castelia City image and an image of Lower Manhattan, which New Age Retro Hippie feels is a better demonstration of the links to New York than the below proposal.
Ryulong's proposal
Use the current setting image in combination with an overhead view of New York City.
- This is accurate.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:41, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Good. While such an image combination would be useful, using an image already present in the article in combination with a more detailed depiction of New York City would allow us to use one less fair use image than necessary. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 00:51, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- But your screencap of Castellia City over Pinwheel Forest doesn't really add much. The detail of the full map compared with the detail of a real world photo would be much better.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:00, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- The fair use rationale used in Castelia City's image is probably the strongest of the article's images. The tall buildings are seen in both the Lower Manhattan image and the Castelia image, the image demonstrates its use of 3D that no other image does, the HUD, the C-Gear, and the use of both 2D sprites and 3D animation, whereas the setting illustrates itself and only itself, nothing more. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 02:34, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- I do not know why you are bringing up "strength" of fair use rationales, because that is not a factor I have ever seen in determining what image to use. All you have is an image that can be used to illustrate several different concepts in the article. That is not "multiple fair uses" or however you have phrased it.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:19, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Well, you can believe that if you must, but it's wrong. How is it not effectively multiple fair use rationales for the image? A strong image is an image that demonstrates several things about the game yet does not cause distortion to players. You argue that the image I added doesn't add much, but when I argue what it adds, you go off on a weird tirade that having a stronger fair use rationale should not be the deciding point in what image to use. An image with a weak fair use rationale is a bad image, through and through. Unless there is an incredibly compelling reason to not use an image with a stronger fair use rationale, it should be #1 consideration when we are trying to figure out which images to use. You seem to dispute the argument that the image demonstrates the New York-based theme, but I don't see any reason why it wouldn't. The town is directly inspired by a city in New York, and the two images show the similarities quite clearly. An article should use, ideally, two images if possible. Using an article I recently cleaned up of several images, several of them had decent fair use rationales. One was to demonstrate the design of the buildings, while the other showed the units. However, the main image found in the Gameplay section demonstrated both of those elements. Wouldn't you agree that it is pointless to have two extra images when the first image can demonstrate everything that they claim to? - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:35, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- "Multiple fair use rationales" is not a term. All you have is one copyrighted image that can do the work of several. You still have one fair use rationale for the image, it just serves multiple purposes for improving the article where free images cannot suffice. But I do not think that we should eliminate the picture of the Unova region. It more accurately depicts the setting of the game and we can use a photograph of Manhattan to compare it with rather than having one small in game screenshot (already smaller because we have to include the C-Gear UI) and using it to explain that the game's setting is based on NYC.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:37, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- You're splitting hairs. It's obvious what I meant based on what I've said through the discussion. If taken out of context it may be difficult to understand what I meant, but otherwise. You act like having an image that illustrates several things is trivial. The one thing that we need on Wikipedia is an image that successfully illustrates multiple facets of a game instead of just one, which the overworld map is an example of the latter. The photograph of Manhattan is obviously similar in design to the game screenshot due to the tall buildings. It is not presumed that a game's setting should be depicted visually, and in this case, the gameplay image depicts the New York styling. It would be one thing if the image was so small that you could not see these details, but it's absurd to say that we cannot see the similarities described in the article. The similarities are obvious, and as such, makes it redundant to use a second image for the setting when we already have one. To have two images depicting the setting is to have one image being used in a purely decorative sense. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 19:51, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- The image cannot be construed as decorative if the subject is being described in the text. If we include a single free image of Manhattan, it will increase the educational purposes of the map of the game setting. And just because other articles don't utilize these graphics does not mean that this one cannot either. And if we ultimately decide to remove the map here, I believe it should be moved over to Pokémon regions.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:03, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- You're splitting hairs. It's obvious what I meant based on what I've said through the discussion. If taken out of context it may be difficult to understand what I meant, but otherwise. You act like having an image that illustrates several things is trivial. The one thing that we need on Wikipedia is an image that successfully illustrates multiple facets of a game instead of just one, which the overworld map is an example of the latter. The photograph of Manhattan is obviously similar in design to the game screenshot due to the tall buildings. It is not presumed that a game's setting should be depicted visually, and in this case, the gameplay image depicts the New York styling. It would be one thing if the image was so small that you could not see these details, but it's absurd to say that we cannot see the similarities described in the article. The similarities are obvious, and as such, makes it redundant to use a second image for the setting when we already have one. To have two images depicting the setting is to have one image being used in a purely decorative sense. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 19:51, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- "Multiple fair use rationales" is not a term. All you have is one copyrighted image that can do the work of several. You still have one fair use rationale for the image, it just serves multiple purposes for improving the article where free images cannot suffice. But I do not think that we should eliminate the picture of the Unova region. It more accurately depicts the setting of the game and we can use a photograph of Manhattan to compare it with rather than having one small in game screenshot (already smaller because we have to include the C-Gear UI) and using it to explain that the game's setting is based on NYC.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:37, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Well, you can believe that if you must, but it's wrong. How is it not effectively multiple fair use rationales for the image? A strong image is an image that demonstrates several things about the game yet does not cause distortion to players. You argue that the image I added doesn't add much, but when I argue what it adds, you go off on a weird tirade that having a stronger fair use rationale should not be the deciding point in what image to use. An image with a weak fair use rationale is a bad image, through and through. Unless there is an incredibly compelling reason to not use an image with a stronger fair use rationale, it should be #1 consideration when we are trying to figure out which images to use. You seem to dispute the argument that the image demonstrates the New York-based theme, but I don't see any reason why it wouldn't. The town is directly inspired by a city in New York, and the two images show the similarities quite clearly. An article should use, ideally, two images if possible. Using an article I recently cleaned up of several images, several of them had decent fair use rationales. One was to demonstrate the design of the buildings, while the other showed the units. However, the main image found in the Gameplay section demonstrated both of those elements. Wouldn't you agree that it is pointless to have two extra images when the first image can demonstrate everything that they claim to? - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:35, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- I do not know why you are bringing up "strength" of fair use rationales, because that is not a factor I have ever seen in determining what image to use. All you have is an image that can be used to illustrate several different concepts in the article. That is not "multiple fair uses" or however you have phrased it.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:19, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- The fair use rationale used in Castelia City's image is probably the strongest of the article's images. The tall buildings are seen in both the Lower Manhattan image and the Castelia image, the image demonstrates its use of 3D that no other image does, the HUD, the C-Gear, and the use of both 2D sprites and 3D animation, whereas the setting illustrates itself and only itself, nothing more. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 02:34, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- But your screencap of Castellia City over Pinwheel Forest doesn't really add much. The detail of the full map compared with the detail of a real world photo would be much better.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:00, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Good. While such an image combination would be useful, using an image already present in the article in combination with a more detailed depiction of New York City would allow us to use one less fair use image than necessary. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 00:51, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Moving it to the regions page would be fair since it seems like a more relevant analog to a real-world location for English readers than the others. Anyway, the free use image of Manhattan also increases the educational purposes of the screenshot. There's just no point in having two images for the same purpose. The screenshot image demonstrates the style well enough and the influences are clear. That's what makes the map excessive for this article. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 20:13, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- A free picture of Manhattan by itself is pointless. With your current screencap featuring Castelia City it's useful. But we have still yet to come to a decision as to whether or not the map does not belong on this page.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:11, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- The point is that we don't need two images when one image does what the other accomplishes and then some. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 00:18, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- One image need not do so many things.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:23, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- That doesn't mean we shouldn't try. The gameplay image demonstrates what the setting image already does. Need we demonstrate something twice? - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 00:37, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- It didn't demonstrate this untilyou changed the image. And it doesn't demonstrate it very well.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:08, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- What does a former truth have to do with a current truth? A lot of stuff was not true until it became true. This article, for example, wasn't notable until it became notable. How does saying that an image didn't demonstrate something until it did contribute to the discussion at hand? I still have no idea why it doesn't demonstrate it very well. The image we're using of Lower Manhattan uses tall buildings while the screenshot uses tall buildings. It is very easy to see the buildings, there is no possibility that the readers will not understand the connection between the real-life area and the fictional area. The interview that discusses its connections to New York even uses an image of the skyscrapers from Castelia, suggesting that the strongest influences are in there. The point is that we clearly do not absolutely need the map of Unova in the article because the only significant purpose it serves is accomplished in another image already. Whether one image is superior in this demonstration or not, being better in that one respect simply isn't enough. The screenshot is clearly adequate in demonstrating the New York links. It may not be the best (though I think it really clearly is), but when deciding between two images, we go with the more generally useful one. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 02:06, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- I am fairly certain that you cannot use one fair use image to depict multiple things. Either way, do whatever the hell you think is right. I just did not think that removing a fair use image and replacing it with two free images that are not free equivalents to the fair use image was proper.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:08, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- I have no idea why you would not be able to. Where in NFC does it suggest this? I imagine that blocking the use of one image to depict multiple things would make much less sense. To use one image to depict multiple things does not hinder the reader's ability to understand the image or what it is depicting, at least in the case of this image. The reader can clearly see the New York influences without being unable to understand the HUD, the C-Gear, the 3D visuals, the 2D sprites, or the depiction of the overworld. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 02:34, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- What does a former truth have to do with a current truth? A lot of stuff was not true until it became true. This article, for example, wasn't notable until it became notable. How does saying that an image didn't demonstrate something until it did contribute to the discussion at hand? I still have no idea why it doesn't demonstrate it very well. The image we're using of Lower Manhattan uses tall buildings while the screenshot uses tall buildings. It is very easy to see the buildings, there is no possibility that the readers will not understand the connection between the real-life area and the fictional area. The interview that discusses its connections to New York even uses an image of the skyscrapers from Castelia, suggesting that the strongest influences are in there. The point is that we clearly do not absolutely need the map of Unova in the article because the only significant purpose it serves is accomplished in another image already. Whether one image is superior in this demonstration or not, being better in that one respect simply isn't enough. The screenshot is clearly adequate in demonstrating the New York links. It may not be the best (though I think it really clearly is), but when deciding between two images, we go with the more generally useful one. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 02:06, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- It didn't demonstrate this untilyou changed the image. And it doesn't demonstrate it very well.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:08, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- That doesn't mean we shouldn't try. The gameplay image demonstrates what the setting image already does. Need we demonstrate something twice? - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 00:37, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- One image need not do so many things.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:23, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- The point is that we don't need two images when one image does what the other accomplishes and then some. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 00:18, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
And I must ask that you be more disciplined with your tone. There is no need to be swearing or "copping 'tude". - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 02:37, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- I am getting very tired of people bitching about my vernacular.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:41, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Hearts and Flowers. If you want people to stop "bitching" (apparently wanting to have an adult conversation is bitching now), then stop. If you can't stop, don't edit anymore. You obviously have a serious problem controlling yourself that has no place in this community. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 04:27, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Other proposals
- Could we just not have a setting image? I don't see the importance of it, really. I would rather have an overworld screenshot and a battle screenshot then have something for the setting. It's just not that important. Gameplay somebody who knows nothing about the series can learn about it. Maps show nothing. Blake (Talk·Edits) 02:10, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- The maps show the correlation between the real world and the fictional one as stated by the developers.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:22, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- Just to note, Blake, but my proposal would use the image already in use for the setting, meaning that we would not utilize an extra image. The image that would be used to compare Lower Manhattan to Castelia would properly demonstrate the analogs to New York City without adding an extra image. I just don't see the point in having two images to demonstrate the analogs. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 02:38, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- The maps show the correlation between the real world and the fictional one as stated by the developers.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:22, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
- What is this debate about? Do you mean the image already in use in the connectivity section. Taking a stab at this comparing the pic in the settings section to the pic in the connectivity (please link to the correct pictures if I am wrong), I think the the Castelia image portrays the atmosphere and architectural theme of Unova, but a comparison of the map would show the geography was also derived from New York. In other words, while the images may both demonstrate that part of the setting was derived from New York, they show different aspects of the derivation. Both aspects deserve to be discussed, which would support the use of two images. NAHR does have valid goal of removing excessive fair use images, but I see the same information being retained if the map of Unova is removed. That being said, without a picture of Manhattan, the map does not demonstrate the similarities to anyone unfamiliar with the geography of New York. —Ost (talk) 15:55, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- [1] - These are the images that I would propose be used in the Setting section. The world map just comes off as extraneous if we're using two images for roughly the same purpose. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:11, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Ooh, so we could use two free images instead of one non-free image is what you are saying? I think that would be acceptable. Blake (Talk·Edits) 18:17, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- That is not possible The two free images New Age Retro Hippie suggested are not adequate free alternatives to the one fair use image he replaced them with. The overworld shot of Castelia City accompanied with a picture of Lower Manhattan, as Ost316 also states, is not a suitable comparison. The full map with an aerial photograph of New York is an effective use of free and fair use images. Taking a picture of the Brooklyn Bridge and saying that a game area resembles it is not an effective use of images.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:29, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- You keep saying that it's not an acceptable comparison. Why? It shows the one most defining aspect of the free use image - the tall buildings. I understand that you can't take the position that it is acceptable since if it is, that would mean you would acknowledge the presence of two image used for the same reason. Ost does not ever say that the screenshot is not a suitable comparison. In fact, he says the exact opposite - "the images may both demonstrate that part of the setting was derived from New York". To Blake, what I'm arguing is to use the fair use image that we're already using to demonstrate the overhead view and C-Gear to also demonstrate the New York inspirations, so that we can consolidate our images down to the fewest possible - as I see it, if this image can successfully demonstrate this fact - and it clearly does - we don't need a world map showing it, too. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:38, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- They were not an acceptable replacement for the Unova map. Not free equivalents.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:54, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- You keep saying that it's not an acceptable comparison. Why? It shows the one most defining aspect of the free use image - the tall buildings. I understand that you can't take the position that it is acceptable since if it is, that would mean you would acknowledge the presence of two image used for the same reason. Ost does not ever say that the screenshot is not a suitable comparison. In fact, he says the exact opposite - "the images may both demonstrate that part of the setting was derived from New York". To Blake, what I'm arguing is to use the fair use image that we're already using to demonstrate the overhead view and C-Gear to also demonstrate the New York inspirations, so that we can consolidate our images down to the fewest possible - as I see it, if this image can successfully demonstrate this fact - and it clearly does - we don't need a world map showing it, too. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:38, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- That is not possible The two free images New Age Retro Hippie suggested are not adequate free alternatives to the one fair use image he replaced them with. The overworld shot of Castelia City accompanied with a picture of Lower Manhattan, as Ost316 also states, is not a suitable comparison. The full map with an aerial photograph of New York is an effective use of free and fair use images. Taking a picture of the Brooklyn Bridge and saying that a game area resembles it is not an effective use of images.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:29, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Ooh, so we could use two free images instead of one non-free image is what you are saying? I think that would be acceptable. Blake (Talk·Edits) 18:17, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- [1] - These are the images that I would propose be used in the Setting section. The world map just comes off as extraneous if we're using two images for roughly the same purpose. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:11, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- What is this debate about? Do you mean the image already in use in the connectivity section. Taking a stab at this comparing the pic in the settings section to the pic in the connectivity (please link to the correct pictures if I am wrong), I think the the Castelia image portrays the atmosphere and architectural theme of Unova, but a comparison of the map would show the geography was also derived from New York. In other words, while the images may both demonstrate that part of the setting was derived from New York, they show different aspects of the derivation. Both aspects deserve to be discussed, which would support the use of two images. NAHR does have valid goal of removing excessive fair use images, but I see the same information being retained if the map of Unova is removed. That being said, without a picture of Manhattan, the map does not demonstrate the similarities to anyone unfamiliar with the geography of New York. —Ost (talk) 15:55, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
No one is proposing the exclusive use of the two free use images by themselves. I am proposing that they be used in conjunction with the one fair use image we have, because such utilization demonstrates the New York links. Why should we use two images for the same reason? - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 19:58, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- The Castelia screencap alone does not adequately illustrate the New York City link, nor would it be very clear if you were to include this photograph. You cannot make out anything from the overworld screencap other than some details about the game engine and that the setting is urban.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:01, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- The most defining aspect of the free use image is tall buildings. I'm kind of lost as to how a reader will not see the use of tall buildings in both images. We can write that Castelia City was modeled after Lower Manhattan and call the city "Castelia City" in the gameplay image's caption. Why can we not make out the tall buildings that are present in both images? Are the readers that oblivious? I think it's rather inane to assume that someone would be incapable of seeing what is an incredibly obvious resemblance. The only thing you can really discern from the Lower Manhattan image clearly are harbours and tall skyscrapers, the latter being an obvious feature of the first image. What makes you think that people would not see the similarities between the two images? - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 20:20, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- There is nothing specific in th Castelia City screencap that allows anyone to say that it is representing the borough of Manhattan. It's a series of tall buildings along with a dock. The much clearer image of the Unova world map compared with a map or satellite photograph of New York City is a much better comparison.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:31, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Are you suggesting that an image of tall buildings and a dock bears no similarities to an image of tall buildings and a dock? I've given you the benefit of the doubt, but this just silly. At what point is it true that two images that share two defining features are dissimilar? Your argument is that Unova's image is better. Is it? Maybe. But it doesn't matter if it's better. All that matters is that one image already accomplishes it. Your denial of this fact is simply absurd. No reasonable person would ever say that two images that share the most defining features of their environment are dissimilar, and it's just coming across as you fighting for the sake of getting your way. In short, we don't use an image just because it does a better job in one respect. The image of Castelia City clearly shows tall buildings and a dock, which are prominent in the free use image. I'm not even going to state that as opinion, it is fact, as much as the sky being blue or grass being green. It is impossible for anyone to not see the buildings or dock clearly. There is no issue with them being difficult to see. Are you implying that these similarities are not enough for people to understand the analogs between Manhattan and Castelia? - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 20:48, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- No. I'm suggesting that there are better choices of images to use for the purpose of which the Castelia screencap is not. Rather than just pointing out the similarities between one location in the game and one real world location, it is better to point out the similarities between the entire game setting and one region.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:51, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Again, "it's better" is not a reason to use the image. All we need is an adequate image. The fact of the matter is that we are assuming that Unova in its entirety is based on New York, even though it has several areas that have nothing to do with the region. As such, to provide an image of New York from a satellite view would actually serve to confuse readers as to several dissimilarities, whereas the comparison between Lower Manhattan and Castelia City gives detailed and immediately obvious analogs between the two images. As a free encyclopedia, we should be using as few images as possible. I am not one to try to stripmine an article of images, but this image is by and large the weakest of the three images in use right now.- The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 04:01, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
- "Adequate" is not a requirement anywhere. And we are not assuming that Unova in its entirety is based on New York. We have textual proof that the entirety of Unova is New York because that's what Masuda said. Pointing out Castelia as Lower Manhattan and Skyarrow as the Brooklyn Bridge is basically original research but it's flown here because no one called anyone out on it. Masuda never points out any particular areas. He just says all of Isshu is New York City. So we cannot use particular images to point ou comparisons when all we have is the whole of the region being commented on.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:04, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
- Again, "it's better" is not a reason to use the image. All we need is an adequate image. The fact of the matter is that we are assuming that Unova in its entirety is based on New York, even though it has several areas that have nothing to do with the region. As such, to provide an image of New York from a satellite view would actually serve to confuse readers as to several dissimilarities, whereas the comparison between Lower Manhattan and Castelia City gives detailed and immediately obvious analogs between the two images. As a free encyclopedia, we should be using as few images as possible. I am not one to try to stripmine an article of images, but this image is by and large the weakest of the three images in use right now.- The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 04:01, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
- No. I'm suggesting that there are better choices of images to use for the purpose of which the Castelia screencap is not. Rather than just pointing out the similarities between one location in the game and one real world location, it is better to point out the similarities between the entire game setting and one region.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 22:51, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- Are you suggesting that an image of tall buildings and a dock bears no similarities to an image of tall buildings and a dock? I've given you the benefit of the doubt, but this just silly. At what point is it true that two images that share two defining features are dissimilar? Your argument is that Unova's image is better. Is it? Maybe. But it doesn't matter if it's better. All that matters is that one image already accomplishes it. Your denial of this fact is simply absurd. No reasonable person would ever say that two images that share the most defining features of their environment are dissimilar, and it's just coming across as you fighting for the sake of getting your way. In short, we don't use an image just because it does a better job in one respect. The image of Castelia City clearly shows tall buildings and a dock, which are prominent in the free use image. I'm not even going to state that as opinion, it is fact, as much as the sky being blue or grass being green. It is impossible for anyone to not see the buildings or dock clearly. There is no issue with them being difficult to see. Are you implying that these similarities are not enough for people to understand the analogs between Manhattan and Castelia? - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 20:48, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- There is nothing specific in th Castelia City screencap that allows anyone to say that it is representing the borough of Manhattan. It's a series of tall buildings along with a dock. The much clearer image of the Unova world map compared with a map or satellite photograph of New York City is a much better comparison.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:31, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
- The most defining aspect of the free use image is tall buildings. I'm kind of lost as to how a reader will not see the use of tall buildings in both images. We can write that Castelia City was modeled after Lower Manhattan and call the city "Castelia City" in the gameplay image's caption. Why can we not make out the tall buildings that are present in both images? Are the readers that oblivious? I think it's rather inane to assume that someone would be incapable of seeing what is an incredibly obvious resemblance. The only thing you can really discern from the Lower Manhattan image clearly are harbours and tall skyscrapers, the latter being an obvious feature of the first image. What makes you think that people would not see the similarities between the two images? - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 20:20, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
The only Featured articles that use Settings use them as follows: Two use real-world settings to give readers an idea of what the area looks like (The World Ends with You and Vagrant Story), one uses an in-game setting that received almost universal praise and attention in gaming (BioShock), and one of the examples is an image with a generic fair use rationale that was added to the article where just about any article could become featured at the time. The fact of the matter is that there is no recent precedent to allow the use of a setting image of this kind - this kind being an image that lacks any significant reception to it (not enough to warrant inclusion like in BioShock). Also, I do believe that if Masuda said everything in Unova is based on New York, that tells us that Castelia is, too. And it is not hard to notice that Castelia City is the header image for the entire discussion. And excuse me? There are only two kinds of images - adequate and inadequate. The Castelia City image is perfectly adequate, a quality that WP:NFC requires without exception for all fair use images. It does not ever say that another image can be included just because it does one thing better. The fact of the matter is that we only require that readers be able to infer the New York inspiration from the image currently employed. If readers are already educated to this fact, how is the map image educational in any way, shape, or form? - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 11:03, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not going to read all the tortured digressions above, but from my skimming I'm inclined to agree with New Age's analysis. Ryulong, strength is and always has been a factor in determining WP:NFCC compliance. If one non-free image can perform several functions, its use is prioritized and valued because NFCC requires us to use as little non-free content as possible; ergo, the fewer images the greater general compliance. So the region is based on New York... so what? It's already sourced in prose. Removing such a non-free image is not detrimental to reader understanding of the topic, as per NFCC. 14:01, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
- The removed image still provided information on the article at the time, when the other non-free image did not cover so many topics at once. The original non-free image still serves a purpose on this article and is not considered excessive use.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:32, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
- It doesn't matter what it did in the past. We found an image that covers more of the subject than the previous image did, including what the map image accomplished. The Unova image was fine when it was the only image that accomplished this. But when we have an image that does multiple things including what the Unova image did, it is NOW considered excessive use. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 21:45, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
- It's not excessive use when you cannot directly imply that Castelia City is Lower Manhattan, particularly from the chosen screenshot. The full map serves its purpose here, and it should not have been removed and replaced with two free images based on original research that was not picked up on until the other day. The only way we can adequately show that the games' setting was based on New York is with an image that shows the whole setting and an image to compare it with based on reliable sources. The three images on this article are adequate for their educational purposes.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:32, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- We don't have to say that it is based on Lower Manhattan. You are not arguing adequate representation, you are arguing excessive representation. The screenshot image is of an area that, according to you, is based on New York. That image provides an example of the similarities between New York and Unova. That image is adequate. There is no guideline or policy anywhere that would imply that just because all of Unova is based on New York, we have to show all of Unova. Readers can discern that the whole region is based on New York and Castelia City serves as an example to provide to readers understanding of this. You've never explained why the screenshot is inadequate, yet you repeat it ad nauseum. The reliable sources work to verify that both images are depicting settings based on New York, by the virtue that any town in Unova must be based on a New York setting. Again, readers are not educated by this image. They see the first image and they gain adequate understanding that Unova is based on New York. They see the second image and learn nothing because they already learned this information already. But the whole point is moot. So far, you are the sole supporter of this image, with three other editors agreeing that the image is excessive for this article, especially when its only fair use rationale is used in another image. I would venture to say that this discussion is going nowhere and you have not shown any signs that you are going to give in to the current consensus, so I am moving to remove the Unova image. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 00:57, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- Still, I do not think we need to remove that image just because of your Castelia screencap. The Unova map more adequately represents the first paragraph of the setting section. If we add a photo of New York (perhaps this one to be placed alongside the map, then we have a better usage. The screencap does not show enough to serve as something to compliment commentary on the setting.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:08, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- While I admit that the Unova image is GOOD, good does not necessarily mean appropriate. The Castelia image may be "less adequate", but it doesn't have to be more adequate, it simply has to be adequate. If it was a competition of them on equal standing - namely, both only used the rationale of depicting the setting - the world map image would win. However, since the first image has additional qualities to it, it wins out because it is more useful for a wider range of things, including the rationale in question. The screenshot shows the same amount of content as shown in the very image that is used as a header to the entire discussion of Unova, albeit in less detail and at a different angle. The image's quality is not so low that readers would be unable to make out what is present in the image, and as such, it is not likely that readers will be confused about why the image is used to visually represent the New York inspirations. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 01:29, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- I just want to say that I prefer the current Unova map image. I certainly get a better sense from that image of how the region geographically resembles New York, than from a picture of some buildings with an awkward perspective. I would completely support a satellite image of New York being placed alongside the current image, to help show the comparison. This seems like a much more logical thing to do. Incidentally I also dislike the new connectivity image. The resolution seems almost too low, and the thick border seems unnecessary and makes the image seem much smaller that it should be. But obviously that is neither here nor there for this discussion. --Dorsal Axe 07:07, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- While I admit that the Unova image is GOOD, good does not necessarily mean appropriate. The Castelia image may be "less adequate", but it doesn't have to be more adequate, it simply has to be adequate. If it was a competition of them on equal standing - namely, both only used the rationale of depicting the setting - the world map image would win. However, since the first image has additional qualities to it, it wins out because it is more useful for a wider range of things, including the rationale in question. The screenshot shows the same amount of content as shown in the very image that is used as a header to the entire discussion of Unova, albeit in less detail and at a different angle. The image's quality is not so low that readers would be unable to make out what is present in the image, and as such, it is not likely that readers will be confused about why the image is used to visually represent the New York inspirations. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 01:29, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- Still, I do not think we need to remove that image just because of your Castelia screencap. The Unova map more adequately represents the first paragraph of the setting section. If we add a photo of New York (perhaps this one to be placed alongside the map, then we have a better usage. The screencap does not show enough to serve as something to compliment commentary on the setting.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:08, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- We don't have to say that it is based on Lower Manhattan. You are not arguing adequate representation, you are arguing excessive representation. The screenshot image is of an area that, according to you, is based on New York. That image provides an example of the similarities between New York and Unova. That image is adequate. There is no guideline or policy anywhere that would imply that just because all of Unova is based on New York, we have to show all of Unova. Readers can discern that the whole region is based on New York and Castelia City serves as an example to provide to readers understanding of this. You've never explained why the screenshot is inadequate, yet you repeat it ad nauseum. The reliable sources work to verify that both images are depicting settings based on New York, by the virtue that any town in Unova must be based on a New York setting. Again, readers are not educated by this image. They see the first image and they gain adequate understanding that Unova is based on New York. They see the second image and learn nothing because they already learned this information already. But the whole point is moot. So far, you are the sole supporter of this image, with three other editors agreeing that the image is excessive for this article, especially when its only fair use rationale is used in another image. I would venture to say that this discussion is going nowhere and you have not shown any signs that you are going to give in to the current consensus, so I am moving to remove the Unova image. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 00:57, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- It's not excessive use when you cannot directly imply that Castelia City is Lower Manhattan, particularly from the chosen screenshot. The full map serves its purpose here, and it should not have been removed and replaced with two free images based on original research that was not picked up on until the other day. The only way we can adequately show that the games' setting was based on New York is with an image that shows the whole setting and an image to compare it with based on reliable sources. The three images on this article are adequate for their educational purposes.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:32, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- It doesn't matter what it did in the past. We found an image that covers more of the subject than the previous image did, including what the map image accomplished. The Unova image was fine when it was the only image that accomplished this. But when we have an image that does multiple things including what the Unova image did, it is NOW considered excessive use. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 21:45, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
- The removed image still provided information on the article at the time, when the other non-free image did not cover so many topics at once. The original non-free image still serves a purpose on this article and is not considered excessive use.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:32, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
We are not arguing which image to use in the article. We are using the Castelia City image no matter what - its inclusion is not a factor in this debate. The entire debate is A. whether Castelia City's image adequately demonstrates the New York inspirations, and B. Whether the image of Unova educates readers to the point where it is not simply educating readers to the same thing. Wikipedia does not allow such redundant images, and Wikipedia does not have any guideline or policy that supports what you are arguing. All that is required for the Castelia image is that it adequately demonstrates what is attempting to do. The argument of "better" only applies when you are arguing for the replacement of one image with the other, which we are not discussing. Basically, if the gameplay image is demonstrated as an adequate representation of the New York inspiration, then the Unova image should not be used. Additionally, I am confused. Why is the perspective awkward? I assume that you are arguing that it is awkward for a Pokémon game, but we are not attempting to depict the game in its most traditional fashion. Quite the opposite - in this case, the use of 3D and the "awkward perspectives" is unique to the game and makes the fair usage of a copyrighted gameplay image that much stronger due to it depicting things that are unique to it and may require visualization to help explain to readers its elements. I've clearly explained the various reasons why the image is adequate: an image of the city is used as the lead-in to the section of the interview which discusses the New York inspirations; the image shows the area's tall buildings and urban setting; and with a combination of its use as the lead-in and a reference verifying that, along with the rest of Unova, it is based on New York, that is more than enough information to make the judgment that it is adequate, and being adequate, we do not need a second image to depict Unova. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 07:44, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the diff link above. Though I don't have HARH's fervor and certainty that the specific picture must stay, there is a reasoned rationale for the Castelia photo; simply, it shows both graphical changes and the C-Gear. If the graphics were not important to show, I could envision a rationale that the Castelia picture is a combination of two images from two separate screens, making it about the same as having two pictures of one screen each for showing the map and the C-Gear in separate photos. If there are sources that support that the geography is important, the Castelia picture is not ideal, but with it showing some of the harbor that has been compared to Manhattan in links, I can understand the rationale that is is sufficient if the prose the notes the geography in the image by mentioning the harbor. —Ost (talk) 18:02, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- A. It doesn't and B. The Unova map would not be redundant if you had not decided that the gameplay screencap should serve quintuple duty on the article. I think the Pinwheel Forest picture should be put back, if it has not already been deleted. We do not need to have one image of middling quality (even if it is fair use) to serve all of these purposes if it does not adequately show the subject at hand.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:05, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- Your post is incredibly confusing. Where in any guideline or policy does it imply that an image having multiple reasons for inclusion is wrong? If anything, the best thing for a fair use image to have is these multiple rationales. Additionally, I have asked you time and time again for WHY it's not adequate, and all you say is "it isn't". As for the Pinwheel forest image, it does only the C-Gear and the traditional style of graphics, whereas the new image does the C-Gear, the graphics, significantly more 3D shown, and a demonstration of the angles that are employed at several points throughout the game. Additionally, this source clearly states that Castelia City was based on New York, and cites both the tall buildings and the Brooklyn Bridge-style suspension bridge, the former which is clearly visible in the screenshot. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:19, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- I am not saying it is forbidden by policy. I am just saying it is unnecessary for it to serve all of these purposes. And that article only says that Castelia is based on New York. Not the entire region.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:21, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- Why? Why is it unnecessary for an image to be more useful? Are you implying that it is in the best interest of the Wiki to be less useful as a fair use image? The ideal thing to do is to make it demonstrate as much as humanly possible. If it could possibly demonstrate every single thing in the article, then that would be STRONGLY recommended. It is absolutely necessary as it cuts down on the number of images we need by conveying more information in less images. And the article does not need to say that the region was based on New York because we already have a reference for that. This article demonstrates that the screenshot is an adequate representaiton of New York, because a reliable source clearly cites the visible buildings as an example of the inspirations for New York. There is no guideline or policy that suggests that we need to demonstrate that all of Unova is based on New York. We only need to provide an example. Because the image clearly depicts elements which a reliable source say demonstrates its New York inspirations, this makes the image adequate for that purpose, and makes the Unova image excessive. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:27, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- I just simply disagree with the usage. Why should I have any more to explain about it? The Unova map serves the purpose of displaying how Unova and New York are related visually. We do not need to have the screenshot serve that same purpose as there are suitably other areas of the game that can be used to show the 3D rendering aspect.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:31, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- Yes we do! You have never once, in this entire discussion, explained why it is inadequate to depict the New York inspirations. And if it is not inadequate, then this means that you are trying to put an image that educates readers on nothing because they already have been educated by another image in the same article. I believe that you need to read WP:NFC to a significant degree, because I believe that you have a VERY poor understanding of the fair use policy. The fact of the matter is that no matter how much you dislike the image, it still serves the purpose that the Unova image serves. And why should we use a different screenshot that is less useful to the article? What value is there in using three fair use images to do what two fair use images can do? - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:35, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- The screenshot does not need to depict everything. You could have found another part of the game where the 3D engine is in use and utilized that, such as the Skyarrow Bridge scene or something else. And there is nothing educational about having that image higher up in the article where we have no text accompanying it concerning the game setting which in your words makes the Unova map excessive fair use. And I have been here long enough to know fair use policy, thank you very much.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:50, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- Why? What reason is there for an image that CAN depict everything to not? If an image can depict four elements mentioned in the article without diminishing any of the four elements that it demonstrates, at what point could anyone possibly argue for the use of an image that does what this image does? We could have used an inferior image, but we're not! The Skyarrow Bridge scene does less than the Castelia City image. The Castelia City image does 100% of what the Skyarrow Bridge does and more. Your entire argument is blatantly obvious that you are not using any policy or guideline behind any of it, only your own personal opinion on how things SHOULD be. The caption for the image can be amended to also mention its New York inspiration. We absolutely do NOT need to have it in the Setting section for it to apply to content found in the Setting section. Hell, I am looking at the Setting section and the image at the same time. The image is RIGHT ABOVE the Setting section. This discussion has fallen into the depths of petty squabbling that is enforced by you refusing to admit that the image is adequate and simply making things up that no guideline or policy ever supports. If you gave me any reason to believe that an image used in one section cannot be used as a demonstration of content in another, I would let you "win" the argument. But if you can't do that, then just give in and accept that the Unova image's only reason to be included is already accomplished. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:59, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:IMAGES#Image_choice_and_placement, WP:MOSIM.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:19, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- So this guideline tells me that the image should be placed near the relevant text. The image is visible when reading about the setting. How is that not near, exactly? It never says that it has to be in the same section. If you want a relevant, image, we can also put a picture of the Brooklyn Bridge and Lower Manhattan in its place. As demonstrated, the only fair use image of an overworld map in a featured article was added six years ago, while all other articles either have no such image or use real world images. The more recently featured article, The World Ends with You, uses a picture of Shibuya instead of showing the setting from the game. The article does not need an image of the overworld map when an image right above the Setting section accomplishes the only thing it seeks out to do, and which can be replaced by a more useful image that tells readers of the specific features of New York such as the Brooklyn Bridge and Lower Manhattan. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 19:26, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- Diamond and Pearl has a map of Hokkaido alongside the Sinnoh map. I do not see why this article should be any different just because we can have an image that vaguely resembles New York's harbor.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:37, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- So this guideline tells me that the image should be placed near the relevant text. The image is visible when reading about the setting. How is that not near, exactly? It never says that it has to be in the same section. If you want a relevant, image, we can also put a picture of the Brooklyn Bridge and Lower Manhattan in its place. As demonstrated, the only fair use image of an overworld map in a featured article was added six years ago, while all other articles either have no such image or use real world images. The more recently featured article, The World Ends with You, uses a picture of Shibuya instead of showing the setting from the game. The article does not need an image of the overworld map when an image right above the Setting section accomplishes the only thing it seeks out to do, and which can be replaced by a more useful image that tells readers of the specific features of New York such as the Brooklyn Bridge and Lower Manhattan. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 19:26, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:IMAGES#Image_choice_and_placement, WP:MOSIM.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:19, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- Why? What reason is there for an image that CAN depict everything to not? If an image can depict four elements mentioned in the article without diminishing any of the four elements that it demonstrates, at what point could anyone possibly argue for the use of an image that does what this image does? We could have used an inferior image, but we're not! The Skyarrow Bridge scene does less than the Castelia City image. The Castelia City image does 100% of what the Skyarrow Bridge does and more. Your entire argument is blatantly obvious that you are not using any policy or guideline behind any of it, only your own personal opinion on how things SHOULD be. The caption for the image can be amended to also mention its New York inspiration. We absolutely do NOT need to have it in the Setting section for it to apply to content found in the Setting section. Hell, I am looking at the Setting section and the image at the same time. The image is RIGHT ABOVE the Setting section. This discussion has fallen into the depths of petty squabbling that is enforced by you refusing to admit that the image is adequate and simply making things up that no guideline or policy ever supports. If you gave me any reason to believe that an image used in one section cannot be used as a demonstration of content in another, I would let you "win" the argument. But if you can't do that, then just give in and accept that the Unova image's only reason to be included is already accomplished. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:59, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- The screenshot does not need to depict everything. You could have found another part of the game where the 3D engine is in use and utilized that, such as the Skyarrow Bridge scene or something else. And there is nothing educational about having that image higher up in the article where we have no text accompanying it concerning the game setting which in your words makes the Unova map excessive fair use. And I have been here long enough to know fair use policy, thank you very much.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:50, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- Yes we do! You have never once, in this entire discussion, explained why it is inadequate to depict the New York inspirations. And if it is not inadequate, then this means that you are trying to put an image that educates readers on nothing because they already have been educated by another image in the same article. I believe that you need to read WP:NFC to a significant degree, because I believe that you have a VERY poor understanding of the fair use policy. The fact of the matter is that no matter how much you dislike the image, it still serves the purpose that the Unova image serves. And why should we use a different screenshot that is less useful to the article? What value is there in using three fair use images to do what two fair use images can do? - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:35, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- I just simply disagree with the usage. Why should I have any more to explain about it? The Unova map serves the purpose of displaying how Unova and New York are related visually. We do not need to have the screenshot serve that same purpose as there are suitably other areas of the game that can be used to show the 3D rendering aspect.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:31, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- Why? Why is it unnecessary for an image to be more useful? Are you implying that it is in the best interest of the Wiki to be less useful as a fair use image? The ideal thing to do is to make it demonstrate as much as humanly possible. If it could possibly demonstrate every single thing in the article, then that would be STRONGLY recommended. It is absolutely necessary as it cuts down on the number of images we need by conveying more information in less images. And the article does not need to say that the region was based on New York because we already have a reference for that. This article demonstrates that the screenshot is an adequate representaiton of New York, because a reliable source clearly cites the visible buildings as an example of the inspirations for New York. There is no guideline or policy that suggests that we need to demonstrate that all of Unova is based on New York. We only need to provide an example. Because the image clearly depicts elements which a reliable source say demonstrates its New York inspirations, this makes the image adequate for that purpose, and makes the Unova image excessive. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:27, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- I am not saying it is forbidden by policy. I am just saying it is unnecessary for it to serve all of these purposes. And that article only says that Castelia is based on New York. Not the entire region.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:21, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- Your post is incredibly confusing. Where in any guideline or policy does it imply that an image having multiple reasons for inclusion is wrong? If anything, the best thing for a fair use image to have is these multiple rationales. Additionally, I have asked you time and time again for WHY it's not adequate, and all you say is "it isn't". As for the Pinwheel forest image, it does only the C-Gear and the traditional style of graphics, whereas the new image does the C-Gear, the graphics, significantly more 3D shown, and a demonstration of the angles that are employed at several points throughout the game. Additionally, this source clearly states that Castelia City was based on New York, and cites both the tall buildings and the Brooklyn Bridge-style suspension bridge, the former which is clearly visible in the screenshot. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:19, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- Ryulong, reread what I said again. Just because you can provide a defense of an image does not mean A) it cannot be adequately replaced by free content, B) another non-free image can usurp its use by being better according to NFCC, and C) The image is integral and must be in the article. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 19:42, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- A, it cannot, B, the current choice is not, C, it isn't but it's good enough.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:38, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- The image used in that article is more acceptable than Unova's because no other image demonstrates the links between the two regions. The screenshot image does an adequate job of showing the similarities between New York and Castelia, and the ONM link even says that the tall buildings are obvious links to New York. According to reliable secondary sources, this similarity is not "vague". If the screenshot used in Diamond and Pearl made it obvious that the region was based on Hokkaido, we should not use an image of Sinnoh. An additional contention is that even if the Unova image squeaked by as not excessive, what then? It would either be removed as the weakest image when brought to FAC - especially considering features such as the battle gameplay and the Dream World have no representation - or it would prevent more important images from being added. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 19:45, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- Why not instead show a picture of the Dream World instead of Castelia City? Kill equally as many birds with one stone but still leave the Unova map in? Don't we cover the 3D engine at Pokémon Platinum?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:42, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- Why would we replace an image of the game with an image from a browser game? The Dream World's image is completely different in its purpose to the Castelia City image. Whereas the Dream World image would provide a visual depiction of a separate game that serves as a counterpart to Black and White, the Castelia City image is used to depict the subject article's gameplay. The two images cannot possibly be used as a replacement for one another. If the Castelia City image were to go, we would have no depiction of the game. If the Unova image were replaced by the Dream World image, we would still have a visual depiction of the similarities between the region and New York. As for the Platinum article, the use of 3D is not only unusual and never reproduced in Black and White, but it is a depiction of a completely different game - it cannot be used as a replacement for this image. I'm honestly very confused why you proposed using a different game's article to depict this game in this article; that is never advised to require readers to leave an article to achieve the basic understanding of the subject. Your logic would also make it advisable to put Unova on the Pokémon regions article and remove it from here. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 20:54, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- Why not instead show a picture of the Dream World instead of Castelia City? Kill equally as many birds with one stone but still leave the Unova map in? Don't we cover the 3D engine at Pokémon Platinum?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:42, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
This Page Needs to Be Archived And Removed.
The talk page here is so ridiculously out of date, that it has become utterly pointless. Can we just archive it and let the discussions start over? Because from what I see here, almost all of the discussion is asking questions which did not have answers but now have been quite clearly answered by the games' worldwide release.
This page does absolutely nothing a talk page is supposed to do. 74.132.249.206 (talk) 07:05, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
- Done. I archived everything before the release. Blake (Talk·Edits) 18:04, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
Remake
In this interview segment here on Gametrailer.com, Junichi Masuda, the game director, hints at a third installment to Pokémon Black and White. They were asked "Why did you decide against a third entry for this generation?" Junichi Masuda stated that the creator doesn't "recall saying that there would not be a third and he was very surprised to hear that." User talk:RickyBryant45324 23:09, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
- Even though this is February material, it's a bit too early don't you think. I mean words like "hint" are a no no in Wikipedia and no specific details have given info about a sister game. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 00:56, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
It does say there is one: the creator doesn't "recall saying that there would not be a third and he was very surprised to hear that." which means there is going to be a third one. User talk:RickyBryant45324 05:20, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
- Besides early or not if there's a statement that's been made isn't wikipedia's job to give the information? I mean isn't that what this encyclopedia is for? Information? And technically it's not early as Black and White are released early in Japan and later in the US. User talk:RickyBryant45324 05:27, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
- We have policies. Masuda only hinted the release of future games. He may be surprised that someone gave information without his consent and he has never explicitly stated that new games will come out. We do have policies, like WP:CRYSTALBALL. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 10:33, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
Okay now that you've had your piece with the cyrstal ball ordeal over and over listen to what I'm saying. We post it because that's what has always been done. Pretty much would go like this "According to an interview segment with Gametrailer.com, Junichi Masuda stated that creator did not deny the possibility of a remake of Black and White." Swifty*talkcontribs 08:01, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
- If you are confident that it is safe to add that information, fine, go ahead. Our views differ; surely you can agree. Do you know which section it would fall under? —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 19:18, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
All the other pairs of Pokemon games have had remakes, so what are the chances of there being a Pokemon Grey/Gray released in the near future? 203.211.126.162 (talk) 05:58, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
More images needed
Hi all,
I think we should use more images, such as sprites of Reshiram and Zekrom. (These can be found on Bulbapedia.) This is because this page looks quite (dare I say) plain for a totally hip new video game.
Besides, I'm trying to put together a userbox:
This user enjoys playing Pokémon Black and White. W
that would work better with sprites than with boxart and a capital W.
Thanks,
The Doctahedron, 15:27, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
- That userbox fails WP:NFCC. We can't use non-free files for userspace. And any sprite of Pokemon would fail NFCC unless they were for infobox indentification purposes. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 15:35, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
- this page looks quite...plain
The point of an article is to inform, not please the eye. --Limxzero (talk) 22:15, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Outdated
Are we supposed to update this with new info? The Black 2 and White 2 section feels less than empty right now?--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 11:48, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- The CoroCoro issue hasn't been released yet though has it? Can we add leaked information? —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 13:37, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- Not unless the leaks are reported by reliable sources like Kotaku. But even it says that it's source is Serebii. So essentially, by sourcing Kotaku, you are sourcing Serebii, which is not allowed. lol. I would wait a month for it to officially come out. Blake (Talk·Edits) 13:45, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, I think we should just wait for the official scans. We shouldn't cite fansites, even indirectly. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 14:02, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- But the scans were already leaked now. And each issue were always leaked, new info were released as well.--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 15:49, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- Scans being leaked means nothing. We cannot add information to this article that should not be available to us until the magazine hits news stands.—Ryulong (竜龙) 19:13, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- But the scans were already leaked now. And each issue were always leaked, new info were released as well.--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 15:49, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, I think we should just wait for the official scans. We shouldn't cite fansites, even indirectly. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 14:02, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- Not unless the leaks are reported by reliable sources like Kotaku. But even it says that it's source is Serebii. So essentially, by sourcing Kotaku, you are sourcing Serebii, which is not allowed. lol. I would wait a month for it to officially come out. Blake (Talk·Edits) 13:45, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
About the manga
Apart from the one already in Wikipedia, I'm pretty sure there is another manga based on Black and White. In fact, the two protagonists are named Black and White. Any info on that? —017Bluefield (talk) 02:36, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
- Not sure what you are referring to. There are plenty of manga based off of it. Pokémon Adventures has volumes based off all regions. There is also Be a Master! Pokémon B & W and Pokémon Réburst. What info are you asking for? Do you want them to be listed on this page for some reason? Your question is very vague. Blake (Talk·Edits) 02:45, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
- Okay, I know this much:
Be a Master! Pokémon B & WandPokémon Réburst. All I'm really sure about is that the male protagonist's name is Black, and the female protagonist's is White, so I'm guessing it's from Pokémon Adventures's Unova series. —017Bluefield (talk) 02:51, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
- Okay, I know this much: