Talk:Pokémon/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Genesect

:The following discussion is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion were Genesect is not to be acknowledged without a reliable source and any edits to add it are to be reverted immediately. ^_^ Swifty*^talk 01:50, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

The official Japanese website has since released information that now officially supports the existence of the character. Swifty's closure and decision is now rendered moot. Just because he cannot personally read Japanese (nor apparently can anyone he is colluding with in saying Pokemon.co.jp is not the official website) is not a reason to exclude Genesect from the English Wikipedia, when it has been nearly two weeks since its official reveal.—Ryulong (竜龙) 06:59, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

---

Okay once and for all we need to have the Wikipedia community decide on the bases of Pokémon 649: Genesect. Even though it has been said several times that Genesect has not been recognized officially by Nintendo or Game Freak or whoever owns Pokémon people still insist on wanting to post Genesect so I propose a community vote on the issue. So please post whether you Oppose to Genesect being added to the count or if you Support it and your reason why. Thank you! Swifty*^talk 23:08, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:CRYSTALBALL as we do not know if whoever owns Pokémon will acknowledge or distribute Genesect. Swifty*^talk 23:09, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose: Genesect is only known to the fandom because of the actions of people delving through the video game's hidden data. There are no reliable sources or official confirmation from Nintendo, Game Freak, or the Pokémon Company that even remotely acknowleges its existence. Just because we know it to be true, does not mean it can be adequately covered. When it does happen, we will say there are 649 Pokémon. I don't know why we're bothering with this Swifty, because it's only newbies and anons who are bothered that we aren't covering everything like a fansite would.—Ryulong (竜龙) 23:21, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

  Felt it necessary to allow a wide variety of people to have an opinion on it though I oppose it. Swifty*^talk 23:24, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

  The fact that that was discovered in the official game should indicate that Nintendo did create it.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 23:27, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

  It does not matter if it was discovered in the official game. There is no reason for Nintendo to release it. Nintendo never released the item that would unlock the event that gives you a wild Arceus. If we covered the items in the game, we would have to cover that thing as well.—Ryulong (竜龙) 23:29, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

  You have good points but I'm torn in this matter. I'm staying with neutral.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 23:33, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

  Another great example is the GS ball which was only released in Japan that allowed the player to get a Celebi in Pokémon Crystal but this event was never released in the US and required something with a mobile phone connection in Japan and in the US you can use a Gameshark code to unlock the GS ball and the event to get Celebi but why post all that information on here? Nintendo does not even support Gameshark/GameGenie/ActionReplay because of they do illegal things that only Nintendo wants you to do through them. Swifty*^talk 23:36, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

  If the GS ball isn't in there, it should be because it was talked about several times in the Anime and for Nintendo, it's official.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 00:31, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

  In the anime yes it existed but the event where the GS Ball was used in Pokémon Crystal to obtain Celebi never happened in the US. I am talking about the event in the game not the anime. Swifty*^talk 00:52, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

  Oh.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 01:27, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

• Neutral As much as I believe it is a Pokemon and me personally have seen it, it should not be added if Nintendo denies it as an official Pokemon at this time. At this time it is mere speculation whether it's an official one or not. But then again there's this which proves it was used in the Pokemon Black & White game. I really don't know what to vote for.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 23:27, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
• Neutral All I know is my gut says maybe. It is a difficult topic because as mentioned above there is data for genesect in the official Pokemon game and there are items for it but what do Nintendo or Gamefreak need to do/say to prove/make Genesect official? I personally don't see a movie coming out any time soon with the release of Pokemon black2/white2 coming. Lunashy_{Friendship letters.}^{write a friendship letter} 01:52, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose As incomplete as "648 Pokémon in total" sounds, Genesect FTTB is about as notable as a minor easter egg and is inaccessible right now. The one reputable site I can think of now that acknowledges Genesect is IGN, but that is just a game guide. Again, if Nintendo does not want us to know about this until it's released, let's not. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 02:18, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
• Nonsensical Question for Rfc. The question is there, but makes little sense to none Pokemon illiterate. I Abstain! It seems that many questions are combined into a single question, so it makes it impossible for none interested parties, invited to pass comment under Rfc, to make valid comment or observation. So kindly rephrase the question as a single issue and stop presuming that all wiki editors have any idea about Pokemon. See - WP:DGAF - See Countering Systemic Bias — Preceding unsigned comment added by Media-hound- thethird (talk • contribs) 02:21, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose - There was a powerful discussion held here that stated that we must have official sources state that they exist other then the game data found by hackers. We don't have to have a new discussion just because hit-and-run editors come and say "dude, why isn't genesect listed, thats dumb", "you guys are outdated", etc. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 03:46, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose - No justification for inclusion without proper sources. SpigotMap 03:58, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
• Neutral - From a purely Wikipedia standpoint, it shouldn't be included due to the lack of official sources. However, in this case given that there is programming within the game specifically for Genesect (albeit discovered through hacking), it may warrant inclusion as a side note. Something along the lines of "In addition to the 648 officially recognized Pokémon, data on an additional Pokémon exists within the programming in Black and White" could be used to appease both sides. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 04:24, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Support the proposal by Cyclonebiskit, or put something as a footnote with a dagger after the "there are x pokemon" part. Someone further up has mentioned it being recognised by IGN, who I assume would be considered a reliable source(?), and this would appease the people who "know" it exists without intruding excessively on those who are following a wiki policy. BulbaThor (talk) 13:45, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose - In addition to the points that have already been made above, the fact that Keldeo and Meloetta were ultimately recognized as official species by Nintendo and/or TPC cannot be treated as evidence that Genesect will definitely receive such recognition per WP:NOR. --SoCalSuperEagle (talk) 18:39, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
• oppose - WP:CRYSTAL. Sources would have to be of the highest reliabilty for this one so i can't support its inclusion at this time. Thanks Jenova20 12:00, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
• Comment - The only question that should be asked is: "Are there reliable, independent sources about Genesect?" If yes, then it should be in the article. If not, it would be unsourced OR. Its "officially announced" status (or lack of) is completely irrelevant. Salvidrim! 03:17, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

• Comment I think an example of Wp:IAR could be made here. Third party sources are not needed as this list merely lists Pokemon which exist; and thus primary sources, including the pokedex entries, serve as a reliable source in its own right. CyanGardevoir ^{(used EDIT!)} 10:36, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

• Comment - Even though the pokemon hasn't been officially revealed by Nintendo (which plans to release it with future events), it is featured in the actual game and its code, there are means to get it (i.e.: using a custom pokemon grobal trade system[1]), so it is not WP:CRYSTAL. Eduemoni^↑talk↓ 02:18, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry but it is WP:CRYSTAL and also WP:OR. You can't just claim something like that because i could just as easily claim the opposite. You need reliable sources or the material can be challenged and removed. Thanks Jenova20 08:20, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Comment - I do not think WP:CRYSTAL here, which goes: Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation. The game itself acts as "verifiable information", and the speculation doesn't really mean anything - the character might not exist even though it exists? As for WP:OR...well, the list page merely lists Pokemon which does exist, and their Pokedex entries are enough to prove that. By using {{cite video game}}. CyanGardevoir ^{(used EDIT!)} 23:22, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm just commenting, I neither approve, nor disapprove its removal, I'm pointing out that the content exist and even with Nintendo's refutations, this pokemon exists within black and white source code and there are means to get it, as per non reliable sources, I can comment on the opposite as well, there are some things that are relevant as soon as they surface, reliable sources are needed when the actual content is challenged and its existence is dubious or non existent. Eduemoni^↑talk↓ 19:01, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

• Comment - Just a note from the fanbase world: Genesect has apparently been confirmed to appear in the sixteenth movie trailer. There are likely Japanese sources for this; however, I can't read Japanese and can't search for it. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 00:29, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

If you can confirm it reliably i'll change my vote to support. But it still cannot be linked to code for Genesect in the game unless there is a reliable source. The proof of one does not prove the other per WP:SYNTHESIS. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 08:42, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

It's official now - Genesect event confirmed for B2/W2 by CoroCoro Cyclonebiskit (talk) 14:53, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

It's official and not in english? This means nothing to me, i don't read japanese, nor do i recognise the image or anything saying this is official...ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 15:18, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

The magazine is only sold in Japan (ergo in Japanese) but you can clearly see on the left-hand page an in-game battle with Genesect accompanied by details on the Pokemon itself. The magazine itself frequently releases information on upcoming Pokemon events, such as the Japanese Wifi Distribution of Genesect from August 11 to September 14. You can see these dates at the bottom of the left page. It doesn't have to be in English for it to be official, especially since it's not even released in English yet. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 21:06, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

So what is this magazine? Is it an official image or a mock-up of what this pokemon would look like battling? Is this magazine created by Nintendo? This is too vague still. We have an image of a pokemon and japansese writing, that's all ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 23:53, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

CoroCoro Comic Cyclonebiskit (talk) 02:41, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Without being able to read Japanese though i can only speculate on what it says. Without that we don't know if we have a mock-up or an actual image that was taken from the game. This leads to it possibly being a leak or an official screenshot - although i'm sceptical as "Sceret" appears in big letters. So it's probably a "leak" and not a confirmation. Thanks again ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 14:20, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

• Support It's officially confirmed now. Since it's official, there is no reason to not have it in there with the rest of the Pokemon.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 21:39, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Comment Can you provide the official source? ^_^ Swifty*^talk 06:13, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Note

Nintendo.com, Pokemon.com, Black 2 and White 2 official website and the Black and White official website have made no announcements a magazine (do not think it is official) leaked it but no way to source it other then fan sites that are leaking the magazine, CoroCoro, over the internet. Does not make it officially announced until Nintendo, GameFreak, or Pokemon.com announce it. Otherwise it is still speculation. ^_^ Swifty*^talk 07:14, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Well said. Official and available are different things ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 08:17, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Would it not be the case that a reliable source is needed, not an official source? BulbaThor (talk) 10:50, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Well yes, either will do...but we've had neither so far. I've not even seen one in English yet. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 11:58, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

• oppose It will be revealed officially soon enough, but until official releases happen, it's not a thing. Lots of things exist in game code in all sorts of games that are never ultimately released, or are left discarded at the very last minute. Or cut scenes in films and TV shows. For whatever reason, they may not quite make the final cut, so don't count. Theoretically could happen here (but probably not). Until then, no. Mingmingla (talk) 22:30, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
• Support - It is going to be revealed soon enough, game is sufficient to show its relevance, what if Nintendo and GameFreaker suddenly disappear, the pokemon in the game still exist and there are means to get it, even though Wikipedia should not have an article to anything that exist on the world, adding a note about its existence (if it is relevant), Fandom suffices relevancy aspects and it does not fit WP:CRYSTAL because it does not feature any speculative information (if it does, it should be adjusted), if it was a hoax, then I would be eagerly against it. Eduemoni^↑talk↓ 03:30, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

You really need to read WP:CRYSTAL as there is no English or reliable proof of this, it fails this as speculation at the first hurdle. Being "revealed soon enough" is a clear violation under Crystal. We can't be the first to announce this stuff, it would make us a primary source and we can't link to something that links back to us. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 12:50, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

 Resolved It seems to me this this situation has been resolved and it is the agreement of the Wikicommunity that Genesect is not posted until official relevance until it is acknowledged by the owners of the Pokemon with reliable sources being Nintendo.com or Pokemon.com or the official sites for Black and White and Black2 and White2 here for the English Wikipedia. As according to these agreements we must make sure that List of Pokémon and List of Pokémon (599–648) and this page remain stating that only 648 Pokémon exist. If I am wrong please correct me. ^_^ Swifty*^talk 01:40, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Genesect confirmed on July 14, 2012

Swifty, you've completely screwed everything up. This discussion became resolved two weeks ago when the official Japanese language website released the official confirmation that Genesect exists. Your final determination of this discussion is now moot, and we will state that Genesect has been confirmed to exist on Wikipedia because we have reliable sources to back that up. So long as the sources are reliable, it does not matter what god damn language they are written in.—Ryulong (竜龙) 06:40, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

No official announcement has been made Pokemon.jp.co is not the official site if you check the picture on the page the Pokedex entry is wrong. Genesect is Unova Pokedex number 155 not 300 and I doubt an official website would make that mistake. ^_^ Swifty*^talk 07:04, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Swifty, I've told you an official announcement was made. Pokemon.co.jp is the official Japanese language website. Genesect is number 300 in the new Unova Pokédex in Black 2 and White 2. You are just completely out of touch with anything that's been happening in the Japanese games.—Ryulong (竜龙) 07:14, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Cut it out you two, the issue is done with and Ryulong you don't need to put messages that personally attack others in a disagreement. I'm happy to assume "Pokemon.co.jp" is an oficial site solely because a £billion industry would own the website as soon as anyone else tried.

Although Google translate wasn't the best there i can confirm this disputed pokemon does exist on the site an what appears to be a link to pokemon Black/White 2.

I'm happy to support inclusion but i'm iffy about linking it to either game without a proper translation to do so. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 08:44, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Having chatted with Swifty, I think we all agree it's an official site, and that the disputed pokemon exists in the japanese version of the game. Would anyone object to the sentence becoming "a total of 649 fictional creatures have made an appearence in the games, though some are not available in all countries", and Genesect going into the list pages with a note stating it's available in Japan? Worm^TT(talk) 09:22, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

All that is important is that the final count is now 649 confirmed creatures. We do not need to put a conditional on there saying one of them (actually 3) are not available internationally.—Ryulong (竜龙) 10:06, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure I agree with that. If a reader from a country with less than 649, that'll cause confusion. I would have thought accuracy was essential here. Worm^TT(talk) 10:13, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree with Ryu here Worm, although if he tries to link it specifically to a game (Black/White 2) he/she will have to make the distinction you mention. The 649 exist the world over whether available in a game or not. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 10:22, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I got the same crap on my page when I attempted to tell him that, but I just let it go. We have evidence Genesect exist, and told me to stop "vandalism" which if you see is not. I call this moot. --Hinata talk 01:27, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Number of species

According to Pokemon.com there are 646 pokemon, not 648. Evilrainbow (talk) 01:36, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Pokemon.com has yet to update this. Keldeo and Meloetta were officially revealed by Kyurem vs. the Sacred Swordsman: Keldeo, note the movie title and a short that goes along with the movie is called Meloetta's Sparkling Recital making Pokemon's 647 and 648 official. No official source has yet to be given to show that Genesect is official. So technically Pokemon.com is wrong in their number or has yet to update the site and probably will not update it until the official English title of the Keldeo movie is released. ^_^ Swifty*^talk 06:24, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Also note to anyone trying to add Genesect, an early leak of CoroCoro revealed it, but because it's a leak, let's wait till the August issue is officially released before changing the number to 649. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 18:31, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, we're now at 649 because CoroCoro came out a day later, and Pokemon.co.jp released the information at the same time.—Ryulong (竜龙) 07:24, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

I just checked Pokemon.com and the total number of pokemon is actually 718, ending with Pokemon X & Y's legendary Zygarde.Miafacee (talk) 22:29, 3 November 2014 (UTC)Miafacee

For the number of species, in the updated one now that Pokémon X & Y came out, I noticed something. There are only (currently - although you can get 3 more by hacking the game, as these three pokemon are not out yet. They come from a new region being currently designed)719 pokemon. The article says there is 720. There really is 718, but the Legendary Diance became official AFTER the release of X & Y, so they added an update which adds her to the game, thus making the Pokedex total 719. I would change this but this is semi protected and I cannot change it yet. I need to change it for a school assignment, so if some admin or some staff allow me to change it so I can get a good grade, that would be appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheezywizard5292 (talk • contribs) 20:17, 17 March 2015‎ (UTC)

@Cheezywizard5292: The count of 720 is per List of Pokémon, and that list appears to be sourced well. You'd need to discuss the change at that article's talk page if you think some of them should be delisted. —C.Fred (talk) 20:25, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Hoopa is not yet obtainable unless you hack the game using an action replay or some other form of hacks. Hoopa is one of the three I mentioned above that will come from a new region, as hinted in XY by a Traveler, whose name I just forgot. After talking to him for a few Pokedays, he will give you a statue that comes from a new region, saying it depicts a pokemon that protects another region. Gossip says it's most likely Hoopa, Which if you will note the list they gave, Hoopa has no Pokedex number thus making the true pokedex numbers 719. My source is I have Omega Ruby & Alpha Sapphire, with all 719 pokemon but no Hoopa as you must cheat to get it. - Cheezywizard5292

Obtainable is not the same thing as known. If the species has been documented, it should be listed. The only angle to pursue would be the source for that Pokemon not being reliable, but then that might call more entries on the list into question. —C.Fred (talk) 21:00, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Then why not add volcanion (found with Hoopa in the new region, supposedly) & Missingno & `1 to the list. The two after Volcanion were known and obtainable in the first generation. Also you could get a ghost, not a ghost type pokemon but a literal ghost AND a hand in the first generation. If they are going to list pokemon with no pokedex entry whatsoever, then I think they'd better include them all, right? - Cheez. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheezywizard5292 (talk • contribs) 21:31, 17 March 2015‎ (UTC)

Slight Change To Avoid Confusion

In section 3.1 Generations at the bottom it says that (referring to x and y) They will be the first games in the main series fully rendered in 3D I think that this should be changed to say that They will be the first games in the main series released on a handheld fully rendered in 3D Some people would consider the gamecube games as part of the main series. This is just to avoid confusion. PurpleMesa (talk) 21:35, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Really? Odd; I always thought the handheld collect-the-badges games constituted the main series. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 21:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Woops i realised this need correcting thanks (about the badges) but games like Pokemon Colosseum could be debatable. PurpleMesa (talk) 22:02, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Yep. Pokémon has focused on the handheld generations, but with spin-off stadium games for the television consoles. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 22:06, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Still I don't think it would hurt to change it because people new to the series might get confused also on wikipedia it doesn't list it as a spinoff PurpleMesa (talk) 22:36, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

I checked the source and it does not say anything about these being the first main-series games, so I'll leave this for now. I shortened the sentence to "hey will be rendered in 3D and have a simultaneous worldwide release in October 2013." —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 23:04, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Partly done: by Wikipedian Penguin. Vacation9 12:53, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

1995 not 1996

Pokemon was created in 1995 not 1996. Every source lists Pokemon with a 1995 as a starting date. Some pokemon cards came out in 1995.Your article is wrong — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasonkd90ewwe990 (talk • contribs) 17:41, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Above message was deleted by a vandal almost a year ago. I restored it, and for the record: Pokémon started with the games in 1996. The TCG came later that year. However, for a reason I don't know, the copyright banner of the franchise states that it was created in 1995. - theFace 19:36, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

I think, and don't hold me to this, but I think that the '95 vs. '96 thing came up because of when it was released in Japan. I'm pretty sure the copyright system is different over there, which may be part of the confusion. Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 17:30, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't know much of it, but "Pokémon" is a trademark so it has to be registered (see also: Japanese trademark law). The first pair of games were released on February 27, 1996. I assume that Nintendo by then had already taken care of the trademarks, some time in 1995. - Manifestation (previously theFace) 18:36, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Edit request on 25, February 2013

• "The term Pokémon, in addition to referring to the Pokémon franchise itself, also collectively refers to the 649 fictional species that have made appearances in Pokémon media as of the release of the fifth generation titles Pokémon Black 2 and White 2."

This needs to be changed to "The term Pokémon, in addition to referring to the Pokémon franchise itself, also collectively refers to over 649 fictional species that have made appearances in Pokémon media as of the upcoming release of the sixth generation titles Pokémon X and Pokémon Y" 184.58.22.86 (talk) 20:27, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

I do not think that this will work. 649 is the total number and "as of the upcoming release" makes absolutely no sense in English.—Ryulong (琉竜) 20:32, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Six have so far been revealed: http://www.pokemon.com/pokemonxy/en-us bringing the total as of now to 655 species official announced. 184.58.22.86 (talk) 20:36, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, but the number refers to the total as of a certain date. You cannot say that there will be more as of a date that has not happened yet.—Ryulong (琉竜) 20:42, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Well it will be over 655, that can be certain as they usually release over 100 new Pokémon each generation. 184.58.22.86 (talk) 20:45, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Would also like to point out that it says "that have made appearances in Pokémon media" the official site is a "Pokémon media" so technically the statement is incorrect as over 649 have now made appearances in "Pokémon media". 184.58.22.86 (talk) 20:47, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 25, February 2013

• "The term Pokémon, in addition to referring to the Pokémon franchise itself, also collectively refers to the 649 fictional species that have made appearances in Pokémon media as of the release of the fifth generation titles Pokémon Black 2 and White 2."

This needs to be changed to "The term Pokémon, in addition to referring to the Pokémon franchise itself, also collectively refers to 655 fictional species that have made appearances in Pokémon media as of the upcoming releases of the sixth generation titles, Pokémon X and Pokémon Y."

Six have been official announced by the official site: http://www.pokemon.com/pokemonxy/en-us

184.58.22.86 (talk) 20:43, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Done  TOW  talk  23:35, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

I declined this same request the day it was made why did you make it again? Edit undone. The wording does not make sense concerning the fact that X and Y are not out yet so there is no way to be sure how many will be released.—Ryulong (琉竜) 01:59, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Just a question, given that one of the main attributes of the franchise is that new pokémon species are added with each new generation of games, why not just mention "since the release of this and that pokemon games, there are XXX known pokémon species" and a link to the pokemon list? since it's a given that as long the franchise survives the number of species will keep growing and the page will keep being outdated. Furthermore, the official sources rely on misinformation and fan speculation to keep the interest alive so even those sources are dubious until the actual games and the official game guides are out. Am I mistaken? Godshawk (talk) 16:15, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Megami Tensei

Under the "Similar video game series" label in the "See Also" section, shouldn't the Megami Tensei series be listed? Most of the games involve collecting and battling with the various demons in the series. Also, the Megami Tensei series has been around for almost a decade before Pokemon Red/Green were released in Japan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.217.201.98 (talk) 14:04, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 15 April 2013

When it states the original Release dates for pokemon movies and it says for Japan May please make it to English Spyavatar (talk) 02:55, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

 Not doneNo. The films are Japanese and the first release date is always the more important one.—Ryulong (琉竜) 03:25, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Manga

In the manga section it is said that "The manga differs greatly from the video games and anime in that the trainers were able to kill the opponent's Pokémon.". It's should either be removed or marked which series it's referring to (in this case Pokémon Adventures). Please correct this. 212.149.216.106 (talk) 05:43, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Some wording clean up needed.

In the second paragraph of the Concept section, it says the following: "Afterwards, it will obey whatever its new master commands, unless the Trainer demonstrates such a lack of experience that the Pokémon would rather act on its own accord." But actually, Pokemon will not disobey the trainer that caught them; only traded Pokemon do that. Im not sure if the line is meant to refer to just the games or pokemon as a whole, but that information should be there too. Referring to the games makes it obvious and needs to be fully rewritten, but if its referring to the entire franchise then having the current one and the one about traded pokemon in the same section would be alright. 74.132.252.16 (talk) 02:14, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

The line refers to the concept of Pokémon as a whole and doesn't try and delve into specifics such as precise situation in video games. Adding such specific information into this general concept section seems unnecessary. Artichoker^[talk] 04:44, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 14 May 2013

< a total of 10 Pokemon have been released as promotion for Pokemon X and Pokemon Y. The 6 in the sentence about X and Y should be changed to 10. source: http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Pok%C3%A9mon_X_and_Y> 164.104.166.11 (talk) 19:08, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Bulbagarden shouldn't be a source.—Ryulong (琉竜) 19:53, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 12 June 2013

But plural species are said "two Pikachus" or "three Bulbasaurs,"eg. Xhgaerlan (talk) 05:33, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Could you provide a source?—Ryulong (琉竜) 06:10, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Logo vector

I noticed that the vector used for the logo has some slight shape errors, such as the inner hole of the P and the é. Is there any chance it will be fixed?68.204.141.149 (talk) 20:45, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Not quite sure. Pokemon themselves created that logo. I don't see any glitches with the logo, and we are at no liberty to alter the official artwork.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 01:52, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Help to change

Anyone can help to change about this? "With the upcoming releases of Pokémon X and Y, 28 new Pokémon have been featured in promotions for the games as of August 8, 2013." (36.236.20.240 (talk) 06:55, 18 August 2013 (UTC))

Number changed to 29.—Ryulong (琉竜) 10:07, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Naming Pokemon games in general Wikipedia Version

...But yes, I would like to direct your attention to the section of this page, instead of repeating the info yet again. Long story short, I believe we need to slightly rethink the way we handle the naming of this series, because it seems we're inaccurate. Every work, the time it was released, and it the way it handles this "two title" scenario needs to be examined. Despatche (talk) 06:18, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't see any reason for any of this. In English it's "Pokémon". In Japan it's "Pocket Monsters" in literal translation, and "Pokémon" is also used. The current format is fine. We need to provide both. And what Bulbapedia does will never work for Wikipedia.—Ryulong (琉竜) 06:57, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

The problem is that every article is written under the assumption that the series is known as "Pocket Monsters" in Japan; just a few minutes ago, "Pocket Monsters Platina" was considered the Japanese name of Pokémon Platinum Version (and really, it still is, due to the presence of that romaji). I only link to Bulbapedia because it's an issue there too (they handle it even worse, believe it or not) and so I wouldn't have to retype the entire situation again and again (which is why I linked to the VGMdb topic on Bulbapedia). Yes, the same thing needs to be done with all three sites, can be supported by all three sites, and would benefit all three sites (though I think I found all the major stuff on VGMdb, it's not exactly a giant wiki). Despatche (talk) 07:05, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

It is known as Pocket Monsters in Japan. It's just not written as "Pocket Monsters" in English anymore. We do not need to change anything here on the English Wikipedia.—Ryulong (琉竜) 07:09, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

It is no longer called "Pocket Monsters" in Japan and has not been since 2002 (in fact, Nintendo will probably never use that phrase again); they only use "Pokémon", "ポケモン", and "ポケットモンスター". No, "ポケットモンスター" is not "Pocket Monsters"; it is a completely different title used for a completely different purpose (and technically it actually spells out "Pocket Monster", not that this matters much). Yes, there is a problem, and it needs to be addressed; this is sweeping it under the rug like it doesn't exist! Despatche (talk) 07:35, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

ポケットモンスター literally translates as "Pocket Monster(s)". Just because the Japanese distribution no longer uses "Pocket Monsters" in English does not mean Wikipedia should any way completely disregard this plainly visible fact that the katakana are read in a particular way in English. No one has had any such issue with this up until you decided to attempt to push these changes that you see as right and the other as wrong on multiple websites.—Ryulong (琉竜) 07:54, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Incorrect: it was that Nintendo told us "ポケットモンスター" means "Pocket Monsters", and it became Nintendo telling us "ポケットモンスター" should mean "Pokémon". My hands are tied; I can do nothing. A proper transliteration (not a translation) would be something like ポケット・モンスターズ, which will probably never be used under any circumstances for anything. Also, "literal translations" are irrelevant, and tend to mean even less than the original phrase. But that's not even my point. My point is that, again, these articles keep trying to press that "Pocket Monsters" is somehow relevant, when it isn't; it is an old brand that is no longer used, and the wording needs to be changed to reflect that. Today we have "Pokémon", "ポケモン", and "ポケットモンスター", and that's it. I'm not sure China and Korea even have their own transliterations. This isn't about opinion, it's about facts. I only say "I think" because people would chew me out the same way you're doing... thanks for making it clear that I shouldn't bother with such formalities.

No one has had an issue with this because no one else has ever cared, not that they necessarily have seen the change and agree with it (Wikipedia is far too big for that to ever be true). That's why I opened a discussion for this to begin with, and that's why you don't open a discussion every single time you want to make an edit, you just do it and see what happens. I've gotten myself into a pointless "argument" with a guy who completely misappropriates whatever point I bring to the table, and in a very rude and outright disruptive fashion that looks like vandal behavior. Is anyone who's reading this really surprised to see me so upset? Despatche (talk) 03:25, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

And when you get called out on making that edit you start a discussion about it. This is what Wikipedia is about. These pages are for suggesting that you make changes to articles, particularly if you think it might cause problems. What you don't do is just get into an edit war like when you suddenly decided that "Unofficial Sentai Akibaranger" should use "Hikounin" instead of "Unofficial".

But what matters here is this: We are not removing the literal translation of the Japanese name just because you've suddenly discovered that the company that owns the trademark on the name decided to cease translating it as "Pocket Monsters" and is now solely translating it as "Pokémon".—Ryulong (琉竜) 04:29, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

I didn't "suddenly decide" anything; I never saw "Unofficial" used anywhere, and I was certain it was a simple clerical error I was fixing. Obviously, I make errors too. As do you.

No, I do not want to remove the "literal translation" (please stop using "translation") of the Japanese name, and I don't know how many times I have to say this. What I want to do is make it very clear that "POCKET MONSTERS" is no longer used while "ポケットモンスター" is, like so:

Pokémon (ポケモン, ポケットモンスター, Pokemon, Poketto Monsutā), once known as Pocket Monsters, is a media franchise[...]

The problem here is that you get a different type of inaccuracy and/or potential redundancy. Therefore, the note about the old title needs to go elsewhere, and this mysterious place was obvious enough. This is why we need to rethink what we do; what we currently have is incompatible with the facts. Despatche (talk) 06:03, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't see what's incompatible. We list both "Pokémon" and "Pocket Monsters" on the page, and separately. It would introduce an unnecessary confusion if we said that ポケットモンスター means "Pokémon" in Japan. It doesn't. The company simply changed how their trademark is parsed in English.—Ryulong (琉竜) 07:53, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure what this discussion is about. If literal translation is Pocket Monsters, then name it that, if it is literally Pokemon(I didn't know they did that?), then it should show Pokemon. However, edits like this are not good. The idea that PS2 was called G&S in Japan is worth noting. Removing it is just disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 04:45, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

What are you talking about? It wasn't called G&S in Japan; it's the only set of games that don't use an English word or letter for their versions. There is absolutely no WP:POINT going on here, not on my end. You should see Ryulong over there instead, with his reverts sans explanation and his refusal to talk about anything on his own talk page.

Yes, that does mean Red, Green, and Blue are called "Red Version", "Green Version", and "Blue Version" in-game... something the pre-release poster did as well, actually. No one can be blamed for the decisions of Game Freak and Nintendo programmers, but they can be blamed for not adhering to them. Despatche (talk) 06:03, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

But the thing is, the article currently says ^{"known as Pocket Monsters' Stadium Kin Gin"}. What is Kin Gin? If that translates to Gold&Silver, I think that is worth noting. When I put ポケモンスタジアム金銀 in Google Translate, it comes out to be Gold and Silver. So I don't know what your problem is.(actually, isn't Google translate sort of open source? somebody probably just put it there, so forgive me if that is incorrect.) _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 15:46, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

I think the point here is you don't want "literal translations". But as a English user, I think knowing that for instance Zelda: Spirit Tracks was called "Zelda: Steam Whistle of Earth" is good information to have. Sure, in Japan, it is not referred to as that there. It is called "Zeruda no Densetsu: Daichi no Kiteki(ゼルダの伝説　大地の汽笛)". But not knowing Japanese, I would like a translation to be placed there. It is informative to the user. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 15:46, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

There is nothing informative about a fake translation that is completely dissociated from fact. ("Zeruda no Densetsu" lol) Titles are not about meaning, they're about physical structure. It is bloat, and it needs to stay out of articles! Besides, why is it "good information" when you can just cram that title into Google Translate to get the same thing? Despatche (talk) 21:04, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Despatche, no one is agreeing with you over the removals of the literal translations of the game titles so stop removing the literal translations of the game titles. We get it. The Pokémon Stadium games, while written as Pokemon Sutajiamu in katakana are written in English as "Pocket Monsters' Stadium" within the Japanese market and the Platinum version is written as Poketto Monsutā Purachina in katakana but in English as "Pokémon Platinum". This is no reason to remove any literal translations (and they are translations, just not the ones the company chose) because otherwise it appears we are saying the two translate into each other the wrong way. But I will acquiesce to your insistence that we do not refer to Platinum as Platina within Japanese, even though the Japanese word for platinum is a loan word from Spanish platina.—Ryulong (琉竜) 20:57, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

No one else is agreeing with me because no one else is heeerrreeee. You are completely wrong about this silly translation theory, because "ポケモンスタジアム2" is meant to be read as "Pocket Monsters' Stadium 2"; that's the whole point of having two titles at all! And why the hell does the source loanword matter, at all, ever, when Nintendo felt the need to write down "Platinum" anyway? Stop blaming me for things Nintendo does, please. Despatche (talk) 21:04, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Blake and I both disagree with you, so that's why no one else is agreeing with you. But this is not the point. Literal translations of the Japanese titles are not fake translations just because Nintendo, Game Freak, the Pokémon Company, etc. decided to use specific forms of English language text that apparently do not match with the Japanese language pronunciations. There's nothing you can say that changes the fact that "ポケモンスタジアム2" is literally read as "Pokémon Stadium 2", even though the words "POCKET MONSTERS' STADIUM 2" appear in English on the Japanese box and cartridge and you've made no such convincing argument that we should omit that information.—Ryulong (琉竜) 21:19, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

THAT IS EXACTLY WHY THEY'RE FAKE TRANSLATIONS. IT'S NOT MY FAULT YOU CHOOSE TO IGNORE REALITY. Despatche (talk) 21:35, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Ryulong, what the hell are you doing? You were the one who told me that "Pokémon <thing> Version" was the official title outside of Japan. Now you're telling me that adding "Version" where appropriate is WP:POINT? I can't assume good faith with a guy who lies about every little thing. And why are you continuing to dodge my actual position? Are you even reading any of this? Despatche (talk) 21:04, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes. It is WP:POINT because you specifically stated that your addition of it to every instance of the games titles was to make a point.—Ryulong (琉竜) 21:19, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? You are a terrible person, and no one seems to care. You lie and you lie and you lie with your misguided everything because you cannot think beyond that. All the good faith in the world could not deal with your character. I don't ever want to see you again, and I hope something causes you to leave this place as soon as possible. Despatche (talk) 21:35, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

I am not going to discuss these issues with you if you do not keep your emotions in check.—Ryulong (琉竜) 04:49, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm afraid that I am not familiar enough with translational niceties to take a side on this dispute, but I would advise you to calm down, Despatche. WP:Civility is one of the five pillars of Wikipedia, after all. I'd suggest stepping away from Pokémon-related articles for a couple days and then coming back when you're not quite so upset. Then, try to reach a consensus on the translation issues. If you find that the resulting consensus is not to your liking, then you probably you should away from editing Pokémon articles. That's what I do. Being a young-earth creationist myself, my blood boils whenever I read evolution-related articles. However, I realize that the scientific consensus (and Wikipedia consensus) is against me, so I just stay away from editing those articles. (Though I would maintain that I'm right and everyone else is wrong :)). AmericanLemming (talk) 06:46, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

The pocket monster Films

The pokemon franchise has had a number of films made starting with mew vs. mewtwo and now later in 2013 the film 'the sword of justice' has been released. later films may follow as pokemon is extremely successful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Freddo forg (talk • contribs) 09:44, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi, this is already covered at Pokémon#Films. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 15:44, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 December 2013

24.251.99.249 (talk) 02:06, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Note: No request was made. --ElHef (Meep?) 05:05, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 January 2014

• "The name Pokémon is the romanized contraction of the Japanese brand Pocket Monsters (ポケットモンスター Poketto Monsutā?)."

Isn't that technically a romanized portmanteau? Djnickers (talk) 23:56, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

In Japanese, it's very normal to contract multiple words to create new words. Indeed, you could call them portmanteaus (see Portmanteau#Japanese), but I don't know if it's common to describe Japanese contractions as such. I think the term is mostly used in English context, for example: infotainment (information + entertainment). Cheers, theFace 19:06, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

I've marked this request as answered. No action has been taken. I won't make the edit because I really don't know if we should call Japanese words portmanteaus. Cheers, theFace 17:24, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 March 2014

Change Ash To Saad Mexican224 (talk) 14:11, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Not done: Why? --Mdann52talk to me! 14:38, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Mention of pokemon in the intro

Is there reason why there is no mention of what pokemon is (ie collectible creature characters) in the intro? It seems strange that it's not mentioned there, although at least the intro is rather succinct.--Prisencolinensinainciusol (talk) 04:56, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Because this page at it's core is about the franchise, not the fictional species. Weegeerunner (talk) 17:48, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Pokemon owned by Nintendo

Hi guys I just read this Article and in the first sentence is sais: (Pokemon is)"published and owned by Japanese video game company Nintendo". As far as I know it is owned by Gamefreak and published by Nintendo. Even if I am wrong there should be a proof for this statement. I hope this can be clarified/fixed.--Slytzel (talk) 00:19, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Game Freak is just the game developer. Nintendo owns the entire franchise. ZappaOMati 00:30, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

I was about to make more or less the same post as the thread opener. I have had it with people citing this questionable sentence as truth over the Internet just because it's written in Wikipedia. The factual situation is: The Pokémon franchise is owned by "The Pokémon Company" which in turn is owned by a triumvirate of Nintendo, Game Freaks and Creatures. This is for example why there are Pokémon applications on mobile devices despite Nintendo having made it more than clear (until earlier this year) that it doesn't want to see its franchises on them. Nintendo merely partially owns the franchise (32% to be exact). The Japanese Wikipedia entry starts with "Pokémon is a video game series published by The Pokémon Company (originally Nintendo)..." which somewhat reflects this situation. Frankly said I have had it with Wikipedia. You can't even get the simple first sentence in this major article right and it's been there for years. --78.50.94.234 (talk) 22:59, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

OK thanks that makes sense, sorry that I asked again I didn't see your post. I really think that the first sentence should be changed to clarify the situation.--Slytzel (talk) 02:31, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

So does anyone feel like fixing this? I don't have a Wikipedia account and thus can't do it myself. --92.224.212.75 (talk) 13:27, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

So I'm checking back two months later and this is still isn't fixed. What kind of joke is that? The claim that Pokémon is (only) owned by Nintendo (at the very start of this article) is not only not backed up by a citation, but it's factually wrong. I will even do the work for you and give you a counter-citation http://www.pokemon.co.jp/corporate/en/history/ "The Pokémon Company was established through joint investment by the three businesses holding the copyright on Pokémon: Nintendo Co., Ltd., Creatures Inc., and GAME FREAK inc." --78.50.92.131 (talk) 10:13, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Zappa already responded to this by contesting it. The only way it is going to change at this point is to come up with a reliable source to back that Game Freak isn't just the developer. The IP's citation below backs the claim that it is owned by Nintendo therefore it isn't wrong. Finally, if you want to change the wording to include all three companies, please give a request of the form "please change X to Y". — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 13:08, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Ah, fuck it. I withdraw the request and ask to leave it be. Who cares about if what Wikipedia says is factual anyway. --78.50.95.245 (talk) 20:11, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Twitch Plays Pokémon?

Would it be a good idea to mention Twitch Plays Pokémon here, or would that be too specific for this page? Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 19:54, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

I restored your edit. I think its a great idea to include it and I just acted in a knee-jerk reaction so my apologies. NathanWubs (talk) 08:26, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Eh, don't feel too bad, I understand (I've actually had multiple IP's yell at me for reverting their edits, and they were right some of the time). Thanks! Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 00:33, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

New Pokemon Games: Omega Ruby Alpha Sapphire

Nintendo announced the games in a press release on May 7, 2014. Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire will be released worldwide in November 2014. http://www.polygon.com/2014/5/7/5690692/pokemon-omega-ruby-alpha-sapphire-trailer-nintendo-3ds — Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.102.68.14 (talk) 08:59, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Yep, and that's already in the article and even has its own article. Feel free to help out at either location, or preferably both! Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 11:24, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 June 2014

can i edit the part about pokemon being bad? Cranidos99 (talk) 20:44, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. —cyberpower ^Chat_Online 22:03, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

First picture in Video Games section

I have small sugestion. I think the picture about fight between bulbasaur and charmander should be at least grayscale (if not in original colors). Red and Blue are from GameBoy which didn't have color display. So this screen is from other version (probably Yellow) and description is wrongly pointing at Red and Blue.

Thanks for pointing this out. The screenshot is from Pokémon Yellow, so I have altered the caption accordingly. Artichoker^[talk] 00:14, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

The screenshot actually is from Pokémon Red or Blue, using the Super Gameboy's colour palette. If it was from Yellow, Charmander would have a different sprite. It was most likely taken using an emulator, most of which display the Super Game Boy colours seen here.--101.98.206.172 (talk) 22:21, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 November 2014

Hello, I will try to keep this as formal as possible. Basically I am currently requesting to edit this. It has a lot of out dated information and grammatical mistakes. Just in case you guys want to know why I am doing this, its because of educational purposes! I here kindly ask you to give me permission to edit this. If not I understand. I will be patiently waiting for your reply!

                                                                                Thanks,
                                                                                         Anonymous

BrookieWP (talk) 08:20, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

 Not done This is not the right page to request additional user rights.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request. - Arjayay (talk) 08:31, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Small Error

In the Name section of this page, it states that there are 719 known fictional species. There are 2 species yet to be revealed (which I don't think are mentioned). MaxmarioU (talk) 21:51, 2 December 2014 (UTC)MaxmarioU, 12/2/2014

Semi-protected edit request on 7 March 2015

The picture mistakenly says Pokemon Yellow in stead of Pokemon Red 100.33.207.62 (talk) 12:29, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Not done for now: How do you know it was Pokemon Red instead of Pokemon Yellow, is there any proof that it could not have been Yellow? — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 20:21, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 March 2015

202.176.202.134 (talk) 09:22, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. NiciVampireHeart 10:33, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 April 2015

The official name for pokemon in japan is poket monsters. Calobhotovec (talk) 16:50, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Kharkiv07^Talk 16:55, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 April 2015

The picture where Charmander is battling a bulbasaur is from Pokemon Red and blue not Pokemon Yellow like it says in the description. Link for proof: [2] 2600:1010:B118:AC65:6CB1:A44A:9F2A:8B45 (talk) 07:19, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 12:10, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Monster in My Pocket

I noticed the link is dead and then did a google search to find any information on the lawsuit from Morrison Entertainment Group. I couldn't find anything about this, which seems strange given that it allegedly involves such a high profile company. Should we remove this section entirely? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScottDNelson (talk • contribs) 01:09, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

The acute accent's rule

Article says "The name Pokémon is the romanized contraction of the Japanese brand ..." but the acute accent "é" does NOT exist in romanization processing. It does exist in many european languages, also vietnamese. So why Nintendo want it to be there anyway? I suppose Nintendo thinks about a international brand name that all countries will pronounce same way. English talkers will say "Pokeemon" if accent were not on the "e". Then, the term "Pokee" is alrady used in Japanese. So this accent tells everyone that we not shall say "ee" but "é" as in "pocket". If everyone agree, that explanation should be in article. Do you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.250.241.172 (talk) 16:28, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Unless Nintendo explains why the e is accented, it does not belong in the article. And even then, it would be given the matter undue weight. —Farix (t | c) 22:47, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Another reason might be because it would appeal to the Latino audience, as the acute accent and other diacritics exist in Spanish writing; something similar can be seen in the San Jose, California naming controversy. Ill get by to making a thread again, but honestly this page shouldnt have an accent because of WP:OFFICIALPrisencolinensinainciusol (talk) 19:59, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

I believe it's to get people to pronounce it correctly, because in English the E in Pokemon is mispronounced often. Pronouncing the E as schwa, etc. is all too common. A lot of people might have heard of the foreign é (from French influence on English) so they might of wanted to make such a connection. Hill Crest's WikiLaser! (BOOM!) 14:05, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Pokemon universe

Just thought I'd point out that the Isle of Man is not part of the United Kingdom. Could someone edit that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.6.236.111 (talk) 23:14, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Done. Landfish7 (talk) 06:59, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

bruh.

bruh theres 915 mons 2600:1700:4A34:D06F:1554:D0D8:2923:50E6 (talk) 21:16, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

I figure that since we don't know how many Pokémon will come with the release of Pokémon Scarlet and Violet, we shouldn't update this value until those games come out. ChancellorPalpatine (talk) 06:05, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Referring to time periods in Pokémon as "generations"

I noticed that the Wikipedia article refers to various time periods in Pokémon as generations. I understand that this is a common practice among fans and is a really neat way to classify Pokémon's eras, but the term is unofficial and thus I'm not sure if we should use it. ChancellorPalpatine (talk) 06:02, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

The concept of "generations" has been acknowledged officially on a few occasions. Landfish7 (talk) 04:39, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

"Pokémon: Tenth Anniversary" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Pokémon: Tenth Anniversary and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 6#Pokémon: Tenth Anniversary until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Pizzaplayer219^Talk_Contribs 13:16, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 October 2022

Change 921 to 922 at the end of the first paragraph; there are 922 pokemon 173.28.188.39 (talk) 18:24, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

looks to me like this article only counts the game-released 905, so i'll get rid of this template 173.28.188.39 (talk) 18:34, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

History section

Why is the history section almost entirely focused how how the franchise was advertised in the USA? I understand not including the full history in this articles since there's a separate one, but shouldn't the summary focus on the most important points for the franchise as a whole (like when it was created and the first games released), not highlights from their marketing campaigns in one country? 86.162.130.131 (talk) 15:05, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

The reason I added that was because it was a big deal when the franchise was launched in the United States. But you're right the history section does need expansion. Timur9008 (talk) 15:13, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

I agree. I came looking for how old it was, but found this. Maybe it was a big deal also when launched in other countries outside Japan, so I don't see why focusing in the US. 190.20.208.99 (talk) 17:47, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 March 2023

KantoPrimeape (talk) 15:57, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

can i edit this

 Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone may add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. Cannolis (talk) 16:24, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Intro paragraph grammar

There is a basic grammar error in the first paragraph of the body. "Pokémon is one of the highest-grossing media ->franchise<- of all time." --> "Pokémon is one of the highest-grossing media ->franchises<- of all time." 74.110.98.64 (talk) 13:56, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done Timur9008 (talk) 14:06, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 March 2023

change
| website = {{Plain list|
* {{Official website|URL=http://www.pokemon.co.jp/|name=Japan}}
* {{Official website|URL=http://www.pokemon.com/|name=United States}}
* {{Official website|URL=http://www.pokemon.com/uk/|name=United Kingdom}}
}}

to
| website = {{Official website|URL=https://www.pokemon.com/jp/country-region/|name=Select a Country/Region}}

86.30.69.219 (talk) 16:40, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

@86.30.69.219:  Done, and I also added the official YT, Insta, Twitter, merchandise shop, and Pokémon Go website. - Manifestation (talk) 21:25, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2023

173.198.45.2 (talk) 20:30, 27 April 2023 (UTC)pokemon is bed

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Tollens (talk) 21:14, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

What? The article is evolving!

I have submitted a new article. Some things of interest:

• To be clear, the current article is *NOT* finished, and may never reach a desirable finished state. This could be because the sources needed are not yet found, or because they simply don't exist.

• Per MOS:SERIESTITLE, the word "Pokémon" should not be italicized when it is used to refer to the media franchise as a whole. It should be italicized when referring to the Pokémon anime series.

• As MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE explains, the purpose of an infobox is to summarize. "The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance." Therefore, "wherever possible, present information in short form, and exclude any unnecessary content". Because of this, the infobox of the main Pokémon article should not list relatively trivial things like Pokémon Junior and the Pokémon Trading Figure Game.

• As explained in the thread below, a large part of this article was written with machine-translated Japanese sources. This is of course far from ideal, but there really is no other option, aside from having the sources professionally translated for thousands of $/€.

• The old article was mostly a hub to the sub-articles: "Video games", "Manga", "Trading Card Game", and "Anime". I intended the new article to be primarily about the history of Pokémon. After all, we have the other (sub-)articles for all the other info.

• If you are knowledgeable about Pokémon, you'll see that the article omits many things. This is because the article is supposed to be a summary. It should only include the things about Pokémon that are of the highest importance (e.g. the origin of the name, how Pikachu was chosen, etc.) and/or that cannot be put into another article. For example, one thing I omitted was the story of how Masuda repaired Game Freak's central workstation, rescuing Pokemon Red and Green from death. A great story for sure, but it would be more fitting to put in the articles Junichi Masuda and Pokémon Red, Blue, and Yellow.

• The article I submitted is in fact a shortened version of a shortened version. I removed several bits before posting it. In fact, I suspect that the article might have to be shortened even further in the long term (see also WP:SIZERULE).

• Enough material exists for a History of Pokémon, so maybe one day that will be created, comparable to History of Nintendo and Nintendo#History.

• In Japan, the franchise was originally called "Pokemon", without acute accent. When it was launched in the US, the e was emphasized to help with pronunciation. The History section is, obviously, written chronologically. Therefore, the first three sub-paragraphs call the franchise "Pokemon". In the sub-paragraph "1997 – 2000: Introduction to the rest of the world", the accented form "Pokémon" is introduced, and from that point used.

• One point of criticism I'll probably get is that the article is very US-centered. I completely agree, and I wish it had turned out different, but I've worked on this article for a very long time, and I am honestly over it.

• I left out File:Beta-gengar-nidorino.jpg, a copyrighted image, in favor of File:Pikachu on New Yorker cover, Nov 1 1999.jpg.

• All dates are written as <day> <month> <year>, because I dislike the illogical <month> <day>, <year> format used in the US. Accordingly, I've put the {{Use dmy dates}} tag on top. If anyone disagrees, feel free to change it.

- Manifestation (talk) 08:20, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Why did I create the Poke Sources website?

https://poke-sources.info/

Obviously, I'm a fan, and have been since the 90s. From an early age, out of general interest, I looked up things about Pokémon on the internet. I started to notice something: despite being one of the biggest franchises in the world, not that much is known about Pokémon. For a long time, there were only two real English sources on the franchise's genesis that were available online: the Time article and the interview with Tajiri from 1999. During the 2010s, a few more sources sprung up, thanks in part to Junichi Masuda, who gave interviews to The Guardian (2013), Game Informer (2017), and Polygon (2018), among others. And then we had these two interviews from 2018, which introduced many of us to Atsuko Nishida. Professional English translations were commissioned and published by Did You Know Gaming? and LavaCutContent. However, all these sources contained only scattered bits of information on Pokémon's history. There wasn't a single repository tying it all together into a coherent historical overview. This is usually where Wikipedia comes in, but unfortunately, Wikipedia's Pokémon article amounted to nothing. It was less an article than a collection of tables.

At some point, I decided to accumulate every single English source I could find and filter out all relevant facts, attempting to outline the history of Pokémon. The result was a rubbish article, not fit for publication.

I discovered there were a number of Japanese books on Pokémon. These books were never published outside of Japan, and thus were never officially translated. I realized that these Japanese books could enclose the answers to the questions I had. The only problem was: I can't read Japanese.

And so, I embarked on a massive undertaking. I bought the Japanese books, single handedly scanned every page, extracted the text with OCR software, pasted the text into Word documents, then put those documents through DeepL. The translations it produced were in fact reasonably good. Machine translation has come a long way since the days of Babel Fish.

As I was working on it, I realized that I had underestimated the mental stress the machine translations were putting on me. With every single sentence I read, I was thinking to myself: is this really what the Japanese text is saying, or is it what the DeepL engine believed it is saying? I of course could not be sure. So, I knew there was only one thing left to do: publish these books on the internet for others to translate/analyze. I actually had that idea right from the start, because everybody knows that machine translations are not as good as human ones. It will take a number of decades before that happens.

I know that putting these sources on the internet is in violation of copyright, and I know that Nintendo can be harsh in protecting its IPs. But in this case, I honestly don't care. The books in question are over two decades old, and long out of print. The copies I bought were all second-or-more-hand. There is currently no other legal way to access these works. They are not searchable via Google Books. They are not on Kindle, or any other eBook service. They are not in any library outside of Japan. And you could say: "Well, the law is the law, so tough luck". But I look beyond laws. I believe that, after all these years, the information should be given to the people that allowed Pokémon to exist in the first place. The fans want to know these facts. Indeed, many people want to know them, fan or not.

And if I may make another bold statement: I believe that machine translations are the future of Wikipedia. As AI becomes better and better (case in point: ChatGPT), it will eventually become possible to create almost perfect English translations of non-English sources. Spanish, German, Russian, Arabic, Hindi, Mandarin Chinese. All kinds of media in those languages, including history books, newspapers, magazines, and video news items, will eventually become available online. They may be free, they may be behind a paywall, but they'll have near-perfect English translations created by AI. They'll become a boon to Wikipedia's growth. The best is yet to come.

Take care, Manifestation (talk) 09:03, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Main Series Page Names

I was wondering if they should be renamed to align with the English website. For example, "Pokémon FireRed and LeafGreen Version" is "Pokémon FireRed Version and LeafGreen Version" on the website. ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 18:04, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME. For article titles, the most commonly used name should be used as the title. This is not always the full name of something, e.g. Joe Biden instead of Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 20:07, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Doesn't anyone have this page on their watchlists?

I worked on this article for 1,5 years. Blood, sweat, tears, and an entire website went into it. Obviously, I care about the article's quality and am emotionally invested into it. Recently, User:TheVHSArtist, hereafter VHSA, came along and inserted a number of inaccurate statements into the article:

• VHSA put in the very first sentence that Pokémon was created by Satoshi Tajiri. Tajiri came up with the basic idea behind it. But the franchise as a whole is created by many different companies/people.
• VHSA later contradicted himself, stating that Tajiri, Junichi Masuda, and Ken Sugimori were the ones who created Pokémon. Masuda and Sugimoro have played key roles in the main RPG series, which are developed by Game Freak (with assistance from Creatures). The core dev team that developed Red and Green consisted of nine people (group photo).
• In the lead, VHSA removed the part about Pokémania ending in 2002. The intro then incorrectly implied that the fad never stopped. But see: Pokémon#2001 – 2006: End of the craze, business reforms.
• VHSA removed the statement that Tsunekazu Ishihara is the co-creator and -owner of the franchise. Tajiri in fact worked underneath Ishihara while creating Red and Green (source). Ishihara founded Creatures, Inc., one of Pokémon's co-owners (see here). Ishihara later became the president of The Pokémon Company, which he remains until this day.
• VHSA incorrectly stated that Ape, Inc. was later renamed to Creatures, Inc. They are in fact seperate legal entities. It would arguably be correct to call Creatures the successor to Ape, but they are not one and the same company.
• VHSA claims that Tajiri came up with the basic idea behind Pokemon while developing Quinty. However, the original source clearly states that he began thinking of it around April 1989, i.e. around the time Quinty was finished.
• In the part that describes the development of Red and Green, VHSA insists on calling the games Pokémon, with accented e. At that point, this name did not yet exist. It was coined later by Al Kahn (source).
• VHSA removed this crucial part: "However, this is in fact the total time passed from planning to finish: GF did not work on the game for six years straight." The first pair of Pokemon games did *not* take six years to develop. This is a misconception which the native Japanese sources very firmly debunk.

And these are only the falsehoods that VHSA inserted (which I corrected here). He or she also made many changes that, in my opinion, did not improve the article at all. For example, he deleted the mention of Pokémon Go from the lead. Because... you know, whoever heard of that app?

If this was a high-traffic article, like Climate change or Donald Trump, these edits would have been reverted on a speed you won't believe. But it has been a week now, and no one seems to even notice. Strange, because Pokémon is one of the world's top franchises and has lots of fans.

Please Wikipedians, put this article on your watchlists! Make sure it stays ok! Thanks!! Take care, Manifestation (talk) 15:20, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

This article has 1,487 page watchers. I'm gonna comment on this edit [3] as I'm the one who created the highest grossing media franchise page. Neither Nintendo or The Pokémon Company ever actually said Pokemon is the highest grossing media franchise. The "About The Pokémon Company International" page states that Pokemon "one of the most popular children's entertainment properties in the world." There is this vague mention from Nintendo of Canada General Manager Susan Pennefather[4] "And then there’s Pokémon. It’s the highest grossing entertainment media franchise of all time, with more than 440 million games sold worldwide. In November we launched Pokémon Scarlet and Pokémon Violet, which sold over 10 million units globally in just three days. But that's about it as far as actual info on that. Timur9008 (talk) 16:03, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Almost 1,500 watchers. I don't think that there is no-one watching this article. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:21, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@Lee Vilenski: Then why is no one reverting User:‎TheVHSArtist?

@Timur9008: My original text was actually "one of the highest-grossing media franchises". TheVHSArtist changed this into "the world's highest-grossing". This may or may not be true, but it's an exceptional claim. You then changed this to "estimated to be", which I think is much better. 🙂

@Everyone: Note that TheVHSArtist reverted my edit within minutes. But they have not yet responded to my comment regarding the inaccuracies they added. - Manifestation (talk) 17:42, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

User:NinjaRobotPirate what do you think? You've warned User:TheVHSArtist before on his talk page. Timur9008 (talk) 17:49, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@Timur9008 Manifestation already went to my talk page to discuss what they felt did not improve the article. But their edits posed problems:

1. "It is created by many different companies, based on an original idea by Tajiri" If Tajiri had the "original idea," he created the franchise. It's that simple.

2. While three companies being the legal owners of an IP is unorthodox, the line about the franchise having "an uncommon ownership" structure seems completely superfluous. In contrast, writing that "the franchise is owned by The Pokemon Company, a joint venture" is a lot better and fits in better with WP:MOS.

3. Parts of the lead were not supported by sources. Not only that, the lead is supposed to SUMMARIZE the article, not go into detail; articles have sections detailing specific events, including the release of Pokémon Go, which I don't think should be mentioned in the lead.

4. "The paragraph now incorrectly implies that the global fad never stopped." The franchise grew beyond the fad into a multi-billion dollar franchise.

This is maybe a nitpick, but the user used the dmy format, even though almost all articles on WP use mdy unless made explicitly clear. The article is written in American English, thus should use the month-day-year format.

Aside from those, there were spelling errors galore. Maybe changing the "e" to "é" was a bit much, as the franchise was still new and hadn't begun to use the acute accent, but most of the rewrites are to fix these errors, and simplify terms, again attempting to reflect WP:MOS. I hope to achieve that. TheVHSArtist (talk) 19:15, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

The above response completely makes no sense. It once again demonstrates that you don't have a clue what you're talking about. And that's not even to mention the pointless rewriting you keep doing. For instance, changing "grew in popularity" to "became popular", or changing "The series' titular superhero" to "Its title character". Here is a full overview of all your pointless edits so far. You are rewriting the things I wrote just for the sake of rewriting them. Most of what you write clearly isn't better, like this:

"Pokémon are differentiated from real-world fauna in that they and their moves are of any of the 18 types in the series, and possess superhuman abilities."

You have no idea what you're doing! - Manifestation (talk) 19:23, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

I would just like to say that I am of the opinion that Manifestation's version of the article is the better version. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:58, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

At the very least, I opine that the article should follow the mdy format as is the case with many on WP. The article is written in American English, which uses the mdy format. TheVHSArtist (talk) 21:18, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

There is no connection between the choice of English variety and the date format. One can write an article in American English and still use DD-MM-YYYY dates. Masem (t) 21:37, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@Masem: I see. TheVHSArtist (talk) 21:56, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

I know little about Pokemon except that children in the 1990s and 2000s liked it, but I was already an adult by then. If you think someone is misinterpreting sources, I don't know that there's an easy way to resolve it besides trying to convince other people via dispute resolution to establish consensus for the version that you think is correct. Policy does provide some control or limitation at WP:BURDEN, though. This requires an inline citation that verifies challenged content. Since you apparently have access to the sources and understand them (some appear to be in Japanese?), you could ask for a direct quotation from the source that verifies the content that was changed or added. Or provide a quotation from the source that shows it doesn't match up. It's easier for me to understand stuff like this than it is to understand disputes over the history India or half the stuff that shows up at WP:ANI, but it's still opaque. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:13, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

@NinjaRobotPirate: "Since you apparently have access to the sources and understand them (some appear to be in Japanese?)". This is exactly why I set up poke-sources.info. You can look up the Japanese sources there, and use DeepL to translate them. If you have 500+ edits, you can also access ProQuest; see here. - Manifestation (talk) 08:12, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't have any interest in reading about Pokemon, especially when I'd have to read machine translated sources. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:47, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

He's still at it

Yesterday, User:TheVHSArtist worked his 'magic' on the "Reception" section. To his credit, he has toned down his pointless rewriting of sentences, although he still replaces various words for no particular reason, or puts them in a different order.

VHSA appears not to understand what the words fad and craze mean. He believes that Pokémon was a perennial craze that never ended or something. For example, he changed this:

"Anne Allison interviewed various American parents during Pokémania."

to this:

"Anne Allison interviewed various American parents during the initial fad."

This again worsened the text. Allison interviewed parents during Pokémania. Not during "the intitial" fad, whatever that means.

VHSA has now also begun italicizing the word Pokémon when it refers to the franchise as a whole, violating MOS:SERIESTITLE.

And still no one cares. - Manifestation (talk) 08:18, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

It seems like SERIESTITLE actually supports italicizing that. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:11, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

@TheVHSArtist, I appreciate it that you corrected the errors you made (here). And I *am* sorry if my response to you was a bit harsh. But you have to understand that I studied and worked on this for 1.5 years, almost every day. You emotionally hurt me when you barged in and started turning the entire article upside down. If you would've rewritten a few sentences here and there, that would've been fine. But you reformatted entire parts, and most of inferior quality.
As for MOS:SERIESTITLE... well, I'm actually a bit at a loss here. I've made a thread about it at the talk page of the "Titles of works" guideline. Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 17:34, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

@Manifestation It's all right, I should have taken it to a discussion first before anything else. TheVHSArtist (talk) 17:55, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

The VHSA edits

Full overview of the edits of User:TheVHSArtist so far.

His first edit was on 30 July. That's two weeks ago. And STILL nobody cares.

Here is a selection of changes by VHSA which, in my opinion, did not make the article better:

The VHSA edits

1

My text:

VHSA's change:

− Combining this inspiration with his memories of catching insects and other small species, Tajiri's idea would eventually evolve into a virtual recreation of his boyhood experiences, and an attempt to "regain the world that he had lost". + Combining his inspiration with his childhood memories, Tajiri developed his idea into a virtual recreation of these experiences, and an attempt to "regain the world that he had lost".

The new text implies that Tajiri and Game Freak had the entire game mapped out from the beginning. This is not true. As explained in this interview, Tajiri's basic concept for Pokemon "instantly sounded like an amazing idea, but we weren’t really sure how to make it a game at first". Game Freak then proceeded "to continue adding things as we break down the game into its final product". Also, as explained in this interview, "Pokemon was originally planned as a smaller, more compact game". It then organically grew into the game we now all know.

2

My text:	VHSA's change:
− ''[[kaiju]]'' (monsters), + ''[[kaiju]],''

The word kaiju (怪獣) literally means "monster(s)". VHSA removed this meaning. So if the reader doesn't know what the word means, they have to look up the kaiju article first.

3

My text:

VHSA's change:

− However, it later turned out that the term ''Capsule Monsters'' could not be [[trademark]]ed, and it was subsequently decided to call the game ''Pocket Monsters'', which became ''Pokemon''. According to Tomisawa (2000), the phrase "Capsule Monsters" was already registered. According to Hatakeyama & Kubo (2000), the word "capsule" could not be used in the trademark. Tomisawa (2000) states that the Game Freak staff then came up with several alternatives, before someone within the team suggested "Pocket Monsters". + However, ''Capsule Monsters'' could not be [[trademark]]ed, and it was subsequently decided to title the game ''Pocket Monsters'', which was shortened to ''Pokemon''. Author Akihito Tomisawa wrote that the Game Freak staff devised with several alternatives, before settling on "Pocket Monsters".

This is a pet peeve of mine. I was really annoyed that I couldn't definitely answer the question why Tajiri's original Capsule Monsters name was dropped. Tomisawa (2000) wrote that the phrase "Capsule Monsters" was already registered (pages 65-66). Hatakeyama & Kubo (2000) wrote that the word "capsule" was the problem (pages 99-101). It is also not clear who came up with Pocket Monsters / Pokemon. Tomisawa wrote that someone within GF suggested it. But apparently, no one could remember who it was.

4

My text:	VHSA's change:
− Ishihara, a friend of both Itoi and Tajiri, was involved with Ape's management (and would become its vice-president in 1991). + Ishihara, a friend of both Itoi and Tajiri, was involved with Ape's management and became vice president of the company in 1991.

Not the worst edit, but I would still revert it. The reason I put the "vice-president" part within parenthesis is because the events of the paragraph take place in '89/'90. The source says that Ishihara became vice-president in '91, the year after that. Again, not a huge issue, but for the sake of the chronological flow of the text, I'd put that part within brackets.

5

My text:	VHSA's change:
− [Masuda] did part of the programming. + [Masuda] did additional programming.

According to the book Game Freak (2000), part 1, chapter 2, there would have been no Pokémon without Masuda. Quick manga summary of what happened: 1, 2, 3, 4 (read from right to left!). To make a long story short: stating that Masuda only did additional programming would be doing him a great disservice.

6

My text:

VHSA's change:

− They soon realized that the game they were beginning to envision would not be easy to make. Sugimori admitted that, at the time, no one at GF had much knowledge of RPGs. "We thought we could handle it, but as we began working, we realized it was going to be tough", he acknowledged. + It became clear that their idea would not be easy to realize. Sugimori admitted that, at the time, no one on the staff had much knowledge of RPGs.

The new text implies that Tajiri and Game Freak had the entire game mapped out from the beginning. This is not true. As explained in this interview, Tajiri's basic concept for Pokemon "instantly sounded like an amazing idea, but we weren’t really sure how to make it a game at first".

As for the Sugimori quote VHSA removed: it isn't really needed. I added it to emphasise that GF was an enthusiastic startup when they began, but soon got hit by a dose of reality. Sugimori basically admitted this in Hatakeyama & Kubo (2000), page 108.

7

My text:	VHSA's change:
− After the initial development phase in 1990 and '91, + After the initial development phase in the early 1990s,

Tomisawa (2000) wrote at page 33: "一九九〇年の頭に契約を交わしているのだから、実質的な制作期間は十カ月にも満たない。" ("Since the contract was signed at the beginning of 1990, the actual production period was less than ten months.")

Kawaguchi said: "最初の１年半くらいは田尻くんが試作などを持ってきていたんですが、そのうちパッタリととだえてしまった。" ("For the first year and a half, Tajiri-kun brought in prototypes, but then he stopped working on it.")

If we believe Kawaguchi's quote, then Pokemon's first development period continued well into '91 before being suspended. This idea is further confirmed if you look at Game Freak's earliest titles:

1. Quinty, 27 June 1989
2. Jerry Boy, 13 September 1991
3. Yoshi, 14 December 1991

As you can see, there is a gap between Quinty and Jerry Boy. It is during this period when GF laid the groundworks for what was to become Pocket Monsters, then known as Capsule Monsters.

8

My text:	VHSA's change:
− Tajiri had the idea of having the software generate a random number when first booted + Tajiri had the idea of having the software generate a random number on the first playthrough

This source clearly says that the game created the random number "the first time it was booted up", not when the player selects New Game.

9

My text:	VHSA's change:
− Miyamoto then suggested using + Miyamoto also suggested using

Incorrect use of the word "also" in this context.

10

My text:	VHSA's change:
− Both games were identical, but each had Pokemon not found in the other, encouraging players to socialize and trade to complete their collection. + Both games were identical, but each had Pokemon not found in the other, so as to encourage trading between players.

VHSA removed the socialization aspect from the text. However, I would argue that this is a key reason behind Pokémon's success.

11

My text:

VHSA's change:

− Because of the timing, some were under the impression that the Game Boy ''Pocket'' was made to promote ''Pocket Monsters'', but this was in fact a coincidence that would end up benefiting both. + Due to the timing of the products, some believed that the Game Boy Pocket was created to promote ''Pocket Monsters'', while others noted that it was purely coincidental timing that nonetheless benefitted them both.

The new text incorrectly suggests the possibility that the Game Boy Pocket is related to Pocket Monsters. They are in fact unrelated. The timing of the releases was purely coincidental.

12

My text:	VHSA's change:
− After the release of ''Pokemon Red'' and ''Green'', Game Freak continued to grow, and a number of new employees were hired. + After the release of ''Red'' and ''Green'', Game Freak continued to grow, hiring many new employees.

I doubt that Game Freak hired *many* new employees at this point. The card game was not yet released. The anime production had yet to launch. Pokemon wasn't that big in Japan yet, and almost completely unknown abroad.

13

My text:	VHSA's change:
− he thought it would overly hasten + he thought it would harshly hasten

"harshly hasten"?? Now that's something I've never heard for the life of me.

14

My text:

VHSA's change:

− Different people appeared at different meetings, but four individuals usually present were Ishihara of Creatures, Sugimori of Game Freak, Yuyama of OLM, and independent producer Yoshikawa. Yoshikawa had the final say. + Multiple meetings were held, with Ishihara, Sugimori, Yuyama, and Yoshikawa (the first three respectively representing Creatures, Game Freak, and OLM) usually in attendance and Yoshikawa having the final say.

The phrase "Multiple meetings were held" implies that the anime production council existed for some time and had a number of meetings before dissolving. The production council in fact still exists to this day.

By the way, in case anyone wonders: it is not true that Shogakukan and OLM made season 1, send all the tapes to TV Tokyo, and then rested on their laurels. New episodes were being written and animated continuously while the series was ongoing, as with many anime. TV Tokyo president Yutaka Ichiki said in January '98 that a new Pokemon episode was delivered about three or four days before it was set to air.

15

My text:

VHSA's change:

− The success of this character would later lead to the game ''Pokemon Pikachu'', released in Japan on 12 September 1998 (it would be released in the West as ''[[Pokémon Yellow]]''). An adaptation of ''Pokemon Blue'', this 'Pikachu version' was made to resemble the TV series more. + The success of this character would later lead to the development of ''Pocket Monsters Pikachu'', released in Japan on September 12, 1998, modified from its predecessors to closely resemble the anime series.

Pocket Monsters Pikachu = Pokémon Yellow. I have no idea why VHSA would remove that part. Also note that he calls Red/Green/Blue "predecessors" to Yellow. I don't think Yellow was a successor to them. More like a variation. The true successors were Gold/Silver.

16

My text:	VHSA's change:
− Fiercely protective of Pokemon's [[brand equity]], Ishihara was unwilling to greenlit an item just because it had a picture of a Pokemon printed on it. + Strongly protective of Pokemon's [[brand equity]], Ishihara was unwilling to approve an item only because it had Pokemon on it.

"it had Pokemon on it" sounds a bit iffy.

17

My text:	VHSA's change:
− An example of a firm that benefited greatly from Pokemon was food manufacturer [[Nagatanien]]<span class="noprint" style="font-size:85%; font-style: normal; "> [[[:jp:永谷園|jp]]]</span>. + One firm that benefited greatly was food manufacturer [[Nagatanien]]<span class="noprint" style="font-size:85%; font-style: normal; "> [[[:jp:永谷園|jp]]]</span>.

Nagatanien was just one example of the many companies that made huge profits off of Pokemon. The reason why I highlighted Nagatanien was because many Japanese sources did.

18

My text:	VHSA's change:
− No one died. + No deaths were reported.

The new text implies that there *could* have been deaths, but they weren't reported. If a child died because of watching a Pokemon episode, don't you think that would have been reported?

19

My text:	VHSA's change:
− However, no national TV station was interested + However, no television networks were interested

Okay, this may be splitting hairs, but I would argue that a television network is not the same as a television station.

20

My text:

VHSA's change:

− which normally prohibits the use of injunctions in [[Advertising to children|ads directed at children]] (e.g. "You must buy this!"). While the tagline does sound commanding, the FCC reasoned that the act of ''catching'' is at the core of Pokémon's play. Therefore, the phrase was allowed. + which normally prohibits the use of injunctions in [[Advertising to children|ads directed at children]]. FCC reasoned that the act of ''catching'' is at the core of Pokémon's play, which facilitated their approval of the otherwise commanding slogan.

VHSA removed the "You must buy this!" example. So, people who do not know the word injunction may have difficulties understanding what's being said here.

21

My text:

VHSA's change:

− In [[Israel]], the anime debuted in February 2000. For unclear reasons, ''Red'' and ''Blue'' were not officially released there. Thriving only on the strength of the TV series, ''The First Movie'', the cards, and [[Parallel importing in video games|imported video games]], the Israeli Pokémon still became a success. + In [[Israel]], the anime debuted in February 2000, while ''Red'' and ''Blue'' were not officially released there and were thus [[Import|imported]]. The Israeli ''Pokémon'' release still became successful, through the release of other associated media.

The original source says: "For reasons that remain unclear, the Nintendo computer game was never introduced to the Israeli market". This refers to Pokémon Red and Blue. I personally found this very strange and a missed financial opportunity. Why would Nintendo not release Hebrew versions of the games? VHSA apparently thinks this is not strange at all, and erased this observation from the text.

22

My text:	VHSA's change:
− Dockery (2022) noted that + Author Daniel Dockery (2022) noted that

It is not relevant here to note that Dockery is an author.

23

My text:	VHSA's change:
− Some parents expressed their concerns about the craze, + Some parents expressed their concerns about the cards,

While it is true that the cards where the main focus of the criticism, parents didn't *only* express their concerns about the cards. They expressed concerns about Pokémon as a whole. As also explained in the article, some considered Pokémon to be "ruthlessly commercial", and believed that its aggresive, ubiquitous advertisement "brainwashed" children into purchasing. (Tip: South Park's "Chinpokomon" does an excellent job at summarizing the Pokémon controversy of 1999-2000.)

24

My text:	VHSA's change:
− [[Anne Allison]] interviewed various American parents during Pokémania. + [[Anne Allison]] interviewed various American parents during the height of "Pokémania".

The orginal source doesn't specify if Allison interviewed parents during the height of the American Pokémania.

25

My text:	VHSA's change:
− The ''Pokémon Trading Card Game'' was designed by [[Creatures (company)|Creatures]], which continues to develop new cards and card sets to this day. + The ''Pokémon Trading Card Game'' was designed by [[Creatures (company)|Creatures]].

No idea why VHSA removed the latter part of the sentence.

To clarify: this is not everything. If I have to make a rough estimate about VHSA's edits, I'd say that 40% of his changes made this article worse. 50% was not necessarily better or worse, just pointless, e.g. replacing "poorly received" with "negatively received". 10% of his changes were actually an improvement, like replacing "1998 – 2000: Introduction to the rest of the world" to "1998 – 2000: International expansion". I have to admit, that *does* sound better. He also shortened the "Name" and "General concept" sections, which I think does have merits, because the article was getting pretty long.

All in all not a good score though. - Manifestation (talk) 10:59, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

I think you should probably ping another admin or revert to your last revision. Timur9008 (talk) 11:02, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

@Timur9008: I understand, and thank you for your support! 😊 However, I think I will do a part revert soon, not a full revert. Stay tuned. Manifestation (talk) 11:27, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Reverting is done. I did not undo everything, but I did revert more than I thought I would. I honestly tried to have another serious look at VHSA's edits, I gave it a fair chance. But his writing is so poor that I ended up reverting most of it. Also, there were some mistakes that I had previously missed, like changing '98 to 1988, and writing "after the Tajiri's magazine". - Manifestation (talk) 19:56, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Suggested edit

Maybe internally link All Nippon Airways. --2001:1C06:19CA:D600:96F5:4FF9:C05A:7509 (talk) 11:36, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

 Not needed. Let's not go crazy on the linking. Right next to "All Nippon Airways", there is a link to Pokémon Jets. If that link is followed, the reader will see a link to All Nippon Airways in the article's very first sentence. Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 11:52, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Typo fix

Hi there, I think there are a few typos which need fixing on this. Unfortunately I can't make the edits myself due to the article being protected.

The first is the following header:

"Copyright counsel formed, merchandising expands"

This should be: "Copyright council formed, merchandising expands"

The second is similar. The following sentence:

"...the Japanese copyright counsel, headed by Ishihara, had the last say over it."

should be changed to:

"...the Japanese copyright council, headed by Ishihara, had the last say over it." 213.134.179.238 (talk) 09:37, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

I am not sure if they are intentionally worded this way. Wingwatchers (talk) 14:21, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Typos fixed. See council & counsel. - Manifestation (talk) 09:59, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 September 2023

pokemon is not a real animal Pokeman6756 (talk) 19:58, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

 Not done. This is not an edit request. - Manifestation (talk) 20:09, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Length of the article

NB: I've also left a note about this at Talk:Pokémon Red, Blue, and Yellow.

Today, User:Wingwatchers made a serious effort to trim down this article, reducing the readable prose size to 85 kB, compared to 98 kB on 1 October (see here). For one, he/she deleted almost the entire Media#Video games and other software and #Trading card game subsections. I appreciate his efforts.

I have removed the following from #History:

It is commonly stated that development of the first Pokemon game took six years.[10][93][94][95][96] However, this is in fact the total time passed from planning to finish: GF did not work on the game for six years straight.[97]

I originally added this to combat the widespread misconception that GF worked on the game for six years continuously. They did not. However, we don't need to explicitly state this, because the rest of the text already makes this clear enough. The above bit would be more suitable at Pokémon Red, Blue, and Yellow#Development, which I note should be completely revamped, as it is poorly written and at times inaccurate.

I also deleted this paragraph:

Both Tajiri and Ishihara sought to 'individualize' the player's experience, to make each game slightly different so that every playthrough would be unique.[107] At an early stage, Tajiri had the idea of having the software generate a random number when first booted, ranging from 00001 to 65535 (the highest possible value of an unsigned 16-bit integer).[108][109] When a player then catches a Pokemon, it is assigned both the game's ID and the player's name, which stick with the creature even after it is traded.[110] Furthermore, based on the unique ID, GF wanted the game to render slightly different landscapes and present the player with different Pokemon.[96][109][111] This idea proved infeasible, however.[e] When Tajiri discussed his thoughts of individualization and the ID system with Miyamoto, the latter noted that it was a bit difficult to understand. Miyamoto then suggested using different colored cartridges, which would make the differences between versions more visually clear.[112] According to Tajiri, "five or seven colors" were considered,[113] but they eventually settled on two: a Red version and a Green version. Both games were identical, but each had Pokemon not found in the other, encouraging players to socialize and trade to complete their collection.[107]

I added this because it explains how the idea for the dual versions came about, which became a hallmark of the Pokémon RPGs. Looking back at now, though, it is excessively detailed, and it should be at Pokémon Red, Blue, and Yellow, not here.

Here is the diff of my edit. Readable prose size is now 84 kB. Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 09:39, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Great! Wingwatchers (talk) 18:29, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Did Ape, Inc. co-develop Pokemon Red and Green?

User:Wingwatchers recently posted a question about Ape, Inc. on my talk page. More specifically, he asked me about the sentence "Ape, Inc. is not credited on the final product". Since I believe this is an important subject, I'll copy-paste my response here:

I believe the phrase "Ape, Inc. is not credited on the final product" is important. To the best of my knowledge, it is currently not publicly known what Ape did on Pokemon, if anything. Maybe they did nothing. But it is also possible that Ape, Inc. was a so-called ghost developer for Pokemon. Ghost development has a long history in Japan, going back to the 1980s (see here: Video game development#Ghost development). Game Freak's first game, Quinty, was also partly created by an unidentified ghost developer.

I found only two quotes by Tajiri-san regarding Ape's role. I was unable to establish to what extent they were involved. What I do know is that, over the years, people have noticed a number of similarities between Pokemon and EarthBound, such as Mewtwo resembling Giygas. See here, here, and here for more information.

My best bet is that Ape handed them some things along the way, especially at the very beginning in 1990. At that point, Ape had already developed one RPG: Mother. Game Freak had never developed an RPG, so it makes sense that Ape would help them out. On the other hand, Pokemon initially started out as a much smaller, compact game, made on a small budget. So maybe Ape's assistance was in fact quite limited... or did not even happen?

Bottom line is: we don't know. The only thing we know is that Ape is not credited on the final product. That we know for sure. This statement does not need to be sourced. It can be hard to prove a negative, but if you look at the box, the cartridge, the title screen, and the credits, you won't see the name "APE" appear anywhere.

What do you guys think? Did Ape co-develop Pokemon Red and Green? If so, what was their involvement? So many questions, so little time. 😉 - Manifestation (talk) 19:41, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

@Manifestation I suppose I will restore it. I agreed that it is somewhat significant but I only removed it due to lack of in-line citations. Wingwatchers (talk) 19:45, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

I already restored it. Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 19:47, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

I know. Wingwatchers (talk) 20:07, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Nemona in Wikipedia

Hey, guys, I made an article focus on Nemona.

Here it is: Draft:Nemona. Starkiryu64 (talk) 07:20, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello Starkiryu64. Firstly: the draft is only one sentence long. Secondly: if you would expand it and move it to the main space, it would be deleted, because it lacks sufficient notability. At Bulbapedia, such content is welcome though. 😉 Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 09:40, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

oh.

Can we make an article about Lusamine or no? Starkiryu64 (talk) 14:02, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no. Only a handful of highly prominent Pokémon characters are allowed to have their own article on this site. See Category:Pokémon characters. However, Wikipedia does have List of Pokémon characters and List of Pokémon anime characters. For more extensive information, people can visit fansites like Bulbapedia. Take care, Manifestation (talk) 14:53, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Were Gold and Silver really intended as the final Pokemon games?

For a long time, I believed that Gold and Silver were intended as the franchise's last installments. As the 'finish line', hence their names. In 2010, Ishihara said this in a Iwata Asks interview:

“ Iwata: You’ve just used the term “ultimate” and I feel that even in their names, Gold and Silver were meant to be the ultimate in Pokémon games.

Ishihara: That’s right. After we released Red and Green, we began working on these titles, thinking that the ultimate in Pokémon games could only ever be Gold and Silver.

Iwata: Not in your wildest dreams did you think that you’d be making more and more games after Gold and Silver. (laughs)

Ishihara: The reason that I licensed so many products and developed things like the trading cards was basically to ensure that Gold and Silver were successful. I felt that this was my primary role. So at that time, I worked with the assumption that after we put out Gold and Silver, my work as far as Pokémon was concerned would be done.

Iwata: I see.

Ishihara: So for me, Gold and Silver represented the finish line.

Iwata: They were the finish line?

Ishihara: I didn’t intend to make any more Pokémon titles. I even thought that once we entered the twenty-first century, it would be time for me to do something else entirely. (laughs)

Iwata: (laughs)

”

Like many others, I interpreted this passage as meaning that Gold & Silver were planned to be Pokemon's final.

However, when you go to the third page of the interview, you can see this:

“ Ishihara: I remember that when Pokémon Gold and Pokémon Silver were released, I felt like a burden had finally been lifted from my shoulders. We'd had our sights set on the finish line of Pokémon Gold and Pokémon Silver for so long, and now that we'd finally completed the major series running right through from Pokémon Red and Pokémon Blue, I felt I could say to Tajiri-san: "I've fulfilled my duty!"

Iwata: But that didn't turn out to be the finish line.

Ishihara: No, it didn't turn out to be the finish line! (laughs) Once we'd released Pokémon Gold and Pokémon Silver and it was selling even faster than Pokémon Red and Pokémon Green, I couldn't very well get off the ride halfway through saying: "Nice work everyone. Good luck from here on in!"

”

That last part, about not wanting to get off halfway through, is important. More about that later.

Last month, Did You Know Gaming? released a video in which they state:

“ Okay, now we're gonna debunk a couple of long-running, popular rumors about Gen 2, starting with the oft-repeated claim that Gold & Silver were originally planned to be the last Pokemon games ever made. (...) It's been a persistent rumor for over a decade. But it just ain't true. In a July 2000 issue of Nintendo Online Magazine we translated, originally published before Gold & Silver were even released outside Japan, series creator Satoshi Tajiri and now-president of The Pokemon Company explain Gen 2's development. The interview asks if Gold & Silver is the end of the story. Tajiri says flat-out: "No, it's not the end." ”

Here, DYKG incorrectly calls Tajiri the president of The Pokémon Company; this is in fact Ishihara. However, the rest of their information is correct. They cite this interview (translation) with Tajiri and Ishihara, which states:

“ Q: “The first Pokemon games were Red, Green, and Blue. But the sequels’ names went straight to Gold & Silver. For some reason these new titles make us feel like the story’s coming to an end…”

Tajiri: “No, it’s not the end. With the originals we pushed ourselves to the limit and put everything we had into them. Our staff was expanded for the sequels, so we chose those names to suggest an even more amazing game is on the way.”

Ishihara: “We made Red & Green, then after that we made Blue. Later we made Yellow, and it might’ve been nice if the next games were called Pink or Purple. But if we did that, all we’d be doing is perpetually making extensions of the originals. But by calling them Gold & Silver, I think we keep the color theme, but at the same time adding a new element that expresses there’s something more to them than the originals.”

”

Regarding the 2010 Iwata Asks interview, DYKG argues that Ishihara was misunderstood, and that he was only talking about himself, not Game Freak. In the quote below (direct link), the narrator emphasizes the pronouns, which I bolded and italicized:

“ [Ishihara] is just saying he was done, not the franchise. Throughout that same [Iwata Asks] interview, Ishihara goes on to say: "For me, Pokémon Gold and Pokémon Silver represented the finish line. I didn't intend to make any more Pokémon titles. It would be time for me to do something else." Every Pokemon game up to that point was made by 10 or 20 developers, and sold in the tens of millions -- they were ridiculously profitable. A lot of development was literally done out of a house -- they didn't even have to pay for office space. Game Freak would've been swimming in cash even if they were only selling one million. Ishihara wasn't a developer -- he did do some consultation on the games, but first and foremost he was the guy who sold merchandise and licensing deals. He was worried Pokemon fever was cooling off, so if sales really did drop significantly, there wouldn't have been boatloads of merch and licensing anymore. So he was considering moving on and taking his business skills elsewhere -- but ultimately decided, quote: "I couldn’t very well get off the ride halfway through". ”

Clearly, DYKG's knowledge is lacking here at some points. Tajiri absolutely did rent office space, and Ishihara's role in the development of Red and Green went beyond "some consultation". See the Wikipedia article.

Still, DYKG does have a point here. Ishihara made important contributions to Red and Green, which were programmed and graphically created by Game Freak. But Ishihara was never *in* Game Freak. He became a manager at Ape, Inc. upon its establishment in 1989, and became its vice-president in 1991 (see Tomisawa (2000), p. 30 and Hatakeyama & Kubo (2000), p. 97-98). On 8 November 1995, he founded Creatures, Inc., which was granted co-ownership of Pokemon. But perhaps Ishihara's remark about not wanting to "get off the ride halfway through" indicates that he had a degree of independence. He could've abandoned Pokemon if he wanted to, and leave all his duties to Game Freak and Nintendo, but he chose not to out of loyalty.

The DYKG video further points out:

“ At the end of one of those Japanese magazine interviews, they ask Game Freak that now Gold & Silver's finished, if they felt like they'd completed the games they wanted to make. They all said in unison: "Not even close!" Masuda continued, saying: "To us, they don't feel fully complete." They'd pushed the Game Boy Color to its limits, but there's still so much more they wanted to do. ”

To me, this issue is inconclusive. I do believe, however, that it is justified to remove this information about Gold & Silver from the article. - Manifestation (talk) 18:14, 19 November 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 February 2024

Generation VIII[422] debuted with the release of Pokémon Sword and Shield on November 15, 2019 for the Switch.[423] The new region now take place in the region called galar, which is based on the United Kingdom in real life. Within this game, the creators implemented many features such as wild area, camps, and max raid battles. Director Shigeru Ohmori stated that they designed the games based on what they believed of the biggest Pokémon theme of becoming/being "the greatest or strongest," which was expressed in the games' gigantic-size Pokémon core mechanic called dynamax and gigantamax and the games' increasingly powerful software and hardware capabilities. Within the Ohmori further revealed that through developing the Let's Go games as research projects for the Switch, they were able to gain valuable experiences and knowledge to develop Sword and Shield. He noted that they took advantage of the Switch's high resolution and TV connectivity to implement the games' gigantic-size core Pokémon mechanic. They envisioned the games' setting to be a "wide-open space" that is different from the traditional route systems and is constantly changing where the player can meet and explore with other players.[424] LLTJoker (talk) 21:18, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

@LLTJoker: Please explain why you want these changes to be made. Sincerely, Guessitsavis (she/they) (Talk) 21:42, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

 Not done. Apparently you intended to add this particular sentence to the article: "The new region now take place in the region called galar, which is based on the United Kingdom in real life. Within this game, the creators implemented many features such as wild area, camps, and max raid battles.".
However, the article is supposed to be a summary. The paragraph in question is big enough as it is, and does not need more details. Those can be placed in Pokémon Sword and Shield. Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 21:45, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 March 2024

Add new section about Pokemon Legends: Z-A.

Urps5westie (talk) 02:26, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Jamedeus (talk) 03:22, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

 Done. I have added one sentence to the article about the recently announced Pokémon Legends: Z-A, the successor to Pokémon Legends: Arceus. - Manifestation (talk) 19:35, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Does a Pokemon art exhibition of traditional Japanese artists rate?

While working on the page Yuki Hayama, I learned he created a single vase containing over 500 Pokemon illustrations. Further, this was part of an entire exhibition of many Japanese artists that incorporated Pokemon themes into their art forms including sculptures, weavings, paintings etc. The first exhibition was held in Japan and it has subsequently traveled to Los Angeles.

Another editor felt this didn't rate as being interesting enough to be included into the page.

Proposed text:

Acclaimed Japanese artists integrated Pokémon into their traditional art forms for an exhibition first held in Japan. The exhibition then traveled to Los Angeles. For example, artist Yuki Hayama reproduced over 500 Pokémon-themed illustrations onto a single vase that required multiple firings to complete.

References

What are your thoughts? I suggest you first look at the website for the exhibition before deciding. Pbmaise (talk) 13:43, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello Pbmaise. Thank you for your contributions. I agree that the Pokémon sculptures look really cool. The reason why I still removed your paragraph is because it falls outside the scope of the article. Wikipedia articles are supposed to be summaries, and should only include the most important stuff. The Pokémon franchise is huge, and includes lots of ancillary phenomena, such as Pokéfuta, Twitch Plays Pokémon, and Pokémon Uranium. None of these are mentioned in the main Pokémon article, because they aren't as notable.

You could try and write a separate article about the art exhibition, but it will likely be nominated for deletion. A mention in the Yuki Hayama article would probably be the highest attainable result for you. Take care, Manifestation (talk) 15:07, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Who can name all main series games (remakes to)?

Do you know your pokemon games? 2603:7080:E7F0:8380:9496:20C7:5FC5:C69 (talk) 11:26, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello! What exactly is your question? If you're looking for an overview of all Pokémon games, you may want to look at Pokémon (video game series)#Games, List of Pokémon video games, or see this page at Bulbapedia. Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 11:45, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

I just thought it would be fun to see how maney people could name all the main series games😀 2603:7080:E7F0:8380:9496:20C7:5FC5:C69 (talk) 11:04, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Ah ok. Note, however, that Wikipedia Talk pages are meant for discussion about improving articles. They are not intended for playing games, fun as they may be. For more information, see Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Have a nice day! - Manifestation (talk) 21:24, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

OK sorry I thought you could talk about lore and other fun stuff thank you! 2603:7080:E7F0:8380:9496:20C7:5FC5:C69 (talk) 10:50, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

With or without acute accent

A user came along and changed all instances of "Pokemon" to "Pokémon". This is a common mistake, which I have reverted.

The events described in the article's "History" section are, obviously, written in chronological order. Before circa 1998, the term "Pokémon", with acute accent, did not yet exist. During this time, the Japanese people did not use this spelling, which was officially introduced in 1998 by Nintendo of America, with the North-American launch of the franchise. The original, shortened form "Pokemon" is written *without* accented e. With the release of Ruby/Sapphire in 2003, the Japanese also started using the accented version.

The article has a separate "Name" section that clarifies this. It also has an invisible comment that states "name is coined (*without* acute accent)". I honestly thought that was enough, but I've added another hidden comment at the beginning of "History" for further emphasis. - Manifestation (talk) 11:03, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Well, at least change it to reflect the entire "before 1998" thing because almost all of them were from things that were after 1998 or just talking about it in general. Also, why is this page different from all the others? its not like the page "Pokémon Red, Blue, and Yellow" uses "e" instead of "é" for any of the terms. CheeseyHead (talk) 19:10, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Not only that, but you reverted ALL of my changes, not just the ones with the acute accent. CheeseyHead (talk) 19:17, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

"because almost all of them were from things that were after 1998 or just talking about it in general"

No, you changed *all* instances of Pokemon to Pokémon, including those in "1989–1995: Development of Red & Green" and "1996–1998: Rise in Japan". The events described in these section take place before Pokemon became Pokémon.

"you reverted ALL of my changes"

Yes, because none were very good. I don't know why you would bold Pokémania in the lead, because this article is not about Pokémania. It is about the Pokémon franchise as a whole. Also, linking WiFi and changing "grey" to "gray" is cosmetic at best. I will admit, however, that changing PokeGear to PokéGear was correct, so I've put that back. - Manifestation (talk) 19:48, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Poké Sources is now offline

This is not really a thread. More like an announcement.

As of today, poke-sources.info has been shut down. However, the website is archived at the Wayback Machine. So its contents can still be viewed, and if you want to verify statements made in this Wikipedia article, you still can. Have a nice day, Manifestation (talk) 07:03, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Good thing it was archived. Timur9008 (talk) 23:40, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Best-selling toys at retail

User:Manifestation Can this source be incorparted into this page? [5] I would update myself but I'm not sure where to put it. Timur9008 (talk) 23:44, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Also these two [6] and [7] Timur9008 (talk) 10:10, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Timur9008!

The first source is a sales report from July 2000. It would be better if the Wikipedia article says something about the sales of a whole year, not just one month.

The third source is some PR talk from 4Kids. I'm not sure what it's supposed to prove.

The second source about Pokémon in India is an amazing read! I didn't even knew that Pokémon was only introduced there in 2003. It reminded me how America- and Europe-centered this Wikipedia article is. I knew that right from the start, and pointed it out when I submitted the first version of the article (see here, 10th point on the list).

I researched little beyond 2001 or so. I mostly studied 1996 – 2000, and the years leading up to that era. That alone was a massive undertaking which took me years. Pokémon's formative years were the most important, of course. But to document Pokémon's history further, including its reach throughout mainland Asia, would be an even more colossal project. - Manifestation (talk) 12:14, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

The 2001 4Kids retail report mentions the $10 billion figure. (revenue for the franchise up to that point). I haven't really checked for other sources for Pokémon in mainland Asia.

There was actually two Pokémon in India articles here on Wikipedia but they were deleted. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pokémon anime in India and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pokemon in India. Timur9008 (talk) 15:03, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

What *may* be possible is Pokémon in Asia, with a section for each country (#India, #China, #Vietnam, #South Korea, etc.). The same would apply to Pokémon in the Middle East and North Africa, Pokémon in South America, Pokémon in Europe, and so on. But I don't think such articles would ever be created. I'm not even sure the sources for it exist.

I'm a bit wary about citing press releases for sales figures. I only cite them for release dates and such, because a company is unlikely to lie about that. Also, phrases like "Game X made 10 million" and "Franchise Y made 100 million" sound abstract and hollow. I prefer to state the amount of units sold, the amount of households that were watching, that the first episode was the most-watched premiere in Kids' WB's history. Those are more concrete statements which actually give the reader an impression. Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 20:39, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Order of the company names in the infobox

Hey, Master106 and StarMan98.

You have reverted each others edits: [8][9][10][11].

But instead, maybe we should discuss this and try to sort this out?

I do feel that StarMan98's order may be better: "Nintendo, Creatures, Game Freak". This is how it's written on the franchise's copyright notice. The likely reason for this is that Ishihara, the founder of Creatures, was the leader of the dev team that made the original Red/Green. Tajiri worked under him at the time. Nintendo had financed the game's initial development phase in 1990 and '91 and, according to one source, also purchased the Pokemon property after it was finished.

So that's probably why the firms are in that particular order in the legal info. Then again, in terms of actually creating the content, Master106's order of "Game Freak, Nintendo, Creatures" would make more sense. Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 15:53, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I think it should be in order of importance to the franchise and order of content creation. Which would be:

Game Freak

Nintendo

Creatures Master106 (talk) 22:50, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

In terms of importance, the order would probably be: "Game Freak, Creatures, Nintendo". Because Creatures develops the card game. The card game was inspired by the video game, but it plays a similarly pivotal role in the franchise. Creatures also developed some spin-off video games.

On the other hand, the infobox clearly says "Owner", not "Creator". - Manifestation (talk) 10:25, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

I found that Game Freak owns 36% and Nintendo owns 32%. Which means Creatures owns less than 32%. If this is the case, it should go Game Freak, Nintendo, Creatures. But this needs some verification. Master106 (talk) 09:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Ok. Do you remember where you read that?

I googled on this, and found this quote from Junichi Masuda: "In terms of genuine ownership, Masuda says it’s one-third each for Game Freak, Creatures, and Nintendo."

I also found this: "Let’s drop the big point first: The Pokemon Company does not own the Pokemon brand. They manage it, they license it, they publish/co-publish games and are directly involved in the development of any products carrying the license."

Because of this, I've decided to undo the edit I made. I suggest we follow the official legal info, because apparently this is what the three companies contractually agreed upon. - Manifestation (talk) 11:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Unrelated but shouldn't the info box be styled Owner(s) Pikachubob3 (talk) 23:25, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

@Pikachubob3: That's a good point. {{Infobox media franchise}} currently does not do this, but it can easily be changed. I've made a thread at the talk page. - Manifestation (talk) 16:56, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done. Implemented by User:Favre1fan93. - Manifestation (talk) 08:12, 25 August 2024 (UTC)