Talk:Pokémon Platinum

Why delete?

Resolved

 – During the AfD proces, the majority wanted to keep this article, so we will not delete or merge it any time soon.

Why should this page be deleted when it is a confirmed game? It just needs to be fixed up (starting with an accented e in the title). 12.31.255.91 (talk) 22:24, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

You should probably look at the AfD page beforehand. All of this happened in January, from what I saw. Quadrius^Contribs 03:35, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I see nothing but crystal-ballism here, and consensus is that fansites fail WP:RS, meaning that, even if planned, the article is (a) unsourced and (b) speculative. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 04:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

All the information is taken from the magazine release (i.e. big publication). The fansites are just the source through which you can view it online. Does anyone on Wikipedia spend more than 3 seconds looking through the information of a page before throwing the delete tag on? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.113.60.50 (talk) 04:09, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't matter if CoroCoro revealed it; CoroCoro is not Nintendo. Unless Nintendo itself out-and-out confirms it, it is speculation. The fact Serebii is used as a reference (fansites are unusable per Wikipedia:Reliable sources) only puts a hole in the hull. Furthermore, the article is up for AfD anyhow here; removing the AfD tag while the discussion is ongoing is vandalism. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 04:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Why doesn't it matter CoroCoro revealed it? The guidelines say a reputable third party source, which CoroCoro is and it is also a printed publication which would satisfy notability. Wikipedia: Always assume everything is bad, delete everything and rule with a subjective fist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.113.60.50 (talk) 05:32, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I know it doesn't fall in accordance with WP:RS, but, don't kill me for saying this but maybe we should leave it on here for a few days, because Nintendo will probably announce a press conference in a few days saying whether it's true or false.

The CoroCoro shots look very real, and Serebii has never really said anything that's turned out to be false...

Although still fansites aren't accepted... ARGH! Wikipedia's rules drive me insane sometimes, everything has to be 100% confirmed by :::::sources even though things are blindingly obvious... Not talking about this article in particular, this could possibly be fake (even :::::though personally I think it's real) but Wikipedia honestly does have some stupid rules sometimes. Ignore me. :::::LuGiADude (talk) 14:30, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, on an unrelated note Nintendo did register the 'Another Form' and 'Origin Form' names.LuGiADude (talk) 14:38, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

They may have registered them, but there's no proof yet that it's for another Pokémon game, especially given that the French "Forme" is generally preferred in Pokémon (see Deoxys).

And Serebii has indeed been wrong a few times, such as Legendary Lucario. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 18:51, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

But this time they have a scan from a magazine confirming it.

And? Serebii is still a fansite; fansites still violate WP:RS. Now, if it was Nintendo itself hosting the scan, we wouldn't be having this discussion. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 21:07, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

When did CoroCoro did a mistake? Indeed Serebii makes mistakes but CoroCoro?? Did CoroCoro made a mistake on revealing Emerald? Diamond and Pearl? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.1.53.2 (talk) 12:05, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Where do you lot think CoroCoro gets its information from anyway :P coughnintendocoughLuGiADude (talk) 13:42, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I think this will be settled tommorow seing as how that issue of coro coro comes out tommorow. So far all we have is leaked stuff. But this page shouldn't be deleted seeing as how this game is pretty much COMMON SENSE.Zabbethx (talk) 12:19, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

True but apparently Wikipedia doesn't like Common Sense ¬_¬ Stupid rules... LuGiADude (talk) 17:51, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Common sense also says there will be a Baby Geniuses 3, but we don't yet have an article on that movie. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 20:49, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

It's now already confirmed. Visit www.pokemon.co.jp —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.1.53.2 (talk • contribs) at 13:10, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

To be exact, go here: http://www.pokemon.co.jp/special/platinum/ - Face 13:23, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Dialga/Palkia

The game will feature both D and P. If you look at the scan, one of the overworld screens has the shadow of Giratina standing in front of Dialga and Palkia. Sincerely, Thrashmeister [ U | T | C ] 00:36, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Image.

Shouldn't someone upload an image of the scan?--Kirbychu (talk) 19:29, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Unless you have a nonfree use rationale, it's not wise to do so, especially because the AfD is looking at a late frost. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 19:37, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep. There's not a snowball's chance in hell that the result will be 'delete' considering the amount of people voting for 'keep' or 'merge' ;) LuGiADude (talk) 20:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Ha ha, indeed. At the time of its creation, it looked like a snowball to people who either didn't know of the KoroKoro scan, or didn't know that KoroKoro was N's semi-offical magazine. I still think we should have merged with Diamond and Pearl right away though. But he, if the majority wants an article, then an article they shall have. We could always merge later if it turns out there are not enough differences. Cheers, Face 07:27, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Well Crystal and Emerald both have separate articles even though it is mostly the same plot, same pokémons and such.. although, Platinum will have different forme of Giratina, and possibly Regigigas and Shaymin like as it says below. --staka (T ・C) 20:01, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Haters?

Is it just me or does it seem that Wikipedia really hates pokemon? Just a few months ago individual pokemon pages were on this site. But they felt that it was too much so now we have crappy lists. Now we have a pretty much confirmed third Sinnoh game but it already has a bunch of people ready to delete it. I didn't see people trying to delete the Halo 3 page back when Halo 3 was just a rumor. And for the record don't give me that "Wikipedia is not a forum" crap, evertime I type something I hear that.Zabbethx (talk) 19:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

8-) Halo was not up for deletion ever, so yes, your point is valid. And the point wasn't a 'forumy' comment so you won't be getting that response here. Stated again - HALO 3 WAS NEVER UP FOR DELETION, EVEN WITHOUT 'SCANS' OR 'ALIKE' SO WHY IS THIS NOW??? The caps wasn't 'shouting' it was making my point clearer. LuGiADude (talk) 20:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

The reason the individual pages were reduced to lists was because they were determined to be non-notable on an individual basis (sans Pikachu, and the reason this page got put up for deletion was because it read like soothsaying. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 20:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

When this page was created, it was based off info from an image taken with a cell phone that might have been a real image from corocoro that was only talked about on the fansites. If you read that sentence, you can see why it was nominated for deletion. There was no reliable proof WHEN THIS ARTICLE WAS NOMINATED FOR DELETION. Since then, real proof has come around so there is no reason for it to be nominated any more, which is why i closed it. The Placebo Effect (talk) ^{How's my editing? Please contribute to my editor review.} 18:20, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Completely agree with Zabbethx Arutoa (talk) 18:13, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

You guys shouldn't shout, and certainly not when you're on editor review :-(   Face 20:25, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Pokémon individually isn't notable so it is against the Notability Fiction policy.. so that is why it was placed into a list. Although some Digimon have their articles, I believe.. the last time I checked. --staka (T ・C) 20:05, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

You'll have to talk to the governing WikiProject about that; however, you'll have an albatross around your neck whan you do. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 03:35, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Should we deem CoroCoro as a reliable source?

Resolved

 – As a promotional protégé of Nintendo Japan, the CoroCoro can certainly be considered an RS.

Now we've seen that CoroCoro is right about this, and has been right about everything that's been revealed in there, for example Gold/Silver, Crystal, Ruby/Sapphire... and basically every Pokemon game since, I'm thinking we should make CoroCoro an 'unofficial reliable source', if that makes sense. Hell, CoroCoro gets its information from Nintendo, so why not? LuGiADude (talk) 16:37, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree. They have been right about everything pokemon so far.Zabbethx (talk) 17:47, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

CoroCoro is very reliable. The scan even had the Ken Sugimori artwork of Origin Giratina which was made specially for Platinum. And the fact that Nintendo made a Platinum website should also be taken into account. CoroCoro has only been wrong once, and that was about the Sinnoh starters. One mistake. Even Nintendo makes mistakes. The infamous "Cresselia is not a legendary" mistake, for example. So we should be able to trust CoroCoro. Arutoa (talk) 18:13, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

As I already stated above and at the AfD, the CoroCoro Comic has served as an informational magazine for new Nintendo games for years. Apart from Poketto Monsuta, it has featured numerous other manga based on Nintendo games (Mario, Donkey Kong, Kirby, Bomberman), and frequently has informational/promotional articles about new Nintendo products. So it is certainly an RS in my opinion. Cheers, Face 21:45, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, CoroCoro is a reliable source. However, because an official announcement was made on pokemon-games.co.jp before the issue was supposed to go on sale, it no longer matters. Posting scans of the magazine violates Fair Use, not to mention that it doesn't have any information that's not readily available on the official site. For now, the official site is the only source we need -- no CoroCoro, no Serebii/other fansite spam. Wikipedian06 (talk) 11:32, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

What about Bulbapedia? 79.70.179.58 (talk) 18:46, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikis can't be used as sources. Technically they're unreliable.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 18:54, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Other Forms

Is it true that Regigigas and Shaymin both have other forms as well? And if so, should it be in the article. I believe Regigigas is a "Sky Form" and Shaymin is "Another Form". But I'm not certain. Could some one check this up? I would but my computer is way slow and crappy.Zabbethx (talk) 20:06, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

If I recall correctly, the names of things like "Sky Form," "Terrestrial Form" etc. have been copyrighted, but I'm not certain they were confirmed by the CoroCoro scans. I don't think anyone's denying their existence, but I don't think you'll get a reliable source at this point. The full detail of the rumour is that Regigigas will have a Sky Form, and Shaymin will have an alternative form that may be part Ice-type (although some sources swap the two around). 86.136.156.205 (talk) 20:29, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

As no one has seen of anything, and that this information could have been changed/lost in translation, i think we should leave it for now. Matt (talk) 05:48, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

There have been rumors of alternate forms for Shaymin and Regigigas, however at least one instance of the flying Shaymin has been disproven (an image many people thought was official was actually drawn by a fan); and it is unlikely there would be a special/better version of an event pokemon, something a player can't normally obtain. There has also been no real evidence of an alternate Regigigas... Could someone please remove or change the line about the Grass/Flying Shaymin in the article, to at least present it as a possibility instead of a fact? 72.177.191.52 (talk) 19:58, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Platina & Form

I keep having to fix these each time I check this article.

• Purachina (プラチナ) is the Japanese word for "Platinum." It is not "Platina" even though that is how it is read. I don't know where people are getting "Platina" other than the initial posting on Serebii (the official Japanese website is "pokemon-platinum.com" for a reason).
• The official website uses "Origin Forme" (オリジンフォルム, Orijin Forumu) with an E. This is different than "Form" (フォーム, Fōmu), which is spelled and pronounced differently.

I've placed commented out items to reflect these proper/official spellings.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:59, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I figured they'd use Forme; they did the same with Deoxys' 4 formes. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v E pluribus unum)} 02:11, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

As for Platina: Pu-Ra-Chi-Na P-La-Ti-Na. It's really obvious... it's a DIRECT translation - PLATINUM is NOT the Japanese name. So why have we translated the 'Pocket Monsters' bit from Pokkettu Monsuta or whatever but not Purachina to the PROPER way it's pronounced? IE - Pokkettu - Pocket, Monsuta - Monster, Purachina - PLATINA. PURACHINA =/= PLATINUM. LuGiADude (talk) 16:10, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

The Japanese word for Platinum is "Purachina." Go check ja:プラチナ, where you will see that it redirects to the Japanese language name for platinum in Kanji. Also, the official Japanese page is "Pokemon-Platinum.com," not "Pokemon-Platina.com."—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:35, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

That official site is http://www.pokemon.co.jp/special/platinum/02.html. That is just a redirection. Even so, shouldn't it be Pocket Monsters Purachina in that case? Why put an English word into the supposed 'Japanese' name, so it would be Pocket Monsters Purachina? LuGiADude (talk) 14:07, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

The address bar clearly says Platinum though. -Sukecchi (talk) 14:14, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh... yeah. *facepalmsself* LuGiADude (talk) 22:56, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Last I checked, "forme" is the British variant of "form".74.76.44.179 (talk) 13:50, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Current speculation

It will be an enhanced remake of Pokémon Diamond and Pearl,[1][2] in the same vein as Pokémon Yellow, Crystal, and Emerald.

Does ANYONE have a reference for this line? Im going to delete it in a few hours, unless anyone can provide a reference or give me a good reason why it should be deleted.

Also, see WP:ATT, more specificly: The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. In other words, whether material is attributable to a reliable published source, not whether we think it is true: Wikipedia is not the place to publish your opinions, experiences, or arguments. Matt (talk) 05:00, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, the current sources count for nothing here - ie They're in Japanese. Matt (talk) 05:01, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Japanese language sources are just as relevant as English language sources, and the second Japanese reference mentions that fact that you claim has no reference.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 05:17, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

If i cant read them, i cant deem them reliable. Exactly what does it say?

Also, Where editors use a non-English source to support material that others might challenge, or translate any direct quote, they need to quote the relevant portion of the original text in a footnote or in the article, so readers can check that it agrees with the article content. Translations published by reliable sources are preferred over translations made by Wikipedia editors. Matt (talk) 10:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

The fact that you can't read them seems to be only your problem. There is always the idea of sticking it into Google. In there it says it's a "follow up" and "volume up" (ボリュームアップ, boryūmu appu), which appears to mean "remake" as it's used to describe such items in other Japanese text sources.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 10:28, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, its the fact that its not a reliable source because no where in the text can you read anything to do with a remake. Follow up does not denote Remake, and is it even a reliable source anyway? It looks in no way official. Please, don't add speculative material. Im gonna delete it unless you can, once again, try to provide some proof. Speculative material should be deleted without hesitation.Matt (talk) 05:25, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

The "volume up" and "follow up" parts clearly denote that it is a remake, as the phrase "volume up" refers to an update and a follow up. The game is Japanese, and the news sources about it now will all be Japanese. Dengeki Online is part of ASCII Media Works which is a reputable publisher of information. These are all reliable sources and concrete proof. Just because you cannot figure out the context or read the language does not preclude it as being "official" or "unreliable". Nothing in this article is in any way speculative.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 06:25, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

They're not official sources. The company might be a reputable publisher, but it does not mean all there information is concrete fact. This should not be in here until it is comfirmed by nintendo. The context may be lost in translation. Now, source it properly or wait until nintendo releases more information to put it up. Matt (talk) 07:49, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

The only thing lost in translation is you right now. All of these news sources come from press releases from the official source. There is the Nintento website and the news website. The news website is a reputable and reliable source. That and Wikipedia requires that not all sources be primary sources. Secondary and tertiary sources are welcome if they can be determined as reliable, which the Dengeki website most certainly is.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:08, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Still, you haven't provided enough of a reason to keep this. At the very least, saying the game is on the same tier as E/C/Y is speculative. Best, Matt (talk) 09:10, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

All three of those games were remakes. We have sources that say this one is a remake.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 09:12, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

We're going to end up in an edit war here, but seeing as that you seem to have some sort of point to make here, im going to step back. I do feel that this is still speculative though, as only one word which may have been a mistranslation seems to in the broadest sense of the phrase, prove anything. I do agree that it most probably is, but wikipedia is a place for things for facts, not for truths. Please remember in future however, not to add speculative material. Best, Matt (talk) 09:21, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Confusing Sentence

I'm not quite Sure what a sentence here means: "When the special Regigigas that comes with the pre-order ticket for the 2008 film is traded from Diamond/Pearl, Regirock, Regice, and Registeel appear in the story." For one thing, how would Rigigigas "come with" a movie? Ignoring that for a minute, the sources are in Japanese, which I can't read. I tried translating them; one didn't work the other got me this: [1]. It's in extremely broken English but what it looks like to me is (and what sounds somewhat likely) is that it means if Regigigas is added to Platinum then Regice, Registeel, and Regirock would be unlocked. Does any one know what this means (particularly Staka who added the sentence)? Tommy11111 (talk) 01:53, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

It means that Regigigas is given out with a viewing of the movie, and it unlocks an event that makes the other three catchable in Platinum when this Regigigas is transfered from Diamond/Pearl to Platinum. I will try to clarify this sentence in the article.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:59, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Serebii.net reliable source

Why not?!? Wikidude57 Go Red Sox! 19:34, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

WP:SPS. Shah mat. For the long story, we cannot use Serebii because it (α) is a self-published source and (β) has little to no editorial oversight to confirm a claim. As such, we can't use it any more than we could use AGNPH as a source for Hentai. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v Trump XXI)} 20:18, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Self-published material may, in some circumstances, be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. However, caution should be exercised when using such sources: if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so. Serebii is occasionally wrong, however for non-controversial issues is should be allowed as they are as far as you can become, an expert in the field. Metagraph comment 11:54, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Occasionally wrong? How about never!Wikidude57 I am Stinky Stanley! 21:39, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Uh.. no. --staka (T ・C) 22:09, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Serebii is not reliable. They've screwed up way too many times in the past: for example, publishing the fake Shaymin Sky Forme pic and then retracting it a few days later after it was confirmed to be a hoax. If you want a reliable news site that's written in English, use pokemonplatinum.net (which I see has been cited). Everything is translated line by line from Coro Coro, Famitsu, the official website, etc. and from my limited Japanese knowledge (nowhere near fluent but can understand basics), they seem to be accurate. Wikipedian06 (talk) 04:57, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

You're kidding me, right? They never stated that fake Shaymin picture to be real. In fact, they were more than likely sure it was a hoax, but posted it anyway for informational purposes, specifically reminding users not to take it as fact just yet. Sincerely, Thrashmeister [ U | T | C ] 02:47, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Direct Japanese language news sources are a better choice here for content rather than the translations by Serebii or other English language fansites. I've removed the Pokemonplatinum.net sources, as they are just translating Corocoro or Famitsu, which we could source instead if we knew the issue number and other information regarding the release date.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 03:28, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

This would appear to be just as unreliable as Serebii, and if we cant accept them as a source, we can't accept that site either. Metagraph comment 06:18, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Could I just say, serebii.net get all their information from reliable sources. CBrowncamel (talk) 08:14, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

But the site itself is not a reliable source per Wikipedia's guidelines.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:17, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Japanese in article

Wouldn't this be better suited to the japanese wikipedia? I could be wrong, but i see an abundance of japanese text on the article. Why? Metagraph comment 21:05, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

That's because this game hasn't even been released in Japan yet, so the majority of sources are Japanese. However, as evidenced by the AfD, the sources are still valid. Artichoker^[talk] 21:12, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Also, as the source material is almost all Japanese, the article should contain the text of the source material in some form.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:15, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't deny that the sources are valid (anymore), but wonder whether we need all the japanese names throughtout the article. The average reader can't read them, and all they do is make it look like a cross between jp.wp and en.wp. Metagraph comment 21:44, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

The subject of the article is Japanese. It should contain the relevant Japanese text to reflect that and allow for people to know where the terms come from.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:45, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I believe this article correctly follows Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles). Artichoker^[talk] 21:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I guess, however it has a japanese translation for the forme's and everything. The game name sure, but the names of places and forme's? Couldn't this be found in the sourcing of such names? Metagraph comment 21:49, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

The Japanese text isn't mentioned anywhere else. So it's better if it's here.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 21:52, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

At Least Two New Characters

It is also shown by Bulbapedia that there are at least two new characters that will be in Pokemon Platinum. There will also be a large castle now available for exploration somewhere in Sinnoh. TheMANDan (talk) 06:18, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Bulbapedia is like Wikipedia but solely focused on Pokémon. Their information cannot be used here unless there is a reliable source backing their info up and information that is encyclopedic for inclusion here.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:43, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the game's website backs up that information, actually.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 07:52, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

It probably does, but is it OMG I NEED TO KNOW AND IT NEEDS TO BE IN AN ENCYCLOPEDIA sorta information?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:29, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

The castle is in the trailer or the video on the official site.. but it is likely those contest places. Not for adventure and exploring.--staka (T ・C) 15:48, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Release date

I noticed that Serebii.net[2] and Pokemonplatinum.net[3] both released a release date for the game, September the 13th this year. I added it to the article, but quickly removed it due to the lack of reliable sources. My question to all the editors is, should Serebii/Pokemonplatinum be classed as reliable sources? I guess one could classify them as a news source, and they usually are right (apart from some certain times, where apprehension and warnings have been put forward - not in this case), especially for uncontroversial issues.

And i cite,

Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy.

They are a third-party source with a reputation for fact checking and accuracy.

Proper sourcing always depends on context; common sense and editorial judgment are an indispensable part of the process.

They ususally are correct, in fact Serebii usually triple checks facts before posting them. Its very unlikely these sites are wrong, but they do appear to fail WP:RS. Should we allow them, as the content guidelines allow for the occasional exception and use of common sense? Or should they be used for specific situations like this where no RS are present, and the information is probably more than likely correct? (coming back to the common sense part) I'd like some input! Thank you everyone, Metagraph comment 11:17, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, we can definitely use their reference (Coro Coro) as a reference here, and then suppliment it with Japanese entertainment/video game website news stories.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 11:19, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Serebii posted the fake Shaymin sky forme image (speculative) and has posted numerous errors in the past. Though they are getting better recently, I doubt the "triple-checks" claims. PokemonPlatinum.net is just line by line translating, so I don't see how it can go wrong, but it is an unofficial site. Has it had a history of posting inaccurate news? Then again, the Japanese news sites you insist on using (ITMedia, GPara) aren't necessarily any more official or reliable. Wikipedian06 (talk) 16:41, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, when it comes to the Japanese news sites, they get their information directly from Game Freak and the like. Several of the Japanese websites are major media websites, and we are using the textual source that these English websites use. I found the particular CoroCoro issue, and if we source that, it's essentially the same.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 16:52, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

The ones I consider reliable are Famitsu, Dengeki, Nintendo Dream, Shogakukan, Coro Coro, etc. I haven't heard of the other ones. Wikipedian06 (talk) 16:56, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

They're still news sites. It's not like they're blogs or fan sites.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 16:57, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedian06, apart from the Shaymin incident (which was only reported on because Serebii felt everyone had a right to make their own decision whether it was real or not, and posted many, many warnings in regard to its legitimacy), Serebii.net has had very few errors. He does triple check news, i believe he gets it from at least three Japanese news sites, and if its reported in those he'll do it. Remember, it is more of a business and in his line of work PR is everything. What im asking here is that Serebii be used as a source for non-controversial issues when a Japanese source cannot be found at the present time. Its not that easy to find a Japanese source in the first place, then translating becomes an issue. Metagraph comment 22:43, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Serebii doesn't have industry insiders or anything like that. If Serebii has a piece of info, then the ENTIRE REST OF THE INTERNET has that info as well, and all that's left to do is follow the trail of copycat news sites until you find one that cites original source, which you can then use yourself. Serebii usually states where it gets its info from anyway. The fact of the matter is, Serebii is not a reliable source, and the very CULTURE of videogame news means that the only thing that is truly reliable is an official source - except for the few sites big enough to actually communicate with the industry, videogame news sites just republish stuff they found on the internet, and even though some make an effort to verify their material and thus tend to be right, they're still not really RELIABLE sources. Gelmax (talk) 05:06, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

merge proposal

I do not think these articles should be merged. There is enough independent information on Platinum as it is. Tezkag72 (talk) 18:40, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree. --Theleftorium (talk) 18:42, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

I've removed the merge notice. Sure, in a few months when there is not as much news coverage, this article could be merged, but that is not what is going to happen now. There are enough references that that outcome is not necessary. Sure, it happened to other similar pages, but that does not mean it should happen to this one.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:05, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree that this article should not be merged as of yet. Once the game has been released and things have quieted down, we'll see what happens. My view is if this article is close to good article status a couple months after its release, it should be kept as an individual article, but if not, it should probably be merged. Artichoker[talk] 19:18, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Pokémon Platinum is just a enhanced remake of Pokémon Diamond and Pearl, remakes don't met the criteria of Notability, and notability is not temporary.--MCP9999 (talk) 19:19, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Umm, this is a legitimate Pokémon video game and therefore would warrant its own article. Pokémon Yellow, Crystal, and Emerald could all very well be individual articles, but were chosen to be merged mostly because their articles were not very good quality. And in the future, if you have a merge proposal, instead of simply slapping on a tag, start the discussion on one of the talk pages. Artichoker[talk] 19:22, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

This is a remake of a pokémon video game, Isn't just with Pokémon games, remakes aren't notable to own a article, and in future, let's try to reach a consensus before removing merge tags.--MCP9999 (talk) 19:29, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Regardless of being a remake or not, this is a notable Pokémon. It survived an AfD and the consensus was to keep, not merge. Artichoker[talk] 19:34, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

You (Mastercomputerpro999) are presently the only user pushing for a merger. Just because the word "remake" is in the article, does not mean that the subject of the article is immediately not notable on it own. There are eight separate references, seven accessible online, that are in the Japanese news media that support statements made in the article. As of now, the subject of this article is notable on its own. If, at some point, following the international releases, that the content of this article, including sales information and reviews (which are inevitable), still says "merge," then a merge can be discussed.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 19:37, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay.--MCP9999 (talk) 19:40, 27 July 2008 (UTC)