Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pokémon/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pokémon

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kenny c002 (talk | contribs) at 01:22, 15 July 2006 (→July roll call). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:PCP

Shortcut
Archive
Archives
  1. August 2005 – April 2006
  2. 1 May 2006 – 15 May 2006
  3. 15 May – 28 June
  4. 28 June – 12 July
  5. Current talk


Archiving

I notices that the page was getting bigger than the prefered size, so I decided to archive it. If there are any comments which were still in use, please revive them from the archive, cheers Minun (talk) 10:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Started new Future Focus articles. Alvin6226 talk 23:03, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Sure, feel free to restore the existing discussion from the archive Minun (マイナン) 10:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Its been restored, feel free to continue the discussion Minun (マイナン) 10:33, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Revived roll call. Alvin6226 talk 20:33, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Future Focus Articles

Next Pokémon Creature Article

It's not horrid anymore, right? Erik the Appreciator 19:38, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
This I have revised as well. Erik the Appreciator 19:38, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Next Miscellaneous Article

I reommend choosing Max as the next focus article. Thoughts? The Raven's Apprentice (Call) 11:25, 17 May 2006 (UTC) Other Mishaps? This article might need some help. Alvin6226 02:30, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

By the way, that's Max (Pokémon) (obviously). And come to think of it, even Poké Ball and Team Aqua and Team Magma need help. Thoughts?? The Raven's Apprentice (Call) 07:27, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Max (Pokémon) needs the borrowed Pokémon section removed, and lots more cleanup, so it would thus be good as a miscellena next article--XenoNeon (converse) 11:23, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Make sure the ugly table of Pokémon is replaced with prose! Please! - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:56, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
The Pokémon character articls are now being taken care of by WP:PAC2, so we should be taking a non-character article. How about Poké Ball or Glitch City?? The Raven's Apprentice (Call) 07:43, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
I think that Pokemon Ranger should be our next focus.--Ac1983fan (talk • contribs) 23:43, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
Let's not do a speculative article if we can at all avoid it. Poké Ball needs a lot of love, Max (Pokémon) needs work despite the presence of WP:PAC2. and all of the glitches still need to be collapsed into a single article. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:19, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
WHAT?! If the glitches are merged, we need to transwiki the original articles somewhere else. Okay, so they don't belong in an encyclopedia, but they're very informative for people who want to exploit the glitches. And they're much better than their Bulbapedia counterparts. The Raven's Apprentice (Call) 06:10, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Even Pokémon trainer needs a lot of work. The Raven's Apprentice (Call) 15:11, 16 June 2006 (UTC) The aforementioned article just needs some heavyhanded deletion. The Raven's Apprentice (Call) 11:43, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Right, lets just all point out all the problems with the article, this way we can find out which is most important, and we can help fix the article. Minun (talk) 17:03, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Charizard

According to Charizard's peer review, the article Charizard needs references. It has been suggest we search for a reference on the internet that fits the ifnroamtion thats given, and then use it, cheers Minun (talk) 18:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

It is now on FAC, see the discussion here, cheers Minun (マイナン) 13:59, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
It appears it needs more copy-editing, any volunteers to copy-edit it Minun (マイナン) 19:52, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

New Pokémon

I have created three new articles, Dorapion, Chierimu and Pachirisu, per this. New information was all released, noted here. If editors could make the neccessary updates, that would be great. Highway Batman! 14:46, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Im adding the {{Pokerefs}} template Minun (マイナン) 13:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Munchlax

I think that we should modify this article to make it compatible with WP:PAC/S. Cheers Minun (マイナン) 10:36, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

It totally lacks references, we need a lot of help to cite the sources, cheers Minun (マイナン) 10:44, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
I know of a good way to properly format references, you can use the title that appears in the title bar as the title of the reference Minun (マイナン) 10:53, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Lucario

I've made a few modifications and helped to clean it up, should we remove the cleanup notice, or make further changes? Minun (マイナン) 19:58, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

POV Rampant

several, several articles are out there with POV like "this pokemon is favored" or "a (any adjective) moveset would be..." and other ridiculous things that should NOT be included in an encyclopeadic (sp) entry on a particular pokemon, that kind of stuff is best left for forums and serebii.net. i think we really need to make a concentrated effort on all the articles to remove POV statements, helping to elevate the project as a whole. is anyone else in favor of this? we could start a new section on the project page listing the NPOV pages and those that still need to be changed (for those uncomfortable with making edits). i'm willing to go ahead an start, but the project is daunting and i'd like to make sure others out there are interested in this too. Zappernapper 20:54, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I noticed the statements you made at Talk:Umbreon, and I'll use that article and your arguments as examples. I think there's a flaw in your reasoning. However, I could be wrong; somebody else should correct me if I am. Whichever way, I think it's great that you read about Wikipedia's policies; many new editors don't do that.
According to the official WP:NPOV policy, the NPOV is "not the absence or elimination of viewpoints". In the example you presented at Umbreon, both a positive and a negative statement about Umbreon's use in battle were presented, which creates balance and presents both viewpoints as objectively as possible. The NPOV policy continues by saying that "Background is provided on who believes what and why, and which view is more popular." Therefore, it is also alright to say how popular Umbreon is among trainers.
In conclusion, the article is allowed to say whether people think Umbreon is great for battle or not, but it's not allowed to simply say whether the article thinks Umbreon should be used in battle. PCEevee talk 01:48, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Just list a couple of articles that you need help with, cheers Minun (talk) 10:25, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


perhaps more what i'm quibbling over isn't so much whether or not the articles are allowed to discuss popularity of a pokemon among players, but rather the way it's being discussed. To quote from Umbreon itself, "Umbreon is perhaps the most un-used of the Eeveelutions... due to the fact it can't learn any powerful Dark-type moves such as Crunch, players preferring...." a statement like this is pure specualation without any reference given to even an internet poll on a heavily used fan-site, adding "perhaps" is just weasely. Opinion and speculation are not suitable in an encyclopedia. maybe removing that specific statement entirely (unless it can be backed by some factual data) and then reworking the sentence that later comes up discussing Umbreon's strengths to include its weaknesses as well. Like -
Umbreon's movepool works in tandem with his above average defenses, including moves like confuse ray, mean look, snatch, and moonlight. This of course means that he doesn't learn very many strong attacks, namely crunch, because of his low special and physical attack stats. Other alternatives for more "aggressive" movesets would be Houndoom or Tyranitar.
It's kinda wordy and not the best written but i think you get my point. Also we need to remember that not everyone is always up on the lingo, so using jargon like "tank" and "annoyer" should be avoided unless it's briefly explained. Or better yet, linked to a page detailing what this terminology means.
Zappernapper 02:13, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
I've managed to merge the Trivia sections to characteristics per a set of tips, it may still need some changes, please consider reviewing the article, cheers M inun (マイナン) 10:49, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

July roll call

The list of members on the front page is getting REALLY long, so let's weed it a little. It's time for a roll call. If you're still interested in working on this project's articles (even if you're not doing so right now; I'm just removing people who aren't active on WP or aren't interested any more), please sign below. 

# ~~~~
  1. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:41, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
  2. - Erik the Appreciator 00:44, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
  3. - Toastypk 01:01, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
  4. - Hbdragon88 01:14, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
  5. - PCEevee talk 01:30, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
  6. - Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 02:29, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
  7. - Highway Rainbow Sneakers 08:24, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
  8. —Celestianpower háblame 09:56, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
  9. Minun (talk)
  10. The Raven's Apprentice (Call) 15:00, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
  11. Alvin6226 talk 05:34, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  12. XenoNeon (converse)
  13. Ac1983fan (talk • contribs) 15:30, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
  14. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 05:52, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
  15. Shadoom1
  16. GangstaEB
  17. いかづち(ikadzuchi)-Squeak 14:24, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
  18. Zappernapper 02:17, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
  19. RandomOrca2 03:17, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
  20. Kenny c002 01:22, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Pokémon/Archive_7&oldid=63883927"