Talk:List of Pokémon (361–386)

Legendaries

I strongly recommend that individual articles on legendary Pokémon should stay if this thing goes ahead. They are so important for the development of the game in those terms. Rather than deleting those articles, we should have short summaries here with links to the main articles. Eternal dragon 10:22, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do they have any real life info? Well, take all the regis for example, do they have ANY real life info when they stand alone, but not as part of the trio? It isn't the importance of the pokémon that matters, it's the NOTABILITY. TheBlazikenMaster 00:37, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Latias has yet the longest entry on these pokémon lists. Congratulations!!!

Now seriously guys, it needs some cleanup. It has four whole paragraphs of game locations, which doesn't belong here. The main reason we merge is so we can get rid of that kinda stuff. TheBlazikenMaster 10:40, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Two reasons for this: 1, you may have noticed that every other Pokemon has a link to a separate, much more expansive article. Latias does not (Why is that?). 2, Latias is more prolific than than the others in the list, and requires the extra room anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.251.253 (talk) 20:54, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pacificlog Town

Should it be mentioned somewhere that the Regi-type are somehow connected with a tale told in this town? Maybe in their respective section within this article? I know that to unlock these Pokemon you first have to make sense of townsfolks' cryptic messages. I know that it's found in the games and it's not original research and it adds to their general information. Is that too in-gamish?SuperChencho 05:39, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you have something to source it to, I'd say add it. If it's only your own fan speculation then don't add it. The town is Pacifidlog by the way. If you do add it, I'd keep it to one or two sentences, as it's not very important to the overall article. Spigot Map 05:45, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Latias with no main article

Every other Pokemon on this list has a link to their own separate main article, but not Latias. Why? Surely, of all the Pokemon on this list, Latias deserves an independent article (being a reasonably prolific legendary and featuring in a movie). Can someone sort it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.251.253 (talk) 20:57, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only reason why the rest of them have a separate article is because they haven't been merged yet. But you're more than welcome to help with the merging. TheBlazikenMaster 22:17, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

JLBot and under-consrtuction template

The template itself says it should be removed if no edits occur in several days. If this is wrong the place to address that is primarily at the template talk page itself. JLBot's behaviour should be addressed at the Bot or Owner's talk page. If you use Nobots or Bots templates please do not use them as a blunt instrument, and please remove them once the underlying problem has been resolved. Rich Farmbrough, 17:36 31 October 2007 (GMT).

Frustration

I actually liked it when wikipedia had all separate articles for the pokemon. Now you get very small, undescriptive, non-picture, pages of pokemon like this. It was fine four months ago when there was separate articles for all the pokemon. These articles used to tell how to obtain this Pokemon(such as Mew, Deoxys, and Celebi) Please help my consideration and make this happen by "re-editing" these articles. I'll be I will be happy, and many other people will be happy. user: Venom124 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.98.203.108 (talk) 00:36, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes this has been brought up almost daily. The reason for the lists is because single pokemon fail WP:RS, WP:V, and capture/locations fails WP:NOT. These are all Wikipedia policies. Spigot Map 00:39, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

    THAT'S WHAT BULBAPEDIA'S FORAAP52 23:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It what way do they fail WP:RS and WP:V? I see no way they fail those criterias. I agree there is no requirements for capture locations, but the information can be taken from Pokedex entries, which are created by Nintendo and thus do not fail WP:RS. Therefore this arrangement is unreasonable. It should be restored at once.Executor Tassadar (talk) 14:16, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images

I'm curious about why several Pokemon on this list (Snorunt, Glalie, Luvdisc, Shelgon) have images on this list when none of the other lists do. I know perfectly well why the lists can not have non-free fair use images, I was just wondering why these four Pokemon seem to be exceptions, and if they should be removed. MelicansMatkin (talk) 16:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In that case....

In that case, all the stuff on Pokémon on Wikipedia should be deleted and have a link or redirection to Bulbapedia-- Wikipedians wouldn't be able to edit it, but Bulbapedians could. --RayquazaDialgaWeird2210 (talk) 22:58, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rayquaza in SSBB

Should we note how different the Rayquaza in SSBB is from the game Rayquaza? In the Pokemon games, Rayquaza is basically a sky god that eats ozone and is said to never go near ground, but in SSBB Rayquaza is some kind of sea serpent who can slither on land and burrow into the ground.Mavrickindigo (talk) 11:13, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rayquaza LIVES in the Ozone Layer. You're trying to give it characteristics you don't know if it has or not. I think attempting to claim Rayquaza becomes some type of sea creature in Brawl falls under Original Research. -Sukecchi (talk) 11:42, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IPA

Why do we need IPA phonetic symbols on Deoxys' section, and nobody else's? Why have them at all? I don't get it...2D Backfire Master (talk) 14:53, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

O.R .

I don't know much about RuneScape, but the phrase "appears to be the inspiration", along with too many Capital Letters, makes that part seem sketchy. Never seen this Steel Titan before, but if it really does resemble it, isn't there a better way of phrasing it? Also, the Regis representing the Ages thing is probably OR, speculation, guesses, or other useless philosophy. But should it be deleted? Yours long-windedly, 2J Bäkkvire Maestro ^{RQQ et al} _{favorite haunts} 23:09, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the Ice age stuff, and the RuneScape bit. If someone wants to add something funky, they have to give a source. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)}