![]() | This redirect was nominated at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion on 23 April 2024. The result of the discussion was retarget the first three to List of Pokémon and delete Ledgendary pokemon.. |
![]() | Tip: Anchors are
case-sensitive in most browsers. This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Legendary Pokémon redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Um...Articuno and Regice are ICE types xP Arcuneh Meeps 20:20, 17 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Why Are Ho-oh and Lugia listed with Mew on the tier system? Should this be changed or is it correct. If it is correct, perhaps elaboration on why it is so?
Jorge jojae 14:03, 1 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Some of the ideas on this page - namely the idea of legendary trios related to the elements from Japanese philosophy, and the theorised relationship between Mewtwo, Mew, and Deoxys - seems to run contrary to Wikipedia's research policy. Wouldn't it be better to explain the Legendary Pokémon only in terms of their appearences in the games, anime, and other media, without theorising about categorising the legendaries and so forth?
I don't like the charts. They include some fanstuff ( Mew and Mewtwo being "equivalent" to Latias and Latios), and ignore some more concrete info (the stat totals of Mewtwo, Lugia, Ho-Oh, and Rayquaza are equal to each other and no other Pokémon.) Someone tried to change it to descriptions, but forgot about half of the legendaries. We need consensus. -- HeroicJay 19:11, 27 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Cool. I already reverted the page once because someone had added Manaphy. I'm sticking to the NO FOURTH GENs rule until we have concrete evidence. - SaturnYoshi 16:21, 28 July 2006 (UTC
I have an idea. What if we make it so the charts that were here before we did change them into descriptions, actually were seperated into a section. It's hard to explain, so I'll just show you in an example, maybe Suicune.
= = Suicune = = [no spaces]
Legendary Beasts:
Raikou | Entei | Suicune |
(section description)
[Suicune is in bold, in case that's hard to see]
-
So, what'd'ya think? DarknessLord 15:58, 30 July 2006 (UTC) reply
And plus, this page will look more official... and cooler ^_^ DarknessLord 00:53, 31 July 2006 (UTC) reply
"It still risks being fanstuff"
Raikou-Suicune-Entei, Rayquaza-Kyogre-Groudon, Moltres-Articuno-Zapdos, Latios-Latias, Mewtwo-Mew, Mew-Celebi-Jirachi-Manaphy (even if the last one isn't legendary), Ho-oh-Lugia, and Diaruga-Parukia (even if they aren't legendary) relations are not fanstuff.
"it's not really necessary as all of the Pokémon are listed on the page anyway"
Hello? I'm not relisting the Pokémon!
"and will cause problems for Pokémon without any closely associated legendary (Celebi, Jirachi, and Deoxys come to mind.)"
I never said every single Pokémon had to be categorized. And plus, Celebi and Jirachi fall together under unique. DarknessLord 16:33, 31 July 2006 (UTC) reply
And, you guys are so safe and precautious that you fail to realize Manaphy, Diaruga, and Parukia are legendaries. I can bet you thousands of dollars they are legendaries. Manaphy is normally unobtainable in the main games, ring a bell? Cough, Jirachi, Mew, and Celebi, all are legendaries, Cough. LUGIA, HO-OH, SUICUNE, GROUDON, KYOGRE, RAYQUAZA: Box art, all legendaries.
These two things have given me so much anger I might just add the charts myself! DarknessLord 13:14, 1 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Also, who says they Nintendo have to continue the format they used for Mew, Celebi, and Jirachi. DarknessLord 13:25, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Look at this:
= = Raikou = = [no spaces]
Legendary Beasts | ||
---|---|---|
Raikou | Entei | Suicune |
The difference is it looks better, and it provides links to others on the page, meaning I link to their section, not their own article, which would work with the Mew-Celebi-Jirachi-(maybe) Manaphy relations. DarknessLord 19:56, 8 August 2006 (UTC) reply
I think this page needs a little pizazz. Something to kick it up a little. Maybe like an image... artwork wouldn't work, too predictable... maybe under their name and main article and above their chart they have like their third-gen/fourth-gen article.
On a seperate note, don't you think that we should just ==[[]]== the article, instead of popping up those annoying, space-eating, main article thingies?
Keep It Poké, Keep It Mon. Darkness Lord | T | C 21:26, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Update: No response in about one hour and I'm considering adding something myself. Darkness Lord | T | C 21:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I just uploaded a bunch of sprite pics. You can see them at my sandbox. I also have the shinies if need be. - Saturn Yoshi THE VOICES 21:48, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Looking at the article, there's not really much on there that isn't on each of the Pokemon's individual articles. That said, I suggest that we scrap whatever information we have on the page right now besides the groupings, the description at the top, and possibly a breif description for each group, then move to List of Legendary Pokémon. Even then, the article will need major rewriting: the description at the top is poor, at best, and some groups have poorly thought out names (Latios and Latias, regardless of what their species are called, are not eons). You Can't See Me! 07:29, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
And it wasn't a bad fanpage. Unfortunately, as an encyclopedia article, its problems were legion:
It was desperately in need of some merciless editing. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 10:47, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
SPECULATIVE?! How in any way was it speculative? If it was, then it was probably one small edit by a nameless user (an IP) that we hadn't looked over yet.
Well, I'm settling with the way it is now, so deal with it!
Sorry for all that roughness. We're gonna keep it as it is now and update all the info that this article should have.
But come on, the WHOLE ARTICLE?! You need to resolve your edits to contemplate your anger. Darkness Lord | T | C 10:54, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Speculative:
We're not going to keep it as it is now. We need, desperately, to start from scratch, as this article is full of speculation, OR, in-universe commentary, dubious or just-plain-wrong nonsense, and game-guide advice. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 11:06, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Here is the last verbose version. Restore pieces of it if and only if you are sure you have sourced it, rewritten it into encyclopedic tone, and removed speculation, OR, game-guide-style advice, and other junk. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 11:08, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I hate to keep going back to this stub, but the additions just aren't encyclopedic. Let's go through step by step.
They are usually the last numbers in a Regional Pokédex, along with very powerful three-stage evolution Pokémon in the first two generations.
Each generation of Legendary Pokémon gain more and more by generation (5, 6, 10, 14).
And why do you care? Darkness Lord | T | C 21:18, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I hate to be undoing the work that was previously done here, but I think what was done was inadvertantly harmful, encouraging unencyclopedic speculation and original research, and the additions, while well-meaning (I hate to be undoing them), don't solve the problem. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 19:47, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I'm at a loss... I'll think of something, though. - Saturn Yoshi THE VOICES 21:21, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I don't think I insulted SY, and I came to take a look at this article because I am interested in Pokémon in general and because this article in particular was brought to my attention by another editor. My suggestion is that you not take things so personally and read my advice carefully, as I have been doing this for quite a while and do generally know what I'm doing. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 21:36, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I have an idea. Someone could put the old version on a user subpage. --
~PinkDeoxys~
23:36, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
So. Um. Got any? We've got Serebii and the similar sort-of-reliable-fansite strata of links, but I'm coming up with zippo for anything harder. Google News gives nawt, and a regular Google search has given me loads of crap but no gold. Maybe someone could hit Lexis-Nexis? (We have to have a student here who can poach a prof's or the school's access.) - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 21:48, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
LexisNexis maintains a database of articles published in newspapers and other publications (as well as other info, but that's not really relevant here). If something has been published mentioning Pokémon, Lexis is a start. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 07:44, 6 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Manaphy can breed Fione, but Fione can not evolve into Manaphy. See Serebii.net's index (it may be under archives) for more information. Darkness Lord | T | C 15:31, 9 October 2006 (UTC) reply
It's not about being right; it's about using reliable sources. Serebii is good for simple stuff, but they're just not reliable on cutting-edge stuff; no fansite is. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 19:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC) reply
you know what this page needs? a list of the pokemon, the catagory way of finding them confuses people-- Cody6 23:40, 6 November 2006 (UTC) reply
Having just surfed in, a pokemon lay person, and generally being the target of this kind of article, I found it strange that it lacked the basic information. Namely, what Cody6 above me suggested. A simple list of all the legendary pokemon to appear in the games would improve this article enourmously, as that's generally what people surfing in are looking for.
I've noticed that all movies except for Mewtwo Returns seem to have two legendary Pokemon. I haven't seen all the movies, but it seems like they do. The first has Mewtwo and Mew, 2000 has Lugia and the Three Legendary Birds, 3 has Entei and Unown, 4 has Celebi and Suicune, 5...I haven't seen 5, is it the Deoxys one? Well that one has Deoxys and Rayquaza, and the Jirachi one has Jirachi and Groudon, and that's all the movies I can think of. Should this be noted in the article?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.9.121.137 ( talk • contribs)
This article states that "To date, every Pokémon movie has centered around an encounter with one or more legendary Pokémon". But Lucario isn't ledgendary, is it? Heartandstar27 18:02, 1 July 2007 (UTC) reply
I do not think the amount of abbreviation used in this page is really acceptable for an encylopaedic article. The terms such as RBY , GSC and RSE are never explained and could be quite unclear to anyone not knowledgable about the pokemon game series - or even people who are but have never heard the abbreviations. At the very least their should be a glossary but I personally think that terms such as "R/S/FR/LG/E to D/P" - make parts of the article alsmost unreadable. I tried putting in the abbreviations after the main titles so that some kind of link could form in people's minds (e.g. Red, Blue and Yellow (RBY)) but this was deemd unneccessary. I really think these terms are not common usage and are just jargon used by a certain section of fans. At the least there should be a glossary or a fleshed out example the first time an abbreviation is used (e.g. RBY (Red, BLue and Yellow)). I'd also question the need for what is really a very text heavy article when most of the information contained within it is present in the pages for the individual pokemon. Surely an explanation of what 'Legendary Pokemon' are and their common characteristics (e.g. high stats, rarity} followed by a list of the creatures (organised into appropriate catagories) would be enough. I realise that a lot of these issues have been discussed before but I think their are definate problems with the page. Fire Red and Leaf Green - the FR and LG from the incomprehensable "R/S/FR/LG/E to D/P" are only mentioned in the Deoxys section with no links - I think it could be very difficult for the uninitiated to work out what's going on. Any thoughts? [[ Guest9999 17:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)]] reply
On a seperate issue the article is also probably the dullest to look at on Wikipedia - no pictures, lists, info boxes, anything - almost looks like an essay - makes it a bit hard to follow. [[ Guest9999 17:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)]] reply
Ok, I think I got all the abbreviations - although I'm not exactly sure about the results. I still think the page is a bit of a mess. Might need attention from someone with a greater knowledge of the subject than I. [[ Guest9999 22:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)]] reply
Does Phione count as a legendary Pokémon? After all, it isn't unique; just keep breeding Manaphy and/or Phione itself. Wouldn't this make it a regular Pokémon?
I was thinking...Jorge jojae said that the three Regis represent the solid state of fire (Regirock), water (Regice), and lightning (Registeel). What does this make Regigigas? Or am I simply thinking of something no one else is anymore? Leprechaun Gamer 00:30, 7 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Read the Defence/Water talk at the top of the page to see what I'm talking about. Leprechaun Gamer 19:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Those images do not comply with WP:FAIRUSE. Decorative galleries are unneeded, ugly, and forbidden. Fair use images must be used sparsely and encyclopedically. The different ones are already covered in the template anyways. TTN 22:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The Lugia-rules-over-the-three-birds thing is anime-only; specifically, it comes from the second movie. There is NEVER any connection between Lugia and Articuno/Zapdos/Moltres stated ANYWHERE in the games. So there's no reason to have a mention of it in a section that's very clearly labeled "in the Pokémon video games." *growls and removes it yet again* 63.215.28.146 20:56, 26 August 2007 (UTC) reply
In the first section (pokemon in the video games), the fact that mew can be caught via glitch in the game is left out.
![]() | This redirect was nominated at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion on 23 April 2024. The result of the discussion was retarget the first three to List of Pokémon and delete Ledgendary pokemon.. |
![]() | Tip: Anchors are
case-sensitive in most browsers. This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Legendary Pokémon redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Um...Articuno and Regice are ICE types xP Arcuneh Meeps 20:20, 17 June 2006 (UTC) reply
Why Are Ho-oh and Lugia listed with Mew on the tier system? Should this be changed or is it correct. If it is correct, perhaps elaboration on why it is so?
Jorge jojae 14:03, 1 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Some of the ideas on this page - namely the idea of legendary trios related to the elements from Japanese philosophy, and the theorised relationship between Mewtwo, Mew, and Deoxys - seems to run contrary to Wikipedia's research policy. Wouldn't it be better to explain the Legendary Pokémon only in terms of their appearences in the games, anime, and other media, without theorising about categorising the legendaries and so forth?
I don't like the charts. They include some fanstuff ( Mew and Mewtwo being "equivalent" to Latias and Latios), and ignore some more concrete info (the stat totals of Mewtwo, Lugia, Ho-Oh, and Rayquaza are equal to each other and no other Pokémon.) Someone tried to change it to descriptions, but forgot about half of the legendaries. We need consensus. -- HeroicJay 19:11, 27 July 2006 (UTC) reply
Cool. I already reverted the page once because someone had added Manaphy. I'm sticking to the NO FOURTH GENs rule until we have concrete evidence. - SaturnYoshi 16:21, 28 July 2006 (UTC
I have an idea. What if we make it so the charts that were here before we did change them into descriptions, actually were seperated into a section. It's hard to explain, so I'll just show you in an example, maybe Suicune.
= = Suicune = = [no spaces]
Legendary Beasts:
Raikou | Entei | Suicune |
(section description)
[Suicune is in bold, in case that's hard to see]
-
So, what'd'ya think? DarknessLord 15:58, 30 July 2006 (UTC) reply
And plus, this page will look more official... and cooler ^_^ DarknessLord 00:53, 31 July 2006 (UTC) reply
"It still risks being fanstuff"
Raikou-Suicune-Entei, Rayquaza-Kyogre-Groudon, Moltres-Articuno-Zapdos, Latios-Latias, Mewtwo-Mew, Mew-Celebi-Jirachi-Manaphy (even if the last one isn't legendary), Ho-oh-Lugia, and Diaruga-Parukia (even if they aren't legendary) relations are not fanstuff.
"it's not really necessary as all of the Pokémon are listed on the page anyway"
Hello? I'm not relisting the Pokémon!
"and will cause problems for Pokémon without any closely associated legendary (Celebi, Jirachi, and Deoxys come to mind.)"
I never said every single Pokémon had to be categorized. And plus, Celebi and Jirachi fall together under unique. DarknessLord 16:33, 31 July 2006 (UTC) reply
And, you guys are so safe and precautious that you fail to realize Manaphy, Diaruga, and Parukia are legendaries. I can bet you thousands of dollars they are legendaries. Manaphy is normally unobtainable in the main games, ring a bell? Cough, Jirachi, Mew, and Celebi, all are legendaries, Cough. LUGIA, HO-OH, SUICUNE, GROUDON, KYOGRE, RAYQUAZA: Box art, all legendaries.
These two things have given me so much anger I might just add the charts myself! DarknessLord 13:14, 1 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Also, who says they Nintendo have to continue the format they used for Mew, Celebi, and Jirachi. DarknessLord 13:25, 7 August 2006 (UTC) reply
Look at this:
= = Raikou = = [no spaces]
Legendary Beasts | ||
---|---|---|
Raikou | Entei | Suicune |
The difference is it looks better, and it provides links to others on the page, meaning I link to their section, not their own article, which would work with the Mew-Celebi-Jirachi-(maybe) Manaphy relations. DarknessLord 19:56, 8 August 2006 (UTC) reply
I think this page needs a little pizazz. Something to kick it up a little. Maybe like an image... artwork wouldn't work, too predictable... maybe under their name and main article and above their chart they have like their third-gen/fourth-gen article.
On a seperate note, don't you think that we should just ==[[]]== the article, instead of popping up those annoying, space-eating, main article thingies?
Keep It Poké, Keep It Mon. Darkness Lord | T | C 21:26, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Update: No response in about one hour and I'm considering adding something myself. Darkness Lord | T | C 21:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I just uploaded a bunch of sprite pics. You can see them at my sandbox. I also have the shinies if need be. - Saturn Yoshi THE VOICES 21:48, 4 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Looking at the article, there's not really much on there that isn't on each of the Pokemon's individual articles. That said, I suggest that we scrap whatever information we have on the page right now besides the groupings, the description at the top, and possibly a breif description for each group, then move to List of Legendary Pokémon. Even then, the article will need major rewriting: the description at the top is poor, at best, and some groups have poorly thought out names (Latios and Latias, regardless of what their species are called, are not eons). You Can't See Me! 07:29, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
And it wasn't a bad fanpage. Unfortunately, as an encyclopedia article, its problems were legion:
It was desperately in need of some merciless editing. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 10:47, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
SPECULATIVE?! How in any way was it speculative? If it was, then it was probably one small edit by a nameless user (an IP) that we hadn't looked over yet.
Well, I'm settling with the way it is now, so deal with it!
Sorry for all that roughness. We're gonna keep it as it is now and update all the info that this article should have.
But come on, the WHOLE ARTICLE?! You need to resolve your edits to contemplate your anger. Darkness Lord | T | C 10:54, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Speculative:
We're not going to keep it as it is now. We need, desperately, to start from scratch, as this article is full of speculation, OR, in-universe commentary, dubious or just-plain-wrong nonsense, and game-guide advice. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 11:06, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Here is the last verbose version. Restore pieces of it if and only if you are sure you have sourced it, rewritten it into encyclopedic tone, and removed speculation, OR, game-guide-style advice, and other junk. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 11:08, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I hate to keep going back to this stub, but the additions just aren't encyclopedic. Let's go through step by step.
They are usually the last numbers in a Regional Pokédex, along with very powerful three-stage evolution Pokémon in the first two generations.
Each generation of Legendary Pokémon gain more and more by generation (5, 6, 10, 14).
And why do you care? Darkness Lord | T | C 21:18, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I hate to be undoing the work that was previously done here, but I think what was done was inadvertantly harmful, encouraging unencyclopedic speculation and original research, and the additions, while well-meaning (I hate to be undoing them), don't solve the problem. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 19:47, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I'm at a loss... I'll think of something, though. - Saturn Yoshi THE VOICES 21:21, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I don't think I insulted SY, and I came to take a look at this article because I am interested in Pokémon in general and because this article in particular was brought to my attention by another editor. My suggestion is that you not take things so personally and read my advice carefully, as I have been doing this for quite a while and do generally know what I'm doing. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 21:36, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
I have an idea. Someone could put the old version on a user subpage. --
~PinkDeoxys~
23:36, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
reply
So. Um. Got any? We've got Serebii and the similar sort-of-reliable-fansite strata of links, but I'm coming up with zippo for anything harder. Google News gives nawt, and a regular Google search has given me loads of crap but no gold. Maybe someone could hit Lexis-Nexis? (We have to have a student here who can poach a prof's or the school's access.) - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 21:48, 5 October 2006 (UTC) reply
LexisNexis maintains a database of articles published in newspapers and other publications (as well as other info, but that's not really relevant here). If something has been published mentioning Pokémon, Lexis is a start. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 07:44, 6 October 2006 (UTC) reply
Manaphy can breed Fione, but Fione can not evolve into Manaphy. See Serebii.net's index (it may be under archives) for more information. Darkness Lord | T | C 15:31, 9 October 2006 (UTC) reply
It's not about being right; it's about using reliable sources. Serebii is good for simple stuff, but they're just not reliable on cutting-edge stuff; no fansite is. - A Man In Bl♟ck ( conspire | past ops) 19:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC) reply
you know what this page needs? a list of the pokemon, the catagory way of finding them confuses people-- Cody6 23:40, 6 November 2006 (UTC) reply
Having just surfed in, a pokemon lay person, and generally being the target of this kind of article, I found it strange that it lacked the basic information. Namely, what Cody6 above me suggested. A simple list of all the legendary pokemon to appear in the games would improve this article enourmously, as that's generally what people surfing in are looking for.
I've noticed that all movies except for Mewtwo Returns seem to have two legendary Pokemon. I haven't seen all the movies, but it seems like they do. The first has Mewtwo and Mew, 2000 has Lugia and the Three Legendary Birds, 3 has Entei and Unown, 4 has Celebi and Suicune, 5...I haven't seen 5, is it the Deoxys one? Well that one has Deoxys and Rayquaza, and the Jirachi one has Jirachi and Groudon, and that's all the movies I can think of. Should this be noted in the article?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.9.121.137 ( talk • contribs)
This article states that "To date, every Pokémon movie has centered around an encounter with one or more legendary Pokémon". But Lucario isn't ledgendary, is it? Heartandstar27 18:02, 1 July 2007 (UTC) reply
I do not think the amount of abbreviation used in this page is really acceptable for an encylopaedic article. The terms such as RBY , GSC and RSE are never explained and could be quite unclear to anyone not knowledgable about the pokemon game series - or even people who are but have never heard the abbreviations. At the very least their should be a glossary but I personally think that terms such as "R/S/FR/LG/E to D/P" - make parts of the article alsmost unreadable. I tried putting in the abbreviations after the main titles so that some kind of link could form in people's minds (e.g. Red, Blue and Yellow (RBY)) but this was deemd unneccessary. I really think these terms are not common usage and are just jargon used by a certain section of fans. At the least there should be a glossary or a fleshed out example the first time an abbreviation is used (e.g. RBY (Red, BLue and Yellow)). I'd also question the need for what is really a very text heavy article when most of the information contained within it is present in the pages for the individual pokemon. Surely an explanation of what 'Legendary Pokemon' are and their common characteristics (e.g. high stats, rarity} followed by a list of the creatures (organised into appropriate catagories) would be enough. I realise that a lot of these issues have been discussed before but I think their are definate problems with the page. Fire Red and Leaf Green - the FR and LG from the incomprehensable "R/S/FR/LG/E to D/P" are only mentioned in the Deoxys section with no links - I think it could be very difficult for the uninitiated to work out what's going on. Any thoughts? [[ Guest9999 17:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)]] reply
On a seperate issue the article is also probably the dullest to look at on Wikipedia - no pictures, lists, info boxes, anything - almost looks like an essay - makes it a bit hard to follow. [[ Guest9999 17:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)]] reply
Ok, I think I got all the abbreviations - although I'm not exactly sure about the results. I still think the page is a bit of a mess. Might need attention from someone with a greater knowledge of the subject than I. [[ Guest9999 22:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)]] reply
Does Phione count as a legendary Pokémon? After all, it isn't unique; just keep breeding Manaphy and/or Phione itself. Wouldn't this make it a regular Pokémon?
I was thinking...Jorge jojae said that the three Regis represent the solid state of fire (Regirock), water (Regice), and lightning (Registeel). What does this make Regigigas? Or am I simply thinking of something no one else is anymore? Leprechaun Gamer 00:30, 7 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Read the Defence/Water talk at the top of the page to see what I'm talking about. Leprechaun Gamer 19:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC) reply
Those images do not comply with WP:FAIRUSE. Decorative galleries are unneeded, ugly, and forbidden. Fair use images must be used sparsely and encyclopedically. The different ones are already covered in the template anyways. TTN 22:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC) reply
The Lugia-rules-over-the-three-birds thing is anime-only; specifically, it comes from the second movie. There is NEVER any connection between Lugia and Articuno/Zapdos/Moltres stated ANYWHERE in the games. So there's no reason to have a mention of it in a section that's very clearly labeled "in the Pokémon video games." *growls and removes it yet again* 63.215.28.146 20:56, 26 August 2007 (UTC) reply
In the first section (pokemon in the video games), the fact that mew can be caught via glitch in the game is left out.