Please remember to follow the manual of style and code of conduct at all times.
Check BNN and Bulbanews for up-to-date Pokémon news and discuss it on the forums or in our IRC channel #bulbagarden on irc.systemnet.info.

Bulbapedia talk:Project GlitchDex

From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
Revision as of 16:45, 3 February 2008 by Abwayax (Talk | contribs) (A proposal)

Jump to: navigation, search

I'd say this should be renamed to fit with the other cataloging projects, like MoveDex and Pokédex. Maybe move it to "Project GlitchDex"?

Oh. And, um, make sure that glitches stay separate from normal Pokémon. Reference Pokémon pages, utilize template code, but don't use the templates themselves. Check out MissingNo. for my call on that. User:TTEchidna/sig 20:30, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually.. before this sprang up I was thinking of a project GlitchDex. :p Glad to see the glitch pages being worked on, always found them so cool.
..yeah, I think we should move it to Project GlitchDex. No need to type the e nonstop. :p User:TinaTheKirlia/Sig 20:32, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that does sound better. Missingno. Master 20:35, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh snap. Um. Um. The other projects have a capitalized Dex. Um.. I'm moving it again. DX User:TinaTheKirlia/Sig 20:38, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Goddammit. DD:< It's not letting me move it. God. D< User:TinaTheKirlia/Sig 20:40, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Moved. It's moved. You're welcome.

Glitch Pokémon and Official Pokémon

There is no real difference between the two. In my opinion, the two should be considered equal!

000.png

03:02, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Sprites

Now, I think the first thing we ought to do here is upload sprites of all the glitch Pokémon. Noticeably, several of these articles lack sprites, such as .4, A (uppercase), 3TrainerPoké, and 44Hy. We're also lacking proper sprites of MissingNo.'s other forms (Aerodactyl/Kabutops skeletons+ghost).

Glitch Pokémon and Official Pokémon

There is no real difference between the two. In my opinion, the two should be considered equal!

000.png

14:02, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Join

Can I join?User:Pokemaniac102/Sig 18:39, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Just sign your name (No date or fancy signatures needed) on the participants section. User:TinaTheKirlia/Sig 18:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Can I join too? User:PokéZoe/Sig

Anybody can. fivex

how? I'm glatra i'm new--Glatra 03:06, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Stick your sig in the members section. No permission required. PH34RИван 06:47, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

OK Thanks --Glatra 22:52, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Glitch Infobox?

While adding sprites to the glitch articles I noticed that some of the articles had the standard Pokémon infobox (with the categories removed), while others had none whatsoever. I also noticed that the majority of the infoboxes had "N/A" or "None" in most of the fields while the relevant information was in a list in the article itself. I propose that we make a seperate infobox for glitch Pokémon that includes relevant glitch-specific information (hexadecimal identifier, Pokédex number, equivalents in other versions, whether its Pokédex entry is terminated correctly, etc). Good idea? File:Ani201QuMS.gif abwayax (t/c) File:Ani201ExMS.gif 20:26, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Seperate infobox, hm? I think it's a good idea.. like, instead of the regular stuff, it'd have the corresponding Mew glitch Special hex and stuff. User:TinaTheKirlia/Sig 20:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm in agreement here. An infobox for the glitch Pokémon is a good idea.
Glitch Pokémon and Official Pokémon

There is no real difference between the two. In my opinion, the two should be considered equal!

000.png

02:32, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I made the Glitch Pokémon Infobox! -- Glitch and Official Pokémon. There is no real difference between the two. In my opinion, the two should be considered equal!-- quoted by Missingno. Master 20:26, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I changed around the infobox slightly. Got rid of the "height" and "weight" and "species" stuff (that stuff is pretty much meaningless in terms of glitches) and replaced it with Hex ID and Version. When should we start placing this thing on the glitch articles? File:Ani201QuMS.gif abwayax (t/c) File:Ani201ExMS.gif 20:32, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I already put it on the MissingNo. article to start with. -- Glitch and Official Pokémon. There is no real difference between the two. In my opinion, the two should be considered equal!-- quoted by Missingno. Master 20:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

As you may have noticed I made separate type templates for the glitch infobox. The reason being is that the standard Pokémon type templates add the page to type categories, and consensus seems to dictate that we keep the glitch Pokémon seperate from the officially recognized ones (That and many of the glitch Pokémon have glitch types, which don't have real categories (ex. there is no Category: Pokémaniac-type Pokémon nor will there likely be one in future). File:Ani201QuMS.gif abwayax (t/c) File:Ani201ExMS.gif 23:04, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Categorization

Okay. I've looked over a few articles and from what I can tell, the consensus within Bulbapedia is to not treat the glitch Pokémon as "real Pokémon". On the MissingNo. article there was actually an edit war with some people attempting to classify it as a "Pokémon", but from what I can tell the clear consensus is that MissingNo is not a "Pokémon". To that end, I modified the Template:GlitchPkmnInfobox so that it doesn't put the page in any Pokémon categories. However, recently MissingNo. was put into Category:Normal-type Pokémon again. Should it be acceptable to include glitches in the type categories? I'm only asking because I don't want to revert that edit and inadvertently start another edit war. File:Ani201QuMS.gif abwayax (t/c) File:Ani201ExMS.gif 01:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Eh, I think we should.. if it happens to share a normal type, however. So no Category:Bird-type Pokémon. User:TinaTheKirlia/Sig 02:01, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Notability criteria

Here's something that's really been bugging me. Where exactly do we draw the line between a notable glitch Pokémon and a non-notable one? Obviously MissingNo. is notable, and apparently the 20-something other Gen I glitches listed are too... but what about the 120-something others that aren't? Furthermore, should glitch items and attacks deserve pages? Even pages such as List of glitch items...? File:Ani201QuMS.gif abwayax (t/c) File:Ani201ExMS.gif 03:43, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

No glitch items, attacks, and Pokémon shouldn't even have pages. They are errors in a game's data and shouldn't even exist.User:Pokemaniac102/Sig 03:54, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
But they do exist, so why pretend they don't? File:Ani201QuMS.gif abwayax (t/c) File:Ani201ExMS.gif 04:28, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Eh, don't listen to him. Although, List of glitch items sounds like a greater idea than to just give seperate pages to them-- as I think the only 'notable' glitch item is Teru-sama from Gold and Silver... same thing goes for the glitch moves, like TM07 and the like. It's kind of a mystery on what the TM moves do, really. User:TinaTheKirlia/Sig 15:28, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
If they do exist, why don't we have all of them? huh?!User:Pokemaniac102/Sig 22:23, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
And who ever said I was a him?!!!User:Pokemaniac102/Sig 22:24, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
The effects of the TMxx moves are documented, actually. And would anyone have issues with me making pages for the other 100-something glitch Pokémon not listed yet? File:Ani201QuMS.gif abwayax (t/c) File:Ani201ExMS.gif 07:26, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Here's what I think.

1st. gen: Any Glitch Pokémon you can obtain by any method that doesn't require a cheating device could be considered notable. Anything else, no.

2nd through 4th gen: Every Glitch Pokémon for these should be considered notable, as there are significantly less of them and even fewer obtainable w/o a cheating device.

But this is just my opinion.

Also, we should do something for the glitch moves, but as to what, I don't know. -- Glitch and Official Pokémon. There is no real difference between the two. In my opinion, the two should be considered equal!-- quoted by Missingno. Master 19:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

A proposal

I think that we should make the Glitch Pokémon articles titled in a way similar to the Pokémon articles. Example: "MissingNo." moved to "MissingNo. (Glitch Pokémon)"., ".4" moved to ".4 (Glitch Pokémon)", ect.. See the thing? This would be effective in stopping people from moving MissingNo. to MissingNo. (Pokémon), and stuff of that sort. I would also propose a link template like Template:P. Maybe {{gp|name}}. -- Glitch and Official Pokémon. There is no real difference between the two. In my opinion, the two should be considered equal!-- quoted by Missingno. Master 20:25, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Dude, that is not needed. Nobody is gonna move Missigno. to Missigno. (Pokémon). Why? Because it's not a Pokémon! User:Theryguy512/Sig 00:49, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
But you never know when you get the extreme Glitch Pokémon extremist who tries to do something like moving MissingNo. to MissingNo. (Pokémon). True, I did at one point seriously consider doing so, but somehow forgot.
IMHO this is unnecessary. What would this suffix accomplish, in terms of disambiguation? The Pokémon articles are titled like that to disambiguate them versus articles on significant members of that species (Pikachu disambiguates to Pikachu (Pokémon) and Ash's Pikachu) since individual Pokémon usually don't have their own names (Ash's Pikachu is just called Pikachu, as are most of the Pikachu in the world). AFAIK "MissingNo." or ".4" wouldn't refer to anything else, and even if we did decide otherwise, making a template to link to them would be a bit excessive - how many times would we link to one of these articles in article space? File:Ani201QuMS.gif abwayax (t/c) File:Ani201ExMS.gif 16:45, 3 February 2008 (UTC)