Talk:Jessie's Mimikyu
Trivia
Is it worthy to add Trivia of Mimikyu being the first Pokémon captured in a luxury ball and only the third to be captured in a non standard Pokéball after Ash's Tauros and Ash's Totodile?--BigDocFan (talk) 08:27, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- Of course it is. It's been awhile since the Johto saga. So I think that's reasonable for that.--CoolPokéGuy (Talk) 03:42, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
- "Drought trivia" can be notable at times, but in this case, it's not notable because this is the third instance that a Pokémon has been captured in a non-standard Pokéball by a main cast member. It's not anything special at this point, so it really does not need to be mentioned. --Pokemaster97 17:37, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Mimikyu's gender
Someone on TV Tropes is adding female gender pronouns for Jessie's Mimikyu. Did I miss something in episodes 3 or 4? Has Mimikyu's gender been named, or is someone pulling something out of their rear end? Macsen (talk) 19:50, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Is this trivia worthy?
Is it worth mentioning that Mimikyu is another Pokémon that Jessie caught by stealing it from another trainer that wanted to catch it first? --PKMNAdventurer (talk) 02:18, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
- The last time Jessie did that was in Sinnoh. --PKMNAdventurer (talk) 04:21, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Why can we "assume" the gender of Ash's Tauros but not Mimikyu's ability?
http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Ash%27s_Tauros
Tauros are always male in the games. Mimikyu always have the Disguise ability. So why are they treated differently? - unsigned comment from Unowninator (talk • contribs)
- Because Anime ≠ Games. It was never said that Mimikyu had Disguise as its ability. Unless it was mentioned, then yes. If not, then wait. --PKMNAdventurer (talk) 04:14, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
- Were Ash's Tauros mentioned? Unowninator (talk) 06:09, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
- We shouldn't assume Tauros' gender. I don't believe it's ever mentioned so I've removed it from that page, but if I'm wrong please revert me. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 06:47, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
- Were Ash's Tauros mentioned? Unowninator (talk) 06:09, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Wood Hammer
The move with its tail is obviously wood hammer. We've seen it before in SM003 or 4, and we see it again now, and it's the same log from XY, but the colour is different.--ShallowShaddoll (talk) 14:08, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- It is not the same in XY. In XY, the users hand had a green log surrounding it, Mimikyu's attack was it's stick tail being surrounded by a purple mist. Besides both involving wood, they aren't the same. Plus, Mimikyu's tail is already made of wood, so it's not easy to tell what move it is. Playerking95 (talk) 14:22, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- Mimikyu doesn't have hands, so it uses its tail. That's pretty much it. And what mist? Like I said, the colour is different, from green to violet, but you can still see the tail forming a log, just like in XY.--ShallowShaddoll (talk) 14:25, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- What else would it be? It's clearly Wood Hammer.--Pikablu (talk) 14:27, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- The purple mist that is around its tail. And there was never any mist in XY. And just because it's tail is wooden, it doesn't mean it is most likely going to be Wood Hammer. By that logic, any Pokemon that attacks with a wooden body part or anything wooden, like Timbur's log or Komala's stump should just be counted as Wood Hammer. It could be Wood Hammer or some Ghost-type move. Playerking95 (talk) 14:31, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- You're completely ignoring the fact that the "aura" forms a log, just like in XY. Like, your only nitpick is the difference in colour, which is not unusual and not the first time we've seen this when the series change from one to the other...--ShallowShaddoll (talk) 14:38, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- You always argue against moves just because it doesn't fit your ideas. Prove it otherwise or stop trying to haunt the flow of information.--- unsigned comment from Pikablu (talk • contribs)
- No I'm not. It grows, it doesn't add anything wooden too it. It becoming larger doesn't mean a thing and @Pikablu, no I don't. I argue against them when they are stated as certain moves, when they aren't confirmed to be those moves. You're asking for proof, but that's exactly what I'm asking and there is no proof for it to be confirmed. I'm not "haunting" the flow of information, I'm being sure that lies aren't being spread. There's a difference. Playerking95 (talk) 14:51, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- There's a log... Like, watch the episode again. Or should I just take a snapshot for you? O_o log. Take a look at Mimikyu's tail shape when it doesn't use this move (the tip is a quadrangle) and when it does use it (the tip is round)--ShallowShaddoll (talk) 14:53, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- Without a doubt it is Wood Hammer. this is just like Turtonator's Flamethrower. We all know what it is. You just want to feel important by stopping it.--Pikablu (talk) 14:59, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- No, it's tail is always rounded. Just look at it's sprite. It does not change shape and if it does, it's not by much. And it is not without a doubt Wood Hammer. Kiawe's Turtonator did use Flamethrower, I just didn't see it used at the end of the episode, where it was shown more clearly. And that is not why I'm doing this, so stop spreading falsehoods or I will contact an admin for abuse. Playerking95 (talk) 15:01, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- Without a doubt it is Wood Hammer. this is just like Turtonator's Flamethrower. We all know what it is. You just want to feel important by stopping it.--Pikablu (talk) 14:59, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- There's a log... Like, watch the episode again. Or should I just take a snapshot for you? O_o log. Take a look at Mimikyu's tail shape when it doesn't use this move (the tip is a quadrangle) and when it does use it (the tip is round)--ShallowShaddoll (talk) 14:53, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- No I'm not. It grows, it doesn't add anything wooden too it. It becoming larger doesn't mean a thing and @Pikablu, no I don't. I argue against them when they are stated as certain moves, when they aren't confirmed to be those moves. You're asking for proof, but that's exactly what I'm asking and there is no proof for it to be confirmed. I'm not "haunting" the flow of information, I'm being sure that lies aren't being spread. There's a difference. Playerking95 (talk) 14:51, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- You always argue against moves just because it doesn't fit your ideas. Prove it otherwise or stop trying to haunt the flow of information.--- unsigned comment from Pikablu (talk • contribs)
- You're completely ignoring the fact that the "aura" forms a log, just like in XY. Like, your only nitpick is the difference in colour, which is not unusual and not the first time we've seen this when the series change from one to the other...--ShallowShaddoll (talk) 14:38, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- The purple mist that is around its tail. And there was never any mist in XY. And just because it's tail is wooden, it doesn't mean it is most likely going to be Wood Hammer. By that logic, any Pokemon that attacks with a wooden body part or anything wooden, like Timbur's log or Komala's stump should just be counted as Wood Hammer. It could be Wood Hammer or some Ghost-type move. Playerking95 (talk) 14:31, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
you're not getting your way and you're going to report abuse? We are just trying to convince you that it is Wood Hanmer.--Pikablu (talk) 15:24, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- It looks like Wood Hammer though. What else would it be? Davidwes14 (talk) 16:05, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
- Just in case: let's not continue this line about "abuse" and all. Let's try to get along civilly and keep on the topic specifically. (If anyone wants to take it to my talk page or any staff member's talk page, that's perfectly fine.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:14, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
On the ability
Is it really too soon to assume its ability is Disguise, considering Pikachu connected what would have been a supereffective move, and said move did nothing? - unsigned comment from Madiyasha (talk • contribs)
