Talk:Legendary Pokémon: Difference between revisions
From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
Jump to navigationJump to search
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
The matter of separating the articles of Legendary and Mythical Pokémon is in discussion because of Generation VI's newly introduced disambiguation of the term ''Mythical Pokémon''. I have started a [[User:Ash Pokemaster/Mythical Pokémon|short draft]] that anyone should feel free to expand. Meanwhile, in response to [[User:Bwburke94|Bwburke94]] ([[User talk:Bwburke94|talk]]) [[Talk:Legendary_Pok%C3%A9mon/Archive2#Separation|15:18, 5 May 2015 (UTC)]]: | The matter of separating the articles of Legendary and Mythical Pokémon is in discussion because of Generation VI's newly introduced disambiguation of the term ''Mythical Pokémon''. I have started a [[User:Ash Pokemaster/Mythical Pokémon|short draft]] that anyone should feel free to expand. Meanwhile, in response to [[User:Bwburke94|Bwburke94]] ([[User talk:Bwburke94|talk]]) [[Talk:Legendary_Pok%C3%A9mon/Archive2#Separation|15:18, 5 May 2015 (UTC)]]: | ||
:A better phrasing might be "a related group of Pokémon related to Legendary Pokémon", but I'm being conservative for the time being. I haven't found evidence supporting that ''Mythical Pokémon'' are indeed ''Legendary'' (as far as Japanese media are concerned), and the fact that | :A better phrasing might be "a related group of Pokémon related to Legendary Pokémon", but I'm being conservative for the time being. I haven't found evidence supporting that ''Mythical Pokémon'' are indeed ''Legendary'' (as far as Japanese media are concerned), and the fact that [http://www.pokemonconquest.com/en-us/outline/densetsu recent] text refers to all of them collectively as "Legendary and Mythical Pokémon" makes me think they aren't. Mythical Pokémon as an English term may be relatively recent, but 幻のポケモン has always been a thing -- it has been in use on and off since 1998 (potentially even earlier, in Mew ads from 1996). It started catching on (that is to say, being used more commonly) around [http://www.pokemon-movie.jp/history/ 2007] or 2008. Prior to that, reference to Mythical Pokémon has been generally informal, with several other terms like [https://web.archive.org/web/20040404003246/http://www.pokemon.co.jp/game/deoxys/index.html 特別なポケモン] (''Tokubetsuna Pokémon'', probably a parallel to ''Event Pokémon'') seen in official media. Ever since Gen 5, it has been in use unambiguously. You can even find a formal definition of 幻のポケモン in Pokescrap's [http://www.pokemon.co.jp/ex/pokescrap2014/pokemon/ page]. | ||
: | :As of today (arguably since [[Talk:Legendary_Pok%C3%A9mon/Archive2#Mythical_and_Legendary_classification_with_sources|Gen 5]]) the same holds for ''Mythical'', as there is no reference of Mythical Pokémon being Legendary anywhere, as far as I know. Even cases like Deoxys, where 幻のポケモン was originally mistranslated as ''Legendary Pokémon'', are now properly classified. The assumption that Mythical Pokémon are Legendary is natural, and the western community especially is accustomed to the convention for most of the franchise's life, with the proper term coined years after its Japanese counterpart (granted, the term ''Rare Pokémon'' was once being used in places like Pokémon Ranger and [http://bulbanews.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Pokemon.com_officially_reveals_Shaymin announcements]), but I have to ask: what's the point of including Mythical Pokémon in the Legendary Pokémon page when they aren't officially referred to as ''Legendary Pokémon''? Saving clicks? Is an encyclopedia's mission to pander to the community's fondness of obsolete terminology, or is it to be accurate and in-line with the series' current conventions and lore? [[User:Ash Pokemaster|Ash Pokemaster]] ([[User talk:Ash Pokemaster|talk]]) 17:41, 5 May 2015 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 17:52, 5 May 2015
Separating Mythical and Legendary Pokémon
The matter of separating the articles of Legendary and Mythical Pokémon is in discussion because of Generation VI's newly introduced disambiguation of the term Mythical Pokémon. I have started a short draft that anyone should feel free to expand. Meanwhile, in response to Bwburke94 (talk) 15:18, 5 May 2015 (UTC):
- A better phrasing might be "a related group of Pokémon related to Legendary Pokémon", but I'm being conservative for the time being. I haven't found evidence supporting that Mythical Pokémon are indeed Legendary (as far as Japanese media are concerned), and the fact that recent text refers to all of them collectively as "Legendary and Mythical Pokémon" makes me think they aren't. Mythical Pokémon as an English term may be relatively recent, but 幻のポケモン has always been a thing -- it has been in use on and off since 1998 (potentially even earlier, in Mew ads from 1996). It started catching on (that is to say, being used more commonly) around 2007 or 2008. Prior to that, reference to Mythical Pokémon has been generally informal, with several other terms like 特別なポケモン (Tokubetsuna Pokémon, probably a parallel to Event Pokémon) seen in official media. Ever since Gen 5, it has been in use unambiguously. You can even find a formal definition of 幻のポケモン in Pokescrap's page.
- As of today (arguably since Gen 5) the same holds for Mythical, as there is no reference of Mythical Pokémon being Legendary anywhere, as far as I know. Even cases like Deoxys, where 幻のポケモン was originally mistranslated as Legendary Pokémon, are now properly classified. The assumption that Mythical Pokémon are Legendary is natural, and the western community especially is accustomed to the convention for most of the franchise's life, with the proper term coined years after its Japanese counterpart (granted, the term Rare Pokémon was once being used in places like Pokémon Ranger and announcements), but I have to ask: what's the point of including Mythical Pokémon in the Legendary Pokémon page when they aren't officially referred to as Legendary Pokémon? Saving clicks? Is an encyclopedia's mission to pander to the community's fondness of obsolete terminology, or is it to be accurate and in-line with the series' current conventions and lore? Ash Pokemaster (talk) 17:41, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
