Talk:List of Pokémon by weight

Should MissingNo. be included here?

• It has a Pokédex number (000)
• It has a weight
• It is a Glitch Pokémon

File:Ani386NMS.gifPokeFile:Ani386AMS.gifmaniacFile:Ani386DMS.gif102File:Ani386SMS.gif 00:20, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Flawless logic if ever I heard it. Missingno. Master 00:27, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

It's not a Pokémon. :/ It's a glitch. We removed it from the list on Normal... User:TinaTheKirlia/Sig 00:28, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

REALLY!! (sarcastic of course) In the article, it said that it is a Glitch Pokémon. OH OH WHAT NOW!?!File:Ani386NMS.gifPokeFile:Ani386AMS.gifmaniacFile:Ani386DMS.gif102File:Ani386SMS.gif 00:42, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I meant an actual Pokémon, like Bulbasaur. Actual, official, meant-to-be-programmed-in, ones that are listed in official guides. Yeah. >:C User:TinaTheKirlia/Sig 00:45, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

People, Missingno. is a Glitch, NOT a Pokémon! Therefore, it should not be included in the list. end of discussion. File:Ani234MS.gifMERRY File:Ani385MS.gif CHRISTMASFile:Ani225MS.gif 00:48, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I dont think that it is even a glitch. File:Ani491MS.gifKPFFile:Ani123MS.gif 00:48, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh so a Glitch Pokémon isn't an actual Pokémon? No one had EVER said that MissingNo. wasn't meant-to-be-programmed-in. And technically, official guides aren't actually official (unless they were written by the creators themselves).OH OH WHAT NOW!!?!!File:Ani386NMS.gifPokeFile:Ani386AMS.gifmaniacFile:Ani386DMS.gif102File:Ani386SMS.gif 00:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

The "glitch" moniker takes precedence over the "Pokémon" moniker. Besides, I don't go around saying "put Teru-sama in the list of items". It's a GLITCH before it is anything else, the "Pokémon" part merely indicates the type of glitch. User:TTEchidna/sig 00:52, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

How do you know that it isn't a pokémon? It has a weight. It has a Dexno. It has a type (two actually). It has a height. It has a catch rate. It is a species. It has stats. It can attack. It is obviously alive.File:Ani386NMS.gifPokeFile:Ani386AMS.gifmaniacFile:Ani386DMS.gif102File:Ani386SMS.gif 00:54, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Umm.. how the frick do you know it's an actual Pokémon? XDD; User:TinaTheKirlia/Sig 00:55, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Did I even mention that I know that it is an actual pokémon? I think not! WHAT NOW!?!File:Ani386NMS.gifPokeFile:Ani386AMS.gifmaniacFile:Ani386DMS.gif102File:Ani386SMS.gif 00:57, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

...the way you're throwing around this incredibly stupid arguement, it sounds like you do think Missinga$$ is a Pokémon, just not any reasons for it.

It's a glitch, it's a glitch Pokémon, whatever you call it, it's just not a Pokémon like say, our good buddy Bulbasaur is. Missingno's 'data' in the 'dex is nothing but garbage, or 'borrowed' from another Pookémon. User:TinaTheKirlia/Sig 01:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes but I still believe that all glitch pokémon are pokémon and glitch items are items. But of course it is only my opinion. One can't always trust a pokédexFile:Ani386NMS.gifPokeFile:Ani386AMS.gifmaniacFile:Ani386DMS.gif102File:Ani386SMS.gif 01:02, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

However.. that's only your mind.. User:TinaTheKirlia/Sig 01:06, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

OR!!!, of course, one could always just put MissingNo. in a trivia section of the articleFile:Ani386NMS.gifPokeFile:Ani386AMS.gifmaniacFile:Ani386DMS.gif102File:Ani386SMS.gif 01:06, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

No. User:TTEchidna/sig 01:07, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

...um. We.. don't need to mention every glitch in articles that tell about data that glitches happen to have.. >_>;;; User:TinaTheKirlia/Sig 01:08, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I of course knew you were going to say that(both TTE and Tina)File:Ani386NMS.gifPokeFile:Ani386AMS.gifmaniacFile:Ani386DMS.gif102File:Ani386SMS.gif 01:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Of course, majority rules. End of argument.File:Ani386NMS.gifPokeFile:Ani386AMS.gifmaniacFile:Ani386DMS.gif102File:Ani386SMS.gif 01:10, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Well. That was all unnecessary. User:TTEchidna/sig 01:15, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

My apologiesFile:Ani386NMS.gifPokeFile:Ani386AMS.gifmaniacFile:Ani386DMS.gif102File:Ani386SMS.gif 01:15, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

If I could just input my opinion here...

First off, I wholeheartedly agree with Pokemaniac, for saying that all Glitch Pokémon are Pokémon. I've taken that stand myself for as long as I can remember. I mean, it makes sense. Missingno. has a catch rate, a dex entry, a sprite, attacks, types, a cry, and base stats. Far as I'm concerned, that's what constitutes a Pokémon.

Secondly, I think glitch Pokémon should be included in these sorts of articles, but under a special category. Say, for instance, the page Normal (type). We have categories for pure normals, normals with a secondary type, and other types with normal as a secondary type. I'm thinking a fourth category: Glitch Pokémon with a Normal type. This would include any and all glitch Pokémon with Normal as their only, first, second, or both types (And yes, there is a glitch Pokémon that's Normal/Normal). Just my idea. Feel free to shoot it down at your leisure. Missingno. Master 01:21, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

...

We don't need to include glitches on every single page that's made up of the 'regular' Pokémon, like the Normal (type) page. Look through the history - I think at one point Missingno was on there, but got taken off. See? :p User:TinaTheKirlia/Sig 01:36, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

'regular' ? Such Segregation (said in an overly dramatic way)File:Ani386NMS.gifPokeFile:Ani386AMS.gifmaniacFile:Ani386DMS.gif102File:Ani386SMS.gif 03:02, 20 December 2007 (UTC)