Please remember to follow the manual of style and code of conduct at all times.
Check the Bulbagarden home page for up-to-date Pokémon news and discuss it on the forums or in the Bulbagarden Discord server.

Talk:Normal (type)

From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
Revision as of 08:13, 7 September 2010 by 444Zekrom (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigationJump to search

Glitch Pokémon?

Why is Missingno. included on this page? I thought only real Pokémon were included, like Pidgey, not Glitch or Fake Pokémon! Somebody explain to me why Missingo. should be kept on this page because I believe it should be removed. --Tesh 17:19, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Because Missingno. has a place in all our hearts and is our best glitchy friend. :) *cough* Well, it's one of the only (I believe?) glitch Pokémon to have a real type (Glitches like .4 have types like Pokémaniac and such) and after all, Missingno is just a very notable glitch. I say keep him. ;D TinaTheKirlia 17:22, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Lol. But seriously, it should be left on the Glitch page. Now that we have Missingno. on this page, we may aswell start new pages for other Glitch types for all of the other Glitch Pokémon, and that's just plain ridiculous. Tesh 17:27, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Bird. All I gotta say. Either way, no Missingno. should not appear here. TTEchidna 17:36, 19 September 2007 (UTC)


All glitch Pokémon deserve SOME publicity. I'm not saying all glitch types should have a type (they actually do have them too). I am just saying if they have a REAL type they should be listed on that type's page. --I need help Making My User Page 19:04, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

The Attack chart...

really needs to be completed. It's just wrong to have some attacks and not others, as well as inconveniant. We should put it up on other type pages, too.DittytheDitto 15:05, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Stats

According to the article, the Normal type is one of the best defensive types. I believe that. But if that is the case, why is the Defense and Special Defence stats so low? It is just 56 and 61 respectively. Can the stats be checked? FireHazard 09:58, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Probably because of baby Pokémon, useless idiots and the tons of pre-evolved Pokémon. Θρtιmαtum♏Talk|Links10:02 30 Aug 2008

Changer of type!

Should Arceus really be included in the list of pure Normal-type Pokémon? After all, its type changes depending on the plate it holds. FireHazard 10:00, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

It's main type is normal tc26 10:25, 30 August 2008 (UTC)


"Gimmick" Strategies

I get the rest of them, but why is Spinda included in that? I looked at its moveset and abilities, it cannot change it's type, and cannot learn any move in the game like smeargle can, there was nothing that I could see that made it have a super unusual strategy. It having many forms does not affect gameplay.

Edit request

Mamepato and Chiramii. CuboneKing 04:43, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Done. Werdnae (talk) 04:56, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Spelling

I've fixed this in the other articles about elemental types. Often, the name of a type and the word "type" are joined together by a hyphen. This is correct when they're acting as an adjective ("The Electric-type Pokémon are fast", "Electric-type moves may paralyze", "Electric-types are fast", "An Electric-type is fast").

However, this is not necessary when the words form a noun phrase ("The Electric type is useful"). Read the game's text; it's handled that way from the top of my head, at least in Generations III and IV.

Screenshot of a notable case in Generation III.

Examples of wrong use in this article:

  • "(...) Trainers that specialize in the Normal-type include Whitney (...)"
  • "(...) The Normal-type is considered to be one of the best types defensively, (...)"

Examples of good use in this article:

  • "(...) Although Normal-type attacks (...)"
  • "(...) and many Normal-type Pokémon have high stats defensively."

Informal but still acceptable:

  • "(...) There are also many Normal-types that rely on (...)"

Please fix this because people at forums are starting to copy this horrible habit from you fellow Bulbapedians ;) --Johans 23:45, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Done. I think I got them all, but if you see any more just point them out. Werdnae (talk) 00:06, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

A bit of trivia

Ugh, just check its grammar and validness, please... --ЫъГЬ 16:25, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

  • Not counting moves, which power varies, Normal type moves holds titles of both the most powerfull (Explosion) and the weakest one (Constrict). Notably, both introdused in Generation I.
Excluding moves of varying power, the most powerful and the most ineffective moves are both of the Normal-type. They are Explosion and Constrict, respectively(, and were both introduced in Generation I). I don't know if the bracketed part is absolutely essential, but I've worded it better. —darklordtrom 22:31, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Tabunne?

Look at the list, and you see Tabunne. It's just speculation! How can you put it there?

Has it been confirmed? Nope.

Has it appeared in a screenshot that is confirmed? Nope.

Anything other proof? Nope.

So it shouldn't be there.--444Zekrom 08:13, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/w/index.php?title=Talk:Normal_(type)&oldid=1178469"