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


From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search


Since all the other commanders of team galactic have their hair based on a Pokémon in their party what Pokémon is Plutos hair based off? From:User:Ultamatecharizard

Only one member is truly based on a Pokémon. The others are just speculation. --ケンジガール 22:13, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
thats not true nearly all other members of team galactics hair resembles a Pokémon
Ultamatecharizard 23:08, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
No. It's not speculation. It's an opinion. -Sketchies 00:48, 7 October 2008 (UTC)


In the article, it says that "Pluto always wanted to hug his new friend, but he couldn't for obvious reasons." and "obvious reasons" has a link to Discharge. In my opinion, he couldn't hug Rotom because it was a Ghost. You can ride a Ponyta and not get burned, so why can't you hug a Rotom (if you could) and not get electrocuted? It also says "Pluto realized that Rotom had entered his toy. He could then finally hug his new friend.", if he couldn't hug Rotom because it's an Electric-Type, then he'd still be electrocuted. I think that they meant he could hug Rotom now that it had a physical form. Anybody else think so? Rpp 00:33, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. I'm removing the link to discharge. That was silly speculation anyways. We can do that for songs, but for a character? Still, I wonder what obvious reasons could mean. Ghost makes sense, but the fact that someone thought it was discharge means it isn't obvious. Silly logic. Satosuke 04:58, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
It's been changed back at some point.. I'll change it back AGAIN. :| Lucadan (Talk) 20:55, 28 August 2009 (UTC)


Thanks, Disney, for being such copyright freaks. TTEchidna 07:11, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Why Charon? Why didn't they just name him after another planet? Neptune maybe? --ケンジガール 09:48, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Let's not panic, guys. This is pre-release info, after alll. Personally, I'd prefer Mercury :D --Manga-in-a-bottle 09:50, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Charon/Pluto has the whole evil underworld connection, I guess. At least Charon sounds almost like a real person's name though (albeit some weird kind of Hollywood name, lol) — THE TROM — 09:52, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Or they could name him Your Anus Uranus to follow the line... Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, and Uranus. --ケンジガール 10:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Isn't Charon of of pluto's moons? or am I mistaken? --Force Fire talk 10:06, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Well according to my book, yes it is. But still, there was no good reason to change it. --ケンジガール 10:09, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
According to Wikipedia, Charon is one of Pluto's moons]. ~~Takoto - サソデイ 10:11, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Am I the only one who actually LIKES the name Charon? --Maxim 16:35, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, maybe the English Nintendo guys figured Pluto was too cool a name for an executive you don't even get to fight. Pluto really should be Akagi's title, in my opinion (if the planet names are actually codename titles, which makes more sense to me then calling someone Mars, Jupiter, or Saturn). I was quite disappointed when they gave away Pluto to another executive, because Pluto is the God of the Underworld. Charon works for Pluto, so that would make more sense. Of course, Japanese names overrule English names, so I have no idea what the English Nintendo guys are doing, especially since they kept the other Galaxy Executives names the same. Satosuke 16:00, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

@TTE: Well, if Disney weren't such copyright freaks, we wouldn't get as cool a name as Charon. =D Besides, it's not confirmed that that's the reason, that's entirely speculation on PB's part. Cipher (Talk) 16:06, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Technically speaking, Pluto's not actually a planet anyway. If what you guys were saying about the player never battling Charon is true, the fact that he's named after a moon in the English version and a dwarf planet (Wikipedia or Google it) kinda make sense. Anyway, since we use the English names on this Wiki when we know them, is anyone going to move this to Charon? -- Nebula 16:08, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Circuit City is not an official source. No move unless an official source reveals it. For all we know, he might end up as "Andromeda" in the final product...--Shiningpikablu252 16:18, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
As stated on the talk page for Ruined World, until a source more reliable than Circuit City confirms the name, the article's staying here. Cipher (Talk) 16:19, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Is GameStop a reliable source? I read the Platinum page there, and it used the name Charon.
Any signifigance that Circuit City has now removed the page? Also Charon is the primary moon of Pluto which is named after Charon, the ferryman to Greek Hell, pronouced with an sh as a planet but a k as the figure. Aura-Knight 23:40, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I love how everyone is freaking out over this. Do you guys even read the TTEchidna's post? COPYRIGHT. --HoennMaster 05:35, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Relevant to the article, people are just explaining to each other about the potential name Charon. Nobody's really freaking out. Aura-Knight 02:15, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
I honestly don't see how its a copyright issue. Pluto from Platnium is no where close to being the dog off of Disney. And how can Pluto the ex-planet co-exist with Pluto the dog if Copyright was an issue. Because I honestly doubt Pluto the dog existed before the name. It's not the same thing with Hamilton. Sure I'll buy they didn't want to risk being sued. But I doubt there would even be a problem. --Dman dustin 02:30, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Well duh. Disney liked the new planet when it was discovered and named a dog after it. And then he went all nuts about copyright and anytime anyone gets near his cash reserves, he bites. TTEchidna 01:13, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I think that since a lot of the Circuit City things turned out to be true, this might be, too. However, this is not enough for a move. Despite this, I find that this page requires a mention of the fact that he was referred to as Charon in the Circuit City leak. The same goes for Handsome, too. TorchicBlaziken (talkedits) 16:01, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

LOL Your Anus Atomix26 14:20, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok, people. Handsome has been moved to Looker, so shouldn't it now be moved to Charon?--Mew a.k.a. Prmatt11 at 01:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Unconfirmed.--☆Coolピカチュウ! 01:12, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Charon or Chiron? Which charon? THE WORLD NEEDS TO KNOW *which means me*.DCM((Mock MeEdits)) 02:52, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


Shouldn't we put Rotom on his page as a befriended Pokemon? 01:06, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that's a good point. Uh, it's protected though. — THE TROM — 06:56, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
And a further edit request to the admins is the addition of his Japanese name to the top of the article. For those non-Jap speakers it's on the bottom of this article. — THE TROM — 20:33, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

No Speaking Role?

Well, I've noticed, it says Pluto doesn't speak at the Valley Windworks. I'm pretty sure he does... there's parts where it says "プルート: -words, words, words-". Maybe it was meant that Pluto doesn't talk to the player? Because I'm not sure if he actually talked to me (I think he was speaking to Mars). PoisonRose 13:34, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

You're right. It's protected though.--☆Kevzo8 13:37, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Exactly how can you assume the tiny guy is Pluto? Juan Sanfiel - Blah, Blah, Blah 02:15, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
>_> It's really obvious if you play the game or the rom with an english patch.....--☆Coolピカチュウ! 02:21, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Also, プルート translates literally to Purūto, which is the closest (and official) way to get "Pluto" in Japanese. And yeah, his overworld sprite is seen several times with the same name everytime, as well as clearly looking like him. PoisonRose 02:35, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
He indeed spoke according to the screenshots of Ҝəυzø8 10:40, 18 February 2009 (UTC)


OMG. Now EVERYBODY knows that Pluto's name is Charon! Merrick just didn't list it because it was revealed before. If you could believed him on the Brains names, then you should move Pluto into Charon! And unprotect it! --Maxim 19:04, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Aw it has four days left and no one's getting Platinum before then. We can then add all we want to it. TTEchidna 20:44, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Disney

Copyrighting Greek gods' names since 1930! TTEchidna 20:51, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Well....the dog is a pretty big icon... --Theryguy512 20:55, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
This makes me so very, very sad. It's not like he looks anything like the dog. Or is Disney really that big of a copyright harpy that they'll freak out over the same name? --Darkeiya talk to me! 21:47, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Soon they'll probably have textbooks all over the world changing the name of the planet, too. --Theryguy512 22:16, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Disney is in fact that much of a copyright hound. Every time the first Disney animations, like Steamboat Willie, come anywhere near falling into the public domain, Disney WHINES TO CONGRESS to get the law changed. Copyright now lasts something like 100 years after its creator's death in the United States. Hell, some flippin' cult member supported the last Copyright Term Extension Act, likely for her cult so it can keep selling its Nazi shit to people and this dwarf midget can keep making money. TTEchidna 02:04, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Mow Rotom

Shouldnt Mow Rotom be on the Befriended list?

Spr 4p 479L.png

because it said in the Journal it said that Suddenly a Rotom jumped out of his lawnmower.

Possibly meaning that Rotom could also have Become Mow Rotom just like DP105. ☆AlienX2008☆

It's the same Rotom, just in different forms. — THE TROM — 08:15, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Exactly, But first he met Rotom in a Lawn mower not a Oven, Washing machine, Fridgirator or a Fan.

479.pngSpr 4p 479L.png


I think that he means that the Mow Rotom sprite should be placed since it's what he saw first, like in a Pokédex where it records the first form seen. Example: Unown and Deoxys. *tc26* 08:54, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
True. But seeing as it "came out" of the lawnmower, it seems to have stopped inhabiting it and spent all its time as a regular Rotom.... I don't know. I guess the arrow idea could be a good one. — THE TROM — 09:13, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Not Really, The Trom is Right. But I Was Thinking Something Like this: Mow Rotom → Rotom

or this:Rotom ↔ Mow Rotom ☆AlienX2008☆

OK, I've updated it. — THE TROM — 09:30, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


Should the trivia be deleted or be edited, because the name Charon is a moon of Pluto, and thus the name CHARON was from a MYTHOLOGY as well as the other commanders, so truly the trivia is wrong about it.. Plus you may research in WIKIPEDIA.ORG for it or SPACE.COM for more verification because, American editors will not named it if it was not in the line of the meaning in the true japanese version... SHUT!


In the science lab in the Galactic Veilstone Base, if you press A on Charon, Saturn refers to him as 'Gramps'. ZOMG!!!!!!!!!!!---- |\/| | Z Z | |\| G Y E Z 21:30, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Probably just a reference to his age, as he is considerably older than the other three commanders. Missingno. Master wants YOU! Join the Order of the Glitch! (my talk page) 22:17, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, it's actually a common word used to refer to a man who is way older then you. --HoennMaster 10:47, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Well, it kinda seems to me that Saturn is the only one that isn't SO FREAKIN' MEAN! If not...*MEGA EPIC UBER FACEPALM!*- unsigned comment from Missingyes (talkcontribs)

Pulseman Reference

So, nobody has guessed what his hair is based on. After looking at this: [[1]], I have come to the speculation that he's based on Doc Waruyama, the leader of the Galaxy Gang in Pulseman. His relation (as the former Dr Sakuei Yoshiyama) as creator of Pulseman, and his leadership of the Galaxy Gang seem like the qualities are reflected in a reference with Charon. Charon's hair is similar to Waruyama's, if you age him many years, his relationship with Rotom and his role as leader (albeit, for a short time) of Team Galactic seem like enough references to include this at least in the trivia of his page. Anyone agree or disagree with me? Satosuke 01:53, 3 May 2009 (UTC)


It appears before Galactic, Charon worked for Silph. At least we know now how Cyrus got the Master Ball. TTEchidna 21:15, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Theories in Trivia

I smell too many fan theories in the Trivia section based on a single implication that he had worked for Silph Co. Do we need them? --Maxim 14:55, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I sprayed some air freshener over there. Better? —darklordtrom 04:42, 5 February 2010 (UTC)


On the notebook and the journal- The notebook is, pretty obviously, Charon's. But what about the journal? It seems silly to assume that Charon had written it.

"It was by pure chance that I obtained information about the Pokémon Rotom."

This seems to be directly referencing the discovery of the journal.

"This Pokémon requires exhaustive observation and analysis. To ensure I get all the credit..."

Comparing this heartless viewpoint to the unshakable bond shown in the journal, I'd say that there is reasonable doubt that Charon penned the journal. Is there any evidence, along the lines of something in the Japanese version referencing "Pluto" within the journal, that I don't know about? If there isn't, maybe we should alter the page a little bit. Kryptnyt 12:08, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Why doesn't anyone ever respond to important discussions like these? I have to agree that the notebook doesn't really seem like something Charon would write, and we have no proof that he wrote it. It just seems to be the "information" that Charon received by pure chance.
This information should be removed. Pokemega32 09:14, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Alright. Since no one is responding, I'm going to change the article. Pokemega32 12:27, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
I love how you edit the page back, but don't bother posting anything on the talk page in response to me.
There is no evidence that Charon wrote the journal. This is a wiki where, despite knowing that Cheren is a normal type Gym Leader, that the Plain Badge is the first badge obtained in B2/W2 and that we can see the area where Cheren stands behind the badge case, we don't technically have proof that he gives you that badge, so we can't put that on the wiki.
So why are we making such a huge assumption about the author of the journal? Pokemega32 (talk) 18:29, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Charon is credited for discovering Rotom, and the journal goes through one person's experience studying Rotom, and eventually naming it. It's blatantly Charon.
I'm not really sure what you mean about Cheren. Cheren is shown giving you the Basic Badge (Plain Badge is Whitney) so it is his badge. What more do you want?
Please try to watch your temper. If no one responds, bump the message. Don't post rude comments on the talk page. That will just make people angry at you, which never solves anything, and certainly won't help your cause. Jo the Marten ಠ_ಠ 18:48, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Charon is not "credited for discovering Rotom". He has a notebook that says he obtained new information about Rotom. That doesn't even imply he was the first to discover Rotom. The other notebook has an account from someone who seems to have an entirely different personality than Charon. There is no conclusive evidence that Charon wrote it.
About Cheren, I was talking about how, despite having so much evidence that he gives out the Basic Badge, people kept reverting edits that added the information to the Gym Leader and Badge pages until recently.
As for being rude, I edited the page, and then someone reverted it back without even bothering to respond to my comment on the talk page. That was certainly rude of him. If there's an edit conflict, isn't it some sort of policy to actually discuss the conflict?
I'm pretty sure it's also policy not to post theories as fact on this wiki, and that is what this whole "Charon discovered and named Rotom" thing is: a theory. Pokemega32 (talk) 18:58, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

And again, no response. Look, I personally don't believe that Charon wrote the journal. But that doesn't matter. What does matter is that there is no conclusive evidence that he did. Thus, it should not be treated as fact. Pokemega32 (talk) 08:06, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Anyone going to respond? I feel this is an important topic. Pokemega32 (talk) 01:21, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

This is incredibly childish. Whether or not you believe Charon wrote the second notebook or not, there is no conclusive evidence saying he did, so it should not be stated as fact on this page. You tell me I'm not allowed to edit the page without discussing the issue first, yet you completely ignore my attempts to have a discussion.

Would someone please give some solid evidence that it was Charon who wrote that journal? Pokemega32 (talk) 21:33, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Just to give an answer, both reference Rotom's ability to enter a motor and Charon wanted to make sure he got the credit for discovering Rotom, so he kept it a secret, meaning only he would know about Rotom's ability. And both were also found in the Galactic Building, so it kind of makes it obvious that both the notebook and the journal were written by Charon, especially if the notebook end with "To ensure I get all the credit, my Rotom research must be kept secret. They will come to recognize me as the scientific genius Char...".--ForceFire 09:52, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
And again, no, that doesn't "make it obvious" that he wrote both. It's just as logical (and I believe more so) that that the information on Rotom Charon discovered by chance is the second notebook. Pokemega32 (talk) 10:19, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
I'll reiterate again, both the journal and the notebook mention Rotom's ability of which Charon only knows since he kept it a secret to get credit for discovering Rotom. --ForceFire 11:43, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Charon clearly did more research than the notebook states. He did research into putting Rotom in the Daycare and in the Union Room. He presumably learned that Rotom could possess motors from the notebook and then used that knowledge to test the rest of those possibilities. The total explanation of Rotom's possession is what he's keeping secret, not just the basic "Rotom can possess appliances" mentioned in the notebook. Pokemega32 (talk) 12:29, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Of which is about Rotom's ability (since it emerges when in Daycare or Union Rooms). It clearly is Rotom's ability he's keeping a secret.--ForceFire 12:38, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
I actually have to agree that it's not logical that Charon wrote the "old notebook"/journal. I don't know (or much care for the moment) if that means it just needs a disclaimer or if it should be moved elsewhere (the Galactic Building page?) or what, though.
1) While both notebooks are, strictly speaking, described as having indeterminate age, there's actually some pretty strong nuance. First and foremost, the first notebook is actually called a "mysterious" notebook, while the second is called an "old" notebook, implying that it's older than the first. Secondly, "Its age is impossible to tell" (for the first notebook) definitely leaves much more room for, so to speak, more "youth"—having no blatant indicators of "advanced" age—than "There's no telling how old it is" (for the second), which clearly implies being pretty darn old (but who knows how old) and probably worn. It certainly sounds like something Charon could have found, to me.
2) The "mysterious notebook" (Charon's) states "It was by pure chance that I obtained information about the Pokémon Rotom". At first blush, this can be read like someone told him about it by chance or he overheard something, and that's entirely reasonable. But A) if you read the second notebook, that doesn't hold up (that "old" notebook is clearly in Charon's possession, and it's not too likely he came upon it after hearing of Rotom), and B) there's just no way to square the assumption that Charon wrote the second notebook—which says "Our encounter was a sudden one. [... A] Pokémon startlingly emerged from the lawn mower's motor!"—with "It was by pure chance that I [Charon] obtained information about the Pokémon Rotom". If Charon wrote that old notebook, he did not "obtain" that information, no way, that's not at all how a reasonable person words that.
3) As has been said before, the tone of both is pretty starkly different. The first (Charon's) is written by someone interested only in fame. The second is written by someone who loves Rotom, their friend. Those are not likely to be the same person. And (I swear someone has somewhere) you can't say that Charon changed after writing the first notebook, because, again, there's just no way to square that with the second notebook (per "2" above).
ForceFire: It is certainly not "obvious" that both notebooks were written by Charon just because both are in the Galactic Building; the only conclusion that can reasonably/rightly be made from that minor evidence (alone) is that he possessed both. To summarize from above: if Charon wrote the "old notebook", he did not "obtain" info about Rotom as he wrote in the "mysterious notebook". It's entirely (and, I contest, more) logical that the "old notebook" is in the Galactic Building because he found and brought it there. Also, the fact that Charon wanted to keep Rotom a secret doesn't mean he must also be the person who wrote the "old notebook"; if that person never told about Rotom or its abilities, Charon can still receive all the credit, which he very plainly stated is the thing he's really interested in. Hell, if Charon's got the "old notebook" and if the person who wrote that is even still alive, then that person would (very likely) have no real "proof" that Charon didn't "discover" Rotom first. So Charon would be pretty safe either way. (I find it amusing that we've really credited Charon with Rotom's discovery anyway, as per his ambition. =P ) Tiddlywinks (talk) 13:59, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
1) I think the content also hints at its age, as the mysterious Journal implies years of research whilst the old notebook implies a childhood experience. I know one can write down their childhood experiences at any time, but that's just the vibe I get (i.e. Charon wrote the old notebook in his childhood or teenage-hood and the mysterious journal in his adulthood)
2) That's a good point, I guess you can't really "obtain" something if you already have it. Whilst we can speculate that he either found the old notebook or that the Rotom was willing to be researched on (thus obtaining more information on Rotom). The mysterious journal also implies that he has a Rotom (since he had to have found out about the Union Room and Daycare stuff in some way, yes the old notebook may have mention that but we're only judging on what we do know which is the old notebook only showing the page of the initial encounter and nothing else). And if we assume that there is only one Rotom in the games, then there's probably no way Charon could have just found that Rotom referenced in the old notebook without finding the source of said notebook (which I don't think is mentioned anywhere). He either had to have been extremely lucky or have been the one who wrote the old notebook.
3) Personality changes when you grow older. So it's possible Charon got greedy over time.
Whilst I know it's not super obvious, but it's the only link we have. I tend to not think about stuff like "he may have found it and brought" since there's not evidence that he did find it (other than maybe the "obtained" line in the mysterious journal), so I only base my thoughts on what we do know and what we can see. So in this case, Charon wrote the mysterious journal which is in the Rotom room that's in the Galactic building, it also has an old notebook and both the journal and notebook mention Rotom's ability and that Charon wanted to keep that a secret (as per the mysterious journal). I know it's assumptions as well, but it's all that we have.--ForceFire 05:35, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
You're making a very, very basic mistake at the end. "I know it's assumptions as well, but it's all that we have." "But it's all we have" is not the right conclusion. Not when "it" equates to "assumption". If you acknowledge there is only assumption, you should not consider it an acceptable claim to put in the mainspace as established, definite fact. I would hope, as a staff member, that I can expect you to uphold Bulbapedia's high standards and not (respectfully) become careless and try to hand wave it off.
I won't ask you to believe that Charon brought the "old notebook" from elsewhere. Indeed, there's simply no strong facts about Charon's relationship to that old notebook. That is what I would ask you to acknowledge; fully, and with no "but it's all we have" reservations. I'm sure you can think of a number of other situations where you wouldn't approve the tenuous assumptions of other editors just because "it's all we have".
When there is no way to rightly conclude one thing or another, the proper course of action is to point readers to the basic facts (e.g., "Charon also had a second notebook in his lab at the Team Galactic Eterna Building.") and let them draw their own conclusions. Tiddlywinks (talk) 06:29, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
I think a rewording of the whole paragraph would be a better alternative, not just a complete removal as there is still that ambiguity of whether old notebook is Charon's.
I use "it's all we have" to counter the speculation that he may have found it, of which we have no evidence of. I acknowledge that he may have found it, but again, it's not something that we can see from the games. We have to go off tangent and speculate further rather than speculating on what we have in front of us.
I know we don't want any sort of assumptions and speculation on the mainspace, which is why I think a reword is need, but I don't think it should just be removed completely.--ForceFire 07:15, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

HeartGold/SoulSilver Header

Is there a reason there's a section named "In Pokemon HeartGold and Pokemon SoulSilver" and a section named "In Pokemon HeartGold and SoulSilver," and the second is merely a repeat of the first? Dimenticare (talk) 00:24, 3 September 2012 (UTC)