The Pokémon: Symphonic Evolutions concert tour is coming to Philadelphia on September 19th. We have two sets of concert double-passes to give away to lucky Bulbanews readers!
Pokémon Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire are coming this November! Check BNN and Bulbanews for up-to-date Pokémon news and discuss it on the forums or in our IRC channel.

Talk:List of fully evolved Pokémon by base stats

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

Does nomebody know how to change the title, 'cause I gave it the wrong title? --Grrgrrgrr1000 18:41, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Next to the history tab at the top of the page click on move, that let's you change the title. Pikiwyn talk

Shouldn't we add Scyther in this list? I mean: it isn't fully evolved,but it has the same Base Stats total as Scizor. Reizo20 21:33, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

So let me get this straight. You're saying we should add a Pokémon which is not fully evolved to a list of fully evolved Pokémon? Werdnae (talk) 22:03, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

yes! xD but, actually, scizor isn't always a better choice between the two, so, if someone want to compare the stats of those with other pkmn, he'll be able to do so. (obviously we'll add in the bottom of the page "scyther isn't fully evolved, but was added because...) sorry for the horrible english, LOL Reizo20 17:02, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

name change

Could we change the name of the list to 'List of Pokémon which can't change their base stat total upon evolution by base stats' and add Scyther? Nickvang 16:54, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

By the way can somebody please count all those Pokémon and add the total? I can't find the number of fully evolved Pokémon anywhere and the internet. Nickvang 16:55, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Another reason why Scyther should be added is becaus it is the strongest Pokémon allowed in the little cup. This is because it doesn't change its base stat total upon evolution. Nickvang 17:02, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

2 questions

Any specific reason as to why are Mega Evolutions included? In the list of "Pokemon that are not part of an evolutionary line" Megas are excluded, so why not here? Another is that I'm not sure if it makes any sense to include Pokemon who do not evolve in list of fully evolved Pokemon, so if it were on me, I'd remove Megas and Pokemon with no evolutions (legendaries included)--Elveonora (talk) 11:54, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Megas are alternate forms instead of true evolutions, while stand alone Pokémon are technically fully evolved as in that they cannot evolve. Both pages make sense as they currently are.--Den Zen 12:06, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Okay, thanks. I didn't know Pokemon who do not evolve count as fully evolved ._. So now I get it that Megas are included for the same reasons forms are, I see.--Elveonora (talk) 14:45, 17 June 2014 (UTC)