Talk:Status condition

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


"Check damage values 4 poison and burn, I think toxic keeps doubling and poison (and/or burn) does 1/16." No, except for poison's 1/16 in RBY. --Jshadias 04:48, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Non-volatile battle status

Status ailment#Non-volatile battle status makes no sense. --Raijinili 07:26, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


What's the damage for confused hits? --Raijinili 23:09, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

There's nothing specific, to my knowledge. It depends on the attack and defense of the confused Pokémon, and it seems that's it. --Juunannio 4:46, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Which is why Swagger can make things get ugly pretty quick. TTEchidna 22:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
I meant the base power. --Raijinili 19:38, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
He just said there was nothing specific about the base power. --Phred 05:31, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Having a fixed base power can still let the damage depend on attack and defense. --Raijinili 06:21, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
According to Smogon, confusion causes a 40 power typeless physical hit. --Laoris 05:53, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Miracle Eye and Mist.

First off, if Foresight and Odor Sleuth are listed, why isn't Miracle Eye? (Miracle Eye is an attack which is similar to Foresight/Odor Sleuth, but instead of allowing Normal/Fighting moves to hit Ghost-types, it allows Psychic attacks to hit Dark-types).

Also, Mist can be erased by Defog which I have added. - unsigned comment from Nebula (talkcontribs)


Can steel types become poisoned when eg. a steelix uses toxic on alakazam with synchronize?????--Wowy 06:05, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Steel-types can be poisoned, for certain. I once had a Pineco that was poisoned, then evolved. I'd try to test that myself, but I half wonder if Synchronize works with a partner's attack, too. TTEchidna 04:27, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Synchronize is programmed not to poison a Steel-type. Given that ability is programmed not to reflect all status conditions, however, it might just be the ability's effect.
However, it is still possible to poison a Steel-type directly; the added effects of the moves Twineedle or, if used in standard grass in Generation III, Secret Power can indeed poison a Steel-type. Psycho Shift should also be able to do the job. --Shiningpikablu252 20:32, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Ice Ball

Does Ice Ball get doubled by Defense Curl? --Raijinili 08:47, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, my testing suggests that it does. I used a level 100 Spheal against a level 100 Nidoking. Using Ice Ball on Nidoking in the first round, it did 42 damage. When I used Defense Curl first, it did 90 damage. One time, it crit the first round and did 98 damage. It appears that Defense Curl does double Ice Ball's initial damage. — Laoris (Blah) 19:20, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
How do you know the damage? ht14 20:03, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
I used two DSes. — Laoris (Blah) 20:16, 11 November 2008 (UTC)


why are status ailments such as sleep and paralyzation called non-volatile? they seem pretty volatile to me Happizelpom 01:59, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Because they don't damage the affected Pokemon, unlike Poisoning and Burn Gastlys mama 18:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I think it's because they don't go away automatically after battle. See the fifth dictionary entry. We're using the word volatile to describe status ailments that are inherently temporary. There are better words, in my opinion. — Laoris (Blah) 18:25, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
But sleep doesn't go away automatically after battle (though it does go away during battle) and paralysis doesn't go away automatically, after or during battle. Gastlys mama 19:00, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I know. I'm saying that sleep and paralyzation don't go away automatically after battle, which is why they are described as non-volatile. — Laoris (Blah) 19:48, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Oh, I see, I thought it meant volatile as in potentially dangerous or harmful, but it rather means the other (surely less used) meaning of likely to change. Faaaaaaaaair enough. PokéPokéPokéPokéPokéGastlys mama 20:38, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I've never heard "volatile" used as "harmful". "Explosive", yes. --Raijinili 11:17, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Personally, I prefer the terms persistent and nonpersistent. I just think it's a more clear and accurate desriptor for that. But either way works. Whatever the consensus is works just fine. --Abra 04:37, 25 April 2009 (UTC)


Would it be worthwhile noting that your last Pokemon dying of poison is the only way to black out outside of battle? Also, it could be added that the reason a poisoned Pokemon with one HP loses this status in Gen IV is probably to prevent that from happening.Gastlys mama 18:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Acutally, there was a glitch with the Pomeg Berry about that, that's the reason, more than the black out, because you'll still easily faint against a wild Pokémon. Aura-Knight 23:12, 5 February 2009 (UTC)


I know it has its own article, but it can technically be considered a status ailment. If a Pokémon has it and no other status ailment it will display PKRS on the status bar in the summary...My point is, should we add a small section to this article and have it link to the Pokérus article? βetA ZerØ 02:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Pokerus is not a status ailment that causes a problem in battle. -Sketch 02:52, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Ailment is a negative word, therefore the Pokerus virus would not be counted as an ailment, although since every is willing to kill to get it, it might be an IRL ailment? Haha! --Lustre 07:34, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


In the freeze section it mentions that sunny weather can reduce the chance of freezing, but no mention is made of the difference on the weather effects page. Does sunny weather actually reduce the chance of freezing, or should it be removed from this page? Werdnae 05:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I seem to remember, on Pokémon Stadium 2's Pokémon Academy, it mentions that sunny weather reduces freezing chance - so this was true at least in Generation II. I would assume that they haven't removed or changed this feature... though why this isn't included in the weather page I don't know - I'm not sure whether to add it or not, since I don't know how much the percentage actually changes (halves, reduces to 2%, etc). It's certainly worth mentioning on the weather effects page, I'll do that now. NLawson 13:29, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Also in the freeze section, it is noted that no move has higher than 10% chance of freezing the enemy. On the List of moves that freeze, however, secret power (in snow) is said to have a 30% chance of freezing. Which is correct? NLawson 01:01, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Why are "battle statuses" listed as non-volatile?

Why are "battle statuses" listed as non-volatile? I'm pretty sure they go away after battle or I'd be using them more often ;)--MoonKing 02:20, 27 May 2009 (UTC)


I believe I have conclusive testing that Ground-types cannot be paralyzed. I recently played multiple matches in Platinum's Battle Arcade in which the roulette landed on paralysis for my Pokémon. In all of these matches, my Porygon-Z was paralyzed, but my Garchomp and Torterra were not. This, combined with other articles off Bulbapedia that have listed this, leads me to find my evidence conclusive. If I am wrong, please correct me. Ninjask 26 May 02:30:12 UTC

Then odds are it's a glitch. Moves like Body Slam are supposed to be able to paralyze Ground-types. --Shiningpikablu252 03:13, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Ground types can be paralyzed. The Battle Arcade paralyzes via electricity, noted by the lightning bolt, which Ground types aren't effected by. -Sketch 03:15, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
OK, so perhaps I didn't quite know that exact tidbit. But trust me, if they did paralysis by Stun Spore instead of electricity, then odds are it would affect the Ground-types. Honestly, why would someone believe Ground-types can't be affected by paralysis as a whole based on that one Battle Arcade effect? That would be like saying that Steel-types can't be poisoned simply because the vast majority of poisoning moves are Poison-type; do keep in mind that Twineedle and, in certain areas in Generation III, Secret Power, are non-Poison-type moves capable of poisoning and thus capable of poisoning Steel-types. --Shiningpikablu252 03:23, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Badly Poisoned

Can Poison-Types be Badly Poisoned? It says they can't be normally poisoned, but I want to check. - unsigned comment from SilverMetelthatisGold (talkcontribs)

They can't be poisoned. Period. R.A. Hunter Blade 02:44, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Paralysis bug

In Gen 3, I'm pretty certain that the speed-reducing effect of paralysis does not come into effect until the turn after the target is paralysed. This is most commonly seen in Double Battles (at first I believed it was an XD bug until I recently noticed it in Emerald). That is, if a faster Pokémon paralyses a target who isn't the slowest on the field, they'll still attack second or third, even though their reduced speed from paralysis should make them the slowest on the field. In subsequent turns, the paralysed 'mon will be the last to attack as it should do. I should point out that it only seems to be the speed cut that doesn't apply to the infliction turn - move fail due to paralysis does sometimes kick in on this turn as per usual. In Gen 4, this 'bug' does not seem to occur. Is this something worth listing on the page? Is there a known explanation for this? My personal theory is that the move order of the Pokémon on the field is calculated before the attacks are performed, but I'm just guessing. Raylax 00:53, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

As far as I know (and this is partly what I've read and partly a guess - I could well be wrong) your personal theory is correct: move order is determined at the start of the round (before any attacks) and the "roll" (for lack of a better term) to see if a move fails due to paralysis is performed immediately before the move is launched. I would assume that rolls for defrosting, failure due to attraction and confusion, and waking up are all checked directly before the suffering Pokémon acts as well. NLawson 01:10, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
So, this would probably mean that if the speed is lowered with a move rather than Paralysis, like String Shot, then the same thing would happen. So it is probably not a bug, but the way it's meant to happen. --SnorlaxMonster 02:36, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Damage of Burn and Poison Rounded?

The stated damage for these two is 1/8 of the Pokémon's max HP. When that damage is calculated, it would have to be a whole number. So is it rounded up or down? - unsigned comment from Cheshy458 (talkcontribs)

Like all calculations in Pokémon, it's rounded down. Starscream 13:03, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Hang on...

We've established that confusion self-damage is a 40-base power physical typeless move. But, is it typeless, or is it ???-type? And if so, if a Pokemon becomes the ???-type, and hurts itself in its confusion, does it gain STAB on the confusion damage? Because if it does, that might be something to note in the article! Missingno. Master wants YOU! Join the Order of the Glitch! (my talk page) 18:50, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

There is no type. It's just like recoil damage, except it's not based on how much damage you do to the opponent. R.A. Hunter Blade 21:36, 24 November 2009 (UTC)


Instead, shouldn't we be calling it infatuation like the games do? I would change it, but I know how many links that would break.--SnorlaxMonster 11:53, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Done anyway. If links break, we can fix them. —darklordtrom 12:04, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
I tried {{anchor}}ing it. I hope that stops those links from breaking. --SnorlaxMonster 12:08, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
You, sir, get six points and a fancy hat. (That is, of course, assuming the links lead to your anchor...) ;) —darklordtrom 08:12, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
From what I'd seen, most linked to Attraction (which if spotted, should be changed). I'm surprised it took so long before someone noticed that it was infatuation. --SnorlaxMonster 09:43, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Infatuation in Double Battles

If a Pokémon becomes infatuated in a double battle, is it only affected by infatuation if it tries to attack the Pokémon that used Attract on it/affected it with Cute Charm, or could it be immobilized attacking either foe? - unsigned comment from HerbieHero (talkcontribs)

Pretty sure it's immobilized entirely, ie attacking either foe. Smythe 12:02, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Are you sure ice types can be frozen in gen I games?

It says on here that ice types can be frozen only in gen I. Most people are saying that's not true and I tested it on the yellow version and couldn't do it. Are you guys sure? Subsmoke 17:30, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

For the record: after further evidence in this thread, the except for Generation I has been removed from the page. Werdnae (talk) 08:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC)


The picture next to "Poison" is of Gliscor being affected by poison, but the caption underneath it says that Staraptor is being affected by poison instead. I'd fix it but I don't know how to edit picture captions. Could someone tell me how or fix it for me?--Celebi96 11:28, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

The file was updated without being checked. Here's how I fixed it. File embedding is quite straightforward on a wiki: simply type something like [[File:Imagename.ext|displaytype|size|alignment|Caption]]. Easy when you get the hang of it. —darklordtrom 11:34, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Status problems in Rumble

Someone mentioned that Poison-types cannot be poisoned, but in Pokémon Rumble they can. Also in Rumble, status problems are removed when moving to the next floor in an area (I believe this is also true in Mystery Dungeon, but I'm not 100% sure). Additionally, moves that restore health in Rumble do so over time, an effect which is removed by going to the next floor as well. I don't know if any of this is worth mentioning here, but I figured I would bring it up. Pokémaniac 21:52, 21 August 2010 (UTC)


Under infatuation can someone remove that Mew can infatuate other genderless pokemon, I tested it and it doesn't work. And I can't remove it because it won't let me edit the page. Pikiwyn 19:41, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Removed. Werdnae (talk) 20:32, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Pikiwyn 23:57, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Badly Poisoned Counter + Baton Pass

If a Pokémon is badly poisoned and it is Baton Passed to another Pokémon that is badly poisoned, does the badly poison counter reset, or is it kept from the Baton Passer? e.g. A Pokémon is badly poisoned for three turns and then uses Baton Pass to a Pokémon that is also badly poisoned. Does the new Pokémon lose a quarter of its health (1/16, 1/8, 3rd turn = 1/4) or does it start over and only lose 1/16th? —Naokohiro 21:45, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

The counter gets reset, I tested it. Pikiwyn 16:34, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
I thought a badly poisoned Pokémon that rejoins a battle after being switched out would have its counter reset anyway? That means bad poison isn't Baton Passable and the counter is reset simply because the counter gets reset when the Pokémon is switched out, right? But then, what if a badly poisoned Pokémon Baton Passes to a Pokémon that is afflicted with regular poisoning? Does that Pokémon then become badly poisoned as well or is the "bad" transferred to the new one, leaving the Baton Passer who was badly poisoned with just regular poisoning if it reenters the battle? I♥Togetic (talk) 07:28, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Each major status ailment in its own article?

As it stands now, all status ailments, including the five major ones, share this article. I think there is much more that can be said about each of the major ones (plus the most common minor ones like flinch and confuse), enough so that they would merit their own article. This includes detailed effect descriptions, a list of moves (which already exist, they would just be integrated into the article), and related abilities and items (such as Flame Body or Flame Orb for burn).

I've made an example page for a stand-alone Burn article, made from the info in this article, the list of moves that burn, the status effect resource over at The Cave of Dragonflies, and common knowledge; it was pretty simple to create. (If this ever comes to the mainspace, the List of moves that burn article would then redirect to the moves section in the new page). So, do you agree that the most important status ailments deserve their own articles? Memo326 04:25, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

I would say that burn, freeze, paralysis, poison, sleep, confusion, flinch and possibly infatuation deserve their own pages. --SnorlaxMonster 07:37, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
I like your Burn page. If we can enough information about each status that SnorlaxMonster listed, then I'm fine with separate pages for each status condition. I.e. enough info so that none of them are stubs. —darklordtrom 08:21, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
I like your article, my only comment would be to recommend removing the "Advantages" section. Bulbapedia is not here to provide strategy (beyond the empirical details of a given move) and this would be very subjective.--Beligaronia (talk) 08:28, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Would we have to locate them all at NAME (status ailment) due to poison? Also, if these pages were to be created, a lot of switch statements would need to be made in {{Status}}. --SnorlaxMonster 09:02, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
I think it would just take one. [[{{#switch: {{{1|poison}}}|poison|burn|sleep|etc.={{{1}}} (status ailment)|Status ailment#{{{1}}}}}]] should do it. Since consistency is good, they would need to be at Name (status ailment) or Name (status) Werdnae (talk) 09:44, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
I was expecting we would have to compensate for all those different ways of saying it, like burn, burnt, burned, burning. I was expecting more of this:

[[{{#switch: {{{1|}}} |poisoning|poisoned|poison=Poison (status ailment)|badly poisoned|badly poison|bad poison=Poison (status ailment)#Bad Poison|burning|burned|burnt|burn=Burn (status ailment)|asleep|sleeping|sleep=Sleep (status ailment)|freezing|frozen|freeze=Freeze (status ailment)|Paralyze|Paralyzed|Paralysis=Paralysis (status ailment)|confuse|confused|confusion=Confusion (status ailment)|cringe|cringed|cringing|flinched|flinching|flinch=Flinch (status ailment)|attraction|attracted|attracting|attract|infatuated|infatuate|infatuation=Infatuation (status ailment)|Status ailment#{{ucfirst:{{{1}}}}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]]

However, it shouldn't matter too much --SnorlaxMonster 12:52, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
To Beligaronia, I made the Advantages section so that I could logically include abilities or moves from which a Pokémon would benefit with a status ailment, such as Guts or Facade from burn, paralysis and poison, Steadfast from flinch and Tangled Feet from confuse, which don't fit under "causes" or "prevention and cure". I didn't want to separate by moves/abilities/items since in the same way that a move that may paralyze should be distinct from SmellingSalt (which would fit under "prevention and curing"), an ability which makes a Pokémon immune to paralysis (Limber) should be separated from an ability that causes it on contact (Static). Perhaps there is a better name/better way to organize it to remove the subjectiveness, but moves/abilities like Guts, Facade, Steadfast need to stay as they're related to the status ailment. Memo326 20:56, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
@SnorlaxMonster: We could also have a second parameter for display text.
@Memo: I see where you're going but your advantages section would need to be rewritten because it makes hints and suggestions (being poisoned works more effectively). Would "benefits" be a better retitle or is that going in circles? —darklordtrom 21:51, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
Actually, in what I suggested, there is a second "display" parameter. As for "benefits", that still sounds a bit subjective. After "causes" and "prevention and cure" we should have "other effects" or "dependencies". --SnorlaxMonster 12:10, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
I like the idea of major status ailments having their own articles. This page is too cluttered, and doesn't even have all the information one might be looking for when they want to find out about a specific status ailment. I might also suggest that these pages have "In the anime" sections where they can detail occurrences from the show, such as when Ash's Charizard was frozen solid in the Orange Islands. --AndyPKMN 12:17, 31 August 2010 (UTC)


Should we include this. Examples: whirlpool, wrap, and bind - unsigned comment from Sudowooper (talkcontribs)

Added. --SnorlaxMonster 08:20, 1 November 2010 (UTC)


I believe the image of Turtwig being harmed by Leech Seed should be removed from this page and instead put in a trivia section of the Leech Seed page. It is an inaccurate depiction of Leech Seed... its a grass-type... if I'm unmistaken... Feng277394 07:40, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Leech Seed doesn't affect Grass-types... but until we have a better image, we'll keep using this one. —darklordtrom 11:20, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
There are many better examples of leech seed that are already located on the Leech Seed page. Although no changes may be made to this page yet. We could atleast add this image to the errors/trivia section of the Leech Seed page or of the episode this originated from.Feng277394 23:44, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Why the heck is this page populated by screens from the anime anyway? Even aside from this hysterical display of the show's blatant disregard for how the games work, they don't do an especially great job of showing what the status problems really do. Beyond aesthetics, at least. BP 04:10, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
If you have an issue with it, the page isn't protected. Rather than just complaining about it, why don't you try and get some good images from other media and add them? Werdnae (talk) 07:47, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
I could. I may. Who knows. BP 07:40, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Well, we could use a:File:Bulbasaur Leech Seed 4.png; however, a recent image is preferred to an older one. --SnorlaxMonster 13:56, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Confusing Ducks?

This is something that's been bugging me for a long time. I realize it's not too relevant to this article itself, but I don't know where else to ask.

Does anyone here know why confusion makes ducks spin around the Pokemon's head, from Gen III onward? (Maybe II if I recall wrong) --Aescula 05:58, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Typing cartoon thing. --SnorlaxMonster 07:11, 28 April 2011 (UTC)


Does animation starts in Generation II or III (not in I. In I, it just shakes and there is text)? I can provide screenshots for both (as they are not present in articles) Marked +-+-+ 14:39, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Confusion turns

I have a question about

  • the turns of being confused, says that 'Confusion wears off after 1-4 attacking turns', does it means when the random confused turn is 4, so that in fourth turn, the pokemon will out of confusion? Same question to the other status like sleep / taunt / disabled etc..
  • when does the confusion turn counter decreases? also the other turn counters? Kolu (talk) 13:05, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

King's Rock with multiple hits in one move.

Does the chance for Flinch apply once per move or once per hit? PLA (talk) 10:38, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes Kolu (talk) 00:08, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
That wasn't a yes or no question. Did you mean "yes, it applies once per move," or "yes, it applies once per hit"? --AndyPKMN (talk) 17:13, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


Does Charge's Electric-type attack boosting effect count as a volatile battle status? Defense Curl boosting the power of Rollout and Ice Ball applies, so I would assume Charge counts as well. Hyper Turtwig (talk) 20:25, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Specify major status ailments

Nowhere on this page does it explain which status ailments are considered "major." Since there are several articles that refer to "major status ailments," and since that descriptor has no page of its own, I feel it would make sense to mention here which ones those are. Krychek (talk) 14:49, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

"Major" should refer to "non-volatile". That's probably something that should be changed on other pages, not on this one. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 16:44, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Confusion Statistics Inquiry

It says "Confusion wears off after 1-4 attacking turns." However, this gives no information about the chances of it occurring. There are 3 things that can happen when confused:

1. Pokemon comes out of confusion. 2. Pokemon hurts itself. 3. Pokemon stays confused, but still delivers its move.

Does anyone have the information about the chances of each of these occurring? - unsigned comment from Hank (talkcontribs)

Heal Block

In a part of the description of this status condition is written "The moves Absorb, Mega Drain, Giga Drain, Leech Life, Dream Eater, Drain Punch, Horn Leech, Parabolic Charge, Draining Kiss, Oblivion Wing and Leech Seed will still inflict damage, but will not restore HP when the user is affected by Heal Block. This is not true as of Generation VI, however.", but by reading this we can see two different meanings: the mentioned moves don't hit in Gen. VI, or they hit and restore HP in this Generation. Can anyone that knows which is the right explain in the article? Suic12- (talk) 22:39, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

I have clarified this in this article and the Heal Block article. HP-draining moves cannot be used under Heal Block in Generation VI. --SnorlaxMonster 11:15, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Confusion crit

Can the 40-power typeless attack that confusion causes have a critical hit? I'm pretty sure it can't, but I don't want to add that information to the page without confirmation. --Xolroc (talk) 14:41, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Self-inflicted attacks from confusion are never critical hits. --Froggy25 (talk) 23:14, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Partial trapping moves do not stack


  • pokemon-online dot eu /threads/multi-turn-attacks-partially-trapping-moves-do-not-stack.29795/
  • I asked Smogon Research and they said they don't stack
  • gamefaqs dot com /boards/696959-pokemon-x/69396350

--Zarel (talkc) 01:27, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Volatile status condition vs. volatile battle status

What is the difference between the two? The article does not specify this properly, and as far as I can think, I never differentiated when playing. On a related note, where would Yawn's drowsiness and Uproar's uproar fit? Nescientist (talk) 10:26, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

It might be intended to be effects on yourself vs effects from other Pokemon.
That said, either it's terribly named or a terrible division. (I dunno, maybe there should just be subdivisions of "volatile status": external vs self-inflicted.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 10:44, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
If this division is not justified in-game (or by any other media), I think it should not be made here. The suggestion would also have difficulties placing Confusion, Perish Song, Infatuation and Taking in sunlight. Nescientist (talk) 11:11, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
This page could use a good deal of improvement IMO. If it were simple I'd have done it already. I haven't managed to devote my energy to an alternative, though. Tiddlywinks (talk) 11:29, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
Our German and French partner wikis seem not to differentiate either. Both have two distinct groups of status, the Germans calling them "primary" and "secondary", the French "main" and "other". Their first groups contain our non-volatile status conditions, their second both our volatile status condition and volatile battle status (although their lists are not as exhaustive there).
I would kinda like to get rid of so much detailed info on this page (in the same section), but lacking an argument that justifies a cut, I'd suggest to merge our current section "volatile battle status" into "volatile status condition" (keeping that name), and to improve the article overall. Do you agree? Is there any other opinion/suggestion? Nescientist (talk) 12:04, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
You are entirely free to do something with a user page if you like. But I think we already have too many "statuses", and putting almost all of them in one giant section is not my idea of smart. Tiddlywinks (talk) 12:38, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
As I said, it's not ideal, and I do not particularly like it either. However, I still believe it is better than the current split, which appears to be arbitrary really.
Even if I could make a user page (which I guess I cannot just yet), it wouldn't be any better than, well, putting almost all statuses in one giant section. That's why I'm still hoping for other, better suggestions. Nescientist (talk) 13:26, 26 June 2016 (UTC)