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

User talk:Mikuri

From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search
Welcome to Bulbapedia, Mikuri!
Bulbapedia bulb.png

By creating your account you are now able to edit pages, join discussions, and expand the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia. Before you jump in, here are some ground rules:

  • Be nice to everyone. It's in the code of conduct.
  • Make good edits. Preview them before you save to make sure they're perfect the first time around.
  • Use wikicode and link templates when adding content to a page.
  • Use proper grammar and spelling, and read the manual of style.
  • You can't create a userpage until you've added to the encyclopedia. It's a privilege. See the userspace policy.
  • Use talk pages to resolve editing disputes. Don't "edit war," or constantly re-edit/undo the same thing on a page.
  • If you have a question about something, be proactive. Take a look at our FAQ. If you're still stuck, ask for help. The staff won't bite.
  • Sign all talk page posts with four tildes (~~~~). This will turn into your name and the time you wrote the comment.
  • For more handy links, see the welcome portal.
Thank you, and have a good time editing here!
  TyraniThrone 13:38, 6 August 2011 (UTC)  


Hello Mikuri, please check your e-mail* as soon as possible, awaiting for your reply. Thank you. ♫♪ エイディニズ ♪♫ 10:45, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Re: Preview Button

Warning acknowledged. Sorry. --FinnishPokéFan92 (talk) 15:02, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Revert some edits?

Igor The Mii deleted information from Tackle for some reason and attempted to add it back at the bottom of the page, which borked up the whole thing. Was wondering if you could revert his two edits, as I'm using a phone without any decent copy/paste function and no one else has seemed to notice it. Glik (talk) 22:43, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. Funktastic~! has reverted the edits. Mikuri 23:07, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

My account was deleted!!!

I made an account a few years ago. I admit that I've been a very infrequent poster, but when I tried to login this morning I was unable to! I tried to create an alternate account using the same email and was allowed to do so. If I was able to send you my email privately, would you be able to see what happened to my first account? Thank you very much. Gen7mon (talk) 13:52, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Gen7Mon, Mikuri is a junior admin and doesn't have access to the "check user" function to look for your email address. I can try and help you though if you email me (you can use "email this user" function from the lefthand side of my userpage). Is it that you don't know the username you picked or...? We actually can't delete accounts due to the mediawiki software so I'm sure it's in here somewhere haha. --ZestyCactus 16:23, 25 January 2014 (UTC)


How can I delete my account? - unsigned comment from Dukeoftrumpet (talkcontribs)

Unfortunately, we cannot actually delete accounts due to the limits of the Mediawiki software. The closest thing to having an account deleted, is simply not logging in anymore. --Pokemaster97 22:05, 29 January 2014 (UTC)


What would count as good trivia (especially for the anime episodes)? I've seen people on talk pages suggest some, and then others don't accept it. --リックEO (オープン for discussion) 21:40, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

I suggest you read this and this. I think it will help you. If you have any other questions, let me know. :) --Mikuri 02:34, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Becoming a contributor

Hi. I want to start writing plot summaries for episode pages without ones. I saw on the project page that there are alloted episodes to be completed each month, but I would much rather work down the category of episode articles with incomplete plot summaries and eliminate them at my leisure, as an afterwork hobbie without the pressure of a project and without commitments.

I'm more or less adept with the mechanics of a wiki editor and I used to be highly active in the Bleach Wiki where I was a member of the Policy and standards committee (a body of at most 10 rollback users working directly under the admins to determine the site's short and long term agendas). I'm especially proud of the work I did writing episode summaries for that Wiki, both in quantity and quality.

Anyway, I wanted to get a thumbs up from an official before I started and also ask if there is anything I should look out for while writing the summaries. Sincerely, WellyDawn (talk) 19:06, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Before I forget it, sorry for the late reply! Nice that you want to help with the episode pages. We highlight some episodes as a way to get attention to them, but you're free to choose the episodes you'll be writing summaries for. Select the one you want and happy editing. Just remember to follow the manual of style at all times. :) --Mikuri 03:40, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Will do. Thanks! WellyDawn (talk) 07:34, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Rayquaza artwork

Could you answer my question. Why has the ORAS artwork of Rayquaza not being used? Ellis99 (talk) 10:33, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

That's because the artwork from Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire was uploaded on the Archives as a new file, when it should have replaced the old one. I suggest you talk to a staff member over at the Archives, they will certainly explain this better than I can and make the correct changes. --Mikuri 14:54, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Okay. I'll talk to one of them. Ellis99 (talk) 10:45, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Artwork image section

Would it be okay to add in the artwork image under their own sections for anime counterpart characters without their own articles such as Cynthia and Alexa? PattyMan 01:57, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

No, artwork should be a section of its own. You can make something like this on Cynthia's page, creating an artwork section above the sprites section and adding her anime artwork there. --Mikuri 02:36, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Oh yeah, I forgot about the other non-anime art in the section. At least they don't have too many artwork images unlike Ash. Also, I would like to thank you for helping with some of the file name organization of the said images back on the Archives. PattyMan 02:52, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
I just added the artwork to their sections. Feel free to fix it if it wasn't exactly what you told me. PattyMan 03:26, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
About Ash's artwork section, I think it would be better if it had only one artwork per series, because as you said, Ash has a ton of images. Maybe a note at the top saying something like "For more artworks, please see Ash images on the Bulbagarden Archives." - unsigned comment from Mikuri (talkcontribs)
Which artwork image(s) of Ash should we keep on the page then if it's going to be one per series? You do have a good point though. PattyMan 04:11, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
OS, AG, DP, and BW. I think these images are good. One for the XY series isn't needed as it appears in the infobox. --Mikuri 04:29, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. PattyMan 04:51, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Ash's Pikachu

The last eight edits to the page have been the addition and removal of the same string of text - a mini edit war, if you will. May I recommend protecting the page as-is right now to FORCE discussion at the talk page? Aggron989 at least TRIED to start the discussion, but other editors seem more interested in not discussing and instead forcing their opinion. CycloneGU (talk) 19:19, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Just to clarify, protect it as it is without readding the string. Otherwise it looks like you are yourself forcing your opinion on the matter and not giving others a say. Protect as-is without the string and discuss. CycloneGU (talk) 19:22, 19 May 2015 (UTC) On second thought, four different people advocate that version, you included, so I reverted to your last revision for protection purposes. CycloneGU (talk) 19:30, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Junior Administrators can't protect pages, so neither me nor Mikuri can protect it. Only users of Administrator rank or higher can. --Abcboy (talk) 19:37, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Good point. It looks like Rahl has gone to the talk page, however, and I've been doing research that I intend to post, so it may not be needed anyway. CycloneGU (talk) 19:38, 19 May 2015 (UTC)


After reading several policy pages, I made this change to the Strong winds article, as this says "Bulbapedia...should contain the best possible level of literary style" and "if you notice...errors on a page other than the ones you have created, feel free to correct the problems, as Bulbapedia is an open project.", and the way it was written did not seem very grammatically correct as it was ("Strong winds, also known as a mysterious air current..., are a weather condition...").

I know that every wiki has its own different policies, but I understand that the usual trend on wikis is to include the title of an article in bold either directly at the beginning of an article or somewhere within the first sentence of an article, preferrably towards the beginning of the first sentence. I checked a few other Bulbapedia articles, and found some that do not have the bolded article title strictly at the very beginning of the article, and then checked the policy pages to make sure, at which point I read that this says "The full name of the subject of an article should appear within the first few words of the article itself.", so I thought my change was okay and didn't violate any policies.

However, the change was reverted, with "Articles should define the subject. 'X is ...'" given as the reason. I'm just confused, because from what I read, the change should be okay, and the beginning of the article is now grammatically incorrect again, but that's the only way I could think of to fix the grammar errors. If the change is indeed against policy, is there at least some happy medium that could be applied so that the grammar is correct?

Xérnéas (talk) 18:05, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

As Mikuri has yet to reply, I hope it's not minded that I answer as grammar is something that also concerns me.
The sentence you are disputing is "Strong winds, also known as a mysterious air current, are a weather condition introduced in Pokémon Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire." The term "Strong winds" is indeed plural. Therefore, "are" is a proper follow-up. If we were only talking about a mysterious air current, "is" would be proper; however, it's used to supplement the discussion of what strong winds are, and if that portion is removed from the sentence there is no grammar issue anyway. Since such sections between two commas do not change sentence grammar structure, there is nothing wrong with that passage. CycloneGU (talk) 20:23, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
I honestly mean no offense when I say this, and I don't want to sound rude, but I was already aware of everything you pointed out and had taken all of that into consideration when I made the assessment that the grammar in this sentence was incorrect. For some reason, the sentence just didn't sound right when I first read through it, and for me, there were two problems with it. The first problem stemmed from the fact that "strong winds", which is plural, is referred to as "a mysterious air current", which is singular; this is accurate, but did not sound grammatically correct, at least to me. The second problem had to do with the "strong winds" being defined as "a weather condition", which is also singular.
In my mind, it was akin to reading something like this: "Oceans, also known as a sea, are a large body of salt water found on the planet Earth.", where everything is obviously all over the place. I might reword such a sentence to say this: "Oceans, also known as seas, are large bodies of salt water found on the planet Earth.", this: "An ocean, also known as a sea, is a large body of salt water found on the planet Earth.", or even this: "Large bodies of salt water known as oceans or seas are found on the planet Earth." (which is closer to how I changed the sentence in question), but I definitely wouldn't leave it the way it was.
Maybe what's throwing me off is the fact that the term itself is "strong winds", but I feel like what it's referring to (and by extension what I feel like we're still actually talking about each time we use the term "strong winds") is a singular entity, i.e. the wind (as a collective mass of individual winds). Like if I wrote something like "Strong winds are collectively considered to be a weather condition.", that sounds more correct for some reason (not saying the sentence should be changed to resemble something like that, just trying to communicate what I'm seeing versus what everyone else might have been seeing).
Then I was trying to think about the names of establishments and things of that nature. Take for example the proper noun "EA Games". One could say something like "EA Games is one of the greatest video game developers in the world.", or, if one (for whatever reason) wanted to refer to "EA Games" as just "EA", they could say "EA games are some of the greatest video games in the world.". If I pretended for a minute that there was a guy named John Strong who opened a store called "Strong Winds" where customers could go to purchase packages with winds somehow contained inside them (I know, bear with me), one could talk about the store and say "Strong Winds is one of the best stores I've ever been to.", or one could abbreviate the name of the store as simply "Strong" and say "Strong winds are the best quality winds that can be bought in this area.". But I feel like I'm just babbling now and I'm not sure if I'm even making sense anymore. Maybe I'm just massively misinterpreting and overthinking this.
Xérnéas (talk) 00:28, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
As I was the one that reverted the changed, allow me to expand on my thoughts. The problem I had with your edit was just as I said: it the first sentence should define the subject of the article. To my knowledge, this is what most basic pages (i.e., not ones like List of modified moves) do. (If not, I think they should.) So when you made your edit, you made that sentence's main point some fairly trivial fact (that is, when it was introduced) instead of a definition of "strong winds"; and that's the only and whole reason I reverted it.
As far as the grammar you wanted to fix, if you want to try and do so without repeating the same mistake, you're more than welcome to. A simple "fix" would be changing "are" to "is"; because, for my money, the subject of that article is "a" weather condition, and certainly not a plurality or multitude of weather conditions. Of course, at the same time, the current wording is not really a problem IMO. I would liken it to maybe saying something like "Snowflakes are a type of precipitation." (as far as I'm concerned, at least, that's grammatically fine). Tiddlywinks (talk) 01:19, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Also, strong winds is a weather condition. I'm saying it just like that. If you question the grammar in that sentence, then you question what is currently in the article. If that sentence there is fine, the article is fine. CycloneGU (talk) 01:36, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
While it may sound weird, it is not grammatically incorrect to say strong winds is a weather condition, just like it isn't wrong to say Bad Dreams is an Ability and Precipice Blades is a move. Keep in mind we have to consider what the article is talking about, a weather condition, the name isn't as important. --Mikuri 15:52, 22 May 2015 (UTC)