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:SatoMew2

From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
(Redirected from User talk:Pokemon lover)
Jump to: navigation, search


Welcome to Bulbapedia, SatoMew2!

As a new user, you may wish to learn a few things that will be useful in your editing:

  • For a basic overview of wiki code, see this page.
  • The manual of style is very important. Make sure to read it. It outlines all official policies of Bulbapedia.
  • The word Pokémon is spelled with a capital P and an accented é. The P, of course, is accessed easily by holding Shift and pressing the P key, while the é can be accessed using Alt + 130 or Alt + 0233 on a Windows computer, and Option + e, then e again on a Mac. Otherwise, you can click it in the character palette below the editbox.
  • The word Poké Ball is spelled as two words. The "Poké" part is identical to the four beginning letters in "Pokémon"; "Ball" is spelled with a captial B (which is, again, accessed by holding Shift and pressing the B key). The spelling "Pokéball" arises frequently, but is incorrect.
  • The word "you" and all forms of it should not be used on encyclopedic pages unless it is a quote from Pokémon media. Bulbapedia is an encyclopedia, not a walkthrough.
  • On talk pages, please sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
  • The use of link templates is official policy. For an explanation on their use, see the page on shortlinks.
  • If you happen to spot a vandal in the recent changes that has not been dealt with, please see this page for how to deal with it.
  • A list of pages that are linked to, but have not been created, can be found at this page. A list of short articles that may require more information can be found here, while a list of articles that need improvement can be found here.
  • A list of the admins that you can contact in case of a problem, can be found here.

Thank you, and have a good time editing here! TESHIGIGAS 17:56, 5 February 2008 (UTC)


Next time, instead of doing 4 edits on one page, do just one edit. The preview button is there for a reason. Glinn Mgraw 10:28, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Four years later, and you're still not using it. This message was left here before I even became an administrator, so there's no reason you shouldn't have learned about the preview button since then. -- MAGNEDETH 21:47, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
I do use it. However, there are moments when I'm a little bit more "fastened up". You're right, though. I have to make sure I only save the changes upon previewing them and after I got everything I want to change. It's that sometimes I found things that wasn't aware of before later and then rush into editing the articles to add them there. SatoMew 21:51, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
You say that, but of your last 50 mainspace edits, you've only edited 21 articles. Maybe you should slow down. -- MAGNEDETH 21:54, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
I will try. Thanks for reminding me of it, though. When I go through the history, I see so many subsequent edits that I did and I think the exact same thing. SatoMew 21:56, 10 April 2012 (UTC)


Glinn Mgraw, I'm sorry for editing the post so many times; I promise I will try to be more cautious from now on. But talking about the post, if you watch with attention the introductory video of EP001 and the one from Pokémon Red (JP) and Green and compare it with the international versions of Pokémon Red and Blue, you'll see that the sounds heard when Nidorino and Gengar move are slightly different in the Japanese and international versions, meaning that the Japanese games' introductory video is the right correspondence to the one shown in EP001. Pokemon lover 19:21, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

In this case, it really does not matter, as the difference is minute. Glinn Mgraw 11:56, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


The user name Satoshi has already been taken. Furthermore it is not possible to rename accounts which have been migrated to the unified login system. - 振霖T 15:08, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, now it is, but the same applies to before: No taking another's name. Satoshi Ketchum should be fine though. TTEchidna 22:42, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, Satoshi Ketchum isn't actually a very original name, I agree, but the other solution would be using my real name, however, that isn't my idea at all. Yet it may be better to use mine, since it'll be an original name. Pokemon lover 14:32, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
SashaKPokéMaster, prehaps? Takes the French name of Ash, his last initial, and his goal. TTEchidna 23:32, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for being away for so long but since now I logged in into the Wiki, I'm going to ask you if you can change my username to André Torga. Pokemon lover 22:25, 27 January 2009 (UTC)


Please don't go inserting information about Pokébeach's demise if such an event is not confirmed. Yes, the site is giving me 403 Forbidden errors right now, but that doesn't mean the site's shut down permanently. Last I heard, these difficulties are due to a server move, not a site shutdown (which your edits were implying).

Trust me, I've been fooled by a similar incident sometime prior to the Majestic Dawn release. That incident crippled, but didn't kill, the site. If Pokébeach managed to survive after a much worse catastrophe, don't assume it's not going to survive something much more minor. --Shiningpikablu252 18:34, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, as far I understand, the website really shut down. But that's just what I interpret from this Forums' article. Pokemon lover 19:21, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Water Pokémon Master said that his site will be down for a couple days. MoldyOrange 18:55, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
That link led to a story about what people thought really was the site's demise back in April. We all know Pokébeach came back from that. Crippled, maybe, but not dead. If Pokébeach can survive the calamities that article describes, odds are it will survive these minor hiccups.
If that incident has taught me anything, it's never assume the site is dead unless the webmaster himself says so and it's for real. As far as I can tell, there's been no such event. Unless the webmaster comes out and says Pokébeach is dead for real (and not an April Fools' coverup), assume Pokébeach will be back. --Shiningpikablu252 18:56, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Talk Page Comments

Please don't erase talk page comments for no reason. Trust me, you do NOT want to end up like Big Johnno, who got into an edit war with a sysop over comments the former had erased and was trying to keep erased. That user ended up blocked and subsequently had every erased comment restored. --MoldyOrange 18:55, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm so sorry! I didn't know that. Pokemon lover 19:21, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

One last thing...

Please sign your comments. Just type ~~~~ after your post on a talk page to leave your signature and timestamp. Like this: Martonimos((Argh|Blargh)) 19:10, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

And two dashes before the four ~~~~--KukiTalk 19:14, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

You don't need the two dashes. I never put them on. MoldyOrange 19:16, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
They're optional, but they're nice, as they set your sig apart from the rest of your text. The second button from the right on the toolbar above the edit box will summon up th whole thing (--~~~~). --Martonimos((Argh|Blargh)) 19:17, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
I assume the colors and the fact that none of my signature is in line with what i said would be enough for people to realize that it actually is a signature. MoldyOrange 19:23, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

OK guys. Thanks for the information. I better read the first post of this talk page. Pokemon lover 19:21, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Heads up

Don't make edits just to add or remove spaces. - Kogoro | Talk to me - 18:58, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, it won't happen again. Pokemon lover 11:32, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

About G/S Jp back

Here is the image I found, it's from IGN so it's a good source.--Midnight Blue 23:37, 8 September 2009 (UTC) 446340_68460_back.jpg

Thanks. That clears up the doubts. But I'll talk with TTE first before adding it to the GS article, just in case there's something that needs to be in the trivia. ;-) Pokemon lover 12:34, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Umm Pokemon Lover I hate to burst your Bubble...


but... Gold and Silver we not the first games to have Version on the back of the box, Red and Green were. I just found this today. I know it is hard to see but it's there.--Midnight Blue 22:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Hold on here is a bigger one.--Midnight Blue 22:59, 10 September 2009 (UTC)


Sorry for the late reply.
Good find! I'll fix things. ;-) Pokemon lover 15:53, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

The backs

Go to google and type in "Pocket Mosnters Red or Silver". Only trust IGN or Gamespot.--Midnight Blue 21:02, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

You mispelled "Monsters" as "Mosnters". XD Thanks for the info, anyway. ;-) Pokemon lover 19:46, 25 September 2009 (UTC)


Hey, all of those Greens you changed to Blue are supposed to be Green. FR/LG are remakes of the original Red and Green from Japan. Porygon-Z 15:08, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I know that but they are remakes of Red and Blue, official-wise outside Japan. So shouldn't they be Blue? Pokemon lover 22:43, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
No, they're remakes of Red and Green everywhere. It's just common thought that they're remakes of Red and Blue outside of Japan because those are the games we got. I understand your point of view, but they're Red and Green. Porygon-Z 23:44, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
OK, thanks for the clarification. ;-) Pokemon lover 13:52, 21 December 2009 (UTC)


Hey, I found Crystal and such and took a screenshot of the "...". [1]. It's a little unclear, but the "..." it's at the bottom, it's in the center, so it's more like "- - -" not "...". - Takoto 19:24, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

That's what I thought. It's something Nintendo forgot to change in the translation because the ellipsis are aligned like that in the Japanese version. However, they fixed that for the versions of other languagues. Thanks once more for telling me that, it was just for the sake of confirming the trivia. ;-) Pokemon lover 19:29, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Ahh, right. No problem, there isn't much I can help with on the pedia now a days so it's nice to be able to help out with something x3 - Takoto 19:54, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

SIC e Panda Biggs ==

Olá! Podes ver o Pokémon ao Sábado e ao Domingo por volta das 7:20 da manhã (às vezes o horário muda um bocado, mas é só uma questão de no dia anterior ir a Em relação ao Panda Biggs, eles estão a tentar comprar os direitos, mas não à SIC, sim à Shogakukan. Caso o Panda Biggs consiga os direitos, a SIC não os perde, continuando a transmitir os episódios. É provável que a SIC passe os episódios recentes, enquanto o Panda Biggs passa séries antigas. Em relação ao tratamento da SIC ao Pokémon (que tem sido MUITO mau, diga-se de passagem), um raio de luz surgiu recentemente, que é o de agora o Pokémon na SIC ter um patrocinador! É verdade, a Giochi Preziosi está a patrocinar o Pokémon desde Sábado passado! Assim, havendo alguém a dar dinheiro para que passe Pokémon, é muito provável que a SIC comece a tratar melhor o Pokémon! E quando o Panda Biggs conseguir os direitos (espero que consiga!), vamos ter Pokémon dos dois lados, ou seja, só ficamos a ganhar :D Outra coisa, em relação ao Panda Biggs só dar na ZON, a verdade é que eles NÃO têm um contrato de exclusividade. A ZON apenas foi a única companhia que manifestou interesse no canal. Mas, ao que parece, também a Cabovisão já manifestou interesse no Canal! Em relação à Meo, há uns boatos que dizem que também já manifestaram interesse, mas não sei de nada ao certo. (vai a este blog que ficas a saber muitas coisas spobre isto tudo) Portuguese Old Man 20:12, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

About the evolutionary lines

From like two weeks ago but whatever.

Past an evolutionary branch, we don't need to indicate the branch anymore. A Gardevoir can never become a Gallade, but as a Ralts or a Kirlia it still can become one. A Wurmple can become either Silcoon or Cascoon, and further either Beautifly or Dustox, but once it evolves past the branch there's no going back, and thus no need to link to Pokémon that it can never become. If you've got a Slowpoke, you wanna know which moveset is better, Slowbro or Slowking... but if you have a Slowking already, why do you care about Slowbro's details? TTEchidna 22:42, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I got the point when my edits where reverted but thanks for explaining it further. ;-) ポケモンあいこうか 19:50, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi there

I saw what you did for the games and the different languages, with the box, I was wondering, are you considering about different Pokémon names and episode names?--Midnight Blue 01:13, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the late reply.
As for the template, yes I have thought expanding it to cover the names in more articles, but hadn't enough time yet to do so. ポケモンあいこうか 19:48, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Red & Blue

Kindly simply leave them in the order they are. Moving them simply for the sake of changing the order is too big a hassle... it will create a mess of double redirects and broken links, which I guarantee you will get tired of fixing or not know how to fix. It's no big deal to have the order wrong, please leave it be. Thanks. --P o L i 14:49, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

OK, I'll leave it as is, though I was aware that it required to update links and templates. ポケモンあいこうか 15:00, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Lavender Town

I have the OST on a CD, I have Japanese Red, North American Red (& France Red, but I didn't check that one) and I just don't hear a difference. :S --ZestyCactus 18:10, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps you have V1.1 of JP Red? ポケモンあいこうか 18:12, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Is there an easy way to tell V1.0 vs. 1.1? I thought there was only JA Red and Green, then JA-Blue, then international Red & Blue. Most of the differences I'm aware of seem to originate from JA-Blue. --ZestyCactus 18:17, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
As far as my knowledge goes, there isn't exactly one... =S ポケモンあいこうか 18:21, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Well, do you have Red (or Green) 1.0 then? Where did you find this information? --ZestyCactus 18:33, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
I have V1.0 you-know-what of both Red and Green. And if you look at Lavender's article, you'll see it is also mentioned there, with a link for a YT video of this specific theme included. ポケモンあいこうか 18:46, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Your game infobox

Thanks for the work you put into this, and for the million or so tests you put on the talk page. I have now updated most of the articles with your design. Great job. —darklordtrom 20:45, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Ty for your feedback, I appreciate it very much. And it's good to be useful. ^^ ポケモンあいこうか 21:44, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

PCC theme

Uh, that's indeed the same theme. Then I don't know what the other one is, however I'm certain that it's not a beta leftover or an unused thing. I don't know what triggers it but it surely requires using Mobile Adapter. It's impossible to check now (unless we ask some Japanese fan). Nonetheless, the hidden song in RSE is a direct remix of that Mobile-related theme. --Maxim 16:31, 16 March 2012 (UTC)


As per the signature policy, you signature must resemble your username. Please change your signature to do so as soon as possible. --SnorlaxMonster 13:57, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Not sure if you checked Umeko's talk page Snorlax Monster. Regarding name changes, I think that has been abolished as it breaks the server. Or something along the lines of that, ask trom.--ForceFire 14:08, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Nope, hadn't seen that. Umeko's been on hiatus for a while, but the rename function actually has been fixed. You can see that we've renamed a user somewhat recently. Any Bureaucrat or above can perform a rename (so Umeko herself can). --SnorlaxMonster 14:14, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
Yup, I know I've been breaking the signature policy rules but I do really want to change my username, though. Since the renaming function is now fixed, I've requested Umeko herself if she could perform the change. SatoMew 16:34, 17 March 2012 (UTC)


I have some good news! Due to recent necessary maintenance, the tool needed for renames should be fixed. I probably don't need to ask this question, but I will do so just for safety's sake: You're still certain you want your Bulbawiki (Bulbapedia, Bulbanews, and Bulbagarden Archives) username changed to SatoMew? - Kogoro - Talk to me - 23:29, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes! ^^ And sorry, I've been a bit busy lately that I haven't even checked if you had replied yet... SatoMew 23:39, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
It looks like we have another problem that I foolishly didn't notice ^^;;;. The name of SatoMew appears to have already been taken, way back in 2009. Despite the account not contributing in over three years, I can't reasonably let you usurp the username. If you still want to be renamed, you'll need to pick something else. If you'd prefer to just stick with the name you have, you'll need to re-merge your accounts via your preferences & change your signature. - Kogoro - Talk to me - 05:56, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Then rename me to SatoMew2, if you don't mind. Also, is there any technical reason as to why accounts cannot be removed? I've always wondered about that. SatoMew 19:21, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Done. You will need to re-merge your accounts via your preferences & change the links in your signature. If you find yourself unhappy with this username, you won't be able to request another username change for at least 6 months. - Kogoro - Talk to me - 06:15, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Oh, it's fine now. Thanks. :3 SatoMew 23:04, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the weather effects apng

I know this was a few months ago and we both discussed it, but can you change the frame of the apng so that everyone can see the image? Thanks in advance~ ht14 13:52, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

I will try to do it as soon as I can. SatoMew 14:02, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Your game infobox

Instead of this:

{| style="text-align:right;" class="roundy" style="background: #{{{{{colorscheme|bulba}}} color}}; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px; border: 3px solid #{{{{{bordercolorscheme|bulba}}} color light}}; width: 30%"

Why not put alignment in the same style like this?:

{| class="roundy" style="text-align:right; background: #{{{{{colorscheme|bulba}}} color}}; margin-left: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px; border: 3px solid #{{{{{bordercolorscheme|bulba}}} color light}}; width: 30%"

Thanks! --Abcboy (talk) 22:34, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. I'm playing around with the align replacement tags to make it right. SatoMew 22:37, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
With them in the same tag, it's less redundant. style="text-align:left/right/center;" is for text and images, while table alignment is style="float:left/right;" or style="margin:auto;" for centering the table. Good luck! --Abcboy (talk) 22:46, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
You can also do it in any other cell with text:align. There are so many... --Abcboy (talk) 22:49, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I saw Werdnae mentioning the replacements. I've applied the change to all the other cells with text:align but there's a problem. The template should be placed on the right, not on the left. Also, the input data for the cells below the name and artwork should be placed to the left. Is there anyway to fix the template's placement and override the cell's main text:align tag for certain elements? SatoMew 22:59, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Add float:right to the first opening statement under style. In all opening statements with two styles, combine. Remove all text-align from the opening statements of all tables. --Abcboy (talk) 23:08, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
It's finally looking good again. Also, when you said to combine the styles, do I need to do it here? Sorry for all the doubts but I do want to learn. SatoMew 23:19, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
In this example: ! colspan="3" width="90px" style="text-align:right;" class="roundytl" style="background: #E0F2B6; border-bottom: 1px solid #C4E673;" | Developer(s):
There are still two style tags. They need to be combined. --Abcboy (talk) 23:30, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Done that. Should the code be further reorganized or streamlined? SatoMew 00:07, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
Any "background: #FFFFFF" can be replaced by "background: #fff". Werdnae can give it a thorough double-check (because I'm not that good at this). --Abcboy (talk) 00:29, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
Done. I have also relocated some code to make it more consistent across the template. SatoMew 12:38, 27 October 2012 (UTC)


Hello. If a game has an article, there's no need to put its Japanese name right next to it; especially when you're linking to it. It's just redundant that way. Ataro (talk) 22:51, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

I know it is. But it makes the article more professional and encyclopedic because it already gives the Japanese name(s) in comparison to its English name(s) and because you cannot expect the reader to click on the links just because they're there. SatoMew 22:55, 27 October 2012 (UTC)


Planning on adding B2W2? --Abcboy (talk) 17:23, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes. SatoMew 17:23, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Fury Swipes Translation

The words mean what they mean. Midare is "disturbed" and Hikkaki is "scratching." I'm not undoing it because I'll leave it to the higher-ups to decide, but you might as well change Fury Attack as well while you're at it. P.S. We tend to leave Japanese translations literal. Exhibit A: Pokémon 2000's hilarious Japanese subtitle, "Lugia's Explosive Birth!" --IWannaBeTheVeryBest (talk) 22:49, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Late response but that is just stupid. Translations should make sense and loyally reproduce the meaning of the original text, not be literal for the sake of it. SatoMew 17:50, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Move Translations

Hello. I noticed you have been changing the translations for some of the moves, such as Fire Punch and Pay Day, as well as adding tt templates, creating new redirects, and marking other redirects for deletion. Thanks for adding the tt templates and the new redirects, but please do not mark the old redirects for deletion. As far as changing the translations goes, please contact Umeko before changing anymore of them. We appreciate the effort for more accurate translations, but they need to be discussed first. Thanks for understanding. Crystal Talian 00:53, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

The tt templates are the same as those in the infobox. As to the translations themselves, Umeko has been inactive but I'll try contacting her via e-mail. But what exact issues are there with marking old redirects for deletion? Aren't they just used for those who type in the translated Japanese names? If so, the old redirects are incorrect and should be deleted to avoid encouraging mistranslations. I will refrain from doing more changes now until I get word from Umeko but I'd like to know what issues could there possibly be with this. SatoMew 01:19, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Our users will need time to adjust to the changes. For example, if a long time user attempts to search for an old redirect they will be told that the page no longer exists. This would cause them problems as they may not know how to reach the page if, for example, they are not familiar with the English names and are instead only familiar with our existing disambiguation pages. It is also possible that they may be led to believe that a page for the move they are searching for no longer exists at all. Crystal Talian 01:50, 21 December 2012 (UTC)


Hi, hearing that you've been translating things here, I thought I'd ask if you'd consider helping to translate some of the songs on this wiki. Some of them have bad or very bad translations, and some have none at all. As such, there's certainly a lot of improvement that could be done. If you're not interested in them, that's fine too, but I thought I'd ask in case you are at least. :) Bluesun (talk) 17:36, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

My knowledge is very limited in order for me to translate so much text. And because I suggest that we avoid bad translations, it's a task for Umeko or someone else with actual and broad Japanese knowledge. SatoMew 19:07, 21 December 2012 (UTC)


You removed the move errors because "there is no source". Are you indirectly saying that you watched those episodes in Japanese and heard the same moves as in the dub? It's obviously a requirement to watch a episode before removing/adding anything regarding to it.--Den Zen 22:10, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't have access to the episodes but I got the info from someone who does. There are no errors. And it's better to not list them if they aren't confirmed, don't you think? If false, it is misleading people. SatoMew 22:14, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Well, that's okay then. And yes, it really makes more sense.--Den Zen 22:19, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Take note that it would be better if you yourself watched the episode in Japanese, instead of relying on others, mainly because anything can be said on the internet (or anywhere else really). I myself haven't sen the Japanese episodes so I'm not going to revert you.--ForceFire 02:22, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
I'd like to do it myself but unfortunately I can't right now as I don't have the episodes. Still, I believe it's better to not list unconfirmed errors until they are verified. SatoMew 11:34, 3 March 2013 (UTC)


The word itself means closer to "mutual contact". It isn't limited to just physical contact. It can also refer to emotional connection, as referenced in the English name. While 触れ合い動物園 does translate to "petting zoo", I don't think the meaning of the word is limited to just that. --超龍Chao 13:14, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

But Amity Square is for strolling and interacting with Pokémon within the boundaries of a limited area, similar to petting zoos. So "Petting Square" is perfectly accurate. SatoMew 14:16, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Regarding Changing Translations

Please refrain from changing any of the translations on this site until Umeko, our head of translation, has issued an opinion on them. Also, edit summaries such as this are not appropriate. Please, drop the attitude and wait while staff looks into this. Thank you. Crystal Talian 23:02, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

If you are going to change a move or ability's Japanese name translation, you have to change them on every card that specific Japanese word/phrase has appeared on. MaverickNate 23:07, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
All in all, a consensus about the move translations should take place first. I'm just correcting what I'm sure is wrong since many of the translations are incorrect or inaccurate. SatoMew 23:13, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
Actually, a consensus about the move translation should take place on the talk page before the actual page is edited first. MaverickNate 23:15, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
I'm not talking about the move translations themselves but the fact that I've attempted to change them before only to have them reverted, since apparently one requires authorization from Umeko-senpai first, even though such is impractical as she has been away for months and the people who browse the wiki aren't waiting for that. Regular users should be able to change the translations if they are indeed incorrect, inaccurate or unnecessarily different. SatoMew 23:19, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

The Preview Button

Instead of editing a page several times in a row, try using the preview button to make sure your edit looks the way you want it to. It's right next to the Save Changes button... Please try it out, so as not to clog up the Recent Changes. Thanks! --Masatoshitalk 23:50, 16 March 2013 (UTC)


Where are you getting all these translations from? -- MAGNEDETH 22:19, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Japanese translations are by using WWWJDIC/Denshi Jisho, looking at what the move does, how it is described and deducing an accurate string. I'd like to use Nihongo Kokugo Daijiten more but I haven't found a way to properly search its database yet. Some things also take further investigation to see what they are associated to, like Cut's Japanese name, Iaigiri, being associated to Iaido but literally meaning "cut with sword", as seen in a Japanese Guiness entry about a Iaido master who managed to cut a tennis ball very swiftly (最速テニスボール居合斬り Fastest tennis ball cut by sword). It's not an easy process. SatoMew 22:30, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
The problem is that there's no way to tell for sure if your translations are exact and perfect. More to the point, changing these translations affects a multitude of pages. I will need you to stop until Umeko can look into it. -- MAGNEDETH 22:42, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Lists of glitches

I appreciate your efforts, but please don't remove anomalies just because they are minor: they are glitches anyway. As {{Glitches}} dedicates itself to feature the main glitches, those lists consist of everything imaginable, except for glitch pokémon. Just see this page, and you'll see the definition is general. TheOriginalOne 19:10, 25 July 2013 (UTC)


I'm the only source who confirmed the Serperior walk animation bug, and I'm untrustworthy and only one sauce zomg !!!111! you might as well take it down too. If the guy confirmed in his own vid the egg duplicated, it's good enough for Bulbapedia. --The Truth aka Relicant 10:44, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Zubat's Roost

I can verify that Roost in the name is only written in Hirogana. I've been playing through both Katakana/Kanji to check what they are for each. G50 20:14, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, G50. Also, you misspelled "hiragana". SatoMew 20:17, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Other articles

You mentioned that other articles do the same thing, by which I understand you to mean that they also use a Japanese word where you were using "Kyūsho". If you'd like to point out those places to me, I'd be happy to fix those as well. A meaningless foreign word should never be put in that place when a reasonable translation can be made; to do so would defeat the purpose of that format. Tiddlywinks (talk) 20:17, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

A deletion request

Hey, I noticed that your page User:SatoMew2/Eyecatch is almost an exact duplicate to the Eyecatch page, and therefore isn't really needed. It is weird asking but, can you request for it to be deleted? Adamws (talk) 21:44, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm aware of that but it's there so that it helps in the discussion to split Eyecatch into two articles. SatoMew 16:14, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Ok, I didn't know. Adamws (talk) 19:59, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

The comment regarding PEGI

Hello! After looking at your talk page, I see that you are more experienced than I am in regards to Bulbapedia, so I understand that you may know things I don't. But here are my thoughts about the comment regarding PEGI: According to the comment, PEGI's website doesn't say it's been rated, but Poké UK says otherwise. To me, it seems that Poké UK made a mistake or something. If this is true—and it may be false—then it seems to me that even those who do not edit Bulbapedia could glean somewhat relevant information—at least as relevant as the attention-grabbing "Trivia" sections used in many articles. Is there anything I'm not seeing and/or seeing incorrectly? Thanks! —The Sackinator (talk) 21:11, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Well, it's true I have been here for a while but I'm by no means a staff member so you should direct your question to them (SnorlaxMonster, for example). Personally, I think the comment is only important for editors because it's there to warn anyone who might be willing to change the information. The usage of tooltips is discouraged, especially if it's applied to full sentences. SatoMew 21:26, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
For full disclosure, I did advise Sackinator to contact you here. But it's true that a staff member might be a better authority on this type of question. CycloneGU (talk) 21:43, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Well then, should we contact an administrator over this issue? —The Sackinator (talk) 01:16, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
To help with full disclosure, SatoMew2 created a thread at this location suggesting that removing their use as standard might be the way to go. I can't predict the conclusion of that discussion, but it seems clear to me that, in terms of an involved editor, that means SatoMew2 is in favour of not using tooltips at all. That said, until a policy is put into place barring their use, I can see how a tooltip might serve useful to a casual reader. Reviewing the edit now, here's my take:
I know nothing about how classifications work in the UK. However, if it were something I was concerned about as a parent of a child in the UK and I did not know anything about video games at all - much less Pokémon - I'd be interested upon reading this that our Web site is making note of this classification. If I then looked up the PEGI Web site to verify the claim, it clearly cannot be verified if they don't show it as classified. Therefore, we should not be publishing a rating at all. It might be worth externally contacting PEGI and providing them with a link to the Pokémon UK source and let them figure it out, and then we follow up on what they do. In my opinion, therefore, the rating should be completely removed and it be labeled unrated because PEGI claims it's unrated and we're referencing PEGI.
This, however, is just my opinion. If you want to involve a staff member to give a better ruling, you can enlist Jo The Marten, the head of Games, to get such an opinion. Note that with the holiday season now underway that there could be a delay in response, so if you do that, post your request and be very clear, and link back here. My opinion will also be considered with yours and whatever Jo determines (unless someone like Kogoro intervenes) is law. CycloneGU (talk) 02:39, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Sorry to butt in, but PEGI's only been in existence since 2003. RBYGSC can't have been rated. --Abcboy (talk) 03:11, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
That's what we're debating, Abcboy. Apparently a Pokémon UK site is claiming it is. It's entirely possible PEGI didn't update on their end, but it's also possible Pokémon UK made the mistake. This needs to be figured out so we put the correct information. Because it's pre-2003, that's why I said it should be listed as unrated. CycloneGU (talk) 03:22, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
As I think about it, my thoughts are currently this: Since there is conflicting official sources with the "more official" source saying there is no rating, we should put "Unrated" in. However, since there is a source that says otherwise, that, perhaps, should also be noted—whether it be by tooltips or some other means.
Well, what do you think? Should we contact Jo The Marten? —The Sackinator (talk) 04:51, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
You have echoed what I'm thinking. I'm going to go ahead and label it unrated, then put a tooltip stating that. SatoMew2, I know you're not a fan of them, but it seems like the best solution for now. I will contact Jo myself and ask for administrative opinion here, and there might be another method to be used instead, but I'll let Jo do that if needed. CycloneGU (talk) 04:56, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
I've just done some cleaning up. I like how it's turning out. However, tooltips being unreadable to mobile users does seem like it could be a problem. (Actually, however, I rarely go to Bulbapedia on a mobile device myself.) However, this might be an issue that's over Bulbapedia as a whole, not just with this PEGI issue. However, one solution I thought of is that we could (also) put the info in the "Trivia" section—unless it seems too minor. What do you think? As for now, it's been nice making Bulbapedia a better place! —The Sackinator (talk) 06:12, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Those might be questions better answered by Jo upon arrival here. I asked to outdent if there is a desire to comment (kind of like taking over the discussion). I will point out for Jo the two additional edits made by Sackinator - the cleanup ones - after I linked mine, so don't edit from my version if you do anything else. As for the tooltips, that is indeed a general problem for mobile, but it may be deemed that it's unneeded and perhaps the bit about Pokémon UK implying there's a PEGI rating can go in the prose somewhere. It might even be removed. Let's not do that ourselves, however. CycloneGU (talk) 06:17, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
I'd like to offer my thoughts as the person who put the note there in the first place (back when I was going through all the game classification sites and correcting all the rating on articles, since a lot of them were assumptions). I doubt that Nintendo/TCPi has just made a mistake; the boxart they display is an (anachronistic) edited version the US boxart that just sticks the PEGI classification over the ESRB classification (example); they provide a supposed PEGI rating for all of their games. I put it there primarily because I believe the games were not classified and TCPi is just putting a rating there because their site is set up to require one; I think it might be worthwhile as a visible note for readers. --SnorlaxMonster 10:39, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Definitely a valid point, and thanks for commenting. =) I suppose they could provide what might have been a PEGI rating had PEGI been around at the time, but I do believe that it's still not an official rating. It is certainly worthwhile noting what the supposed rating is (3 IIRC), but my only concern is whether it belongs in the template. My call in this was simply from the official PEGI stance, but it also might not be the correct treatment, hence why I asked for administrative ruling on it either way to ensure it's handled correctly. CycloneGU (talk) 15:24, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Just to update over here, Jo has looked into and made a decision on this. That setup is now what should be. Hoping Sackinator is following this page or the article and also sees it. CycloneGU (talk) 05:51, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm following both. Has Jo read this section on this page, though? I think there is good reasoning here to have the "3" be in the tooltip (the ref was decided by Jo to be replaced) and the main text saying something like "Unrated" rather than the other way around. But I won't question Bulbapedian authority if Jo stills has the other opinion despite reading this. —The Sackinator (talk) 01:53, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
I have no idea whether this discussion was considered. If you wish to ask, go over there and create a new section asking, or add on to the section I started previously. I asked for an opinion and this is the route that was decided upon. CycloneGU (talk) 04:08, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Okay, I just did. —The Sackinator (talk) 04:35, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
I noticed. =) CycloneGU (talk) 04:45, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Trivia question

Hey SatoMew2, I was wondering about the following trivium:

  • These are the only core series games released after Generation I where the player character does not face a NPC Trainer when challenged. Coincidentally, they are also remakes of the original paired versions of Generation I.

I'm not sure I quite follow. What exactly do you mean? The player character is never challenged by an NPC? ht14 17:11, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

When a NPC Trainer sees you, the player doesn't turn around to face them, like in the original games (for example, you're walking down a route and a NPC Trainer notices you; when he or she approaches you, you remain in the same position and don't look directly to the NPC). In all other games, the player turns around to face the Trainer. This is what I'm referring to. SatoMew 17:17, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
Ah, I see. The wording seemed very unclear as "face" could have multiple meanings. That makes more sense. Thanks for clarifying. ht14 17:19, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
You're welcome. SatoMew 17:21, 25 December 2014 (UTC)


Is there any particular reason you are consistently removing signs from location articles? --SnorlaxMonster 17:22, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

They don't add anything of value to the reader. If notable, such as in Celadon Game Corner's case (in which it's referring to the slogan), then it can be mentioned in prose on the descriptive sections. They otherwise add unnecessary fluff and make the articles look bloated, making it harder to find the important information while scrolling. This is especially noticeable when there are signs from multiple generations saying the same thing and they're right at the beginning of a section. SatoMew 17:30, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Moving and merging pages

Recently I've noticed you've been taking it upon yourself to move some of the candidates for moving, with little or no discussion. Please note that if a discussion on the talk page about the move has gone stagnant or the candidate for moving/merging has no discussion at all, that it is not code for "go ahead and do it." Also note that there's a way that staff can merge pages so the edit history of both of the pages are preserved, so the contributors of the page that will become a redirect will not lose the record of the contributions they made to the page. Additionally, the Editorial Board has been working on approving and disapproving the massive backlog of "candidates for _____" for months and when one moves/changes the pages without discussion, it only hinders this work. Tl;dr discuss and wait for an explicit decision to be made before moving the page, no more making major changes without talking to anyone. Thank you. --Pokemaster97 00:14, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

I understand the policy but the articles I moved are rather small in terms of significance when compared to major and popular articles (and I don't touch those like this either). Furthermore, I took care of updating links, fixing non-redirect links prior to the move/merge, and assure the contents were properly relocated. At least three of the articles that became candidates for moving/merging were so because of me as well. SatoMew 00:53, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
The fact that you nominated the candidates for moving/merging doesn't invalidate my point though. You nominated the pages and when there was no discussion, you made the decision to move it instead of even attempting to revive the discussion, this is what I had a problem with. While there's nothing particularly wrong with the pages you moved this time, we're trying to give you a heads up now before it becomes a habit. It's great that you fixed all the links and relocations, if something about the move ends up wrong or disagreed, someone (usually the staff) will have to undo all of it. --Pokemaster97 02:01, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Whoa whoa whoa!

Please stop making massive edits to the version & beta articles, especially ones that are intended to massively change the subject of the latter. Massive changes that affect multiple articles must be thoroughly discussed. - Kogoro - Talk to me - 02:12, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Alright alright. I'm just organizing the mess it currently is now. This has been an issue that has been pointed out since 2009. Are we going to let it pile up further until it's too late? SatoMew 02:16, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
These very articles are extremely high on the Editorial Board's to-do list. While we appreciate that you want to help re-organize things that badly need it, your organizing is going to make the beta/development content even more messy for us to deal with. - Kogoro - Talk to me - 02:19, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
The reorganization process is outlined clearly. And why has it taken 6 years for something to be finally done about it if it's on the top list of things to take care of??? SatoMew 02:22, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
You really need to stop exaggerating, the beta/development articles have not been on the list of articles needing attention for anywhere close to six years. That said, the Editorial Board has been working practically non-stop (since its restructuring last February) on the massive backlog of articles needing attention & other unfinished projects, and we have made significant progress in these 11 months. While the beta/development articles are of extremely high priority, there were a number of projects at the same priority level that have been in need of attention for significantly longer. Working a backlog of this extent is not an overnight process, it is going to take time to clean out. The beta/development articles are due to be addressed before the end of the month. - Kogoro - Talk to me - 02:49, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't mean to interrupt, Kogoro, but is there a public list of the articles under Editorial Board attention? I only ask so that I have an idea what not to work on (at least not in any major form) since it's being handled by higher staff, and I'm not concerned about the timeline. I just got alerted to this because I've been here before and now I'm wondering. CycloneGU (talk) 03:00, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Your reply was directed at my previous statement in which I pointed out that it is a six-year-old issue that hasn't been fixed, not to mention that all public discussion has agreed with the changes years ago, and this particular subject does not warrant a lot of discussion in the first place since the solution is very obvious. If they weren't always high-priority, then you could've clarified that since the beginning. After all, the backlog appears to be non-public and we're not claiming to be psychics that guess what the staff is thinking on.
The fact that such a backlog has gotten so big over the years to begin with implies a much more fundamental issue in itself. Nonetheless, it's still not an excuse to let things to rot until they have to be really fixed, especially when regular members are prevented from doing anything productive on the grounds that the staff is (allegedly) already taking care of the matter, thus they [regular members] must stop to prevent the internal backlog from becoming even messier. That's a poor attempt at appeal to authority and it reeks of groupthink. SatoMew 12:08, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
I just want to jump in briefly to say that I would also dearly love to have an idea of staff's projects/priorities. Tiddlywinks (talk) 15:54, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Sato, do you know where the discussion and support for splitting the pages is? I personally think (though I'm not an admin) it should be discussed again on the same page (or a new page if there isn't one) and if the majority still support within say three weeks, then the changes should be made.
I reverted your Gold and Silver beta changes (regarding splitting the articles to separate the unused content and prerelease information) because I thought it needed to be discussed, but please excuse my ignorance if there was a discussion.
I have mixed thoughts on a change like that. People would have to go to separate articles to see both the unused and prerelease material, and I feel it's not actually bad having them both in one article as long as they are separated by headers like "pre-release" and "post-release".
I know that TCRF make a big deal over the usage of beta (or at least used to, I don't know anymore), but I think that beta is becoming a catch-all term for all types of "unseen" things. This is probably a similar situation to "glitch" and "bug". Though the differences between them aren't as solid (and personally I don't see the difference; some may say 'bug' is a problem in the actual script (like the Focus Energy bug quartering the critical hit chance), while I disagree), glitch is more commonly used in the English Pokémon community. What I do think should be changed are any references to things being in a "beta version" (if there still are any like this), because there is no such thing as the beta version; there are many different builds of a game in its development.
I do agree with you in that it's bad if some things that are "striking issues" don't get sorted immediately (I didn't like location previews being listed in eyecatch where you could say they are completely different). For those cases, even though I'm not staff, I would encourage people to go ahead and split them without discussion. However, I think the beta split thing is more controversial since many people do consider all unseen things as 'beta' even though it may be misleading.
On the other hand, I actually have mixed thoughts on this. On a wiki I administrate, I did split unused content and prerelease information. I did that because I wanted to make things as clear and objective as possible; but this discussion on Smash Wiki made me re-think things, one of the users stated that incorrect language becomes correct through usage.
Even though it's none of my business, I'm sorry if you think a lot of outstanding issues don't get done on Bulbapedia, because I would feel frustrated too.
Chickasaurus (talk) 16:31, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Actually I changed my mind, I support the articles being split, but I don't know what others may think. Chickasaurus (talk) 16:40, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
If that "beta" discussion were started somewhere else, I'd be happy to respond to it. Well, except perhaps for the fact that Kogoro stated above that staff intend to rework the "beta" pages already. I think I'd just as soon see what they do with it (or else hear their intentions) first. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:08, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Beta Pokémon games and Talk:Pokémon Platinum beta#Article move have discussion on this. The former has me talking about the need to change things since June 2009.
The way I see things, pre-release media and info is not the same thing as unused content discovered by datamining the code of the games. I'm not against content being shared between these two but they're still separate things, and in such a case they must be analyzed on an individual basis.
I'm aware that the usage of the term "beta" is changing for better or for worse but that doesn't mean that we should fall prey to the common usage for the sake of the majority if the goal of this community-based wiki is to provide factual information on all things Pokémon, as long as it meets the requirements for notability (which is a whole different matter altogether). SatoMew 17:22, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

If I may...
why are discussions for changing pages on the Wiki NOT on the Wiki? Even if it's something handled by the Editorial Board exclusively, actually SEEING the Editorial Board discussions and having pages currently under discussion locked (with anyone able to contribute to discussions) would provide full transparency, would allow other opinions to be heard and openly discussed, and make it 20 times better than it is now. CycloneGU (talk) 17:45, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

User page deletions

In the future, if you have a large number of user pages that you want deleted at once, please contact a staff member and tell them which ones you want deleted, as per the userspace policy. This prevents stress to the server and also saves you from the tedium of tagging every single page with {{delete}}. Thank you! --ZestyCactus 05:41, 4 January 2015 (UTC)


Why did you remove the quotes from the Ghost (literal) article? I saw that you were removing message boxes that you thought were pointless, but you could've at least kept the quotes. Many character articles (such as Professor Oak) have quotes, so I don't see why Ghost shouldn't. Pikachu Bros. (talk) 18:04, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

YouTube vides

All of your YouTube videos that show up in the mainspace have the username link to Now, unless you're Star Industries_finance department, the links appear not to be working properly. --Abcboy (talk) 18:09, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Old habits die hard but the video itself will lead you to the right channel. After the Google+ integration, YouTube channel IDs were altered and now custom IDs are only allowed for users who fulfill certain requisites. The ID used in the examples I provided on Template talk:YouTubeEmbed is the correct one. SatoMew 18:51, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Damage category

I don't follow your argument. Physical/special/status specify the kind of damage dealt, which would be accurately described by "damage category". The kind of damage dealt is relative to the damage category, not the individual move. --SnorlaxMonster 04:33, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

The categories specify the type of damage dealt but they are a property of the moves themselves (hence the terms "physical move", "special move", and "status move"). Considering that status moves do not deal damage, the unofficial expression currently in use is inaccurate. SatoMew 13:58, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
I get your point about status moves not dealing damage (although I think "no damage" can easily be considered a type of damage to resolve this). What I don't understand is why you think that the damage category being a property of the move makes the term inaccurate. I think "category" alone is simply too broad to describe these three possible values of a single property of moves. --SnorlaxMonster 14:42, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Thus the suggested title "Move category" to fix this problem. SatoMew 14:51, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
I don't understand why you think that's better. Physical/special/status describe the kind of damage dealt, thus "Damage category". There are countless ways to categorize moves, making "Move category" insufficient. --SnorlaxMonster 07:40, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Lemme just chime in that I mostly agree with SatoMew2. Physical/special are certainly kinds of damage, but "status" is not a "kind of damage". Status moves deal no damage, so you can't call it any "kind" of damage. It's like calling rain, sleet, and snow kinds/types of precipitation; trying to then call "no precipitation" another kind/type of precipitation is fundamentally wrong. I can reconcile calling status moves a "damage category", but it's still fundamentally silly (to put it kindly) for the same reasons.
I really wish I could argue well for "move category", but I get the concerns; on the other hand, I personally don't have any problem with just decreeing that "The move category refers to this property that can be physical/special/status." If we choose to define it like that, that should be enough as far as I'm concerned. Tiddlywinks (talk) 08:04, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Another reason for "move category" is that Pokémon categories are a thing. I guess we could call them "action categories" instead since they specify the type of action a move has: physical moves generally cause damage from direct contact with the opponent while special moves generally do so without making any contact whatsoever, and status moves change variables of battles (stats, weather, status conditions). SatoMew2 (talk) 12:39, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Massive edits

When planning on making edits that will remove over half an article's content, it's highly advisable to actually discuss the changes you intent to make, rather than simply gutting an article to its bones just to suit your own personal beliefs on how articles should be presented. Your edits to the Pokémon controversy article have been reverted. - Kogoro - Talk to me - 20:10, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

The gambling content belongs in the TPCi article since it's a criticism of the company for censoring the Game Corners. The stuff about Jynx is already in its article and there is no source provided for the racism claims surrounding Lenora. Anime dub edits and sprite changes are not a reason for controversy. The rest was reorganized with sources and I also added new information.
If you're just going to revert edits without analyzing them, fine. SatoMew 20:59, 1 May 2015 (UTC)


Please do not create articles by copying and pasting text from Wikipedia. The {{WikipediaBased}} template was something that was of use when Bulbapedia was just starting, but it should not be used to create new Bulbapedia articles. I personally like the idea of a Pokémon Shock article, but it needs to be made from scratch, not by copying from Wikipedia. --SnorlaxMonster 10:00, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

The only reason I used the template was for the sake of transparency. Even if you try to change the wording, it would've ended up similar to Wikipedia, which itself used the information from the sources listed in the references. SatoMew2 (talk) 12:12, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Right, and it's better that you used the template than didn't. However, the article had significant portions almost entirely copied from Wikipedia, which is just not acceptable. --SnorlaxMonster 15:13, 2 May 2015 (UTC)


Has not yet been approved by staff for general use on articles. Please do not use it at this time, thank you. - Kogoro - Talk to me - 21:05, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Staff pages

Red and Green and Japanese Blue are separate games from Red and Blue. That's why we have separate pages of staff for them. Your edits to their respective staff pages have been reverted. glikglak 02:18, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

But that's wrong. Red and Blue are just the localizations of Red and Green using Blue's source code. The idea that they're different games because they are split into three versions in Japan is absurd, especially when the only significant changes are the Pokémon distribution (which was also altered in Western Gold and Silver from the Japanese versions), prizes, and Cerulean Cave's layout. Game Freak, Nintendo, and The Pokémon Company definitely consider Red and Blue to be same as Red and Green.* Following such logic, then Korean Gold and Silver as well as Japanese Crystal should be considered separate games as well since, after all, their changes are far more significant (Korean Gold and Silver was developed from the source code of the English versions with most changes reverted to match the Japanese versions plus some Crystal-like changes, along with removal of original Game Boy and Game Boy Printer support, not to mention the inability to officially use the Time Capsule; Japanese Crystal is a major upgrade with online play through mobile phone connectivity as opposed to the minor expansion pack of Gold and Silver that is localized Crystal).
You are also being oblivious to the fact that the credits of Red and Blue list the Japanese Blue staff (mostly the same as the Japanese Red and Green staff) and the localization staff. SatoMew2 (talk) 11:53, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
* "Red and Green refer to Pokémon Red Version and Pokémon Green Version, the first titles in the Pokémon series. They were released for the Game Boy system in Japan on 27th February 1996. They were later released worldwide as Pokémon Red Version and Pokémon Blue Version."
I am honestly inclined to agree with SatoMew2 on this matter, there is minimal differences between the three lists, and those differences that are present have been noted on the page that the three were merged into. This isn't a case like the Pokémon Stadium games either. As a result, I believe a merger of the three articles would be fine, however, I was not aware Glik had discussed with other staff before reverting the changes, which is why I myself reverted them. Once I was made aware, I reverted my own reversions, sorry for that Glik, I jumped a gun. However, I do still agree with the point that SatoMew2 is making in this case. -Spriteit (talk) 13:29, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Unapproved major changes

While I sympathize with your frustrations with the inefficiencies of the some of Bulbapedia's systems for approving moves, merges, redirects, deletions, and other overhauls, you need to stop jumping the gun and moving/redirecting the pages by yourself. I've waited a long time for some things to happen. Major changes to pages must be approved by the Editorial Board before their implementation. Unexpected issues can arise when these kinds of changes are made. --Abcboy (talk) 14:56, 24 July 2015 (UTC)