Please remember to follow the manual of style and code of conduct at all times. Check and Bulbanews for up-to-date Pokémon news and discuss it on the or irc channel #bulbapedia.
User talk:Serial Colour
A few things...
First of all, don't add back things an admin removes, they know what they're doing. Second, that trivia was removed for a reason. The sentence even starts with "it's been speculated" which tells us its' speculation. Bulbapedia does not allow speculation in its articles. Don't add it again. --Psyライダー☮ 22:48, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
- I thought the information was reasonable. There's obviously a theme to the Eeveelutions (all special-type), so noting that Dragon is the only type missing from the set is fine. It's not speculation, it's stating the trend (although I'll grant that it could be reworded... so why wasn't it?).
- As for the "Charizard, Gyarados, Aerodactyl and Sceptile aren't Dragon-type even though Dragon trainers use them" is simply fact, and is quite interesting trivia. It is undeniably true. Why was it removed for being speculation?
- And excuse me if I don't research who the contributors are before I make any changes. I thought this wiki was about providing information, not following the leaders. ~ Serial Colour 23:15, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
- Hi, Serial Colour. PsychicRider asked me to spell this out from the POV of the staff. While I disagree with the statement "don't add back things an admin removes" - we're only human, after all - Bulbapedia frowns on speculation. It is speculation to say that we expect a Dragon-type Eeeveelution. However, it would not be speculation to say on the Eeveelution article that the only formerly special type not to have an Eeveelution is the Dragon-type. As you can see, this second sentence reports the facts without going too far into analysis. I don't so much care for the second piece of trivia, but it may be best suited to the individual Pokémon articles as opposed to the article about the Dragon-type. —darklordtrom 23:51, 16 July 2010 (UTC)