User talk:Tiddlywinks

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


How do I archieve?

I see you just archieved your talk page. I'm feeling my talk page has grown over the years to a size I feel like is more than enough long. Can I just do it on my own like you did with your talk page just now? --FinnishPokéFan92 (talk) 19:07, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Yup, all you have to do is move it more or less wherever you want (with the tab at the top of the page). Make sure to link the archive on your new talk page, too. Tiddlywinks (talk) 19:10, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! I'll do that when I get the chance. --FinnishPokéFan92 (talk) 19:12, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Cosplay Pikachu

Tiddlywinks: To change costumes all you have to do is talk to the lady... That is already written. Sory I am new and still learningTripplekittys (talk) 22:00, 12 November 2015 (UTC)


I just wanted to thank you for your hard work with the e-Reader information for Colosseum. I've been trying to get a hold of that information for a long time and you managed to collect quite a substantial amount. So again, thanks! ht14 23:07, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Nmurthy deserves much of the credit for being the first to find the most recent information and start adding it here. I'm hoping I'll be able to contact the video's uploader, though, and maybe add even more info eventually. Tiddlywinks (talk) 23:18, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Talk: Starter Pokémon

Christian (talk) 21:02, 20 November 2015 (UTC) Hi Tiddlywinks,

I feel this trivia fact in the anime is important and should not be deleted please.

  • Charmander is the only Kanto starter that was not obtained or caught by May.

May only got Bulbasaur and Squirtle, but not Charmander. She does have a Fire-starter, but it is from "Hoenn" not Kanto.

Three Pokemon is a small group, and two is a small number. It borders on coincidence. But honestly, I don't generally bother with the anime so maybe I've got the wrong perspective and others might feel different if you bring it up on the Starter Pokemon talk page. Tiddlywinks (talk) 21:11, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Christian (talk) 02:05, 21 November 2015 (UTC) It might make a great trivia fact. Ash caught all the Kanto starters, but May only caught two of them. Soot yourself if you don't appreciate it. (Others would probably realize this too.)

Tiddlywinks is right, three Pokémon is too small of a group. So your trivia is unnotable.--ForceFire 03:40, 21 November 2015 (UTC)


I am not sure on the exact percents as I didn't dig up the info myself (as I've said on my talk page). I did check other things on my own, and for example there are indeed natural Spiked Tiles in Solar Cave. Eridanus (talk) 12:30, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Well, it doesn't look like the writer for the FAQ you linked explicitly said whether they got their numbers directly from the game or from lots of experimenting. I don't really mind practical estimations myself; my concern is just, if that's what they are (instead of ideal values), it should probably be noted. Tiddlywinks (talk) 12:42, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
I'll edit the pages appropiately. And use your template as it's far more convenient. Eridanus (talk) 12:52, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Pokémon Manga Location

Hi, you previously removed my addition to the Location part of PS001 saying that the infobo wasn't meant for more than one information.

Alot of other chapters such as PS002 contains more than one. I'm lost. MannedTooth (talk) 23:49, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Okay, that's partly my bad, then.
There's still a couple issues with what you were trying to add, though. First and foremost, as a guideline, how about we generally try to stick to places we actually have pages for on this wiki? (I.e., not "West part of Pallet Town's Forest".) Second, checking the summary, it really doesn't sound like Oak's Lab features at all prominently in PS001; so that's probably a reason against adding Oak's Lab there too. Also, while I do notice that PS005 includes the Gym as a location, other chapters like PS014 don't include Pokémon Tower and such; you can argue they should, but I would suggest this: most often, it's not really necessary to include locations within a town (like Oak's Lab) if that town is already given as the location.
Feel free to ask any other questions. I'm totally capable of being wrong or underinformed, so I'd be happy to hear if you see anything else that seems to contradict what I've said. Honestly, one of the Project Manga contacts may be a better person to try to talk to if you want more confident answers. =P Tiddlywinks (talk) 00:10, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
I totally understand that places that don't have a page are irrelavant, that's sorted out for me now. But for your exemple with Oak's Lab, even though it is IN Pallet Town, this is still a well-known and important place to be in the Pokémon game. But that's not my question, no, it's rather as you said, Oak's Lab is not the main place in which the chapter takes place, but at the end (2 pages or so) of the chapter, Red is outside of Oak's Lab and we can very clearly see that it is his lab since there's a sign and all that.
As you said, you might not be the best person to argue something like that since it's manga-related, but where should we draw the line? Is knocking at the door of a building before entering it counts as being a location, or does the character needs to be INSIDE of that location? Thanks for your fast and elaborate replies ! It's really appreciated. :) MannedTooth (talk) 00:18, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Just to be clear, I'll reiterate first: I don't really think Oak's Lab should be in the infobox at any point. Pallet Town is pretty much good enough, and the summary arguably suffices otherwise.
As for where the line might be: as a bare minimum, if a place isn't entered, it doesn't belong in the infobox. Tiddlywinks (talk) 00:38, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Gotcha! MannedTooth (talk) 00:40, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Content removed

I had a couple of questions regarding my removed additions.

  • In Interviewers, you said "Please don't use "you". Also, quotes are for individuals, not Trainer classes"
    • I won't be using first person from now on, I will be using 3rd person. Thanks for the tip.
    • I agree with you on the fact that it should be for individuals, not for trainer class, but this one's tricky, since in every game, the interviewers are only 2 persons that stick together, so if you mention the game, you automatically know which trainer we are talking about. So what are the option here? I am seeing three:
      • We make an exception for this trainer class since, as I mentionned, they're unique in every game.
      • We make an exclusive page for each character and include their quotes in it.
      • We add to the trainer list their quotes from talking and initiating, winning or losing a fight.
  • In Player's House you said "Please stick to the 3rd person (not "we"). And that's not unique to ORAS"
    • As said previously, I will stick to the 3rd person. But can I still add this information?
    • Texts on Player's Houses signs aren't always written the same way even though they are very similar, should we put a table stating what every sign mentions for every generation?

Thanks again! :) MannedTooth (talk) 05:28, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

As for interviewers... Firstly, I'll note that we do have pages for Gabby and Ty and Roxy and Oli. But, secondly, it's really not guaranteed that any "interview" is conducted by those people unless that is explicitly conveyed. There's no reason other people can't have jobs as interviewers. (And thirdly, a "report" really isn't guaranteed to be conducted by "interviewers" either.)
For the house, I kind of think the sign is pretty trivial (and I don't mean that it belongs under Trivia). More, the differences between the signs are really trivial I think. If the sign would warrant any mention, it would be as part of the intro, not multiple times for each section. Tiddlywinks (talk) 05:42, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
You're right, I haven't thought about the fact that others may be interviewers. For the next point, the game itself says that it's more than one ("we") interviewers than speak since it's written as so: "Interviewer: (text)" so it's probably them, but as you said, it's not guaranteed. As for the signs, yeah, it's pretty trivial, but it's still a part of the game's text/lore. Well, it's up to you, I'll stop mentionning it if it's that trivial. :P MannedTooth (talk) 05:51, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Quotes Mark. Why or Why not?

You recently removed the quotes on my TV shows' titles. Why is that so? I didn't quite understand the thing about the Teachy TV. As for the quotes themselves, the game uses them, shouldn't we use them too? MannedTooth (talk) 01:36, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Where does the game use them? I only noticed them in the quotes for one of the shows you were adding, and at least one other didn't have them. While on the other hand, none of the other sections except Teachy TV had quotes either. (Teachy TV is a little weird, so I won't say it definitely should or shouldn't use quotes.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 01:46, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
Well, in fact, 3 out of the 6 shows I'm adding uses them. Considering Nadia Reports is not the official name. It's 3/5.
They are:
  • ThePokémon Whisperer,
  • What's that?
MannedTooth (talk) 01:53, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
Well, the headers for the Unova shows (including its Koukan Talk) didn't have quotes either.
The simple answer, though, is that it's just a special, applied format... Like how APA insists you underline or italicize shows or songs or whatever. But that's just in bulk text, really; that doesn't mean we must do the same thing in the section headers, it's just a very different context.
Side question: can you tell me why you chose to title the one section as Nadia Reports? In short, is that totally invented by you? Tiddlywinks (talk) 02:05, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
No, I took it from the Kalos Shows list. MannedTooth (talk) 02:07, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
OK. Someone should look into whether that's really the best title... Tiddlywinks (talk) 02:10, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

trainer tips layout

Want me to reproduce the layout as in ORAS? I skip a line everytime the game does, is that it? MannedTooth (talk) 04:47, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

I already did. But like I said, there needs to be an actual ORAS format for that template first. Tiddlywinks (talk) 04:51, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Well, if you corrected the format, why do you keep it hidden? MannedTooth (talk) 04:54, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Because the Emerald format does not work properly with the ORAS text (and, again, there's no ORAS format currently). Tiddlywinks (talk) 04:57, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Ooohh, that's what you meant! Sorry! Now I understand. :P MannedTooth (talk) 05:06, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Trying to delete discussion on main page

i am currently unable to delete the post I started on the main page. I want to delete it because I shouldn't have started a post out of "anger". Once again, Im sorry. MannedTooth (talk) 07:49, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Oh, well, that's better than what I thought it was, you trying to remove all comments after your first. =P As I did say on your talk page, though, talk page comments usually are not allowed to be removed. Tiddlywinks (talk) 07:52, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
I knew you were gonna think I was trying to remove your comments... That stressed me out meanwhile I was struggling on my iPad, I really, really, don't mean harm to the website, nor do I want people to think I am a cheater, only wanted to delete my bad move. (Feeling bad about the fact that might start to get annoyed by all the trouble I've put you through, once again, gomen!) MannedTooth (talk) 07:57, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
I'm just fine, but thanks. =) All I can really tell you is, if it at all deserves removing, I'm sure someone higher up will do it. (But I wouldn't count on it.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 08:01, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
A huge thank you for being so patient with me ^^ is this a good place for discussing what I was saying earlier? I would want to keep improving plots' quality. As for the Professor Oak thing, I wasn't so sure about that, you might be right, I just thought "Oak" was too... Hm.. Friendly, I guess? Anyways, as for the collective nouns, are those okay? Should they be considered 3rd person singular as I said or ..? MannedTooth (talk) 08:08, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Basically, I'd advise just leaving the collective nouns alone. IMO either way can be valid—I can even change my mind from one moment to the next. Like I kind of think "Team Rocket overhear Clemont and Bonnie talking about Snover and decide to take revenge on Abomasnow" is better than "overhears"/"decides", but then I think "Elsewhere, Team Rocket have also followed the group to the snowy mountains" is not as good as "has".
The other thing you mentioned, "Red sends out Poliwhirl and uses Water Gun", is not a wording I really have much problem with personally. And to be nitpicky, "makes him use Water Gun" isn't a great-sounding alternative IMO. Because, on the one hand, the Trainer is making the decisions; and on the other, it kind of gets awkward if you'd always have to say "makes [it] use". There may still be ways around both issues (like "Jessie sends out Gourgeist to attack with Shadow Ball and Seed Bomb"), but the best thing in the end may just be to get used to it (which of course is entirely up to you and your "conscience", so to speak). Tiddlywinks (talk) 08:29, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
After a quick research, I have come with some more information concerning collective nouns, well explained on this page:

In short: a team, for instance is always one thing, but it appears like I was part wrong, since when it acts as a whole, it's singular, and when it acts as individuals, it's plural. Examples:

  • Team Rocket IS looking for somewhere to hide.
  • Team Rocket ARE taking care of THEIR Pokémon. (Jessy for Ekans and James for Koffing for instance)

My "<trainer> makes <pokemon> uses <move>" phrasing is not that good I admit, but we should find a better way to do so, since even if it's minor. Let's say Ash asks Bulbasaur to tackle Blue. Is Ash tackling Blue? No, Bulbasaur is, on Ash's order.

Anyway, these are little details that are worth looking up in official sources since, if we want to build a real, good encyclopedia, our grammar/wording must be top-notch! ^~^ MannedTooth (talk) 08:41, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Streamlining signature

"I'm curious. Why do you streamline" your signature every time? Shouldn't it be possible to just edit it in your preferences so that part you keep removing never appears?": Is it possible to do that?

Jdogno4 (talk) 06:59, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Click the preferences link at the top of any page. The third box should be for your signature, and if you enter [[User:Jdogno4|Jdogno4]] ([[User talk:Jdogno4|talk]]) in the new signature box, I think that'd make your signature appear like you want.
On a side note, it's usually best to reply to someone's original comment directly (like mine on your talk page) instead of starting a brand new comment on their talk page. Tiddlywinks (talk) 07:03, 25 January 2016 (UTC)


Thanks for updating the Genesect article. I just found a source that sites the code life. Do you think a source for the events should be provided? Blado (talk) 17:25, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

If you follow the event link, there is a link to Bulbanews article and links to the 20th anniversary site. I suspect that's the sort of source you were thinking of? Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:57, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Number of badges needed

So, if I know that it's not 1, what should we put? Since writing 1 is a lie/mistake. MannedTooth (talk) 21:57, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Put 2 if that's right. Or 3 if that is. Or 4, or 5 or 6 or 7 or 8. You can take the time to figure it out. "?" is just a bit too odd.
(FWIW, you may also want to check the shops just before you get a Badge, just to see if there was maybe something in between that actually changed it and you don't mistake that for a Badge.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:04, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Is there a way to improve this template? Like, if I change something on it, I need to change it for ALL the shops in Hoenn Gen 6 which is like for every city... Can't we just make a template already filled up with the good info and simply add it to every page we need it? As a programmer, that seems more logical to me, that makes your code (wiki) more DRY (don't repeat yourself). MannedTooth (talk) 22:21, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Basically, no, it's easier to just change every page.
Strictly speaking, it probably could be done, but I'm pretty sure the cons will outweigh the pros. ("Pretty sure" in part because it depends on how exactly you want to implement it. And also because I'm not an expert on how templates burden a wiki; I just know they do to an extent/at a certain point. You unfortunately can't do everything with a wiki you might like to with a custom program.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:37, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Well, I don't know about the burden (but to me, one instance is less heavy than many) but I know enough about wiki templates that I know this can be done, and as you said, except for the burdening (which may even be smaller imo). All you have to do is create the template already filled, and then add it where you want, when you change the original, they all change, so much more ergonomic and easy-to-use. Who are the ones who decide the template stuff? I would like to discuss that with them. ^~^ MannedTooth (talk) 22:42, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Well, I can tell you that when a template needs to be improved, one of the first things that gets done is to manually substitute any nested template calls. It has to do with this sort of thing and everything that's on that page I think. So a template that's just a thin wrapper for another template probably won't exactly be appreciated.
But if you really want, sure, I can try to direct you to someone else...? Tiddlywinks (talk) 23:00, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Consistency on Route 110

In the game, they appear in this order : Plusle on the left and Minun on the right.

(It's a 2v2 battle) MannedTooth (talk) 02:51, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

1) In a battle, Trainers face each other. So your left Pokemon (which is your first) is not opposite their "left"/first Pokemon.
2) The game also says, "sent out Plusle and Minun", not Minun and Plusle. Tiddlywinks (talk) 02:57, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Oh, yeah, right! You never stop to be right don't you? ahah MannedTooth (talk) 03:03, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Paradoxically, the secret is to never trust that you are. =P Tiddlywinks (talk) 03:06, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Well, you see, I try to be humble about everything and accepting what others tell me, like, the first time I joined the wiki, I didn't understand your way of doing things. But now that I more or less understood, I try to verify every sources and accept other's arguments. (although, you saw that I love arguing) :P MannedTooth (talk) 03:08, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Deleted shop

I know it was already mentionned that there were move tutors, but I think we should still make a section for the shop that does so instead of all putting in move tutors. (Talking about Mauville City) MannedTooth (Talk) 14:35, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

You hardly added anything with those shop sections. The Ultimate Move Shop is the one exception, but only barely. Ultimately, you were pretty much only adding the signs for each shop. And that's not nearly enough justification for making entirely new sections on the page. Tiddlywinks (talk) 15:06, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Well, there was content to add, simply I didn't go in depth. I was planning to do that later. MannedTooth (Talk) 15:10, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
You still shouldn't duplicate/overlap the move tutors section. Didn't you say it before: D.R.Y. =P Tiddlywinks (talk) 15:16, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
T_T you can't use my own sentences against me only when that helps you x) MannedTooth (Talk) 15:18, 3 February 2016 (UTC)


You should probably ask before removing (like you did now), especially if you don't know the concepts, if you don't want people to get mad :D

Ninjas are very often associated with the moon (and the night) in Japanese folklore. The word "moon" implies a "night", from where Greninja's Dark Type comes from.--Omojuzeforever (talk) 16:01, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

There's not really anything I could quote you from the top of my head. Though if you have ever read/watched ninja stories, the ninjas are said to move "with the moonlight". Almost all of their most dangerous missions are on nights that have either a "full moon" or a "crescent moon". Sorry, can't really quote you anything from the top of my head. Also, the "moonlight" implies "night", which is "darkness", from which Greninja's Dark-Type comes.--Omojuzeforever (talk) 20:05, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Pokemon Mystery Dungeon Quotes

Hey, I would like to start doing exactly what I'm doing for ORAS, but this time, for PMD Blue Team. What would be the best way to document quotes and such?

Shall I create a page for every notable NPC in the game?

MannedTooth (Talk) 17:57, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

You'll either have to look through Pokémon Mystery Dungeon characters to find some examples or just ask someone who deals more with PMD. Outside the core games, I've pretty much only played games that can connect with them (Ranger, Colo/XD). Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:11, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
I already looked aat these lists, but the problem is that they are just a bunch of Names and Description more or less. I was thinking about creating pages for every one. Just like I saw for ORAS, I would try to "mimic" the way it's done. So if anything's wrong, you can always help me improve it. What do you think? MannedTooth (Talk) 18:21, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
I'm saying I don't really have the first clue. It'd be easier for you to just try to ask either someone who's more familiar with PMD or else who takes more responsibility for "Games" as a whole. Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:30, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Streamlining signature.

"Jdogno4, your signature is appearing with "--" at the beginning because you are clicking the signature button, which inserts --Jdogno4 (talk) 08:43, 9 February 2016 (UTC).": I get that. "However, this is in no way forcing you to save your posts with that "--" before your signature.": I get that as well. "You may either delete the "--" before your signature before you save your post, resulting in only Jdogno4 (talk) 08:43, 9 February 2016 (UTC), or you may forego the signature button entirely and simply type Jdogno4 (talk) 08:43, 9 February 2016 (UTC) at the end of your posts manually.": I suppose I am trying to avoid deleting the "Jdogno4 (talk) 08:43, 9 February 2016 (UTC)" when I remove the "--". There is less chance of that once the signature is stamped.

Jdogno4 (talk) 08:43, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

upload please

I am currently making Hazel's Pikachu page. I need this image to be uploaded:


Thanks! MannedTooth (Talk) 16:47, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I'd suggest just focusing on making the page in your userspace for now so it can be determined whether it's notable for the mainspace. Until then, it's not too important whether it has a picture or not. =P Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:07, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

About the six month old discussion

Hey hello,

You removed my question with the message that I should refrain from commenting on six months old discussions. Sorry about that, I thought it was still appropriate.

Do you think I should add a new section next time or do I have to do something different? Editing Wiki's isn't really my speciality, but please let me know! :)

Kind regards, MistrX (talk) 20:46, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

If you have a new question or something (or a different angle, or whatever), then yes, it would be preferred if you just started a new section. For more information, check out our talk page policy (the part about old discussions is specifically under talk page etiquette). =) Tiddlywinks (talk) 20:51, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

New template? (again, I know)

So, I had another idea of template for the wiki, and since you're the latest online and the one I'm more "familiar" with (I'm sorry by the way hehe), I thought I'd show it to you.

So, basically, it is a template intended to go on the top of pages to make sort of a summary of the item/page with the quote of someone in game.

Just look at the template itself, you'll understand.

Let me know what you think, being in computer sciences, I dig making templates! :3 MannedTooth (Talk) 23:53, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't think it really works for me (not talking technically). I tried your default on the Pokédex page, and IMO it just comes off too casual for what the wiki is generally aiming for... Tiddlywinks (talk) 00:11, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
Well, it's kinda just intended to be a light and concise summary without going into details. I got this idea from the Don't Starve Wikia (ex: ) and I thought it was pretty sweet. But if it doesn't go with the wiki's goal, I'll just forget about it. Do you have any template ideas? :P MannedTooth (Talk) 00:16, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
I can't think of anything off the top of my head. Tiddlywinks (talk) 00:40, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

The Preview Botton

My bad! I was doing it at night and I had to stop to focus on other things, but yeah, won't happen again :) --LHakaLH (talk) 20:41, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I wasn't sure :P

As I said in my edit summary, I thought that this was the name of the guy that was playing. MannedTooth (Talk) 03:11, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Upload please :P

Can you upload this? If you can, I'll have more.


Thanks! MannedTooth (Talk) 15:24, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

That doesn't look like great quality to me. I'd suggest either checking it with Maverick Nate or bringing it up directly at the Archives. Tiddlywinks (talk) 15:43, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
What about this? [2] MannedTooth (Talk) 15:57, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
We already have the English print. Even if we didn't, we would have no need for it. The only time we'd want card images that aren't Japanese or English is if the card is actually different from those prints (or doesn't exist in them). glikglak 16:05, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
I know, and it is different. Look carefully, it is in english, and the text is on the right side, basically, the card is flipped from its jap/en version. MannedTooth (Talk) 16:14, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
Well, never mind what I just said, only thing different is the langage of the attack on the art. Is that notable? MannedTooth (Talk) 16:15, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
That's the same as the Japanese print. glikglak 16:23, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
Just to let you know for future reference, MannedTooth, any Korean TCG images must be approved by Maverick Nate before being uploaded. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:42, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
I'll keep that in head, is there any particular reason for this? MannedTooth (Talk) 16:52, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
Primarily, Maverick Nate heads the TCG effort here on Bulbapedia. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:01, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Prof. Oak and Birch

I thought that misspellings and other issues were ok to place in the Trivia section of the main article considering the Professor Oak article. Should that Oak example be removed as well or am I mistaken is some part? --Super goku (talk) 21:06, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't get where there's any misspelling or anything. Feel free to be as elaborate as you want trying to explain it to me =P , because I just can't see anything wrong with it. Tiddlywinks (talk) 21:28, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
Ah, I see. Here is how the line goes, "Great! I'm sure May'll be happy to hear that, too." For some reason, the text combines May's name with the word will to create "May'll" for some reason. I had a few issues wording it in the article, so I might not have been clear on what the text displayed. --Super goku (talk) 02:01, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Are you saying that it is an error? :o MannedTooth (Talk) 02:03, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
"For some reason"? That's a very natural thing in English, contracting "will" like that. Like I said, it doesn't seem to be any problem...
Can I ask, do you know what it says for Brendan? Tiddlywinks (talk) 02:06, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Contracting with a proper noun is correct? MannedTooth (Talk) 02:09, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
I'm sorry MannedTooth, but I'd really like to not have to try to carry on two separate branches of this discussion at the same time. If Super goku and I can resolve the main issue here, then if you still have questions, feel free to bring it up again then, please. Tiddlywinks (talk) 02:11, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
I'm sorry to Tiddlywinks for causing the issue without checking more into it. Based on what you said and looking at footage, you can use the contraction of the word will with a name. Sorry for the trouble. --Super goku (talk) 03:09, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Where is th- Oh...

I had to Ctrl+F to find it. :o Isn't that a sign that it's not evident ? xP MannedTooth (Talk) 00:27, 16 February 2016 (UTC)


Congrats on new rank. :) - unsigned comment from Tripplekittys (talkcontribs)

Thank you. =) Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:43, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

MC Images

Why is all the images on here are linked as sources at the bottom and not uploaded? MannedTooth (Talk) 23:13, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

It is against Bulbapedia policy to copy and upload images from a website without permission from the website owner or an affiliate. We prefer scans/pictures from our own users. Hence, this is why the aforementioned images are referenced and not uploaded. SirFinkleBottom 23:19, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Even when these come from official sources or that we mention where it comes from? MannedTooth (Talk) 23:25, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
I sympathize with that question, MannedTooth, but I'm not 100% certain how strict our policy is in that regard. Certainly official images are usually OK, but when other companies enter the picture...
Going by the style of the pages for previous generations of figures, though, it could also be that it would be preferable to have pictures of the figure including its packaging, and the references are mostly meant as a stopgap measure. (Since Lady Ariel added all of those references, it may also be faster if you simply asked her why she did it like that.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 23:33, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
I found that this image [3] (for example) is tagged with its website, so can I use images from that website? If I can't, I am willing to upload take pictures on my own, only thing, I am not confirmed on the archives due to a lack of edits; there is nothing to edit, so is there a way to confirm me manually so that I can upload these? I also have plenty of Roaring Skies cards in english that I would be able to upload in order to replace the japanese that are currently there. If I add pictures/scans, my edits requirement will be met anyway, right? :P MannedTooth (Talk) 00:33, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
If you think there's nothing to edit, you haven't looked hard enough. Like the saying goes: where there's a will, there's a way. Learn about the Archives and then look around to figure what you can improve.
Also, let me just say this: if you have any questions about the TCG, direct them to Maverick Nate (or at least anyone but me). I really don't know enough about our TCG effort here (or the TCG in general) to advise on much of anything about it. Nate would definitely be able to give you a definite answer about TCG issues. Tiddlywinks (talk) 04:26, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
On another note, should the Monster Collection page be renamed MONCOLLÉ. I'm no expert in this, but according to this the official name and logo has changed to MONCOLLÉ. If not, it should at least be mentioned. --Wowy(토크) 08:11, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Suggested. It will receive consideration in due time. Tiddlywinks (talk) 13:47, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Thought I would answer the question about those references on the page. They are meant to be sources for the release date of the figures (and if you look closely at the links, not all of them actually link to a page with a picture of the figure), but it just happens most of the links also include a picture of the figure. Lady Ariel 21:01, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Template:Mystery dungeon items

Hey why not link TMs and HMs in this template to List of TM and HM locations in Pokémon Mystery Dungeon instead? --Raltseye 14:40, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Hm. I'm not sure, maybe. I'll see if any other staff have any thoughts about it. Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:31, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

hitting pokemon

what rips of XY images are you talking about that says hit? Yamitora1 (talk) 12:41, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Images for XY (same place I got File:ST basic bag.png from) that I previously received from Kaphotics when I asked about any such resources. I've not seen the link he gave me in public anywhere else, so I'm not sure if it's okay for me to just share that, but you could always ask him about it if you want. The images may also be available to anyone who has a decrypted ROM, scattered around the file structure.
Beyond that, though, there were still problems with your latest reasoning. Mainly, if, with the 'normal' "poking/prodding", you were referring to when you just tap once on the Pokemon, then that's defintely not "poking/prodding"; that exact same effect happens when you tap away from the Pokemon too. And IMO, there's much more to the "hit" SFX than just a shortened rubbing SFX.
At any rate,'s definitely something we should continue to discuss here or on Amie's talk page (where it'd be easier for random people to join) rather than risk edit warring about it. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:46, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

User possibly abusing multiple accounts

Hello, I believe that the user Lukeno94 is using this account when they already have one. In a comment on "Talk:ROM Hacks" it said something about not being able to access their old account. I'm telling you about this because it's against policies so you or any other admin can decide what should be done.Sly Fox (talk) 18:21, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

EXs & Breaks of Fates Collide.

Hi, there. I need to clarify something and I didn't want to bother Maverick Nate. Is it okay if I remove all the EXs and BREAKs added today to the english set list for now? Users are always told here to not copy information from other sites, specially PokéBeach. And I'm pretty sure the user who added those cards only did it because he saw the article at PokéBeach. Other than there, I haven't seen that information anywhere else so it can't be properly confirmed. Metalizard (talk) 22:08, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Honestly, the TCG is definitely not my area of expertise. As far as Fates Collide (TCG) goes, the only judgement I can make is that Nate already visited that page, so either he thought it was okay or he didn't notice. If you were sure it was improperly sourced, though, I'd say go ahead. But in short, it may be best to ask Nate anyway. Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:27, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Ones revealed via images are fine*. The ones revealed via text on other sites are not and should honestly be removed however, since false information is frequently posted on said sites (I'm pretty sure N kept getting removed because a certain site said it wasn't a part of the main expansion, which isn't true.) Feel free to remove it. MaverickNate 22:50, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks both of you for answering. I was just confused and started wondering if the cards had actually been confirmed somewhere else. Metalizard (talk) 02:22, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Need a small favor

Since we both have done some good work for the Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire page, could you come over to my talk page and participate in the recent discussion regarding an edit I had to revert for a noble reason on the ORAS page. -Tyler53841 (talk) 01:01, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

'File appearance

I wanna be a Glitch PKMN. You don't understand. - unsigned comment from Scooterscanley (talkcontribs)

No offense, but if you're just joking, there was no need for this comment. (I only mention this because you just previously made another idle comment. I just want you to understand that talk pages are meant for improving the wiki.)
If you're not joking: categories are reserved for pages that belong there. User pages only belong in categories like User groups. Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:21, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

ALSO: Any advice for TMs/HMs? Whenever I preview my profile page, all it displays is all the text I've entered. scooterscanley (talk) 18:22, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Your header and footer only have one "}" at the end; it should be two ("}}"). Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:45, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Ah. Also, why does it say "Character for Old man glitch", and why is the Johto Guard Glitch/Time Capsule Exploit excluded?scooterscanley (talk) 19:20, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
I would guess the Old man glitch part is the same as the Mew special stat thing, it's what you need to get that glitch 'mon using that glitch. The Time Capsule exploit part that's in the regular GlitchPkmnInfobox template isn't there simply because that template was updated after the Nocat version was split off. Tiddlywinks (talk) 23:58, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

re. Fury Swipes

I made the change because as it stands, it's implying that three and only three hits is the most probable outcome, which is not true: it has the same probability as two hits at 37.5% each. It means to say that three or more hits is likely (37.5% + 12.5% + 12.5% for a 62.5% chance of three plus hits). This yields an above average likelihood that the power yield will be 18 × 3 or more, resting on an average power of 54.

I'm not sure what is confusing about this, especially given the current wording. DKqwerty (talk) 19:52, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

If you performed the move 100 times, you'd likely get 300 hits. That averages to 3 hits every time the move is used. That's what an average usually is, an arithmetic mean. You're talking about mode. The current wording is perfectly correct and/or adequate. Tiddlywinks (talk) 20:05, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Oddish debut

I feel that something is overlooked. It says in GDZ25 that another Trainer owns the Oddish instead of Shu while Shu's page mentioned that he owns the Oddish in that chapter. Can you clarify which chapter is the actual debut for Shu's Oddish? PattyMan 21:58, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Actually, at the end of the chapter, the unnamed Trainer offers Shu his Oddish as an apology for what it did. I guess I never gave it much thought. Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:25, 14 March 2016 (UTC)


Hey Tiddlywinks! Just a thought, but to my knowledge there aren't any pages or categories putting all the moves available in Pokémon Conquest in one place. Since there aren't any new moves introduced in Conquest, would it be appropriate to make a category for these moves?--Wowy(토크) 00:23, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

That sounds good (and easy, with the move template). I'll just double-check it with other staff real quick and hopefully I can make that happen. Tiddlywinks (talk) 00:33, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Sentences ending with prepositions

Hello, you recently reverted an edit made to Gengar's page. Is it really okay to end a sentence with a preposition? My English teacher made it very clear that a sentence should never end with one.Sly Fox (talk) 23:26, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it's okay. With all due respect to your teacher(s), that rule just doesn't match normal English discourse. I don't even mean "casual" discourse. I mean, no matter how formal almost anyone is trying to be, there's just no way they're going to put enough thought into their speech to avoid prepositions at the end of a sentence. Tiddlywinks (talk) 23:33, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

I know they're not remakes.

My point was, they could've changed it just like the Pikachu minigame thing. The only reason I brought it up was that they left the game corner unchanged, despite gambling laws forcing them to change/remove them in other games. I hope this clears things up. Unowninator (talk) 18:47, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

The primary problem with what you wrote, sure, was implying that the VC games were remakes. Beyond that, I'm not entirely certain what's rightest, but I lean against it just because "no change" should pretty much be the expectation. One place it'd be more directly relevant/notable, though, is Pokémon controversy#Gambling. Tiddlywinks (talk) 20:00, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Template:Pokémon Infobox

Hi, I was just wondering if it would be possible for someone to please edit Template:Pokémon Infobox to account for the unique names of the alternate forms belonging to Zygarde and Hoopa (similar to what was done for Charizard and Mewtwo's dual Mega Evolutions); as it is now, the template displays them kind of backwards. I can't edit the template myself as it's protected.

Xérnéas (talk) 07:13, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

It's protected for good reason. A template with such heavy use (and so complicated as well) is not wise for anyone (even staff) to edit freely. It's not the highest priority, but we should get around to it...eventually. We still need to update the hatch time calculation, too. =P Tiddlywinks (talk) 23:57, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Just a heads up

I think you might have meant to say "Café is the proper spelling" instead of "Cafe"--Cold (talk) 04:55, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought I did =P , thanks. I worded that first one differently at first, and then when I came to make it like others I wrote below, I must have screwed it up. Tiddlywinks (talk) 04:59, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

help identifying a weird glow in battle

Lately I've been encountering a strange ominous red glow on Pokemon in the Battle Spot, and all my attempts to search for the cause leads to incorrect search results and several rule 34 results. I seem to encounter it on Shiny Pokémon a lot. Here is a Vs Recorder of a battle I encountered it, watch the Mismagius.


It looks like either eyes or ribbon loopsYamitora1 (talk) 13:36, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Further in the battle the same red eyes or ribbon loops appear on a shiny Umbreon Yamitora1 (talk) 13:40, 4 April 2016 (UTC) Tiddlywinks (talk) 14:21, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank youYamitora1 (talk) 11:26, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Slowpoke as a Water Bear

Nah, that was the right link. I mean, it may look strange but I'm sure they're based (not only psychically) on Water Bears (AKA tardigrades): they have similar body and limbs shapes; Slowpoke, and Slowbro, both have some ursine characteristics (suggesting a pun) and the name Tardigrada itself means "slow stepper".

I'd like to ask you to reconsider this one. ExLight (talk) 19:15, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

What I see is eight limbs and segmented bodies, and mandibles. And they're miscroscopic. I could go on... They're pretty much nothing like Slowpoke.
Your pun is fairly abstract. In the absence of any other stronger connections, it just comes off as a stretch to me. Tiddlywinks (talk) 20:13, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Help in editing my discussion page

I want to clear the content of my discussion (talk) page but a error message came Vandal Filter 3 and asking an administrator to do that. Please help! Subhraneel (talk) 03:47, 9 April 2016 (UTC)Subhraneel

Well, in the first place, people aren't really supposed to "remove" a talk page's contents anyway. What we ask users do as an alternative is archive their talk page. Try that. =) Tiddlywinks (talk) 04:19, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Quick question about pkmn template links

Should these be actively replaced? Part of the reason I decided to use {{pkmn}} (for the Pokémaniac and Tuber pages at least) was because every other Gen VI trainer class page used it in their "Art from"/"Appears in" bits and I wanted to be consistent.--Cold (talk) 19:39, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

I didn't exactly think all that far about it ( ^^; ). I was just thinking I didn't want to leave those changes and thereby "encourage" more use of pkmn for anyone who might see those. But if it's really used so regularly, it'd certainly be best if we could replace it with a proper game template.
...Assuming I'm not just being "silly" about this distinction. =P I had this idea someone told me not to use "pkmn" before, but it may be I just imagined that (I can't find where that might have been from a brief search). Tiddlywinks (talk) 19:53, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Re: New pages/notability

Oh, sorry about that. Just thought that since Bulbapedia was a primary place for people to look stuff up, it should have full lists for Battle Maison stuff. I wanted to add the quotes for Trainers since there seemed to be a lot of fascination around those on the web.

And on the topic of keeping up-to-date info (despite almost being Gen VI), can you look at the Cute (condition), Cool (condition), Beauty (condition), Clever (condition) and Tough (condition) page? I made fully-working tables updated for ORAS a while ago and left them on each of the discussion pages until the mods decide to update. Thanks. TehPerson (talk) 01:06, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Also, I know you said there was nothing wrong about the Trainers and Pokemon page, but the code is extremely hefty. Editing would be so much less laggy if I could use one template instead of 5ish newlines per entry. TehPerson (talk) 01:08, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
For future reference, if someone posts on your talk page, respond there. (If everyone went back and forth, each person's talk page would only be half a conversation. =P ) Conversations should be kept in one place.
When a page gets to a certain size, it just gets unwieldy, and I don't think templates necessarily help. But how much information have you still not included? Are you still gathering information somehow? (And/or how?) Tiddlywinks (talk) 01:21, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

repeated links

In Route 124 Surf is linked in items, but it also linked in the right side bar. So it's already linked twice? - unsigned comment from EternalDragonX (talkcontribs)

The infobox can usually be "ignored" for that sort of consideration. Tiddlywinks (talk) 14:19, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

But a Lucky Punch doesn't work on Happiny.

Shouldn't this fact just be on Chansey's page? Unowninator (talk) 05:43, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

First off, don't put part of your conversation as a discussion title. That's not what a title is for, and it just becomes easy to miss, as well. If you can't think of what you should put, just use the page name where your issue originates (like "Happiny").
As to your question: It's talking about the family. I think it's fine. Tiddlywinks (talk) 06:37, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

That Colosseum thing.

I don't understand your explanation for removing this:

Also, any Pokémon absent from Pokémon Ruby and Sapphire that are in Colosseum (whether they're catchable or not) were all introduced in Generation II.

To elaborate, the only gen 1 Pokemon trainers used were the ones that were in Ruby & Sapphire (from this list) [4], such as Zubat, Geodude, and Tentacool. Anything from gen 1 that's not on the list, such as Onix, Porygon, and Snorlax were not used by any trainers.

You said:

It's mostly expected that a pair of games opening a generation lets you catch all the new Pokemon. That only leaves Gen I & II, so the last part is obvious/not notable

I fail to understand what makes it obvious. Can you please elaborate? Thanks. Unowninator (talk) 15:48, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

You've already excluded Gen I with the start of your point. So it very literally doesn't need saying that any Pokemon not in RS are from Gen II: that's the only (reasonable) possibility! Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:06, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Okay, I get what you're saying. But just so we're clear, you do understand I'm talking about your opponents & not the player, right? Unowninator (talk) 16:11, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
I have no idea what distinction you're trying to make.
Also, please use ":"s to indent your responses one space farther in than the previous reply. It should be simple enough to understand if you look at the code here when you reply. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:15, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, force of habit; another wiki I use doesn't enforce it.
So you still don't get my explanation, huh? Hmm... Okay, you know how only 200 Pokemon are obtainable in Ruby & Sapphire? (See this [5] for which ones) Some of the Pokemon from gen 1 couldn't be caught or seen in either game.
Now you know how when you see a Pokemon in Colosseum, it gets registered into your P★DA (like a Pokedex)? Well, let's say you battle every single trainer and snag every Pokemon. Now if you look at your P★DA, the only gen 1 Pokemon you'll find are the ones on that list I gave you. There was no way to get Raticate & such on there until Firered & Leafgreen came out. If you still don't understand, which part(s) don't you get? Unowninator (talk) 16:28, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
(Reminder: Use preview and/or use the indent on your whole response, please.)
I never assumed you were talking about Pokemon traded in from another game. That kind of completely ruins any point. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:33, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Technically I wasn't talking about trading; I only brought up FR/LG because I didn't know how to explain it any better, and I still don't. Also, if we keep indenting, won't it get a little... messy? Unowninator (talk) 16:39, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
There's nothing "messy" about indentation. What's messy is mixing it back and forth (or not using it at all).
If you can't understand what you're trying to say well enough, then I'm sorry, but I just can't exert myself too hard to try to understand you in your confusion. As far as I'm concerned, this whole conversation has basically been about Pokemon obtainable within Colosseum alone. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:45, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Oh, so you still think this is about obtainable Pokemon? That would explain the confusion. I'm not talking about that at all; I'm talking about Pokemon you can battle, but can't actually catch. For example, Lady Venus has a Steelix & Vileplume but you can't actually get one. However, they still get registered to your P★DA just from battling her. Unowninator (talk) 16:51, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Then I'm just going to say it's not important. Or too complicated to be important. Obtainable Pokemon? Sure. Just encounters? If it's not very straightforward (very easy, simple, perhaps "natural" delineations), it's not really worth noting. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:59, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Okay, well, at least you finally get it. Even if you don't add it, I'm just glad I finally explained myself. Sorry about the whole thing; I'm not always good with words. I'm usually either too specific or too vague. Thanks for talking this through. I hope I wasn't a bother.Unowninator (talk) 17:03, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Re: Battle area templates

Thank you for making the battlearea templates. That should help save a lot of memory when editing. I have created a header and footer to go along. They are different, but hopefully an improvement on, what already exists. TehPerson (talk) 18:11, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

King's Rock

Ooooohhhh right, it doesn't mean Hariyamas are in Mossdeep City! Sorry for the confusion. - unsigned comment from UltramanAce3245 (talkcontribs)

That's alright, just glad to clear it up. ^_^ Tiddlywinks (talk) 01:30, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Pokken Pages

Thanks for the advice! If I find some free time soon, I might start up those pages but we'll see. As for your question about the arenas, the only thing different about them other than scenery is shape and size (which can actually have a large impact on the fighting itself). I actually just got the game yesterday so I haven't even unlocked them all yet, haha. The way I see it, either there could be a page for each arena, or just an "Arena" page that lists them out and describes them briefly. Either way, I do think it should be separated from the Pokken page at some point. Swiftgallade46 (talk) 06:49, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

And if it'll get split, someone has to start it. =P Someone else could do it tomorrow, perfectly! But we can't really bet on that. If everyone waits, nothing will ever get done! If you decide to start something on a userpage, feel free to make whatever choice you want, an individual arena or a list; we can see what happens. ^_^ Tiddlywinks (talk) 07:08, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
After getting some more information, it might be best to start out trying a list. Just make a section for each arena, with a basic, overall description I guess (and/or whatever you can think of that you think is notable), and then I suppose the bulk of the section would be taken up by background Pokemon. (If you don't see this before you start a page, though, and you make an individual arena page, no biggie, we can still see what's what and then maybe try starting a list.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:06, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

So what IS an acceptable source? And can you prove it has Flame Body?

Smogon also states Flame Body. Can you prove which is the correct ability? Unowninator (talk) 02:48, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Smogon's alright.
It's weird, I tried looking back, and I can't find any good reason it was added. We said Flame Body in Gen V. Then all of a sudden a "note" is added for Flash Fire recently. Tiddlywinks (talk) 03:33, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Re: Japanese names

Korean Ending,, Google Translate. --DarkPikaDex123 (talk) 23:31, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Miscrediting of anime animation directors

Hi, I noticed that the anime episode infoboxes have credited some people wrongly as animation directors (作画監督) when they should have been assistant animation directors (作画監督補佐). I have corrected one such case, but it seems that this may be more common than I think. For example:

  • XY002: 田島瑞穂, 松田真路 and one more person not in the infobox are actually credited as assistant animation director in the anime
  • XY003: 堤舞 and 松永香苗 are actually credited as assistant animation director in the anime
  • XY009: 岩根雅明 is actually credited as assistant animation director

I looked around and saw one example in DP063 (comparing against Anime_staff_by_episode_(DP061-DP070)#DP063), which does not have this problem, but then again, this is from a previous series, so I am not sure if it is some guideline/policy introduced with the XY series and want to clarify what the correct way should be, before I go about correcting the other articles. Chenzw (talk) 12:58, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

There is another problem when the episode credits the executive animation director (総作画監督) and assistant executive animation directors (総作画監督補佐). The credits screen places these staff on a higher position than animation directors (作画監督), but it is not necessarily reflected in the episode's infobox, where they are all credited as animation directors (作画監督):
Example in XY106: 志村泉 and 松永香苗, who served as assistant executive animation directors in that episode, not only are miscredited in the infobox, but are also placed below 岩根雅明 in the infobox. Chenzw (talk) 14:59, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
There is currently no particular policy regarding your question. Tiddlywinks (talk) 03:02, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
The verdict is that only those credited as a plain animation director should be listed as such in the infobox. Tiddlywinks (talk) 03:23, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Ok, thank you for the clarification! Chenzw (talk) 03:27, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
I ran into another edge case on SS026: there is no animation director listed in the credits, but 総作画監督 is listed (although this is translated to "executive animation director" on Bulbapedia, now I am not sure if the translation is fully correct; the "総" taken in context, could mean either "lead", or "chief"). How should the episode infobox be filled in, in this case? I have added the executive animation directors to the infobox for now. Chenzw (talk) 08:10, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
That sounds fine to me (if there's no position X in the credits, then the next highest position is appropriate/acceptable), but I'll have to double-check with others to be sure. Tiddlywinks (talk) 14:54, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, it's fine. Tiddlywinks (talk) 20:19, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

"Not unique = not notable"

You say that a lot, but I'd like to mention a few things:


Noibat and its evolution Noivern are the only dual Flying-type Pokémon to have Flying as their primary type.


No other Pokémon has the same type combination as Aegislash and its evolutionary relatives.


This episode marks one of the extremely rare instances that Ash ever intentionally hurts a Pokémon, as he kicks J's Drapion in the face in order to escape from its claws.

I could name more examples, but I just want to ask, why are these considered special exceptions? Just out of curiosity. Unowninator (talk) 16:49, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Unique to, at most, a single Pokemon family.
I hardly know the anime, certainly not enough to have any real idea about Ash's habit or lack thereof of abusing Pokemon. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:56, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Well then why isn't the anime thing notable for Porygon2 and Porygon-Z? Unowninator (talk) 16:58, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
I have no idea what "anime" thing there was for Porygon2/Porygon-Z. There was a Melee thing and there was a TCG thing. (And "not unique = not notable" was only referring to the latter.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:04, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Oops, I meant to say voice, not anime. Unowninator (talk) 17:07, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
That wasn't at all about being unique or not. Like I said in the edit summary, the point was contradictory. We can't keep something contradictory on the page, and since it contradicted itself I wasn't sure what the point was really supposed to be, so all that was left was pretty much to remove it. If the intended point can be expressed without being contradictory, then it may be possible to judge if it's actually notable. (If you want to try to do that, I'd ask you to do it here in case there are any further questions, just so it doesn't spark multiple edits on that page.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:09, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Strange, I don't recall Z having a voice at all. Maybe I should just return the fact to what it originally was? Unowninator (talk) 17:30, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
* Porygon2 is the only one in its evolutionary family to not receive an audible voice despite having a role in Super Smash Bros. Melee, where Pokémon have recorded voices. This also makes it the only one of the first 493 not to have a voice.
I'm actually wondering, why does Melee need to be mentioned? Were there other Pokemon who didn't have "audible voices" before Melee who received them in Melee? For that matter, is the whole point only supposed to be talking about Melee? Are there even 493 Pokemon in Melee—especially with "voices"? If it's not just about Melee, then is an "audible voice" or "voice" different from a cry? Because I know Porygon2 has a cry—makes a sound—in Gen III and IV at least. The more I think about it, the more I have to wonder if it's not just a bad point, period... Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:47, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Sorry for not indenting, but it's starting to get cluttered IMO. Anyway, you do understand that a cry and a voice are 2 different things, right? Like how Pikachu uses a voice actor in the anime, but in the games makes a weird noise (cry)? BTW, [[6]] Porygon2 is at 2:42ish. 19:42, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

I see no reason I should have realized that a "voice" is not a "cry". The trivia point is pretty damn confusing if you ask me.
Porygon2 is the only one in its evolutionary family to not receive an audible voice despite having a role in Super Smash Bros. Melee, where Pokémon have recorded voices. What does this mean? Does this mean, all Pokemon that appear in Melee except Porygon2 have a "voice"? Does it mean something else?
This also makes it the only one of the first 493 not to have a voice. What does this mean? Does this mean, in Melee, the first 493 Pokemon all appear somewhere, and all but Porygon2 have a "voice"? Does it mean, in some core series game, 492 of the first 493 Pokemon have a "voice"? If the latter: which game(s)?
I have more questions, but let's try to answer these first. Tiddlywinks (talk) 20:02, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Forget the core Pokemon games. As to your questions:
  • Let's just change it to "Porygon2 is the only one in its evolutionary family to not receive an audible voice, period."
  • ... It means Porygon2 never had a human voice actor in any of the franchise, really, whether it be in the anime or a spin-off game.
  • What was the 3rd question again?
Unowninator (talk) 20:32, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Not notable: too small a group.
After looking back through the page's history, I was able to find where the point was originally added and the intent becomes clearer, and that too was actually unnotable for the same reason.
The addition of the latter part is also much clearer and is a bit like what you say above. That part is maybe notable... I just don't know if there's any Pokemon beyond the first 493 who doesn't have a "voice". If it's not unique, it's not notable. "Porygon2 is the only Pokémon that has never been voiced by a human voice actor" would be good (and clear) trivia, if it's true. Tiddlywinks (talk) 20:40, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

So just out of curiosity, why doesn't this rule apply to the anime? I see it a lot (ex: this happens again in over say, 500 episodes later) Unowninator (talk) 01:15, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

First off: I don't really know the anime.
That said: 500 episodes is pretty long. Tiddlywinks (talk) 01:17, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Mind if I chime in here, since that point came up in a potential trivia point before XY116 aired? As Tiddlywinks said, 500 epsidoes is a long time, and according to ForceFire droughts are notable. Not something I personally agree with, but it seems to be the accepted norm for the anime at this point. ChE clarinetist (talk) 01:23, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Well, 718+ Pokemon's a large number. So why does it only have to apply to 1 for it to be trivia as opposed to just 2 or 4? Unowninator (talk) 01:50, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
As far as I'm concerned, if you want to argue about the games, we (you and I) can argue about the games. But if you want to argue about the anime, or use the anime to argue about the games, you should find someone more familiar with the anime for that. I can parrot and postulate, but I don't have any real "feel" for the anime. Tiddlywinks (talk) 02:03, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Very well. I was just asking out of curiosity anyway. Unowninator (talk) 02:07, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Ice cannot be frozen in any gen
pokeruby has not yet the info, but if you REALLY want to, I can disassemble the relevant part in Gen 3 real quick.
I'll make sure to use more meaningful summaries in the future, but you'll have to excuse me for being slightly -annoyed- at having to ask people to not believe Bulbapedia for any old gen related information if the article has not been updated recently, then having people revert my edits because my summaries are "not gonna cut it", while edits like the following one pose no problem, and worse they cause wrong information to be on the wiki for more than a year, and cause a lot of people to take it for true, thus I had ONCE AGAIN to expain to people that NO, they aren't going to freeze my Jynx with Ice Beam, despite whatever is written on Bulbapedia, and that NO the implementation on PS is not wrong.
The wrong info was added by SnorlaxMonster, on December 30th 2014, with the reason "Not sure if Ice types can be frozen by Ice-type moves in Gen II and III". Now that's a completely valid reason to make that edit and to add wrong informations, right ?
So, yeah, I'm a bit pissed right now. If my edit has a bad summary, the edit was still done, and the first thing you should have done is looking at my contributions to conclude that I'm "not just confused or something", but that this info was removed because it was incorrect (or at the very least not on a whim), so you wouldn't have to undo my edit. Also don't mark the undo as a minor edit. If the "Hide minor edits" is active in a user's watchlist, he won't be able to see it. Then you could have sent me a message on my talk page to ask the reason of the edit, and tell me to write meaningful summaries. Much better than restoring wrong info on an article, one of the too many that still has incorrect info about old gens that old gen players are trying to correct. --Froggy25 (talk) 15:56, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

It's totally understandable if you're annoyed. But don't place the blame on me.
I do actually know you from your past contributions—but the other day I sure as hell didn't know you from Adam, and some unknown going "Huh?" just screams "I'M ASSUMING!" Sure, there's various things I could have checked. But you sure as hell didn't look very trustworthy, and I sure as hell can't always do everything I might want to, so no, I really don't think any particular blame is on me for reverting you. If you want to avoid similar confusion in the future, you know how. I don't claim to be perfect, but something other than "Huh?" can only help.
In all hope of goodwill, I do look forward to your further contributions. Like I said, I've seen you contribute good things. Just try not to take things too personally and address any confusion with all due civility. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:27, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

"Cite" template from Zelda Wiki

I saw that Zelda wiki uses Citations as references for sources as to where does certain information comes from. Example

I was wondering if we could implement that. I would love to do that. MannedTooth (Talk) 19:57, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I don't think there's much need for something like that. And perhaps you really think it'd be good for us...but the way you've said it here, you just sound like you're on a similar track as some of the other things you've wanted to do before and that's your primary concern—and such a big change isn't likely to happen just to make one person happy. Tiddlywinks (talk) 20:55, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
I was just wondering. MannedTooth (Talk) 21:01, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I got a dumb question about the code of conduct... :P

Considering what it basically means, would actually using the phrase "WTF" actually be a violation of the code of conduct? Like I said, it is a kinda dumb question, I guess, but I just started to wonder about that. :P Thank you for your time. ----NateVirus(Talk|Contributions) 22:19, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Bulbapedia:Code of conduct#What that means. It doesn't have to be a bad thing. (I might think, in the majority of situations it might be used, it wouldn't be too bad.) The goal isn't really to avoid "curse words", it's just like it says on the tin: Be nice. Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:25, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Okay, thanks! ^_^ ----NateVirus(Talk|Contributions) 17:55, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

About Recruitable Pokémon in Dungeon

Hey Tiddlywinks! I noticed your recent edit about the "Recruitable Pokémon" section in Super Mystery Dungeon, and I just thought I'll bring up some discussion into this.

Regrading its notability, I think it is kinda notable since the Pokémon are recruited at different levels and importantly they can come with special moves (e.g. one of the Unown). But if the page was to have all the Pokémon listed as it is now, the page would probably become way to huge. In my opinion, I prefer the table format as it is in Connection Orb, and I think adding the moves/levels into that table would probably be the most logical since it is relevant to Connecting; but the table will become even larger than it is right now (which is already big!). --Wowy(토크) 04:07, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! That is a thought, putting it on Connection Orb where all the Pokemon are already listed. I've had a few questions I've remained unsure about, though, maybe you could help me out just so I can be sure?
From what I've gathered, "connecting" in the Connection Orb is basically the new recruiting, right? And you can't (ever) recruit Pokemon by beating them in dungeons like in the past games, is that right? Also, anyone you connect with in the Connection Orb will be recruitable when you go on an expedition (give or take any who are on a "break")?
I'm actually thinking SMD needs a bit of a rethink overall, re:connections/recruiting...
As far as I can tell, this connection stuff is basically equivalent to availability for SMD (like Bulbasaur (Pokémon)#In side games)... I'm thinking the table on Connection Orb only really needs the first four columns, and we should put the info about how to meet and/or connect with a Pokemon on its species page. I also think we should add something like a "Connections" section to all the location pages listing what Pokemon you can connect with there (and how), and maybe what Pokemon you can just meet (basically like the "Pokemon" sections of core series locations; it could even be called "Pokemon" maybe). On a dungeon page, it could say what mission (that can be done at that dungeon) can be completed to connect with a Pokemon, and it could say if any Pokemon can show up as traveling/fainted/fleeing Pokemon. And for Serene Village, it could say how you can talk to Azumarill in Café Connection (though I don't know how random Café Connections are...). I think this would be more appropriate and about as useful as trying to cram all that info into the same page on Connection Orb (which we really don't generally do).
I have thoughts of mocking up a few pages (and templates) to demonstrate the idea. Tiddlywinks (talk) 04:39, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Firstly, yes, "connecting" in the Connection Orb is basically the new recruiting. And yes, you can't (ever) recruit Pokemon by beating them in dungeons like in the past games. Not sure what you mean by your 3rd question but you can use any members you have connected with on a mission. I'm only very early in the game though...
And I think all your ideas sound great and practical! :)--Wowy(토크) 04:51, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! I hate the idea of asking something burdensome of you, but it'd be great if you could keep track of what missions are at what dungeons as you play, and what Pokemon connect after completing them (since most of that isn't even filled in on Connection Orb table). When there's still whole dungeons without pages, I don't hold out a lot of hope that there'll be people jumping at the opportunity to fill out connection details if we add such sections. =P Tiddlywinks (talk) 05:03, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Sure thing! I was already sort of keeping track, but as you can tell I'll be going pretty slowly because of other commitments. But better late and never. --Wowy(토크) 05:06, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, that's totally fine! I may put some time into browsing some playthrough videos for that sort of data too, but I kind of expect it'll be hard to get complete data for some/many places by that. It'll be good if there's someone who can keep better track. ^_^ Tiddlywinks (talk) 08:29, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Non-significant "error" on XY114

Hi, I wonder if you could take some time to take a look at Talk:XY115? I don't think this error that was added into the article is really what we can consider an "error", but more of a technical limitation due to resolution. I removed one part that was obviously false, but the rest of the statement doesn't seem right, too. Chenzw (talk) 08:59, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

I don't know whether it should be called a techinical limitation or what, but I kind of agree with you: it's just too far away for me to personally care about calling any of those things "errors". However, I'm really not very familiar with the anime or anything, so it would probably be best if you asked someone who is about this. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:55, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Right, thank you! Chenzw (talk) 17:22, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Web accessibility


Have you ever heard of web accessibility ? If not, I recommend you to read this and, especially, that.

By undoing some of my changes, I think you are not very nice to impaired persons. Ju gatsu mikka (talk) 17:01, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

I essentially reverted it because it's just not how we've done any table here (AFAIK). I will bring up the considerations you suggest with other staff members. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:26, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

That error you undid.

Basically, Meowth is apparently a wild Pokemon, because in other episodes (like where he's supposedly fired from Team Rocket), he's been hit with a Pokeball and sucked inside, although it breaks out. But in that episode, it doesn't. You see what I'm saying?

PS: How am I supposed to know if it's a redirect? I can't tell it apart from the real one. Unowninator (talk) 23:43, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

The Poke Ball was originally thrown at Kabutops and then deflected/rejected. As far as I'm concerned, that means it doesn't have to "activate" when it hits Meowth. If there's any particular reason to think otherwise, please let me know.
Visit both of these links: Pokeball and Poké Ball. If you compare them both, you can easily see the difference. Specifically, look right under the article title. It says. If you just follow the links you're making, you can easily check if it's a redirect. Tiddlywinks (talk) 23:55, 1 May 2016 (UTC)


Hey Tiddlywinks. Just wanted to note a few things before you make any changes to SMD related pages. I was comparing my missions with youtube videos, and I noticed a few differences.

  • The location of the mission can differ (e.g. Ralts mission [7] vs. [8]). I think the locations may be fixed to certain limited locations since mine was the same as one of them, and not all locations are open at the start. This means that the idea of putting which Pokemon can be connected with on specific location pages might not work.

However, things that do appear fixed:

  • The type of mission
  • The reward after a mission (I don't know if you want to include this info to wherever the mission info will be moved to)
  • The difficulty of the mission (I don't know if you want to include this info somewhere too)

Also what do you mean by "set 3 contains 809 Pokémon" on the Connection Orb page?--Wowy(토크) 00:53, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks for finding that and letting me know! If you might be up for experimenting, maybe you could see if there's any way to soft-reset and change where a Pokemon's mission is set. (Maybe you have to soft-reset to before their mission-posting requirement has been met.) It'd be really interesting to know how many locations most missions are limited to (especially if all the dungeons have been unlocked), just a few or a lot (or any) or what? If it's a lot, it may indeed be less useful to try to list a dungeon's missions...
I took 809 from a quick look at a number I already had from a step in my process, not realizing that it was actually something like the total number of Pokemon in the first two rows of the table, instead of just the number of individual rows/"nodes". I completely spaced on how big the number I was writing actually was. =P Tiddlywinks (talk) 01:14, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

How was that too specific? (Pikachu)

Pikachu is the only Pokémon to have 2 of its base stats increased in Generation VI. Specifically, its Defense and Sp. Def

If it's the last part, why didn't you just delete it? Unowninator (talk) 21:17, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

I was thinking...stuff? I've re-added and reworded it. Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:31, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Okay, thanks. One more thing, over here on the ability page [9]. Please tell me you I'm misunderstanding that last part. >_> Unowninator (talk) 22:52, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
What? (I don't understand.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 23:15, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
 (and no one else "matters")
(Sorry for not indenting; I can't seem to do it with the box) Unowninator (talk) 23:24, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
That doesn't tell me what you're misunderstanding...
If some random site says they were variations or something, that's completely irrelevant to our page. Tiddlywinks (talk) 23:30, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
I was interpreting it as you meant nobody matters except you. And I didn't get the info from any site or anywhere else; I've noticed the connection years ago; I only said it was removed for consistency purposes. Unowninator (talk) 23:35, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
I wrote "us"...
Overcoat wasn't removed. No one removed anything. That table didn't exist until you put it there, just as it appears now (without Overcoat). Even if it had been removed at some point, saying it was "removed" wouldn't be the way to note it. (No one cares. We only describe the end result, not someone saying, "Hey, this needed to be removed.") Tiddlywinks (talk) 23:50, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
My apologies; I just assumed from move variations (like Blizzard) that it was the same type of thing. Unowninator (talk) 23:58, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
It is. But if you saw an example on move variations, it would have been much less confusing if you had copied that example better. Tiddlywinks (talk) 00:01, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, I don't know why I didn't mention it sooner. Sorry I bothered you. Unowninator (talk) 00:06, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Re:Bewitching Tunnel

The latter. It was not acceptable? S U O M I (talk) 12:32, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, generally, our convention is that a page starts with its official English name, but if we only know the official Japanese name, then we only include the Japanese parts at the beginning. (For example, see M19, which has not been released outside of Japan yet.) It may be more convenient sometimes to use the translation/unofficial name in the text afterwards (and for the page title), but it's intended that someone eventually figure out the official English name, and putting the unofficial name there just confuses that.
Also, for future reference, please try to keep conversations in one place rather than moving back and forth between different talk pages. Thanks. =) Tiddlywinks (talk) 12:43, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Need your help with something

A little trick I've been noticing on X and Y is that if in one of the areas where one of the "electric mice" (Pikuchu, Plusle, Minun, Pachirisu, Emolga, and Dedenne) appears and if one of them (or Pichu or Raichu) is at the front of your party then they appear in a battle more often (I've did a recent check and found they kept appearing most of the time when Raichu was at the front of my party, in fact it helped me make it easier to get a Light Ball from Pikachu). I need a second opinion on this, and how to best approach this situation, as I don't know if this was intended or a simple game glitch (nor will I resort to speculation). -Tyler53841 (talk) 05:51, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Have you tested it thoroughly with all of the "electric mice"? It sounds like it's just Static, but Plusle, Minun, Pachirisu, and Dedenne don't have Static. If this doesn't actually work with them, then yeah, it's probably Static, but otherwise, you'd want to test other things. Like can they draw any Electric-type, or just fellow mice? Can any Electric-type draw the mice/Electric-types? And it's always nice if you can give some hard numbers too. Tiddlywinks (talk) 06:15, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Yup, Static. But anyway have a nice day. -Tyler53841 (talk) 13:50, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

FireRed and LeafGreen page

When you have a chance could you go over the FireRed and LeafGreen and make any relevant changes to improve its quality. While it may have been the banned user SatoMew2 that originally posted the cleanup tags, I think if someone can improve quality then it can warrant the need to remove those tags and since you are better at sentence structure than I am, I think you can do a better a job when you have the time seeing how we both worked on Omega and Alpha Sapphire's page and you did a good job of improving quality (to which I won't complain as I understand your reasons). -Tyler53841 (talk) 05:04, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

I've taken a look at it. I'm trying to focus on other things for a bit, but I'll try to get back to it. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:51, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Good luck with your other work, and remember as I said above it's no rush in dealing with the changes, since you can do it when you ready. -Tyler53841 (talk) 16:56, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

EXP yield changes in Gen VI

I thought you might want to know about this because you are working on a modified version of the infobox template in your userspace: there are some Pokémon who have had their experience yields adjusted again in Gen VI. Examples of some species which I have discovered so far are: Pikachu, Raichu, Nidoking, Nidoqueen. The current version of the infobox template only allows for "splitting" of these values between Gen 1-3, Gen 4, and Gen 5. Please consider highlighting this issue further upwards. Chenzw (talk) 14:16, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

From what I've gathered, you have some experience with 3DS/ROM modding or somesuch. If you would be able to dump various stats for Pokemon from the Gen VI games and link me the output somewhere (like just some file sharing site, or pastebin), I'd be happy to process the info and consider your suggestion.
If you can dump all sorts of base stats and such beyond just the experience yield (like catch rate, base friendship, exp growth, egg groups, egg cycles, gender ratio, species, color, body type, base exp, EVs, type, height/weight, base stats), that'd be neat too. I ask just because, personally, I'd like to be able to verify the data on our pages if the need arises. I don't know if you'd know where all of those bits of data are, but any you could dump would be great. =) Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:51, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi, here's the dump. All of this would not have been possible were it not for the efforts of Kaphotics and those folks at Project Pokemon, so a lot of the credit really goes to them - I only made some modifications to allow for a more complete dump.
Some notes about the output:
  • Gender ratio corresponds to the table on Personality value
  • Height/weight are in metric units
I can't find the location for the body type data; for Species (I assume you meant that bit about whether it is a Fox/Mouse/<whatever> Pokemon?), this text is stored somewhere else in the game data, and I will put up another separate dump later tomorrow. Chenzw (talk) 17:32, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Cool, thanks! I'll digest that in a while. And I guess Species is probably straightforwardly in the text dumps which have been floating around for long enough already, actually. I kind of just threw out (almost) everything I could think of. =P Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:51, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Your revert on Captivate (move)

I removed that part because it was already addressed in the second statement: "It will fail if the target has the Ability Oblivious, is the same gender as the user, or either or both Pokémon are genderless." Please reconsider your revert. Chenzw (talk) 16:19, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

It certainly should not be reverted. Even if the next sentence says that it fails if they're opposite genders, that's simply "too late"; mention of such a core requirement should not be deferred like that. On Attract, we certainly wouldn't say that it causes the target to become infatuated, period, and for Synchronoise, we wouldn't say that it damages all adjacent Pokemon, period; and then only in the following sentence mention that, oh, by the way, it doesn't work on [these] Pokemon... That's just not appropriate for these sorts of moves.
As the section stands, it's hardly terrible; the second sentence is simply listing all the cases where it fails. However, if it's really such a problem for you, what you could do is remove the mention in the second sentence. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:35, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

The nightmare trivia

Why did you remove the trivia at The Nightmare? I do understand that it's already made clear that the Pokémon mentioned in that point is already in the Pokémon encountered section, but what is not clear is that they're connected to happiness. So that's why I think the trivia should stay, so once again why was it removed? --Raltseye 07:59, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

In general, I think the point was leaning a bit more subjective than not, and I think it's easy enough to look at the table and just see, "Yeah...most of those don't look very scary." Tiddlywinks (talk) 15:53, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

About the Item template

Hey, I was wondering about the Item template, I've noticed when I was previewing my edit on the Seed page, I noticed that the |sprite3=Seed VI was not working. So it made me realize that the Item template is missing a {{#if:{{{sprite2|}}}|{{{{#if:{{{mdex|}}}|Md}}bag|{{{sprite3|{{{name|Cancel}}} code or something like that. I'm terrible with programming, but like I said earlier, I am willing to learn. Also, I have many models of items that I can upload, if everyone is okay with that. Is it okay if I upload the models of items from Gates to Infinity and Super Mystery Dungeon? —Platinum Lucario (talk) 22:02, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't know if we necessarily want lots of sprites in the item templates.
You've already gotten permission to upload captured 3DS images. If you have any further questions about uploading, you may want to ask someone who's specifically on the Archives staff. Tiddlywinks (talk) 23:15, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Alola/Melemele Pokédex

I noticed you removed my reference to the Melemele Pokédex with the comment "Please, do not assume. It's only been shown in Japanese." Since when are we not allowed to include Japanese names for things that don't have confirmed English names? Unless you're taking issue with me romanizing メレメレ as Melemele, in which case you should know that "melemele" is Hawaiian for yellow. Given that the region is based on Hawaii, "assuming" that メレメレ refers to the Hawaiian word "melemele" is just as reasonable as "assuming" that the パルレ in Pokémon Amie's Japanese name refers to the French word "parler". If you really want to be anal about it by all means keep it as "Meremere" for the time being, but I see no reason not to include it just because it's not the English name.--Siobonbon (talk) 07:59, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

First off, please do understand that we do not wish to present (romanized) Japanese names in a way that people might mistake them as official English names for things. In the past, that may have been kind of necessary in our coverage of the core games, since the English might not be fully revealed when the Japanese games were already out; but the core games are currently being released/introduced simultaneously worldwide, so that's not really a problem anymore.
Otherwise... I kind of took the simplest approach at the time. I feel that waiting isn't so terrible a thing. (Sure, Melemele/Yellow seems pretty reasonable...but there's always that niggling fear of an alternative you didn't see, especially at this point in the "game".) But on your insistence, I'll take the middling option. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:14, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Trainer's Choice

I will acknowledge that much of what I wrote was unnecessary for a concise summation. But I would like to know by what reasoning anything I put down was 'outright wrong.' --The Dreamer (talk) 16:35, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

For AG052: Incorrect; while Torkoal's Fire-Type makes him strong against the Grass-Type Shiftry, Taillow's Flying-Type is both strong against and resists Grass. The thing is, Fire also resists Grass. Taillow isn't special in that. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:41, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Ah, an oversight on my part. Thank you for the clarification. --The Dreamer (talk) 16:42, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

I just don't understand

Why is it that they tell me to add noteworthy facts, which I did for Bibarel and Combee, and then have it reverted. I don't get it!Theexploringgamer (talk) 19:53, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

The trivia here is a bit strict compared to ssbwiki, IMO. From experience here (by which, I mean screw-ups), I can tell you one thing: if it applies to more than 1 Pokemon, it's not considered trivia, unless one evolves into the other. Unowninator (talk) 20:12, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I don't really know what to tell you either, Theexploringgamer. It's just a general rule of thumb in our trivia is that a thing should either be unique to a single Pokemon or to a single family. Tiddlywinks (talk) 01:40, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Movesets of CPU-controlled trainer Pokemon

Usually, the movesets of Pokemon in trainer encounters are undefined; the game looks at the Pokemon's current level (which is programmed into the trainer encounter data), then "generates" a moveset on the fly corresponding to the last 4 level-up moves that the Pokemon would theoretically learn. Trainer battles with explicitly defined movesets seldomly come by, and seems to be mostly limited to characters relevant to the storyline.

However, there's this Ace Trainer at Kiloude City which has a custom moveset for his Pokemon. Would it be alright to use {{Party/Single}} for him? Chenzw (talk) 15:16, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

No...I don't think so. He's a one-time battle, and only in one game (pair). He's not really notable and that's what the template is generally meant for. If you'd like, you could leave the moveset in HTML comments by his team perhaps. We have considered a bit the possibility of adding movesets to the Trainer list template, so it may get used. And if'd still be there for other people to find? Actually, at that thought, it might be more visible on the city's talk page. (Feel free to do either, or both.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 15:25, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
I will add it to the talk page, then. Looks like Anton is a one-off exception (at least for Gen VI), probably because he somehow decided to use Weezing and its 4 most recent level-up moves at level 65 are... not that stellar. Chenzw (talk) 15:35, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Plenty of generic Ace Trainers/Veterans have custom movesets in my experience starting in Gen III and IV, as well as almost every trainer in the console side-games. Every trainer with Smeargle in X/Y also has a custom moveset for it. The trainers in Terminus Cave/Victory Road had a bunch of them from what I remember. Sky Battles too, I believe. It's still debatable if it's notable, but it's not really all that rare. VioletPumpkin (talk) 16:17, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Oops, I completely forgot about all those! I guess it's due to the way the movesets are generated; some Pokemon do not have good level-up movesets for battle at higher levels, too. Perhaps the next pair of games will do something else regarding this. Chenzw (talk) 16:23, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Pokemaster97's vandal is back.

Goes by the name GogglesTheTotodile . I was told this is how I report someone. Unowninator (talk) 16:55, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

There is not strong reason to suspect that user of being a sock or anything at this point. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:58, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
My apologies; I just assumed based on the message similarity. Unowninator (talk) 17:02, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Secret Base Representative Trainer Class

The information is necessary because it's incorrect otherwise. I spent a good 2 hours trying to get trainer representation to be correct for my program to only find out it takes the first byte and the information on the wiki was incorrect. Modulo 256 will sometimes give a different last digit than just the plain Trainer ID. - unsigned comment from Trigger death (talkcontribs)

You're absolutely right, that's totally my bad. I tried to think if it made a difference and just didn't think in binary right. Sorry. Tiddlywinks (talk) 19:44, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
No worries. :) And good idea with linking modulo for people who don't know what that means. Trigger death (talk) 20:55, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Why not just delete the dead ref?

Referring to this. Why not just delete it? Or replace it with [citation needed]? Just curious. Unowninator (talk) 05:13, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Because (AFAIK) it was a valid reference. Removing that makes it unsourced and liable to be removed by someone (and even "citation needed" kind of implies the claim was never backed up), and I don't think that's really appropriate if it was valid before.
I don't think this is a "good" solution. In point of fact, I don't know a good solution. Tiddlywinks (talk) 05:50, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
I see. I did google the link in hopes for an archive somewhere, but said page was literally the only result. I'm sorry that I can't help. Unowninator (talk) 06:24, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Actually, what about an {{outdated}} template? Just explain that the link is dead. Unowninator (talk) 06:26, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
That's not what it's really meant for, and it seems like overkill for a piece of trivia. Tiddlywinks (talk) 14:11, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Birth of Mewtwo link

I'm really sorry. I just wanted Bulbapedia to have a copy of at least the script. I couldn't find a decent-looking website that had an english text translation, so I took to YouTube. Which was probably my big mistake. Ericbazinga (talk) 20:39, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

We don't really need (or possibly want) a whole English translation either. We have plot summaries/synopses for a reason. Tiddlywinks (talk) 23:02, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

SMD Update

Hey Tiddlywinks! Just an update on SMD. I tried resetting to find the locations of the missions, and it appears there are multiple, but not infinite, number of locations for the missions. However, I can never be certain whether I've found all the locations just for that one Pokémon, and doing this for ALL of the Pokémon is too big of a task for me. Plus, the locations may change throughout the story. For example, when the player moves to Lively Town, you get to access more areas. So (I think) it is impossible to find all locations, so I suggest removing the location column from the Connection Orb page. On top, my computer is not high tech enough to edit that table without significant lag, so I don't know how I'll edit that table using the data I've gleaned so far.

I was also editing the Seeds article today, but the buy and sell price for Heal Seed in SMD doesn't appear. I don't think I did anything wrong so I'm thinking the table can't support four buy and sell prices at once.

Thanks! --Wowy(토크) 11:18, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

In that case, the thing we may want to be noting for each Pokemon is how you can meet them. That is, note where they can be found in the overworld or whose mission to complete to automatically be connected to them (or both if a Pokemon can be met either way). So then we could basicallly just let people find the Pokemon, and they can just view their own Connection Orb to see where they need to go for that Pokemon's mission. (The only other thing I think might be nice would be noting if there's a requirement before a Pokemon will ask you for a mission--supposing they don't offer immediately after being met, or the day after being met or something. But if it's not that, there could also just be some random element to it. IDK.)
I'll take look at Seeds later on. Tiddlywinks (talk) 11:28, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
Oh, if you tell me what the SMD buy/sell price is, I can add it if I fix it or whatever. Tiddlywinks (talk) 11:29, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. How you meet them would come under the "Methods" column right (e.g. Chansey gets connected in connection with Rotom after completing Rotom's mission, or Azumarill gets connected when you talk to it at Cafe Connection)? Also, instead of "location", you can have "rewards" as a column. But I'm not sure how important it is because only a small percent of missions give rewards.--Wowy(토크) 11:38, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
Nah, the last three were all supposed to be about connecting, not meeting. The best example for Method is something like Traveling Pokemon; there's still a location, but not exactly a mission.
Maybe we can just have two columns (scrapping the current last three entirely), like "Overworld" and "Acquaintances".
I'm a little curious about cases like Azurill. I wonder if there are any cases where it might, somehow, be possible to meet a Pokemon like that in the overworld or by an acquaintance connection if you skip the auto-connect Pokemon for a while. That would make things a little interesting. Tiddlywinks (talk) 12:22, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
Wowy, could you clarify what you mean by multiple locations for the missions? Are you talking about the Connection Orb requests, Traveling Pokemon, overworld, all of them, or some combination, and what exactly varies? Certain requests simply would not work if they weren't in specific dungeons, and there's data (I can elaborate later if needed) that suggests that Traveling Pokemon (and fleeing/fainted) are locked to specific dungeons after a certain point, though the exact floor they appear on may differ. Non-static Overworld Pokemon do get shuffled around each in-game day, though (early-game Serene Village stuff could have some differences, admittedly).
Also, I agree that the everything in the Mission column could fit in the Method one, at the very least. I'm pretty sure that every connection/acquaintance is completely set, and it's not possible to recruit any acquaintance Pokemon separately (and if there was, it would be an oversight and could be noted as such unless more interesting effects happened). I think it could even be reasonable to group Acquaintance Pokemon with the 'main' one to make it more obvious that all of those Pokemon are recruited as a group for doing a specific thing, but it could hurt sortability. VioletPumpkin (talk) 15:55, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
What do you mean about non-static overworld Pokemon exactly? Are there a bunch of Pokemon that can just have random locations? (I'd kind of figured Pokemon in Cafe Connection might have unique circumstances, but otherwise I would mostly expect most Pokemon to be in just one place... Maybe not story characters, I guess?)
Also, do you mean, for instance, that Azurill isn't even present anywhere in the overworld? Or Umbreon or Espeon? Or anyone who's labeled "connection of client" on Connection Orb? Or what? I'd kind of assumed basically everyone would be somewhere... Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:22, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
Indeed, there are many Pokemon who are always found in a set location based on which day of the story it is (or section of the epilogue since you don't have to progress the first parts of that storyline immediately). These include the story-relevant characters, but also many other characters of usually minimal importance. In Serene Village/Lively Town, these ones will usually say something that makes sense to the player/partner, or they're having a conversation with another static villager. In the other towns, there are also Pokemon that are always in the same spot. Though, outside of the story-relevant trip to the Air Continent, I think they more or less say the same things.
Then there are other spots, some scattered around the towns, but also in Cafe Connection (these are always the same locations regardless of the 'day'), that have a random Pokemon from a set list. These include Victini, many starters/evolved starters, Roserade/Gallade, Azumarill (this one might be a special case but I'm not sure), and quite a few more. These random Pokemon include some of the ones who give requests through the Connection Orb, and I believe you can accept the request either through talking to them or through the Connection Orb. If these Pokemon don't have a request/connect with you immediately, they will just tell you a one-liner which never changes. Which Pokemon is in each spot changes every day, for the most part (there were some Pokemon who had uncompleted requests who seemed to stick around in the same spot until I finished it). I'm pretty sure there are a decent amount of non-legendary Pokemon that can never appear in this way. For example, the only letter Unown (memory is fuzzy on ? and ! and they're separate from the others in a few ways) that ever appeared for me in this way are the ones who connect directly with you, and they acquaintance-connect many of the other Unown. Additionally, some of the Rotom formes can be found and talked to in this way before you connect with them (as traveling Pokemon), and won't automatically connect with you in the overworld.
I'm not sure if I ever saw Azurill or Espeon, and I'm pretty sure I never saw Umbreon, but my memory is fuzzy on this. It did take me a while to connect with all the Eeveelutions though, and I only ever recruited them through their requests/as acquaintances/traveling Pokemon. Every overworld Pokemon, static or not, that can be connected just through talking to them almost certainly has some sort of trigger that allows them to be open for connection. For many static Pokemon and the various random starters, that trigger is completing the epilogue's story arc, but many others I'm not so sure about. I hope that was able to clarify some things, it's hard to remember many of the minutiae regarding specific Pokemon. VioletPumpkin (talk) 00:24, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
The Rotom forms, you mean even if you talk to them they don't get registered as "met" in the Connection Orb? (If you're not sure, do you know/can you tell me where they are in the overworld?)
Half the reason I only had a place for connection requirements on Connection Orb was because it's what was there beforehand; the other half of the reason is that there's already a fair amount of columns. But "meet" requirements are arguably just as important if not more. (It's also worth noting that this stuff should also be on individual Pokemon pages under Game locations. For now, both meet and connect requirements would be good... That way we can always decide we don't want one or the other.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 00:45, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
No, they do get met, sorry if that was confusing, and whenever I say connected, I mean they become usable in expeditions, which I think is the main thing that matters. Adding a meet requirements column feels needlessly convoluted, since most Pokemon are 'met' through connections anyway, and the rest are quickly found in towns (maybe a list of the Pokemon in the towns could be helpful). Pokemon that have requests (beyond the first one or two for each group from what I remember) will only give those requests if they're adjacent to a Pokemon you're connected to and the dungeon their request is in is able to be visited. Okay, thinking about it, trying to do this in the current table doesn't feel like it's worth it to me, but if it was possible to make some sort of flowchart designating which missions or conditions you might need to do for each particular Pokemon, it could work out, I suppose. That's still something else for the most part though...
Actually, maybe I'm just misunderstanding? Perhaps a prerequisite column could be okay. For example, you need to reach a certain rank to unlock the dungeon to connect with Articuno, and we would put x Rank in that column. Doing that unlocks the Moltres dungeon, and for Moltres we'd put Articuno in the pre-requisite column there, and so on? VioletPumpkin (talk) 01:51, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
If there's anyone you can't meet by connecting with nearby Pokemon or just by playing through the storyline, who you need to specifically search out and talk to to meet them (who you can skip—even if they're impossible to miss at some point, if you're not absolutely required to talk to them, you could always skip by them and forget...), then they'd probably need a note—somehow—about where to meet them. Maybe it wouldn't be worth it for everyone... (I'm still not totally sure, simply because I'm having to rely on others, I don't have the game to experience things for myself.)
If the Pokemon with random locations for missions at least always have the same mission, then it might be possible to just say "Random" for the location (if there's any apparent limit on that, like "on the Air Continent" or Rank X-dungeon or something, it might be worth including that--but not crucial if even that's a lot of work).
Ideally, a dungeon's rank requirement should simply be on its page so that (as long as the location is fixed and it's not "Random") people can just click on the link to figure out that sort of prerequisite. And Moltres and Articuno are already noted as having a connection. Tiddlywinks (talk) 03:03, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Fair enough, I understand where you're coming from at least. The easiest way to test it would probably be to avoid talking to the non-Ghost Rotom forms and seeing if any of them still appear as traveling Pokemon, since they don't have connections with other Pokemon and don't appear as wild Pokemon to my knowledge (encountering a generic wild Pokemon in a dungeon is another way to 'meet' that Pokemon that I forgot about earlier). At least in my limited experience of a single (rather thorough) playthrough, meeting Pokemon only ever seemed to only be completely cosmetic, but if the Rotom forms don't ever show up in dungeons under those circumstances, I agree that it'd be necessary. We can cross that bridge when we get there, though. VioletPumpkin (talk) 05:40, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Oops, didn't see this. Just to answer VioletPumpkin's first question, I was talking specifically about the locations of missions. For a particular mission, there can be several locations where that mission can be held. (For example, Ralts mission [10] vs. [11]). These locations aren't totally random, but finding all possible locations for all missions is too hard. Some missions may have set locations, but I can't be certain of that because I haven't gone far enough to confirm. --Wowy(토크) 23:30, 5 July 2016 (UTC)


Hi! I have a request which I hope you will be happy to do. For the Connection Orb page, will you be happy to split up the table into the different sets (1,2,3... [ignoring any changes that might be made to the table later per discussion above]) so that they each have a separate edit-able section? It's probably not the most sensible thing to do, but the table is way too laggy for me to edit, and probably for other users too, and I'm wanting to edit it as I go along, rather than doing it all in one huge bunch at the end. Unless you can think of another alternative.

Also while I have a staff member's attention, will you be able to change the template for Mystery Dungeon items so that they show up a 4th buy and sell price? It's locked so I can't edit it. Thanks! :) --Wowy(토크) 10:57, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

First and foremost, you can always update Game locations data on individual Pokemon pages. And I currently think the table should stay as it is/focus on connection (as opposed to meet) requirements, with location noted as "Random" if it's not apparently fixed..
If I have a "big" concern about splitting the table, it's probably that that'd mean 30+ subsections for the tables, which is a bit extreme. (Not terrible, but not so pretty either.)
(Just to check, when you say it's too laggy, do you mean you can't even get a preview? Or that it takes several/many seconds to preview? If it's the latter (which is what happens for me), that shouldn't be a terrible impediment; just concentrate on filling in the table/code, and only worry about preview sparingly.)
I'm not entirely satisfied with just adding a 4th price option... Not with the fact that pretty much every MD game seems to have a different price for some items like the Heal Seed (...will that continue forever?), nor with the fact that all those prices are only disambiguated by cumbersome tooltipped notes. I'll try to shop around for any better ideas for those prices, but I can't really think of much myself, so in the end I may just add the 4th price... Tiddlywinks (talk) 14:04, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
What I mean by lag is that I try writing a few words and it takes a whole minute for those words to appear. But I'm going around that problem now by copying it onto a Word document first, and then pasting it back onto the page. The only flaw I know of doing this is that ' appears as ’ when pasted back, so I'll have to change these manually.
About the item templates, I agree that having 4 price options makes the table look cluttered, but I haven't thought of any other options so far. --Wowy(토크) 07:00, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
I see, I hardly would have imagined a problem like that with mostly just text on a page. =P If you want to solve ' changing to ’ in Word, you could consider using a simpler program like just Notepad or Wordpad. (There might also be some AutoCorrect options under Tools or something that controls that change in Word.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 10:28, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm hardly even sure what now, but I got caught up in other things and quite forgot about the buy/sell stuff here! I've updated the item template now. Heal Seed on Seed is working fine. Tiddlywinks (talk) 06:56, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that! I don't know what will/should happen with future releases though. --Wowy(토크) 10:13, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

The cave on this page is incorrect

I am new to this sit and I wanted to help out with a few things. I started to edit things and then you just put them back the way they were. The cave listed in castellia sewers is 100% incorrect. It is not the cave, it is actually the relic passage and the pokemon in the area are listed incorrectly as well in the cave you will find Timburr, Ratatta, Woobat, Onix, and Roggenrola. Somehow the numbers I found for these were incorrect so I was trying to change them to get the correct image to display. If you could help in changing this it would be greatly appreciated. - unsigned comment from Digidoggie18 (talkcontribs)

To be clear, are you saying that the "Available Pokemon" table in this section (the first one, with only 3 Pokemon) is incorrect? And are you saying that you are not finding the Pokemon listed in that table while walking in this area? That, when you walk in that area, you find Pokemon like Roggenrola?
I'm pretty sure our information is correct, especially if you look at our main pages for those locations (Castelia Sewers and Relic Passage). Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:39, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Did you seriously just look at my contributions list and revert all my edits on trivia sections?

Header says it all. sumwun (talk) 21:36, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Great question. If you mean, like, Anything much earlier...and I really don't remember anything that you might be referring to right now. (At that, in the past month, I've apparently only reverted ONE edit of yours (directly).) Tiddlywinks (talk) 21:42, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Okay, just making sure. sumwun (talk) 00:03, 11 July 2016 (UTC)


I've got an article in my userspace that I want to see in the mainspace. So, what's the procedure? The article seems very much notable (especially in these days), I believe it's decent, the page is not protected or anything, and if we'd not link to wikipedia all the time, it would be linked to in popular places. So, move it, then link to it? Just to be safe, and just to be sure to waste your time once again. :D Nescientist (talk) 07:49, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for asking! As it happens, mainspacing decisions (and moving and other similar stuff) are generally supposed to be left to staff/the Editorial Board. I'll bring it to the proper attention. You're right, it is very relevant right now, so hopefully we can sort it out. Tiddlywinks (talk) 08:32, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! I thought I read something like that before somewhere, but it seems I was also bad at browsing policy pages. Nescientist (talk) 08:42, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Oh, believe me, I understand how it can be easy to miss. =P Tiddlywinks (talk) 08:45, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Need a second opinion

I was able to get more Mirage Spots later on during one day so I am thinking there might be a 12-hour window before players can get more Mirage Spots for that day on Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire. Can you help me confirm this? -Tyler53841 (talk) 13:21, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

First you probably want to see if you can repeat that a few times in a row. Shouldn't be too hard. Try it at about 9 AM (or whatever), then 9 PM, then 9 AM again, then 9 PM again. If it seems to work out each time, then that's interesting... Tiddlywinks (talk) 15:56, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
To maybe save you some trouble, connecting to the internet in-game (while StreetPass is enabled?) gives you data that's functionally identical to StreetPass data for the random passerbys that appear automatically (giving you Secret Bases, extra Mirage Spots, etc.) on the PSS. This would occasionally happen in the same day, and it seemed to me like this function was on the same 8 hour StreetPass cooldown that would happen if you were to StreetPass another 3DS/relay. The BuzzNav should update when this happens, just so you know. Apologies if this wasn't what you were talking about. VioletPumpkin (talk) 19:37, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Actually I did, after it happened the first time, I was able to do it again. If you do it early in the morning, and wait until night you can see those numbers on the BuzzNav. I also did find that in addition to the previous mirage spots, the additional Mirage Spots are also seen. I also saw these reset at the beginning of the next day as well. All that needs to be done is pinpoint how many hours it takes for that little trick to happen before it can be posted in the mainspace. If you can do something like this for yourself it will help you understand this better, so I recommended doing the first part of this in the morning as soon as you can. -Tyler53841 (talk) 02:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Regarding the links on "List of glitch Pokemon"

I made them into links so that they would appear on the "wanted pages" list. Are there already articles about those Pokemon? sumwun (talk) 03:58, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

It's a simple description. We don't need any page about ""Egg" with Bulbasaur's model". Tiddlywinks (talk) 04:09, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
But I really want to know what it is. sumwun (talk) 15:04, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Glitch Pokemon are not at all my specialty, but I don't think there's anything notable about the Gen VI "glitch Pokemon" for index 000 or 723. If you want to try to make a userpage about it, please feel free.
In the meantime, the main point is, ""Egg" with Bulbasaur's model" is simply NOT an appropriate name for some glitch Pokemon. Tiddlywinks (talk) 15:48, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Is there a particular reason why the real name isn't on Bublapedia? sumwun (talk) 21:39, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
There is no "real name". Tiddlywinks (talk) 21:41, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Then what is it called when it's forced to exist in the game? sumwun (talk) 22:19, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Like I said, I really don't know about glitches. I'm not the right person to ask about this thing. People somewhere like the Glitch City Laboratories forums probably know more if there's anything to know. Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:25, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Then why did you revert my edit? sumwun (talk) 00:26, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Tell you what. If you make a userpage about the 000-index Pokemon, then we can talk some more. Until then, I'm sorry, but this just isn't going anywhere. Tiddlywinks (talk) 00:28, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
If I make such a userpage and add a stub template, will it appear on the list of stubs? sumwun (talk) 03:59, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
Make it first. Worry about anything else later. Tiddlywinks (talk) 04:09, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Why did you revert my edit to the glitch types page?

If I wasn't supposed to edit the page without reason, for what reason did you revert my edit? sumwun (talk) 03:58, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

For being an inappropriate edit. Tiddlywinks (talk) 04:09, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

New Attack: Highhorse Power

Hey, there. Today on, they showed a new attack that Mudsdale used. It is called Highhorse Power and it is a ground-type move. Seabiscuit2020 (talk) 21:03, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, this is almost completely unverifiable at the moment. Tiddlywinks (talk) 21:39, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Starting sentences with conjunctions

Not at all a Bulbapedia rule, more so a rule of the English Language, albeit a disputed rule, so don't show me a source that contradicts me, as I know full well you could find loads. The point is, sentences begining with conjunctions have no place on a formal website such as this one. You'd perhaps find it where the sentence represents a voice: a blog post or speech within a novel. That particular point of trivia looks sloppy as it is written currently and I, truly, ponder why it is you thought 'Seen as' didn't make for a coherent formal scentence and how you could possibly think it was better to revert the edit. I'll concede that 'Seen as' may not comply with the general style of Bulbapedia trivia, but niether does 'because'. I think an admin should presnt a greater example, and show a better way of fixing the problem, rather than just reverting the edit like a user who began three days ago.

This would be a better way to present the trivia, though I'll query the "notability" of the point. I added points of trivia concerning simalur discrepacys regarding Pokémon in Pokémon GO being capable of moves they can not learn in the main series; such as Golem lerning Mud Shot, and Grimer lerning Acid. They were all removed for not being deemed "notable". Diamond Lanturn CodeName: 05308 08:31, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

I think you're thinking of coordinating conjunctions like "but", as opposed to subordinating conjunctions like "because". They are quite different beasts. (In fact, before your comment here, I wouldn't even have thought to call "because" a conjunction of any sort.) Plenty of the examples the above page gives for subordinating conjunctions are easily used at the start of a sentence, like "As soon as [Ash got home]", "Even if [he lost]", "Until [he won]".
And "seeing as" (not "seen as") is functionally speaking exactly the same as "because". Anything that can simply substitute for "because" must function exactly like it (or close enough to make no difference). If it were really that bad, you'd have to restructure the whole sentence, not just substitute something else in for "because".
But it's perfectly fine as is. Tiddlywinks (talk) 08:58, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
Have you only addressed the first line of my message? I did "restructure the whole scentence". I won't argue this further; my final piece is that to begin a point of trivia with any subordinating conjunction, be it: 'because', 'as soon as' or 'although' is sloppy and does not give the impression that the pages are written with professionalism and seriousness, Diamond Lanturn CodeName: 05308 09:24, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
I don't know what that link is supposed to demonstrate.
The part about restructuring the whole sentence, I was referring to your original edit, not the option in your comment here.
Also... An 'although' search on Wikipedia, a 'because' search. If you search either of those pages for ". [word]", you'll find plenty of cases where those words start a sentence. The big daddy of wikis doesn't seem to care that much. In fact... Have a gander at Wikipedia:Basic copyediting#Things that do not need to be fixed. Tiddlywinks (talk) 09:37, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

New move powers in GO

So, did you undo my edit in the list primarily because you can't get back the old move powers? If so, does it matter? As I said, it's been official and publicly available, and I believe that's what a wiki should cover. After all, we do, for example, cover glitches that have meanwhile been patched, or websites that are now defunct; and I think we should be. Would Niantic rename Gyms, we would certainly not not mention they were once called like that, would we? It may not be particularly helpful (on the list), but I didn't add it because I thought it was. I've basically done the asterisks because they're at list of moves (although I admit there are fewer of those there, at least currently), and the Go list is clearly thought to mirror that somewhat. Would you also disagree to add the changed move powers to the moves' pages, as we do for the core series? Nescientist (talk) 15:56, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Half because like I said. Half because asterisk notes are not an ideal way of doing it: they make the reader think there's something "important" there, when (again, since you can't get it back) it's not. Personally, I don't even think an extra column would be worth it. (Not worthless, but far too little worth for the bloat/whatnot.) The nearest solution I've come up with is adding something to the main GO page's Version history.
If you have to download a patch and it's optional, then arguably we do need to keep covering it, since some people may still have old versions. (The hypothetical about Gyms, in particular, is pretty different than move powers. Everyone knows a "Gym". Everyone does not know every move's exact power. And a defunct website is also fairly different; it's not a changed website (which is also different from changed move stats).) But this was changed server-side, so you absolutely can't hold onto it or get it back.
...I would not, personally, really be happy with tt notes on individual moves' pages about old stats. But you also don't especially need to use tt there; you could just write out that these stats got changed. That's quite fine by me. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:19, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
Ok, I only mentioned patches, defunct websites or renaming Gyms (I should've chosen Pokéstops :P) as a great way to illustrate that "you can't get it back" is a weak argument. I'm definitely against an extra column (because that would be half empty?). I'm much more concerned about conformity that about having all info everywhere. And we do have tt's for core series move power changes on the individual pages. So, if you could maybe do whatever is in your mind at, say, Bug Bite, I could do the rest!?
So, could we possibly settle on the following then:
  1. Adding a subsection at List of modified moves (and rewording the intro)? Seems better than at the main Go page; we could link to the new subsection from there instead.
  2. Removing asterisks from list of moves?
  3. The thing about Bug Bite I just mentioned? (We may also opt to not do that if we do 1.)
Thank you! Nescientist (talk) 16:49, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
For Bug Bite, you'd just add something like, "Prior to an update to Niantic's servers on July 30, Bug Bite had a power of [X]."
List of moves is very different from anything related to this change in GO. The asterisks on that page are about things in different Generations...things people playing a game in that generation will be dealing with and may need to know. Those aren't getting removed.
I'm also not all for putting this GO data on the list of modified moves either. Again, those are things you can go back to, depending on which generation you play. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:05, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
So, asterisk then basically means "toggle if you're playing old game, you need different info", and that's why you removed them at GO? Got it. And I'm sorry, could you just do it over at Bug Bite please (it was 6)? Nescientist (talk) 17:32, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, Sir. Nescientist (talk) 18:23, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Camp Pokémon

Hey, so I noticed that in the side game data, there was nothing on Camp Pokémon. On my user page, I tried to make a template and I have the information on all of the Pokémon on it for there. I can make all of the things myself and add them there, I was just wanting some feedback? IHHeroes (talk) 04:36, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Try making a user page putting together this information somehow. There are (arguably) some games that really just aren't substantial enough to warrant much if any mention among species' game data, and from looking at the Camp Pokémon page, I can't really tell what there might be that should be on the species pages. Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:42, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

The route to improve the damage article

You'd be my best guess on a user to assist in this math- and programming-intensive issue (no offense, BulbaBot); and I hope you're capable of TeX for the remainder of this post. So, just to say it out load, the obvious way for the rounding problem is to remove the current formula, replace it by the correct one, and update the article accordingly. This would involve updating the image formulas over at the Archives, so we should update the images and the articles kinda simultaneously.

So, Tiddlywinks, I want to ask you, will you be my TeX-to-Archives-image converter, from this day on to the end of... tomorrow? So please answer with "Yes, I will."

I would then create a userpage with TeX-code where images should be, and alert you once I'm done, so you could wreck havoc at the Archives and update the damage article accordingly. I guess this should be the proper way to do it.

I would personally be going for \cdot over \times, and for including \lfloor and \rfloor in the formulas as well (and not only mentioning them in prose), but I would like your opinion on that. Additionally, I would be interested in whether they're actually actively rounding down, or they're just doing some kind of float-to-int-conversion. The code's in the Smogon reference that's on the page, but I cannot reliably make sense of it (and possibly you could!?) Again, if you don't speak TeX (there's no user template for it, unfortunately :P), I'm sure we could find another method. Thanks. Nescientist (talk) 10:54, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm not really sure how everyone else makes images for formulas, but I've been using this. Perhaps you can use that too. If you'd still like me to plug in those formulas, though, I can do it. (If you do it yourself, I'll suggest that the variables for "Level" and "(Base)Power" be written out as such, whereas the Attack/Defense variables can perhaps be left as "A"/"D", which will make it a little harder for people to assume it means the physical stats and a little easier for us to define those in text as dependent on the move category.)
I will note also, the images on the Damage page will take a good while to update on the page once they've been updated on the Archives. (About a month, from past experience.) ...But it may be possible to write text that pretty much works for either formula.
Rounding/integers: the Smogon article says right out that "÷ always denotes the in-game unsigned divmod function, i.e. the unrounded/truncated integer division". Going by that, the formula on the Dragonflycave page that has floor(2 * L / 5 + 2) should probably technically be (2 * floor(L / 5) + 2), which could make a difference if you had something like level=13 (floor(2*2.6) = 5, whereas 2*floor(2.6) = 4). By contrast, Smogon says applying any modifier actually ends with a straight rounding (decimals <=0.5 are rounded down, otherwise it's rounded up). It may also be worth noting that, according to Smogon/for Gen V at least, there are a few modifiers that come before the random damage factor. Tiddlywinks (talk) 15:28, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for spotting the division thing. Looking at both sources (Smogon basically has the same formula than Dragonfly, it's just us who've re-written it), I guess it should technically be floor((2*L)/5) + 2 and not what you said, which shouldn't make a difference (5 in your example either way). The tool is basically a TeX-image converter, but it'd be cool if you could still account for the Archives part (not being confirmed on Archives and such), would you? I don't know yet whether it will be possible to write text that works either way (I guess not if we're renaming). I thought the images update on bp if I edit the article? If not, maybe we should (if it's text that only works the new way) upload new images instead of updating old ones?
Anyway, got opinions regarding last message's last paragraph? Also, there's a tradeoff between having Damage=...*Modifier [next line] where Modifier=a*b*... vs. having Damage=...*a*b*... (image size vs. inventing/defining "Modifier"); got an opinion on that as well? Nescientist (talk) 19:33, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Oh, yeah, I managed to miss how Smogon's page said (2*level), not 2*level. I might've just gotten confused by looking at both the pages. Yeah, in that case, Dragonflycave's format is practically speaking the same thing.
Got it, if you can't do the uploading, sure. (Trying to put a bit of time in at the Archives might be a good idea for future needs too. =P )
I think there are cases where an image might update right away, but I wouldn't bet on it. And uploading new images just because the old ones are cached isn't really appropriate.
The floors can be included, and the times operator should probably be something more visible than \cdot (\times just because that's apparently our standard in most other formulas). Since there's already a modifier image in the article currently, and putting them together would definitely make the formula quite long, I think it's best to just keep them separate. Tiddlywinks (talk) 19:57, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the fast reply. Makes sense. Just wanna add that I guess most modifiers are applied before the random damage factor. (Let's probably discuss this further once I got the userpage ready.) Opinion: Shouldn't Smogon's modifiers for A and D be located at Statistic#In-battle modification rather than at damage? Nescientist (talk) 20:04, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Smogon appears to say that the random factor is the 4th of 8 modifiers, the last of which has many and overlapping possibile components itself. (If you were counting the base power, attack, and defense modifications, those aren't part of the same modifier component, so to speak.)
Smogon's base power, attack stat, and defense stat sections (sections 3-5) can probably be offloaded to other pages, yeah, with appropriate nods/links (like power and Statistic#In-battle modification). Tiddlywinks (talk) 20:36, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Started my article here, with lots of info/considerations/todos hidden. Apart from the missing example, that's the basic outline that should do it. Note that I didn't do floor (or hid it, cause the formula looks way to confusing imho), but instead just explained it in prose. The old descriptions will not make it, cause there's new factors, and "A" and "D" have been renamed. Nescientist (talk) 09:28, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
I have now finished what I had in mind, including the formulas that would need to be uploaded. From the HTML-hidden notes, do you happen to know an easy way to do 1 (I guess you can tell what I had in mind)? For some of the other notes, I feel I kinda lack the authority to decide on my own. If you want to edit the article or discuss something, feel free. Feel free to also remove the HTML-hidden notes if you want to move it or something (I have them here). Thank you very much. Nescientist (talk) 12:43, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
(Without having read the whole page super thoroughly) I can't actually tell what the "hidden details" your "1" is referring to are. I'll take some time trying to consider all sorts of stuff otherwise. Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:22, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
Oh, I mean the expandable tables/texts on the page. Whatever you see looks ugly. I wasn't (easily) able to make them look how they're supposed to. Thanks for your time! Nescientist (talk) 19:29, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
Oh, I see. I keep Javascript disabled as a rule, so I had no idea those were even supposed to be hidden/collapsed. =P Tiddlywinks (talk) 19:31, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
As this is related, we should also be splitting off the "Attack modifiers" (how Smogon calls 'em) from our In-battle modification (the rest would be "boost level"). Foul Play apparently uses the target's (base) Attack stat and "boost levels", but applies "Attack modifiers" as normal (and I cannot currently word it). The same holds true for Defense modifiers, and I guess for everything else that does also not count towards the maximum/minimum of 6 stages. Nescientist (talk) 20:45, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
Edit: Managed to reword Foul Play, but the mentioned section could still need a split. As in, later. :P Nescientist (talk) 21:20, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

(resetting indent) 1) I don't see any real need to split the things that change stat stages from the things the modify stats in any other way. The latter is already differentiated by being labeled Other in the table.

2) A tip in regards to Foul Play: don't use a phrase like "stat modifiers" too broadly. It especially should not be used to attempt to refer to stat stages (or "boost levels"), which already have a well-recognized name—trying to refer to that with the words "stat modifiers" is only confusing. It shouldn't even be used to refer to all "modifiers", including stat stages, simply because it's ill-defined. Something like "stat stage and all other modifiers" would be a much clearer way to identify all modifiers. (Really, "modifiers" is only clear when directly contrasted with stat stages.)

Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:09, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

The need is the max/min limit. And Other is not (currently) used exclusively for that. (But that's all rather minor.) I was using "stat modifiers" specifically because that's what our stat page uses (like for virtually everything), and not "stat stages" (as a term) or "boost levels". And while the current wording is much better/clearer than mine, it still might sound like it references the user for Reflect, Multiscale, or even Defense, as well. Nescientist (talk) 22:23, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
And pretty much everything outside of the Statistic page will refer very specifically to stat stages when speaking of them, and not jump through hoops trying to use the word "modifier".
Like you say, the user case is basically the normal case (except that trying to use that word in the description is confusing); that should be pretty well understandable. If it helps, you could think of it like the damage formula acts (so to speak) from the user/target's perspective. Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:35, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I know, I checked, I read the code, and I'm quite sure I understood it. Nothing changes except for the Attack stat and the Attack stat stages being taken from the target instead of the user. Yet that's not what the current descriptions says. Nescientist (talk) 22:42, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
I wasn't talking about the code or that sort of thing. I was only talking about the description.
If your problem is still something to do with Reflect, Multiscale, or Defense: the effect description currently says it "references the user for all other modifiers to Attack" (and did originally, but I got confused by your edit summary when I redid it). Only Attack. Not Reflect, Multiscale, or any Defense modifiers in general. Tiddlywinks (talk) 01:35, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I just thought you were unsure whether I actually understand what the move does. As you know, I was recently very much into everything that has to do with damage calculation, including code.
Therefore, the current description is still not correct, as burn and many Abilities never modify "Attack". Please understand that this is not some kind of personal vendetta or anything. I do not want my specific wording to be on the description, not even my specific terms. We both want the description to be correct and clear, but if we cannot manage to have it correct and avoid saying "nothing else is different"/"everything else acts as normal", then we should not avoid saying that and have it incorrect, but we should have it correct and not avoid saying that. That's a very bad tradeoff, it's just not worth it then. Nescientist (talk) 08:38, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
Burn: now that bugs me, actually. I can't tell from the Gen V code what's actually going on, but Gen I and II do seem to account for a burn on the Attack, not the damage. (Also, burn is always described as lowering Attack... If it's technically cutting physical damage, that's an annoying distinction to hide.)
Abilities: again, as I wrote it, the description is only worried about all other modifiers to Attack. Abilities that don't modify Attack are completely outside of that consideration. Tiddlywinks (talk) 15:36, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
You're right about the burn in Gen I and II. I guess you can technically call that wording correct (and super-careful) then. So I'd be ok with it, if "type" was removed.
You should hopefully be able to tell what's going on after you've thoroughly read and considered my damage page :P (FYI, I've also analyzed/used [12] and [13], my wording is in accordance to the calculation, and my damage values are in accordance to their calculator's) Nescientist (talk) 19:56, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
If "you should be able to tell [...]" means you still have a problem with Abilities, then I don't see it, no. You'll just have to do a better job explaining if you think you still need to convince me. Maybe give specific examples.
Trusting derived programs is fraught with hazards. Tiddlywinks (talk) 20:05, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
It was not supposed to mean it. And I didn't trust those programs entirely, I just used them to doublecheck. Nescientist (talk) 20:08, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
Actually, is there any reason not use their code as "source"? They've clearly analyzed the game's code, and they are sooo super accurate for anything I have checked so far: If there was any contradiction, it was always others who had it wrong. It's far more accurate than we (currently) are or "regular" Smogon is, and also slightly more accurate than the Smogon article (that misses Whirlpool etc.). (Dragonfly is super, but not as concrete/detailed.)
Interestingly, from checking their code, those Minimize-effect moves do not seem to "always hit" if the foe had used Minimize, but to just take their (base) accuracy no matter what; doesn't make a difference for Body Slam, but certainly for Dragon Rush. So, I'll be testing, and if they're correct there as well, I'd like to just treat it as the most accurate "source" we have, and go start "correct" everything that's wrong/imprecise. Ok?
Also, do you have a place you'll be doing that in-battle modification split? If so, I'd be willing to start adding how everything affects/modifies stats to a table/tables (i.e. everything bar stat stages). And also power at power. Nescientist (talk) 21:18, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
You say it's clear they've analyzed the game, but I know of no particular reason it is. Nor do I have any idea how they've analyzed the games. We prefer to avoid assumptions. I'm not comfortable with just assuming those calculators are truly accurate, especially regarding some new mechanic or change. You can find some support, but don't just take their word (so to speak) for it—especially if there's no way (or hardly any) to be sure of the difference (like, for example, a burn halving physical damage instead of Attack).
I'm trying to balance a handful of things at the moment. I'll hope to make some more progress surrounding this damage stuff this weekend, here and there (though not necessarily "finish" (maybe, but not at all sure)). Tiddlywinks (talk) 21:44, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Oh, I'm not talking of the calculator. I'm talking of their source code that's available on GitHub. There are comments in there that clearly show they basically (try to) port the game code, like here. I'm almost sure they can just read and understand the original.
Yes, thanks. I guess neither of us thought that this will end up in some "project" as big as this. Nescientist (talk) 21:52, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Yes, by the calculator I meant more or less their source. Looking at the page you linked, I don't see anything that necessarily suggests they've looked at the games' source. All I can tell is they've apparently implemented things to function like the games. Is there a particular comment that indicated to you that they read the games' code? Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:10, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Yes, this comes to my mind:
"// GameFreak rounds DOWN on .5", and the entire "pokeround" rounding function they have no reason to include (in places where they include them) otherwise.
They have also rewritten everything for Gen VI (by intact backwards-compatability), whereas if I had no access to the code, I would just have copy-pasted Gen V. Nescientist (talk) 22:21, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

(resetting indent)I'll punt a bit and see what other staff think. A good part of this is just trust, especially as communicated by someone in a position to know. I've heard from trustworthy people that UPC is good. This calculator seems likely okay, but I'd still really like that actual trust factor (and/or clear testament or something from the developers). Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:39, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Ok then. Just to clarify, it's not just the move calculator, but also their online battle simulator (else we had no accuracy etc.) But I'd like to point out that my trust in it in large part comes from checking what they have (in-game, UPC, the Smogon article, ...; they're right in contradictions; Minimize accuracy). And that it's virtually impossible to add details such as the burn thing if you trust noone (which you don't, but anyway). Nescientist (talk) 22:56, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Excuse me, Tiddlywinks, but do you happen to have any news regarding any of the topics we discussed? I'd really like to get things going before Sun-rise, even for reasons other than being selfish or only personally disliking current states. Nescientist (talk) 11:29, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
I've kind of been trying to do a few things recently before S/M comes out/PGL shuts down, and this isn't a huge priority, so I've been letting it slide. I haven't forgotten, I just haven't made time to finish it up yet either. Tiddlywinks (talk) 03:53, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
I see. Thank you.
Just as some kind of explanation, or maybe excuse: It's just that I've been considering to check/correct move effects (possibly after doing something with this, but not sure) before I have no clue whether it's still up to date. (And this is not primarily about minor things.) As it's a rather time-consuming thing to do or plan, it would be open up opportunities at least for me if you could possibly move your judgment on Showdown a bit further upstream your priority list (at least above the damage article stuff).
I've seen other users at talk pages basically saying "I just tested <effect> in <game>, it's not what the page says. Can someone confirm/correct?", where I could just answer "Yes, I already noticed that, I'm sure you're absolutely right, and that it is <effect2> instead, but yeah, the article doesn't reflect this." For me personally, it's kinda sad to see others basically relying on info that's outdated from my point of view, and it's also weird to give answers that basically go "I'm sooo clever, trust me, don't trust Bulbapedia." (you may or may not believe me here :P) Nescientist (talk) 09:19, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Showdown? I may need to apologize. When I tried to ask about it, no one apparently knew much about it and I kind of forgot/didn't think about pursuing it myself. Part of me thought you would contact whoever's working on Showdown, too. I thought you were a bit more familiar with all of that, so you would know who to go to or where to look a little faster than I would if I had to look into it. So I haven't been thinking about that myself, actually. Unless you really do know well who to go to, I guess I can try to reach out to whoevers sometime today.
And are you saying that you can't answer "Yes, I already noticed that [etc]" because you would know that from Showdown? We don't restrict people's "sources" on talk pages. If you want to say, "Yup, Showdown suggests such-and-such is the real mechanic(s)", you're entirely free to make that response. We're only strict with what makes it into mainspace pages. Tiddlywinks (talk) 10:14, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Well, you said you'd check it or talk to whoever, so I didn't pursue asking others when I thought you did. (And if you're really eager to get some "testament" from developers, as it seemed you kinda were, I guess you (or staff) should try to get that anyway, not me!? I wouldn't see that as a must, personally.)
I did answer it like that on talk pages. But I've restrained from changing anything on mainspace pages myself. (If you wanna, I was even kinda ahead whoever asked those questions.) Nescientist (talk) 10:28, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
The verdict is a negative for using Showdown as a source. We'd prefer more direct access to the disassembled instructions/workings as opposed to a necessarily derivative simulator. Tiddlywinks (talk) 02:33, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
I see. (Though I'd say Bulbapedia is at least just as "necessarily derivative" for the most relevant part.) So, what would be the appropriate procedure for me instead (like when there are contradictions etc.)? Nescientist (talk) 16:14, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
I don't really know how to answer that. Case by case?
Try giving me an example of a contradiction. And then give me your best guess of what you would/could do. Maybe that'll help me understand well enough to give a better answer. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:22, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

(resetting indent)(I don't know if this came out wrong, but I don't want to source Showdown as in reference them in the article. I'm not affliated in any way, I don't even play there.) So, I'm not sure, but I think "case by case" is kinda what I was asking for!? Let me sketch a few different cases that might show:

1. Well, probably have a look at Whirlwind in the last few days (minus the nonsense I did), as well as its talk. What I would have done in that case is to change it without testing.

2. Another example, starting with A: Astonish, according to Showdown, doubled in base power after Minimize in Gen III only (and was not the only move to do so). Nobody complained yet, and probably nobody on here will for quite some time, but Showdown data shows different, which I noticed. Seeing that UPC also says this, I would have changed that without testing.

3. Heat Crash up next: In Gen VI only, it doubles after Minimize. I've tested this in-game some time ago, and Showdown was correct; but in a case like that, I would also like to add it without testing. I have nothing that contradicts this, and it is highly likely nobody added it to Bulbapedia yet. I would, of course, be super careful with Gen VI info in particular.

I have yet to go through all effects systematically, but I believe there also could be things like before someone complained at Whirlwind, that Bulbapedia explicitly contradicts Showdown (like before this). I would have used common sense there, going with what's likely, what's unlikely, and being very careful on removing Bulbapedia info. Just assuming for a moment that nobody already noticed the contradiction in-game and that UPC (and Azure Heights, and if you have more you consider reliable, then these as well) had no data on Whirlwind, and Bulbapedia explicitly contradicts Showdown, I would go to Whirlwind's talk page (and/or Spading) and not change anything yet.

So, can I do that? Nescientist (talk) 17:16, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

1: I'm a little wary when you mention "change it without testing". If it was just after Hydroxybutyric's oriingal comment on Talk:Whirlwind (move), that would seem a bit hasty.
2: UPC is a fine source.
3: If you've tested it, that's fine. Do not presume Showdown is correct and "add it without testing".
The long and short of it is, don't trust anything to Showdown solely. Consider it like Serebii or something: find an alternate source/proof. And don't just guess at what's "likely" or "unlikely". Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:36, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
That seems like something I can work with (although it seems a bit restrictive imho, and from all I can tell, I believe I'm generally even slightly more... precautious than you). Depending on how much "Showdown-exclusive" info it will be, I guess I will go to individual talk pages or make up a "public" user page with accumulated contradictions (unless you have a better idea). Thanks! Nescientist (talk) 18:26, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

About the page splits mentioned on your userpage...

Are you ever going to finish them? It's been over two weeks since you said, "It's been over two weeks." sumwun (talk) 01:08, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes. Some day. Tiddlywinks (talk) 01:09, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Accuracy, accuracy, evasion, power

(Has nothing to do strictly with the damage article, but) I guess there are clear parallels for calculating "effective" normal/standard stats (i.e. Atk/Def/SpAtk/SpDef/Init), accuracy, evasion, and power:

  1. Start with the (base) Atk[/...] stat seen in-game / the move accuracy seen in-game / a value of "1"/100[%] / the move's power seen in-game (or as calculated by special routines)
  2. Modify with [multiply by] the Atk[/...] stat stages / the accuracy stat stages / the evasion stat stages / [nothing for power]
  3. [modify SpDef with unique Sandstorm modifier here]
  4. Modify with [multiply by] effects of items, Abilities (iff they affect this here)

(And technically speaking, I'd therefore prefer to say Gravity and anything other than accuracy stat stages modify (move) accuracy rather than the user's accuracy stat, and have items/Abilities listed in that article rather than the stat page.) Just prominently saying/reminding, in case you intent to reformulate/work on any of that (or any moves/Abilities affected) in a moderately larger scale. Nescientist (talk) 10:52, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Edit: Effects of Badges come after 2 in early Gens, and 4 would also include Tailwind. Also, evasion is not calculated all on its own, but the evasion stat stages are simply subtracted from those of accuracy (in step 2) [14] (so technically, there is basically no "evasion stat", but only evasion stat stages). Nescientist (talk) 16:53, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
If nothing else, Statistic#Accuracy has the actual accuracy formula. I think that makes it a far better place to link to than Accuracy. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:24, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
Actually, I guess you're right. (And this further justifies my proposed move of accuracy.) Still, a split (or better just a mention somewhere, coz the table's so nice) between "affects stat stages" and "doesn't" would be nice. Nescientist (talk) 17:30, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
The In-battle modification table is nice (pretty), but I've been thinking it's a little cramped/haphazard/something, too. I intend to split it up a bit in the process of vetting its contents. It won't be the same kind of pretty, but I think it'll be a bit better in its own way too. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:39, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
After thinking about it, I guess our formula is also wrong then. It at least contradicts what I just said Dragonflycave says. Have the user have +2 accuracy and the target +1 evasion (Gen V+), our formula gives 5/4, but theirs gives 4/3. Nescientist (talk) 17:55, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
I'll have to look at that later, then. I have to focus on squaring things away for Damage first. Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:04, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
I'm quite sure our formula is off after Gen II (and that Dragonfly and the Showdown guys are right). I'll probably try to check in-game some time soon (and try to get a miss with a 75% move at -1 vs. a -2 opponent).
When you edit articles about accuracy (nice formulation btw), you may want to also (my favorite) limit Moves that cannot miss to damaging (physical/special) moves (and remove status moves currently in it). Or to moves than can affect an opponent (and add weather-inducing moves, entry hazards, the Terrain moves, Sketch, Telekinesis, Miracle Eye, Odor Sleuth, Psych Up, Role Play, Mud Sport, Water Sport, Aromatherapy, Heal Bell, Block, Howl, Gravity, Tailwind, Guard Split, Power Split, Wonder Room, Magic Room, Heal Pulse, Reflect Type, Bestow, Rototiller, Sticky Web, Ion Deluge, Flower Shield, Electrify, Fairy Lock, Play Nice, Confide). Or add virtually all status moves... You may also consider whether to add Thunder, Hurricane, Blizzard (or open a discussion or whatever). Nescientist (talk) 21:10, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Edit: better not add Thunder etc., or we'd also have to add moves that power up against a Minimized opponent. Nescientist (talk) 22:03, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
I tested, and our formula appears to indeed be incorrect after Gen II, and Dragonfly and Showdown seem to be correct on this. Anyway, I noted that we also note that somehow, but in a very different section (Statistic#Stage multipliers). Nescientist (talk) 11:11, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
I know that staff may sometimes need dedicated/special ways to discuss things, and that sometimes no communication is just most efficient. And while I adore your efforts and most of your design decisions (and do not oppose most others either), I would like to kindly ask you to consider being more public/transparent/something in regards to at least the (in the broader sense) damage-related stuff you're doing. It's a wiki, we may be able to coordinate things, I may be able to assist.
The categories in particular needed some refinement, sure. But if it's just you changing some things, I (and possibly others as well) have no chance to know what the deal is. Recently, for example, I could only guess that you may have missed to add Ice Ball to Moves that power up, but intended not to include Earthquake (and others); I'm just not sure, I don't know your reasoning (and future plans that might influence that)—you might even have just missed them as well. Also, I would, personally, definitely like to at least be able to give some input on your choices as they're made, instead of spamming your (or any) talk page after they're already implemented (especially when I could very well be aware of certain issues that might've fallen through the cracks initially). (Also, as kind of an argument to this, I believe I'm not super pedantic, and I'm very well able to just accept imprecise wording/categorization if it helps overall simplicity/readability/wiki-bility, or carefully made decisions I personally oppose.) Thank you. Nescientist (talk) 11:31, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
The extent to which I've coordinated with other staff is pretty much "Is this a bad idea?" I'm trying to put things together so (as much as possible) they can be easily and accurately referenced regarding damage calculation. I did indeed miss Ice Ball. But Earthquake's modifier does not act on "power".
There are a number of reasons I may not be real good at the kind/level of communication you apparently want, but right now, the only thing still on my mind is incorporating "Modifiers for the base power" from Smogon's page into power. And after that I hope to be able to think about the Damage page more directly. I hope that helps somehow. Tiddlywinks (talk) 12:15, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Well, thank you for understanding. We're both having the same goals. Of course, I'd be pretty willing to answer "Bad idea?" questions if I was asked, or to draft my ideas at a talk or user page. If you'd prefer it, though, I'll continue to share my thoughts at your talk page, and let you continue do your thing, so to speak.
As I said, I wasn't sure on Earthquake, I just (correctly) assumed the most reasonably thing. Thanks for clearing that up anyway.
According to Showdown, if you want that, the base power is also increased for Knock Off (Gen VI only), and Revenge (since its intro in Gen III, but missing completely at the Smogon article, unlike its variation Avalanche). As an idea, it might be worth introducing "Moves that power down" (or similar) as a counterpart for "Moves that power up" (for Solar Beam etc.). Alternatively, we could just include both kinds of moves directly in "Move that have variable power", which is basically how I have split things at the power article some weeks ago (I'd slightly prefer to not do that alternative, though). Nescientist (talk) 13:37, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Actually, the way we do it now, "Moves that power down" would only include Solar Beam, so it might be a bad idea. However, moving Eruption etc. there would be an option (and the most precise one technically); that would also have the neat effect that "Moves that have variable power" was mdash-only (if we say Stored Power "powers up", which I guess it does technically), but also the drawback that we should then probably also label Reversal (and others?) as "Moves that power up" (from zero). I'm unsure on that one, so maybe we should only have "Moves that have variable power" and no "that power up/down", or just have everything the way it is now, except for Knock Off and Revenge. (Sorry for talking too much...) Nescientist (talk) 00:27, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Eruption is variable power. There's no trigger condition. (I deviated from a certain theoretical ideal to include the likes of Rollout, Triple Kick, and Fury Cutter, but Eruption's power is still on a continuous sliding scale; that's plainly different from the mechanics of any of the "moves that power up".)
In some part, I'm not actually happy with being this strict—with quibbling over "technically such-and-such modifies damage and whatsit modifies power" (possibly Attack too), a difference that should mostly be negligible, as well as pretty unimportant (possibly even confusing) to most users. Perhaps that could simply be addressed with another category, though, something that, somehow, implies it covers any modifiers to power or damage (or etc.), and "moves that power up" could be a subcategory to it and Earthquake and stuff could go in the parent or new subcategories. ...But for now I'm just going to continue on as I have been. What I'm trying to do is task enough for now. A case for more or different can be made eventually, if someone wishes. Tiddlywinks (talk) 00:59, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

(resetting indent) Well, that depends somehow; you basically meant to define "moves that power up/down" as "has no trigger for variable power", whereas my idea would more be like "may deviate from what the label says". I guess you mean unimportant/negligable for categorization; then yeah, sure. The supercategory idea sounds cool, too. Meanwhile, I'll just slow down interrupting you. :) Nescientist (talk) 01:35, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

About moving "Magnagate" article to "Magnagate Dungeon", as well as maybe moving or deleting all the named Magnagate Dungeon articles

Since I've been analysing and researching the internal data of Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Gates to Infinity, I have discovered that there is no set list of Magnagate Dungeon names, they are determined on two separate lists. The first list in which determines the first name, in this case "Alluring". Then the next comes from the second list of names in which determines the second name of the dungeon, in this case "Crevasse". So the name of the dungeon becomes "Alluring Crevasse". And there's more to it too, the first list of names determines the enemy Pokémon and items that appear, while the second list of names determines the music and the dungeon layout and textures.

So I'm just wondering about the Magnagate article, should it be moved to Magnagate Dungeon? The article itself seems like it hasn't had any activity for quite a while and needs improvement. Also, what should be done about all the named Magnagate Dungeons that are listed, such as Forgotten Rock Formation? Should they also be moved into an article in which lists all the Magnagate Dungeons? Or should they be deleted altogether? Lemme know what you think.—Platinum Lucario (talk) 16:03, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Can you start out by telling me how many possibilities there are for the first and last parts of a name?
And I'm not sure if I'm missing something from your explanation...but it seems none of the other dungeons with "Forgotten" (like Forgotten Maze) match the Forgotten Rock Formation's encounter list.
My first inclination (with reservations, given the "Forgotten" stuff above) is just to describe how each piece of the name affects the dungeon on the Magnagate page, and the resulting combinations don't need dungeon pages, but that definitely needs to discussed with other staff first (possibly even up to the EB).
And "Magnagate" seems alright to me... Not sure what's better about "Magnagate Dungeon", but I've never played (or been super interested in, really) any of the MD games. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:20, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, I was thinking that too. And hm... seems like whenever a Magnagate Dungeon is generated in the game's data, it might also be selecting a Pokémon encounter group, as of random. But I'll need to look into it more, and I'll have to see what determines the items that appear in a dungeon too.
And there's also another reason why I thought "Magnagate Dungeon" would be more fitting for the article, 'cause I also noticed that there's no article about the "Magnagate" in the actual story of the game, in which uses Entercards, however there's one close to that in which does explain what would fit into a Magnagate article too, which is the Entercard article. From playing and researching the game, there is the Magnagate Dungeons created by an Entercard, in the story of the game. And I understand you haven't played the game or been interested in it. I just like to research the data in games and find out how it functions when certain bytes are changed. As well as discovering unused content in the game too (such as the Exit tile, which functions in the same way as the stairs).—Platinum Lucario (talk) 16:54, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Am I going to get blocked for reverting that edit?

I'm sure you're aware that I'm under a trivia ban. Unfortunately, one of the edits I did turned out to be trivia. I didn't even look at what I undid (until after); I just saw him edit warring and undid his edits blindly. Sorry. :{ Unowninator (talk) 19:20, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

It's fine, don't worry. Tiddlywinks (talk) 20:04, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Phew, thanks. ^_^ I'll be more careful in the future (unless it's something obvious or offensive, in which case...) Unowninator (talk) 22:50, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Pokémon GO - Move - Bug Bite

Page in question → Bug Bite (move)#Pokémon GO

I noticed that you stated the "Energy Delta" was increased from 6 to 7 on July 30th.

It is my understanding that it was always 7.

    "ID": 201,
    "Name": "Bug Bite",
    "Move Type": "Quick",
    "Animation ID": 4,
    "Type": "Bug",
    "Power": 6,
    "Accuracy Chance": 1,
    "Stamina Loss Scalar": 0.01,
    "Trainer Level Min": 1,
    "Trainer Level Max": 100,
    "Duration (ms)": 450,
    "Damage Window Start (ms)": 250,
    "Damage Window End (ms)": 450,
    "Energy Delta": 7

— Thanks, Rmkane (talk) 01:35, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

That page says power, not energy. The power was 6 (and is now 5). Tiddlywinks (talk) 01:39, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Oh, good catch, sorry. Thanks for the quick response. I am staring at a huge JSON file and m eyes are going cross-eyed...

— Thanks, Rmkane (talk) 01:42, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Re: Undo revision by Poliwhirl (talk)Umm...why?

Thanks for changing it back. I was giving the people who think they're 14 the benefit of the doubt, but it really shouldn't be on there until there's some kind of concrete source. I'd probably just remove the age section of their infobox altogether since the only source that claims that says they were "initially" envisioned as being 16, but that doesn't mean they were in the final game. Still better than nothing though.--Poliwhirl (talk) 13:43, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

I understand the impulse to remove the age parameter. On the other hand, I think, at the very least, there should probably be some acceptable compromise/middle ground. Tiddlywinks (talk) 14:01, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, I added the "14-16" as an attempt to compromise because it seems to be commonly believed that they're 14. I still can't find the supposed Famitsu article that states this, though. It's probably better to leave it off until it's found. --Poliwhirl (talk) 14:07, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
I'm going to remove the ages for just Bianca and Cheren. It's assumed they're the same age as Hilbert and Hilda but it's not 100% confirmed, and I think it's better to remove them until a source is found that states their official ages, if they even have any. I hope you don't mind. --Poliwhirl (talk) 19:52, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


I've thought about it some time ago, and I'd like to share my thoughts/considerations.

So, there are actually two different concepts/connotations of "target" (hence also my subtle push for a target/range article over here):

  1. what you can select (with stylus etc.); from what I can think of, nothing depends on this (other than what you have to select);
  2. who the move affects/hits; virtually everything depends on this, such as who can Protect, whom it contacts, who can Mirror Move it.

While these are one and the same for almost anything, they're different/conflicting for Outrage and variations and also for Uproar (and possibly also for Struggle in some way). So, as our template (currently) only supports one option, and although admittedly it visually looks like we should be using 1. over 2., I'd actually like to convince you to undo your changes. I guess that, from the technical/programming side, those actually are a special kind of foe-affecting rather than self-affecting moves (see e.g. this and this, or how UPC calls the range/target "random opposing Pokémon"). The template/page notably says nothing about a "target", but just uses "affects" (which I initially imagined might have been an intentionally carefully designed wording to account for these moves); it does, however, simultaneously mention Protect etc., which I guess kind of demands its target param to be "adjacentfoe" (or to not be "self"), if only for clarity reasons. Nescientist (talk) 18:12, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

I'm not undoing Petal Dance/etc's "targeting".
Both the "select your target" kind of targeting and the "you may hit these" kind of targeting are pretty fundamental to moves, but the former is a good deal more prominent (more visible, more interactive) in the games. The effect section can always explain the effect—who's actually hit/how.
...And if you wanted to go the "you may hit these" route, then we'd have to consider changing the targeting of other moves like Bide and Counter. And we really just don't need those kinds of arguments; we'll stick with the thing the game very clearly defines.
(At best, we could perhaps add a parameter that mostly looks like "self" except that instead of saying "Affects the user", it says "Affects a random opponent". But hell, if Counter works fine saying "Affects the user", I'm not sure there's really that much of a difference. Hell, UPC technically says Counter and Swords Dance have different targeting. But in the end...I don't know if it's worth it for us to mark those differences that well. At any rate, it could probably become a much larger conversation if we wanted to treat Petal Dance/etc any differently.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:50, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
Ok. What kinds of arguments do we not need? Nescientist (talk) 20:19, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
About what the "right" targeting is. Tiddlywinks (talk) 21:47, 3 September 2016 (UTC)


The same problem you dealt with on Skitty's page, I had to take care of on Sunkern's page. -Tyler53841 (talk) 01:44, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Yup, I noticed, don't worry. Tiddlywinks (talk) 01:47, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Well, I was going to fix that edit anyway before you got to it first, but I think think this user needs a temporary block from what I've seen on their talk page. -Tyler53841 (talk) 01:50, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
We see it as well. We'll deal as needs dealing in due time. Tiddlywinks (talk) 01:51, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Up to his old tricks again, I would say now would be a good time, as this user will not stop. -Tyler53841 (talk) 02:13, 7 September 2016 (UTC)


Excuse me Tiddlywinks. Thanks for helping out the situation.--CoolPokéGuy (Talk) 16:45, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:18, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

yveltal and the black death dispute

I hate to bother you with this, I admit I only came to you first because your username was easy to remember. ^^;

So here's the problem. Pumpkinking0192 removed mention of the black death from Yveltal's Origin section. Upon questioning his motives, he first claimed just because it's black and related to death has nothing to do with the black death, which I told him that was not remotely the reason for the origin mentioning it. Then he said it can't be related because Yveltal is not a poison type and now he refuses to discuss it due to the "wall of text" I used to address his reasons. and told me to go to a staff member. Sorry I don't mean to sound like a kid running to the teacher to tattle here, but this is beyond ridiculous. Yamitora1 (talk) 07:31, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

If I may clarify, Tiddlywinks, please read my talk page posts with an open mind instead of accepting Yamitora's exaggerated characterization. In no way did I say any of my suggestions were "must-be"s or "can't be"s, just that their presence or absence made it unlikely that the plague was an intended influence on Yveltal. If you keep that in mind, my posts speak for themselves, and this is the last post I have any interest in making in this silly dispute. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 16:07, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
The Black Death is not something I would say has or should be connected to "poison".
I tend to lean permissive on origins (more or less precisely because of the likelihood for this sort of detailed and subjective (on both sides) arguing). So, when all's said and done, my own conclusion here comes down to just..."Eh, why not?" But I'll see if other staff have any thoughts and try to get back to you. (If I don't get back after a couple days, assume I've forgotten perhaps. And/or if you're not satisfied with my lack of conviction, feel free to consult someone else.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 00:31, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
I didn't exaggerate anything, read the edit log for Yveltal and Pumpkinking0192's talk page and you'll see I listed the key points of the situation.
edit log for Yveltal 00:32 September 10, 2016 Origin: Being the color black and themed around death does not automatically make it related to the plague outbreak nicknamed "the Black Death." It has no other connection to the plague that I'm aware of, so this really doesn't belong.) Yamitora1 (talk) 18:48, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
The ascendant opinion among staff seems to be that there's little connecting Yveltal to the plague. I will defer to that, and I hope you can make peace with this. Thanks. Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:08, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your time, yes I can make peace with the decision. Yamitora1 (talk) 05:20, 14 September 2016 (UTC)


Why did you add that trivia point back? It is pure speculation and is not sourced someone jumping out of a plane doesn't automatically mean James Bond and could just be a coincidence. The copyrighted material is James Bond he is a copyrighted character and from what I've seen before no comparisons to copyrighted materials are allowed.Ratchet and Clank 1995 (talk) 07:40, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Once again, you have horribly misinterpreted the trivia. No where is it saying the scene is based off James Bond. It's saying that Daniel Craig was dressed as James Bond as he and the Queen parachuted during the opening ceremony of the 2012 Olympic games. And no, it does not need rewording, the trivia is clear as clear can get.--ForceFire 09:27, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
That still doesn't explain that it is unsourced, speculation and most likely a coincidence.Ratchet and Clank 1995 (talk) 16:37, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
I don't even know what you mean by "unsourced". It's not like you need a "source" to draw a comparison. I think "speculation" isn't really a right word to describe this either. The similarities could, however, be mostly coincidence, or both paralleling an underlying trope instead of the Olympics specifically. On the other hand, the timing between the Olympics and the episode is close enough that it's not at all unreasonable to consider that that may have been the inspiration. I'll think about it. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:35, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Apparently the league conferences often have parallels to the Olympics, like a torch in the first conference. In that light, I think the trivia on BW103 is perfectly reasonable and acceptable. Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:08, 13 September 2016 (UTC)


Thanks for removing that trivia. I haven't seen the episode (wouldn't know where to look, actually) but the original writer's use of "explicitly" misled me to think this was something unprecedented for the anime. Thanks for setting the record straight. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 02:07, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Marill family and fairy type

C'mon, it's not that speculative; in fact, it is one of the best explanations, I've ever come across, to their fairy type and it does make sense. If you find a better explanation I'd gladly accept it, but just removing it seems really biased. - unsigned comment from ExLight (talkcontribs)

Can you explain to me (in full/explicit detail, not just with a link to Wikipedia) why you think it is based on the tooth fairy? Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:35, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
Sure, but first we must consider that Marill's family wasn't originally supposed to be tooth fairies, it received the type mainly to spread the new type, so it doesn't really have the tooth story to support it.
Since the mouse image is strongly related to the tooth fairy, I do believe this was the reason Marill was chosen to get it. In fact, the original tooth fairy might've been a mouse (The Little Mouse,, now, this one seems to be popular (I'm not really sure how much) in France. (The fact it is a French fairy tale MIGHT be important, since the Kalos Region had french influence on other Pokémon like Aromatisse and Goodra).
The Mouse-Tooth Fairy relationship still relevant on some hispanic countries (Ratoncito Pérez). So even nowadays, representations of the fairy aren't only the 'tinkerbell' one, some of the most frequent among the uncommon are rodents, and sometimes rabbits (
So, that's it. I do believe this is more than enough to give a Pokémon the fairy type, some other need way less to be categorized as such, e.g., Morelull because of its foxfire (a.k.a. fairy fire) and Swirlix being a cotton candy (a.k.a. fairy floss). ExLight (talk) 02:25, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
"first we must consider that Marill's family wasn't originally supposed to be tooth fairies"
I'm tempted to stop right there. That's practically the definition of speculative.
But long story short, you've just got so little. You mention Swirlix. Swirlix at least looks exactly like cotton candy. (You also mention Morelull, but its typing is not mentioned on its page at all.) Marill? Marill hardly looks like a mouse, and doesn't look like a tooth fairy, and isn't connected to teeth in any particular way. If anyone's biased here, it's you, wanting an explanation badly enough to be more certain about your theory than is really reasonable. I'll admit, you've got some interesting coincidences and you could be right... But that's about all you have: coincidences; it could easily be something else entirely, something that makes much plainer sense (if only we knew about it). You also argue they basically internally retconned Marill to justify it being Fairy; but that's really not a good assumption either (as we often say: "don't assume").
There's simply not enough there. Tiddlywinks (talk) 03:00, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
"Coincidences", huh. *sigh*
Better than no explanation. Anyways, thanks for hearing me out. If you say so I won't disagree. ExLight (talk) 03:28, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Pokédex 3D

What's wrong with the images that I am putting into Pokédex 3D that you are removing? I am not following what you are wanting that section to contain. --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) 04:08, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Long story short: what's the point of multiple images that basically show the same thing? Tiddlywinks (talk) 04:12, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
I made sure to take care of duplicates (or images that don't add much to the article, which I found two and are tagged for deletion on the archives). The PNGs I linked all have something different to them. --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) 04:15, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
Many of them just have different Pokemon. That's hardly any difference. Tiddlywinks (talk) 04:19, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
What do other people think? Could you ask around? --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) 05:11, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
What Tiddlywinks said. One image per "feature" is enough. --Carmen (Talk | contribs) 14:37, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
OK, I reached a compromise. {{unused}} was applied to applicable images (my images). --Wildgoosespeeder (talk) 20:34, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

National number

Hello! I'm from Poképédia, and I saw that you added the national numbers for Rowley, Litten, Popplio and Pikipek. As for now, I've only seen Rowlet's number, in a Bank Pokémon screenshot. For the other ones, is it just deduction from the regional numbers or is there a real source? Matt.(talk, discuter) 09:53, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

The others are inferred from Rowlet's number and the regional order (and the perfect space for expected starter evolutions), yes. In every game since RSE, the regional 'dex order has exactly mapped to the National 'Dex order, with the sole exception of the tail end of the Gen IV Pokemon. (For the record/ease of reference: starter regional numbers, Pikipek regional/Melemele number.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 14:28, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
So if I understand well, it's just deduction based on the Regional numbers, but nothing really official. Alright, thank you! Matt.(talk, discuter) 14:34, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Fainting source

It was on the official Poké page about Pokémon Refresh. Sometimes they’ll avoid attacks from opposing Pokémon—and even hold out when they’re on the verge of fainting. MannedTooth (Talk) 21:55, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

It says affectionate, not friendly or happy. Given that Refresh looks like Amie 2.0, we'd probably best hold off on assuming Refresh's mechanics until the parallels (or divergences) are made more explicit. Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:06, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Orbs and seeds

Hi! I wanted to ask you something before I added some large-ish edits about MD since I've approached you on some before. I was thinking of adding an availability table to some MD pages like Wonder Orbs and Seeds about which games they can be found in. The item lists currently on those pages don't easily differentiate which games they are from unless you open the details of each one and see whether they can be found in those games. For example, one Orb might have only been available in Gen 3 and 4 games, while another is available in Gen 4, 5 and 6 games, and another only in Gen 5. I was thinking of adding a table like the one on this page, though it doesn't solve the messy cost issue. What are your thoughts on this? --Wowy(토크) 11:13, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

It's not a great solution, but if you can turn Javascript off (NoScript makes this very easy for me in Firefox), all the tables will display without you having to click each one.
We also have a small hope of splitting all items out to individual pages sometime in the future. (It may never happen, or may never happen until Gen 8, or who knows what. These sorts of things aren't exactly discussed every day, and for now it's had a bit of support but not much in the way of momentum.) It occurs to me that if that happens, a table like you're thinking of would be more appropriate on the Orb/Seed pages.
Since the MD games are pretty different from the core games in this respect, though (where non-Key items almost always carry forward), if you still want to, I'd say I guess it's alright? I don't think it'll be a perfect solution still, but it is a unique problem for MD games. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:21, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

monopoly moves descriptions

Although I get what you're doing by removing instructions, I can't quite seize why you removed half of this one. MannedTooth (Talk) 07:11, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

I guess that part doesn't have parentheses like the others. But it looks pretty much like instructions. Are you sure you didn't miss any parentheses on that? (Likewise, do you know if you missed any part of Thunderbolt?) Tiddlywinks (talk) 07:16, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Nope, I've verified again and it's all okay. The thing about Bonemerang is that what's left on it is just... not pointless but like, it doesn't really mean or describes anything. MannedTooth (Talk) 07:29, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Following most of the rest's example then, I suppose Bonemerang's whole thing is the "description" then... Tiddlywinks (talk) 07:43, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Whirlwind and Roar

Sorry, I screwed up there. What I wanted to make clearer initially was that it would succeed if the opponent has switched etc., which I'm pretty sure of, and neither revisions nor upc contradict. I somehow forgot that this was the Gen II section somewhere in the middle, then made everything wrong; so sorry for that! Nescientist (talk) 17:59, 2 October 2016 (UTC)


Should Greninja count as a Pokémon that appeared in the anime before its game debut? Because the Ash-Greninja form was first introduced in the XY series prior to the Sun and Moon games. Seabiscuit2020 (talk) 19:43, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

It basically seems the same as Zygarde. If Zygarde counts, Greninja probably does too. Tiddlywinks (talk) 20:54, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
That's all I needed to know, thanks. But the problem is that the Greninja page is locked and I can't add that category to it. Seabiscuit2020 (talk) 21:01, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

sound based moves page messed up

I can't fix some kind of weird error that is under snore. Yamitora1 (talk) 18:54, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

You mean Spriteit's page? There's nothing really to be done about that without removing the infobox or deleting the page entirely, I think. Tiddlywinks (talk) 21:20, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Direct damage

I saw you used that term, and I was wondering if that should contain all of those? I'm asking primarily cause I also saw this, and if a mention of exceptions actually is warranted, it'd be easier to link to the category then. Nescientist (talk) 17:24, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Well, do you have a preference for Fur Coat etc.? Nescientist (talk) 16:14, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
I forgot about that part. Thanks. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:22, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
In lack of an actual answer, just to make sure: you realized that this affects more than just Fur Coat, right? And you prefer to note exceptions? In which case, I can go ahead and change all effects affected!? Nescientist (talk) 17:16, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
I don't have a clue what you're talking about, but how about: go forth and prosper. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:22, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Well, thanks for your trust I guess, but let me probably explain beforehand:
For Fur Coat, I see two possibilities, namely saying "Fur Coat halves damage from physical moves, Psyshock, Psystrike, and Secret Sword." (and stopping there), or adding "(..). It does not affect moves that deal direct damage." (and noting all exceptions by linking to the category). However, if we do the second thing here, we should probably similarly note exceptions at a lot of other articles, including rather obvious ones like Friend Guard or Thick Fat, but also weird things like damage-reducing Berries, gems, probably others.
I can't say I have a clear preference of what it should be ideally, that's why I was asking whether you have one. Right now, I would probably just delete that "Does not affect..." exception sentence entirely for simplicity, and note the exceptions on their respective pages and that's it. Nescientist (talk) 18:26, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Thick Fat modifies attack stats, not damage. Most of the resist Berries activate on supereffective damage, which simply cannot apply to any of the direct damage moves. For Chilan, however, it would be fine to note the direct damage exception. Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:40, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
You're of course right on Thick Fat. (And I should have known!) Gems also affect power. I was a bit too fast with the list; I've slowed down to compile a new one: Chilan, Reflect/Light Screen, Friend Guard, Life Orb, Multiscale/Shadow Shield, Metronome (the item), Burn. The way we have it also Fairy Aura (e.g. Pixilated Super Fang), Electric Terrain (via Electrify), Misty Terrain (Dragon Rage), and said Fur Coat (Showdown disagrees it affects damage for all of those; it's exceptionally hard to test, but would not even require us to make an exception for direct damage).
So, does "it would be fine to note" actually mean you prefer to note direct damage exceptions there over not noting them? (I'm about to apologize to ask for your opinion...!?) If so, I could add this within the next 24 hours; it's a matter of whether we want that. Nescientist (talk) 19:47, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
If it's confirmed, a note is certainly warranted. Tiddlywinks (talk) 08:50, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Alright. I won't necessarily be testing/doublechecking all, but I've got my Raticate right here. Nescientist (talk) 14:34, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Table formatting

I have these two tables that should look better.

# Pokémon HP Attack Defense Sp. Attack Sp. Defense Speed Total EVs
015 015 Beedrill 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 3

How do I make the colors line up correctly and remove the "0" from the last column?

# Pokémon Exp.
017 017 Pidgeotto 122 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

How do I remove the extra column that's right of the last column? - unsigned comment from Sumwun (talkcontribs)

First off, FYI, the four pages you've recently created in your Sandbox aren't really good mainspace material. It's all just trivia, which doesn't add up to a good page.
Otherwise... The problem you're having comes from the fact that you're using a template, and that template is meant to do things a very specific way; it's not just going to let you pick and choose the pieces you want somehow. Instead of using that template, you could solve it by making another template in your userspace that only uses the parts you want, if you're able. Or, for the second table, you could just do the rows like on User:Sumwun/Sandbox/List of Pokémon with unique catch rates instead of trying to use that template. If you still feel like filling them out even if they won't be mainspaced, you could also just ignore the extra parts from the template (like just add an extra, empty column to the header of your first table so the other rows align). Tiddlywinks (talk) 05:34, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. As for the pages not being good mainspace material, how meaningless does something have to be in order not to be mainspace material? sumwun (talk) 18:39, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Well, like I said, as a rule of thumb, if it's basically just a trivia list, then it's probably not great for the mainspace. On the other end of the spectrum, things like game features are prime mainspace material. Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:45, 17 October 2016 (UTC)


So I'm curious about a couple of decision-making processes by the admins of this wiki, but since the admin who made the decision has yet to respond to my questions and you have been at least somewhat civil to me every time I've asked you such a question, I figured I could come to you to get an explanation.

First of all, I asked on Talk:Red (Origins) if I could split Caterpie and Metapod into separate boxes (for reasons that are listed there but I don't feel like repeating here). After a long time of no answer, I went ahead and did it, only for it to be reverted. When I asked on the talk page why it was reverted, ForceFire, who reverted the edit, responded that I can't change something when no one has commented on it, but that they did not know whether or not I was right. Since there's still been no one who has pointed out a problem in my logic, can I make this change now, or do I still need to wait for someone to join in the conversation?

Secondly, I added a parallel trivia point to Gallade and Froslass similar to parallel trivia points found on pages such as Phanpy or Gothita, only for ForceFire to remove it because it's "opinion". I could understand the trivia point being unnecessary, but I'm not sure why it's considered opinion when several other examples of nearly identical trivia points are not.

I hope this doesn't come off as rude or snarky since I really am just curious and would like to understand better so that I don't make the same mistakes (though I'm aware that I tend to phrase things in ways that come across as impolite and have yet to improve). Thanks! Nutter Butter (talk) 21:22, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Continuity of characters is pretty standard. Caterpie is a character. By growing, it can become Metapod. It's somewhat more weird to think they introduced an entirely different Metapod and didn't point it out at all than it is to think that Caterpie just evolved. If they show both at the same time, or if they explicitly say that they're different Pokemon, then fine; but otherwise, the reasonable assumption is that they're the same.
The sort of trivia on Phanpy's page hinges (strongly) on the fact that it and its "counterpart" are exclusive to different games in a pair. This is not true of either Gallade or Ralts; they're don't even "look" the same, with Ralts' family having three stages and Snorunt's having only two. You're welcome to draw the parallel and believe there's an intentional connection there, but that's your own "opinion". There's too little in the way of really good connecting points (some of the connections you try to point out just come off as reaching, especially after the first couple or so). It's mostly just coincidental. Tiddlywinks (talk) 01:58, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
I see... Thank you! Nutter Butter (talk) 02:11, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Regarding age of Black/White protagonists

Are you sure it should stay the way it is now? I feel like there there shouldn't be something definitively stated like that unless there's a source. There's no official source I can find that identifies them in that age range, even though the designers did most likely intend for them to be around that age, but if we're going by that we might as well add an estimated age for every protagonist, which I don't think is a good idea. Most of them don't have an official age. I just think it's probably be better to be consistent and not list an age for the protagonist unless it's definitively stated somewhere (unless you want to consider what the scenario writer said as applying to the final game and change it to 16). P.S. I apologize in advance if I did something wrong by making a new section here rather than putting this in the previous one I made. --Poliwhirl (talk) 12:31, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

It seems one way or another I missed when the "14-" was added again, that much was not appropriate actually. The Twitter source in the trivia is at least *a* source, so we'll keep those there for now. I'll consult with other staff, though, and double-check if we should remove it after all and just leave it in the trivia. Tiddlywinks (talk) 12:46, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. I assumed you/the other admins were okay with it since it was left alone for a month and you reverted my edit back to it. Sorry about that. --Poliwhirl (talk) 12:53, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
I actually forgot I had touched any of that over a month ago. =P And removing the age entirely is a big step, which I didn't adequately understand until your message here. (And then I looked into the histories again and...the rest is history? Pun intended.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 13:02, 21 October 2016 (UTC)


I only added it in the meantime just for an early start. Not because of the demo version. I was just trying to help.--CoolPokéGuy (Talk) 12:15, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

So I may have found an interesting piece of material.

I was looking on the internet not too long ago, and I came across a Nintendo Dream article (apparently the same as the one where Mega Flygon was revealed to not be a thing) that interviewed Game Freak about Zinnia. According to what some people have translated, the "Aster is a Draconid" plot wasn't made up by Pokespe and is actually canon to the games, but was not put in as a way to keep players guessing. I was just wondering if it wouldn't be impossible to add it to either character's articles, but I just wanted a second opinion. Ataro (talk) 14:10, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

According to the head scenario writer, Zinnia herself has no special powers, she's just a normal person. One day, Zinnia inherits her position from Aster, a person with special powers, but she never had the powers of a lorekeeper herself. Zinnia does what she can as a "powerless (/helpless) person", and that's one of the core themes of the Delta Episode.
Man, they absolutely, completely buried that whole angle, then. I like that there's actually some authoritative word on Aster in the games.
Can you link the original page that image was on? I'd really like if we can reference the exact issue that's from. Tiddlywinks (talk) 14:51, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Here you go. It's a new entry, so it's listed at the top as well as the very bottom. Ataro (talk) 15:24, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
I've added the information into Zinnia and Aster after finding a reference with more complete scans. If you see any way it needs improvement, please feel free. ^^ Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:25, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Water Shuriken

Now that the Ash-Greninja sprite is up, do you think you can add it to the Water Shuriken page? --Seabiscuit2020 (talk) 17:47, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

We hardly know anything about who learns what and how for Gen VII. And even less for Ash-Greninja. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:49, 23 October 2016 (UTC)