Talk:List of Pokémon by availability

Hi there!

If you know a fix that needs to be made, go right ahead and fix it: this page isn't (or oughtn't be) protected. But if you can't fix it, for example because a protected template is broken, please still report it here! --Eskay 09:41, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Radar

Ought we made those available by Radar alone be "Ra"? It'd be easy enough to add... TTEchidna 00:40, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Glow ahead. Θρtιmαtum♏_Talk|Links 00:48, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

I think the templates need to be changed before we can add stuff like "Ra" for Radar, and we probably need a "W" for Walker. Also, what about swarms in HGSS? They're currently listed as "C" but shouldn't they be "S"? Dragoness 08:09, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

The swarms have now been marked, thanks. What's a good plan for changing the template? --Eskay 09:58, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Disponibility for Hoenn and Sinnoh Sound

Put disponibility for Hoenn and Sinnoh Sound, please!--Ash 22:21, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Huh? I don't follow. I'm pretty sure "disponibility" is availability, but what are Hoenn and Sinnoh Sound? (Was under HGSS heading) --Eskay 09:41, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps this is what Ash is looking for? It looks like the already existed when I made this post, but shouldn't it have its own icon? --Enervation 03:13, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Pruned

I've pruned this talk page of resolved issues, as of this timestamp. With thanks to LaprasBoi, ht14, and JDigital, for adding issues which I claim that I've resolved. --Eskay 09:41, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

If we want an archive page or something, it's certainly possible to restore one from the history. --Eskay 10:18, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Black and White

Looks like it is possible to catch some, but not all, earlier-generation Pokémon again? So we'll need to extend the templates for the earlier sections to allow input of B&W data. Also a potential opportunity to extend the template functionality as discussed above under Radar. --Eskay

We may want a third column for Dream World availability, if that's stable, per discussion at Template_talk:Availability. --Eskay 20:01, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Also remember that there's something new besides the Dream World: the PokéShifter . - unsigned comment from EzekielMaple (talk • contribs)

What's the point of having things like Poké Transfer and Pal Park if they aren't used? They seem close enough to trade anyway. Also, what if the Pokémon can be obtained with more than one method. For example, Qwilfish can be obtained in both rippling water (catch) and the Pokémon Dream World.

Adding Pokéwalker info

Since Dream World info is planned to be added, and it is not strictly part of the games, how come there's no mention about adding Pokéwalker info? Blueapple128 04:01, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, I don't believe that the Pokémon Dream World, the Pokéwalker, and events are truly in-game, so I'm proposing a move to List of Pokémon by availability. --Enervation 03:18, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Event Pokémon inconsistency

I was under the impression that Ev stood for in-game event (GS Ball, Navel Rock, Flower Garden, etc). However, the chart lists Mewtwo as Ev in Black and White, where there is no in-game event for Mewtwo. Does Ev now stand for any Pokémon obtained in an event download? If so, there's a hell of a lot of editing that needs to be done to the Gen II, Gen III and Gen IV sections to reflect all of the event downloads that were released for them, too (including releases by Toys R US, Gamestop etc).

I don't mind which way it is (although I'd prefer the former). It's just the lack of consistency that's confusing. Pacter 17:03, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Cleanup.

Is it just me, or does it really needs a cleanup? The legend is getting slightly messy. Marked +-+-+ (talk) 15:37, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree, and I have some ideas for it:

• I don't see anyone on the page marked with a P or PS, so we should just get rid of that and denote all transfers with T since it's basically the same thing.
• Dream World should have it's own column under Generation V, that way we can simply write C, E, and B under it.
• Snagged Pokemon in Colo/XD could be marked Sn so that it won't be confused with Swarm, or just use C since there's hardly any difference.
• Since we have Dream Radar marked I think it would also be appropriate to add a W for Pokewalker exclusive Pokemon in the HG/SS columns.
• The event Pokemon are a mess. I think we should only use Ev to denote the typical Event Pokemon as well as any Pokemon found through an in-game event that is triggered by either an event item or presence of another event Pokemon. I can't even verify many of the Pokemon currently marked, some information simply seems lost to history.
• I've never found evidence of Mew being released at any event during Generation II so it'd have to be traded from a Generation I game that received it.

So those are just my main issues. If nobody objects, I'll start work on improving it soon. EV Love (talk) 23:01, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Well, Mew was distributed here, but you can't see it due to limitations. --Abcboy (talk) 01:26, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Don't forget to roundy it too. --Abcboy (talk) 04:44, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

It's bad idea to replace Snagging with C, as C is used for Poké Spot Pokémon. Also deleted Pal Park, as nothing uses it (and aside from event Pokémon, the only that could use that are Regis). Marked +-+-+ (talk) 15:10, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Okay well I tidied up, fixed a few errors and added Pokéwalker info. I might start on the Dream World column soon since in places such as here it has it's own box with a pink styling, so a column to match that will do. EV Love (talk) 04:29, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Need help with that? I could add it for you. --Abcboy (talk) 04:45, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Yeah go ahead, remember to change the Avail template for each gen. EV Love (talk) 18:27, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Confused about the DW header in table. When it should be C and what about Dream World markings for Pokémon from BWB2W2? Marked +-+-+ (talk) 17:29, 14 November 2012 (UTC) PS. For the sake of Distortion World, why Dream World has W and WE? These are for POKÉWALKER. Okay, Ev and EV are one thing, but this? This is obviously wrong. Marked +-+-+ (talk) 10:58, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Everyone found in Dream World is found in the same way, it makes no difference between BW and B2W2. And once we finish updating the column, all the DWs, DWEs and DWBs will be gone. EV Love (talk) 05:30, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

It does make difference. For instance, you cannot catch Duosion here with original games. You have to connect with sequels. Also Froslass has WE on Dream World, for no reason, it's not visible when editing, only when viewing.Marked +-+-+ (talk) 13:18, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Oh okay, I see. Well done. The article looks a lot better now. Any more ideas are welcome. EV Love (talk) 18:13, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Maybe Pokéwalker header? Marked +-+-+ (talk) 18:31, 23 November 2012 (UTC) PS.Okay, I did that for Generation I, planning for other, except some of Pokéwalker mons are exclusive to event-only areas (such as Sightseeing's Torchic) and not sure how to mark these. Marked +-+-+ (talk) 20:05, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Mark them as Ev like the others. And make the column header PW so that it's not so wide. EV Love (talk) 03:01, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Okay. Also, change the in-game event Pokémon to Ev? Marked +-+-+ (talk) 11:36, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

I think I like how it is now, leaving the in-game ones as EV and external ones as Ev. Or perhaps to avoid confusion, in-game events could be marked IE or something.EV Love (talk) 04:33, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Somewhat version-exclusives?

For example, Registeel is only in Black 2, but via Key System communications with White 2, can be obatained in White 2. Regice is vice-versa. Should this fact be included or left as it is? --Abcboy (talk) 10:53, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Tauros in Dream World

The list doesn't have anything in the Dream World column for Tauros even though they can be caught there. I'm not sure what letter to put in, so can someone else correct this? Pokemega32 (talk) 05:30, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Riolu also. Pokemega32 (talk) 05:32, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

A few propositions

This article is getting quite complicated and hard to follow, and some parts don't quite make logical sense. I came up with a few suggestions on how to improve the article, but some of them are a little drastic so I wanted everyone else's input before I made any edits:
1) Handling Event Pokémon:

• Looking at the article right now, it says that Ivysaur in GSC can be obtained by evolving an event Bulbasaur. This is quite hard to imagine; GSC events are notoriously hard to get and not thoroughly documented. It is much more likely for one to get Ivysaur simply by trading from RBY.
  
• Raichu from Yellow is even crazier; its obtaining method is listed as obtaining an event Surfing Pikachu and then evolving it by Thunderstone (since it doesn't have the starter Pikachu's ID number). The number of people on Earth who have done this probably can be counted on one hand, if that.
  
• There is a lot of cluttering involving the labels "EV", "Ev", "EvE", "EvB", etc. Is this necessary?
  
• I propose that a single label, "EV", be used to denote event-exclusive Pokémon, and nothing else. Do we really need a precise distinction between direct distribution (ex. Keldeo) and in-game event (ex. Newmoon Island)?
  
• Under this label, only those Pokémon unnecessary to obtain the Diploma would ever receive the "EV" label. There might be a few exceptions for corner cases like Ho-oh, Lugia, Phione, Zorua, and Zoroark, but all other Pokemon should be listed under "T" if they are not normally obtainable in that game. For example, what's more likely: getting a Bulbasaur in Gen V through an event, or getting it by trading one from HGSS?
  

2) Handling the Pokéwalker and Dream World columns:

• Much of these columns don't make sense. They are not games in the same sense as the main series or Colo/XD, and the idea of trading or evolving Pokémon within them doesn't seem right.
  
• I propose that these columns are completely removed, and their contents merged with the main series columns.
  
• Pokéwalker-exclusive Pokémon should be given "Pw", "PwE", or "PwB".
  
• To perhaps merge some labels, both Dream World and Dream Radar-exclusive Pokémon should be given "Dr", "DrE", or "DrB", with "Dr" standing for "Dream". Again, these are for Pokémon exclusive to the side game, and should not be used if the Pokémon is obtainable normally.
  

That second one might be controversial, and I'm definitely open to other opinions. How does this sound? Blueapple128 (talk) 04:47, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree with you with the Event Pokémon part: this change would be very useful for whose want to get the Diploma, p.e. IMHO only events-EXCLUSIVE pokémon should be marked as Ev/EV/EVB ecc ecc. Do we need someone's authorization to work on this change? Fosco Corazza 13:49, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I feel like the Pokéwalker availability should be treated the same way as with Dream World (lowercase letters: so, for Duskull, it'd be "c" instead of "C", and Dusclops would be "e" instead of "E") since the concept seems to be the same anyway. ^ht14 17:48, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

As far as I know, the lowercase is for Pokémon who appear only with one pair, but not the other. Uploader (talk) 16:46, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

You mean as in doesn't appear in the main series but appears in Dream World/Pokéwalker? The example I gave is the only way by which they can be obtained in HGSS. ^ht14 17:26, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

No, the lowercase is reserved for DW for Pokémon who appear only when connected with BW (non-Unova) or B2W2 (Unova)... at least that's how I understand it. Uploader (talk) 17:35, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

"I feel like the Pokéwalker availability should be treated the same way as with Dream World." I mentioned this because it just seems to make sense considering the way Pokéwalker works. ^ht14 17:37, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Mistakes

Uploader, you can get Torchic as a gift and you should change it to Ev and EvE for its evolved forms. The rest of the Pokémon, Stunky can be captured in the wild and you must change it to C and E for its evolved form, Finneon is not caught in both versions and you have to trade for it so change it to T in the X version box. You had found so many mistakes that other users need to fix this. Cinday123 (Talk) 11:16, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

I derped Finneon, forgot about Torchic and didn't know about Stunky. (I might also need to add the note for evolutions of DW exclusives, just for clarifying.) Uploader (talk) 11:21, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

You better check other pages (such as Kalos routes and events) and Serebii but do not steal and copy any information from Serebii while editing. Cinday123 (Talk) 11:52, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Another mistake

Tranquill can be caught in Friend Safari, you should change it to C, you breed Pidove, you better change to B and for Unfezant you evolve from Tranquill then change it to E, but only in the Friend Safari boxes. Cinday123 (Talk) 22:53, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Gonna do a rewrite

Given that this page's source isn't even loading for me, I believe it is time for the article to have a rewrite. I'm going to work on writing up new templates (which would behave very similarily to these; mainly just setting default values), followed by redoing the entire list, using the data set I have at this time (thanks to user mew/vulpix on IRC for getting the current source). So as to not destroy the article in it's current form, I'm going to be doing this in userspace, User:TruePikachu/LoPbA, but please keep your edits on this page (I'll run through a diff to get my version updated before contributing it to mainspace). --TruePikachu (talk) 22:43, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Fixed link, that's what I get for not previewing... --TruePikachu (talk) 22:44, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Two Mistakes

I've been verifying this article column by column and am currently on Gen III. However, I've been unable to edit this article for some time now because it always times out on me. But if anyone is able to, there's two things to fix:

• Granbull should be marked as S for Colosseum and T for XD.
• Duskull should be marked as S for XD.

I'll report any additional findings. EV Love (talk) 04:06, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Alternatives...

This page is rather difficult to maintain currently. It doesn't save well. We should probably look for some alternative ways of presenting the information...

Not using templates at all (or ifs and switches) might speed it up. I just created a user page of the Generation I table from this page if it weren't using templates. When everything was pretty much optimized as well as it could be, the page came in at about 190,000 bytes. That's enough to put it second on the list of long pages on the wiki, and if you added the other generations, it'd easily top that list. In other words, perhaps that wouldn't be the best option, especially if we keep trying to add games into the future, eternally bloating this one page.

The other alternative is to split it by generations. The question is, which way? Put simply, we can split it so there's one page for each generation column on this page currently or we can split it so there's one page for each generation section of this page currently. The latter's easiest to do; just put each section on its own page. But if you want to know the availability of Pokemon, you probably want to know it over the whole generation. Of course, if you split it by columns, you kind of lose perspective, especially if a Pokemon isn't available at all in the given generation. (...I have a thought that we could perhaps add a column that links the most recent previous generation a Pokemon was available in if it isn't available at all in a given generation. For example, Chikorita isn't available in Gen VI, so it would have a link to Gen IV. In general, though, it might just be easier to let people explore whatever Pokemon they need to themselves. They can just visit a Pokemon's page to see all its locations in all the generations easily.)

Having talked it out here, I think I would be in favor of splitting this page by its generation columns. Tiddlywinks (talk) 13:30, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

I was just thinking about suggesting this idea and agree that it's difficult to decide which way to do it. I think it'd be a good idea to do both, although it would require 12 pages assuming columns are split only by generations and the games released during them (thus GCN is part of III, PW part of IV, DW part of V, and FS part of VI). But seeing how many other topics are split into several pages I couldn't see this one being a problem. IMO this is the most useful page on the entire site and I refer to it constantly, so I'd really like to see some changes (as I can't edit it anymore) while still keeping it as convenient as possible. EV Love (talk) 16:05, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

P.S. There is the issue though of every edit being made on one chart having to be made on the other. So if that can't be worked out, then I recommend splitting by columns. If someone needs to see every gen for a Pokemon, they can just go to that Pokemon's article. Or just open all the charts in separate tabs. EV Love (talk) 16:27, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Staff shout-out

This is honestly just ridiculous. At the moment, I'm failing to even load the page, just so I can look at it. Could a staff member even just comment on this page's issues? Are staff aware, is it on the agenda, what? This is a useful page, but it is not up to snuff performance-wise. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:58, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Tiddlywinks, check the attitude at the door please. Yes, we know there's an issue with the page & we're considering options on how to deal with it. Screaming and yelling over it isn't a prudent course of action. The biggest issue with this page are the templates it consists of. I was doing the math on it just a moment ago:

• Generation I rows have 28 availability cells, all with a switch call. At 151 Pokémon, that's 4228 switch calls.
• Generation II rows have 24 availability cells, all with a switch call. At 100 Pokémon, that's 2400 switch calls, 6628 total.
• Generation III rows have 21 availability cells, all with a switch call. At 135 Pokémon, that's 2835 switch calls, 9463 total.
• Generation IV rows have 14 availability cells, all with a switch call. At 107 Pokémon, that's 1498 switch calls, 10961 total.
• Generation V rows have 8 availability cells, all with a switch call. At 156 Pokémon, that's 1248 switch calls, 12209 total.
• Generation VI rows have 3 availability cells, all with a switch call. At 70 Pokémon, that's 210 switch calls, 12419 total.

At over 12000 switch calls, it's unsurprising that the page finally completely imploded with the addition of Generation VI. Gen VI added about 2157 switches to a severely lag-ridden page already containing over 10000 switch calls. This is a huge issue, and is going to require a significant amount of planning to fix and prevent the issue from happening again. Please, have some patience. - Kogoro - Talk to me - 17:47, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

What attitude? If you mean "ridiculous", I was using that for the page, not staff. I specifically asked for staff comment because there's been none on this talk page. I thank you for remedying that. It's good to know staff are aware and considering. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:56, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Trying to edit the page statement

I'm just trying to edit the statement about what this table lists in order and I keep getting an HTTP error. I'm kind of worried, because I think I left an error last time I edited that statement and now I can't edit it to make "Dream World" a link. I know how to do so, but it won't let me save. ZHODY (talk) 19:43, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

This is likely related to the unresolved issue above. We'll do our best to get the problem back onto the front burner and taken care of as soon as possible. --Pokemaster97 19:53, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Still unable to edit page

It's been months and I still can't edit or even look at the page without going to Google and viewing it Cached.Blob55 (talk) 18:53, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire

Can update with availability from the currently or better suggestion is divided by generation this article? --HoopsterJohn (talk) 00:42, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Hidden Pokémon in ORAS

When I updated the page, I just marked them all as "catch". I think that the hidden Pokémon are most like the Poké Radar, which are all marked with "catch", and not as much like swarm, which got its own designator. Does anybody think the hidden Pokémon are distinct enough that they should get their own designator? --Abcboy (talk) 19:52, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Phione

In the trivia, Phione does not require Manaphy. It is readily available in My Pokémon Ranch. ~ By Caroline under Bulbagarden ~ (talk) 16:33, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

"S" in XD/Colo?

Snagging shadow Pokémon in XD/Colosseum should not be distinguished from catching Pokémon in other games, especially not using the same letter as "Swarm." If it's to distinguish between catching a Pokémon at a Poke-spot in XD versus snagging a Pokémon, then "S" should be used there to mean "spot" because the Poke-spot mechanic is more similar to the "Swarm" mechanic. - unsigned comment from MeNowDealWithIt (talk • contribs)

Perhaps to compromise, we could use "Sn" instead? ^ht14 14:04, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

My point is that snagging and catching in grass should not be distinguished. Adding another type of mark to the list would just make it even more confusing. MeNowDealWithIt (talk) 14:44, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Two Mistakes I spotted in gen 3

First, Didn't Ho-Oh and Lugia become Event-Only in generation 3? As far as I know, (and corroborated on their respective pages on Bulbapedia), both of these birds are unobtainable within any of the Gen3 games. But at the bottom of the article, it says that in Gen3, "all non-event-exclusive Pokémon are obtainable without inter-generational communication". Is this because Ho-oh/Lugia count as "event-exclusive" in this generation? The real question is, do you need Ho-Oh and Lugia to complete the national pokedex in Gen 3?

Second, why are Espeon and Umbreon marked as unobtainable in Gen3? Can't they can be evolved within RSE because those games have an in-game clock? Thanks! - unsigned comment from Atonaltensor (talk • contribs)

In Generation III, Ho-Oh and Lugia are not needed for the National Pokédex diploma and are considered event Pokémon in Generation III due to them being unavailable without event items. (You can also get them from the GCN games, which would also allow you to obtain the two Pokémon without inter-generational communication.)

Eevee can't be obtained in RSE, so you can't evolve Eevee into RSE without trading Eevee from FRLG or directly from Colosseum/XD. "Trading" is ranked lower than event distributions, and as such it's displayed as "event" rather than "trade". --Abcboy (talk) 14:40, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Ah! That makes sense now. Thanks for the clarification :) I was not aware that Trade is ranked lower than event distributions! Maybe there should be a distinction between Trade within the generation vs. inter-generational trade? Either way, I was confused because the table cell's background for Umbreon and Espeon were all WHITE for RSE and FRLG, so it made me think these Mon's were totally unobtainable within Gen3 games. But, as you correctly state, they are obtainable with trading within the generation. Thanks again. Atonaltensor (talk) 20:20, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Do trade evolutions deserve a colored background?

It seems to me that if a game's column is colored for a particular Pokemon, that's supposed to signify that a player in the given game can get that Pokemon on their own, without outside trading. But then you have things like Alakazam which, while they are evolutions of Pokemon you can get normally, those evolutions are explicitly locked away without trading.

Maybe those species could have a label of TE, to distinguish them from both the other E's and also from the "even more inaccessible" T's. But the background ought to be white just like the T's, assuming you can't get the evolution by some other means (like Milotic in OR/AS, or Gengar from an SOS chain in S/M). SadisticMystic (talk) 03:16, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Regarding your first paragraph, I believe currently, colored background means you don't need different versions, not that you only need one copy. (I don't take a stance regarding your second paragraph.) Nescientist (talk) 10:46, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Definition of obtainable in-game

Why are the D's considered obtainable, and the T's are not, despite that they both require interacting with another game? sumwun (talk) 20:30, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

There's no perfect answer. Dual-slot mode has greater or lesser similarities in both directions. If we changed it, someone could just as easily ask why we don't call it in-game.

IMO, trading (i.e., anything you have to catch in another game first; so this includes something like Dream Radar) and events are the things that definitely are not in-game. Almost anything else is in-game. (I haven't explicitly considered every alternative, though.) You still catch dual-slot Pokemon in-game basically exactly like regular wild Pokemon. Tiddlywinks (talk) 20:47, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

I thought this article was meant to clearly categorize each Pokémon into either "requires one copy of a game" or "requires multiple games or an event". Is it not? sumwun (talk) 21:37, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Are you saying that's your opinion? Tiddlywinks (talk) 21:43, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

It was, until this discussion started. Now I don't know whether this article was ever intended for said purpose. sumwun (talk) 20:02, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Alright. If other people would like to offer their own opinions, it may be worth considering changing something. If not, though, then that probably means it's fine as is. Tiddlywinks (talk) 20:24, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

I have to chime in and agree with Sumwun; I don't see the point of a page like this, why it exists, if not to indicate what is and isn't available per single copy of a single game. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 01:58, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

As it stands the way the page is structured, there's no way it can easily distinguish "one copy of one game": you can only obtain one starter Pokémon in a game, not three; you can only choose one of the fossils at Route 111; for Giratina to be encountered in OR/AS/US/UM, it needs both Dialga and Palkia, both of which can't be obtained in one of the games alone, etc.

This page ignores these, and merely matches the shading on the pages of individual Pokémon, which is about all that you can ask for in an abbreviated form like this page. (How the key is categorized is also independent of the shading in the table: EV is considered "Obtainable in-game" but is not shaded.) --Abcboy (talk) 03:06, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Both C and R

What do we do with Pokemon that can be caught and received, like Emerald Horsea or Pt Eevee? Right now the table lists them inconsistently, and I personally think R should take priority over C. sumwun (talk) 17:25, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Additional Rows

I want to add these 2 rows to the table.

Symbol	Meaning
TC	The Pokémon can be caught in-game after somehow interacting with another game.
TE	The Pokémon cannot be caught in-game, but an earlier evolutionary stage can be obtained. It can be evolved into the Pokémon in this game by trading.

Examples for the first row include DPPt Spiritomb and Regigigas and ORAS Giratina. Examples for the second row include RBY Golem and GSC Politoed. sumwun (talk) 17:25, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Can we put the overview in its own article?

The overview is very long and takes somewhat time to scroll through to actually get to the list. Most other list pages have very breif content prior to the lists, if at all. The overview seems like it could get its own at the rate it's expanding, but if there's elswhere that could be a better pick, let me know. CoolMan6001 (talk) 22:44, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

That makes sense, we could move the overview into its own article. Maybe the new article could be called Pokémon availability. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 22:52, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

I've been thinking, I'm actually not really sure. The overview helps to understand the list below. I'll wait to see if anyone else has anything to add, but I'm leaning towards keeping the overview and the list together. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 10:52, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

What I have to agree to is that, for me personally, the article has become way less usable. I want to see the list when I'm here (and the article is still titled "List of", so I expect this also applies to many others), I don't want to scroll down eternally to see it. (I actually think this change could have been discussed beforehand.) If there's some solution that enables that (a split; shortening the overview; ...), that'd be fine with me. Nescientist (talk) 17:09, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

I think this article is too large even without the overview. The text at the top (sections "Overview" and "Availability by generations") are about 28 kB. The whole article is about 123 kB. So that text is a bit more than 1/5 of the article. Maybe we can split the article into various lists of Pokémon by generation or something?

That aside, is "List of Pokémon by availability" a good title in the first place? This article is not really a list of Pokémon by availability. It's just a list of Pokémon by their Pokédex number, and their availability. A list of Pokémon by availability would be a list of catchable Pokémon, a list of evolvable Pokémon, a list of gift Pokémon, etc. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 20:41, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

What I was trying to say was that this version was perfectly fine (better) for a list article.

By Pokédex number is about the only reasonable way I can think of that allows for displaying all that information across different generations. Also note that many "List of Pokémon" articles are lists of Pokémon by dex number and then some attribute (such as List of Pokémon by wild held item). Nescientist (talk) 21:42, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Are there any articles bigger than this one? We should probably split those before worrying about this article's size. sumwun (talk, contribs) 03:02, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes, there are. This one is currently the 77th largest article. The top largest currently are Timeline of events in the anime, Easy chat system, and Sun & Moon TCG Era merchandise. Full list: Special:LongPages. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 03:13, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Trade Evolutions

Can I add a separate category for trade evolutions? I think they're notably different from other evolutions because they can't evolve using only one copy of a game. sumwun (talk, contribs) 17:03, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

I like this idea. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 04:06, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

I also like it, but the problem I have is: Which would cases like Machamp in Yellow be, where you only need one copy (since there's an NPC that trades their Machoke)? Nescientist (talk) 14:43, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

In-game trade.--Rocket Grunt (Report To Me) 14:56, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

True. In that case: I like the idea. Nescientist (talk) 15:01, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

I did the edit. Can other people make sure I didn't misplace any T's? sumwun (talk, contribs) 20:36, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Didn't want to change it unilaterally, especially since you suggested that years ago and nobody contested it, but I think it should be "ET" rather than "TE" because EVE/DRE/EvE mean you start EV/DR/Ev and evolve it (which is not the case here) and because it's much more useful to view it as a T subgroup of E than an E subgroup of T. Nescientist (talk) 16:58, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

I personally don't care what letters you use as long as they're different from 'E' and 'T'. sumwun (talk, contribs) 21:50, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Changed it, then, and made sure they replaced what were E's before. Nescientist (talk) 15:30, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Adding Pokémon GO

Should Pokémon GO be added to the table? It might be useful considering it is going to be able to connect to the main series games in the future, and a person looking at this page might want to check what Pokémon are exclusive to Raids or Research breakthroughs. RB could stand for Raid Battles, and RBT could stand for Research BreakThroughs, though I admit that might get confusing. Iml908 (talk) 16:17, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

At this stage I don't think it's a good idea, partially on grounds of it would become out of date far too easily and we have enough trouble keeping on top of that stuff, if it weren't for TehPerson we'd be so much further behind. Maybe once this linkage is more prominent and not requiring linkage via the Let's Go games, it can be revisited. --Spriteit (talk) 09:36, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Specifying Regional Forms in name box in table

Is it possible to do this? For example an Alolan Rattata would have "Rattata\n(Alolan)" (where the \n signifies a new line) in its name box. I've not been able to figure out how to get a new line in the box, nor how to make it link only the Pokémon and not include the "(Alolan)" part. Gameskiller01 (talk) 20:44, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Nevermind, I figured it out by creating a new template. Gameskiller01 (talk) 21:11, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Cropping Images

Is it possible to do this? Whether it be through a new template or otherwise. A lot of the Galarian Pokémon and forms have a lot of blank space around their icon, causing a mismatch between the 68x68 Galar icons and the 40x40 icons for the rest of the Pokémon. Gameskiller01 (talk) 22:06, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Done.--Rocket Grunt (Report To Me) 22:19, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Island Scan Differentiation

Should Island Scan pokemon in SM/USUM be outlined differently? Like the Friend Safari, it is a very awkward type to find.

That's a very good idea, I went ahead an implemented it, using the "S" that was going unused in Gen 7 in order to avoid cluttering up the Key even more, and since the Pokémon are all technically obtainable in-game without any external help (at least to my knowledge). Also, please remember to sign your post using four tildas (~~~~) whenever you post on a talk page, thanks! Gameskiller01 (talk) 15:43, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Merge D and G

D and G have such similar meanings that I think it makes sense to merge them. Leaving them separate makes it easier to confuse dual slot and Pokemon Den, which are much less similar and only have the 'D' initial in common. Can I also rename them to "TC" (for "trade catch") or "CC" (for "communicate catch")? sumwun (talk, contribs) 18:38, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

That sounds like a good idea. I would suggest potentially leaving the 'D' as is, since it's been like that for some time now, and only changing the 'G' to make things clearer. Gameskiller01 (talk) 18:49, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Agreeing with Gameskiller. (Actually, nobody ever bothered to give 'G' the background it deserved.)

I don't like your ideas for a rename either. Nescientist (talk) 17:09, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

I think the background should remain white because the Pokemon isn't normally obtainable, even though it's caught in-game. EV's background is white for the same reason. So both of you agree that Pokemon that require communication to catch, including dual-slot Pokemon, should be marked "G", not "TC" or "CC"? sumwun (talk, contribs) 17:23, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

I think the key should really be order of priority, and everything above "Not obtainable in-game" should have a background, while everything below shouldn't. The cases are similar, that's why you proposed to merge them, right? So, especially after merging 'G' into 'D', it should have a background. Nescientist (talk) 17:33, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

I think "obtainable without communication" is a more important distinction than "obtainable in-game", because it affects people who have only one device or one copy of a game, and "obtainable in-game" only affects people who impose this restriction on themselves. sumwun (talk, contribs) 18:20, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Very good point. Feel free to ignore my latest comment, then. (I failed to respect that distinction at that time, and I have no idea/comment right now, except that background vs. no background should depend on the letter imo.) Nescientist (talk) 18:57, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

I went ahead and changed "G" to "CC" since I think it's a clearer description, given that the letter "G" doesn't really have any relation to it. I didn't merge it with "D", though, since I think Dual-Slot is unique enough to warrant its own description. I did, however, remove the background from the Dual-Slot Pokémon, so now all of the Pokémon with backgrounds in each column should be all of the Pokémon that can be obtained with only a single copy of that 1 game and nothing else. I also added a separate distinction for Pokémon that can only be obtained by evolving a Dual-Slot Pokémon. Gameskiller01 (talk) 00:41, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Moving Meltan and Melmetal to their own little section

I think it could be a good idea to move these 2 Pokémon into their own little table underneath the Gen 7 table, since these Pokémon being in the Gen 7 table means that all Pokémon in that table need to have the LGPE columns, even though it's useless for the other 85 of them. Moving them to their own little section would remove the need for the LGPE columns in the Gen 7 table, and would also remove the need for the SM/USUM columns for Meltan and Melmetal. Plus, their official designation is "Unknown Origins", so it's not even like it would be out of place to have them separated.
Alternatively, the Let's Go games as a whole could be moved to a new section, similar to how the regional variants were before they got merged with the main tables. and remove the LGPE columns from all the main tables entirely. This could help to de-clutter the Gen 1 table a little bit, as well as making things cleaner if they make future Let's Go games as they would have their own section, and would also fix the issue with Meltan and Melmetal without them having to have their own section. Gameskiller01 (talk) 17:54, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Spinoff Games

Is it worth it to potentially add information about how to obtain each Pokémon in each of the spinoff games in which they appear? (I'm particularly thinking of TCG (Game Boy), Snap, Pinball, TCG 2, Pinball: R/S, Trozei, Mystery Dungeon Red/Blue, Ranger, Mystery Dungeon Time/Darkness, Ranger 2, Mystery Dungeon Sky, Rumble, Mystery Dungeon Blazing/Stormy/Light Adventure Squad, PokéPark Wii, Ranger 3, Rumble Blast, PokéPark 2, Conquest, Mystery Dungeon Gates to Infinity, Rumble U, Battle Trozei, Shuffle, Rumble World, Shuffle Mobile, Super Mystery Dungeon, Picross, Go, Quest, and Mystery Dungeon DX). Different Pokémon can be obtained in different ways in each of these games, and this is potentially valuable information that is currently being left on the table. Should it be added to this page, made into its own page, or just left out entirely? --GoldenSandslash15 (talk) 08:04, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

For some of those big series, I would suggest using separate pages:

• List of Pokémon by availability (Mystery Dungeon) - with a list of all Pokémon in the Mystery Dungeon series
• List of Pokémon by availability (Ranger)
• And so on.

--Daniel Carrero (talk) 13:24, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm working on it but I struggle to harmonize the columns' widths: User:Kristak/Sandbox/List of Pokémon by availability (Mystery Dungeon). Does anyone know why it happens?Kristak (talk) 16:02, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Dream World

Since Dream World is the one form of availability that has been retired (at least officially), it should probably be removed from the main table and have a table listing all base Pokémon that could have been obtained with it, similarly to how Spinda's Café article does it. Eridanus (talk) 13:38, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. In my opinion, the Dream World should be removed from this list as you said. But let's also make sure some other page lists the Pokémon that were once available in the Dream World anyway (for historical value if nothing else, even if they are unavailable now). --Daniel Carrero (talk) 14:09, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Personally I believe that the Dream World should instead be included in the BW/B2W2 columns in a similar way to how the Friend Safari is included in the XY columns, since that doesn't remove it entirely from the list but still removes the extra column, and only shows a Pokémon as having to come from the Dream World if that was the only way to obtain one in Gen 5 without transferring up from previous generations. Gameskiller01 (talk) 14:21, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Would this be above event in priority or only above trading/transfer? Eridanus (talk) 22:11, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

I would say that it should have a higher priority than events, since at least Dream World Pokémon were universally available for the time that it was up while events weren't, and neither are available anymore. Gameskiller01 (talk) 22:25, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Either that, or honestly I wouldn't mind having it as is, and just mentioning at the beginning of the section that PW is now defunct. If the glaring color is what is bothering you (as that usually indicates "can get this right now", we could just make it light-colored or striped via the template!? Nescientist (talk) 13:09, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

PokéWalker

Could it be a good idea to merge the PokéWalker column with the HGSS columns, similar to how the Dream World column was merged with the BWB2W2 columns and the Friend Safari column was merged with the XY columns previously? With the recent addition of the BDSP columns, and potential future addition of a Legends Arceus column, I believe that some of the tables are getting a bit too big, especially for Gen 1.
I think it would be for the best if the amount of columns was minimised, which would involve creating a separate Key entry for the PokéWalker and removing that column from the table and merging the information with the HGSS columns instead, much like how the Friend Safari and Dream World were merged into their respective columns in the past. Plus, with the existence of a separate "List of Pokémon found through the Pokéwalker" page, I don't think it's necessary to duplicate all of that information on this page. Thoughts? Gameskiller01 (talk) 14:48, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

I agree that we should merge the Pokéwalker column with the HGSS one by putting priority over the main games over the Pokéwalker for Pokémons that can be found in both HGSS and the Pokéwalker like Woobuffet which can be found in the Dark Cave and the Noisy Forest. Kristak (talk) 15:42, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Sinnoh Trophy Garden: S instead of C?

For Pokémon that can only be caught by using the "special" slot of the Trophy Garden, like Meowth and Porygon, the mechanics of that location are remarkably similar to swarms. Since S is presumably separate from C to convey a specific message--"This Pokémon is not reliably available to catch all the time, but rather only if you get lucky and have it chosen as the one possibility that's active for the day"--is there any reason that same philosophy can't apply to Trophy Garden? SadisticMystic (talk) 22:14, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Sounds pretty reasonable to me, yes. Nescientist (talk) 10:10, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

It's time to split this up

I know this article is far from largest on the site, but for this type of the data and the way it's presented, it has gotten to the point that we need to split it up. This layout would be fine for Google Sheets or something, but not as a series of hardcoded tables. I honestly feel the only way to split it up would be by generation column-wise (so RBY gets its own article, GSC its own, etc). I can’t even view all of gen I on my computer screen anymore without having to scroll or zoom, and it’s going to get worse with every new game if we stay with this format.

Nowadays with more people using this site on mobile, having each table be only 3-7 columns wide would fit perfectly on screens. Trying to see if an early gen Pokémon is in a later gen game is currently a nightmare, and most people only need to look at the generation of games they’re playing anyway. If they really need multiple gens side by side, they can easily paste the table into Sheets/Excel/etc. I’ve been making occasional edits to this page since gen IV and even back then it was a pain in the butt to tell which row or column you’re reading or changing, but now it seems even messier with all the regional variants added (with more on the way in Legends Arceus).

So by splitting the article "vertically", we can eliminate all the blank space from the earlier game tables for regional forms or anything else added in a later gen. We can also simplify the symbols by giving each page its own key since we have so many symbols we need to use to distinguish ways of obtaining Pokémon in different gens. Columns removed long ago due to space concerns could be reinstated, such as the Pokéwalker in gen IV and Dream World in gen V (even though it’s retired, it’d still have some historical value). We could even add an event column to each article for distributions that occurred during those gens, but I digress. The articles should still have a different table for each generation of Pokémon (for situations like gen VII not needing a Let’s Go column for everyone), and the huge “Availability by generation” section could be separated into each article. Lastly, we could add sorting functionality to each table which would be very convenient.

I know this was previously discussed and we were considering splitting it up horizontally (meaning split by generations of Pokémon instead of games), but this wouldn’t solve the readability issues and probably be even more of a pain to someone wanting to see everything available in the game they’re playing. Even though it’s not the largest article, it still seems to take as long to load, if not longer than the largest articles on the site possibly due to all the formatting. In general, I feel like this overhaul would solve more problems than it could cause. Anyone agree? EV Love (talk) 17:37, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm torn on this. On one hand, I quite often look at a Pokémon's availablity across the entire series, as I like to find the earliest game where a Pokémon can be found in "mint condition" so to speak (as in, not having to evolve in order to obtain it). On the other, I recognise that that's probably a very niche use-case, and that the page being very difficult to read on mobile is probably a more pressing issue. I have also found that it can be extremely difficult to edit as it's very hard to tell which column you're actually editing. But back on the other hand again, having all of the information available in 1 single place is far more convinient than having it split across 8+ different articles. I will say that if the page is to be split, I definitely agree that it should be split vertically. Splitting it horizontally would've made it a massive pain to find which Pokémon are available in each game, as you mention, but splitting it vertically at least allows people to see all of the Pokémon available in a certain game on 1 page. Gameskiller01 (talk) 17:59, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

That’s a good point as I myself am very into checking data like that (especially for legality purposes), but I feel like the game locations section on each individual Pokémon’s article usually suffices for situations when looking across all generations is necessary. I've also noticed that a number of other lists on the site are split by generation (such as the Pokémon index numbers, and those could easily fit into one page of tables without being overwhelmingly large). I know the article doesn’t seem too intimidating to those of us who are familiar with it or have worked on it, but I can’t say the same for casual players. I remember when my friend was playing through Let’s Go rand asked me if there’s a list somewhere of Pokémon who can only be obtained through evolving. I sent him this page and he responded “I’m not even going to try reading that”. I don’t mean to criticize anyone who has worked on this article as the data integrity is very good and accurate, it just needs to be presented better. I initially thought of grouping together gens that had a significant level of interfacing into one page (such as gens 1 & 2 or 3 & 4) but this gets subjective and the lines are blurry. So for consistency with other lists on the site I think it’d be best to just have 8 pages. I would definitely be willing to help out on the editing necessary as well. EV Love (talk) 06:42, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

With the death of the 3DS eShop pretty much cutting off the older games from HOME for most new players, I think it should be split into two pages. The main page should have only the games that are compatible with HOME, so LGPE onward, and there should be a separate "pre-HOME" page that has everything up to USUM and maybe the Pokéwalker/Dream World columns. If emulated versions of some of the old games come to Switch they would be on both pages. If the Switch eShop sticks around, the table will probably get just as big in 10-20 years but people will still be picking up SwSh and transferring Pokémon from the latest game into them. Pikcahu (talk) 16:37, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Space-time Distortions

For Pokémon Legends: Arceus, should there be a separate symbol for Pokémon that can only be caught in space-time distortions? -Ratboy Jr. (talk) 19:46, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Changing "D" for dual-slot to the more all-encompasing "CC" instead

I think it makes more sense, pretty much every other way that Pokémon can be caught after communicating with another game is already under CC, I don't think dual-slot mons need their own denomination. Plus, since D is already used as a suffix to indicte Pokémon caught through DLC I think it could get a bit confusing. Gameskiller01 (talk) 17:01, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

List of Pokémon by availability in spinoff video games?

I knew that there still had been lists of Pokémon by availability in core video game series, Pokémon GO, and Pokémon Sleep. However, what about the list of Pokémon by availability in spinoff video games, other than both Pokémon GO and Pokémon Sleep? Swampertguy (talk) 17:32, 21 August 2024 (UTC)