Talk:Tauros (Pokémon): Difference between revisions
From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
In the articles, it is said that Tauros and Miltank are Male/Female equivalents. I don't think this is true. --[[User:PikamasterADV|PikamasterADV]] 02:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC) | In the articles, it is said that Tauros and Miltank are Male/Female equivalents. I don't think this is true. --[[User:PikamasterADV|PikamasterADV]] 02:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC) | ||
:Well, I imagine that's Nintendo's intent... but is there concrete proof? Like, will breeding Miltank with anything end with a Tauros from the egg? Heck, is there that sort of connection between the Nidos or Volbeat and Illumise? Should something be mentioned, perhaps in Evolutions, of very closely related Pokémon? Such as, Plusle appearing next to Minun in its article, or both Nido families being in the evo area of all six? I've wanted to put something like that in there for a while, but I dunno how appropriate it'd be... | |||
:I suppose, though, it's like the Hitmonlee/chan relation that was theory before GS proved it. But should we acknowledge stuff like it here? [[User:TTEchidna|Tom Temprotran]] 06:18, 9 November 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 06:18, 9 November 2006
Tauros <-> Miltank?
In the articles, it is said that Tauros and Miltank are Male/Female equivalents. I don't think this is true. --PikamasterADV 02:22, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I imagine that's Nintendo's intent... but is there concrete proof? Like, will breeding Miltank with anything end with a Tauros from the egg? Heck, is there that sort of connection between the Nidos or Volbeat and Illumise? Should something be mentioned, perhaps in Evolutions, of very closely related Pokémon? Such as, Plusle appearing next to Minun in its article, or both Nido families being in the evo area of all six? I've wanted to put something like that in there for a while, but I dunno how appropriate it'd be...
- I suppose, though, it's like the Hitmonlee/chan relation that was theory before GS proved it. But should we acknowledge stuff like it here? Tom Temprotran 06:18, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
