User talk:Inkster

Welcome to Bulbapedia, Inkster!

By creating your account you are now able to edit pages, join discussions, and expand the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia. Before you jump in, here are some ground rules: Be nice to everyone. It's in the code of conduct. Make good edits. Preview them before you save to make sure they're perfect the first time around. Use wikicode and link templates when adding content to a page. Use proper grammar and spelling, and read the manual of style. You can't create a userpage until you've added to the encyclopedia. It's a privilege. See the userspace policy. Use talk pages to resolve editing disputes. Don't "edit war," or constantly re-edit/undo the same thing on a page. If you have a question about something, be proactive. Take a look at our FAQ. If you're still stuck, ask for help. The staff won't bite. Sign all talk page posts with four tildes (~~~~). This will turn into your name and the time you wrote the comment. For more handy links, see the welcome portal.

Thank you, and have a good time editing here!   Frozen Fennec 22:38, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Rei/Akari's age

I included an "~" sign next to Legends: Arceus protagonists' age, as Cyllene says "15 or so". I also specified that this information is only confirmed when the character is the protagonist, not an NPC. --FinnishPokéFan92 (talk) 06:27, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

She said "look" in that same sentence, meaning that she was assuming the PC's age based on their physical appearance. It's not that deep. Inkster (talk) 07:21, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Signing

Please remember to always sign your comments. You can sign your comments with 4 tildes (~) or clicking the signature stamp () on the top of the edit box. It should also be noted that once your comment has been marked as unsigned, you cannot replace it with your signature as it will give off the wrong time stamp. Thank you for taking your time to read this message, have a good day. --Bfdifan2006_{something to say? · My work documentation} 13:21, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Talk page discussions

Please allow time for discussion to take place before making changes when there is an on-going conversation on a given subject. Even if several days, or even weeks, have passed, changes should not be made until there is a clear consensus. There is no reason to rush in to make these changes. Going in and making them before everyone has had time to pitch in will not help resolve or prevent disputes. If a conversation has gone stagnant you can feel free to bump the discussion by leaving a new comment. To be clear, this is not just about the discussion going on at the Cyllene page, as this appears to be a recurring issue for you recently. Landfish7 13:45, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Edit at Calaba

I don't get it: Special:Diff/3520383. I styled the reference after the one on Cyrus's page. Also, if the quote is italicized, you do not need to wrap it with quote marks. --Bfdifan2006 (T/C) 19:35, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Other pages that have quotes as references like in the revision, so I thought it should be consistent. Inkster (talk) 20:18, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

RSE May's age

Most people seem to think May is 10 or 11 in RSE.

Personally I think May looks to be 7 or 8 in RSE but the Pokemon company officially said 10 or 11. Mario60866 (talk) 15:03, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

ORAS explicitly confirmed that she and Brendan are 12 years old. Red's article lists him as 11 in FRLG despite being only mentioned in RGBY, so why shouldn't that also apply to Brendan and May?Inkster (talk) 15:05, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Also, ORAS May looks visually older than RSE May. With Red for example he looks about the same between the two versions of the game.

RSE May is shorter than ORAS May by about a growth spurt or so, and looks slightly less... Developed. (In PG terms) Mario60866 (talk) 15:09, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

I would argue the opposite. I think ORAS actually looks visually younger than RSE May. I don't see how she looks significantly shorter than ORAS May at all. The official art is also scaled differently, so that's not a fair comparison.

It doesn't actually matter how old a character "appears to look" anyway. Only official confirmation matters. PokemonMasterJamal3 (talk) 15:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Ages (anime)

Unless a characters age is specifically stated, don't post as that is speculation--BigDocFan (talk) 21:51, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Block

I was being kind when I partially blocked you, but it's become pretty clear that you are the type that refuses to use talk pages when it comes to disputes. Do not just continuously revert edits or hastily make certain edits to try to get your own way. Use the talk page, discuss issues and problems. If you return and continue to refuse to use the talk page to sort out issues, you may receive another block. Thank you.--ForceFire 05:23, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

In the case of Bonnie, I was merely adding a source to back up her being less than 10. Inkster (talk) 14:47, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Ages

Much like in the anime, unless a characters' age is specifically said in the games, no age is to be added.--BigDocFan, Junior Admin Bulbapedia (talk) 10:06, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

That wouldn't be a problem if the infobox said "Age: Unknown" by default. Inkster (talk) 13:13, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Legends Arceus

What's with the vague, non-committal "hundreds of years" for PLA? The game is based around the Meiji era of the real world, and as we've seen in both Gens I and III, the Pokemon timeline, while it is no direct mirror to ours, has its parallels. Not simply that, we meet Spiritomb - presumably the Spiritomb that the Pokedex in Sinnoh was based around - and Vessa already claims its been a few hundred years since she was originally sealed. With both of these, how it is unfair to presume it is at minimum two centuries? I'd not bring this deliberately to a user talk page but I don't think anyone even checks article talk pages anymore.--Darknesslover5000 (talk) 00:23, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

It was a Spiritomb that was sealed, not the Spiritomb, and both Cynthia and Volo have one on their team, which implies the existence of more than one Spiritomb. Inkster (talk) 00:24, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

If that's not the reasoning for the listing, then what is the reasoning for "hundreds" of years when we have the obvious Meiji era basis to go on for speculation? That page is largely speculation anyway, but you'll be intentionally vague in spite of a logical deduction?--Darknesslover5000 (talk) 00:28, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Because there is no official confirmation on how much in the past it takes place. - unsigned comment from Inkster (talk • contribs)

Fine. The in-game setting is enough, but not for this barely functioning website, I suppose.--Darknesslover5000 (talk) 00:32, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

I already gave up trying to put up with people on this wiki over-interpreting the *#^% out of this franchise's intentionally vague lore, ESPECIALLY the intentionally vague gap between Gens II/IV and V. Inkster (talk) 00:40, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Continuous edits

The continuous back and forth you've been doing on many articles, especially those that you've had an extensive history of edit warring, is unconstructive and has almost come to the point of obsession. It is very clear you are still not satisfied with how things are done and are attempting to make changes that suit you. So I'm going to have to ask you to cease any attempts to repeatedly change anything relating to age or canon without having a discussion on the talk page and coming to a conclusive decision first. Ignoring this, and making those changes anyways, will lead to a block.--ForceFire 01:33, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Last time I checked, the general concensus was that Rei and Akari are 15. Inkster (talk) 01:36, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

It was even mostly agreed on Akari's talk page months ago that they're btoh 15. Inkster (talk) 01:38, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

And as for canon, you people seem to treat speculation as fact. Inkster (talk) 01:40, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

"General consensus" is not citable "fact". (Not even remotely.)

If you have a problem with speculation somewhere, let us know and we'll take a look. Tiddlywinks (talk) 01:57, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

The speculation I'm referring to is the timespan between GSC/DPPt and BW in the core series article. The lore from that book cited hasn't been canon for 20+ years, and Porygon's Dex entries are just a real-world reference that shouldn't be taken at face value. As I pointed out, a GF staff member explicitly stated said timespan is intentionally vague. My point is, the "12 years" thing is all speculation and therefore doesn't belong on the article. Inkster (talk) 02:05, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

I apologize if you get the impression that Bulbapedia believes speculation is fact. Let me inform you that that should not be Bulbapedia's standard. Unfortunately, many people have different levels of strictness regarding exactly what they consider canon, and Bulbapedia can be edited by any of those people. We don't always catch those edits. So in that respect, I thank you for doing your part to ensure that the core series article is as rigorous as possible. Thanks. Tiddlywinks (talk) 02:42, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

The whole section in question: "Porygon's Pokédex entries in Pokémon Sun, Ultra Sun, and Ultra Moon state that it was created 20 years ago,[Notes 4] and Pocket Monsters Encyclopedia states that Porygon was created one year before the events of Pokémon Red and Green, meaning Pokémon Sun, Moon, Ultra Sun, and Ultra Moon take place 19 years after Pokémon Red, Green, Blue, and Yellow. From this information and the known gaps between other games in the series, it can be calculated that the gap between Generation II/IV and Pokémon Black and White is 12 years long." As I mentioned, that books lore is very outdated (Pokémon Legends: Arceus blows the introduction section of Pocket Monsters Encyclopedia completely out of the water. The book claims that "30 Pokémon species were known in the 18th century" and of course, "150 types of Pokémon have been discovered through Professor Oak's surveys and research". In PLA, set centuries before Gens I and IV, over 200 species were discovered), which invalidates its credibility as a reliable source. And as for "Red and Green takes place in 1996"? Forget it. "As of 1996" ≠ "the games take place in 1996". It's also hypocritical to dismiss the Member Card date as a real-world reference, when Porygon's entries are only a reference to Red and Green being released 20 years prior to Sun and Moon. Inkster (talk) 02:57, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

This sounds less like an issue for staff and more like something you should just take up on Talk:Core series. I understand that it's frustrating to see inconsistencies, but this argument doesn't seem like a staff problem. So the best way to address it is through discussion. (I.e., not right here.)

Hope you have a good day. Tiddlywinks (talk) 03:08, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

(resetting indent) The fact you people actually believe the whole "gen is set in 1996" bullshit that I explicitly made up shows how gullible you are. Inkster (talk) 02:30, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

About Caitlin's age

Then why Red and Blue have reported age based on the "official" timeskips? Brendon (talk) 21:35, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Given Caitlin, they'd likely be in their 20's. Let me fix that real quick. Inkster (talk) 00:09, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Ages again and general wiki behavior

As has been extensively discussed at this point, the Nintendo Dream interview about player characters' ages is a general statement and not an explicit confirmation about any of their ages. Neither the Gen 2 nor Gen 4 protagonists are confirmed to be 10 (they could easily be 11, for example). The rival in ORAS is also confirmed to be 12, and while this isn't explicit confirmation on the player's age, I think it still shows that the interview should be taken with a grain of salt.

To be honest, I think you are a bit too overly focused on timeline and age-related matters and unwilling to let things go. From what I've observed, the vast majority of your edits are related to at least one of these, if not both, and all of your blocks (both partial and full) have been as a result of edit warring on these topics.

Additionally, please keep the code of conduct in mind. This is clearly rude and uacceptable behavior. PokemonMasterJamal3 (talk) 14:50, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Everything about the intentionally vague "timeline" should be taken with a "grain of salt" despite this wiki clearly treating it as fact. Do you not consider the possibility that a floating timeline has existed starting with SwSh? Inkster (talk) 17:29, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

In other words, Masuda practically decanonized that deleted tweet. Inkster (talk) 17:30, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

You also forgot that the PLA protagonists are indirectly confirmed to be 15. Inkster (talk) 17:36, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

"Everything about the intentionally vague "timeline" should be taken with a "grain of salt" despite this wiki clearly treating it as fact. Do you not consider the possibility that a floating timeline has existed starting with SwSh?"

Believe it or not, I actually agree with you here. However, the current way you are going about trying to get things changed (i.e. edit warring) will only cause people to push against this. Your best bet may be to talk to an admin, but try to present your points calmly.

"In other words, Masuda practically decanonized that deleted tweet."

Again, I don't disagree, since the tweet was clearly deleted for a reason. I think the main reason people hold on to it is because it's never been explicitly confirmed to be retconned.

"You also forgot that the PLA protagonists are indirectly confirmed to be 15."

The thing that confuses me here is that you've gone back and forth on whether or not their ages should be listed. I'm not opposed to it being listed, personally, but you've caused confusion for quite a few users like here. PokemonMasterJamal3 (talk) 18:08, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Adding onto that tweet, it was also clearly unauthorized information as proven by it's deletion shortly after. Also, if a character doesn't have a confirmed age, it should just be listed as "Unknown" by default instead of not having anything. Inkster (talk) 18:19, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Player character

Despite being told multiple times that the source for the "10-11" statement is fine, you have clearly shown an inability to let it go. As such you have been blocked from editing that page indefinitely, at least until you can show that you have moved on from that subject and will not attempt to remove valid information again. Just because something was released over a decade ago doesn't make it bad or invalid. It is still a legitimate source.--ForceFire 01:11, 29 April 2023 (UTC)