Talk:Five question marks

Page title

If multiple question marks in a title isn't supported by the wiki, why can this page have so many question marks in its title? Chocolate (Chat with Me) 21:21, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

No answer? Chocolate (Chat with Me) 00:12, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

That's right. ^Maverick_Nate 00:13, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Why did my original question go un-answered? This page should be titled "?????", not "five question marks", because ????? is the real name, and I was asking why it couldn't be called that. Chocolate (Chat with Me) 00:17, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Chocolate raises an excellent point. We have ??????????, yet we can't have this page moved to ?????, where it belongs? I personally find that ridiculous. I'm Missingno. Master. See my new and improved user page, and comment on it! 01:11, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

That makes it the second edit summary this question was answered in. Learn to read past your nose. Multiple question marks in a row are not supported in page titles." ^Maverick_Nate 02:41, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Then why can we have ?????????? Chocolate (Chat with Me) 02:42, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Because that has a different issue. There can be two things considered as "ten question marks". Look at the pages before you ask questions that could be answered with a little research. ^Maverick_Nate 02:48, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

But "?????" is the real name of the Pokémon here. Chocolate (Chat with Me) 02:49, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Read the new MOS. I made a mistakeDCM_{((Mock MeEdits))} 02:50, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Why not just make "Ten question marks" an article with every thing named as "??????????", then keep ? and leave that as the main article with the other section in the Ten question marks article. — eA 02:52, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

There. Problem solved. — eA 02:59, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Now to deal with the problem of all the other articles with question marks in their titles. Apparently, the system no longer finds titles with even one question mark in them acceptable, and it's causing problems...--Shiningpikablu252 05:25, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

More page title

So the article is "five question marks" but the screenshot has six question marks? ZestyCactus 02:16, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

oh nvm the status page screenshot has five question marks... :S ZestyCactus 02:17, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Wrong template

Why is this article protected? Anyways, this article has the wrong glitch Pokémon template. It should be {{GlitchPkmnNonObtainable}}, not {{GlitchPkmn}}. GlitchPkmn is only Gen I Pokémon. ZestyCactus 05:45, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Move war. Thanks for finding this :) —darklordtrom 06:27, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for changing it. :D ZestyCactus 06:32, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Movesets

I can get the movesets for these with my emulator but they will all be different. Do you want that? OwnageMuch 03:17, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean by "they'll be all different"? Like, one for each Pokédex number? At any rate, sure :D ZestyCactus 03:19, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah although it seems only one of them learns moves naturally, and one of them has a starting move. OwnageMuch 04:32, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Obtaining legitly

If the moves --, TM52, TM54 and TM55 were learned by a generation 1 Pokémon, then traded to GSC, then the Celebi egg trick modified using one of those moves instead of Beat Up, wouldn't these Pokémon be able to be obtained? Can someone test this? --SnorlaxMonster. Help here 12:28, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

I read on glitch city forums you can get 2 variants, one by getting a bad clone, the other by doing the celebi egg trick using the bad clone which has the glitch move in 3rd spot. Can't remember which numbers, I think it was #255 and #000. OwnageMuch 20:23, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, 000 would also work with no move, but this method seems to be able to get a Pokémon without breeding anything. More of a hex scrambling trick. So 000 is definitely obtainable, but I'm not sure about 252, 254, 255 and Glitch egg. Can someone test this please. --SnorlaxMonster. Help here 02:02, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Isn't a bad clone No. 255? OwnageMuch 08:16, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

The types of hex 000 255 254 and 253

1. Hex 00: Steel/Glitched
2. Hex FC: Psychic/Glitched
3. Hex FE: B / (blank)
4. Hex FF: 'l) m) ZM / Normal

Can somebody help incorporate these into this page, I can't seem to do it without the whole page messing up. --Chickasaurus 13:36, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

You'll have to explain Glitched, does the game actually call the type Glitched, is the name of the type randomly generated each time it's view or something else? --SnorlaxMonster 05:52, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Also, the image clearly disagrees about Hex 00 type, so I'll leave that one. --SnorlaxMonster 09:02, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

(Personally) I always find it has type Steel/Glitchy characters (no it doesn't actually say glitchy characters), but I think it can change sometimes depending on other influences in the game (don't put that in the article though, it's only a theory)- unsigned comment from OwnageMuch (talk • contribs)

There is the possibility that the status screen shows Normal and GGQRRROO ROCKET, but its real types are Steel and Glitch. However, I will leave the type as Normal/GGQRRROO ROCKET for now. If someone could check to see if this is true, the infobox could then be changed.--SnorlaxMonster 23:36, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Sometimes you can also find that it says it's a different number to what it is. OwnageMuch 09:02, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

As in Pokédex number? --SnorlaxMonster 10:40, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

As in the Pokédex number it has at the top of it's summary page, yes, I think it can. I make a video of me getting it and just show its Steel/Gltich type. OwnageMuch 23:57, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

OK, and when you do, put it in a battle to show type effectiveness, to show that it is steel and not normal. --SnorlaxMonster 00:42, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Alright I took a look myself in Gold AND Silver, it is indeed Steel/Glitch in both, not Normal/Rocket whatever. I have no idea where that picture came from, and honestly the stats of the glitch Pokemon are right after Celebi's stats. So the RAM cannot affect this because it's reading from hard coded data in the ROM to find what types these Pokemon are. Interestingly, the Crystal Versions have different stats. #252 is a Fire/Normal type, I'll add information on those later. Koolboyman 15:02, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

In my Crystal, FE version has Normal/Normal type, although I don't found any weaknesses. Does anyone could check if in their game it's the same? I want know if it's really or just my game glitched. Marked +-+-+ 19:42, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Bingo! The type that is shown in article, is from Gold/Silver. It looks that FE version has at least one difference in Crystal... Marked +-+-+ 09:43, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Hmm....FE version would need 2 infoboxes as version between Silver (and probably Gold) and Crystal is noticable. Weight, height, species (in Silver it was glitchy while in Crystal it was non-glitchy), types... Marked +-+-+ 10:27, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Something interesting happened.

So I got crystal, and I decided to trade cyndaquil to it from silver, and it came to be a pokedex 000 pokemon, So I got it in a way none of the others were obtainable. - unsigned comment from Piexil (talk • contribs)

Probably just something to do with a loose/dodgy link cable. --SnorlaxMonster 07:48, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Separation

I personally think that all forms of ????? should be given their own pages, due to the fact that they are different pokemon. --Missingno909 20:09, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree that ?????00 and ?????FC should receive individual pages, mostly because FC evolves into 00, and they have individual types and move sets. Blendmaster345 01:57, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Wouldn't that be a tad confusing? The above comment is supported by Wildgoose. 01:09, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

I think both sides are right: in my opinion, this page should keep existing, but it would just have the basic information about all the types (example: how to get). Then, there should be a list with the links to all the pages referring the specific forms. TheOriginalOne 18:25, 29 July 2012 (UTC)