Talk:PalletShipping

What is "dodge"? --Greengiant 06:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Odd...

Anybody find this to be an odd shipping? -Politoed666 01:13, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Some may find it odd, some others won't. It's simply depends on the veiws someone has. Personally I'm not bothered by it, but it's not one of my favorites either. -Mudkipchan 01:15, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm not homophobic or anything, it's just that it seems like Gary really dislikes Ash. -Politoed666 01:17, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, Gary did seemed to dislike Ash. But wasn't he starting to go a little easier on his behavior toward Ash during the DP anime series? I personally don't know, for YTV Canada(a broadcaster) doesn't seem to be airing DP episodes at this moment. -Mudkipchan 01:23, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I think it started in mid-Johto with Power Play, Gary began to develop a sort of respect for Ash. Clearly, losing to Ash in Johto had an impact on Gary, and I think he gained a new respect for the trainer he once looked down on. I haven't seen any DP episodes either, but it seems to me that they're essentially on good terms now. --PAK Man ^Talk 01:36, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Changes

I've made some minor changes to this section, if anyone's interested:

1) Removed the following from the first paragraph:

"many of these points have been debated and anti-Palletshippers call them off as nothing. However Palletshippers have strong beliefs that these are valid proof of the ship."

The first sentence seems like a biased statement. None of the other shipping articles I've checked have something like this, and I'm sure the same sort of debating and labeling has been done with other ships, so there is little use of mentioning it only in the Palletshipping article. The second sentence just seems redundant.

2) Edited the following, also from the first paragraph:

"The following list of summaries of scene in episodes of the Pokémon Anime that Palletshippers believe to be valid proof of a possible romantic relationship between Gary and Ash."

It seemed really jumbled.

3) Changed 'cradles' in the picture caption to 'holds.'

4) Read through the article and made any grammar, punctuation, etc. changes that I felt were appropriate.

EDIT (11/30/07):

Added External Links and a link to the BMGf thread, and removed the stub tag.

EDIT (12/6/07):

Removed the following from the Alternate Names section:

"FoeShipper: Very uncommon. Probably not in use at all.

GakiShipping: Gaki, in Japanese, is a rude way to refer to a kid, like Twerp."

I've been a Palletshipper since about the year 2000, and neither of these have been used on the English sites or message boards I've visited. Additionally, the term Gakishipping has traditionally referred to Pokeshipping, and its newer function ("to describe the actual shipper, and is now used only in an insulting manner towards shippers (Not necessarily just PokéShippers) who use flimsy evidence to support their position, or otherwise act childish") could be applied to any ship to some degree, making it pointless to have the term on the Palletshipping page but not every other shipping page.

12/8/07:

The Stub tag is back, though I'm not sure why. Bulbapedia's "manual" says this:

"A stub is a very short article, often a paragraph or less, containing an insufficient amount of information....If you saw that message on the article, but the article is developed well beyond stub status, please feel free to remove the tag. If the article is much longer than a stub but still incomplete, rather than marking it as a stub, please add this template to the start of the article: [incomplete]."

The Palletshipping article takes up many paragraphs, so it's definitely not "very short." In my opinion, it also has sufficient information (with the basic info, hints, alternate names, and links, it's one of the longer and more informative shipping articles I've seen). As the manual says you can remove Stab tags when the article is much more than a Stub, I removed the tag. But if it still seems incomplete to other people, maybe we can put in an [incomplete] tag instead?