Talk:Gender unknown

The question, is this programmed into the games? Far as I knew, the egg groups are taken from the actual game programming, and the Pokémon that are genderless can't breed with anything but Ditto. TTEchidna 02:08, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Well? TTEchidna 05:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

*taps foot* I'm waaaaaaiting. TTEchidna 00:04, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Dunno?--KukiTalk 00:09, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

He,he, nevermind, I found it (stupid me). So, TTEchidna, how's my sprites?Taviource 00:17, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

What now? TTEchidna 00:37, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Well...

Even tho this is not ingame I would say this to be deleted due to its being unnecessary, because of the existance of the Undiscovered egg group, however this might be useful for people that want to know if the pokemon that they are about to breed is genderless and requires a ditoo. I dont see any harm in keeping the link

Anyway...

Seriously, is this programmed into the games, or is it more of a subcategory for genderless Pokémon that can breed? TTEchidna 03:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

i dont think this is programed into the games, but, it should probably be mentioned. after all, a Magnemite and Geodude are in the same group (mineral) but they cant breed together. -- MAGNEDETH 03:49, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Remove genderless Pokemon from other egg group pages?

Yes or no? MathijsP 09:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

No. They're in those egg groups according to the game programming. This page exists because Nintendo knew there'd be a bunch of people writing letters and saying "Y CANT MY MAGENMIT BRED W/ MY STELIX?!", and so listed the genderless breeders separately in Stadium 2. TTEchidna 14:10, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Trivia

The trivia section states that all members belong only to this group, yet they are still listed among the other egg groups as well. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 14:29, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

That's because they are in the other groups. This comes from stupid Stadium 2's stupid classification because Pokémon fans have demonstrated time and again that there's nothing dumber than we are. They likely made up that listing because they didn't want people to be whining about not being able to breed their Onix with a Magneton. TTEchidna 22:37, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

...why, exactly, are you fixating on that combination? --Martonimos_{((Argh|Blargh))} 22:40, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Because it's a convenient one? I'm not gonna go say "Y KANT MI GARDEVOUR BRED W/ MY ROTTOM" because Garde and Rotom get enough questions about their egg groups...

Specifically why Garde's not in Humanshape and if Rotom's a legendary. TTEchidna 22:48, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not saying that they shouldn't be listed in other groups, just that the trivia says they are not. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 22:47, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Correction. You sure work faster than I can get my point across... ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 22:49, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Rotom, Manaphy/Phione

According to the pages, Manaphy/Phione is also in the Water1/Fairy groups, and Rotom is in the Indeterminate group. If these truly belong as part of this egg group, they need to be put in a separate table for "also in other groups".KrytenKoro 19:03, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Here's the thing. The "Gender unknown" egg group is simply a listing of the breedable Pokémon which lack genders, because Nintendo thought people were stupid and would attempt to breed Onix and Magnemite. TTEchidna 22:35, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Well then, the header shouldn't say "Only in this egg group". Nevermind.KrytenKoro 18:47, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

?

Shouldn't this article be called Gender unknown Pokémon rather than than Gender unknown (egg group)?? why is it an egg group from the first place?--Wowy 08:33, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Stadium 2 listed genderless Pokémon who were able to breed (only with Ditto) as a distinct egg group. This article is a reflection and extension of that. --Shiningpikablu252 15:13, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey guys.

Why is this listed as part of the total of egg groups (16), if ???-type isn't listed as part of the total of types (17)?

Could it be that... a der, the ???-type is just like this egg group: a side note. So. I'm saying in the other articles, only count 15 egg groups, mention, like the ???-type, that this is a "special" grouping, but not count it. TTEchidna 09:45, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Deletion

This does not appear to have been discussed in more than half a decade, so I think our standards have tightened enough since then that it's worth a second look at this page.

(1) First and foremost, since this does not actually exist in any game except Stadium 2, I think this should be deleted and simply mentioned in the Stadium 2 article. At the very least, even if this page isn't deleted, we need to demote it so it isn't mentioned as if it was a normal Egg Group and so it doesn't appear in the Egg Group navigation box. It isn't a real group, and it doesn't appear in the games' programming, so I really feel it's even less canonical than the Bird type, which at least was actually programmed in even if it was scrapped before release.

(2) On a separate note, since this seems to have only existed in Stadium 2, why have we been adding all the genderless breedable Pokémon that have been introduced in Generation III and beyond??? If it's true that this group only existed in Stadium 2, then all those Pokémon have never belonged to this group and should in no conceivable way be on this list. This is a ridiculous fanonical overexpansion, and if this page remains I really feel like it should cover only what is official — the Pokémon that Stadium 2 listed in it.

That's my soapbox. Sorry if it was a bit of a rant. Please discuss. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 06:41, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

While I fully understand where you're coming from, I think that genderless breedable Pokémon need to be differentiated in some way. While we're on this topic, I don't like how they're mixed in among other members of their own egg group (such as Mineral), giving them the illusion that they can breed with other members of that group, when they can't.

What I think would be a fair solution is to delete this page (but perhaps create a "list" page that contains all the Pokémon seen here), and on the individual egg group pages that contain genderless Pokémon, sort them out into a separate table at the bottom. — KiANGLO ^TALK 07:11, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

I have no reason to not delete this page as long as a "list" page replaces it (as already stated). I think it's important to make a distinction between Undiscovered and Gender Unknown.

Also, I didn't notice that the liked of Magnemite were listed in their technical egg groups. I'd say that gender unknown Pokemon ought to have an annotation on their egg group page clarifying that they are unable to breed with the rest of the group. FoggyMoor (talk) 18:10, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

List.

My biggest problem with this is that it adds a third "Egg Group" to some Pokemon. I mostly think this classification from Stadium 2 could be mentioned on Egg Group and maybe Pokémon Stadium 2 and that'd be fine.

Alternatively, however, I think it'd also be alright to just remove the "Other" column on this page and that'd address part of my own unease. After all, the point of these Pokemon is that they can only breed with Ditto anyway, it's not really important what their formal Egg Groups are. On other pages, that column makes plenty of sense; but not here. Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:30, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

I agree one thousand percent on adding a note to Pokémon who are genderless on their own Egg Group pages. Like a little asterisk after their names stating that they cannot breed (I'd personally prefer genderless Pokémon to have their own separate table on those pages, but whatever). I think it's IMPERATIVE that such a distinction be made, because of how many times I go to one of those pages to look up potential "fathers" for my breeding and have to sift through Pokémon that cannot breed based on nothing but my memory. And sometimes it's not easy to remember that Golem has a gender and Cryogonal doesn't, and things like that. — KiANGLO ^TALK 05:30, 10 June 2016 (UTC)