Talk:Jessie's Mimikyu

Trivia

Is it worthy to add Trivia of Mimikyu being the first Pokémon captured in a luxury ball and only the third to be captured in a non standard Pokéball after Ash's Tauros and Ash's Totodile?--BigDocFan (talk) 08:27, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Too specific and third time isn't notable.--ForceFire 08:45, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Of course it is. It's been awhile since the Johto saga. So I think that's reasonable for that.--CoolPokéGuy (Talk) 03:42, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

"Drought trivia" can be notable at times, but in this case, it's not notable because this is the third instance that a Pokémon has been captured in a non-standard Pokéball by a main cast member. It's not anything special at this point, so it really does not need to be mentioned. --Pokemaster97 17:37, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Mimikyu's gender

Someone on TV Tropes is adding female gender pronouns for Jessie's Mimikyu. Did I miss something in episodes 3 or 4? Has Mimikyu's gender been named, or is someone pulling something out of their rear end? Macsen (talk) 19:50, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

To me, I think it could be a male? I'm not sure. - unsigned comment from Hamfart (talk • contribs)

Please don't assume. We cannot say anything without absolute official confirmation. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 15:32, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Is this trivia worthy?

Is it worth mentioning that Mimikyu is another Pokémon that Jessie caught by stealing it from another trainer that wanted to catch it first? --PKMNAdventurer (talk) 02:18, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

The last time Jessie did that was in Sinnoh. --PKMNAdventurer (talk) 04:21, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Why can we "assume" the gender of Ash's Tauros but not Mimikyu's ability?

http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Ash%27s_Tauros

Tauros are always male in the games. Mimikyu always have the Disguise ability. So why are they treated differently? - unsigned comment from Unowninator (talk • contribs)

Because Anime ≠ Games. It was never said that Mimikyu had Disguise as its ability. Unless it was mentioned, then yes. If not, then wait. --PKMNAdventurer (talk) 04:14, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Were Ash's Tauros mentioned? Unowninator (talk) 06:09, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

We shouldn't assume Tauros' gender. I don't believe it's ever mentioned so I've removed it from that page, but if I'm wrong please revert me. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 06:47, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Wood Hammer

The move with its tail is obviously wood hammer. We've seen it before in SM003 or 4, and we see it again now, and it's the same log from XY, but the colour is different.--ShallowShaddoll (talk) 14:08, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

It is not the same in XY. In XY, the users hand had a green log surrounding it, Mimikyu's attack was it's stick tail being surrounded by a purple mist. Besides both involving wood, they aren't the same. Plus, Mimikyu's tail is already made of wood, so it's not easy to tell what move it is. Playerking95 (talk) 14:22, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Mimikyu doesn't have hands, so it uses its tail. That's pretty much it. And what mist? Like I said, the colour is different, from green to violet, but you can still see the tail forming a log, just like in XY.--ShallowShaddoll (talk) 14:25, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

What else would it be? It's clearly Wood Hammer.--Pikablu (talk) 14:27, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

The purple mist that is around its tail. And there was never any mist in XY. And just because it's tail is wooden, it doesn't mean it is most likely going to be Wood Hammer. By that logic, any Pokemon that attacks with a wooden body part or anything wooden, like Timbur's log or Komala's stump should just be counted as Wood Hammer. It could be Wood Hammer or some Ghost-type move. Playerking95 (talk) 14:31, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

You're completely ignoring the fact that the "aura" forms a log, just like in XY. Like, your only nitpick is the difference in colour, which is not unusual and not the first time we've seen this when the series change from one to the other...--ShallowShaddoll (talk) 14:38, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

You always argue against moves just because it doesn't fit your ideas. Prove it otherwise or stop trying to haunt the flow of information.--- unsigned comment from Pikablu (talk • contribs)

No I'm not. It grows, it doesn't add anything wooden too it. It becoming larger doesn't mean a thing and @Pikablu, no I don't. I argue against them when they are stated as certain moves, when they aren't confirmed to be those moves. You're asking for proof, but that's exactly what I'm asking and there is no proof for it to be confirmed. I'm not "haunting" the flow of information, I'm being sure that lies aren't being spread. There's a difference. Playerking95 (talk) 14:51, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

There's a log... Like, watch the episode again. Or should I just take a snapshot for you? O_o log. Take a look at Mimikyu's tail shape when it doesn't use this move (the tip is a quadrangle) and when it does use it (the tip is round)--ShallowShaddoll (talk) 14:53, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Without a doubt it is Wood Hammer. this is just like Turtonator's Flamethrower. We all know what it is. You just want to feel important by stopping it.--Pikablu (talk) 14:59, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

No, it's tail is always rounded. Just look at it's sprite. It does not change shape and if it does, it's not by much. And it is not without a doubt Wood Hammer. Kiawe's Turtonator did use Flamethrower, I just didn't see it used at the end of the episode, where it was shown more clearly. And that is not why I'm doing this, so stop spreading falsehoods or I will contact an admin for abuse. Playerking95 (talk) 15:01, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

you're not getting your way and you're going to report abuse? We are just trying to convince you that it is Wood Hanmer.--Pikablu (talk) 15:24, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

It looks like Wood Hammer though. What else would it be? Davidwes14 (talk) 16:05, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Just in case: let's not continue this line about "abuse" and all. Let's try to get along civilly and keep on the topic specifically. (If anyone wants to take it to my talk page or any staff member's talk page, that's perfectly fine.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:14, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Bumping this for more opinions. For now, more people are fine with adding it as Wood Hammer, but it'd be better to hear from some more people before making a decision that could cause unnecessary reverts.--ShallowShaddoll (talk) 13:25, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

I believe it is Wood Hammer. It seems to fit every requirement for it.--Rahl (talk) 14:23, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

In Episode 25, it confirms it. The thing is, James was shocked to see it used, meaning Mimikyu hadn't used it before. - unsigned comment from BulbasaurRepresent167 (talk • contribs)

On the ability

Is it really too soon to assume its ability is Disguise, considering Pikachu connected what would have been a supereffective move, and said move did nothing? - unsigned comment from Madiyasha (talk • contribs)

We don't assume because the animation fits the description. It's not Disguise unless it was explicitly said to be Disguise.--ForceFire 04:36, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

But that's stupid! Mimikyu can only have the ability Disguise. Just put disguise and say (Not activated) Also, in episode 25, it actually shows Mimikyu coming out the bushes with it's "disguise" broken. - unsigned comment from BulbasaurRepresent167‎ (talk • contribs)

I wholeheartedly agree that it's stupid, but here on Bulbapedia, they don't like to assume anything. Anything. - unsigned comment from Missingno. Master (talk • contribs) 01:41, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Okay, episode 38 the title translated from Japanese is "Mimikyu's Disguise" it doesn't confirm much, but I am adding it. BulbasaurRepresent167 (talk) 20:19, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Please don't just do as you please. Just because the title is "Mimikyu's Disguise" does not mean that it will use its ability or have its ability explicitly mentioned. Wait until the episode airs. Thank you.--ForceFire 07:11, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Mimikyu and Jessie

Is it worth mentioning that the Luxury Ball that Mimikyu was caught in didn't have any effect on Mimikyu when it comes to its relationship with Jessie? --PKMNAdventurer (talk) 23:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Games=/=anime.--ForceFire 02:38, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

What I meant was indicate that the Luxury Ball had the same effect as a standard Poké Ball. --PKMNAdventurer (talk) 20:33, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Or this Luxury Ball's eff couldn't work on Mimikyu, because he (or she) have so intense grudge forward Pikachu, so even Luxury Ball cannot calm it down. - unsigned comment from Modikisha (talk • contribs)

Again. Games=/=anime. The writers could decide that the Luxury Ball has no secondary effects.--ForceFire 04:01, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Besides, in the games, the Luxuary Ball affects happiness and not affection. Diamond Lanturn CodeName: 05308 08:29, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Gallery of Mimikyu disguises

I think this article needs a gallery with images of disguises Mimikyu used in SM038. TossedDwarf5019 (talk) 23:43, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Pokéball variant trivia

The trivia says it's the first since the OS to be caught in a Pokéball variant. From memory, the only ones that come to mind are in Apricorn balls (Ash's Totodile, Brock's Forretress, and Misty's Corsola), caught in a banned episode and appear in standard Pokéballs (Ash's 30 Tauros) or temporary (Ash's/Casey's Beedrill). Could it be changed to cover the above without it being a mouthful and more? Mimikyu is the first non temporary Pokémon owned by a main character to be caught in a Pokéball variant to still appear in the variant as well as the only one caught outside a banned episode not counting apricorn balls seems a bit long and precise. Masser (talk) 15:12, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

The trivia is fine as is, don't need to be specific about what kind of ball variant or whether it's still in a ball variant.--ForceFire 15:47, 22 May 2019 (UTC)