Talk:Pokémon category

??????????

Should ??????????'s species (UNKNOWN POKEMON) be added?

I don't think so. It's not in any of the other lists of Pokémon, because it's not really a Pokémon, just blank data. --TTEchidna 23:24, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Should Pokémon with the same classification be together?

Example: Pikachu and Rattata, Mouse Pokémon. --Stinkoman

I think it'd be a cool idea to add the same species together like that, but then we'd get some strange ones, like Chansey and Exeggcute who are both "Egg Pokémon" and Lanturn and Ampharos, both "Light Pokémon". I'm all up for it, though, it'd be interesting to see how many Pokémon share the same species name. --Someone Else 02:35, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Just make it a sortable list... TTEchidna^G_SDS! 06:19, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I made the page List of Pokémon by species, which does just that. --Someone Else 17:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

That's not a sortable list... That's... that's... I don't even know what to call that. I said sortable, not sort them into it. You know, sortable, like the List of Berries by growth time or something. TTEchidnaFire echy 20:04, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, right. Uh, okay. I guess the new page wasn't totally necessary then... Though it doesn't hurt to have Pokémon sorted like that, does it? --Someone Else 22:53, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's really not good to have a page with 355 sections... that will likely grow as the generations go on. I'll fix it. TTEchidnaFire echy 01:50, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

STILL FIXING IT! TTEchidnaFire echy 02:51, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

DONE FIXING IT! It unprotects itself in about seven hours, not that anyone will need to add stuff to it for another year or so. TTEchidnaFire echy 03:06, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Alright, cool. Thanks for fixing the page. Now the whole world will be able to see how Igglybuff, Qwilfish and Drifloon are all related to each other...amongst other things. --Someone Else 03:11, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. TTEchidnaFire echy 03:38, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Species length

The article says species are always ten characters or less. I think, if you do a little research, you'll find they're twelve characters tops, not ten. --Kyoufu Kawa 19:57, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Seems like someone confused them with Pokémon names. TTEchidna 21:38, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

A friend did exactly that when I talked about this very mistake. I accept this explanation. --Kyoufu Kawa 18:29, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't the article mention how, in FireRed and LeafGreen, the species length was shorter, so that Squirtle and Pidgey, for example, had the same species - Tiny Pokémon - rather than the true species names of Tiny Turtle and Tiny Bird? Satosuke 02:49, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Go for it. TTEchidna 03:02, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

TTEchidna, look on Moldy orange's page.--☆Tavisource 03:05, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Wait... for my clone game, I ripped the PokéDex data from Fire Red (US version) and my data file says "Tiny Turtle" and "Tiny Bird". --Kyoufu Kawa 19:00, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

There's nothing more trustable than Game Data ripped by Kawa. Kawa is the man! --Maxim 19:15, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I think it's in the data file, certainly, but something's screwed up in the dex where it only displays the first word. TTEchidna 20:26, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Great Scott! ...wait, does this mean Weedle is a "hairy Pokémon"? --Kyoufu Kawa 18:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Quick question: Are there any examples of 12-character species? I can only find 11-character ones (including "Tinyswallow" for Taillow, which probably should have a space to make it better - is there a reason there's no space?). Does the 12-character limit include the space between the species name and "Pokémon"? ~ Serial Colour 00:14, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Quickish answer: there are twelve bytes per species name. This is 11 characters, plus the terminating null byte. The space between that and "Pokémon" is a part of the latter. --Kyoufu Kawa 16:53, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Japanese species name?

Would it be alright if we added on the Pokémon's Japanese species name? --ケンジのガール 07:01, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I dont see why not.DCM_{((曲奇饼妖怪Spy on My Edits))}

Trivia

"Pidgey's Pokémon FireRed and LeafGreen species names are not the same in each version. FireRed labels Pidgey as the "Tiny Bird Pokémon" (as do the Pokédex listings of other generations); however, LeafGreen erroneously defines it as the "Tiny Pokémon"." I checked Fire Red 1.0, 1.1 and Leaf Green 1.0. All three list Pidgey as a "Tiny Bird" in the database. This is probably related to the bug described in "Species length" above, where the space is counted as a terminator. I'm deleting it, if you don't mind. --Kyoufu Kawa 17:04, 1 September 2009 (UTC) Quick update: Emerald 1.0, Ruby 1.1 and Sapphire 1.1 also list it as "Tiny Bird". --Kyoufu Kawa 17:07, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

MAGNEDETH checked that before I posted it; and it was brought up on our "dispute resolution" page. It may just differ from location to location. I'll check with him. —darklordtrom 07:14, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

i have LeafGreen, i checked it myself, it says Tiny Pokemon. -- MAGNEDETH 07:16, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Good. Now go read the "Species length" part on this very talk page. The whole section, please. --Kyoufu Kawa 11:55, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, in that section you tell us why the maximum number is only eleven characters. "Tiny Bird" fits in those eleven characters. We have proof that the exclusion is in LeafGreen only; perhaps some versions of LeafGreen only. There are other double-barrel species names in FRLG, such as "Poison Bee", yet that isn't cut short. It's just Pidgey. —darklordtrom 22:43, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

"Perhaps some versions of LeafGreen only" is right. It seems, of the three games I tried, both 1.1 versions (FR -and- LG) show the full name, while FR 1.0 cuts it off. If only I had an English LG 1.0 to check... --Kyoufu Kawa 16:20, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

my LG is 1.0, it says "Tiny Pokemon" -- MAGNEDETH 16:48, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for confirming my theory. If you'd like to restore that trivia section, please reword it as a bug that's fixed in 1.1. --Kyoufu Kawa 15:28, 4 September 2009 (UTC)