Talk:Sabrina's Haunter/Archive 1

From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search


Yes I moved it. It's not his anymore and I cite Casey's Beedrill as precidence - unsigned comment from Lego3400 (talkcontribs)

Well, I can see your point, but this raises a question; do we rename all of the other Pokémon that Ash gave away? For instance, should we rename Ash's Primeape so that its name is Anthony's Primeape? I'm okay with this change, though. --PAK Man Talk 21:57, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
I don't know...If we were to go through with such a plan, we'd have to change Jessie's Lickitung to Benny's Lickitung, Brock's Vulpix to Susie's Vulpix, and so on and so forth. Keep in mind that Anthony and Benny were both characters of the day, and characters of the day Pokémon articles are, for the most part, non-notable. I'm not quite decided myself on this issue...--Shiningpikablu252 22:05, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
That is a very good point... I didn't think of those two when I did it. However, Ash only kept Hunter for one or two, episodes before it decided to stay with Sabrina. Cassie's Beedrill also falls in that same boat. Ash also never caught Hunter, so it would have been more aptly named, Haunter (Anime) if it didn't decide to stay with Sabrina. As for Primeape, Vulpix and Lickitung, they were part of their previous trainer's team for quite some time before being traded. Primeape has also reappeared in openings alongside other of Ash's former Pokemon, something Haunter hasn't done. Also Ash stated that he would come back for Haunter (Which we know isn't going to happen), and didn't do that for Primeape. Lego3400 16:10, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, Vulpix was originally Suzie's anyway... TTEchidna 21:24, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
The Beedrill comparison isn't valid: Beedrill has been shown as one of Casey's main Pokémon while Haunter has not been seen again since Ash got it.
Haunter is a more complicated issue and should be set as precedent even less than Beedrill. --FabuVinny T-C-S 10:03, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, seeing how the Japanese version of Haunter vs Kadabra used the japanese word for Get Pokemon in regards to Haunter (from both Ash AND Sabrina), it was owned by Ash. Weedle Mchairybug 22:11, 8 May 2009 (UTC)


Well it be nessecary to make a Sabrina's Pokémon template? --File:Spr 3e 115.gifTheryguy512File:Spr 3e 202.gifFile:Spr 3e 327.gif

I suppose it couldn't hurt. --PAK Man Talk 00:51, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Yhank you for letting me make one! Here is the finished product:

--File:Spr 3e 115.gifTheryguy512File:Spr 3e 202.gifFile:Spr 3e 327.gif 01:00, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Moves Used

I'm pretty sure Haunter used Lick on Misty before they reached the Gym

User: ShinyMedicham

the caught at box is left blank

i tried editing but couldnt find where to put it.Any way the answer is Lavender Town - Pokémon Tower .--Solid! 07:18, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Caught At

Similar to the note above this why does it say caught at Saffron City now? Just like Ash "never Caught it" there is no evidence that Sabrina ever put it in a Pokéball. Since it was never put in a Pokéball I think the place it was originally "found" should be it's "catch location" (Lavender Town - Pokémon Tower) if any at all, not Saffron City. -- D558 23:54, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Ash never officially owned it. Sabrina did. Sabrina picked it up in Saffron City. Nuff said. Caught doesn't always mean catching in a ball. --ケンジガール 06:46, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
What made it so Sabrina caught it but Ash didn't? By your logic that a pokeball dosn't mean capture can mean that Ash owned it too (Ash "picked it up" in Lavender town, nuff said?). Haunter was with Ash for 2 episodes but is only with Sabrina in 1 then is mearly implied that "they will be together forever". I am keeping in mind that this is a contested subject for a lot of people and I doubt i'll change bulbapedias mind but I would just like to present this conflicting "knowledge" somewhere noticeable -- D558 20:24, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Um... What is the title of this article? Is it Ash's Haunter? I think not. It's now staying with Sabrina. Just let it go. --ケンジガール 21:23, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
It is just that kind of stubborn ignorance that will force me to "let it go" because I can't be bothered to try and reason with someone who is so high and mighty with their "knowledge" that they feebly base their arguments on something that is well known to be disputed and is in fact extremely closely related to the point I am trying to calmly and logically dispute(where haunter was caught and by extension who). Specifically against your "argument" that the title proves your point, There was a famous German leader who called a plan "The Final Solution" but any sane or caring person would think of it as anything but that... -- D558 06:45, 22 December 2009 (UTC)


Would it be safe to assume that the Black Fog would be the Electric Tale of Pikachu equivalent of Ash....Sabrina's Haunter? I mean, a Haunter and only makes sense Ataro 03:59, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
This handsome fellow right here
bringing this up again Ataro 18:49, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
And bringing it up yet again......Ataro 15:09, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
From what I understand(which isn't much), the Haunter called the "Black fog" is Sabrina's enemy, and she does not own it. This is not enough of a similarity to put it on this page. Blake Talk·Edits 03:23, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
You need to read the manga and it's differences to understand...Ataro 03:28, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
To me, the story is too different and the Black Fog deserves its own seperate article. Then again Ash's Fearow has the Fearow from EP081 listed as its anime equivalent so I suppose this isn't too different from that. --ZestyCactus 19:06, 19 March 2011 (UTC)


Haunter tagged along with Ash for an episode or two, but he never caught it. Haunter hung out with Sabrina at the end of the episode, but she doesn't necessarily own it because she wasn't seen actually using it. So shouldn't this be at Haunter (anime), like Jigglypuff is? Satoshi101 18:17, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

I feel the this article sould be called something else, enless someone has proof that Haunter is really sabrina's. Though I will let an adim. do the title changing. Truthseeker4449 18:01, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

I actually agree, Haunter is really just a free-spirited joker with no more links to Sabrina than Ash has to Jigglypuff or Sandile. We don't even know if Haunter stayed with Sabrina beyond the time it took for Ash and the others to leave. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 05:39, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Haunter is featured in the TCG as one of Sabrina's Pokémon.--ForceFire 05:42, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
*coughs* A Pokémon doesn't need to have a Poké Ball to be considered under someone's ownership. Jo the Marten ಠ_ಠ 05:46, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
But what makes it under Sabrina's ownership any more than Ash's but left with her? And Force Fire, Sabrina also has a Gastly, Alakazam, Drowzee, Jynx and Porygon under her ownership. Gym Leader expansions should not be the determinative factor for an anime decision. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 06:08, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

I tried to move the page, but it ended up in edit war, and now I can't even edit the page. Help! Satoshi101 01:45, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

You really should have left it unmoved until a consensus was reached, all you do is hurt the cause because you are seen as a vandal. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 02:00, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
You can't move or edit it because it's protected.--ForceFire 02:02, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
I personally would like to know what evidence we have that Haunter is still with Sabrina. Truthseeker4449 02:07, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
What evidence we have that Haunter isn't still with Sabrina? The way I see it, it was seen with Sabrina's family as Ash was leaving. If it was seen leaving with Ash, or seen going back to Lavender Town, it'd be "Ash's". But it wasn't. It was along side Sabrina's family like it was a welcomed member. Jo the Marten ಠ_ಠ 02:17, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Jo, that'd be good enough for me if one completely ignored the entirety of Haunter's character. Its frequently moved around of its own free will, abandoning Ash on a whim. And its already walked away from one family, its Gastly and Gengar friends who it lived with prior to meeting Ash. Why would it change its entire character just to hang around with a girl it met once? Toon Ganondorf (t c) 11:35, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Well if I recall, the ghosts were lonesome and wanted someone to play with, which was one of the biggest reasons Haunter left with Ash anyway. To have someone to play with, along with helping out a friend during a gym battle. Haunter usually left Ash to find others to make laugh (i.e. Jessie when he nearly killed Team Rocket). Considering how mentally unstable Sabrina was, she really needed someone to make her laugh, and she found that in Haunter. I'd be willing to speculate that without Haunter around, Sabrina would sink back into her depressive split personality deal. It's like her father said, "Deep down all Sabrina ever wanted was to make friends." So in short I'm saying: Haunter wanted a friend to make laugh, Sabrina wanted a friend to make her laugh. They're a perfect match, so it's not completely unfathomable that he'd stay with her. Jo the Marten ಠ_ಠ 11:55, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Well I don't think its completely unfathomable that Ash's Charizard is a male, but Bulbapedia has always been very rigid on evidence and I don't any reason for Haunter to be classified as belonging to Sabrina. By all mean list its location as "With Sabrina" and whatnot, but its still a free spirit and unlike Mimey, there's not enough appearance to justify a decision that it is her Pokémon rather than just a wild Pokémon hanging around for its own purposes. Like Meowth. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 12:27, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

While I don't agree on the whole Charizard being male debate I do think that it should stay because it falls under speculation. It's just silly to think after Ash and company left Haunter just got up and left Sabrina. There's no evidence. We can't and don't go innto a full fledged investigation about where old characaters Pokemon have gone. Madame Muchmoney's Granbull frequently ran away from it's owner, do we keep checking back to see if it's still there? No. So why should this be treated diffrently? --Pokemaster97 13:59, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
You do make an excellent point, however the key difference is that Granbull was a rebellious Pokémon who was owned by Madame Muchmoney. Haunter was technically still a wild Pokémon. The two cannot be compared because even if Snubull ran away, it still belonged to her. My point is that even if Haunter is still with Sabrina, it doesn't belong to her because it is a wild Pokémon floating around of its own motivation. Mimey has taken battle commands from Delia, Haunter just licked Sabrina in the face. Ownership is not correct. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 22:27, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Since we've had a bit of an updated discussion, it seems that the majority agree that ownership to Sabrina isn't accurate. Do you guys think we can reach a decision? If so, then reply, and we can cross that out on the list of things to do. I also apologize for any vandal-like behavior I might have been known for in this dispute. Satoshi101 02:52, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Only 3 people think it should be moved with 2 against, one of them being a staff member. I don't think that's consensus. I think we should wait and discuss a little longer. --Pokemaster97 03:05, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Honestly I think it's pointless to move it to Haunter (anime). Not to mention the majority of the fandom sees this Pokémon as Sabrina's as well as all the other language wikis. All it will do is confuse people. About the ownership issue, I'd like to bring up Ash's Larvitar. He doesn't own it, never had. He had six Pokémon already when it was traveling with it so it could not be his at all. It's with its mother now. So should we move that to Larvitar (anime)? Yes the bond was shown to be stronger but we have no idea what happened after Ash left Saffron. Jo brought up good points as well. Sometimes it's not about official ownership when these articles get named. That's my two cents. --ケンジガール 03:36, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

The title "Sabrina's Haunter" says that Sabrina owns Haunter. We don't know that and we have no way of proving it. We can't disprove the claim that Haunter is Sabrina's either. It's the same principle with Ash's Larvitar. We can't prove anything about its ownership. The title "Haunter (anime)" neither confirms nor denies that Sabrina own's Haunter. That's why this page should be moved to Haunter (anime).--Alex726(TALK) 03:46, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

And Ash doesn't own Larvitar. T That's a fact. They title implies that Ash owns Larvitar. So it should be moved to Larvitar (anime). Right? This is what I'm trying to say. He doesn't own Larvitar and Sabrina isn't confirmed to own Haunter. So why is it fine for Ash and not Sabrina? --ケンジガール 03:51, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
I completely agree with you. I just suggested moving Ash's Larvitar to Larvitar (anime). We should be consistent.--Alex726(TALK) 03:58, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Just to note, I wasn't saying we should go ahead a move Ash's Larvitar because of this. I personally like them where they are as it's what the fandom knows them best as, whether it be strictly correct or not. --ケンジガール 04:01, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
I know it's not what you intended, but I personally think they should be moved. I'm only submitting my vote and making a suggestion to fix something you brought to my attention. Thank you for mentioning the inconsistensy, by the way.--Alex726(TALK) 04:07, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
It is inconsitant and I agree it needs to be cleared up, but we need to keep articles at a name most fans will know. "Ash's Larvitar" and "Brock's Vulpix" all fall under this same technicallity of not being theirs, but people know them under these owners the best. --Pokemaster97 04:12, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Brock's Vulpix is different. Brock owned the Pokéball that contained Vulpix. Brock may have said that he felt Vulpix was never his, but that's just it. He only said he felt Vulpix was never his. It was given to him and he eventually gave it back. And just because fans know these Pokémon best as their current titles doesn't mean we will cause a panic if we move them. If they search "Sabrina's Haunter" it will just redirect them to the correct page. I tried searching "Ash's Haunter" and it redirected me to Sabrina's Haunter immediately.--Alex726(TALK) 04:21, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Suzy handed it off to him and it was his, but he gave it back to suzy therefore making it not his anymore. Now it's Suzy's vulpix. But the fans know Vulpix better as Brock's so the page is titled "Brock's Vulpix". "Suzy's Vulpix" redirects there as well. So no it's not all that diffrent. --Pokemaster97 04:30, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Ash is not Sabrina. Ash has appeared in every single episode to date. Brock to a lesser extent has appeared in Kanto, Johto, Hoenn, Battle Frontier and Sinnoh. Sabrina appeared in two episodes. You cannot compare Ash and Brock to Sabrina, not matter what her role in the games, TGC, manga and franchise in general.

Unlike Casey's Beedrill, Haunter has not appeared again and it never ever battled or did anything under Sabrina's ownership. It had a five second shot if it floating beside her. That precedent should not be followed. For reasons I've already given, the TGC should be completely irrelevant to the decision.

With all due respect, I completely reject Kenji-girl's claim that "a majority of the fandom sees it as Sabrina's". Jo and Kenji are the only ones who have explicitly opposed the move - ForceFire has made observations but not argued against and I disagree with counting that as a vote unless they say so. If you were to ask the average fan who had not read articles on this wiki if they remember Haunter, none of them will say "oh yes, Sabrina's Haunter", they would say Ash's Haunter. It wasn't caught but neither was Larvitar. Therefore I'm going to deviate from my original position and suggest that it be renamed Ash's Haunter again. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 05:58, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Toon Ganondorf. For the sake of uniformity, like Larvitar, it should be Ash's name in the title. Honestly, when I was younger, I thought of it as his all along. The "befriended by Sabrina" bit is purely speculation. LimeGreenCharizard 06:03, 24 November 2011 (UTC)