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

Talk:Shuckle (Pokémon)

1,073 bytes added, 17:22, 22 October 2016
Damage trivium: is it worth keeping?
:::Do you see any reason why restoring the calculation (''anywhere'') would be bad (i.e., worse than the current state)? Or rather, do you (personally) have a reason why you removed the calculation in the first place (but of course not the entire thing)? From what I can tell, you ''seemingly'' agree that notability and reliability are largely independent issues, and that the (''complete'') removal didn't solve the notability issue but at the same time introduced/worsened the reliability issue.
:::Regarding "it should go altogether": I don't heavily disagree, but I also don't really agree. [[User:Nescientist|Nescientist]] ([[User talk:Nescientist|talk]]) 17:00, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
::::When something gets so complicated that accurately describing it takes a solid (and dense) paragraph, it's not really worth including as trivia. Furthermore, the "max damage" situation just requires so much complicity from all battlers that it's not even a practical feat; it's ''very'' much contrived. IMO that hurts its worth as trivia. Mostly, though, IMO it just inspires too much quibbling and is too complicated to be confident of a correct answer to be worth including, period.
::::But ''if'' this belongs anywhere, as far as I'm concerned, it ''really'' only belongs on the [[damage]] page, because that's very much the core. Shuckle is otherwise pretty much equally as important to the trivia as {{a|Flash Fire}} or {{m|Ice Ball}} or just about any other part of the situation is; but it's not really sensible to put it on all those pages, nor is it any more sensible really to only have it on ''Shuckle'''s page. This is about damage; IMO that's where it belongs. [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 17:22, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Navigation menu