Talk:Hitmons
Latest comment: 11 May by Landfish7 in topic Relevancy compared to Applin
Move
"Hitmons" is unofficial and "Tyrogue squadron," according to this article, is official. Even though "Tyrogue squadron" sounds terrible, I don't see why we're using an unofficial title when an official one exists. Canonicity trumps aesthetics, sadly. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 03:48, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- Even this page doesn't have the unofficial term. I do agree with you with "Tyrogue squadron" sounding terrible since Hitmonlee and Hitmonchan were introduced first. Maybe something with the word "brothers" in the name since they're all male. PattyMan 04:09, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- I don't think we can really take that page as official names. They appear to mostly be "witty" titles (which is also why I don't think we can call it an official usage of "Eeveelution"); for example, it calls the Kanto Fossil Pokémon "Rewarding Rocks" and the Kanto starters "First Friends" too in the same way, neither of which I could consider and official name. --SnorlaxMonster 04:23, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- Should we remove the claim on this page that that guidebook's name is official, then? Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 05:36, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- It's not claiming that it is official. It's mentioning that they were refereed this way by a source. I don't see why it shouldn't be mentioned. MaverickNate 05:41, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- The "Tyrogue Squadron" title was deemed not prevalent enough to become the title for this article. MaverickNate 17:41, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
- It's not claiming that it is official. It's mentioning that they were refereed this way by a source. I don't see why it shouldn't be mentioned. MaverickNate 05:41, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- Should we remove the claim on this page that that guidebook's name is official, then? Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 05:36, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
- I don't think we can really take that page as official names. They appear to mostly be "witty" titles (which is also why I don't think we can call it an official usage of "Eeveelution"); for example, it calls the Kanto Fossil Pokémon "Rewarding Rocks" and the Kanto starters "First Friends" too in the same way, neither of which I could consider and official name. --SnorlaxMonster 04:23, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Relevancy compared to Applin
Is this page relevant? I assume it exists because Tyrogue has three potential evolutions which is pretty unique, so for consistency sake, should Applin's evolutions get their page too? There's now three of them, or even four if counting further evolution, plus gigantamax forms.--Rocket Grunt 18:39, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
- Bumping this. Rocket Grunt 16:49, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
- I feel part of what makes the Hitmons particularly notable is that they involve previously unrelated species being connected via Evolution. They're also relatively notable and popular within the fandom and have been acknowledged officially as a group on a few occasions beyond just being evolutionarily related. I worry the Applin line hasn't quite reached that level of notoriety yet?
- My other concern is that the quality of this article isn't necessarily the best, and I'd kinda like to avoid carelessly replicating its format. I'm not sure what the benefit of having the separate page would be in regards to the Applin line, aside from perhaps being able to more easily compare all the evolved forms? I just wish there was something more substantial we could say on these pages than how they're handled now.
- That said, the fact that the Applin line is so unique in that they have three branches, with one having an additional Evolution as well, and two of the Applins having G-Max forms (though visually the same), all might tip this slightly closer to notable territory, but it would be good to figure out what we'd be able to actually say about these guys rather than making the page just because we can. Landfish7 17:21, 11 May 2026 (UTC)