Talk:Tower duo
Latest comment: 10 September 2025 by Maverick Nate in topic Article name
Tower
Only Ho-oh's actually found on a tower; Lugia's found in a cave. Shouldn't this be called something else? Unowninator (talk) 05:39, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
- If you actually bothered to read the article, you'd know. "Their legend is introduced in Generation II, and states that the two birds each resided on a tower: Lugia on the Brass Tower, and Ho-Oh on the Bell Tower. When the Brass Tower was destroyed (prior to the start of the second generation games), the pair was split up" ☆The Solar Dragon☆ 07:56, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Article name
There are a few official sources calling them "legendary birds" or "Legendary Birds".
Maybe this article should be moved to "Legendary birds (Johto)"? --Daniel Carrero (talk) 16:18, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
- Oppose. The term has been used only a few times by obscure, outdated sources, which predate a more established history of the term being used to refer to the Kanto birds. Landfish7 17:30, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
- There are a few reasons why this is a bad idea. Firstly, if this is to be renamed as such all instances of "Tower duo" would be replaced with "Legendary birds", forcing us to use an awkward disambiguator like "Johto legendary birds" each time it appears. Secondly, if we accept "legendary birds" as the official name of two separate groups then we get into territory of having to prove that they're officially separate groups in the first place. More than likely it's just being used as a descriptor in those sources rather than an official title. Biblical Bambi (talk) 17:37, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
- I oppose this move for the same reasons stated above. I appreciate the thought of trying to use an official name for the page, but since the term hasn't been used to refer to this group consistently over time, it doesn't seem TPC is interested in using it as an official name for the group. In the absence of any official name for the group, the current page title will suffice. Storm Aurora (talk) 19:44, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
- In my opinion, "Legendary birds (Johto)" is at least better than "Tower duo". Apparently the latter has been used 0 times in official sources.
- If "Legendary birds (Johto)" is not good enough, maybe the article could be named something like "Lugia and Ho-Oh" or the descriptive "Generation II Legendary Flying-type Pokémon". In particular, I think that the wording "Lugia and Ho-Oh" has been used on official websites and guidebooks. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 00:22, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
- It would be the first time we used a legendary group term with the names of said Pokemon duo. Would be closest given what the rest agreed on for majority. Jacob9594 (talk) 00:51, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
- "Lugia and Ho-Oh" introduces an amount of ambiguity with links and other interwiki issues such that it's not a type of title I would allow us to ever switch to. On the same coin, "Generation II Legendary Flying-type Pokémon" is so excessively wordy that we move beyond what one of the main goals here is: describe the group concisely. MaverickNate 04:48, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
- It would be the first time we used a legendary group term with the names of said Pokemon duo. Would be closest given what the rest agreed on for majority. Jacob9594 (talk) 00:51, 10 September 2025 (UTC)
- I oppose this move for the same reasons stated above. I appreciate the thought of trying to use an official name for the page, but since the term hasn't been used to refer to this group consistently over time, it doesn't seem TPC is interested in using it as an official name for the group. In the absence of any official name for the group, the current page title will suffice. Storm Aurora (talk) 19:44, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
- There are a few reasons why this is a bad idea. Firstly, if this is to be renamed as such all instances of "Tower duo" would be replaced with "Legendary birds", forcing us to use an awkward disambiguator like "Johto legendary birds" each time it appears. Secondly, if we accept "legendary birds" as the official name of two separate groups then we get into territory of having to prove that they're officially separate groups in the first place. More than likely it's just being used as a descriptor in those sources rather than an official title. Biblical Bambi (talk) 17:37, 9 September 2025 (UTC)