User talk:ArcToraphim/Archive1

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

I Have a New Idea!

Hi! I just joined to help! I have a new idea for one. How about Brock and Autumn. I also have a suggested name for it! How about... 1. YoungOldShipping 2. TutorShipping 3. BrotumnShipping Tandra88 14:47, 28 March 2009 (UTC)tandra88

Tutor would probably have been a good choice. Except Brock/Autumn is already named KitchenMaidShipping. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 03:25, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


Why did you change KnowledgeShipping to NavigatorShipping???? Brock and Max know a whole lot more than Gissele (a C.O.D.), and Gary. Can't we change the Gary/Gissle shipping to something like GravelerShipping???? --Theryguy512 14:12, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

-- *eye roll* Dude, we have an official list for a reason (even the out-of-date one on Bulbapedia will confirm that it's been under these name since at least May): so things like this won't happen.

Knowledgeshipping has been Gary/Giselle for even longer than I can remember and I've been in the 'shipping game for years, and someone (not you, because I know who it was) named Brock/Max Navigatorshipping even before it occured to you. There is no changing when it's been that way for that long; you'll have to live with it. Sorry. Luna Tiger

Okay, it's not that bad. I just wanted a reason why we changed it, and you gave me one. Thanks. --Theryguy512 14:58, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


What in the HELL made you change DrugShipping to BlueShipping?? Quite clearly DrugShipping made more sence "I'm sick of people not checking and doing things willy-nilly" what the hell does that mean?? I checked to see if there was a shipping like that there wasn't so I made one!! You have no right to change the name so there I'm pissed off Ok are you happy!?!? I want answers!!! I will not change it for risk of being banned but I think that everyone has a choice of what to call there own pages!! GAWD!!! Rucario64 22:04, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I Googled both names, but BlueShipping seems to be more common for the Meowth/James ship. - s.Combusken 22:17, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Yeah I did the same thing and..well... I apologize for freaking out I hope you can forgive me Luna Tiger!! HeHe!! Anyway thanks for at least changing it to make things better for Bulbapedia!! Rucario64 22:22, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
...Just...*headsmack* Can people just stop rimming me out and trying to think they know more about 'shipping in the Pokémon fandom than me? I update the damn list; I'm immersed in this stuff up to the gills I should have by now. If I change a name, can we just assume it's for a pritty dam gud reesun and not think they'll be the one to prove me wrong? Pleeeeease? ArcToraphim 22:30, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


Alright. It's spelled "brunette." Not "brunett." Next time, heed the warning that questions whether you really want to create a page that was previously deleted. See why it was deleted. Thanks. --ニョロトノ666 16:08, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

TRUST ME. Yes, it's a damn misspelling! It's LISTED on the bloody list as 'Brunett'. Brunette is Delia/Jasmine. Did you even read the updated article? I bet you didn't. Forgive me for typing rudely, but I think I know what I'm bloody well talking about. Gary/May is LIST ON THE LIST AS BrunettShipping. So thank you kindly for being far too hasty and for being just another person who doesn't trust me when I change something. ArcToraphim 16:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Go here [1]. Then scroll down to #36, and read it! Read the story if u have to!--KukiTalk 16:15, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

No, I don't read fanfiction. Never have, never will. So are you telling me that it's an intentional misspelling because they couldn't think of a different name for it? BTW, BrunettShipping only gets, like, 53 hits on Google. BrunetteShipping gets 152. --ニョロトノ666 16:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
For one, that's infuriating. And wrong. How 'bout this: you go here, ctrl+F 'brunett' and pay attention that that list wasn't updated since May of '07. And cascade posted that 'fic in Feb of '08. No, I'm not backing down from this. I know the bloddy difference between brunet, brunette, and brunett. Gary/May is listed as Brunett. Give it up. Please.
And yes, it was an intentional misspelling. ArcToraphim 16:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I was talking to Arc--KukiTalk 16:22, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah, whatever. Carry on shipping. --ニョロトノ666 16:27, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Well noone believes in DeliaXJasmine--KukiTalk 16:28, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

So? That no excuse. Absolutely not an excuse. Delia/Jasmine came first. They get precedent. It's how the game goes. ArcToraphim 16:33, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Move War

Knock it off, you two. ArcToraphim knows more about shipping, and I admit that I know absolutely nothing, so leave the misspelling. However, should I delete BrunetteShipping, since it refers to something totally different and doesn't have an article? --ニョロトノ666 17:15, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

It has an article, so NO--KukiTalk 17:16, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Brunetteshipping should be a redirect, as should Shellshipping, I suppose. It goes against my better nature since they're both claimed, but neither will be getting any articles any time soon. ArcToraphim 17:23, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

ShellShipping I'll keep as a redirect. BrunetteShipping, however, should be deleted, since there's no connection between BrunettShipping and BrunetteShipping besides the similar names. --ニョロトノ666 17:30, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Point taken, but at the same time, you did make the point about the common use of Brunetteshipping on Google. .....I just don't want to keep going through these arguments between people, and if this is what I get for something not many people support, imagine what's going to happen once I find the strength to do something about Farawayshipping (which should be Outcry, but Faraway's in much more use). I'm too old and settled for the crap.
In the short run, Delia/Jasmine will never get an article, for obvious reasons. If it's possible to create a disambig that states Brunette is Delia/Jasmine and commonly mistaken for Gary/May, please go here for article, that I can live with. They used to have similar pages, which 'ships that were couples twice like Luckyshipping, before they became irrelevant. ArcToraphim 17:41, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


As an admin, I'm obligated to remind you of our signature policy. Signing as "Luna Tiger" is inappropriate, even if it is your nickname. Your sig must reflect your username. You're free to try and get a username change, though. Thank you. --ニョロトノ666 18:45, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Just warning you

Yami Takashi gets upset when you revert him. I had a hell of a time with him a few days ago over a stupid last name. If he starts giving you trouble, let me know. --ケンジガール 02:52, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


Images from any Pokémon media containing logos of companies, say the Cartoon Network logo on anime images, are frowned upon here at Bulbapedia. Before my block, I found pictures from here [2], andmany of the episode pictures are logoless, compared to your probable direct from TV pictures. That site will have better quality pictures too. hope you find this helpful.--KukiTalk 17:07, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm aware that no-logo-is-betteru, however, I would rather pull images from online streaming sources than pilfer someone else's capture work, even if credited. ...And don't act so pretentious, considering you're hardly one to talk about images. If I could find a source that streamed without the logo, do you think mine would have it? In the mean time, it's a temp until I can find such an image. It's something to work on later. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 19:59, 17 November 2008 (UTC)


do you have proof? -- MAGNEDETH 01:20, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Do you have proof it's not? Like owning the game yourself? ...Look, the reason I went on a spree of asking and asking was because someone make a 'ship submission, and outright claimed that it was spelled "Brigette". ( I asked around, in hope that someone could clear this up, because I thought it was Bridgette too. No one answered. Except Teradyne. They say they got proof, and if two unrelated people are saying it, and Teradyne saying they got proof, if necessary.... What. Ask them for the proof. I'll take their word for it. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 01:27, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
why didnt you ask in the BP section on the forums? hell, TTEchidna has the game, hed know. -- MAGNEDETH 01:29, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Because I wasn't initially asking for the sake of the BP. I went to the game forums. Asked on their "Simple questions" thread. You know, figuring there were more gamers there than anywhere else? Given the context of the forum in question, and all. You're assuming I can psychic-up that TTE's got the game himself. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 01:33, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Don't worry, I corrected him over AIM.----RexRacer -talk 01:34, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
that seems a tad condescending Arc. how would we all edit the pedia if we ourselves didnt know everything about the games were writing out? and all in the name of a ship? in the meantime, Rex has looked into it and confirmed it is indeed Brigette. but seriously, next time, ask us. -- MAGNEDETH 01:37, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
-headdesk- What do you think I did? Twice? In relevant BP places to ask? ...*sigh* Nobody knows everything, and obviously, if there were more people who editted the BP who knew more about BOX than those who didn't, why then, was Brigette's name misspelled for so long? Why would I ask a forum that likely didn't know either, when I wasn't getting answers elsewhere? I went to where I thought I would get the results. I eventually did. Condescending or not, the 'Pedia is thus not the answer to every question. Don't feel slighted I didn't ask the great collective you first, when I couldn't trust the answer that's here.
...And no, it's not all in the name of "a ship". It's in the name of many 'ships that have Brigette in them. The list is directly related to BMGf. Do you want anything reflecting BMGf to be wrong? I hope not. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 01:47, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
well, we cant always scan every single talk page we see. besides, if you dont get an answer on here, the forums are visited by many people, namely the admins. i guarantee you would have gotten an answer. and while the pedia isnt the answer for everything, wed like it to be. so, just because we skimped some talk pages isnt a reason to get up in arms about something. as for shipping, im not a shipper, so, i dont care about that. -- MAGNEDETH 01:56, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
No, you can't, but at the same time, it seems plenty of people go to talk pages all the time to talk of perpetually nothing. It's just that no one wants to bother with the talk pages they want to know nothing about. Truth. The matter is done anyway. I'm not in the wrong. I got my answer. I am happy. I'm not getting into arms. I just don't like it when people come onto me and claim I don't know what I'm talking about, as my talk page clearly demonstrates (who wouldn't keep getting into arms when the only time they bother to message me is when they get defensive and say "How dare you?!"). And it doesn't matter if you're not a 'shipper. I've a job to do keeping it as correct as possible. I'd like to think I'm doing that job by maintaining it to canon standard. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 02:05, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
And I've been meaning to thank you, Rex, so, thank you Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 02:05, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
now, im not here to stir things up, im just saying, if a talk page doesnt do it, use the forums. i also didnt know we had a head of shipping, so, sorry. -- MAGNEDETH 02:14, 13 February 2009 (UTC)


Yay! One more GodisdeadShipping fan. There should be a page for that when it gets a tiny bit more popular. Zephy Changes 15:16, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Godisdeadshipping will never get any more popular than various underground bands that only a handful listen to and believe are more superior than mainstream music. XD It's all in the name. The name makes it truly wicked. But a page? Perhaps. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 16:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC)


Sorry, I guess I forgot. My bad. シンジShinjiLover,Edits 22:29, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


Satoshi is a disambig page because there are two characters named so. Tajiri is just an addition to an existing disambig. As for voice actors, we don't make disambigs just because of their first names because no one refers to them just by their first names. That "what if they think Chie's the surname?" is not a reason. What if someone thinks that "Ketchum" is actually Misty's surname? Is it a reason for a disambig? No. We NEVER create disambigs just because some VA shares a name with a character. We only add VA names to EXISTING disambigs. Hence, there's no need for Chie being a disambig. --Maxim 13:07, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Ever think if you took a less demeaning course of action, people would actually take you serious more times than not? Saying things like "We NEVER" is belitting (as though you're yelling at a child) and akin to a personal attack that puts people who don't know how to deal with you on the maximum defensive. It also makes you feel you've erected a wall others cannot argue around, empowering yourself to whatever your statement is, which in fact, it can.
Because I would like to see where this mandate that "VAs don't get listed in disambigs when this, that, and these" is dictated (even a solid agreement on a talk page involving Those Who Matter would do if it's not apart of a manual), instead of something you feel should be warranted by your own say-so. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 16:23, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Personal attack? Don't be funny. I just think there's no need to create disambigs for the sake of creating disambigs. The arguments for "Chie" as a disambig are very weak. If there were two characters with such name - I would agree with it. Or even, if there was more than one notable VA with that first name. But there is nothing like that, a person who could be searching for a "Chie" in POKEMON Pedia would most possibly be searching for Maisy/Maizie/Macey/whatever it's spelt. And it's funny how you completely changed the topic of the discussion, questioning my methods of reasoning. There is no mandate about creating useless disambigs but there should be one (I think I'll contact TTE on this issue) and as long as there's no such one, I'm just seeking for usless disambig and annihilating them. Your advocating of them is ridiculous. And we actually deleted one disambig like that (character vs. VA) - that was Hiroki. I was the one to annihilate it and (despite Maverick Nate's revert) my decision was supported without any further problems. --Maxim 16:33, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm not saying you're attacking people; I'm saying the way you conduct yourself makes people feel like you are, regardless if you are or not: all guns ablaze, and all that jazz. And see, now you're bringing what you should have brought in the first place instead of CAPS usage and demanding to be right: passive reasons for its elimination (except for that "advocating of them is ridiculous part"; I rightly take offense).
Now, I agree somewhat with what you're saying and I see what you mean, but I have to protest: it's very unlikely that anyone searching for "Chie" is looking for Maisy. Chie Sato is a lot more prominent for being a voice actor than Maisy is as a character (being that she existed a thousand episodes ago and anyone looking for her will likely only know her English name, or will search her out through Kurt, if they don't know her English name).
Chie Sato, however, is still functioning through the series as the occasional voice or various roles and remains a current member of the minor cast. My reasoning for "what if they think her first name is her surname" is logical: you might think such a person to be an idiot, but there are a lot of people who cannot discern an Asian surname from a first name (because it's all Greek to them). Also, if a person's mind blanks and they can only recall "Chie", what then? If it leads to a redirect, they're square out of luck, no?
However, I will concede to the point of not having the disambig (for now). Though I don't believe it's right, only because it plays a part in isolating the Japanese part of the 'Pedia from the English folk. And if you DO bring this up to TTE, be a lad and bring up both sides of the argument, yes? Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 17:05, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

About Barry

On the page it said, "Also, like Gary, his name is taken, in both Japanese and English, from the first-listed default name for his game counterpart in the primary version." But isn't this wrong? The first listed name for the rival in Red/Blue was Blue not Gary. Gary was second. - Kirby Phelps (PK)

Point. Perhaps it needs to be reworded to negate doubts of a pattern; the problem with just saying the name was taken from one of the defaulted list makes it seem like there is no pattern, while that's untrue (and would give way to possible arguments on "how he should have been Damion"). The pattern is the top-most normal name (colors and metals not considered in the general "normal" vicinity) of the alpha version is given to the rival. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 02:32, 29 May 2009 (UTC)


Do not get rid of it when it is used to link to games. That is its correct usage.--RexRacer 04:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I figured that out on my own, belatedly, before you started reverting. Though at the same time, I also figured, why have a template that physically makes the same link as adding "Pokémon" does? If all roads lead to Rome, when it comes to how the article will look with the G template or the word itself, what's the point of using it in the first place? It really is a lazy template, even game wise, if you are using it instead of writing out the darn word. Dreaded é you can just click on the palette. Ooooo, I'm frightened. It's a silly template, if you want my opinion, even if you didn't. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 11:07, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Manga Jasmine

I've never read the manga, but most of the online resources I've found seem to back up the info on the page. This page, for example. I'll leave it up to your judgment what to do; you obviously know more about this than me. But I don't want to have a big chunk of information missing from that page for too long. --((Marton imos)) 19:27, 7 June 2009 (UTC)


Do you happen to know the name of the ship for Brock and Natalie? I looked on the List of Shippers and I can't seem to find it. Weird, being that I can find Natalie x her sisters... --ケンジガール 06:26, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

I have looked and scoured a couple resources. =o Nothing has cropped up. 'Tis free to name, if you want to be the one? Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 22:44, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


Just wondering about this... Why is the shipping called Pandershipping? - unsigned comment from Mikanlamperouge (talkcontribs)

The answer is here. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 03:09, 27 August 2009 (UTC)


Please don't put up redirects for the deletion because "the search bar can tell where the capitalization is". If we were to delete all of the redirects such as AdvanceShipping you've been putting up for deletion, then we'd be leaving redlinks where page content links to that redirect. This is because the search bar is smarter than the article bodies, and we don't cater redirects exclusively to the search bar. --Shiningpikablu252 23:23, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

So it'll lead to a redlink on an article; if a link is entered incorrectly, a user would fix it to be correct. By having redirects with lowercase "shippings", which is my only beef, isn't that saying that users who edit can just leave the 'S' uncapitalized and screw the uniformity of the Shipping article requirements? No one takes a missing accent over the "e" lightly; why should this? Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 23:30, 3 September 2009 (UTC)







- unsigned comment from Trancebuddha (talkcontribs)

...Yeah, no. I hate militant 'shippers. I hate CAPSLOCK rage too. For the record, none of your pics showed anything particularly telling of the pairing, which that NeoLeague pic does. Which is why they aren't 'shippy enough to consider. Your reasoning, also, is nonsense: you're telling the wrong person what should be considered 'shippy and what /isn't/ 'shippy. Especially when it comes to the gay 'ships. Those take a bit more substance to them. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 19:07, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


Hello. I am sorry to have to interrupt, but you deleted a lot of advanceshipping from the advanceshipping page without reason. I just hope that you won't do it again.

Best Regards to you --SilverMorningRain39 20:29, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Listen up

I see you have changed the advanceshipping page again. Yes, I did read your reason, but that still does not permit you to delete most of the hints. After all, shipping pages are meant to be for POV and opinion. And, not to mention that the other shipping pages (Pearlshipping etc.) include things of that nature as well. I will go change the advanceshipping page back to what it was, and I am hoping that you refrain from deleting any hints from it again.

Best Regards

--SilverMorningRain39 20:37, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

First off, I'm the Shipping project leader. I've a right to delete what I feel isn't doing a 'shipping article justice. I didn't delete "a lot", just some of what you wrote, and most of the useless bits that really have no right being there. I did have a reason. Believe me, it's justified; don't edit war over this. Please note this, and thank you for being concerned. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 20:40, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Listen up

Please listen. You have deleted many hints from the advanceshipping page. I did read your reason, but you cannot erase what many advanceshippers believe to be true. After all, the shipping pages are meant to be POV pages. And, the other shipping pages (like pearlshipping) include things that you said were wrong on the advanceshipping page. I will now go back to change the page again, and I am hoping you do not delete any more.

Best Regard, --SilverMorningRain39 20:40, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

I would like to point out that, no, the pages are not meant to be THAT POVish, nor will they ever reflect "what many advanceshippers believe to be true." There are some things that just do not warrant mention on any 'shipping article, and you have to understand that. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 20:49, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Many people and a Cubone are thinking...

...that the shippings of minor characters should be deleted. What's you opinion? Alpha CuboneKing 22:25, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

In all honesty, it depends which ones. Then again, there are some with /basis/ that should have articles, but does that matter? Nooo, who's going to listen to my (*$&)(#@*&^R%*&^$WEF#@#@^&%#@ opinion when two/thirds the people making the bid for deletion aren't even involved with 'shipping in the first place, so they've no idea which ones are actually relevant and which ones aren't? You have to have an article that's over three pages long with a zillion hints to stay in place. Everything else? Baleeshun! Rather annoyed, because only NOW you're asking for my opinion, on something as minor as the fate of minor character 'ships?? Because you can take my opinion back, and again, who is going to care what a lil ol' project leader has to say? Being the damn mod for BMG's 'shipping forums apparently doesn't give me the credit for weight on the matter. Jesus Christ, at least give me some time to back this crap up, because it's all inevitably going to happen, with or without my opinion (because you guys really don't care what I have to say; no, you don't, you haven't, and you're being too damn trigger happy over the matter, and you don't want to listen to me).
And that is my opinion. Thanks so much for pretending to care what I have to say. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 23:55, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
BP:COC Alpha CuboneKing 23:58, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
I know, I know! *sigh* Excuse me for lashing out here, for once. This is aggravating, insulting, and painful. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 00:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I can't vouch for what CK really thinks*. But as for me, I truly do believe that your opinion should matter. In fact, I was the only one who suggested it. I know how you're feeling right now. I'm the head of Project Anime and no one asked my opinion about the anime Pokémon articles and which ones should be notable or not. I found out after some pages were deleted. All that really matters is what the editorial board thinks. But I really think that they should take in to account what Project Leaders, like yourself and I, think. Even I, someone with admin powers, don't have enough power to stop the editorial board. They are higher admins and it's basically what they decide. But they are trying to figure out a solution to this so that everyone will be happy. I'll also try to help you out. Just know that there is someone out there who thinks your opinion matters. --ケンジガール 00:07, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Luna, with all due respect, being a Project Leader does not give you authority to make a final decision on what stays or goes. That's why we have discussions. I did not delete anything without discussions. Check my contributions in the Shipping talk namespace - those are the current candidates for deletion. You are more than welcome to voice your opinion - but the EB will have the final say. Same way as if the EB would consider a music article not notable against my better judgement, it would still get deleted - because the EB outranks the Project Leader. --electAbuzzzz 00:09, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I know the chain of rank. And I know what I'm looking at, and I know how much power I really have as a PL (don't you dare believe I don't know that), and I know what my say is worth. I could say "Keep" to the five craps already there, and what would it do me? Except make my voice futile. I know shipping. I'm /stuck/ in shipping, because I update the list, and I have to be for its sake. Do you really know shipping? I know you don't like it, so do you even know what's truly worth deleting? Really? Delete Energy, delete XDRival. Those ones aren't worth much, but how about asking what I thought first? I /know/ this crap; why do you think I was made PL in the first place? It just would have been nice. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 00:20, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
And hugs and hearts for Kenji. Thank you. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 00:22, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
@ KG: I just do whatever I want that is good for the 'pedia. I just do what the admins say as well. Because back when I didn't, things got ugly. Alpha CuboneKing 00:26, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Oy, Luna, stop fuming. I treat shipping notability exactly like any other section's notability. I know when an article is crap. Take ClingyShipping for example. You think that thing really has a place on Bulbapedia? Not every pairing dreamt up by some random kid is notable. --electAbuzzzz 00:27, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
@ CK: Having your own opinion on something is not the same thing as yelling in all caps at people. You should also take in consideration others' feelings. --ケンジガール 00:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I don't yell anymore. I'm worried that if I do, I will be infiblocked. Alpha CuboneKing 00:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Again with the "I know". And I can stand that. Deleting Clingy is /fine/, so was Forina. Deleting Origin, however, is a mistake: it's got grounds for means and context that simply isn't recorded in there yet, and if you knew 'shipping, you'd know that. What the hell, on the professionalism of that topic starter, BTW? Because you might treat shipping notability like any other, but I know you're against 'shipping entirely to begin with and wouldn't mind tossing the entire collection, if given the choice. So may I ask, are you the best choice to be leading this parade? In all sincere honesty? How unbias are you being? Not questioning your power, or your right to it (that's all fine; I don't argue that, nor do I challenge it), but as a person and your own feelings on the matter. And you, CK, don't need to be either a kiss-ass or a screamer; there's a grey area, I swear there is. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 00:47, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

(resetting indent)I was not chosen by anyone to lead anything. I'm just a user (who happens to be an admin, it's irrelevant) who thinks some of these articles are not notable, so I start discussions on their talk pages. If I get enough support and EB approval for a certain ship, I delete it. Yeah, I admit, if it was up to me, the shipping namespace would be down to 10 articles, tops, but it's not up to me. Nor is it up to you. We're a community - that means we make these decisions together. Now, if you really think Origin should stay, then explain why on its talk page, don't give me some cryptic sentence here about how it has "grounds for means and context". If you don't give actual reasons, don't complain later when the page gets deleted. If you do give reasons and we decide to keep it, well, good for you. --electAbuzzzz 00:55, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

But it's because you're an admin that people are predominantly going to agree with what you believe, like CK here, who's only trying to get on the admins' good side, as he admitted above. It's also a pseudo-domino effect: what one person thinks and then does, it's suddenly alright to have that opinion, even if they were completely indifferent before, and not necessarily because they believe it should be done, but it's also nice to know that, seeing as we're a community, that you wouldn't contact me that this was going down, and I have to find out after I come home, and feel because it is being done, it's futile to fight back against the inflow of opinion. Because, you know, you're an admin. No one's going to think you're doing this "as a user" and not as "an admin". PLs just sit pretty, after all. You'd think, as a community, you'd also get the opinion of the one whose overseeing the articles and is up to their eyeballs with the subject matter, instead of getting the opinions of users who aren't. And not just me, mind. It might be a process, but did you even ask which ones are definitely not notable? I'll tell you.
Castle, Energy, XDRival, Breast, Jovian, Machisaki, Team, Spyro, ShootsDown, and Pander, some of which you already have campaign for. The rest, you honestly shouldn't. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 01:17, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I agree. Alpha CuboneKing 01:27, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Buzz is offline for now, so ill step in and say something. he is right in that he doesnt do anything without EB consent first, even going as high as checking with evkl if no one is around. some of these articles arent just bordering on pointless/questionable notability, but they are completely empty of useful content. if someone creates a bad article, we delete it. ive had to do just that about 3 times this week. some of these ships have little to no information in them. its not a matter of how many people like them, theres no point in them existing if theres nothing to say. should someone tell you if theres a question about its notability? yes, but the ones that are simply vacant in content, well empty pages arent useful, and in turn are not notable. theres no real need to check with anyone because theres nothing at stake. if you really want to save all these articles you crave to need, then fill them with information. but even then, Shipping is fanon and on a wiki, based on facts, its hard to justify their place, however, thats a notability standard even above the EB, so the best we can do is not make it look like ass. -- MAGNEDETH 01:42, 3 October 2009
And so what about the ones that are somewhat vacant, even if they are notable (the ones I fear for the most)? ChikoShipping is sadly as empty as can be, but it's as notable as PokéShipping, because a big part of Chikorita's character was her infatuation with Ash (just as it's apart of Misty's characterization). The same can be said of Aipom and HatThiefShipping. And some 'ships are just starting out as of the DP saga even if they don't have enough content. What do you do for those? Are they not notable even when they have room to grow and possibly could? Delete them only to have to redo the article because something major happened? Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 01:51, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
honestly, yes. while i think a ship between a character and Pokemon is absurd in its own right (relationship =/= loyalty), the rule is, if you cant create a good full article right off the bat, then dont. as i said, theres no point in having "this is a ship between X and Y. they like each other." and thats it. it doesnt even explain why people follow the ship. it just tells people it exists. these shipping articles are more like definitions than articles. they could all be condensed onto one page without losing any spec of information, and without taking a massive amount of room either. -- MAGNEDETH 02:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to see you tell that to the supporters of the big 'ships. The 'ships themselves might not be fact, but the in-media hints they use are. The only thing that differs between mainspace and shipping articles is that interpretation is allowed on those facts. The "why suchandsuch is supported" is never important; that's opinion in and of itself and would never be allowed; the facts of action is what either speak for the 'ship or don't change anyone's mind. Its relevance to the circumstance is important, however, in the case of things like Contestshipping and Fireshipping, being character and episode subplots respectively. Accord, Aegis, and Repulse are directly connected to the advance of the 10th movie, Dedicate was some cute one-off crush for May to not reciprocate, and same for Kissshipping, and even that one isn't confirmed to be one-sided (meaning harmless flirtation over real first-sight feelings). Ability, Morpheus, Alto, and every other crush-on-Ash are related to the characters of the episode(s) in question, as is all the one-sided main-character 'ships (since it's the main characters that are involved, even if they aren't doing the involving). Canon 'ships should have their due, because they are fact, and all one-sided 'ships bask in the canonical status as being factual in some way, for someone (Brock's daily crushes not withstanding). Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 02:20, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
youre talking about things that i wasnt talking about at all, and you have therefor lost me. but if it came down to it, id have no problem telling supporters of a ship that their ship is crap, and/or the article for their ship is crap. -- MAGNEDETH 02:39, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

[Resetting indent]I think I should throw in my rationale. Luna, you have to divorce your feelings for shipping in general - which I profess to know next to nothing about - with Bulbapedia's overarching standards for quality and notability. We can't sacrifice our standards to keep a segment of the fan base happy. If people are that interested in Chikoshipping, they'll make an article for it. We aren't hostile to ships. We are hostile to articles that are not of even acceptable quality and clog up the site. This isn't an attack on you or the work you do, but you and I have talked numerous times and agreed that a handful of ships are outrageous on face, simply there because someone can contrive it. I think narrowing the number of articles will allow contributors to focus on the more viable ships, and as they grow, the smaller ships will pop up again, and then they will get filled in, and the section will expand out. It's worth noting that Bulbapedia itself only opened with 114 articles. There were, if memory serves, 386 pocket monsters at the time. You grow from a core outwards; right now the Shipping space is paralyzed by sprawl, with too few contributions and daunting tasks facing it.

I recommend a setup in which we condense all ships who have articles at "small stub" level into a handful of list articles. Viable stubs and full articles are kept. People work on the viable stubs and the big articles. If someone wants to expand a subsection in a list article, once it's meaty enough to be spun off into a viable stub, we do that. I think that'll benefit your overarching goals--an expanded, high-quality shipping space--and ours, a neat, clean, and easy-to-approach section of Bulbapedia. -- evkl (need to talk?) 16:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Deth, you try working under duress when you're sick; I realized what I said wasn't what you were getting at, but I was too tired to change it, or make an amendment. For that, I'm sorry.
Evan, I just don't want to lose what little information there is for the more prominent 'ships (by popular definition or not); you know that's my stance from the last time we talked. Whether it's shuffled into a make-shift list like the nevermet 'ships or just left alone, as long as it's somewhere to be seen and likely added to. If that's what what you mean by 'list articles' (the nevermet list), then I only ask that I have what was deleted from Greenshipping, so as to make a PiPiPi manga 'ship list (too few and they're all small). It's one of the few I didn't c/p before deletion. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 01:30, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
I agree with you completely. As we transition small stubs to lists, we'll preserve them in their entirety. This may present a bit of a formatting challenge but I'll get people to think up ways to make sure everything stays together. We won't reduce an article of two sentences to "___shipping; shipping between A and B" in a list. We'll keep the full two sentences, or however much there is. I think at this point the biggest issue is twofold; one, we need to determine what constitutes a viable stub, and two, we need to determine a way to categorize all of these new to-be-removed stubs into very intuitive lists. I'm looking forward to your ideas. -- evkl (need to talk?) 03:05, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
At your request, Luna, the content of the GreenShipping page before deletion, minus the templates and such, was:
GreenShipping, in the context of the manga Pokémon PiPiPi Adventure, refers to a romantic relationship between the brothers Pistachio and Peanut.
No evidence exists for such a pairing, as Pistachio and Peanut interact only once in the entire ten-volume series, when Peanut introduces Pistachio to Hazel. This lack of interaction, however, has lead some fans to speculate as to exactly why they don't interact.
Listing them by canon would probably be a good idea, although some ships are cross-canons. We could have a "list of ships in Pokémon Special", for example, where the big ones (Special, MangaPoké, Choosen, Frantic, Graceful, MangaQuest? I'm not sure) will be links to the main article, and the small ones will be instead of the current article. --electAbuzzzz 12:18, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
If they can make it more creative then what I got in the nevermet article, please, I implore it.
And that's what I was thinking, in the list idea. Graceful would have been linked from the "canon ship" article and the lesser ones like Balance made into tiny blurbs. If it fit the subject, a link would be appropriate. Though if you guys want to start on that, you'll have to do it. I'm, unfortunately, looking at a backlog of small projects for my classes and won't be too available to make any great progress in that department for the next foreseeable week and a half. =\ Price of graduating: gotta do it the best way possible. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 03:19, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Ach, damn, my manners. Thank you, buzz. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 03:20, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Dirty Ships

me and Trom were going over our list of articles needing improvement, and i came upon a handful of ships. one of which i outright deleted because it contained 4 warning tags, and less than a sentence of information (it was also obsolete due to evolution). i would like you to look at these ships and determine if they are worth keeping. if so, please clean them up, or maybe get someone else to.

also, Shipping:History of Pokémon shipping article is on the list and it is massive with multiple problems, seems like an important article to seemingly forget. anyway, thats all for now. -- MAGNEDETH 00:55, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Nix Smother, Jail, and Curtain. Blue does have multiple episode hints, but no one's been paying any attention to them. And no, the nature of 'shipping rarely stops the masses from supporting it (the majority of supporters [which yes, are a minority] don't support Sundae because it's pedophilia, or else Brandon/Ash would have been huge); but if you haven't noticed, some 'ship articles do have walls of texts, because that's the best way to get the relationship across. Hoenn, hang on to. I've a feeling I'm going to be combining articles once I'm privy to the time for it (List of player ships, which would be player/player and player/rival). Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 14:09, 30 October 2009 (UTC)


Hey, I made the page, so do you want to take it off the list? I didn't want to without permission.--Smartkidhen 20:59, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Lists of ships

I was thinking, maybe it will be simpler if we code a nice roundy template for each "box" you use in those lists....? --electAbuzzzz 13:54, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Roundy corners would be so nice. D: Have at? *couldn't figure out roundy corners to save her life* Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 14:53, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
{{Shipping}}. There. There's still a slight glitch (the romanized names are bolded for some reason I can't figure out), but it works. --electAbuzzzz 15:56, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
=O *pulls a shocked!Pearl Fey* That is so cool. And I assume you did figure out the bolding thing; their names are italicized from what I see. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 17:24, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Project Shipping

Hey im new so can i b part of Project Shipping? I kno lotsa ships and can find evidence for them. Sorry for seeming like a pathetic noob. As matter of fact i am. - unsigned comment from emovampire1 (talkcontribs)

That's fine. You don't actually have to ask permission, however. Just add your name to the bottom of the list and help where you can. And sign your name with the four tilde (~~~~), please. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 23:37, 31 March 2010 (UTC)



Allows the name of the page to show up in the category, in this case, Category:Shipping, without having to write out the whole page name. For example, instead of [[Category:Shipping|AdmirationShipping]], users can simply put [[Category:Shipping|{{PAGENAME}}]] on the AdmirationShipping page and have AdmirationShipping show up on the Category:Shipping list. It also works for any other category, such as Category:Anime ships, and can be used on every shipping page. I hope this helps and/or clears up the misunderstanding we had. Thanks,--Smartkidhen 19:45, 5 April 2010 (UTC)