User talk:Felthry

Welcome to Bulbapedia, Xolroc!

By creating your account you are now able to edit pages, join discussions, and expand the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia. Before you jump in, here are some ground rules: Be nice to everyone. It's in the code of conduct. Make good edits. Preview them before you save to make sure they're perfect the first time around. Use wikicode and link templates when adding content to a page. Use proper grammar and spelling, and read the manual of style. You can't create a userpage until you've added to the encyclopedia. It's a privilege. See the userspace policy. Use talk pages to resolve editing disputes. Don't "edit war," or constantly re-edit/undo the same thing on a page. If you have a question about something, be proactive. Take a look at our FAQ. If you're still stuck, ask for help. The staff won't bite. Sign all talk page posts with four tildes (~~~~). This will turn into your name and the time you wrote the comment. For more handy links, see the welcome portal.

Thank you, and have a good time editing here!   --ZestyCactus 04:08, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Archives edits

There are some TCG cards that need their summaries and categories updated. Simple stuff, keep Evolutions open as you go through each card image on the Archives (you can follow the links through the card's page or search through the Archives, every card follows the same format of "File:[Name of card]Evolutions[card #].jpg"). The summary should be changed to "[Name of card] (Evolutions [card #])" if it isn't already and "[[Category:Evolutions|(Card #)]]" should be directly above the category for Expansion Pack 20th Anniversary or XY-P Promotional cards. There needs to be three digits in the category, so put preceding zeroes if necessary. And if there's a line that says "From pokeca.net" in the summary, remove it. - unsigned comment from Glik (talk • contribs) 22:19, 6 January 2017

Are you sure about it being all of them? The Venasaur EX card is titled VenasaurEXXY1.jpg and has like five alternate images as well. I'll just skip that one for now. Xolroc (talk) 22:56, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

That's its first print, there's another one for the Evolutions print lower down the page in the gallery. glik^glak 23:03, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Forest's Curse

In addition to the rationale I gave in my edit summary, I also did a little digging and found this old edit which points out Trick-or-Treat can also result in an 8x weakness in Inverse Battles. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 17:26, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

I forgot inverse battles exist. But yeah, good point. Xolroc (talk) 17:41, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

User talk pages

Hi. I just wanted to say, you may want to take a moment or two to acquaint yourself with our warning templates. If you want to inform a user about something covered by one of those templates, we ask that you use those templates (with "subst:"). They're generally intended to be neutral and informative (as well as uniform by their nature), as opposed to a hodge-podge of whatever each person can come up with when talking to another user. Thanks. Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:53, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

I wasn't aware that those exist! I shall try to use those in the future, apologies. Xolroc (talk) 18:55, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

For Your Freedom

Pumpkinking has been undoing my edits, so I went to him to talk to him, but you decided to answer mostly for him. I don't know how related you 2 are or if you are good friends, but just because he isn't available at the moment of things doesn't give you the right to act like his... well, I'm not gonna say it, as it will go against the Code of Conduct; let's just say Slave, or Servant. Please get word to Pumpkinking so he won't remove so much of my edits. I'm over why he removed my edits for Shuckle and Kommo-o, but my edits to the Alolan starters and Registeel were still removed for no general reason, and I would like to know why. - unsigned comment from Bulldogs1234869 (talk • contribs) 16:29, 16 January 2017

Please use the {{unsigned}} template if you forget to sign a post.

Pumpkinking has been undoing your edits because they are not in the correct place. You edited a few species pages to include information that belongs elsewhere (the fact that one Pokémon has the same BST as another is not notable). The Registeel edit being reverted is because, quite simply, it's not notable. It doesn't matter if it's technically the wrong arm for it, it's still considered offensive and that is why they changed it. Anything more than that and you're discussing history in a probably-excessively-pedantic manner, and this wiki is for information about Pokémon, not history.

Also, for my freedom? Really? I have freedom, that's why I made the edits I did instead of waiting for someone to tell me to. Xolroc (talk) 17:12, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Alright, fair enough about the Registeel sprite, but many people have argued about who is the best Alolan starter, and I thought that maybe a little trivia like that could help settle it out a bit. The starters of any region have never shared the same BST, so I rather find it interesting that it stands out over other starters. Finally, sorry about the whole thing about your freedom; I was just feeling really triggered. Bulldogs1234869 (talk) 18:33, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

It's alright. Please, try to understand that everyone here is doing what they can to improve the wiki. And I know that you were too; it's just that other users (including an administrator, who has final say in matters like this) have decided that those particular edits are not constructive. It's not any personal vendetta against you or anything, even if it may feel like it is at times. If an edit you make gets reverted, and you feel it shouldn't have been, I recommend you go to the article's talk page and ask about it. Other users can provide input, discuss whether to include it, and who knows, maybe you'll manage to convince people--or maybe they'll convince you that the edit should have been reverted. That's the nature of collaboration: trying to make something the best it can be, by getting input from everyone involved.

As for the starters' BSTs, I think that the fact that they have the same BST wouldn't do much to quell arguments over superiority. You could argue that Primarina's high special stats make them the best, or that Decidueye's speed gives it an advantage, or that one moveset is superior to another... People will find things to argue about, no matter what! Even without that, the fact that all three have the same BST is not unique, as Serperior, Emboar, and Samurott all have a BST of 528. Uniqueness is a notability criterion on this wiki; trivia should be "the only X" or "the most X" or similar, without resorting to overly specific trivia like "the only X that is Y and Z, before generation Q".

In conclusion, just keep trying to make the wiki better, and try to understand that everyone else is trying to make it better as well. One of the hardest and most important lessons to learn in life is that you are not infallible, that you can be wrong, and that it's perfectly fine to be wrong. Xolroc (talk) 18:58, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Burmy's Trash Cloak

Wording that sentance that way implies that Burmy should't retain its Trash Cloak when evolving but does anyway, which is not the case. That's why I removed it. Also just stating that it retains its present cloak should suffice. --Raltseye prata med mej 01:21, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

I think it's important to mention the Trash Cloak in particular there, because otherwise, you're just stating a seemingly-unrelated fact about the Pokémon. Wormadam in general does not belong on the page, but Trash Cloak Wormadam does. --Felthry (talk) 01:29, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

I guess the current wording makes sense. --Raltseye prata med mej 09:20, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Sorry

I saw you corrected me. Sorry. Some how I misread "bind" as "bide". Upon seeing yout summary, I read it more carefully and found my mistake. Thanks for your help. RubyLeafGreenCrystal (talk) 22:49, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Hey, that's fine. Everyone makes mistakes; don't worry about it! --Felthry (talk) 03:09, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Help

I'd need someone to update/upload some TeX formulas on my behalf over the course of the weekend or so, would you be able to do that? Follow-up question, would you maybe help me out beyond that (provide opinion etc.)? Nescientist (talk) 16:29, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Sure, I can help with that. Just give me more details on what you need and I'll see what I can do! --Felthry (talk) 23:03, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Ok, great. It's about User:Nescientist/Damage, and about its integration into Damage (replacing the "Damage modification" and "Damage formula" sections, maybe except for the part on "Type effectiveness", which I might want to relocate later, in a second step).

So, the opinion part: Would you be able to read it, provide second opinion, and, if necessary, correct errors/ambiguities, tell me where it's not as easy to understand, where it needs rewording, or reword yourself? (You have my permission to edit it, if necessary, or you can relay whatever you find to this discussion/to me. I believe it's hard for me to assess such things objectively/reliably, because I'm an expert on the topic and a decent mathematician and because I wrote it in the first place, but the article is intended for general public/readership.) FYI, I intend to at least find some decent way to somehow "fix" the alignment of the bullet points that include tables, and to move the 0 HP thing somewhere out of trivia (if you find a nice way to do that, of course, be my guest.)

And the Tex-converter-abuse part: the "correct" formulas need to replace the ones currently on the page, of course. Anyway, we need to coordinate things smoothly, such that at the time we change the prose, we do also change the formulas (and the other way around). Nescientist (talk) 10:44, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

After reading the article, I feel like the most obvious thing that needs fixing is the big table of "other" values. I think that should be expanded out into multiple tables of "moves affecting damage" "statuses affecting damage" and "abilities affecting damage". Also, clarify what happens when multiple "other" factors apply--it's not explained in the text, even if it's pretty obvious how that would work.

You seem to also have made a typo in the section on "critical"; you say it's 2 for a critical hit in generations II-V, but I am reasonably sure that should be I-V.

I'm too mentally drained right now to do any TeX stuff (school and life and anxiety attacks, wheeeee), and I still don't really understand what you want me to do with TeX anyway. --Felthry (talk) 22:52, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Alright, thanks.

• Sure, the huge table is a problem, that's why I made it hidden/collapsable by default—that's where I left off, at least (I'll ask Tiddlywinks why he changed it). Anyway, I'll think about separating/splitting it somehow in the next few hours.
• I'd actually actively decided not to say something on multiple other factors, because while it is the "obvious" case most of the time, it is some binary-related random chaotic stuff sometimes; I'll see if I can include something (accurate), though.
• Critical only "exists" from Gen II onward (crits just double Level in Gen I); I'll see if I can make that clearer somehow.
• I think there isn't some mentally exhausting TeX stuff I'd like you to do: basically, I want you to copy the TeX code that's already on my page, turn them into images, upload them (over existing images, the ones right next to the TeX code on my page). The only potential issue is that I should be online when you do that (coz new images with deprecated prose is bad).

I plan to be here around 23:00 UTC later today, so maybe we can sort everything out then, but we're not in a hurry anyway. Nescientist (talk) 10:22, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Well, that much I can definitely do, if you've already got the TeX finished.

It seems un-encyclopedic to me, to not mention what would happen with multiple other factors active; just because it's sometimes complicated doesn't mean the details shouldn't be explained. I'd think the best thing to do might be to say something along the lines of "In most cases, these factors stack multiplicatively, but here are some exceptions:". --Felthry (talk) 13:34, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

(resetting indent)I've rendered all of the TeX on that page, so just let me know when you want it. There were a couple instances of TeX split into two images that I was able to render as one image keeping it all on one line, so I went ahead and did that; if you prefer otherwise, just ask. --Felthry (talk) 21:46, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I see the point, but I've abstracted from the machine-level (binary) math so much that I really don't want to fall back to it just to explain how appending several "others" works. (FYI, the complex stuff is that those modifiers aren't really just decimals, but 16-bit integers that are then divided by 0x1000, and they are appended as M'' = ((M * M') + 0x800) >> 12). I hope you like how it's presented now.

For the images, if you didn't change anything, I guess that's great then.

I've also split the other table, which should make anything easier to find at least. In case you have some other idea (here or anywhere else), please speak up. Otherwise, I believe we're good to go? Nescientist (talk) 22:49, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

The table looks better, yeah. Regarding that calculation you mentioned.... That's just fixed-point arithmetic isn't it? That should be exactly the product of the two numbers, up to the precision of the representation in memory. So it should be safe to say that they stack multiplicatively, since the error is simply the same rounding error that exists in most things that go on in video games.

And yes, I didn't change anything of the images. Would you like them uploaded now? --Felthry (talk) 23:28, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

"Just" isn't really the right word for me, but yes, you could be right that it's always a (proper) multiplication, but I cannot rule out exceptions. I think the current wording is fine either way.

Yes, please. (I think I confused some file names, though, but I guess you've figured it out already.) If you could include the images at my userpage once you've uploaded them, that'd be great. Then, I can move/merge it. Nescientist (talk) 23:49, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Uploading is done. File:DamageCalcExample2.png and File:DamageCalcExample4.png are now obsolete; I made both of the examples into one image. I'm not sure how to add images to a page, so I think I'll leave that job for you so you can get it how you like it. --Felthry (talk) 03:42, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

I've tagged the obsolete ones for deletion. And if you do find a way to upload the images in a reasonable size (so we don't have to scale them manually on the actual page), I think that would be preferred.

Anyway... thanks so much! Nescientist (talk) 04:52, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Oh, if you can tell me the size you want I can get them re-rendered in a better size! Probably tomorrow though, because it's long past time for me to be asleep. --Felthry (talk) 05:14, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

I had temporarily set them to a height of 18px and 54px, respectively, I think somewhere along that lines would be good. Anyway, when you're back online, I suggest you pay attention to my talk page first before you do anything (where hopefully, my current confusion will wear off). Nescientist (talk) 05:45, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

I've corrected the ridiculous sizes to something reasonable; though they may still need a little rescaling on the page, at least they don't exceed the Archives' maximum resolution anymore. Also, I put your name in the public domain release template (see this edit) as you were the one to write the LaTeX, and all I did was render it; if you think I shouldn't have you can change it to mine if you want. - unsigned comment from Felthry (talk • contribs) 17:57, 27 February 2017‎

Thanks. For the copyright, I've changed them because I believe I technically cannot be the one releasing them to public domain; you're the genius creator of that amazing piece of art, I'm just your muse. Nescientist (talk) 16:31, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

(resetting indent)I don't know about technicalities, I just know that all I did was stick your code into latex2png.com and mess with the settings a bit! It's not really worth arguing over; regardless of which of us is the technical rights holder, both of us would release it to the public domain anyway. --Felthry (talk) 20:52, 28 February 2017 (UTC)