984
edits
Talk:Emolga (Pokémon): Difference between revisions
→Emonga
(→Emonga) |
Taromon777 (talk | contribs) (→Emonga) |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
I think it should be worth mentioning but other people might take it off. I once put in Pikachu's trivia that every generation had electric rodents similar to it. Generation 1 had Pikachu itself and Raichu, Generation 2 had Pikachu's pre-evo Pichu, Generation 3 had Plusle and Minun, and Generation 4 had Pachirisu. I also put that none of the lookalikes to Pikachu's family evolve. (This was before Emonga of Generation 5 was revealed, but then again, Emonga might not evolve either.) Someone took it down saying it wasn't worth mentioning, but I think it is even more worth mentioning Pikachu having lookalikes now that Emonga is revealed. I mean, all 5 generations so far have Pokemon looking like Pikachu, wether from Pikachu's family or not. I think yours would be worth mentioning as Emonga is the first of similar electric rodents with secondary type, but beware someone might take it down and say it isn't worth mentionng. --[[User:Brats817|Brats817]] 23:43, 8 August 2010 (UTC) | I think it should be worth mentioning but other people might take it off. I once put in Pikachu's trivia that every generation had electric rodents similar to it. Generation 1 had Pikachu itself and Raichu, Generation 2 had Pikachu's pre-evo Pichu, Generation 3 had Plusle and Minun, and Generation 4 had Pachirisu. I also put that none of the lookalikes to Pikachu's family evolve. (This was before Emonga of Generation 5 was revealed, but then again, Emonga might not evolve either.) Someone took it down saying it wasn't worth mentioning, but I think it is even more worth mentioning Pikachu having lookalikes now that Emonga is revealed. I mean, all 5 generations so far have Pokemon looking like Pikachu, wether from Pikachu's family or not. I think yours would be worth mentioning as Emonga is the first of similar electric rodents with secondary type, but beware someone might take it down and say it isn't worth mentionng. --[[User:Brats817|Brats817]] 23:43, 8 August 2010 (UTC) | ||
:I really don't see the logic in people saying a piece of trivia is "pointless" and not worth mentioning. The thing is, ''all'' trivia is pointless, that's why it's called trivia! If it's an ''interesting'' fact, and something that not everyone would have noticed before, then it's worth adding to an article. And the electric mouse trivia is interesting and certainly something I hadn't noticed before. [[User:Taromon777|<span style="color:turquoise; font-family:Arial">'''T a r o m o n'''</span>]] 12:48, 11 August 2010 (UTC) | |||