13,668
edits
Talk:Fairy (type): Difference between revisions
→Retcon?
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
We don't know if they were ''actually'' retconned yet, do we? There could be some lame in-game excuse....--[[User:Phoenixon|Phoenixon]] ([[User talk:Phoenixon|talk]]) 00:41, 13 June 2013 (UTC) | We don't know if they were ''actually'' retconned yet, do we? There could be some lame in-game excuse....--[[User:Phoenixon|Phoenixon]] ([[User talk:Phoenixon|talk]]) 00:41, 13 June 2013 (UTC) | ||
:They changed something from the past. With or without an excuse, it's still a retcon. Even if they say something like, "These were discovered to be Fairy-types all along" or "These Pokemon recently gained Fairy-type attributes" it's still a retcon. [[User:Crystal Talian|<span style="color:#9F00C5">Crystal</span>]] [[User talk:Crystal Talian|<span style="color:#FF00FF">Talian</span>]] 00:50, 13 June 2013 (UTC) | :They changed something from the past. With or without an excuse, it's still a retcon. Even if they say something like, "These were discovered to be Fairy-types all along" or "These Pokemon recently gained Fairy-type attributes" it's still a retcon. [[User:Crystal Talian|<span style="color:#9F00C5">Crystal</span>]] [[User talk:Crystal Talian|<span style="color:#FF00FF">Talian</span>]] 00:50, 13 June 2013 (UTC) | ||
::True, but still, the word ''retcon'' is a little bit slangy/casual/Newspeaky, no? Wouldn't the phrase "such-and-such Pokemon were ''changed'' to be Fairy-type" suffice? [[User:Pumpkinking0192|Pumpkinking0192]] ([[User talk:Pumpkinking0192|talk]]) 00:54, 13 June 2013 (UTC) | |||