174
edits
Talk:List of Pokémon by availability: Difference between revisions
Talk:List of Pokémon by availability (view source)
Revision as of 06:42, 9 January 2022
, 9 January 2022→It's time to split this up
| Line 322: | Line 322: | ||
I know this was previously discussed and we were considering splitting it up horizontally (meaning split by generations of Pokémon instead of games), but this wouldn’t solve the readability issues and probably be even more of a pain to someone wanting to see everything available in the game they’re playing. Even though it’s not the largest article, it still seems to take as long to load, if not longer than the largest articles on the site possibly due to all the formatting. In general, I feel like this overhaul would solve more problems than it could cause. Anyone agree? [[User:EV Love|EV Love]] ([[User talk:EV Love|talk]]) 17:37, 8 January 2022 (UTC) | I know this was previously discussed and we were considering splitting it up horizontally (meaning split by generations of Pokémon instead of games), but this wouldn’t solve the readability issues and probably be even more of a pain to someone wanting to see everything available in the game they’re playing. Even though it’s not the largest article, it still seems to take as long to load, if not longer than the largest articles on the site possibly due to all the formatting. In general, I feel like this overhaul would solve more problems than it could cause. Anyone agree? [[User:EV Love|EV Love]] ([[User talk:EV Love|talk]]) 17:37, 8 January 2022 (UTC) | ||
:I'm torn on this. On one hand, I quite often look at a Pokémon's availablity across the entire series, as I like to find the earliest game where a Pokémon can be found in "mint condition" so to speak (as in, not having to evolve in order to obtain it). On the other, I recognise that that's probably a very niche use-case, and that the page being very difficult to read on mobile is probably a more pressing issue. I have also found that it can be extremely difficult to edit as it's very hard to tell which column you're actually editing. But back on the other hand again, having all of the information available in 1 single place is far more convinient than having it split across 8+ different articles. I will say that if the page is to be split, I definitely agree that it should be split vertically. Splitting it horizontally would've made it a massive pain to find which Pokémon are available in each game, as you mention, but splitting it vertically at least allows people to see all of the Pokémon available in a certain game on 1 page. [[User:Gameskiller01|Gameskiller01]] ([[User talk:Gameskiller01|talk]]) 17:59, 8 January 2022 (UTC) | :I'm torn on this. On one hand, I quite often look at a Pokémon's availablity across the entire series, as I like to find the earliest game where a Pokémon can be found in "mint condition" so to speak (as in, not having to evolve in order to obtain it). On the other, I recognise that that's probably a very niche use-case, and that the page being very difficult to read on mobile is probably a more pressing issue. I have also found that it can be extremely difficult to edit as it's very hard to tell which column you're actually editing. But back on the other hand again, having all of the information available in 1 single place is far more convinient than having it split across 8+ different articles. I will say that if the page is to be split, I definitely agree that it should be split vertically. Splitting it horizontally would've made it a massive pain to find which Pokémon are available in each game, as you mention, but splitting it vertically at least allows people to see all of the Pokémon available in a certain game on 1 page. [[User:Gameskiller01|Gameskiller01]] ([[User talk:Gameskiller01|talk]]) 17:59, 8 January 2022 (UTC) | ||
::That’s a good point as I myself am very into checking data like that (especially for legality purposes), but I feel like the game locations section on each individual Pokémon’s article usually suffices for situations when looking across all generations is necessary. I've also noticed that a number of other lists on the site are split by generation (such as the Pokémon index numbers, and those could easily fit into one page of tables without being overwhelmingly large). I know the article doesn’t seem too intimidating to those of us who are familiar with it or have worked on it, but I can’t say the same for casual players. I remember when my friend was playing through Let’s Go rand asked me if there’s a list somewhere of Pokémon who can only be obtained through evolving. I sent him this page and he responded “I’m not even going to try reading that”. I don’t mean to criticize anyone who has worked on this article as the data integrity is very good and accurate, it just needs to be presented better. I initially thought of grouping together gens that had a significant level of interfacing into one page (such as gens 1 & 2 or 3 & 4) but this gets subjective and the lines are blurry. So for consistency with other lists on the site I think it’d be best to just have 8 pages. I would definitely be willing to help out on the editing necessary as well. [[User:EV Love|EV Love]] ([[User talk:EV Love|talk]]) 06:42, 9 January 2022 (UTC) | |||