Editing of Bulbapedia is currently restricted. Please see this message for more details.
Pokémon Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire are coming this November!

Check BNN and Bulbanews for up-to-date Pokémon news and discuss it on the forums or in our IRC channel.

Bulbapedia talk:Editor's Hub

Return to "Editor's Hub" page.

Protection

Shouldn't this be protected to prevent vandelism much like the main page is? Truthseeker4449 13:04, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

It is protected.--Supermon 20:24, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
I know it is now, it wasn't when I post the message above. And I stayed up to date on status of the page and thus noticed when it was semi-protected then fully protected. Truthseeker4449 20:30, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Tentacool

I need help changing one of the type effects of Tentacool over to somewhere else. I am a new member so I don't know how to do all these changes so if someone can help that will be nice.

what needs to be changed is electric needs to be taken out of tentacool's weakness column and put in the regular effect column. if someone can tell me how to do that then that will be nice thanks again. (Roadmaster84 23:29, 21 December 2011 (UTC))

Tentacool is a Water/Poison Pokémon. Water is weak to Electric and Poison is neutral to Electric. Therefore Tentacool is weak to Electric moves and the existing chart is correct. Werdnae (talk) 23:38, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Page Like "Incomplete" for "Bad Picture"?

Is there a section for Bad Picture just like there is for Incomplete? I can't find it anywhere! --Wildgoosespeeder 00:19, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

You mean like this? Jo the Marten ಠ_ಠ 00:23, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Cool! Where did you find that link? If it is really hidden and out of the way, I think it should be in the box with the Machop. --Wildgoosespeeder 00:39, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
I don't know what machop you're talking about, but it's in the categories on any page that has that template. In particular, I found it here. Jo the Marten ಠ_ಠ 00:56, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
The Machop on the Editor's Hub page! There are three links to get you started improving articles. --Wildgoosespeeder 01:06, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Oh, haha, I see. I rarely look at the Editor Hub. Alright, I added it. Jo the Marten ಠ_ಠ 01:11, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Recycle restoring Air Balloon

The page Recycle doesn't mention anything about being able/unable to restore a popped Air Balloon. Shouldn't that be changed? PC-Reviver 15:59, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

No, because a popped Air Balloon is an item that's been consumed, and thus falls under the category of consumed items. - signed comment from q~Bisumito is Snazzy~p (talkcontribs) 20:31, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

how do i get permission to make pages

hi im new and wondering how to make pages Xspeedx 18:05, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

You need to make a (top secret) number of edits to the mainspace (i.e. articles) and have had your account for a short (also top secret) length of time. This is done so that you get a chance +to learn our rules and styles before trying to build a page on your own. Werdnae (talk) 03:54, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

I need advice

Hi, I saw the Anville town Article and saw the section at the top said you can get to anvillle town using the Anville town line in the battle subway. I was thinking that changing it to the Brown line because it's colour is brown? I'm not sure if i should but please tell me if i'm right! SkyAltaria1 14:16, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps it would be more precise to change it the brown line instead of just saying "Anville line". I don't think there's any harm in changing it. --Pokemaster97 15:38, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok Thanks :) SkyAltaria1 06:49, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey, I need advice too. I know of a glitch that is fairly well-known, yet this wiki doesn't have a page for it. I notice that most glitches have their own pages as well as appearing on the List of Glitches section of the Glitch page. However, I don't have permission to make pages yet. Should I just add this glitch to the List of Glitches and hope someone else makes a page for it, or should I request that a page for it be made, or what? HappyGasGames (talk) 17:06, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

If you have a question on a topic that's glitch related, you should talk to SnorlaxMonster. He's the leader of Project:Glichdex and would probably have the answers you're looking for. --Pokemaster97 17:10, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Romanization

I'm not entirely fond of how Bulbapedia handles their Japanese names for things, primarily how we use the trademarked name and completely ignore the rōmaji. Yes, I think it's important to have the trademarked Japanese names, but I think it's also equally important to have the bare rōmaji, too. I think it would be effective to use the {{tt}} template around the Japanese text itself to show the rōmaji alongside the trademarked name. For example, it would look like this: ラルトス Ralts or カメックス Kamex.
Would anyone object to me going around and doing this? Mitsuru 23:13, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

List of Japanese Pokémon names. This does that. I personally do not like the idea for esthetic reasons. --ケンジガール 23:19, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
Alright, but it applies to more than just Pokémon themselves. Many pages unrelated to Pokémon suffer the same (Snag Machine, N, etc.). And I disagree; I don't think it's too much of an eyesore, and it's hardly invasive. Mitsuru 03:06, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

BW2 Soundtrack

Do we need a page for the BW2 soundtrack "Pokémon Black 2 & White 2 Super Music Complete"? I have the CD here and I figured I might as well contribute. Me, Hurray! (talk) 20:00, 3 August 2012 (UTC) Nobody? No. Okay, you can remove it if you don't like it. It was fun to do anyway. Me, Hurray! (talk) 00:02, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Bulbawiki Festive Frontier?

"As outlined on Bulbagarden forums, Bulbapedia is done hosting its second annual Christmas Improvement Drive. The Festive Frontier challenge is now over."

Wasn't the Festive Frontier challenge from last year or was it a few months ago? (Just curious since it is currently up on the page.) --Super goku (talk) 02:34, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Update?

Staff of PokéPark 2 is already made. Don't you think we should take it off the Needed articles section? ☆ヨッシ の世界☆ 00:17, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Edits

How many Edits do I need to do/have to add New Articles? Lskitto (talk) 04:52, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

It's an secret amount of edits and a secret amount of time that is only known to staff. Keep editing, and you'll eventually be able to start articles. --It's Funktastic~!話してください 04:54, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Screenshots

How do you get a screenshot of an entire city/route/area in the video games? 152105 (talk) 20:14, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Linking Pages

When I put in a link to another page it always comes out as Template:whatever-the-article-name-is and I have no idea why.Uglycats101 (talk) 13:26, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

It would be because you are using {{ and }} to link instead of [[ and ]] one links to templates the other links to pages. --Spriteit (talk) 13:41, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

oh thanks so much, it works!!! but how do I get those brackets you used they're not on my keyboard or in the character palette at the bottom of the screen I'm currently using copy and paste to get them in. Uglycats101 (talk) 13:30, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

What keyboard layout do you have? It would be incredibly unusual for any keyboard to not have those brackets. On a standard QWERTY keyboard, they're immediately to the right of the P key, such that typing this whole row yields QWERTYUIOP[]\. --SnorlaxMonster 17:14, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

oh my gosh, im so dumb, thanks so much for that Uglycats101 (talk) 15:19, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Kato and Kiko

I need help adding a trivia sentence for Kato and Kiko. I don't want to try and add a new trivia sentence and end up messing up the whole thing for their trivia. Either someone help me or ill just tell you what I want to post so you can do it yourselves:

For Kato's trivia: Kato's hairstyle resembles the horn of his pokemon, Heracross.

For Kiko's trivia: Kiko's hairstyle resembles the wings of her pokemon, Beautifly.

If you can tell me how to post it that would be excellent or if you want to post it yourself that would be just as excellent. If you end up doing it yourself don't add both on one just kato's on Kato's page and Kiko's on Kiko@'s page. I don't mind either way as long as it manages to get posted and i have some credit for it. Thanks. (RioluMaster1123 (talk) 01:01, 8 June 2013 (UTC))

Message of the Day

There are no more featured MotDs. That part of this page should be replaced. Spyspotter says… Edit the mainspace, kids! 03:08, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't see any "Message of the Day" on this page. Unless you mean the Message from the Editor, which should stay and will be updated when there is new information to put there. --SnorlaxMonster 05:28, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
I mean the featured content. - unsigned comment from Spyspotter (talkcontribs) 01:00, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Protection of Pokemon X/Y related articles

I've been noticing that the admins on this site have been protecting almost all Pokemon X/Y related articles and not allowing normal users due to "Speculation Crackdown" till after October 12. It's kind of harsh because not all normal users registered users on this site are speculators. Some really want to help this site gather information from official sources as the game's release draws closer. Blueknightex (talk) 09:41, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

While not all registered users will add speculation, it only takes a handful of users to wreak massive havoc across a wide spread of pages. A lot of XY articles were locked as a reaction to speculation, not as a proactive measure. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 17:48, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Speculation would not be good for bulbapedia's reputation, and I'm sure no-one wants that! Like Blueknightex said, it only takes a handful of people to wreak havoc with speculations and rumours. --KyuremDialga101 (talk) 01:11, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Article on Ash's Charizard does not need editing

I noticed that the article Charizard was in need of an English voice actor. However, after some heavy research, I found out that the voice actor is the same as the Japanese one. What do I do now? Please help, I just joined! --KyuremDialga101 (talk) 01:08, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

It could refer to Charmander and Charmeleon. They showed up in flashbacks during BW and, while I didn't watch the episode myself, it could be they spoke during the flashbacks, and had different voice actors. Jo the Marten ಠ_ಠ 01:11, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi. The voice actor data for Charmander and Charmeleon was present, so it was not referring to them. Currently, the page is showing that for Charizard, the Japanese voice actor did both the Japanese AND the English roles. However, Bulbapedia has named the data as incomplete. Is there anyone I could take my concerns to? Thanks. --KyuremDialga101 (talk) 01:13, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Charmander and Charmeleon's voice actors on the article are the 4kids actors. During the Advanced Generation the dub was passed on to DuArt. For example, look at Ash's Bulbasaur. See how it says Tara Jayne for EP010-AG133 then Michele Knotz as current? That's because of the voice actor swap. Since Charmander and Charmeleon appeared in the Best Wishes series, they would have been given new voice actors. Those are the ones that are missing. If you want, you can leave a message on Kenji-girl's talk page. She's been busy lately so it might take her a while to respond. Jo the Marten ಠ_ಠ 01:26, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Regarding Volcanion, Hoopa and Diancie

Should we create pages for them yet? We know they are real, and this sort of thing has been done with other event pokemon like Arceus and Genesect. I have pictures which have been confirmed real that we could put in the articles too.--BigBadBatter (talk) 01:50, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

We do not know they are real. All we know is that other fansites have circulated rumors about them. We do not take info from other fansites. We are an encyclopedia, not a rumor mill. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 02:16, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
I think we know that they're names of potential Pokémon, due to GTS stuff, but that doesn't seem like enough for a page. --Wynd Fox 02:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
You can find them in game, GBA Temps has a wild modifier code for them. And the fact that there is already in-game proof (the GTS tests) kind of confirms it's all real. Remember that stuff had been added about previous event 'mons without knowing much about them too.--BigBadBatter (talk) 05:03, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
For those of us who don't know, can you explain what GBA Temps is? And how wild modifier codes work? --Wynd Fox 05:27, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
GBA Temps is a website that I imagine distributes cheat codes. Wild modifiers work by simply changeing the pokemon that normally appear in an area to the one specified in the cheat code, as it temporarily alters the game's code. Say, if you put an identifier of 001 in there you would find bulbasaur for example. EDIT: Wait, wrong place, it ws a different guy who made the modifier, GBA Temps made a .pkx editor that could also be used to get the pokemon in game, if anyone wants to test and see, I have a link [1]/--BigBadBatter (talk) 05:40, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Serebii has just confirmed the existence of Diancie, Hoopa, Volcanion, Mega Latios and Mega Latias as possible event Pokémon with pictures associated. --Wolfy Harfleur 76700 (talk) 10:35, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Joe literally wrote in his news story on serebii "Do note, these are still unconfirmed." MaverickNate 14:41, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

(resetting indent) It seems people have forgotten that this site is, above all else, an encyclopedia. I've seen some wikis have speculative articles and then have some tag at the top of the page saying "This is unconfirmed, yada yada yada." That's extremely unprofessional, and it makes way for a truck load of spam articles under the guise of being "unconfirmed". A good wiki, Bulbapedia included, uses the agenda of official confirmation being absolutely crucial. As much as it may seem, at the current moment, that these three Pokémon and the Mega-Eons are as real as real can get, leaked information is the exact opposite of confirmed information. Even Serebii's no fool. He's not going around asserting that everything he finds is fact. As Nate even said, the words "Do note, these are still unconfirmed" are used on his site. Besides, it's god-honestly better to not have the information until it's confirmed than to have guesswork that turns out to be wrong. Schiffy (Speak to me|What I've done) 15:29, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

correct me if I am wrong but didn't bulbapedia treat meloetta, keldeo and genesect as real pokemon before they were officialy confirmed? It doesn't seem any different here. 0danmaster0 (talk) 15:46, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
The problem is that we could still access the game data to be able to confirm it. We cannot access the game data this time around, which is why we still do not have a lot of images of the Generation VI stuff. Unless we can find data on the PGL to confirm this, we have to treat it like false info until we have proof it is true. --Super goku (talk) 17:15, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
In which you can use the hacks to get the pokemon to put into the PGL to prove they're real.--BigBadBatter (talk) 21:28, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
You cannot put Pokémon into the PGL, that was only Dream World, which only works for Generation V games. Not to mention that the Pokémon shown could be dummied out Pokémon left on the cart. We will need to wait for proof, whether it is from files on the PGL or some info from Nintendo. --Super goku (talk) 21:44, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
How would one get this info from the PGL? Like people got all the DW art and stuff didn't they? And also I'm quite sure they wouldn't leave dummy 'mons in the game, they would have been replaced with Bad Eggs.--BigBadBatter (talk) 21:48, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Files. Every website that uses pictures needs to reference the picture in the website. Thus, most pictures are hosted in the same server as the website itself. Basically, if the images are added to the server, we just need to peek into the server's files and see what is there, which is how we got the other files. As for the other part, why are there two Vivillon patterns in the game that no one has obtained? We don't know what GF has done or will do with them. They could be available or they could be dummied out, though they still seem to exist for the moment as dummied out data. --Super goku (talk) 23:44, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Hmmm, perhaps they don't plan on adding the picture files until they're officially revealed. After all, I don't think they added the picture files into the PGL for Keldeo, Meloetta and Genesect until they were revealed, did they?--BigBadBatter (talk) 00:49, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

(resetting indent) Back on the "dummied out content" thing, yes, there's plenty of dummied out content left in the game's code among all of the older games. Bulbapedia has pages specifically on said content. I can't say I'd be too surprised to find out that some species ended up in this genre. Schiffy (Speak to me|What I've done) 02:31, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

On the topic of PGL files, there are two placeholder Vivillon patterns (which are the same as the default pattern), indicating that there are likely to be 2 more Vivillon patterns (matching the leak). The Mythical Pokémon do not appear on the PGL currently. Mega Evolutions all have placeholder artworks (it's just a copy of the Pokémon's standard artwork), and currently there is no placeholder for Mega Latios or Latias. Chances are things that aren't currently there will be added at a later time. --SnorlaxMonster 12:10, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

While the chance is there that they could be fake (this page even says so), the fact that this person was able to cause the three legendaries to appear in one of the early Routes pretty much confirms they are real. If those are Photoshopped images, they're pretty good. Additionally, seeing them on the GTS and not filtered out as gibberish also confirms that they are real. The person writing the linked blog, as well, noted that he tried to encounter Pokémon #722 (meaning these came from 719-721) and the result was a Bad Egg, meaning there is nothing programmed after 721 and that is the end of the current Pokédex.

We ought to acknowledge this information. People have tested and confirmed that the data is there. Serebii even briefly had pages for the trio (since taken down, someone put up a screenshot of the three screengrabs as an image). Nintendo just hasn't released the info because they want to leave something for future announcements and events. Since they're already in the game, other than patching to get rid of them, Nintendo can't do much now to change it (and then what will they use for later games, and who says we have to use the patch? I mean, they can't get rid of this data in the games now!). Therefore, they exist, they just haven't been announced. Pages ought to be created even if they are tagged as unconfirmed Pokémon. CycloneGU (talk) 18:32, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

If you had been paying attention, no one is immediately saying they're faked or photoshopped. But what we are saying is they may very well be dummied out content. And again, as far as a wiki is concerned, if information is not 100% confirmed, it might as well be 100% fake. Bulbapedia has a reputation to keep, and if things that end up being utter bull get articles only for us to find out the truth later, how will that make the site look? And even if they are really there, they can indeed be patched out. That's what patches do. If someone who got, say, one of these "Volcanions" ends up losing data and having their save corrupted because it was patched out, well then that's their own fault. Schiffy (Speak to me|What I've done) 19:03, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I'm paying attention. Here's the thing: if they are dummied out, that makes them notable just for that and they deserve to be recognized as deleted Pokémon. Except perhaps for MissingNo, this would be the first case of this, no? That's notable, and what would be their page as real Pokémon can then be redirected to an article on the deleted trio. CycloneGU (talk) 20:04, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Just thought I'd also mention that if they were dummied out, it is highly unlikely they'd leave all the following data in and have it make sense- Pokedex Entries, Typing, Movesets, Graphical Data, Base Stats. Just a thought--BigBadBatter (talk) 01:56, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Exactly. There are way too many dots to connect here that there's no way this is fake. I'm 99% certain at this point that all three of them are the Keldeo, Meloetta, and Genesect of this generation and we will have all three released by the time of either Hoenn remakes or Z (whichever is first). I'd gamble on it if I could. CycloneGU (talk) 02:18, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) We don't know any of that (except the graphical data) even exists. All we have are a single screenshot of each of them. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 02:19, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
What do you want him to do, take a video of him encountering and catching them, then showing off the Dex entries? CycloneGU (talk) 02:45, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

There's another test we could use to see if this is genuine, the guy who found them also managed to get screenshots of pixie plate arceus and Mew in the game, if the sprites match when Transporter is out we'll know that he truly hacked the game. pics on this twitter: https://twitter.com/PokmonGlobalNew Jmvb (talk) 11:34, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Replying to 0danmaster0 here, linked here is the original draft of Genesect (Pokémon) from September 18, 2010. It got several more edits that day and the following days. Do we have information on exactly when Nintendo announced Genesect? I know it wasn't released until B2/W2 were released; that very day, in fact. That's two years. I doubt they announced it two years in advance.
My point? We were posting an article about Genesect two years ahead of time. What would be different about an article on Hoopa since it has been found in the game? CycloneGU (talk) 16:10, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Yes, but we had proof Genesect existed because we could hack the DS and get the data out. We still don't know these three aren't a hoax, because we still don't fully know how to hack the 3DS. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 16:19, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Evidently this guy does know how to hack the 3DS. That's the same thing. I could have said Genesect was a hoax back then myself because I am not a hacker. Same argument. CycloneGU (talk) 16:38, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
The difference is that when lots of people could do it, it was clearer that Keldeo, Meloetta and Genesect were real because so many independent sources were backing each other up. Currently, (as far as I know,) there's only this one guy "proving" these three, so we have no idea whether he's a good hacker or just a good counterfeiter. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 16:44, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Pumpkinking has hit the nail on the head. The bottom line is if we can't replicate the results to verify, a random on the internet is nothing more than a dubious source. We can't repeat or verify those results. Therefore, they get no article. --Pokemaster97 19:21, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
I still point out the fact that the names appear on the GTS. That validates them as real Pokémon. I will admit that the images could still be shopped (some are pretty good even of those), but the Pokémon names are real. If Nintendo patches them out after this independent crusade (for lack of a better word), then the article could be about what the names of the Pokémon would have been and were changed due to a hacker. A hacker causing Nintendo to change plans is notable. So one way or another, whether now or after news comes of a new patch that removes the names (impossible on the GTS though unless they close it briefly and remove all requests), an article will exist somewhere on either the Pokémon or the schematics surrounding them being changed (even when the trio does eventually come out with similar types and the would-be names are matched up). I still see no problem with very brief and locked pieces on the three and what has been discovered, with a byline at the top saying the information is unconfirmed. CycloneGU (talk) 19:26, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Just thought I'd mention that we have Diancie's dex entry too. Kotaku said it, not sure if it's a reliable source though.--BigBadBatter (talk) 00:52, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
The bottom line is if we can't replicate the results to verify, a random on the internet is nothing more than a dubious source.
That's funny. Someone earlier said that the reason the article doesn't exist is because Nintendo hasn't announced it. However, Nintendo hadn't announced Keldeo, Meloetta, or Genesect and those articles came up with "multiple independent sources".
We now have "multiple independent sources" confirming these three new Pokémon showing up as valid in the GTS by people requesting other than themselves, which is backed up by hacked data confirming their existance and with images (though again, I prefer video). Sersbii had pages up brifly, since taken down. This is exactly the scenario we had with the Unova group, just not as many sources. Yet now the rules are different because it's more convenient to wait for Nintendo to announce it before putting pages up.
We need to stop changing the rules in convenient ways for a situation and just report what people have found out already. Wikipedia uses references as a method of sourcing ANY information. We have several sources, even if one main one is a blog and others are forums. That's enough for me for a video game (we're not sourcing nuclear fission or anything like that). If it turns out not to be real, we correct it. That's what a Wiki does. CycloneGU (talk) 03:47, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
You're wrong with the part about "exactly the same scenario". As already said above, the key difference is being able to replicate the results; that is, unlike with DS games, the encryption for 3DS games is still yet to be broken so data mining is outright impossible. You can't make a ROM dump out of your X or Y game card, break in, and check the Pokémon specification data structures yourself. Instead, for anything other than the names, you need to rely on and believe the authenticity of the few still images by one community member. For the same reasons, we're still missing various things like complete movesets for many Pokémon, all up-to-date data for yet unavailable Gen I to Gen V Pokémon, and so on.
Don't get me wrong, I personally don't have any objections for adding the trio into the wiki, but it seems that for now the only thing that can be proven with certainty is that the three names exist and are recognized by GTS as valid ones. That doesn't really yield good, comprehensive pages at this moment, so I understand why they're quite unwanted for now. Soulweaver (U.S.) (about me · chat · edits) 04:15, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps someone should ask smea to supply the necessary information by his twitter account, after all HE is the one with this information. We know the pokemon exist, we don't officially know their appearance until we get solid proof, and everything else falls under the former category. If he could give us a video showing us exactly what he is doing, showing us the dex entries and types at least, we might actually get somewhere. Same could go for the other discoveries too.--BigBadBatter (talk) 05:22, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
I have a feeling that they won't since they have apologized for spoiling the Pokémon already. Little hope on that route. --Super goku (talk) 07:27, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
As for the other side of the problem, I am confused now with the issue. We know the Pokémon exist. We have proof that they exist. We can replicate the data, though not in the conventional way. We can even data mine the games to confirm it through a modified 3DS that bypasses the encryption issue, which is currently being done to determine how the game stores the data structure for individual Pokémon. The problem we have is over if the three Pokémon are actual Legendary Pokémon that exist in the game or if these are just dummied out Legendary Pokémon that Nintendo and Game Freak thought would be alright to leave on the cart without removing their existence. We cannot confirm that they are event Pokémon, so we cannot add them as articles at the moment. --Super goku (talk) 07:27, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
I will concede that individual articles would not have a lot of information right now (heck, Xerneas (Pokémon) and Yveltal (Pokémon) were once like that even when they were announced). However, even if staunch "it's not official" people around here don't want to allow articles, we do need at least one: an article talking about the three and how they were discovered. I point out once again that the three are not being confirmed, the data is simply being reported on.
and he apologized for "spoiling the Pokémon"? Some of us want to know everything, spoiler or not. I really want to see a video of these. CycloneGU (talk) 16:22, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
(Resetting indent) What I don't get is why some people seem to be convinced they are dummied out when they are under the same circumstances as last gen's event pokemon. If they were dunnied out, they would leave all that important info in there. - unsigned comment from BigBadBatter (talkcontribs)
Because the data for the two other Vivillion is present in the games, but cannot be access without a modified 3DS. This is similar to past data, like ???-type Arceus. --Super goku (talk) 23:59, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Good point, but remember that was only in there to stop crashes, it was never meant to exist within the "actual" game--BigBadBatter (talk) 00:39, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
My guess? Those two Vivillon will be in the next games and can be traded into these ones. How? I don't have a guess on that yet, but maybe they are east and west like the Shellos. In that case, west (North America and possibly Europe) would get one, and east (yeah, beyond Europe, Africa included perhaps) would get the other. That would be consistent with the patterns based on your 3DS region bit. CycloneGU (talk) 07:56, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

(resetting indent) I think it's about time this topic be left alone and not touched again. Multiple staff members already said these three aren't getting articles until there is enough evidence to prove that they are absolutely and indisputably real, so let's leave it at that, shall we? Schiffy (Speak to me|What I've done) 16:42, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

I think the debate is not that they aren't real. It's about whether they should have articles without Nintendo confirmation. CycloneGU (talk) 17:05, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Regardless, at least three staff members have all said they are not and have given a multitude of reasons. I don't even see why people are still arguing. Schiffy (Speak to me|What I've done) 17:12, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, let's leave it for now. Apparently the offical facebook page made a random post about carbink, so we may see some interesting stuff...--BigBadBatter (talk) 23:00, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
The official japanese guide confirmed that there are 721 Pokémon[2] Shepeedy (talk) 12:36, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Now this is interesting. More confirmation much?--BigBadBatter (talk) 22:47, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Here's the thing. We do not report on or make articles for information that we cannot confirm ourselves. The person who discovered these did so through a method we cannot replicate. There may be three hidden legendaries, but we cannot confirm that these three are them. The difference between these and previous event legends is the fact we could view the game's code and confirm it ourselves. So, to put it bluntly, until these are confirmed by Nintendo or a widespread method to view the game's code is available, these Pokemon will get no article. No amount of arguing is going to change that. This discussion is serving no purpose whatsoever and should be done. If you want to discuss these rumored legendaries, you should take it the forums. Crystal Talian 22:56, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

they are real. no doubt. they are unannounced, there fore un obtainable, there fore unmarked. they WILL be made, and this guy did officialy find volcanion. there was also a leaked article on pokemon.com, quickly removed, for diancle. just make the pages, and delete them if need be. I will be watching for them in the new year, when I expect them to be announced, after torchic. and also, regarding pixie arcius and mew in x/y, they were added in the 1.1 patch which also allowed all pokemon to be added to the dex via pokebank. so In adding the pokebank, 1.1 had more than it seemed. prove me wrong, but I want evidence I am wrong. I know Nintendo, and this is legit. make the pages. I will cover the story. EDIT- while poking on serebii to take notes, I saw that they have a classification. I don't know if I can put them here, but am doing so any ways. :diancie the jewel pokemon, volcanion the steam pokemon, and hoopa the mischief pokemon. have I blown your mind??? proves their real! - unsigned comment from Dra9onslayer (talkcontribs)

What height and weight could it be for the three event Pokémon, what body style do they have and what colour category do they have? Cinday123 (talk) 07:04, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Look, let's just leave it for now, as we don't have the tools to hack the game and find out for ourselves. Therefore, we cannot make the pages.--BigBadBatter (talk) 23:50, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

I know staff members said don't put them up, and I'm not arguing that (that's a good policy, even if we can get into the game). I'm just wondering why people say it isn't the same as before. Because of course Darkrai could have been dummied out back in Gen IV, but now we know it wasn't. Just curious, is all, as that seems to be the big argument (Once again, I agree with the policy of not putting up the page until Gamefreak confirms, because of the risk of it being dummied out. Makes sense) --Shadowater (talk) 00:23, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

The difference is that even if Darkrai, etc had been dummied out, we could hack the game so we still knew all of its data. We can't hack the 3DS, so none of the leaks about these three (except for their names on the GTS) are verifiable. We don't know whether the images floating around are legit or a clever Photoshop; we don't know whether the type combinations are true; we don't even know what order their National Dex numbers are in*. There's literally nothing we can say in good conscience except "these are their names," whereas in the past, we could hack the game and reliably report every single piece of data for event-exclusives on the DS and prior systems. (That's my standpoint. I think this is a much more persuasive reason not to acknowledge them yet than the "what if they end up being dummied out" argument.) Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 01:40, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Mostly quoting myself from above, "We know the Pokémon exist. We have proof that they exist. We can replicate the data, though not in the conventional way. We can even data mine the games to confirm it through a modified 3DS that bypasses the encryption issue, which is currently being done to determine how the game stores the data structure for individual Pokémon. The problem we have is over if the three Pokémon are actual Legendary Pokémon that exist in the game or if these are just dummied out Legendary Pokémon that Nintendo and Game Freak thought would be alright to leave on the cart without removing their existence. We cannot confirm that they are event Pokémon, so we cannot add them as articles at the moment." Remember that there is still data on the game for two more Vivillion forms that the Global Links files confirm. The problem is that this data, while present in the games, cannot be access without a modified 3DS. In Generation IV, we had data for the ???-type Arceus, which was never released for good reasons. --Super goku (talk) 05:10, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

I figure now is a good time to resurrect this discussion now that more evidence has appeared from what appears to be a separate source, corroborating with leaks we've already seen. Dummied out or not, it appears what we've seen before was indeed correct. I also don't know if this was mentioned, but the PokEdit link also seems to have official Sugimori art, the two missing Vivillon patterns, and a model of AZ's Floette. This is getting harder and harder to call fake, if you ask me. VinLAURiA (talk) 18:05, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

The artwork is fake, in case you were wondering: Diancie, Volcanion, and Hoopa. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 18:38, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Again, this is my response on the issue. I still say that we should take the time to wait and see what GF will do. --Super goku (talk) 06:16, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Diancie was unveiled on CoroCoro, but I bet you Bulbapedians are going to say that even if it's not a fake, we can't say the same for the other two (and Mega Lati@s). Am I right? Shepeedy (talk) 21:18, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Fake is not the issue, but yes, that's exactly right. Diancie does not confirm anything else from leaks. We wait for official sources regardless of whether the leaks appear to be true. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 21:21, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
I suppose that we should probably make a start on the page, shall we? --BigBadBatter (talk) 21:40, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Force Fire already has. Glik (talk) 21:52, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Ah yes. I was wondering because the link in the Bulbanews article had no text on it.--BigBadBatter (talk) 22:48, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
With all due respect, I think that's completely unreasonable. If fake isn't the issue, then I fail to see what could be. Even if the other two were dummied out, there's no reasonable doubt left that these guys aren't still on the game card and with all the glitch Pokémon we document that have never been officially acknowledged, shouldn't we at least put in a word about how the other two exist but aren't officially revealed yet? Look, think of this from a practical standpoint: the circumstances have changed. Diancie's been officially announced and yet most of the data out there when you Google it (as people are bound to do now) are gonna come up with Hoopa and Volcanion along with it. And when they to go look it up on Bulbapedia, they'll find info on one of the three while the other two are still not even acknowledged to exist. What, are we just gonna play dumb and not confirm or deny anything still? I know to assume good faith and all that jazz, but I think Bulbapedia's official stance on this at the moment reeks of stubbornness for no good reason. At the very least, acknowledge the controversy around the matter with an administrative announcement or something instead of keeping everything in talk pages. At least make our stance on these three visible, rather than not even telling people why the other two aren't listed unless they go looking in the right places. VinLAURiA (talk) 17:24, 14 February 2014 (UTC) (Note for transparency's sake: I'm an inclusionist.)
Unfortunately, policy is policy, and unless we have more people hacking the 3DS, we won't get pages 'til the official reveal. If you'd like to hack the 3DS to prove a point, I believe Smea did it by running homebrew and pokemon Y at the same time, allowing him to see the game's code, developed wild modifier cheat codes, making the event 'mons appear.--BigBadBatter (talk) 23:09, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

[3]

someone recorded the mega lati duo in action. i think they are at least worth a mention now. hoopa and volcanion's articles can wait until similar footage appears. --The Truth aka Relicant 16:12, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

mega lati twins are out in the wild, although in an "Arceus/Genesect" manner rather than "nintendooo confirmdd" way. seeing as its arceus all over again, we should definetly mention the megas on their respective pages, there is nothing denying their exstince now. The Truth aka Relicant 21:03, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Datel has released a cheating device that can be used with X and Y. I think it's pretty safe to say that once some Bulbapedians get it and use it to get the Mega Lati twins and the event pokemon, these guys will be getting pages once we get the appropriate info. --BigBadBatter (talk) 21:38, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
why do we need a bulbapedian to confirm? undisputable ecidence of at least the mega latis is sitting right in front of us. --The Truth aka Relicant 21:54, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Read the rest of the discussion.--BigBadBatter (talk) 01:00, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
i did its just people screaming at each othrr. we have undisputable proof of at least the lati duo's megas existing and the two legends in limbo are probably are just an ar code away, so why are we still saying "durr 50/50 chance of being real" and not adding this? we did it with arceus and genesect, so why ar the mega latis different?--The Truth aka Relicant 04:54, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

(resetting indent)OK, so now that we got the addition of Mega Latios and Mega Latias on the Megas page (the other relevant pages are locked unfortunately) , I'm pretty sure that this should be settled once and for all. We have indisputable evidence that Volcanion and Hoopa exist (thank you Datel), can we please make pages for them now? --BigBadBatter (talk) 22:29, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

i'm working on a draft of Hoopa's page right now. do we know whether or not the leak regarding the event trio's signature moves is true? --The Truth aka Relicant 23:06, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
I imagine it is, but there is only one source at the moment.----BigBadBatter 01:02, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
If you can't confirm something yourself, assume it's false until you can confirm it. That way there's no chance we're left with egg on our face. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 03:16, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
That's what I thought. We'll just have to wait 'til someone reliable gets the event 'mons then.----BigBadBatter 03:59, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Okay, someone with a powersave has confirmed with a video that Diancie's signature move is Diamond Storm, it's a physical rock-type move, with 95 acc, 100 power and chance to boost defense, here are two videos [4][5]----BigBadBatter 21:33, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Seeing as how Diancie has been officially revealed, as have the Poké Ball and Fancy Pattern Vivillon, can we know include Hoopa and Volcanion on Bulbapedia? Fairy-type Arceus was also confirmed true and Mega Lati@s has been added to the Mega Evolutions page. I can assume AZ's Floette will be released later as well, since there's also an event for that, but this is just about Volcanion and Hoopa. --BlackButterfree (talk) 23:55, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

The key word being "officially revealed", which Hoopa and Volcanion haven't been. So no.--ForceFire 02:46, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Neither have Mega Lati@s, which are featured quite prominently in the Mega Evolution page... --BlackButterfree (talk) 05:00, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Mega Lati@s was added because a staff member was able to confirm the existence of the Lati@site via a device. Because they were able to confirm the Lati@site, Mega Lati@s are on the Mega Evolution page. While I don't really like that they are on the page, a staff member confirming the existence of the mega stone is satisfactory for me.--ForceFire 07:49, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Well for me, satisfactory is YouTuber upon YouTuber showing video footage of them activating the Hoopa, Diancie, Volcanion and AZ's Floette events, which is exactly what's happened since around the time Diancie has been officially announced. I mean, it can't be that hard to find someone with a PowerSave and get them to activate the events in the presence of a Staff Member. This isn't 1996. --BlackButterfree (talk) 01:28, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
I think this Hoopa and Volcanion situation is of the utmost importance. There has been multiple sources confirming without a show of a doubt the existence of both of them. I dont remember Arceus, Genosect, Meloetta, etc not being added before it was officially revealed by Nintendo. Saying that there's no way to check doesnt apply on this date. There's already documented tools to activate the event. For anyone that wants to check for themselves the tool you need is Datel Power Saves, which is available on Amazon and other online stores. Epsilonsama (talk) 19:34, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Whilst I completely understand that Volcanion and Hoopa remain unofficial, and whilst I agree that we should not pass them of as we would any other Pokémon due to the insufficient amount of data that has been able to be retrieved from the X and Y games, would it not be reasonable to have maybe a single article on both, and possibly the now-confirmed Diancie as well, stating that their names are recognised by the GTS, and that they have therefore been coded into the games in one way or another. Obviously we cannot pass off much other information about them, as there is very little of it that can truly be confirmed as official, however, a single short mention that the names of the Pokémon are coded into the games should suffice for the article. The names exist in the GTS without a doubt, in fact, that was how I first found out about them very early in the game when I went on to the GTS and saw someone requesting a Hoopa. The way I look at it, whether or not they are patched out of the game, never used/talked about again, swept under the carpet by Nintendo, or released as official Pokémon, we will eventually end up with an article about them, will we not? We currently have articles for unused prototype Pokémon such as Honōguma, Buhi, and Kurusu, and on backsprites for the early Shellos and Gastrodon from the coding of Ruby and Sapphire. Hoopa and Volcanion will essentially end up with their own pages, on a new page for patched out Pokémon, or on the page for prototype Pokémon. So, as little confirmed information on them as there is, surely it's noteworthy enough to at least acknwoledge them as sort-of-maybe-Pokémon-to-be that we know officially a little bit about, after all the GTS does recognise them as something, and if the GTS acknowledges them, then why shouldn't we? I understand that we know little about them, and the last thing I want to do is fuel a massive debate, but I think they at least deserve a little mention, no matter how ambiguous, somewhere rather than "What Pokémon? Huh? Who? Where? There's no Pokémon here!".--ShinyPatch (talk) 01:55, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Diancie has an article already. As for the second issue, you can see it has been talked about for a long, long time. So, since this still has not been settled for everyone, I will try to sum up what we have and do not have, among other things. This debate has centered around the following Pokémon: Diancie, Hoopa, Volcanion, Mega Latios, Mega Latias, two Vivillon forms, one Floette form, and one Plate Arceus. Here is how things have been sorted: Diancie has an article, Mega Latios and Mega Latias have the information on several articles, Vivillon forms have been distributed, Floette is AZ's, Arceus can be transfered to Gen VI, and nothing for Hoopa and Volcanion. So, why not create the articles? Because they have not been officially released yet. Granted, I am paraphrasing Force Fire and potentially taking their words out of context. On the opposite side of this is how the Mega Latios/Latias info was given approval. Again, I am linking to User:SnorlaxMonster has said in the past and about a different issue that may not apply. I would have recommend asking if Hoopa and Volcanion could be added to the List of Pokémon by index number (Generation VI), which is the Index number counterpart to the items, moves, location, and ability articles. However, the article has not currently be created at this point in time, so I do not believe I can recommend that action. Regardless of not being able to help, I hope that this somehow explains why we are not making that many references to them or their moves. --Super goku (talk) 03:38, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Editing of Headbutt

Basically, I just went to add that Bibarel is confirmed to learn the move at Lv.18 (no idea about the pre-evo yet, but I trust it's also the same). It seems that I am unable to save edits to that page. Do we know what is causing this? I just edited Acupressure without a problem a few minutes ago. Meanwhile, I tried the chat room, but it's more interested in a bot trivia game (now over 1,300 questions in!) and the other official channel is - well - dead. CycloneGU (talk) 19:40, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

I tried to edit it and it didn't go through. Maybe it's the amount of templates on the page? It's the only thing that really sets apart enough from other moves for it to be the only one to be uneditable. I'll see if someone can figure it out. --It's Funktastic~!話してください 20:21, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Well, if any of them are complete, some could perhaps be converted to generic tables and left in like that (if they get vandalized, they can easily be restored). That might help with that issue. But then, I wondered why the learnset table was so far down. Clearly trying to include Headbutt as it applies to G/S/C. CycloneGU (talk) 20:41, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Pages with lots of code transcluded to them, such as the code used in the template, exceed the maximum amount of code able to be used on a MediaWiki page. This limit is unable to be changed. The Headbutt page seems to be just before that limit. The page can be saved, it just takes a huge amount of time and a few attempts. But, any longer, and parts of the page will seemingly go missing, starting from the bottom up. We had a similarly large page on Wikisimpsons. We ended up needing to split the page up into several pages as huge tables of information just vanished. That might have to be done here too. ☆The Solar Dragon☆ 20:48, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
If you'd like, I can take a look at it between assigning moves. I think provided the main page has the same types of data as the rest of the moves, it should be easy to move other data to a secondary page that doesn't need much editing. Also, if I cut the information off the existing one and save, I should have no problem saving less data.
With that said, if you'd rather do it later, understood. But it keeps me and others from adding data to it until it's done, hence why I'd like to look at it. CycloneGU (talk) 20:53, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

(Indent reset, any replies to the above can continue there, this is a separate segment.)

I have copied from Headbutt the data that I think can be removed from the page. What I will suggest is taking this off the page and having it linked separately on the page. This will bring the page data down to a more useable level that saving issues will hopefully be reduced. The current location of the copied data is in my userspace. I'm open to working on the piece there and then moving it to the article space when it's ready for inclusion as a separate page. Or we can move it immediately and work on it already linked from the main page. What do you folks think? CycloneGU (talk) 21:03, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

I think wait for input from admins before anything major is done to the page. Although the only way I can see the page being editable again is by splitting it up in my expert opinion (expert as I've encountered this issue before :P) ☆The Solar Dragon☆ 21:05, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
This is why I have already copied the data separately to my userspace. That way an admin. can move it to an appropriate title, the data removed from Headbutt, and the link made between the articles. I agree, this issue was encountered six or seven months ago by someone on that talk page, and we can't deal with this over and over. We might even need to reduce the size of some of the lists at the bottom of the page by indicating all Pokémon in the previous list are also on the following list, and just not list them; however, that is a more drastic change I won't explore at this time. CycloneGU (talk) 21:10, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
I just had a separate afterthought as well (hence the almost immediate new edit, this is not a preview issue). The list of Pokémon learning the move by TM can be included on the second article. It only applies to the second generation (for now) and we can remove it from the main article, again to save space. CycloneGU (talk) 21:12, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
(Addendum) I have copied the TM information to my userspace. Again, no edits have been made to the main page yet, and I'd like to help work on a separate article regarding Headbutt and the mechanics as used in Generations II and IV in G/S/C/HG/SS (hence why it's in my userspace right now, but I'm open to it being moved to the main space if admins. approve the idea). The obvious alternative is to not be able to edit the main page or have data go missing; this at least preserves the data. CycloneGU (talk) 21:21, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
For the record, I think it would be more appropriate to move the lists of Pokemon that can be found via Headbutt. Learnlists should all remain together, but we do have precedent for moving lengthy material about how a move works to a separate page rather than keeping it on the same one. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 05:34, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
For the sake of full disclosure, I also brought this up with one of the admins. personally. Because Headbutt was only a TM in Generation II (replacing Razor Wind but since becoming Dragon Claw in Gen. III, which has not changed since), and was likely made such for the specific reason of allowing players to buy the TM for repeated use teaching Pokémon the move to attack random trees, I have made the recommendation that the TM move data be placed there for that reason. I've provided additional points at the linked location.
The TM section alone is 11,000 bytes of data, and with the page causing problems due to being so large, any space we can get would be useful at this point. If it is deemed after staff discussion that it should stay there, I would recommend putting the data on a page by itself and transcluding the data to the page. This could technically be done on both pages, in fact, since the data specifically applies to that game where the mechanic occurs. That way, the string putting the data on one or both pages is a simple string, and the data is its own page.
For examples of how transclusion works, head over to Wikipedia and see 2013-14 NHL season, specifically under Standings. All four charts there are located on other pages and edited on those pages due to the daily updating on each compared to the article itself. This way, people editing the standings and people editing the rest of the article aren't running into constant edit conflicts. CycloneGU (talk) 06:04, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
UPDATE: Again, for full disclosure, see User:CycloneGU/Headbutt for how I'm proposing to reclaim the space on the page. I don't know if this is ideal for the staff, but the data I am recommending to transclude in this case should never have to be edited again, so the data page can be locked and the importing line in the article commented above and below warning not to modify that line. Of course, the data page would be moved first, hence why it's still a proposal. CycloneGU (talk) 06:31, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
I've split the wild Pokémon only off into Headbutt (move)/Wild Pokémon, as this needed to be fixed swiftly, since it was preventing editing of the page altogether. If you think the scope of the subpage should be different, please bring that up on its talk page. I'm not even that sure we need these lists (for HGSS, since Pokémon encountered are dependent on area rather than what category of area it is), but they can't stay on the Headbutt page. --SnorlaxMonster 07:02, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
I still can't save edits to a segment of the page. I still propose, since the TM data should never be edited, doing the same thing there by moving the page in my usersdpace and linking that there. Unless it's just a case of the cache needing to be dumped, in which case it may work after that's done. CycloneGU (talk) 07:07, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
It certainly can be edited now, because my edit moving the wild Pokémon lists off the page went through. And if the issue is being unable to save a specific section, it is unlikely to be due to the number of templates; in fact, IIRC you can still edit sections of a page that is too big to save. --SnorlaxMonster 07:16, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
As for keeping the TM list on the page, it has less to do with editing than it does with reading. A major reason people go to move pages is to see what can learn it (I would assume), and I don't want to split up learnlists across multiple pages. --SnorlaxMonster 07:18, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Re TMs: did you see the page I created in my userspace? No, that's not the layout I propose, but I basically copied the TM data as it currently appears to a separate document, which allows the header to still be edited (I grabbed after the header up to the next header, for the next table).
Re editing Headbutt, it FINALLY went through. so I'm satisfied with it now. CycloneGU (talk) 07:20, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Wild Hold Items

I've been a member for about ten minutes and I probably have no chance of anyone seeing this... but how about a page that states the Pokemon that hold certain items in the wild including the item and the hold percentage. Possibly even moves or abilities that change the item's effect or position like unnerve or thief. I'm not sure but I think it'd be helpful. - unsigned comment from 8BitRevenge (talkcontribs)

Actually, this is already done. On sections for items, if a wild Pokemon holds it in the wild in a game it is found in, the game section for that item lists it. The same for a Pokemon's page (under the "Held items" section), although it is only on the Pokemon's page that the percentage for that item is listed.--NOBODY (talk) 03:37, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
That list is here. --SnorlaxMonster 12:41, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Dream World Moves

This deserves attention. Dream World no longer needs its own section because, well, the Dream World is closing (at least in terms of naptime and usefulness) as of December 14. Additionally, we are updating Pokémon pages for Gen. VI now; since Dream World isn't there, we should not include it as a section.

With that taken into account, do we or do we not have a place to list moves that are learnable in an earlier generation? If so, all Dream World moves should be moved to that location. We can also update those lists to take into account moves learned via Move Tutor in prior generations, or learned via TMs that no longer exist. If a move can be learned by breeding, we don't even need to list the Dream World move; see Pawniard, whose moves Psycho Cut and Sucker Punch are learnable via breeding. However, in the case of Butterfree, we have Air Cutter and Roost unlearnable via breeding since Caterpie cannot learn any moves through breeding itself, and thus those moves belong in that section on Butterfree's page (which I've started updating except for the DW section).

Thoughts? CycloneGU (talk) 18:05, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

They're already on the "Generation V learnset" subpages (here's Butterfree's, for example). I think that's fine, isn't it? Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 18:22, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
That's my opinion as well. The question is whether other editors want to preserve them in some way.
I'm actually going to remove it from Butterfree now pending opinion on this. I'm about to pull Butterfree out to level up. The only thing I can't fully check yet is the TM list, but I can start that. CycloneGU (talk) 18:48, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Time travel and Time Travel

There are two pages with the same name differentiated by a capital letter: Time travel and Time Travel. Both have links to the other page (I added the one to Time Travel), but this is still quite confusing to have it like this. Wouldn't it make more sense to have Time Travel renamed Time Travel (e-reader application)? Jmvb (talk) 23:31, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I coudn't agree more!--BigBadBatter (talk) 23:48, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

I have a question...

I've noticed that the facility trainers (in the Battle Frontier, Maison, Contests, etc.) have the same name/team/quotes. Since these trainers are recurring, is it important that we put them on the page for their respective locations? Just wondering. -- Pringles 23:33, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

I don't think they have the same teams (at least for battle facilities; contests might). There is a pool of Pokémon that each Trainer has their Pokémon randomly selected from. --SnorlaxMonster 04:21, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages format

I am pretty strongly of the opinion that most of the disambiguation pages are currently formatted badly. The numeric pages like 046 appear to have "good" formats, with the "disambiguated" links at the beginning; but it appears that just about all other disambiguation pages, like Aaron, use a bad format, with the disambiguated links only appearing after the description.

It's hard to provide a concrete reason why this is "bad". One possible rationale is that, in many cases, an article title alone can be enough to know which article you want, and any description appearing before that link just gets in the way; by contrast, anyone who needs that description text is not at all inconvenienced if it appears after the link. Another possible rationale is simply that, without the disambiguated article title at the beginning, I simply have nothing concrete to link the description with initially, so it's just a little abstract...

It may be worth noting that Wikipedia's manual of style for disambiguation pages specifies that the (relevant) link should come first.

Mostly, though, I just know that, for example, the Metronome disambiguation page works better like this than like this. It always irritates me seeing the latter and having to navigate it...

Do others agree that the "disambiguated" links should be written first? Tiddlywinks (talk) 01:29, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Agreed, and it is an involved project, but would improve Bulbapedia's consistency and navigation. - poikins 21:55, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Retrieving Information Question

While I was looking around on the site for something to improve, I discovered that Bulbapedia doesn't have a page for Style in Lumiose City. I would like to make this page, and I found another page on Serebii that seems to help. However, I don't want to just copy information. How should I handle this? Here's the page Also, should I just add this information to the page Lumiose City instead, once I get the information? Lnwz (talk) 00:44, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Proof requirement for hatch times?

Hello my friends! Noah speaking, I was planning on doing some research into the hatch times of certain unconfirmed Pokemon. What form of proof would you require? I could film it and add a footnote, or would you prefer multiple tests/people working on the same egg?

Polishpeo12 (talk) 18:54, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Unless there is some reason to doubt a hatch time you write down, then I don't think you need a source. --NOBODY (talk) 23:16, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Skrelp

Hello. In Skrelp's page, I realized that in the trivia section, it says that Skrelp was the only Poison type introduced in the 6th generation. I think that's untrue. Wouldn't Mega Venusaur and Mega Gengar count as new Poison-type Pokémon? (Hoogachakka (talk) 02:00, 28 December 2013 (UTC))

No, they wouldn't. Mega Evolutions are not new species.--SnorlaxMonster 03:29, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Overworld Sprites

Hello! I noticed a problem with the top of a Kalos Pokémon page, where it says which Pokémon comes previously and next in the National Dex. It doesn't have the sprites of the Pokémon. I can easily retrieve the pictures, so how do I edit those? - unsigned comment from Hoogachakka (talkcontribs)

You upload images through the Bulbagarden Archives, though you'll want to contact an administrator because no one has been able to provide the sprites without stealing them or get permission from other sites. Glik (talk) 02:17, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
I was going to take a picture of the sprite in the game, then upload it to my computer, then photoshop it to be just the sprite. That way, it's my photo. (Hoogachakka (talk) 02:37, 28 December 2013 (UTC))
You mean, take a photo with a camera? That's going to produce a very low-quality image. We need pixel-for-pixel faithfulness to the games, so a capture card is the only option. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 02:49, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
There are a few images on the archives that are recreated images without taking it directly from the games, but I do not believe that the practice is recommended. I would contact an administrator on the archives if this would be acceptable. --Super goku (talk) 04:03, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Regarding APNG images

In using Bulbapedia as a reference for various Moves, I noticed you employ the APNG format, however many of the animations are unnecessarily large. I've personally spent quite a bit of time building and deconstructing APNGs in order to understand the format. I thought I'd start my contributions by providing and animated version of Reflect. Before I upload it though, I'd like to confirm my suspicion that the existing animations are intentionally split with the first frame being midway through the loop so that APNG unaware browsers will still display a useful illustration of the move. --GARY-DOS (talk) 06:21, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it is intentional to have the unanimated frame be still a useful image. --SnorlaxMonster 07:05, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Version Exclusive Trainers

I apologize if this is not the correct area to talk about this. The character box for trainers is made up of several templates, which means there is not a core talk page for this to go to. After the debacle of exploring Mt. Mortar in Gold (gen II) with every possible resource online and through game play, I have come to the realization, unless I still have not explored well enough, that three out of the four trainers are more than likely version exclusive to Crystal version. That being said, there is not an area in the trainer box to show if certain trainers are version exclusive. Due to this, articles with trainer boxes which do not state the specifics of certain version exclusive trainers are misleading, which should be fixed. That being said, I do not know exactly how many trainers are version exclusive, and I am aware that determining that would take a lot of time. One may say that due to it costing a lot of time to calculate the above, as well as it being so specific, that it doesn't matter. I wish to know the opinions of others to see if this is necessary...not just for my sake, but for any other viewer using Bulbapedia for information about locations and the trainers within them. Qj (talk) 02:30, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

(Now that you mention it, I'm pretty sure I remember my old VersusBooks guide from my childhood mentioning that the Trainers were new to Crystal. So I'm pretty sure you're right.) I wouldn't think it's necessary to change the templates. I think we should just be able to use separate section headers (i.e., it's "Generation II" now, so we could add a subheader under it for "Crystal only"). As for the time necessary, that may be an obstacle, but no logistical obstacle should be considered large enough to make us not even try to compile correct information. If we try and fail, sure, and the topic will almost certainly attract very little attention, but giving up before the start seems defeatist. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 03:17, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Just so you know, a good amount of pages already have version exclusives separated (for example: Route 115 has the trainers separated between Ruby and Sapphire (where all the trainers are pretty much the same) and Emerald, with trainers who have differences being marked off. It's the same with Generation IV Routes like (Route 212)). If any Routes aren't marked with version exclusive trainers it was either done by someone with one game assuming they all have the same trainers, or don't have version exclusives. --It's Funktastic~!話してください 05:46, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for the clarification on the issue. I would have seen the separation, but the articles I visited had none of the separation you talked about above. I hope that editors willing to make edits to trainer boxes in the future will first make sure their information spans through all games of the generation in question, as to prevent future misunderstandings for all future viewers. (StrategyWiki, in general, is not as accurate compared to this site due to the large community.) Qj (talk) 06:31, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Mega Eon Duo are now Available to the Public through Cheat Codes

A hacking company has released cheat codes to get the Mega Eon Duo, and the Internet is now roaming with players using these Mega Evolutions. Does this mean it's now okay to acknowledge the existence of the Mega Eon Duo and add them to the pages around Bulbapedia? Nintendocan (talk) 03:02, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

were not allowed to aknowledge them until Nintendo actually reveals them apparently. --The Truth aka Relicant 03:43, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
It's more along the lines of "We don't like using stuff that we didn't find ourselves if Nintendo hasn't revealed it". We'll get pages once Bulbapedia contributors get the cheating device required to obtain them--BigBadBatter (talk) 06:04, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
We currently do mention them: check the Mega Stone, Mega Evolution, Latios (Pokémon), Latias (Pokémon), etc. pages. --SnorlaxMonster 05:04, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, that comment was made a while before that round of edits.----BigBadBatter 22:04, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Shouldn't we have an image of them?--PikaTepig999 09:58, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Blaziken Mask/Meyer

All right, so the episode that reveals the fact that these are the same character just so happened to air this morning. There is no more spoiler for North America, only for those who haven't seen the episode. As I don't believe it's natural to try to prevent spoilers five years down the line (hey, I only started watching the anime a couple of years or so ago), I think it's time that the two pages be merged. This has been brought up at Blaziken Mask's talk page and eventually confirmed by Blazingfist there, another opinion given for a merge, and even Meyer's talk page was created with a note that it should be the new home of the Blaziken Mask information.

I first commented on March 17 (actually evening of March 16 for me) also noting we need to make the move within a week. No response followed until Mkbw50 suggested continuing use of spoiler tags on the merged page; I disagree with this myself since it's known they are the same character now. Blazingfist and myself have since commented further, but I decided it was time to bring more visibility to this and get more editor opinion on this.

So...it's time to merge Meyer and Blaziken Mask. They are the same character; continuing to keep the pages separated implies they are different people, which would not be prudent for us to do. Let's discuss a merge. CycloneGU (talk) 15:25, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Event-exclusive moves

Is there a list or category of them? If so, can someone direct me to it? If not, should it be created? --Abcboy (talk) 02:14, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't think one exists. A category sounds like a good idea. As far as I know, the event-exclusive moves we currently have pages for are V-create, Hold Back, Celebrate and Happy Hour. Plus, some of the moves we know exist but don't know how to get in-game might be event-exclusive. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 02:56, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Prior to Generation (#)

Just notice that in Pokedex entries, "This Pokemon is unavailable prior to Generation (#)" is written. But as for sprites, all the genrations are listed, and then, "This Pokemon did not appear in Gen (#)" is written. Can't we just write "This Pokemon did not appear prior to Gen (#)"? TrainerTantei (talk) 07:52, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

I agree! By player 3.25 (talk) 19:21, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Adding information to the anime episodes

I'm slightly new to Bulbapedia, and would like to contribute to the episode guide and the pages containing the episode information of the XY series by adding some broadcasting information, but the thing is I don't know how to add that info and would like to know. Jamie64326 (talk) 13:50, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Vertical line thing

I can't figure out how to get the following line thing: | (I had to copy and paste that). Does anyone know how? Player3.25 (talk) 20:21, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

On standard American keyboards, it's the key above Enter (Return) on the same key as the Backslash ( \ ), but typed by holding Shift. On other keyboards I do not know the answer. Schiffy (瀬藤健二) (Talk Contribs) 21:06, 6/21/2014 (UTC)

That's OK, but I'm from Ireland. Player3.25 (talk) 07:45, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Look for the key with "|\" on. Shift click that. ☆The Solar Dragon☆ 07:49, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Which row is it in? I can't find that key anywhere on the keyboard. By Player3.25 (talk) 16:04, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Apparently it should be next to the Z, but there's a note here saying it's not on all keyboards. Schiffy (瀬藤健二) (Talk Contribs) 16:19, 6/22/2014 (UTC)

Oh. It's on my keyboard, but on the actual key, it shows 2 short vertical lines with a gap between them, but when I typed it, this came up: | Thanks! By Player3.25 (talk) 18:05, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

How do I know when I can create pages?

I know you can create pages when you have edited enough articles, but how do I know when I've done that? Does it alert me or something? The person (talk) 18:41, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

No alert, you can just be able to create your user page. --NOBODY (talk) 21:22, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

How do you replace images?

Does anybody know how to replace the images in the boxes with captons on pages? By player 3.25 (talk) 16:53, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

We have separate server for files. Eridanus (talk) 16:58, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

??? By player 3.25 (talk) 18:00, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

You need to go there and upload new pictures in order to replace them here. Also, please make sure to use colons (:) when responding to posts in order to indent your message. --It's Funktastic~!話してください 18:12, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

How do you create info boxes?

How do you create information boxes? By player 3.25 (talk) 19:18, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Type percentages

I noticed that the percentages on the type pages are wrong, so I made this page with the correct numbers. Would it be all right to change this in the type pages? TheSilentHero (talk) 09:37, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Demographics

I'm getting the feeling that some of the populations are incorrect. For one, Safari Zone Gate seems to be way lower than it should be, and the attendants in the Pokemon Centre dont seem to be counted at all. Yet, The Talk Page of both Black City and White Forest has someone saying they should be. A lot of people seem to be unclear on this scince Ive seen comments of people on other Talk pages not being sure. I'm just gonna go ahead with (slowly but surely) recounting Johto, Kanto and possibly Sinnoh's cities and towns, including Pokemon Centre's Marts, and Gates. I'm ignoring Hoenn because that will change in OR/AS anyways and ignoring Unova because I dont know what Castelia City/Nimbasa City people were counted and which werent. And I dont have X/Y yet so cant count Kalos. Also, the older regions have been here a while, so checking stuff for them might have slowed down too. If anyone wants to help, or comment on this, then go on ahead. Just posting this here since I think a heads up would be necessary. Smear-Gel (talk) 22:13, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Last modified on 10 September 2014, at 22:13