Junction, maybe??
Shouldn't Victory Road be considered a junction of Route 223, in between the Pokémon League and the rest of Route 223?? Or, should it be considered one of the terminals of Route 223?? Victory Road isn't even mentioned on this page, nor on the Pokémon League's page. I think it's rather important, considering how large of an obstacle it is to overcome. It's the final challenge in the way of getting to the Elite Four. It's long and tedious, and there's even a Pokémon Center at the entrance (that in my gameplay I have returned to often). What does everyone else think?? Soon to be Mrs. Shirley
Agreed, I edited the page to say it connects to Victory Road and the Pokemon League, rather than editing the junction itself though as Victory Road is considered part of the Pokemon League. If anyone else wants to add that in they can but I thought it looked too cluttered to have both in the junction. --Heyyopat 00:17, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
- It doesn't connect to Victory Road. You have to go through the south part of the League area. By that logic you'd say Route 9 connects to Rock Tunnel... TTEchidna 00:23, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
In the beginning it seems to a player that route 223 connects to the victory road because when they reach the top of that waterfall, they don't realize that it is the southern part of the Pokemon League mountain area which happens to have the cave entrance to Victory Road. The same happened to me. Even the Victory Road page info box shows only that part. Only after seeing the Pokemon League info box image did I understand that.
--Ishu bagaria (talk) 10:12, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Dive Ball
Is the Dive Ball only available in Platinum? Because I took a long look around in Diamond and didn't find anything, and even looked at some walkthroughs and no Diamond walkthrough mentions a Dive Ball. They do, however, mention a Pearl (the item). --Crystal Shards 17:55, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Staryu
I Am A Player of Platinum and I have just landed a staryu (lvl 33) using the Super Rod at the edge of the beach at Sunyshore, not sure if this counts as a catch at route 223 or Sunyshore though, I thought I would bring it to attention (I haven't checked sunyshore's page yet but i will), thanks and I'll upload a screenshot of the summary page saying where it is caught ASAP--Titan 21:08, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
- No Matter it's a Sunyshore capture --Titan 21:10, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Not only there is no Staryu on route 223, but the current % for Fishing with Super Rod in Platinum go far over 100%. According to the encounter slots, it's the same as route 230 : 60% Gyarados 30% Wailmer 5% Octillery 5% Wailord. (0:Gyarados 1:Wailmer 2:Octillery 3:Wailord 4:Wailord). The confusion must come from the proximity of Sunyshore City, which has Staryu. -- Gpm (talk) 12:14, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Octillery with Good Rod.
I've found Octillery on Route 223 via Good Rod. I checked in the data of Platinum and found it was 5% chance to be found. I added it to the good rod list and changed percentages. - unsigned comment from PrismNeoCrimson (talk • contribs)
- Thanks. You found it while playing English Platinum? Did you also confirm the Magikarp/Remoraid percentages you changed? And did you also find Octillery in DP (which is what you also added)?
- I'm asking because I have a feeling that these and these might actually be the correct values. (That's slightly different percentages, and no Good Rod Octillery in DP.) I don't have encounter data at hand, and even if I had, I couldn't read it properly (nor know whether it's reliable). But maybe you can help, or someone else can have a look? Nescientist (talk) 11:36, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- I did the math of the encounter rates. And got that. Two 40% slots, 15% slot, a 4% slot, and a 1% slot. Same as in gen 3. --PrismNeoCrimson (talk) 12:10, 9 July 2017 (UTC)PrismNeoCrimson
- It's not the same as in Gen 3. It shouldn't even be, Gen 3 did slots differently for each rod. Please try to avoid such assumptions. You should be able to cite a reliable source. Tiddlywinks (talk) 15:20, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- Question for staff: Veekun lists encounter data that is presumably ripped directly from the games and differs slightly from both what we already had and what PrismNeoCrimson tried to add, but it makes a lot of sense in reconciling those two wrong claims. I know we can't normally take data from other fansites, but since we provide a link to Veekun on every species page, does that mean we have some kind of deal/partnership with Veekun that might give us permission to use that data? Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 15:24, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- We're not going to blindly trust anyone in the face of conflicting data. We need to investigate carefully and figure what's true/why. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:40, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- How are "we" going to go about investigating that? Do the staff have the resources to check the data themselves? Or should I contact my friend who used to work on Veekun and see if they know whether that particular dataset was ripped directly? Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 17:32, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- Encounter slots did not have rate data in these games. Slots just have set rates, which you have to figure out elsewhere. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:44, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- I'm not talking about slots, I'm talking about the data on Veekun. But my friend apparently doesn't know whether the exact percentages Veekun uses were ripped or not, so I guess it's a moot point. Since that's the end of my ability to help figure this out, are the staff going to do it or is this just going to sit around forgotten? Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 17:53, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- It's not in any way staff's job. It's a thing that needs doing, not unlike any number of old things that may be corrected on any given day on other pages. Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:24, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, but the staff have demonstrated previously through new game releases/etc that they have the capability to go about data-based things like this, so unless the unusual circumstance occurs that someone else with that capability notices this talk page, the staff will be the only people with both the capability to fix it and the knowledge that it needs fixing. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 18:32, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- Let me put it this way. I don't like how your framing basically keeps it out of the realm of regular users to do anything. It's definitely not. Anyone can help, this is not just down to staff. Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:37, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- This is true and I'm not trying to suggest that it's just down to staff, but I've seen the result of the passive voice ("it needs to be done" rather than "X person will do it") on countless talk pages before, and that result is: nobody does it because they all assume someone else will eventually. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 18:44, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- ...You're putting out the options "It needs to be done" or "X person will do it". In short: you want to force someone to commit to doing it. ...That's now how it works.
- I don't think this immediate vein can add anything further. Tiddlywinks (talk) 19:05, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- This is true and I'm not trying to suggest that it's just down to staff, but I've seen the result of the passive voice ("it needs to be done" rather than "X person will do it") on countless talk pages before, and that result is: nobody does it because they all assume someone else will eventually. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 18:44, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- Let me put it this way. I don't like how your framing basically keeps it out of the realm of regular users to do anything. It's definitely not. Anyone can help, this is not just down to staff. Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:37, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, but the staff have demonstrated previously through new game releases/etc that they have the capability to go about data-based things like this, so unless the unusual circumstance occurs that someone else with that capability notices this talk page, the staff will be the only people with both the capability to fix it and the knowledge that it needs fixing. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 18:32, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- It's not in any way staff's job. It's a thing that needs doing, not unlike any number of old things that may be corrected on any given day on other pages. Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:24, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- I'm not talking about slots, I'm talking about the data on Veekun. But my friend apparently doesn't know whether the exact percentages Veekun uses were ripped or not, so I guess it's a moot point. Since that's the end of my ability to help figure this out, are the staff going to do it or is this just going to sit around forgotten? Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 17:53, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- Encounter slots did not have rate data in these games. Slots just have set rates, which you have to figure out elsewhere. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:44, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- How are "we" going to go about investigating that? Do the staff have the resources to check the data themselves? Or should I contact my friend who used to work on Veekun and see if they know whether that particular dataset was ripped directly? Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 17:32, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- We're not going to blindly trust anyone in the face of conflicting data. We need to investigate carefully and figure what's true/why. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:40, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- Question for staff: Veekun lists encounter data that is presumably ripped directly from the games and differs slightly from both what we already had and what PrismNeoCrimson tried to add, but it makes a lot of sense in reconciling those two wrong claims. I know we can't normally take data from other fansites, but since we provide a link to Veekun on every species page, does that mean we have some kind of deal/partnership with Veekun that might give us permission to use that data? Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 15:24, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- It's not the same as in Gen 3. It shouldn't even be, Gen 3 did slots differently for each rod. Please try to avoid such assumptions. You should be able to cite a reliable source. Tiddlywinks (talk) 15:20, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
- I did the math of the encounter rates. And got that. Two 40% slots, 15% slot, a 4% slot, and a 1% slot. Same as in gen 3. --PrismNeoCrimson (talk) 12:10, 9 July 2017 (UTC)PrismNeoCrimson
Rematches Platinum
Pages is missing info on the rematches in Pókemon Platinum
Swimmer Miranda: lvl 59 shellder, lvl 59 Lumineon, $944
Swimmer Crystal: lvl 56 Wailmer, lvl 59 Pelipper, lvl 59 seaking, $944
Swimmer Wesley: lvl 57 Qwilfish, lvl 57 Tentacruel, lvl 57 Floatzel, $912
Sailor Zachariah: lvl 56 Pelipper, lvl 58 Gastrodon, lvl 60 Machamp, $1856
Swimmer Francisco: lvl 52 Golduck, lvl 58 Relicanth, lvl 60 Tentacruel, $960