Talk:Legendary Pokémon: Difference between revisions

:As of today (arguably since [[Talk:Legendary_Pok%C3%A9mon/Archive2#Mythical_and_Legendary_classification_with_sources|Gen 5]]) the same holds for ''Mythical'', as there is no reference of Mythical Pokémon being Legendary anywhere, as far as I know. Even cases like Deoxys, where 幻のポケモン was originally mistranslated as ''Legendary Pokémon'', are now properly classified. The assumption that Mythical Pokémon are Legendary is natural, and the western community especially is accustomed to the convention for most of the franchise's life, with the proper term coined years after its Japanese counterpart (granted, the term ''Rare Pokémon'' was once being used in places like Pokémon Ranger and [http://bulbanews.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Pokemon.com_officially_reveals_Shaymin announcements]), but I have to ask: what's the point of including Mythical Pokémon in the Legendary Pokémon page when they aren't officially referred to as ''Legendary Pokémon''? Saving clicks? Is an encyclopedia's mission to pander to the community's fondness of obsolete terminology, or is it to be accurate and in-line with the series' current conventions and lore? [[User:Ash Pokemaster|Ash Pokemaster]] ([[User talk:Ash Pokemaster|talk]]) 17:41, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

::Bulbapedia's mission is not necessarily to be official, it's to be an informative English-language Pokémon encyclopedia, which happens to be a mission that involves official sources. Since we're just going in circles ''again'', let me just point out that when the community searches for "Legendary Pokémon", they expect to find info on Mew, Celebi, Jirachi, et cetera in addition to those normally obtainable within their debut generation. Splitting the page would also have the effect of splitting Mew and Keldeo from their respective legendary "families", to the detriment of the wiki. In addition, my position since the start of English-language Gen V has been that mythicals are a subset of legendaries, and as I pointed out last time we talked about this, North American ''Super Smash Bros. for Wii U'' backs me up, while you have not cited an English-language source in your argument. [[User:Bwburke94|Bwburke94]] ([[User talk:Bwburke94|talk]]) 06:50, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

:::I suppose that we principally disagree on whether Bulbapedia's coverage should be based strictly on canonical sources (which exclude contradicting English-language sources which commonly include mistranslations, although this may also be a matter of argument) or be more in-line with fans' expectations. I will admit I have no source that downright states "Mythical Pokémon are not a subset of Legendary Pokémon", but what's the point of the "Legendary and Mythical Pokémon" statement if the latter aren't a separate group? It would be a redundancy. Your NA Smash Bros. argument only augments my point, if only because the difference between the European and the NA version simply proves that there's an existing ambiguity that the more careful sources (ie. the ones that don't spell Onix as "Onyx") take under consideration. Besides, why should it be taken under consideration over the European translation? What makes it inherently more valid?

:::I will agree that this is most likely going to go in circles. It would be better to let other people weigh in. --[[User:Ash Pokemaster|Ash Pokemaster]] ([[User talk:Ash Pokemaster|talk]]) 07:37, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

::::People expecting to find Mythical Pokémon when coming to this page can be solved with a hatnote and in-article prose. However, we should be using official definitions whereever possible. --[[User:SnorlaxMonster|<span style="color:#A70000">'''Snorlax'''</span>]][[User talk:SnorlaxMonster|<span style="color:#0000A7">'''Monster'''</span>]] 09:38, 20 May 2015 (UTC)