40,879
edits
Talk:Legendary Pokémon: Difference between revisions
Don't respond to comments over six months old, this discussion has been resolved and does not need further commenting.
m (Explaining my source of information) |
Force Fire (talk | contribs) (Don't respond to comments over six months old, this discussion has been resolved and does not need further commenting.) |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| Line 606: | Line 606: | ||
:::::Well... I ''did'' say that it's fine (i.e. gave approval), so you didn't have to revert yourself.--[[User:Force Fire|<span style="color:#F1912B">'''F'''</span><span style="color:#F6B775">orce</span>]][[User talk:Force Fire|<span style="color:#5599CA">'''F'''</span><span style="color:#90BDDC">ire</span>]] 06:02, 1 February 2018 (UTC) | :::::Well... I ''did'' say that it's fine (i.e. gave approval), so you didn't have to revert yourself.--[[User:Force Fire|<span style="color:#F1912B">'''F'''</span><span style="color:#F6B775">orce</span>]][[User talk:Force Fire|<span style="color:#5599CA">'''F'''</span><span style="color:#90BDDC">ire</span>]] 06:02, 1 February 2018 (UTC) | ||
::::::Okay then, that you for understanding and giving approval Force Fire.--[[User:Jacob9594|Jacob Kogan]] ([[User talk:Jacob9594|talk]]) 06:06, 1 February 2018 (UTC) | ::::::Okay then, that you for understanding and giving approval Force Fire.--[[User:Jacob9594|Jacob Kogan]] ([[User talk:Jacob9594|talk]]) 06:06, 1 February 2018 (UTC) | ||
== the averaging == | |||
i always find it strange to have different forms count as different pokemon. they are the same species. why are we treating them separately? I would like to suggest an alternative way to average. rather than counting all the forms as separate pokemon, we average the forms first, then use the average for that pokemon. for example, instead of treating mewtwo as three separate pokemon, we average the stats of the three form, and count that as mewtwo's (average) stats, and then we use this to average everything. Mewtwo would still be counted as 1 species of pokemon rather than 3. I am not saying this is the best way, but perhaps we can have a discussion on whether to keep the current way or have this instead. thank you (same for the mythical). -[[User:Pokeant|Pokeant]] ([[User talk:Pokeant|talk]]) 03:38, 17 March 2018 (UTC) | |||
== Merge duos + trios == | |||
I believe we should merge the pages of legendary trios and duos. We now have two quartets of legendary Pokémon as secondary legendaries- the Swords of Justice and the tapus (arguably the Legendary titans as well, although the use of the term is ambiguous). Neither of these groups get a place in either the legendary trio or duo pages, despite their relationship being just as important- the number of Pokémon in each group limits the scope of the article. There is not much reason to keep the two pages separate, as the two pages focus on the same topic: relationships between legendary Pokémon. (Additionally, the two pages, as they are right now, are very different: the legendary trio page is considerably less detailed than the legendary duo page.) | |||
I also think that, if we were to merge the pages, they should be written to focus more on the relationships between the Pokémon in each grouping rather than just simply describing each group, to prevent the article from becoming a lite version of the "List of Legendary Pokémon" section on this page. | |||
(Also, I hope I don't seem impatient, but it's an issue I feel strongly about- have any developments been made on Necrozma's trio status? The evidence is, in my opinion, clearer than other trios.) --[[User:Celadonkey|Celadonkey]] 01:30, 12 May 2018 (UTC) | |||
: I agree with you Celadonkey on the matter and what you are getting at. Other than information reveled in the Post Game USUM Guide book and yesterday's episode, still taking time. From that I hear there is definite proof but from what an admin told me, we still need approval from the staff to finalize it if I recall, look how it took for Zygarde for example. So we may still have to wait for it. Also if we do that would the Trio Master be included as well to support it or just those two? Just was curious thats all as it a big proposal.--[[User:Jacob9594|Jacob Kogan]] ([[User talk:Jacob9594|talk]]) 01:59, 12 May 2018 (UTC) | |||
::I feel like, apart from Lugia and Ho-oh, trio masters are already a part of their respective groups. Earlier I mentioned Regigigas which is also a strange case due to the existence of an official term. Where it gets weird, imo, is Arceus. Not only is Arceus a very asymmetrical case when compared with Dialga, Palkia, and Giratina, but it is also the master of the lake guardians. I think that trio masters are worth mentioning, but not much redefining is to be done there in my opinion. I would be welcoming of the inclusion of Arceus into a quartet with Dialga, Palkia, and Giratina but it’s not really my choice. | |||
::Tl;dr: I think trio masters would be a valuable thing to bring up in a legendary grouping article but I don’t think that, for example, Lugia should be included with the legendary birds. --[[User:Celadonkey|Celadonkey]] 02:10, 12 May 2018 (UTC) | |||