Talk:List of type combinations by abundance

Can the type combination table be sorttable? ^ht14 14:31, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

The second one already is; I don't know why the sort arrows don't show up (maybe because of the text/background color? maybe because the cells are too small to accomodate them?). The whole point of the first one is that it's ranked, so I don't think making that one also sortable would make much sense. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 17:42, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, that's true. I didn't realize that by just pressing the "Generation" title, there would be something sorted. Thanks~ ^ht14 02:56, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Two things

• Mega evolution should be included. I think so, as alternate forms are included.
• Should this appear in the Lists of Pokémon template?

--Nico649 (talk) 00:26, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Another two Things

1. 171 Type Combinations possible and 324 different combinations based on the order in which the types come.
2. What is meant by the Incomplete Message, it doesn't make much sense.

--Ditto51/Tom (My Talk Page) 23:02, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Because, it's not the type order, people better fix it for the type order in Normal, Fighting, Flying, Poison, Ground, Rock, Bug, Ghost, Steel, Fire, Water, Grass, Electric, Psychic, Ice, Dragon, Dark and Fairy. Cinday123 (talk) 23:11, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Diancie

Since it was revealed, is it ready to be added or not yet due to the lack of its menu sprite? --Cinday123 (Talk) 10:29, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

I support the idea of adding it in; its types have been confirmed in official sources, including Pokémon.com (This link goes to the Pokémon X and Pokémon Y homepage, where the news article for Diancie is displayed). Superbreeder 03:40, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

It was already added on Feb. 13, almost a month ago. Look before you post. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 04:09, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Mega Evolutions

Shouldn't the other Mega Evolutions be added? TheSilentHero (talk) 17:33, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Unused Type Combinations

Should a section of unused type combinations be added?

While the second table does show the unused type combination by showing a total of 0 Pokemon for that type combination, should it have its own section?

While not useful in any way, it is interesting. - unsigned comment from Disgraced (talk • contribs)

As you pointed out, the second table show the unused combinations, and you can easily check what's unused, since you can sort the table. I don't see the point in having that section if you can already easily check the thing. Eridanus (talk) 07:05, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

I would also like to see a section for unused pokemon types added. There is a demand for unused type combinations out there but, no real comprehensive list out there and we should give them what they want and add it. So can we add it now? Theenlightenedone (talk) 15:34, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

You can very easily see these by navigating to the bottom table (which is sortable) and clicking the "Total" column header to sort by the number of combinations in total. Everything with 0 in that column will be grouped together, and that's your comprehensive list. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 15:50, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

I know but something visual like the stuff above would be nice as well but, also something with a trivia section noting which ones are a unique type that only exist as Megas, Legendaries, or Alolan ford and don't have their own regular pokemon line. Does that make sense? - unsigned comment from Theenlightenedone (talk • contribs)

Volcanion

I think the number of used type combinations should be updated to 132 as Volcanion is a Fire/Water type Pokemon and the only one at that.- unsigned comment from Disgraced (talk • contribs)

Volcanion hasn't been officially revealed. This is also why Hoopa isn't in the article as well.--ForceFire 04:16, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

How come Mega-Audino and Mega-Slowbro are considered official when the only source is a leak and not an official announcement? --Disgraced (talk) 04:23, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Pokemon.com is official.--ForceFire 04:25, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Only Mega-Audino is confirmed if I'm not mistaken. If I am, could you link me to Mega-Slowbro's confirmation? --Disgraced (talk) 04:32, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Considering that both links have been removed, I can't send you that link. Both Pokemon were accidently revealed on the Korean Pokemon.com before being removed. Just a rule of thumb, anything on Pokemon.com is official whether it be an accidental reveal or not.--ForceFire 04:36, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

In the chart at the bottom, Ghost/Psychic still is listed as zero despite Hoopa being officially revealed, but Fire/Water is listed as one despite Volcanion still being unofficial. This should be changed for consistency purposes, which would bring the total to either 132 (include Hoopa only) or 133 (include both). Kplaxxc25 (talk) 23:55, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Headers

Could we change the second header? "Type combinations ranked by their abundance" and "Type combinations and their abundance" sound like they're listing the same thing, and it doesn't quite describe how the second sections lists how many of each type combination was introduced in each generation. TechSkylander1518 (talk) 21:26, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Arceus and Silvally

Should they be under every pure type? Monkey2371 (talk) 16:55, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

They're only counted by what type their standard form is, which is Normal-type.--ForceFire 16:58, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

I get that but they're the only ones to do that, making the number of each pure type other than Normal inaccurate by two Monkey2371 (talk) 20:40, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

They are not the other types by default, which is what we're going with.--ForceFire 05:05, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

It just seems odd they're the only ones to do that with. They're still alternate forms with different types like any of the others.

Eg psychic arceus's default type is psychic and bug silvally's bug. If you're saying about not default because it's holding an item or something then surely eg Zacian and Zamazenta's alternate forms shouldn't be included either Monkey2371 (talk) 05:15, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Zacian and Zamazenta are pure types in their normal forms but dual types in their hero form, so it counts as it is still their typing by default. Arceus's type by default (with no plate) is normal, as is Silvally's.--ForceFire 02:18, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Your distinction is completely arbitrary though. You haven't at all explained what counts as "default" and/or why forms that aren't default (only for Arceus and Silvally) should be excluded from the list. Based on List of Pokémon with form differences#Arceus, List of Pokémon with form differences#Silvally, Arceus (Pokémon)#Forms and Silvally (Pokémon)#Forms, their other types are inarguably completely separate and full forms of their own, and as the article says "For the purposes of this list, each form with a different type than another of the same Pokémon's forms counts as a different Pokémon", and thus those forms should be included. Those forms themselves have their default type which matches what the form is: Water-form Arceus's default type is Water; Grass-form Silvally's default type is Grass, etc. There is no reason for them to be excluded, and the list is incomplete without them. Per your "Arceus's type by default (with no plate) is normal", why does having no plate matter? As I said before Zacian also requires an item to change its form just as Arceus does, yet its other form counts just as it should. If Arceus and Silvally's normal form is somehow more default than all their other forms and they should be excluded for that reason, then I'd say for certain that Castform's normal form is absolutely more default than its other forms, yet Castform's other forms are also included just as they should be. There is no consistency in excluding Arceus and Silvally. Under the last table, it says these two are excluded "For convenience". Whose convenience? I'd argue not the reader as they aren't getting the complete picture. Monkey2371 (talk) 00:19, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Zarude

Despite not having a sprite yet, could someone please add a placeholder space for Zarude? BlueDecoRoller (talk) 01:14, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

We also need one for Kubfu, Urshifu, and Calyrex Pallukun (talk) 16:30, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Forgot about those two. Thanks for the reminder! BlueDecoRoller (talk) 21:34, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Galarian Slowbro

Is anyone going to update the page to include a sprite and listing for Galarian Slowbro, which has a thus far unique type combination of Poison/Psychic? --LavaringX (talk) 05:51, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

New template

If the icon template would use <div class="overflow-ms"> then this table could be even more reasonable size, but it is flawed because links don't work anymore.--Rocket Grunt 20:46, 13 October 2020 (UTC)