Talk:Shiny Pokémon

Archives

• Archive 1

shiny odds increased?

I got Pokémon X on October 12, launch date. Within an hour of playing it, I found a shiny Psyduck. Two days later, I found a shiny Woobat. So either I'm REALLY lucky, or the chances of finding a shiny Pokémon increased for Generation Six. What do you think? ShinyMew9001 (talk) 13:08, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Wow, how did you do that a year before the game came out?!

Seriously, though, I've been hearing this quite a bit lately from all over the place. Also, apparently Monochrome Pokémon are appearing at the previous Shiny rate. Pokérun MAY also be more common, but that one's a little harder to pinpoint. Unfortunately, the 3DS games can't be data mined like previous gens, so it might be a while before we have any solid numbers. --KingStarscream (talk) 19:30, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

I've heard that the monochrome Pokémon are simply a texture error, which seems likely to me. We also can't say anything about increased shiny rate without hard facts. Maybe that many fans think shinies are more common in Gen VI, but that doesn't seem terribly notable. --Wynd Fox 22:30, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

I've heard that the shiny encounter rate is more generous in X and Y. Kikaypikachu (talk) 10:07, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

I understand that there's no easy way to prove that the Shiny odds have increased, but can I point out one more thing? One time I (almost) traded with someone who had a teal Frogadier and a black Furfrou. I do believe that they are Shiny Pokémon, so that means that the person is either super lucky, a hacker, or the Shiny odds have increased. Once again, there's really no way to prove this without a confirmation from Nintendo, but I just wanted to throw that out.

Also, Pokérus may be more common now. One of my friends got Pokérus within one week of playing X, while I've been playing Black for over two years now and I haven't caught it. So either-- well, you know what I'm going to say. And once again this is all speculation, which really makes me wonder why I'm even pointing this out.

Also, what's this talk about Monochrome Pokémon? Unless you're referring to Generation One, I have no idea what you're talking about. ShinyMew9001 (talk) 13:48, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Some rumour about a new type of Pokémon similar to Shiny Pokémon, with the coloroation being black and white. I've heard about it and also heard it's some texture error, either that or it's just a hoax. ☼ BlazingFist ☼ 13:59, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

I don't think Pokérus is more common. Shinies pretty clearly are though (and can be observed easily from empirical testing, and has been). A single person finding Pokérus while their friend does not is not a good sample size; with that data, Pokérus could easily be less common.

As for monochrome Pokémon, I'm calling them a hoax. If they exist, I challenge anybody that has one to record a battle video featuring one and share the code; if they are an intended mechanic, in a battle video they will appear monochrome for everyone. --SnorlaxMonster 14:05, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

If there really were monochrome Pokémon they would probably have been revealed earlier. Kikaypikachu (talk) 14:30, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Monochrome Pokémon are caused by a texture error, and are not an intended mechanic. --The Truth aka Relicant 14:53, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Ah, that makes sense. I would also like to point out one more thing: it may be impossible to find a shiny Xerneas, Yveltal, and Zygarde. Once again, this is all speculation, and I bet the majority of admins would have my head for this, but I've looked all over for an encounter with a shiny Xerneas, Yveltal, or Zygarde, and I've found nothing. It may be that people haven't had time or motivation to shiny hunt them, but I'm sure that there would at least be a screenshot of a shiny legendary by now. I don't want to drag this topic out for too long, but do you have any thoughts on the matter? Also, I'm sorry, admins. ShinyMew9001 (talk) 22:31, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

It's plausible that Xerneas and Yveltal have coding in place that prevents them from being shiny, since last Gen's mascots Reshi and Zek have similar measures in place. Either that or like you suggested people have had no luck/time finding them.--The Truth aka Relicant 23:09, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

That's very possible. Kikaypikachu (talk) 23:12, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Once again, there's really no way to be sure about this without a confirmation from Game Freak, I'm just pointing this out. ShinyMew9001 (talk) 00:17, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

GF's never gonna tell us 'bout that sort of thing. We need hackers for that--BigBadBatter (talk) 06:18, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Research has been done about this: http://nuggetbridge.com/forums/topic/2793-instacheck-hotspot-a-fast-pok%C3%A9mon-checker-for-xy/ This Shiny Value is between 0 and 4095. 'Shiny Value' is the equivalent of TID and SID XORed and right shifted 4 places. It used to be shifted 3 places (2^3 is 8 which is why the value has to be less than 8 because the last 3 bits don't count), however no it's shifted 4 places, meaning the last 4 bits don't count. So going by the calcs in the article the answer can now be less and 16 for it to be shiny. Therefore the range is doubled and the chance of getting a shiny is doubled. I'm about to edit the article to mention this change. Lucky V4.0 (talk) 18:32, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

With the shiny percentage change in generation VI, can a pokemon imported from gen IV that wasn't shiny become shiny? Zombiedude347 (talk) 20:48, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

I highly doubt it. Pikachu Bros. (talk) 13:34, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

I've heard this theory before. Since there's now a whole new set of personality values for each individual wild Pokémon that could be shiny in Gen VI, and that weren't in V, theoretically they could end up as Shiny when moved, in the same way that something traded from Gen I over to II could become shiny after being traded. However, I can imagine that this late in the game, Nintendo would have forseen that and made it so a transfer via the Poké Transporter doesn't change the color palette. Schiffy (瀬藤健二) (Talk Contribs) 13:39, 3/31/2014 (UTC)

My friend caught a Shiny Fearow and Remoraid in his Pokemon X game after only having it for 2 months, and I haven't seen a single shiny I'm pokemon black, even though I've been playing it for half a year. I'm guessing the shiny odds probably were increased.Espurr101 (talk) 22:40, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Could possibly the pokemon that aren't shiny become locked that way in a similar manner to how azumarill that would change genders upon evolution get locked upon poke transfer? Zombiedude347 (talk) 14:14, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Shiny parents

This is unrelated but I was curious if hatching a shiny Pokemon is more likely if one of the parents is shiny. Mariofan99 (talk) 19:49, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

This is only the case in Generation II, where Shininess is the result of IVs. --SnorlaxMonster 00:07, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Horde Battle and Friend Safari not mentioned

How come there is no mention of Horde battles increasing the chance of finding a Shiny? I am not the best at math, but I know it gives you a 5x better chance then the traditional 1-on-1 encounter. Again, not the best at math, but if I did it right it looks like each Pokémon in a horde has a 1/4096, which in terns means there is a 1/819.2 chance of encountering a horde with a shiny Pokémon if I am correct?

Also, I'm pretty sure there is a higher chance of finding Shiny Pokémon in the Friend Safari but there is no mention of this either. The first time I entered a friend's Flying type Safari I encountered a Shiny Hawlucha. If I am not mistaken, I think the reason there is a increase is because there are only 2-3 Pokémon available in the Friend Safari at all times, thus your chances of encountering a shiny, at least of those 2-3 increases. This might be a superficial increase though. Yamitora1 (talk) 19:40, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Horde Encounters do not increase the shiny rate. Five Pokémon means that you're five times more likely to have any of the members of the horde be Shiny, yes, but the random generator still creates each individual Pokémon with the same rate as normal. As for the Friend Safari, I haven't seen anybody say anything about an increased Shiny rate there except people idly speculating based on anecdotal evidence like you're doing right now. We can't report it as true until either (A) we hack the game and check the data ourselves or (B) a high-quality (i.e. sample size of several thousand, at least) statistical analysis is performed. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 20:38, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

The probability posted by Yamitora is very accurate, but it's calculated in a wrong way; by that logic, a 4096-Pokémon horde would always include a Shiny Pokémon. The true probability of encountering at least one Shiny Pokémon in a Horde Encounter is 1 - (4095/4096)^5 or about 1/819.6.--電禅Den Zen 21:25, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

The probability he posted of a battle containing a Shiny might be accurate, but that's neither how the games are programmed nor how our pages are presented. The probability of a particular Pokémon being generated as Shiny by the algorithm is the same regardless of whether that's in a Single Battle, a Double Battle or a Horde Encounter. Claiming on our page that a Horde Encounter has a higher Shiny rate would be misleading. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 22:33, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

I already said I am not that good with math. I mentioned 1/819.2. Den Zen, you came up with 1/819.6 I wasn't trying to say it like every horde has a shiny, I was just unintentionally misrepresenting the math since again, not so good with it.

By the way Pumpkingking0192...Its both rude and condescending accusing me of speculating like that. I'm trying to do the best I can with what skills and resources I have. Please show some respect and courtesy for me as a fellow editor.

Also Den Zen already said that the horde battles do in fact in crease the odds of finding a shiny by the fact there are 5 Pokemon instead of 1. Just like smoking a pack of cigs a day increases your odds of developing lung cancer. Its all in the numbers. Yamitora1 (talk) 02:17, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Gen VI Shiny Charm Calculations

I'm not sure if the calculation for the Shiny charm still triples the chances, but if so would the chance be 1/1365.33 in gen VI?

again, I am not good with math. Yamitora1 (talk) 21:22, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

One more thing. Under Generation VI it says "The exact rates at which the previous four techniques increase the Shiny probability are currently unknown." What four techniques does this mean. I know chain fishing rates are unknown still, but what are the other 4? because I am only counting 3 techniques, The shiny Charm, Masuda Method and Poké Radar which I am pretty sure those odds have already been calculated. Yamitora1 (talk) 14:08, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

They are? Nobody said they went up 4 times like normal chance, or they changed at all, considering G5 did buffed Masuda method by 1/8192 IIRC while wild was still 1/8192. Eridanus (talk) 14:16, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Its confusing that's for sure. Yamitora1 (talk) 14:48, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

I imagine that Shiny Charm is the same, and triples the shiny rate.----BigBadBatter 01:37, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Well, it's probably coincidence, but no sooner did I get the charm that i ran into a carbink/ragarolla horde with a shinny ragarolla in it. But I think we have to hack the game and see the code before we can be sure or add to the article. Yamitora1 (talk) 02:21, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Gen 1?

Can Shiny Pokémon occur in the first generation? I have encountered a Missingno of alternate colors while recording, and someone on the video comments says they once got a gen1 shiny as well. Is this an intentional effect or is it the game not properly setting the second species byte that controls colors? Or is it something that is caused due to hardware or emulation errors? (Was there a report of people naturally encountering ??????????'s with a "1 in 1 million" chance? This might be similar). Here's my video. --Pokechu22 (talk) 15:59, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Shiny Pokémon do not strictly exist in Generation I; that is to say that in those games there is no difference at all, but they do retain their Shininess when traded from Gen II to Gen I to Gen II again, and Pokémon caught in Gen I can be Shiny after being traded to Gen II. But as for your actual question, Missingno.'s pallet being wrong does not mean it is Shiny. I can't tell you exactly what the cause of the incorrect pallet is, but it's not due to Missingno. being Shiny. --SnorlaxMonster 16:11, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Hm. I'll have to see what happens if I trade it then. But that could be interesting. I'll have to find my save state. --Pokechu22 (talk) 16:33, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

I believe this is due to your disabling cheat codes during the black entering-battle screen. I'm not 100% on this, but I think what's happening is you've effectively interrupted the wild Pokemon generation process causing it to split between the Pokemon determined by the code and a Pokemon that can normally be encountered in that area. So it started loading the specified MissingNo. data into RAM, but you intercepted the process which resulted in the remaining data being generated for a wild Pokemon native to that area. Based on coloration, I'm guessing the encounter generated an Oddish. Try repeating the process by interrupting more encounters. --GARY-DOS (talk) 03:13, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Encounter with Shining Pokémon

The Pokémon 10th Anniversary Collector's Edition Complete Pokédex calls "Pokémon Gallery: Encounter with Shining Pokémon" "Pokémon Gallery: Encounter with Shiny Pokémon". Would this be the "English name" or not? Pikachu Bros. (talk) 14:24, 7 April 2014 (UTC), edited 14:24, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're asking, but yes, Shiny Pokémon is absolutely the official English Name for them. It's the name given in all of the recent games. ^★Jo the Marten^★ ಠ_ಠ♥ 17:43, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

No, I'm saying the name of the picture says Shiny instead of Shining in the 10th Anniversary book, and asking if we should change the name of the picture. Pikachu Bros. (talk) 19:10, 7 April 2014 (UTC), edited 19:10, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the current title is a translation of the Japanese title, so if there's an official English one, I say go for it. --SnorlaxMonster 05:37, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

This was published in generation 3, and the term shiny wasn't used until gen. 5, so it was probably because the gen 2 cards referred to them as "shining pokemon", so the author probably used that.--Espurr101 (talk) 22:43, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

The book says "Shiny", though. Pikachu Bros. (talk) 22:56, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Pokédex registration Shiny sprite

It happens as early as HGSS. I don't think it happens in G3, not sure about DPPt. Anyone could double check? Eridanus (talk) 12:45, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Calculations

I decided to do some math. I'm sure I'm not the first to come up with these numbers, but I haven't seen them anywhere, so i figured I would post them.
Number of encounters required to have a 10% chance at finding a shiny Pokémon... 864
Number of encounters required to have a 25% chance at finding a shiny Pokémon... 2357
Number of encounters required to have a 50% chance at finding a shiny Pokémon... 5678
Number of encounters required to have a 75% chance at finding a shiny Pokémon... 11356
Number of encounters required to have a 99% chance at finding a shiny Pokémon... 37224
Of course, you can never reach 100%, but 99.99999%.............................. 132032

Not sure if anyone cares, but I thought it was interesting. Equation I used was y = 100 - (100 * ((8191/8192)^x)) if you want to look at it. Kplaxxc25 (talk) 06:05, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

Changing Shininess through generations

As Generation VI increased the probability of Pokémon being shiny, wouldn't some Pokémon from games of earlier generations became shiny after being transfered to Generation VI? Suic12- (talk) 18:39, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

No. for the same reason a pokemon's ability slot is now locked Jmvb (talk) 18:25, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

But that's because ability and personality value (that determines the ability slot) are stored separately and redundantly. Is Shininess really stored the same way (I'd be quite surprised if it were)? (Also, by 'now' do you mean new to Generation VI? Ability locking has been present since Pal Park where a Pickup Zigzagoon from Gen III would always keep Pickup upon transfer to Gen IV but have a 50% chance of switching to Gluttony on evolution based on its predetermined personality value.) Blueapple128 (talk) 18:40, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

What I meant by ability locking is that in Generation VI the ability is still locked on evolution. So a pick-up Zigzagoon from Gen III will always evolve into a pick-up Linoone in GenVI even if it evolves into a gluttony Linoone in GenIV/V. I assume that shininess is now stored separately from PID simply to stop pre-gen pokemon becoming shiny on transfer Jmvb (talk) 19:00, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Huh, very interesting; had no idea about that. Any links to sources and/or disassembly? Blueapple128 (talk) 23:47, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Source for the ability thing is myself as I tested it (though a bunch of others did too). Apparently I was wrong about shinyness now being stored separately. According to some guys at project pokemon, if your pokemon's PID fits the criteria of not being shiny pre-genvi but would be shiny in genvi, poketransfer will actually change the PID so it isn't shiny. This doesn't seem to affect anything else though as it seems to be the only thing the PID is still used for. Jmvb (talk) 00:49, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Tag.

What is the tag for a shiny Pokémon? I saw it somewhere, but I lost the page. A little help please? WATERWarrior67 23:08, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Unobtainable Shiny Pokemon

Shouldn't Arceus be removed as it can be obtained in the Event that started today? Source: Serebii.net Hydrachomp (talk) 12:10, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

We're not allowed to use Serebii as a source here, but if he's right there should be loads of other sources cropping up soon. JMVB - I don't what to put here. (talk) 12:36, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Pretty sure the Ageto Celebi in Gen III can be shiny. Source Pac (talk) 00:54, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

I recommend reading all the way through that thread. As you can see in posts toward the end the algorithm is known to be unable to produce Shiny Celebi. --SnorlaxMonster 08:12, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Shiny Gyarados in Crystal

At least Shiny Gyarados has the "Can't escape!" script when attempting to flee: https://youtu.be/MXNDw_YIdKw
Shiny Gyarados IVs are fixed to 0 HP / 14 ATK / 10 DEF / 10 SPE / 10 SPC, and Escape is prevented.

Encountering wild Shiny Gyarados:

RO20:4648 79               ld   a,c
RO20:4649 FE 1B            cp   a,1B
RO20:464B 38 01            jr   c,464E
RO20:464D AF               xor  a
RO20:464E 4F               ld   c,a
RO20:464F 06 00            ld   b,00
RO20:4651 21 71 46         ld   hl,4671
RO20:4654 09               add  hl,bc
RO20:4655 09               add  hl,bc
RO20:4656 09               add  hl,bc
RO20:4657 5E               ld   e,(hl)
RO20:4658 23               inc  hl
RO20:4659 56               ld   d,(hl)		// de = (D230)

ROM0:26D4 E5               push hl
ROM0:26D5 C5               push bc
ROM0:26D6 F0 9D            ld   a,(ff00+9D)
ROM0:26D8 F5               push af
ROM0:26D9 FA 39 D4         ld   a,(D439)
ROM0:26DC D7               rst  10		// Bank 1C for Shiny Gyarados
ROM0:26DD 21 3A D4         ld   hl,D43A
ROM0:26E0 4E               ld   c,(hl)
ROM0:26E1 23               inc  hl
ROM0:26E2 46               ld   b,(hl)		// 1C:4072 for Shiny Gyarados
ROM0:26E3 0A               ld   a,(bc)		// 1C:4072 is 07
ROM0:26E4 03               inc  bc
ROM0:26E5 70               ld   (hl),b
ROM0:26E6 2B               dec  hl
ROM0:26E7 71               ld   (hl),c
ROM0:26E8 47               ld   b,a
ROM0:26E9 F1               pop  af
ROM0:26EA D7               rst  10
ROM0:26EB 78               ld   a,b
ROM0:26EC C1               pop  bc
ROM0:26ED E1               pop  hl
ROM0:26EE C9               ret  

RO25:769C 12               ld   (de),a		// Store battle type in (D230)
RO25:769D C9               ret  

ROMF:696F FA 30 D2         ld   a,(D230)	// Load battle type in a, 07 is fixed shiny
ROMF:6972 FE 05            cp   a,05
ROMF:6974 20 20            jr   nz,6996

ROMF:6996 FE 07            cp   a,07
ROMF:6998 20 06            jr   nz,69A0
ROMF:699A 06 EA            ld   b,EA		// If fixed shiny, bc = 0xEAAA
ROMF:699C 0E AA            ld   c,AA
ROMF:699E 18 08            jr   69A8

ROMF:69A8 21 0C D2         ld   hl,D20C
ROMF:69AB 78               ld   a,b
ROMF:69AC 22               ldi  (hl),a
ROMF:69AD 71               ld   (hl),c		// Set the IVs to 14 ATK / 10 DEF / 10 SPE / 10 SPC

Attempting to flee:

ROMF:58B3 FA 30 D2         ld   a,(D230)
ROMF:58B6 FE 02            cp   a,02
ROMF:58B8 CA A2 59         jp   z,59A2
ROMF:58BB FE 06            cp   a,06
ROMF:58BD CA A2 59         jp   z,59A2
ROMF:58C0 FE 09            cp   a,09
ROMF:58C2 CA 8D 59         jp   z,598D
ROMF:58C5 FE 0B            cp   a,0B
ROMF:58C7 CA 8D 59         jp   z,598D
ROMF:58CA FE 07            cp   a,07
ROMF:58CC CA 8D 59         jp   z,598D		// If shiny, display "Can't escape!"
ROMF:58CF FE 0C            cp   a,0C
ROMF:58D1 CA 8D 59         jp   z,598D		// (Entei, Raikou, Suicune)

--Froggy25 (talk) 03:44, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

As far as I know, it applies to other Shinies as well in G2. Eridanus (talk) 13:54, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Nope, I have tested it with a regular shiny encounter in the wild. Used a save state so I could test it multiple times that battle in case of flukes, but the first attempt to run resulted in running successfully. I didn't use encounter codes or anything either --Shadowater (talk) 21:47, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for confirming it. Then the edit I made should be correct. --Froggy25 (talk) 23:45, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Few questions and things to say about shiny Pokémon.

Hello. At first, I just noticed the Gyarados from the HG/SS expansion (123/123) was missing from the list of shiny Pokémon cards. Also, why are Groudon, Kyogre and Rayquaza present in the unobtainable list on Gen VI ? Cannot they be imported as shinies from Gen IV ? It also says that none of the Mew distributed in Gen I had IV making them shiny, but citation is missing. Do we have any proof of that ? Finally, I have two questions about shiny Celebi and Jirachi. Are we 100% sure that Wishmaker can be shiny, since it is not accepted by Poke-Transporter ? And what about the possibility of a shiny Ageto Celebi ? The last time I read about it, it was said that the Celebi sent to Colosseum could not be shiny, but there were still doubts for the 48 ones sent to the GBA games. Any recent news about that ? Thanks !

Jack-spearow (talk) 13:35, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Rayquaza/Groupon/Kyogre aren't listed there... The bonus disc is capable of producing a Jirachi, it has been proven with people using GBA saves that will generate it. In fact pokemon bank now lets it through. All the evidence suggests the remaining 48 Celebi are produced in the same way as the Gc one so it can't be shiny JMVB - I don't what to put here. (talk) 11:56, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Shiny-locked Pokémon in Gen VI

Are we going to mention how some legendary Pokémon cannot be obtained Shiny in Generation VI games, but can be imported from previous generations? Mewtwo, the legendary birds, Deoxys, and the weather trio cannot be legitimately encountered Shiny in their respective Generation VI games, but they can be ported over to Generation VI from a Generation V or earlier game or received through an event like the current Shiny Rayquaza event. This is basically the same thing that happened with Reshiram and Zekrom in Generation V, but because none of the aforementioned legendaries debuted in Generation VI, they can be obtained Shiny through trading or migrating, but cannot in Generation VI (so there will never be a legitimate Shiny Groudon with the blue pentagon identifying it as native to Generation VI). Kyurem's Ice Blade 21:11, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't think this page is the best place for that info. Perhaps we can have notes about shiny locked pokemon on the location pages where there are caught? JMVB - I don't what to put here. (talk) 21:50, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Sinnoh

One NPC in Oreburgh City calls these differently colored Pokémon. Eridanus (talk) 09:49, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Shiny-lock Clarity

Okay, I think the section for Pokémon that can't be shiny needs to be more clear, more detailed, and possibly broken up into sections, a table, or even its own page.

Look at it this way: Xerneas and Yveltal cannot be found shiny in the wild in X or Y, however they don't make the list because there has been an event for shiny versions of them in Japan. But then someone reading the page might not know about the event, so they're expecting to be able to soft-reset for them. Or they're going to be taken in by a hack because it says it was caught at Team Flare's HQ but there's nothing to say it can't be. As far as anyone reading this page will know - Xerneas and Yveltal can be found in the wild as shiny Pokémon.

Or to put it more simply: Mewtwo can be obtained as a shiny in FRLG and sent forwards to XYORAS meaning it doesn't make the list, but can the Mewtwo in XY be shiny? I have no idea, because the page doesn't differentiate between the two possibilities.

It is too vague to be of any use. It needs to be more specific, or it might as well just be removed and replaced with the simple phrase "event and plot-significant Pokémon can't be shiny."

What I propose is that the section be broken up into "Pokémon That Cannot Be Shiny in the Wild" and "Event Pokémon That Cannot Be Shiny", or that Pokémon that cannot be caught as shinies in each generation but can be transferred up should still be listed but with a footnote explaining that they can be obtained as shinies in past generations. Me, Hurray! (talk) 19:52, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

The point of the list is to indicate whether the Pokémon can legally be Shiny at all, regardless of the method. Noting which particular instances of Pokémon cannot be Shiny might also be a good idea (i.e. Shiny locked Reshiram/Zekrom in Gen V and the Gen VI Shiny locks), but it's quite different to what the current list is trying to achieve. --SnorlaxMonster 02:09, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

I feel like that broad definition of "unobtainable" makes the list completely useless, though. I think we should do what you just said about notation. Then the list would function both ways. All a user would have to do is consult the notes to know whether its shiny-locked or completely unobtainable. Me, Hurray! (talk) 22:23, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't see why that makes the list useless. Knowing whether something can ever be Shiny is the kind of thing that is useful on a page about Shiny Pokémon; knowing if a Pokémon can be Shiny when obtained in a particular way is typically more useful to include on the page about obtaining it that way, but this page does also mention Shiny locked Pokémon by generation. Trying to make the list also mention which Pokémon are Shiny-locked in-game as well is just going to make it confusing (esp. once you start considering Colo/XD), whereas Shiny locking for particular kinds of encounters are very common in Gen VI so it makes more sense to just specify those. --SnorlaxMonster 01:15, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Hidden Power of Shiny Pokémons in Gen. II

OK, so I'm a bit confused: the Trivia section states that the power of Shiny Pokémons in Gen. II is either 50 or 70. However applying shiny DVs to the calculation formula of hidden power yields 31(base) + 20 or 0(for Attack) + 10(for Block > 7) + 5(for Speed > 7) + 3(for Special: floor((5 * floor(10 / 8) + 10 mod 4) / 2) = 3) = 49 or 69 . Did I make any mistakes during the calculation? --Rabby250 (talk) 06:06, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

You are correct. I suspect this info comes from Pokémon Online, which implements Hidden Power wrongly. I wanted to submit a fix on GitHub, but looking at this non-sensical code discouraged me, as I'm worried of breaking things if I try to correct that. --Froggy25 (talk) 20:41, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes, looks like filing an issue would be preferred over direct modification. Thanks for verifying the outcome. --Rabby250 (talk) 11:34, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Shiny Victini

During the Liberty Pass event Victini is generated under a standard A-B-E-F type PID, there is no evidence to suggest that it has limiting factors to its IVs, Nature, or Shininess.

It has also been caught shiny before on plenty of unmodified hardware

Here are videos of people catching legit shiny Victini: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvOIJGYqUZM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJczEkWxmKY - unsigned comment from DoubleYou (talk • contribs)

Both of those videos explicitly say in the descriptions that they hacked to remove the shiny lock. This doesn't prove anything. VioletPumpkin (talk) 04:09, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

If those videos are the kinds of proof you're going to offer, then we're going to have to be very skeptical that Victini isn't Shiny-locked in the Liberty Pass event. If you can get a reliable second opinion from someone (publicly), perhaps somewhere like the Smogon forums, confirming what you're saying, then we may be able to trust your claim. Tiddlywinks (talk) 04:18, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Just because you see someone catching a Shiny Victini in a video doesn't make it legit. Take for example this video. Uneducated people would say "Oh hey, Bulbapedia are idiots, they don't know this can be done, I'm going to fix it". But then look at the description and we're not really that dumb. He says both in the video and in the description, where he includes Action Replay codes, that it's Shiny-locked. The same codes would also get you a Shiny Reshiram and Shiny Zekrom as well, but obviously we don't advise doing that as they are invalid anyway. CycloneGU (talk) 04:24, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Generation VII SOS Battle Shiny Odds with Shiny Charm

So far, Bulbapedia is the only place that I've found that lists the current shiny odds as being 4/1365 (approximately 1/341) with the Shiny Charm on a chain of 70-255 rather than 1/683 under the same conditions. Both Serebii and even the bulbahandbook (http://bulbahandbook.bulbagarden.net/pokemonsunmoon/guide/sos-battle-chaining) state that the odds are 1/683, and when I tried to find a source of the new data in the changelog, none was given.

The information was provided by BlazingDiancie, but no further evidence was provided at the time of the edit, nor does BlazingDiancie have a userpage on which I could directly verify the source material for said odds (70-255 SOS chain w/Shiny Charm).

Did I miss a recent discovery in data-mining that revealed this new statistic? Basically, should the bulbahandbook be corrected to 1/341 under said conditions, or should the Shiny Pokemon page be corrected to 1/683 under said conditions? - unsigned comment from ‎Tjallan53149 (talk • contribs)

Generation VII image

We need to get a screenshot of a Shiny Pokemon appearing in Generation VII, with its version of the sparkle imagery. I have an image available for a Shiny Rockruff, though I am unable to upload due to permissions. Another idea would be to go back to the original theme of the Shiny pictures, and get an image of a Shiny Alolan Sandshrew appearing. --Macsen (talk) 15:47, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Pokémon GO Shinies

We should have information on the new Shiny Magikarp and Gyarados that can be found in Pokémon GO as of March 2017. I do not have any images personally available. TraxScrip813 (talk) 15:32, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

Island Challenge trials

Can shiny Pokemon appear in Island Challenge trials? sumwun (talk) 20:04, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Friend Safari and DexNav Odds

Hello! I was wondering if there is a reason why we use information from MrNbaYoh for DexNav odds, but not Friend Safari odds. MrNbaYoh says in a tweet [1] "So, the PID seems to be calculated 5 times (+2 if shiny charm) in the friend safari." This indicates that the odds for Friend Safari are 1/819.2 without charm and ~1/585.143 with charm. Is it because nobody's noticed the tweet, there's no breakdown of the information, or the wording of the tweet? Or something else entirely?Theskipster (talk) 21:54, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Unobtainable Shiny Pokemon

As it stands, this section consists of a collection of lists, with one list for each generation, which is a bit awkward. I think it would look much better in a table. I've gone ahead and made a template that I think would suit it well, here. I'd just like to know if there are any objections or concerns before getting the template mainspaced and turning the lists into a table. Thanks!

—Haddady ~Straight Outta the Bag~ 23:07, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

"光るポケモン"

Can anyone cite when this term has been used officially? People on Twitter are saying official Japanese promotional materials only ever use "differently-colored" and mocking Bulbapedia for claiming otherwise, so we need to either A) remove it if it's false, or B) back up the claim. Nutter Butter (talk) 16:04, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

It's been at least mentioned in the intro for Stadium 2 and the name of a poster. --超龍_「Chao」 00:54, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

As for in-game, the term "ひかる ポケモン" appeared in the description for Shiny Charm. --超龍_「Chao」 01:05, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Old Man's Shiny, FRLG

The "Pokémon" that the old man encounters in FRLG? Isn't it always a Weedle? Striker212 (talk) 00:02, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Gen VII Shinies

Can someone please unlock this page? You're now two shiny images behind on Generation VII. Need pictures from both SM/USUM and LGPE. SM/USUM one can be an Alolan Sandshrew. --Macsen (talk) 09:22, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, the page is not locked... You might need to be autoconfirmed to edit certain pages, but I'm not really sure. --Celadonkey 14:51, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Unavailable Shiny list - sub sections for gen 7 to show LGPE and SMUSUM?

Should we separate the lists under gen 7 to have a section for SMUSUM and LGPE. Before splitting it by generation made sense because of the inter-compatibility - but LGPE has thrown that out of the window. currently only Mew is affected but it looks a bit awkward JMVB - literally it doesn't stand for anything (talk) 07:49, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Shiny in biology section

Here's a question about Shiny Pokemon: Is it a good idea to describe their Shiny colors on their pages? --Dogleader (talk) 23:04, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

masuda method forced shinies?

I think I saw a video once that said if you use the masuda method and count the number of eggs before you get shiny, soft reset and breed the same number of eggs with a pokemon of your choice it will be shiny. He called it shiny swapping (video) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nc3BsqkdYY. Has this been checked? If not I can. - unsigned comment from Bob-jo3 (talk • contribs)

It's probably worth mentioning somewhere, but I'm not sure where. I'm by no means an expert but this seems like more of a side effect of the RNG algorithm than a formal "method" for shiny hunting. There's more information here if you're curious. --celadonk (talk) 17:24, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Pokédex NPCs in Isle of Armor

Wandering through Isle of Armor there are some NPCs that offer to you the chance to see a Pokémon present in the area that you've never encountered before for 100 Watts. Agreeing with the service, you'll see a Pokédex page with a random Pokémon that you miss as seen and these Pokémon have the chance to be shiny, as demonstrated here. I don't know how these NPCs are called and I haven't find record on the wiki, but this could definitely be added to the "Non-playable character's Shiny Pokémon" section.- unsigned comment from Croma (talk • contribs)

Virtual Console Shinies in SWSH

Virtual Console Shinies are also guaranteed to be square Shinies, but the article only mentions fateful encounters and Pokémon GO. Icycatelf (talk) 16:13, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

This is because Virtual Console shinies are not guaranteed to be Square, just very very likely, with 65521/65536 being Square, and only 15/65536 being Star. Several encounter types are highly weighted towards being Star or Square depending on generation method and RNG. There is a list here for reference. Atrius97 (talk) 23:01, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Ah. I was always under the impression that they were. I appreciate the info and the link! Icycatelf (talk) 23:45, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Proposed edit

In the "in the anime" section, I think there are two problem statements;

• Regarding Pink Butterfree, it states: "This is, however, not the standard alternate coloration for a Butterfree, and therefore may not be counted as a Shiny Pokémon."
• The first true Shiny Pokémon that appeared was a Noctowl in Fowl Play!.

According to whom? There is currently a prevailing view in the fandom that "if an alternately colored Pokémon doesn't match the color of the mainline games' shiny sprite or 3D model, it 'doesn't count'" or is wrong. However, no official source has ever stated as such. While the fandom term "Shiny" became canon starting with Generation 5's English games (over-ruling Gen 3's "Alt. Color" in English FRLG), it didn't necessarily canonize the way some fans understood the term shiny. This would suggest that the Mewtwo Shining Mewtwo (Neo Destiny 109) "isn't shiny", or that some of the alt. color Pokémon in the 3D N64 and Game Cube games "aren't shiny". This applies a fan inference of something which no official source has ever stated as fact, and applies that fan understanding (or misunderstanding) of mainline game logic to other sections of the franchise, all of which seem to approach this situation in their own way. I think the best approach would be to take a sort of 'agnostic' compromise on the matter;

• Since no official source has ever stated Pink Butterfree "may not be counted as a Shiny Pokémon," omitting that phrase and leaving the acknowledgement that it is nonetheless "alternately colored" is a compromise.
• It'd then follow that rather than a fandom determination of what counts as a "true Shiny Pokémon", The statement regarding Noctowl should be rephrased to say it's the first alternate colored Pokémon to match the coloration and behavior (re: sparkles on coming out of the Poké Ball) of mainline game appearances of Shiny Pokémon.

The opening of this article is very strong – the Terminology section shows a good understanding of the weird circumstances by which the term 'shiny' went from fandom to official but doesn't perfectly align with the Japanese terminology and understanding of いろちがい, but this section in particular seems like a mix of switching back and forth between the phrase "alternately colored" and "shiny" and then passing judgement on what does and doesn't count as shiny, based on a fandom definition. --INTERNETFRIEND (talk) 01:37, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

From conversation with a few people in the Discord (which was unproductive on both ends), there seems to be a fair amount of confusion regarding what I've stated here. I'd encourage folks to check out the older comments on this Talk page – i.e. those in the archive – because it more clearly outlines what kind of happened here and why you might be confused. In March of 2007, stated that;

"If it's not a normally-coloured Pokémon it must, logically, be an alternately-coloured Pokémon. It doesn't matter if it doesn't match the precise alternate colouration of the games."

which I'm asserting is correct.. In response, another user said that;

"Technically, yes; "alternately colored" means, technically, it's simply a different color. "Shiny" is a different story, however."

In 2007, "shiny" wasn't an official term yet – it wasn't really canonized until some time in late 2009, if memory serves. So we see that *Shiny* as a term was being approached as a fandom term, with its own definition, that differed from the official franchise understanding of being "alternately colored". Where things got murky was when promotional materials introduced the term, and eventually the mainline games themselves changed from "Alt. Color" to "Shiny Pokémon." At the time, I remember being parts of conversations where we all understood it would get confusing because people might mistakenly assume that by making the fan term official, it'd be making the fan definition, official, too. And, I think confusion that we were anticipating might end up happening about seems to have ended up becoming the case. But believe it or not, nothing's actually changed in how the franchise does, or rather, doesn't clearly define what "counts" as a Shiny Pokémon. So "Technically, yes; "alternately colored" means, technically, it's simply a different color. "Shiny" is a different story, however." is as true today as it was in 2007, but because "Shiny" has gotten confused, I know most people will have a hard time following the argument unless they dedicate themselves to reading the entire talk page history, looking up in game mentions of these terms (and more importantly, looking up and noting *lack* of mention, and *lack* of commitment to clearly defining these terms) to understand how things got here. I will firmly reject any claims, like what I met in the Discord, that what I am arguing is "bad faith". I am doing my best to clearly outline what the situation is, and it should be noted I'm leading with a proposed edit that I believe is a compromise. --INTERNETFRIEND (talk) 02:55, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

The comment regarding Pink Butterfree is correct as the episode it debuted in was prior to Shiny / Rare / Shining Pokémon being introduced properly as a concept in Generation II games and TCG sets. The English versions of Gold / Silver / Crystal also have a trainer at Lake of Rage make a reference to a Pink Butterfree. The shiny Butterfree in the game has similar colors but is not the same coloration and was introduced long after the episode that Pink Butterfree debuted in. Pink Butterfree is... well, pink; whereas in all official sprites and models for Butterfree starting from Generation II have them as some shade of purple with lavender color wings.

Ash's Noctowl is the first properly introduced Shiny Pokémon in the franchise as the episode debuted after Generation II games released.

While no official word is given as far as I know, Alternate color was seemingly a catch-all term in Generation III as in Generation II, the terms Shining and Rare (used within internal game data) were used when the devs were trying to figure out a term to make different colored Pokémon standout as unique and different. Alternate color works more with the special one-off non-Shiny Pokémon in the anime as those are usually from very unique circumstances or items that may have altered what their colors were supposed to. In side-games, spin-offs, and crossover games, several Pokémon have alternate color schemes and tend to be noted as such in those games as non-Shiny (although Shiny colors may be pallets that get used.) The earliest used instance of "Shiny" was during Generation IV for an event before it became official in Generation V games. Frozen Fennec 04:47, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

I don't follow on what basis the Pink Butterfree comment is correct, unless it's because you're still using the fandom definition of Shiny Pokémon, rather than the official definition of Shiny Pokémon, which has never clearly stated that any Pokémon "doesn't count" as shiny. Well, it has more or less already clearly delineated the difference between a "regular color Pokémon" and a "Shiny Pokémon", but it has never ruled on the idea of an alternate Pokémon with a third, unique color scheme, "not counting" as Shiny. I think if you were to suggest that the games are implicitly suggesting as such, I might even agree with you, but the approach of this project doesn't appear to be to take suggestions and run with it – Pokémon Legends Arceus is implicitly suggesting several characters are related to characters in other games, but the general approach has been to say that "the relationship between the [characters], if any, is unknown."

I would argue that instances like the TCG's Shining Mewtwo, Mudkip Star, Creatures' models for Pokémon Stadiums, Colosseum, XD, etc. actually do point towards an answer about whether these "third, unique color scheme" Pokémon count as shinies (the answer being yes), and while you might choose to point to Pink Butterfree at Lake of Rage as a "reference", I'd choose to interpret it otherwise. We don't know which answer is correct. The games have never directly commented on it.

If you're going to insist on applying a fandom definition of "Shiny" here, I'd suggest the opening of the article be revised to more explicitly concede the murky history of the term, and on top of that I'd suggest following up on one of the conversations in the Archived talk pages – I am opposed to the redirect of this page from 'Alternate colored Pokémon'. To quote a 2009 post, "Shiny is only focusing on shiny Pokemon. Alternate coloration can imply any other colors of Pokemon such as Pink Butterfree." (i.e., Shiny Pokémon as a page for the fandom sense of the term, and Alternate color Pokémon for the official sense of the term.) --INTERNETFRIEND (talk) 06:46, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Alternate color may be the official sense of the Japanese term, but we're an English wiki. It's true, there's no official definition of "Shiny" as far as I know. (Though if Frozen Fennec says some side games distinguish differently colored Pokemon that don't match game colorations, that's worth hearing in more detail.) But it doesn't necessarily matter if there's no given definition; it's not hard to see a reasonable definition just by the evidence of our own eyes. It's like the intro says currently: they're Pokemon that are not their normal color.

Now, I also think that specifying the games' standard as the rule for "Shiny" Pokemon is fine, again because of abundant evidence: if "Shiny" is always used for Pokemon from the games, it is reasonable to consider other Pokemon to be something slightly different. I will agree that there's no evidence that there not "Shiny", but there's also no evidence that they are.

As a wiki, following official terms is not our sole purpose. If the broad fandom has decided that it's easier to call Pokemon with non-standard colors "alternately colored", then it's perfectly valid for BP to document that as well.

I feel like I'm starting to lose the thread now...but those are my thoughts in response to what has been brought up. I'll wait for a response and try to respond better then. ;^^ Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:21, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

https://pokemongolive.com/en/post/valentines-day-event-2023-luvdisc-research-day/

The term "Shiny" is officially used by the developers of Pokémon Go, and in Raid Battle in The Ruins!, the character Shane Seeker showed only the official variations of Shinys from the games when he showed the pokedex. That is, they are aware of the term and color variations.

The anime itself makes it clear when the Pokémon is Shiny or not, that is, Ash's Gengar is not Shiny.--Hikaru Wazana (talk) 16:31, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi Hikaru. Same question for you as above, since you are deliberately talking past what I outlined above. Why are confusing the fan definition of shiny with the official definition? Is it deliberate? Or do you really not understand what I outlined?

To Tiddlywinks; "If the broad fandom has decided...." Can you more clearly outline what the official policy of this wiki is? I have historically defended Bulbapedia on other fansites and one of the argument which often came up was that many of the project's users insist on trying to make certain fandom terms official, or else try very hard to blur those lines. I felt strongly that when the site abandoned its massive shipping agenda, it was a step in the right direction, and often pointed to it as evidence to the contrary. However, I'm finally ready to give up on defending this site, and want to be able to point to this talk page as an example of how this project still tries to pass off head-canon as formal. Can you please clarify the idea that this site treats fandom as binding, if a 'broad' (majority?) has agreed on it? I don't want to be accused of misreading, or putting words in anyone's mouth, so it'd be best to have you more clearly outline the idea here. --INTERNETFRIEND (talk) 16:37, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

For the benefit of someone like Hikaru, who maybe is a bit... I'll copy-paste what I wrote on another talk page;

Alt. Color Pokémon (official definition, prior to 2009): Any alternatively colored Pokémon.

Shiny Pokémon (fandom definition, prior to 2009): Any alternatively colored Pokémon, but only of a particular coloration that matches the mainline video games.

In 2009, official use of Alt. Color Pokémon was retired in favor of Shiny Pokémon. But doing this does not mean your asinine definition of what does or doesn't count as meeting that criteria changed;

Shiny Pokémon (official definition, 2009-onward): Any alternatively colored Pokémon.

Shiny Pokémon (fandom definition, 2009-onward): Any alternatively colored Pokémon, but only of a particular coloration that matches the mainline video games.

You are conflating the official and fan definition of "Shiny Pokémon". There is no evidence to support what you're claiming. When Pokémon Go says that, for example, "here is Shiny Furfrou." it does not say "here is shiny Furfrou, and all the other Shiny Furfrou are wrong and don't count." You're adding that. The burden of proof is on you. --INTERNETFRIEND (talk) 16:41, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Ash's Gengar has never let out the Shiny sparkles that other Shiny Pokémon like Ash's Noctowl, Lance's Gyarados, and Steven's Metagross have demonstrated before in the anime. In addition, its Gigantamax form has its regular colors. --FinnishPokéFan92 (talk) 16:46, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

OK, and? That doesn't address any of what I've just said. You're still using the fandom definition of the term, which says a Shiny Pokémon has to be this, do this, etc. or it "doesn't count". There's no official source that's ever agreed with the fandom definition of the term in this way. --INTERNETFRIEND (talk) 16:48, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

The entire basis of your argument boils down to the Russell's Teapot and Argument from ignorance logical fallacies. The burden of proof for someone making empirically unfalsifiable claims falls on the one making those claims, rather than shifting the burden of disproof to others, and a proposition is not inherently true because it has not yet been proven false. Even when attempting to shift the burden of proof onto everyone else, you refuse to accept ample evidence to the contrary. The other users across the various talk pages and Discord provided ample examples of the official usage of terminology and definitions of Shiny Pokemon, your refusal to accept them does not make them invalid. Atrius97 (talk) 17:04, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Not really. But your argument does boil down to Wikipedia:cherrypicking. (I can be just as snarky as you :) ) --INTERNETFRIEND (talk) 17:09, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Basically, you are reading into the official use of the term what doesn't exist, and your self-assured examples last night proved this. "PLA says a Shiny Ponyta is blue" does not say, for example, "PLA says a green Ponyta is not Shiny." Likewise, while an official source will say "Shiny Butterfree is purple with green eyes," you cannot read into it that it says "A pink Butterfree is not Shiny." These are things we go through in elementary school. (e.g. "All people named Sally are girls," does not mean "all girls are named Sally.") You can cite all these fallacies and this and that and the other that you want, but it's not going to change the fact that you're failing at a basic logic problem. The fandom definition of "Shiny" is unnecessarily more stringent than the official definition of "Shiny", which has never said what you are claiming it says. --INTERNETFRIEND (talk) 17:20, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Going by the English games (because we are an English wiki), the only thing you can say about Shinies is that all Pokemon called Shiny have matched the have game colorations. Can you show me where a Pokemon of different colors was called Shiny?

It's all well and good to say that they never said Shinies can't have other colors, or that Japanese or other terms are broader. But as far as English goes, you need to show a concrete example that "Shiny" is intended to be broader. Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:27, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Then you're necessarily stating the "2009-on official definition of Shiny Pokémon" I've provided is wrong, and that means that official term "Alt. Color Pokémon" was never retconned. Therefore, "Alt. Color Pokémon" needs to be its own article and this page needs to be significantly rewritten to undo an impression of equivalency between the terms. --INTERNETFRIEND (talk) 18:42, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

I see the Discord server is falsely characterizing my edits to some other pages as 'vandalism'. Doesn't it appear like it? It's because it's your stupid comprehension being put into practice - if you're going to claim that Shiny Pokémon now have to be a particular color or they "don't count", the Shining Mewtwo card isn't a Shiny Mewtwo. Mudkip Star isn't a shiny Mudkip. You cannot have it both ways, and it's bad faith to suggest edits to implement your stupid logic into practice are vandalism. If you don't like the result of your logic, stop insisting upon it. --INTERNETFRIEND (talk) 19:38, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Proposed split and redirect

In the event a consensus is reached that I am incorrect in the above conversation, so that "Shiny Pokémon" is understood to be, for example, "a Pink Butterfree is not shiny," then this means that the article rename in 2009 was incorrect, because at that time the community incorrectly assumed that Shiny Pokémon as a term retconned/replaced the term Alt. Color Pokémon. Since you are all now arguing that these are mutually exclusive terms, then that means the term Alt. Color Pokémon was never retconned. I therefore proposed that it would deserve its own page on this wiki, and this article should be rewritten to accomodate for this. --INTERNETFRIEND (talk) 17:43, 13 April 2023 (UTC)