11,917
edits
Talk:Trio master: Difference between revisions
relinking
(→Suggested merge: Fan terms, Fan Head Cannon and fan logic are nothing but trouble, and really should never be used to justify the creation of a page.) |
Nescientist (talk | contribs) (relinking) |
||
| (107 intermediate revisions by 47 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Untitled== | |||
Don't you think this is overdoing it a bit? -[[User:Happy Mask Man|Happy Mask Man]] 17:24, 17 February 2007 (UTC) | Don't you think this is overdoing it a bit? -[[User:Happy Mask Man|Happy Mask Man]] 17:24, 17 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
| Line 5: | Line 6: | ||
Eh, I figured it needed to have a name. After all, there is a definite relationship between the birds and Lugia, the beasts and Ho-oh, and the Regis and Regigigas. | Eh, I figured it needed to have a name. After all, there is a definite relationship between the birds and Lugia, the beasts and Ho-oh, and the Regis and Regigigas. | ||
Think it should just be a subpage of [[Legendary trio]]? [[User:TTEchidna|Tom Temprotran]] 20:35, 17 February 2007 (UTC) | Think it should just be a subpage of [[Legendary group|Legendary trio]]? [[User:TTEchidna|Tom Temprotran]] 20:35, 17 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
Forget a subpage, just merge it into the main trio article as a section. That article is short anyway. --WikidSmaht 09:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | Forget a subpage, just merge it into the main trio article as a section. That article is short anyway. --WikidSmaht 09:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC) | ||
So, uh, when's something going to be done about this silly article? -[[User:Happy Mask Man|Happy Mask Man]] 01:17, 6 April 2007 (UTC) | So, uh, when's something going to be done about this silly article? -[[User:Happy Mask Man|Happy Mask Man]] 01:17, 6 April 2007 (UTC) | ||
== Arceus == | == Arceus == | ||
| Line 48: | Line 50: | ||
:A little late, but this should merged into the legendary trio article. Anyone oppose? [[User:DanPMK|MK]] 03:12, 11 September 2008 (UTC) | :A little late, but this should merged into the legendary trio article. Anyone oppose? [[User:DanPMK|MK]] 03:12, 11 September 2008 (UTC) | ||
::Naw, it's a good article. It could be fleshed out a bit more, and after Movie 12, it will probably be bigger with the Dragon Trio added. I say keep it for now. [[User:Kumori Satosuke|Satosuke]] 03:58, 16 October 2008 (UTC) | ::Naw, it's a good article. It could be fleshed out a bit more, and after Movie 12, it will probably be bigger with the Dragon Trio added. I say keep it for now. [[User:Kumori Satosuke|Satosuke]] 03:58, 16 October 2008 (UTC) | ||
:::I agree with Maxim here. The article is inconsistent and attempts to reveal patterns that don’t exist. Lugia definitely isn’t the master of the birds in the games, for example, and Ho‐oh is not the master of the beasts in the anime (AFAIK; bear in mind that I haven’t watched the show in years). The fact that we ''repeat'' Rayquaza really shows that this is just shoehorning. [[Legendary trio]]s this is not. [[User:IIMarckus|IIMarckus]] 22:13, 24 December 2008 (UTC) | :::I agree with Maxim here. The article is inconsistent and attempts to reveal patterns that don’t exist. Lugia definitely isn’t the master of the birds in the games, for example, and Ho‐oh is not the master of the beasts in the anime (AFAIK; bear in mind that I haven’t watched the show in years). The fact that we ''repeat'' Rayquaza really shows that this is just shoehorning. [[Legendary group|Legendary trio]]s this is not. [[User:IIMarckus|IIMarckus]] 22:13, 24 December 2008 (UTC) | ||
==Lake Trio Giratina== | ==Lake Trio Giratina== | ||
| Line 82: | Line 84: | ||
! Relation | ! Relation | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | [[a:File:Legendary_birds.jpg]]<br>[[Legendary Birds]] | ||
| align="center" | [[Image:249.png]]<br>{{p|Lugia}} | | align="center" | [[Image:249.png]]<br>{{p|Lugia}} | ||
| Lugia rises to quell the fighting of the [[legendary birds]] in ''[[The Power of One]]'', and is the only one who is able to do so. | | Lugia rises to quell the fighting of the [[legendary birds]] in ''[[The Power of One]]'', and is the only one who is able to do so. | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[File:Neo3_beasts.jpg|100px]]<br>[[Legendary | | [[File:Neo3_beasts.jpg|100px]]<br>[[Legendary beasts]] | ||
| align="center" | [[Image:250.png]]<br>{{p|Ho-Oh}} | | align="center" | [[Image:250.png]]<br>{{p|Ho-Oh}} | ||
| After the three [[legendary beasts]] perished in the fire at the [[Brass Tower]], Ho-Oh revived them. | | After the three [[legendary beasts]] perished in the fire at the [[Brass Tower]], Ho-Oh revived them. | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | [[a:File:GenIII_Battle.jpg]]<br>[[Weather Trio]] | ||
| align="center" | [[Image:384.png]]<br>{{p|Rayquaza}} | | align="center" | [[Image:384.png]]<br>{{p|Rayquaza}} | ||
| Rayquaza may internally be the master of the [[weather trio]], primarily because it had quelled the fighting between the other members of its trio in {{game|Emerald}}. | | Rayquaza may internally be the master of the [[weather trio]], primarily because it had quelled the fighting between the other members of its trio in {{game|Emerald}}. | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[File: | | [[File:Legendary titans.png|100px]]<br>[[Legendary giants|Legendary Golems]] | ||
| align="center" | [[Image:486.png]]<br>{{p|Regigigas}} | | align="center" | [[Image:486.png]]<br>{{p|Regigigas}} | ||
| Regigigas will awaken on bringing the three [[legendary golems]] to [[Snowpoint Temple]]. Regigigas' {{game|Platinum}} Pokédex entry also claims that it built statues made of {{p|Regirock|rocks}}, {{p|Regice|ice}}, and {{p|Registeel|magma}}. | | Regigigas will awaken on bringing the three [[Legendary giants|legendary golems]] to [[Snowpoint Temple]]. Regigigas' {{game|Platinum}} Pokédex entry also claims that it built statues made of {{p|Regirock|rocks}}, {{p|Regice|ice}}, and {{p|Registeel|magma}}. | ||
|- | |- | ||
| [[File:Dialga-Palkia-Giratina. | | [[File:Dialga-Palkia-Giratina.png|100px]]<br>[[Pokémon of Myth|Dragon Trio]] | ||
| align="center" rowspan="2" | [[Image:493.png]]<br>{{p|Arceus}} | | align="center" rowspan="2" | [[Image:493.png]]<br>{{p|Arceus}} | ||
| According to legend, Arceus created Dialga and Palkia, and it's stated in {{game|Platinum}} that Giratina was created alongside them, thus completing the [[dragon trio]]. All four legendary Pokémon will battle in the 12th Movie, ''[[Arceus: To a Conquering Spacetime]]''. | | According to legend, Arceus created Dialga and Palkia, and it's stated in {{game|Platinum}} that Giratina was created alongside them, thus completing the [[Pokémon of Myth|dragon trio]]. All four legendary Pokémon will battle in the 12th Movie, ''[[Arceus: To a Conquering Spacetime]]''. | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | [[a:File:MespritAzelfUxie.jpg]]<br>[[Lake Trio]] | ||
| Arceus is also said to have created the [[lake trio]] whilst creating the universe, making Arceus the only trio master that is related to two legendary trios rather than just one. | | Arceus is also said to have created the [[lake trio]] whilst creating the universe, making Arceus the only trio master that is related to two legendary trios rather than just one. | ||
| Line 341: | Line 343: | ||
:I'm actually more in favor of abolishing this entire article, since it serves no real purpose and is nothing but speculation brought forth through fan head cannon and happenstance evidence weaker than an ounce of instant coffee in a water cooler. [[User:Yamitora1|Yamitora1]] ([[User talk:Yamitora1|talk]]) 20:58, 27 January 2014 (UTC) | :I'm actually more in favor of abolishing this entire article, since it serves no real purpose and is nothing but speculation brought forth through fan head cannon and happenstance evidence weaker than an ounce of instant coffee in a water cooler. [[User:Yamitora1|Yamitora1]] ([[User talk:Yamitora1|talk]]) 20:58, 27 January 2014 (UTC) | ||
::I agree that this article/concept is too much of fanon. However, like "electric rodents", the concept of a "trio master" is popular enough in fanon that we'll have to document it somehow, but I don't think this quite warrants its own page either. I personally support a merge to the [[Appendix:Fan terminology]], this is the kind of thing that article is for. ''Popular'' fanon should be documented, but not treated like it's an official thing. [[Special:Contributions/Zesty Cactus|--]][[User:Zesty Cactus|<span style="color:#006400">'''Zesty'''</span>]][[User talk:Zesty Cactus|<span style="color:#3CB371">'''Cactus'''</span>]] 22:05, 27 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
:::Well, since its a page specifically for fandom stuff, I think it should be placed there. But the style of the article seems sterile, so what info would really be added that isn't already on the article to begin with?[[User:Yamitora1|Yamitora1]] ([[User talk:Yamitora1|talk]]) 23:29, 27 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
== Other 'references' == | |||
I'm a little unsure about some of the things that appear in the {{DL|Legendary group|other references to trio masters}} section. To me, some of them really don't seem like references at all, namely having to purify all of the Shadow Pokémon in Colosseum and having to befriend all 300 Pokémon in the Oblivia Browser in Guardian signs in order to encounter Ho-oh and Lugia, respectively. Yes, in each of these cases the befriending of a legendary trio is required to meet their master, but befriending the trio ''specifically'' is not. The three legendary birds are indeed needed to encounter Lugia in Guardian Signs, but so are 297 other Pokémon. That doesn't seem like much of a reference to me. It's not even like they're the only legendary trio that appear in the Oblivia Browser anyway. This also applies to the legendary golems in Shadows of Almia. I think that these three points should be removed from the page. [[User:Dannyboy601|Dannyboy601]] ([[User talk:Dannyboy601|talk]]) 16:34, 27 May 2014 (UTC) | |||
== Why does this exist? == | |||
Why has this fanfiction page returned to dominance? It makes no sense to have this on every legendary page and only even begins to make sense by combining sources from difference canon. Lugia is not a "trio master" in the games and it's not a term that's ever even uttered in the anime or manga, any details that this page tells us can be told on the appropriate section of each Pokemons page (such as Lugias relation to the legendary birds in the anime). This is an eyesore on an otherwise factual and accurate wiki and needs to be mass deleted.[[User:Five|Five]] ([[User talk:Five|talk]]) 09:14, 16 July 2016 (UTC) | |||
:I fully agree, but as far as I'm aware this has been brought up before and never gained much traction. We would need to get the approval of the {{bp|Editorial Board}} to delete it, so the most effective path forward might be to make your pitch on one of their talk pages in hopes of convincing them to discuss it. [[User:Pumpkinking0192|Pumpkinking0192]] ([[User talk:Pumpkinking0192|talk]]) 16:14, 16 July 2016 (UTC) | |||
::I disagree, this page is useful in describing a recurring relationship between legendary Pokémon in the games. While I agree that Lugia's inclusion is perhaps questionable, the others are clearly trio masters. Ho-oh resurrected the dogs, regigagas is clearly the master of the regis, arceus created the creation and lake trio, Rayquaza and Landorus are clearly internal leaders. It's clear that whenever there's a trio, there's usually a clear external or internal leader/master/overseer (whatever you want to call them). I say that's noteworthy [[User:Jmvb|JMVB - I don't what to put here.]] ([[User talk:Jmvb|talk]]) 18:52, 16 July 2016 (UTC) | |||
:::It's not canonical, though. It's all fan inferences. It belongs, at best, on [[Appendix:Fan terminology]], not in the mainspace. [[User:Pumpkinking0192|Pumpkinking0192]] ([[User talk:Pumpkinking0192|talk]]) 05:40, 17 July 2016 (UTC) | |||
::::Perhaps it isn't canon. However, the issue for deletion is apparently "it is fanon and therefore does not belong in the mainspace." And if that is the reason, then [http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/File:Project_Fandom_logo.png&limit=100 we had better be prepared to do quite a bit of deleting] for a reason that seems to be worded oddly. --[[User:Super goku|Super goku]] ([[User talk:Super goku|talk]]) 06:00, 17 July 2016 (UTC) | |||
:::::Fanon =/= fandom. The vast majority of those pages are documenting the Pokémon fandom in real life and/or on the Internet. This page (and a small handful of pages on that list, like [[HM slave]]) is instead trying to describe something in the games that is entirely inferred or invented by fans. The latter category of pages, in my opinion, do not belong on a self-respecting encyclopedia like we hope to be. [[User:Pumpkinking0192|Pumpkinking0192]] ([[User talk:Pumpkinking0192|talk]]) 06:08, 17 July 2016 (UTC) | |||
:::::Wiki's should always be factual, preferably with supporting evidence. My problem is that many articles on here now, this trio master stuff specifically, relies far too heavily on assumptions, theories and fan ideas, most of which only make sense if you assume anime rules and lore apply to the games, which is something we can say for 100% certainty is not the case. I can understand the argument that fanon has its place here, but it shouldn't be so prominent in the description for every single legendary. It's misleading, if not completely incorrect.[[User:Five|Five]] ([[User talk:Five|talk]]) 09:32, 22 July 2016 (UTC) | |||
I agree that the page should be deleted. "Trio master" is not a defined, solid concept, and the relationships referred to on the page could easily be moved into a '''Relationships between Legendary Pokémon''' section of the Legendary Pokémon article. --[[User:Lmoamemesxd|Lmoamemesxd]] ([[User talk:Lmoamemesxd|talk]]) 10:07, 22 July 2016 (UTC) | |||
:I'm really not sure you can call this "fanon". In fact, "fandom" really is more accurate. The only thing that's really not canon is the name "trio master", but that's what the unknown name template is for (and look just how many times it's used on this site). Each "master's" status over the respective trio are supported by canon. This relation between one more powerful Pokémon and a trio (or two others, thus creating a trio) isn't exactly disputable. It's mentioned time and time again, in game after game. [[User:Schiffy|<span style="color:#006400;">I don't even give a Schif</span>]] ([[User talk:Schiffy|<span style="color:#FF6600;">Talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|<span style="color:#FF0000;">Contribs</span>]]) 22:04, 26 July 2016 (UTC) | |||
This page should be deleted , but all links to this page should be removed beforehand to remove all traces of this article. And to make there be no red links. [[User:Boorider7|Boorider7]] ([[User talk:Boorider7|talk]]) 16:06, 16 August 2016 (UTC) | |||
:Except the thing here that is truly non-canon is the term itself. Trio Masters are canon that has been made clear on different occasions such as with the weather trio. And even if the term is non-canon right now there is a good chance it can fall into official usage like Eeveelutions and Shiny Pokémon did. {{unsigned|Flain}} | |||
::As far as I'm concerned, if we have endless pages on shipping, the whole fanon excuse to delete this page is bogus. Move it to an Appendix page, but not deletion. Trio Master relationships are canon in both the games and anime. --[[User:HoennMaster|<font color="blue">Hoenn</font>]][[User talk:HoennMaster|<font color="green">Master</font>]] 05:38, 28 September 2016 (UTC) | |||
:::This article should not be deleted, but the rules should be voted on as to what should be taken into consideration as to what qualifies a Pokémon to have such a title. Because it seems only a small group of people have decided what dictates the rules for a trio master, adopting and changing them as they see fit so as to keep the article to their liking. and because of this people with valid points are left without a voice and/or ignored altogether. | |||
:::Alternatively we could rename the article since master isn't exactly the best description. maybe Trio Mediator would be a better name since Pokémon like Lugia and Rayquaza don't necessarily control as much as counterbalances the others. [[User:Yamitora1|Yamitora1]] ([[User talk:Yamitora1|talk]]) 13:22, 3 February 2017 (UTC) | |||
It should stay because it's describes a phenomenon that appear in pokemon games and media. Anime-only ones like Meloetta and Jigglypuff too must be included in a seperate part of this article.--[[User:Martianmister|Martianmister]] ([[User talk:Martianmister|talk]]) 13:03, 11 February 2017 (UTC) | |||
The deletion template has been on the page for years. The conversation should probably still continue because having so many of them is quite annoying. I'll say the page and concept should be moved over to fan terminology. Based way too much on speculation and non-specific evidence. The information is however important, but the actual term is complete speculation. I'd suggest a page that describes the relationships between Legendary and Mythical Pokemon, Which would also include some extra information on Pokemon who AREN'T duos/trios such as the Tapu with Solgaleo/Lunala, who have lore with eachother but isn't mentioned very much on their own pages. The legendary titans aren't really a trio anymore either, but all the information relating to them is on their own page, making a "Trio Master" page for them completely redundant unless you want a page with quick summaries (which is what I'm suggesting). But even then it's a bit redundant knowing how there is a page for {{redlink|Myths and legends involving Legendary Pokémon}} also exists and has most of the information people are likely looking for. [[User:TrainerSplash|TrainerSplash]] ([[User talk:TrainerSplash|talk]]) 06:30, 27 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
== Rather than deleting this page, here's my take... == | |||
I think this page is necessary, and it already makes it clear that "trio master" is a fan term and not particularly elucidated by the games in every instance. While it can be argued Lugia, Ho-Oh, and Arceus being "trio masters" is fanon due to the fact that they only have very loose, very roundabout in-game associations with their respective trios, it is an established fact that Rayquaza is the master of the weather trio, Regigigas is the master of the titans, and Landorus is the master of the Forces of Nature. Each one of those either keeps the other members of its trio in check or created the members of its trio. Lugia on the other hand was only referenced in the game canon as tied to the legendary birds via Sea Spirit's Den, and otherwise, very much unrelated. Ho-Oh has absolutely nothing to do with the legendary beasts other than reviving them. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the three don't worship it, the three don't follow its commands, nor does anyone make a clear connection between the four. Arceus was the creator of the lake guardians and creation trio, but does that necessarily mean it itself is part of those trios? Like the prior examples, it is otherwise a standalone Pokemon with no common design/type/name themes. I think this page simply needs to be reworked rather than deleting it or considering it in its entirety as fanon. | |||
[[User:Crunchdog29|Crunchdog29]] ([[User talk:Crunchdog29|talk]]) 04:52, 27 December 2016 (UTC) | |||
== The page should stay... == | |||
I think that the page should stay, but it's only a personal opinion. The page might be mostly fanon, but it still contains a lot of canon information, such as how Arceus created the creation trio. --[[User:AngelicEspeon|AngelicEspeon]] ([[User talk:AngelicEspeon|talk]]) 20:18, 5 February 2017 (UTC) | |||
== Are legendary pokemon mythos not goofy speculations? == | |||
From the beginning, Legendaries were for fun and challenge. The birds were hard to find, hard to catch. Should these beings not have higher authorities within their worlds? The idea of Mythical Pokémon being seperate from legendaries is mostly fan-founded as well! This page has a place, if only under meta or fandom. | |||
[[User:AmbipomContestant|AmbipomContestant]] ([[User talk:AmbipomContestant|talk]]) 03:36, 15 April 2017 (UTC) | |||
:Okay what was the point you were trying to make?[[User:Flain|Flain]] ([[User talk:Flain|talk]]) 16:42, 24 April 2017 (UTC) | |||
== Please delete this article! == | |||
It is too fan-speculatey to exist!{{unsigned|Gmaxwell}} | |||
== Removing the Legendary Golems == | |||
Since {{p|Regieleki}} and {{p|Regidrago}} have been announced, should the [[Legendary giants|Legendary Golems]] be removed from this page? {{p|Regigigas}} is now a quintet master instead of a trio master. [[User:Ratboy Jr.|Ratboy Jr.]] ([[User talk:Ratboy Jr.|talk]]) 01:27, 4 June 2020 (UTC) | |||
:At this point, I think we need to wait for more background for them to determine whether we should just remove it from every trio related page. --[[User:Spriteit|Spriteit]] ([[User talk:Spriteit|talk]]) 05:15, 6 June 2020 (UTC) | |||
::Just remove {{p|Regieleki}} and {{p|Regidrago}} from the Golems section and leave the Hoenn regis if you want them to be a trio. [[User:SeanWheeler|SeanWheeler]] ([[User talk:SeanWheeler|talk]]) 02:41, 18 June 2020 (UTC) | |||
::How would "more background" change anything? Regieleki and Regidrago are official Regis, making them canonically not a trio. I say they no longer belong in this page. [[User:Golden Trainer|Golden Trainer]] ([[User talk:Golden Trainer|talk]]) 10:04, 5 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
:::I feel like we should give Regigigas its own section on this page since it did serve as a Trio Master for four generations. We also don't know what it's relation with Regieleki and Regidrago is going to be yet. --[[User:HoennMaster|<font color="blue">Hoenn</font>]][[User talk:HoennMaster|<font color="green">Master</font>]] 17:02, 5 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
::::Until [[The Crown Tundra]] comes and revel more information on the two new Legendary Titans, maybe leave it the way it is till then. the Second DLC when it comes out can settle this debate, once and for all.--[[User:Jacob9594|Jacob9594 ]] ([[User talk:Jacob9594|talk]]) 17:39, 5 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
:::::We can't leave it the way it is right now because it's wrong. The new Regis were already added to Regigigas' group in this article, making it a legendary ''quintet'' and thus unfitting for this page. I'd say our options are the following: | |||
:::::a) We remove the new Regis for now and deal with it once the DLC comes out | |||
:::::b) We remove the whole group for now. If the DLC comes out and it gives us reason to reinstate them (Yeah right! Does anyone honestly believe that will happen?), we can re-add them later. | |||
:::::c) Or we make a separate section called something like "Masters of former legendary trios" like we did with the Legendary trio article and move the Regis there. | |||
:::::My vote goes to b, as I think it's the less ugly option. There's also the fact that an argument could be made that they stopped being a trio the moment Regigigas was introduced in Gen 4. [[User:Golden Trainer|Golden Trainer]] ([[User talk:Golden Trainer|talk]]) 18:11, 5 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
::::::Like Saying Regigigas was actually a 4th member and creator?--[[User:Jacob9594|Jacob9594 ]] ([[User talk:Jacob9594|talk]]) 18:50, 5 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
:::::::Yeah, an internal master like Rayquaza. People usually lump all the Regis together. [[User:Golden Trainer|Golden Trainer]] ([[User talk:Golden Trainer|talk]]) 20:56, 5 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
::::::All right, I waited and there were no objections in 3 days after I voted for removing them, so I went ahead with it. But HoennMaster saw it differently, as he reverted them back saying that "It's still under discussion". | |||
::::::So if you people disagree with removing them, please share your thoughts on the matter so that we actually have a discussion to go by. [[User:Golden Trainer|Golden Trainer]] ([[User talk:Golden Trainer|talk]]) 21:28, 8 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
:::::::There were already multiple objections to completely removing it before you removed it. As of right now the majority supports not removing and giving it a seperate section on the page, especially until we know the relationship with Regieleki and Regidrago. --[[User:HoennMaster|<font color="blue">Hoenn</font>]][[User talk:HoennMaster|<font color="green">Master</font>]] 02:46, 9 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
::::::::I didn't see any objections after I brought up the issues with leaving the article in its current state and said why I believe the second of solutions I listed was the best. And I still don't see any discussion going on right now, from you or anyone. Going silent for days isn't discussing. [[User:Golden Trainer|Golden Trainer]] ([[User talk:Golden Trainer|talk]]) 10:21, 9 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::All right, I'm giving it two more days before I remove it again. Don't say I didn't warn you. [[User:Golden Trainer|Golden Trainer]] ([[User talk:Golden Trainer|talk]]) 22:02, 14 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::That's not how this works. As I already said, there were already multiple people who don't agree with removing it just yet. --[[User:HoennMaster|<font color="blue">Hoenn</font>]][[User talk:HoennMaster|<font color="green">Master</font>]] 01:14, 15 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::::Those were posted before I made my argument that the article is broken in its current state and should be changed, and none of those people have rebutted said argument since then. This is a discussion, you're supposed to ''discuss'' things. If nobody tries to refute my argument or object to my proposed course of action, I can only assume that they have no issues with it. [[User:Golden Trainer|Golden Trainer]] ([[User talk:Golden Trainer|talk]]) 02:44, 15 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::::Gross exaggeration won’t get you any more votes here.--[[User:KnightGalarie|KnightGalarie]] ([[User talk:KnightGalarie|talk]]) 03:04, 15 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::::::Who said I was asking for "any more votes"? I specifically asked people to speak up if they disagree with their removal, and nobody did. So I can only assume they have no issues with it. [[User:Golden Trainer|Golden Trainer]] ([[User talk:Golden Trainer|talk]]) 03:12, 15 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::::::You didn’t even have an immediate consensus, let alone a formal one--[[User:KnightGalarie|KnightGalarie]] ([[User talk:KnightGalarie|talk]]) 03:14, 15 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::::::::This is a discussion, not a poll. And if most people disagree with their removal, why haven't they spoken up about it, even a week after I specifically asked them to? [[User:Golden Trainer|Golden Trainer]] ([[User talk:Golden Trainer|talk]]) 03:16, 15 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::::::::::Because yelling “Can I have this car?” in an open space and not getting a response is not permission to take the car--[[User:KnightGalarie|KnightGalarie]] ([[User talk:KnightGalarie|talk]]) 03:18, 15 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::::::::::...Let me ask again. If most people disagree with their removal, why didn't they speak up about it after being asked to? [[User:Golden Trainer|Golden Trainer]] ([[User talk:Golden Trainer|talk]]) 03:22, 15 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
{{indent}}Were you asking anyone directly? You said “These are our options”, waited a few days and got no response, but you never asked anyone to respond. Newcomers to a conversation aren’t gonna know unless they randomly stumble upon it--[[User:KnightGalarie|KnightGalarie]] ([[User talk:KnightGalarie|talk]]) 03:29, 15 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
:I'm going to directly quote what I wrote above: "if you people disagree with removing them, please share your thoughts on the matter so that we actually have a discussion to go by" | |||
:What more do you want me to do, go to each user's talk page and ask for their permission there? [[User:Golden Trainer|Golden Trainer]] ([[User talk:Golden Trainer|talk]]) 03:32, 15 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
:::Just because you have the most recent post, it doesn't mean no one disagrees with you. There are thousands of pages on the wiki, you aren't always going to get a response right away. As I already stated, there have already been objections to removing from the article. We don't know the full relationship with Regieleki and Regidrago yet and irregardless of it, the original relationship is still there and should be given it's own section on the page vs full removal. --[[User:HoennMaster|<font color="blue">Hoenn</font>]][[User talk:HoennMaster|<font color="green">Master</font>]] 06:25, 15 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
::::Except that none of those comments addressed my point. I pointed out that the article doesn't work the way it is right now, as it contradicts itself. In the starting paragraph it says that a trio master is "a Pokémon that, in some way, oversees a Legendary trio of Pokémon", yet the article clearly treats the Legendary Titans as a quintet, having already added the new Regis to it, rather waiting until the expansion comes out. | |||
::::How much longer do you want me to wait for responses? If I bring up a problem with an article and offer a solution, then ''specifically ask people to speak up if they're against said solution'' and nobody says anything after a week, then I don't think I'm being unreasonable for taking their silence to mean that they have no issues with it. I can't read minds, the only way I can know if people have objections is if they post them. | |||
::::And if you read one of my previous comments, I don't really care whether the Regis are removed or not, ''as long as the article is corrected''. We don't need to wait for the expansion to come out in order to see how self-contradictory the article is. Either remove the new Regis for now, remove the group altogether, or move it to a separate section for former Trio Masters. Either solution works for me. We can update it again once the expansion comes out. [[User:Golden Trainer|Golden Trainer]] ([[User talk:Golden Trainer|talk]]) 07:26, 15 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
:::::This discussion seems to have escalated to a high level of animosity, but we can probably all calm down and not rush into things. | |||
:::::About the topic at hand, all we know so far is that Rigice, Registeel and Regirock are a trio, and that Rigigigas is their master. And now two more regis are to be introduced. We don't know if they make a quintet with the previous trio, or a new trio with Regigigas, or whatever. The sensible thing to do, I think, would be keeping the page as it was before, without the new regis, with maybe a note about them saying their relation with the group is still unknown. | |||
:::::To Golden Trainer, it's not unusual to have to wait for a response in the talk pages here. Some discussions may end up taking months or years, but not having new responses doesn't necessarily mean people agree, specially if there wasn't consensus before. I know it's not exactly pleasant to wait indefinetly, I too have been anoyed from similar situations, so I found that the best you can do is to ask for the intervention of an admin to try to settle things a bit quicker. [[User:Suic12-|Suic]] ([[User talk:Suic12-|talk]]) 12:34, 15 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
::::::Sounds good to me. Leaving a comment note to wait until the expansion comes out should prevent people from re-adding them. Anyone against that? I assume that's acceptable, HoennMaster? [[User:Golden Trainer|Golden Trainer]] ([[User talk:Golden Trainer|talk]]) 19:45, 16 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
:::::::Until Regieleki and Regidrago's relationship with the rest of the Regis is fully understood, I too agree that we should leave it as it originally was. --[[User:HoennMaster|<font color="blue">Hoenn</font>]][[User talk:HoennMaster|<font color="green">Master</font>]] 07:23, 19 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
== Master for every gen == | |||
There is a master for every generation, albeit some later than others. They're stil a thing! Therefore It should not be deleted, but reformed better. [[User:Necrozma800|Necrozma800]] ([[User talk:Necrozma800|talk]]) 21:01, 14 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
== Aura and Light trios == | |||
Could someone add Zygarde as the internal master of Xerneas and Yveltal, and Necrozma as the internal master of Solgaleo and Lunala? I ask as I do not have the proper ability to do so myself. --[[User:ZygardePlotleForme164|ZygardePlotleForme164]] ([[User talk:ZygardePlotleForme164|talk]]) 00:22, 28 July 2020 (UTC) | |||
== Deletion == | |||
I am completely against with deleting the trio master page because it can be very interesting information for fans of old and new. ~~[[User: FeeBeePokemon2002]]~~ 10:20am, September 30 2020 (AEST) | |||
I am in favor of deleting [[Legendary group|Trio Master]] and merging the info into [[Legendary group|Legendary trio]]. The current legendary trio page would benefit from a section explaining the connections between the trios and other Pokémon, and it would not require the use of the name "Trio Master" which is fanon. [[User:EeveelutionaryN|EeveelutionaryN]] ([[User talk:EeveelutionaryN|talk]]) 14:43, 5 January 2021 (UTC) | |||
== Expand/Rename/Merge to cover Legendary Groupings == | |||
So deleting the Regis from this article broke a number of comments on the article that refer to the Regis, and belies a history of Regigigas' relationship with the Regis as their Trio Master. They may be a Quintet now, but that doesn't mean there shouldn't be a role for discussing assymetrical Legendary relationships. We already saw in Gen VII that GameFreak is willing to break their normal rules and introduce Legendary Quartets instead. The Swords of Justice are another example: within normal gameplay, they're clearly a Legendary Trio but given Keldeo as a normally unobtainable in-game mythical Pokémon (not a Legendary by definition), they are considered a Quartet too. Could we merge Duos, Trios, and Trio Masters into a single article about the relationships of Legendaries & Mythicals and their overseer legendaries & mythicals? I believe that would be the most comprehensive response to the nuance of these matters given that GameFreak clearly documented in the games and anime and other material these overseers and relationships, but they're not necessarily Trios or Duos+Overseer or Trios+Overseer, or Duos without Overseer, etc. There's a lot of nuance. That's not reason for deletion, it IS reason to broaden rather than restrict the scope unnecessarily and cut out key parts of the article. Just like Rayquaza and Landorus oversee Duos, Regigigas oversees a Quintet. That's worth documenting and comparing against other overseers like Ho-oh and Arceus. [[User:Kumori Satosuke|Satosuke]] ([[User talk:Kumori Satosuke|talk]]) 16:50, 26 January 2021 (UTC) | |||
== Zygarde? == | |||
Shouldn't Zygarde also be listed? This one guards the ecosystem by overseeing the cycle of life (Xerneas) and death (Yveltal), and intervenes when the natural order is upset. Its ability and signature moves are also specifically designed to counter Xerneas and Yveltal. [[User:Golden Trainer|Golden Trainer]] ([[User talk:Golden Trainer|talk]]) 14:34, 26 May 2021 (UTC) | |||
== Resolving Trio master Issue == | |||
Hi there. I made this to hopefully help resolve an issue that has been left unsolved since 2007/2014. I it is regarding this issue. I think of two good options. They will be listed bellow. | |||
1. Keeping the page name by itself. It has its own unique identity and just because name is not official doesn't mean it real. Trio masters has been acknowledged by Game Freak and PIC through gameplay and story mode like for example Regigigas only appear an unlocked in presence for the Legendary titans. Hell Arceus counts given its mention it created two legendary trios. Also is trio master still a good name, what fi we could renamed into something like Masters of Legendary and Mythical Pokemon Group. In a way, that could allowed Cobalion to be on page and as Pokemon has evolved to the point it is no longer about Trio having masters, even legendary pokemon duos have masters like the case with Calyrex. | |||
2. If merged to the Legendary Trio as suggestion long in past, it needs to be unique or connected. Again, I would say it would have to be given its own separate section to why they are connected to Legendary trio and role. Its not like the page would be called Legendary trio and master. Would be repetitive. What name would work to reference both should merged be approved. Plus the merged page would need one huge expansions. | |||
Hopefully these options I am giving could help resolve this and keep the page around or be reborn. Hope to your your thoughts and suggestion on how to improve and resolve.--[[User:Jacob9594|Jacob9594 ]] ([[User talk:Jacob9594|talk]]) 15:01, 26 October 2022 (UTC) | |||
:There are other Legendary Pokémon that can meet the Masters list that is not a trio or are a trio. One example is Zygarde as its entries mentioned it will show should Xerneas and Yveltal get unbalanced, serving a trio master role. The pacemaker of Life and Destruction. Another one is Cobalion as its the leader and master of the other three Swords of Justice, given he is their leader and they follow it. Third example is Calyrex, as it is the master of Spectrier and Glastrier as its the only one who could tame and calm the legendary duo. | |||
:Would it make more sense if they were also a legendary trio given all three are connected and meet trio requirements given Calyrex is like Necrozma/Kyurem, and the Legendary Steeds are like Solgaleo and Lunala/Rehsiram and Zekrom? Looking back, maybe the Trio master could be renamed into something more fitting like Masters of Legendary and Mythical Pokemon. Maybe after doing that fan terminology to help improve it or make it better?What would be the best option for this?--[[User:Jacob9594|Jacob9594 ]] ([[User talk:Jacob9594|talk]]) 14:22, 29 October 2022 (UTC) | |||
::I have to agree with both this and an older topic by user Satosuke. The concept of a "Master" among a group of legends is somewhere between canon and fanon, and it'd be a waste to completely eliminate it. But Crown Tundra's introduction of Regileki and Regidrago makes it ''really'' hard to justify continuing to use the term "Trio" for all the others. What it may be time to do, in my opinion, is combine all the groupings into one super reference. The trios, the duos (Eon, Tower, Lunar, and the Cyclizar relatives), and now a [[Treasures of ruin|legendary quartet]] that has no "Master". All the mentions of a group of legends, regardless of quantity, generation, or presence of a "Master", could be plausibly covered in one article. [[User:Schiffy|<span style="color:#006400;">I don't even give a Schif</span>]] ([[User talk:Schiffy|<span style="color:#FF6600;">Talk</span>]] • [[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|<span style="color:#FF0000;">Contribs</span>]]) 16:02, 9 December 2022 (UTC) | |||
== Addressing Deletion == | |||
Guys, I don't think we should delete this article. It may not be fact, but it's still Pokémon-related lore, therefore serving as Pokémon-related information, which is the literal reason why Bulbapedia even exists. Do you really think we should delete it? [[User:Lugia+Ho-Oh|Lugia+Ho-Oh]] ([[User talk:Lugia+Ho-Oh|talk]]) 01:29, 20 April 2023 (UTC) | |||
:I actually agree with deletion, since it's based on speculation and the criteria is unclear (what makes Rayquaza a trio master and not, say, Zygarde or Necrozma)? Any actual lore can be added to the respective trios' articles, while this vague term that doesn't even see wide use in the fandom in this day and age can be removed. [[User:Biblical Bambi|Biblical Bambi]] ([[User talk:Biblical Bambi|talk]]) 04:28, 14 August 2023 (UTC) | |||
::Recent discussion seems to indicate that this page perhaps should be replaced with a general page about Relationships between Legendary and Mythical Pokémon (or a similar such title) [[User:Landfish7|<span style="font-family:Tahoma;color:#00d1bc">'''Land'''</span>]][[User talk:Landfish7|<span style="font-family:Tahoma;color:#006699"><small>'''fish7'''</small></span>]] 04:48, 14 August 2023 (UTC) | |||
I don't think deleting this article would benefit categorization. The term trio master, even though speculative, is every bit logical, and for the first 2 generations, we see this formula exactly replicated. From generation 3 onwards, the "trio master" might be one of the members of the trio or an external legendary/mythical. We see Arceus as the master of the creation dragon trio(exclusive trio master) , and Rayquaza as the master of weather trio (inclusive trio master). For gen 5's tao trio, there is no trio master so as to say, but there are always such exceptions. In the same gen 5,we see the forces of nature, tornadus and thunderus get subdued by landorus who acts as the master of that group. Also notable is that landorus has a higher base stat total than the other forces of nature. After the inclusion of Pokemon Legends Arceus and the addition of enamorus to the group, Landorus still has the special position, has a higher BST and is seen as the leader of the group, fitting in with the theme of a trio master, so as to speak. Going on to generation 6,we see zygarde as the boss of the Aura trio, and Necrozma as the overpowering entity that dominates the light trio. In sword and shield, the legendaries are more complicated, and don't fit any structure, but if we got shadow lugia, the birds of Galar would finally have their master back... And now on to gen 9, it also doesn't have a designated trio master for the "lousy" Three, but the generation is far from completion. [[User:Lucifer Lawliet|Lucifer Lawliet]] ([[User talk:Lucifer Lawliet|talk]]) 03:59, 19 September 2023 (UTC) | |||
:Personally, I don't think the concept needs its own article, and could still be covered neatly in an overall article about Legendary groups or Relationships between Legendary and Mythical Pokémon or the like. Also, the term "Trio master" in this context leaves a bad taste in my mouth tbh. [[User:Landfish7|<span style="font-family:Tahoma;color:#00d1bc">'''Land'''</span>]][[User talk:Landfish7|<span style="font-family:Tahoma;color:#006699"><small>'''fish7'''</small></span>]] 04:28, 19 September 2023 (UTC) | |||
::I support deletion of the article as well as deletion of the category of the same name. I don't believe adding another page is necessary, as each group of legendaries has a separate page, in addition to the Legendary Pokémon page, the Legendary Duo and Trio pages, and the Myths and legends involving Legendary and Mythical Pokémon page. The relevant information ought to be documented on existing pages. --[[User:Apopheniac|Apopheniac]] ([[User talk:Apopheniac|talk]]) 02:19, 23 September 2023 (UTC) | |||
The point of bulbapedia articles is to study trends, analyse information regarding pokemon. This entire website is built by fans for fans, and the trio master concept is one that has been prominent for generations. As I noted earlier, the point of any online internet archive, rather any system of categorization is to clarify classification. The trio masters among the legends are dominant. That, is, therefore a way to classify these unique legendaries, and therefore, definitely scores to deserve an article. Also I'd like to request to not confuse personal feelings with facts for these very important articles. Trio master article deserves to stay, but if thr name feeld odd, we can discuss a name change. [[User:Lucifer Lawliet|Lucifer Lawliet]] ([[User talk:Lucifer Lawliet|talk]]) 06:00, 19 September 2023 (UTC) | |||
The previous discussion about "resolving the trio master issue" by @Jacob9594 has clearly stated two alternatives to solve this issue. And I, strongly, vehemently oppose the deletion of this article. I do agree with @landfish7 that we need a new page that highlights the relationship among different legendary pokemon groups and mythicals, but deleting this article would not really serve any purpose. We would need articles that link to the parent article about legendary pokemon relationships that describe all the different relationships in detail, unless we decide to put all of the information into one overcomplicated page of gargantuan proportions. By now we have duos, trios, qaurtets, quintets, and who knows, maybe even more such groups will evolve in the future. Instead of deletion, I'd like to propose this article be modified to denote the dominant legendary among groups, and the trio master serve as a category among those who constitute a trio. | |||
Deleting an article about a well established concept is harmful towards classification, and I'd also like everyone to go read up @Jacob9594's discussion on the same topic previous to this conversation. [[User:Lucifer Lawliet|Lucifer Lawliet]] ([[User talk:Lucifer Lawliet|talk]]) 07:40, 23 September 2023 (UTC) | |||
:The concept is not "well-established", Lugia is only the "trio master" in the anime, which we have decided to stop focusing on, Ho-Oh created the legendary beasts, but has no active involvement in their activities. The "overseeing" part of the definition is violated three times versus being enforced four times. This page has no info that isn't on others and its deletion would do no harm. It's pure fanon.--[[User:MissDelibirda|MissDelibirda]] ([[User talk:MissDelibirda|talk]]) 17:16, 23 September 2023 (UTC) | |||
It is not pure fanon actually. Lugia's case is often looked with little regard, and I understand that. But, a legendary trio, and thier master is a relationship that is often exhibited among Legendaries. Rayquaza, Ho-Oh, Landorus before gen 8,and Regigigas before gen 8 had played these roles. You'd need to go and catch the other members of the group before actually getting to the final "boss" of the group. Deleting this article would be absolutely inapt with regards to classification. [[User:Lucifer Lawliet|Lucifer Lawliet]] ([[User talk:Lucifer Lawliet|talk]]) 17:25, 23 September 2023 (UTC) | |||