User talk:SatoMew2/Archive 1: Difference between revisions

m
Line 392: Line 392:
:You are also being oblivious to the fact that the credits of Red and Blue list the Japanese Blue staff (mostly the same as the Japanese Red and Green staff) and the localization staff. [[User:SatoMew2|SatoMew2]] ([[User talk:SatoMew2|talk]]) 11:53, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
:You are also being oblivious to the fact that the credits of Red and Blue list the Japanese Blue staff (mostly the same as the Japanese Red and Green staff) and the localization staff. [[User:SatoMew2|SatoMew2]] ([[User talk:SatoMew2|talk]]) 11:53, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
:<small>* [http://iwataasks.nintendo.com/interviews/#/ds/pokemon/0/0 "Red and Green refer to Pokémon Red Version and Pokémon Green Version, the first titles in the Pokémon series. They were released for the Game Boy system in Japan on 27th February 1996. They were later released worldwide as Pokémon Red Version and Pokémon Blue Version."]</small>
:<small>* [http://iwataasks.nintendo.com/interviews/#/ds/pokemon/0/0 "Red and Green refer to Pokémon Red Version and Pokémon Green Version, the first titles in the Pokémon series. They were released for the Game Boy system in Japan on 27th February 1996. They were later released worldwide as Pokémon Red Version and Pokémon Blue Version."]</small>
::I am honestly inclined to agree with SatoMew2 on this matter, there is minimal differences between the three lists, and those differences that are present have been noted on the page that the three were merged into. This isn't a case like the Pokémon Stadium games either. As a result, I believe a merger of the three articles would be fine, '''however''', I was not aware Glik had discussed with other staff before reverting the changes, which is why I myself reverted them. Once I was made aware, I reverted my own reversions, sorry for that Glik, I jumped a gun. However, I do still agree with the point that SatoMew2 is making in this case. -[[User:Spriteit|Spriteit]] ([[User talk:Spriteit|talk]]) 13:29, 18 July 2015 (UTC)