222
edits
User talk:Theexploringgamer: Difference between revisions
→New game speculation
| Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
It's totally understandable that you're excited about the new Pokemon games. But please try to keep in mind that, as a rule, we want to avoid speculation on Bulbapedia. This means things must generally have ''explicit'' and official confirmation. We don't assume romanized names, we don't assume that a trademark will be used (or how), we don't assume National 'dex numbers. We wait until official information is released that explicitly tells us these things for sure. I hope you can understand. Thanks! [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 20:52, 11 June 2016 (UTC) | It's totally understandable that you're excited about the new Pokemon games. But please try to keep in mind that, as a rule, we want to avoid speculation on Bulbapedia. This means things must generally have ''explicit'' and official confirmation. We don't assume romanized names, we don't assume that a trademark will be used (or how), we don't assume National 'dex numbers. We wait until official information is released that explicitly tells us these things for sure. I hope you can understand. Thanks! [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 20:52, 11 June 2016 (UTC) | ||
:I'm sorry, but I assumed as a Pokemon fan, you would understand and know how Pokemon does things. Clearly, starters are ALWAYS the first Pokemon of National Dex numbers. The only time this proved not true was when [[Victini]] was No.000. But, did you notice how Victini, because it was No.000 became 494? See, it's just inference. Why WOULDN'T Rowlet be #722? [[User:Theexploringgamer|Theexploringgamer]] ([[User talk:Theexploringgamer|talk]]) 20:54, 11 June 2016 (UTC) | :I'm sorry, but I assumed as a Pokemon fan, you would understand and know how Pokemon does things. Clearly, starters are ALWAYS the first Pokemon of National Dex numbers. The only time this proved not true was when [[Victini]] was No.000. But, did you notice how Victini, because it was No.000 became 494? See, it's just inference. Why WOULDN'T Rowlet be #722? [[User:Theexploringgamer|Theexploringgamer]] ([[User talk:Theexploringgamer|talk]]) 20:54, 11 June 2016 (UTC) | ||
::In fact, it's not even me "assuming", I'm using the fact that they take the new Pokemon from the regional Pokedex in the order they are and put them in the National Dex numbers. If Rowlet is 001, then this means that Rowlet would be #722. I don't understand how you can't see that it wouldn't somehow become 760 or something...[[User:Theexploringgamer|Theexploringgamer]] ([[User talk:Theexploringgamer|talk]]) 20:56, 11 June 2016 (UTC) | |||