13,668
edits
Talk:List of Pokémon by evolution family: Difference between revisions
Talk:List of Pokémon by evolution family (view source)
Revision as of 17:31, 14 June 2016
, 14 June 2016→A suggestion, not for now but for the future: new section
(→A suggestion, not for now but for the future: new section) |
|||
| Line 151: | Line 151: | ||
:You're right about 27 of 81 not being "most," but Tiddlywinks' edit summary also correctly points out that your rewording implied that all of those lines were fully three stages at the time they were introduced, which is also wrong. At the risk of sounding overly jargon-y, I think the correction that best preserves the current wording would be simply to change ''most'' to ''a plurality of''. I'll go ahead and make that change now. [[User:Pumpkinking0192|Pumpkinking0192]] ([[User talk:Pumpkinking0192|talk]]) 04:58, 11 June 2016 (UTC) | :You're right about 27 of 81 not being "most," but Tiddlywinks' edit summary also correctly points out that your rewording implied that all of those lines were fully three stages at the time they were introduced, which is also wrong. At the risk of sounding overly jargon-y, I think the correction that best preserves the current wording would be simply to change ''most'' to ''a plurality of''. I'll go ahead and make that change now. [[User:Pumpkinking0192|Pumpkinking0192]] ([[User talk:Pumpkinking0192|talk]]) 04:58, 11 June 2016 (UTC) | ||
::Thank you for the edit! I wasn't sure of a good way to reword it. '''[[User:Slimey01|<span style="color:#40A060">slimey</span>]][[User talk:Slimey01|<span style="color:#E88686">01</span>]]''' 13:35, 11 June 2016 (UTC) | ::Thank you for the edit! I wasn't sure of a good way to reword it. '''[[User:Slimey01|<span style="color:#40A060">slimey</span>]][[User talk:Slimey01|<span style="color:#E88686">01</span>]]''' 13:35, 11 June 2016 (UTC) | ||
== A suggestion, not for now but for the future == | |||
I know we've had some controversy in the past about whether to group unrelated but similar Pokémon together (such as Throh and Sawk), and in fact I'd railed heavily against that idea on the grounds that they are not related by ''evolution'' and this is a page of ''evolutionary'' families. Well, at the E3 Pokemon presentation today, the translator said the Pokédex would group each Pokémon with its evolutions '''''or other similar Pokémon'''''. I know this is very early, but I just want to mention it so this idea is not forgotten — if this is correct and not a translation error, perhaps when Sun/Moon comes out, it would be good to move this page to a more neutral title (removing/substituting "evolution" in some way), and grouping the Pokémon by the groups canonically listed in the Pokédex. That way we would have a page more firmly grounded in canon rather than arbitrarily deciding that evolution constitutes a "family" and other similarities don't. Again, certainly not anything to worry about yet — just something I wanted to bring up so I don't forget about it later. [[User:Pumpkinking0192|Pumpkinking0192]] ([[User talk:Pumpkinking0192|talk]]) 17:31, 14 June 2016 (UTC) | |||