Talk:Leaf (game): Difference between revisions

Talk:Leaf (game) (view source)

Revision as of 10:36, 18 November 2018

993 bytes added , 18 November 2018

no edit summary

ThePacisBack

3

edits

@@ Line 330: / Line 330: @@
 ::My comment above was deleted, so I am re-posting it here to continue the above discussion. It makes sense in the context of the series as a whole, but for FR/LG Leaf makes more sense as a counterpart to Green, since a "WaterBlue" doesn't exist in either Japan or America. --[[User:LavaringX|LavaringX]] ([[User talk:LavaringX|talk]]) 05:40, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 :::... So what if there is no WaterBlue. An identical looking girl exists in association with Red and Blue, it makes sense for the franchise if that girl is the same girl like the other two boys are the same boys.--[[User:DanyyelTR|DanyyelTR]] ([[User talk:DanyyelTR|talk]]) 10:27, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
+::Just to contest a common point being brought up here: Kotobukiya is not a "Game Freak" source, but this does not make it unofficial. Someone at The Pokemon Company obviously had to take a look at the product before deciding that it was an accurate representation of the franchise and gave it the official seal of approval. TPC has a storied history of strictness and standards in interacting with these affiliates. Despite Let's Go already being in development at the time of the figure's conception, they clearly had no issue with Leaf as the character's name. Unless the staff is interested in introducing a magical "degrees of canonicity" system, I don't see why it should be discredited. There are a wellspring of things on the wiki considered canonical by current standards that haven't been directly echoed by Game Freak gospel, but have been run by TPC/TPCI and are considered fine--[[User:ThePacisBack|ThePacisBack]] ([[User talk:ThePacisBack|talk]]) 10:36, 18 November 2018 (UTC).