Recurring anime Grunts
Are they worthy of their own article? They seem to have a rivalry with the TR Trio. --Maxim (talk) 11:26, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Split suggestion
This is semi-closely related to the matter at Talk:Aether Foundation Employee (Trainer class)#Move to Aether Foundation (Trainer class), for the record.
TehPerson pointed out on that page that Aether Foundation Employees use "Aether Foundation" as their Trainer class and "Employee" as their name (i.e., "Employee" is listed in the same group of text strings as "Guzma", "Lusamine", "Hau", etc). I went looking through the same file they cited and found that the same is true for Team Skull — all members except Guzma and Plumeria use "Team Skull" as their class and either "Grunt" or "Gladion" as their name. These are clearly differentiated by being located in completely different parts of the game text.
My suggestion is to move the anime/manga/etc material to "Team Skull Grunt" (with no parenthetical), and combine the Trainer listings with Gladion's and place them at "Team Skull (Trainer class)". This will be in line with the canonical name of the class, unlike the current situation where we've essentially assumed and made up a nonexistent Trainer class name.
I'm not sure where to find older text dumps (Project Pokémon doesn't seem to have them, or at least not in a place I can easily find), but I strongly suspect past games did the same with their villainous team grunts. If staff are open to this suggestion for Aether and Skull, it may be worth more thorough searching to find the text strings for older games to verify, and potentially move those articles as well.
Thanks for your consideration. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 23:24, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
- All this stuff about the exact Trainer class name and stuff is taking things too literally IMO.
- Let me just address the idea of making a page for "Team Skull Grunt" while shoving the in-game Trainers called "Team Skull Grunt" onto "Team Skull". ...This is pretty ridiculous. You're forcing a very technical distinction while still trying to say there's some worth to a dedicated page about them. If they have a page, the Trainers should be listed there. I really don't understand how you reasonably come up with any other result. (Focusing on the technicalities doesn't make that result reasonable. Quite the opposite.)
- And they should have a page. Reasonably, a Trainer class is a class of like Trainers. Grunts and whatever else are practically by definition an indistinguishable group. Honestly...who really cares that grunts "technically" have a "class" called "Team Skull", except for people very much focusing on such technicalities? The average reader is much better served by a page that's simply dedicated to the grunts. Tiddlywinks (talk) 02:40, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- Then we should at least move this page to "Team Skull Grunt" with no parenthetical, then, since it is actively misleading our readers to claim that "Team Skull Grunt" is the verbatim name of a Trainer class when it isn't. I'll change the split template to a move template. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 03:17, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- Oy... This is a bit of a sore point for me. This talk about Grunts having their team name as their Trainer class and Grunt" being their name... While I admit it's technically true, it still doesn't make sense. Every other villainous team Trainer who uses their team's name as their Trainer class is distinctively different from the Grunts. They simply just don't fit into the same category as their underlings. It would mean that the Trainer lists would consist of a load of Grunts and then the one-to-three others who aren't Grunts. That just wouldn't look good or make sense.
- And while I know how hypocritical I'm going to sound here, I still say that the "Trainer class" part in the title should be left there, even though I know the "Grunt" part of the name is technically not a part of the class name. Let's just say that I see it as a... "compromise" of sorts.
- Boy, it feels so ridiculous that we actually have to be debating over stuff like this... --FinnishPokéFan92 (talk) 06:54, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- This discussion should includes all grunt pages too. because all grunts also use the trainer class of their organization and name grunt. you can't be moving for team skull and ignoring the rest since they are the same. -Pokeant (talk) 01:59, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- That's a pretty awful "compromise", Finnish, as it means you get everything you want and I don't get anything. If it's what ends up happening, fine, but don't call it a "compromise". And what's so ridiculous about wanting to remove lies from the wiki?
- I would be in favor of that, Pokeant, if I had any data to support that conclusion. I strongly suspect it's the case, but I can't prove it so I'm not suggesting it for the others. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 06:08, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- I do not agree or disagree, but i will just list out the affected classes.
- - Rocket (Grunt/Executive) in GSC & Team Rocket (Grunt/Admin) in FRLG. Admin is its own trainer class in HGSS as executives due to them receiving names.
- - Team Magma (Grunt) / Team Aqua (Grunt). The grunts are the only ones using the team trainer class, until USUM with Team Magma Maxie and Team Aqua Archie.
- - Galactic (Grunt). the grunts are the only one using the galactic trainer class. Cyrus in USUM use Team Galactic (but both are same in japan so should be put together).
- - Team Plasma (Grunt). Team Plasma is also used by other trainers such as N, Ghetsis etc.
- - Team Flare (Grunt / Admin). Team Flare is also used by the flare's scientists and Lysandre.
- -Pokeant (talk) 07:19, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- I'm aware of all that... what I mean is, I don't have any data to prove that they exist in back-end data as "class: Team X/name: Grunt" rather than "class: Team X Grunt/name: none". Skull and Aether are the only ones for which I've found that kind of data. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 07:56, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- All games uses "class: Team X/name: Grunt". Here is one for FireRed, which confirmed that is true. I can confirm it is true for the hoenn games in gen 3 too, since i used to play around with the text editors. using text editors we can also see this is true for gen 4 and 5. of course, my words cannot be used as evidence, but it is difficult to find a text dump for the games. -Pokeant (talk) 09:55, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- I'm aware of all that... what I mean is, I don't have any data to prove that they exist in back-end data as "class: Team X/name: Grunt" rather than "class: Team X Grunt/name: none". Skull and Aether are the only ones for which I've found that kind of data. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 07:56, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
- This discussion should includes all grunt pages too. because all grunts also use the trainer class of their organization and name grunt. you can't be moving for team skull and ignoring the rest since they are the same. -Pokeant (talk) 01:59, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
(resetting indent)I'm not sure, but isn't this implicitly taken for granted that "Trainer class" means the first part of any Trainer's name? That's a very technical distinction to make, and it comes with big drawback. I'd rather go with "class of like Trainers" (as Tiddlywinks suggested). I think it's not a problem of truth vs. lie, but of conflicting definitions.
The class of like Trainers is "Team Skull Grunt" (and the fact that they have no individual names like Bob or Carol makes sense story-wise). In my opinion, how exactly the name is assembled internally shouldn't really matter. Anyway, a pattern of <1> + <SPACE> + <2> + <SPACE> + "wants to fight" does not allow for an empty <2> (unless it allows two consecutive spaces), so that might be just an easy fix/workaround rather than something that's meant to be taken literally (i.e., as an in-universe distinction).
I do not support a move of grunt pages based on that. Nescientist (talk) 17:24, 23 March 2018 (UTC)