Talk:Hydreigon (Pokémon)

Name Origin

The name part "Zan" is similar to "san", 3 in japanese, is a reference to how many heads it has. - unsigned comment from Franztrovao (talk • contribs)

Discussion on moving to "Sazandra (Pokémon)"

Move. The "ra" is obviously there, and was probably missed when the name "Sazando" was created. Ztobor 10:47, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

..how did that get missed? Ataro 01:40, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Should it be moved? DeadUniverse ^Hello! 08:29, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

NO. Hi! Talk to me! 02:49 p.m., 1 October 2010 (not UCT).

Why not?--でんのう ☢ Zえんし 18:55, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Sazandra is the romanization of this Pokémon's name. Therefore, why not move it accordingly? ~Kianglo 20:50, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Has it come out officially yet? If not, we should move it to "Sazandora" first. Serebii has actually changed it now. Ztobor 00:00, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I have no idea. It was the people at Serebii first, I think. It's understandable - I mean, I missed the "do" in front of "doryuuzu" when I first tried to romanize its name. But now that we know what it is correctly, we should change it accordingly, is what I think. Ztobor 00:00, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, the kana reads "Sa-za-n-do-ra," which would suggest "Sazandora," but the pronunciation is more like "Sazandra," based on general rules of the language. So it depends on whether we want the actual or the phonetic pronunciation, but from looking at the majority of the pages here, the Japanese names are spelled phonetically. I'd recommend "Sazandra" (because I have a theory that "-dra" comes from "Hydra" or maybe "dragon.") ~Kianglo 00:41, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, it's obviously "dra", like Urugamoth instead of Urugamosu.--でんのう ☢ Zえんし 06:37, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Since everyone agrees, I'm going to move it. Anyway, it is incorrect now, so it needs to be fixed as soon as possible. --SnorlaxMonster 15:04, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Just my own two cents: Kingdra. Seadra. TTEchidna 09:31, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

I would like Sazandra. Also, shouldn't is be noted that mono- = one, jihe in Chinese means group (v.), and zan (or san) is three? - unsigned comment from 444Zekrom (talk • contribs)

Who revived this discussion? TTE? Boy, I'ma cut you.

Sazandora is the trademarked romaji. We use trademarked romaji once we have it. We aren't moving this article to anything that isn't "Sazandora" until the English names come 'round. End of discussion. 梅子^❀_✿ 19:21, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Sazandora based on King Ghidorah

A bit of copy and paste from Ulgamoth's talk page, but oh well...

I know that if someone adds to the origin that Sazandora may have been inspired by King Ghidorah, it will get taken done because it is apparently just an opinion. However, the two share similarities in appearance, destructive tendencies, ability to fly (levitate for sazandora) and Sazandora's name may also even be based on Ghidorah's. I don't think this is just an "opinion", and may be a legitimate origin.

Your thoughts? - 050294 09:06, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

• They're right next to each other in the National Dex. Exhibit B. Yurtablemoron 06:49, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

To say this Pokémon is based on something in popular culture is an opinion. Regardless of how much it sounds like it's based on it, you can't say it's based on King Ghidorah because it's an opinion. -Sketch 19:09, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Problem with what you're saying Sketch: Hydra ain't got no wings and cannot float by any means. Ghidorah can, so the Hydra CANNOT be the only explanation. Since you are not Game Freak you cannot control what a Pokémon is based on like that, as it is GAME FREAK's decision on what a Pokémon is based on. If they have Sazandora based on Ghidorah then they have Sazandora based on Ghidorah, end of story. Shiramu Kuromu 19:58, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Like I just said on the other one, you aren't GameFreak either. It is your opinion that this is what the Pokémon is based on. Since it is your opinion, and not fact, it cannot be said that it is its origin. Unless you can prove it, with physical evidence that says the Pokémon is based on this monster, it cannot be said, period. -Sketch 01:22, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

But isn't it your opinion that this is not based, or at least makes reference, on Ghidorah? Therefore, you'd need evidence that it was NOT based on it before removing possible origins. - 050294 02:01, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

And due to the wings and destructive nature stated by PokéDex entries, there's more evidence relating to Ghidorah than evidence not relating it to Ghidorah. Shiramu Kuromu 08:07, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

I personally think you guys provided enough evidence here. I mean Ghidorah... Sazandora... they sound similar. And it's next to the Pokémon that resembles Mothra in the Pokédex. You've convinced me anyway. And it wouldn't be the first time we have icons of pop culture in the origins section. What about all the references to Pulseman we have? I think that if their is enough evidence supporting it, than it should be mentioned as a possible origin. I won't deny that it is an opinion, but so are pretty much all origin sections. Pop culture or not. That's my 2 cents --ケンジのガール 08:37, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

In that same vein, it has (rightfully) been pointed out that Abagoura is likely to have been based on Gamera. I think that the connection made between Archeos and Gyaos is a little more tenuous, but there are some similarities. Above all, though, I think it would be highly appropriate to at least make reference to Ghidorah as a possible influence. Kamen no Otoko 12:59, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Abagoura being based on Gamera is a bit more tenuous IMO; frankly, Blastoise looks more similar. --Andy^P_K^M_N 16:04, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

This is why you don't put stuff like this up, because it's an opinion that everyone may not share. -Sketch 16:26, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

You saying that these Pokémon aren't based on Kaiju is ALSO an opinion, as like you said, everyone may not share, which is right, as you're the ONLY one here saying they're not based on Kaiju. Shiramu Kuromu 19:06, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Actually the armor and "fangs" makes Abagoura look more like Gamera than Blastoise. - 050294 18:10, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

See, it looks more like a mask than "fangs" to me. But arguing about Abagoura really doesn't belong here, so I'll just let y'all keep talking about Sazandora and King Ghidora. --Andy^P_K^M_N 20:37, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

I could believe Mothra, but not this. Sazandora looks NOTHING like King Ghidora. The only similarities are that they are both flying three-headed dragons, which are highly common in popular culture. Not only that, but its other 2 heads aren't even real heads like Ghidora; the Pokédex states that they don't have brains, and they are really just heads on the ends of arms. --SnorlaxMonster 01:52, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

I personally think that sazandora is based on king ghidorah I mean the names sound alot alike and they look alot alike. Its kinda like how feraligatr is based on godzilla. - unsigned comment from Mewtwomaster (talk • contribs)

WTF? Feraligatr ISN'T based on godzilla. Don't add to discussions unless you have something meaningful to contribute (and by meaningful I mean new evidence, not just opinion). And also, sign your posts. --Andy^P_K^M_N 00:46, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

now now..let's not bite peoples heads off andy... but he's right..Feraligatr and Godzilla look nothing alike Ataro 00:50, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Error

I found an error and I'm lost on how to fix it so maybe by telling "you" the error maybe you can fix it. But in the Pokedex entries it says that this Pokemon was not obtainable prior to generation (one), when it should be "was not prior to Generation (five)" with the whole Roman numeral thing. However when I looked at the source I couldn't see anything wrong with it (with my limited knowledge on "wiki-type" editing). So hopefully you can fix it. --Dman dustin 10:45, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Found it. There was a stray "？" in the gen parameter not commented out, so the template got confused.(^Dion₂₄) 11:04, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

I actually got rid of the ? as well. It's not required; clearly we don't know the Black entry if it's not there. —darklordtrom 11:08, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of which, I've noticed that most of the new Pokémon only have dex entries for White version. Does no one on the wiki have Black, or are the entries the same in each one? --Element03 15:05, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I just looked and we do have the entries. Nevermind. --Element03 15:11, 5 November 2010 (UTC)