Talk:Kiawe's Marowak

Headbutt?

Is it possible that Marowak knows Headbutt too? It seems to frequently headbutt Turtonator in its rematch, and afterwards when it got stuck in Turtonator's weak spot Azure/ChromeVoid42 (talk) 12:06, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

The act of heabutting does not equal the move headbutt.--ForceFire 12:21, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

it was in battle though, is there any evidence that says it can't be a known move? Scraggy headbutted people all the time too and that's a listed move Azure/ChromeVoid42 (talk) 12:29, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Even if it was used offensively, it could've been Tackle, Slam, or any other move involving ramming oneself into their opponent.--ForceFire 14:35, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Marowak?

Shouldn't it be Alolan Marowak? --PKMNAdventurer (talk) 17:19, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Not really. 'Alolan' isn't so much part of Marowak's name as it is just a category it falls under. It'd be like having a page called 'Ash's Shiny Noctowl'. Watchermark (talk) 18:21, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Moveset

Why is there apparently an issue over Marowak's moveset? Not a single move has been placed on the page, despite three of the four used being obvious. Headbutt, Flame Wheel and Bonemerang all appeared clearly in the episode; the latter two matched previous animations while the fact that Marowak's head shone before using Headbutt makes it almost certain that's the move being used. Shouldn't these at least be put? I mean, if it's wrong (and it wouldn't be the first time) we can always change it? Watchermark (talk) 22:43, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Current Bulbapedia policy is that a move must be explicitly identified in order for us to attribute it. If it's not identified but people still think it has a unique animation, then you should wait for it to be okayed before adding it (anyone can have an opinion; waiting for approval will help avoid edit wars).

Also remember that the moves may be identified in the dub's CCs. Tiddlywinks (talk) 22:55, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

FWIW, your question in conjunction with an earlier question about the same issue shows exactly why we require explicit identification: You've concluded that Marowak's head shining means it's using Headbutt, while FinnishPokeFan92 observed the same thing and concluded it was Iron Head. You both can't be right, and you might both be wrong. And it will always be possible for disagreements to happen over these kind of "eye of the beholder" assumptions for any move that's not explicitly identified and doesn't have a unique animation. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 23:24, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

So.. Lemme get this straight: The mods decided on a shitty rule, did no announcements for it, AND it applies only starting with SM? Wow, honestly, that's kind of ridiculous. And this rule is kind of dumb because wild mons very rarely have their moves named, so... It's self-sabotage at its finest..--ShallowShaddoll (talk) 23:58, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

I know I explained it to a number of people when we decided it should be strictly enforced. (What I'm also saying there is that I believe it's been the ideal for a long time, but it was allowed to slide and/or may have gone mostly unnoticed. One of the older staff—especially one more familiar with anime matters—would know about that better than I.)

And you seem to think we're saying it's OK to assume for moves from XY or earlier, but that's absolutely not the case. It applies to any move move in any episode. If a move has previously been attributed that violates this rule, that should be fixed (or discussed). Tiddlywinks (talk) 00:07, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

But this rule is so ridiculous (would stay mad, or stupid, but don't want to offend people...): You're purposely stopping the flow of information instead of, I don't know, putting it up to a vote in the talk pages. Like, that would be much more reasonable. And, as beforementioned, wild mons don't have their moves named. What are you gonna do now, remove ~80 per cent of moves just 'cause it was used by a wild mon and Ash and co. didn't bother to call it by a name? Immediately, like half the mons should be removed from the Psychic section, for example.--ShallowShaddoll (talk) 00:15, 21 July 2017 (UTC)