Talk:History of the Pokémon world

Shaping this article

I think this article needs to be redesigned... "history" is a bit of a general term - there are differences between the histories in different parts on the cannon (games, anime and different manga series have contradicted each other several times in the past). We need to make rules to decide what goes in and what doesn't...--ElectAbuzzzz 12:37, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

It may not even be possible to write such an article since there is not much historical information, not to mention a good part of it is legend. (Then again, in this world it seems legends are generally true.) - 振霖_T 15:17, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I think it's more accurate to say that the Pokemon that appear in legend are true. There's no solid evidence to say that the Sinnoh Myths aren't simply that: Myth. I feel that until Nintendo officially confirms that Arceus did in fact create the Universe, or any other legend, such as Regigigas moving the continents, we should treat them purely as myth and/or theory, and not include them with articles dealing with fact, such as this Timeline.--Dual 03:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

The timeline must have another sub article--Snorlax 10:30, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Should the spinoff games (Colosseum, XD, Ranger, Snap...) fit in anywhere? There's not a lot of evidence linking those to the handheld games... is there any way to put them in? --Kayube 04:09, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I doubt it. There is no indication that any events in the non-handheld games are canon to the basic storyline, so there's no real point to including it here. On another note, it's my personal opinion that this needs to be moved to a different article, because there isn't much of the history that has been confirmed; most of it, as has been mentioned, is legend and theory. Regardless, I'm going to try to clean this up a bit and Wikify it some. Vekter 15:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, the Pokemon Ranger games seem to actually reference events from the games (and also is the reason why Manaphy even exists in the main games.) If we aren't going to count the Ranger games are canon to the basic storyline, then we shouldn't count Manaphy as canon, either, since that's the only EVENT pokemon in the main series that debuted in a side game/spinoff game rather than in the main game series. Besides, since we can't transfer any prior gen pokemon onto the R/S/E/FR/LG game packs, Pokemon Colosseum is currently the only legit way to even ACQUIRE Celebi (though this is only in the Japanese version), and it (as well as it's sequel, Gale of darkness) is also the only OTHER legit way to acquire Ho-Oh and Lugia if you didn't get the Mystic tickets in the Emerald/FR/LG versions. now, for games like Mystery dungeon, yes, those SHOULDN'T be counted as canon in there, since that's an Alt universe. Weedle Mchairybug 13:04, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

What should NOT be considered canon is all this fan-made BS about Pokemon populations decreasing, when the unobtainables came into being, how Doduo/Dodrio came to have multiple heads, etc. -- Umbee 22:01, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Do you think the "Contemporary History" should be moved to a new article called "Timeline of events in the games"? This article is supposed to be about how the Pokémon Universe developed, not what happened in it afterwards.

Can anyone state where it was said that the S.S. Tidal was created in the 1990s?

I need to know because the article said it was created in that time period, and yet I don't really recall the games even stating that it was created in the 1990s (In fact, I don't even recall it even mentioning the date of when it was created at all).

Don't forget to sign your comment with four tildes ~~~~. On to the subject i agree there is no mention of when it was built nor is there mention of its age and assume its age from the release date. So Any suggestions on what to do with it? Pterodactal 07:00, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I seem to recall the ship was under construction during the journey portion of R/S/E. Bardock 12:33, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I created it. Sorry. But we could leave it as it is. K.J.Boring 11:31, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Generation III

It should be sometime BEFORE Generation II and AFTER Generation I because Generation II states that STEEL is a NEWLY discovered type, and Generation III has steel types... Agent #448 ^{☆ | ♥} This will put you off eating for life! 12:30, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Here's how the Generations go in chronological order (This isn't merely fanon, it is supported by evidence from the various canons.)

Generation I→Generation III→→→Generation II→Generation IV

→=short time in betweeen
→→→=long time in between

Shiny^?! 13:22, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

This really puzzles me - I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just confused by this: how exactly are Generations in that order? I don't even understand how Generations I and II could have their timelines connected with III and IV... Ie: what is the canonical proof for this? (not because I'd doubt it - rather I'd love to know it, please) Sipulichu 20:51, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that Steel is newly DISCOVERED type. It's just newly classified type out of those we actually had (the Steel Pokémon could be identified as Rock Pokémon before). The text in game may be mistranslated, since American Pokémon media loves to give us a shit about "new" Pokémon. --Maxim 13:26, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Moon Stone

What about "The Moon Stone"? Of Clefairy and the Moon Stone:

"Seymour theorizes this is because both the Pokémon came from outer space, and the Moon Stone was their spacecraft - which means the Stone belongs to the Pokémon, and the humans must leave it alone."

Mateussf 21:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

That was only in the animé. As far as I know, the whole "Pokémon came from outer-space" thing was never mentioned in any game.--Pokencyclopedia 23:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Except for MAYBE Deoxys and the Clefairy family

~~Weedle McHairybug~~

How about Jirachi? Comet=Outer Space --Theryguy512 18:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

thanks for pointing him out, Theryguy512. ~~Weedle McHairybug~~

IIRC there is an NPC in the Space Center that mentions the theory in Generation III. I believe I've also seen this mentioned in other games, though I may be mistaken. Vekter 15:43, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Lunatone and Solrock appearantly came from outer space as well. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 14:40, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

The theory is explicitly stated by a Lass outside of Brock's gym in Gen. I and Gen. III. That Clefairy are aliens. Deoxys is also stated to be an alien virus that came to Earth on a meteorite. Kyurem was believed to be an alien before his status as Reshiram and Zekrom's original body was discovered. Solrock and Lunatone are also stated to be extraterrestrials and Elgyem and Beheeyem are based off of the 1949 Roswell, New Mexico incident so even though it's never stated outright, they're aliens as well. I personally think that the arrival of Pokémon from outer space should be included. --BlackButterfree (talk) 04:53, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Where did the bird trio go? Sinnoh.

Look at this, the legendary bird trio ( Articuno, Zapdos, Moltres ) is revealed to roam Sinnoh in Pokémon Platnum. These three, are missing in the GSC games (they can't be found in Kanto). So, they might have flown to Sinnoh. K.J.Boring 04:55, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Maybe if someone actually says that in-game. Otherwise, it's speculation.--Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 05:03, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

No one says that those are the same birds though. The Frontier brains afterall have legendary birds aswell.

Forgot to sign name--Outrage DD 23:26, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

In the anime as well, it's shown that there are multiple versions of legendaries (even in the same frame, a mother and baby Lugia come to mind). ←{Berrymaster|Talk|Contrib}→ 23:28, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Clean-Up, Please?

Going through this article, all I see is fan speculation and unusual conclusions. I for one would like to see some evidence of these claims, as many of them see totally made-up. For example: What connection to Kyogre and Manaphy have? And "herds" of Latios and Latias? As far as I remember, it's one for each player. I wouldn't say there were "herds" of Mewtwo, would you? Me, Hurray! 03:05, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually, the "Herds" of Latios and Latias was stated in the Pokedex Entries of Latios and Latias. Don't believe me? Try looking at the pokedex portion of their article. Weedle Mchairybug 03:12, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Kyogre and Manaphy were both in Ranger of The Sea Temple ( i think thats what it was called)DCM_{((Shut the **** upSpy on My Edits))}

Mewtwo is the only successful clone (attempted by humans) of a Pokémon as far as we know. And we're 100% certain that he's the only Mewtwo out there. R.A. Hunter B. 03:25, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

And in the case of the games, it's also the only cloned pokemon, Period [even then, lab notes hinted that it wasn't even a clone {the whole "Mew Gave Birth" thing comes to mind}.] Weedle Mchairybug 00:17, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, okay, but I still think these should be referenced in the article. It is still true that most of the article is mere specualtion, however. Me, Hurray! 04:32, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I doubt that half of it is speculation. Most of it is from the games. Yeah, some of it is guessing for the dates, but that is why they have a large number of years separating the different sections, as the games don't give specific dates, except for that Arceus created the Pokémon universe. R.A. Hunter B. 17:15, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Because everything mentioned in the games is meant to be taken literally. Yes. I see it now. Silly me.Me, Hurray! 20:41, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry. I didn't mean for it to seem like that. When things are typed, they always sound different in the mind of somebody else. R.A. Hunter B. 00:16, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I strayed away from the point. My only problem is that there is no evidence and there are no citations in the artical. It's alright pointing things out here in the talk page, but if there's no evidence in the artical itself then I don't think it meets certain standards. I'm really just requesting evidence.

We can't really cite the games, which is why there aren't any citations at the moment. R.A. Hunter B. 21:22, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

You can sorta cite the games. Who to talk to and where to see what's said. TTEchidna 04:14, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

True. But I think the citing that Me, Hurray is talking about is links and stuff. Or at least very specific descriptions of where they come from. Links we can't do for games, but yeah, I guess it would take some time, but we could find all of the people who tell us the random info. R.A. Hunter B. 04:20, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Mentioning who gives the information in-game sounds like a satasfactory measure to me. at least then the information can be varified and proven correct. Me, Hurray! 16:46, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Rotom

it is never said that Rotom was made in the 70's, infact I taught Pluto discovered it in the 50's, so I think we should leave it blank until Platinum's out in english Ultamate_Charizard 16:49, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I only knew he discovered it. In his youth. I didn't know there was a date involved. R.A. Hunter B. 22:25, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I still don't get who put that in, I mean it would be diffrent it was ever said but I looked Rotom's page and it didn't say anything Ultamate_Charizard

All you have to do is go through the editing history. R.A. Hunter B. 20:31, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Multiple Mew!?

Alright, who said that Mew were plentiful soon after the creation of the Pokémon world? And how does anyone know that this Mew is different from that Mew? It could just be a different voice actor. パルキアJosh 23:23, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

• Ok, about the reason why Mew from Mewtwo Strikes Back being different from the Mew from Lucario and the Mystery of Mew, it's for a couple of reasons. Yes, the voice doesn't necessarily mean much, however, MSB's Mew's Japanese VA was definitely in the 8th Movie as he (she? I don't really know the VA's gender) was the one who voiced Sir Aaron in that Movie. I mean, why would they give Mew a different VA (assuming that it IS the same one) if it's original VA is still very much available? Plus, the one from Movie 1 was very far from Kanto, and If this were the same mew, it would spend most of it's time inside of a Lake/Jungle than in a deciduous forest with a Tree-like Rock formation, not to mention that MSB's Mew lives a considerably far distance from Kanto, or heck, any of the regions that have been seen thus far, while LatMoM's Mew was located, if not in Kanto, then just barely beyond the border. As for the multiple parts, I'm guessing the fossilized remains of a Mew, as well as it being a genetic ancestor to every pokemon seems to answer that question.) Weedle Mchairybug 23:36, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Don't forget that the first Mew was seen to be sleeping underwater, possibly for a long time, untill Mewtwo unleashed his power on the world, creating storms and kidnapping the Nurse Joy of the city. The most recent Mew, was seen to have been connected to the Tree of Beginning, so it should be assumed Mew can't be away from it for long periods of time (longer than seen in the movie). And it and the Tree are so closely connected, when Mew would be damaged in the first movie, the Tree would also sustain damage. And the first Mew is also living in the Johto area, not Kanto. R.A. Hunter B. 21:54, 10 December 2008 (UTC) Mew is the ancestor of all life. A being cannot breed with itself. Thus-multiple Mews-Mtn_Otter

Lugia did what?

Who ever said Lugia actually created the 3 birds? just because it's the master trio doesn't mean it created them. --いぬみみ 23:42, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Well........now thats up to interpretation. I say noDCM_{((曲奇饼妖怪Spy on My Edits))}

I agree. It doesn't say anywhere that he created them. It just says that a Lugia has the power to destroy (Pokédex entries) or save the world (movie), depending on the situation. It only has control over the birds and their powers, and I think they only obey him out of respect for a higher being. R.A. Hunter B. 16:13, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup!

This article is really very well done as it sums up everything so those supposed continuity errors are straingtened out (such as the "Which came first? Arceus or Mew?" paradox). But I really think it needs a cleanup. All it has are random dot points on Pokemon that aren't related. Clean it up! Also, fan assumptions should be excluded! It's annoying to see speculation assumed as fact. Bttsstewart 15:30, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, we've been trying to do that for a while. And if you want it cleaned up, then don't just tell people to do it. You need to do something too. R.A. Hunter B. 16:10, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

There really isn't a paradox concerning Arceus and Mew. It is believed (according to Dex entries) that Mew is the ancestor of Pokémon, but it clearly states in the DPPt origin story that Arceus was born before every other Pokémon (before the universem even). Arceus created Mew, ta-dah! And like R.A. Hunter B. said, you can't just tell people to do things you want done. LordArceus 16:12, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I've had an interesting theory, which could solve the Arceus/Mew paradox. Arceus may have created the universe, but what if Mew came around before the universe was created, and Arceus sort of descended from it? Also, Mew is the ANSCESTOR of all Pokémon, not necassarily their creator. So if Arceus created Dialga and Palkia and the Lake Trio, then they are still anscestors of Mew, because Arceus is.

Please remember to sign comments. I realise that there's no Mew/Arceus paradox, not really. I just mean this article can definitively solve the arguing. (I've seen A LOT of arguing on the subject.) Bttsstewart 14:33, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

To answer above from Rocket Admin Hunter Blade & LordArceus): I didn't think I was 'qualified' enough to contribute to the cleanup. I though you sort of had to be in the webiste 'inner ring'. Haha. I guess that's silly. I've just had a look and I think it's fine as it is. It's just the allignment of the dot points that's a little dodgy. Bttsstewart 14:42, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

The only "qualification" you need, is the ability to not get carried away and screw everything up. Other than that, you should be able to do a lot, such as grammar mistakes, spelling, punctuation, and moving text to the correct sections. R.A. Hunter B. 22:11, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Celebi, Jirachi and Shaymin

Where did the "theory" come around supposing that Celebi, Jirachi and Shaymin were all born at the same time, and after the invention of the Unown writing system? There's no evidence to support this, so why even include it? Taromon777 22:55, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Pictures

I think it would improve this article a great deal of some pictures were included. It would give people more of an idea of what they were reading about. If anyone has any pictures of ancient Sinnoh region tapestries, or anything similar, be sure to add it to the article! Taromon777 22:55, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Kyogre Problem

How could Kyogre have expanded the sea with the help of Manaphy and Lugia when it went to sleep millions of years before, and wasn't woken up again until the events of Generation III? I think that, considering the fact that the Pokémon world is very similar to our own, the sea was probably created the same way that Earth's sea was, and that the theory of it being created by Pokémon is simply a legend. There is definately no archaelogical evidence that it was expanded by Pokémon! Maybe, until we are certain, we shouldn't mention how the sea was created like it is fact. Taromon777 22:55, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Please sign your edits. R.A. Hunter B. 19:39, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

This is all based off Dex entries and such. Kyogre created the oceans, not Manaphy or LugiaDCM_{((曲奇饼妖怪Spy on My Edits))}

Writing System

The article claims that the first writing system was created 1500 years before Generation 1. If this is based on present time, the first writing system was created in 500 AD. I haven't done any research yet, but I'm just noting that in our world, writing was created in about 2500 BC (Egyptians). This would be 4500 years before the present. Firemaker 23:29, 3 January 2009 (UTC) Also the information about the pokemon (Mamoswine, Farfetch'd, Magikarp); is that true? Firemaker 23:29, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Writing first came about around 3400-3000 BC. It's still disputed wether Egypt or Mesopotamia had the oldest writing system. And for your second question, yes. Mamoswine are based off of woolly mammoths, so their history is almost the same as in our world. Farfetch'd have been mentioned somewhere, for their history, but I can't remember. And then Magikarp are the easiest. Many of their TCG Pokédex info boxes talk about it. R.A. Hunter B. 23:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm also curious about what citations there are for when the writing system was created, as I can't find any in-game dialogue referencing that myself. Does anyone know where that information came from? I wonder whether said dialogue might have actually been in reference to language in Kanto/Johto/Hoenn/Sinnoh specifically, rather than the entire world, as Japan adopted the Chinese writing system as its first ever writing system in 500 CE. But without the source text from the game, I can't really make that determination. Chigauchigau (talk) 06:56, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Gigas?

Didn't IT make the three, not humans? TTEchidna 08:16, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

It says that? I haven't been paying attention then... They came around naturally, so nobody really created them, not even Regigigas. Although Platinum DOES say he did, the problem is that the Pt. Dex entry goes against what the Gen. III Dex entries say. R.A. Hunter B. 18:48, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I think it says in the Gen III Pokédex entries that humans created the first three Regis. Regigigas, on the other hand, came into being naturally, and helped to shape the continents. That's what I always though anyway. Taromon777 19:55, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I read that Gigas did the continents, but it became too strong so humans made the Regis and used them as keys to seal it away. Of course, that may have come from this site.... — THE TROM — 08:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

That's the thing... most of the stuff on Bulba is from other things here... but in this case, it's hard to decide. Because how can it control the Regis if they were made by humans? Either mind control because they're so similar, or the humans made three original Regis, and then Gigas made more. R.A. Hunter Blade 23:16, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm not seeing where in the Gen III Pokedex entries it says that humans created them... Registeel and Regirock's say that humans sealed them away, but have nothing that I can see about humans creating them. Unless I am misreading horribly, that part of the timeline needs to be changed. - C.Olimar788 21:52, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

The Pokedexes definitely don't say that humans made the Regi.KrytenKoro 21:26, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Prehistory and Recent History

I personally think this article needs to be either fixed up, deleted, or at least protected, especially the Prehistory and Recent History sections. I mean, at least part of those sections are true, but the rest of it is rubbish. Who ever said the Regis were made in their respective ages? Part of it has nothing to do with Pokémon: why is Apollo 11 even in here? I just want your opinion. Leafstorm151 18:26, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Because. The Pokémon world has some things tied in with ours. And in the Gen I games and their remakes, a guy talks about buying a color TV just to see Neil Armstrong land on the moon. And the Regis is most likely speculation, but at the same time not. R.A. Hunter Blade 19:02, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Regis were made by Gigas then Gigas was sealed and the Regis got exported to Hoenn to keep them away. TTEchidna 00:50, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

What about Damos?

It is stated that Arceus "FIRST" fall into never ending sleep BEFORE the first humans appeared ehh...but in the case of Movie12 Arceus meets Damos, a human, what about that?.....I mean that the first humans appeared after Arceus fall into never ending sleep then....i think we should change that section..."☆AngelGuardian☆" 07:33, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Speculation=no. Until we see movie 12 nothing gets added.--RexRacer 07:35, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

So you mean that whole story of Movie12, of Damos or whatever happens was all because of manga? i mean you get all the information on manga?"☆AngelGuardian☆" 07:40, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Until Movie 12 gets released there can still be doubts. Just wait. I'm sure everything will be explained in time. TTEchidna 07:44, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Arceus, as the creator of the space-time continuum, could logically travel through time in a manner similar it Celibi or Dialga. Also Arceus may have created clones of itself to manage the world while it is asleep.-Mtn_otter

Whats with the Humans land on the moon

Is this Just for fun, because it has no relation with pokemon at all... ---> 223☆Dåv]d 12:29, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

If you've EVER played R/B/Y, or FRLG, you'd know. An old guy in the Pewter Museum of Science mentions getting a color TV just for that moment. R.A. Hunter Blade 16:24, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

oh.... never played anything other than gen 4 :P ---> 223☆Dåv]d 02:30, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Well then, now you know. R.A. Hunter Blade 02:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Pictures!

I just added some pictures to the article, relevant to each era in the history of the Pokémon World. It makes it look a lot more interesting, don't you think? Taromon777 17:58, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Leaf

Shouldn't we remove Leaf from the article? HG/SS proves that Red's story is the canon one, and Leaf doesn't exist in Red's continuity because she never appeared during his quest. - Crystal Master

Absolutely not, unless we also remove Kris due to non-interaction with Gold in Crystal. And we're not removing Kris. Just because Leaf doesn't appear in HeartGold and SoulSilver doesn't mean we should treat Leaf as if she never existed. --Shiningpikablu252 20:04, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

I left Kris there just in case that for whatever reason you consider Pokémon Crystal to be canon rather than the remakes (which would still mean the Leaf isn't part of continuity).

And even if you're going to assume that Leaf existed somewhere, the article is still wrong because she can't have had the same story she had in FR/LG. That would mean that both Red and Leaf had the same mom, the same house, the same rival and the same events within the same continuity, which makes no sense. If she was part of continuity, she would have a different role from Red's, like May and Dawn had in Brendan and Lucas' respective stories. Moreover, the article states that she defeated Green/Blue in the Pokémon League and became the new champion, which can't have happened, considering that Blue/Green states in HG/SS that the trainer who defeated him shortly after he became champion was Red, not Leaf.

Lastly, the article should be about writing what we know that happened, not what might have happened. We know that Red's story is canon and Leaf's isn't, as they can't both happen in the same continuity. Therefore, we know that Leaf never appeared in continuity. That there's a Leaf somewhere in the established continuity is unfounded speculation, no matter how much some people want her to be part of it. - Crystal Master

There are absolutely no acceptable grounds in removing all references to Leaf from the article. By removing parts from the article, you're trying to imply Leaf never existed to begin with, and for that to be true, FireRed/LeafGreen would have to have had only a male player character. Either that or there would have to have been no FireRed/LeafGreen (and if that were to be the case, there would be no HeartGold/SoulSilver either).

Those parts from the article you're trying to have removed in no way imply Leaf exists in HeartGold/SoulSilver; to have any area of the article imply any involvement from Leaf in HeartGold/SoulSilver, Leaf would have to be mentioned in one of the sections further below, and last I saw, there weren't any such mentions.

In conclusion: Leaf exists, and she always will. The fact HeartGold/SoulSilver doesn't mention her does not change that. Where Leaf is already mentioned, she should be. Where Leaf shouldn't be mentioned, she's already not. Trying to erase all traces of her existence from the article is akin to vandalism. --Shiningpikablu252 23:58, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh, ok. So you weren't saying that there was a Leaf somewhere in the HG/SS timeline. My bad.

Anyway, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this article about the timeline of the Pokémon world? Isn't it about making a recollection of the canonical events in the established continuity and making it the less ambiguous possible (ie: saying that "Brendan/May" became the Hoenn champion only because we don't have confirmation about which story is the canonical one, which is different from the case in FR/LG)?

Also, I thought that the most recent games that rewrite history take priority over the older ones. In the RSE section we say that the player calmed down Groudon and Kyogre with Rayquaza's help (as depicted in Emerald), not that s/he "stopped Groudon/Kyogre" (as depicted in Ruby and Sapphire respectively), because we use the most recent rewrite of the RSE story, Emerald, as canon. Likewise, shouldn't the GS remakes, which established that Red's story happened in the timeline but Leaf's didn't, take priority over FR/LG (as HG/SS are the most recent games)?

Edit: I'm not saying that Leaf doesn't exist. I'm saying that she doesn't exist in the continuity established by the overall timeline (if you believe HGSS or GSC), which I think this article is supposed to be about. - Crystal Master

Perhaps instead of rewording the article to not mention Leaf, we reword the Gen III section to be ambiguous as to it's version:

"After defeating Hoenn's eight Gym Leaders and, with the help of Steven and Wallace, calming Groudon and/or Kyogre after they are awakened by Team Magma/Team Aqua, respectively, he/she...."

AFAIK, Platinum's story is different from Pearl and Diamond, yet no mention of Giratina is made. Just keep the version ambiguous. Drake Clawfang 03:07, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Drop me some drafts and I might consider it. I'd really want the text to securely take all player bases into consideration yet not allow possible relentless editing to try to make it look like one player base never existed in the canon. --Shiningpikablu252 03:19, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

There's a draft right there, just replace the one sentence. Drake Clawfang 03:24, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Protection?!

Thanks a lot! I've been working really hard on improving this article over the last few months and now it's been protected! What is the reasoning behind this? --Taromon777 20:21, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Ever think about checking? R.A. Hunter Blade 22:25, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Page now unlocked as both parties in the edit war reached a truce. —darklordtrom 22:27, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Yay, I can edit again now, thanks! Sorry if I came across a bit impolite before. --Taromon777 10:24, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Colosseum and XD

how do we know it takes place 2 years after Gen 2 and 4?--Midnight Blue 18:33, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Not quite. According to the page, Colosseum takes place sometime between Generation I/III and II/IV, which makes sense, and then XD is supposed to be set quite a few years from Colosseum, although I don't know how we got "two years after Gen IV" specifically. ZestyCactus 19:04, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok, thanx. I just thought someone just put that there without proof.--Midnight Blue 19:16, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

I know this is a VERY old topic, but I've been theorizing for a while that Ranger 1 and XD Take place between Gens 3 and 4, 3 Years after FRLG, and that Colosseum takes place 2 years before FRLG, and would like to submit this theory for consideration. --Hwrdjacob (talk) 05:24, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

For reference, I find it most likely that this ACII timeline is how it plays out: Colo.-(2 Years)->FRLG-(about a month)->Emerald/BoxR+S-(3 Years)->XD-(About 2 months or so)->HGSS-(At LEAST a month, but no more than a year)->Platinum/MyPokemonRanch/BattleRevolution-(Unknown timespan)->Black/White-(Two Years)->Black2/White2/DreamRadar-(A few months to a few years)->X/Y/Bank Since Im not all that knowlegable about Ranger, but it's enough to put Ranger1 around the time of XD and SoA/GS somewhere in Gen 4--Hwrdjacob (talk) 05:40, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Can anyone tell me how is it possible for Generation II and IV happened at the same time?

Its not possible because Jasmine is in the Sinnoh Region right?--Jason avelino 10:42, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

People just say that because they believe the odd-numbered generations take place at the same time. Yet there's zero proof of even that--no timeframes are ever stated for when the games that take place in either Hoenn or Sinnoh take place. For all we know, the Generation III Hoenn games takes place five years after Generation II and the Generation IV Sinnoh games take place 10 years further down the road, and yet the technology of their respective platforms allows them to trade freely with the remakes in their generation that do take place at the same time as their originals (addtionally, in Hoenn's case, it can even freely trade with two console games that take place years apart). Besides, where was it stated that the red Gyarados in the Diamond and Pearl intro is the one from the Lake of Rage? Right, nowhere. Yet people are using such a baseless assumption as evidence of the even-numbered generations taking place at or around the same time.

The only times timeframes between two games are ever stated are the case between Generation I and Generation II being three years apart, and Colosseum and XD: Gale of Darkness being five years apart. The fact that both of the latter are compatible with all handheld Generation III games just goes to show that we don't know when the Hoenn and Sinnoh games take place, and that all assumptions of them taking place at the same time as the remakes in their repsective generations are baseless and shouldn't be trusted. --Shiningpikablu252 13:02, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok thanks for answering my question...--Jason avelino 05:35, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Timeframe for Sinnoh, by the way. Rowan returned from Kanto after four years of study with Oak. Red Gyarados specials were still airing on TV. Sinnoh's either during or shortly after the story of Johto. TTEchidna 06:42, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Not necessarily. The Red Gyarados report had Mount Coronet in the background. That means the Red Gyarados couldn't have been in Johto. Edge578 18:46, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Rayquaza from MINERALS?

Where the heck is this from? None of the Pokedexes mention it, and well, there aren't minerals in the ozone layer. They'd be much, much too heavy. Even if a volcano erupts and sprays ash (not minerals) into the air, it doesn't reach the ozone layer.KrytenKoro 21:28, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Regis Created By Humans?

Where does it say that the Regis were made by man? Or that they were made in the three eras (except for Regice)? In fact, Registeel is said to be "tens of thousands" of years old, according to the Pokedex, whereas the Iron Age was just 3,000 years ago. Plasma 20:06, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Generation V

Due to the fact that Cynthia and Looker mention Lucas/Dawn in passing, it can be safely assumed that Generation V takes place around the same time as XD. TorchicBlaziken ^{(talk•edits)} 01:11, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Not necessarily. It can be assumed to take place after Platinum, but we have no idea exactly how long after. --Andy^P_K^M_N 12:06, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Can we edit the Generation IV timeline by shifting the focus to Platinum's storyline rather than Diamond/Pearl with Platinum in parentheses? I believe Cynthia says something about the trainer who battled Giratina, which isn't in the DP Storyline. Pocketfanmk 17:20, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

I agree with pocketfanmk, considering that Platinum is the only game all three of the trio members and that the game is more detailed in all senses. As for Generation V... That's a tough one. Smashbrother101 00:24, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

It's true. Because of the Gen V references we can assume that the Platinum Story is the canonical one, instead of the DP Story.line

About the time of each generation(like what he said:I-III--II-IV) is this because of the remakes of red and blue, in Gen III and gold and silver, in Gen IV?. If it is, and if they will make a remake of ruby and sapphire in Gen V, then shouldn't it be I-III-V---II-IV? Phoenixon 15:16, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

More than one Regigigas?

"Landmasses such as Mt. Coronet are created, and Regigigas move the continents, forming the regions,"

Grammar suggests more than one, is this true or did someone make a typo?--Burgundy 06:40, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it is suggesting that there were more than one. But I could be wrong. :/--Han Ji-Wan 07:12, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Well there are multiple Regigigas in the anime, so it may not be an error. XVuvuzela2010X 11:17, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

That bit seems fine, but the tense of that whole section is weird. Shouldn't it be in past tense? --jda95 12:41, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

If there is only one Regigigas, it would be "Regigigas moves"--Burgundy 16:17, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Basis of article

Is this article based on the games or the anime? --☆FiMbUlWiNtEr2O|2☆ 04:15, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm assuming a combination of both.. Why? --Han Ji-Wan 04:51, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

The article says that it is based on the canon and the games, but it seems like a lot is from the movies. Aren't the movies part of the anime? And also there is a separate timeline for the anime. --☆FiMbUlWiNtEr2O|2☆ 22:34, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Article is Fan Speculation

Shouldn't the article be marked with that Togepi tag saying that this is only speculation?Jazama 03:55, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

And why should it? You need to give a real reason why Ataro 04:00, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

There are various things in there that are not officially confirmed. It is never officially said when the GameCube or Hoenn Games take place. All that is said is that Generation II takes place three years after Generation I, XD is five years after Colesseum, Generation IV is probably set around II, and that V takes place after II and IV. Until a timeline is ever given out, this is just speculation.Jazama 05:59, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

One more thing, the Pokedex is notoriously unreliable and myths are, by definition, religious stories, not accurate tales of history.Jazama 06:22, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

After it says, "This information is based primarily on the mythology of both the Hoenn and Sinnoh regions," maybe there should be another sentence explaining that the myths are not necessarily true.Bulbamelia 01:29, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Missing Unova Details

the following details are missing in the list. however, it is difficult to place them into the timeline. should we mention somewhere that the placement is unknown? missing details:founding of unova region, dragon split into reshirm and zekrom, kyurem came down in a meteor, muskteer trio save pokemon during middle age, thundros and tornados fighting and landros calming them down. there should be more missing though - Pokeant 17:54, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Shouldn't it also be noted that sometime between gens IV and V, Ghetsis somehow acquired the Adamant, Lustrous and Griseous orbs? Wind 21:19, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

And I think, the construction of the Marvelous Bridge? Village Bridge? "☆AngelGuardian☆" 04:42, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Can we include a unknown date section for the information with unspecific or unconfirmed date? -Pokeant 11:11, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Some issues with the timeline

Approximately two years after Generation II/Generation IV:

• Cipher and Team Snagem return in the Orre Region, and create XD001, a supposedly unpurifiable Shadow Pokémon, but their plans are thwarted by Michael. Meanwhile, Dr. Kaminko and Chobin invent Robo Groudon and Robo Kyogre, and Professor Krane invents the purification chamber, where Shadow Pokémon can be purified more easily.

When was it ever stated that the Orre games even take place at the the same time as the Hoenn games? Orre looked like post-apocalyptic world.

Approximately 10 years after Generation II/Generation IV (Generation V):

• The events of Black and White.

Why 10? If Black and White take place 10 years after Gen IV, then both Looker and Cythia have had botox. XVuvuzela2010X 02:03, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

To answer your first question, it occuring around the same time as the Hoenn games/Kanto games was implied with the fact that it could trade to the Sevii Islands/Hoenn when linked up. Weedle Mchairybug 02:34, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

it is written as 10 years since the team rocket grunt in gsc/hgss makes an appearance and had a son. however, it can't be 10 years too. assuming he returned to unova the same year as gsc/hgss, it should roughly be 5 years. since from my memory, the overworld sprite of the son is a kid (i think) and so should not even be 10 years old. therefore, 5 should be a good approximation in my opinion. maybe another source mentioned it takes place roughly 10 years later? -Pokeant 03:32, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

"A meteor breaks up a Pokémon World Pangaea, and makes all the regions"???

does this belong to the anime history instead of here? it is not stated in the games a meteor breaks up the region. istead regigigas is the one that pulls the continents... i think this should go to the anime list. -Pokeant 10:04, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

You are correct. I have already eliminated that statement since it is from the anime. You can add it in if you would like to. :] Han Ji-Wan 19:33, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Giratina returns to the Pokémon world prior to Generation I?

"Some years prior to Generation I: Giratina returns to the Pokémon world." "Between Generation I/III and Generation II/IV: Giratina returns to the Distortion World." Okay, where does it say that in the games or the like? --Insert Witty Dialog Here NateVirus(Talk) 01:38, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

• I thought Giratina was stuck in Distortion World until the events in Platinum (or Generation IV really). But, I'll keep those parts up, in case there is a source that I'm missing. ----NateVirus(Talk|Contributions) 06:02, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Parallel universe?

I've been toying with some ideas on an alternate view of the game's history based on a few key facts. Essentially, there must be some concrete level of parallelism between the real world and the Pokémon world, if everything in the games is taken as canon:

• Most (or many) Pokémon are classified by what type of animal they are (Pikachu is a "Mouse Pokémon", etc.), so it can be assumed that Pokémon were not prevalent as a whole in the universe until sometime within the realm of documented history; otherwise, animals would be classified by what Pokémon they are like (if there are even normal animals in the game; the only real indication I know of is the aquarium in the Cerulean City gym in the anime).
• From that point, two options emerge:
  • Pokémon evolved from actual animals sometime approximately within the realm of documented history, then out-competed normal animals to near, if not total, extinction. This must have occurred within documented history, for surely even a minute population of a given species of Pokémon would quickly dominate any corresponding animal (e.g., two Pikachu could flourish against thousands of normal mice).
  • Pokémon were suddenly introduced into the universe. This could have resulted from several things: Dialga/Palkia/Giratina essentially control all of space-time, so Pokémon could have been transferred from a totally different universe; a population of Mew that existed on the planet beyond human influence, because of some external influence, suddenly evolved into all manner of other Pokémon; or something to that effect.
• Taking the Pokédex entries as fact, refer to Golduck's entry from R/B, which makes mention of the "Japanese monster Kappa." This implies not only that Japan as a country exists in the Pokémon world, but also that its historical and cultural development must have been largely similar to its real-life history, or else such a legend would likely have never existed.
• Other entries of that sort appear, such as Poliwrath's, which refers to the Pacific Ocean, implying that general geography is such that sailing and exploration occurred in a similar way to real life. Also consider the journal entry claiming to have sighted Mew in Brazil (I believe?). As such, we can assume that the Pokémon world was for a long period of time identical to our own, save potentially for minor changes outside of human influence (e.g. Mew population), until some particularly disruptive event thrust the world into an alternate timeline.
• Of course, there must be some limitation as to how much parallelism is accepted as canon; every player character owns the latest generation of Nintendo console at home. What is to be made of that?
• Also consider the technological development of the world, especially based on needs and resources; teleportation is essentially perfected, but there are only a handful of planes, none of which are for passengers (as in Black/White).
• If these points are all accepted, we are given potential insight into the development of Pokémon society within species: Since Pokémon must have come to human attention after the development of language, it can be assumed that all Pokémon capable of saying their names evolved to do so only after sufficient exposure to humans calling them by that name, or else language would have been deterministic.
• Given that Pokémon did not dominate the ecosystem until relatively recently in the world's history, it is important to consider how Pokémon have or have not emigrated across continents. If humans have made contact across continents for some period of time, it should be expected that Pokémon would be able to do the same (e.g. if Pidgeot can fly at Mach 2, what's stopping it from crossing any ocean a boat or a Water-type Pokémon can cross and invading a new ecosystem?). This point requires more research.

I'd love to hear what you think!

FurretTurret 04:05, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

PokePark Wii

Can someone put the PokePark Wii plot in it? Metalfenix11 15:17, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

How do you guys know that PokePark Wii takes place between Generation I/III and II/IV??? Metalfenix11 12:29, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Implications of Steven being Champion and the Dotted Hole

What evidence is there that RSE are taking place at the same time as FrLG? The Dotted Hole saying "CONNECT THE PAST" in FrLG and Steven being Champion still in HgSs seem to being evidence that FrLG and RSE aren't taking place at the same time. Are there any events or dialog in RSE or FrLG that definitely (or probably) reference specific time-line events in the other? -Babilfrenzo 19:32, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Evidence

Where's the evidence for Generations I and III taking place at the same time, and for Generations II and IV at the same time? Black and White show that Platinum is the canon version for the Sinnoh games, and it didn't have the Red Gyarados report. Trading without time travel is a flimsy justification at best. Cynthia never mentions the events of DPPt in HGSS, and Steven only makes vague reference to similar-looking challengers, not to the Aqua/Magma crisis. Is that different in the original Japanese? I forget exactly what the Hiker in Hearthome says about Elm's report on Eggs, can we see what he says in both language versions of Platinum? I was discussing this with a friend (trying to support the same time argument), but I was unable to find any hard evidence that he couldn't come up with an alternate explanation for, so this is all seeming like a lot of speculation being passed off as fact. --エルレイド 05:46, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

You're not kidding when you say 'Trading without time travel is a flimsy justification at best'. Colloseum and XD Take place five years apart, yet both of them can still trade with Generation III Games. The upcoming BW2 Games are also extremely likely to be able to trade with the original Black and White, although they take place two years apart. Pokelad2 15:32, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Gen III concurrent with Gen V?!!?!

Caitlin is the same Caitlin in both Gen IV (Battle Frontier) and Gen V - she looks about 4 or 5 years older which would imply that 4-5 years pass between the ends of the two storylines. Now, there's a trainer in BW2 that mentions the Mirage Tower recently disappearing... does that mean Gen III is concurrent with Gen V?! Based off that, I think it goes RGBYFRLG---3yrs---GSCHGSS---2yrs---DPPt---4yrs---BW---2yrs---BW2,RSE Jjl2357 (talk) 21:32, 10 March 2013 (UTC)jjl2357

In B2W2 there are Magma and Aqua grunts that have formed a family both say they were part of the teams in R/S/E "Several years ago". This means R/S/E happens several years before the events of B2W2 which can be anywhere between 3 to 11 years before B2W2 which puts it before Black and White's story anyway. Current placement is most accurate based on events that transpire between R/S/E, FR/LG, and the spin offs XanderO (talk) 02:47, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Timeline Citations

Forgive me, however after scanning through this article it bugs me that the only reasoning (which I can find) for Gen III and Gen I being concurrent is speculation and that doesn't sit well with me.

We know that Gen I and II are three years apart as that's mentioned repeatedly in G/S/C/HG/SS and B/W and B2/W2 are two years apart for the same reason.

We can derive that BW2 takes place after the events of RSE because of the Former Aqua/Magma couple in Iccarus, as we can derive it's after the events of Gen II and IV as Team Rocket and Galatic's failures are mention in N's castle in B/W.

Despite this, it doesn't nessessarily mean that D/P/Pt must be concurrent with G/S/C, likewise with R/S/E and R/B/Y, unless I've missed something?

As for Spin-Offs, admittedly the only one I've played is Ranger 2 and for all I know that could be before R/B/Y as it could be after BW2.

--

My point is, could we have it mentioned (maybe in the introduction) the order of the games as far as we cannoincally know? Conductor Alix (talk) 00:16, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

I was under the impression that RBY and RSE were considered concurrent because they reference the events of each other as current events, and the same goes for GSC and DPPt. DPPt had a mention of the Red Gyarados incident from GSC, for example. That being said, I can't remember what the other references were, so I might be completely wrong. Yamiidenryuu (talk) 22:35, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Some details

It somewhere information about the Giovanni/Silver/Celebi event in HGSS? And about the later appearance of champions and gym leaders in B2W2, specially about Sabrina joining the Pokewood industry and Giovanni wasn't arrested or something? DPPt storyline wasn't supposed to be a bit earlier than HGSS because of Jasmine appearance in Sunnyshore City and later change of clothes? Sorry for my english :) --Virus bass (talk) 17:52, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Old man in Coumarine City

During my Pokemon Y playthrough i talked to this old man in Coumarine City. He said something about seeing a "Pokemon Trainer with a great Ampharos" in Azure Bay when he was a young boy (possibly Jasmine?). Is this helpful in placing X and Y in the timeline? JEFLIV (talk) 03:56, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

He probably talks about the man in Azure Bay who gives you an Ampharosite. And even if not, it would be speculation if it were Jasmine, and speculation on pages is not allowed. ☼ BlazingFist ☼ 14:49, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

Writer tweets timeline?

The writer for the series has tweeted the official timeline for the series. Which mostly matches up with what you guys have here https://twitter.com/matsumiyan/status/464052839870787584 X and Y seem to take place at the same time as B/W2 --Tuskin38 (talk) 15:42, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

X/Y Can Not Be Concurrent With B/W2. X/Y Take Place During The Same Year As R/S/E

X/Y can't take place at the same time as B/W2 as the Y Pokedex entry for Lunatone states that it "..was discovered at the site of a meteor strike 40 years ago. " The pokedex entry for Emerald also states that it was found 40 years ago. Therefore X/Y have to take place at the same time as R/S/E.

Senkara (talk) 22:18, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

The dex entries are already known to contain contradictory or outright nonsensical information, so I don't think keeping them coherent is much of a priority for Gamefreak. Most likely thay's just an oversight.

Besides, it's confirmed that XY take place after BW at least (mentions of something big having gone down in Unova a couple years before the games), and BW take place after RS (don't remember which games, but there's the former Aqua and Magma couple). So XY being concurrent with RS is impossible anyway. Yamiidenryuu (talk) 22:45, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

No, it was recently stated that XY and B2W2 take place around the same time. As for the Pokedex, it means nothing. They're full of things that don't really make sense. (Slugma as hot as the sun.) And it's just a reused entry anyway. Ataro (talk) 23:02, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Time Paradox Danger

Well, I'm also excited for the upcoming games however there is a problem everyone ignores. as RB(RG) comes with RSE, a remake for RB(RG) that takes time with RSE make sense indeed. and so on for remakes of GS and DPPt. BUT, and here is a big but, RS already have a stated position in timeline, and if XY and RS will be able to trade with each other, we would yeild a time paradox. The solutions that would remove this time paradox are as follows: 1. you will not be able to trade from XY to new RS, only through the bank. 2. it will be about 8-9 years after the events of the original RS, though if I'm not wrong it have been confrimed that aSoR would be remakes of RS with the same storyline and characters. 3. you will get an item or access to a place similar to GSC that will some sort of a time forward machine to be able to trade with XY.

if none of the above would happen, we will have a difficult to write the timeline properly. sorry about my english, it's not my first language. Shaked (talk) 15:16, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

3000 years prior...

In the actual article, there's a "3000 years before generation five" and a "3000 years before generation six". Whether or not the games happen at the same time (which B2/W2 do with X/Y) at the very most, there's only a decade separating the Kanto games from the Kalos games. So shouldn't both "3000 years" events be combined into one?--BlackButterfree (talk) 04:29, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Spin-off games

When have the spin-offs ever been considered canon? Colosseum/XD and the Ranger games are mentioned repeatedly in this article, despite not being developed by GameFREAK and never being referenced in any of the main games whatsoever. The officially released timeline doesn't even include them, so throwing them in here makes about as much sense as including Snap or the TCG Gameboy game. This is almost as bad as the "trio master" page for being almost entirely fan fiction.Five (talk) 09:12, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

How ORAS fits into all of this

Now, as we all know, Zinna leaves a nice little quote during the Delta episode that implies a multiverse. And, as previously stated, ORAS would cause a time paradox if it were anywhere in the current timeline due to various elements such as Fairy types being just a normal thing while it was a big deal in XY, Mega Evolution being somewhat well known, etc. This obviously points to the sheer implausibility of ORAS being anywhere in the main timeline. With Zinna's quote in context, could it be Nintendo cleaning up their continuity errors for once? All leads seem to point to it right now.--Hwrdjacob (talk) 05:51, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Zinnia's quote puts Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire firmly into the same timeline as X and Y. She mentions the other Hoenn belongs to a world where the Kalos War did not happen and Mega Evolutions aren't well known. ORAS fit into "all this" the same way all remakes do: they replace the older games in the main continuity. - Taylor (talk) 06:01, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

About your points: breeding, Steel- and Dark-types were "a big deal" in the Johto games, and they're all treated as normal, common things in the original Hoenn games, which happen chronologically before. New features are only treated as such in their first appearance; in all following games, they're treated like they have always been there. This is not news. - Taylor (talk) 06:03, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

The difference being, however, that Gen 1 and 2 are very likely not the same timeline as Gen 3-6, with RS being something of a reboot in terms of continuity, and GS being firmly established as being after Emerald even before HGSS's release, making the whole Steel/Dark Type and Egg debate mostly moot. The other world she speaks of might very well be the verse of Gen 3, which if ORAS is concurrent with Emerald, would make sense at the time. Compounding these facts is that ORAS would create contradictions, regardless if you placed it around the time of FRLG or the time of XY. In addition, while every feature of the original Gen 1 and 2 were retained, with additions and extensions while towns were mostly kept the same with the exception of minor updates, Mauvile is just one example of an absolutely blatent example of intentional differentiation from the originals, along with axing the Battle Tower/Frontier for no good reason. Also, every major character is redesigned, it seems, something neither of the other two remakes did, with the arguable exception of the main characters. And this is of course, ignoring the contradictions in Mega Evolution backstory- Lucario VS. Rayquaza being first to Mega Evolve and Rayquaza making Mega Evolution vs. Xerneas/Yveltal making it via the Ultimate Weapon's radiation (The latter of which I am admittedly fuzzy on the side of Rayquaza's version). I could go on, with details such as the changing of most of the Gyms, Cosplay Pikachu, etc. Generally the reason new features are treated like they always were there I believe is because there isn't usually any of major significance, outside of adding Steel/Dark and Breeding, which a reboot fixed pretty quickly since technically, it was then correct to say it was always there... --Hwrdjacob (talk) 06:36, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Emerald hasn't been canon since HeartGold and SoulSilver, and now Ruby and Sapphire are no longer canon either. I could go on about your points and speculations (the other remakes didn't have redesigns, really?), but in fact it's as simple as that. - Taylor (talk) 06:43, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

There is an interesting claim that you just made. Would you explain why the release of HeartGold and SoulSilver made Emerald no longer canon? --Super goku (talk) 06:50, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

HeartGold and SoulSilver, which take place after the Hoenn events, state that Steven is the Hoenn Champion. In Emerald canon, Wallace is the titleholder. - Taylor (talk) 07:04, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Keep in mind, we don't know what happens between generations. Wallace being Champion was implied in Emerald to be a VERY recent development, possibly even happening after you began your journey. So keep in mind, even with Emerald canon, he could have reclaimed his title behind the scenes. After all, Red relinquished his behind the scenes. If anything, I think it cements Emerald as canon by referencing both Aqua and Magma in a negative light. --Hwrdjacob (talk) 13:14, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Apparently, Championship is a very fragile thing, futher shown by Iris and Alder...--Hwrdjacob (talk) 13:18, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

As for the redesign thing, I'm aware there were minor tweaks in most cases, but only once or twice did they take very durastic liberties, and it was only with Blue in HGSS and arguably the player characters off the top of my head. Try comparing pretty much any Gym Leader in ORAS to RSE...--Hwrdjacob (talk) 13:29, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

And ultimately, Steven only remains Champion at the end in RS. He relinquishes his title to Wallace during the Delta episode.--Hwrdjacob (talk) 14:48, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

The PWT in BW2 makes Emerald being canon even more likely. Blue is counted in the Champion Cup, implying they count current AND former Champions. Not only does Wallace appear, but he does so in the Champion Cup and using his Emerald appearance. It seems as if he became Champion in Emerald, then lost the title again to Steven, if he says he is Champion in HGSS on. Hwrdjacob (talk) 17:20, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Speculation, speculation. The solid fact is that HGSS take place after the Hoenn games and Steven is the Champion - like RSORAS, unlike Emerald. (And have you really paid attention to ORAS? Steven doesn't relinquish his title, he suggests he may do something like that one day; both Magma and Aqua are villains in both games, the only difference is which of them is the bigger threat and which reforms first). And, please, don't say there were never radical redesigns in the past, you're insulting everyone's intelligence (Blaine, Karen, the Rocket Executives, there are countless examples). Moreover, PWT is purely fan service and its canonicity is questionable; seriously, it has Giovanni waltzing around the place. Bottom line: as far as we know, remakes work now the same way they always did. You're desperately trying to find excuses to assume that Game Freak will for some reason change the way things have always been done and somehow deem that a ten year-old game is canon and the newest releases -- telling the same story -- are non-canon. - Taylor (talk) 20:52, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Giovanni was allowed to be Gym Leader in the first place, y'know, so I doubt anyone would bat an eye at him if he waltzed into the PWT. And since Driftveil was renovated for the purpose of hosting it, and the events with Colress there, I think it's canonical status is spoken for. Plus, the Rocket Execs? If you're referring to Proton and Petrel, the design was still used by Archer, so... there.And I'm not denying there weren't ANY radical redesigns, but they at least attempted to keep the same appearance with the majority of the characters. A good portion of THE ENTIRE CAST is radically altered and there's a blatent sense they aren't intended to look anyting like the originals (Contrast Emerald Brawly with ORAS Brawly, then GSC Brock with HGSS Brock for my point...) Lastly, I find it a bit hypocritical you'd put "No Speculation" on an article that has pretty much no basis for the placement of Pokemon XD. Im am not implying ORAS is non canon either. That's pure speculation on your part.--Hwrdjacob (talk) 22:25, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Separate Timeline?

I think Gen VI is set in a separate timeline since Mega Evolution is in the games and isn't in the games prior to them. Also Zinnia states about another Hoenn where Mega Evolution is unknown, which could be the one from RSE. Ellis99 (talk) 12:54, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

It was confirmed a while ago that the events of X and Y are contemporaneous with the events of BW2 in terms of the timeline of all games as a whole (in other words, BW2 and XY happen at the same time). Plus, it isn't confirmed that the original RSE timeline is the exact alternate Hoenn that Zinnia refers to in the Delta Episode. Plus, I think you took that wrong, even if X and Y are in a different universe, I don't think it is exactly a separate timeline, per se, but rather an alternate universe with a very similar timeline, but with the presence of Mega Evolution and the war. Furthermore, I strongly doubt this would matter much, as this page is already filled to the brim with discrepancy anyways, and Pokemon history is already very unstable and confusing... ScraftyIsTheBest (talk) 14:43, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Origins of Weather Trio

I haven't played ORAS, so where's the info about the origins of Weather trio coming from? Trainer Yusuf (talk) 17:09, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Error on Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire

Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire events(ORAS for short) didn't happen at the same time as original ruby and sapphire, instead, they happen at the same time as the events of XY. the events that happen in ORAS are similar to RS however it's a different universe as was hinted at the delta episode, and also, that explain why looker is found at the battle tower island, not remembering everything, after getting from XY's Kalos to ORAS's Hoenn for unkown reason as it was probably moved between universes! also, it fixes the trading paradox, as if XY and ORAS are happening in the same time, it's the only explanation of how you can trade betweem the two games(different universes but same time)! whereas it would be impossible to trade from XY to original RS(as RS happens at the past of XY), the assumption that ORAS is not the same time as RS makes sense!! Shaked (talk) 19:52, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

We're not going to rely on fan theories like "it would be impossible to trade [otherwise]" to decide that sort of thing. The only things that seem to date ORAS at all (mentions of Kalos around the Battle Maison, a general mention of the Kalos war 3000 years ago (i.e., it's at least roughly contemporary with XY), Professor Cozmo mentioning working with Sycamore "a few years ago"...and maybe the general state of Mega Evolution knowledge) don't place it at any very definite time.

We may be wrong, but we're hardly certain whether we are or aren't. There's a huge rabbit hole we could go down thanks to the whole parallel universe trick. We can't approach the question of ORAS's place in the timeline haphazardly. Tiddlywinks (talk) 20:30, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

well, it can't be 'fan theory' as the fact gen II and gen IV, are happening at the same time and gen I and gen III happening at the same time was made as to give explanation why does both can trade with each other, as otherwise no such explanation were needed(as people wondered how gen I and gen III can trade pokemon in between and same for II and IV). as you stated, you can't know if it is RS timeline or XY timeline, so placing it at the timeline of RS is wrong as well, and ORAS events should be placed outside of timeline, stating it is happening at a parallel universe, or otherwise, no one told you that ORAS happend the same time as RS. furthermore, there was no problem with assuming that RGBY and FRGL are same universe and GSC and HGSS are same universe as no trading paradox was made! JUST becuase there would be trading paradox between ORAS and XY if ORAS=RS, they invented the parallel universe thingy, to fix it up.(if in the future a remake of diamond and pearl is made, they can "play" with that parallel universe even again). Shaked (talk) 20:39, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

I think when you say Gen I, II, III, and IV, you're meaning the events of RBY, GSC, RSE, and DPPt... But saying it like that is incredibly confusing, because Gen III and IV also contained remakes of the Gen I and II games. If it comes up again, I hope you can remember to be clearer.

FWIW, the reference at the bottom of the page confirms the basic chronology on this page through XY; so we certainly don't have to rely on direct trading capabilities to "prove" that two stories happened at the same time (up to XY at least).

Also FWIW, BW and B2W2 can trade, and we're quite certain those have a non-trivial time difference. Maybe direct trading was part of the justification at one time (I'm not at all sure there weren't other decent reasons, but I'm not interested in researching it that deeply), but given the Gen V games, it's definitely not viable anymore.

You also have no evidence that the parallel universe thing was invented to "fix" the possibility of some paradox; you're only guessing. (What I'm trying to say is, please try not to put words in the developers' mouths.) Hell, is it even any neater or anything? (IMO, no.) Either you're trading between different times—which at least we've seen before, first explicitly for RBY and GSC, then quietly for BW and B2W2—or you're trading (or perhaps transferring, at some point) between parallel universes. Short of another cutoff like Gen II->III, there's probably not a "reasonable" solution if they're going to keep doing remakes.

All that being said... It may be reasonable to distinguish ORAS from the normal timeline. (That's probably not a decision anyone should take entirely upon themselves, though...) Tiddlywinks (talk) 21:32, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

First let me say that aside from remakes of Generation 1 games existing in Generation 3 (FR/LG), there is nothing that strictly says the events of Kanto happened in tandem with the events in Hoenn, unless you have some other source I have not been able to find.

I've done EXTENSIVE research on this and I am glad someone else pointed this out before Sun and Moon even came out. With the advent of Sun and Moon we have CONFIRMED the existence of alternate universes, and that Ruby, Sapphire, and Emerald exist in a universe/on a timeline separate from OR/AS, X/Y, and Sun and Moon. However, Shaked was keen to point out that OR/AS already has differences that we could have spotted in Generation 6 alone. Let me list a few more below, as cited from the "References to Other Generations" page on Bulbabedia itself. In the OR/AS references to RSE, the following can be found:

A Bug Catcher tells the player that he "heard that Pokémon Centers used to have two stories until 10 years ago" and had "a special area known as the Pokémon Cable Club". The last game to utilise this feature, Pokémon Emerald, was first released in 2004, 10 years before the remakes were released. A man at Mt. Pyre mentions how there used to be holes in the floor, a thing that was true in Generation III. When the player shows Norman the Eon Ticket, he says that it has been 11 years since he last saw the ticket. Eon Ticket was originally distributed in 2003, 11 years before the remakes' release. All of these are in game pieces of dialogue; lore inserted into the game to inform the player about the universe that they are roaming. These are direct references to the original Ruby, Sapphire, and Emerald games, placing them as existing 10 to 11 years before the events of Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire. This suggests that the major events of OR/AS take place 10-11 years later than they do in RSE. Red and Blue from RBY have aged about that much (give or take two years) in Sun and Moon, and with the "Remake Rule" that Gen 1 games (RBY) and Gen 3 games (RSE) happened simultaneously because of Gen 3 remakes FR/LG, the idea of OR/AS taking place around this time makes sense (likely just before the events of Sun and Moon).

Another huge piece of evidence that links OR/AS with the time of X/Y: Wally. In Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire, we see a mega evolution using Wally who grows to become a strong trainer. In Sun and Moon, we see Wally again, and he seems to have slightly aged. However, he has not aged 10 years like Red and Blue have (which would HAVE to be the case if OR/AS and RSE happened at the same time as the events of RBY). He’s only grown a bit taller, as if aged up two to three years or so to be a young teenager. We know from the official Sun and Moon concept art for Grimsley found in the collector's guide that Sun and Moon happen two years after B2W2 (and because of the tweet, X and Y as well). So that two years of growth into an adolescent make perfect sense. Besides the slight height difference, his design remains about the same. If OR/AS was parallel in time with RSE, then Wally would ALSO have to be 21 like Red and Blue in Sun and Moon, which is most definitely not the case. Now, some people believe that Wally could just not have grown due to his “disease” that he has. But if you look at the details to what his disease actually is, you realize that it’s most likely a respiratory disease, like asthma. We can infer this from the fact that when Wally and his family move to Verdanturf, a town that is remarked by residents to have exceptionally clean air, Wally’s health is said to greatly improve because of it. This doesn’t entirely rule out a genetic growth disease, but I doubt that anything affected by genetics will improve instantaneously with a change in air quality.

References to Kalos and its technology—most notably the model of Prism Tower from Lumiose City—link these games very solidly to X and Y. There are VERY few links to Kanto to be found in the Hoenn of Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire, so to assume that they are intrinsically related would be misled.

Also, Anabel, a character seen ONLY in Pokémon Emerald before Sun and Moon, was said to have been found on the shores of Alola about 10 years ago by Looker and Nanu after having been cast through an Ultra Wormhole. This matches up closely with the timeline evidence I presented above.

Finally, you should follow your own "Remake Rule" regarding OR/AS! If Gen 1 and Gen 3 events happen at the same time because of the Gen 1 remakes in Gen 3, and the same for Gen 2 and Gen 4, then the same should hold true for Gen 3 and Gen 6. Why make an exception to that pattern now? It only weakens the links for the other ones.

Combine that all with the confirmation of a split between mega and non-mega universes, and you have very convincing evidence that OR/AS is more closely linked to X/Y than R/B/Y, and that the events do not happen simultaneously.

Let's talk about that tweet "reference" that is used for the timeline. Not only has that tweet since been deleted, but it came out before any lore about parallel timelines existed in Pokémon. Now that this has been confirmed in Generation 7, this tweet looks very outdated, especially with the idea that X and Y exist in a universe separate from the games that it came before. Also, that official ordering says specifically RSE, and makes no mention of OR/AS. To assume they are the same is incorrect and baseless.

I'm really hoping that what I've presented here helps convince you to rethink your placement of OR/AS. AlmigthtyArceus (talk) 12:14, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

This is an incredible analysis, but I do have one piece of information that kinda throws a wrench in it: Porygon. In Firered, its Pokédex entry implies that it was a very recently created Pokémon, based on the Pokédex's use of "the most advanced technologies", and not including "of its time" or any similar phrase that would indicate a particularly distant past. Meanwhile, its entry in Sun states that it was created "roughly 20 years ago". In other words, there's a 20-year gap between the Kanto games and the Alola ones. Eskay64 (talk) 18:20, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Pokémon Colosseum and Pokémon Ranger

How do we know Colosseum and Ranger take place shortly after Generations 1 and 3, and subsequently, how do we know XD Gale of Darkness takes place about two years after Generations 2 and 4? Also, do we know where the Ranger sequels are confirmed to be concurrent to Generations 2 and 4? BlackButterfree (talk) 08:13, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Sorry to be a nuisance, but I still would like an answer for this. While these two spin-offs do take place in the main canon, they shouldn't be listed if they're not properly sourced. (Which honestly, kinda applies to most of the page.) BlackButterfree (talk) 02:48, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

The timeskip between Generation II/IV and Generation V

I see that the page now states Generation V took place "At least three years after Generation II/Generation IV". Why is that? As far as I know, there was no information available about much time passed between Generation II/IV and Generation V. --Scan (talk) 21:55, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Generation VII takes place at least 10 years after Emerald, because of the amount of time Anabel has been in Alola. All the other gaps have a canonical length, so when you add it all up*, the gap from IV to V can be no less than three years. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 23:46, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

More on alternate timelines

Doesn't the stuff with Anabel in Sun/Moon further imply the alternate timeline/reality thing? TheFatPanda (talk) 16:54, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Game chronology

This page is very much in-universe and doesn't cite its sources at all. Since timeline disputes have come up numerous times on various pages (usually about characters' ages), I would like to add User:Pumpkinking0192/Game timeline as a subsection either on this page or on Core series#Timeline. The rigorous citations will clearly explain the timeline, so people shouldn't get confused anymore. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 20:09, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Poke. Does anyone have an opinion on this proposal? Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 15:01, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

First off, why do you repeat yourself in the GS and HGSS paragraph? Tiddlywinks (talk) 15:21, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Because I'm trying to be rigorous and provide an exact citation for each game, and not just assume that remakes or third versions take place at the same time as their originals. I believe the first paragraph (Yellow, E, FRLG, ORAS) is the only place those citations are impossible and such assumptions have to be made. Obviously if the staff don't think that's necessary, it can be pared down, but just to start with I wanted to be as thorough as possible. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 15:26, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Your GS/HGSS references already specify the games.

If I try to make an alternate, would you prefer I leave your userpage alone? Or that I simply make a second section? Or do you care if I replace it, with the original simply remaining in the past revisions? Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:09, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Any of that is fine by me. Thanks for your interest in the subject! Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 16:16, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

I found the right-floating table a little hard to deal with or understand, mainly because of the large ranges in some perhaps, but also because it was relatively onerous to keep a given number in mind and then look for the piece of prose that says something about that number. For that reason, I put it all together in one table. I also added an explicit "years passed" column, because that's the actual number we usually have, and I think it's good to be able to find that easily and then see how that affects the aggregate timeline.

The third version/remake caveat emptors can all be a preface to the more proper specifics. On a vaguely similar subject, you could probably also combine the GS and HGSS references into one (just adding the text of the latter onto the end of the former), since it's really the same thing just with version/remake differences.

I really think the alternate universe deserves to be kept as separate as possible too, so I put those games in their own column. We could maybe take out notes that still state that a game takes place in the Mega Evolution universe since that's arguably taken care of by the ME timeline's column. (Maybe it could stay where XY and B2W2 are said to be contemporaneous, just to make it clear they're still separate.)

I also moved all the reference "text" to the end, because having all that inline with the first references of each just bloated the wikicode; they work fine at the end, and it's much easier to get a handle on the text that actually uses the references.

I'm not sure where/if it belongs on this page, but I think that all is better if it will go somewhere. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:03, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

I like it! I don't think it needs to be sortable, but otherwise I don't have anything to complain about. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 17:11, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

I don't think we should be using pokedex entries. dates provided are not definite and some games uses same entry so the time does not make sense (i.e. lunatone pokedex entry from emerald, HGSS, and Y all mentioned it is discovered 40 years ago, but we know the 3 games are set apart from each other). in addition, before the release of oras, XY can take place in the original timeline too, since in game, mega evolution is also stated to be discovered recently (though they might be referring to our real world), can't remember which npc quote it. also there are inconsistency such as lucario being the first to mega evolve instead of rayquaza which would make sense if it take place in original timeline -Pokeant (talk) 16:27, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

A few things. Let's first refresh ourselves on what Zinnia said: "A world where maybe the evolution of Pokémon took a slightly different path, where Mega Evolution is unknown... A world where that war 3,000 years ago...never happened."

1) This establishes ORAS and XY as being in the same world/timeline, contrasted to one without them. ("A world where Mega Evolution is unknown" and "where that war 3,000 years ago...never happened".)

2) It must also be noted that, despite the ambiguous wording in English of "A world [...] where Mega Evolution is unknown", in Japanese, her line explicitly says, "where Mega Evolution does not exist".

Now, first and foremost, just on the face of it, reasonably, all the Gen I-V games, where Mega Evolution wasn't a thing, should be part of the "no Mega Evolution" timeline. Can you argue that it's not certain that Mega Evolution didn't exist in those games? Yes. Is there anything that makes that more than just a theory? ...No.

And if you do make the argument that maybe they just didn't know about Mega Evolution, it can theoretically apply exactly as well to RSE as to RBY or BW or whatever. I really don't think there's a reasonable way to carve out RSE specifically (and/or certain other games) as being one timeline and leave the rest in the other timeline; even if you can theorize your way to it, it'll be very heavily speculative (require many leaps of logic/assumptions)—as opposed to the simplest explanation: that Mega Evolution simply didn't exist in pre-Gen VI games.

(To just quickly and directly address your suggestion (if I'm not mistaken) that Mega Evolution was a recent discovery in XY: 1) the Tower of Mastery almost surely was not built "recently"; 2) a Beauty on the Tower's fourth floor says, "When he was younger, Professor Sycamore trained here to learn about Mega Evolution. But he decided he didn’t have what it takes and left fairly quickly.", which doesn't really sound "recent" either. If you can find your quote, that'd be helpful. The closest things I can spot in XY's script are Korrina's line, "we still know very little about [Mega Evolution]" (if you take it a bit too far) and Sycamore's line, "[...] Mega Evolution, a new kind of Evolution", which still at least kind of contradicts him being in the Tower of Mastery.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 15:02, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

It's only speculation now but I just want to share my suspicion that the gen 1 and 2 games might be made part of the ME timeline. Since with the virtual console the games are easily connected with the new games, it would also fill the gaps in the new timeline without needing to make other Kanto and Johto remakes again.--DanyyelTR (talk) 13:53, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

It conflicts directly with both the existence of Mega Evolution in Hoenn, and the discovery of Steel/Dark types. The latter I bring up because, with the release of Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon, specifically the RR episode, there's possibility for a third timeline to be considered; a Classic/Disappearance Timeline. The reason I believe a third timeline exists is because it cleanly resolves all paradox retcon discussion while keeping all mainline games canon in some way. The plot of the episode not only confirms without a single shadow of a doubt the existence of alternate universes, but seems to explore a third timeline in which player characters didn't exist. However, taking a close look at the dialogue of the team leaders fought, it seems that the missing characters are very specific; only Archie, Maxie, Cyrus and Lysandre mention having emerged victorious, and moreover, they make allusions to the fact that the player characters in their world didn't even show up. This is different with Ghetsis and Giovanni; neither mention ever accomplishing their goals, instead, Ghetsis implies he might have had trouble controlling N, something he shouldn't have had with an absence of a hero trainer, (though that's very much debatable,) and Giovanni mentions a feeling of nostalgia, plus his attitude towards the player makes it seem as though this wasn't the first time he had been defeated. I believe this all points to a third, sequential timeline that starts with RBGY to GSC, then a sequence of generations where the villains win; C!Kanto is represented by RBGY, although Red does not catch Mewtwo, while concurrently C!Hoenn's Maxie and Archie successfully revive Groudon and Kyogre without the player's interference, and end up on a stalemate, meaning the world is spared and why at best minor side effects occur(weakest link, I admit). → C!Johto's events occur. C!Sinnoh's Team Galactic manage to capture Dialga/Palkia, but Cyrus is attacked by Giratina before he's able to finish his plan. → C!Unova's Ghetsis's plan to take over the world by taking away it's Pokémon fails, most likely due to N disobeying him and defeating him with the opposite Dragon. As a result, not only do B2W2's Plasma events not occur, but Pokémon remain in the world for X and Y's events to occur; → C!Kalos's Lysandre explicitly mentions successfully triggering his ultimate weapon, so even with him momentarily vanished, his plan to wipe out all life is successful.

Other details that stick out, at least to me, are: •Giovanni has Mewtwo here, who was missing from GSC but not in HGSS. •Archie and Maxie utilize their Gen 3 designs, a very intentional decision, considering no game before has returned to a character's old design post-remake, not to mention the ORAS models were ready and available to be easily recycled. Their legendaries also don't utilize Primal Reversion. •Ghetsis uses his BW design and owns one of the dragons, possibly leaving N with the other.

I'm sure there's inconsistencies I'm not catching, but I think there's some thought to be put into this theory since it places RBGYGSC in an established, known timeline instead of simply retconning them.--ChReNiC (talk) 09:35, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Melmetal and 3000 years MIA...

Per the Let's Go entries, Melmetal's been MIA for about that length of time. Do we add that in, and if so where? - unsigned comment from KrspaceT (talk • contribs)

Modern Poké Balls developed in 1925

The source of this information is a fan club site, should it really be considered canon?

In Black 2 and White 2, Drayden states that Poké Balls did not exist when he was little. Ultra Ray (talk) 14:38, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Canon or not canon, it was stated by official sources (multiple times, the first mention of that comes from the "Encyclopedia Pokémonica" promotional booklet back from Gen I times and I think it was also mentioned in Takeshi Shudo's novelization of the anime) and is therefore worth noting. Given the multitude of licensed Pokémon materials, it is often hard to discern what is "canon" and what is not. The franchise never gave any strong guidelines about that either, so anything that isn't sheer fanfiction is welcome here. --Maxim (talk) 15:52, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Galar timeline and ages

There is a lot of information that can be inferred on the timeline of events in Galar, based on snippets we see in Rare League Cards and dialogue.

For this, I am making the assumption that Hop, Bede, Marnie, Peonia, Victor and Gloria are meant to all be peers of the same age group. If this is true, the earliest picture we have of a member of their generation would be of Peony and Peonia, taken while Peony was still a Steel-type Gym Leader and potentially the Champion of Galar. Peony stepped down after a certain amount of time, when Rose became chairman. That means that, at the earliest, Hop would have been Peonia's age in the picture when Leon became a champion at age 10. Because both Marnie and Peonia are representing transgressive, rebellious fashion trends (punk and ganguro respectively), it is likely they are meant to be middle adolescents at least (14 to 18). This would mean that Marnie and Peonia are 14 or 15. Counterpoint to that is that Gloria and Victor appear to share their rigs and proportions with Selene and Elio, which would indicate Gloria, Victor and Hop are 11 or 12.

It is stated that it was Chairman Rose who implemented the use of the Dynamax phenomenon in gym battles. In Piers' Rare League Card, he is quoted to state that, even though Spikemuth doesn't have a power spot, he will do his best to represent the town. This means that dynamax battles were implemented prior to Piers becoming a gym leader. Piers is noted to have gifted Marnie Morpeko when Marnie was five. This means that Piers had already begun his pokémon journey or maybe had already concluded it when Marnie was five. It is even possible Marnie joined Piers on his journey while she was five. This suggests that Piers' Rare League Card picture was taken around the same time that he gifted Morpeko to Marnie (the picture representing the age at which Piers entered the League, as opposed to when he became gym leader). Based on Piers' rare league card image, Piers looks to have been older than the protagonist characters were when they started their pokémon journey, though it's hard to tell by how much due to the style, but not so old that he would stop growing afterwards.

Based on Peonia's picture and comparing this with Marnie's age when she received Morpeko, it seems as though Marnie was around the same age as Peonia was in Peony's Rare League Card. Assuming no special interactions between Peony and Piers take place in the game (I might be wrong there), it seems likely that Piers did the gym challenge after Peony stepped down and at the start of Rose's tenure as chairman. In the relatively short time frame in which rival characters tend to become gym leaders, dynamax bands were introduced.

Added together, this suggests that Piers may have been significantly older than Leon (as much as 15 or 16 to Leon's 10) and may have been Leon's rival during his Galar Gym Challenge. It is possible that Leon became champion without an incumbent champion to defeat (since Peony stepped down without a fight), before or during the introduction of the dynamax phenomenon by Chairman Rose. This would place Leon's age anywhere between 16 (assuming Hop was 5 to Leon's 10 and Hop is now 11) and 21 (assuming Hop was 4 to Leon's 10 and Hop is now 15). Piers would be anywhere between 18 (assuming he was 12 to Marnie's 5 and Marnie is now 11) and 26 (assuming he was 16 to Marnie's 5 and Marnie is now 15). Calmetta (talk) 14:26, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

lore from the backstory

https://twitter.com/RavelMonte/status/1393999352205615106 Roserade57 (talk) 02:50, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Move article

I feel like the article should be named "History of the Pokémon universe" because this article is talking about the entire Pokémon universe and not just the Pokémon world. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm (talk) 18:30, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

There is no way that Pokemon Legends: Arceus takes place "hundreds of years before Gen IV"

Legends Arceus is so clearly based on early Meiji Era Hokkaido that I don't know how anyone could have ever thought otherwise. The Galaxy Team headquarters is practically a replica of the Hokkaido Government Office that was built in Sapporo by the Meiji government in 1873, and it has a Galarian Weezing styled smokestack on the roof which also implies post industrialization. There are also kerosene lamps throughout the interior, which were invented in 1853. Laventon's office has a steam powered machine of some sort, and he has a camera based on the Leica I which came out in 1925. Even Hisui having its named changed to Sinnoh is a reference to Hokkaido getting its name changed from Ezochi by the Meiji government. In light of all this, I think PLA should be placed, at most, 120-130 years before Gen IV if not a bit later. - unsigned comment from Porkadi110 (talk • contribs)

Pokémon chronology doesn't have to be 1:1 with real world chronology. Just because the industrial revolution happened in the 19th century, doesn't make Hisui's timeline the 19th century as well. I don't think we even got an exact number, just a vague "X years ago". Sure, this entire article is mostly speculation, but it's speculation based off known information.--ForceFire 04:44, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

In Pokemon Legends Arceus there is a side-quest where you need to find 108 spirits to capture Spiritomb that has been sealed hundreds of years prior, going by that information would put the game around 300 years before gen 4 at the earliest since its said hundreds in plural. Also considering that the game contains most ancestors of other characters it wouldn't make much sense to put the game that far in the timeline, of course it is never stated (for now) but considering the fact that most of those ancestors are so similar to its descendants it would make sense that they are their grandparents or great-grandparents which would put the game at around 150~100 years before gen 4. Draconk (talk) 12:21, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Taking what you mentioned about the Spiritomb request into consideration, the game would most likely take place 300-100 years ago, not 150-100. Inkster (talk) 04:53, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Most information seems to support technology progressing in the Pokemon world similarly to how it progressed in real life. The Parfum Palace was built 300 years prior to Gen VI, and it matches the exact kind of architecture that was popular in France 300 years prior to the present. Klink, a Pokemon literally made of industrial gears, didn't start appearing in Chargestone Cave until 150 years prior to Gen V. Nacrene City's warehouses weren't constructed until 100 years before Gen V. The moon landing happened in the Pokemon world on the exact same date that it happened in real life. There are far more parallels between the technological progress of the real world and the Pokemon world than there are discrepancies. Still, like you said the article IS speculation, but even so you yourself admitted that Arceus is only vaguely stated to be "X years ago," so the article should still be changed regardless because there is absolutely nothing that states that it takes place "hundreds" of years prior to Gen IV. Porkadi110 (talk) 00:56, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

The whole matter of Spiritomb is entirely irrelevant and a moot point. All the little girl says is "hundreds of years ago," but considering Spiritomb was sealed for the first time 500 years before Gen IV, that's not entirely helpful. Her statements don't directly support the game taking place 300-100 years ago OR 150-100 years ago. Porkadi110 (talk) 00:56, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Spiritomb and Vessa's dialogue is relevant because it at least gives a hint to the game's placement in the timeline. Inkster (talk) 20:28, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Vessa's dialogue isn't relevant for the context of this discussion. All she says is "hundreds of years ago," meaning the game could take place 300 years before Gen IV and her dialogue would still be true, the game could take place 200 years before Gen IV and her dialogue would still be true, the game could take place 100 years before Gen IV and her dialogue would still be true, the game could take place 50 years before Gen IV and her dialogue would still be true, etc. Nothing in her dialogue makes a date of 300 years prior any more likely than a date of 100 years prior, so it isn't really relevant for the purposes of this discussion. Porkadi110 (talk) 05:10, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

We do actually have a solid time frame of when Pokémon Legends: Arceus takes place, a review published by PC Magazine states: "Pokemon's Hisui/Sinnoh region is based on the island of Hokkaido. Its early form as the Hisui region and the story around Pokemon Legends: Arceus actually touches a bit on that history. The game takes place during the equivalent of Japan’s Muromachi period, when people from mainland Pokemon’s version of Japan are settling Hisui and interacting with the native residents. In this case, the Galaxy Expedition Team are the first settlers from the mainland, while the Diamond and Pearl clans (analogous to the Ainu people) welcome them." We can assume that this is a reliable source because PC Magazine received the game early from The Pokémon Company to review along with information on the game, as well as being recognized as a reliable source in the industry. The Muromachi period takes place from 1336 to 1573 which would make PLA take place somewhere between around 500-700 years ago, but most likely around 700 years ago since it is stated in-game that the Galaxy Team only arrived less than 2 years prior to the game's start. As stated earlier in this discussion the Pokémon timeline does not have to be 1:1 with the real world, but without any other information to state otherwise about PLA's placement in the timeline, we will just have to assume that PLA takes place around the same time that it's real-life equivalent does. Mew07777 (talk) 23:52, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Yeah I'm not buying it. PC Magazine is just speculating on their own and aren't quoting gamefreak there at all. Plus, as Inkster said, the dating of the Muromachi period is completely contradicted by Vessa's dialogue. As I made clear earlier, all the real world parallels that gamefreak put into this game come from the Meiji period, not the Muromachi period. It's pretty obtuse to think that gamefreak, a Japanese company, would purposefully pick references to 19th century Japanese history for a fantasy setting inspired by medieval Japanese history. That'd be like giving a first glance at Red Dead Redemption 2 and thinking that Rockstar (meant to say rockstar), an American company, was placing the game in the 1700s even though the entire thing is clearly inspired by a late 1800s western setting. The timeline doesn't have to be 1:1, but Gamefreak has shown with a fair bit of consistency that they usually opt to make the timeline line up with real life more often than not. It makes no sense to ignore every single Meiji period reference that Gamefreak put into Legends Arceus in favor of going off of some speculation made by a western gaming magazine. Porkadi110 (talk) 05:19, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Thing is, with the information about the first Spiritomb that was sealed according to the Pearl/Shining Pearl Pokédex entry, the game cannot be set more than 500 years ago. Inkster (talk) 01:04, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

At this point, I think we should just have it say "at least 100 years". Inkster (talk) 05:49, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

I'm fine with that, or heck even just saying something even vaguer like "many years before." It just makes no sense to me to arbitrarily pick "hundreds of years ago" when even Japanese fans over on Pixiv are speculating that it takes place at some time analogous to the early Meiji period:https://dic.pixiv.net/a/LEGENDS%E3%82%A2%E3%83%AB%E3%82%BB%E3%82%A6%E3%82%B9 Porkadi110 (talk) 06:04, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Why have the events of PLA been moved to 500 years before Gen IV? I am going to revert it back to at least 100 years ago. Mew07777 (talk) 04:11, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Did Arceus create the Pokémon world or did Dialga and Palkia?

Did Arceus create the Pokémon world or did Dialga and Palkia? There are myths saying that Palkia and Dialga created the Pokémon world and there are myths saying that Arceus created the Pokémon world. So which is it? This article states that Dialga and Palkia created the Pokémon world while the Pokémon world, Pokémon universe, and Myths and legends involving Legendary and Mythical Pokémon articles say that Arceus created the Pokémon world. We need to keep the information on Bulbapedia consistent. Mew07777 (talk) 20:49, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

The problem is that the myths themselves are inconsistent. —Legoless (talk) 09:38, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes, but we need to be consistent on which myth we use for our articles. We can't have two articles saying different things about the same topic. We have to decide which myth we will use, the myth that says Dialga and Palkia created the Pokémon world, or the myth that says Arceus created the Pokémon world. Mew07777 (talk) 21:13, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

We don't decide anything, this is a wiki so all we do is report what official media say. I'm not much familiar with all the myths, but if games sometimes say it was Arceus and sometimes that it were Dialga and Palkia then that's what should be said on all the pages. Please fix that anywhere you find such inconsistency.--Rocket Grunt 22:01, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Pokémon Legends: Arceus should take place at most 200 years before Pokémon Brilliant Diamond and Shining Pearl

Spiritomb's Pearl and Shining Pearl Pokédex entries state that it was sealed in the Odd Keystone 500 years ago. Since Spiritomb appears in Legends: Arceus, which is a premake (a portmanteau of remake and prequel) of Diamond and Pearl, and Vessa mentions it was sealed away "hundreds of years ago", and The Free Dictionary defines "hundreds of" as "several hundred" ("Several" being defined as "more than 2 but not many"), Pokémon Legends: Arceus should take place at most 200 years before Pokémon Brilliant Diamond and Shining Pearl instead of at most 300 years before Generation IV. -- Matthewmgcs (talk) 13:35, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

This is an incredible valid point. Legends Arceus is, at most, two centuries away from the modern games. Even if you disregard Vessa herself, the Pokemon world has time that mirrors ours - we even see this in Gen I and III with the space shuttle and such - and this game is obviously Meiji period.--Darknesslover5000 (talk) 00:13, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

There is no official confirmation on how long PLA takes place before DP, no matter how obvious it is. Inkster (talk) 00:19, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Move to Timeline (game)

Mainly for consistency with the other two timeline articles, and the current title falsely implies that it is the history of the franchise in general. Inkster (talk) 13:38, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

I like the ring of the current title better. Just calling it "timeline" takes the life and charm out of it. The anime timeline records the story of the anime, so it makes since to call it a timeline, as it is mostly a strict timeline of events in the anime, plus flashbacks. Whereas this "timeline" is an attempt at a full history of the Pokémon world as a whole, so the title should reflect that. Landfish7 08:43, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Well, in any case this page is formatted like a timeline pretty much like Timeline (anime) and Timeline (Adventures).

At least in my opinion, I would be OK with calling this one Timeline (game). If the wording "History of the Pokémon world" is good, maybe Timeline (anime) should be moved to History of the Pokémon world (anime)? But anyway I think I'd prefer using "Timeline (anime)" as it's shorter to type.

Please let's use a consistent naming format for those pages if possible. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 12:33, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

I suppose you're not wrong. And I do like how Timeline (anime) and Timeline (Adventures) can be linked to with link templates, as would Timeline (game). My idea of what this article should be is different from what it is, but I suppose as it stands Timeline (game) would be fine. I'll go ahead and say that I support the move. Landfish7 13:25, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Humans 3 million years ago

Where is stated that human appeared 3 million years ago? I have searched, but I could not find any evidence of it. --Marcodpat (talk) 16:22, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Pokémon Legends Arcues

The events of Pokémon legends Arceus, are just left in this article like: "The events of Pokémon Legends Arceus occur", I feel like this is unfair for a main line game in this page because all the other games in the main line do have a detail account of the story of each respective game, can someone add the story of the game please? --Neos (talk) 09:49, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Anorith

What is the source for Anorith being 500 million years old? Its page/Sword entry only lists 100 million years. warlic (talk) 02:39, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

PLA 200 years (cont.)

If there's no confirmation, then the entry in "recent history" should not read "Hundreds of years before Generation IV." That's misleading.
Additionally, there is an avenue for dating Pokemon Legends Arceus that isn't mentioned on the page. The pokemon world is quite often parallel to our own (see the 1995/1996 mentions for Porygon/Pokemon RGBY). Jubilife city is based on Sapporo city. In Legends Arceus, Jubilife Village was founded two years ago. In our history, Sapporo Village was founded in 1868. That would put LA 126 years before Gen 1 (and 129 years before Gen 2 and 4).
The mention of hundreds of years is baseless and should be replaced with "sometime before," or perhaps omitted altogether.- unsigned comment from Nava.Nevermore (talk • contribs)