Talk:Hoothoot (Pokémon)

Clock

A clock? Where'd that come from?--BJG - unsigned comment from Blackjack Gabbiani (talk • contribs)

>It's horns appear to be hands of a clock.

In addition: "It has a perfect sense of time. Whatever happens, it keeps rhythm by precisely tilting its head in time." - Pokemon Silver

"It begins to hoot at the same time every day. Some trainers use them in place of clocks." - Pokemon Crystal

"HOOTHOOT has an internal organ that senses and tracks the earth's rotation. Using this special organ, this POKéMON begins hooting at precisely the same time every day." - Pokemon Ruby

- Zeta - unsigned comment from Zeta (talk • contribs)

Sprite

Not the best place to ask I know, but I'm having a bit of difficulty uploading sprites for the article's sprite section. I uploaded it successfully on Bulba achieves with the correct file name, Spr_b_g2_163.png. However the image still is not appearing in the sprite table... and well, I have absolute no knowledge in any of this. The sprite may be deleted from the archives, but I may as well know for the future. Eh, thanks for reading... -Mudkipchan 01:17, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Clear your cache. Or something. P: Tina ^δ♫ 01:18, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

You mean my 'cookies', I'm sorry if I am being an idiot here which I am probably being... :/ -Mudkipchan 01:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Artwork

It seems HootHoots artwork was one of the few Johto Pokemon to get an update during generation III as the pic says it's from FR/LG unless this is a mistake and this is actually newer (could it be from HG/SS? i don't keep track of every Pokemons artwork) If so i'm guessing this is the case with a few other Johto Pokemon artwork and they should be noted as well -- D558 15:51, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok maybe it isn't so few but i still think they might be noteworthy -- D558 16:00, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Number of Feet

Hoothoot only has one foot. Redstar 07:12, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Sigh. Check Hoothoot's Gold Pokédex entry before you start spouting. If a Pokémon can change feet, clearly it has more than one. --Oz 07:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

True, but I happen to have an interview where Ken Sugimori himself clearly states it only has one foot. Redstar 07:34, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

By all means, provide a link. --Oz 07:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Nintendo Power Vol. 134, Pg. 78 - Group Interview Pt. 1 Nintendo Power Vol. 134, Pg. 79 - Group Interview Pt. 2 - unsigned comment from Redstar (talk • contribs)

Well, it says it has one foot, but that could very well just mean that it has two, but only shows one foot(which is what Oz was saying) By the rest of what he said in that little part it would make more sense that he designed the legs directly after his bird which had two legs but only showed the one when standing. Plus the in-game Pokedex entries say it changes feet. (Yaminokame 08:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC))

He says "It only has one foot." That's definitive enough for me, and the rest indicates he created Hoothoot with "one leg" in mind, regardless if he later realized his pet bird had two. It was the memory that inspired him, so he created it. It should be noted that Ken designed the lion's share of the Pokémon at the time, while others did the actual programming and making of the game. It's simple enough to assume the actual game developers didn't realize his intention, so misrepresented the Pokémon. This later forced Game Freak to "recognize" two legs. However, is the notion of two legs present in the Japanese 'Dex entry?

Basically, we should at least mention the discrepancy in the trivia section. Redstar 08:44, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

In the song Which One ~ Is It?: "Is Hoho's leg the left or right one?" Also I've personally seen both of Hoothoot's feet. I can't remember were. Probably the anime. But I definitely saw them. --ケンジのガール 08:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

That song debuted nearly ten years after Gold and Silver were released, let alone how much longer beforehand Ken designed Hoothoot. How many feet it has now isn't the issue, but how many it was intended to have/once had. Redstar 08:49, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Well that's not what you were implying when you first started this conversation.

"It's simple enough to assume the actual game developers didn't realize his intention, so misrepresented the Pokémon."

No. We don't "assume" things on Bulbapedia. That alone means it's speculation. For all you know, he was speaking Japanese when he was interviewed and the translator made an error. --ケンジのガール 08:58, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't implying anything, actually. And don't start the whole "It's speculation", "He was mistranslated" bull. It's speculation to assume the creature was always intended to have two legs, which is contradicted by this direct statement from the creator of that specific Pokémon. We must investigate all avenues before dismissing plain facts. Redstar 09:01, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

It has two feet. Always has. Always will. Ta dah. TTEchidna 09:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Except the creator of the specific Pokémon, and of Pokémon in general, said it only has one. Redstar 09:07, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Diamond dex entry: "It always stands on one foot. Even when attacked, it does not brace itself using both feet." Even if the guy who created said he planned for it to only have one foot, it's clearly had two since Gold and still has two in Generation IV. —darklordtrom 09:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Your first comment, Redstar, and I quote "Hoothoot only has one foot." So... You weren't implying that at all huh? And it's just as much speculation to say the programmers whom Sugimori works closely with would make such a critical error. You should probably investigate this further before you add anything. But what ever. I won't stop you if you do. But this smells of translation error to me. --ケンジのガール 09:14, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

@TROM: The Diamond 'Dex entry doesn't matter. As I said, it could have been planned oterhwise There's no indication it was meant to be two feet until at least the third generation, with the second gen 'Dex entries being translation errors.

@Kenji-Girl: Umm... No. I don't see how that would be implying anything other than the discussion it started. And I never planned to add anything without discussing it beforehand, which I've clearly already done. I already suggested investigating it further myself. I just need the Japanese 'Dex entries for Gold and Silver. Redstar 09:24, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Ta-da. —darklordtrom 09:30, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

@Redstar: That's not how people usually start up discussions. That seems more like how people start arguments. If you truly wanted to bring up the discussion you would have laid all the evidence on the table from the beginning instead of this bait-and-trap thing you set up. I know when I want to start discussions, I always present the evidence first before saying something so contradictory to what the actual fact is. That would be like me staring a topic saying "Misty has blue hair" and saying nothing else. I also would respect what people would have to say that was contradictory to my evidence instead of being hostile and saying that it's "bull". And where did you hear that Hoothoot's GS dex entries have translation errors? You never mentioned that earlier. So it's completely possible that a game has translation errors but not a magazine?

Personally, I don't believe you for a second when you say that your original intent was to bring up a discussion about Ken Sugimori's original plan for Hoothoot to have one leg. If you did, would have just said everything straight up. That you know that it is officially stated that Hoothoot has two legs but you have a quote from Ken Sugimori that says it has only one leg and then state your beliefs that Hoothoot was meant to have one leg. But that wasn't how you made it sound at all. Instead you just made it seem like the whole damn system is wrong and that you are right and then present your theories little by little. And as people contradicted you, you added on to your argument. Not that there is anything particularly wrong with it. Just don't lie about it and act like people are being argumentative against you for no reason. -ケンジのガール 09:48, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, given that it's a magazine interview and not an interview with audio feedback, I'm of the opinion that the magazine's translator made the error. Like Trom said, it's hard to believe that Sugimori's (don't just call him Ken, you don't know him on a personal level) workmates would make such a blunder, as opposed to a third party. And, even if what you are saying is true, don't you think that steps would have been taken to rectify said mistake in the third and fourth generations, such as reverting Hoothoot to only having one foot? Things have been retconned before, and if Hoothoot was mistakenly given two feet, I believe that Nintendo would have fixed the problem as quickly as possible. But no such change has been made, ergo it's highly unlikely that Nintendo made the mistake, and very probable that the magazine was in error. --Oz 10:13, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

To Redstar again, I'm sorry if I seemed uncivil there. My point is, try to be more clear when you start a conversation like this. Otherwise people get confused and get angry. Nothing personal. I apologize. --ケンジのガール 10:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

@Kenji-girl: If I hadn't of started it that way, no one would have responded. Heck, I started a discussion offering as much evidence as I could on the Mew Talk page, which is arguably the most popular Pokémon after Pikachu, and received no response. It's called bait and switch, and it gets results. Likewise, I happen to have official artwork of Jesse and James in the usual black Team Rocket uniforms. (Not really likewise, but I want to bring it up anyhow)

I never said that the 'Dex entries were mistranslations, just that they could just as easily be mistranslations if the interview was.

@Oz:Occam's Razor suggests it'd be easier to retcon Hoothoot having one foot than it would be to remedy mass perception of it having two. This is already evident with Jynx, when they opted to go the much simpler route of modifying the Pokémon's appearance than explain cultural differences and that it was not actually a racial caricature. All I'm saying is that Ken probably meant it to have one foot, but it didn't end up that way. I'm not demanding we re-write the whole page or anything. Redstar 10:42, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Of course Jynx was retconned, but that was over public outcry. No-one ever made clear any views of Hoothoot being offensive for only having one foot, and very few people would care (or even notice) if the switch would be made, had it come to that. So... what exactly is it that you're trying to have come into effect here? --Oz 10:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

About the dex entry, I can confirm that there is no mistranslation there. It says the same thing in Japanese that it does in English... too bad we don't have the original Japanese interview :/ I would still opt to say though that the translated interview is not a mistranslation either, it's just being taken too literally. I've seen that happen so many times it's not even funny. (Yaminokame 11:05, 7 January 2010 (UTC))

@Oz: You completely missed my point. And what I'm trying to get into effect is exactly what I said before: some mention of the discrepancy.

@Yaminokame: I seriously doubt it was a mistranslation... Who says it was a Japanese-to-English interview anyways? Redstar 11:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh, don't worry, I got your point. I was just humouring a notion. Besides, Sugimori seems to have based Hoothoot's behaviour on his pet bird in that it stands on one leg. And it would definitely be a Japanese-to-English translation because the Nintendo staff would have been more comfortable talking in their native language. If you had the choice, you certainly wouldn't talk about your own business in a foreign language for fear of saying something wrong, believe me. But whatever; if you want to keep gunning the issue, that's your prerogative. Good luck making someone else see things your way. --Oz 11:43, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I think you missed my main point there; no matter if the conversation took place in English, Japanese, or any other language out there, it could be as simple as "you are reading too much into it." He is saying that his image is a bird with one leg, but that doesn't mean that it ONLY has one leg. He likes it because (visibly) it has one leg, which was brought about from his experience from his own bird. When looking at it for the first time you say "oh look! that bird has one leg!" But it doesn't ACTUALLY have only one leg, it has two but only shows one. I agree that he wanted to capture the fact that he based it off of a bird that (visibly) had one leg, but that doesn't mean that the species actually only has one leg or that the original intent was for it to only actually have one leg. (Yaminokame 11:46, 7 January 2010 (UTC))

@Oz: I don't know if anyone is necessarily more comfortable talking in their "own" language. The interview largely had nothing to do with business anyway and were yes or no questions.

@Yaminokame: Ken said "It only has one leg". There's no way that can be construed to make room for the possibility of another leg; the key word here, "only", modifies the verb "leg" too specifically for that to take place. What you said, about the whole visibility thing and so on, is more so "reading too much into it" then reading it literally (with context making no suggestion it shouldn't be read literally) is. Redstar 12:22, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Fryd y eteud. Have you ever tried talking in a second language? And the part that you're so insistent on wasn't a yes or no question, it was an answer with an explanation to it, so that makes your statement essentially null. Vilgehk ramm. And I meant "business" as in "one's own doings" not "one's own company". You read it literally, and didn't take into account a possible other meaning of what I was saying (kind of like what you're doing with this Hoothoot thing). --Oz 12:29, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

"What's your favorite Pokémon?" is a form of a yes or no question. There's really only one possible answer: a single Pokémon. An explanation wasn't necessary, and in fact several of the developers didn't offer explanations at all. This makes your statement "essentially null".

You splitting "business" into different meanings is semantics. In fact, why would you mean "business" to refer to "one's own doings" at all? The interview was about a business, as in a company, and the question about which Pokémon is their favorite doesn't even fall under the definition of "one's own doings" except under the most broad of categorizations. Seriously, why are you arguing this? I'm simply trying to discuss a legitimate source for addition to this article. Redstar 12:35, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

That is not a "form of a yes or no question". Yes/no questions are closed questions; questions that can have many answers (for example, "What's your favourite Pokémon?") are called open questions. And they all offered backing statements, even ones as small as "it looks funny". Sugimori's comments about a bird standing on one leg might be considered semantics. Ever heard of the saying "mind your own business"? It doesn't mean "mind your own company". I'm not arguing any more than you are; I'm simply discussing the points you raise for your point of view, and rebuking them with my own. That's a discussion. If I wanted to argue, I'd flat out say you were wrong. Instead of "arguing", as you put it, with me about this, why not try asking someone who can give you a more definitive answer, hmm? Can you even find another source to corroborate your claim? --Oz 12:41, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't know how old you are or what your level of education is, but that is a form of a yes or no question. It is closed. To ask someone what their "favorite" is closes off possibility to answer in any way but to give the "favorite". Just because they chose to elaborate doesn't taken from the fact they were closed questions from the onset. They teach you this in English class, so you may have got it.

I have heard of that saying, and my point is that you're bringing up alternate definitions for a singular term when no other definition fit the example. It's simple obfuscation on your part.

Why do I need a source other than the OFFICIAL guide to Nintendo, and from the very mouth of the guy that caused this site to come into existence in the first place? It's a non-issue. Redstar 12:52, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

There's no need to try and insult my intelligence and belittle me to try and get your point across. That's just plain rude. You may even be right on the matter, but that's no excuse for poor behavioural etiquette. I can't rebutt the fact that it's the official guide, but the so-called "OFFICIAL" guides have been wrong before, and this may be one of them. It still doesn't explain why nothing else has ever been raised on the matter, or why Nintendo haven't fixed it with regard to anything, and as such, I believe that it's not even notable to begin with. Marill's original design was different to the end result, and so was Tyranitar's, so if you're going to put up something about the possibility of Hoothoot originating with only one foot, you should go and put it in the Unreleased Pokémon and characters page. --Oz 13:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

So, the Gold Pokédex description means nothing? Where it clearly states it changes what foot it's standing on so fast it can't be seen? -Sketch 13:05, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! That's what I said right at the start. :) --Oz 13:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

@Oz: I didn't belittle your intelligence. I just said that at a particular age in a particular grade of school (college, for me, at least) they teach you about questions.

Whether an official guide is wrong or not is moot, because it's official. If there's nothing alternative to document, then you either document it or you ignore the subject. We have an official source stating one foot, so it should be mentioned. And something coming from someone's mouth doesn't make the guide itself wrong.

This information wouldn't belong on that page, because Hoothoot was, quite clearly, released. And this interview took place after Gold and Silver hit America's shores.

@Sketch: No one said the Gold 'Dex entry meant nothing. Redstar 13:09, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Ah, but if Sugimori definitively said that it had one foot, then its design would, therefore, had to have been changed between creation and release, because its Pokédex entries say that it can change between feet. Thus, an altered design that would go on the unreleased page. --Oz 13:14, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Ken said that after the games were released in both Japan and the US, not between creation and release. Redstar 13:19, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

So? There's a distinct difference in the number of feet a Hoothoot has between Sugimori and the games. One says it has one, the other says it has two. And since Sugimori is responsible for the artwork/design of the Pokémon, then he would have known about the number of feet before the release. Ergo, a change occurred between creation and release. --Oz 13:22, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

So what you're saying is that at the time of the interview he wasn't aware that someone had changed his idea from one foot to two (because he would have had to have said this then AFTER the pokedex entry said it had two feet)... (Yaminokame 13:24, 7 January 2010 (UTC))

That's the only possible explanation I can see by following Redstar's points of view. I still think that the magazine mistranslated and that this whole thing is pointless. --Oz 13:26, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Quite possibly. I IMed my friend asking "Is Ken Sugimori retarded?" She said maybe. He is into Playboy magazine, apparently, according to this very wiki.

@Yaminokame: I'm not saying that at all. It could be very well that Hoothoot was intended to have one leg, but was "given" another due to bad localization. Redstar 13:28, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Before this goes any farther, here: a:File:EP223.jpg{{a:File:Hoothoot.jpg}}

Straight from the anime. And I'm pretty sure that EP121 has Hoothoot use both legs, because I remember seeing that episode when if first came out. R.A. Hunter Blade 13:29, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

The anime isn't exactly a shining example of canon. Redstar 13:31, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

RA with the three-pointer! And, Redstar, the American translation is a direct one of the Japanese text, which says that Hoothoot can change feet. I agree, Sugimori's comments should be mentioned, but not on this page. --Oz 13:33, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

R.A. didn't exactly do anything. Mentioning the anime is comparable to bringing up the Book of Mormon on a theological discussion of Judaism.

I've yet to be provided with any evidence supporting the Japanese text says the same.

Where else do you expect the information to be provided? >_> Redstar 13:36, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

How could you possibly have not been saying that? I've already told you that the original Pokedex that came out before he said that DOES say that it has two feet. If he said and meant those exact words, then that means he had no idea that the bird actually had two legs up until that point because someone pulled a fast one on him that he didn't catch or was not made aware of... by what you're saying, I can't see any other way to look at it... How about this... what exactly do you want to put in this article and where. You've already said that what you first said is not what you want to change, so what exactly do you want to say if you could put it up there right now... I think that would help us to see what you're going for a little bit better. (Yaminokame 13:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC))

Of course you won't see any evidence, because you don't seem to be able to read Japanese, and if I was to translate the text for you (which would prove that it has more than one foot), you might call me a liar. --Oz 13:45, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Redstar, you can't just ignore the anime. Do we say to ignore it sometimes? Yes, we do. But not for this. That's like saying in "a theological discussion of Judaism" that somebody who's been following Judaism their whole life wouldn't have a say in a conversation if somebody who's studied Judaism for their degree is having with another person. It's still relevant, and the follower has a right to be in a conversation about his religion. Even more so than the person with the degree, because the follower has lived Judaism, not just read books on it. R.A. Hunter Blade 13:48, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

@Yaminokame: Yes, you told me what it says, but you didn't back it up.

I think it's entirely possible a "fast one" was pulled on him. Shigeki Morimoto snuck Mew into the game without him knowing, after all.

"While in-game text and the anime have both hinted at and directly stated or shown that Hoothoot has two legs, Satoshi Tajiri in an interview in the July of 2000 issue of Nintendo Power [source] stated the Pokémon only has one leg, though this may be the result of a translation error or misunderstanding on the part of the interviewers." How would that sound?

@Oz: I translated the page via translators, and nothing on the page mentioned feet. I wouldn't call you a liar, but I would like a translation.

@R.A. The comparison to Judaism was unnecessary and bloated. I have no idea what you said. I don't believe the anime has any contribution on this issue. Redstar 13:51, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh, okay, so it's more proof you want? Here:

Japanese: いつも　いっぽんあしで　たっている。あしを　いれかえる　しゅんかんは　すばやくて　なかなか　みられない。 English: It always stands on one foot. It changes feet so fast, the movement can rarely be seen.

going from Kenkyusha's new college Japanese - English dictionary: いつも - always いっぽん - one (counter for long slender objects such as a foot) あし - a foot; a leg たっている - is a form of たつ - stand. which makes the first sentence somewhat equivalent to: It always stands on one foot. -- being a directly the same. Now let's move to the second sentence:

あし - a foot; a leg いれかえる - change; replace しゅんかん - a moment; a second; an instant すばやく - a form of すばやい - nimble; quick; agile -- this particular form making it either: nimbly; quickly; agilely なかなか - very; quite; exceedingly; highly; considerably; rather; pretty; fairly (this is used to describe the next word) みられない - the negative form of みる - look; take a look; set eyes on; watch -- the form that it is in turns the meaning to - can't look; can't take a look; can't set eyes on; can't watch. Making the sentence something like: It changes feet so fast, the movement can rarely be seen. As you can see, it is an exact translation. (Yaminokame 13:52, 7 January 2010 (UTC))

It's Ken Sugimori, not Satoshi Tajiri, isn't it? --Oz 13:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, it was Sugimori. (Yaminokame 13:58, 7 January 2010 (UTC))

Irrelevant. I consider them the same person anyways... So what's the decision? Redstar 14:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, I guess that just leaves the question: is it notable enough to put on Hoothoot's page, should it go on the unreleased page, or shouldn't it go up at all? What do you fellas think? --Oz 14:01, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Consider all you want, Redstar, they're different people. I still don't think it should go up there. --Oz 14:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Up where? The trivia section is at the bottom. Redstar 14:04, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

It's a step "up" from the talk page. It's not really notable. --Oz 14:06, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Not worth mentioning because it is common knowledge that Hoothoot has always had two feet. -Sketch 14:08, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

It's actually not, since I was unaware up until this very year. Likewise, while it may be "common knowledge", it's also not common knowledge that Ken Sugimori said the opposite. Redstar 14:09, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, Sketch said it's not worth mentioning, and I'm going to take the word of an EB. Page stays as it is. --Oz 14:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Personally, I've seen worse trivia on here before, so I'm not fully against it, I just couldn't for the life of me figure out what he was getting at at first. If it's not a misinterpretation of what is written, it would seem that if indeed he meant the exact meaning that Redstar is pulling from that sentence, then it's notable enough to say that he had imagined one thing and another actually happened when he wasn't looking. Do I fully believe that he meant that exactly? No, because all we have is interpretations of one sentence which I don't think is enough proof, but if others believe that what Redstar is saying is what sugimori was going for, then all I can say is that we've had worse :/ (Yaminokame 14:11, 7 January 2010 (UTC))

I've added this bit of trivia in the fairest way I could. I think it will prove to be interesting trivia without claiming a definitive answer to Hoothoot's "true" number of feet. (Lamartian 3:24, 19 April 2013 (UTC))

Cuckoo ?

"It may also be a portmanteau of "hoot" and "Cuckoo""

I highly doubt that... the only similarity betwen "Hoothoot" and "cuckoo" is the "oo" sound. Yeah, I know that name origins are usually complete speculation since very rarely do the creators come out and say the reason for the names... but saying that "Hoothoot" comes from "cuckoo" based on nothing other than the fact that "cuckoo" has the "oo" and there happens to be a clock with the word "cuckoo" in it sounds like way to much of a stretch. Dannyjenn 14:44, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

If you read afterwards it says "referencing the Cuckoo clock, again referring to Hoothoot's keen ability to keep track of time."--ForceFire 04:38, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Time flies pun

Are Hoothoot and Noctowl possibly visual puns on the saying "time flies", which ends in a number of ways including "like an arrow". Hoothoot's clock hand eyebrows do look a little like arrows, and Noctowl has arrowhead markings on it. Forgetting the arrow thing, it does seem like both of these guys might have been based on the saying. If not, it's a nice coincidence. Samuelmather (talk) 04:15, 30 April 2020 (UTC)