Bulbapedia talk:Project Pokédex/Structure

Game locations

I am not sure if the Project pages are all archived or not, but I feel like I should ask this anyways. Is the order information listed out of date? I am trying to update a few articles to be consistent with each other and am not sure if Routes are to be first or second to named locations. --Super goku (talk) 05:43, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Adding moves available only by transfer from an earlier generation

Sumwun and I believe that, for the moves, an additional section "By transfer from an earlier generation" would be sensible. (Please refer to User talk:Force Fire#Transfer-only moves and ability changes.) The addition of this subsection would enable users to tell what moves <species> can know (in <game/generation>) at one glance.

It's very well possible even Tiddlywinks is underestimating how difficult it is to answer the "know in <game/generation>" question (as much as I initially did). As Sumwun said at the referenced talk page, currently, you'd have to click at least up to 6 links to learnset pages, assuming you already know by heart how transfer works (and that you can't transfer Pokémon from GO by any means, which is what I actually doublechecked). And additionally, you might have to actually neglect irrelevant sections on learnset pages (for example, in USUM/GenVII, Bulbasaur cannot know AncientPower AFAIK). (If there's a faster method, I'd like to hear it.)

And I can't stress how important I think that question is, for I believe it is the central question to that species and learnset pages should be providing an answer to (the use case). It all boils down to that use case: in Tiddlywinks' words, what's the "concern" species/learnset pages try to address? I can't sketch a question/use case that would include "By events" but not "By transfer from a prior generation". (Well, for USUM, I can sketch the question "What moves can <species> with black clover know?", but that's arguably a "special" case, and probably comp-centric*.) I would like to know what you guys think that use case should be.

Regarding Tiddlywinks' comment about this coming from a "specific focus like comp/challenges", I took some time to think about that. Apart from the fact that I don't think the use case is comp-centric even, it is also not subjective, but purely factual, unlike the questions you said "we're never going to do" (and, by the way, I agree we shouldn't). For example, I recall that I once designed a team for my next playthrough, and I was searching possible moves for them. From context, I can recreate it must've been for XY before ORAS came out, because I wanted my Swinub to have a good Special Ground-type STAB and ended up breeding it in an earlier generation so I could teach it Earth Power via move tutor, then transfered (and traded) it to the new save file. I don't think that I ever was, in any point in time, trying to answer a question where I required all current subsections but not "By transfer from a prior generation".

I would like to know what you guys think that use case should be, and whether you think the suggestion subsection is sensible. Nescientist (talk) 12:17, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

As far as event moves, the alternative to listing them would seem to be...not having them documented. (If that option seems sensible to you, please explain it to me. =P )

Regardless of whether it is an "exclusive" concern of comp (though I could very much argue that you searching for a "good" move is still some above average interest in strategy), it is still a fairly niche concern. Exploiting legacy moves requires effort and resources (having access to more than one game or console is not necessarily trivial). It's much simpler, and works just fine, to just play the game at hand. Tiddlywinks (talk) 13:58, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Well, they would still be documented at event distribution pages and move pages, but I don't want to remove that section anyway.

If you say "What moves can <species> know (in <game/generation>)?" is a niche, what do you think the central question is (like, the most important one; what are leansets there for)? Nescientist (talk) 15:33, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

In short, info new to this generation. Tiddlywinks (talk) 15:56, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. "By transfer from an earlier generation" is not within that scope, of course.

Does that mean you oppose that section, then? Nescientist (talk) 16:07, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

I said no before. It means I won't say we definitely need it. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:24, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. (I guess you didn't explicitly say that you don't oppose it, and I certainly didn't understand it that way.) Nescientist (talk) 16:37, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Are Bulbapedia users more likely to care about "What moves can <Pokemon> learn in this generation?" than they are to care about "What moves can <Pokemon> know in this generation?"? sumwun (talk) 21:57, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Even if the large majority of Bulbapedia users only care about learning moves, adding transfer-only moves will still help the few of us who care more than it will annoy or hurt anyone, right? Are there any real drawbacks to adding transfer-only moves? sumwun (talk) 22:16, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

If you can make a user page (say a page for each generation to keep it relatively simple) with all legacy moves for all Pokemon, then I won't mind if you want to ask, essentially, is it so hard?

As long as that's gonna be on us, though, that effort is non-trivial, especially when, once again, the info is available if you need it currently. Tiddlywinks (talk) 23:38, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Okay. I'll try to do that when I get enough time. sumwun (talk) 01:47, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

This is a feature I'd like to have as well. It's something I've wanted in the past but never thought to ask about adding it here. --Felthry (talk) 02:44, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

FYI, abcboy has given a go for this. I'd like this to be done properly, and not end up in chaos and/or unfinished, so I've made a userpage documenting the progress etc. for this project at User:Nescientist/Project Trace.

We probably have some kind of momentum right now, there's several skilled users interested in this who've actually worked for this or might be willing to actively help. In order to coordinate things smoothly, I kindly suggest to offload any relevant on-wiki discussion regarding the actual project to the userpage's talkpage (rather than indivual users' talkpages or multiple talkpages). So let's do this! Nescientist (talk) 19:43, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Moves available via transfer of a pre-evolution

In an attempt to concentrate on the question "What moves can a Pokémon know (rather than learn) in a game/generation?", we had added moves available via transfer from the same species to a dedicated section within the learnlists some time ago (see above). However, there are cases where a species can know a move (only) if its pre-evolution was transferred (and then evolved), which was initially not considered, but belongs to answer the question. Examples include Gen II Blissey being able to know Body Slam when originating from a Gen I Chansey; Gen VIII Mr. Rime being able to know Mud-Slap when originating from a Gen IV Mr. Mime or Mime Jr.; or Gen VII Glaceon being able to know Reflect when originating from a Gen I Eevee.

As can be seen when clicking the above links, Bulbapedia is a wiki with many dedicated editors, which has led to the addition of some moves on some pages, but with inconsistent (and confusing) formats, while others have not (yet) been added. I'd like to finally move forward with streamlining this, giving all relevant pages a consistent format that average readers can understand and get used to; so, the plan is to list all relevant moves on all pages they belong, in this format (1b), over the next couple of days. It's quite some work to be done (seek all relevant moves, edit around 200 pages), so if there's additional input, I guess now's the time. Nescientist (talk) 16:03, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

The only suggestion I have is would it be worth linking to the generation page of the pre-evolution, so in your example linking to Gen VII Chansey transfer section, not sure how difficult that would be? --Spriteit (talk) 00:10, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

It should certainly be possible, if we want that instead. In that case, I'd prepend an arrow (or similar), to indicate the link won't lead you to the actual Chansey (Pokémon) article. Nescientist (talk) 10:38, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Upgrading forms and evolution

Partially as a response to the size of the List of Pokémon with form differences page, I think it's time we move most of the details from that page to species pages. In a similar vein, I think complicated evolution details should be moved to the Evolution section.

This means a few things. I like Forms above Evolution (most pages that have both right now are the opposite). I like a Forms section for any Pokemon with forms. (Some like Basculin go without.) Obviously the form differences page can be much simplified if complicated details are left to the species page. I think a similar thing can apply to the evolution info in the intro: strip out any complicated "this used to be a little different in older games" (Eevee is a prime example) and I think generally focus only on the latest generation, referring readers below for past details. I also think this can apply to the evolution infobox: explain the latest game (maybe with some note in the infobox) and just write other details above the infobox.

I'd like to hear any thoughts or comments on this plan. (Even just "I like it" is a good barometer.) If there's nothing major, I'm thinking we can move forward this weekend. (I will also try to make a little mockup this evening for a clearer example.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 15:41, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

I love it! Support. Landfish7 21:18, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, sounds like a good idea. I agree about moving the details to the species pages.

I see, it also makes sense keeping the intro short and focused on the latest games while having "Forms" and "Evolution" sections dealing with the details and changes between generations.

You know, the List of Pokémon with form differences page was created in 2007. Back then, there were only 4 generations, and most existing forms were from gens 3 and 4, besides the Unown forms. But now this page has all kinds of details, base stats, moves, abilities, lore, mechanics, methods of obtaining, sometimes even a bit of anime info, about Pokémon forms from 9 generations so far. This is currently the 29th longest page.

Incidentally, at some point we may consider creating separate pages for Alolan Form, Galarian Form, Hisuian Form, and Paldean Form instead of keeping all the details only in the regional form page (which is currently the 131st longest page). --Daniel Carrero (talk) 22:15, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Speaking of which, I think the form differences page could be reduced to a similar table to what is used on the regional form page. Landfish7 22:21, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Forms aren't specific to the main series games: they are a staple for every branch of the franchise. Although I do think that much of the information could be brought out of that massive list, general information about forms and evolution needs to be present somewhere within the general sections of species pages, like the intro or biology. Technical information about evolutions that is game specific is fine to have there, but I think we should workshop the placement of form data, because relegating it to deep within the games section doesn't represent the franchise overall. ^Maverick_Nate 01:21, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

What information specifically? Forms are currently mentioned in the intros and biology, and I don't believe the plan is to change that, so I'm wondering what info would be missing? Landfish7 02:10, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

I would like to know the extent of it too, honestly. ^Maverick_Nate 04:06, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

(resetting indent) So given discussion among staff about including general form/evolution info, this is what I imagine species pages looking like: User:Tiddlywinks/ProjPokedex. (Not final/still up for discussion.)

A couple notes of my own thoughts. I believe Biology should be generally media-agnostic. I'm not trying to include notes about specific game mechanics in those subsections (that's what Form data/Evolution data are for below). I could even see stripping down the Eevee evobox in Biology even more than the barely stripped down version currently there, mostly just showing that these are the 8 evolutions (ignoring conditions which may vary wildly depending on the medium). But otherwise, I do think there are fair ways to expand the Biology subsections beyond what I currently have. Like moving the visual form descriptions in there. And probably other things I'm not imagining.

Again, thoughts welcome. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:05, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Is there really need to make two sections for forms and evolution on each page? I think that infobox and the introduction sentence on top of the page already cover presenting them in general sense. Honestly, I would like to see form and evolution sections taken out of the game data and put somewhere higher.--Rocket Grunt 20:03, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

I agree with the sentiment but I'm not sure all of the technical info fits well up in the Intro or Biology. I agree that the Forms/Evolutions should be acknowledged higher up on the page in some form though, just maybe in a way that isn't so visually redundant. Landfish7 20:53, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

(resetting indent)This new format is hereby approved.

I'm not saying everything in User:Tiddlywinks/ProjPokedex is perfect or ironclad, I think we can still iron out some best practices. (Like someone mentioned maybe current stats for forms like Basculin's section has.) But these examples should give us plenty to work off of in splitting info from List of Pokémon with form differences.

(FWIW, I'd also say the first thing to do is update species pages. Later/at intervals we can weed out the list page, rather than 50+ sections individually.)

(I'll also take this opportunity to highlight User talk:Tiddlywinks/HeldItems/header, if anyone would also like to update the held item templates as well.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 14:06, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

On Other Appearances

Ahem. Other Appearances has become a wastebucket taxon. It's a dumping ground for everything that doesn't fit how a species page is structured, which is a lot of things turns out. It was originally conceived of as the "Non-Pokémon fiction" section, primarily covering Smash Bros material. I feel that it should return to that state, with current information moved about as follows

• Music videos that are animated are animation, and live in the "In the anime" section. So are any other animations.
• Live action content is not animation (Let's go with court of public opinion and say realistic CGI is still here) and gets a new "in live-action media" section.
• In the odd cases where one work has both animated and live-action segments, then just put it in both sections! (Celestial is an example). Be silly!
• Pokken and UNITE characters go in "Game Data", somewhere. Considering PokePark gets top shelf billing, giving these other two a section below that called "Other playable appearances" seems like it solves the problem succinctly.
  • I admit I have 0 Detective Pikachu experience, but it appears the temporary assist characters from the sequel are propagating in "NPC Appearances". (Why any other Pokémon characters are missing considering the adverts clearly sell Pokémon talking to Pikachu as a major component is beyond my means.) Sounds like most Detective Pikachu content is winding up there, and the Detective himself likely qualifies as a full on character in some position above the Pokken and UNITE characters.
• Smash Bros stays where it is. Trust me, Bulbapedia coverage of Smash deserves to be down there.

The only trouble spot is non-realistic CGI in live action media, and I think running on my "court of public opinion" laws says that also winds up being in both animation and live action sections.Salmancer (talk) 05:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC)