User talk:Chocolate/Archive 5

Now, I really don't want this to get filled up quickly again. So please, if you have something to tell me that isn't important to Bulbapedia, e-mail me or tell me on the forums. ^Chocolate 23:57, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Stick to the old

Epic fail on the cards. They had site stamps, which had to be deleted. Not fun. And it was obvious that you just went on a search engine and stole the images. Stealing, not good. Not even giving credit to the site you stole from, horrifically not good. Leave the TCG to people who actually know what they are doing. Stick to what you know more, games and anime, but do not do TCG again, because what you did was a disgrace! ^Maverick_Nate 01:49, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

But the others are horrible! And there were no site stamps! I'm sick of people saying things that are completely un-true! ^Chocolate 16:45, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

And there's absolutely no possibility that you just didn't see it? Both Nate and SP252 are saying that they were site-stamped, and these are two respected admins who aren't exactly going to lie about something like that. End of discussion, I suggest you drop it.

Also, if you want to contribute, do it properly. Some of us - including myself, Politoed666, Kogoro and Nate - actually take the time to scan in our own cards for Bulbapedia. I personally believe a quick flick through a search engine, when looking for scans, to be a very half-assed job, because they're hardly ever (if ever at all) up to the quality we can provide by scanning in our own cards. Cipher ^(Talk) 17:20, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

I didn't see any site stamps because there weren't any! I'll even make a video for proof if you want it. ^Chocolate 17:24, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

That won't be necessary. Not for me, anyway. I didn't see the scans so I'm not going any further with this. Whether Nate wants to take it further is up to him - same goes for SP252. Regardless of whether or not they were site-stamped, the fact still remains that using search engines to find scans isn't a good idea, and it doesn't make us feel great when we take time out of our day to scan in our personal collection. Cipher ^(Talk) 17:30, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

But just look at the other ones (the ones not uploaded by me). You can't even read any of the text on 'em! ^Chocolate 18:04, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Which ones? Give me some links. Cipher ^(Talk) 18:13, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Brocksrhydon.jpg, Image:Erikasdragonair.jpg, and Image:Erikasclefable.jpg, as a start. There's definitely plenty more though. ^Chocolate 18:15, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

At least they're there. To me, as long as they're there and can be used in articles (which they can be), they're fine. If I or someone else decides to scan in cards from Gym sets (I myself have a more than decent collection of Gym Heroes cards), they can be replaced. But this is not at the top of the TCG priorities list. As far as scans are concerned, the priorities are to complete the articles which do not have images. Cipher ^(Talk) 19:07, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Just so this shouldn't have to come up again... I'm going to be working on some of the EX sets tonight. Chocolate, if you can get a list of cards with images you find to be badly detailed, and post it onto my talk page, I might be able to do a few of them with each night's scanning. Would that make everybody happy? - Kogoro | Talk to me | 19:10, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay. That sounds like a great idea. ^Chocolate 19:12, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Ash's Gliscor

Listen to Jmath. I think he's right--KukiTalk 20:45, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

How? ^Chocolate 20:47, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

So it has in indent and no bullet on two trivia, it's not like it's the only two that have the pic make it look like a poorly indented paragraph --KukiTalk 20:50, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh. I see. ^Chocolate 20:51, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Bullets

I agree triva sections should have the bullets, but dont make an edit for the sole reason of adding a bullet. thats stupid. -- MAGNEDETH 00:31, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Did you mean it the other way around? Because I've been taking the bullets out, not putting them in. ^Chocolate 00:31, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

yea, but that sort of brings a new light to the table. stop deleting them. -- MAGNEDETH 00:33, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

But bullets are used to list things seperately. There's nothing to list seperately if there's only piece of trivia. ^Chocolate 00:34, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

first off, "separately"

second off, it makes it look tidy, and theres always the inevitable chance of more trivia. now, i know your going to say "whomever adds the next trivia should add it" and thats true, but, itd make more sense if it could already be there, like it should be everywhere else. its clean, its uniform, leave them alone. add to that you already got yelled at for this, if you keep doing it, it becomes you disregarding an admin, and thats punishable by block. -- MAGNEDETH 00:39, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

I didn't get "yelled at" for it. I got questioned about it. ^Chocolate 00:40, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

maybe "yelled at" isnt exactly the right term for it, but the fact it was questioned by an admin, shouldnt that raise a big flag? well if you dont think you were yelled at before, then im yelling at you now. stop it. -- MAGNEDETH 00:43, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Politoed666 was the one who asked me about it. He asked me where I saw something about how bullets are used. I responded by telling him that I was doing it based on how I saw several pages in the past. So, he actually didn't question it in a bad way, he was just curious. ^Chocolate 00:45, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

actually, i believe he questioned where it was stated as a policy because it isnt, and you acted like it was. -- MAGNEDETH 00:50, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

ok

we can be friends --Guardian of Earth |SGMS 2010

Yay! I'm glad we made up. ^Chocolate 00:38, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Check email--KukiTalk 02:00, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

I did. I replied as well. ^Chocolate 02:11, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Images

I don't want you uploading images for Kuki anymore. He's blocked from the archives and using you as a go around to the block is the same thing as ban evading as far as I can see. So no more uploading for him. Alright? -Sketch 15:54, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay. ^Chocolate 15:56, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking about saying this, but I would have probably been called a cyberbully, a bad admin and someone who should have my powers revoked. ^Maverick_Nate 17:19, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Email

Chek it for my source--KukiTalk 16:27, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

HIATUS????

Who r the users? Tell me thru email--KukiTalk 19:24, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

It's not just because of some of the users here. It's for other reasons that don't have to do with Bulbapedia, or the Internet in general. ^Chocolate 19:25, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Grades in school?--KukiTalk 19:26, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

No. I just don't feel like sharing the reasons why. ^Chocolate 19:27, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Admin

I would love to be an admin, however, I know that I have yet to contribute enough to the Pedia in order to qualify; I am not active enough. You may nominate me, however, I can promise that the answer will be no. I appreciate the offer. - unsigned comment from Paperfairy (talk • contribs)

Your Sig

i was reading over the sig policy, and in a bit of coincidence noticed your sig is against the rules. the little bump you give your sig breaks the normal lines and is technically against the rules. -- MAGNEDETH 02:07, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

But other users have that "little bump". ^Chocolate 02:09, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

(Maverick Nate and Tavisource for example).--^☆Tavisource 02:10, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

And Cipher. ^Chocolate 02:12, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

my, and the others', "little bumbs" are in small text. It can be small, just not normal and never big. ^Maverick_Nate 02:14, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, fixed. ^Chocolate 02:15, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

What do you mean by little bumps?--Diamaster 02:17, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

You can make text go up in the air with the tag <sup>. ^Chocolate 02:19, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Whats so wrong about that?--Diamaster 02:27, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

It will push all letters up, causing an "unwanted" gap.~Ποκεμανιακα0β 02:28, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

exactly. thanks for fixing it C. -- MAGNEDETH 02:31, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Ability

Thanks for doing this, but you're assumming WAY too much. It's the same idea as the genders... ^ht14 15:06, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I forgot that Tauros can also have Anger Point. But the others I added can only have one ability. ^Chocolate 15:06, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Well....that's not my point...It's possible that pre-Generation III, there were no such things as abilities in the anime. However, you somewhat prove a point, as Pikachu has it. Still....we should only put it up when actually shown... ^ht14 15:12, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

All right, I'll prove a better point. Afterwards, I'll talk to tc26. Let's use Tauros again. Generation III came out, and Tauros was in the episode against Brandon, right? Does that prove its ability is immediately proved to be Intimidate? And so on... ^ht14 15:16, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Hmm...good point. I'll only add the abilities for Pokémon that can only have one ability. ^Chocolate 15:17, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, what about the possible Gen V? They may add more abilities on Pokémon that only have one....then we're still in square 1. ^ht14 15:19, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

If they add more abilities in Gen. V, then we can change the listed abilites to "unknown". But Gen. V is nowhere close right now. ^Chocolate 15:21, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

If you say so then.... - unsigned comment from Ht14 (talk • contribs)

On a side note, thanks for putting me up for admin. With your ability....get it? Sorry.... ^ht14 21:20, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't me who nominated you. Tavisource nominated you. I just voted support. ^Chocolate 21:22, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Right. My bad...I just remembered you were on there somewhere... ^ht14 21:25, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

TCG

Just because there is a specific type for a move doesn't mean it's the same as the TCG. See Lapras ex (EX Ruby & Sapphire 99). Besides, the game move didn't even come out yet until Gen IV. ^ht14 20:59, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

But every Pokémon other page lists the moves as the type that they are in the games. ^Chocolate 21:02, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

You sure? Any examples of the cards that contradict the type, but are mentioned correctly? ^ht14 21:03, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

An example would be...?--Kkllnn blastoise 21:03, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, look here. Golbat's never been a Water-type in the TCG, right? ^Chocolate 21:04, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Fixed....I'm not saying that either. Are you saying that Dragonite's a Fire-type, Electric-type, or Water-type? Besides, Dive didn't come out yet... ^ht14 21:08, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

But why exactly are we listing it by the Pokémon's type rather than the move's type? ^Chocolate 21:09, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Clueless....ask an admin of higher power.... ^ht14 21:12, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Like me. --ニョロトノ666 21:14, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay Politoed, I'll ask you: When listing moves that a Pokémon can only have in the TCG, why have the type as the Pokémon's own type instead of the move's type? ^Chocolate 21:18, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Solution: Don't list a type. There's not really a "right" answer to this question, and I think this is too big a project to take on ATM. Some Pokémon have moves that aren't in the games at all and are of an indeterminate type. For instance, what would you do with Charizard's Dragon Tail attack? This whole thing is a bad idea. --ニョロトノ666 21:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

That sounds like a great idea. ^Chocolate 21:29, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Um... what? --ニョロトノ666 21:29, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Not listing a type. ^Chocolate 21:31, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

You're not going to finish this. You're going to do maybe a few of these and then realize that it's too big a project to take on. I play the TCG. There are a ton of TCG-exclusive moves for each Pokémon and thousands of cards to go through to make sure you don't miss a move. It's pointless to start if you're not going to do it all the way. --ニョロトノ666 21:34, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about spamming your talk page.....so, should we stop with the Moves not in the Pokémon games? We have a TON! Yes, some are repeated, but they don't always describe the same. ^ht14 21:45, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

We are currently and have been for sometime (if I wouldn't keep getting sidetracked) to make a style and have that TCG only move list have more than just the move name, we really need to come up with that, but currently, the TCG is swamped with things to do. This will eventually get done in a way that displays the most information without being excessive, but for now, leave it alone, because we aren't exactly sure about what we want yet. What comes first is the Japanese names, Japanese translations, images we need, and the McDonald's promo from about the e-card era that has 18 cards but no information here for it. ^Maverick_Nate

Thanks for your input

If you haven't been following the conversation (which is clear) then you should probably stay out or risk sounding like an obvious admin wanna-be. For your information, I've already said that I don't care about getting blocked. I intended to leave Bulbapedia yesterday, when I saw the ridiculous garbage that was going on with the tier list. The only reason I'm back today is because the spam filter of my email inbox isn't working yet. Scarfcrosspwns 02:59, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

You are incorrect

Jpg are preferred over png.s for cards. Png's are the best to use for anime screenshots, and should be used as often as possible. ^Maverick_Nate 21:48, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Really? Because I've seen JPGs used for anime screenshots pretty much everywhere. ^Chocolate 21:49, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

And they look so much worse. They are probably used more often because they are easier to get. But, when even the editor in chief is trying to get everyone to change anime jpgs to pngs because of the much better quality, we need to use pngs. They just simply look much better. ^Maverick_Nate 21:53, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

As long as Bulbapedia is not running out of disk space, PNG sounds better to me. JPG isn't, though, bad either, as long as its compression quality is high enough (one can manually affect the quality in certain image editors, for example Photoshop (no, not in MS Paint)). So, in my opinion it doesn't matter which one the image is unless the JPG pic is a low-quality one. UltimateSephiroth ^{(user · talk · contrib)} 22:04, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Paul's Ursaring

Maybe because of the low resolution.--^Kevz_o8 03:09, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Wait!

Why are you merging two seperate groups of information on the types pages into one giant garbled mess that is way too confusing?!?!?! ^Maverick_Nate 17:29, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Because we don't need two tables for something that can be described in one. ^Chocolate 17:31, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes we do, the two tables keep the information seperated because they are different sets of information. And, you have to discuss style changes and modifications with an admin before you actually do them; in this case, the previous was much better. ^Maverick_Nate 17:32, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

But why do you find the previous to be better? ^Chocolate 17:33, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

what in the living hell did you do that for?? if we wanted it in that way, we would have done it in the first place! -- MAGNEDETH 17:37, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, bye. You'll never see me edit again. ^Chocolate 17:38, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Chocolate...Don't be immature about this. ~~Takoto| サソデイ 17:44, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Takoto is exactly right. making such a big style change is something that has to be confirmed by an Editorial Board member first. moreover, youve been told before we do not want those tables merged in that way. relax. -- MAGNEDETH 17:50, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Takoto, hes not being immature, those guys treated him realy bad, theres no reson for a response like that, if he did wrong just say, you dont need 2 admins ganging up on him, and saying there point repeatedly, you guys handled that situation really badly, but I dont think Chocolate should leave. --Guardian of Earth |SGMS 2010

Chocolate shouldn't leave, but he really is being a little immature. Leaving over such a minor thing. I don't want to be the bad guy here, but it has to be said. ~~Takoto| サソデイ 17:52, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

It really isn't minor. Perhaps you should look at my contributions and see how often stuff like this happens. ^Chocolate 17:54, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Choclate shouldn't make such changes without permission. He should know that, he's been here long enough. The admins are only doing their jobs. TESHIGIGAS 17:55, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I think its more about the way the admins reacted than about the actual issue here. The admins scare quite a few people off (Blue Jirachi) and it does mean less contributors for the project. Chocolate, although annyoing, should stay, and the admins need to learn some softer approaches. --Guardian of Earth |SGMS 2010

I'm happy with how the admins have reacted. Like I said, it's their job. Someone does somthing wrong, they have to be told or thay'll just end up doing it again. TESHIGIGAS 18:00, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

We did not scare Blue Jirachi away; the stupidity of that Democratic Bulbapedia mess did. ^Maverick_Nate 18:01, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

when someone makes a big edit, one person might not be enough. IRL: a cop pulls you over for a speeding ticket, you think hes the only one there? nope, any nearby cops always come to. just in case. not that we expect Chocolate to go AWOL or something. -- MAGNEDETH 18:03, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

The Admin's were just doing their job, in retrospect, and Chocolate has just reacted a tad too much. I see nothing wrong with what the Admin's did/have said. ~~Takoto| サソデイ 18:05, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Give me a damn good reason why I should stay. ^Chocolate 19:40, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Because you're going a little bit to far with this, and leaving over such a... small reason would make you look...well... ~~Takoto - サソデイ 19:50, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

It's not just because of the issue with the types. There's other stuff that not everyone knows. ^Chocolate 19:52, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Adminship

If you feel that I am a good enough editor to nominate me, I would be honoured to be nominated. I also agree with what TTE said afterwards. Focus mainly on contributing to the 'pedia, and if you happen to notice a user that has been making many good contributions, and helping to keep the 'pedia at its best, etc. Then check deeper into their sign-up date, etc. If they appear to meet the criteria of an admin candidate, then nominate them ^_^ - Kogoro | Talk to me | 21:21, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay. I've nominated you. You should put this template on your user page so more people will vote. ^Chocolate 21:28, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Optimatium's Nomination

Just to set the record straight, he doesn't think he's quite qualified for the job, but he does not oppose the nomination. If you want to change your vote, now would be a good time. -- Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 22:27, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I already changed my vote to oppose, but since he voted oppose in his own nomination, doesn't that mean he opposes the nomination? ^Chocolate 22:28, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I just posted a link on his nomination; I asked him myself on the subject. I'm not asking people to change votes for any reason other then to have a fair nomination, I'd rather he got voted down for inexperience or something instead of for a misunderstanding. -- Jïörüjï Ðērākō.>.cнаt^ 22:30, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Fox

It's a habit to capitalize fox because one of my friends go by P.Fox and i like to type Fox Fox Fox a lot to her. sorry about that. Thanks for notifying me. --いぬみみ 22:16, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Abilities

Please don't add unconfirmed abilities to the anime Pokémon. Politoed666 has started reverting the unconfirmed abilities unless they have been seen or commanded to by their trainers. So, don't add any more, even if they have one ability. Thank you. --^Psychic_Rider^☮ 15:06, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

But if they only have only one ability, how can they not have the abilities I put? ^Chocolate 15:16, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I know, but just read Maverick Nate's talk page for more details. --^Psychic_Rider^☮ 15:26, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Venusaur (Expedition 30)

I'd like to ask you to check every other card article for cards before EX Ruby & Sapphire. Cards that have an attack cost of three or more don't do that. There is no "official" way, but there is a wrong way, and using a HTML break is the wrong way, because none of the card articles use that style. And none of them will. Cipher ^(Talk) 18:32, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

But if we don't do it the way the card does it, it's not consistent with the card. ^Chocolate 19:09, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Articles aren't there to be consistent in terms of design. They're there to be consistent in terms of what the card says and does. The attack on Venusaur, for example, uses GGCC, and the article says it uses GGCC. That's all it needs to do. Cipher ^(Talk) 19:18, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Dude,

Leave Heatran's article alone. Style insists that all images are at 180, without thumbnail, in the release information section. These are not bad images. Just leave what you don't know about alone. This is the second time you screwed with the TCG and it is the second Fail. ^Maverick_Nate 20:18, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I thought we truced! ^Chocolate 20:19, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

When you offered to truce with me, did you really mean it? ^Chocolate 20:33, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I am still truced with you, but I won't keep quiet if you go against style. I am just saying, leave certain things alone because you won't be able to change them. ^Maverick_Nate 20:36, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

What would I do without you?!?

I don't know you (at all)but you've posted some helpfull comments on my talk page, and I'm glad it was you and not a site administrator. I'm very thankfull that you decided to help a newbie like me through the site. Bla, bla, bla. I'm just glad! Dolphins_are_awesome! 01:56, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Just so you know, your signature's still in violation. It has to exactly be your user name, not just part of your user name. ^Chocolate 01:59, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Theres a song about this somewhere......and it doesnt have to be exactly your username, it has to relate to your username. I had Emperor's Cookies for a while--DCM_{((Shut the **** upSpy on My Edits))}

Oh. Okay then. ^Chocolate 02:05, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

TCG moves

We haven't decided on a style yet...we want to get all the Japanese names and translations in before we start those, because we want to have more information ajnd we want to use a template like the other section moves. So, I would like it if you wait on adding those in table format. You can add them in a list like what the other ones had, but we don't really know a complete set on what Pokémon have what attacks and we just aren't ready. ^Maverick_Nate 01:12, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

But the table is more detailed. Plus, Politoed said that we weren't gonna list move types under the TCG-only moves section of Pokémon articles. ^Chocolate 02:01, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

But we are going to list move costs and damage, but we don't know what else if anything; that is why we need to wait. ^Maverick_Nate 02:08, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Check mail--KukiTalk 00:57, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Links in tables

I know there's the rule that you only link the first instance in a section, but it seems kind of weird in a table. In the route table, it's kind of awkward to actually use it if I want to click on route 37, because then I have to scan up through the table to find an actual link to it. The rule works well for actual written sections, since the intent is that the reader should read the whole section up to where the link might be, but with a table, the reader will jump to the section they're interested with. Besides, strictly enforcing this rule in tables would mean you'd only link the first instance of a move in a party table, or only link the first type reference to Grass in a list of Pokémon. My 2 cents. — Laoris _(Blah) 02:43, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

But the location sections take up very little of the page. If someone uses the table of contents to jump directly to the locations section, they'll be able to see everything in the table right away. ^Chocolate 02:47, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

However, Laoris just disproved that statement you just said. each needs to be linked in tables, no matter if they were linked before. It makes it easier for everyone. ^Maverick_Nate 02:49, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

But as I said, you can easily see all of the locations without having to scroll down or anything. ^Chocolate 02:50, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Still, it requires some additional work. It's easier for users not to have to read up through the table just to find a link. — Laoris _(Blah) 02:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Riddle of the day

YES!! You got it right! =P JS 22:02, 21 November 2008 (UTC)