User talk:A Link to the Past

Don't move a page like that without first discussing the change on the talk page. If you wanted to make it say Pikachu (disambiguation), please post on the talk page and explain why you wanted it to be moved to that title. Thank you. --PAK Man ^Talk 00:47, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

^^ What he said. evkl 02:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't believe I have to ask for permission to make an edit. - A Link to the Past 22:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

That is true. However, making such a drastic page move like that created problems. For example, we have a special template on all disambiguation pages involving Pokémon called {{disambigPokémon}}. What this does is take the title of the page and insert it into "Pokémon name is a species of Pokémon. It may also refer to specific Pokémon of that species." By moving it to Pikachu (disambiguation), the page now read "Pikachu (disambiguation) is a species of Pokémon..." There was also a forum discussion about the disambiguations located here. If you would like to comment on that, feel free. As I said, there is nothing wrong with asking for permission to edit, but if you would like to move a page like that, please discuss it on the talk page. --PAK Man ^Talk 23:52, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Almost the entire discussion is pretty much one side explaining that the disambig system of Wikipedia works fine and that the majority of Pokémon do not have that notable of an individual Pokémon in it, while the other side was simply repeating that we should think it over before acting, but I didn't see much discussion besides some people trying to sweep it under the rug. On top of that, I saw many more people who agreed with the new disambig proposal. I simply didn't see the rationale to put Jessie's Shellder on equal level with the entire species. - A Link to the Past 02:02, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, let's get one thing straight here: Bulbapedia is not Wikipedia. It's just done that way. Always has been. This way when someone links to a Pokémon's page they know for sure that it has to be as {{p|Pikachu}}, instead of having it ambiguous. After all, I know several articles on Wikipedia which are literally damn impossible to find because of this.

What I don't get is why people think that we have to link everything as short as possible. Consistency is a better thing to have, because once you get used to it, you do it automatically. So what, when you just type it in the searchbar you can't get there instantaneously. If you've been here for any amount of time at all, you can see they are all at [species name] (Pokémon). Not one of them isn't. All types are at [type name] (type), all moves are at [move name] (move) (both of which, of course, are very helpful due to the fact that several egg groups and TCG types share their names with the elemental types of the games, and definitely in that there is still a chance in future generations for other things to have the same names as moves, as we've seen with Double Team (trainer class)). Maybe nowhere near the amount as there are of Pokémon, but still. I personally don't have that much trouble with the disambig pages I know are probably there, especially for something like Turtwig, but maybe that's just me. After all, by moving the Pokémon, we'd have to ask "okay, then, should we move the types? And the moves?" And then we'd be hit with a dilemma of whether Psychic or Psychic is more important. And don't just say "oh no we can just make that the disambiguation, because then we'd have some noob who didn't read the MOS coming in and linking everything with square brackets and having fifteen thousand links to disambiguation pages.

Remember: the point is that the species name pages disambiguate people to all canons. For the handheld game canon specifically, including stats, move lists, locations, and otherwise, it's all at [species name] (Pokémon). You can't just walk in and say "oh, I'm changing policy". Consistency in linking is much better than convenience in searching, especially if all you gotta do is click one link. TTEchidna 16:22, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I hope you at least retained the whole consensus thing. Multiple people wanted policy changed, and you know what the only arguments against changing provided were? "Convenience in clicking" and "too much work to change". Not very convincing. Also, I want consistency - are you saying that putting the species at the main page is not consistent? - unsigned comment from A Link to the Past (talk • contribs)

Of course it's consistent. Who's saying it isn't? But do you realize how much work that would be to move all 400+ Pokémon articles to just the Pokémon's name? Also, we would have to go through all of the Pokémon disambiguation pages (of which there are 190) and delete all of them, because it's not possible to move a page to another that has a page history without doing that. The system's not broken, why fix it? It's consistent as it is. --PAK Man ^Talk 21:57, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Many clearly disagree. Almost every single species of Pokémon lacks an important character in it. - A Link to the Past 01:16, 19 September 2007 (UTC)