Talk:Rowlet (Pokémon)

Rowlet's Design Origin

Sorry for editing Popplio earlier. I edited before it got restricted in editing. Anyways, since Gen VII seems to be based in Hawaii, I think Rowlet is based on the Pueo, the Hawaiian Owl.—Naui (talk) 12:48, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

And the name of the region is not Aloha, it is Alola, from Aloha. Chomper4 (talk) 12:54, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

It looks more like the barn owl, which is the more populous kind of owl in Hawaii. glik^glak 14:50, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

to me they look like an owl and a coconut or other similar fruit/treenut cross bred. Yamitora1 (talk) 19:26, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

It's also not native, but introduced and a threat to native birds. But i digress, I concede that it is possibly based on the Barn Owl. But Pueo is more famous natively.— Naui (talk) 19:53, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

I am almost certain it is a Forest Owlet. the markings are similar, the typing makes sense, and the japanese name is literally "wood owl". i think its english name relating to the term for a baby owl is only 1 side of the reason for "owlet" given this information. --Puerluna (talk) 21:14, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Rowlet's Biology Section

"Rowlet is an avian Pokémon that resembles a young owl. Its body is rounded in appearance, having no discernible head. A white facial disc frames its beady, dark eyes, and it has a short, stubby beak that is white on top and brownish-orange on the lower mandible. Most of its plumage is light brown in coloration, but it has white feathers at the base of its body. Part of its feathers are made of razor-sharp leaves, including a bow tie-like marking on the chin and its tail. There are also green feathers on the undersides of its wings that are revealed when they are spread. It's feet are brownish-orange with two claws facing forward and one pointing backwards.

Rowlet is capable of twisting its head nearly 180 degrees, which allows it to look behind itself. It has impressively keen eyesight and can fly silently through the darkness of night. As it approaches an opponent, it attacks with either powerful kicks or a flurry of leaves launched from a distance."

It would be easy to change the voice from "it" to "they" if that's what's preferred. ~Destruction on Wings~ (talk) 13:10, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Name Origins

Rowlet may be a combination or Rowan (the tree) and Owlet Nosredna (talk) 13:51, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

In German, Bauz may be a combination of Baum (tree) and Kauz (owl).Dntpnc (talk) 17:55, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Roulette pun, anyone? --Scheneighnay (talk) 23:41, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Type Effectiveness

Since we have this Pokémon's type already, then we can add its type effectiveness (which should be the same as Hoppip's, for example). Mateussf (talk) 13:59, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

We don't know if there will be any tweaking of the type matchups, so I imagine for now we should wait and see? Starscream (talk) 14:22, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Rowlet's typing

It seems that Rowlet is the second-ever starter Pokémon to have a secondary type in its base form, after Bulbasaur. Coincidentally, both are Grass-type. Should we note this?--Darthrai (talk) 14:07, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Nope. Now that there's two, it's not notable anymore. Crystal Talian 14:17, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

But shouldn't we note that the only two starters that are dual typed are both primary grass? --Raltseye 14:34, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

How is it not notable? It's a seven generation gap. Word it like "Rowlet is the first Pokemon since Bulbasaur to be a dual-type starter" or something. Aidan the Aura Master 14:39, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Not unique is not notable. Since the situation is no longer unique, it is no longer notable. Crystal Talian 14:51, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

I believe that Darthrai and Raltseye are right on this fact and so do I.

Christian (talk) 17:11, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

I also agree that it is worth noting that from all 7 generations of starters, this is only the second starter that has a secondary type in his primary form. --Basinox (talk) 17:18, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes and like I said it's only two out of twenty one starters that are dual typed and those two just so happen to be primary grass type and that is noteworthy in the trivia section according to me. --Raltseye 18:45, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

For what it's worth, there's a similar piece of trivia on the starter Pokémon page about name length and region rather than dual typing and primary typing. I can't really say if this point is notable or not, but if it is it should probably go there rather than on this page.--Cold (talk) 19:13, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

The trivia is fine on the starter page, as that's where it's most relevant. It's simply not relevant here. Crystal Talian 12:00, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

BP has followed the "policy" that droughts are notable. Saying it has no relevance on Rowlet's own page makes no sense. --HoennMaster 18:19, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Where has BP followed the "policy" that droughts are notable, if I may ask? AFAIK, that's only been in the anime. And as we are also fond of saying, the games are not the anime. Tiddlywinks (talk) 18:29, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Why is a drought considered notable in the anime but not in the games? 20 years and six generations later is a long time. Anime=/=Games is when saying "Move X didn't work like the games", not trivia. --HoennMaster 01:27, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Again, it's just not relevant to this page. It's on the starter page and that's fine. We don't need to repeat trivia in multiple places. It has more relevant to the starter's as a whole than specifically to Rowlet. There's no point in arguing when it seems like there's already an agreeable compromise. Crystal Talian 01:41, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Many Pokemon pages have quite enough trivia on them already, we don't really want to open the door to even more by relaxing our standards for Pokemon trivia.

The following is solely my opinion:

Anime=/=games. Even for trivia (or at least this kind). In the anime, there are HUNDREDS of episodes. In the games, there are only SEVEN generations currently. That's an INCREDIBLE difference. What you're really saying about Rowlet is, it's the first dual-type since Generation I. But if you said in the anime that "X" is the first whatever since six episodes ago, that wouldn't be notable. And "real time" is not a relevant factor either; if Generation III had come, say FIFTY years after Generation I and Rowlet were a starter, that wouldn't at all make it relevant that Rowlet was the first dual-type since Bulbasaur. It's the iterations between them, the generations, that matter. And seven is barely more than a handful. Talk to me when we have 15-20 generations. (Again, note that this is solely my own personal resolution of the difference between anime and games for droughts. It is not necessarily staff policy, but I do think it is solid logic.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 02:25, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Rowlet's Number

It's obvious they are not gonna' do a Victini situation again, so we might as well make it's number No. 722. - unsigned comment from Theexploringgamer (talk • contribs)

No assumptions. If it's that "obvious", people are free to assume it for themselves. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:41, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Rowlet's Ability

How do we know that it's ability will be Overgrow? I mean, sure, every grass starter has it, but every grass starter also has the same gender ratio, and that's still on the page as "Unknown". Should we change one of the two? EnderBolt (talk) 18:31, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

It's officially revealed. ChE clarinetist (talk) 19:18, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Whoops, my bad. EnderBolt (talk) 19:33, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

"Rowlet is the only Grass-type starter Pokémon to be based on a bird." ... really?

Why don't I add that Froakie's the only Water-type starter to be based on a frog? I'd remove it, but it appears I'm not allowed for some reason. Unowninator (talk) 18:32, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

"Bird" isn't a species, it's one of the basic animal groups, along with mammals, fish, reptiles, and amphibians. Saying Rowlet is the only bird Grass starter is analogous to saying that Chespin is the only mammal Grass starter. Mangaman13 (talk) 18:56, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Well, one of the groups of VERTEBRATE animals, that is. Mangaman13 (talk) 03:45, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Name origin

I know the name Rowlet comes from owlet, but what about "R"? Christian (talk) 18:44, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

I heard someone say on twitter that it's round + owlet, and, well, it is pretty round.. EnderBolt (talk) 18:49, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

I was thinking something similar to Roulette, which comes from the french Little Wheel.Yamitora1 (talk) 19:12, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Would the "R" in Rowlet also come from Rowling as in J.R. Rowling, the author of the Harry Potter books? Christian (talk) 23:21, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

That's too much of a stretch.Animaltamer702:24, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Stymphalian Birds

It seems to me that Rowlet is at least partially based on the Stymphalian birds from Greek mythology. They were known for attacking by shooting out their feathers as projectile weapons. Rowlet does the same thing, although his are leaves that double as his feathers and therefore are his feathers, as was detailed in the official information release on the Pokémon Sun and Moon website. Link to the Wikipedia page on the Stymphalian birds here. Mangaman13 (talk) 19:03, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

we'll have to wait on further evolutions to get a better grasp on their basis. Also, it may be based on something more botanic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urticating_hair Urticating hairs or urticating bristles, i.e. irritating hairs, are one of the primary defense mechanisms used by numerous plants. Rowlet are a grass-type afterall. Yamitora1 (talk) 19:20, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Trivia fact

Here's a good trivia fact.

Rowlet is the first Grass-type starter to be based on a bird. Christian (talk) 01:18, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

That's pretty self-evident. --Pokemaster97 01:32, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Official art

Are we 100% sure that it's Sugimori's art this time around? Normally it'd be a no-brainer "yes", but Ohmura has been doing a lot of human character art recently, and Rowlet's art more closely resembles his style (the linework is an especially noticeable giveaway). It could just be Sugimori changing up his style to match, but it's hard to know for sure. Has credit been officially listed somewhere? Frezgle (Silverlucario) (talk) 06:32, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Well nothing specifically mention, but this is the only artwork we have of Rowlet at the moment.Animaltamer707:11, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Here's an image that explains who did what in SM: [1] --Tuturuu (talk) 00:23, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Do you have an official source for that information? Because a random image with some text slapped onto it really does nothing for us. --Carmen★ (Talk | contribs) 00:31, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Do you have an official source stating all the artwok was done by Sugimori? I've followed both his and Ohmura's art progression ever since Pokémon Red and Blue were released, and since Ohmura joined during the development of Black and White. If you examine the art closely, like in that "random image", you can clearly see that the two characters were drawn by two different people. It's no tougher than telling Picasso and van Gogh apart. I'm not telling anyone to change the wiki pages, but blindly clamiming it was done by Sugimori even when there's contradicting information is not something I can overlook. --Tuturuu (talk) 00:51, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

(I'm assuming you're talking about the template on the file pages. If I'm mistaken, please correct me.) By default, we state that the artwork is done by Sugimori since the associated template is defaulted to state that. However, once/if we get official confirmation that Ohmura has worked on the Pokémon artwork, we will definitely make the appropriate updates to the template, like what we did with the character artwork template. Bottom line is, we don't want to make such drastic changes to such a high-use template solely based off of guesswork and speculation, since an update to the template would also involve moving the template and relinking it everywhere it's used. I hope you understand. --Carmen★ (Talk | contribs) 01:32, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Exactly, I was talking about the template. Again, I don't want it to be changed until there's official confirmation, but I think it's worth pointing out that not all Pokémon art may be done by Sugimori anymore.--Tuturuu (talk) 16:28, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Website

Take this into consideration

http://www.pokemon-sunmoon.com/en-us/pokemon/rowlet/

It has more info

Dadijo2002 (talk) 16:41, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Rowlet's face

Rowlet's face has vague (or strong) resemblance to a mandorla, 2 overlapping circles making an almond shape in the middle. This symbol is commonly used to represent heaven and earth, which i feel is relevant to it as a grass/flying type. (on a similar note of symbols on the new pokemon, littens forehead stripes and large eyes bare high resemblance to formation of the symbol for brimstone, also called sulfur, an element naturally occurring in and around volcanoes and hotsprings)--Puerluna (talk) 13:55, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

We will keep this in mind if its evolutions seem to be based on Christian Priests or almondsl. --Basinox (talk) 14:43, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

mandorlas have more than just that one meaning, and beyond christianity, and i meant earth and heaven on a broader definition than "mortal earth and biblical heaven". so sassy... --Puerluna (talk) 06:56, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Addition to Trivia: Rowlet's dual typing

I haven't been able to edit the Rowlet page, but I think that the fact that Rowlet is the first dual typing since Bulbasaur is good for the trivia section. Srushj11 (talk) 19:50, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

This was already discussed on this exact page. Look up. --Carmen★ (Talk | contribs) 22:09, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

New Move

Two things. One: I think we could include in Trivia "Rowlet is the only Pokémon Sun and Moon starter Pokémon to be revealed with a new move" or just the first Gen 7 Pokemon, I also think someone could make a Leafage page. Or maybe not. --GameCubeAdvance 12:36, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

1) That's not really notable, especially with only four (counting Magearna) Pokemon revealed so far.

2) All we know about Leafage right now is its name and that it's a Grass-type move. That is no where close to enough to have an article made about it. ChE clarinetist (talk) 12:45, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Rowlet's Number (Again)

In the Japenese Rotom Pokedex Trailer, it shows the Rowlet is 001 in the Alola region Pokedex, also confirming Magearna will not be doing another Victini thing with the #000. This means that in Regional Pokedexes, Rowlet is #001 In National Dex, it's #722 Theexploringgamer (talk) -Here is the Trailer that shows the starter's numbers, also confirming they have evolutions. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nc03tXikfJs Theexploringgamer (talk) 20:36, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

That doesn't prove anything. The answer is still no, we are not adding numbers until the game comes out. And of course they have evolutions. Why wouldn't they? Ataro (talk) 21:39, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

But could we not add its regional Alola dex number then? --Raltseye 23:39, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

The Alola Pokédex appears to be split into sections like the Kalos Pokédex. As we don't yet know the English section names nor even the Japanese names for all the sections, we aren't yet adding the Alola Pokédex sections to the infobox. --Abcboy (talk) 23:44, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

But unlike the Kalos Pokedex, it also has one whole Alola Pokedex section, if you see what I'm saying. It's split, but there's also one who one that merges them together. When Sun and Moon comes out, should we put Alola and then "Coastal", "Mountain" things like that? - unsigned comment from Theexploringgamer (talk • contribs)

When S/M comes out...we'll figure it out. Tiddlywinks (talk) 14:32, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Okay! sorry, I'm not trying to get in the way or be a distraction, I just like the facts to be 100% correct. Also, I made a comment of Talk: Rayquaza_(Pokémon) and list of variations featuring Zygarde.Theexploringgamer (talk) 14:38, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Venn Diagram

The very first thing I noticed looking at Rowlet is that it's face is clearly supposed to resemble a Venn diagram, and other parts of it seem to be made of intersecting ovals as well. This has not gone completely unnoticed, but I found very little mention of it on the internet and I think it's worth a note in the trivia of this page. - unsigned comment from Rowl (talk • contribs)

It's mostly just an owl's face in cartoon form. What you're seeing is basically just coincidence. Tiddlywinks (talk) 16:37, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Pretty confident it's not. Apart from the curve at the top and bottom, Rowlet's beak lines up perfectly with the rest of the circle around it's eyes and a perfect venn diagram can be layed over the top, which is certainly not the case with a real owl at all. It's quite clearly purposeful. - unsigned comment from Rowl (talk • contribs)

No, no it's not. And even if it was, we don't know nearly enough about Rowlet to justify adding it to the article. Ataro (talk) 17:38, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Like I said, this is a cartoon/drawing. You can't compare that to a real owl and necessarily draw conclusions from every thing that doesn't conform perfectly to real owls. Drawings aren't supposed to conform exactly. A simple oval is much easier than drawing a detailed beak. You're reading too much into simple shapes. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:51, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

I don't see how there's any more justification for mentioning that the leaves resemble a bowtie. Yeah they do (albeit an oddly shaped one), but his face also resembles a Venn diagram, and the leaves could just as easily just be leaves. It's not like it would have been harder to draw Rowlet's beak like, I dunno, an owl's actual beak, with a sharp downward point, rather than the convenient shape it is. I don't see how one is justified mentioning but the other is not. Plus Rowlet's name is (or at least the article considers it likely to be) a portmanteau of owl and round, which further suggests a link with the intersecting circle structure of the Venn diagram. - unsigned comment from Rowl (talk • contribs)

The resemblance to a bowtie is mentioned in the Biology section, where it's purely descriptive—it's meant to paint a picture, not imply that there's necessarily any significance/intention to it (which is what you want for the Venn diagram you see). They're completely different things.

I haven't said it outright, but personally, I don't really see a Venn diagram even if I'm looking for it, anyway. It just looks like an owl with big ol' owl eyes and a big honkin' owl "nose" to me. Tiddlywinks (talk) 02:35, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Well I guess it's a little silly me even bothering with this. It's not that big a deal, but I'll show you an illustrated example anyway.

And the owl nose, well I've yet to find any google images of owls with a beak shaped like 2 halves of an oval that meet together flat in the middle. They mostly look like this. very sharp downward beaks, like most raptors. I don't personally see the difference between saying 2 leaves look like a bowtie and saying it's face looks like a venn diagram but it's probably pointless for me to continue arguing on what is essentially an interesting but fairly trivial issue. - unsigned comment from Rowl (talk • contribs)

I really didn't need a demonstration... I get the idea, but I don't think there's actually enough there to call it what you want to call it.

Also: barn owl. Pretty close. Tiddlywinks (talk) 02:47, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

A barn owl would be a great idea for a love themed pokemon with a heart shaped face and a beak which points to the bottom of the heart from it's eyes. - unsigned comment from Rowl (talk • contribs)

Possible Kakao basis

I was wondering if there could be some basis on the Kakapo, otherwise known as the Owl Parrot -> Kakapo. Yamitora1 (talk) 09:21, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Pokemon Bank Screenshots Confirm Rowlet's National Dex Number

If you view the gallery on this page on the official English site, it shows Rowlet's National Dex number, #722. Mettie7 (talk) 22:06, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Trivia Fact

I thought of a good trivia fact for Rowlet.

Rowlet is the first bird-based Starter Pokémon that is part Flying-type.

This is true because Torchic and Piplup are not part Flying-type and are based on flightless birds. Torchic's evolutions become part Fighting-type while Piplup's final evolved form becomes part Steel-type.

Christian (talk) 03:22, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

It may be true, but it's not notable. There' only three, it's too small of a group.--ForceFire 03:49, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Trivia Fact 2

Rowlet is the second starter ever that's a dual-type on its first form. With the first one being Bulbasaur, twenty years ago. That sounds like relevant trivia.

Also... Rowlet is the first starter ever to have a 4x weakness from the first form (ice). And the 4th starter to have a 4x weakness on its final form; after Charizard (rock), Marshtomp (grass) and Chestnaught (flying). Gets a bit technical, though. - unsigned comment from Sebatrelles (talk • contribs)

Hi, thank for your input. The first trivia has been discussed many times. It's not notable here. It's on the starter page, were it is notable. The second trivia is overly specific and not needed. The third point is way too convoluted and being the fourth is never notable. Please remember to sign talkpage comments with ~~~~ Thanks. Crystal Talian 07:57, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

And to add its final form has been confirmed to be a Grass/Ghost type, not Flying. Probably why it is always best not to assume information before confirmation. ----NateVirus(Talk|Contributions) 14:14, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Possible Trivia?

Rowlet is the only starter to lose one of its' types when it reaches its' final form (since both it and Dartrix are Grass/Flying while Decidueye is Grass/Ghost). Luigi-San 20:42, 6 November 2016 (UTC)