Talk:History of the Pokémon world

Can anyone tell me how is it possible for Generation II and IV happened at the same time? Its not possible right? Because Jasmine is in the Sinnoh region right?

---

Shaping this article

I think this article needs to be redesigned... "history" is a bit of a general term - there are differences between the histories in different parts on the cannon (games, anime and different manga series have contradicted each other several times in the past). We need to make rules to decide what goes in and what doesn't...--ElectAbuzzzz 12:37, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

It may not even be possible to write such an article since there is not much historical information, not to mention a good part of it is legend. (Then again, in this world it seems legends are generally true.) - 振霖_T 15:17, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I think it's more accurate to say that the Pokemon that appear in legend are true. There's no solid evidence to say that the Sinnoh Myths aren't simply that: Myth. I feel that until Nintendo officially confirms that Arceus did in fact create the Universe, or any other legend, such as Regigigas moving the continents, we should treat them purely as myth and/or theory, and not include them with articles dealing with fact, such as this Timeline.--Dual 03:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

The timeline must have another sub article--Snorlax 10:30, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Should the spinoff games (Colosseum, XD, Ranger, Snap...) fit in anywhere? There's not a lot of evidence linking those to the handheld games... is there any way to put them in? --Kayube 04:09, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I doubt it. There is no indication that any events in the non-handheld games are canon to the basic storyline, so there's no real point to including it here. On another note, it's my personal opinion that this needs to be moved to a different article, because there isn't much of the history that has been confirmed; most of it, as has been mentioned, is legend and theory. Regardless, I'm going to try to clean this up a bit and Wikify it some. Vekter 15:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, the Pokemon Ranger games seem to actually reference events from the games (and also is the reason why Manaphy even exists in the main games.) If we aren't going to count the Ranger games are canon to the basic storyline, then we shouldn't count Manaphy as canon, either, since that's the only EVENT pokemon in the main series that debuted in a side game/spinoff game rather than in the main game series. Besides, since we can't transfer any prior gen pokemon onto the R/S/E/FR/LG game packs, Pokemon Colosseum is currently the only legit way to even ACQUIRE Celebi (though this is only in the Japanese version), and it (as well as it's sequel, Gale of darkness) is also the only OTHER legit way to acquire Ho-Oh and Lugia if you didn't get the Mystic tickets in the Emerald/FR/LG versions. now, for games like Mystery dungeon, yes, those SHOULDN'T be counted as canon in there, since that's an Alt universe. Weedle Mchairybug 13:04, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

What should NOT be considered canon is all this fan-made BS about Pokemon populations decreasing, when the unobtainables came into being, how Doduo/Dodrio came to have multiple heads, etc. -- Umbee 22:01, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Do you think the "Contemporary History" should be moved to a new article called "Timeline of events in the games"? This article is supposed to be about how the Pokémon Universe developed, not what happened in it afterwards.

Can anyone state where it was said that the S.S. Tidal was created in the 1990s?

I need to know because the article said it was created in that time period, and yet I don't really recall the games even stating that it was created in the 1990s (In fact, I don't even recall it even mentioning the date of when it was created at all).

Don't forget to sign your comment with four tildes ~~~~. On to the subject i agree there is no mention of when it was built nor is there mention of its age and assume its age from the release date. So Any suggestions on what to do with it? Pterodactal 07:00, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I seem to recall the ship was under construction during the journey portion of R/S/E. Bardock 12:33, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I created it. Sorry. But we could leave it as it is. K.J.Boring 11:31, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Generation III

It should be sometime BEFORE Generation II and AFTER Generation I because Generation II states that STEEL is a NEWLY discovered type, and Generation III has steel types...File:Ani475MS.gif Agent #448 ^{☆ | ♥}File:Ani282MS.gifThis will put you off eating for life! 12:30, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Here's how the Generations go in chronological order (This isn't merely fanon, it is supported by evidence from the various canons.)

Generation I→Generation III→→→Generation II→Generation IV

→=short time in betweeen
→→→=long time in between

File:164sMS.pngShiny^?! 13:22, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

This really puzzles me - I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just confused by this: how exactly are Generations in that order? I don't even understand how Generations I and II could have their timelines connected with III and IV... Ie: what is the canonical proof for this? (not because I'd doubt it - rather I'd love to know it, please) Sipulichu 20:51, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that Steel is newly DISCOVERED type. It's just newly classified type out of those we actually had (the Steel Pokémon could be identified as Rock Pokémon before). The text in game may be mistranslated, since American Pokémon media loves to give us a shit about "new" Pokémon. --Maxim 13:26, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Moon Stone

What about "The Moon Stone"? Of Clefairy and the Moon Stone:

"Seymour theorizes this is because both the Pokémon came from outer space, and the Moon Stone was their spacecraft - which means the Stone belongs to the Pokémon, and the humans must leave it alone."

Mateussf 21:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

That was only in the animé. As far as I know, the whole "Pokémon came from outer-space" thing was never mentioned in any game.--Pokencyclopedia 23:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Except for MAYBE Deoxys and the Clefairy family

~~Weedle McHairybug~~

How about Jirachi? Comet=Outer Space --Theryguy512 18:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

thanks for pointing him out, Theryguy512. ~~Weedle McHairybug~~

IIRC there is an NPC in the Space Center that mentions the theory in Generation III. I believe I've also seen this mentioned in other games, though I may be mistaken. Vekter 15:43, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Lunatone and Solrock appearantly came from outer space as well. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 14:40, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Where did the bird trio go? Sinnoh.

Look at this, the legendary bird trio ( Articuno, Zapdos, Moltres ) is revealed to roam Sinnoh in Pokémon Platnum. These three, are missing in the GSC games (they can't be found in Kanto). So, they might have flown to Sinnoh. K.J.Boring 04:55, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Maybe if someone actually says that in-game. Otherwise, it's speculation.--Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 05:03, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

No one says that those are the same birds though. The Frontier brains afterall have legendary birds aswell.

Forgot to sign name--Outrage DD 23:26, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

In the anime as well, it's shown that there are multiple versions of legendaries (even in the same frame, a mother and baby Lugia come to mind). ←{Berrymaster|Talk|Contrib}→ 23:28, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Clean-Up, Please?

Going through this article, all I see is fan speculation and unusual conclusions. I for one would like to see some evidence of these claims, as many of them see totally made-up. For example: What connection to Kyogre and Manaphy have? And "herds" of Latios and Latias? As far as I remember, it's one for each player. I wouldn't say there were "herds" of Mewtwo, would you? Me, Hurray! 03:05, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually, the "Herds" of Latios and Latias was stated in the Pokedex Entries of Latios and Latias. Don't believe me? Try looking at the pokedex portion of their article. Weedle Mchairybug 03:12, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Kyogre and Manaphy were both in Ranger of The Sea Temple ( i think thats what it was called)DCM_{((Shut the **** upSpy on My Edits))}

Mewtwo is the only successful clone (attempted by humans) of a Pokémon as far as we know. And we're 100% certain that he's the only Mewtwo out there. R.A. Hunter B. 03:25, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

And in the case of the games, it's also the only cloned pokemon, Period [even then, lab notes hinted that it wasn't even a clone {the whole "Mew Gave Birth" thing comes to mind}.] Weedle Mchairybug 00:17, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, okay, but I still think these should be referenced in the article. It is still true that most of the article is mere specualtion, however. Me, Hurray! 04:32, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I doubt that half of it is speculation. Most of it is from the games. Yeah, some of it is guessing for the dates, but that is why they have a large number of years separating the different sections, as the games don't give specific dates, except for that Arceus created the Pokémon universe. R.A. Hunter B. 17:15, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Because everything mentioned in the games is meant to be taken literally. Yes. I see it now. Silly me.Me, Hurray! 20:41, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry. I didn't mean for it to seem like that. When things are typed, they always sound different in the mind of somebody else. R.A. Hunter B. 00:16, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I strayed away from the point. My only problem is that there is no evidence and there are no citations in the artical. It's alright pointing things out here in the talk page, but if there's no evidence in the artical itself then I don't think it meets certain standards. I'm really just requesting evidence.

We can't really cite the games, which is why there aren't any citations at the moment. R.A. Hunter B. 21:22, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

You can sorta cite the games. Who to talk to and where to see what's said. TTEchidna 04:14, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

True. But I think the citing that Me, Hurray is talking about is links and stuff. Or at least very specific descriptions of where they come from. Links we can't do for games, but yeah, I guess it would take some time, but we could find all of the people who tell us the random info. R.A. Hunter B. 04:20, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Mentioning who gives the information in-game sounds like a satasfactory measure to me. at least then the information can be varified and proven correct. Me, Hurray! 16:46, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Rotom

it is never said that Rotom was made in the 70's, infact I taught Pluto discovered it in the 50's, so I think we should leave it blank until Platinum's out in english Ultamate_Charizard 16:49, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I only knew he discovered it. In his youth. I didn't know there was a date involved. R.A. Hunter B. 22:25, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I still don't get who put that in, I mean it would be diffrent it was ever said but I looked Rotom's page and it didn't say anything Ultamate_Charizard

All you have to do is go through the editing history. R.A. Hunter B. 20:31, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Multiple Mew!?

Alright, who said that Mew were plentiful soon after the creation of the Pokémon world? And how does anyone know that this Mew is different from that Mew? It could just be a different voice actor. パルキアJosh 23:23, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

• Ok, about the reason why Mew from Mewtwo Strikes Back being different from the Mew from Lucario and the Mystery of Mew, it's for a couple of reasons. Yes, the voice doesn't necessarily mean much, however, MSB's Mew's Japanese VA was definitely in the 8th Movie as he (she? I don't really know the VA's gender) was the one who voiced Sir Aaron in that Movie. I mean, why would they give Mew a different VA (assuming that it IS the same one) if it's original VA is still very much available? Plus, the one from Movie 1 was very far from Kanto, and If this were the same mew, it would spend most of it's time inside of a Lake/Jungle than in a deciduous forest with a Tree-like Rock formation, not to mention that MSB's Mew lives a considerably far distance from Kanto, or heck, any of the regions that have been seen thus far, while LatMoM's Mew was located, if not in Kanto, then just barely beyond the border. As for the multiple parts, I'm guessing the fossilized remains of a Mew, as well as it being a genetic ancestor to every pokemon seems to answer that question.) Weedle Mchairybug 23:36, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Don't forget that the first Mew was seen to be sleeping underwater, possibly for a long time, untill Mewtwo unleashed his power on the world, creating storms and kidnapping the Nurse Joy of the city. The most recent Mew, was seen to have been connected to the Tree of Beginning, so it should be assumed Mew can't be away from it for long periods of time (longer than seen in the movie). And it and the Tree are so closely connected, when Mew would be damaged in the first movie, the Tree would also sustain damage. And the first Mew is also living in the Johto area, not Kanto. R.A. Hunter B. 21:54, 10 December 2008 (UTC) Mew is the ancestor of all life. A being cannot breed with itself. Thus-multiple Mews-Mtn_Otter

Lugia did what?

Who ever said Lugia actually created the 3 birds? just because it's the master trio doesn't mean it created them. --いぬみみ 23:42, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Well........now thats up to interpretation. I say noDCM_{((曲奇饼妖怪Spy on My Edits))}

I agree. It doesn't say anywhere that he created them. It just says that a Lugia has the power to destroy (Pokédex entries) or save the world (movie), depending on the situation. It only has control over the birds and their powers, and I think they only obey him out of respect for a higher being. R.A. Hunter B. 16:13, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup!

This article is really very well done as it sums up everything so those supposed continuity errors are straingtened out (such as the "Which came first? Arceus or Mew?" paradox). But I really think it needs a cleanup. All it has are random dot points on Pokemon that aren't related. Clean it up! Also, fan assumptions should be excluded! It's annoying to see speculation assumed as fact. Bttsstewart 15:30, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, we've been trying to do that for a while. And if you want it cleaned up, then don't just tell people to do it. You need to do something too. R.A. Hunter B. 16:10, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

There really isn't a paradox concerning Arceus and Mew. It is believed (according to Dex entries) that Mew is the ancestor of Pokémon, but it clearly states in the DPPt origin story that Arceus was born before every other Pokémon (before the universem even). Arceus created Mew, ta-dah! And like R.A. Hunter B. said, you can't just tell people to do things you want done. LordArceus 16:12, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I've had an interesting theory, which could solve the Arceus/Mew paradox. Arceus may have created the universe, but what if Mew came around before the universe was created, and Arceus sort of descended from it? Also, Mew is the ANSCESTOR of all Pokémon, not necassarily their creator. So if Arceus created Dialga and Palkia and the Lake Trio, then they are still anscestors of Mew, because Arceus is.

Please remember to sign comments. I realise that there's no Mew/Arceus paradox, not really. I just mean this article can definitively solve the arguing. (I've seen A LOT of arguing on the subject.) Bttsstewart 14:33, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

To answer above from Rocket Admin Hunter Blade & LordArceus): I didn't think I was 'qualified' enough to contribute to the cleanup. I though you sort of had to be in the webiste 'inner ring'. Haha. I guess that's silly. I've just had a look and I think it's fine as it is. It's just the allignment of the dot points that's a little dodgy. Bttsstewart 14:42, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

The only "qualification" you need, is the ability to not get carried away and screw everything up. Other than that, you should be able to do a lot, such as grammar mistakes, spelling, punctuation, and moving text to the correct sections. R.A. Hunter B. 22:11, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Celebi, Jirachi and Shaymin

Where did the "theory" come around supposing that Celebi, Jirachi and Shaymin were all born at the same time, and after the invention of the Unown writing system? There's no evidence to support this, so why even include it? Taromon777 22:55, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Pictures

I think it would improve this article a great deal of some pictures were included. It would give people more of an idea of what they were reading about. If anyone has any pictures of ancient Sinnoh region tapestries, or anything similar, be sure to add it to the article! Taromon777 22:55, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Kyogre Problem

How could Kyogre have expanded the sea with the help of Manaphy and Lugia when it went to sleep millions of years before, and wasn't woken up again until the events of Generation III? I think that, considering the fact that the Pokémon world is very similar to our own, the sea was probably created the same way that Earth's sea was, and that the theory of it being created by Pokémon is simply a legend. There is definately no archaelogical evidence that it was expanded by Pokémon! Maybe, until we are certain, we shouldn't mention how the sea was created like it is fact. Taromon777 22:55, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Please sign your edits. R.A. Hunter B. 19:39, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

This is all based off Dex entries and such. Kyogre created the oceans, not Manaphy or LugiaDCM_{((曲奇饼妖怪Spy on My Edits))}

Writing System

The article claims that the first writing system was created 1500 years before Generation 1. If this is based on present time, the first writing system was created in 500 AD. I haven't done any research yet, but I'm just noting that in our world, writing was created in about 2500 BC (Egyptians). This would be 4500 years before the present. Firemaker 23:29, 3 January 2009 (UTC) Also the information about the pokemon (Mamoswine, Farfetch'd, Magikarp); is that true? Firemaker 23:29, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Writing first came about around 3400-3000 BC. It's still disputed wether Egypt or Mesopotamia had the oldest writing system. And for your second question, yes. Mamoswine are based off of woolly mammoths, so their history is almost the same as in our world. Farfetch'd have been mentioned somewhere, for their history, but I can't remember. And then Magikarp are the easiest. Many of their TCG Pokédex info boxes talk about it. R.A. Hunter B. 23:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Gigas?

Didn't IT make the three, not humans? TTEchidna 08:16, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

It says that? I haven't been paying attention then... They came around naturally, so nobody really created them, not even Regigigas. Although Platinum DOES say he did, the problem is that the Pt. Dex entry goes against what the Gen. III Dex entries say. R.A. Hunter B. 18:48, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I think it says in the Gen III Pokédex entries that humans created the first three Regis. Regigigas, on the other hand, came into being naturally, and helped to shape the continents. That's what I always though anyway. Taromon777 19:55, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I read that Gigas did the continents, but it became too strong so humans made the Regis and used them as keys to seal it away. Of course, that may have come from this site.... — THE TROM — 08:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

That's the thing... most of the stuff on Bulba is from other things here... but in this case, it's hard to decide. Because how can it control the Regis if they were made by humans? Either mind control because they're so similar, or the humans made three original Regis, and then Gigas made more. R.A. Hunter Blade 23:16, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Prehistory and Recent History

I personally think this article needs to be either fixed up, deleted, or at least protected, especially the Prehistory and Recent History sections. I mean, at least part of those sections are true, but the rest of it is rubbish. Who ever said the Regis were made in their respective ages? Part of it has nothing to do with Pokémon: why is Apollo 11 even in here? I just want your opinion. Leafstorm151 18:26, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Because. The Pokémon world has some things tied in with ours. And in the Gen I games and their remakes, a guy talks about buying a color TV just to see Neil Armstrong land on the moon. And the Regis is most likely speculation, but at the same time not. R.A. Hunter Blade 19:02, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Regis were made by Gigas then Gigas was sealed and the Regis got exported to Hoenn to keep them away. TTEchidna 00:50, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

What about Damos?

It is stated that Arceus "FIRST" fall into never ending sleep BEFORE the first humans appeared ehh...but in the case of Movie12 Arceus meets Damos, a human, what about that?.....I mean that the first humans appeared after Arceus fall into never ending sleep then....i think we should change that section..."☆AngelGuardian☆" 07:33, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Speculation=no. Until we see movie 12 nothing gets added.--RexRacer 07:35, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

So you mean that whole story of Movie12, of Damos or whatever happens was all because of manga? i mean you get all the information on manga?"☆AngelGuardian☆" 07:40, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Until Movie 12 gets released there can still be doubts. Just wait. I'm sure everything will be explained in time. TTEchidna 07:44, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Arceus, as the creator of the space-time continuum, could logically travel through time in a manner similar it Celibi or Dialga. Also Arceus may have created clones of itself to manage the world while it is asleep.-Mtn_otter

Whats with the Humans land on the moon

Is this Just for fun, because it has no relation with pokemon at all... ---> 223☆Dåv]d 12:29, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

If you've EVER played R/B/Y, or FRLG, you'd know. An old guy in the Pewter Museum of Science mentions getting a color TV just for that moment. R.A. Hunter Blade 16:24, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

oh.... never played anything other than gen 4 :P ---> 223☆Dåv]d 02:30, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Well then, now you know. R.A. Hunter Blade 02:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Pictures!

I just added some pictures to the article, relevant to each era in the history of the Pokémon World. It makes it look a lot more interesting, don't you think? Taromon777 17:58, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Leaf

Shouldn't we remove Leaf from the article? HG/SS proves that Red's story is the canon one, and Leaf doesn't exist in Red's continuity because she never appeared during his quest. - Crystal Master

Absolutely not, unless we also remove Kris due to non-interaction with Gold in Crystal. And we're not removing Kris. Just because Leaf doesn't appear in HeartGold and SoulSilver doesn't mean we should treat Leaf as if she never existed. --Shiningpikablu252 20:04, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

I left Kris there just in case that for whatever reason you consider Pokémon Crystal to be canon rather than the remakes (which would still mean the Leaf isn't part of continuity).

And even if you're going to assume that Leaf existed somewhere, the article is still wrong because she can't have had the same story she had in FR/LG. That would mean that both Red and Leaf had the same mom, the same house, the same rival and the same events within the same continuity, which makes no sense. If she was part of continuity, she would have a different role from Red's, like May and Dawn had in Brendan and Lucas' respective stories. Moreover, the article states that she defeated Green/Blue in the Pokémon League and became the new champion, which can't have happened, considering that Blue/Green states in HG/SS that the trainer who defeated him shortly after he became champion was Red, not Leaf.

Lastly, the article should be about writing what we know that happened, not what might have happened. We know that Red's story is canon and Leaf's isn't, as they can't both happen in the same continuity. Therefore, we know that Leaf never appeared in continuity. That there's a Leaf somewhere in the established continuity is unfounded speculation, no matter how much some people want her to be part of it. - Crystal Master

There are absolutely no acceptable grounds in removing all references to Leaf from the article. By removing parts from the article, you're trying to imply Leaf never existed to begin with, and for that to be true, FireRed/LeafGreen would have to have had only a male player character. Either that or there would have to have been no FireRed/LeafGreen (and if that were to be the case, there would be no HeartGold/SoulSilver either).

Those parts from the article you're trying to have removed in no way imply Leaf exists in HeartGold/SoulSilver; to have any area of the article imply any involvement from Leaf in HeartGold/SoulSilver, Leaf would have to be mentioned in one of the sections further below, and last I saw, there weren't any such mentions.

In conclusion: Leaf exists, and she always will. The fact HeartGold/SoulSilver doesn't mention her does not change that. Where Leaf is already mentioned, she should be. Where Leaf shouldn't be mentioned, she's already not. Trying to erase all traces of her existence from the article is akin to vandalism. --Shiningpikablu252 23:58, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh, ok. So you weren't saying that there was a Leaf somewhere in the HG/SS timeline. My bad.

Anyway, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this article about the timeline of the Pokémon world? Isn't it about making a recollection of the canonical events in the established continuity and making it the less ambiguous possible (ie: saying that "Brendan/May" became the Hoenn champion only because we don't have confirmation about which story is the canonical one, which is different from the case in FR/LG)?

Also, I thought that the most recent games that rewrite history take priority over the older ones. In the RSE section we say that the player calmed down Groudon and Kyogre with Rayquaza's help (as depicted in Emerald), not that s/he "stopped Groudon/Kyogre" (as depicted in Ruby and Sapphire respectively), because we use the most recent rewrite of the RSE story, Emerald, as canon. Likewise, shouldn't the GS remakes, which established that Red's story happened in the timeline but Leaf's didn't, take priority over FR/LG (as HG/SS are the most recent games)?

Edit: I'm not saying that Leaf doesn't exist. I'm saying that she doesn't exist in the continuity established by the overall timeline (if you believe HGSS or GSC), which I think this article is supposed to be about. - Crystal Master

Perhaps instead of rewording the article to not mention Leaf, we reword the Gen III section to be ambiguous as to it's version:

"After defeating Hoenn's eight Gym Leaders and, with the help of Steven and Wallace, calming Groudon and/or Kyogre after they are awakened by Team Magma/Team Aqua, respectively, he/she...."

AFAIK, Platinum's story is different from Pearl and Diamond, yet no mention of Giratina is made. Just keep the version ambiguous. Drake Clawfang 03:07, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Drop me some drafts and I might consider it. I'd really want the text to securely take all player bases into consideration yet not allow possible relentless editing to try to make it look like one player base never existed in the canon. --Shiningpikablu252 03:19, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

There's a draft right there, just replace the one sentence. Drake Clawfang 03:24, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Protection?!

Thanks a lot! I've been working really hard on improving this article over the last few months and now it's been protected! What is the reasoning behind this? --Taromon777 20:21, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Ever think about checking? R.A. Hunter Blade 22:25, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Page now unlocked as both parties in the edit war reached a truce. —darklordtrom 22:27, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Yay, I can edit again now, thanks! Sorry if I came across a bit impolite before. --Taromon777 10:24, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Colosseum and XD

how do we know it takes place 2 years after Gen 2 and 4?--Midnight Blue 18:33, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Not quite. According to the page, Colosseum takes place sometime between Generation I/III and II/IV, which makes sense, and then XD is supposed to be set quite a few years from Colosseum, although I don't know how we got "two years after Gen IV" specifically. ZestyCactus 19:04, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok, thanx. I just thought someone just put that there without proof.--Midnight Blue 19:16, 8 November 2009 (UTC)