Talk:List of Pokémon

Do glitches count like Pokemon? I think not, therefore I think we should take the Glitch list out. Gambler 01:41, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

If we had a separare article for an actual list of glitch Pokémon, and not just glitches, we should use that... It is a valid resource, some people might want a list of glitch Pokémon. And it's one of the few not on the template itself. Tom Temprotran 05:47, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Not convinced. Glithes are not Pokemon, they are just that, glithes. If a person is looking for glitches they can type the word and look at them, but people looking for actual pokemon may think that glitches can be used to fight, trade or anything that we know they don't do if they find the link from the actual "List of Pokémon" page. Gambler 06:27, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Eh, well, in RB they could technically be. Not really now. I dunno. Remove it, I guess. Tom Temprotran 07:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Sortable

Should we perhaps use the sortable table type to merge all of these into a few articles? We could have:

• by name (English, Japanese, German, French, and Korean)
• by number (Kanto/National, Johto, Hoenn, Fiore, and Sinnoh)
• by index number (all 4 generations)
• by physical attributes (color, weight, height, and habitat)
• stats (base stats, catch rate, EVs, gender, and species)

It may seem silly, but I love being able to organize and sort things. Tell me what you all think. It could save bandwidth. And if it seems tedious, I'd be willing to do it all :P MK 08:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, it'd become ridiculously hard to add new Pokédexes... And the index number doesn't include some, the same as the regional dexes and Browser. (You know, as Sinnoh only has the 151, Kanto as well, Johto the 251, Hoenn the 202, and the Browser 213. By name, well, since we have the non-English name ones technically being in National Dex order... eh. Weight and height might be able to fit in with each other, but only if you could get it to recognize that 1'11" is smaller than 2'0". The base stats are hard enough together, it'd be crazy to put in their gender ratios, species, and all of that, too.

We can't consolidate them all into a tiny box. This isn't Senor Cardgage Mortgage. And I dunno just how much it'd save bandwidth. If anything, the whole page would take longer to load than the individual ones, and it'd mess up the Pokémon infobox.

Though if you wanted to go ahead and organize a list of Pokémon by type... Tom Temprotran 11:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I didn't mean to make it all one big list, that'd be insane. I'll sandbox some stuff to see if it works. MK 22:41, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

If you need the info it is all in my userpage. Just edit what you need, that's what I'm doing for most of the lists. In fact I have most of the list ready in my drive, I'm just waiting for official names of the new PKMN. Gambler 01:00, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Type

LIST OF POKéMON BY TYPE!! Sorry But I Have To Say That This a Key Sorting That Has Been Missed!. Tesh 19:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. I suppose it'd be a good idea. But then, how, exactly, would we list them? We do have separate lists for Pokémon of each type on the pages for the individual types... Anyone else think that they should be on an all-encompassing type page as well? TTEchidna 04:48, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

In the Pokédex, there is an option that allows Pokemon to be sorted via type. The order goes like this: First Type:

• Normal
• Normal/Flying*
• Fighting
• Poison
• Ground
• Rock
• Bug
• Ghost
• Fire
• Water
• Grass
• Electric
• Psychic
• Ice
• Dragon
• Dark
• Note that a secondary Flying-type goes afer the pure first type.

Tesh 12:43, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Well still, it's a good idea in theory, but then how would we order the secondary types? I mean, I imagine we could order it like what was done in FRLG... but eh. We'll see is all I can say. TTEchidna 02:24, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Sure we can. We do the sort of thing that is done here (without the nonexistant types) Gligar 19:21, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

It probably needs a different layout with the names of the Pokémon, but here's my proposal, List of Pokémon by type. Gligar 17:13, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

By the way, TTEchidna, LOPBG is overdue for the mainspace. You just have to make a template off of the subpage template and then find+replace User:TTEchidna/LOPBG/Template with the new template name in Word or NotePad. Gligar 17:13, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

List of Pokemon by evolution method

Just an idea. Gligar 17:40, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Planning. TTEchidna 19:49, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Orre dex

Should there by a list of the Orre's Pokedex-like listing (the Strategy Memo) which is basically "List of Pokemon by name" excluding Generation IV Pokémon. Just an idea. Gligar 19:21, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Eh, no. That'd be dumb. Alphabetically alone is fine, if people don't recognize a Pokémon that's Gen IV... Hrm. If we really really need to I'd say color-coding by generation would be better, but discussing the colors used here would be better to do first. TTEchidna 19:50, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

That's simple. Each Generation has its respective color used here. And the color-coding by generation could expand to other lists. One last thing: Should "Odex" redirect to "Pokelist by name" or "Strategy Memo"?Gligar 22:18, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

List of Pokémon Availible by region?

Since this is sometimes different than the Pokémon in the regional dex, and always different than the Pokémon in the national dex, should we have this? And if we do, should we have Kanto (and later Johto?) discriminate by Generation? The Dark Fiddler - 10% Satisfaction Guaranteed! 01:02, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Pokémon by habitat?

Why isn't the Pokémon by habitat list included on here? It could go under a Gen III heading, or just as a special. NikNaks 12:13, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Gen IV Pokémon would cause problems. ^tc²₆tc₂₆ 12:22, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't see why it would. The point is already made at the top of that page anyway. NikNaks 14:49, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

If anyone's interested, I made a version of said list with the Sinnoh pokémon added. Some page numbers are off, but otherwise I'm pretty happy with it. Obviously, I may have made some mistakes, or suggestions for better groupings might be suggested, and I'm open to criticism. Here's the list. NikNaks 20:54, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Pokemon by...

I think we should have a list of Pokemon that can't learn any TM/HMs. Comments?--Gou 06:21, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Every Pokémon (with the exception of Magikarp, Caterpie, Weedle, Kakuna, Metapod, Wurmple, Cascoon, Silcoon and Feebas) can learn any HM/TM's--ForceFire 06:25, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

There's also Unown, Wobbuffet, Wynaut. Also, Feebas can learns TMs. But that's not the point. It is a characteristic exclusive to certain Pokemon, and I believe that it merits a list/artice.--Gou 16:06, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Too small for an article. Just right for a section. —darklordtrom 22:58, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

We need a lsit of Pokemon in Spanish

Since we now have the Spainsh language version, we are thinking of getting the list of Pokemon in Spanish. What do you think? Giratina Joe - Question Giratina Here- DO NOT DISTURB IT 10:17, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

A list of localized Spanish Pokémon names? As far as we can tell, the names of the Pokémon are the same in Spanish as they are in English; this is why List of Spanish Pokémon names redirects to List of Pokémon by National Pokédex number. Trust me, if the names were different in Spanish, there would have been a fully-compiled list of such names a long time ago. --Shiningpikablu252 16:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Pokémon by Inspiration

I few months ago, I saw a list of Pokémon sorted by real-life inspiration (e.g. dogs, parrots, cacti), but have not been able to find it since. I am not sure that it even was on this site, or possibly even, now that I think about it, real (I have very convincing dreams sometimes, but I don't think this was one of them). Does anyone know of this, or am I just making it up? Either way, I think it would be a nice addition to the site. Goldenpoke111 05:27, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

It was around, we decided it was a bad idea because people could disagree. TTEchidna 06:56, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

So I did see it here. Taking it off makes sense, though. Don't need edit wars on a page like that. However, if there is any way to get around arguments (maybe put some Pokémon in multiple "Disputed" subcategories, or place them by majority vote), I still think it would be nice to have. Goldenpoke111 17:06, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Seek and thou shalt find. —darklordtrom 07:22, 30 August 2009 (UTC)