Talk:Brock

Special images

Okay, for both Brock and the other Gym Leaders - are there any images out there of them in the Special manga we could use that aren't blatantly taken from Serebii? If for no other reason than they were made to look good on a dark gray background, not a white one? --Pie 12:44, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Harrison?

Now, of course, we know that Eric Stuart has confirmed that this is his name, but it still doesn't feel right to be up in the infobox and all. Maybe it's just me. I dunno. Pie? You're the Brock expert here. TTEchidna 09:32, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

As I see it, it's only Harrison in the anime and we dont even know if PUSA recognise that. It should be mentioned but I don't think it should be in the title. --FabuVinny ^T-C-S 10:38, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I really don't think we need it in the article. Maybe under Trivia, but definitely not in the infobox. Besides, are we sure Eric Stuart knew what he was talking about when he made that statement? --PAK Man ^Talk 15:44, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't like the fact that we mention his surname. It was never mentioned in the anime. Also why is this okay to mention what Eric Stuart says when it's not okay to say that Mayumi Iizuka (Misty's Japanese VA) said that Misty would return to the series? So we're allowed to go on what a voice actor said in this case but not for the other? In my opinion this is way worse. The Iizuka thing was put in Misty's trivia section however this is being displayed in the infobox. Note that Iizuka's comments were removed from Misty's trivia because they were not credible enough. Conclusion: We should not put on our pages what voice actors have said. However, things like that should be mentioned in the trivia section. --☆ケンジガール 03:40, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Age

Sooo...even though he was that age as of his debut, is he older, or still 15?

We don't know. He probably is. But as Pie said, there's this eternal youth going on in the anime where the characters don't age. --☆ケンジガール 03:40, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

The "At Pewter Gym" section

What is Shiny Noctowl thinking by saying "800px looks better"? That section's table is way too wide at 800px! Horizontial scrolling is practically necessary to see the whole table at 800px. There is no way 800px can be considered better than 600px--you basically need the best of monitors to support a resolution where 800px looks good!

How can I get the table to look good in a 600px setting? Please do not suggest leaving it at 800px, as having it at 800px is a bad thing. --Shiningpikablu252 03:13, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Proposal of splitting the article

I've noticed here on the Bulbapedia, other major characters of the anime such as Ash, May and Dawn all have seperate articles from their video game counterparts, unlike Misty and Brock. I was thinking that in order to potentially improve consistancy of the articles, that we could split off seperate articles for Misty and Brock's anime incarnations like what is currently in place for Ash, May and Dawn. Thoughts? Like the idea? Hate the idea? Don't care either way? Sato 15:34, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, Brock and Misty do have huge, and I mean huge articles. But splitting them off into anime/games, then where'd Special go? Would we split Special off of all of the Gym Leaders? Would it go with the game one, because, you know, May and Dawn also have their Special counterparts in Sapphire and Berlitz... That's the problem with the consistency; what exactly should we be consistent with? May's anime and game counterparts are distinct, as one's a player character/rival that can have a pretty variant amount of Pokémon, another's this contest-crazy girl with a Blaziken, and the third is doing the complete opposite of the anime one and challenging Gyms. I get where you're coming from, but the biggest problem is maintaining the consistency between all of the Gym Leaders, too. We'd have a ton more complaints than we already do about the parentheticals if we extended them to commonly-known characters like the Gym Leaders... especially if we were to do so to Wallace and Janine, who didn't even appear in the anime, for consistency.

But I dunno. What's everyone else think, anyway? To me, Brock's Brock, Misty's Misty, in every iteration, unlike May, Ash, and Dawn. Red's silent as night, Ash won't stop screaming at a Mankey for his hat. Sure, they know different people, but hey, if Brock and Misty get divided among their similar counterparts, jeez, Koga's certainly going to need to be divided among his crazy ninja, evil Team Rocket member, and trap-setting Poison guy selves. And Lance... hoo, that guy's different in each iteration. TTEchidna 16:05, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Why not just split 'em because of size, not because of incarnation? Split the ones that are big enough to require it and leave alone the rest. No need to split all the gym leaders if not all of them need splitting.

As for where the mangas would go... whichever ends smaller out of Brock (anime) and Brock (games), I suppose. Cassius335 16:45, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

No, please, God, no! Characters like Ash, May and Dawn have separate articles because they are considered as different characters from their game counterparts (this applies to all playable characters). Characters such as Brock and Misty are just adaptations of the same characters in different canons. Everyone who thinks that Red and Ash, Blue and Gary etc. are all the same character is a N00B! Read the Inter-media counterparts article for further explanation. --Maxim 16:51, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Bingo. Plus, don't forget, the manga adaptations of Brock and Misty are just as different from the game versions and the anime versions as the game and anime versions are from each other... If there'd be any splitting, then we'd be splitting into three... for each and every one of the Gym Leaders. TTEchidna 20:58, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, I wouldn't really consider splitting articles to be a problem with the other Gym Leaders, since the majority of them are only around for anywhere between 1-5 episodes of the anime usually, making them only slightly more notable than characters of the day, while Misty and Brock both have well over 200 episodes under their belt. As for manga incarnations, Pokemon Special information should remain with the game version's article and Electric Tale of Pikachu information should go with the anime version's article, since those are the original canons that the manga are based upon. The only reason I suggested it is because Misty and Brock are both highly important characters in the anime, who could easily have a whole article based on their anime version alone. Sato 02:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

And you also suggested that you know nothing about Pokémon canon. The only thing that annoys me in big articles is Trivia Sections made of stupid trivia bits. I think it's the ONLY thing which should be changed in articles. --Maxim 14:28, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

And... How exactly did I suggest that I know nothing about Pokémon canon? Sure, Misty and Brock's anime incarnations are adaptations of their game personas. However, despite being considered a different character, Ash is still an adaptation of the character Red. How does acknowledging the fact that Pokémon has many seperate unrelated canons insinuate that I don't know anything about Pokémon canon? I ignored your last comment about being a "N00B", simply because it was irrelevant. However I only made a mere suggestion, I didn't say "We should split off new articles" I said "Should we split off new articles?". You're entitled to your opinion that the articles shouldn't be split, however directly insulting people calling them "N00B"s and saying they "know nothing" is extremely rude and childish. I'm here at Bulbapedia as I see it as a good source of information worth working on and improving, NOT to be insulted. I'm not going out of my way to insult you, so don't you insult me. Thank you very much. Sato 01:27, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

You know, Maxim, you are getting dangerously close to trolling here. Would you please chill out so the rest of us can have an intellegent conversation?

Anyway, I personally don't care if anime Misty/Brock and game Misty/Brock are the same character or not. Split 'em already and lets see what it looks like. It can always be reverted if it isn't working, right? Cassius335 09:59, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

They are fine NOT SPLIT!!!! We don't need to split them, It's is fine as one big article. --File:Spr 3e 059.gifFile:Spr 3e 132.gifTheryguy512 File:Trozeiani025.gif 11:49, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Big articles are good in a sense but it is better to split them. Because Brock in the anime and Brock in the games have a lot of different information which I don't think is good in just one article. And its also much easier for anyone visiting Bulbapedia.

If May can get two different articles why not Brock? File:Ani254MS.gifJmathTalkFile:Ani448MS.gif 13:24, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

WARNING: This page is 33 kilobytes long; some browsers may have problems editing pages approaching or longer than 32kb. Please consider breaking the page into smaller sections.

That is pretty much the main reason to split the article. Misty's article isn't at this stage yet. --FabuVinny ^T-C-S 13:52, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

But that's only because of those freakin' templates and images. --Maxim 15:12, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

The images and templates are needed for the article. File:Ani254MS.gifJmathTalkFile:Ani448MS.gif 15:32, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Thing is... we'd have to change them 04824143194104712 links to Brock, if we did split it.. but then again, editing this page out of the 'edit this page' tab instead of some sections at a time... whoa, that'd be one HUGE code. But it seems just good as one article, but at the same time I think we should spilt it. (Speaking of Brock, I have Art Brock... :c) User:TinaTheKirlia/Sig 16:22, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Should the issue be put to a vote, similar to the James's Cacnea issue?--PikamasterADV 19:07, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure that's a good idea. Remember how Shiny Noctowl kept trying to skew the James's Cacnea poll in Gardenia's favor? How are we to know similar stunts wouldn't happen in this case? --Shiningpikablu252 19:09, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Because Shiny Noctowl is blocked for the next week. ;)

Seriously, coming to a consensus on the talk pages is preferable to creating lots of polls. And the fact that this particular article is too long means that a split is simply necessary so the only question is how to do it. Sure, there are a lot of links to this page but a bot can help cut down a lot of the work. --FabuVinny ^T-C-S 20:23, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah, that's right. Bots. In that case... I say spilt the article.. User:TinaTheKirlia/Sig 20:28, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Please don't split it! There's no need to! If we split this one, does that mean will have to split EVERY SINGLE Pokémon's, move's and character's in the anime section, too??? --File:Spr 3e 059.gifFile:Spr 3e 132.gifTheryguy512 File:Trozeiani025.gif 21:26, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Of course not. This article is being split because it is too long. Using this to set that kind of precedent would be completely stupid. --FabuVinny ^T-C-S 22:01, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, and also, every single Pokémon, move and character aren't notable enough in the anime to have their own articles anyway. The main reason I suggested it for Misty and Brock is because they are highly notable in the anime, with Misty being a main character for over 200 episodes and Brock being a main character for over 400 episodes. A lot of Pokémon, characters and moves (Eg. Lt. Surge and Porygon) only appeared in one episode, making their anime anime apperances nowhere near notable enough to have their own seperate articles. Sato 10:53, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Then split it shall be. But...I don't have the power for that. I didn't even realise there was san argument about this. My Reasons:

1. Yes, Brock (the article) is too large.
2. The rest are more or less like the other's reasons.
3. Lastly, it's Payback to Ryguy for callingm e Opitmus and not doing anything about it...

Haha, yes...User:Optimus35/sig 11:06, 2 December 2007 (UTC) So which bot?