Talk:Yveltal (Pokémon)

Time to Create

I think we have enough to go ahead and kick off the two legendary Pokémon pages. (Other being Xerneas.) CycloneGU (talk) 15:13, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Because we don't know the types these Pokémon will have yet, we will be holding back the creation of their articles for now. Knowing the type of a Pokémon is basic information, but a relevant one when creating an article (mainly because of {{PokémonInfobox}}). Masatoshi_talk 16:47, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Redirect

Before the pages get ready, can I make the redirect pages already? the ones with pokemon instead of Pokémon, e.g. Xerneas (pokemon) redirect to Xerneas (Pokémon).--Igor (talk) 16:02, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I personally see barely any point in creating redirects to an inexistent article. It will create false positives shown in the search bar, misleading a lot of people. I suggest you to wait until we actually create the article.

Evil?

It seems as if it's being pronounced "ee-vell-tall," and I don't want to speculate too much, but could the name possibly come from "evil" or something along those lines? --Zewis (29) 22:02, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

The name also seems to stem from the figure in Aztec myth named "Coatl." Or at least, that's what my mind went to when I first saw it's name. Coatl is often represented as a winged serpent not unlike the design of Yveltal. Zoraluigi (talk) 01:55, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

How about Weltall? Even though you hear about it from Xenogears, it's German for universe or space--a hint to its origins. Lennox (talk) 02:14, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

So in other words, we shouldn't do anything yet? --Zewis (29) 11:18, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I suppose we shouldn't. Time will tell, I suppose. --Zoraluigi (Talk) 16:52, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

How about "evil" + Quetzalcoatl? Yvel -> Evil, -tal -> -tl (from coatl). Tano (talk) 15:20, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

There's a definite Aztec vibe from this one. We'll just have to wait. Let's be reasonable and say it's a Flying type. Scarabola (talk) 19:27, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, I was talking about the name origin --Tano (talk) 14:45, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

"The mascot of Pokémon Y"?

...should we really be saying this right now? I know they're not the same games, but Black and White flipped things on us before. At the very least, this comment needs to be sourced if true; otherwise it should be left out. Starscream (talk) 13:52, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

The X and Y in the logos of the games are styled after Xerneas's horns and Yveltal wings. It's pretty obvious that they're going to be the mascots. - Blazios _talk 13:55, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

It was "pretty obvious" that Alomomola was the evolution of Luvdisc, but that turned out to be bunk, too. We shouldn't be making any assumptions about any of the Pokémon that have been revealed so far. It doesn't matter if they WILL be; there's been no announcement about it so far, so the information shouldn't be up yet. Starscream (talk) 02:34, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

• Starscream does have a point though, but they probably will end up being mascots at least. ----NateVirus(Talk|Contributions) 20:44, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

I feel like they wouldn't have released a game called "Pokémon Y," have one of the only five Pokémon in the promotional video clearly be a legendary, make it shaped like a giant Y, and later reveal its name to start with a Y, without it being the mascot. --Zewis (29) 03:38, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Zekrom and Reshiram seemingly traded what versions they should have been mascots for, recall. Game Freak's decisions won't always comply with expectation or common sense. No matter how obvious it seems to be, it is still not confirmed. On a similar note, we also shouldn't be assuming what bodytype category they'll go in, since that system could get retired anyway. yeyjordan 06:08, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Except they didn't. They were going for a Yin Yang theme. That's all. Ataro (talk) 07:15, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

well they released the new magazine, which seems to agree with the fact that Yveltal is in Pokemon Y and Xerneas is in Pokemon X Harrichan (talk) 8:00, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

The reason for flipping the Black and White colors was because of (probably to emphasise) the "Yin Yang" theme. Scarabola (talk) 19:29, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Really Ataro and Scarabola, REALLY? You guys still think Reshiram and Zekrom have to do anything with Yin and Yang? Don't you guys understand that Yin and Yang represent the balance of things which can't exist without eachother? And that ideals and truth can and will try to exist without eachother? Not anything that's Black and White has to represent Yin and Yang! I don't think we should make any assumption which is somehow derived from Zekrom and Reshiram representing Yin and Yang! So your argument is invalid. Nickvang (talk) 19:13, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

...are you serious? Dude, the Japanese games couldn't be more obvious in that regard short of the designers knocking on your door and shouting it in your face. Frugali (talk) 14:53, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Possible Future Trivia? Or Origin? Maybe, maybe not?

This maybe too soon or just plain stupid on my part but anyone noticed how Yveltal looks like a Y? I know it probably was what they were going after considering the game title, just didn't know if that was trivia-worthy or an origin-worthy note yet if not at all. ----NateVirus(Talk|Contributions) 20:44, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

I would say that something like that would probably be best in the physiology section or something. --It's Funktastic~! (talk) 20:47, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

I'd figured as much. But I guess that can be added later when we get more info on the game and/or the Pokémon itself. ----NateVirus(Talk|Contributions) 21:00, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh, let me try, maybe, maybe, Xerneas with spread legs looks like an X! Oh, and the X and Y in the logos have elements of Yveltal and Xerneas!! WOW!! Jokes aside, I agree with you when you say that this is going to be trivia, and let me add that it should be included design orogin/physiology and name origin. But, man, honestly, I believe that everyone who watched the direct 3 days ago noticed it. Tano (talk) 16:04, 11 January 2013

Official Art

We can probably replace the screenshot now that we have official Sugimori art. Official Art Zond (talk) 12:53, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

• That's the one cleaned by PokemonBattle.it. They also have Xerneas. The trivia should be fixed too, since Xerneas and Yveltal are confirmed to be also the Japanese names and they were revealed on French, German and Italian sites too at the same time, so they're not just the English names. Tano (talk) 14:44, 11 January 2013

• I cleaned it some more --Tano (talk) 20:59, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Name origin

I don't think wyvern is a likely origin—if it were pronounced "WAI-vel-tal" then maybe, but otherwise it is not similar in pronunciation or spelling (it shares "ve" with it). The Yv combination seems to be more common in French (e.g. Yvelines is the top suggestion on Wikipedia when typing Yv in the search box). I think the name may come from French rather than English, which is why we cannot find an apparent origin. --SnorlaxMonster 15:58, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Look above in the "Evil?" section. I agree with you however when you say that "wyvern" is not part of the name origin (but probably the origin of the concept for the design). Yveltal is pronunced in a Latin way, as French people or Italians would do, like "evil-tal", so I suggested it's probably "evil" + Quetzalcoatl? Yvel -> Evil, -tal -> -tl (from coatl), and then they added the "Y". Tano (talk) 16:04, 11 January 2013

Oh, I know that it is pronounced ee-VELL-tall (Pokémon tweeted the official pronunciation). However, I guess "evil" probably is a good origin, although I doubt it would be the only one with that spelling. I also agree that wyverns may have been part of the design influence, but not the name origin. --SnorlaxMonster 16:19, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I knew that tweet, but I think that "evil" pronunciation is similar enough, and I agree with you about "wyvern": the only thing they have in common (talking about the word) is the "y", wich is in "Yveltal" because of the concept. Well, we can't deny it's a wyvern (and I like that). Tano (talk) 16:21, 11 January 2013

I also think that the derivation from Quetzalcoatl (a mythological dragon) is more correct that the one from Quetzal (the little bird). "Evil" would be totally confirmed if it's part Dark type. Tano (talk) 17:24, 11 January 2013

How about guivre or vouivre? I'm not that familiar with French (or the actual pronunciation of wyvern*), so I can't say for sure. As for Quetzal, it's still a reference to its design, which features a long tail feather. Quetzalcoatl has a closer resemblance to a "feathered snake" than an actual bird. --超龍_「Chao」 16:34, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Going on pronunciation, they don't really fit. Those would be GWAAV-re and VWAAV-re (I think—it's been quite a few years since I studied French). They don't really fit on spelling either. --SnorlaxMonster 16:48, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Doing some research on the subject, Yvelines is a department in France and the Yvel is a river in France. Neither has a counterpart beginning with X as far as I can tell so far but the river in particular seems like a likely origin.--MisterE13 16:53, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Quetzalcoatl in ff8 is kinda Y shaped and it's derived from the mythological Quetzalcoatl, so that even a feathered snake can have this shape. Also the quetzal (the green bird) takes its name from the Quetzalcoatl, and with spread wings it's Y shaped, since it has a very long tail. And even if the river Yvel has almost the same name, I don't think that GameFreak knew about it. I guess it's just a coincidence. The name origin should contain elements with something to do with the Pokemon. Tano (talk) 16:61, 11 January 2013

Yvel and Yvelines are probably a coincidence. Quetzal isn't really derived from Quetzalcoatl. The word itself is Nahuatl for feather. Quetzalcoatl is more of a compound word that means "Feathered serpent", though I can see that it can count as design influence. --超龍_「Chao」 17:14, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Then please give it some dignity and replace Quetzal with Quetzalcoatl, lol. Why should it be named after a bird instead of a mythological bird-snake? Tano (talk) 17:21, 11 January 2013

The bird may be considered a coincidence, like the river. They have no purpose to use the Quetzal to make its name. The Quetzalcoatl at least is a mithological winged snake (=wyvern, in a western definition). Also you derived Xerneas' name from Cernunnos (horned Celtic god), even if they don't have much in common. I think that Yveltal should be derived from a god too (Quetzalcoatl is an Aztec god).

If the French pronunciation thing is true, I'm sure we're mostly aware that X and Y will take place in a land taking inspiration from France. Scarabola (talk) 19:40, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I think most likely, is that the name is based on the German word "Weltall" (pronounced vel-tall) which is the German translation for "universe". skypeia(talk) 11:53, 13 January 2013 (EST)

Origin

At the moment it contains "Yveltal is based on some kind of avian". Guys, it's based on a wyvern: bypedal, horns, claws on wings, etc. - unsigned comment from Tano (talk • contribs)

The reason I went for the ambiguous "avian" is that cultural depictions of wyverns vary drastically. Most depictions I've seen have them as "close cousins of dragons", but they are plenty where they just are dragons. If I go off of Wikipedia's definition "A wyvern is a legendary winged creature with a dragon's head, reptilian body, two legs (sometimes none), and a barbed tail." then the only condition Yveltal really fits is having no legs. Also, your link is broken (it may require logging in to view it or something). --SnorlaxMonster 17:25, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

According to my (too many) years of D&D, a wyvern is a creature similar to a dragon, but with no forelegs (or, in general, with just 2 legs), often with a poisonous claw on the tip of the tail, wich would fit Yveltal (except for the poison part, that we still don't know). About the broken pic, it probably external links, try with the page or this fanart (that is actually a trace/rip of the one I linked before). Tano (talk) 17:30, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Another wyvern. Tano (talk) 20:44, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I believe it's more based on a Roc. But that just be my obsession with Arabo-Persian mythos thinking. Scarabola (talk) 21:06, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

The Roc is a mythological bird, right? I believe it has bird wings, beak, plumage and it doesn't have a long tail with claws on it, or claws on its wings, or horns. Yveltal has horns, claws on wings, a long and strong tail with claws/spikes on it, no beak, no plumage (from the 3d render, that's skin, not plumage). It's simply a wyvern, that is also a fantasy creature. Can still have a mythological origin however, since its shape is similar to the quetsalcoatl, a winged-snake god, that is similar to a wyvern in some aspects, being a winged reptile with a long tail and "Y" shape (the only y-shaped god I can think about, also possible name origin). Tano (talk) 22:15, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Trivia

I feel like there is an error in the trivia for both of the Gen VI legendaries. The names were revealed internationally at the exact same time. Why does it say that it was revealed in English before Japan? Noah★ (talk) 18:35, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

The English names were revealed in the official site on January 8 whereas the Japanese names were revealed two days later in leaked CoroCoro scans.--電禅Den Zen 18:43, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Right. But the names are all the same. What was on the Japanese site on the 8th?Noah★ (talk) 18:58, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

There was no Japanese site on the 8th. There still isn't a Japanese site. ^★Jo the Marten^★ ಠ_ಠ♥ 19:01, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Alrighty. No arguments here Noah★ (talk) 19:04, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, to be honest there is still an error, since it's not the "English" name, but also the French, German, Italian and Spanish name. And it was revealed on US and European sites in the same moment. Tano (talk) 19:14, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

What? Yveltal is its English name... And we don't need to mention other languages because this is an English wiki--電禅Den Zen 20:42, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I think it's still an incomplete information. Tano (talk) 20:45, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

I thinks that's a good point and should be corrected. Even if this is an English wiki, "Yveltal's name was revealed internationally before being revealed in Japan" sounds like it would be more accurate. - unsigned comment from Noah★ (talk • contribs)

Imperial conversions

Yveltal's height is 19'00" (Rounded to the nearest inch) and weighs 447.5lb (Rounded to the nearest tenth). How do I know? I converted its metric weight and height. --KirbyRider (talk) 21:51, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

X/Y axis

Xerneas walks on the ground, a possible reference to he horizontal X axis in mathematics, while Yveltal flies through the air, a reference to the vertical Y axis. Should it be added?

I agree. There is a strong analogy with the coordinate system. It can't simply be a coincidence since this game is on a 3DS, so it has probably something to do with the dimensions (Z axis Pokemon coming, lol). --Tano (talk) 15:09, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Physiology

Wrote up a backbone for the Physiology section. Feel free to use in the article, edit, or contribute.

"Yveltal is a large flying Pokémon with a vaguely avian appearance. The upper side of its body is dark in coloration, adorned with greyish diamond patterns along its wings and long tail. Both wings have three points extending from their trailing edge, close to where the wing meets the body. There are large, claw-like structures at its wingtips, with three curved hooks facing inward like a hand, flanked on each side by a shorter, spike-like protrusion. The end of its tail bears an identical claw, and as a result Yveltal's entire body forms a Y-shape when its wings and tail are fully extended in flight. Its underparts are bright red, and appear to be capable of lighting up or glowing under certain conditions. Black markings run from the center of its torso towards its extremities, each ending in a three-pronged branching pattern. Similar markings are present on Yveltal's head, running up its neck to its pointed, beak-like snout. Black horns extend from above its piercing blue eyes, with a sharply-curved portion pointing forward and thinner prongs facing the rear. A feathery grey ruff, similar to that of a vulture, encircles its neck and billows out over its back. Yveltal has small, birdlike legs with powerful talons. Like the rest of its underside, the legs are red with black adornments, and its talons are grey. Each foot has two toes facing forward and one pointing backwards, creating a Y-shape. ~Destruction on Wings~ (talk) 14:09, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Wyvern, wyvern, wyvern, another wyvern, quetzalcoatl, quetzalcoatl in ff8. Almost all of them are from Japanese games/authors (2 of them from americans, 1 is an ancient flag), all of them are or are inspired by quetzalcoatl (an ancient god) or wyverns (a fantasy beast). They are all Y-shaped, with wings and a long tail. It makes sense, we are talking about a legendary. Why do you keep ignoring that? On 4chan they already call it "the pokemon rathalos", while here is referred as "avian" (correct, but generic and obvious) and its name is said to be from this little bird. - unsigned comment from Tano (talk • contribs)

I agree that it absolutely resembles a wyvern, but the inspiration doesn't belong in the physiology section. Physiology is meant to detail the appearance and nothing more, and in this case "avian" works as a good basic description cuz as far as we know its just an generic winged beastie. Boring? Maybe, but proper and descriptive. If it gets Dragon typing or something it is more likely based on a wyvern, but that still isn't needed in the Physiology section. In my opinion, the comparison to a wyvern belongs in the Origin section. ~Destruction on Wings~ (talk) 14:09, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't agree with this part: "A feathery grey ruff, similar to that of a vulture, encircles its neck and billows out over its back". From how they're randomly floating in the artwork, they seems more like hairs, not feathers. They remind me of Entei, not Mandibuzz --Tano (talk) 15:20, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

That's a fair enough point. I wasn't really sure how to phrase that bit, we can change it to "A grey ruff of fur or feathers, similar to that of a vulture, encircles its neck and billows out over its back." ~Destruction on Wings~ (talk) 16:32, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

I'd remove the analogy with the vulture. "A grey ruff of fur or feathers encircles its neck..." is more then enough. I agree with all the rest, you did a pretty good job. --Tano (talk) 16:56, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Thinking more carefully about it, they can't be feathers at all. It makes too many randomic curves, look at this pic I made (lol). They are hairs, totally. I was confused too from the video, but the artwork made it clearer. --Tano (talk) 17:06, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

While that is a good point, I would like to point out that Cresselia does not appear to have feathers either but does indeed drop the lunar wing on multiple occasions. I guess we'll have to wait until we see a better quality picture of it (perhaps in the anime) before we can really tell if it has feathers or hair. Noah★ (talk) 21:39, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Cresselia may have feathers on her body. Feathers can't simply float in that wavy way. --Tano (talk) 21:44, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Latias and Latios also are said to have feathers. Latias's red part of her body for example also resembles Yveltal's possible plumage. I'm just saying that even though it doesn't look like it, there is still a good possibility that there are feathers on that body. You have to think with a Pokemon-esque form of logic when thinking about their physiology. Although since it does seem to be based on a Wyvern, it could also be scales too.Noah★ (talk) 22:49, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

In fact I'm not saying it has no feathers over the red or the black part of its body (I can't possibly know that, even if i don't think so because of the connection with the claws, but well...), I'm just talking about the grey part around the neck and I've already explained why. –Tano (talk) 00:45, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Type

It could be a flying type, as it is seen flying or dragon. - unsigned comment from Dragon146 (talk • contribs)

While it is strongly implied that it's capable of flying (and as such, being part of the Flying or Dragon-type classes), we aren't sure, and as such shouldn't speculate on the Pokémon's real typing until we get a confirmation. Masatoshi_talk 20:21, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

There is actually a strong precedent for Pokémon who fly on wings but are not Flying-type. Examples include Flygon, Lati@s, Resh, Zek, Beedrill, and Venomoth. You can never be sure about Game Freak's peculiar decisions. yeyjordan 23:14, 12 January 2013 (UTC)