User talk:Crystal Talian

Hello! Welcome to my talkpage. Feel free to ask me any pedia related questions, and I will do my best to help you. Please keep in mind that I don't know everything, so I may need to redirect you to other staff members for some questions. Remember, new questions to the bottom and always sign with ~~~~ Archives: First Archive

Demand

Hi, could you please delete my userpage ? I'd like to get rid of it. Same for the subpage. Thanks ! -- Braviapert 14:50, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Turtonator

It pains me that this is not a part of their page already, and I cannot edit their page as of yet, so could you edit it to note that given it's domed, spiked head and beak, it seems to be based on a kappa" - unsigned comment from GMario3826 (talk • contribs)

I am still reviewing some of the new Pokemon and their origins. Hopefully everything needed will be added over time. Thanks. Crystal Talian 03:45, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Gardevoir

C'mon I want some really good explanation. Did you even read what I wrote? ExLight (talk) 00:27, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Firstly, please do not come to my page rudely demanding answers. If you want to discuss something, you could at least ask politely. But regarding your Guenevere edits. What connects Gardevoir to Guenevere? The story of Lancelot and Guenevere, or indeed King Arthur's entire story, is a very detailed and varied legend. Saying Gardevoir is based on Guenevere simply because its Japanese name has 'knight' in it and some superficial sound similarities is a weak suggestion at best. There's a lot more to Guenevere than that, such as her queenly nature and forbidden romance with Lancelot. There's also other woman in Arthurian legend, Morgan, Morgause, Elaine, Nimue, to name a few. It also completely bypasses the fact the Gardevoir is not a 100% female species. They can be male. There really wasn't much added in edit besides that. Crystal Talian 02:33, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Sorry 'bout being rude, wasn't my intention. I just got really frustrated, didn't mean to be disrespectful.

I do want to have a polite discussion about it.

So; about Gardevoir and Guinevere. Firstly, I'd like to begin with Guinevere's Welsh original name and its meaning; Gwenhwyfar, " which seems to be cognate with the Irish name Findabair, can be translated as "The White Enchantress" or "The White Fay/Ghost", from Proto-Celtic *Uindo- "white, fair, holy" + *seibara "magical being" (...)". Just this small definition already explains part of Gardevoir's design and typing (Including the retconned Fairy-type). And yes, their names have phonetical similarities.

Now, about the story, I'd like to remind us that we do have a Lancelot/Gallahad pokémon counterpart, this one being Gallade, reforcing the ideia that Gardevoir is related to this especific Arthurian Legend and characters. And since you talked about its gender, this one is really interesting; because in my edit, I did add "Gardevoir resembles a theatre actor" because of it. As known, Gardevoir and its family are related to performatic art; in this case, Gardevoir is a principal dancer (reflecting Guinevere's importance as a main character in her story) and an actor; and yea, not actress. This is because during the Middle Ages actress on the stage weren't common; usually, the men would dress as a woman to interpret such roles.

I'd also like to discuss about it being primarily treated as a ghost. Gadevoir may have a "ghostish" appearance, but to conclude it is a ghost seems kinda weird. It doesn't seem related to any specific kind of ghost, it doesn't have a ghost type, its description doesn't relate to ghosts, and it almost doesn't learn any ghost moves! And a ghost that would give up their life to protect their trainer? Doesn't make much sense to me. And why would it be trapped here?

Anyway, that's it. Once again, sorry if I sounded rude. ExLight (talk) 03:58, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

To call Gallade a Lancelot/Gallahad counterpart to Gardevoir is kind of awkward. Lancelot, perhaps, but as Gallahad was Lancelot's illegetimate son by another woman, that's awkward. Also, the phoenetical similarities only exist in the English name, and that and the name meaning are really the only things lending any support to this theory. I strongly disagree with saying Gardevoir is based on Guenevere because of the lore surrounding both.

Gardevoir is a protector. It's entire story regards it foretelling the future and protecting its training. In counterpoint, it was the knights protecting Guinevere that brought about the fall of Arthur's kingdom. Also, while Guenevere's name may mean enchantress, she doesn't act as one in the stories. That 'honor' falls on other Arthurian woman. Every person in Arthurian legend has a group of stories just for them, and trying to narrow Gardevoir and Gallade down to specific characters is only going to create weak connections at best. It's better to simply say its based on a knight and leave it there.

As for the actor bit, it still disregards the fact that Gardevoir can be either gender. I'm well aware of how men would play women's roles in the middle ages. The problem is that its either saying its specifically based on a woman, or that its a man playing a women. It's a weak connection at best in my opinion.

For the ghost part, you're connecting to the type too much. Gardevoir is in the Amorphous egg group as well, suggesting a more spiritual body form. Furthermore, ghosts remain behind because they unfinished business - in this particular case the business would be protecting its Trainer. Not 'trapped' per se, but choosing to stay to guard those it loves. Now, stating ghost as its primarily origin may not be absolutely correct, but it has more connection there than to the legends surrounding Guenevere.

The only part that was added that I would agree with is saying that it may be based on a knight, as its Japanese name and lore are both in agreement with that. Crystal Talian 04:18, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Hm, I guess that does make sense. So the Knight part is the only one addition we both seem to agree completely.

I won't keep pressing on this, but still, couldn't it be at least considered? I mean, something like "although unlikely, Gardevoir shares a few resemblances with Guinevere"? Or about the similar sonority in their names? It does seem like something worth to point out. Just a brief mention would be enough, could even to prevent some future discussions like this with other members.

Anyways. Again, thanks for hearing me out. ExLight (talk) 05:19, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Starter abilities

Hi, I wasn't sure why my edits got reverted? I figured I should ask you before adding the trivia on Panpour and Simipour's pages too... It is factual that those elemental monkey Pokémon are the only evolution lines who can have abilities that are otherwise exclusive to starters, and I think that's significant. I was very careful with my wording - I even said "can", being mindful that the abilities are hidden ones for them - so I'm not really sure what I was doing wrong with that? Draceon (talk) 16:31, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

True doesn't necessarily mean notable. Yes, they can have these Abilities, but is it significant? Not particularly. Their purpose is to be parallel to the starters, so it kind of makes sense they would have these Abilities. Also, the fact that they are hidden abilities makes it less notable. They can have them, but lots of Pokemon have exclusive Abilities as Hidden Abilities, like Drought or Drizzle. It's also pretty obvious looking at the pages for the Abilities, so there's no need to point it out. Crystal Talian 16:34, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Torra from torrefy

I thought I should point out that Torra might also come from Torrefy.

VERB

[WITH OBJECT] technical Roast, scorch, or dry (a substance such as an ore, a drug, or a fuel) with heat to drive off all moisture or impurities. ‘torrefying wood loses 30% of the mass but only 10% of the energy’ Origin Early 17th century: from French torréfier, from Latin torrefacere dry by heat, from torrere parch, scorch.

another possible but less likely origin is Torr, which is a A unit of pressure equivalent to 1 mm of mercury in a barometer and equal to 133.32 pascals. I only bring that up since a lot of people are associating litten's line with mercury in some kind of alchemy theme. Yamitora1 (talk) 16:57, 4 October 2016 (UTC)