Talk:Magnemite (Pokémon)

The nails

If the magnets are supposed to represent Magnemite's hands, do the nails represent its feet?--KukiTalk 16:50, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

well, they arent nails, they are screws, but yes, they do. dispite Magnemite anti-gravity it still has a footpring in the dex, and it is the imprint of a screw. -- MAGNEDETH 16:54, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Well in fact, Magnemite's flight is temporary. When it is about to sleep or faint, it drops to the ground. So the screws might serve as its feet. Weezing22arbok 01:55, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

if you are implying that Magnemite walk using their magnets, then you would be wrong. as seen in Snap, they hover over the ground. when they faint, they simply lie there. anti-gravity implys they do not require any actual energy to hover. this is why anti-gravity is impossible to recreate in real life, because any and all "hovering" man made has used energy in some way shape or form. they dont create the anti-gravity, they just do it. -- MAGNEDETH 04:03, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

In the Stadium games, I seem to recall that they busted apart when they fainted... ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 13:30, 24 June 2008

well yea, be he said when they get tired they walk, and im just stating they do not walk. granted, in the anime, Magnemite and Ton do not fall apart when they faint. -- MAGNEDETH 22:32, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

You are right on all accounts. Magnetmite dosent "walk" but it could be man-made. Its ether hollow or the eye takes up all room. Whatswithalltheextraspace 16:47, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

it might just have poke-guts inside. we dont know, and we wont until the pokedex shows us pokemon skeletons. -- MAGNEDETH 20:59, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

They do! Kabutops and Aerodactyl!--KukiTalk 21:01, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

i was hoping it was obvious i ment every pokemon, not just them... -- MAGNEDETH 00:44, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

I know, but it was still a start!--KukiTalk 00:46, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Type effectiveness

Shouldn't the "type effectiveness" box of Magnemite / Magneton be redone somewhat, since many of the original alignments before the release of Gen II have been overlooked in the notes below? eg. The Dragon-type hasn't been acknowledged as previously doing 1x damage, nor has the Fire-type's or Fighting-type's 1x effectiveness due to the lack of the Steel-type in Gen I. The existing type alignment notes are also rather disordered, when they could be more efficiently grouped into 1x and 0.5x.

H4r8z0r 19:26, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll fix that... As for the 0.5× vs ½ thing... well, I'm absolutely certain that decimals would confuse people. I once had a guy ask me whether 0.6 or 0.5 was half. TTEchidna 19:35, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Right, cool. Sorry, I meant 1/2x actually, not 0.5x; I didn't mean to differentiate between the two different ways of writing "one half", only to point out that they could be grouped as "normally effective" [1x] and "not very effective..." [1/2x] to make reading easier. But thanks!

H4r8z0r 20:03, 26 September 2008 (UTC)