User talk:Force Fire/Trivia Policy/Species

Unique base stat totals

Are unique base stat totals notable to certain Pokémon as of current generation, if yes, could you add it as uniqueness? --Cinday123 (Talk) 07:22, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

So I add the trivia about unique BSTs on certain Pokémon, so is it notable, then add it. --Cinday123 (Talk) 04:29, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Explain what you mean, and i will answer. Because cutrrently, i have no idea what you're asking for.--ForceFire 06:08, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

The unique base stat totals? They're notable, it should be with other trivias with uniqueness, so it's my request to add it. --Cinday123 (Talk) 06:18, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

They... are there...

Uniqueness are fine, as long as they are current to the latest generation. The following uniqueness are notable.

Highest BST of a type.

--ForceFire 06:24, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Force Fire, unique BSTs are still fine and notable! --Cinday123 (Talk) 06:25, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Ties

Force Fire, are ties aren't notable, if they are, could you add it into the unnotable section? --Cinday123 (Talk) 04:06, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Ties aren't notable because it falls under the "more than one isn't notable" category. I'll add it, only because I was hoping the "Unique" dot point would've been obvious enough to tell users that ties aren't notable.--ForceFire 04:18, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

So can you remove ties for certain Pokémon with this in their own pages in their trivia sections? --Cinday123 (Talk) 04:20, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Unique Egg Groups

Are Pokémon with unique Egg Groups notable, including Pokémon that are part of an evolutionary line? --Cinday123 (Talk) 02:56, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

If it is unique within that evolutionary line only, then it is notable.--ForceFire 03:18, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

So can you add it in the notable section into the uniqueness part? --Cinday123 (Talk) 03:21, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Height and Weight

Force Fire, are height and weight trivia notable, if not because it was easily found in the species' pages, can you add it into the unnotable section? --Cinday123 (Talk) 04:56, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Grammar

You just misspelled "There" "Their". --Raltseye prata med mej 13:51, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Ties

I didn't see that this had changed and I'm aware I'm a year or more late, but is there a reason you changed the policy on ties to allow two-way ties? As far as I can see, this will just invite more clutter. I have to express my strong disagreement. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 20:37, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Highest base stat ties and highest BST ties are notable. Every other ties is not notable.--ForceFire 04:33, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Similarities

I think you should change

• Pokémon with similar traits to another. This is only valid if comparing to the entire Pokédex, not a specific group (such as Starter Pokémon) as they may be too small of a group to consider notable.
  • Example: Charmeleon, Charizard, Flareon, Moltres, and Infernape are all known as Flame Pokémon.

to something like

• Pokémon with similar traits to another. This is only valid if the traits are usually unique and if comparing to the entire Pokédex, not a specific group (such as Starter Pokémon) as they may be too small of a group to consider notable.
  • Example: Charmeleon, Charizard, Flareon, Moltres, and Infernape are all known as Flame Pokémon.

This way, you can disallow stuff like, "Squirtle, Wartortle, Blastoise, Psyduck, Golduck, Poliwag, Poliwhirl, Seel, Shellder, Krabby, Kingler, Horsea, Seadra, Goldeen, Seaking, Staryu, Magikarp, Vaporeon, Totodile, Croconaw, Feraligatr, Politoed, Remoraid, Octillery, Suicune, Mudkip, Wailmer, Wailord, Corphish, Feebas, Milotic, Clamperl, Huntail, Gorebyss, Luvdisc, Kyogre, Piplup, Prinplup, Buizel, Floatzel, Shellos, Finneon, Lumineon, Phione, Manaphy, Oshawott, Dewott, Samurott, Panpour, Simipour, Tympole, Basculin, Alomomola, Froakie, Frogadier, Clauncher, Clawitzer, Popplio, Brionne, Wishiwashi, and Pyukumuku are all Water type." sumwun (talk) 02:27, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

I think that's an extreme counterexample, but if your goal is to allow shared category trivia and more clearly disallow other non-unique group trivia, a better solution is just to explicitly say shared categories are notable, rather than trying to dance around it. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 05:12, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, that example is something that doesn't need a written rule and is just common sense. Of course that's not notable. I can clarify it to make it more specific.--ForceFire 06:12, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. sumwun (talk) 18:22, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Other Nintendo properties

I understand that we can't cite copyrighted characters as a possible inspiration for a Pokémon's design unless the creators confirm it, but surely we can make an exception for other Nintendo properties. Nintendo isn't going to get in trouble for referencing another one of its properties. They do it all the time. Buzzfan120 (talk) 05:59, 3 December 2022 (UTC)