Characters.Pokémon Reorganization/Cleanup

So... nobody disagreed with me that the type pages should be cut, but they're still there. Should we hold a crowner?

Is a crowner even necessary?

So, according to Bulbapedia, Staraptor is unknown gender because the decoy he falls in love with in one episode "doesn't count as acceptable evidence as we have addressed this several times before that the gender stereotypes are not enough to verify genders in the anime". Likewise, they claim that Goh's Pinsir is also unknown gender because in her Day in the Limelight episode, Goh called his Pinsir a "good guy" which is "a gender neutral term". Should we make a note of this?

I don't want to just cutlist such huge pages without warning.

Honestly, that’s just Bulbapedia being overly cautious. And a reminder that they’re ultimately a fan wiki website.

I mean, how long did it take for Mimey to be recognized as Ash’s Pokémon despite the fact that official Japanese website listed Mimey as one of Ash’s Pokémon?

Edited by Shadao on May 20th 2022 at 3:49:52 AM

Well, tbf on that one, I don't think the anime recognized Mimey until recently either.

Let’s remind ourselves that Ash’s Pikachu’s gender was going to be male once it’s cleared that Gen IV introduced gender differences but it wasn’t until one female Togepi using attract about a hundred and 42 episodes in DP that Bulbapedia finally confirmed Pikachu’s gender as male.

Then there’s the fact that Stoutland was pretty confirmed to be dead without actually saying it, but Bulbapedia held off from saying Stoutland is dead (saying it just disappeared) until its literal ghost came back to meet Torracat.

So yeah, let’s not be overtly dependent on Bulbapedia’s definitions to TV Tropes.

For the Pokémon Types, it should be noted that many types are well known amongst the fanbase for different reasons. For instance, Water is very versatile and has the most advantages in the rain and Ice gets the short end of the stick of being found in the wild until Pokémon Sword and Shield and has many weaknesses and Dark-types have the whole "not getting an official gym until Generation VIII" thing going on. I think we should at least make mention of how fans tend to bring up types in terms of advantages and disadvantages.

I don't think so, that's audience reaction, and isn't something to get into on objective pages.

• shrugs* Ah, well.

Still doesn't make them characters.

So did we ever start a crowner on deleting the archetypes/types pages?

I don't believe we did.

I wonder if I can add this to Raichu's entry: Leaning on the Fourth Wall: Raichu's Pokédex entries in Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon feels like they're calling out the Pokémon: The Series writers and Gamefreak for getting Raichu Demoted to Extra in favor of Pikachu at least until Generation VII.

Cross-pollinating from the Yu-Gi-Oh Characters clean up thread I'm working on: Is it possible to remove the Awesome, but Impractical, Cool, but Inefficient and others like that from the character entries (e.g. Awesome, but Impractical from Chewtle and Drednaw's folder, Cool, but Inefficient from Kling, Klang, Klingklang's folder)?

I'm gonna need some more context- why do you want to remove those entries?

From Yu-Gi-Oh's character clean up page, Wuz: :I have been blanket-cutting uses of Awesome, but Impractical on the character sheets; is this correct? Using the Pokemon comparison, some of the Pokemon character sheets still use Awesome, but Impractical."

That... doesn't really clarify anything. It just says someone's been removing tropes without saying why. they're been doing it. Pokémon character pages have already gone through some trope cuts with seemingly no intention of placing them somewhere else.

All right, here's another thing from another troper who was working on it: "I'm in favor for a thorough cut this time around regarding the "x but y" tropes in order to curb the overuse of the metagaming tropes as character tropes (though I think Nerf should stay (with a rename probably), for example, as long as it doesn't devolve into a massive explanation of the effects that got nerfed in the manga/anime to OCG transition, and simply says "it had "x" effect but this was changed because "insert reason""), then later we can work on an agreement of what standards should such tropes have, and add a few examples back (we don't need "awesome but impractical", "cool but inefficient", "power up letdown" and "useless useful spell" all at the same time when the troper that was using all of them would add exactly the same card effects under the entries, for example)."

Basically, we don't really need "x but y" tropes on character pages for Pokemon and Yu-Gi-Oh when we have subpages for those.

Should we have Platinum listed as Moon's sister in Pokémon Adventures or not? On the one hand, it's pretty obvious she is with the same look and owning an Empoleon. On the other hand, Bulbapedia calls the sister "Unnamed sister" but as we've seen, Bulbapedia isn't exactly trustworthy when it comes to certain details (like trying to claim Ash's Staraptor and Goh's Pinsir are both "it" even though it's pretty clear Staraptor's a guy and Pinsir's a girl.)

Is it officially confirmed?

Seems to be, [1] Celebrity Lie: Downplayed, while she brags about being close with the famous researcher known as "Miss Poison" (Moon), she actually did meet her, but the only thing they did is exchange contact info, which only happened due to Platinum pestering them to do it due to both of them specializing in Poison-Type Pokémon.

So this is something that came to mind when reading the latest story update to Pokémon Masters.

Morality Pet trope is used for various characters in the games, mainly the villain team leaders and such. This is mainly due to them having at least one Pokémon who evolves through Friendship mechanism, or something similar such as Lysandre having Mega Gyarados due to in-lore reasons.

The thing is that in the latest Masters update, Colress argues with Paulo that there is no distinction between good and evil when dealing with connection of the heart. Just how sentient/sapient Pokémon are is hard to measure, but they are not as complex as humans. All that a Pokémon really expects is for their Trainer to do their best for them, even if what they want from their Pokémon is to commit evil acts. So basically, as long as the Trainer is not being abusive (see: Ghetsis), a Pokémon having a high Friendship level with their Trainer is not necessarily because they are good. Mind you, this is during Paulo's slippery slope of an arc of getting stronger.

So the question is, does this technically disqualify the whole point of Morality Pet for these Trainers if the bond they have with their Pokémon is more of just "they aren't absolutely abusive towards them"? There are few examples that can stay like Silver due to his Character Development, or Lysandre because the trope is discussed with him, but some of the other Trainers might not qualify.

Edited by TPPR10 on Oct 10th 2022 at 2:26:11 PM

Hrm. That makes things complicated as on the one hand there's Team Rocket but on the other hand there's Damian from Pokémon: The Series who was abusive towards Charmander but there's no indication of his Pokémon leaving him and Volo who has his Pokémon stay with him including Lucario and Togekiss despite the fact and as the Characters page for Legends Arceus points out, just sees his team as tools.

It's a little too Fridge Logicy for my taste. I would not consider it an example if the bond is not highlighted in-series. There are lots of ways they could have gotten a Pokemon like that.