Talk:List of Pokémon (387–440)

Note

 * This page was previously Talk:List of Pokémon (387–400)
 * Talk:List of Pokémon (401–420)
 * Talk:List of Pokémon (421–440)

Legendary Pokémon articles
I strongly recommend that individual articles on legendary Pokémon should stay if this thing goes ahead. They are so important for the development of the game in those terms. Rather than deleting those articles, we should have short summaries here with links to the main articles. Eternal dragon 10:24, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

We should do that with every article. I agree. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.47.191.173 (talk • contribs).
 * Please read WT:PCP. There's a reason why we've done this. -WarthogDemon 22:19, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but not all legendary Pokemon are important in real life. If you ask someone who's never played Pokemon, what will they say they've heard of, Kyogre or Pikachu?--ZXCVBNM 01:46, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, some legends aren't notable, especially the Regis, they are very unnotable when referring to one of them, and not exactly them all three. TheBlazikenMaster 09:20, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * No, but the legendaries have each been in their own movies which is notability enough. Ninja337 23:48, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Hundreds of pokemon have been in movies many of them had bigger roles in the movie then the legendary of that particular movie. There's a whole nother set of guidelines to movies and having articles for the main characters, of which I doubt the legendaries would meet. Spigot  Map  00:47, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ricky Bobby, Mike Lowrey, Chev Chelios and a lot more of characters are in their own movies, but guess what? They are redirected to the movie page, because one movie appearance isn't good enough. TheBlazikenMaster 12:14, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I find it sad that I have to avoid the Rayquaza because of laggy loading caused by clumping several articles into one. Surely you can atleast make seperate articles for the elemental trio, as saying "Kyogre isn't prominent to those who barely know Pokemon" is ridiculous. People who don't know alot about Crash Bandicoot don't know who Dingodile is, and he's had less appearences in video games than Rayquaza and his elemental pals, yet Dingodile still has a page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.77.225.79 (talk) 03:08, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * The reason why that is, perhaps you should ask them at the WikiProject of this character. See this: WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS]. TheBlazikenMaster 16:39, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

We should also add what the Legendarys stand for. (kyoger made the sea. Lugea controls the sea. Rayquaza made the sky. Etc...) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.23.173.89 (talk) 23:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Turtwig, Grotle, and Torterra
I'm currently debating if I should add some things I know on Turtwig, Grotle, and Torterra. I had them from the start of my D/P adventure, and knows all of their moves (same as Piplup, Chimchar, and evolutions) because I have a D/P guide. But I'm only thinking about it... Also, I noticed something, How come it talks about Latios and not Latias? I just sorta think that is odd. -SonicMuobius 10:24, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, the info you have is useless, Wikipedia is not a game guide. Unless the move is special, we don't need it.
 * And to answer your question, the reason why Latias isn't listed is because Latias is number three-hundred and eighty, so it's on another page. TheBlazikenMaster 18:29, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * And to answer your question, the reason why Latias isn't listed is because Latias is number three-hundred and eighty, so it's on another page. TheBlazikenMaster 18:29, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Also, the internet has any possible information you have. So attempting to single yourself out as some super awesome source of information that only you know is pointless. Because I'm sure you're not the only person who started with Turtwig, buku. -Sukecchi 18:38, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I did never say it's pointless, what I meant it's useless here. This isn't the right place to list the attacks. TheBlazikenMaster 20:14, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Go to Bulbapedia instead. You can add anything you want there.--ZXCVBNM 21:33, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I personally think that this list should be expanded to include 380-400, just so that Latias and Latios are on the same page. 24.226.77.23 (talk) 12:42, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Chimchar.png
Image:Chimchar.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 02:28, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Where are the images?
Sheesh. Firstly Pokémon lose their individual articles, now they lose their images??!! What's happening here? Is there some copyright thing? I tell you, some of them were on their way to becoming FAs. We should at least try to make these featured lists, deleting those images are making it less informative. æt 'ə' rnal 'ðrAعon'  → 10:12, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * If you would read into it, buku, the images had problems with the copyright information or something along those lines. -Sukecchi 11:17, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Please see Wikipedia Signpost/2007-05-07/Fair use images in list like this are not acceptable under our non-free policy. βcommand 13:26, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Believe me, even us mergers are against the images being removed. But we have to get them to be acceptable, and it's no easy task. TheBlazikenMaster 16:35, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, where can we obtain this copyright thing? As far as I was concerned they all had detailed fair use rationales.  Where can I upload these again from if there is a legitimate claim of fair use? æt 'ə' rnal  'ðrAعon'  → 02:24, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

It's a good thing i had that Piplup photo from Origins.--Bedford 16:41, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Not really. I think it's better to have nothing rather than that. -Sukecchi 22:29, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * What if the pic was cropped to only show Piplup?--Bedford 22:50, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Still not really good...it's still a costume. The art is better. -Sukecchi 10:28, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, where can this copyright thing?  As far as I was concerned they all had detailed fair use rationales.  Where can I upload these again from if there is a legitimate claim of fair use? æt 'ə' rnal  'ðrAعon'  → 02:24, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

please go to talk: 202-251
there, you can find my request Valehd (talk) 14:59, 19 July 2015 (UTC)