Talk:Pokémon Master

PLEASE READ THIS

This is just a plea for those experienced in wiki to not remove this page. This is my first article and I tried my best to follow the guidelines established by wikipedia. I am sure I failed in following some rules/techniques used here, but it was not intentional. If an expert in wiki comes across this and determines that this is not adequate, I ask that the article not be removed. Instead, change it. Replace every letter I typed if necessary. Completely change the focus of the article. I think this topic is underrated and deserves attention. Over the past few years, I have done some occasional research on what people believed a Pokémon Master was. Their were numerous responses and various parts of the Pokémon universe could support or deny them. I only wish to present both sides to each argument. In general, I have found that there is no one or finite list of requirements but instead a whole bunch where everything is incorporated. If it seems I am being too biased, please fix this. What I am most interested in is finding the truth here. I think that the creation of this article and then contributions from others will greatly benefit understanding of the Pokémon universe. If you are not knowledgable about Pokémon but still find this article unacceptable, please state why here and maybe ask someone else to fix the page up. I feel that this is a topic that nobody seems to fully understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Archknight (talk • contribs) at 00:56, 15 July 2006

Comment
I noticed that almost no articles link here, and this article isn't in any categories. As a result, few people will ever likely find this article. You might want to figure out the best category or categories to put this article in. (you put an article in a category by adding the proper category tag to the article) --Xyzzyplugh 11:49, 15 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Oops... Thanks. As I said, I am new to this... I was not familiar with categories or how to apply them. I guess putting this in the Pokemon category is best.--Archknight 05:56, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

The greatest
"The only person to ever become a pokemon master was Varun P, perhaps the greatest of them all " What? Granted I ain't played ALL the games, but I've never heard of this, and a google search didn't turn up any notable results. I'm removing it unless someone brings up a source on this...sounds like some overzealous player bragging, to me... 70.149.217.82 12:37, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

This article doesn't sound very encyclopedic, it's in dire need of editing by someone who's familiar with the subject (i.e. not myself)

Needs to be more encyclopedia-like
Good job on your first article.

To further improve it, it needs to sound less like an essay (especially with a conclusion that says that it is an unattainable dream), and it needs more sources. That last one is going to cause some problems. All over the WikiProject Pokemon there are heated arguments over the current merger, with the main reason for it being that much information is actually original research and cannot be backed up by sources.

The subject of Pokemon Mastery, as I recall it, is rarely, if ever, mentioned in the games, but it is heavily emphasized in the anime. Perhaps citations from the anime itself could help improve the article.SuperChencho 17:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Should this be merged with Pokémon trainer?
Just wondering.....

Technically Pokémon Masters are still pokémon trainers. They are trainers that have been practicing their strong Tyranitar, Steelix, Metagross or whatever for a very long time. Well, since this article doesn't have any sources from the real world, or Earth, I think merging it is the best solution. I'm a Pokémon Master myself (but don't have the sinnoh Pokémon for some reason) so I know damn well what I'm talking about. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 22:37, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I would agree. This article is extremely in-universe and almost impossible to source.  I don't think it can really stand alone as an article.  Bhamv (talk) 18:49, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll toss my two cents in and merge. And call for a massive rewrite because this is written like an essay, not an encyclopedia article. hbdragon88 (talk) 00:00, 18 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I almost want to say we should delete it altogether, but I can imagine that it could be appropriate in the page on "pokemon trainer", but as a small blurb. I don't see any reason why a "pokemon master" is especially important out of pokemon topics, and deserves a special page. This probably falls under "Wikipedia is not a dictionary" AND "Avoid neologisms", because it tries to define a term; a newly made-up term at that.


 * The only way I'd be comfortable with content like this staying is as a short definition inside a larger article: Talk about what "pokemon master" is taken to mean in the show and games, with examples, and then that's it


 * At current, this is an uncited, original essay, and the only thing I think saves it from deletion is that it can be dramatically chopped down and completely rewritten, hopefully in the context of a larger article TheBilly (talk) 19:40, 20 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge and rewrite; as it stands now, the article is entirely unsourceable and doesn't fit the format of a Wikipedia article. As pointed out above, it is written as an essay, and not encyclopedic at all. What part of the trouble seems to be is that there is no real definition for what a Pokemon master is. MelicansMatkin (talk) 20:40, 20 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree with Melican's statement.The article needs complete and utter cleanup and rewriting to meets Wikipedia's quality standards. User:Agent008.

Stripping down this article
As I suggested above, this article needs to be significantly stripped down, since at current it is Orginal Research, unreferenced, and an essay rather than an encylopedia article

Firstly, original research: It is not appropriate to state your own original thoughts, opinions, or observations about a topic in a Wikipedia article. For that reason I'm attempting to chop down a lot of this article, and reduce it to only a string of simple statements about the games, anime, and manga, which directly relate to the term "Pokemon master". This will still probably have some problems as being more original research than not, but at this point I'm trying to improve it rather than fix it all in one go.

Secondly, "in-world" terms and tone problems: The existing sections talk about specialized, fictional terminology as if the reader is already familiar. This is inappropriate anywhere on wikipedia, for any topic. Articles should be accessible to anybody, fans and non-fans alike, and so it should be written in a general rather than fandom-centric manner. For this reason I think it's more appropriate to restructure the article as "in the games", "in the anime", "in the manga", rather than as an essay which tries to go back and forth tying all of these together. Back to original research (as well as NPOV), you should not write an article in a style that attempts to advance a position.

As of this writing, I've cleaned up the first section, but I'll try to chop down and improve the others as well. (or, of course, if anyone is actually actively following this they can too!) TheBilly (talk) 20:49, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, at the moment I've copied the article and created a sub-page where I am completely re-writing it; I should have a link here in a few minutes (hopefully). MelicansMatkin (talk) 20:51, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Stripdown complete
I've removed everything unencyclopedic and rewritten the entire article on this subpage. I'm sure that most of the information is already out of date (animewise anyways); I'm pretty sure that Pokemon Mastery has been mentioned more often than just the Prime episode. Anyways, this is what the barebones of the article looks like when all of the embelleshing and fancruft is removed. MelicansMatkin (talk) 21:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Since this has already languished so long as an inappropriate, uncited essay, I think we should go ahead and be bold in giving this article the dramatic improvement it desperately needs, so I'm going to go ahead and edit in your rewrite. For any appropriate information that is missing from this new version, it can be incrementally re-added from the old revisions TheBilly (talk) 04:22, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

New version
Per the couple of discussion sections above, I've completed the new rewrite and committed it. Although it is dramatic, as mentioned above there were substantial problems and so this new version is limited mostly to things that can be cited (though they currently are not)

Please help us all out by commenting on this new version, keeping in mind wikipedia's content policies (e.g. we shouldn't go back to like before and include all sorts of things just because fans want it). I'm hoping that we can work towards a version that can be merged into the Pokemon Trainer article

Sorry KrytenKoro I had to revert your edit. Otherwise it would have reintroduced a lot of the problems from before. It was just a matter of bad timing (2 minutes apart, both working at the same time) TheBilly (talk) 05:00, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Here's what I did - I'm pretty sure all of these changes would be important clarifications (though the Celebi thing might possibly be cruft) Here: . Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 05:46, 21 December 2007 (UTC)