Talk:Unused Pokémon in the 1997 Pokémon Gold and Silver demo

Gameguide
You added the Gameguide template, but I am not sure which aspects of this list are the issue. I don't believe it contains any more gameguide-esque material than the other lists of Pokémon species do, right? I don't think any of the descriptions here say anything about how the Pokémon play, honestly, it's almost exclusively about their visual designs and their development background. ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat ) 09:39, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm no expert on the Pokémon games so can't judge what's appropriate and what isn't, but some of this (especially the lists) is stuff I'd expect to see on The Cutting Room Floor (which it is) and/or a Pokémon wiki rather than here. Do we really need to list every single cut Pokémon, or go into detail about them in the prose? That seems like WP:GAMECRUFT to me. In fact, even the other Pokémon lists seem (to me at least) to go into unnecessary detail, even though they have a notice at the top. But as I said, I'm no expert, so don't know what's relevant enough. Adam9007 (talk) 18:08, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I think the question quickly comes down to to which degree these fictional creatures are individually notable, personally. In the end, Wikipedia really just repeats what reliable secondary sources say about a topic, and because a lot of such sources have talked about the newly discovered Pokémon, it is completely reasonable to at least have a list of them like this. It is not uncommon for us to have lists of fictional characters, after all. ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat ) 18:24, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Just because it's in reliable sources, doesn't mean it's suitable for Wikipedia. There can be plenty of stuff in reliable sources that isn't suitable for an encyclopaedia. I think this goes into the kind of detail that only fans of the games would be interested in, but again, I'm no expert. We may need a second opinion on this. Adam9007 (talk) 18:30, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I feel a common element of some encyclopedias is, if they are descriptive, then to include their focus on their 'real world influence' (such as reception from popular sources). Hence articles like Pikachu due to their real world influence have stayed; lesser known Pokémon have been moved to List of Pokémon (this also links in with Pokémon test). Although encyclopedias do not have to focus on this, and at the same time some may argue notability is a subjective thing. Wikipedia has an inclusion criteria under Notability, which links in with another page called What Wikipedia is not, so these may give insight on some general criteria of what staff have decided to keep, and what should be deleted. Torchickens (talk) 22:53, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protection
Can an admin lock the article so that only established (autoconfirmed) users can edit it? --4TacklesMath (talk) 19:48, 30 September 2019 (UTC) Any particular reason to protect this article? It has not really seen any vandalism, so I don't know why we would do this. ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat ) 19:58, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Legality of Link to The Cutting Room Floor
Is that link to The Cutting Room Floor legal? From what I understand, not all of the content on that site is exactly legal. I can understand the low quality versions of the sprites that are used on this page, but the link to The Cutting Room Floor seems quite brazen, and I'm not sure how it could be justified from a legal perspective.

Just looking out for Wikipedia here. I've never previously seen a Wikipedia entry that had such a very questionable link. Tharthan (talk) 22:44, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Interesting question. Our article on the website itself also has a link to the website, which makes sense. Having an external link to the subject of the article is the norm on Wikipedia. Many of the sources used in this article also link directly the Cutting Room Floor or show off all the same Pokémon sprites. Whether it is legal and in accordance to Wikipedia's legal guidelines, I honestly don't really know. Linking to a website that hosts copyrighted material may not actually be a legal issue at all in the US, but I don't know. It is distinct from hosting this material ourselves, at least. ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat ) 11:37, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

New leak
Some more prototype designs from Gold and Silver were recently found, along with the game's source code. Once they're covered by a reliable source, should they be added to this article? Most Horizontal Primate (talk) 01:52, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Once more sources cover them and cross-verify the information, certainly. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 03:35, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I also started this draft on the general development of these games. I hope these new sources will help in expanding that one so it can go into the mainspace eventually. I do want to keep this list as a list; I hope some new Pokémon species were revealed that would be really cool :3 ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat ) 08:02, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a title change such as "Unused Pokémon in Pokémon Gold and Silver demos" would be fitting, seeing as these new Pokémon are from a 1999 demo. ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat ) 08:07, 25 April 2020 (UTC)