User talk:Artichoker/Archive 1

Template:Artichoker
Hi, I have nominated your template at Template:Artichoker for speedy deletion as it is a test page. If you wish to contest this nomination, add hangon to the top of the page and explain why you think the page should be kept on the talk page. Do not remove the speedy deletion notice. Thank you. SmileToday☺(talk to me, My edits) 03:37, 6 November 2007

Recurring characters in The Legend of Zelda series
Heya, im the one who was "proving a point" on the re-occurring Zelda chars page. See, I added a part about Syrup the witch being hinted at in A link to the past for the GBA. It was deleted as speculation, but the entire page held very similar assumptions about characters. I feel that if my addition was removed, twice, then the page should be consistent. All the edits I did were professional and none vandalizing, I removed allot of speculation holding the same values that deleted my one little addition. I apologize if you saw it as vandalism, however it was just correcting hypocrisy, and I don’t think my "speculation" should have been removed when the page was littered with it. If mine was to be removed, then the rest should have been too. Wikipedia is filled with this kind of hypocrisy, and if my harmless addition is to be targeted, then I shall fix the entire page. I honestly did not mean to cause trouble, only fix what evidently is so important to defend to many others. 64.5.200.106 (talk) 06:16, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh! me again, if you want to discuss this with my feel free to e-mail me at Kitmouse@hotmail.com :D I do have a Wikipedia log in, but I don't use it often, and mostly just use Wikipedia at work. if you look at the history of this IP address, you will see I don't vandalize. 64.5.200.106 (talk) 06:31, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey. Well a lot of the stuff that you removed was not speculation, but notable information. You kind of went overboard, removing large chunks of writing of some good information. Your addition to Syrup the Witch was speculation, but that last edit you made to her can stay. Also, for future reference, please sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). Thanks. Artichoker (Discussion) 15:08, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Races in The Legend of Zelda series
Just to clear things up it is HoHo not Ho Ho i know this because did the research for the article and i never said the Gorons were a tribe i have been working on getting rid of that. and i dont know if its you but the yook are a tribe but this is refering to a collective race. LegendLiver (talk) 22:58, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know if you know this, but each page has its own edit history. This means you can tell exactly who changed something on that page. KrytenKoro is the one who undid most of your changes (an example being the HoHo title). I was the one who reverted your edit from "Goron" to "Goron Tribe", however (I misread the edit history, and I apologize). If you have any questions regarding HoHo (or Ho Ho), please consult KrytenKoro, for I have no clue. Also, please sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). Thanks. Artichoker (Discussion) 23:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Pokemon abilities
Concerning your revert of Pokemon game mechanics: You wrote: Each Pokémon has one or two abilities according to its species. I'm not trying to get into an edit war, but this is false. Each species has one or two possible abilities, but each (individual) Pokemon can only have one ability. If you've got a better way to word it than it was written before, than by all means go ahead. 128.54.228.80 (talk) 22:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, individual Pokémon can have more than one ability. For example, the Pokémon Hariyama has the abilities Thick Fat (Fire and Ice-type move inflict only 50 percent of the damage) and Guts (The Pokémon's attack power rises 1.5x when inflicted with a status condition). Artichoker (Discussion) 22:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Eh, I know for a fact that there's only one "Ability" slot for each Pokemon in R/S/E (so the Hariyama I caught could have Thick Fat or Guts, but not both). Maybe it's different in D/P. I don't know. I can't find any fansites or screens confirming one way or the other. 128.54.228.80 (talk) 22:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
 * How would you know that there is only one ability slot for each Pokémon? Another example is the Pokémon Shuppet. In D/P, it has the abilities Insomnia (Pokémon cannot be put to Sleep) and Frisk (Allows you to see your opponent's hold items). I have confirmed that an individual Shuppet can hold both of these abilities at the same time (since this is very easy to test.) Artichoker (Discussion) 23:00, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Um, maybe because I've played the games? And if Lotad could have both Swift Swim and Rain Dish at once, I wouldn't have had to breed so many of them to get the 'right' ability? In any case, I guess they changed it in D/P. Nevermind. 128.54.228.80 (talk) 22:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Character's Pokemon
The show revolves around them catching Pokemon! Since that's the point of the show it's not worthy to name which types of Pokemon they have! Otherwise the articles are all like Max's, that they don't have any! Just leave them in there because their Pokemon are important to the plot of the show! --71.115.66.40 (talk) 21:55, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Pokémon are important of course, but nonnotable for the articles on characters like Ash Ketchum. Maintaining a list of all of his Pokémon is of limited interest, and so it should be taken out. Artichoker (Discussion) 22:18, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Team Rocket
Do you think it should be redirected? I've trimmed and pasted most of it. Ultra! 15:26, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I think it could be a redirect. I'll go do that now. Thanks. Artichoker (Discussion) 16:27, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Ash Ketchum
While they may be anons, they are still editors. I think that removing his Pokemon counts as a controversial action due to the revert warring over it, and you should garner a consensus in a discussion before repeating the deletion. Cheers,  -  The Hybrid  -   02:42, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes you do need to take our opinions into consideration. You constantly say that we have no reason worth editing it and that we need to give a reason, yet all you do is say "It's nonnotable."  You're the only one who deletes it, and that's only your opinion.  I would appreciate it if you would think of others and not only yourself!--71.115.66.40 (talk) 02:29, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Also you were saying how we need to get others approval to make edits about certain things, and yet I didn't see you making any discussions about weither the Pokemon sections should be removed. You were just hoping that nobody would listen to us because we were anons, but that's hypocrisy, you need to make discussions next time you make an edit!--71.115.66.40 (talk) 02:39, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I do think of others, and I also think of the good of the article. I have proved your claim, that I am the only one who deletes it, wrong on the talk page. Hybrid here reminded me that I needed to make a discussion before I reverted again. And at the time of his posting here, my current version was on the article. Now someone has nicely started a section on the talk page, and I have responded to it. You however, do need to give a better argument as to why the Pokémon section should be added back. All you have done so far is make frivolous claims that distract from the original discussion. Artichoker (Discussion) 13:26, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Is Legendary Pokemon needed?
Google hits show all fansites. I added its parts to both games and anime. Ultra! 16:26, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
 * No, it probably isn't. I think I'll make that a redirect too. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Artichoker (Discussion) 17:35, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Need an opinion on Orange Islands
Somebody is reverting this redirect to Pokemon regions saying "discuss it first." Ultra! 14:17, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with you that the article should become a redirect. However, since they continue to revert you I suggest you discuss it on the talk page first, like they said. I will participate in the discussion. Artichoker (Discussion) 16:39, 25 May 2008 (UTC)