This article is within the scope of WikiProject Popular culture, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Popular cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Popular cultureTemplate:WikiProject Popular culturePopular culture
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CultureWikipedia:WikiProject CultureTemplate:WikiProject Cultureculture
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion.
To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime, manga, and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anime and mangaWikipedia:WikiProject Anime and mangaTemplate:WikiProject Anime and mangaanime and manga
The title "Dragons in fiction and literature" is much better, since all dragons are fictional. We wouldn't have a "List of multicellular turtles" or a "List of people who have parents." On the other hand, the other article needs to be cleaned up. So merging the content into this format is a good idea, but use the other title. 128.227.68.11913:07, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That title may be better, but fiction is something purposefully created. The original dragons were from legend, which is something different. Mythology believed to be true by the people who think it, fiction is known to be false by the people who spread it. Please don't confuse the terms. This article only talks about dragons in fiction, not in myth and legend. DreamGuy06:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article should possibly be considered to be split. As a list, it is not very helpful at all, and appears to be an indiscriminate list. If the article were expanded to add context to all these dragons, it would become exceedingly long, and no longer a list. Would it be a good idea to split it apart to allow for expansion, or should it remain as a list without detail? --Taelus (talk) 22:58, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No merger – The article List of dragons in popular culture has very limited citations and is an article with other issues including trivial information, I would like to see that specific article improved (or deleted) before any merger was even considered. List of dragons in mythology and folklore is not the same topic either, people actually believed in these stories and the popular culture version of the list is about fictional dragons. If you want to learn more about editing styles of WP, please review MOS:LIST. Jooojay (talk) 00:30, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This is something I've kind of thought of for a while. Charizard is fire/flying and not fire/dragon and I cannot really think of any instances where it mentions it's a dragon (I think one of its mega evolutions gets part dragon though). So maybe it's literally just a lizard with wings. It's name literally derives from charcoal and lizard, it's Japanese name also is from lizard and the "-don" most likely refers to it actually being a dragon, and that it literally starts out as Charmander, known as the "Lizard Pokémon". I mean, there are dragons that are literally stated to be dragons besides being dragon-type, and dragons in literature generally fly (an example of a dragon Pokémon that doesn't fly is Goodra, who is pure dragon type, the Hisuian form being steel/dragon, although the regular is the "Dragon Pokémon" and the Hisuian the "Shell Bunker Pokémon" which obviously does not state it being a dragon) so most dragon Pokémon that represent dragons do indeed fly. Even if you are a flying dragon if you need an extra type then you won't need the flying type, like Flygon who is ground/dragon and flies (literally in the name) so if Charizard quite literally is a dragon then why isn't it a dragon type? Maybe the reason is that having your first partner become dragon type is a little too powerful or something (unless you get in a fight with an ice or fairy or another dragon type) but in my opinion it sounds fine. Swoorm, who is the final form of Wabug, the water-type first partner in Buggol (one of my fan-made works) is water/dragon. I think there might be some clashing with Buggol's first partners considering Puffipuff is grass/fairy and Starlezlem is fire/poison so Puffipuff would be good against Swoorm because both of its types beat Swoorm's types. Trust me this all makes sense. And also, Swoorm is a winged dragon that isn't part flying. And then you get dragon-types that aren't exactly dragons, take Altaria for example who is a bird, but is dragon/flying. So this all makes sense for the page. Charizard is and isn't a dragon at the same time, but dragons are literally giant lizards with wings, so why not be a dragon-type? And you can also be a dragon without being a dragon (cough cough) Horsea, as the entire line is the "Dragon Pokémon" but are sea horses but Kingdra does have the dragon type and you do need to use a dragon scale for Seadra to evolve.
–MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 03:25, 24 December 2019 (UTC)