Talk:List of generation VI Pokémon/Archive 1
This is an archive of past discussions about List of generation VI Pokémon. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Is there a reason that "generation" isn't capitalized on these pages?
If there is, please inform me. Paintspot (talk) 17:56, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
First FL possibility?
I like the changes you made to this list today, @Cyclonebiskit:! This list seems to be very close to FL criteria right now. Seems like a pretty cool possibility ^_^ ~Mable (chat) 20:44, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
No Greninja article? Why not?
Hey, guys. Did you know why there has never been any article about Greninja? And I also wants to know if you can create one for me? Or if not, please tell me why not? Thomas Wiencek (talk) 01:51, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Thomas Wiencek: Most likely no one has bothered to create one. There's almost certainly enough information to support having a standalone article for Greninja, so you're more than welcome to start it up yourself if you wish. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 01:58, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on List of generation VI Pokémon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141102070422/http://ppg.canon.jp/pokemon/ to http://ppg.canon.jp/pokemon/
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www1.ipdl.inpit.go.jp/syutsugan/TM_DETAIL_A.cgi?0&614&0&580&46&138816922369494602384024
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www1.ipdl.inpit.go.jp/syutsugan/TM_DETAIL_A.cgi?0&615&0&580&46&138816922369494602384024
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www1.ipdl.inpit.go.jp/syutsugan/TM_DETAIL_A.cgi?0&619&0&580&46&138816922369494602384024
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:51, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
Zygarde page
Can someone make a page about Zygarde. You've made one for Xerneas and Yveltal, so why not Zygarde. I don't know how to code so can someone do it for me please? Thanks. Porygon-Z (talk) 17:34, 28 May 2019 (UTC)
On the topic of Greninja
Based on the current state of this article, I really think it would be better as a redirect. It's *popular*, but that's about it; it hasn't had any real analysis 38.75.235.237 (talk) 21:03, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
- I still have the same opinions I had during the last AfD, so if you want my opinions, you can look there, but in brief summary, I do think Greninja squeaks past notability thresholds. Barely, yes, but there is something there.
- Though I still feel it should be kept, I feel a merge would be better than a redirect should the article reach a conclusion of not meeting standalone notability thresholds, just because there are some decent sources in the article that can be used regardless of individual notability or not. Pokelego999 (talk) 01:30, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- disagree
- i think it's more than notable enough for its own article (if the one with all the porn and gardevoir getting them is anything to go by), but it's kinda meh as an article. would appreciate some reworking, but i really wouldn't say it needs to be merged or anything
- if personal opinions worked here, i'd have this site pretend that frogadier just doesn't evolve into anything, but that's just not how we do it in this garden cogsan (give me attention) (see my deeds) 11:15, 21 November 2023 (UTC)