Talk:Mimikyu/GA1

GA Review

Passed. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 05:08, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Pokelego999 (talk · contribs)

Reviewer: Hydrangeans (talk · contribs) 14:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'd like to pick up this review. Pokémon are interesting to write about for Wikipedia's broad audience, and this is an intriguing article. I aim to complete the initial review over this weekend. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 14:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The nominator has resolved the issues identified in the reivew. The article's prose is clear and concise and can be understood by a reasonably general audience. Reliable sources are cited inline and original research and copyright violations are avoided. The article reasonably covers the topic's main elements. The article is neutral, and it's stable. An appropriate image, with a Fair Use Rationale, is included. The result of this review is passed. Thank you, Pokelego999, for this contribution to Wikipedia! Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 05:08, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999: I just finished an initial pass. Overall, the article is in a satisfying state. You've done well to try to lay out the necessary context for understanding the character and its reception and place in the cultures/demographics it reaches. There are some spots where I think further explanation would be useful, whether in line or in an EFN, plus some other feedback to polish the article and be a good contender as a GA. Feel free to ask about my comments or explain why something I'm suggesting doesn't work if it doesn't. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hydrangeans Made the edits you wished for me to make. Let me know if anything else needs to be done. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:12, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999: Thanks for that really prompt reply to my review comments! The majority of the implementation was great. I've replied to a few of the matters and have a few further questions. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 00:43, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hydrangeans replied to your replies, hope this is satisfactory. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 01:07, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999: Great work on this round. Just a few small matters, summarized here and further detailed below:

Content–source alignment for the phrase too horrifying to behold (the "to behold" bit doesn't seem to be verified in either cited source)
Explanation for what "Generation VII" means (mentioned in the sentence about the popularity poll)
Whether or not you want to add content summarizing Cassone using Mimikyu as an example about Pokédex entries and the fan rationalization of them
Making the date format consistent across citations

Once those are resolved, I think it'll be time for spot checks. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 01:47, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hydrangeans Fixed the sentence, and rephrased Gen VII's mention. I've elected not to include Cassone for now just in case of potential confusion, though it's definitely a viable source that could potentially be included at another point in time. I've already made the date format consistent, though let me know if I missed any. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 02:09, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999: I think the sentence rephrase works, and the article's still a reasonably complete summary without that additional detail from Cassone. As for the dates of publication in the citations, I've circled the remaining ones. Based on this edit, I take it you're going for [Date Month Year]. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 02:33, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hydrangeans fixed all remaining date citation issues. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 02:44, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

However, in the animated series: You use the word however, but I'm not quite seeing this contrast between the game and animated depictions in the article, summarized from a source. This may be inadvertent editorializing (note the "worsd to watch"). I'd encourage cutting the "However" and just starting the sentence as "in the animated series". Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's a leftover from a previous editor that I missed during my edits on the article. Thanks for the catch. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 22:41, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Granting that the lead is a summary of material in the body, but do you think it'd be worthwhile to mention here in the lead that Pikachu is the franchise mascot, hence the meaningfulness of the Mimikyu character/species' imitation of Pikachu? Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added a note that Pikachu is the series mascot both here and in appearances. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 22:41, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks; good fixes here. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 23:43, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Design and characteristics

some can transform into stronger species through a process called evolution: Is this necessary for this article? Evolution doesn't seem to be mentioned anywhere else. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is from a copypasta-esque bit of text used at the start of Pokémon species articles to lay down basic information about the series for readers. It's been used in other GAs for species, but admittedly this is the first one where the Pokémon in question isn't part of an evolutionary family. If you still feel it should be cut, then that's likely fine given the context of the article, but I did just want to clarify in any case. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 22:39, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Makes sense that this is used across articles; it's a good summary of the main necessities. I do think you might as well cut the line about evolution, since it doesn't apply to Mimikyu. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 23:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, removed. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:43, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Something that you don't mention is that Pokémon have "types" rooted in elemental or other affinities and can have "abilities" and "moves". None of that is brought up until Mimikyu is described in Appearances as a Ghost/Fairy type with a special "Z-move" and "ability", and those don't have enough context for an unfamiliar reader, I think. I think rather than talk about evolution, if this first paragraph talks about Pokémon types, moves, and abilities, that'd be useful. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I find it a bit difficult to define the specificities of types to a casual audience, but I've tried to change up the wording in spots to make it more clear. I've also added context to Z-Moves and made the ability description less game-terminology focused. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 22:40, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You did well in explaining that; the new explanations work! Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 23:43, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, as with the lead, you mention that part of the Mimikyu design and narrative is the resemblance to Pikachu, but you don't mention what Pikachu is or that Pikachu is the franchise mascot. I talk about this more in my comments for the Promotion section, but I think this is where Cassone's essay would make sense to cite as a way to summarize the semiotic relationship Mimikyu's design and narrative has with the franchise mascot.
The cloak is so shabby and worn that it is almost unrecognizable as Pikachu: Is it possible to clarify if this is what's supposed to be the case in the setting (as in, characters in the Pokémon world find it difficult to recognize Mimikyu's cloak as resembling a Pikachu) or if this Nadia Oxford writing for USGamer is saying is true for a real life audience's reception of Mimikyu (as in, do real life audiences who play the games or watch the show or see the character struggle to recognize the cloak as resembling a Pikachu)? Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Removed due to potentially unclear wording. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 22:43, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sensible enough to do so. Sorry to have missed this on my first pass, but is there a way to address is said to be too horrifying to behold? That's another case of "are characters saying this or are audiences saying this?". Is this a Pokédex entry? Maybe you could say something like "as according to the Pokédex its true form is said to be too horrifying to behold", especially since you already introduce the Pokédex in the first paragraph of the section. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 23:46, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe it was a Pokedex entry, but I feel either way it may potentially be unclear due to taking a subjective viewpoint on the subject's appearance. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:43, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the concern. What makes sense for Wikipedia to do is admittedly a pretty narrow and specific thing: while we wouldn't use Wikipedia's voice to describe Mimikyu as horrifying to look at (or as cute), we can objectively describe others' subjective descriptions/ascriptions of/to the character. So just as it's fine for the page to cite Carden (2017) calling Mimikyu a "Mimikyutie", I think Wikipedia can describe how in the setting Mimikyu is supposedly horrifying.

I also did just realize there's an issue: I don't think either Dennis (2016) or Cassone (2021) actually verify that Mimikyu is supposed to be too horrifying to behold. Cassone just says that its true appearance is "terrifying". So this seems to need some other revision altogether. I think the detail still matters for inclusion; Mimikyu covering up its terrifying appearance is apparently an important part of the character/species. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 01:37, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mimikyu is voiced by Billy Bob Thompson in English: Is this in the video games or in the animated series?
You mention that Mimikyu is voiced by Billy Bob Thompson; should Megumi Mizutani as the designer be mentioned too? Granted these are primary sources, but the article doesn't depend on them for notability and these seem like reasonable uses to identify key real life people involved in the creation process. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added, good catch. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 22:43, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Appearances

I mentioned above that I think Pokémon having types, abilities, and moves needs contextualizing, whether in the Design section or here. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added a description for types in the Design and characteristics section, and added context on the other two. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 22:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
a Totem Pokémon- a special boss opponent in game- in both: The formatting here seems a little off. Consider reformatting to either a Totem Pokémon – a special boss opponent in game – in both or to a Totem Pokémon—a special boss opponent in game—in both. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 22:43, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
encountered by Jessie, James, and Meowth of Team Rocket: Any way to mention here who these characters are, i. e. recurring characters who act as antagonists? This also contextualizes why they're fighting the series protagonist, as mentioned later in the paragraph. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added context Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 22:44, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mimikyu appears: Should this be "a Mimikyu", since it's a specific one (as reinforced at the end of the paragraph)? The lead and earlier sections already clarify that Mimikyu is a species, so I think a reader will be able to understand that there can be multiple Mimikyu in the setting and that this animated series character is a particular Mimikyu. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to "A Mimikyu" Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 22:44, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Meowth, being able to understand Mimikyu, is terrified by the unheard horrifying things it says: This might be hard to get for someone unfamiliar with the series. Is there any way to add some context, whether as an EFN ([[Help:Explanatory notes

|explanatory footnote]]) or a parenthetical aside, why it is that of the three only Meowth can understand Mimikyu? I realize that might be a bit of an ask, asking you to identify a source that explains that in the animated series Pokémon can apparently understand human speech but aren't necessarily intelligible in turn with exceptions like Meowth, but it would go a long way to preventing confusion for a less familiar reader. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added a brief source describing Meowth's ability to talk. Also made other edits per your other Appearances comments. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 22:53, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On Meowth, pardon my particularity, but I wonder if this could be said more precisely as "Meowth, a Pokémon who can also speak human language", since at least from what the cited source says, the animated series' depiction of Pokémon is that they can talk to each other, even if they can't speak human language. And that helps clarify how it is that Mimikyu, despite "not talking" (or rather, not talking in a human language), can say "horrifying things" and talk about hating Pikachu.
Also, the introduction of the new citation is affecting the content-source integrity: since the Gamer article about Meowth's role in the animated series vis-a-vis its depiction of Pokémon communication is cited before Comicbook article "Mimikyu Is Super Messed Up", it looks as if the former is what's verifying the content about Mimikyu's appearance in the animated series, when that's not the case. Or to say it more directly, could the "Mimikyu Is Super Messed Up" citation be added again to, say, the end of A Mimikyu appears in the anime Pokémon: Sun & Moon, encountered by Jessie, James, and Meowth of Team Rocket?
Related to that, neither of those sources strictly speaking verify that Team Rocket are recurring antagonists in the series. Could a source for that be appended to the end of the clause a group of recurring antagonists in the series? Thanks for bearing with these fixes. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 23:53, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Made changes where necessary. It's surprisingly annoying to find a source describing Team Rocket as a role without it being assumed people know already, so let me know if that source works out for it purpose. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:45, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That citation works; great! Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 01:29, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the was uploaded to the official Pokémon YouTube channel: Any way to change this to active voice, something like "that the Pokémon Company uploaded to its official YouTube channel"? Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
alongside Scraggy: Since the reader may not know that Scraggy is a Pokémon, can that be briefly mentioned/explained? Something like "alongside another Pokémon called Scraggy"?
It will assist the player who released it, and will attempt to grab and attack enemy players when summoned: Could this sentence be revised to state player character and enemy player characters rather than players? As written it sort of reads as saying that the Smash Bros Mimikyu character will try to attack the human players playing the game, as much as it's obvious that can't happen. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mimikyu also appears as a Spirit in this game: Any way to contextualize what a "Spirit" is in Smash Bros, whether in line or in an EFN? Is a Spirit a name for a power-up? An ally character who helps in the gameplay? Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Throughout the section, there's some inconsistency about whether you describe the species/character's appearance in media in the present tense (appears) or in the past tense (appeared/reappeared). This would be better if rendered consistent. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion and reception

Peach John released: Small matter—so as to not oblige a reader to click the link, could it be mentioned in text or in an EFN that Peach John is a clothing retailer? Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 22:53, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
it "to great effect", and": Since the clause following the "and" isn't an independent clause, I think foregoing the comma is more grammatical. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 22:54, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
merchandise, stating "Grappling: Here, I think a comma is necessary after "stating" since it's introducing an independent clause in a quotation. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Changed Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 22:55, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
while the others did not: Because both "Mimikyu" and "players" intervene here, it's not entirely clear that the antecedent to "others" is supposed to be "generation VII Pokémon". Can the article go ahead and restate that so the phrase is "while the other generation VII Pokémon did not"? Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to "while the other Pokémon did not" for clarity Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 22:56, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Related to the above, the current version of the article doesn't explain how Pokémon are classified in "generations" tied to new settings introduced in mainline releases. Is that something that can be explained? Maybe in an EFN? Either that, or phrase this instead as "other new Pokémon introduced in Pokémon Sun and Moon"? Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 22:55, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just noticed that the phrase Generation VII is used earlier in the Promotion section, in the first sentence of the second paragraph about the Pokémon company's popularity poll. So that needs to either be explained, or alternatively rephrased along the lines of the other Pokémon revealed for Pokémon Sun and Moon phrasing you used (or perhaps "other new Pokémon introduced in Pokémon Sun and Moon"?). Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 23:56, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rephrased. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 02:07, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
one of the most pleasant surprise to come out: A minor typo; I think that should be "surprises". Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 22:56, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mimikyu was analyzed as an example of a meta-referential element in the series: This seems misplaced. Cassone's paper, at least as summarized in the article, isn't talking about the public reception of Mimikyu but is instead providing an interpretation of the design's semiotic interaction with the Pikachu mascot, and with it being an interpretation of the design, should this be in the Design section instead? Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The paper discusses the fan reaction with this quote "Many long-term fans have appreciated the meta-referential elements of the franchise such as Mimikyu, (or the eighth generation fossil Pokémon), elaborating many fan theories that try to address the most glaring contradictions in the franchise" It also analyzes Mimikyu as a meta reference on its own, which is its own form of analysis of the design instead of being basic description information. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:00, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
its own form of analysis of the design instead of being basic description information: Yes, Cassone's article is more than basic description—but its interpretation is also precisely what is expected of a secondary source. Secondary sources assess, observe, and interpret; tertiary sources like Wikipedia summarize those findings. The way Cassone's paper is being used in the article right now is a sort of "citing the source to say the source says something": Mimikyu was analyzed as an example of a meta-referential element and It was highlighted as an example. Why not summarize more straightforwardly? For examples:
"Mimikyu is a meta-referential element of the Pokémon franchise; its imitation of Pikachu references the latter's role as the series mascot." (page 554). This could be in the Design and characteristics section, or in Appearances? It's not really reception; this is less about people's reaction to Mimikyu than about what Mimikyu was created to evoke. Cassone makes this more explicit on page 557: the authors and managers of the franchise, who purposely do not focus on strong internal narrative coherence, willingly presenting meta-references. Cassone's description of Mimikyu's meta-refentiality isn't about what audiences think of Mimikyu but about what the creators of Mimikyu intended for Mimikyu to be.
I also think there's a bit of a disconnect between how the article is summarizing Cassone and what Cassone actually says. The article text says, It was highlighted as an example of how the series' own self contradictions- such as Pikachu's in-universe popularity- were widely accepted by fans and developed into fixtures of the series. However, this doesn't quite line up with Cassone:
Cassone doesn't talk about Pikachu being popular within the setting of Pokémon but about Pikachu's popularity outside the setting, in the real, "external" world: the diegetic universe hints at the artificial nature of the franchise by referring to an "external" world where Pikachu is not just a Pokémon among others, but the franchise mascot, or more precisely, its face. (554)

The article text states that fans embraced the series' self contradictions, but Cassone states instead that Many long-term fans have appreciated the meta-referential elements (554, italics added). The "contradictions" are brought up in a separate clause, separated by a comma, stating that there are many fan theories that try to address the most glaring contradictions in the franchise and that this is an example of the way in which fans appreciate Pokémon's meta-referential elements.

The matter of self contradiction is also awkwardly summarized in the article as-is. According to Cassone, it's not that Mimikyu is an example of a self contradiction but rather that Mimikyu's PokéDex entry is an example of the amusingly incoherent Pokédex: the anthropomorphism in Pokémon is both internally incoherent (with many Pokémon assuming various degrees of human traits, or being based on humans) and diegetically exposed. While certain Pokémon may raise fewer issues for the interpreter’s cultural encyclopedia, others do so to various degrees, with the further fact that incoherencies are highlighted within the franchise itself, mainly through the descriptions in the PokéDex (the diegetic encyclopedia of the Pokémon Universe), as well as by meta-referential elements. The most notable examples are [and then Cassone lists some examples; one of them being how many Pokémon possess specific behaviours which duplicate or resemble cultural ones attributed to humans and how Some of these features are particularly incoherent because they are attributed to a species, while apparently describing unique characters (#778 Mimikyu’s disguise, this being about how Mimikyu's longing for friendship (something that would seem to be an individuated experience) is generalized into a trait for the entire species.

And this is the context for what Cassone says about fans. Cassone doesn't really describe fans reacting to Mimikyu specifically; Cassone's observation about how fans devise theories to explain the franchise setting's apparent illogic is elaborated later in the paper in the phrase For instance, the explicitly incoherent nature of the PokéDex descriptions has led to the fan theory that its entries were written by the ten-year-old characters of previous games, thus explaining the Pokémon individualization, the impossible measurements, the conflicting entries and descriptions by rumours, and so on. (557). In Cassone's paper, Mimikyu is thus an example of Pokémon individualization in the Pokédex, and Cassone doesn't describe fan reactions to Mimikyu so much as fan reactions to the Pokédex in general, with Mimikyu entry being one example of the way the Pokédex is written.
All this to say, more briefly: the portion of the article that's summarizing Cassone (2021) needs some revision to more accurately reflect what Cassone says. One sentence I suggest is to cite Cassone to say in the Design section that ""Mimikyu is a meta-referential element of the Pokémon franchise; its imitation of Pikachu references the latter's role as the series mascot." (cited to page 554). It's correctly cited to the clause ending its true form is said to be too horrifying to behold (referring to material on page 552). But the statement that an example of how the series' own self contradictions- such as Pikachu's in-universe popularity- were widely accepted by fans and developed into fixtures of the series isn't an accurate reflection of what Cassone states. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 00:21, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the response. I must have misinterpreted what the article was saying when I cited it, my apologies on that front. In any case, I've made the changes you've requested to the Design section, let me know if that's alright. Would you suggest including reference to Cassone's assessment of how fans rationalize self-contradictory information (The Mimikyu individual vs species characterization) or would you leave that out of the Reception? Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:52, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. This sort of thing happens. A similar issue came up in a recent GA nomination of my own when the reviewer and I had to parse out what a source was saying.

As for including a summarization of Cassone talking about the Mimikyu Pokédex entry in the context of fans rationalizing the Pokédex's conflation of individual-seeming characteristics with species traits—if you think there's a clean way to summarize that and that it's relevant to the Mimikyu article, go for it. I'm somewhat neutral on this, so I'll support your decision. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 01:40, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

The Good article criteria don't require any particular citation style; what most matters is consistency, and this is largely consistent. That said—and it's alright to not consider this mandatory, but I think it could help—would you consider using a shortened reference form (whether SFN, Harvtxt, or RP) for the two paginated sources in the article (Millennial Monsters and "Gotta Face 'Em All")? I ask that because while the other sources are generally short enough that it's plausible to read through them for verification (not only by myself but by future users as well), especially with "Gotta Face 'Em All" the page range for the entire article is pretty long and makes it harder to know where in the article to locate the information. I realize the Millennial Monsters citation already has a relatively narrow range; using an SFN or RP or something for it as well would just be a matter of consistency with the other paginated source. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm admittedly not familiar with using these, so I managed to get it working for "Gotta Face 'Em All" but not the Cassone source. How would I go about fixing doing it with the Cassone source? Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:11, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like you made an SFN for Millennial Monsters, but you also have it in with the rest of the unpaginated citations. I made a couple sandboxes to try to demonstrate what I mean:
Example of how to use the RP template

Example of how to use the SFN template
I hope it doesn't seem like I'm requiring a specific citation format, since that's not part of GA review. These are just two ideas for how you can indicate narrow page ranges to make information summarizing Cassone's "Gotta Face 'Em All" easier for readers to locate and verify. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 00:37, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe I've made the necessary changes to the SFN template? It's a bit confusing but I think I'm sort of getting the hang of it now. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 01:07, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nicely done! Thanks for bearing with that. It just makes long, paginated sources that much easier to check. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 01:40, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, just noticed something—this is very minor, but double check if the formatting for publication dates is consistent across sources. I see there's December 25, 2016 for Hillard's "Pokémon Red & Blue – A Look Back" and June 22, 2018) for Radulovic's "Everything We Know", but 2018-12-07 for Shea's "Nintendo Details New Pokémon}} and 2021-12-31 for Casssone's "Gotta Face 'Em All", and 28 November 2016 for Kleinman's "How to Catch Mimikyu" an 13 July 2016 for Hernandez's "The Internet Has Fallen in Love". An ideal scenario would be for each citation to use the same date format, whether [Month Day, Year] or [Year Month Day] or [YYY-MM-DD], etc. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 00:42, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed citation date formats Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 01:03, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but it doesn't look like they have been made consistent (permanent link to live page version as of writing this comment). They're all still jumbled up: some are [Month Date, Year], some are [Date Month Year], some are [YYY-MM-DD]. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 01:43, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

File:Pokémon Mimikyu art.png: Has a standard Fair Use rationale, so I think that's good to go. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spot checks

To follow after the content comments are resolved. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999: I've completed the spot check. Please resolve the verification issues as indicated by or . Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 03:49, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mimikyu is a small Pokémon, standing 8 inches (0.2 m) tall: I realized that this isn't verified by Cassone (2021)—but it doesn't seem to be verified by Oxford (2016) either. Mimikyu's size seems relevant to understanding the character concept—its smallness as depicted is probably context for its perception as cute, since an elephant-sized Mimikyu would be much less pleasant to imagine—but is there a source to verify that? Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 03:49, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cited now. Missed that one when going through edits. Also is giving me the image of a massive Mimikyu, which is frankly hilarious. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:14, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Pokémon itself hides underneath a tattered cloak, that is shaped like Pikachu, with black eyes, orange cheeks, a black mouth, a lightning bolt-shaped stick that resembles a tail, and ears that are black on the top. A pair of beady black eyes can be seen in the lower area of its costume, and a vague semblance of a lower body can be seen at its costume's hem. During some attacks, it will occasionally extend a black appendage from beneath the disguise: Do you have the right citation attached to this sentence? None of this is verified by Oxford (2019). That source's entire coverage of Mimikyu is This adorable, creeping horror is one of Sun and Moon's most beloved additions to the larger Pokemon roster. Aside from its dark (but sympathetic) lore, Mimikyu is a tough target to hit. Its typing makes it immune to Normal, Fighting, and Dragon-based attacks, but more than that, its "Disguise" ability allows it to absorb the damage from one hit. Opponents who aren't prepared for a face-off against Mimikyu may find themselves in big trouble. I'll add that the website is no longer live, so I looked at the archived link. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 03:49, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Changed the wording to be less in-depth, and also cited the basic overview description. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:15, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mimikyu is voiced by Billy Bob Thompson in English: Verified with the source cited.
It changes its appearance when hit by an attack: This is cited to Kleinman (2016) but the source does not verify that Mimikyu's appearance changes when hit with an attack. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 03:49, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added a source now. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:15, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mimikyu can use an exclusive Z-Move— a special, one-time use powerful attack— known as "Let's Snuggle Forever", that requires Mimikyu to know the attack "Play Rough" and hold a Mimikium Z: This is cited to Kleinman (2016) but the source does not verify the content about what Z-Moves are or that Mimikyu can use one called "Let's Snuggle Forever" when holding a Mimikium Z. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 03:49, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could have sworn there was a source verifying that at some point. In any case, added. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:15, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
a special boss opponent in game: This is in a sentence cited to Tapsell (2017), but the source doesn't verify what Totem Pokémon are; only that Mimikyu is one. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 03:49, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cited. I can see the source being a bit iffy in wording though so lemme know if it's alright for what it's describing. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:16, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
and Pokkén Tournament DX: Verified by the source cited.
Meowth lifts Mimikyu's disguise, and is nearly killed by the sight of its true appearance: This is cited to Hoffer (2016) but the source doesn't verify this. Hoffer states, Mimikyu tries to kill him when Meowth attempts to see what's under Mimikyu's costume. According to the source, it's not that seeing Mimikyu's true appearance nearly kills Meowth; it's that Mimikyu reacts to Meowth getting a glimpse by trying to kill him. If Hoffer is wrong; consider citing this to Hernandez (2016) instead, who says it is the sight of Mimikyu's appearance that nearly kills Meowth. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 03:49, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to the Hernandez cite Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:16, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It later allies with Team Rocket when it sees them fighting Ash Ketchum's Pikachu, expressing its hate for Pikachu as the reason it emulates the Pokémon's appearance: Verified by the source cited.
This specific Mimikyu briefly reappears in Pokémon Journeys: The Series: This is cited to Anime News Network (2023), but the source doesn't verify Mimikyu's appearance in the Journeys series. In fact, it only mentions Mimikyu in the title of a Pokétoon short. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 03:49, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could have sworn I put a source describing that in there. In any case, I can't seem to locate that source now, so I've removed the information given a lack of a source discussing this. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:16, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mimikyu appears in a music video rapping about itself that was uploaded by The Pokémon Company to their YouTube channel: Verified by the sources cited. Technically neither mention YouTube in-text, but the video thumbnail is visible, so that's probably fine.
Mimikyu also appears as a Spirit— a collectable item that can give buffs to a playable character— in game: This one needs to be read carefully, but a full read of the cited source does verify that in context, the article is talking about Mimikyu as a Spirit (see description of Pokémon as Spirits such as Smeargle further up the page).
Items featuring the character were sold in retail shops in Japan beginning on September 22, 2018 Verified by the cited source.
Mimikyu was voted the most popular Pokémon introduced in Sun and Moon with 99,077 votes: This is cited to Hernandez (2020), but the source doesn't verify that Mimikyu was voted most popular Pokémon introduced in Sun and Moon, or even in Generation VII. The source only verifies that Mimikyu placed third overall. Additionally, the contest does not verify what is the "most popular" Pokémon but rather was a poll to determine "Pokémon of the Year" in 2020. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 03:49, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added a Fanbyte source that clarifies these points. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:17, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They highlighted that its popularity came from the fact that Mimikyu "needed" players while the other Pokémon did not, stating that it seemed "expertly tuned to grip fans' hearts and never let go," due to the emotional vulnerability the Pokémon displayed: This is cited to ["The Power of Helplessness: Why Everybody Loves Mimikyu and Hates Popplio" Hawkins (2016)] and is mostly alright. The overall information, including about Bewear and Popplio, is verified. However, the quoted "needed" is slightly off; Hawkins states it in the present tense: "Mimikyu needs", not needed. Also, is there any particular reason why the name of the author, Janine Hawkins, is not included in the citation template? Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 03:49, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Hawkins thing seems to have been an issue with the auto-citation. It's fixed, and I've adjusted the quote, which was likely just caused when either me or a previous editor (I forget who) copied it down. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:18, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hydrangeans I've addressed all of the citation issues. Let me know if anything else needs to be done. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:18, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mimikyu is a meta-referential element of the Pokémon franchise; its imitation of Pikachu references the latter's role as the series mascot. Nothing wrong with the sourcing of this sentence, but it's oddly placed, at the top of the paragraph. A reader may not realize yet, if they skipped the lead, that Mimikyu resembles Pikachu in the first place. Can this be moved to be after it's mentioned that Mimikyu's disguise looks like Pikachu? Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 04:24, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

During some attacks, it will occasionally extend a black appendage from beneath the disguise. This sentence is cited to the Oxford (2016) USGamer source but doesn't verify the content. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 04:24, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

99,077 votes: The Fanbyte citation does verify that Mimikyu won the vote for Alola Pokémon but not the vote total (which the Kotaku source also doesn't verify). Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 04:28, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999:: Great resolutions! See three matters for resolution above. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 04:30, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hydrangeans Surprisingly can't seem to find a source on the arm, so I've removed that line. I've also shifted the meta-referential line to after the Pikachu line and adjusted accordingly. Removed the vote count. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:35, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999: It looks like the appendage line was accidentally left in (permanent link).

like Pikachu, and acts as a meta-referential element of the Pokémon franchise: there's just a minor grammar hiccup here. It should either be "like Pikachu, and it acts" (a command indicating the beginning of a new independent clause) or "like Pikachu and acts as" (no comma because the subsequent clause is a dependent one). Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 04:45, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hydrangeans Good catch on the appendage line. Removed it and fixed the Pikachu meta-referential line. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:48, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above spot check comments have been resolved. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 05:08, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sentiment was shared by other contributors to the site, who echoed similar praises: This source does verify that plural Destructoid contributors praised Mimikyu in similar terms.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.