Thread: So a decision must be made.

Guess who gets to make it.

That's right, you guys, the random users who decide to show up here in the Bulbawiki forum.

Users have, over the course of Bulbapedia's history, gotten pissed at us because of our unique style. Disliking the X (Pokémon) style we use, and the {{p}} template. And especially the many species disambiguations we have. Tired of clicking through from Torterra to get that oh-so-precious learnset data? Here's your chance to be heard.

This vote determines the fate of Bulbapedia. Do we rid ourselves of the disambiguations and redirect each and every plaintext species name to the respective X (Pokémon) article, regardless of who has owned it in the anime, manga, or any other significant Pokémon of that species, and move the disambiguation pages to X (disambiguation), with this featured at the top of every Pokémon page? Do we just move all species pages to the plain species name, and keep consistency with the rest of Encyclopaediae Pokémonis (who we rarely interact with anyway, unlike the case with NIWA's other wikis), taking the {{p}} template out of use? Or do we leave things as they are?

If you use Bulbapedia, please, give us your opinion. Give a reason behind it, too.

Well, I voted to keep things the way they are. The "extra" click to get to the species page has never bothered me, and I like the simplicity of using the {{p|}} template. I think that if we were to move the species page to , it would create a nightmare in terms of linking, as in, "Ash's [[Bulbasaur]] used Razor Leaf" would lead to the actual wrong page, not just a disambiguation which has a link to the correct page.

Additionally, I think that the disambiguation pages add a bit of visibility to sections which don't usually get a lot of attention, such as manga, TCG and side games. Not to mention that since I often edit the manga pages, I like them being easier to get to :P

What? people still haven't gotten over this? gosh.

I say keep it, there's no problem with it and IMO it makes more sense, <Pokémon> doesn't just mean the species, it can mean anything.

I voted in favor of an all-out switch from "Species (Pokémon)" to "Species", but that's personal preference; I think simply redirecting the species names to the articles and placing the disambiguation as a separate page (linked on the top, a la wikipedia) is the most effective way to go.

I've gotten into a rough habit of typing out the full article title whenever possible, because the extra click does indeed bother me; our servers aren't always running at top speed, and every extra page loading is making it take that much longer to get to where I want to go.

When someone searches for "Blaziken", they usually want the Pokémon itself. If they wanted Harrison's Blaziken, or May's Blaziken, they'd likely either be headed for Harrison/May's article, or they'd simply scroll down to the "In the anime" section. If they wanted a list of Blaziken cards in the TCG, that's also easy to find in the species article (that section could use a bit more info, yes, but that's a project that could follow very closely behind this one).
For everyone who isn't searching for Harrison's Blaziken, or May's Blaziken, or one of the various Blaziken TCG cards (which I would imagine is a majority of our users, especially those who are not regulars), they have to speedbump over the disambiguation page for no reason.

TL;DR: if you search for "Blaziken", you probably want "Blaziken (Pokémon)". If you meant to search for a specific Blaziken, you probably don't know where it is (which is why you did such a generic search), and "Blaziken (Pokémon)" just so happens to list all that stuff too, in addition to the disambiguation notice that'll likely be up on the top.

You'll find that our servers' general failishness interferes more with saving an edit than getting anywhere.

How about just posting a disambig link on the top of the default page? That way, that link gets loaded ASAP and those looking for something else can get onto there. Also, disambig links shouldn't just be "For other uses". If something is notable enough, put direct links there first, then the disambig. All at the top of the page.

We have "In the anime", "In the manga", "In the TCG", etc. sections on our Pokémon pages, so if someone searches Celebi and wants the movie one, logically they would go to the "In the anime" section of the page, where they would be linked to the main article. regardless of that, not many people would search for, or even expect to find an article on, a character that has only ever appeared in one movie. And as Jioruji Derako said, people looking for Dawn's Ambipom don't go to Ambipom expecting it to be there.

We even do this for Misty; if people want information about her in the anime, they go to the "in the anime" section, which gives a little information and directs them to the main article of Misty (anime).

Of course, the template at the top is a further advantage. While ジャローダ 2.0's suggestion is good in almost all cases, Pikachu (and probably 2 or 3 more) would have huge sections at the top of their pages. If possible, we could have disambiguation pages only for them, and all other pages have the disambiguation on the pages themselves.

The only problem I have with the template is that it says the page is regarding the main series games. This is misleading, as all side games information is located at that page (well, except for certain individual Pokémon in Mystery Dungeon, but they have their roles summarised there anyway).

There's nothing wrong with it as it is. I've nothing to add to that that someone else hasn't already mentioned above me.

I like it the way it is. It feels much more organized and one extra click of a mouse isn't something to get uppity about. How lazy can people get? They're barely moving their bodies sitting at a computer as it is and they're up in arms about one mouse click?

I say leave it as it is. Bulbapedia's layout is great.

Originally Posted by Captain Kipper

There's nothing wrong with it as it is. I've nothing to add to that that someone else hasn't already mentioned above me.

I like it the way it is. It feels much more organized and one extra click of a mouse isn't something to get uppity about. How lazy can people get? They're barely moving their bodies sitting at a computer as it is and they're up in arms about one mouse click?

I say leave it as it is. Bulbapedia's layout is great.

With that logic, we should be putting shipping-like warnings on the front of every article saying "Are you sure that you want to view this article? It contains spoilers." because every article potentially spoils something.

It's not the fact that the extra click is unbearable, it's that it's not necessary.

How about this?
For too many notable ones, default page is disambig.
If there's only a few other uses, direct links on top of page.
If there are a lot of uses but only few are notable, direct links for notables ones and link to disambig for others.
For expected pages (Many Pokémon pages), disambig links/direct links depending on situation.

(Sticky this?)

Originally Posted by Snorlax Monster

With that logic, we should be putting shipping-like warnings on the front of every article saying "Are you sure that you want to view this article? It contains spoilers." because every article potentially spoils something.

It's not the fact that the extra click is unbearable, it's that it's not necessary.

Hm, that's a good point; but one shouldn't look up an encyclopedia expecting things they don't want to see to be omitted.

Originally Posted by Captain Kipper

Hm, that's a good point; but one shouldn't look up an encyclopedia expecting things they don't want to see to be omitted.

We won't omit it. We will just separate it into multiple pages, and give links on top of the default page. As for spoilers, that's what spoiler warnings are for, right?

Also, can we merge the second and third options? In the end, same result.

Isn't the issue at hand whether to make the current redirect go from the default Species-disambig to Species (Pokemon,) not (in real terms) what to do with the species page in terms of its naming convention?

That was my understanding, from the backend discussions we had.