Printable View
We generally get the alternate artworks (see Category:Kyurem on the Archives), but we only use the main one on the Pokemon's page itself. Although we may wait until we get a clean release of this alternate artwork before we upload it.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Outrage
Early today I was thinking, wouldn't it be a great idea to have a move origin section, like there is with pokémon? I frequently see people questioning why a move does what it does, such as with aerial ace's wide distribution, why razor leaf is a physical attack, why faint attack is not related to the user fainting, etc. It seems like it would make for interesting information, with moves based on rituals (fire blast), sci-fi references (simple beam), strange phenomena (will o wisp, fire spin), physics concepts (gyro ball), weapons such as caltrops (spikes), among others.
I think the Warlords of Pokémon Conquest should have their own pages. Even if they're based on real people with their own Wikipedia pages, there's a lot of fictional elements that we could cover, like about their role in the plot, and what Pokémon they use. Maybe the generic Warriors could all be lumped together in one page, though.
we are currently working on how we want to organize the Conquest information. characters, Pokemon, locations, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by TorchicBlaziken
Please have some patience, we are trying our best to update the articles. You are more than welcome to contribute.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anser
I wish I could, but I have no information about the game, and also I don't know how I can contribute :( I'd be more than willing to help, though. Also, I'm not trying to rush you or anything, I just wanted to know if the information is going to appear sometime. Don't worry, I'll wait! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by AdynizPlease have some patience, we are trying our best to update the articles. You are more than welcome to contribute.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anser
Due to the small number of moves that this actually matters with, currently this information just goes in the trivia section.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hayarotle
Yeah, we've already decided that we want to give them their own pages, we just need to info. They're being linked to their Wikipedia pages right now because they don't have pages yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by TorchicBlaziken
I edited Multi-hit Move with all of the correct calculations. Please do not remove my hard work. Finally, it is easy to see just how much average power and effective power each multi-hit move has.
Again, let me reiterate: No matter how mundane it may seem, these numbers only provide a better understanding of how damage is calculated in multi-hit moves.
I understand why average power would be useful, but short of giving every move an effective power, I really don't think it is necessary.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aviator Zero
That's the thing, though. All of the other hundreds of moves don't need an Effective Power column, because basic statistics dictates that a 100 power move that hits 70% of the time effectively has 70 power on average. That truly is mundane, but 2-5 hit moves, and perhaps Triple Kick and the high critical hit ratio moves are so complicated that it certainly would help to give an idea of the move's expected outcome.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnorlaxMonster
Might be a dumb question, but what constitutes "stealing from other websites" in the context of sourcing and citing information?
I want to get around to expanding articles about some of the older or defunct fansites from the turn of the millenium. I found a wiki with a wealth of UPNetwork information that would be useful for the Bulbapedia article. If I write it in my own words and cite the source, is that okay? I know it's worked in school projects, but I don't know what the wiki admins think.
With wikis it depends on the license of the wiki as to what extent the information can be sourced, but I would be surprised if any wiki used a license that didn't allow facts to be cited with attribution when it's written in your own words.Quote:
Originally Posted by UnovaCastaway
In general, as long as a source is considered reliable for information on the subject and they haven't specifically told us that they don't want to be used as a source of info (e.g.: Serebii.net), they're fine to use as a source, again provided there is attribution.
UPNetwork? Can you give a more detailed idea of that?Quote:
Originally Posted by UnovaCastaway
Also, could you provide a link to that wiki? I'd like to read what it may have that Bulbapedia doesn't so far (I kinda love trivia).
This is about the card game? Or something else? I'm not quite getting it...Quote:
Originally Posted by Digifiend
