Just a suggestion. Why is there currently no summarised article on the location of pokemon in the various games. Sure it says it on each separate page, but it would make it easier if there was a summary for each game.
Printable View
Just a suggestion. Why is there currently no summarised article on the location of pokemon in the various games. Sure it says it on each separate page, but it would make it easier if there was a summary for each game.
Probably because there's too much info to include. There are about 50, probably even more, locations in each game where Pokemon can be found. Such an article would be longer than the longest article currently found on the 'pedia.Quote:
Originally Posted by alexpreston
I mean, it's not a pain in the ass to actually make the page, but it would be to navigate it. and perhaps hard on the eyes, because less than 1/2 the page's width would be taken up (at least on my 1366 x 768 screen).
It could be created into brackets of pokemon from 1-50,51-100,101-151, etc...Quote:
Originally Posted by Zekurom
Plus, it would only contain a small amount of data for each pokemon , just locations for that game.
That small amount of data takes up a whole infobox. Multiply that by 493, and oh man have you got a long page.Quote:
Originally Posted by alexpreston
Not to mention all the locations should be listed on the species page anyway. If you are looking for where to find a particular Pokémon then just go to that Pokémon's page. For example, on Zubat's page.
He said that he knew they were on the page, but whether there was just a conglomerate location where it could be found.Quote:
Originally Posted by Werdnae
I don't know why he'd want it either, but you're saying something he's already addressed.
I fail.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zekurom
No, there isn't a conglomerate location, and nor is there likely to be. Like Zeukrom says, it would just be far too long, and require too many pages to be practical. Use the list of Pokémon by in-game availability to see if it is available in that game, and then look at the species page of the ones you want.
You know what we should have on the Trainer infoboxes? Their quotes.
Sorry if this has been mentioned before, but Firefox has a plugin for searching. I have one for google [default], Wikipedia EN, imdb, Dictionary, et cetera. I've really wanted one for Bulbapedia. Opening a new tab by clicking on something random on the page I'm looking at, waiting for that to load, and then typing in the search is annoying to me. Mostly because Bulbapedia is slow on my computer.
Also, on Wikipedia, when you search something that can mean more than one thing it'll say, "For other blahs of _____, go to the *link*Disambiguation page." or something. My friends and I agree it's really [really] annoying to search Charizard and see "A Pokémon belonging to ..." x4 and a ton of other stuff. We'd rather have it be like Wikipedia and just take us to the normal Charizard page and have the link to a disambig up top.
Just my two nickels.
Actually, Wikipedia does have plenty of pure disambiguation pages: See the pages on Cell and Labour Party, for example. While I agree the current system employed by Bulbapedia can be cumbersome, it does seem to be the lesser of several evils given the nature of the series.
The Sinnoh routes on the List of routes in the Pokémon world page seem to be broken.
Sorry if this is the wrong place it looks like the right place.
I don't know how to add my three fan types to a battke chart on bulba peadia. Can anyine help?
Fan types don't go on the chart. We only take official information.Quote:
Originally Posted by Werewolf Hero
Well, your post is a bit difficult to understand, but it sounds like you want to add your fan-made types to Bulbapedia. This is not permitted. You may make a page in your userspace about this, but nothing in the mainspace. If you don't understand userspace and mainspace, see Bulbapedia:Namespace.Quote:
Originally Posted by Werewolf Hero
No not to the sight to a chart on my sand box sorry