Misplaced Pages

Twiddly points

Isn't it usual to use "straight" quotes rather than “curly” ones? And shouldn;t the footnotes appear after the puntuation, not before? And finally, can someone convert to the <ref> style (see m:Cite/Cite.php)? -- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ALoan (talk • contribs) .

Either is acceptable according to the Manual of Style. I think the curved typographical quotes look more professional, especially in a Featured Article candidate, which, as some of the best work Misplaced Pages has to offer, may someday make it into print in Misplaced Pages: 1.0. Most articles use straight marks, but that’s likely just because few contributors want to make the effort.

If you don’t like the footnotes, check the Manual of Style and correct them, as for the citation parsers, I don’t know how to do that, if you do, maybe you could? -- WikidSmaht (talk) 18:27, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Typewriter, or "straight" quotes are by far more common, although there is no consensus on which version to use. Since there is no consensus, a mass conversion is improper unless there is consensus for that particular article to do so. Yes, the footnotes should appear after the punctuation. As for converting to <ref>, that needs to be agreed upon first. Pagrashtak 22:28, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Ketchum

What’s with the change from “Ash” to “Ketchum”? I can see mixing them up for variety, but as his surname is little-used, it seems inappropriate to me, and frankly sounds a little ridiculous( my opinion). Is there something in the Manual of Style that states a preference for surname even when a person or fictional character is almost exclusively called by his given name? -- WikidSmaht (talk) 13:50, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree - "Ketchum" is rarely mentioned - "Ash" is used almost exclusively. Could we change it back? --Celestianpower 13:53, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Will do. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 16:14, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Computer worm

If a reference can be found, this would be a good indication of Bulbasaur’s cultural impact, and should be restored. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 18:48, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Google →Symantec:

VBS.Saur.A
... 
Also Known As:  Bulbasaur
Type:  Worm 
...
Number of infections: 0 - 49 
Number of sites: 0 - 2 
Geographical distribution: Low 
Threat containment: Easy 
Removal: Easy 
...
...the worm copies itself to <Windows>\bulbasaur.bat.
Then, the worm creates and executes <Windows>\Bulbasaur.vbs
using a temporary file calld BulBasaur1.vbs...

HTH. -- ALoan (Talk) 19:01, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Someone should restore that, then. Perhaps I will. Or not. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 13:21, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Wait. A virus with less than 50 reported infections distributed over 2 or less sites? That's waaaaaaaaay below what's worth mentioning even in passing. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:26, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

No Japanese article

Amazingly, this article is a featured article in English but appears to be completely non-existent in the Japanese Misplaced Pages. Any fellow Japanese speakers care to double-check? I did a brief run through the Japanese version and couldn't find anything under フシギダネ or any other name. Alexthe5th 11:30, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

That's because the Japanese Misplaced Pages has all its Pokemon articles in one great long list; . smurrayinchester 13:41, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Anime

Can someone cite DVDs or episodes with production numbers, instead of or in addition to the Serebii.net episode guide? I think it is extremely inappropriate for a Featured Article to use a fan site( even a high-quality one like that) as the only source for some of its info. By adding the DVD info, we can cite the episodes themselves as primary sources, and get around that. In addition, the episode summaries, while accurate, are TERRIBLY written, I believe by a non-native speaker of English. I consider the site quality because of its scope and accuracy, but the English is often quite poor. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 13:21, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm trying to go through the articles to find the relevant episodes as references. However I only have part of the first season as the DVDs weren't made available this side of the Atlantic. --

OverlordKain (talk) 11:44, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

They’re listed at the bottom in the notes section, just commented out. Go to the editing page and scroll way down. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 23:55, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Spoken article

The quality of the spoken article is VERY VERY bad, with some changes of volume very depleasant. It is almost unlistenable (or more precisily, unundersatndable for a French!)!

I recorded it and yes it is bad: it was my first ever one. I hope to rerecord at some point but don't hold you're breath ;) --Celestianpower 18:03, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

If you do, keep in mind that you can’t pronounce Japanese words as though they’re English. Fushigidane, for instance, is more like “foo-shee-gee-dah-nay”( hard g, not sure where to put the stress, but I usually stress the penultimate syllable, as that’s a pretty common stress pattern in the Japanese language). You also nelected to update the file information and the template when you re-recorded it. I fixed it in the article, you might want to tackle the file details. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 22:32, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Listening to some of the Japanese videos, it is difficult to note stress, as stress is less pronounced in Japanese than in English, but it sounds like Rika Matsumoto (the Japanese voice actor for Ash/Satoshi) is saying FU-shi-gi-da-NE with stress slightly falling off then picking up; admittedly I was straining to hear any sort of stress differences at all. I've certainly never heard fu-shi-gi-DA-ne. --Kain 13:50, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I hadn’t listened to it before today, but yes, the volume thing is a problem, among others. I’ve been meaning to record it myself for a while actually, since it’s changed so radically. It needs it even more now that it’s featured, but I haven’t had access to a computer with a mic. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 22:32, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Trivia

The fact that it's the first Pokémon in the Pokédexes is mentioned in the infobox.

The translated names aren't really relevant, and it was decided during the FA candidacy to remove them. I feel they're unencyclopedic, and typically, similar articles about other fictional characters don't have this information.

The worm...I dunno. Mention it in the intro or something. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:24, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree on the first count.

The names are in many articles, about many different subjects. Perhaps in this case we could have a "The name Bulbasaur" section, like here (sorry, first one that popped into my head.

We could do that, but articles are always being criticised for introducing comething in the lead which is never mentioned afterwards. And what about the name origin? --Celestianpower 07:50, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Line

This line has been bothering me for a while now:

During the grass field battle of the Indigo League tournament, a battle competition that takes place on the Indigo Plateau, Ash’s Bulbasaur defeated two of the opponent’s three Pokémon on its own (a Beedrill and a Scyther), despite little fighting experience as a part of Ash’s team.

I don't understand the last part. Bulbasaur was part of Ash's team for the majority of the first season. If anything, the victories were notable in that Bulbasaur defeated two Pokemon in a row whom he had a type disadvantage against (Bug is strong against Grass). Anyway, I would be bold and change it, but since this is a FA now, I wanted to see if there were any objections first. Acetic Acid 07:13, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

I think what it means( how I read it, anyway,) is that Ash didn’t use it in battles very often before the League competition. Though for that matter, Beedrill’s other type is Poison, and Scyther’s is Flying, so they Both had a double advantage! Unless Poison is resistant to Poison... hmm... I think it is, actually... -- WikidSmaht (talk) 21:20, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

It is, partially. In the games, a poison attack like Poison Sting is not very effective on Bulbasaur. He still did use Bulbasaur a bit though. Bulbasaur fought Tangela for the Rainbow Badge, despite losing. Didn't it fight Ditto, too? And then that Rhyhorn, in the episode where it almost evolved. And Venonat, which it beat (again, a type disadvantage). AceticAcid 08:42, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

In the original Red/Blue/Yellow series of games, Bulbasaur was strong against Poison attacks because it was part Poison itself- this took precedence over Grass's weakness. After Pokemon Stadium and in all subsequent games, the two multipliers simply cancel each other out- Grass type makes the Poison attack twice as effective, Poison type makes the Poison attack half as effective, so the net effect on the attack's strength is zero. The same applies if you use Bug type, since the same weaknesses and strengths apply. Also, as a long term player of the game, I can tell you right now that a Bulbasaur beating a Beedrill, Venonat or Rhyhorn is nothing special- the first two are rather ineffective as offensive players and don't have any moves which are super effective against Bulbasaur, apart from Venonat's Psychic-type moves, which they never use in the anime(IIRC), and Rhyhorn has a double weakness against Grass types, making them four time as effective, and low Special stat/Special Defence Stat, depending on generation. Scyther also has a very sparse movepool that's actually strong against Bulbasaur- Wing Attack is the only one is learns naturally, IIRC, and it doesn't do much good, considering Bulbasaur's respectable Physical Defence stat, and the low base attack of Wing Attack(60, boosted to 90 by STAB)- and this is all academic anyway if that Scyther didn't use it. Scyther also had a *BEEP*ing atrocious Special Stat in the original games, meaning it's resistance, which meant half instead of quarter damage in that generation, was cancelled out, so Bulbasaur didn't really have a net type disadvantage against Scyther in that generation. Anyway, as far as low battle experience goes, maybe Ash had Exp All, or that Rhydon was very high level- I can see Bulbasaur being able to beat a Rhydon that was 15 or 20 levels above it, since it would be a OHKO if the Rhyhorn first attack missed or was just plain rubbish. Also, we don't know how much experience Bulbasaur had before joining Ash's team, and starter Pokemon are always have higher base stats than regular Pokemon, anyway. Signed, Anonymous, who is Legion

Removing of "da ne" interpretation

So...CelestianPower, was it? o.o Why was that removed? And even more strange, why did you edit my corrections to the template:nihongo, which was used incorrectly on every count? urutapu 00:35, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Because you'd removed the {{nihongo}} completely. Plus, I don't see the characters for "da" or "ne" in the Japanese name for Bulbasaur. Therefore, I thought that it was vandalism. If I was wrong, sorry, but we get a lot of vandalism here - and this is a featured article. --Celestianpower 07:31, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

...I used hiragana as opposed to katakana for the interpretation of "da" and "ne" because katakana are like..never used in that case. And every single template:nihongo was incorrect before I came along.

I'll show them so you can compare...hiragana on left, katakana on right.

だ da → ダ da

ね ne → ネ ne

urutapu 07:42, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

If it's rarely used then why would it be used in the name of Bulbasaur?

If they're badly formatted then could you fix them? They didn't look bad to me - they did the job. Don't just remove them please. --Celestianpower 07:48, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Because it's part of a name. It's difficult to explain--I'd recommend giving the katakana article a good once-over, and any other Japanese language articles that might help. urutapu 07:53, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm - okay. But bear in mind that many other non-Japanese people mihgt have the same queries. As to the nihongo templates, thanks! --Celestianpower 08:03, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Shiny Bulbasaur

The Italian version of this page has an image of a shiny Bulbasaur. Could this image either go here or shiny Pokémon? smurrayinchester 20:54, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Shiny Pokémon is more relevant. Highway 20:58, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Copy edit

I just did a copy edit of the article, so please don't revert it without reading this. Generally, what I fixed was the pluralization of the article, Bulbasaur are a species, so from the intro until the end of the videogames should refer to Bulbasaur as a species (from anime downwards, it refers to individual Bulbasaur). Other things fixed are linking, I tried to cleanup the intro, it was a tip. Thank you for reading and harmonious editting, Highway 17:56, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't get it. People say "tyrannosaurs" when they talk about species. Why doesn't the article use "Bulbasaurs?" --Kjoonlee 07:36, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Because the plural and the singular are the same thing, One Snorlax, Two Snorlax. Red Snorlax, Blue Snorlax. Highway 12:29, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I still don't get it. Why are the plural and the singular the same with Bulbasaur? "One tyrannosaur, two tyrannosaurs. Tall tyrannosaurs, small tyrannosaurs." --Kjoonlee 04:20, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

And why do we need to refer to it as a species, when it's much simpler to just treat it as a common noun? "One dog, two dogs, red dogs, blue dogs." Treating it as a species just seems to be an artificial distinction. --Kjoonlee 05:35, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Because it's like "fish" and "sheep", that is how the grammar works. We are treating it like a proper noun and a common noun, because we are referring to Pokémon called Bulbasaur, and the Bulbasaur. Highway 11:51, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

And who thought of that? Is it supported by actual use? I think not. --Kjoonlee 12:47, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Well let's see the games, Nintendo, the anime, the manga and Satoshi Tajiri. It is supported by actual use. I suggest that you stop arguing now, you are not going to change the way we pluralize because you don't agree with the actual system. Highway 12:50, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Well that's a nasty way of saying things. I suggest you be nicer in the future. If it *is* supported by actual use, then I'll stop. --Kjoonlee 12:53, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Well you've been going on, and frankly, I've been dealing with scores of editors who think they have a PhD in Pokémon grammar. You just have to think about it, have you heard Ash or Brock say "Bulbasaurs"? Sorry. Highway 12:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

No, and you have to understand this: probably all of those people have no experience with Pokémon . I know I don't.

Normal rules of English grammar, and similar words (such as tyrannosaur) suggest "Bulbasaurs" is the "acceptable" plural. If you don't want people changing it back, you might want to mention it in the article instead of including it in the talk pages. --Kjoonlee 13:06, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

But one more thing: How many times did Ash or Brock say "Bulbasaur" when they met more than two one of them at the same time? --Kjoonlee 13:16, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I seem to recall an episode set in a Bulbasaur ranch. I could be thinking of a different Pokémon, though. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 13:21, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Could you check it, to be sure, please? If the answer to my earlier question is either "zero," or "not available — they've only met single bulbasaur Pokémons," then I strongly disagree with the use of Bulbasaur as an uninflected plural. --Kjoonlee 13:23, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I know for a fact the plural of Pokémon is Pokémon. I'm sure someone who feels more strongly about this than I do will be along to confirm or deny my claim about Bulbasaur, though. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 13:27, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

"Bulbasaur's Mysterious Garden"? The episode that contained the mass evolution ritual, where dozens of Ivysaur and Bulbasaur evolved into their next forms together? I think it's no 51, not sure though. But they never said "Bulbasaurs" in it. Highway 13:42, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Episode guide here]. Highway 13:50, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know, all Pokémon names are like this because a lot of the names (Pikachu, Ariados and so on) use names taken directly from Japanese, which has no plural (フシギダネ could mean Bulbasaur or Bulbasaurs). The in-game Pokédexes definitely don't use "Pokémons" or "Bulbasaurs"; Clefairy's entry reads "On every night of a full moon, groups of this POKéMON come out to play. When dawn arrives, the tired CLEFAIRY return to their quiet mountain retreats and go to sleep nestled up against each other". Not tired Clefairies; tired Clefairy. smurrayinchester 14:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Bulbasaurs cannot be any different from tyrannosaurs. This is English, not Japanese. Evertype 10:36, 28 July 2006 (UTC) (And the plural of euro is euros, too.)

Portmanteau?

I can see how the word Bulbasaur would be a portmanteau if it were a combination of bulb and dinosaur, but if it's merely a fusion of the words bulb and sauros, how is this a genuine portmanteau? By the same logic, Dinosaur, derived from combining the words dinos ("terrible") and saura ("lizard"), is a portmanteau. Heck, almost every scientific word is a portmanteau by that definition. I think you've either got the name's etymology wrong, or this is a classic case of misapplying fun terminology like portmanteau through arbitrary overuse. -Silence, 20:40, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Main Page Editing

I am a user who mostly uses wikipedia as an encyclopedia, I don't fully understand how it works and I only contribute through grammatical corrections! However, I was under the impression that Main Page Featured articles were locked, this is why it surprised me when I clicked on the bulbasaur link from the page page at about 01:20 on 28th July to find that the contents of the article had been deleted and all that was left was a hugely offensive message. I would just like to know how this happened - surely it is possible to avoid this kind of thing, as it could cause a hugely damaging media-storm! Madmatt52 00:43, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Featured articles most certainly aren't locked as a rule. As for a "media-storm" because of some transient vandalism, Misplaced Pages would long ago have sunk without trace if such things were possible. As you get to know Misplaced Pages more you'll learn that vandalism is a common problem that we just live with. Revert the page and get on with your life is my advice. 86.136.2.158 01:32, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Number of the little bastards

The front page currently says there are 401 pokemon while the article says 403. No idea which is correct. --72.224.4.179 01:17, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Fixed, 403 appears to be the correct number. Joelito (talk) 01:22, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Featured Article

You have got to be kidding me. --Mr. Blake 01:15, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

If this is on the front page, then the quality of Misplaced Pages has REALLY declined...

I was so suprised too, I was like "bulbusaur!??".....

Any subject has a chance to become a featured article if it's written and well-sourced. I think it has passed the standards. Elle _{vécut heureuse} (Be eudaimonic!) 01:32, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

It's about time you changed the rules then because this is making the whole site look like a fucking joke! 86.136.2.158 01:33, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

It's a fine article that deserves its status. Your claim is an insult to the many editors who spent their time on it. --Merovingian - Talk 01:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh come on, there is absolutely no way this article helps anybody at all. It's a waste of everyone's time and makes it look like Misplaced Pages caters to 13 year-olds addicted to anime. Were there no actual ENCYCLOPEDIA articles that could have been used? Omnislash 02:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

That, in fact, is the glory of Misplaced Pages. By its very nature it caters to no one in particular (and anyone, in general), and therefore any subject, including Bulbasaur, is acceptable. --DanielNuyu 02:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Regardless of how well written it is, It's still a fucking joke. People are laughing at wikipedia right now.--Akaces23 02:16, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Of course people are laughing at Misplaced Pages. It's an encyclopedia where anyone can sumbit any level of bullshit and no one could ever know. --Macarion 04:06, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Prove it. --Merovingian - Talk 02:23, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

...or rather, Misplaced Pages appeals to everyone. It's as good a resource for main stream things like World War 2 as it is for niche things like specific pokemon. Whether or not people ought to look it up is one thing, but people do look it up, regardless (just look at this pages history). If they didn't do so at Misplaced Pages, they'd do so elsewhere. So why not have it at Misplaced Pages?

Anyway, pursuant to that, I think all articles ought to be treated equally when being considered for the frontpage featured article of the day. To parade Misplaced Pages around as a more main-stream encyclopedia is to ignore one of the things that really makes Misplaced Pages stand out, imho. TerraFrost 03:22, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

You don't think there is something mildly stupid about the fact that this article is longer and more than 10 times as many sources as most articles about important events in world history? Go compare this page with the one for the Battle of Hastings, for example and then tell me that the fact that this article is somehow not only more detailed but also FRONT PAGE MATERIAL is a strength of Misplaced Pages. I am anxious to hear your stirring defense of Bulbasaur. Omnislash 04:19, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

There was an article on The Guardian a while ago that suggested that 1% of people who visit a website actually contribute. If that 1% amounts to more edits for Bulbasaur then it does for the Battle of Hastings then that means, quite simply, that more people are interested in Bulbasaur than they are in the Battle of Hastings. It might not be fair and it might not be right, but whomever said life was either of those two things?

Feel free to call it a problem with Misplaced Pages. I'd rather call it a problem with society, in general. It's for this same problem, imho, that people who watch the news would rather hear about the latest celebrity scandal than they would about something more relevant.

Also, I might add that the article on the Battle of Hastings mainly suffers because it covers something that is old. When something is current it is covered in such detail that it makes this Bulbasaur article look like nothing. Consider Category:2003_Iraq_conflict. Fifteen subcategories. Does that mean the 2003 Iraq conflict is one subcategory shy from being as important and as influential as that which Category:World_War_I documents? No. It means that old events are simply harder to write about then current events are. And Bulbasaur, like it or not, is more current than the Battle of Hastings. TerraFrost 04:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Your response was a stirring defense of the principles of democracy and the spirit of Misplaced Pages and blah blah blah, but you completely avoided my question: Do you think that an article about Bulbasaur is worthy to be on the front page of Misplaced Pages? You blamed a lot of people: some magical 99% of "people who contribute", society, "people who watch the news" (as if that was some special class of people), etc etc. The fact of the matter is that when people visit Misplaced Pages - and I myself visit it at least once a day, on average - they are going to see a foolishly grinning cartoon animal whose entire genealogy has been mapped out in such detail that it would seem like teams of researchers have been giving it the attention you would give the human genome. Who the fuck does this help? How does this serve a single person? How did Misplaced Pages's front page become devoted to a flash-in-the-pan CHILDERN'S CARTOON SHOW to such an extent that it has members vociferously defending the right of "the people" to make it a feature article? I'll ask the question again: do you PERSONALLY think that this is worthy of such an honor? I know you can defend the process, now defend the results. And why, to address your red herring, isn't the Iraq conflict feature news? Surely it's more important than Bulbasaur. Besides, I think that the literally thousands of books on English history would make it just as easy to write about, as if that made a difference. Omnislash 06:31, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Says the person who basied his/her username on a technique in a simmilary flash-in-the pan Console RPG. --195.194.111.218 10:58, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Like I said before, I think the fact that this article is being featured on the frontpage demonstrates what Misplaced Pages really is. I think it demonstrates some of Misplaced Pages's strengths, but I guess you disagree. And if you don't like the fact that people can spend such time on childrens' cartoon shows, THEN LEAVE and go back to your online Encyclopedia Britanica's. You clearly disagree with how Misplaced Pages fundamentally works and are only get more and more frusterated with it. You can try, all you like, to get Misplaced Pages misrepresented on the frontpage, but as you delve deeper into it, you'll see what Misplaced Pages really is. So like I said, how about you save everyone the trouble, AND LEAVE.

And btw, you're wrong when you say my post was about the "principles of democracy and the spirit of Misplaced Pages". My point about how the number of people who edit an article is proportional to the number of people who read it, for instance, isn't some democratic principle - it's a NATURAL CONSEQUENCE of how Misplaced Pages is run. Maybe you should go back and REREAD my post instead of throwing out RED HERRINGS. TerraFrost 06:45, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

The fact that you say so little reveals what you are really saying (i.e., not a whole lot of substance). Go read http://www.theonion.com/content/node/50902 and then tell me that it doesn't contain some truth. The Bulbasaur page right now is even a picture of a gaping vagina, which also "demonstrates what Misplaced Pages really is", in case you cared. Your "love it or leave it" attitude is pretty unpleasant as well; I suppose you support deporting people who disagree with unpopular presidential decisions? Omnislash 06:51, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Only addressing half my response, I see. Are your points really that weak? Regarding your supposition that I'd support deporting people who disagree with unpopular presidential decissions - how hypocritical of you to accuse me of red herrings when YOU DO THEM YOURSELF. Just because I think you should leave doesn't mean that I would support you being forcefully removed. Similarily, if you really disagree with how the place your employed is run, I think you should leave, but I do not think you should be forced out. Atleast on that basis, alone. Leaving the country, unfortunately, is not quite as easy as any of the above. If it were and you disagreed with how the country was run, enough, yeah - I'd probably think you ought to leave. TerraFrost 06:58, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Come on; you edited your response. Expecting someone to frantically refresh the page to see where you corrected yourself is a bit weak and shows that you don't really have a point and are just arguing because you have nothing better to do. But, in any case, you didn't contradict a single thing I said; how is it not democracy when people's choice of article reflects their contributions? You made several appeals to society and so forth; that sounds like an appeal to the masses if I've ever seen one. Similarly, you didn't understand my analogy. I am not an "employee" of Misplaced Pages. I don't get paid, you don't get paid, no one gets paid. Cries of "If you don't like it then what's keeping you here?" are exactly the same thing that any partisan says when their allegiance is threatened. No one is telling you not to like Misplaced Pages as a resource, so why the hostility? I ca;;ed your red herring about the Iraq article a red herring because it was: it has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue at hand.

I can't help but notice you STILL haven't answered my original question. Omnislash 07:09, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Your original question was "do you think this ought to be a featured article on the frontpage", which I have indeed answered. Yes, for reasons I've already elaborated upon and that you (apparently) think aren't relavent. So basically, you'd rather have me say "yes" or "no" without elaboration or justification, because any sort of elaboration I might do is off-topic? Yet the elaboration you do isn't? There's a word for that that I've mentioned before. Hypocracy. And given how much of it you have, I think I'm through participating in this debate (lest it even be called that). TerraFrost 07:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Except that you didn't even SAY a single thing before, like I said. All you did was blame "the people". But hey, good luck and more Pokemon to you. If you think Bulbasaur is such a valuable resource to humanity then no one should say any different. Shine on, you crazy diamond. Omnislash 07:25, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Bleh. I know I said I'd stop participating, but I also don't like being misrepresented.

So, for the record, I never said Bulbasaur was a valuable resource to humanity. Neither did I say that the main article on the frontpage had to be a valuable resource to humanity. TerraFrost 07:36, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

If you don't like being misrepresented then you should go back and read what you wrote! If this article "represents the strengths of Misplaced Pages" but also "isn't a valuable resource", then by extension Misplaced Pages had better not pretend to be a valuable resource for anything anytime soon. I think that's a sad attitude. Omnislash 15:00, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with what I wrote. It's just that you're reading between the lines. Something can be a valuable resource to an individual without being a valuable resource to humanity. I observed earlier that this article appealed to a niche audience. By appealing to as many niche's as possible, I believe Misplaced Pages is a valuable resource. You can't, unfortunately, showcase the fact that you appeal to every niche, but you can showcase the fact that you do appeal to niche's, none-the-less. And if you appeal to one niche, who's to say that Misplaced Pages doesn't appeal to others?

Also, the lines you quote - the "represents the strengths of Misplaced Pages" line and the "isn't a valuable resource" line - have nothing to do with the misrepresentation you did. Of course, I don't blame you - I think I'd have a tough time, too, trying to justify someone's essentially being misquoted.

Keeping in mind, though, you're attitude that arguments that counter yours have no business being made, I apologize in advance for my comments. TerraFrost 16:42, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Last time I checked, Bulbasaur was an encyclopedia article! Also, what's wrong with being addicted to anime?  :) --Merovingian - Talk 02:23, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

If any subject has the chance to be featured on the frontpage, what if we expand the article on Penis, or Nazism, or Depictions of Muhammad? In my opinion, I think although an article can achieve "Featured Status", it doesn't have to be featured on the front page. The front page is the face of the site. There should be special considerations for adult or offensive materials placed on the frontpage as one can't put a warning on the frontpage. I think we should separate featured articles from featured frontpage articles. And I do think Bulbasaur is a bit non-serious to be placed on the front page. --70.18.248.120 02:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is not censored]. Any of those could be FA if they were written well enough. -Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 02:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Who cares, seriously? This is a well-written article. --Liface 02:46, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

One, how does this relate to Bulbasaur? Two, Misplaced Pages is not censored for minors. --Merovingian - Talk 03:03, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

If it was going to be any Pokemon you would think it'd be Pikachu lol

Sadly Pikachu failed to meet the requirements for a Featured Article. The Bulbasaur and Torchic articles are just that better-written. --Kain 14:05, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

This is in fact a notable decision. Many television episode articles now have this article as a defense, being that most can be sourced through the website, podcasts or interviews with creators and actors and merchandising guidebooks, much like the idea of a bulbasaur or whatever. This is also an example of the "rich, white, male and bored" bias of wikipedia.66.41.66.213 03:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Upon seeing this article featured, I was very pleasantly suprised! Very interesting! Way to go, Bulbasaur! Also, I find it ridiculous that people are saying this is ruining wikipedia's image. Misplaced Pages is not some obscure site. It's everyone's refence on the internet and millions of people are dependent on it. This article is of very high quality and I'm glad it's on the front page. Xioyux 03:28, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

same, I like it. Seriously, ask any average wikipedia user and they'll probably not even care about the featured article. I doubt mobs are outside right now protesting this. You people overthink this whole thing. It's a featured article, yeah, it isn't "ruining" the image of the encyclopedia, you know, where you get information and such. Seriously, I'd go as far as make a poll on all forums that I can and I'll bet you that most people would say something along the lines of "So?....". It isn't "ruining" anything. I could've never guessed that people could ACTUALLY get pissed off at a feature article. If you think the others don't have enough info, go on, you're registered (probably), go on and add something if you care so much.EAB 06:52, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I, for one, am glad to see Bulbasaur on the front page. People worked hard to make it a great article and I'll be damned if I'm going to sit around and listen to people say it is ruining Misplaced Pages's image. ANYONE can look up ANYTHING, regardless of what YOU think. Misplaced Pages isn't controlled by you, you whining little brats. Bulbasaur is a wonderful article and is deserving as a featured article. The fact is that it is a featured article, and unless I'm mistaken, there is nothing you can do about it. DEAL WITH IT AND GROW UP. Also, please stop cursing so much. There are other words you could use in place of "fucking" or "bullshit".

I agree, where was this argument when FFX got FA'd? Not there? You know why? Cause'd it deserved it, not unlike how this article has aswell. --Conan-san 11:03, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Critics of this article being a featured article are, it seems, missing the point as to what a featured article is, and for that matter, what Misplaced Pages is. The contributors strove to write the article to meet the criteria to make the Bulbasaur article a featured article, and their efforts have paid off. Anyone can post anything on Misplaced Pages, but for an article to become featured, it must meet the criteria on factual accuracy, referencing, and style, regardless of the subject of the article. Is this debate about what is "worthy" for a Misplaced Pages featured article going to reoccur when the likes of Lakitu, Wario, and Torchic (already nominated as featured articles) make it onto the front page? --Kain 11:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Not if it's Wario...--Conan-san 12:33, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I think it's rediculous that Bulbasaur is on the front page. Yes, the article is well written. Yes, Misplaced Pages can include anything and everything, for anyone and everyone. It looks like a good article and probably deserved to be a featured article, no matter how pointless the article is. I don't normally find the front page articles interesting, but they look serious enough. So to conclude, it is a well written article but it shouldn't be on the front page because it lacks seriousness. You wouldn't find something like that in a paper encyclopedia, and that's what you should have on the front page, Encyclopedia articles. Troubleshooter 12:21, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Of course this should be on the front page, IMO all FAs should probably be on the front page eventually. Specifically concerning this article, it is well written, it has plenty of sources, and in fact the fact that so many people know about is evidence that it has a place in the Misplaced Pages and a place on the front page. Relax Pokéhaters, the day's Featured Article only appears for one day (that's only 24 hours *gasp*)and it seems you're just whining because you don't like Pokémon and try to discourage others from liking it. I'll agree it's of mild importance, but then again it's not the importance of something that matters it's the content of the article and this article has plenty of content. It by no means makes Misplaced Pages a "fucking joke" and your assertion that it does shows profound immaturity (yes, I do feel smart using long words :P). I mean I never liked Harry Potter, but if that appeared on the main page I wouldn't whine and complain because I think it's childish or anything, the only problems I would have would be that it wasn't an FA/maybe not written well/other technicalities. Misplaced Pages does not cater to any age group in fact I think you'll find the average age of a fan of Pokémon is increasing as the old fans who still like it continue to like it. I bet you if Sesame Street was featured on the main page you (as in people who have said that it was childish/ruining WP's image etc.) you wouldn't be hurling these remarks despite the fact that it is clearly targeted for young children. No, instead it's people's harsh POV that makes them act that way.

As for the vandals, no-one gives a shit about them. Deleting content and replacing it with irrelevant porn or remarks like "What are you 12?" or "NERDS!!!!!!!!!!!" are the biggest idiots of all as everyone has the right to read about Bulbasaur. These people accuse us (Pokéfans) of having no life and stuff and then do this?! HAHAHA that's funny!!! I just LOL in the face of these idiots. Especially since the term nerd is overused by dumbass morons mostly.

A few final things left. To the person above, Misplaced Pages is not paper, and not to sound rude or anything but frankly who cares about seriousness anyway, life isn't supposed to be serious, it's supposed to about fun. (In my idealised universe anyway.) Vandals are idiots, people who attack people who like Pokémon are idiots, Bulbasaur is a good Pokémon and Pokémon is a fun video game with high depth of strategy and it rules! (Yes I know that's not NPOV.) I'm sure the contributors of the Pokémon Collaborative Project would be offended. Signing off, WikiSlasher 12:49, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I think some people protest about Bulbasaur or Lindsay Lohan becoming Today's Featured Article because they don't think those subject matters are important enough. So they complain here. But complaining doesn't achieve anything. So instead of complaining, they should instead develop the articles that they think are important to a featured level and promote them. --Xyz or die 16:36, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Pokemon on Misplaced Pages

I like the idea of having Pokemon featured on the main page on Misplaced Pages. Do you think more video game/video game characters could be featured in the future?

Perfect Dark was Misplaced Pages's featured article on May 12, 2006. This is not the first video game article to be featured, but one in a line of many. 03:55, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Do not forget about Final Fantasy X that was featured recently. 04:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I just can't believe there is a Pokemon on the front page. That's awesome! H2P 04:40, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I just can't believe there is a Pokemon on the front page. That's disturbing! :) Fuzheado | Talk 04:43, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't think anyone here really cares that you think Bulbasaur is "disturbing". Jerk.

403 Pokemon?

To the best of my knowledge, there are only 386 pokemon, rather than 403. Either this article or the wikipedia page on pokemon is wrong. - Mr Awesomeness 03:19, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Why does it say one of the 403 known species of Pokemon? Pokemon is a man made thing, people know how many there are currently... --CrazyCasey 02:55, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

It says there are 403 Pokémon because with the continuing information being released about Pokémon Diamond and Pearl, there is constant information relating to new Pokémon that is released to the public, and so far there have been 17 new Pokémon, sixteen of which have been named. For example, see Bonsly, Lucario, and Munchlax. Ryūlóng 05:24, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I also find the "403 known species" comment a bit odd, not because I dispute the number but because it implies that there 'exist' spicies of pokemon that no one knows about. Since Pokemon are fictional creatures they surely only 'exist' in that they have been invented by the shows creators, pokemon that are not known about even by the shows creators surely can't exist! That said I understand the point that the sentence is trying to make which is that within the fictional pokemon univerce there is a (fictional) posibility that more pokemon may be discovered.--JK the unwise 07:26, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

But since there are going to be more Pokemon in Diamond and Pearl, that we, "we" being Misplaced Pages and its Wikipedians, really don't know about yet, the comment is valid. Plus, they give the "species of Pokemon we don't know about yet" line in the game and anime, too. Mostly to give them wiggle room to make up more species as they come about.

Think about it. In Pokemon, we really don't see much in the way of other animals, except for some fish and insects(like the worm Pidgeotto was seen eating in the second episode before Ash tried to catch it), other than Pokemon. Considering the sheer number of species' there are worldwide on Earth, we("we" being Game Freak and Nintendo) likely haven't even scratched the surface of the "true" theoretical variety of Pokemon in the four or five areas we've seen in the games/anime. SAMAS 12:52, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Featured article?

Geez how are these featured articles chosen?! Bulbasaur of all things?! NSD Student 02:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)NSD Student

Quiet. Bulbasaur is a god among Pokemon. --Captain Cornflake 03:20, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Yep, strange. Oh, and someone put "FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAG" right in the midde of the artice, in the intro. Took it out.EAB 03:02, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I didn't do it, but I can't stand pokémon.They are strange but like I said, I didn't do it.--Always Gotta Keep it Real, Cute 1 4 u 05:09, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Featured articles are based on the article's writing and style, not specifically based on whether the article is about something extremely notable or likable to all. --WillMak050389 05:20, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Also, please note that the Talk pages of articles are for discussion on improving the article, not for discussing the content of the article and (in this case) complaining that this particular article is now featured. Ryūlóng 05:22, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I disagree with the assertion that talk pages should be restricted to one goal. It is through the freedom of creativity that people thrive, and as such, I think as long as a discussion is going on about the damn green plant thing, it deserves to be going on.--ttogreh 06:05, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Agree. One could argue that by us questioning whether this article has merit for being "Featured" status is as much as important as making the article factually accurate.--293.xx.xxx.xx 06:08, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Ryūlóng is mistaken. The Talk page is indeed the place to discuss whether an article is of Featured Article quality. In my opinion, this one isn't. The sections are long and unstructured, and have a number of grammatical errors (particularly comma splices). I think we blew it on this one. I would have opposed it if I had been paying attention. (NOT because the topic is silly, but because this is most definitely not an example of our best work.) --P3d0 13:35, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Feel free to nominate it for a Featured article review. -- ALoan (Talk) 14:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Idiotic Vandalizing

Who the hell is Jamie? This moron did something that corrupted the portal to the Bulbasaur article! Something about Bulbasaur being "fucking gay" or some crap like that. Whoever you are, "Jamie" or whatever", you are an IDIOT! Fix the portal!

He was probobly pissed that a Pokemon was the featured article. How is Misplaced Pages gonna convince the world that it's a legitimite source/Greatest Achievment of Mankind if we have friggen Bulbasaur on our front page?

In case you haven't noticed, it isn't all over the page and it isn't the background either. I also didn't know people cared that much about the feature article, much less even read it. Besides, I thought wikipedia has already set itself as a reliable source of information. Just cause it isn't some dead guy/an old builduing doesn't mean it should be take off.

It isn't the only video game article that was a featured article. Can someone please fix the Bulbasaur article? Some immature moron changed all the "Bulbasaur"s into "ballsasaur". Idiot...

What the hells the problem with it being featured? Seriously. I really don't get it. Do people care about their precious encyclopedia that much? Oh wait, it ISN'T theirs.....EAB 06:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I really think we should get the page locked; its too much hassle and its not fair on the people who have to watch this page every two minutes just so some asshole can have some fun... (Daydreams21 06:39, 28 July 2006 (UTC))

I know some of the people that are idiotic vandals, and that's a great description of them. Vandals pay more attention to the front screen than other people, because they feel it their moral duty to let everybody know what is, in their opinion, rubbish.--The last sheikah 07:00, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I feel bad for the people who worked really hard to make this article what it is: great. No, great is and understatement. Brilliant is more like it. I feel so bad right now. All that work and people can't even stop to THINK about appreciating it. All you vandals, go the hell away! You aren't helping to make Misplaced Pages a reliable source of information! You are only hurting yourselves and for that, I laugh at you. HAHAHA!

"THE ONLY PLACE YOU NERDS WILL SEE ONE OF THESE IS ON WIKIPEDIA!!!!!"

heh, WHAT an assumption. Sh*t, I'm using long words, only geeks use long words. Iim goin to fall for a rough trick namd Jim.EAB 07:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Just because someone can count to five without using their hands doesn't mean that they're geeks. By the way, ever heard of spellcheck, loser? You can't even capitalize; I wonder what you CAN do...

More vandalising, yayyy...

This time, people thought it would be funny/gross, to put a picture of a vagina on the page.

How immature, evidently the work of a 12 year old who hasn't been getting enough of the good stuff, eh? -- Megalomania

I wonder...were the other featured articles about games vandalised also?EAB 06:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Someone actually put a picture of a vagina here? Ugh... the vandalizing is so bad that the article is now sprotected. My God, how some people can be so idiotic I will never know... --Cherimu is beautiful! 07:02, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

evidently the work of a 12 year old who hasn't been getting enough of the good stuff, eh? Swish. Pokemon articles get vandalised more, becuase they're so unpopular with charvers and the like. They want everyone to know they don't like uncool stuff.--The last sheikah 07:03, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Pokemon is cool, though. The vandals probably think that they did something biblical by ruining the article, but let's be serious. You morons aren't doing anything helpful. Go the hell away and stay the hell away. Misplaced Pages has enough vandals and we certainly don't need anymore. Besides, Bulbasaur's my favorite Grass starter!

Pokemon is cool, though.Depends on your definition of cool. It definately isn't popular with the average teenager.--The last sheikah 07:19, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I guess I'm not the average teenager then! Yay! :)--Cherimu is beautiful! 07:21, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

sprotected

I have sprotected the article. Currently there were about 3 vandals per minute, and the article was more often vandalized than not. I agree in principle with Raul that main page articles should not be protected, but i would go for an exception in this case. I have no problem with the article being unprotected in an hour or so to see if the vandal(s) have left. -- Chris 73 | Talk 06:53, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Using Geography as a guide, I'm guessing people are bandalising as soon as they see it, in the morning... at the moment, it's round about the right time in Europe, and soon it will be morning in the middle of the atlantic, so there'll be a low point then, then a massive boom as America wakes up. Or I could just be being paranoid.--The last sheikah 07:08, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry. You aren't being paranoid. If anything, you could be an oracle. ^.^ I just hope that all that hard work put into the article won't be for nothing... --Cherimu is beautiful! 07:20, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

That is one scary History log. I doubt we'll be getting another Pokémon on the front page after this. Highway 07:24, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I think you may be right... hopefully, you are wrong. (Sorry if that sounded rude!)

If (when?) it gets unprotected, it might be worth it to report blatant vandals straight to WP:AIV at the same time they are given {{blatantvandal}} warning. Admins may not block as it's out of process after first warning, but if they do vandalize a second time before an admin investigates, blocking will probably be immediate. Just a thought.--Kchase T 07:28, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

...It seems to have been unsprotected. EDIT: No, it's back.--The last sheikah 07:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

CNN and Pokemon?

Why is CNN mentioned in the lead section? What does CNN have to do with Pokemon? Are they leading experts on Pokemon or something? Seems like they've been used as an "authoritative source" to justify the statement in the lead section - really, CNN should only be mentioned in the reference attached to this statment. Carcharoth 11:36, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

In-text citations of this sort are good style. News reporters are supposed to be somewhat experts on anything they talk about. 66.41.66.213 13:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Carcharoth. I find the mention of CNN and Time to be awkward. It should simply say something like "Bulbasaur is considered one of the more popular and iconic Pokemon" and add a citation at the end that directs to the CNN and Time articles. Grammatically, the sentence is also awkward. Is there a special reason why the CNN/Time sentence is phrased that way? Punctured Bicycle 14:28, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

"News reporters are supposed to be somewhat experts on anything they talk about" - <falls off chair and rolls about on the floor laughing - gets up and wipes tears of laughter from eyes> - are you serious?? Carcharoth 16:47, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Feedback

I've quickly scanned through the article, and the lead section is OK, and there are a few interesting tidbits scattered throughout the article, but in the main, after the lead section, the article is heavily detailed and probably only of interest to Pokemon fans. Sounds like its been written by fans for fans. Not much here of interest to the reader of a general encyclopedia. Sorry. Carcharoth 11:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

To explain this a bit more. The detail I refer to is excessive. Some detail is OK, but not this level of detail. If this level of detail is desired, then a lot more explanation is needed. Currently, to understand much of what this page is talking about, I have to follow the links and read several other articles, and I will probably encounter the same problem there. Essentially, what I am saying is that this article does not cater for those who arrive knowing nothing about Bulbosaur or Pokemon. There should be a warning that the casual reader needs to read the Pokemon article first, as much information that would be useful here, is there instead. Carcharoth 11:45, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

No, it's deliberately written for everyone. If someone mentions "Bulbasaur" to you now - you know what they're on about roughly, don't you? A green dinosaur-like Pokémon?

This other issue is a bit of a double-edged sword, I'm afraid. On the one hand, one could include reams of stuff not-relevant to Bulbasaur directly, massively upping the article's length, but making it totally understandable to the lay reader or not include any at all, having an article totally inaccessible to lay readers. Both sides have followings. We've tried to compromise here, by including bits in parenthesis and little introductions to sections. If you have any particular advice about a particular bit that you don't understand though, please say so. Thanks! —Celestianpower 12:35, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I could have found out that Bulbasaur was a green dinosaur-like Pokemon without reading the Misplaced Pages article. I expected more, I'm afraid.

The lay reader versus fan/expert is always a problem, but I have seen far too many articles leaving out basic stuff that can be found by following a link, but should really be put in the article. As an example, for biographical articles about people, at what point do you give someone's birth/death dates, or their nationality, rather than relying on someone to click through to the article. There is a good example here - the inventor of Pokemon, Satoshi Tajiri, is mentioned in the article, but the article doesn't say that he was Japanese and was born in 1965 - stuff which might be relevant to this article (sadly, the article on the artist for Bulbasaur does not even have a birth date). This article fails to make clear that Pokemon is Japanese, or at least originated there - you have to click through to the Pokemon article to find this out, or at least infer it from the numerous Japanese references (eg. the bit about the Japansese names). The article also fails to give the historical context of Bulbasaur within Pokemon history - the Pokemon article says that it started at least by 1995, and since Bulbasaur's debut date is given as 1996, it would seem relevant to know that Bulbasaur was one of the first Pokemon. There is a fleeting reference to "original series", but this is not made clear. Also, it would be nice to say how many Pokemon existed before Bulbasaur, and how many have been invented since.

And the general problems of lay reader versus fan reader have been discussed at WP:WAF (a guideline for writing about fiction). Carcharoth 17:10, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the problem is. Yes, you need to know what Pokémon are like for a full understanding of Bulbasaur. This is similar to the way in which you need to know what humans are like and what Germany is to get a full understanding of Adolf Hitler. Following links and reading other articles is an entirely appropriate response to knowing nothing about an entire topic area. GreenReaper 15:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

It all depends on context. Here, there is definite need to introduce the Japanese origin of Pokemon, and to put the date (ie. 1990s) further up the lead section. These are basic "where?", and "when?" questions that people should be able to find the answer to in this article, rather than clicking through. I came here because I was interested in the number of people who were defending against the "why is Pokemon on the front page" people, by saying that this was a "well-written article", so I'm not going to apologise for pointing out some basic deficiencies quite separate from the 'suitability' issues (I think the variance in styles is detrimental to Misplaced Pages, though the diversity in content is a strength). Carcharoth 17:23, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

the mon

it's today's FA! yeah, bulbasuar's the pokémon! --Bud0011 15:55, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

please

please stop spamming site!

(16:18, 28 July 2006) (edit) (grammar nazi strikes)

I believe bulbasaur is the plural form as well as singular, I'm not sure that edit was needed. --Impulse 16:25, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

OMG Disgusting!

Omg they put a pic of a dick where bulbasaur was!!!!! it shocked me so much....

This is getting so out of hand. i clicked it 5 mins later and 2 big pics of dicks!!!! i thought i read they were suppose t stop ppl form editing the featured articles once they are featured articles

And please change the ability from "cock sucking." Let's grow up folks.

...

How is this a quality encyclopedia read, good enough and notable enough to show on the main page. This isn't good PR.

Unrelated Picture!!!

yeah SOME OF THE OTHER pokemons have the same problem. a lot of those in the national list. whoever did that, it's really rude.

Somebody please take those pictures off!

Those penis pictures have got to go. I wonder what idiot put them up.

I know they so annoying, they makin me mad, cant sum1 make it so ppl cant edit this til its NOT a FA