Talk:Rotom: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:10, 29 June 2007

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rotom redirect.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Alien gel pokemon

i hear that rotom is classified as the alien gel pokemon. anyone know what said classification means? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.54.154.118 (talk) 15:47, 22 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

It means you heard wrong. It's classified as a plasma Pokémon. --ArrEmmDee 18:18, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Legendary Rotom?

Is Rotom a legend? i heard this in beckett pokemon collectors list of legendary pokemon. are they right or wrong?--65.54.154.117 20:00, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-Wrong, since it's breedable with ditto, you could have as many rotoms as you'd like in one game, true legendaries are 100% unique (in one game).

oh, okay.--65.54.155.35 21:37, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning whether Rotom is legendary or not, I'll say what I typed in Talk:Phione:
I think Phione should be considered "sub-legendary" along with Unown. Both have close relations to legendaries, but they're not one-of-a-kind in any of the main games. Rotom is a bit more confusing. Considering it a legendary would make the Sinnoh legendaries to be the only legendaries that don't start with that gen's trio (in the Dex). Not considering it a legendary would make it the only non-legendary/old gen evolution that does not appear in any regional dex. Perhaps a "sub-legendary," too? --Jopasopa 16:36, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. It's the same as Snorlax in R/B/Y/G/S/C/FR/LG, and Snorlax isn't even considered quasilegendary. -Jeske ^{(v^_^v)} 21:15, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But there were 2 Snorlax in all of the Kanto games (R/G/B/Y/FR/LG). --Jopasopa 14:30, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not in G/S/C - there was but one. -Jeske ^{(v^_^v)} 19:10, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm neutral in this debate, but just have a comment. So if Rotom is "sub-legendary" because it is found in one instance of the game, yet is breedable, that means that the following Pokémon are also "sub-legendary": Riolu/Lucario, every starter from Generation I-IV, Togepi/Togetic/Togekiss, maybe Manaphy/Phione, Eevee and all 7 of its evolutions, etc. SuperDT 04:49, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well...you can get wild Eevee at the Mansion in DP...>>;—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 04:58, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot about that... My bad. SuperDT 06:35, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with a line here

Its special ability is Levitate, which

gives it an immunity to Ground-type attacks that would be super-effective against it otherwise, giving it the same :advantage exclusively given to Zapdos (due to the latter's Flying-type) in the previous generations.

This is false. Gengar, Wheezing, and probably a couple of others have Levitate as well, and are yet weak to ground. In this generation, there is also Bronzong. So while yes, Rotom has levitate, it was never exclusive to any real pokemon.

--69.138.232.32 23:16, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We mean in a regard to an Electric-type. Guess it's kind of vague, though.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 23:50, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The fact it said "Given to Zapdos" should have been a tip-off that it was only referring to Electric types. -Jeske ^{(v^_^v)} 02:03, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I Added Something

::: I had put 2 new sentences about it on the sentence under it biology. It is the 2 last sentences on this section. Don't erase it unless you can really have a case about it bcause some of you people really are annyoing about this kinds of stuff (cough-Trusilver-cough):::

...who is Trusilver?—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 20:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

:: Yo, stop that yo. I pt that cuz it's relevant to the article. I'm just going to keep putting it up there until someone can prove it's irrelevant.

Before you put it up again, read through and understand WP:NOR. -Jeske ^{(v^_^v)} 17:15, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dummy, how is it not reliable, it's how you find it in da games dum dum! I'm just going to keep putting it back up becuase it is how you find it in the game and is relevant. You just don't want no one putting up stuff than your skank tail

You're EXTRAPOLATING and putting a theory up; hence WP:NOR. I also recommend you stay civil and not use personal attacks. -Jeske ^{(v^_^v)} 18:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry!

Sorry, I accidentally while editing something screwed up the biological characteristics section. I don't know how to fix it, can sum1 help me wit dat please? I' so sorry.

First off, NEVER edit out someone else's comments without their permission.

Second, NEVER use the :::XX::: markup in the article. Don't indent paragraphs (if you'd noticed, your obsession with indenting causes the "code" function to work).

Third, sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). -Jeske ^{(v^_^v)} 03:04, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you ever managed to get through basic school, you might know that indenting is proper writing but alright. And you're going against what you said. I put a comment and you erased it. It was real so leave me alone.

I didn't remove the comment - someone else did because of blatant incivility. -Jeske ^{(v^_^v)} 03:20, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter now, I already posted it back up on the article.

And I removed it again as extrapolation. -Jeske ^{(v^_^v)} 03:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Explain to me how it is extrapolation, and i put it back up.

What you're saying is because its name is "Motor" backwards, it's found in the TV. Its name is irrelevant to where it can be found. Heck, Buoysel can be found on land. -Jeske ^{(v^_^v)} 03:26, 21 June 2007 (UTC

I didn't put that it was Motor spelled backwards. That's irrelevant. Dog is God spelled backwards but we don't go to church to praise a dog. And it's relvant that it can be found in the games in TV's because it IS!

Read the first few words you actually put:

This contributes to the fact that Rotom is found only after inspecting the TV at the old Chateau

That can be construed as extrapolation. I noticed the change you currently made; I'll move it to the appropriate section ("In the Video Games"). -Jeske ^{(v^_^v)} 03:33, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT) I won't; it already has it there. -Jeske ^{(v^_^v)} 03:35, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is why I put it in the Bio. Hold up: if you can delete what is irrelevant without permission.............. I should have done this a LONG time ago.

It doesn't belong in the Biological Characteristics. The fact it can be found in the TV is already covered in the Video Games section:

Rotom is one of 107 new Pokémon that were introduced in Pokémon Diamond and Pearl. Rotom can be found in the Old Chateau after receiving the National Dex by inspecting the TV at night.

-Jeske ^{(v^_^v)} 03:38, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HA ha, I'm way past that. I did some editing that was irrelevant to the article that was also speculation. You probaly won't find out what I deleted

I can through the page history (see the "history" tab at the top of the page?). -Jeske ^{(v^_^v)} 03:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you ain't got nuttin to say now huh?

Don't look to start fights, you can get blocked for incivility. -Jeske ^{(v^_^v)} 03:46, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You the one starting confusion. I just was mad you on my case and not others, even when I'm not doing anything.

I deleted something not pertaining to this article on the last sentence of the Video Games section, that sentence wasn't about Rotom.

Thanks, but you don't need to announce it. Just say in your edit summary something to that effect. -Jeske ^{(v^_^v)} 17:34, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, I was bout to delete dat. I wonder who put dat on dat sextion.

I think that you both are being incivil. Jeske, you should just delete this whole talk section because what you and that fool are babbling about does not pretain to the article. By the way mister nameless you started the fight by saying that your "indents" were proper grammer, but you finnished the argument by using words that aren't in the dictionary, "If you ever managed to get through basic school..." 12.240.29.68 23:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC)the decider[reply]

If you're the "Decider", as your sig says, remember that it is poor etiquette to edit out others' comments, and actually, the section was regarding edits to the article. Regardless of whether it pertains to the article, we have every right to discuss edits to the article on the talk page (in fact, some users are under that stipulation thanks to Arbitration Committee rulings). -Jeske ^{(v^_^v)} 23:54, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For da 1st time, i actually agree wit Jeske. U ain't no decider, just sum1 who think dey "important" on wikipedia. Don't tell us we wrong and how we should resolve our conflict. Datz my civil side. And to finish my comment on my bad side, bitch don't call me a babbling fool. Is you out cho damn mind?

@@ Line 83: / Line 83: @@
 I think that you both are being incivil. Jeske, you should just delete this whole talk section because what you and that fool are babbling about does not pretain to the article. By the way mister nameless you started the fight by saying that your "indents" were proper grammer, but you finnished the argument by using words that aren't in the dictionary, "If you ever managed to get through basic school..." [[User:12.240.29.68|12.240.29.68]] 23:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC)the decider
 :If you're the "Decider", as your sig says, remember that it is poor etiquette to edit out others' comments, and actually, the section was regarding edits to the article.  Regardless of whether it pertains to the article, we have every right to discuss edits to the article on the talk page (in fact, some users are under that stipulation thanks to [[WP:ArbCom|Arbitration Committee]] rulings). -''[[User:Jeske Couriano|Jeske]]'' <sup><small>(<font color="0000FF">[[User talk:Jeske Couriano|v^_^v]]</font>)</small></sup> 23:54, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
+::For da 1st time, i actually agree wit Jeske. U ain't no decider, just sum1 who think dey "important" on wikipedia. Don't tell us we wrong and how we should resolve our conflict. Datz my civil side. And to finish my comment on my bad side, bitch don't call me a babbling fool. Is you out cho damn mind?