Talk:Kadabra

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Merge, 27 August 2023, see discussion.
keep, 20 June 2021, see discussion.

Kadabra was one of the Video games good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 22, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed
July 17, 2023	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Video games: Nintendo / Characters

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game

This redirect is supported by the Nintendo task force.

This redirect is supported by the Video game characters task force.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Image

What are the plans for an image here? We have to tread carefully on fair use, and not simply paste three images together. Cheers! Scapler (talk) 20:06, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that we'll have much else of an option, unless there's a screenshot floating around of all three together in the anime. MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 20:16, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't we just copy and paste Koffing and Weezing together? Why cant we do that for this trio? Does it violate copyright rules to edit Sugi's artwork to merge them? _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 20:44, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that'd be three fair use images, which may be viewed as excessive. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 20:53, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure the GA/FA reviewers would understand that we cant really do any better. I mean all the Pokemon articles have the Sugi artwork. We cant break the chain by using something else! _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 23:32, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK

What makes these three stand out a among the other PKMN? What have they done to deserve an article? Alpha Cubone King! Bone bone bone! 02:28, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We have enough information on their development and enough Reception for them to meet the notability guidelines. MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 03:17, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I said at Talk:Mr. Mime, just look at the Critical reception section, and you will see why it is notable. If you can find this information for other species of Pokemon, then we can make a separate article. Being merged into the lists doesn't hinder its growth on Wikipedia, though. We could get most of this information for other Pokemon and put it in the lists. Its just alot of work for 500 different ones. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 12:27, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:VG assessment

A few things:

Once it evolves into Alakazam, ... requiring psychokinesis to hold it upright. → seems a little long-winded. I suggest splitting that sentence with either a period or a semi-colon.
- Fixed.
Remember, it's Pokémon in italics when referring to the series of games thereof; it's "Pokémon" without italics when referring to the actual creatures.
- Mostly fixed by you previously. Fixed Pokémon Adventures.
Kadabra and Alakazam are the only known Pokémon that ... → IIRC, Pokemon are referred the same way as human beings, so that should be who.
- Removed. Not sure why it was there as it is trivia.
In Pokémon Mystery Dungeon Alakazam is the leader of a Gold Rank rescue team. He is already a great leader but strives to better himself further to be like his hero, Lucario. He plays a large supporting role in the plot of the game. → Sentence structure is a little choppy there. I would try to make that into one or two fuller sentences.
- Merged sentences. Removed bit about Lucario as it doesn't really need to be there.
That second short paragraph in the "In video games" subsection should be merged into the previous paragraph.
- I changed some things around, added a bit, and merged the paragraphs. Is what I changed ok?
I am tempted to say that all three paragraphs in the "In anime" subsection should be merged into one, but I can see how such a paragraph would be a bit long and winding. It's up to you if you want to do that. I'm just a bit concerned that those paragraphs could be developed a bit more, like you've done in the "Design and characteristics" section.
- Done. I rewrote much of it to make it seem more uniform. Maybe when we go for FA, we can expand everything back.
IGN described Abra's evolutionary line as "losing most of its charm" as it progressed, calling Abra cute, describing Kadabra as having "a bit of that personality", but Alakazam appearing as a "distinctly grim, foreboding character". → Sentence structure is not very good here. It seems to make more sense to split into two separate statements by a period or semicolon.
- Fixed.
...with the hosts noting them as some of their favorite... → WP:PLUSING as listed in bold.
- Does "as the hosts noted" sound better?
...Pastor Eugene Walton distributed pamphlets describing the symbols... → Same as above.
- "distributed pamphlets that described the symbols"
Per MOS:NBSP, you need to insert non-breaking spaces between dollar amounts (in this case, $100 million)
- Thanks for fixing this.
This source http://faqs.ign.com/articles/388/388623p1.html doesn't look like it's reliable; it looks like it's self-published by a user, like something from GameFAQs.
- The writer has been shown to be a staff member of IGN. The guides were endorsed in several articles, and the writer has their own staff email address.

Get the above stuff addressed, and I'll tick it as B-Class. All in all, nice work. Try and find some more coverage if you can, and it's almost ready for a run for WP:GAN. –MuZemike 22:44, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Commented. Working on other half now. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 00:54, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. What do you think? _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 01:40, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good, I'll give it a pass for B-Class. One more thing, now that all those sections in the "Appearances" section are down to single paragraphs, it may not be a bad idea to remove the subsection headings, as they're not necessary needed. Anyways, good job. –MuZemike 02:19, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Golden Jackal or Dreamtime Dingo?

They seem more like a Jackal/Dingo/Coyote than fox like. I only thought of Dreamtime Dingo because Abra is always "asleep", and with Gen V's Dream Smoke. Anyhow, I've always nammed my Abra/Kadabra ANUBIS, now I find out Golden Jackal's can grow horns(not as big as Houndoom's) called Jackal's Horn, which are said to have mystic properties... I also sent an Anubis themed Kadabra evo to GF, among a bunch of pkmn ideas. They said they didn't take fan art/etc, but several similarities popped up in Black/White, so I'm excited for the NA release :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.34.173.171 (talk) 23:53, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Review can be found here the outcome pass.

Gj to all that participated. AerobicFox (talk) 01:27, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While I would have liked a more established editor review it, I thank you for your time. MuZemike (talk · contribs) said that all it needed for a GA run was more coverage, and a whole paragraph of reception has been added since then. So I think it would have passed either way. Thanks, _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 02:08, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Meh, it's understandable you would want a more established user. I feel confident though that this article's GA status would hold up to closer scrutiny, so feel free to be at ease about that.AerobicFox (talk) 02:33, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ref dropping

IGN Rank 91 Kadabra DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 10:50, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I already put this in there. Thanks, _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 13:22, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Abra, Kadabra, and Alakazam. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:55, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Abra, Kadabra, and Alakazam. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6BD00r4qU?url=http://www.ign.com/characters/alakazam to http://stars.ign.com/objects/143/14349925_biography.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:20, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kadabra move

I think the article could stand to be moved to Kadabra, and I feel that the inclusion of Abra and Alakazam are only done to inflate Kadabra's notability. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 13:14, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 20 July 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

It was proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved.

result:
Moved per consensus garnered below. Kudos to all editors for your input, and Happy, Healthy Publishing! (nac by page mover) P.I. Ellsworth - ed. ^put'r there 23:01, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Links: current log • target log

This is template {{subst:Requested move/end}}

Abra, Kadabra, and Alakazam → Kadabra
Kadabra → ?

– (I don't think we need disambuig) as the notable content is mostly based about Kadabra and most of the people at AfD also recommend to move. If the article's title name has been moved, we can replace the content from the Draft:Kadabra. 179.98.112.203 (talk) 23:22, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Kadabra titles a page with content and so it must also be dispositioned. If this request is granted, then Kadabra may be moved to Kadabra (disambiguation) and tagged with {{One other topic}} in accordance with WP:ONEOTHER, or it may be deleted to make way for the first proposed page move. P.I. Ellsworth ed. ^put'r there 08:45, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep unchanged The AfD warriors cant even decide properly on what is notable and what is not. Controversy makes notability today. Tomorrow they will call it a casual mention and say it can be merged in some ever changing Pokemon list. What about Abra and Alakazam? Are they worthless? Strange when the AfD people found Blastoise and Gengar not notable! Leanne Sepulveda (talk) 08:13, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support, delete disambiguation page Previous comment makes no policy based argument. Non-notable does not mean "worthless", and indeed you simply have to go to List of generation I Pokémon#Abra, List of generation I Pokémon#Kadabra and List of generation I Pokémon#Alakazam to see that Wikipedia believes they are worthwhile enough to include. However, the only Pokemon of these that merits a standalone article is Kadabra, so it should be moved to reflect that._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 10:06, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Several comments in the recent AFD mentioned going this route, and I would agree. The WP:SIGCOV here is around Kadabra. The coverage of Abra and Alakazam is not much more beyond what we could get from any other Pokemon. TarkusAB^talk/contrib 15:32, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support move, Delete dab page all the WP:SIGCOV and the main reason this survived the AfD was due to Kadabra. Adding a hatnote to the other link on the dab page and then deleting it is best IMO. Link20XX (talk) 18:57, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above Sahaib3005 (talk) 20:23, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I'm still somewhat new to RMs, but I'm not sure if deletion is a possible outcome for these discussions (I've been looking through the various procedure pages and I'm sure there are examples of old RMs that resulted in deletions, but I haven't found one yet) - my current understanding is that the dab page would need to be discussed separately at AfD. In order to avoid wasting time there, edit: I've struck that, I just read the note at the top. I suppose G6 is fine in that case, but I still can't close this, I'll just leave my comment in case anybody wants to go about it the other way instead. I could see another option being to history swap the two pages and then redirect Abra, Kadabra, and Alakazam to Kadabra as it doesn't appear to serve much as a dab page as of now - this might be an easier close and would not necessarily require an admin. ASUKITE 00:40, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Upcoming GAR

@Blake @Bearsona, sadly these authors are not active anymore. GAR will start next week. The article right now wasnt fleshed after the article was moved and renamed. The article right now needs to be updated. Concept and design should be expanded a bit more. Almost the entire Appearances section are unsourced and needs to be updated based on its appearances and lastly the Reception section where it needs to be rewritten a bit, like removing some pointless source and should be expanded since its flimsy. The lawsuit section seems to be fine, but more sources appeared after checking it at google news and should be expanded a bit more. Thank you! GreenishPickle! (🔔) 02:07, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article was initially created and written as the trio of its species. Now that it focuses only on Kadabara, the work just wasn't put in for it to be up to GA standards. As such, I would agree with demoting it. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 14:41, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]