Pokemon wiki article coordination

#1 Edited by Kowbrainz (923 posts) -

Lately I've been going through and trying to add pages for each of the Pokemon which have yet to be covered by the site, or edit the pages of those with less information by others. The main thing that's come to my attention is that with a whopping 493 different dudes to cover, and with so many different people adding new Pokemon pages or editing existing ones, it's hard to keep the format and content of the pages standardised. So I basically felt like discussing what format should be used for most/all of these pages just to keep them consistant, what information should and shouldn't be included... you know, that sort of thing.
 
Please note that if you don't give a shit about Pokemon and don't have anything constructive to add regarding their wikis on Giant Bomb, please hit the Forums link in the top right corner of the page now. Cheers.
 
Back to business. So far, here's the format I've been using for any new pages I've been adding right now which has allowed me to punch in a bunch of new information for each of the different species without babbling on about nothing:
 
 

Data

National Pokedex No: #XXX
Classification: Such and Such Pokémon
Type: Fire, Water (example)
Ability: Clear Body (example)
Height: X'XX''
Weight: XXX.X lbs
Location: 
Route 2 ( Yellow)
Evolves at: Level 20
 

Evolutionary Chain

  X (Level 20) -->Y (Level 45) --> Z
 
 
 
I feel like there are other categories which could be added, but I haven't had the time for them yet. I'm thinking of having these included in the articles too in the future, though. 

  • Male/Female ratios, gender differences
  • special abilities of the species (if applicable)
  • Pokedex Entries for each game (already used on some articles)
  • Egg Type
  • EVs given? (competitive crap)
  • Base Stats (more competitive crap)
  • maybe learnable moves?
  • sprites
  • additional trivia
 
 The problem I have is drawing the line between where Giant Bomb stops as a general gaming wiki and where it becomes something like Bulbapedia which is dedicated to stockpiling all sorts of knowledge on the games that most average fans aren't going to bother with. So I ask which features should these articles contain, which features should they avoid and perhaps whether we could agree on a single format to use for all of their concept pages. 
Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks. :)
#2 Posted by ZenaxPure (2569 posts) -

Regarding where Giant Bomb should draw the line, that has been bothering me as well for a long time. I wanted to fill in some of the Pokemon specific pages but I wasn't sure how far to go. I am glad to see someone else with an interest in filling it out though and agree some sort of coordination needs to go into it. 
 
That aside I like your idea for the basic stuff but as for the rest I think it depends. If giantbomb is just going to be general knowledge I think gender differences, special abilities, pokedex entries, and additional trivia is all that is really needed. The rest is basically for competetive players only who are probably using Smogon or something anyway.

#3 Posted by Kowbrainz (923 posts) -

Thanks for the reply. I might edit the original post now with a basic template then and leave out the stuff on EVs etc. just as a sort of reference thing.
 
The other thing that came to mind in this respect was something I saw when visiting a few of the Pokemon articles for earlier species. No offense to the writers, but there was a lot of babbling on about theoretical match-ups of the specific Pokemon species with weird reasoning, along the lines of "bulbasaur's thick hide and vines would help it win against weaker Pokemon like Seedot and Squirtle".
 
What I'd like to be able to do is keep the information formatted in a simple, quick and concise table without too much babbling like that, but at the same time I'm sort of worried about losing the personal touch of some of the articles. Maybe that kind of stuff can be left for the trivia sections of these articles, I dunno. Just something I was wondering about.

#4 Posted by ZenaxPure (2569 posts) -

I just went to look at the Bulbasaur page just to see what you are talking about and yeah something needs to be done. I think a lot of what you are talking about should be completely cut from the page. There is no need to go on about Bulbasaur being a grass type and being strong against water types and the like. That is just the general knowledge stuff I would expect to find a walkthrough or something. 
 
To keep it clean and tidy I think the "data" section should stay and the entire "details" section should be cut  besides the pokedex entries which should probably be a section of its own. There are things in the "details" section like first appearances that are already listed on the right side panel. I don't see anything wrong with a small blurb about the Pokemon after it's quick info but not to the detail that is shown there.  
 
That is just my 2 cents though.

#5 Posted by Fallen189 (4931 posts) -

As much as I would love to help on this, time simply doesn't allow it.
 
However, I will back you up and let you know that I fully am behind this project.

#6 Posted by MattyFTM (14328 posts) -

The more info the better. Obviously the key/important facts should be early on in the article, and the super detailed stuff that 99.99% of people don't care about should be later on - but a wiki article can never have too much info.

Moderator
#7 Posted by Ignor (2372 posts) -

Am I allowed to cross-link concepts, objects and such? 
I usually leave the editorial stuff to someone else. 

#8 Posted by ZenaxPure (2569 posts) -
@MattyFTM said:
" The more info the better. Obviously the key/important facts should be early on in the article, and the super detailed stuff that 99.99% of people don't care about should be later on - but a wiki article can never have too much info. "
That is good to know. I was never to sure how detailed these pages were supposed to be since there is a ton of insanely detailed stuff 90% of people won't even care about that some of us could probably put on there. But regards to what he was talking about earlier a lot of the information should be cut I do believe. For example from that Bulbasaur article: 
 
" Grass/Poison-type Pokémon are x2 super effective against grass and water types. The poison typing giving it an edge over grass and the grass typing giving it an edge over water. In general, grass/poison Pok é mon are ineffective against poison-type Pok é mon .


Grass/Poison-type Pokémon are weak to fire, flying, ice and psychic attacks. Like the grass type, Pokémon of this type are weak to fire, flying and ice. Adding in the poison type gives the final psychic weakness" 

 
That stuff just comes off as "general" Pokemon knowledge and that sort of info should either be moved to say a new page called "Grass Pokemon" or something to that effect, or just forgotten about entirely. Either way I don't really think it belongs on every pokemon page because if you go that far it means you would need to go type it on every single Pokemon page that is of the same type. So the Ivysaur and Venasaur pages would need the exact same paragraph pasted there along with any other grass/poison type Pokemon.
 
And I will stop babbling about that now, I think you know what I am talking about now.
#9 Posted by ZenaxPure (2569 posts) -
@Ignor said:
" Am I allowed to cross-link concepts, objects and such?  I usually leave the editorial stuff to someone else.  "
Personally, I think the more people double checking the information the better, especially if you like that kind of stuff (can't say I enjoy adding concepts and objects and the like myself).
#10 Edited by MattyFTM (14328 posts) -
@Zenaxzd: Yeah, it seems like concept pages for the types of Pokemon (e.g. Grass Pokemon, or Fire Pokemon) would be good additions to the database, so those pages can include general info about weaknesses and strengths of these types, rather than repeating information on all the individual Pokemon pages.
 
EDIT: Also, just a note, if/when you do create these pages - please make sure you say "Pokémon" in the names, not "Pokemon" (i.e. with an é rather than an e). We cannot currently rename concepts, so it's important that they are named correctly.
Moderator
#11 Posted by ZenaxPure (2569 posts) -
@MattyFTM said:
" @Zenaxzd: Yeah, it seems like concept pages for the types of Pokemon (e.g. Grass, or Fire) would be good additions to the database, so those pages can include general info about weaknesses and strengths of these types, rather than repeating information on all the individual Pokemon pages. "
Indeed, I'd go make it myself but I am sure when some random person reads this they will probably beat me to the punch. I kinda like editing the pages more than making them anyway heh.
#12 Posted by Kowbrainz (923 posts) -
@Zenaxzd said:
" To keep it clean and tidy I think the "data" section should stay and the entire "details" section should be cut  besides the pokedex entries which should probably be a section of its own. There are things in the "details" section like first appearances that are already listed on the right side panel. I don't see anything wrong with a small blurb about the Pokemon after it's quick info but not to the detail that is shown there.   That is just my 2 cents though. "
Glad to get support before I go cutting through somebody else's work. Can't tell how much time people put into these so it sometimes feels a bit bad cutting out a bunch of that stuff but I think there are times like these where you just have to go ahead and chop away at the page for the good of the community reading through.
 
@MattyFTM said:
" The more info the better. Obviously the key/important facts should be early on in the article, and the super detailed stuff that 99.99% of people don't care about should be later on - but a wiki article can never have too much info. "

Here's an example of a Pokemon article on Bulbapedia. I realise where you're coming from in making Giant Bomb the best games wiki on the web and in some cases I feel the same way, but at times you have to look at some of this and wonder how much information is actually worth the time for each of these articles. Giant Bomb omits a lot of the strategy or technical stuff present on Pokemon sites outside of the wikis, so if users need that information they'll visit Bulbapedia, Smogon, Serebii etc. Giant Bomb doesn't specialise in Pokemon, it covers everything, so trying to maintain every Pokemon article to the highest level and cover all information possible might be a little too much work. Perhaps later on, when all of the articles for the existing Pokemon are fleshed out to a particular level, but I'm not sure if the technical info should be encouraged at this stage.
#13 Edited by Kowbrainz (923 posts) -
@Ignor said:

" Am I allowed to cross-link concepts, objects and such?  I usually leave the editorial stuff to someone else.  "

I actually really like cross linking all of the concepts as it makes navigation through all of the subject matter much easier and gets a lot of more obscure pages noticed better. Only concern is with the Pokemon (franchise) article at the moment since the amount of links in that thing makes it lag like a bitch when editing. But then, I don't really see a way around that because I like the way it links to each of the specific Pokemon pages at the same time. :/
#14 Posted by ZenaxPure (2569 posts) -
@Kowbrainz said:
@MattyFTM said:
" The more info the better. Obviously the key/important facts should be early on in the article, and the super detailed stuff that 99.99% of people don't care about should be later on - but a wiki article can never have too much info. "

Here's an example of a Pokemon article on Bulbapedia. I realise where you're coming from in making Giant Bomb the best games wiki on the web and in some cases I feel the same way, but at times you have to look at some of this and wonder how much information is actually worth the time for each of these articles. Giant Bomb omits a lot of the strategy or technical stuff present on Pokemon sites outside of the wikis, so if users need that information they'll visit Bulbapedia, Smogon, Serebii etc. Giant Bomb doesn't specialise in Pokemon, it covers everything, so trying to maintain every Pokemon article to the highest level and cover all information possible might be a little too much work. Perhaps later on, when all of the articles for the existing Pokemon are fleshed out to a particular level, but I'm not sure if the technical info should be encouraged at this stage. "
Like Matty said before the technical stuff could come later after the pages are fleshed out some. I mean really even though Giant bomb does cover everything and maybe an argument could be made to keep out stuff like IVs or EVs at the same time only a few people would be writing that stuff anyway so I guess there really isn't a problem with it being super detailed since people that know what they are talking about and care to would be filling it all out. 
 
By the way Kowbrainz are you planning on filling in the missing Pokemon to the database? A few weeks ago I was considering it but I never mustered the energy to figure out where the community left off and what was missing. If you are doing that it I applaud that, I have honestly been sticking with mostly Colo and Gale of Darkness articles since I really like those 2 games but it was saddening trying to link to other Pokemon pages to it only to not find them.
#15 Edited by MattyFTM (14328 posts) -
@Kowbrainz said:

"@MattyFTM said:

" The more info the better. Obviously the key/important facts should be early on in the article, and the super detailed stuff that 99.99% of people don't care about should be later on - but a wiki article can never have too much info. "

Here's an example of a Pokemon article on Bulbapedia. I realise where you're coming from in making Giant Bomb the best games wiki on the web and in some cases I feel the same way, but at times you have to look at some of this and wonder how much information is actually worth the time for each of these articles. Giant Bomb omits a lot of the strategy or technical stuff present on Pokemon sites outside of the wikis, so if users need that information they'll visit Bulbapedia, Smogon, Serebii etc. Giant Bomb doesn't specialise in Pokemon, it covers everything, so trying to maintain every Pokemon article to the highest level and cover all information possible might be a little too much work. Perhaps later on, when all of the articles for the existing Pokemon are fleshed out to a particular level, but I'm not sure if the technical info should be encouraged at this stage. "
It's completely up to you how much detail you feel is worth the effort of including. No-one expects you to bring the Pokemon pages up to the standard of Bulbapedia pages, but if at some point in the future we were to get the pages were to get to that standard, it would be awesome. It's entirely up to you how much info you want to add at the moment, but we shouldn't be placing limits on how much info can be included in the pages.
Moderator
#16 Edited by Kowbrainz (923 posts) -

Yeah, I'm filling in the missing ones at the moment. Hit 5000 points today so it's become a lot easier to do it too, although I'm kinda wondering when I'll start to wear out. :P
I haven't played enough of Colosseum and haven't touched XD so I can't help there, but the general stuff I'm okay with.
 
Edit @MattyFTM: Fair enough, good to know. I reckon it'd be awesome too and I'd like to see pages like that here, but I just don't want to see some pages getting fleshed out completely while others are neglected at this stage.

#17 Posted by ZenaxPure (2569 posts) -

Also while we are on the subject and I am pretty much a wiki noob (haven't even hit 1k points) I am curious how do you go about changing the default images for some pages? I have been wanting to fix the Team Rocket page because I feel like it is to anime focused and not game focused (considering half the article is about the anime characters who only appear in one of the 10 or so games the organization is in) and I think it would be more correct to switch the picture with another such as Team Rocket Admins or possibly Giovanni but I've no idea how to go about this.

#18 Edited by MattyFTM (14328 posts) -
@Zenaxzd: Users with over 5000 points can change the default picture. There is a thread here for users below that to request the default picture to be changed.
Moderator
#19 Posted by ZenaxPure (2569 posts) -
@MattyFTM said:
" @Zenaxzd: Users with over 5000 points can change the default picture. There is a thread here for users below that to request the default picture to be changed. "
Thanks Matty, I will toss something in that thread unless I get beat to it.
#20 Posted by Kowbrainz (923 posts) -

Ah cool, I was wondering if I could do that with the images since some of the PNGs I had uploaded for a few pages ended up with ugly black strips going through the centre of the white background.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.