Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Pokémon/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 via FACBot (talk) 00:31, 17 July 2017 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of Pokémon

Featured list candidates/List of Pokémon/archive1

Nominator(s): ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 17:33, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

After a much-needed overhaul to Wikipedia's Pokémon listing, the main page for these eight articles (this list plus the seven sub-lists) now covers the basics of what these creatures are. Given the sheer number of Pokémon (802 as of the release of Sun and Moon in 2016), all of them could not be reasonably contained within a single list. This article covers the names of each Pokémon as well as some background behind their creation and design. It is primarily designed as a hub-list to redirect users to the seven more detailed sub-lists that are divided by generation. The table used for the Pokémon is a bit atypical and uses seven columns to divide the names rather than one obnoxiously long list with over 800 rows. It forgoes sorbability for the sake of accessibility and ease of reading. I believe this list to cover all that is necessary for it as more in-depth information is better handed in either the dedicated lists by generation and/or articles on the Pokémon themselves. Thank you in advance for your comments, criticism, and time! ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 17:33, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

"is divided into articles by generation." – Link is broken.
Per MOS:ACCESS the colour coding needs to be accompanied by a symbol to make the table accessible.

Otherwise it all looks reasonably good. I like the format you've used with the subpages. Harrias ^talk 07:33, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Harrias: Corrected the link and added symbols to the chart per request. Glad you like the new format of the articles! ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 14:03, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

The specific claim that Generation VI Pokemon are influenced by species in France has no in-line citation and is not supported later in the article, only a general claim that "a variety of animals and culture across the world provide the basis for countless ideas to be incorporated into the franchise." This should be reversed: the specific claim should be in the body while the general claim should be in the lead.
"a variant of normal evolution" -> this sentence was written with the assumption that every reader knows what "normal evolution" is. However, the lead only explains that Pokemon have alternate forms. Including this piece of information but neglecting to introduce the concept of evolution is an oversight.
On a similar note, the section about alternate forms in the lead -- namely, Mega Evolution and Primal Reversion -- is missing from the body of the article and should be explained and sourced there, while the existing details in the lead should be cut and generalized. Something along the lines of, "Multiple Pokémon feature alternate forms that change their appearance, stats, and viable attacks without becoming a new species if certain criteria are met", would do. Then, in the body, briefly explain some of these criteria (ie. weather for Castform) and the concept of Mega Evolution. A good location for this information would be the end of the second paragraph of the "Conception" section.

Overall, this list is very well written. My major gripes can be taken care of by taking the following steps: introduce and explain the idea of evolution, and of alternate forms (including Mega Evolution etc) in the second paragraph of "Conception". Then, in the first paragraph of "Design" use Generation VI's French influence as an example of regional influences in the creatures' design. Lastly, rewrite the second paragraph of the lead to be a general summary of the two body sections.

Excellent work on this list! You have come up with a creative solution to the unique problem of listing all Pokemon, and I like the result. This is quality work, and I am excited to see that it has been nominated at FLC! --haha169 (talk) 10:29, 22 June 2017‎

@Haha169: I'm thrilled you enjoy the new style and many thanks for the review! I've done a bunch of reworking and additions based on your comments. Trying to keep the lede pretty simple but I think it covers the necessary aspects presented in the body now. I've greatly expanded on evolution to make it more clear. I don't believe the new paragraph requires direct sourcing since it's extrapolated from the games themselves. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 19:16, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support Your corrections satisfy all my concerns. Really excellent work! --haha169 (talk) 20:21, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Review by PresN

Link handheld platform to Handheld game console
I'd actually swap paragraphs 1 and 2- you launch into the generations before you actually talk about what Pokemon are in the first place. So, sentence one plus paragraph 2, then the rest of paragraph 1.
"with each division encompassing new main series titles" -> "with each division encompassing new titles in the main video game series"
"who enjoy battling and want to go more in depth." -> period outside of the quote unless you're quoting a full sentence, which you aren't here.
"help to make each Pokemon in the game individual," - same
"as of the release of Sun and Moon" - you link this and give the full name in the next paragraph instead of here, which should be swapped
"Throughout development of Red and Green" - these games have not been mentioned as the first or linked since the lead
"Each iteration of the series has brought about praise" - the series itself doesn't make the praise, so just "brought", not "brought about"
"Yoshida goes further and calls them 'the face of that generation' and that 'they're'" - and says that
Not doing a source review, but I will point out that you're mixing date styles in the references (mm-dd-yyyy and dd-mm-yyyy)

Good work on the list! I hope to see the generations lists here as well at some point, I love the new colors. --Pres N 20:54, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@PresN: Thanks for the review! I believe I've covered everything. I've added a brief sentence mentioning the release of Red, Green, and Blue in the Concept section to cover it earlier. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 13:12, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Pres N 21:26, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I had a look over this list last week and could not see anything major wrong with it, as a result im happy to Support its promotion to FL.Jason Rees (talk) 16:30, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:10, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.