Talk:Pokémon Diamond and Pearl
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Archive 2
To save some space (the page was crowded with stuff like release dates), it's nice to start afresh, no? - Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 08:31, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
As usual, revive discussions by copy/paste, or bringing it up again. - Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 08:34, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Game not released tag
Why is there a game not released tag on here when it is already released. Deathmore Wednesday 7 Fenuary 18:09 GMT
-
- Still not released in America and Europe...-Sukecchi 20:35, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Shield and Helmet Fossils
Earlier I tried to alter this part, but it was reverted. There is now a comment on this part of the Gameplay section on the underground area which reads: "This is the correct fossil according to all available sources like Serebii.net and Bulbapedia. In the absence of a reliable source saying otherwise, LEAVE IT ALONE". In actuality, however, neither the linked Serebii page, nor either's Pokédex entries confirm this. Also, this (Wikipedia) article currently says that Zugaidos is cloned from the shield fossil, and Tatetops from the Helmet Fossil. I initially changed this because of, well, logic, based on the appearance and descriptions of the two Pokémon. I was going to leave it alone, but then I found that there is no documentation to back up that warning, so I'm going to change it again. Complain if you want, but if you do so, have some reliable evidence with you. ~e.o.t.d~ 09:19, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
On looking closer at the warning, I see that I was actually getting yelled at for mixing up the version exclusivity, which I completely missed was there until now. I'll fix the fossils, and make sure the versions are correct this time. ~e.o.t.d~ 09:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)- Scratch that, I checked the history and saw that I did have the versions right. Which means someone needs to check their sources. ~e.o.t.d~ 09:28, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Um, fuck no. Read your own first comment in this section. Shield=Zugaidos/Helmet=Tatetops. If you look at your edits here and here, however, you can clearly see that you have been changing it to Helmet=Zugaidosu/Shield=Tatetops. In my edits I have been changing it back. Looking at the Wikipedia articles, they do appear to agree with you, but as none of the other sources do, I am inclined to say Wikipedia is wrong in this case. --WikidSmaht (talk) 14:37, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- First, WP:CIVIL, please. Second, I was referring to the page's original (as well as current) state in my first post, not the changes I made to it. Third, show me a source.
- I'm going to explain my logic in detail here. Zugaidos and Rampard are both "Headbutt" Pokémon, and are based on the Pachycephalosaur, a dinosaur with an extremely thick skull. Tatetops and Trideps, on the other hand, are both "Shield" Pokémon. So, therefore, I concluded that Zugaidos must come from the Helmet Fossil, and that Tatetops must come from the Shield Fossil.
- If you have a reliable source that says otherwise, then by all means I'll stop pressing the point. I'm not wanting to get into an edit war here, so I won't change anything about the Fossils until this gets settled.
- And remember, WP:CIVIL ~e.o.t.d~ 17:36, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- First, I wasn’t swearing at you, and I don’t believe swearing for emphasis is uncivil. They’re just words. Second, what I am trying to explain to you is that the original and current state of the page are consistent with your own statement above that “Zugaidos is cloned from the shield fossil, and Tatetops from the Helmet Fossil”. Your edits, if you examine them, are the ones which are inconsistent with your findings. Third, in the absence of a reliable source, we need to either accept the non-credible sources( SZ, BZ, ST, & BT which all say Shield=Zugaidos & Helmet=Tatetops), or remove the information from the article(s) altogether. As someone recently reminded me, WP:RS is a guideline, not a policy, and its implementation is therefore subject to being tempered by common sense.
- I do understand your logic, and honestly I thought exactly the same thing– at first. However, no source backs up that logic, so to include it in the article just because we logically concluded that that must be the case would be original research.
- And I don’t think I have been uncivil in regard to this matter, but I will strive to remain civil for the rest of the discussion also. --WikidSmaht (talk) 18:14, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Holy fuck! Serebii’s information has changed. I swear not 20 minutes ago it was listed the other way. Bulbapedia still is. So, now we have a dilemma. I am inclined to say we change/leave the articles so they match Serebii, as it is generally accurate and Bulbapedia is too volatile, being a wiki. I think we ought to leave the invisible notes though, as it may remain a point of contention. And I swear, as in, I’d stake my fuckin’ Wii, that that information just changed on Serebii recently. --WikidSmaht (talk) 18:17, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- No problem. I definitely agree with that - the only thing Bulbapedia's really good for in my opinion is absorbing game guide info that might otherwise end up here. :) I'd go with Serebii as well (but I'll let you make any changes). ~e.o.t.d~ 18:31, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Holy fuck! Serebii’s information has changed. I swear not 20 minutes ago it was listed the other way. Bulbapedia still is. So, now we have a dilemma. I am inclined to say we change/leave the articles so they match Serebii, as it is generally accurate and Bulbapedia is too volatile, being a wiki. I think we ought to leave the invisible notes though, as it may remain a point of contention. And I swear, as in, I’d stake my fuckin’ Wii, that that information just changed on Serebii recently. --WikidSmaht (talk) 18:17, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Um, fuck no. Read your own first comment in this section. Shield=Zugaidos/Helmet=Tatetops. If you look at your edits here and here, however, you can clearly see that you have been changing it to Helmet=Zugaidosu/Shield=Tatetops. In my edits I have been changing it back. Looking at the Wikipedia articles, they do appear to agree with you, but as none of the other sources do, I am inclined to say Wikipedia is wrong in this case. --WikidSmaht (talk) 14:37, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
On a side note, I was actually considering completely removing the two sentences going into detail about Fossils, as I don't really think they're necessary for an understanding of the Underground gameplay. I'm continuing the discussion above instead of just deleting the Fossil references because it applies to other articles - namely, those of the Pokémon cloned from those Fossils - and will yield information that can be used in those articles. ~e.o.t.d~ 18:04, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- Heh, edit conflicted. I think removing the fossils might be the right course of action. Players of the franchise will be very interested to know that all fossils can be obtained, but whether it is encyclopedic is questionable. Maybe you could replace it by mentioning how Mikaruge can only be acquired by completing an Underground event. --WikidSmaht (talk) 18:14, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'm even hesitant about that - although, actually, it could just say something along the lines of "Several Pokémon can only be obtained in conjuncion with the underground area's functionality, such as the Fossil Pokémon and Mikaruge" (only less wordy, with links to some Fossils, preferably). ~e.o.t.d~ 18:35, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] ESRB rating confirmed
Just bcause I'm a bit obsessive like that, I'm leaving a small note here in addition to my edit summary: the ESRB (search for "Pokemon" and they'll be at the top of the list) has now officially - and unsurprisingly - given Pokémon Diamond and Pearl "E" ratings. ~e.o.t.d~ (蜻蛉の目•話す•貢献) 06:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] EBGames/GameStop styli
I guess it's sort of relevant, but I have no idea where to add something like preorder incentives. :|—ウルタプ 19:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- I'll help you decide: it's not relevant. It's absoletely non-notable and borders on advertisement to boot. ~e.o.t.d~ (蜻蛉の目•話す•貢献) 00:05, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Huh? What do you mean? It’s an historical detail of the launch. A lot of game articles mention extras, pack-ins, pre-orders and all sorts of other bonus materials. --WikidSmaht (talk) 02:07, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- And so we should automatically include stuff like this because "a lot of game articles" have done the same? Some pre-order or pack-in promotions are notable, of course, like the XD bonus disc containing Jirachi, or the highly-touted Wireless adapter that was bundled with (and used almost exclusively for) FR/LG. This, however, is entirely different: those styluses are most likely third-party, and additionally have no effect on the way you play the game - aside from possibly making you feel even more like a Pokénerd, of course. Hell, Nintendo even advises against the use of third-party styluses because they can damage the screen (an experience, I'm ashamed to say, I have had). It's just not important. I do agree, however, with changing "Reception" to include the US and other regions, and maybe making mention of the fact that preorders started more than two months in advance, with several retailers offering third-party incentives. But there's absolutely no need to go into specifics about what those promotions entail. ~e.o.t.d~ (蜻蛉の目•話す•貢献) 06:42, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Let's wait for launch. Unless we can gather concrete numbers of preorders, it's not really worth mentioning the pre-order stuff, where with launch, Nintendo does release numbers (they can be vague and all, but heh). Also, check if the pre-order incentives are notable before adding it. - Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 06:52, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- And so we should automatically include stuff like this because "a lot of game articles" have done the same? Some pre-order or pack-in promotions are notable, of course, like the XD bonus disc containing Jirachi, or the highly-touted Wireless adapter that was bundled with (and used almost exclusively for) FR/LG. This, however, is entirely different: those styluses are most likely third-party, and additionally have no effect on the way you play the game - aside from possibly making you feel even more like a Pokénerd, of course. Hell, Nintendo even advises against the use of third-party styluses because they can damage the screen (an experience, I'm ashamed to say, I have had). It's just not important. I do agree, however, with changing "Reception" to include the US and other regions, and maybe making mention of the fact that preorders started more than two months in advance, with several retailers offering third-party incentives. But there's absolutely no need to go into specifics about what those promotions entail. ~e.o.t.d~ (蜻蛉の目•話す•貢献) 06:42, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Huh? What do you mean? It’s an historical detail of the launch. A lot of game articles mention extras, pack-ins, pre-orders and all sorts of other bonus materials. --WikidSmaht (talk) 02:07, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Maybe convert the Reception section to Launch, with Japan, U.S., and Europe subsections. --WikidSmaht (talk) 02:07, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps, but maybe we shouldn't use subsections if it can be avoided. We can shove a few paragraphs for that section (in fact, that section will need EXPANSION once we've gained release details. So, I don't think we need for subsections unless it gets overly long. - Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 06:52, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
So, the stylus promotion is now confirmed at multiple stores... should we say something? --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
- Probably, since it's apparent that the styluses are, in fact, made by Nintendo, are being given away at multiple retail chains, and are fairly prominently featured in the only existing commercial for the games. They still shouldn't have more than a sentence or two, though. ~e.o.t.d~ (蜻蛉の目•話す•貢献) 08:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Release date (again)
I've just seen that Amazon.uk have listed Diamond and Pearl, giving them a release date of March 30, 2007.[1] Interesting. Gran2 13:08, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
:-) Hello never did this on wiki before hope this is right.
I emailed amazon to see if the date is correct they sent me an email confirming this:
24-02-07
Dear Customer
Thank you for contacting Amazon.co.uk.
Looking into your query I can confirm that the item "Pokémon Diamond (Nintendo DS)" and "Pokémon Pearl (Nintendo DS)" will be released on March 30, 2007. These items are available for pre order now.
I realise how anxious you must be to obtain this item and thank you for your patience in this matter.
Thanks for shopping at Amazon.co.uk.
so yay so excited, pre-ordered mine. Im not sure if they can be 100% with the dates though.
George
georgecullen@msn.com
- Wow, thanks for that. I've got my
ticketpre-order. Gran2 15:19, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
That is the Ranger release date, Amazon is known to be horribly inaccurate. Blue Mirage | Comment 01:03, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Amazon often states they will be releasing a game much earlier then it is actually available. (I believe this is done so they can get a lot of pre-orders) so don't hold your breath. HarveyDanger 04:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
As I said I would do on my edit when I changed the date I have checked the date for the game, whether they were getting muddled with Ranger, as well as who they got their info off. This was the reply I received:
"Dear Mr Bowe
Thank you for contacting Amazon.co.uk.
Please accept our apologies for any confusion caused regarding your enquiry.
These video games are currently scheduled for release on June 30, 2007, and we will notify you if we find that this date changes. These items are available for pre-order now. This information is received from the manufacturer."
Now I think this clearly states that the date I set was correct, if their are any problems with dates please place your worry on here before randomly changing it. I will now change the date back seeing as how it as the most reliable source we are going to get other than off Nintendo.
Graham1991 11:50, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
- That is considered original research, and can't be accepted as source. -- ReyBrujo 17:02, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
- Well how could it be made usable? The information is available and verifiable, there must be a way to make it acceptably attributable. --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] "sexual dimorphism" vs. "gender dimorphism"
From what I can see, the former is the more widely used term; Googlefight shows 996,000 to 25,000. WickedSmaht's objection was "We can’t call it sexual dimorphism, as we can’t be sure they have sexes." While there are asexual Pokemon (e.g. Staryu), the feature in question only applies to sexual ones (e.g. Scizor), which clearly do: note the male and female symbols. In either case, the link goes to the same article. WildWeathel (talk) 15:57, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- What I meant was, the games and related materials only use the term “gender”, so we don’t know if there are any actual genetic differences, or indeed ANY differences beyond the assigned gender and the superficial differences that D/P introduce. --WikidSmaht (talk) 18:33, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- I had agreed to the change to "gender" initially, but I'm rethinking that, although I can still see that point of view. My view is that, outside of the field of serious sexual and gender studies, the words "sex" and "gender" are essentially synonyms. And although the game only refers to "gender" (partially, I suspect, to avoid complaints by overreacting parents), the term "sexual dimorphism" is, I'm fairly certain, the correct scientific term, and is also much more common - I had never heard the term "gender dimorphism" until the phrase was put on this page, and it isn't even listed as an alternate term on the sexual dimorphism page. ~e.o.t.d~ (蜻蛉の目•話す•貢献) 00:43, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- Further evidence: a search on Wikipedia for "gender dimorphism" yielded these results: the redirect page to Sexual dimorphism, the D/P page, one genus of plants (which also uses "sexual dimorphism") and Etiology of transsexualism, which uses the term not to describe physical differences between genders/sexes, but to describe the point of view that there are only two genders (as opposed to three,four, etc.), an entirely different usage. ~e.o.t.d~ (蜻蛉の目•話す•貢献) 12:16, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- My concern is that we, the writers of Wikipedia use the words that best express the content. No one, as I understand it, is suggesting that "gender" (in the sense of "masculine" being distinguished from "feminine" as social institutions) is a subject of Pokemon; rather, I doubt that Nintendo would touch the topic at all in a children's game. However, the use of the phrase "gender dimorphism" could be misread as suggesting that gender (again in this sense) is presented in-game. Instead, I believe, we should use the more precise term "sexual dimorphism," and avoid any confusion. As to the Nintendo using the term "gender" in-game etc, remember the difference in audience between a game aimed at grade-schoolers (and thus also at their parents) and Wikipedia's audience of educated adults. In response to WickedSmaht, sexual dimorphism has been part of Pokemon from the very start, before either "gender" or "sex" appeared in the literature or games: male and female Nidoran have always had different artwork, stats, and abilities.WildWeathel (talk) 01:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
- I don’t see how the Nidoran case supports use of the term? --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
- The redirect already existed, that indicates something, at least. --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
- Further evidence: a search on Wikipedia for "gender dimorphism" yielded these results: the redirect page to Sexual dimorphism, the D/P page, one genus of plants (which also uses "sexual dimorphism") and Etiology of transsexualism, which uses the term not to describe physical differences between genders/sexes, but to describe the point of view that there are only two genders (as opposed to three,four, etc.), an entirely different usage. ~e.o.t.d~ (蜻蛉の目•話す•貢献) 12:16, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- I had agreed to the change to "gender" initially, but I'm rethinking that, although I can still see that point of view. My view is that, outside of the field of serious sexual and gender studies, the words "sex" and "gender" are essentially synonyms. And although the game only refers to "gender" (partially, I suspect, to avoid complaints by overreacting parents), the term "sexual dimorphism" is, I'm fairly certain, the correct scientific term, and is also much more common - I had never heard the term "gender dimorphism" until the phrase was put on this page, and it isn't even listed as an alternate term on the sexual dimorphism page. ~e.o.t.d~ (蜻蛉の目•話す•貢献) 00:43, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
The main thing you must remember is that Pokémon articles, and this page, will be read by kids and parents would object to their progeny reading anything to do with "sex" (in any of its meanings). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by NP Chilla (talk • contribs).
- However, regarding that comment, Wikipedia is not censored. - Tetsuya-san (talk : contribs) 12:00, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to change it now - it's been several days since the last comment, and while I'm aware that WikidSmaht (the main supporter of "dender dimorphism") apparently hasn't been on Wikipedia for over a week, I think there's more than enough support for "sexual dimorphism". ~e.o.t.d~ (蜻蛉の目•話す•貢献) 19:18, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
- Obviously, I think this is a mistake. I was not referring to the fact that the games only say gender, that that is parent-pleasing is a given. I was referring to the fact that because the games only say gender, we can not verify the existence of the genetic differences( i.e., X/Y or Z/W chromosomes) that define biological sex. --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fake
http://putstuff.putfile.com/54984/8254351
This is wierd.. What's up w/ it? 75.153.204.116 03:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not one to trust unknown files, so I didn't actually look at it, but from the filename I'm assuming it's related to the bootleg version of Telefang that was released as Pokémon Diamond. ~e.o.t.d~ (蜻蛉の目•話す•貢献) 11:54, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I think is is Telefang, I found that out, and the file is safe, it is runable w/ any GBA emulator... It is a binary so I dont think it has viruses... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.153.204.116 (talk) 22:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC).
[edit] English
Is this game out in English? Cuz the article has an Enlish cover art... 75.153.204.116 03:36, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
- Dear god, read the article. It will released 22 April. And the cover art has been released, but not the game.—ウルタプ 03:52, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
- It seen it was unreleased [I only could find Jap Roms...], but was confused, how could u get the alnum art if it's not out? Is it on Nintendo's website? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.153.204.116 (talk) 22:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC).
- Yes. If you take a look, you will see that it is indeed on Nintendo’s main and Pokemon websites[2]. --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
- WP:BITE --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
- It seen it was unreleased [I only could find Jap Roms...], but was confused, how could u get the alnum art if it's not out? Is it on Nintendo's website? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.153.204.116 (talk) 22:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC).
Well congratulations for pointing the obvious, I NEVER would've figured that out -_- Blue Mirage | Comment 23:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
- WP:CIVIL --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Some names are used, others not...
Some of the names released by Serebii and Pokeexperto on the 14th of March are used in this article, while most are not. Why is this? As an "encyclopedia", this should be kept as consistent as possible. So either use all or none. Totema1 22:49, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- We're currently attempting to fix this problem. We're been reverting this article and others all day. See, the names from the Toy Fair are alright, but Serebii and PokeExperto fail Wikipedia:Attribution, since they are fan sites. We can't use their names. -Sukecchi 22:51, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps Wikipedia should become slightly more lenient in regards to its definition of a reliable source. I know it's there for a good reason but some things that are common knowledge are being rejected, and that's just silly. - DavetheAvatar 02:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- We're currently attempting to fix this problem. We're been reverting this article and others all day. See, the names from the Toy Fair are alright, but Serebii and PokeExperto fail Wikipedia:Attribution, since they are fan sites. We can't use their names. -Sukecchi 22:51, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] GBA trading
The article states that all GBA pokemon can be traded to D&P. How is this done if two DS's don't allow for the trade of two GBA pokemon? H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 16:09, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- Uh, apparently I should have read more about Pal Park. Anyway, I do question Pal Park then. If I have Leaf Green with a Charizard, and I put it in my DS, does Pal Park let me send a Charmander into the park or am I only allowed to send Charizard? H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 18:14, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- You get Charizard. Pal Park contains whatever six Pokémon are in the cartridge's party at the moment. However, you have to catch the entire party in your visit and they're permanently transferred out of the cart. (I assume the party on the cart automatically becomes the next six in the box.) So you'd get Charizard. Just breed to get the pre-evolutions.—ウルタプ 22:32, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- Um, Actually, I believe you choose 6 from the PC to upload, not from your party. --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
- It would make more sense to transfer from PC; that way, the player will still have at least 1 Pokemon in their party, and thus will not upset the balance of the GBA game. SuperDT 05:06, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
- Oh. o.o Well, in any event you take six monsters out of the cartridge exactly as they are—level, IVs, items, etc…(dunno about happiness).—ウルタプ 05:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
- It would make more sense to transfer from PC; that way, the player will still have at least 1 Pokemon in their party, and thus will not upset the balance of the GBA game. SuperDT 05:06, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
- Um, Actually, I believe you choose 6 from the PC to upload, not from your party. --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
- Is is possible to do this with a Supercard? 75.153.204.116 17:43, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
- You get Charizard. Pal Park contains whatever six Pokémon are in the cartridge's party at the moment. However, you have to catch the entire party in your visit and they're permanently transferred out of the cart. (I assume the party on the cart automatically becomes the next six in the box.) So you'd get Charizard. Just breed to get the pre-evolutions.—ウルタプ 22:32, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Pal Park
Uhh, does the Pokemon you upload still carry the item it was carrying in the GBA version? If so, that should be in the article.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.9.121.137 (talk) 17:56, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- Yes --WikidSmaht (talk) 08:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Rewriting some sections
Right now, that section reads like a timeline - I'm not sure readers want to know when information on a Pokémon was released - that detail shouldn't even be in their respective articles! It needs some writing on present time, really. - Sotomura (Tetsuya-san) (yell : see) 12:28, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Canadian Release Date
Nintendo of Canada claims that the release date for both games is April 25, 2007. Should we split up the combined North American release date, or is Nintendo of Canada just confused? Ultraflame 18:06, 18 March 2007 (UTC) By the way, Nintendo of Canada is the only Canadian site that I have read that claims the release date is April 25. The Canadian retailer sites that I have seen either have no information on the games, or they say the release date is April 22. Ultraflame 18:22, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Ship date vs. expected availability date, as per usual. They don't actually disagree; it's just that the game ships on the 22nd, so most stores in Canada should have it on the 25th. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- That's gay, 3 extra days! 75.153.204.116 17:42, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
No i called my EB Games store near me and i asked them what day it was coming out and they said 22 and i asked them if they will have it in stock that day and they said yes i just think Nintendo Of Canada is confused! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sohilj (talk • contribs).
[edit] Pre-Orders
Is it worth mentioning in the article that as a pre-order bonus, they receive a free collectible stylus? I believe this is the first time in a while that Nintendo has done such a thing, but I could be wrong. SuperDT 06:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- I can't think of a suitable location to place the information. When there's any data about it, like its sales, I think it'd be worth placement in the reception section. Otherwise, I think the advertisements tell them enough about the promotion. - Sotomura (Tetsuya-san) (yell : see) 06:34, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] I'm a little concerned about the references
Until a few minutes ago, when I replaced several references citing Serebii with ones citing Pokémon.com, there were no references citing said official website. Considering that this is a Good Article, I find that distinctly worrisome. There's a good amount of information on the official sites now, and there are still some more references in this article that could be changed to cite Pokémon.com, pokemon-games.com, or another official source. We also need to keep an eye on all those sites for the next few weeks, and replace Serebii and other unofficial citations with the official ones as soon as they release information. ~e.o.t.d~ (蜻蛉の目•話す•貢献) 11:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- They've been providing speculative information or sneak peeks from the start, and it's been only since February that they started revealing English version stuff. It's still rather scarce information, and looking for reliable, English references does become more relevant as the release nears. Now, I don't think it's too important, but go ahead, be bold and change them as found appropriate while watching those pages. - Sotomura (Tetsuya-san) (yell : see) 13:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
- Admittedly, flash sites such as Pokémon.com can make horrible citations that not everyone can actually grab-and-cite relevantly. - Sotomura (Tetsuya-san) (yell : see) 13:22, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Birthstone
Just wondering if there should be something up about the connection between Pokemon Diamond and the fact that April's birthstone is a diamond.70.104.16.148 02:34, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Nah, we don't want trivia here since it's…well…trivial. I mean sure, it's coming out in June for europe (pearl's month), but…still.—ウルタプ 02:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- Two coincidences make a correlation... H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 04:51, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Australian Release Date?
Is there any information available regarding an Australian release date? Could it be the same as the European date?--La matematica fa il mondo pazzo! 00:31, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
EB Games says: "June, but that could change". 202.7.202.46 11:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Categories: Old requests for peer review | Wikipedia good articles | Wikipedia CD Selection-GAs | Uncategorized good articles | GA-Class Good articles | To do | To do, priority undefined | GA-Class video game articles | Mid-priority video game articles | WikiProject Video games articles | GA-Class Nintendo articles | GA-Class Pokémon Collaborative Project articles | Top-importance Pokémon Collaborative Project articles