Talk:Pokémon

Order of the company names in the infobox

Hey, Master106 and StarMan98.

You have reverted each others edits: [1][2][3][4].

But instead, maybe we should discuss this and try to sort this out?

I do feel that StarMan98's order may be better: "Nintendo, Creatures, Game Freak". This is how it's written on the franchise's copyright notice. The likely reason for this is that Ishihara, the founder of Creatures, was the leader of the dev team that made the original Red/Green. Tajiri worked under him at the time. Nintendo had financed the game's initial development phase in 1990 and '91 and, according to one source, also purchased the Pokemon property after it was finished.

So that's probably why the firms are in that particular order in the legal info. Then again, in terms of actually creating the content, Master106's order of "Game Freak, Nintendo, Creatures" would make more sense. Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 15:53, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I think it should be in order of importance to the franchise and order of content creation. Which would be:

Game Freak

Nintendo

Creatures Master106 (talk) 22:50, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

In terms of importance, the order would probably be: "Game Freak, Creatures, Nintendo". Because Creatures develops the card game. The card game was inspired by the video game, but it plays a similarly pivotal role in the franchise. Creatures also developed some spin-off video games.

On the other hand, the infobox clearly says "Owner", not "Creator". - Manifestation (talk) 10:25, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

I found that Game Freak owns 36% and Nintendo owns 32%. Which means Creatures owns less than 32%. If this is the case, it should go Game Freak, Nintendo, Creatures. But this needs some verification. Master106 (talk) 09:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Ok. Do you remember where you read that?

I googled on this, and found this quote from Junichi Masuda: "In terms of genuine ownership, Masuda says it’s one-third each for Game Freak, Creatures, and Nintendo."

I also found this: "Let’s drop the big point first: The Pokemon Company does not own the Pokemon brand. They manage it, they license it, they publish/co-publish games and are directly involved in the development of any products carrying the license."

Because of this, I've decided to undo the edit I made. I suggest we follow the official legal info, because apparently this is what the three companies contractually agreed upon. - Manifestation (talk) 11:00, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Unrelated but shouldn't the info box be styled Owner(s) Pikachubob3 (talk) 23:25, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

@Pikachubob3: That's a good point. {{Infobox media franchise}} currently does not do this, but it can easily be changed. I've made a thread at the talk page. - Manifestation (talk) 16:56, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done. Implemented by User:Favre1fan93. - Manifestation (talk) 08:12, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Creators

Should Masuda and Sugimori be credited as creators of the franchise as well? Masuda played a key roll in making the orginal games and Sugimori designed the original 151 Pokémon. Pikachubob3 (talk) 11:30, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Sugimoro and Masuda definitely played key roles in the development of Red and Green, but so did many members of the dev team. However, Tajiri came up with the franchise's core idea: catching and trading various creatures. Therefore, Tajiri is commonly said to have been the main creator of Pocket Monsters, which he initially called Capsule Monsters in his original pitch document.

Sugimoro did not design *all* original 151 Pokémon. This is one of the many misconceptions about the franchise that have sprung up over the years, and which this Wikipedia article debunks. Sugimori designed part of them, as did Atsuko Nishida. Nishida designed Pikachu, Bulbasaur, Charmander, Squirtle, and various others. - Manifestation (talk) 14:12, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Ahh, makes sense Pikachubob3 (talk) 21:59, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 September 2024

I think it needs more The1hot1dog (talk) 09:54, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

 Not done. @The1hot1dog, please be more specific. - Manifestation (talk) 10:21, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

"Bulbagarden" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Bulbagarden has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 27 § Bulbagarden until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 11:26, 27 September 2024 (UTC)