Talk:Pokémon Origins

English names vs Japanese names

Seems we're having a disagreement over the naming of characters and Pokémon. As far as my stance goes, as the English names for the characters and Pokémon have been established for well over a decade, as well as the fact an English release of the anime has been announced, the English names should be primarily used based on their familiarity with the English readers. Even if there are series or episodes of things that are yet to be released outside of Japan, if there has been English names established, those are the ones that should be used, with the Japanese names only used if there is yet to be an English counterpart announced. The exception to this argument would most likely be Green who, having mainly derived from a player-named character and having no notable English name, should largely remain as Green since, well, he wears a green shirt throughout the entire special, and none of the English sources states he will be named Blue.Wonchop (talk) 11:12, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

If the names aren't confirmed for the English version, it's sort of original research to assume that the names will be the same. The English version has barely even been revealed at all, to my knowledge, so it is also undue weight(probably not the best matching policy, but whatever) to prefer using the English name over the Japanese name. Until the time which the English version gets more publicity, I say using the Japanese names are fine. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 14:10, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

That may be true for the human names, since we don't really know if this'll be subbed or dubbed, but the Pokémon names aren't suddenly going to lose their English names just cos the thing they are in isn't released in English yet (I know of a few things that retain English names for subtitles even when the Japanese names are different). Unless they suddenly decide to pull a 'Dr. Eggman' on us, Charmanders are still Charmanders, and considering they are still Charmanders in X & Y, it's highly unlikely they'll be making any changes for this. Using Japanese Pokémon names of Pokémon where there are established English names available is just going to confuse the English readers. Wonchop (talk) 16:03, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

The special has not yet been released in the English language yet so it should not use English language names for the cast and characters. It's extremely likely that in November they will translate Hitokage into Charmander and Sakaki into Giovanni, but it's a month away. All character and Pokémon names are linked (or should be linked) to the English names so there is no confusion to be ahd.—Ryulong (琉竜) 16:11, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

We don't need to wait for the anime to be translated because the franchise itself tells us what the English names or these Pokémon have and always will be. And just linking to the article names doesn't make the thing less confusing. It just introduces several instances of "huh? what the heck is that? *hover* ooooh" which detracts from the article (and that's not counting those browsing on smartphones and tablets where hovering is impossible). If the series had featured a Pokémon whose English name had yet to be revealed, like one of the X/Y ones, then that would be cause for inclusion, but not for Pokémon whose English names have been known for so long. Wonchop (talk) 16:23, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

But the real situation is, this article is, at the moment, talking exclusively about the Japanese airing of this series. As such, writing the article as if it is an English anime is misleading. I am sure this discussion has taken place many times on the other anime series articles. I am pretty sure it has generally been the consensus to use the Japanese names when talking about episodes which have as of yet not been released in English. I don't particularly care either way, but I would like to be consistent, and it seems like using the Japanese names would be the best way to go for that.(although, I think using the Pokemon's Japanese name is actually a bit overkill, it should probably exclusively be the locations/trainers which use Japanese names) _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 16:35, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

It's hard tackling this argument without delving into OtherStuff, but in general, episode lists of series in which English names have been established (such as Digimon or YuGiOh) have generally been applied even to parts that had yet to be translated, either due to being revealed in an earlier part of the series or franchise (such as character names) or by media or merchandise previously released in English (such as trading cards). Human names are debateable, but Pokémon names should remain in English, if for nothing else but to maintain consistency across the other Pokémon articles. Wonchop (talk) 16:44, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Lately I've been enforcing a similar format on episodes of the anime which have not yet been released in English and it seems to be working fine.—Ryulong (琉竜) 16:56, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, considering our previous argument on X&Y, you can't really use 2 against 1 as a consensus when you blatantly said it didn't count when I tried it. Just leave the Pokémon names in English until you get a non-biased opinion to back up your side. Considering it was just yesterday that Nintendo used the term 'Mega Charizard X' in their recent XY trailer, you can just use common sense to deduce they'll retain the English names.Wonchop (talk) 17:51, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Since going to WP:3O would pretty much be mooted by Blake's presence, I've put a little something on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pokémon#Japanese names on Pokémon Origins talk page, so we can hopefully get some more opinions from general Pokéfans rather than just Japan fans. Wonchop (talk) 17:58, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Why should my opinion and Blake's be disregarded simply because I believe Japanese names should be used for something that isn't out in English yet? Also, "Mega Charizard X" was in the English language trailer (and however many other localizations changed Lizardon to Charizard).—Ryulong (琉竜) 18:52, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Thing is, this anime is directly based on a game that has been released in English. It's very much like how, when Persona 4: The Animation was airing, localized names such as Teddy and Pyro Jack were used in episode summaries instead of Kuma and Jack o Lantern, despite there not being an English version of the anime yet. Same thing applies here. Unless it's known for certain that something won't be released outside of Japan, you should ideally use localized names when available.Wonchop (talk) 19:15, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

There was a simulcast sub and they used the English character names at the time IIRC.—Ryulong (琉竜) 19:16, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

An IP just switched all character names to the dub names.—Ryulong (琉竜) 18:45, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't think the English names should be used quite just yet. We should probably wait until this series gets an official dub first or maybe a reputable company releasing English subtitles using the English translations. Using the English names right now only makes it seem as though a dub exists and is being told from an English perspective, when there is none. >> KirtZ^Message 23:26, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Okay, looking at the official press release [1], they at least confirm that Professor Oak is Professor Oak and the rival is actually referred to as Blue in the English version, as opposed to Green. This gives a bit more precedence for using English names for the characters and Pokémon. As something that is planned to be release in English, it should use the English names.Wonchop (talk) 02:17, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

That's good enough for me. I think maybe we should add an English airdate column, says there that the first episode will hit Pokemon TV on November 15, 2013. >> KirtZ^Message 02:27, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

At least for the cast section, I think we should keep the Japanese character names associated with the Japanese cast members, and then when the English language cast gets announced/revealed/whatever the English language names can be associated with them instead.—Ryulong (琉竜) 02:40, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, that sounds about right.Wonchop (talk) 12:06, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Reception

I found some material for Reception secton. 1 2 3 4 5 6. That could give notablity to the article. --92.243.167.148 (talk) 13:59, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

You can't "give notability". Also none of those are reliable sources.—Ryulong (琉竜) 14:27, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Since when Kotaku isn't considered to be a reliable source? Reliable sources are news sites like I gave above. Latinos Post is reffered as reliable source in these articles. Others were referred too. Well, at least Kotaku is reliable source. And about "notablity": if there is no Reception section, there is no ххnotablity, therefore, the article will be deleted. Any conclusions?--92.243.167.148 (talk) 15:42, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Critical examination is not a requirement of passing WP:N. The special is already discussed by multiple third-party sources. That confers notability alone. And I doubt an article going "The New Pokemon Anime Is So Brutal" or "Why is Ash from Pokemon Such a Looser" really useful as critical reception of the special.—Ryulong (琉竜) 16:37, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Um... "Why is Ash from Pokemon Such a Looser" may sound not very well, but an least it is an opinion of the reliable source. It compares Origins with the anime, and that's what it does. Nothing more.--92.243.167.148 (talk) 17:25, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Unimportant, none of the reviews are from reliable sources. Reception sections are nice but they are not a requirement, particularly when these English language sources are critiquing an anime that they should never have seen yet in the first place.—Ryulong (琉竜) 17:27, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Nidoran♂

Wonchop stop edit warring with me over the fact that Nidoran♂ is an established name for the Pokémon. There is absolutely no reason to use [[Nidoran♂|Nidoran]] when it is clear that it is the male one and that is what it is called in every single language version of the game. This isn't identifying what sex the Pokémon has since the institution of the system in Gold and Silver, such as if we were identifying two Burmy as being male and female and one evolved into Mothim and another evolved into Wormadam. "Nidoran♂" is explicitly the name of this one type of Pokémon and Nidoran♀ is a completely different type of Pokémon.—Ryulong (琉竜) 09:32, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

There's a difference between distinguishing a gender due to its different evolutions and actually implimenting it as an actual name in an English sentence. It just has no place in an actual English statement since, if you were to speak it normally, you would say "he beat him with his Nidoran" and not "he beat him with his Nidoran male symbol". It's the difference between game dialogue and human language. It's fine enough to just have it link to the male article, since the only people who'd care can click for themselves. Really, the only time you would really need to bother differentiating is if the episode had both a male and female Nidoran. Wonchop (talk) 09:51, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Also, the Pokédex descriptions for Ruby, Sapphire and Emerald don't include the symbol when describing Nidoran. They just refer to them as 'NIDORAN' or 'the male NIDORAN'.Wonchop (talk) 09:57, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

It's still in the name of the creature in every version of the game and there is no reason to omit it from this page.—Ryulong (琉竜) 13:02, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Nor is there a reason to include it. I'm just saying, ♂ isn't a part of the English alphabet. It's never intended to be part of the actual name, just as a way of distinguishing its different evolutions. Wonchop (talk) 15:21, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

It's part of the name of the Pokémon in English, French, Japanese, German, Korean, etc. It should not be removed.—Ryulong (琉竜) 15:44, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Professor Orchid? Japanese version is Okido.

Japanese version is Okido(オーキド). not Orchid(オーキッド). "Orchid(オーキッド)" is different from "Okido(オーキド)".

オーキッド is Orchid

オーキド is Okido

Okido is a universal Japanese family name. 60.33.38.8 (talk) 07:02, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Pokémon Origins. 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://web.archive.org/web/20130818190957/http://www.pokemon.co.jp/info/2013/08/130817_g01.html to http://www.pokemon.co.jp/info/2013/08/130817_g01.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130930084313/http://www.pokemon.co.jp/info/2013/08/130817_g01.html?d001=news to http://www.pokemon.co.jp/info/2013/08/130817_g01.html?d001=news

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 21:04, 12 January 2018 (UTC)