External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mimikyu. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:30, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pokemon series history under Design and characteristics[edit]

The paragraph about the origins of the videogames and an explanation of the wider franchise seems out of place and doesn't necessarily lend any context to Mimikyu's design. Seems it could be removed—thoughts? Griseo veritas (talk) 10:17, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It helps establish terms and concepts related to the series which factors into design.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 16:38, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


This review is transcluded from Talk:Mimikyu/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Pokelego999 (talk · contribs)

Reviewer: Hydrangeans (talk · contribs) 14:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'd like to pick up this review. Pokémon are interesting to write about for Wikipedia's broad audience, and this is an intriguing article. I aim to complete the initial review over this weekend. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 14:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The nominator has resolved the issues identified in the reivew. The article's prose is clear and concise and can be understood by a reasonably general audience. Reliable sources are cited inline and original research and copyright violations are avoided. The article reasonably covers the topic's main elements. The article is neutral, and it's stable. An appropriate image, with a Fair Use Rationale, is included. The result of this review is passed. Thank you, Pokelego999, for this contribution to Wikipedia! Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 05:08, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999: I just finished an initial pass. Overall, the article is in a satisfying state. You've done well to try to lay out the necessary context for understanding the character and its reception and place in the cultures/demographics it reaches. There are some spots where I think further explanation would be useful, whether in line or in an EFN, plus some other feedback to polish the article and be a good contender as a GA. Feel free to ask about my comments or explain why something I'm suggesting doesn't work if it doesn't. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hydrangeans Made the edits you wished for me to make. Let me know if anything else needs to be done. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:12, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Pokelego999: Thanks for that really prompt reply to my review comments! The majority of the implementation was great. I've replied to a few of the matters and have a few further questions. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 00:43, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hydrangeans replied to your replies, hope this is satisfactory. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 01:07, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Pokelego999: Great work on this round. Just a few small matters, summarized here and further detailed below:
  • Content–source alignment for the phrase too horrifying to behold (the "to behold" bit doesn't seem to be verified in either cited source)
  • Explanation for what "Generation VII" means (mentioned in the sentence about the popularity poll)
  • Whether or not you want to add content summarizing Cassone using Mimikyu as an example about Pokédex entries and the fan rationalization of them
  • Making the date format consistent across citations
Once those are resolved, I think it'll be time for spot checks. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 01:47, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hydrangeans Fixed the sentence, and rephrased Gen VII's mention. I've elected not to include Cassone for now just in case of potential confusion, though it's definitely a viable source that could potentially be included at another point in time. I've already made the date format consistent, though let me know if I missed any. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 02:09, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Pokelego999: I think the sentence rephrase works, and the article's still a reasonably complete summary without that additional detail from Cassone. As for the dates of publication in the citations, I've circled the remaining ones. Based on this edit, I take it you're going for [Date Month Year]. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 02:33, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hydrangeans fixed all remaining date citation issues. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 02:44, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lead[edit]

Design and characteristics[edit]

Appearances[edit]

|explanatory footnote]]) or a parenthetical aside, why it is that of the three only Meowth can understand Mimikyu? I realize that might be a bit of an ask, asking you to identify a source that explains that in the animated series Pokémon can apparently understand human speech but aren't necessarily intelligible in turn with exceptions like Meowth, but it would go a long way to preventing confusion for a less familiar reader. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion and reception[edit]

References[edit]

Image review[edit]

File:Pokémon Mimikyu art.png: Has a standard Fair Use rationale, so I think that's good to go. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spot checks[edit]

To follow after the content comments are resolved. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 22:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999: I've completed the spot check. Please resolve the verification issues as indicated by or . Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 03:49, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hydrangeans I've addressed all of the citation issues. Let me know if anything else needs to be done. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:18, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mimikyu is a meta-referential element of the Pokémon franchise; its imitation of Pikachu references the latter's role as the series mascot. Nothing wrong with the sourcing of this sentence, but it's oddly placed, at the top of the paragraph. A reader may not realize yet, if they skipped the lead, that Mimikyu resembles Pikachu in the first place. Can this be moved to be after it's mentioned that Mimikyu's disguise looks like Pikachu? Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 04:24, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
During some attacks, it will occasionally extend a black appendage from beneath the disguise. This sentence is cited to the Oxford (2016) USGamer source but doesn't verify the content. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 04:24, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
99,077 votes: The Fanbyte citation does verify that Mimikyu won the vote for Alola Pokémon but not the vote total (which the Kotaku source also doesn't verify). Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 04:28, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Pokelego999:: Great resolutions! See three matters for resolution above. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 04:30, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hydrangeans Surprisingly can't seem to find a source on the arm, so I've removed that line. I've also shifted the meta-referential line to after the Pikachu line and adjusted accordingly. Removed the vote count. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:35, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Pokelego999: It looks like the appendage line was accidentally left in (permanent link).
like Pikachu, and acts as a meta-referential element of the Pokémon franchise: there's just a minor grammar hiccup here. It should either be "like Pikachu, and it acts" (a command indicating the beginning of a new independent clause) or "like Pikachu and acts as" (no comma because the subsequent clause is a dependent one). Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 04:45, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hydrangeans Good catch on the appendage line. Removed it and fixed the Pikachu meta-referential line. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:48, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above spot check comments have been resolved. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 05:08, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Is there a consensus for reference formatting on this article?[edit]

Kung Fu Man stated in a recent edit summary that eschewing the SFN format for paginated references is not simply a matter of preference, but also a matter of consensus. However, there has been no discussion on this talk page establishing such a consensus. It's possible Kung Fu Man meant to refer to other articles, but as our community guideline for citing sources states, Editors should not attempt to change an article's established citation style, merely [...] to make it match other articles. This is not a requirement of the Manual of Style, as Kung Fu Man said, but of a Wikipedia guideline. Variation in citation style across articles is accepted on Wikipedia.

Additionally, Kung Fu Man stated that no other articles in this sort use that style of ref formatting, even in featured articles; however, if "this sort" means video game topic articles, that's not true: Magnavox Odyssey and Wii both use the citation style of providing paginated shortened footnotes (SFNs) for sources with page numbers but no such shortened notes for short-form sources without page numbers. If "this sort" means fictional character articles, Kenneth Widmerpool uses this format.

As such, I propose restoring the article to its status quo ante before Kung Fu Man's alteration to the citation format such that sources with page numbers are cited with paginated shortened footnotes, and sources without page numbers are cited without such. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 18:03, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're arguing that there's no consensus, but I'm not seeing a consensus *for* this sort citation structure. What's your reasoning for them to be like this? Because I can at least argue it makes the page harder to maintain and is unnecessary given the length, usage of citations, or number of citations of this sort.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 18:16, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This citation style was suggested during the GA review (visible further up the page) and then adopted/implemented by the nominator. As for reasoning, it makes the page more evergreen. If it ever happened that later, citing content from elsewhere in Millennial Monsters would be useful in the article, it's much more possible to do that if all it takes is adding another SFN with a different page number or range. It also makes the page easier for readers and fellow editors to verify, as rather than have to read the entire "Gotta Face 'Em All" article, one can go straight to the indicated page number. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 19:03, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the sake of argument, Millenial focuses on the encompassing detail regarding how elements of the franchise works, not the subject in question (Mimikyu). I'm still standing by my above reasonings mind you, but this by itself is another matter to consider when a "Further reading" section gives the impression that more information on Mimikyu can be found in that book, yes?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 19:09, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do think the "Further reading" section (that section title was not added by myself or the nominator) was misnamed. It would have been better as "sources".
While the book at the moment probably won't be cited for more information about Mimikyu, if hypothetically Mimikyu gained an evolution in a future region, additional parts of Millennial Monsters that explain what evolution is could reasonably be cited. The "Gotta Face 'Em All" article does have more content about Mimikyu that could plausibly be cited by someone who gets a good idea for how to accurately and adequately summarize the material. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 06:04, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]