Talk:Pokémon

Former featured article candidatePokémon is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.
On this day...Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 23, 2004Peer reviewReviewed
December 18, 2005Good article nomineeListed
January 7, 2006Good article reassessmentDelisted
June 29, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
July 4, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
July 22, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
February 16, 2007Good article nomineeListed
July 18, 2008Good article reassessmentKept
May 13, 2015Good article reassessmentDelisted
February 28, 2019Good article nomineeNot listed
September 15, 2023Peer reviewReviewed
October 4, 2023Featured article candidateNot promoted
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on February 27, 2009, February 27, 2016, February 27, 2024, February 27, 2025, and February 27, 2026.
Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive This article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of February 14, 2007.
Current status: Former featured article candidate

"PKMN" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect PKMN 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/2026 January 6 § PKMN until a consensus is reached. User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 02:07, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

First Lego Pokemon Sets

Thinking about adding information about the first Lego Pokemon sets but not sure the best place to put it within the article?

Ref: https://www.pokemon.com/us/pokemon-news/the-lego-group-reveals-first-ever-lego-pokemon-sets-and-trainer-challenge https://www.ign.com/articles/legos-massive-650-pokemon-set-is-already-sold-out 🥑GUACPOCALYPSE🥑 22:00, 13 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That's so cool! 🤩
I guess you could add one sentence about it at the end of Pokémon#History. And if you have the time (and the energy), then maybe you can create Lego Pokémon (sources).
Lots of Lego themes, including licensed Lego themes, have their own Wikipedia article, e.g. Lego Disney, Lego Star Wars, Lego Harry Potter, Lego Minecraft, Lego Jurassic World, etc.
I'd say go for it! - Manifestation (talk) 15:37, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
An article sounds awesome, maybe if I'm feeling brave. I think they would need to expand a bit more but eventually that will definitely be its own. I'll add a line or two to the history! 🥑GUACPOCALYPSE🥑 19:06, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
great idea ~2026-22597-44 (talk) 00:39, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:39, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Key topic missing: Pokémon species/Pokémon (creature)

The first one is just a redirect. Note wikidata: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3966183 . Pl wiki article is decent - not good, but would likely survive AfD here. Perhaps someone interested in this topic would like to work on this. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:38, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Manifestation @Wingwatchers Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:39, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Piotrus! Thank you for your advice. pl:Pokémony does look somewhat decent. Also, there is bulba:Pokémon (species).
We had a Gameplay of Pokémon (e|t|h|li|w|lo) once, which may be a better location for the info you described. It failed an AfD, but imo that was because it was poorly written, not because of notability. Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 06:27, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I mean that one also failed notability; there were no sources regarding gameplay that were actually SIGCOV.
The Polish article appears to be very notability failing; it's entirely just in-universe summary and its citations are very weak (Multiple unreliable and weak sources used per EnWiki standards). It likely would fail an AfD here very easily, other Pokémon articles have been redirected for more.
In any case, I believe the species are covered at List of Pokémon at present, which discusses their concept and design and such. I don't doubt a potential split off discussing characteristics or something, but that would take a lot of research and digging that would likely be very difficult and not even guaranteed to be notable. That's my take on at least, from what research and experience I have in the topic area of Pokémon species. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 01:02, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Objection

Please let me edit to insert this. ~2026-83162-4 (talk) 00:03, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

== See also ==

~2026-83162-4 (talk) 00:03, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:~2026-83162-4. Thank you for your suggestion. While I like your idea, I think it's unfeasible because of the scope it implies. If we were to list various franchises similar to and/or inspired by Pokémon, then the See also section could go on and on. Yu-Gi-Oh, Monster Rancher, Cardcaptors, Medabots, Shin Megami Tensei, Coromon, Nexomon, Dinosaur King, Temtem, Beyblade, Robopon, Monsuno, Monster Crown, Palworld..... You could theoretically mention every monster-taming franchise in existence. Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 18:20, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Content Disclaimer

Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.

  1. The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
  2. There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
  3. It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
  4. Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
  5. Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.