Talk:Pokémon

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

New Lego Pokémon sets revealed: link. - Manifestation (talk) 20:19, 8 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

great idea ~2026-22597-44 (talk) 00:39, 13 April 2026 (UTC)Reply

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

== See also ==

• Tamagotchi
• Digimon
• Skannerz
• Neopets
• Moshi Monsters
• EvoCreo

~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

Sobelone96 made this addition.

What do we think of this? I think it's completely out of place, not to mention out of context. For a reader to fully understand this paragraph, the info should be put within a historic backdrop of the Arab–Israeli conflict and Conspiracy theories in the Arab world. That is way beyond the scope of this article. - Manifestation (talk) 19:10, 19 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Yeah I was confused and baffled reading it. Should probably go.

☯︎Lucy LostWord, the official creator of Wonderful Video Game and Makyuu Project (Touhou Project and Pokémon fan. Let's talk.) 23:39, 19 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

The section is titled "Reaction to Pokemania". How is Saudi Arabia banning Pokemon in response to Pokemania "completely out of place"? Sobelone96 (talk) 07:34, 20 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

A while ago, I shortened this article because it was too long. Among other things, I cut out a paragraph about the reaction to Pokémania in Japan. If that is not in the article, than this certainly shouldn't be.

I also don't think the paragraph is very neutral. It *is* factual, but it lacks context about Arab nations, and especially countries like Saudi and Jordan, banning anything that is even remotely non-Arabic. These people feel attacked by anything, and can see everything as a pro-Israel/Jewish conspiracy. This is part of broader cultures of guilt, shame, and fear.

As for the guy who believes "Pokémon" means "I am a Jew"... well, that seems extreme even for them. I'm not even sure if he meant it, or if he was just doing his anti-Jews/anti-Israel shtick to score some points with his audience. In MENA, such political theatre acts are way more common than in Western cultures.

Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 08:48, 20 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

I see that you are concerned about article length and have been for a while. Still, it seems to me an entire country of tens of millions of people banning Pokemon is notable enough. More notable surely than having six or seven different critique's of Pokemon's animation style, which are currently found in the article. Perhaps one or two of those could be cut to make room for a reaction far more dramatic and impactful than some saucy reviews? The current article completely ignores the non-Western world.

Also, I am amazed at the amount of context you consider necessary. There is no similar anthropological context given about the Western reaction, no survey of Western moral values and historic relationship to Japanese culture. If people are curious about that context, they can look at other articles. That's how Wikipedia works. An article about the Congress of Vienna doesn't have to include Napoleon's childhood. They can go there if they want that context.

Here's what I propose. To respect your concerns about article length, cut the last three sentences of the paragraph I added (while keeping citation [425]). So delete from "As a result..." to "...our moral values." And to respect your concerns about context, add a link in the first sentence to the article "Conspiracy theories in the Arab World" which you provided so the curious can gain knowledge about that if they wish. In return, consider deleting a sentence or two from the paragraph critiquing Pokemon's animation style. (The paragraph starting "The Pokémon anime series was criticized..."). I'm confident the reader would still get the point with an example or two less.

What do you think? Sobelone96 (talk) 20:14, 20 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

"There is no similar anthropological context given about the Western reaction, no survey of Western moral values and historic relationship to Japanese culture."
Yes there is; see #Reaction to Pokémania and #Legacy and influence. There used to be more, but it was cut.

You are correct that the article ignores the non-Western world. Regrettably, there was no other option. This article is full. More info could be placed in Reception of Pokémon and History of Pokémon, but those articles have yet to be created.

The reception of the anime is very notable. That should certainly not be cut.

Also, your paragraph isn't neutral, and can never become neutral considering the way you wrote it and the context it's in. - Manifestation (talk) 08:58, 21 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

I still don't see that the amount of context you propose is necessary in this instance. There is after all WP:MNA. That guideline seems strongly to suggest that it's not necessary to contextualize this within the history of the Arab-Israeli Conflict or psychological nature of the Arab world as you say. I think the Arab-Israeli conflict is something that most readers are probably at least dimly aware of already. Would you agree?

As for your claim that the reception of the anime is so notable that not a single one of the seven different reviews can be cut, I cannot personally see that as anything other than undue when weighed against a nation of tens of millions of people banning Pokemon outright. Especially since the sheikh in question is notable enough to have his own Wikipedia article already.

I am also confused by your assertion that my paragraph "isn't neutral, and can never become neutral". Which of the guidelines in WP:NPOV does this violate? When I look at the five main guidelines in WP:NPOV#Explanation, I see that I am not stating an opinion as a fact, I am not stating a seriously contested opinion as a fact, I am not stating facts as opinions, I am not using judgmental language and I am not giving undue weights to views about whether or not these events occurred. I really don't know what you think WP:NPOV means that leads you to say something so bold: not only that my paragraph isn't neutral, but that it can never be.

I have been trying to foster a cooperative discussion by taking your concerns into account with my last proposal, but when you use come on with these totalizing and highly-questionable assertions like how Saudi reactions to Pokemon are "completely out of place" in a section about reactions to Pokemon or that my WP:NPOV-compliant additions "can never be neutral", I don't feel like I'm given the same grace. Sobelone96 (talk) 20:18, 21 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

Look... your addition is already at Abdulaziz Al Sheikh (diff). So it's on Wikipedia all right.

If you insist on your Muslim-bashing paragraph, then I'm forced to report you to WP:NPOV/N. This violates the neutrality rule. Very blatantly. - Manifestation (talk) 08:36, 26 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

That comment escalates the discussion beyond constructive feedback and constitutes an inappropriate threat regarding Wikipedia sanctions. Jptr11 (talk) 08:56, 26 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

No, that comment points out the problem, caused by User:Sobelone96 and his inappropriate addition. - Manifestation (talk) 14:25, 26 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

I don't understand your assertion that my paragraph is "Muslim-bashing". Do you think it is Muslim-bashing that Saudi Arabia's mufti banned Pokemon? Or do you think it is Muslim-bashing to mention that? Neither one is clear to me.

Can you please quote me a section of the NPOV guidelines you believe my paragraph violates? Sobelone96 (talk) 22:31, 28 July 2026 (UTC)Reply

You don't get it... or you pretend not to get it. I've started a thread at the neutrality noticeboard. Feel free to make your case there. Have a nice day, Manifestation (talk) 09:30, 21 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Listen I think I get where you're coming from, but I feel like it's taking it pretty damn far calling it "Muslim-bashing". As the people here have said, it's pretty damn notable that these countries banned it, and folks here also offered you some compromises that seemed pretty fair to me.

Also, saying that countries like Jordan or Saudi ban "anything that is even remotely non-Arabic" is a pretty odd take, just saying.

Also also, side note, how does one decide that an article is "full"?

Thx Jelllman (talk) 13:38, 21 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

The paragraph is only negative about Muslims. Never positive. Thus, it's not neutral, even though it's factual. And yes, it is "Muslim-bashing".

The correct method would be to have *another* paragraph giving due weight to the one preceding it. This paragraph should point out that things have, in fact, modernized in Saudi over the years, and that Pokémon cards can currently be sold legally in that country. For instance, there is a card store called Battle Round in Jeddah, and another one called SageTCG in Al Khobar.

You probably cannot write such a paragraph, however, because the reliable sources don't exist.

As for the article's size, see this thread and WP:SIZERULE. - Manifestation (talk) 17:51, 21 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thx for the link to sizerule. Regarding the rest of it, ofc it makes sense to also give the info on things getting better there, but what ur saying is that if we don't have good sources for that, then we shouldn't have the prior info even though there are good sources for it? That doesn't rly make sense to me tbh Jelllman (talk) 15:15, 4 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

If you don't have a wide collection of info on something, then how can you be neutral? If the only things you read about muslims are negative, then staying nuanced can be quite hard. - Manifestation (talk) 06:50, 5 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Everything I'm seeing in wp:npov seems to be about balancing things based on their appearance in reliable sources period. Is there a policy that says what you're saying here? It looks like it's the job of reliable sources to be neutral, not ours. Jelllman (talk) 07:06, 5 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Heya folks. I've noticed that this article sometimes says cool, and sometimes 'cool'. I didn't do anything with it cause I wasn't sure what to do, but maybe someone has an idea, or maybe it doesn't matter at all. Jelllman (talk) 13:28, 21 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure it matters. When I wrote it, I didn't use apostrophes, since the word is so common, and because coolness is the single most important goal in advertising and localization aimed at children. Achieving coolness is what Nintendo and 4Kids were ultimately trying to do with Pokémon.

Then again, the word is informal, and may sound unprofessional in certain contexts. - Manifestation (talk) 17:58, 21 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Gotcha, thx for explaining Jelllman (talk) 15:08, 4 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I want to address the fact that the article may currently be overly long, at a size of 232,141 bytes.

I would say that currently the 'Reaction to Pokémania' section is way too long, and the 'media' section is far too short.

The History section is most of the article, and some sections in this could probably be shortened by a couple of paragraphs each. Chattenoir (talk) 16:59, 11 October 2026 (UTC)Reply