Talk:List of Pokémon rivals

Requested move 26 March 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved to List of Pokémon rivals. (non-admin closure) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 17:42, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

---

Rivals (Pokémon) → List of Pokémon rivals – This is very clearly and obviously a list similar to List of Pokémon characters. It doesn't discuss the concept of a rival in the Pokémon universe, it lists them by appearance. The existence of reception about the rival concept doesn't change that. At its base level it is a spinoff character list. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:45, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose as creator there's various articles similar to this such as "Characters of..." lists that function identically to this (For example, Characters of Myst). The article discusses the concept of Rivals as a whole via the Reception, and if you want something that summarizes the role of Rivals in brief at the start, then that can be done via editing. I don't see it to be a list given it actively discusses the role as a whole, not just listing out character names. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 14:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

• I believe this article should either be at Rival (Pokémon) and include an extra section at the start to go into detail of the nature of the character archetype within the franchise, or indeed at List of Pokémon rivals. I would personally prefer the first option, as it's a much more encyclopedic approach. Right now, the article does function completely as a list. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 14:25, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
• Support (alternative option: Pokémon rivals, either is fine) per WP:NATURAL. Easy way to skip parenthetical disambiguation in this case, and "Pokemon rivals" is a genuine term used in video game discussion. SnowFire (talk) 20:31, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
• Support – Better understanding of what the article in question covers. Svartner (talk) 14:09, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Comment I've added a brief description at the top of the article summarizing the Rival role in the games. It's a bit fresh right now, so suggestions for improvement are appreciated. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:55, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

• This is a good addition and I think it makes the whole article stronger. I worry that in a way, it does actually highlight that this is a list of rival characters, as even this section turns into a listing of different (types of) rivals. I don't think it's going to shift the move discussion much, though titles like Rivals of Pokémon or List of Pokémon rivals can still hold really good work. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 10:06, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

• Support - In my experience on other TV related topics, the current title suggests to me that this will take me to a page about a character named Rivals, or to an episode titled "Rivals". -2pou (talk) 16:57, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

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.

"Rivals of Pokémon" vs. "List of Pokémon rivals"

I didn't get the opportunity to weigh in (we really should have an RM section for WT:VG), but I wanted to weigh in that I think "Rivals of Pokémon" or "Pokémon rivals" (with additional work made to have the article cover the concept of Pokémon rivals) is a better fit for the article than a list structure. I saw that others have discussed the prospect of one or the other, so I figured it'd be useful to identify which was preferred.

Pinging: @Zxcvbnm: @Maplestrip: @2pou: @Svartner: @Pokelego999: @SnowFire: - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 18:10, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Definitely no to "Rivals of Pokemon" which is basically a more awkward variant of the article title we just moved away from, or possibly meaning like competitors to Pokemon-the-franchise. What I mentioned was "Pokémon rivals". It doesn't really matter and I say to just keep it at the list for now, given the structure is very list-y. SnowFire (talk) 18:29, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

@Cukie Gherkin: Not to sound like the Vogons, but the notice of renaming was displayed in Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Article alerts for a full week. However I heavily disagree and think this article is very clearly a list. It does not discuss the concept of a Pokemon rival, but is a listing of every rival in Pokemon. And I think if it was only about the concept it would be WP:REDUNDANT and shouldn't be an article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:13, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean by redundant? - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 05:40, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

It would be restating information that could easily be stated in the main article of the TV series or series in general. While there is a lot of reception, I am concerned it makes significant use of WP:SYNTH as it ties the rivals together, comparing and contrasting them in ways the sources themselves never do. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:40, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

I don't quite know what work this article requires to make Rival (Pokémon) work as a title. I thought an extra section might do it, but it's still very much a list. Further edits to make this article feel like a whole is appreciated, but I think right now it's at a fine and accurate title. I don't know if there's much positive precedent for a title like "Pokémon rivals" (plural). ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:37, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm not really pressed about the title being at either or, I just somewhat prefer "Pokemon rivals" (or Pokemon rival as a concept) over a list format, especially since I feel like it could be developed into a non-list-class article, and because lists can be a little tricky to bring to GA if they aren't list-format. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 08:30, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

We have featured lists for that, so it's not as though a list cannot gain recognition in the same way. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:44, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

It can be quite nice: an FL is easier to reach than an FA while still being considered the top quality it can be. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:47, 4 April 2024 (UTC)