Talk:Raikou (Pokémon)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GFDL PokéBall design This article is part of Pokémon Collaborative Project, which aims to improve the encyclopaedic coverage of the Pokémon universe on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project, ask for advice, and see what our current focuses are.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Raikou (Pokémon) article.

Contents

[edit] Raikou and Raijou?

In the animated version of Cardcaptor Sakura, in the dub, I remember a scene where Sakura and Li are fighting Thunder, and Li says something like "That's Raijou, the Thunder Beast!" Is the name similarity incidental, especially with the similar forms the two beasts take?

Nyctalopia 13:16, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

No coincidence. I'm fairly sure the names have common root words in Japanese. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:38, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but why not look further into this and add it to the page itself?! Oh, that does remind me, though...I need to go back and join the PCP officially again, do I not? Niki Whimbrel 18:49, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Rai means thunder/elec in japan, so no surprise there. :) Toastypk 22:27, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Noseplate thing

That doesn't sound very encyclopediac, does it? Kirbyrocks 19:23, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] About the meaning of rai and kou

I am pretty sure that in japanese, the kanji of raikou is 雷公, meaning thunder lord. Rai is the romanji of 雷 and it means thunder. Kou means 公, meaning lord. I don't know who edit that 侯, but it is wrong. I am a chinese and I know much about the kanji so I am sure about it. --Lugiadoom 03:52, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Raikoh

Why does Raikoh redirect to Raikou? That makes no sense. Raikoh is in some Japanese mythology.


[edit] Category

It's under both Category:Fictional cats and Category:Fictional dogs. Which is it? -- ~PinkDeoxys~ 16:23, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Now it's under neither. And until someone shows an official source saying what they are, it will stay that way. -Amarkov babble 13:55, 25 October 2006 (UTC)