Talk:Jigglypuff

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] Page was vadalized

The link for the American Idol audition is now invalid due to that host removing the video for violations of its Terms of Service. Please find another source. --Geopgeop 08:36, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Use Internet Archive and find it again. --haha169 (talk) 19:53, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] SSBM Rest

Rest isn't quite the most powerful non-charged move. Ganondorf's Warlock punch is too close to call, and Yoshi's midair down+a can easy inflict more damage against enlarged characters. Luigi's 1-in-8 forward b, Game and Watch's Number 9 on judgement are also good contenders, and one of Peach's rare turnips does at least 35%. Roy's counter inflicts roughly 1.5% of the damage recieved, giving it the greater potential then the strongest of charged attacks. -SA-

I would guess Game & Watch's down+b is the strongest, but it depends on your defenition of "charged." 3 of Ness' PK flashes into the bucket will make it do over 100% damage.

But using Roy's counter on G&W's Down+B is even stronger. RememberMe? 23:14, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry but Rest is the same all the time meaning that when you use it you know it will strike for massive damage (as long as it hits. Oil panic is completly dependent on the opponent making it easy to prevent. Warlock punch is incredibly slow and easy to see. Rest is much faster, so fast it's all most impossibe to Counter (Roy, Marth)and can be recovered from quikly. So really it can be defined as the strongest move to use with out charging. (Actualy Warlock punch takes time to wind up which could be called targeting). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.142.133.51 (talk) 07:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] SSBB

Unless someone can offer definite proof that Jigglypuff is highly likely to return in SSBB, it's considered fan speculation. 199.126.137.209 04:05, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I believe I read somewhere that the original 12 were not going to be removed, but I can't remember where. RememberMe? 23:12, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

The game has been released now, and yes, Jigglypuff is still an unlockable character. I've already got it. Someone should reword the page (saying that not only Jigglypuff and Kirby can jump several times, but also Meta Knight, King Dedede, and Pit... although Meta Knight and Pit's aren't really puffing up, so much as using li'l wings.) since it's very inaccurate now. I'd do it myself, but I've got to get to bed. Maybe I'll get on it tomorrow. 24.207.83.233 (talk) 05:47, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

This post is from 2006. It's obsolete.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 06:30, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Purin

Uh, "purin" is a Japanese word, based on the English word, "pudding". In Japan, Jigglypuff was called, "Purin", which means "pudding" in English. --PJ Pete

And? Add it! -Jeske (v^_^v) 04:24, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I think purin the food should have its own article. Apparently it has egg in it!

[edit] Is it male or female?

As far as I'm concerned, female isn't an automatic gender for pink Pokémon. The female evoulution of Nidoran, Miltank, Chansey, Blissey, Illumise, and a few others are all female Pokémon, but I haven't seen any data that states that Jigglypuff is a female. So any words that indicate that Jigglypuff is a she should be changed to it.Einsteinboricua 13:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Jigglypuff's gender ratio is 25:75 (male:female), so "it." -Jeske (v^_^v) 15:29, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
i believe Jigglypuff is female, it seems to be hinted that pokemon are male or female at the beginning of their appearance - Mcbowser 11:36, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
and i belive Jigglypuff is a female to, I think Jigglypuff looks like a she. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.183.201.125 (talk) 12:55, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
In the case of the Super Smash Bros. series, Jigglypuff is exclusively female, which is stated on the confirmation page of Jigglypuff being in Brawl. However, it can be male in the Pokémon univierse (play Pokémon FireRed and LeafGreen and catch one if you don't beleive me). So calling it "it" is proper. brickdude^_^ 16:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
In the anime, manga, and SSB series, Jigglypuff is female. Therefore, "she" should be used when referring to any of those Jigglypuff. However, Jigglypuff has a 25% chance of being male in the main series, so "it" should be used in those cases. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.250.214.9 (talk) 01:40, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] TODO: Links to use for reference purposes.

Using this as a depository for references to keep track of them until I put them in the article:

I'll strike them as I add them, will add others later. If notability headhunters come forward in the meanwhile, may be best to direct them to here.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 05:59, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

You do realize that none of those add anything relevant, right? They're just trivial mentions combined with worthless trivia. You're not going to build anything relevant out of them. If you want to figure out what you need, look at some of our featured character articles. TTN (talk) 11:45, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
You wanted notability and reception, to be proven wrong that it could in fact be notable. People citing the character specifically in context is notability. That's my primary concern. By themselves they're worthless. En masse they cement the article. Something unnotable would not be mention specifically as often, would it not?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 12:50, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
There is a difference between actual reception and using it as an example to provide context to readers. This, this, and this are good examples of how to establish notability, not those. TTN (talk) 13:13, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
You know, this might sound completely crazy for you, but I think you're overshooting the scope of what you're going to get. Comparing the amount of possible information you could get on Jigglypuff vs. any Star Wars character, given that Star Wars has an "all ages" fan base and a massive expanded universe to fall back on while Pokemon has...Pokemon...yeah that's just not a good matchup. Any Star Wars character will have a ton more information available than randomvideogame character most the time. Really right now I'm aiming for Everyday Good with this. Featured would require Nintendo to suddenly dump a ton of information on people. I'll read the sections regardless, might give ideas on a few ways to work some information in I'm struggling to.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 13:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
I said that they were examples, not standards. They just show the kind of information you need, not the amount. None of those actually contain good information, unlike the ones featured in those articles. That's what I'm pointing out here. TTN (talk) 13:25, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Well your scope isn't what it should be then. The American Idol bit looks ridiculous by itself for example, but gives a place to first anchor the track Nintendo made for the character based around it's little song. And then it gives an anchor to this [little part] by B.D. Kuchera on the matter that brings a bit more relevance and ties a little into reception for its Smash Bros. counterpart. Jason, Jabba and the Emperor will always have a ton more information readily citable for themselves TTN. They've had comic series, side stories, films and so on dedicated to them. Jigglypuff's main strength as an article is going to land up coming from recognizability and popularity with fans and non-fans alike.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 13:38, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
That's just some random blog by someone that doesn't seem to have any credentials (the article that you linked states that that the film guy is different than the blogger). The overall popularity isn't the factor here. The factor is the quality of the sources and information. None of these are of the quality we expect on this site. TTN (talk) 13:55, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
My mistake then. Apparently though that fellow's blog has been cited here on wikipedia before, so it might do someone good to go through and contend with that.
On topic though, TTN this isn't a central character to the series, and outside of Japan and little kids one that isn't going to have a massive impact, especially since Nintendo has made use of it less and less as a mascot as they increase the number of Pokemon per game. But it still gets mentioned readily when the subject of the game comes up, its still one of the most recognizable and plasted on items by Nintendo, thus it's notable. As it stands at least the information I'm trying to gather here is superior to Pikachu's article. I mean if *that* thing can't get more pop culture...
Really I'd rather if you want to object to the sources, at least try and help find some that could be used to better effect. I'd rather work with you to make a good article out of this than against you so we end up wasting both our times.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 14:16, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Unless it's cited in a FA or a quality GA, I doubt it'd be accepted anywhere else. You just described why this doesn't require a full article. It definitely deserves more notice than the rest, which can easily be done with the list entry. The main difference between this and Pikachu is that if it would actually be worked on, it would likely produce good quality sections. It certainly isn't completely set in stone, but it is a lot more likely than this one. If I recall correctly, there was already fairly thorough search for sources while the entire merging process was being figured out. Nothing of any real impact was found. TTN (talk) 14:50, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Lots of little references establish notability. Insisting this article must be made as good as one of our fiction FAs else it will be redirected is a non-starter and is going to lead to arbitration. - 14:57, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Did I state that it needs to be FA quality? No, I stated that this needs quality reference, as any other article on this site needs. Take those and what's in the article and just try to build a good reception section. You won't get very far without having to stretch them quite a bit. TTN (talk) 15:00, 11 May 2008 (UTC)R

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard can be used to help decide if a reference is reliable. -Malkinann (talk) 23:34, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WP: Mammals?!?!?

Just curious here as I found it really funny. WTH is Jigglypuff doing on WP:Mammals??!?!?!?! 143.106.1.39 (talk) 19:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC)