Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Digimon/Archive 9

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents
Archive
Archives
  1. January 2006 - Feburary 2006
  2. late February 2006 - mid March 2006
  3. March 2006 - April 2006
  4. April 2006 - May 2006
  5. May 2006 - June 2006
  6. June 2006 - August 2006
  7. August 2006 - October 2006
  8. October 2006 - December 2006
  9. January 2007 - late March 2007
  10. late-March 2007 - August 2007
  11. July 2007 - March 2008

Last Words

Do we really need a section in some Digimon articles that say "Last Words" that are well, the last words of a Digimon before it is killed? Is that really needed? I'd like an answer asap just to make sure.--Tohru Honda13Sign here! 20:01, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Seems pretty needless to me. I think we should minimize quotes and plot summaries as much as possible, since technically speaking, they are copyrighted material, and it would make the articles less 'crufty. -- Ned Scott 03:58, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, because I've been attacked for reverting a user's contribution (which were last words). I'll start searching for last words in articles to remove them. Thanks again. --Tohru HondaSign here! 04:14, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't think they are iconic or symbolic enough - unless one quote becomes a world-wide fad, I don't think they should be there. But that's nothing - I got harassed on AIM (or was it MSN?) because I reverted a vandal's edit.  :P x42bn6 Talk 16:18, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Could someone go around checking some of the Digimon articles? I've gone through a few to make sure that the last words sections are gone but I'm pretty sure some of them are still out there. Gdo01 22:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't think we'll have to worry about that for a while now. The main contributor, User:Sceptile, was the person who constantly put back his "last words" after someone else removed it. He constantly broke 3RR, too. He has recently been blocked indef, so we won't have to worry about new additions like last words (unless new users start doing it too). But still, we'll be on the lookout. Thanks, ♥Tohru Honda13♥ 22:40, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Dear friends, I apologise on behalf of the user known as Sceptile. His intentions have only been to help brighten up and add an extra bit of detail to the Digimon character articles. He has been blocked and will probably not repeat his actions after the month is up. I do hope we can all come to an understanding and get along. Unfortunately, he will probably break my legs off if he finds out about this reply, so you might not hear from me again. Thanks for your time. Evilgidgit 18:51, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

No, he's been blocked indefinitely. And he certainly did NOT have good intentions. He broke 3RR various times, did not follow ANY of Wikipedia's policies, and insulted other users for removing the last words. — ♥Tohru Honda13♥ 18:20, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for 'interfering' but,is there something wrong with the section about a digimons' 'last words' as it appears in the films and series very often, of a bad, weak digimon sacrificing itself to save its' friends (sorry I have just joined the project and did not check the articles history).Such as pumpkinmon and gotsomon sacrificing themselves to momentarily 'cease' the vile Myotismon to save their 'new friends'. Wongdai 11:06 8 April 2007

Pinkbamon

Pinkbamon <<<is this redirect meant to be a joke? (i was about to nominate it to RFD, but just wanted to make sure first) --Saintmagician 08:49, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Fake (4 Google hits, anyone?). Speedying. x42bn6 Talk 19:43, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Botamon as Lalamon/Gaomon's fresh form

On our Lalamon and Gaomon articles, we have Botamon listed as the fresh form.

Is this actually cannon.

The note on it says "Based on data from Digimon Savers v-pet, Digivice iC", which seems a bit suspicious to me. Do these two digimon actually have a fresh form in the anime? --Saintmagician 08:50, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

As of now its the only Fresh form they have, the Digivice iC also confirmed their Ultimate and Mega forms before the anime did. Nightmare SE 12:25, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
What i meant is whether they have an anime cannon version. I don't think the digimon pet games really count as 'anime cannon' any more than the digimon trading card games. Unless of course, this one explicitly says it's related to the Digimon Savers anime. --Saintmagician 12:14, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
It a Digivice game, there's one for each anime series, although I don't believe any mode changes are in the Digivice iC. Nightmare SE 19:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Mode Change

What is the source of the belief that Mode Change is not a real digivolution? I have never seen a source for this in the anime or manga, and V-Tamer specifically calls it Super Evolution.

As far as I can tell, it's a belief started by a fansite based on the creators personal opinions, and has been repeated by others.

Can anyone give a source for this besides the cards?128.211.176.24 14:56, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Don't the cards count as an official source? As far as i know, Mode Change is not a real digivolution because it's never been considered an digivolution in any officla source. For example, Warp Digivolution is actually called "Warp Digivolution" in the anime. Characters in Digimon Adventure 02 actually say the phrase "Armor Digivolution". But i don't think Mode Change has been referred to as a form of digivolution. Even something like BIomerge is called "Matrix Evolution".
Digimon who do Mode changes don't change names. All digivolution involve a digimon changing from one species to another, but in mode change, the 'species' name stays the same. We just get a suffix added (so imperialdramon is still an imperialdramon when it goes to fight mode). The term 'mode' generally implies a different 'version' of the same thing - so same species, but slightly different. --`/aksha 08:42, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
What about Lucemon, though? Or UlforceVdramon? One's a Mode Change clearly specified (even by the cards) as a digivolution, the other explicitly reveals a level past Ultimate/Mega (part of the belief on the fansite was that there was no post-Mega level, and it used Mode Change as an argument for that view). It also doesn't explain digimon such as Chaosmon, Omegamon, UltimateChaosmon, and others, where they aren't Mode-Changing, but are still treated like Mode digimon. Sorry, I guess I didn't state my question correctly. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.211.254.142 (talk) 18:31, 22 January 2007 (UTC).
Not true. In Digimon Savers, the transition to Burst Mode is called "Burst Evolution." The call-out that the digimon says is still "BURST MODE", mind you, but this is enough to cement Mode Change as a form of evolution. - --204.184.63.212 13:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Fresh forms of the tamers digimon

The fresh forms for the tamers digimon (e.g reremon) never actually appear in the anime. And the TCG doesn' have cards for fresh digimon.

Anyone know where the information for things like reremon and jyarimon actually come from?

The picture for reremon says it's official bandai art. So i don't suppose Reremon appears in anything official as renamon's fresh form? Otherwise, i really don't know what to do with it. There's nothing to say other than "it's renamon's fresh form". So it's not like we have anywhere else to put it other than on the renamon page. --`/aksha 06:38, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I put the one for Impmon in a trivia section, but I guess we could just get rid of them all together since they're so minor and not really apart of those characters. -- Ned Scott 07:08, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I guess so, don't mind ditching them altogether. But I'd still like to know where they come from though. The pictures for the fresh digimon all say they're official Bandai pictures, used under fair-use. And...*official* pictures have to come from some *official* source/media right? --`/aksha 07:31, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Reremon is in the Digimon Encyclopedia. This image appears to be an extraction of the image in that book. Source for the data is stated as the D-Arks and one of the Wonderswan games. Shiroi Hane 02:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Omnimon should have his own article.

I've said something to this effect before, but Omnimon should get his own article. He more than any single evolution in the franchise appears apart from his previous forms (Agumon, et all), and he's a character in a LOT of the various series.

To put it into perspective, he is a seperate CHARACTER in:

  • Adventure 01 and 02
  • V-Tamer
  • D-Cyber
  • X-Evolution
  • Digimon Savers

And he has a whole bunch of other stuff associated with him such as miscellaneous information that simply CAN'T be handled by having him just be a subfacet of the Royal Knights and Agumon/Gabumon articles. - --204.184.63.212 13:23, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Which is why he's getting mentioned in the article for royal knights (covering x-evolution and savers), and the agumon/gabumon article (covering advernture 01 and 02). The V-tamer stuff has been preserved and will probably get added to an article listing characters of V-tamer. The original omnimon article never made any mention of its appearance in D-Cyber.
I don't see what your point is. You're saying an omnimon appeared as a character in all these things, so let's make an article specifically talking about all these omnimon? The point you need to keep in mind is that the omnimon from adventure01/02 is not the *same* omnimoin from x-evolution, or from digimon savers...and so on. So what's the logic of putting them in the same article? Other than the fact that they have the same name. --`/aksha 13:33, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Because it is dramatically limiting our ability to write about these characters. There are NUMEROUS articles here on Wikipedia that cover different incarnations of fictional characters. - --204.184.63.104 20:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
And the consensus is to merge or delete such article when they are of minor notability or have little real world relevance. We just haven't gotten to them all yet. -- Ned Scott 20:21, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
And Omnimon has anything BUT Minor notability. He's just as prominent in this franchise as Agumon or many of the other mascot digimon. ---204.184.63.212 00:42, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Omnimon's an asshole who dinged my car in the parking lot. He might have played a major role, but is hardly as notable as Agumon. -- Ned Scott 03:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Omnimon shows up on just as much, if not more, merchandise, is currently the most popular digimon in the franchise, keeps repeating himself in the media just as much, if not more than Agumon. And even then, where are we going to write about all this stuff? And the same problem was created by splitting the two Agumons up. You split these based on what's on television - where do we write about all the OTHER times these characters are involved in the franchise? - --204.184.63.212 13:07, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Being on X number of toys does not make one notable. Being whored out by Bandi on many different products does not necessarily make one notable. To answer your question, where do you go to write about all that stuff, you go to a Digimon fansite. -- Ned Scott 20:50, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Just because you decide that D-Cyber and V-Tamer are minor and should be ignored in favor of the show stuff doesn't make it thus. I mean, I could decide that the stuff about Spiderman and His Amazing Friends is inconsequential and go and delete it from every relevant article. I'm not saying we need to summarize everything, but these are prominent characters to this franchise, and we shouldn't ignore them just because we've decided the only relevant to Wikipedia stuff is Digimon matters that happen in the anime. yes, I agree with cutting down articles, but for the characters we HAVE - Omnimon, Agumon, etc. - we should at least TRY to be informative about. - --204.184.63.212 15:45, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
This isn't about *whether* or not to include information on characters like omnimon or agumon. It's about how to organize the information. As i said, the omnimon information isn't being cut - it's just been rearranged. So that now, the adventure section is on the agumon/gabumon article. The royal knight section is on the royal knight article...etc. --`/aksha 09:04, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
So where do we put information on Omnimon's appearance in D-Cyber, V-Tamer, and Battle of Adventurers? Where do we put info on D-Cyber and Digimon NEXT Agumon? Or the fictional appearances of WarGreymon that don't involve him evolving from Agumon? We're scattering the relevant info to the four corners of the site, and it's going to start making considerably less sense as a result. There's no cohesion here. --204.184.63.212 13:30, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
  • sigh* Fine. Let's just ignore the issue until it peters out. That's the way.--204.184.63.212 18:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Gender

Digimon have gender(not phyiscally), but mentally and in personality. You can't refer to a Digimon as a "it" unless it shows no gender differing aspects. In my opinion, whoever did this "his/her to it" just made things harder. User:Fractyl

I pretty much agree with this idea. The big reason we started using "it" in some articles is when it was a Digimon that shows up in two different stories as two different characters, one male and one female. Now that we are reorganizing articles based on the individual character I think it would be safe to use "him/her", etc in those articles. -- Ned Scott 01:21, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
That was a pointless reason, though Ill refer Crusadermon as a guy, I point out the "dub-gender change". Also note that dipite Gatomon's part in it, Silphymon is offically a guy no matter the continity, that bring up that fusion Digimon like Omnimon & Silphymon need to be separate from the main Digimon pages. User:Fractyl

Silphymon from 02 is not officially male. Since we're splitting articles by character, silphymon sections on gatomon and hawkmon's articles refer to *only* the silphymon from digimon adventure 02. And that one never had an official gender.

As for crusadermon, you've been changing crusader to a 'he'. However, as you say, the dub made crusadermon out as a 'she'. And the dub is equally official. I daresay, amoung english viewers, most people would see crusadermon as a she since most of them would have watched Frontiers when the dub aired on TV stations. So should we use "he/she", or the singular they (which isn't really completely accepted in english), or just fall back on it for this special case? Or maybe we should make an arbitrary decision of either 'he' or 'she', and explain why in the article. (a lot of D&D articles used to have this, it didn't work.)

Basing it on what's obvious is going to have other problems too. Agumon used to have 'he' on its article. But Botamon (even when referring to it as agumon's fresh form) almost always had 'it'. Then there're digimon who don't obviously have a gender. Are we going to use 'it' for them? but using it for any digimon implies to the reader that digimon don't have gender.

So i don't see the point of going to all the trouble. Some digimon may look nicer with gender pronouns, but we're doing nothing wrong by using 'it'. Since it is "official" that digimon don't have gender. Renamon says this. Official character notes from tamers also explain how despite how some digimon appear obviously male or female, they officially don't have gender.

As for the DNA digimon. Are you suggesting something like we have a veemon article, we have a wormmon article. And then a seperate article for paildramon/imperialdramon/fightermode/paladinmode? --`/aksha 09:23, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

True, but Renamon meant gender of physical sort, she was female on a mentality level. Even if I had no body, I would still have a guy's mind. As for Silphymon, he is a guy if you noticed the crotch lining (While animal-like Digimon like Silphymon & VenomMyotismon have a U-shape to signal a male, Digimon like Renamon possess a V-shape. It's function of design that points the gender). As for baby Digimon, that may be hard to answer gender may go either way. But likely scenrio is the baby is the "same gender" as its rookie form. As for DNA Digimon, that's the idea. User:Fractyl
As i said on the silphymon talk page - silphymon being male is your original research. What you said here is still Original Research. As for the baby digimon being the same gender as its rookie form...it supports my point exactly that digimon don't have gender and we're just making arbitrary decisions based on appearance. So what do you plan to do with a baby digimon that doesn't have a higher form which is obviously of one gender. What gender do you suppose Datirimon is? --`/aksha 01:06, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
I believe he used male connotations in the Japanese version of 02. --204.184.63.212 14:34, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
FYI, we've had this discussion at least once before. I still stand that gender-implicit pronouns should be avoided where there is an alternative. Shiroi Hane 02:38, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
http://digipedia.db-destiny.net/misc/faq.htm
"In episode 3.49, "D-Reaper's Feast," Renamon notes that "Digimon aren't divided into genders" - the line in the original version directly translates as: "By nature, distinctions of gender do not exist among digimon." Also, in describing Renamon, Tamers writer Chiaki Konaka states that "officially, Digimon do not have gender." But he himself notes that "If anything, gender seems fairly easy to identify in digimon," and says that Sakuyamon was clearly feminine."
I should think it's easy enough to figure out when a writer comes out and says it. As for Silphymon, he's male. It may have Gatomon's mind in him, but he is the natural evolution of Hawkmon, whether he uses a crest, another digimon, or a digisoul. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.211.181.173 (talk) 18:24, 12 February 2007 (UTC).

Digimon don't have sex and gender it's all about their characteristics and how they act,that may seem feminine or masculine, but these 'digital monsters' dont sexually reproduce or have reproductive organs, they are 'data' created in a digital world (some viruses).The pages should remain describing digimon as 'it',or 'they' But not as 'his' 'or her' Wongdai 11:13 8 April 2007

Poll

To ask, who prefered the way the Digimon pages were originally? Some think this new version is more confusing and pointless. You know who you are. User:Fractyl

I disagree with a perceive neccessariness of implementing an artificial separation between the forms, but the merged pages are otherwise just fine by me.Circeus 17:49, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

id rather have the old syestem back as the newer verson confuses and is easily misunderstood Blazemon

I'm not sure if I agree or disagree, but the merger had/has to be done as most Digimon articles don't meet WP:FICT. Personally I think the Misc Section should be Species Section (unless that's already what its supposed to be...). So for example Gallantmon would be in a total of 3 articles, Gallantmon from Tamers would be in the Guilmon Character article, Gallantmon the Royal Knight would be in the Royal Knights article and Gallantmon the species from cards, games, Frontier, etc. would be in the Misc section.Nightmare SE 18:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
That's the basic idea. -- Ned Scott 02:03, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Yeah. Although i think the "Misc section" is still in the "to do" pile. --`/aksha 09:30, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I prefer the way things used to be--Bushido Brown 07:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

When I saw it first I thought it was going to be really messy, but I think it's actually turned out pretty neat and clear... so I'd have to say the new way is better =) Peanutland 12:11, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi there

This sounds like a good project. I watched much of the dubbed Digimon cartoon series on TV. Now that I'm back I'm wanting to watch the original fansubs so that I can get familiar with the original content. For example, I'm just now finding out that the original was called 'Adventure' and it's a good way to distinguish things. So far I found Wolfpack Productions who've done almost 10 of Adventure and Adventure 02. So that doesn't free up the original 50, are there other fansubbers who've done the whole series? Tyciol 20:27, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Discussing fansubs on Wikipedia is a bit in a gray area, but.. Yeah, WPP so far has translated the farthest on Adventure, Adventure 02, and Tamers. They've completed Frontier. They have not started Savers yet, but other groups have and are up to around episode 30 or 40 ish. -- Ned Scott 15:34, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

List of V-Tamer Digimon characters

Since we are now in the process of merging all the individual mon articles, I propose making a list of all the major Digimon which appear in the V-Tamer manga. This would allow us to merge several existing mon articles into this one. My current idea for this article looks like this:

  • Taichi' allies
    • Veedramon (although I think he should keep his own article and instead we merge AeroVeedramon and UlforceVeedramon (+ Future Mode) into the Veedramon article)
    • Gabo
    • Ninjamon
  • LordHolyAngemon's army
    • LordHolyAngemon
    • Seraphimon
    • Dominimon (merge into this article)
    • Leo the Leomon
    • IceLeomon
    • Regulumon (merge into this article)
    • Gekovich
  • Demon's army
    • Demon (+ Super Mega)
    • NeoDevimon (merge into this article)
    • Callismon (merge into this article)
  • Allias 3 Digimon
    • Piedmon
    • Rosemon
    • Omnimon
  • Characters from Specials
    • Parallelmon (merge into this article)
    • Metamormon (merge into this article)

This list is far from perfect but it would allow us to merge several articles and informations into this one. I haven't included all the major V-Tamer Digimon into the list already since I wrote it down in a short time so if you think some Digimon are missing please add them. Diabound00 07:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

An article for V-Tamer characters is defintely something that we need. With Veedramon - if its a main character, then a seperate article for it sounds reasonable. I've never read V-Tamer, so i really can't help you much. Since you're obviously familiar with it, i say just go ahead and fire away. This list certainly does look like it's in the right direction. --`/aksha 09:35, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Article started at List of digimon characters in V-Tamer --`/aksha 03:40, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for doing so. I didn't have time to write anything as planned but I will help to expand this article.Diabound00 14:51, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Hagurumon X and Adventure Megas

Just so you know there is a Hagurumon X page. Also where did we get the information about the Adventure Digimon's Mega's e.g. Plesiomon for Gomamon? trainra 06:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

The adventure megas? I think possibly some digimon video game or v-pet that was specifically related to the adventure series had those as megas. I'm personally in the favour of not including those "unconfirmed" megas unless someone can add a reference for it (so like the way we've taken the fresh forms for the tamers digimon out of the articles.) --`/aksha 11:41, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
HerculesKabuterimon - Confirmed in Pendulum 1
Phoenixmon - Confirmed in Pendulum 4
Gomamon's mega form is rather confusing, in the Pendulum 2, MarineAngemon was his mega form, but the D-Terminal toy (which had all of the DigiDestined from 01 and 02's Digimon) confirmed Plesiomon has his mega form.
GranKuwagamon (and DinoBeemon), Vikemon, Valkyrimon and all Armor Digimon (except for GoldVeedramon and Armor digimon that did not Digivolve from Gatomon, Veemon, Patamon, Hawkmon, Wormmon and Armadillomon) were confirmed in the D-3s.
As for the Tamers Digimon like Jyarimon, Kiimon, etc. to be honest I'm not sure... Nightmare SE 13:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
The problem with things being confirmed in the v-pets is that they don't actually appear in the anime. I mean...if the armor forms appear in the v-pet as being official, are we going to be adding things like Allomon into the hawkmon article? If not, then why add something like herculeskabuterimon into the tentomon article? Then there's the rather non-contraversial additions like botamon being the fresh form of lalamon (from savers). Then again, the rather non-contraversial addition of the tamers fresh forms got removed because they didn't appear in the anime (rather non-contraversial as in there's no room for argument. Jyarimon was obviously designed to be guilmon's fresh form. Unlike say, with gomamon, where even the v-pets seem to disagree what its mega form is.) --`/aksha 13:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Plesiomon and the others are confirmed in the Digivices, which are a great deal more authoritative than the V-Pets, since the Digimon in question are the same ones from the show, and they have a set line (with the exception of the Digivice Burst). They also show up in Brave Tamer, which only showcases the "official" evolutions. In the V-Pets, you can generally evolve any Digimon among several different lines. 24.116.53.2 00:29, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

The mega digimon for adventures i think will work even if you dont know the official one you could do a split. Such as for salamon put in opanimon and magnadramon and write 'one of salamons mega forms...'. As for gomamon im pretty sure pleseiomon is the mega for him however marine angemon could just be a mega for pitimon as pitimon can digivole to other rookies other than gomamon. I think we should disuss this further and i would like to Nightmare SE please. We could give the pertensal megas a main artil and link them to the digimons articals instead of adding it to the merge. Or revert the old format of the digimon articals. Think about it. Thanks Blazemon

Yggdrasil Article

Since this is being suggested on the page I made for him, I'd like to talk about the Yggdrasil page I made's suggested merging with "List of Digimon Savers Minor Characters." I feel that this would be a mistake - he exists in two (three, allegedly) iterations of the franchise, and unlike the various Digimon who appear as a species, this is a variation on the same character idea. Savers Yggdrasil is to X-Evolution Yggdrasil like the Green Goblin is to his alternate portryals - they're the same essential character. Restricting him to just being talked about on the Savers page would be limiting and create a disconnect for readers. - --204.184.63.212 02:04, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Digimon Savers and X-Evolution exist in different alternate universes. The Savers folk probably did copy Yggdrasil from Digimon X-Evolution, but the two (the anime and the movie) don't exist in the same continuity. I'm personally not planning to touch the yggdrasil article any time soon - but if someone did merge Yggdrasil into the savers minor characters list, then i'd imagine it would only be the part about Yggdrasil in digimon savers. Information about the Yggdrasil in digimon x-evolution would probably be put into a "list of digimon x-evolution characters" type article. --`/aksha 02:15, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
But... They're the same CHARACTER. just. Movie Green Goblin and the comic Green Goblin don't exist in the same continuity, but no one can make a valid case for splitting those two into seperate ones. This isn't like using another digimon species, it's the same general idea being repeated throughout the various incarnations of the mythos. They're just portrayed differently as characters who repeat across seperate fictions often are. ---204.184.63.212 03:03, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
... so are we just going to pretend this is already resolved again?--204.184.63.212 03:36, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Digimon (creature)

I started off that idea about having an article that explains the Digimon themselves. I suck when it comes to organizing, so maybe you guys can swoop in and figure out the categories. Indiawilliams 03:48, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Okay, i did some writing. a lot of it actually. One thing the article really needs now is some pictures. A few pictures i think would be very good are:
    • A picture that a digimon's digivolution line on the same image (so for example, a picture with agumon/greymon/metalgreymon together) to illustrate the digivolution section. Ideally, we should illustrate a digivolution line where the digimon look the same (e.g. agumon's line), and a digivolution line where the digimon changes a lot (e.g. gatomon's line)
    • A screenshot of when a digimon hatches out from a digiegg, or a screenshot of when angemon is getting reincarnated back to an egg to illustrate the characteristics section
    • A screenshot of Jijimon and Babamon together may be a good idea for the gender section
    • a picture that includes both a digimon and it's mode change to illustrate the mode section.
  • and if anyone here is bored, some copyediting would be nice. I can assure you there're bound to be spelling errors in that article, but i think i've done enough digimon-ing for one night and really don't want to read over that thing again. --`/aksha 11:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
I am truely impressed. I think it's a great piece of out-of-universe fancruft. I'llsee if I can add some references and copyedit.Circeus 16:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
If you can choose an evolution line, then I'll make an image if you want - I suppose I can use the fair use images and edit them, and the image is still legal? x42bn6 Talk 17:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
I think it's fine as long as we still state that the pictures are under copyright and we're using them for fair use, and that you yourself don't claim any rights over it because you did some editing.
As for specific evolution lines - i think one for the agumon/greymon/metalgreymon, one for the salamon/gatomon/angewomon line, and one with imperialdramon and his other two modes would be nice. --`/aksha 13:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Alright, I will try and do it tomorrow (busy tonight, heh). How should it go? I quite like the idea of just an image with arrows - but horizontal, vertical, or bunched?
I would also prefer it if it was possible to use, say, Veemon's tree. We could show the Armor Digivolutions on it in a tree form, its proper Digivolution to ExVeemon, and then the DNA Digivolution to Paildramon and then even the Mode Change - which would show all forms of Digivolution at once. But if that's not really important, we could always just go for the well-known Agumon line not in Savers. x42bn6 Talk 17:17, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
The Veemon tree would work just as well as Agumon's one. The whole point is to have one picture showing how digivolved forms can look similar to previous forms (Veemon or Agumon's lines would both be fine here), and one picture to show how digivolved forms can look very different from previous forms (gatomon's line) to illustrate the digivolution section. The pic for imperialdramon and his mode changes is to illustrate the mode changes section. It doesn't really matter which specific line or mode change we use, as long as it drives the point across. So just do whatever you want.
Arrows would be fine. I think if you decide to do Veemon, we could have the Armor forms going in one direction (e.g. horizontally) and Exveemon and probably paildramon going in the other direction (e.g. vertically). Just if you're going to do vertical arrows, try not to make the pictures too fat. --`/aksha 04:20, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Draft 1: http://img71.imageshack.us/img71/7281/gatomondigivolutiontreeco9.png Comments? x42bn6 Talk 17:24, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
I think maybe we should have just the straight gatomon line (i.e. without the armor and the DNA digivolution). Because...i don't see how we would be able to fit that picture, and another one for veemon or agumon into the digivolution section of Digimon (creature). Or alternatively, we could just have this one picture. And then have the one with imperialdramon +mode changes later on in the article for the "mode change" section. --`/aksha 03:59, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Gatomon, take 2. x42bn6 Talk 16:24, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Nice, it's turing out really well. -- Ned Scott 19:11, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Misc Articles

Let's get it on. Indiawilliams 22:01, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Level of detail on lists

I problem i see is that for Digimon species who appear as main characters, we don't include random cameo appearances.

So for example - Botamon. We've merged Botamon to Agumon's article - however, the merge only took the information regarding Digimon Adventure's botamon. I didn't include things like "Some Botamon were seen in both versions of the Village of New Beginnings in Digimon Frontier" because i considered them to be too trivial. So that, we don't *have* to list every single tiny appearance of every digimon.

However, for random digimon who are ending up on the "Miscellenous lists" (as the only Indiawilliams just started), we're including information that is much more trivia.

So for example - "A Jyarimon was a student at Togemon's school. Another one was seen at the Fortune Teller Village in Digimon Frontier". Both of those appearances are really quite trivial appearances. But...they are the *only* appearances Jyarimon makes in the digimon anime, so if we don't mention it...then it's like (to the casual reader) 'here's Jyarimon, it exists, but it never really appears'.

So the point is, Digimon in the lists (such as Jyarimon) will be covered in more detail in that VERY trivial appearances will be noted. However, very trivial appearances of Digimon not in lists (such as botamon) will not be covered anywhere.

One solution i thought of would be to just add all Digimon species to lists. So instead of "Miscellanous Fresh/In-Training/Rookie...etc Digimon" lists, we just have "List of Fresh/In-Training/Rookie...etc. Digimon". Those lists will list all digimon species, but for ones which have their own articles, we just use "main article links". The other advantage to this is that we won't need our current List of Digimon article anymore - the "list of..." articles will be a complete list. List of Digimon will probably be turned into something like a disambiguation page that will link to all our other lists.

Any thoughts? --`/aksha 05:41, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

As an example, this is what the Botamon section on the list of fresh digimon would look like according to what i'm proposing. --`/aksha 13:28, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
I agree, but I do not understand why we have to tone down the information on each Digimon, for example DemiMeramon just like every In-Training level digimon can only Digivolve from one Fresh level Digimon, in thise case Mokumon, and I don't see why we can't include possible digivolutions.Nightmare SE 11:20, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, this is where i was in a bit of a delima. On one hand, Fresh-->Intraining Digivolutions have very little ambiguity. On the other hand, i can't justify to myself why we can include "obvious" digivolutions for fresh-->intraining (like mokumon-->demimeramon), but not 'obvious' digivolutions for higher levels. Including the obvious' digivolutions for higher levels is out of question, since the Digivolution lines get very messy (mostly because they get very messy in the TCG, as in a rookie digimon will typically have half a dozen different champion forms).
The other point to mention is that digimon like reremon is a problem. We can say "reremon" very obviously digivolves to viximon, but we have no sources. So if we add it to the Miscellaneous Fresh and In-Training Digimon list that "reremon digivolves to viximon" based on it being 'obvious', then why couldn't we add it to Renamon's article based on it being obvious? I admit there's a problem here, i just know what to do with it... --`/aksha 01:52, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
I see your point, the digivice toys might be a possible solution, but I'm not too sure about those either, the worst part about how it stands now in my opinion is that Jyarimon for example, a Digimon specifically designed to be Guilmon's fresh form has no connection to him or any of his other forms. Nightmare SE 02:21, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
We need the proper name for the digivice toy that Jyarimon appears in as Guilmon's fresh form. If we have that, i'm not going to complain about Jyarimon being on Guilmon's article (to me, it's bloody obvious Jyarimon was designed to be Guilmon's fresh form, whether it appears in tamers or not). And i think, if we put a <ref> on it explaining what toy it's from, i don't think anyone else will be removing it. IIRC, each of the digimon seasons do have official digivice toys (seperate from the standard v-pet toys). --`/aksha 03:29, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
And what about Game information? As it stands now no game information will be included, and I'd like to use DemiMeramon as an example yet again, as Digimon Savers hasn't aired in the US yet, for most english speaking fans DemiMeramon's most notable appearance thus far is Digimon World, a video game.Nightmare SE 11:20, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
i checked the Digimon World article, and DemiMeramon was listed as a digimon who appears, but no description (unlike a lot of other digimon from the game on that article). So i figured demimeramon was another digimon who "just appears" in the game.
I admit i'm not familiar with the games at all. It's hard to judge sometimes whether an appearance is a "this digimon exists in the game full stop" appearance, or if the digimon is actually a notable/special/important part of the game. --`/aksha 01:52, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Don't get me wrong his role wasn't major (like Jijimon for example) but I would say it trumps his Frontier appearance (there's alot of better examples than DemiMeramon, I'll even go as far as to say that 1/3 of the Digimon from Digimon World (including Wild Digimon) have not appeared in the anime yet) . Nightmare SE 02:21, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Also why has Type been removed? Its far more notable than Family which the Royal Knights currently have on their info boxes.Nightmare SE 11:20, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, type and family are both...sort of trivia. Neither of them does much in either the anime or the card game. And type...to me seemed to be even more of an arbitrary classification than family. Do you think we should restore type onto the infobox then? Or just remove family as well? (note - "digimon by family" categories still exist and will still be used whether or not family is in the infobox. But "digimon by type" categories already got deleted in a CFD.) --`/aksha 01:52, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
I really don't see the point in family, correct me if I'm wrong here but it only exists in the card game, at least type exists in the anime (for example in 02 Arukenimon was able to control Insectiod Digimon) and games (Digimon World 1, I don't recall type being important in any other games, although I could be wrong). I think type should be restored (but not the old categories, those were pretty much useless and there's too many types anyway). Nightmare SE 02:21, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, i don't think we're every going to get everyone to agree in either letting go of family or letting go of type. I'll go restore type on the template, i guess it won't hurt too much to have it the infoboxes, trivial information or not. --`/aksha 03:29, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
For that Botamon example on your page, would he still have his section in the main Agumon article? Indiawilliams 18:19, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes. --`/aksha 01:52, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Okay. If there's consensus on this list thing then I supposed we'd better change the categories on the Organization project page. Indiawilliams 16:27, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
....i almost...can't be bothered. We've got so many digimon articles, planning it all out is going to take a long time. Unless you want to do it, i don't see myself doing it.
i think the most practical thing we can do now is to make sure we do the articles in order. So for example, when making the "list of rookie digimon", start alphabetically. Start with "A" and go for x-number of digimon (how many digimon per article depends on article length. They'll just be arbitrary cutoffs).
So...just don't go off and start making articles like "List of Rookie digimon H-M" until we get all the Rookie digimon from A-H into articles first. --`/aksha 03:37, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, it doesn't seem like anyone else cares. So i've gone ahead. List of Fresh digimon and List of In-Training digimon. I wasn't sure whether we should captilize the "digimon" bit....--`/aksha 04:38, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I think that should be capitalized...we treat the word "Digimon" like a proper noun in all our other articles...Any chance you can paste that to an article with the proper name? Oh, and were you saying that we should go ahead and make the list articles as originally planned before going with this new idea? Indiawilliams 16:59, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, i guess so. I'll move the articles.
No...i just meant i can't really be bothered to do planning again. So if no one else minds, let's just go ahead without drawing out a plan. There aren't that many of us doing this, so i don't think it'll be too messy. --`/aksha 04:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
I feel kind of bad that I haven't been spending more time on this. You guys have been doing so much lately, it's really impressive, especially considering how daunting the task is. The progress being made is inspiring, and I'm realizing I need to get my head out of the clouds and get back to the grindstone! :) -- Ned Scott 06:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Digimon and the Wiki's

I recall Wikimon being around a while, and just found out about the less active Digimon Wikia, and it got me thinking.. It would be interesting to do some sort of cross-site collaboration and make the most of all our efforts. I'm not sure what Wikimon's licensing status is, but the Digimon Wikia and here on Wikipedia are under GFDL, meaning we can copy things both ways, etc. Thoughts? -- Ned Scott 02:54, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I was under the impression that all the wikis hosted by wikia are under the GFDL license. The Digimon Wikia looks sort of...inactive. Exactly what kind of cross collaboration are you hoping for? --`/aksha 03:44, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, lets say someone wants to go into some speculation about Ryo or something, they could copy from our articles on Wikipedia (giving them a jump start) and then be able to do those speculations that we can't do here. Less likely, but if it happens that something turns out to be verifiable and not just speculation, we can add it to Wikipedia's side. We can do this already with the way things are now, but not a lot of people know it's an option. -- Ned Scott 04:04, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
The digimon wikia i *very* inactive. In fact, i'd say it's dead. this is their active users list. The guy who runs it hasn't made an edit since august last year. It's probably better off just to contact that people at Wikimon and ask if they're covered by GFDL, or if it's okay to release their content to GFDL. --`/aksha 06:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
I actually left them a note about that, but forgot to check for the license. Is content that is no longer on Wikipedia still subject to the actual license? Like pre-merge versions of Agumon or Veemon?Circeus 12:35, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes, any content was written under the GFDL stays under the GFDL. it's like, the people who contributed to those articles where under the impression that they're contributing under the GFDL, so we can't just change that now that wikipedia isn't using those particular bits of content anymore. --`/aksha 13:23, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Unsourced Digimon (Puffmon, etc.)

Since they're all fresh, in-training, it's fair to say they have only appeared on D-Pets. Unless someone has seen them in the anime (KoDokugumon definitely appears with Dokugumon in Adventure 01, but is not named), then that's where they came from. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.211.254.142 (talk) 16:20, 14 February 2007 (UTC).

Do you happen to know which specific D-pets any of them were in? Indiawilliams 17:30, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Level Beyond Mega...?

A bit of a battle going on at the Digimon (creature) talk page. Is "Super Ultimate" an actual level above the Ultimate? It's in V-Tamer but is it notable enough to mention elsewhere? Indiawilliams 17:30, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

A paragraph does actually exist in the Digimon (creature) article talking about Super Ultimate as a level above mega. It was tagged with [citation needed], and later turned into an invisible comment (i.e. a <!-- Blah -->), and i assume that is because it was unsourced.
"Super Ultimate" is in V-Tamer, Arkadimon at the Mega level does Digivolve again into another form. But i'm personally confused as to whether "Super Ultimate" was actually treated as a whole new level in V-Tamer, or whether the "super" bit was just an adjective. So like "Mega" and "really strong Mega", except with "Ultimate" and "super Ultimate".
Either way, if it indeed meant to be a seperate level above mega, then it's notable. But we need to be careful when explaining it to say that it's *only* in V-Tamer. V-Tamer has a lot of strange (compared to other digimon manga/anime) elements, and this would just be one of them. --`/aksha 08:20, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Redundant TV section

Just noticing that the TV section on Digimon and Digimon: Digital Monsters is a bit redundant. Looks like someone went and synced them up so they're the same thing, which is fine, I guess, but it got me thinking.. maybe we should only have it in one article. Or maybe some level of merging with Digimon and Digimon: Digital Monsters is needed? Not really sure about it myself, but I thought I'd mention it. -- Ned Scott 23:48, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I think just merge completely. I've always wondered why those two articles existed, it's like...when is Digimon ever not "Digital Monsters"? The second article is meant to be specifically on the Digimon anime, but since each anime season has its own article, there's really not much to say on Digimon: Digital Monsters that would be out of place on Digimon. --`/aksha 02:20, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, it's pretty much just left over from the time when all the series / seasons shared one article. -- Ned Scott 08:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Information 'lost' in the merge

i noticed that information like this is being text dumped onto talk pages.

Nothing wrong with it. But just wanted to let people know that i've also been preserving any information from pre-merge articles that haven't yet been included into new articles in my userspace. --`/aksha 03:24, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

That's the only reason I bothered creating the Rookies list tonight; I was gonna add Punimon to the Fresh list but saw he hadn't been merged to Gabumon, but then I couldn't merge him there because Gabumon was using the old template, so my only choice was to text dump Gabumon's other appearances in an appropriate place. ^_^ (BTW, you can scratch Agumon from your list, I added your info too.) Indiawilliams 05:40, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
These lists should be "(A-F)", "(F-L)" and so on, not "(part 1)", "(part 2)". Circeus 22:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

That's what we where going to do...but since now we're going to include all the digimon into lists, the old plans won't work anymore. Say if i wanted to go create the first ultimate digimon list, i have no idea whether to name it (A-F) or (A-G). We don't know how many digimon will be on a list, or how many lists there will be. If i name an article (A-G) and then discover there're tons of "G" digimon of that level, then i'll have to rename the article when i move the "G" digimon to the next list. All of these lists are going to have a huge number of redirects coming in, cleaning up the double redirects after a move is not going to be funny.

I don't see why having (A-G) is better than (Part 1), but i really don't care. It seems to me that it's just an arbitrary presentation decision we have to make. If you want to change it, please wait until after the lists are created and more or less stable so you actually know which letters of the alphabete each part of a list is cutting off. --`/aksha 11:46, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Me again and also about Digivolutions.

The user 84.81.129.59 repeatedly adds the digivolution lines to pages that have them and some that don't, which ones do we delete? I think I have only deleted the ones that already had their digivolution lines on that page.trainra 10:05, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Our old digimon layout listed the digivolution lines in the infobox and in the article prose. The new post-merge articles (e.g. Veemon) don't have the digivolution lines in the article prose, and i think it's better that way. Listing digivolution lines in prose would only be repeating exactly what the infobox already has, not to mention...the digivolution forms are very visible in the TOC and every form is described in the article. Therefore, i've been removing them, and i've also left the anon a talk page note (which seems to have been ignored). --`/aksha 10:41, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
I've been reverting all his edits, that user keeps adding random digivolutions lines that have no source that he's most liking branching off of the card game, like Biyomon -> Saberdramon -> Parrotmon -> Eaglemon. A long time ago Digimon articles were filled with these false digivolution lines, I wouldn't be surpised if this was the user who made them in the first place. Nightmare SE 12:24, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Ok. Just wanted to make sure before I do something stupid. Trainra 08:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I have no problem with repeating the levels in the article and in the infobox. I've always thought of the infobox as an at-a-glance summary more than article content itself. Although, if we do, then there's probably a cleaner way of doing it. -- Ned Scott 08:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Ruki's father

Can someone more knowledgeable than I am about tamer (Japanese and dub) look at talk:Rika Nonaka? There seems to be substancial evidence that her father is not dead. Circeus 22:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Jigga what? Wasn't the assumption always that he and Rika's mom got divorced and she has that vision in the movie because she misses him or whatever? Indiawilliams 01:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Episode article: Deletioon nomination

I nominated A Million Points of Light for deletion, per previous discussion to not create Digimon episode articles.Circeus 13:32, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Savers only gets 48 episodes?!

What is meant by this comment in the List of Digimon Savers episodes?:

"As it currently stands, Digimon Savers will be the shortest series in the franchise to date, and will be ending with 48 episodes. Originally, it was supposed to have 54 broadcast weeks, but due to overriding broadcasts, 6 weeks were missed."

'Overriding broadcasts?' What exactly happened for Savers' time-slot to get taken away? And '6 weeks were missed' sounds like they're just not gonna air the last 6 episodes. Savers WILL end with a proper conclusion, right? Indiawilliams 23:11, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

54 episodes weren't planned, so there are no missing episodes. Savers will indeed have a conclusion. Shining Celebi 19:24, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Digimon merged with Digimon: Digital Monsters

I've merged Digimon: Digital Monsters with Digimon, see Talk:Digimon#Main article and anime article merged for more info. -- Ned Scott 09:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Please Edit This.

Digital Monster Ver. WonderSwan

I can't because I know nothing about the WonderSwan games. Would someone please add some encyclopedic info to it because right now it's breaking every Wikipedia rule ever. *twitch* Indiawilliams 04:52, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Since it was pretty small and said it was just a WonderSwan version of the Digimon virtual pet, I merged it to that article (Digimon virtual pet#WonderSwan). I took some stuff out, and a quick google search seems to indicate that finding some sources shouldn't be too hard. -- Ned Scott 05:55, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

New pix for Lunamon & Coronamon EVOs

Here you go! User:Fractyl

http://www.bandaigames.channel.or.jp/list/ds_digimon02/original/images/chara_1.jpg http://www.bandaigames.channel.or.jp/list/ds_digimon02/original/images/chara_2.jpg http://www.bandaigames.channel.or.jp/list/ds_digimon02/original/images/chara_3.jpg http://www.bandaigames.channel.or.jp/list/ds_digimon02/original/images/chara_4.jpg

http://www.bandaigames.channel.or.jp/list/ds_digimon02/original/images/chara_5.jpg http://www.bandaigames.channel.or.jp/list/ds_digimon02/original/images/chara_6.jpg http://www.bandaigames.channel.or.jp/list/ds_digimon02/original/images/chara_7.jpg http://www.bandaigames.channel.or.jp/list/ds_digimon02/original/images/chara_8.jpg

Lists of Armour Digimon.

I thought these were going to be seperated into egg groups not Lists of mixed armour digimon? Also the edits to talk pages on digimon related articles is not working.trainra 09:28, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

That was the plan to start with. But it seems like we've started on a list of mixed armor digimon. I don't really mind, either one is fine. I'll add a "fromegg=" line into the digimon infobox if we stick with the mixed lists.
What do you mean edits to talk pages not working? You mean no one is replying? Or you mean you just can't edit? --`/aksha 13:29, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
On the main project page under recent changes, one of the links is Talk pages, when you click on it though it says that Wikipedia does not have a category with this exact name. trainra 00:04, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Oh, that's because Ned recently renamed the project to drop the "System Update" bit. I guess the category must have been renamed, but the link hasn't been corrected yet. I'll go fix it. --`/aksha 01:35, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
When I created the Armor list I didn't know that we wanted to split it into different eggs but this can still be done. I will continue with the two lists as they are now and add all Armors into them. Diabound00 07:49, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Maybe they should be left as is. If you break the Digimon up by Digi-Eggs it's just going to create a bunch of stub articles, the current method's much more, uh, thrifty? Indiawilliams 16:45, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
If you don't mind a Nobody's Opinion, why not use the one person's "fromegg" idea in the Mon's info-box, and at the top of the page, divide them by the Rookie they come from? Everyone seems to get what they want this way. It's only my personal opinion "David200k" 23:27, 28 March 2007 (UTC)}

WereGarurumon

Does anyone know which of these attack's Matt's WereGarurumon used?:

  • Wolf Claw (Kaiser Nail): Slashes with his powerful claws and knuckle weapons.
  • Garuru Kick: Throws a powerful kick at his opponent.
  • Baldy Blow: Punches his enemy fiercely.
  • Circle Moon Kick: A spinning variant on Garuru Kick.

And for that matter, did his MetalGarurumon really use all those attacks? Indiawilliams 00:13, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

It's been a very long time since i saw Digimon Adventure, but the first two attacks defintely sound familiar, while the last two doesn't. Don't know if that really helps... --`/aksha 09:58, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
It apparently appears in the cards: [1]. x42bn6 Talk 13:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
But we still need to know which ones appear in the anime for the Gabumon article. --`/aksha 13:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Don't forget to hook me up with MetalGarurumon, yo. Indiawilliams 19:37, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
I agree with the first respondent 'user:Yakasha', as on all the tv series, Weregarurumon only used Wolf Claw,and Garuru Kick,which was also verified by my book 'Digital Digital Monsters,The Offical character guide,written by A.Ryan Nerz',and just to be an ultimate sad loser, I went through my digimon card collection (very old, i dont play with them anymore), and on Weregarurumon's card,there was only,yet again,Garuru Kick and Wolf Claw. Wongdai 11:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

02 CD Dramas

Where do they (Matt's Drama, Michi-blah blah and Natsu e no Tobira) fit in the Digimon timeline? Specifically I want to know if they should be listed before or after Revenge of Diaboromon in the Digidestined articles. Indiawilliams 19:37, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I can give you the dates (in reality) only:
  • Michi he no Armor Shinka: Dated on 2001 Feb 7 (Amazon).
  • Ishida Yamato Tegami -Letter-: Dated on 2001 Mar 7 (Amazon).
  • Natsu e no Tobira: The CD cover has Wallace and Gummymon XD. It was dated on 2001 Oct 3 (Amazon).
  • The Revenge of Diaboromon is 2001 SPRING... Dated on 2001 Mar 3. Kennethayes 08:59, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Argomon

As you know, Argomon have Ultimate and Mega forms. The Japanese translation are "Argomon" and "Argomon(Mega)".

I only have the image of his Mega form (from the card), and I believe that his Ultimate form looks different? I also have the other details on their cards (JT, Vi, Mutant, attacks). So shall I start the page Argomon (Mega) to seperate them? (just like Burgermon? orz||) Kennethayes 08:55, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I guess seperate them. Honestly, i don't know what to do with the weird digimon who have more than one level. But there're really only a few of them, so let's just seperate them (it seems like the more simple solution). --`/aksha 05:21, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Digivolve/Evolve

Do the Frontier Spirit Digimon evolve or digivolve? trainra 07:54, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Digivolve. It's always Digivolve. Digivolve = evolve with the "digi" bit in front, as most digimon things like to have. --`/aksha 10:58, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Just making sure. trainra 11:01, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually it´s Evolve. All Digimon Evolve. Digivolve was a Dub Name.

Yes and we use the American dub terms on Wikipedia since this wikipedia is for English speaking readers. Nightmare SE 17:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, sort of. Same idea, but it's because it's the most recognized by English readers. -- Ned Scott 05:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the back up, specially after the reply on my talk page by the above person. No name will be mentioned. trainra 05:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Can i just say for, the people, who think of it, that evolve,is what digimon,(DIGITAL MONSTERS) do, then they are mistaken, evolve means to 'unfold or developing of something,that means the advancement of physical features, or of intelligence (in creatures),where by natural means, gradually'. Digivolve means to rapidly, advance to the digimons' 'next state' or next form.

I apologise if I sound rude. Wongdai 12:02 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Digimon Savers english Dub

Something to note on the main project page :D

Digimon Savers has been "licensed" (not really licensed, since Bandai and Toei Animation have American branches/whatever) and will have an english dub under the title "Digimon Data Squad". As Amigobro2 has noted on Talk:Digimon Savers: "http://www.toei-anim.com/ Then go to the bottom left, click on shows, and then Digimon Data Squad.".

I would hold off on major changes for the time being, like renaming articles and such, as this is so newly announced. For the time being the original names will still be more commonly recognized, and it's not unlikely for names to be changed before the actual show premiere. Then again, it's likely they will go with the "Data Squad", Touma being changed to Thomas, and other possible changes, so it does seem a bit inevitable. The one thing we don't know is if the TV networks will refer to this as a "season 5" or a stand alone show. If people want to make changes then I guess they can go ahead and do so, but personally I would wait before investing my time in updating links and such. -- Ned Scott 01:39, 16 March 2007 (UTC)


Savers not licensed after all? See here. -- Ned Scott 19:37, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Mercurymon and Neptunemon

These two digimon keep being written as Mercurimon and Neptunmon. Since the original japanese site lists them as Mercurymon and Neptunemon, and neither of them have appeared in an English series yet, I'm really confused why people keep telling me that the names have been changed from the original Roman names. Here's the site, in case you doubt me: http://www.digimon.channel.or.jp/city/gallery/accel/index.html

These need to be changed, and I am going to start doing so. Since Mercurimon (incorrectly) appears all over the Savers articles, I thought I should put this here, since it will be beyond my power to do this myself.

And it has nothing to do with the Warrior of Steel - the official name for that is Mercuremon, from the french word for quicksilver (our Mercury).128.211.254.142 16:21, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Neptunmon appears in Digimon World DS which means it does have a dub name, besides official sites don't always seem to do a good job when translating names, just look at "Chimairamon" or "BantyoLiomon" on that same site. I also wouldn't be surprised if Mercurimon has appeared in the American card game too. Nightmare SE 16:43, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
That still doesn't explain the Mercurimon name, since it hasn't appeared in an American Card yet. BantyoLeomon is another acceptable translation, and as far as I've seen, Banchou hasn't appeared either. In any case, DW DS calls Daemon Creepymon, though it does use BantyoLeomon. Should we say that Creepymon is the official name, too? Chimairamon is an acceptable translation too - better than Kimera, which is wrong both ways, instead of just being an alternate spelling.128.211.254.142 04:00, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
The Creepymon dub name goes back much further than Digimon World DS, it was used several years ago in Digimon World 3, it is simply an alternate dub name used by Bandai of America, there's actually several cases were BoA used different names from the anime, like Lucemon Fallen Mode, BlackSeraphimon, Sylphymon, AzuLongmon, Goburimon, etc. Nightmare SE 13:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

"Mercurymon" and "Mercurimon" are not the SAME digimon. Mercurymon was the water spirit digimon who appeared in digimon frontiers. Mercurimon is the olympus 12 digimon who appears in savers. "Mercurymon" and "Mercurimon" are not alternative spellings for the same digimon. They're two different species.

[english name] <-> [japanese name] <-> [appearance] Mercurying <-> Mercuremon <-> Digimon Frontier (picture) Mercurimon <-> Mercurimon <-> Digimon frontier (picture)

The "Mercurymon" used on the japanese site is either a spelling mistake. Or it's actually referring to Mercurimon (who's generally also called Mercurimon in japanese). It's not referring to our Mercurymon, who is called Mercuremon in japanese. ("Mercuri" would be the jap equivalent of "Mercury". Where as "Mercure" and "Mercuri" are defintely pronounced differently in jap.)

As for Neptunmon - it's always been Neptunmon. Both as the japanese romanization and as the english name. I don't see any romanji on the japanese site you linked to, so i don't see how you could have gotten "Neptunemon" from that site. Also, i believe it has appeared in the digimon card game.

In conclusion, i'm changing both of the names back. --`/aksha 11:12, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Mercurymon (Mercuremon) is the steel spirit not the water! =P
For MERCURIMON, it is correct because Japanese like to use メルクリウス Mercurius (Latin) when referring to Hermes.
When Japanese mean by Mercury, the planet or Hermes in English, the kana is マーキュリー, pronounced as MA-KYURI-.
For NEPTUNMON, actually I like Neptunemon more. But...
  • Neptunmon is the dub name in the games?
  • Same case of Mercurius? Japanese use Neptunus (Latin) when referring to Poseidon.
  • I am not interested in Olympus 12!
so using Mercurimon and Neptunmon is okay. Kennethayes 20:05, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Exactly as Kennethayes said, the names are from Latin. Mercurius and Neptunus are the original Latin name, and it's where Mercurimon and Neptunmon come from, not the English variants. Shining Celebi 00:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
So I have added Mercurius and Neptunus to the Olym-12 page. Also give some information:
NEPTUNMON (ネプトゥーンモン) is named after NEPTUNUS (ネプトゥーヌス, pronounced as NEPu'TOO'NooS)
And Neptune, the planet or Poseidon in English, will be ネプチューン, pronounced as NEPu'CHUU'N. Kennethayes 06:05, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Okay, apparently none of you actually understood me. I KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MERCUREMON AND MERCURYMON. I DIDN'T SAY THAT THEY WERE THE SAME DIGIMON. "Our" Mercurymon is nothing of the sort - I've only ever seen the name Mercuremon on the dub. As for the romaji - click on one of the D-Accel buttons. It spells it Mercurymon and Neptunemon, when you click on their profiles.

imdb also lists the warrior of steel as mercuremon. Every fansite I have seen lists the warrior of steel as Mercuremon. THE FRONTIER DIGIMON IS NOT MERCURYMON. As for the Digimon World DS game - that is nice, but the fact that it shows that it is using Bandai names (Creepymon), as opposed to Toei names, should be a hint that the Toei name takes precedence. I cannot find any images of Neptunemon or Mercurymon appearing on cards. If you can show me an image, please do, but so far you haven't. Unless you can give cites, please change it back to at least Mercurymon (I'll let Neptunmon slide, since it did appear in Digimon World DS, but Mercurymon hasn't appeared in any English form yet.) As for the cards, aksha - I'm having trouble even finding an English Mercuremon card, and I've looked through all of the checklists. Much less finding a Neptunemon or Mercurymon card. Even in the rare event I did find it - the card game has given us such gems as Dunusmon, Beelzemon Bluster Mode, Fanglongmon, Rhihimon, Kuamon, KorIkkaumon, and so on. The cards really aren't the place to look for for dub names - either the dub itself, or the original Japanese is the best you can get, since the dub is usually closest to the original Japanese. 128.211.178.133 16:43, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

if you really prefer original japanese-name in english, you should have read what i wrote about mercurimon above?
メルクリ will never be used to represent the english MERCURY (god / planet).
but for the warrior of steel (japname=mercuremon), i have no opinion. he should have English names in the cards or tv?
(how is his name pronounced in the frontier dub?) Kennethayes 01:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Frontier Dub uses Mercurymon. Even though savers hasn't been dubbed yet, we can be fairly sure they won't be using Mercurymon again since i doubt the dubbers want two very different digimon (both from anime series) running around with the same english name. --`/aksha 03:08, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
The other point to mention is that the naming conventions on Wikipedia say to always use the name which is most well-known amoungst english speakers. A quick google image search for "Mercurymon" and "Mercurimon" shows that Mercurymon is more widely used to refer to the frontiers mirror guy. ANd mercurimon to the savers evil guy.
And for the record, the google image serach for "Mercuremon" comes up with pictures of the same digimon as an image search for "Mercurymon" --`/aksha 03:10, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Which is what I was saying - Mercuremon is the name for the Steel Warrior. Again - I remember Frontier using Mercuremon, and imdb says that that is correct. If anyone can provide a screenshot of the english credits, or any english instance of mercurymon referring to the steel warrior, I will accept that - but the only english I have seen is Mercuremon for the Steel Warrior and Mercurymon for the olympian.

As for preferring Japanese - THAT'S NOT WHAT I SAID. I said that the only romanization that has been found (no one has brought up any others, and it definitely hasn't been released as an english card, aksha) calls it Mercurymon. Yes, that disagrees with the spelling of the Japanese - but the Japanese classification for the Power and Virtue Angels also are mixed up, but the mixed up version is the way it is presented in the translation. Mercurymon is the direct romanization that the Japanese creators decided to use - I'd like to think they may understand Japanese more than we do.

As far as I've seen, there is not a card for Mercuremon either. All I'm asking for is to either use the translations given, or present other convincing translations. Neptunmon is acceptable, since at least it was translated into english, but Mercuremon for the Steel Warrior and Mercurymon for the Olympian have not, as far as I've seen.
As for your google thing - only the steel warrior will be shown if Mercuremon is searched for, and onlyy the Olympian will show if Mercurimon is searched for. You're being very misleading - a google image search for Mercurymon gives you 3 of the steel warrior and one of the olympian - only 2 more, hardly "more widely used".128.211.254.142 06:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
BlackSeraphimon, Sylphymon, AzuLongmon, Goburimon are the same in the cards and the anime. Anyway, it was my point that Bandai made its own names for the toys and cards. Digimon is mainly an anime (or a manga/digital pet to be strictly accurate), so the anime (manga/pet) names should take precedence over the merchandising.
Oh well. The credits for Frontier studiously avoid actually naming the characters, so even though it was pronounced Mercuremon, the toys that I found named Mercurymon are the de facto English name. So I withdraw my complaint.128.211.254.142 06:35, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
oh, you know the problem of 能天使 and 力天使, good. but this is not the mistake of Toei Bandai or any digimon-related bodies. those are translations of "The Celestial Hierarchy" many years ago (as stated in Ja-wikipedia). maybe this is due to using the alternative names Dynameis (5th/Virtues) and Exousiai (6th/Powers) in romanji. if they used (the romanji of) Powers many years ago, they may use the correct kanji.
the kanji of ClavisAngemon's type is 力天使 (literally angel of power) / VIRTUES
the kanji of SlashAngemon's type is 能天使 (literally angel of ability/energy) / POWERS
but if you compare SlashAngemon and ClavisAngemon, SlashAngemon would definitely be the one leading the angels to fight, and the one related to power.
so actually you should appreciate Bandai. even the kanji 能天使 is not appropriate for SlashAngemon (resembling a Power), the character design of him was done correctly.
the mercurimon case is totally different. i dont agree that "Mercurymon is the direct romanization that the Japanese creators decided to use". surely they understand Japanese more than we do. but you have to know that the romanji (& pronunciation) of Mercury is always マーキュリー. nobody will use something such as メルクリィ for Mercury.
just wait for the dub or other US issues. "wikipedia deals with facts", isnt it? =) Kennethayes 13:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
i'll remember to give more references about the angel stuff when i deal with Slash and ClavisAngemon. cheers. Kennethayes 13:52, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
AGAIN, while I accept that the english dub name will be different, I provided a link that clearly shows that Mercurymon is the accepted ROMANIZATION of the digimon's name. This does NOT mean that it is the DUB - Kimeramon is the American name, while Chimaeramon is the ROMANIZATION (if I typed it right).

THEY DID USE メルクリィ to mean MERCURY.

As for Bandai - Toie makes the Digimon, doesn't it? Yeah, I thought that was stupid about the angel translators, too. I don't get "the character design of him was done correctly." though - none of the designs match the actual mythos descriptions (Seraphimon should be a six-winged ball of flame, not a ten-winged armored paladin, Cherubimon should be a man/eagle/ox/lion with four wings and many eyes, instead of a no-winged pink rabbit, and ophanimon should be a gyroscope-like composite of wheels covered with eyes,not a 10-winged female paladin).
I get it though, I withdraw my complaint, since I found the one case where Mercurymon is actually written on official products, and it is the Steel Warrior. It is toys that had it though, so I'm going to have to hold out hope that the dub (by Toie this time) will be consistent with the romanization they have already chosen.KrytenKoro 07:05, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
but on the same page (Nature Genome), it also use GOTTSUMON for Gotsumon, ANDIRAMON for Antylamon (Antiramon).
and in the Ultimate Genome, TYILINMON for Qilinmon, SABMARIMON for Submarimon etc.
so their "japname" (romanization) should also be changed then?
i DO use the data in the Bandai pages to enrich the wikipedia pages, but i WON'T fully stick to them.
we're not just translating what the official pages have, but also analyse and interpret them properly.
i just mean that the design of SlashAngemon (GuardiAngemon?) can resemble a Power even his type in kanji is not desirable. Kennethayes 11:05, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Technically, Andira is also a reading for that heavenly warrior. And that "interpretation" of the romanization leads to a lot of them saying "this digimon's name is a mispelling of". Gargomon, for example (the gargoyle and the rabbit)? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by KrytenKoro (talk • contribs) 17:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC).

Splitting the masterlists?

The number of Digimon per article is arbitrary, just use your judgement - we don't want too many articles, but we don't want really looooooong articles either.

Currently, Champion & Ultimate have around 150 per level. Mega has more than 170. Rookie has 80-something.

Maybe it's a bit early to talk about this, but i really wonder when i came to Wendigomon. orz||

Is it too long to have 50 in a page (at last)? Should I start Part 4 or Part 3 for Wendigomon? @_@ Kennethayes 07:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. List of Rookie Digimon (Part 1) only has about 30 digimon, which i don't think is too long. Something like 80 in one article is defintely too long, but are you saying we have a problem with articles being this long now?
If this is just a hypothetical question - then i'd say (as a rouge guide) around 20-30 digimon per article. But...it really depends on the digimon on it. The only lists i've looked at carefully are the Fresh and In-Training lists, and i've found we really don't have all that much to say for Fresh/in-Training digimon. I suppose this would be different since there're some rookie/champion digimon who appear quite a lot and we have a lot to say about them. I guess another good guide is to see whether the "this article may be too long" message appears or not when you edit the article (using "edit this page", not section edit). If you're getting that message, then it's probably a good sign to stop and start the next part. --`/aksha 11:21, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually the Champions (and Ultimates), especially the older digimon like Greymon, Angemon or Angewomon are quite "bulky". Later, when there are more than 40 or 50 in a page, it would long enough.

I am not really merging the articles according to alphabetical order. I came to Wendigomon as I was dealing with the Lopmon family. But W-Wendigomon is ranking around 130 among the 145 Champions in alphabetical order, and I wonder if it is better to start the part 2 / 3 / 4 earlier. (Just to save time from correcting the redirects / internal links afterwards.)

I will be quite free from late-April to June, and then I would "waste" much time on the lists I guess. Kennethayes 19:39, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

50 i think is a tad too long. Well, that's why i suggested we do the lists in alphabetical order - moving digimon is fine, but having to correct lots of redirects/internal links is just not fun. I suppose starting the 2/3/4/etc parts earlier won't hurt. If you're the one working on those lists, then whatever you find easier to work with. In case you don't already know, the Category:Digimon by level is a really great tool, since it lists all the digimon of a level in alphabetical order. You may find it helpful. --`/aksha 01:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

i know the category page. =P but just dont want to do in order. so naughty. so i will start the other pages (and moving those Weedmon, VictoryGreymon etc). hope that you dont mind me starting the part 4 first for Wendigomon?! Kennethayes 05:48, 21 March 2007 (UTC)