Tachyony: Imported page

2021-12-19T17:48:49Z

Imported page

New page

{{for|the Pokémon WikiProject on Wikipedia|Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon}}
{{essay|WP:POKEMON|WP:PTEST|WP:KIT|WP:KAREN}}
{{nutshell|The Pokémon test was originally used prior to the merger of most Pokémon into the [[list of Pokémon]], but it is analogous to situations where several less-than-notable topics of a common subject matter are merged together. This essay describes the historical context of this test.}}
[[File:POKÉMON TREE.jpg|thumb|right|200px|There are over 890 [[Pokémon]] characters.]]
The '''Pokémon test''' is an argument that was made at [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion]], before specific fictional [[Pokémon]] species were merged into a [[list of Pokémon]]. The test involves the comparison of the article nominated for deletion with an article for a species from [[Pokémon]], to decide whether it is more notable.

By early 2007, these species were merged after a [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pokémon/Archive 14#Is there any reason why all Pokemon are necessarily notable?|discussion]] found most of them [[WP:Notability|non-notable]]. Some such articles have been recreated.

==History==
The Pokémon test is believed to have stemmed from the attempt to curtail the number of individual Pokémon articles by listing them for deletion citing [[WP:FICT]]. However, although [[consensus]] formed in the [[Wikipedia:Poképrosal]] agreed that [[WP:FICT]] did actually apply to Pokémon stubs, the formation of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon|WikiProject Pokémon]] (under various names), and the pledge that all stubs were to be expanded, saw the issue die down somewhat. More recently, the WikiProject has worked on [[List of Pokémon (1-20)|a merge of Pokémon species articles]], rendering the test moot. Since then, the Pokémon test is sometimes cited in the inverse: articles on minor fictional characters are now routinely merged into one article, citing the Pokémon merger and WP:POKEMON as the most prominent and influential precedent.

==Examples of typical use==

* ''if we can have articles for every minor character in Star Wars, Star Trek, and each of those pesky '''Pokemon''', we can have an article about Professor Hopper.''
*''More keep-worthy than any individual '''Pokemon'''.''
*''...if we'll keep made up '''pokemon''' characters, write 600+ words on a character mention only in passing in a harry potter novel, I see no reason this cant be kept.''
*''Keep. I hate to resort to the '''Pokémon''' test, but... if freaking Golbat has its own article, freaking 593 deserves its own article. Not a ton of stuff is more notable than a number, right?''
*''Merge. The individual stops on the [[510 Spadina and 509 Harbourfront (TTC)]] and the [[512 St. Clair (TTC)]] streetcar routes should be merged with their respective lines. If the '''Pokémon''' test can be applied to non-human characters in the respective animé, then it can also be applied to transit stops as well. Using that test, the only pure LRT stop/station in Toronto that would merit an article is [[Queen's Quay-Ferry Docks (TTC)]], as well as individual stops on the [[Scarborough RT (TTC)|Scarborough RT]].''
(Emphasis added.)

===Karen Importance Test===
A related, and even more outdated, test was the '''Karen Importance Test''' (KIT), involving the citing of the specific Pokémon character [[Karen (Pokémon)|Karen]]'s article, for the following reasons:
#She seemed to be among the least significant of all the Pokémon characters with their own articles.
#Her article had technically survived at least one AFD (however, it was speedily closed because the article was already slated to be merged, so it was not kept on its merits).
#When the test was devised, the article looked like [{{fullurl:Karen (Pokémon)|oldid=24674264}} this].
This was no longer a valid argument (if it ever was) by the time the Pokémon Test arose because Karen's article had been merged with other related characters.

==Criticism==
There were three main criticisms of the Pokémon test that often arose in response to its use:
#The first and most common was that the Pokémon themselves aren't notable enough to have their own articles and that the inclusion of so many Pokémon articles was a mistake (see [[Wikipedia:Inclusion is not an indicator of notability]]).
#Notability of Pokémon species may not be equivalent to the notability of other subjects; the argument implies that a parallel bar should be set for every type of article.
#Finally, an argument that an article is at least as notable as an arbitrary Pokémon is still a subjective argument on the notability of that article, rather than reliance on the ''primary notability criterion'' (multiple, independent, reliable sources). Who can be certain that [[List of Pokémon (101-120)#Rhydon|Rhydon]] really isn't more notable than [[WP:GARAGE|Uncle Steve's Garage Band]], after all?

==See also==

* [[Wikipedia:Notability comparison test]]
* [[Wikipedia:Run-of-the-mill]]
* [[Wikipedia:Other stuff exists]]
* [[Chewbacca defense]]
* [[Wikipedia:Glossary]]
* [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion]]
* [[Wikipedia:Fancruft]]
**[[Wikipedia:Do not call things cruft]]
* [[Wikipedia:Poképrosal]]

{{Wikipedia essays|notability}}

[[Category:Wikipedia essays about notability|Pokemon]]
[[Category:Wikipedia essays about building the encyclopedia]]
[[Category:WikiProject Pokémon]]

Wikipedia:Pokémon test - Revision history

Tachyony: Imported page