 | This article was previously nominated for deletion. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Great photoshopping job on this coro-coro scan. However, one issue with it is that the spike-ish thing protruding from behind Diaruga's head isn't supposed to be there; it is actually a part of Parukia that's standing behind the Pokemon, so I suggest someone fix that detail. Thanks. Erik the Appreciator 03:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Someone do something about that image!—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.37.216.17 ( talk) 20:50, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Removed. Hello2112 20:54, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Nominated for deletion Skarlotte 15:27, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Uh...isn't this 'pose to be DIALGA! Ya know, D-I-A-L-G-A? And no, I am NOT Westeren. Arceus493 ( talk) 01:57, 9 July 2009 (UTC) HGVSSS!
What type is dialga?-- User:Rat235478683-- 23:47, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Water/Bug is dialga's type yw people
Diaruga does not appear in the 9th movie. Please update anything regarding this if you use Wiki as a potential source. XenoL-Type 03:36, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Is there any official info that states Parukia is really Diaruga's "rival"?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.37.23.195 ( talk) 03:46, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Apparently not, though it'd be inconceivable that they are not rivals. Just like Red & Blue's cover Pokemon Charizard and Blastoise are "rivals", Gold & Silver's Lugia and Ho-Oh are "rivals", and Ruby and Sapphire's Kyogre and Groudon are definite rivals, the D/P cover Pokemon Diaruga and Parukia being rivals is accepted to be the truth regardless of the lack of the official info. Erik the Appreciator 06:19, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
where'd you get 'Dialga' from? I thought it was Diaruga. Has anybody even announced its english name yet?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.132.84.36 ( talk) 03:03, 20 August 2006 (UTC) –It hasn't been. This is just a fan assumption and I say we baleet it. Evan1109 01:23, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Fixed the serebii link, as it was linking to the wrong poke.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.40.84.7 ( talk) 14:18, 9 October 2006 (UTC) IT IS DIALGA!.... wait, I'm in the wrong place. uh.......... Arceus493 ( talk) 01:59, 9 July 2009 (UTC)HGVSSS! GSDS!
OK, Nintendo hasn't confirmed the official romanization of Diaruga yet, so until further notice this should be at Diaruga. It has no place here at Dialga. Double Dash 20:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
- I was wondering the same thing. Diagla doesn't even sound right! -
24.92.41.95
12:58, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
- I know I'd have read it on SPP or PPN. They've never mentioned 'Dialga'. I'll request moves for both this and Palkia.
Double Dash
21:04, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- SPP never mentions new romanizations. These romanizations were posted on www.Filb.de which is a very reliable site that has never posted unconfirmed stuff. It is very possible that the trademarks "Dialga" and "Palkia" were found on some Pokemon merchandise. Just because you don't like the romanizations doesn't make them fake. -- Lividore 03:11, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
- I know I'd have read it on SPP or PPN. They've never mentioned 'Dialga'. I'll request moves for both this and Palkia.
Double Dash
21:04, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the debate was no move. -- tariqabjotu 23:59, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Dialga → Diaruga – Dialga has never been confirmed, or even suggested, as the official Romanization for Parukia. Double Dash 22:15, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
- Support - Yeah, we need confirmation before we can officialy name the article "Dialga." Besides, Dairuga sounds way cooler!
- Oppose - These romanizations were confirmed by Filb.de, about the only site that has never posted unconfirmed news, and I've said it about eight times now. This move request is ridiculous; if you don't like the romanizations you'll have to swallow that bitter pill and move on because they're confirmed. Lividore 03:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Indifferent- See Discussion on talk:Palkia. SaturnYoshi 09:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC)- Indifferent - Per above as well as the discussion on Talk:Manaphy -- ~PinkDeoxys~ 20:53, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Filb.de is not an official website, so they can't confirm what the name is. TJ Spyke 04:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- Supportread above statement.-- DarkHero 23:02, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose per the fact that the official names will be out in mere days, no need to do this now. Just wait for it. DanPMK 04:28, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose per DanPMK. - Saturn Yoshi THE VOICES 05:01, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose per
DanPMK. Also, I believe trademarkings have been given for the name. -
T
e
tsuya-san (
talk :
contribs)
05:53, 18 September 2006 (UTC).
- Addition to my opposition. I was right: パルキア at
http://www1.ipdl.ncipi.go.jp/syutsugan/TM_AREA_A.cgi (a government site for trademark filings) brings up Palkia as ディアルガ brings up Dialga. -
T
e
tsuya-san (
talk :
contribs)
06:00, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Well there you have it. Solid proof. - Saturn Yoshi THE VOICES 07:13, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Addition to my opposition. I was right: パルキア at
http://www1.ipdl.ncipi.go.jp/syutsugan/TM_AREA_A.cgi (a government site for trademark filings) brings up Palkia as ディアルガ brings up Dialga. -
T
e
tsuya-san (
talk :
contribs)
06:00, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Add any additional comments
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
I've been trying to contribute by adding a few players' perspectives of Dialga into the article. These minor contributions keep getting deleted, probably indiscriminately. It would be much better to take into account the players and their reception of the pokemon. -- 170.211.117.7 13:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
-
I'm sorry, how can you prove people "like" Dialga more, or "more experienced" players prefer Palkia?—
Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (
talk •
contribs)
13:26, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps it needed clean-up, but I referred to a small group. You know you'll be able to argue until you win if I'm referring to the fans as a whole. In fact, I'm referring to a small collective subgroup in the numerous amount of Pokemon fans. The truth is, I didn't refer to the fan mass as a whole, and the facts are most possibly valid. There are experienced players who prefer all kinds of pokemon. Some prefer Blissey over Wigglytuff, and vice versa. This is a debate when "defenseless sponges" are mentioned. --
170.211.117.7
13:44, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- You can't just say an opinion. What you're adding is called weasel words. If you can give an actual, reliable source then you can add your opinions.— Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ ( talk • contribs) 13:58, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps it needed clean-up, but I referred to a small group. You know you'll be able to argue until you win if I'm referring to the fans as a whole. In fact, I'm referring to a small collective subgroup in the numerous amount of Pokemon fans. The truth is, I didn't refer to the fan mass as a whole, and the facts are most possibly valid. There are experienced players who prefer all kinds of pokemon. Some prefer Blissey over Wigglytuff, and vice versa. This is a debate when "defenseless sponges" are mentioned. --
170.211.117.7
13:44, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
If I could have my oppinion, the above user should had cited their sources. Deleting anything without giving it a chance to be verified is destructive to the Wiki. It makes me want to look into the above information myself. -- 74.194.118.12 21:34, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- As if said information can't be added after a source is provided and we can call an opinion true?— Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ ( talk • contribs) 02:04, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
I actually find myself agreeing with Urutapu above. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a place where we discuss Pokemon endlessly and what certain groups feel about this Pokemon compared to its counterpart. Please read what Wikipedia isn't before making any more nonsensical additions. What the Pokemon is, what its abilities are as listed in the Pokedex, and where and when it appears and anything noteworthy about it should be enough. crazyviolinist 17:32, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I think that every pokemon should have an in-game sprite.
- .....They do
Cheeze Master
17:20, 6 October 2007 (UTC)Cheeze Master
- He means in the article. But believe me, the official artwork serves the purpose of illustrating the subject much more efficiently than a sprite...— Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ ( talk • contribs) 19:10, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Have its own page. It is a very important Pokemon in the Pokemon games. I also think that Palkia and Giratina should get their own pages as well. Does anyone agree? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gelatart ( talk • contribs) 18:39, 16 March 2009 (UTC) YES I DO! GROHHHHH! Rahhhhhhhhhahhah.....I am Arceus, in pursuit of creating many Pokémon pages from redirects, hold on... Man! ugh...my page got reformed....Rotom. great. Still, I am in pursuit in making Pokemon pages. I'll add the D/P/Pt trio to the list. And Wikipedia, you have not seen the last of ARCEUS493!!!!!!! RAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!AND ALSO MAKE HGSS THERE OWN ARTICLE!!!!!!!! gruuuu......gRrUuUuUu.....GrAaUuUu(eeeeewp.....ruhhhhhhhhhhewwww!) RAH!PA!JUDGEEEEMEENNNTTT!!!(you shall hear again from Arceuss493!!!! GRRRROOOOPPPPP!!!!!(shhhheeennnnnn) Arceus493 ( talk) 02:11, 9 July 2009 (UTC)HGVSSS You have not seen the last! The final Judgement!