Talk:Ash Ketchum/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

Why?

Why were the minature descriptions of Ash's Pokemon removed? BaconBoy914 (talk) 15:16, 5 May 2008 (UTC)


I think it's becaus eit;s a general encyclopedia and not a pokémon one. If you want a pokémon one than go to bulbapedia and copy it's source over here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.247.0.42 (talk) 23:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

new refrence

Kids Next door recently spoof the original ash —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.181.255.18 (talk) 21:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


Gligar

Yay! Ash caught a Gligar, has someone made a page for it yet?! Big Johnno —Preceding comment was added at 06:06, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Untitled reference

Could someone fix ref #16? I tried, and couldn't figure what was wrong with the title box. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 21:20, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Two sections

I have removed two sections from this talk page that were already archived here. Regards, Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:41, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Gligar # 2

Well this is Ash's first Pokemon that is a ground/flying type also his first arrachnid Pokemon. Matthew Cantrell (talk) 03:15, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Rivals

Why was the rivals section removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.187.115 (talk) 18:57, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Badges

Ash has more Sinnoh Badges than just two. In the Japanese manga he has 7.

The manga has nothing to do with the anime

Not to mention no Pokemon canon manga follows Ash —Preceding unsigned comment added by BaconBoy914 (talk • contribs) 15:15, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Robot Chicken Spoof

I removed the Robot Chicken spoof because its cruel to make fun of shows that Japanese take forever to make Matthew Cantrell (talk) 21:29, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually I disagree. In my opinion making spoof of something shows that you're a fan, or like it. Most comedy shows parody stuff because they like it. So I believe that reason for removal in invalid, then again I shouldn't be replying to such an old comment, but I felt I had to. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 21:00, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
I disagree as well. If you can find the spoof, I think you should add it back, Blaziken. Artichoker[talk] 21:02, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
No I'm not adding it back since it isn't notable in my opinion. Robot Chicken is full of 10-minute episodes that have clips that are rarely longer than three minutes. (most of the time just for few seconds) Robot Chicken is in fact notable, but I still believe that the spoof was just one of those random clips Robot Chicken always has. If somebody's adding it back it won't be me, because I don't find it notable enough. I really like that Disco PokéBall clip from Robot Chicken. But I still think the spoof isn't notable enough. We could continue this discussion, since Matthew's reason of removal was invalid. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 21:12, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Ash's Pokemon

I think that it would be a good idea to re-add the list of the pokemon Ash has. I don't think that it needs the descriptions of each pokemon and what they've done, but just a list of his pokemon. I just wanted to check to make sure everybody else was ok with it.--67.174.128.249 (talk) 23:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

i agree —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.217.220.218 (talk) 20:13, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

It really should, it's definatly true peoplecomehere tolearn what ash has, if anything sprites could be shown of Ash's Pokemon BaconBoy914 (talk) 18:37, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Agree*infinity! -203.218.216.63 (talk) 11:17, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Agreed 

Zainababrahams551 (talk) 15:49, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Ash Ketchum in Codename: Kids Next Door

I have added a sentence that shows ash was in operation archive, is it in the wrong place? should I put it somewhere else? signed by: Ferrariguy1000 (talk) 04:13, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Should Ash's Pokemon be listed?

I think that Ash's Pokemon should be listed since many people go to Wikipedia to see which Pokemon Ash has. The Pokemon that Ash doesn't currently have with him may not be needed, but I think that there is plenty of room for the Pokemon he at least has on hand. Since there's been much dispute about this I thought that it would be good to get the other's opinions instead of edit warring. --67.174.128.249 (talk) 21:41, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

First of all, thank you for posting this on the talk page instead of simply re-adding the Pokémon section. My belief is that Ash's Pokémon are just nonnotable and of limited interest. I am sure there are other fansites out there that display the Pokémon Ash has. And its not about how much room there is in the article (since there is a near infinite amount of space for as much text in an article as you need), but it is if that information is needed in the article, and I believe it is not. Artichoker (Discussion) 22:53, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
I'd have to say that listing every Pokemon that Ash has is taking up more space than necessary, but I guess that the Pokemon has with him would be notable, but I agree with Aritchoker that the entire collection is too much. So I think that only his active roster should be added.--71.115.66.40 (talk) 01:50, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
How would even the Pokémon he has with him be notable? It just seems to be excessive details to me, and of limited interest. Not only would this list change every couple of episodes, but what "good" information does the reader get from Ash Ketchum by knowing the Pokémon he currently has with him. Artichoker (Discussion) 02:05, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
You obviously don't watch Pokemon if you think that the list would change every few episodes. Ash can go an entire season and have only one Pokemon evolve the only time. Also he very rarely ever switches his Pokemon out since he always wants to start out on a fresh new journey. Besides Artichocker, you're the only person who ever deletes them while there are others who re-add what you've deleted, therefore I think that his active roster needs to be re-added.--71.115.66.40 (talk) 02:20, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
You still do not address how you think these Pokémon are notable. And as for your frivolous claim that I am the only one deleting the content, I would like to redirect your attention to the following links: [1] and [2]. I would like to see a stronger argument before you go changing the article. Artichoker (Discussion) 03:11, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I can somewhat see why having his current Pokémon makes sense, even though it's kind of crufty. But people keep adding back in everything he ever had anywhere and it's pretty clear there's consensus to keep that out. I'll remove that portion. Useight (talk) 03:14, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

There you have it, sounds like the majority rule is to simply list his active roster but leave out the Pokemon that Ash has with Professor Oak or has released or traded or whatever. Case closed so lets simply just leave it the way that I added onto the article.--71.115.66.40 (talk) 03:39, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

You still have not given me a valid argument as to why the Pokémon section should remain, therefore the case is not closed. Please give me a good reason. Artichoker (Discussion) 13:18, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Woah, no putting words in my mouth. I don't know about his current roster sticking around, but the previous rosters have got to go. Useight (talk) 15:50, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I did find "Remove material that may be of trivial or of only highly detailed interest to the general reader" at Wikipedia:Notability_(fiction)#Fictional_elements_as_part_of_a_larger_topic. Useight (talk) 15:55, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I do not know what you mean by "putting words" in your mouth, as my last response was directed at 71.115.66.40. I agree with you that the previous rosters have got to go, and I also believe that his current roster fits "Remove material that may be of trivial or of only highly detailed interest to the general reader." Artichoker (Discussion) 16:42, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, my comment regarding "putting words in my mouth" was directed at 71.115.66.40, not you. Useight (talk) 03:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Your argument is always, you haven't made an argument, yet is saying that one person hasn't made an argument an argument? No it is not, therefore I can use your only objection that, no argument has really been made against it, other than your opinion.--67.174.128.249 (talk) 00:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
That is not my main argument. My main argument has already been stated many times (it is nonnotable and of limited interest.) You however, have once again failed to provide any reasoning as to why the Pokémon section should be added back. You simply continue to revert it back. Since you are doing this without constructively contributing to this discussion, your addition of the Pokémon section again and again can only be considered vandalism and will be reverted. You can contest this by stating some actual reasons as to why you think it should be kept. Artichoker (Discussion) 00:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Artichoker the consensus was that the current roster stays, SO LEAVE IT ALONE, even if you don't like it a consensus IS THE MAJORITY! And MAJORITY WINS!--67.174.128.249 (talk) 03:28, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I'm getting tired of this warring back and forth on the article. I'm about ready to semi-protect it. You guys need to settle this on the talk page. Useight (talk) 03:43, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
I am trying to settle this on the talk page. 67.174.128.249, there was no consensus. I honestly don't know what you are talking about. However, you continually revert my edits and then place false warnings on my talk page, without contributing anything of value to this discussion. Useight, I agree with you semi-protecting this page. Artichoker (Discussion) 13:12, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Yea there was a consensus, when more people say it should be there than people say it shouldn't then it should be there, after all majority rules.--67.174.128.249 (talk) 23:26, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
No that is not a consensus, that is a vote, and we do not "vote" on Wikipedia. A consensus is an opinion reach by a group as a whole. Also, you probably don't even have the majority, it seems that only you and another person want the Pokemon section to be in. Please do not say things that are not true. Your arguements so far have consisted of "lots of people want the pokemon section added" and "your the only one reverting it". Not only are these statements mostly untrue, but they do not contribute to the discussion, and you still have yet to provide a reason. I have provided mine (it is nonnotable and of limited interest), yet you have given no rational reason as to why the section should remain. I am open to your opinions if you disagree with me, but not when they are unconstructive and give no real explanation. Artichoker (Discussion) 23:47, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Oh nice argument there, saying that ours is just an opinion and yet your argument is that it's nonnotable, which is your opinion, and of little interest, your opinion as well. Please seriously just give us a valid argument, and it's more than just the two of us that have edited it.--67.174.128.249 (talk) 00:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Sometimes it is just a little bit frustrating dealing with you. Yes, saying that it is nonnotable IS an opinion, I know. I have backed up my claims that the Pokemon section should be removed, you however, have not. You have yet to provide me with your reason as to why the section should stay. And please do not give me another one of those "because everyone wants it except you, Artichoker" things. That is both ignorant and invalid. Artichoker (Discussion) 00:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) Okay, here's what I get from gathering the information: Artichoker's reason for removing: it's a non-notable, trivial detail of little interest

IPs reason for re-adding: summed up by this edit

Editors who have added the information: Soccerguy1039 (who is dangerously close to getting blocked for 3RR), 67.174.128.249, 124.187.48.49, 72.49.71.43, 68.9.176.110

Editors who have removed the information: Artichoker, Wisdom89, WhisperToMe

Is this information correct? Useight (talk) 00:40, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, this information is dead on. Thank you. Now IPs, you can see that I was not that only one who reverted your edits, as you have claimed time and time again.
Also, I would revert Soccerguy1039 edit to the article, however, I am afraid that I would violate 3RR. Artichoker (Discussion) 00:43, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected

Okay, I have semi-protected the page for 5 days. You guys need to get a consensus on this matter. Have a straw-poll, quote policy, get some more opinions, something. Just figure this out here on the talk page, for the sake of the article. Useight (talk) 16:09, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I believe the page protection was necessary to prevent this edit warring. I will continue to discuss this rationally on the talk page as long as people have questions or suggestions. Artichoker (Discussion) 16:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Fully-protected

Useight has fully protected the article, so we can discuss the controversial content without edit warring. So let us calmly come to a consensus. What I DO NOT WANT, is for the edit wars to begin again immediately after the protection has expired. Let us instead discuss this and gather consensus. And thank you, Useight. I believe this protection was needed to prevent the warring. Artichoker (Discussion) 01:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I was bold and fully-protected the page so only admins can edit it, as per the policy at Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Content_disputes. My only other option was issuing several temporary blocks, and I ultimately decided that full protection was better since the warring would likely continue after the blocks ended, and being blocked doesn't give anybody a chance to discuss consensus. I have commented out the content that is currently disputed. It can still be seen by clicking "Edit this page" and scrolling down to that section, however it is not currently visible on the actual page. This dispute will be settled on this talk page, not on the article. Come to a consensus, as defined here, not a vote, not a majority, but actually look at policy and then determine what is best for the article. Useight (talk) 01:04, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

For an outside comment, let me explain how a dispute about notability is supposed to go. The side asserting that the information is notable is supposed to provide evidence that it is notable, and the opposing side is supposed to critique and challenge the evidence to make sure the evidence is valid. If the evidence proves to be valid, the information is inserted into the article. If no valid evidence can be presented, then it is not. The side asserting that the information is not notable has no responsibilities other than challenging the evidence presented by the opposition. Saying something is not notable is a negative assertion (as the statement contains not), and proving a negative is impossible. Therefore, asking them to prove it is not a valid request, and the burden of proof lies with the side making the positive assertion: the assertion that it is notable. Now, having an article fully protected is a fairly big deal. As a result I ask all participants to fall in line and fulfill their responsibilities in this dispute as quickly and efficiently as possible. For relevant links, see the notability policy and what constitutes a reliable source to establish notability. If you have any questions about a source, I assume that you can ask at WikiProject Pokemon where the participants in the project will be able to judge a Pokemon related source better than anyone else. If this hasn't been done already, I would also recommend alerting the aforementioned project to this dispute so this discussion can have more participants. Cheers, -The Hybrid- 01:18, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Well I also said it was trivial and of limited interest, and that is possible to prove. Artichoker (Discussion) 01:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Forgive me, but I don't see where your argument for that point is. Could you perhaps restate it? I will do my best to mediate this dispute. Cheers, -The Hybrid- 02:12, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
It is simply an always-changing list of what Pokemon Ash currently has in the anime. I don't believe the reader gets any valuable information about the character Ash Ketchum out of that. Artichoker (Discussion) 02:20, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, to state it's always changing is a bit of a stretch, but I see where you're coming from as it isn't set in stone by any means. However, the argument that it is not valuable information is the most important part of your statement, and ties back to the notability issue. Cheers, -The Hybrid- 02:27, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
So are you saying that my argument is not significant? (This is in no way accusatory, it is an honest question.) I mean I could say by "valuable" I meant that it was trivial, but wouldn't that tie back to my "limited interest" statement?
I guess what I'm saying is that it's trivial and of limited interest because it does not contribute enough to the article about the character Ash. I mean it tells what Pokemon he currently has: so what? Artichoker (Discussion) 02:38, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Your argument that it is trivial and of limited interest is a long way of saying the material is not encyclopedic. Whether or not material is encyclopedic is determined by its notability, or lack there of. You were making the same argument twice, but didn't realize it. At least, that's the way I see it. I'm open to being proven wrong; I may be taking your comments the wrong way. Cheers, -The Hybrid- 02:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes I see now, and agree that I was making the same argument twice. But was my initial argument about the section being trival lacking or completely wrong? Artichoker (Discussion) 02:54, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
You're saying that it isn't relevant to the article, ie it's trivial, because it provides no pertinent information about the character. You tied this argument to the fact that the information can change at any given time. This is a rather large stretch. The dynamic nature of the information doesn't relate to how relevant the information is. Your argument isn't wrong, though, as your main argument is that the information doesn't reveal anything about the character. This argument is correct, and it is a rather damning argument. You just tried to back it up incorrectly. Cheers, -The Hybrid- 03:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
However, there is an argument to be made that this in itself is information to be revealed about the character, so ultimately everything has to tie back to the notability issue. If notability can be established, the information should be inserted into the article, and if not, then it shouldn't be. Cheers, -The Hybrid- 03:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Well it fails WP:N in my book, for it is not supported by any sources. Also, it fails WP:NOT, for Wikipedia is not a directory and should not contain lists or repositories of loosely associated topics. Artichoker (Discussion) 12:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
What happened to the IPs that were repeatedly adding the information? This is their opportunity to provide evidence. Useight (talk) 15:29, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
I really hope they aren't just waiting around until the protection is lifted to start an edit war again. Artichoker (Discussion) 15:32, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
If they are, then there will be grounds to block them. -The Hybrid- 23:57, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Indeed. Useight (talk) 18:33, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, they've had more than enough time to formulate some kind of an argument. It is obvious that they have either given up, or are laying in wait to edit war again. Go ahead and unprotect the article; there's nothing left to do here. Useight, I'm going to go ahead and leave this to you. As a non-admin there's really nothing left for me to do here unless they decide to formulate an argument. Artichoker, Useight, it's been a pleasure. Cheers, The Hybrid 03:38, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree, those adding and re-adding the content had more than enough time to provide evidence of the notability of that list. Since no more seems to be coming from the full-protection, I have unprotected the article. Since no discussion was made, it appears to have defaulted to leaving the list of current Pokémon out of the article.
Do not re-add the current Pokémon list without further discussion on this talk page. Useight (talk) 05:29, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Unbelievable, you unprotect the article, and already the Pokémon section has been added. [3]. I guess I can give the IP a vandalism warning? Artichoker (talk) 12:33, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, judging by the IP's contributions, it would appear the IP was uninvolved in the edit warring. As such, this was probably a good faith insertion. Do remember, this is probably going to be reinserted ad nauseum by random users as they stumble across the article due to the nature of the information. I would ignore this particular edit for the time being. If they perform the edit again, I would leave a custom warning on the talk page, explaining the situation and pointing him/her to this discussion. Any future attempts to insert the info without a rational for notability provided would warrant a standard warning, IMO. Cheers, The Hybrid 13:38, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
It's been too long since I've been able to access Wikipedia. I can see that I've missed out on far too much discussion.
Firstly, I agree that the list of current Pokemon is unneeded. Great work on the person who decided to be bold and remove it in the first place. Secondly, to help prevent the list being readded, perhaps an inline note would be of use? MelicansMatkin (talk) 01:00, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
I have already added a hidden editor's note in the location where the text was repeatedly added. Useight (talk) 01:04, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Concept art found

I found some concept art on Ash Ketchum on this website. It has lots of other things like that about Pokémon on it too. StarBP (talk) 20:35, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Please see my comment here. Artichoker[talk] 21:06, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Would protection be needed?

I am willing to go to WP:RPP and NOT to have my protection request denied, which is why I want to ask others first? Should I go ahead and ask for protection? TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 20:57, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Although there has been some vandalism by a few users in the last couple of days, I don't think page protection is necessary yet. If the vandalism continues to this degree, then I would support such an action. Artichoker[talk] 21:01, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Ash's Father - Giovanni?

Not sure if this is accurate, but I distinctly remember on the commentary track for the DVD of Pokemon 3: The Movie, a reference made by a crew member that Giovanni was actually the father of Ash. If anyone can verify this, it would add much to the article, as I do not have access to the DVD myself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.172.177.197 (talk) 00:40, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

The only reference I remember of Ash's father was in the second episode of season 1. 128.135.73.21 (talk) 20:36, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
I don't see how Giovannni can be Ash's father. I think more likely Silver, even if he's not mentioned in the show and only in manga, there have been a few hints about it anyway, if you listen very, very carefully. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.188.37.208 (talk) 00:15, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
On the commentary track for the third movie they also mentioned that Ash's Noctowl was evolved from his HootHoot, so anything they say should really be taken with a grain of salt. Also, they did not say that Giovanni was Ash's father; they said that his father was due to make an appearance in the upcoming season. Since that also didn't happen, I think that can be discounted. MelicansMatkin (talk) 01:03, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't think Giovanni is Ash's father because he puts Team Rocket against him to steal Pikachu Zainababrahams551 (talk) 15:44, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Tom Ato

We must discuss Ash's cover name Tom Ato. If someone searches for it, they should at least be linked back to the Ash Ketchum page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PikachuSnowman (talk • contribs) 06:16, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. This was for one episode, I own several episodes on DVD and yet I see nowhere Ash using that name besides that one episode. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 23:05, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
People who are aware of Ash's nickname are probably able to remember his actual name when they're searching wikipediaComatmebro ~Come at me~ 05:15, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Brave kid

This is really getting boring, actually it already has. Is anyone else seriously sick of this unoriginal piece of vandalism? What can we do about this? Usually I don't mind reverting vandalism, but this is really getting boring. What can we do? TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 18:55, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protect is all I can suggest... TheChrisD Rants•Edits 07:35, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

"Red's Pikachu is the strongest Pokémon, levelwise, to have appeared in any Pokémon handheld game."

This is wrong. In Pokemon Platinum, Rival Battle 3, your rival has a Snorlax at level 83, Heracross at 82, and a Starter at 85.

http://serebii.net/platinum/rival.shtml —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.159.115.71 (talk) 21:34, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

And since when was Serebii a reliable source? Oh wait, it never was... If you can get the info in a proper published strategy guide then fine. Plus, your rival only ever gets such high level Pokémon after doing the Elite Four countless times. TheChrisD Rants•Edits 12:06, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Platinum is already out in Japan. A) Does it really matter if it takes that many times of beating the elite four to fight him at those levels? I don't see how it is relevant seeing as how it still proves the statement false. B) Since Platinum is already out in Japan, it would be extremely easy to prove this information correct. But, I don't have a Japanese copy of Platinum so I guess I'd have to rely on someone else to gather that information. Oh yeah, and you kind of sound like a jackass, no offense. Oh wait, nevermind, you can take total offense to that comment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.159.115.71 (talk) 23:58, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Relax. The information was correct for what, seven or eight years? It's just that nobody's changed the information in the article to reflect the recent release of Platinum. It's nothing to get worked up about. And true, Serebii.net isn't a reliable source, but the information is verifiable via every Platinum game sold thus far. I don't see any reason why the information can't be changed to read something like Red's Pikachu was the highest levelled Pokemon to appear in any Pokemon handheld game until the release of Pokemon Platinum. Problem solved. MelicansMatkin (talk) 03:21, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
I personally think it should be rephrased. People on places like Battle towers still count as NPCs in the handheld games. TheBlazikenMaster (talk) 03:33, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Why can't Serebii.net be a reliable source? I know that it is a fan site at the end of the day, but it does get information straight from Japan. When Diamond and Pearl first came out, they were the ones providing us with a full list of the new Pokemon and pictures as they were captured, other sites were basically copying over their pictures. If anything, its the most reliable site with the exception of the owners of Pokemon (and their site is in Japanese).Wild ste (talk) 20:40, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Serebii.net has been wrong many times before, and I don't think I need to list any of the more well-known examples. As for why it is not a reliable source, please see the criteria under WP:RS and take a gander at WP:FANSITE. MelicansMatkin (talk) 04:15, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Despite how old this is, I'd like to point out that Red's Pikachu once again became the strongest Trainer Pokémon from Heart-Gold and Soul-Silver. 

Empoleonmaster23 (talk) 22:52, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Cultural impact

I found something to throw in there. Apparently some kid on Kids Next Door dressed up as Ash, and they had that on the Spanish wiki for Ash. What do you think? --Blake (talk) 14:09, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think a mere screenshot is a reliable source. -sesuPRIME talk • contribs 19:36, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Ash Vs. Red

Now, maybe this has been brought up before, but why is it that this article seems to be blending the charatcer of Ash (of the anime) and Red (the game/manga character)? Were they both simply called "Satoshi" at one point? Even if that's the case, it seems that "Ash" is the rarer of the English names, so why isn't this article either split, or listed under "Red"? Din's Flame (talk) 22:53, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Ash in Gold/Silver?

Should we add this in there? The final boss in Gold/Silver is a trainer known as red, who has a pikachu, espeon, Charizard, Venusaur, Blastoise, and Snorlax. I think it should be in the video game appearances section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.85.242.97 (talk) 04:32, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

The trainer in question is Red, not Ash; granted, Ash is based on Red, but they are not the same character. MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 04:37, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Ash doesn't have an Espeon, Venusaur, or Blastiose. This is a silly assumption. This article does explain Red's role in the games, but it doesn't say everything a "Red" article would say, since this is about Ash. Blake (Talk·Edits) 21:46, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
Ash/Satoshi is an anime-exclusive character. He's based on Red from the games, which also has a namesake manga counterpart in Pokémon Adventures. Basically, manga Red and anime Ash/Satoshi are counterparts to game Red, which is the original character out of all three. 84.90.102.4 (talk) 19:19, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
What are you trying to say? That Red should have an article instead of Ash? Blake (Talk·Edits) 19:28, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Not really, at least I don't see that necessary. However, game Red needs his own article, while Ash and manga Red should be mentioned there as being his counterparts in their respective media. 84.90.102.4 (talk) 20:02, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Yes, that was how it was, however, Red and Blue, were no longer found to be notable, so their articles got redirected. Blake (Talk·Edits) 20:05, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
But they are notable. They're the game characters that have appeared in every generation so far and are also the inspiration of both Ash and Gary (anime), and Red and Blue (manga), respectively. 84.90.102.4 (talk) 20:09, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
That makes them notable "in-universe" but they need out of universe info. Stuff that says how they have impacted the real world. Blake (Talk·Edits) 20:17, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Pictures

Can we put more pictures beside the few Ash picture and the picture of the original voice actor? More pictures would be nice, such as Ash's clown costume from S1 Episode 64, his mother, Ash as a apple, etc. 24.44.119.71 (talk) 15:31, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

That's pretty much fancruft.Tintor2 (talk) 15:38, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

What's fancruft? Anyway, you can get pictures of Delia from Make Room for Gloom. Just download the episode, put in WMM, and when she appears take a picture. Ash as an apple comes from a episode of the Orange Islands. Ash's clown costume you can get the episode it's in (It's Mr. Mimie Time) and follow the instructions from two sentences ago. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.44.119.71 (talk) 15:56, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, we only show pictures for what is necessary. A picture of Ash's mom, or him in a clown suit, doesn't help the readers learn much about Ash's character. Blake (Talk·Edits) 16:07, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

If you want stuff like that there's always Bulbapedia, just saying... Danny2579 (talk) 07:55, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I think pictures of Ash's other pokemón should be added Zainababrahams551 (talk) 15:48, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Ash Ketchum's religion

"In the anime, Ash practices no religion. Ash has an existentialist and secular outlook on life; living in a godless and meaningless world, Ash gives his life meaning by aspiring to be a Pokémon master without any recourse to any type of supernatural faith. Because of this, Ash can eschew religious ceremonies such as going to Mass and receiving holy communion, and still retain a sense of purpose and meaning in life."

I posted that about Ash. It is indeed true so it belong in the article ~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.139.24.215 (talk) 21:36, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

It has nothing to do in the article without reliable sources. Religion is never explicitly dealt with in the anime, so we don't know if they practise any. Besides; "Ash Ketchum never farts or goes to the bathroom in the anime. As such, he is a symbol of purity and an unspoken protest against internet fart jokes." See what I did there? --77.215.75.103 (talk) 01:59, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
It's just not very encyclopedic to post every fact or possible fact about the subject.Comatmebro ~Come at me~ 20:27, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

List of all Pokémon captured

Should there be a list of all Pokémon Ash has ever captured with brief info of where they all currently are? 68.229.82.81 (talk) 22:04, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Mentioning notable ones like Pikachu is important (although the article seems to be lacking in any other than him), but having all of them would be way too crufty for what we're doing here. Supernerd11 Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 13:39, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Infobox needs foxing

Hi, I noticed that the character Infobox is huge and it's taking up a lot of space in the beginning of the article, can someone please fix it and make it it's normal size again. I would appreciate that. 2600:1000:B00A:3269:B516:A59:CA6A:9D9 (talk) 21:35, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

 Done Having the "nowrap" tags in there cause the longer lines to stretch the info box.

Pikachu and Ash

How does Ash meet Pikachu? Zainababrahams551 (talk) 15:42, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

In the very first episode of the anime, Ash wakes up late on the day he is to become a Pokémon trainer. All the other starter Pokémon are taken when he arrives, so Professer Oak gives him Pikachu.

Hope this helped. Empoleonmaster23 (talk) 22:46, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Ash's picture description

Hi. Could I perhaps change the 'seventeenth season' to 'the XY series' or 'Pokémon the series: XY?' Just because, people who don't watch english dubbed Pokémon might not know the numerous individual seasons of the english broadcast, as they are grouped by series. Punpunmon (talk) 23:28, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Outdated image

Whilst the Sun and Moon anime is technically not released in English, wouldn't it be more appropriate to have Ash's Sun and Moon design? Empoleonmaster23 (talk) 04:00, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, it would. Punpunmon (talk) 01:34, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Kayzie Rogers as Ash

From what I noticed, the source cited for Kayzie Rogers is a fan site. It probably got this information from Wikipedia itself, although the former is not user-edited like the latter. Homechallenge55 (talk) 02:36, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Ash Ketchum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:57, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 November 2017

Ash Ketchum's middle name is Lee making his full name "Ash Lee Ketchum" Coach dsmith (talk) 07:19, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Nihlus 07:22, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 December 2017

I wanna edit Ash Ketchum. ❝Thug Life❞ 172.58.3.80 (talk) 15:02, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Upsidedown Keyboard (talk) 15:40, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Picture

Can someone update the picture? The design is from XY series. The current is SM. 2600:1:F169:7451:E8A9:6428:5A84:49FF (talk) 00:58, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Not done: Vague requests to add, update, modify, or improve an image are generally not honored unless you can point to a specific image already uploaded to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons that you would like included on this article. Please note that any image used on any Wikipedia article must comply with the Wikipedia image use policy, particularly where copyright is concerned. Thanks, ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 18:23, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request

Please change the first appearance and first game in the infobox from "Pokémon, I Choose You!" and "Pokémon Puzzle League" to "Pokémon, I Choose You! (1997)" and "Pokémon Puzzle League (2000)", as the year is included in Pikachu's article. 185.165.241.95 (talk) 18:53, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

 Done ToThAc (talk) 17:46, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

New Pic

I've added the image of Ash from SM series, the only problem is the absense of Pikachu. If it's presense is a necessity, then leave a message ; ) Yash Sonbhurra (talk) 13:26, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Pokémon episode 1 screenshot.png

File:Pokémon episode 1 screenshot.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a non-free use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

-- Marchjuly (talk) 09:51, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Pokemonseason6DVDvol1.jpg

File:Pokemonseason6DVDvol1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a non-free use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

-- Marchjuly (talk) 09:52, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

"Ash`s pokemon" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Ash`s pokemon. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 15:25, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ash_Ketchum/Archive_2&oldid=1176033408"