Card Trivia talk:Fenghuang

This is the talk page for discussing the page, Card Trivia:Fenghuang.

This page is for discussing how to improve the page.
- For general discussion and comments, use the general discussion forum.
- To ask about rulings or how cards work, use the ruling queries forum.
- To get help with building a Deck, use the Deck help forum.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~).
Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.

Please try to

Pokemon fanboys: Read this first (although I'm sure you won't)[edit]

STOP adding Ho-Oh trivia to this page. They are NOT related in any way. Houoh's name is NOT similar to Ho-Oh's - it is similar to Houou, the Japanese name of the mythological Chinese beast that both are based off of. Ignorant people who see Ho-Oh and then see Houoh and think they've discovered something groundbreaking are wrong. Stop. Adding. It. If you have an intelligent argument for why the trivia is at all relevant, say it here.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 01:58, July 15, 2011 (UTC)

Well, a small blurb along the lines of "Ho-oh from the Pokemon franchise is based off the same mythological creature, explaining the resemblence both in name and design." is 1.) Relatively accurate, 2.) pretty much harmless, and 3.) could potentially reduce the impulse of people making additional edits to the page on the matter. 75.49.10.155 (talk) 02:26, July 15, 2011 (UTC)

Why are we adding a blurb about something completely unrelated to Yu-Gi-Oh! that happens to have the same origin as this card? They look the same as what a Fenghuang is actually depicted as. This card does not resemble Ho-Oh, they both resemble Fenghuang, and the trivia for that creature has already been added to the page. If we add Ho-Oh for some idiotic reason, then I don't see why we don't add a small blurb for every other thing that is based off of a Houou, too. And trust me, there are a lot. We're only having this discussion because 10 year olds think there's some value in similarities like this. Next, we'll be adding that random Tiger cards are based off of Simba from Lion King.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 02:30, July 15, 2011 (UTC)

Okay, by the same token why do we say Crystal Beast Ruby Carbuncle resembles Espeon? Why is there a random blurb on Galaxy-Eyes about his chest resembling the Color Timer in Ultraman? The triva pages are riddled with things like this, and not having the blurb will end up with edit wars of that sort every time somebody who's played Pokemon visits that page and finds that absent. It's not important to me; I'm just trying to reduce potential headaches down the road. 75.49.10.155 (talk) 02:36, July 15, 2011 (UTC)

The difference is that Espeon is not an existing creature that is directly taken from mythology. Like I said, saying that Ho-Oh resembles Houoh is like saying Simba resembles, IDK, All-Seeing Tiger, despite the fact that they both are just tigers. Espeon is a creature created by Pokemon, and that card legitimately resembles it. The Ultraman trivia is similar, I'm sure, but I'm not familiar with it. And my stance is just that this place is already full of worthless "trivia" like "lololsnipehunterseffectissimilartodarkarmeddragon." Worthless similarities based solely on the fact that the associated material is popular shouldn't be added, especially when they have 0 basis.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 02:45, July 15, 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. You've convinced me of the distinction. However, I do believe this will continue to be a area that people will repetitively attempt to edit unless some blurb is here. 75.49.10.155 (talk) 02:57, July 15, 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that's probably true.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 02:58, July 15, 2011 (UTC)

I actually tacked on 'Incidentally, the Pokemon, Ho-Oh, is based on the Fenghuang as well.' when I added the bit about the Fenghuang, because I knew that if I didn't do it, an edit war would break out, involving a lot of frustration and randoms with questionable language skills. In fact, I've seen people on another message board seriously try to argue that this card is based on the Pokemon before I edited this page. Ruri-ruri Mode (talk • contribs) 06:17, August 3, 2011 (UTC)

Simba is a lion, not a tiger. That's why the movie is titled The Lion King. Just thought I'd toss that in for discussion.

1) That doesn't add to the discussion. 2) No one cares.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 22:33, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

But it corrupts your credibility, and by extension any further arguments you have. Also you aren't being very polite with your second point; I'm sure the fine people at the LION King wikia would disagree with you.

It corrupts my credibility because I couldn't care less about the difference between a tiger and a lion? In case you didn't realise, this isn't Lion King Wiki, and no one could care less about you pointing that out here. Hence why, no one has, for the past month and a half. As for credibility, things that do genuinely diminish it include being an anon and not being bothered to create a username on the Wiki in which you're being a smartass on, but hey, you wouldn't be a smartass if you had a name, right? Other things include reviving a month and a half old discussion with meaningless drivel, probably because you are a fanboy and don't like what I have to say (this isn't the Pokemon Wiki either). Finally, not bothering to follow clear instructions by signing your posts, which is at the top of every edit you make. So, I'll take my chances with my "corrupted credibility", thanks.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 22:57, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

Realize is spelled with a "z." After that I stopped reading because I don't feel like trying to decipher your loose understanding of the English language.

It's called British English. Also, well done on misspelling spelt. I'll leave you in your ignorance-induced shame.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 23:09, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

That one is actually either spelling. Sorry you missed that tossser. I guess you were too busy focusing on the fact that your government has no basis for human rights documented anywhere, and could easily flail into a benevolent dictator-esque social take over. Blimey!

Awwww. I love it when people like you are owned so hard that you have to resort to points that have nothing to do with anything. By the way, it's tosser, not tossser, and since we're being stereotypical, you're fat, because anons usually are. If you're American, that's a double whammy! Oh, and the entire world hates you. Wonder why.--YamiWheeler (talk • contribs) 23:19, September 17, 2011 (UTC)

Just get over with it, unsigned user, Wheeler and Delta Neos are European and they want to spell that way, so let them. Your respond, the unsigned user, is making yourself pretty much stupid and lowlife, therefore halt your comment and be HELPFUL to us by IMPROVING the site, not de-rated it. --F r e d C a t 16:19, January 3, 2012 (UTC)

You lost me on "Your respond, the unsigned user, is making yourself..." —This unsigned comment was made by 68.13.150.134 (talk • contribs) 14:01, February 9, 2012

Well, my grammar was not that great back then and still right now. YamiWheeler is still correct; It's British English, let their spell that way alone, ok? --F r e d C a t 14:13, February 9, 2012 (UTC)