Meta-PokéBase Q&A
2 votes

First, I have not seen any reliable Pokemon location guides on the Internet in my 4 years of searching for one. I have tried using veekun, Bulbapedia, and Serebii and found problems in all of them. So I think every Pokemon player on the Internet should be allowed to question any Pokemon location guide, especially on a Pokemon QA. I already asked this question, and I think Pokemaster's response was this.

I don't think any of the locations are "wrong" exactly, just missing. Where we have a location it is correct as far as I know. So if there is a location listed there you already have your answer. If it's missing then it would be OK to ask a question about it. Or if the only location is extremely rare there is no problem asking a question such as "is there an easier way to catch Mareanie?"
commented May 11, 2018 by Pokemaster

I saw at least 2 problems with this response, and this is why I'm posting this suggestion again.

I don't think any of the locations are "wrong" exactly, just missing. Where we have a location it is correct as far as I know.

These 2 sentences are wrong. Pokemon DB has a bunch of locations that are "there but should be missing" or "false positives", such as Goldeen on Route 202 in Platinum. (there's no water on that route) The Taco person also found a bunch of problems with encounter chances and levels.

So if there is a location listed there you already have your answer.

Even if those other 2 sentences were right, this one would still be wrong. For example, if I tried to look up Hoothoot's Platinum locations, I see that some locations are already listed, namely Route 205, 210, Eterna Forest, Great Marsh. However, this isn't the COMPLETE answer because Hoothoot is also on Route 211.


1 Answer

2 votes

OK you make some fair points, our location guide does have a fair few inaccuracies. However, if you consider it from the point of view of someone asking the questions, I think most of my previous answers/comments still stand. The point is for people not to ask "where do I find X" without even looking at our guide in the first place.

For example, you want to know where to find Goldeen in Platinum. First you'd look it up in our Pokedex and see the locations. You'd open up your game and find which is the nearest location. 90% of the time you'll go to a location that has Goldeen. But if you pick Route 202 and find there's no water there, then you'd most likely go and pick another location and find Goldeen there.

If you tried several locations and couldn't find any, then it would be fine to ask a question here, to get complete clarification.

Same applies to your Hoothoot example. If you looked up the location here, although it's missing Route 211 there are still several valid locations. So I don't see why you would need to ask a question here.

I think I explained other examples in the previous thread. If an encounter is rare, it's fine to ask if there is an easier way or additional methods. There is a subtle difference in the way questions are asked though. For example:

  • "Where do I get Chikorita?" -- seems to indicate they haven't looked at our guide to find the answer.
  • "If I didn't pick Chikorita as my starter, is there another way to get it?" -- shows they're aware of one method but want to know if it's still possible to get it elsewhere.

I guess you could say it boils down to whether or not they put the minimal effort into finding an answer.

Hope that makes it clearer.

You think people should ask questions on Pokebase if they tried looking it up on Pokemon DB and aren't satisfied with what they find there. Is that right? If yes, can you change the rule to say that?

Also why do you get to decide that other people don't need information if you don't know what they use their information for? I remember deciding to EV train at Route 211 because it was easy to find many HP-yielding Pokemon (including Hoothoot) at just the right level and all weak to my Machop's attacks. If I was using Pokemon DB, then my training might have taken 30 minutes longer.

Also also, can you at least look at this?