Talk:Tailpasaran

I don't see why "Dexivines" are part of this article. They look similar to Tailpasarans, but the similarities end there. They don't behave like Tailparasans at all. Jimbo Jambo 20:28, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree 100%, by the way. 20:47, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree 100%, by the way. 20:47, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Aha. Makin' sure this hasn't been discussed before. Jimbo Jambo 20:51, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok, well the situation first came about as a result of this edit over 2 years ago, claiming that they are Tailpasaran. To try and rectify this (without being too radical) I changed that section to indicate that they were not the same, only similar. Admittedly (as JJ points out) the similarity starts and ends with their shape...
 * The real problem with this enemy is that it doesn't have an official name, since they don't appear in the Nintendo Gallery in-game. Having said that, I think we're all in agreement that it's not a Tailpasaran. However, I don't think that we can justify moving to "Dexivine", as it's just a fan-created name. I'd actually suggest, since they're far more similar (hence it being the source of their unofficial name!)  21:35, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * But they are their own enemy, even if they don't have a name. Don't you have a conjectural title template or something? Jimbo Jambo 22:30, 20 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Surprisingly not, although it seems crazy that we don't now that you mention it! But yes, if it was moved to Dexivine with a notice about the unofficial name, I'd have no problem with that. 20:09, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually a bit surprised this never went anywhere. The tag was removed last August without any reasoning. If there are no actual disagreements then I'll go ahead and make the page with a fan name warning header to go along with it. Jimbo Jambo 19:23, 13 January 2010 (UTC)


 * It should've been its own article anyway, as they barely even resemble Tailparasans, outside of the "hand-like" head. 04:23, 14 January 2010 (UTC)