Pokémon Omega Ruby and Alpha Sapphire are coming this November!
Check BNN and Bulbanews for up-to-date Pokémon news and discuss it on the forums or in our IRC channel.
The Bulbapedia mobile skin is currently in open alpha. If you run into any issues using the skin, please report them on the forums.

Talk:Eon duo

From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search

Fanon

Lati@s is a popular fanon term
Fanon is an unconfirmed belief held by fans of a series.
How can such a term be fanon? - Jshadias 04:32, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

>Erm, because the game never revers to them as Lati@s? That's what I assumed, anyways. It's a name made for them by the fans. - Zeta - unsigned comment from Zeta (talkcontribs)

If it's a term made up by fans, how is it an "unconfirmed belief"? - Jshadias 05:15, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

>My point is that it's a fan creation, something that is usually associated fanon. And I guess you could say that it's "unconfirmed" because it's not official terminology. I don't know how you'd define it as a belief though. - Zeta - unsigned comment from Zeta (talkcontribs)

Move

I agree with SnorlaxMoster. Move it to Eon duo, its more formal and looks better than Lati@s. Anyone agree? Disagree? Opinions? ~たかはりい 09:36, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I prefer something like "Legendary eons" really. I never really liked using trio, etc. for the legendaries. tc²₆tc26 10:30, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
"Legendary eons" just sounds weird; they're not "eons", they're the eon Pokémon. In some cases I agree that Trio, Duo, etc. don't work too well (such as with the Musketeer Trio/Quartet), but in this case I think Eon Duo would be an appropriate page title. Lati@s ought to just be a trivia note. --AndyPKMN (talk) 11:54, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Considering the general gist is that almost all "titles" we stick the legendaries under are fanon, Lati@s is highly appropriate. The fact it doesn't look nice or symmetrical with the rest should not be a factor, simple because these names are what people call them on a daily basis. No one calls them the "legendary eons", and "Eon duo" is grossly less used than Lati@s (1,600 google returns vs 7,000,000+). They are Lati@s to the fandom. I do not approve of a move simply to sate a more "official look". Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 12:39, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

The Legendary duo page lists them as the Eon Duo. And by your logic, why do we use Legendary Beasts (~2,800,000 Google results) when Legendary Dogs has far more results (~12,000,000). We've moved these sorts of pages based on what makes more sense before (such as with the horribly named "Raijin Trio") and I don't see why we couldn't do so here as well. --AndyPKMN (talk) 17:29, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Actually, Legendary Dogs has 172,000 return hits and Legendary Beasts has 240,000 hits on Google (Beasts win). Quotation marks = more accurate searches. The Kami trio was also in its infancy (hell, I was there), and any of the terms flying around were in short use so we could basically do what we wanted; same goes for the Taos/Musketeers. But going to change terminology that's been in play since, what 2004? Seven years? That's like renaming Smogon's tier system. And "Lati@s" is no footnote or trivia bit, either. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 18:56, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
My bad; can't believe I forgot quotation marks. Nonetheless, I think Eon duo would be a better name for the page, and I do think that professionalism should take priority over popularity in a case like this. But obviously I'm in the minority, and I'm willing to accept that. --AndyPKMN (talk) 20:02, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
"Lati@s" is just as professional and encyclopedic as "Eon duo" by all technical accounts, given how both are not official terms in the slightest. Just because one has an @ symbol and isn't as uniform next to the other legendary blanket terms we (as a fandom) allotted doesn't mean we should change it, otherwise we'd say "screw canon" and change Lake Guardians back to "lake/pixie/whathaveyou trio" to command uniformity. Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 20:45, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Eon Duo sounds a lot better than Lati@s, How do you even say "Lati@s" Truthseeker4449 21:57, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
I have to agree with Truth Seeker on pronounciation; how do you even say that? Anyway, I have to vote to keep it where it is, because even with a redirect it would be more considerate towards the Pokémon fanbase in general to use Lati@s, because people are familiar with it. I think it would help Bulbapedia's popularity/hits/PageRank/whatever people rate websites with nowadays in regards to search engine data, cleanliness, and basically because it's the one used most. Why move the entire page just because of a silly little "@" sign that we see in our e-mail programs every day? AlexTheRose 22:01, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
"Latias and Latios" got 1,040,000 results on Google, while "Lati@s" got 14,600,000 results. Unless I can't read right, "Lati@s" wins. Truthseeker4449 21:43, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Neither is an official name, so it's not like we're forgoing an official name for the "more common" one (that's silly). I figure we should leave it where it is... we could always make a redirect for "Eon duo", even though i know no one who calls them that. --ZestyCactus 21:51, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
I have always called them either the Eon Duo or just Latias and/or Latios. Execpt here, I have never called them "Lati@s" --Truthseeker4449 22:25, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
To me, Lati@s means "Latias and/or Latios", while eon duo means "Latias and Latios". This is how I have always seen the terms used as well. Ignoring the fact that Lati@s is essentially a contraction and therefore informal, it is much more logical to name them consistently with all of the other legendary groups. Eon duo is much more common when discussing Latios and Latias in comparison to other legendary groups. It is very rare, as well as strange, to find someone talk about "The Lunar duo and Lati@s". Lati@s is generally used for discussing the pair competitively, since "and/or" is generally what is desired here. --SnorlaxMonster 02:36, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Lati@s is the stupidest thing I've ever read, pardon my French. I agree fully with SM's points, and I don't believe that fan terms should gain such purchase as exists here. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 07:39, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Stepping in to point out that Lati@s is as much a fan term as is "Eon duo" and still used much more extensively, so yeah, you're rooting for one fan term over another. (I also don't like the idea of us deciding to change popular terminology to more uniform terminology just because it simply is more uniform. As much as we can control what future groups are termed, I don't think we should even remotely try to bend older terms to our authority.) Luna Tiger * the Arc Toraph 12:30, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
And I would like to mention that the first time I was looking for this page, I searched for Eon Duo, not Lati@s. I would also like to say that Eon Duo looks alot more professernel than Lati@s. Truthseeker4449 12:47, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for all the suggestions, it has been moved to "Eon duo". Have a nice day everyone. ♫♪ エイディニズ ♪♫ 05:00, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Worth noting Mega forms??

since knowledge+access to the lati's mega stones is now widespred (thanks to action replay codes), i think its time that we pull our heads out of the ground and aknowledge the existance of their mega evolutions(with notes stating they havent been reveald officially by Nintendo yet) i've done minor modifications of latios+latias's article intro text and worked out their bst. --The Truth aka Relicant 21:46, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

hey, who remembers that time when instead of creating articles for pokemon like Genesect, who were at the time only obtainable via ar codes but were widely known about, we instead swept them under the rug and pretended they didnt exist?
^ this is pretty much the vibe i'm gettin g from the fact that the main article for the eon duo was protected but nobody bothered to answer here with a good reason why.--The Truth aka Relicant 23:30, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Sorry Relicant, Mega Eon duo has not revealed by Nintendo yet, we have to wait as soon as possible as we don't want to cheat/hack. --Cinday123 (Talk) 23:47, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Darkrai, Shaymin, Arceus, Keldeo, Meloetta and Genesect all had articles up at a time where the only way to obtain them was by hacking/cheating or, in the case of Darkrai and Shaymin, glitches. We have enough proof that Mega Latias and Mega Latios are real, there's several videos of people using said megas on youtube. so no 123, we dont need to wait for Nintendo to reveal them. --The Truth aka Relicant 23:52, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
So the Mega Eon duo are real Relicant and are revealed without Nintendo? --Cinday123 (Talk) 23:56, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
feast your eyes: [1]
vid of the mega eons. Still i dont want to updtr Latias' and Latios' articles with the fact they have hidden megas becaus e the admins would get mad.--The Truth aka Relicant 00:01, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
So these Mega Evolutions of the Eon duo are hidden right? --Cinday123 (Talk) 00:08, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
At the moment, the only way of obtaining the Mega eon duo stones is with action replay. so yes. According to a later post by the uploader, the Mega Lati's Mega Stones cannot be traded, which may or may not be a byproduc t of not being generated legitimately (aka they didnt come from an event). --The Truth aka Relicant 00:13, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Did the people that uploaded those videos hacked/used a cheatcodes themselves? No. They all got it from one source. And as you know, one source is not enough. It's not the number of video evidence that we're taking into account, we're taking into account 'where they got these from, and right know, I'm going to assume they all got it from the same source and did not cheat/hack the games themselves to find out.--ForceFire 03:31, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

(resetting indent) Honestly, the way I see it, with Diancie actually being revealed, it's only a matter of time until CoroCoro or another official source puts out info on these (along with those other two legends), but until then, these topics really have to stop popping up. People are way too impatient on this front. Schiffy (瀬藤健二) (Talk Contribs) 03:38,2/22/2014 (UTC)

As the one who blocked the page, I did actually write a response but it did not send through, my apologies. See Force Fire's message below though. Pretty much though until we can personally get them into the games ourselves, it won't be happening. We don't all want another Mew under the truck scenario. --Spriteit (talk) 05:21, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
the guy in the vid mentioned he used a powersave to obtain the eon's mega stones. people have been using powersaves to obtain the mega stones.
and what is with this stupidly hypocritical "wait for official reveal" nonsense, may i add? we had articles for Arceus at a time where we weren't even sure it was in the games code(and then ar codes happend)! if adding info about the mega eon duo and creatin (prelimenary) pages for Hoopa and Volcanion is being impatient, then what makes whomever created arrticles for Darkrai, Shaymin, Arceus, Keldeo, Meloetta and Genesect long before their official reveal? the mega eon duo is not a Mew under the truck, we have concrete evidence it exists. time for all of you to pull your heads out of the ground. --The Truth aka Relicant 08:54, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
That was then. This is now. I don't actually know the circumstance behind the creations of those page, but times are different and the staff was different from then and thus decisions from those time will not affect our decisions in the future. --ForceFire 09:03, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
I haven't actually seen a staff member say "wait for official reveal" anywhere. I'm pretty sure we can add information of them as soon as a reliable Bulbapedian is able obtain them.--Den Zen 09:21, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
I agree with you here, Dennou. If any reliable Bulbapedians are reading this, please order a powersave, give these guys the proof they need, and let's end this pointless argument once and for all. --BigBadBatter (talk) 21:18, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
At this point plenty of people have access to the Lati Mega Stones (not BP staff that I know of, but plenty of trustworthy people). I am completely confident that they exist (in fact, I even know that Latiasite is index 684 and Latiosite is index 685). I am not entirely sure what we are waiting on. --SnorlaxMonster 03:01, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
The Mega articles have info about the Mega eon duo. only thing to do is add info to the eon duo page and both of the lati twin's respective articles. i cant do it because all three were locked. --The Truth aka Relicant 10:44, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Should we ask a Staff member for permission to edit the other pages?--BigBadBatter (talk) 22:46, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

could a staff member perhaps unlock pages relating to the eon duo? --The Truth aka Relicant 19:34, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Talk:Eon_duo
bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net
crawl=CC-MAIN-2014-41
43436
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:EFONBJQCCD5JDEA55EY32LR5XJQL6LOB
<urn:uuid:bbd4c25b-a4b9-44c8-b1bf-b62d1a2b8054>
2014-09-21T14:30:14Z
23.23.255.15
sha1:EZUYOOWX6QV3OBBBO6EZU3GXGHTPVQYX
<urn:uuid:7362ab4d-b818-44cc-a9fc-fd5bad46d78f>
http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Talk:Eon_duo
response
<urn:uuid:2fd85eec-31d8-4435-ac95-5de406ebf1e4>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-234-18-248.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2014-41
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web with URLs provided by Blekko for September 2014
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf