This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pokémon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
Pokémon universe on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PokémonWikipedia:WikiProject PokémonTemplate:WikiProject PokémonPokémon articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
anime,
manga, and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anime and mangaWikipedia:WikiProject Anime and mangaTemplate:WikiProject Anime and mangaanime and manga articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles
This article was
copy edited by
Scapler, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 10 May 2010.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles
Presently, there are one too many unsourced categories here. "Pokémon anime characters", "Fictional clones", and "Super Smash Bros. fighters" are fine because the article does reference these bits. The rest seem to be here for the sake of it. Thoughts before I act?
Lord Sesshomaru (
talk •
edits)
00:42, 4 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Alrighty, going one by one:
Fictional monsters: it isn't one? Pokemon anime characters does cover human characters in the category as well, so that cat can't be included into the monster one.
Fictional characters who can fly, Fictional telepaths, Fictional characters with accelerated healing: covered in text body under characteristics.
Fictional hypnotists: not mentioned yet, but mind control is a theme applied to him in manga and anime versions of the character readily, so it seemed a good fit.
Fictional mutants: Getting rid of this one. Fictional genetically engineered characters works better, as it is genetically engineered (and oddly Fictional clones is not under it for some reason...)
Mewtwo is also the final boss in Pokemon Stadium (1, dunno about the PS2) - should this be noted somewhere? (i have the game, i cant cite any references right now but can upload pic's of the N64/fully cleared stadium&castle and a mewtwo who wants to fight.. later)
(
Divinity76 (
talk)
11:54, 22 October 2009 (UTC))reply
It's that idiot that keeps adding fake references to Charizard films that don't exist. Looks like it wasn't caught till now and just almost got snowballed in instead.--
Kung Fu Man (
talk)
08:45, 11 December 2008 (UTC)reply
They're fake as well. The guy that's been doing this has been for some time, with the edit summaries saying things like "Trey Parker" or "Matt Stone". None of the stuff he's adding exists.--
Kung Fu Man (
talk)
23:18, 11 December 2008 (UTC)reply
I saw the katakana spelling of mewtwos name and Im pretty sure it's not spelled right. Instead of a tsu theres a shi. Should I go ahead and fix it or just leave it as it is? —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
98.148.150.113 (
talk)
21:14, 30 December 2008 (UTC)reply
That's a bit confusing to me as well. I'd be up for adding it back if there aren't any objections, since the category shows to have the capacity for it (over a third of the characters aren't human).--
Kung Fu Man (
talk)
18:10, 31 December 2008 (UTC)reply
Yep. And another thing, I've been trying to find a reliable reference to support an inclusion of
Category:Fictional telepaths but can't seem to find one. I can't even decipher what technique he used to manipulate Nurse Joy in the first Pokémon movie. Was it hypnosis or mind control or something else? It's probably akin to what he did near the end of the movie. Thoughts?
Lord Sesshomaru (
talk •
edits)
18:35, 31 December 2008 (UTC)reply
Well the difference between the movies may be the problem there, they changed a *lot* in the US film. Brock's reaction in the US film to Mewtwo talking is "It's psychic!" while in Japanese he shouts "Telepathy!" As for Nurse Joy he simply states after freeing her he took her to take care of him, but that she wouldn't remember anything, then adding "Humans can be manipulated in any way with my power." So it seems to imply mind control over hypnosis.--
Kung Fu Man (
talk)
19:26, 31 December 2008 (UTC)reply
I agree. There'll be reception sections in the main SSBM and SSBB articles, and one review somewhere is bound to comment on it. Tezkag7222:10, 27 January 2009 (UTC)reply
I sort of hate how they removed him from the game too, I guess it was to try and get in more recent pokemon like Lucario. (Who I use as a main.)--
'''Blake''' (
talk)
01:36, 25 April 2009 (UTC)reply
B-Article
When did this happen? Mewtwo is defineatly not one of the best Pokémon articles. It is also missing alot of information, such as its big roles in the movies it stared in. Mewtwo still needs alot of work before it goes anywhere. --
Blake (
talk)
02:58, 4 June 2009 (UTC)reply
Ask the editor that did it. Also I undid your edits for a reason: still working on the article, just need it as it is to expand with minimal hassle.--
Kung Fu Man (
talk)
03:00, 4 June 2009 (UTC)reply
I did it. I think the article seems reasonably complete. More info is necessary for its roles in the films in "In other media", but otherwise, I don't really see why it shouldn't be listed as B-class. And it is definitely not in need of "urgent attention".
Tezkag72 (
talk)
03:26, 4 June 2009 (UTC)reply
Mewtwo is definitely the best Pokémon species article we have (even better than Pikachu). The appearances section does need to be expanded, but the article easily passes the B-class criteria and is close to GA status. Nice work (to whoever worked on it)! :) TheLeftorium13:31, 4 June 2009 (UTC)reply
neutrality of the article
When Evaluating Mewtwo's deeds, you should not forget what happened in
Mewtwo’s Origin and what he did in
Mewtwo Returns. Right now most of the description of Mewtwo's character is based on
Pokémon: The First Movie where he was highly coined by either what Giovanni taught him and his indeed immature desire to test out his powers. I think the article puts him in a worse light than justified. His role as some sort of nightly guardian of this unknown city that is hinted at at the end of Mewtwo Returns and the opening sequence of Jirachi Wishmaker should be considered as well. --
78.52.139.128 (
talk)
01:59, 10 June 2009 (UTC)reply
Also consider the differences between the Japanese version and the English dub: The plot in the dubbed English version contains a "fighting is wrong" moral and portrays Mewtwo as a cold heartless villain who just wants to take over Earth. It also contains anti-racism material. Meowth, agreeing with his clone, says, "Maybe if we started looking at what's the same instead of always looking at what's different, well who knows?" The Japanese version instead portrays Mewtwo as a confused being who cannot place himself among other living beings, so his stress of not being able to figure any of that out leads to his destruction of the labratory on New Island, Team Rocket's new base, and eventually, his plan to get revenge on the world to prove he should be alive. -
bulbapedia --
Mewtu (
talk)
23:09, 5 July 2009 (UTC)reply
That can be verified by sources, including one of the people behind the movie's translation stating they purposefully made Mewtwo more of a villain so he'd be recognized as such by kids in the US.
The anime and manga section is going to get a major overhaul, I've just been wanting to tackle the other articles on my list before coming back to this one.--
Kung Fu Man (
talk)
23:20, 5 July 2009 (UTC)reply
I'm not halting the review, but this article has been reassessed and delisted for no stability before. Its needs to be stable to get GA. I don't want to pass it for it to get delisted again. I'm waiting to see if it does change daily with reverts. I understand that noobs add silly things but it doesn't matter. No stability, No GA.
Ajpralston1 (
talk)
12:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)reply
The stability should be fine for GA (and even FA) standards to be completely honest. "Stability" refers more readily to ongoing edit wars over existing content, not the typical vandals. It's more a case where content drastically shifts (not to mention I don't think I've seen any GAR's over the past two years on the grounds of instability).--
Kung Fu Man (
talk)
12:18, 2 October 2009 (UTC)reply
Relax! I passed the quick fail. I agree that the content only really changes due to mindless vandalism, not so much over content or edit disagreement.
Ajpralston1 (
talk)
09:33, 3 October 2009 (UTC)reply
Good Articel Review
1. It is Well-written
(a) the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct.
(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. It is factually accurate and verifiable
(a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout.
(b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines.
(c) it contains no original research.
3. It is very Broad in its coverage
(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail
4. Written in a Neutral POV
(a) it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.
5. It is Stable with no ongoing edit wars
(a) it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
No edit wars at all. Any edit disputes are usually down to vandalism!
6. It is Illustrated by images if possible
(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content.
(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
I will put the review on hold until the few problems are addressed, once they are then it should pass. As you previously told me that you can't get to the internet regularly, I will leave it on hold for 10 days. If you need help with anything or don't agree with something I have wrote, please leave a message on my talk page.
Ajpralston1 (
talk)
13:17, 5 October 2009 (UTC)reply
As for 2a, all those sentences are cited in the main body of the article. If you referenced everything in the lead, it would be messy to look at, as well as to edit. This is why on many articles we have not referenced most of the lead. As for the images, people are funny about those. Some say they help demonstrate the topic, while others say they are unnecessary. Blake(
Talk·
Edits)13:22, 5 October 2009 (UTC)reply
(edit conflict) The statements in the lead are actually sourced further in the article:
WP:LEAD actually pushes against redundant sourcing in a case like this in the lead. As for the image, there wasn't much I could add that would be fair-use compliant, and the only one that featured Dr. Fuji alongside Mewtwo was very poor quality. I've run into issues before where images in character articles don't really add anything to the article in
Necrid's FAC's, and a push that if none do to just use the infobox. Is this sufficient?--
Kung Fu Man (
talk)
13:25, 5 October 2009 (UTC)reply
I will pass the article. Just one small tip:
- Try and add another image if possible. It will make the article look better.
Overall though it is a well written article with no grammar or spelling errors. It read well and the layout is good. The sourced information from the lead which is further along in the article is fine. Nice one!
Ajpralston1 (
talk)
14:01, 5 October 2009 (UTC)reply
No need for sarcasm. It was just a suggestion. Images DO make articles look better and more appealing, thus are more likely to be read thoroughly.
Ajpralston1 (
talk)
20:11, 6 October 2009 (UTC)reply
I wasn't using sarcasm, so sorry if it came across like I did. What I said was correct, though. Non-free images should never be used to make an article look more appealing. Theleftorium20:20, 6 October 2009 (UTC)reply
No more fair-use images
I suggest ignoring the dubious advice from the GA reviewer, the current picture is illustration enough and a second fair-use image is hard to argue.
Hekerui (
talk)
14:44, 5 October 2009 (UTC)reply
A-Class assessment
Wow. For someone who doesn't know a thing about Pokemon it was actually very informative. I was a bit leery of possible weasel words/phrases when I started reading, but thankfully a total Pokenoob like myself understood what I set out to understand. The article is well sourced, they're all reliable, and it's well written. If I had to pick two problems I'd say
The lead technically doesn't need the first reference as it's cited elsewhere, but following the spirit of the rule it's perfectly fine there, as it supports ref #2.
MewTwo's image could probably use alt text. If I recall that's required now.
I think something's missing here.. well, it may be that it was cut in the american show, however, in German TV, Mewtwo's Escape from Giovanni's lab was shown in the series (don't know if it was the first or the second time, Ash and Co. arrives in Vertania City). So even if it was not known at that point (long before the premier of the first movie), it IS the first appereance Mewtwo made.
--
78.94.227.91 (
talk)
19:34, 19 June 2010 (UTC)reply
I added the image at right to the article to support the cited text in the article about the plane: "Mewtwo also appears on the port side of
All Nippon Airways's Pocket Monsters
Boeing 747 jumbo jet, alongside Mew.[1][2]"
References
^Spicer, Stuart (2001). Dream Schemes II: Exotic Airliner Art. Zenith Imprint. p. 21.
ISBN0-760-31196-X.
^Staff.
"Design" (in Japanese). All Nippon Airways. Retrieved 2009-05-13.
It was
reverted as there was 'no need'. Per
WP:BRD, I'm beginning a discussion. I feel that as this is not a
fair use image, the non-free criterion of 'significant understanding' (which I interpret 'no need' as referring to) does not apply. I feel this free image supports the text in the article and should be included. --
Malkinann (
talk)
00:58, 1 August 2010 (UTC)reply
It adds nothing to the article though, not to mention that Mewtwo is barely visible on it. What makes this bit of advertising any more significant than any other in that it requires it's own picture? Nothing at all.--
Kung Fu Man (
talk)
01:28, 1 August 2010 (UTC)reply
It
adds visual interest to the reception section and is an appropriate illustration of Mewtwo's reception, supporting the text in the article about the plane. Given that the plane has been noted by not only the airline but a third party source, it is more significant than other advertising of Mewtwo. Perhaps more direction is needed in the caption to point out Mewtwo, but that is not a reason to not include this image in the article. --
Malkinann (
talk)
01:37, 1 August 2010 (UTC)reply
Hey Guys! Mewtwo looks like Giygas!
Alright, so I was doing a Google search, and I realized that Giygas, as he appered in Mother, looks very much like Mewtwo. should I put this into the relevant articles?
Bonelayer12864 (
talk)
01:46, 9 December 2010 (UTC)reply
That would not be enough since it would still be our own personal interpretation. The only way that could be added is if reliable sources have commented on the similarities between the two characters or the person who designed Mewtwo explicitly stated that he based the design on Giygas, in which case it would be added to the Design and characteristics section.--
76.66.180.54 (
talk)
02:33, 16 January 2011 (UTC)reply
New look?
Just saw somewhere they'll be doing something with Mewtwo in the next gen of the series. Not sure how reliable it is but here's a link to a photo that I saw. [1]— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Matt723star (
talk •
contribs)
23:16, 6 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Omg! So is this information relevant enough to be added somewhere on this page or do you think there should be a page separately created for the new Pokemon? --
Matt723star (
talk)
17:12, 7 April 2013 (UTC)reply
I'd wait until more information comes to make an article for it. Its currently nameless and type-less so there is not enough information on it...
Mrmoustache14 (
talk)
22:35, 7 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Thanks for adding it. Though I think it was more based on Red and Green/Blue than FireRed and LeafGreen, but I guess it technically is both, seeing that they use the FR & LG design for Red and FR & LG is basically Red and Green version remakes anyway. Either way, thanks for adding it. Also, it seems Mewtwo's personality, as I said before, seems more like he was in the games, being savage and aggressive.
152.27.20.9 (
talk)
18:44, 7 October 2013 (UTC)reply
Yes, because FRLG is a remake of RGBY, if you say "based off FRLG", you are basically saying "based off FRLG AND RGBY". However, saying both is sort of redundant :) Blake(
Talk·
Edits)19:22, 7 October 2013 (UTC)reply
In Pokémon X and Y, Mewtwo holding a Mewtwonite X or a Mewtwonite Y can have higher base stats total than Arceus.
http://www.serebii.net/pokedex-xy/150.shtml#mega Would it not be important to mention it?
What reasoning is there that nonphysical messages embedded in a forum post cannot be considered a source even when the material has clearly irrefutable information? How else can I provide this evidence, then?
68.198.70.54 (
talk)
19:40, 13 November 2014 (UTC)reply
I have just modified one external link on
Mewtwo. 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: 5 June 2024).
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.
I have just modified 3 external links on
Mewtwo. 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: 5 June 2024).
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.
I have just modified one external link on
Mewtwo. 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: 5 June 2024).
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.
I have just modified one external link on
Mewtwo. 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: 5 June 2024).
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.
Hello. I read the following phrase:
It was also said to be under a truck in one of the cities, though it had ended up as a trick.[25]
Apparently, someone just get a misconception of the reference. The link there (which actually doesn't give any explicit text about the phrase) just redirects to The Pokémon Company marketing site about a brief description of Mewtwo. Moreover,
that reference points our to the suppoused glitch about Mew, a
hoax that widespread during the localization of Red/Blue in America and Europe. So, I propose to remove that part and add it in
Mew article instead. Thanks. --«[Gtr.]»Errol 06:09, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Only One Scientist
I made an edit regarding the fact that in the main series games, Mewtwo was created by a lone scientist and not a team of researchers, as evidenced by Pokédex entries from Red/Blue, LeafGreen, X, and Shield as well as the fact the Pokémon Mansion Journals use singular pronouns in Japanese with the plurals being added in localization. Someone has undone this edit. I feel that my edit should be restored as it shows in important difference in the canon of the games compared to the anime and similar adaptations which present Mewtwo as created by a team of researchers. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?
MewtwoRBGY (
talk)
22:43, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I feel the sentiments of the reverter are shared by me here. The information isn't really too relevant and a minor detail of Mewtwo's backstory overall, and the information itself needs a reliable source (Which Tumblr is not). Given the fact in-game sources have said multiple things, it might be a decent idea to say something along the lines of "a scientist or a group of scientists" but again, it needs a reliable source discussing this difference in scientist number.
Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (
talk)
22:50, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I have additional sources that confer with the fact that the original Japanese indicates only one scientist such as
this,
TheGamer, and
Bulbapedia. It is a minor detail, but I feel like it is important to note if only for the fact to point out the differences between the games and anime, especially since the anime's backstory for Mewtwo seems to be the only one ever considered. I think the fact that Mewtwo was created by a rogue scientist instead of a group as most adaptations show is notable detail even if only for the fact to show the differences between the canons.
MewtwoRBGY (
talk)
23:18, 19 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I was thinking that it would be a good idea to put pictures of Mega Mewtwo X and Y in the Appearances section since they do appear somewhat frequently in various games and it would just be nice to show them in the article itself. I am wondering if anyone has any objections to this or if you also think it would be a good idea.
MewtwoRBGY (
talk)
17:45, 26 May 2024 (UTC)reply