Lucario (anime)

K

Kuki

YAAAAAAHHHHH
Joined
Oct 12, 2008
Messages
209
Reaction score
0
Many notable movie Pokémon aren't owned by anyone, so we give them the (anime) disambiguation tag. However, Movie 8's Lucario was owned by Sir Aaron, and always believed he was, even in the afterlife. Should this article be moved to Sir Aaron's Lucario?
 
I don't know if Lucario was "owned" by Sir Aaron. Aaron didn't have a Poké Ball for Lucario. I say keep it the way it is.
 
Poké Balls didn't exist then (even said so in the intro), so his scepter was like Lucario's Poké Ball. We even have it as owned on Sir Aaron's page
 
Last edited:
Lucario was Aaron's servant, I guess. It should at least be moved to "Lucario (movie)" to avoid confusion with Maylene's Lucario.
 
He wasn't really his servant, though all owned Pokémon are technically servants, listening to their trainer's demands. He isn't like Alfred to Bruce Wayne. He's Sir Aaron's Pokémon, so that's why I think Sir Aaron's Lucario is a better title. No other notable movie Pokémon was owned by a trainer, so I say this makes sense to move it. Also Blazevoir, don't forget about Riley's Lucario
 
But he trained him in Aura...and he still owned Lucario. Consider Kanto Emily's Psyduck, or Molly Hale's Teddiursa, they're too young to train Pokémon, but still have them
 
Lucario is his. No doubt about it. Doesn't matter if he's a knight. Jeremy's a businessman, and he has Pokémon!
 
Clearly there's doubt about it, or this wouldn't need to be posted.

Just as clearly, there's a reason you can't edit this yourself. So, erm, I'd like it if you paid some attention to that fact and stepped back for a while.
 
Jeremy was a Trainer when he was young. I just think we should make it "Lucario (movie)" to be consistant.
 
There was no such thing as Pokémon Trainers, or Poké Balls back then. Aaron explicitly stated that Lucario was his
 
That has nothing to do with it. Look @ Sir Aaron's page. If it wasn't his, wouldn't it be under befriended? Can we get sum other opinions here?

Any of u gonna say anything?
 
Last edited:
If the Lucario was his, then the card based off of that specific Lucario wouldn't be "Aura's Lucario." Aaron's Pidgeot has appeared as a card belonging to him, but not Lucario. All of the seven cards based off of that movie Lucario have been named either "Aura's Lucaio" or "Aura's Lucario ex." Even the tcg card makers don't agree with you on this one, and they are much more trustworthy when it comes to making decisions like this.
 
The TCG and anime are different. So it's decided on Sir Aaron's Lucario?
 
Last edited:
Uh, one, no one has said that they wanted that except for you. And two, all the movie half deck cards are based off of the actual anime and anime characters. They didn't make up a new character named Ash for the tcg that just hap-hazardly looks exactly like the anime one. These cards were based directly off of these characters, and since there isn't a Sir Aaron's Lucario, it is canonical that it wasn't his Pokémon.
 
Last edited:
Listen to Mav and evkl. They are the final word on this, and seeing as you are banned, you can not edit 'pedia to make it so that everybody has to obey your preferances. This really reminds of that User:Guaridan/Red Gyra/Gyara fiasco.
 
The way I see it, Aaron is a character of the day who appeared in an episode longer than 22 minutes. Yes, he was in a movie, but it's one appearance, and he has never appeared outside of it. Our policy is that Pokémon belonging to characters of the day do not have articles. Therefore, if we renamed it Aaron's Lucario, that would go against our policy.

Just felt I needed to throw my two cents in.
 
Please note: The thread is from 17 years ago.
Please take the age of this thread into consideration in writing your reply. Depending on what exactly you wanted to say, you may want to consider if it would be better to post a new thread instead.
Back
Top Bottom