Site Forum

I generally don't like posting stuff like this but....

There's been alot of activity on the Pokemon front lately. Several new members are adding sets, editing information, and submitting IRs for missing and/or inaccurate entries. This is AWESOME! 

However, some standardization is in order. If I could be so bold as to share a few notes that I've compilied over the last several months. I'm not saying I'm 100% correct...but I don't believe that I'm totally wrong either.

1. Numbering. Admin granted an exception for Pokemon numbering. Number sets like they appear on the card (xx/XXX). I know this rubs some people the wrong way. I apologize for that, but Admin has granted an exception for Pokemon cards.

2. Rarity. Goes in the Note 2 field. Unlike the Note 1 field, the Note 2 field should not be all Caps. (See the FAQs, rarity is specifically addressed). Pokemon Inc.'s "official" rarity naming conventions should be used. There is a little variation in the Pokemon collecting community when it comes to rarity naming, but since Pokemon Inc. does publish rarity with their checklists I think we should use that terminology. (This has not been sanctified by Admin....at least not by me)

3. Holo vs Foil:  For consistency sake, the foil/holo parallel set should be titled "Reverse-Holos". I went to admin on this one. Pokemon Inc. is inconsistent when it comes to naming this set...especially pre '15. Since Pokemon now calls them Reverse-Holos.....Admin has said that is the way to go for all the Reverse Holo parallel sets. Do not use the term "foil".

4. Card modifiers: EX, GX, Prism Star, Delta, etc.... "Modifiers" go in the name field. Lot's of discussion around this one. I wanted them in the Note 1 field, but I eventually came around (at least partially...thanks HutNut for your patience). They go in the Name field along with the Pokemon's name. The card is then linked to the Pokemon's PID (Personal Identification Number). Also, do not use symbols. Some Pokemon and Pokemon cards have symbols in the name (Nidoran- male & Nidoran-female,Prism Star for instance). Symbols are not searchable; spell out the word the symbol represents.

5. Set Name. The set name should include the Series Name and the Expansion Set Name. (ie, Pokemon Sun & Moon Crimson Tide). "Sun & Moon" = series / "Crimson Tide" = expansion set. Non-english language sets should have the languare at the end of the set title; no dashes, parenthesis, or brackets (Sun & Moon Crimson Tide German)

6. 1st Edition and non-english language sets are not parallel sets. Each of those sets have different packaging and are stand-alone sets. As such they should get their own listing.

I'm sure there is more that I'm forgetting. If you have questions or comments let me know. There are several of us that do collect Pokemon and work on the sets. There are also some very active editors that have done a lot of working in clarifying and establishing rules. Many of which are posted in the FAQ's or forums.

If you would like an example, check out any of the 2019 Pokemon sets. I believe those are all done correctly.

Thank you.

1-181 are the 'base' set, 182-196 are 'secret rares'.  Not sure if my terminology is 100% correct, but that's the basic idea.

Big props to everyone working on these. I've spent quite a bit of time in Gaming (mostly on the MTG sets), and I know the effort it takes to get these conformed to our format.

It would be nice if everyone read and followed the site's rules. For example, in this set:

https://www.tradingcarddb.com/Notes.cfm/sid/83754/2006-Pokemon-EX-Dragon-Frontiers?Note=RARE

someone added RARE as a Note and later someone added a definition, both of which were incorrect actions that will now need to be corrected at more effort than doing it right the first time would have required.

I contacted this member. He's a new member and was trying to do the right thing but mixed up the rules between the Note and Note 2 fields. 

Hopefully he's on-track now. I was kind of hoping he would clean them up.....but not sure if his permission level will allow him to edit Note fields.

But I do agree, incorrect work takes WAY more time to fix than doing it right the first time. Some of the Gaming category is in kind of rough shape right now.

I think these standardizations need to be added to the rules/FAQ area so newer members (like me) can easily find them.  I also think we should have set/catagory moderators, like a Pokemon expert (like cnagle) or MTG expert (like HutNut) to moderate those catagories, publish standardizations in the FAQ's, and maybe approve set additions/changes.. 

Dont know if this is even possible or will ever happen, just my 2 cents

"1. Numbering. Admin granted an exception for Pokemon numbering. Number sets like they appear on the card (xx/XXX). I know this rubs some people the wrong way. I apologize for that, but Admin has granted an exception for Pokemon cards."

Using this numbering system does seem odd but having the /XXX for gaming cards is a great help for those that are not experts on the particular card set. There are so many  similar game card sets produced with similar/identical cards across different sets that seeing the /XXX can help determine what set cards are actually from.

First, thanks for the vote of confidence. I'd hardly call myself a Pokemon expert. More like a guy with too much time on my hands and a 5k+ box of Pokemon cards that I'm try to sort and catalog.

I do agree that we should add gaming standards to the FAQ's. As a community, we decided that TCG's were unique enough to warrant their own category and Admin (as usual) made it happen. I would go a little further and say that, in some instances, the gaming category needs specific rules and/or standards.

The current FAQs do an outstanding job of laying the ground rules and the members involved (and Admin) did a great job of putting those guidlines together. It was sorely needed at the time and has given all of us a standard to work from. But the site is always growing and evolving.

Vrooomed (one of the contributors to the current guide found in the FAQ section), mentioned in the forums the other day that when we as community see a need for clarification of rules or additional guidelines, we should bring them to Admin. I think it is time to do that with the gaming category.

The gaming category is much like the Wild West...very few people go there and when they go, they do whatever they want. There's a lot of good work that has been done and many more good intentions (some not so good too) but there is a general lack of standardization that makes finding cards and cataloging a collection VERY difficult. For instance I'm currently working on a Pokemon set that has three separate listings on TCDB each named a little differently. Each set has a hodge-podge of images (one set just has back images) with many members having collection information in all three sets (ie. adding all cards from each set to their wantlist). This makes fixing them time consuming not to mention a mess for members whith current Pokemon collections. 

***A side note and/or word of advice - use caution when randomly adding all cards from a set to your collection or wantlist. Know what you're doing! This is a powerful feature and can have significant implications on your collection and trading activity***

I'm getting long winded...but yes Gaming category guidelines do need to go somewhere in the FAQ. As I work through Pokemon sets this summer, I'll edit the OP of this thread with any thoughts or ideas I have. In a couple months I'll compile and submit to Admin for their thoughts.

If you have any comments or anything to add, feel free to say it here or send me a PM. Or go to Admin yourself. However if you do get personal guidance or direction from Admin concerning gaming sets, I for one, would appreciate if you would post it in the forums so we could all benefit.

Hopefully I'm not coming across as too bold. I view TCDB as a community of equal members regardless of how long you've been here or how many points you have. I'm just trying to do my part in making sure it is a community that best serves the needs of its members.

Retroboysaz wrote:

I think these standardizations need to be added to the rules/FAQ area so newer members (like me) can easily find them.  I also think we should have set/catagory moderators, like a Pokemon expert (like cnagle) or MTG expert (like HutNut) to moderate those catagories, publish standardizations in the FAQ's, and maybe approve set additions/changes.. 

Dont know if this is even possible or will ever happen, just my 2 cents