Jump to content
Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia

Talk:Talonflame

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good article Talonflame has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 7, 2026Good article nominee Listed
April 6, 2026 Peer review Reviewed
Current status: Good article
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject icon Video games : Nintendo / Characters Low‐importance
WikiProject icon 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
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Nintendo task force .
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Video game characters task force (assessed as Mid-importance).
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:
AfDs
Merge discussions
Other discussions
No major discussions
Featured content candidates
Good article nominations
DYK nominations
Reviews and reassessments
WikiProject icon Pokémon Mid‐importance
WikiProject icon 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
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject icon Fictional characters
WikiProject icon 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

GA review

[edit ]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Talonflame/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Cukie Gherkin (talk · contribs) 21:15, 6 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

Reviewer: 11WB (talk · contribs) 21:24, 6 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]


Lead

[edit ]
  • 'allows it to attack an opponent first if Talonflame's attack is Flying-type' - Word repetition, change the second 'attack' to 'move', which I believe is the correct term.
    Fixed
  • 'that increases speed for Talonflame and its allies.' > 'that increases the speed of Talonflame and its teammates.' - It may be possible to trim this down even shorter.
    Fixed
  • There are multiple uses of the word 'causing'.
    Fixed

No issues in the lead otherwise!

Conception and design

[edit ]
  • 'which causes any Flying-type moves to take priority over other Pokémon's moves regardless of who is faster.' - I feel this can be explained in a slightly less confusing way.
    Fixed
  • 'this ability is changed' > 'this abililty functions differently'
    Fixed
  • 'doing damage each turn to them.' - Word order, 'each turn to them.' > 'to them each turn.'
    Fixed
  • 'to be hatched faster.' > 'to hatch faster.'
    Fixed
  • 'Moves Talonflame uses include Brave Bird' > 'Talonflame can learn moves such as Brave Bird'
    Fixed
  • 'a high-power attack that does a percentage of the damage done to the opponent to itself' - This can be simplified as it is basically an explanation of recoil.
    Fixed

The rest is fine here!

Appearances

[edit ]
  • 'until the release of the downloadable content Isle of Armor.' > 'until the release of the Isle of Armor DLC.'
    I reordered it, but I don't want to abbreviate, as not everyone knows what DLC means

Critical reception

[edit ]
  • 'Its reduced usefulness was me with "shock, amusement, and joy".' - WP:NPOV violation.
    Fixed
  • 'taking over for Murkrow' > 'taking over from Murkrow'
    Fixed
  • 'invoke' > 'invoked'
    Fixed

This is a good amount of reception and the inclusion of its presence in the Smogon competitive scene, especially being referred to under the moniker of "Smogonbird", is an excellent inclusion. 11WB (talk) 09:35, 7 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

This criterion is passed. 11WB (talk) 20:39, 7 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

  • Ref 5: Having read some of this article, the information it contains confirms "Smogonbird" among other more trivial details. This is absolutely fine. checkY
  • Ref 9: Reliable and confirms design comparison to secretary bird. Vieth's attribution is also fine. checkY
  • Ref 12: Information about the Flame Body ability is verifiable here. checkY
  • Ref 19: I didn't know what a Speedster is, this confirms what is written. checkY
  • Ref 23: Can't confirm the reliability of this source, but the information is verifiable. checkY
  • Ref 27: Confirms the VA. checkY
  • Ref 30: Reliable Japanese source and confirms the information. checkY
  • Ref 32: Seems fine. checkY
  • Ref 35: No issues here, exactly as written. checkY
  • Ref 37: Apparently this is reliable even though it is clearly an opinion piece and is a post? It confirms what is written so I have no issues here. checkY 11WB (talk) 09:54, 7 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]
    Being an opinion piece or a "post" doesn't really affect reliability; so long as there's staff and a lack of evidence that the content did not go through editorial review, there shouldn't be an issue. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 20:20, 7 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

This article is sourced to a very high standard, and this can be considered a very rare clean sweep. Kudos! 11WB (talk) 09:54, 7 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

This criterion is passed. 11WB (talk) 09:54, 7 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

Everything I expect to be covered has been covered! 11WB (talk) 09:39, 7 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

This criterion is passed. 11WB (talk) 09:39, 7 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

There is currently one violation of NPOV that has been highlighted above. 11WB (talk) 09:38, 7 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

Addressed

This criterion is passed. 11WB (talk) 20:39, 7 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

There is no evidence of edit warring and the talk page shows no disputes. 11WB (talk) 09:15, 7 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

This criterion is passed. 11WB (talk) 09:15, 7 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

The image of Talonflame in the infobox and images of the birds of prey it is compared to are good. Nothing else in particular stands out that could be included. 11WB (talk) 09:37, 7 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

This criterion is passed. 11WB (talk) 09:37, 7 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

Result

[edit ]

Everything seems to have been addressed. This article was already in a very high quality state. I am happy to pass this! 11WB (talk) 20:39, 7 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

This article meets all the criteria and can be reassessed as a good article! 11WB (talk) 20:39, 7 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Peer review

[edit ]
This peer review discussion is closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to bring this to Featured article status in the near future if possible.

Thanks, Cukie Gherkin (talk) 00:38, 12 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

Olliefant

[edit ]
  • The images need alt text
    Added alt text
  • In the ref titles "GO" should be "Go" per MOS:ALLCAPS
    Fixed
  • Ref 6 should link "Bleeding Cool"
    Fixed
  • Ref 20 should be marked as being in French
    Added
  • Ref 29 is appearing as dead despite the original being live
    I'm not sure how to fix that
  • Ref 27 is missing the website
    What do you mean? the |work is listed as Behind the Voice Actors, and it links to the website
  • "In a 2020 official poll" in what medium?
    Clarified
  • "Ash would later send Talonflame to live with Professor Oak" and "It was featured in his final team in a championship tournament, the Kalos Lumiose Conference" these two are in the wrong order
    Fixed
  • Link "non-playable character" on first mention
    Done
That's what I found Olliefant (she/her) 02:35, 13 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]
@Olliefant: Responded to your comments - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 22:01, 13 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]
I meant ref 37, it was a typo Olliefant (she/her) 22:28, 13 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]
Oh, gotcha - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 22:54, 13 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

Could you put citation at the photo's caption at concept and design section? 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 19:18, 14 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

Did - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 01:33, 17 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]
Article is written well and looks like all sources are reliable. You can italicize game titles per MOS:TITLECAPS. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 02:35, 21 March 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

FAC PR sidebar

[edit ]

@Cukie Gherkin: I have added this article to the Template:FAC peer review sidebar. Please consider reviewing other articles listed there. Z1720 (talk) 02:22, 19 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

ZooBlazer

[edit ]
  • "if Talonflame's attack is Flying-type" --> It was just mentioned by name in the previous sentence, so maybe change to "if its"
  • "which Flying-type moves to take priority over other Pokémon's move" --> "which allows..." or something like that
  • "it was initially viewed as a useless Pokémon, which changed once people understood" --> I think "which" technically refers to Talonflame itself. Change it to something like "a perception which changed..." or "a view which changed..." to clarify

Just a few minor things. Good job with the article. -- Zoo Blazer 07:23, 12 March 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

This has been inactive for a couple of weeks, so I'm going to close it. RoySmith (talk) 20:04, 6 April 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /