Talk:Ninetales

GA review

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.

---

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

Nominator: Cukie Gherkin (talk · contribs) 02:48, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: Olliefant (talk · contribs) 04:35, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

Lead

• "Both Pokémon change Fire for Ice type"

  I think this was an incomplete comment, but I made the tweaks I think you intended to suggest

• "Vulpix. a new" should be a comma

  Fixed typo

• "are introduced as part of a form called "Alolan,"" reads really awkwardly

  Reworded

• "X type" and "X-type" are both used, can this be standardized? This is also a problem throughout the page.

  I use "X type" vs. "X-type" depending on whether it's saying "Ninetales gains a Fairy type" vs. "Ninetales is a Fire-type Pokémon"; is this an issue?

  May have "the X type" when it's not an attribute? I don't think its too much of a problem though

• "Both Pokémon change Fire for Ice type," -> "The Alolan forms are Ice-type instead of Fire,"

  Fixed

Conception and development

• "Both Vulpix and Ninetales receive an Alolan form, changing their Fire type for Ice" not sure about the use of "changing" here.

  Reworded

• "It also appears" this wording implies that no other mainline game had it

  I can't find this in this section; was this a note for "Appearances"? In which case, I tried addressing it.

  Yeah thats a mistake on my part

• "from the Pokémon Vulpix"

  Fixed

Appearances

• "remakes of Red and Blue" aren't the Let's Go games considered remakes of Yellow?

  Clarified

• "playable character, made available" -> "playable character, and made available"

  Fixed

• May be worth mentioning the Alolan version was available in SV and PLA

  Added these

Critical reception

• Link "USA Today"

  Fixed

• "particularly in Red and Blue and Gold and Silver" could you find a way to reword this? Currently it flows awkwardly but I'm not sure how to fix it

  How's this?

References

• Spot checks found nothing
• Ref 17 has an error
• Ref 26 "Comicbook.com" -> "ComicBook.com"
• Ref 36 "NintendoLife" -> "Nintendo Life" for consistency
• IMO Ref 36 should have multiple authors listed because while only Olney wrote the article, whats being cited is the video
• Ref 36 should be marked as live
• Why is "NC Docks" a reliable source?

  Fixed all; removed the NC Docks source, as it doesn't seem to be citing anything the other source wasn't (correct me if I'm wrong)

Other comments

• @Olliefant: I think I addressed everything - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 19:07, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

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.