Gardevoir 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 Date Process Result June 3, 2007 Good article nominee Listed June 14, 2007 Good article reassessment Delisted January 11, 2025 Good article nominee Listed
Current status: Good article

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Video games: Nintendo / Characters Low‑importance 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. This article is supported by the Nintendo task force. This article is supported by the Video game characters task force (assessed as Mid-importance). Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks: Pokémon Mid‑importance 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. Fictional characters 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 Pornography Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pornography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of pornography-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.PornographyWikipedia:WikiProject PornographyTemplate:WikiProject PornographyPornography Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: https://www.pockettactics.com/gen-3-pokemon

Fixed an inaccuracy stating Gardevoir cannot learn firepunch. Added psychic to the moves "thunder bolt and ice punch" as moves popular as a sweeper, since it's unlikely a sweeper will pass up same type attack bonus. 82.41.225.84 11:19, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The intro is describing Pokemon in general, not Gardevoir... it's not very good. 65.101.174.127 23:42, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's decsribing what Gardevoir's job is in the series, it just happens to have the same job as other Pokémon. It's fine, and what is expected of any decent article. Highway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 07:13, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gardevoir is popular in Japan like Jigglypuff.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.18.115.227 (talk • contribs) .

Have a source for that? Highway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 22:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well I found a Japanese fanart website about Gardevoir,Kirlia, and Ralts Fans so I thought wow. Gardevoir is popular in Japan. Here's the site [1]—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.18.115.227 (talk • contribs) .

It looks like a fansite, which isn't a reliable source. Sorry, Highway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 06:41, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there no mention of the word 'gar'? Gar means to compell, and the Pokedex clearly mentions Gardevoir's complusive nature when it comes to protecting its trainer. So I believe that Gardevoir's name is a combination of 'gar' and 'devoir' for 'compelling duty'. Bliksem 17:41, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Probably. There are a dozen possiblities, and they'll probably all eventually be removed because a lack of citations, but add it anyway and I'll see which is referencable. I can easily just reference a web dictionary, saying there are numberable possibilites. Cheers, Highway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 17:45, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I edited out the part about the definition of it's name being a combination of "Garden" and "Resevior"(I didn't complete what I said because I'm new to editing pages and accidently hit enter out of habit) because if that were the case, it's type would be far from psychic(most likely water/grass)and it's dex entry would be different. Natch42 18:15, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You know, when I first saw Gardevoir, I thought it was a Grass-type and it's hair was a leaf or something.

Gardevoir is the only Pokemon on the japaness SSBB characters considering list.

I really hope so! Gardevoir rocks! But could we dod something to fix up the article just a bit?Cherimu is beautiful! 16:45, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Japaness? Last tim I check it was still Japanese.

Be nice! You could use some spellchecking yourself! Floramage! 23:34, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So?HHS.student

Ugh. Floramage! 16:55, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where is this list? I'd love to see that. :o Oubliette 00:49, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've cleaned up this article and nominated it for a GA. Please improve it further if you can. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 16:53, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have reviewed this article in accordance with the Good Article (GA) criteria. There are seven main criteria that the article must comply with to pass:

1. Well-written: Pass
2. Factually accurate: Pass
3. Broad: Pass
4. Neutrally written: Pass
5. Stable: Pass
6. Well-referenced: Pass
7. Images: Pass

In my opinion for this GA Review, this article has passed all the necessary GA criteria categories. If no one has a problem with this, I will award it GA status in a few days. Please give me your feedback/comments/complaints (if any), so we can improve on this article if needed. INFORMATION CENTER (T • C) 22:37, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 22:57, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. This is now a GA. INFORMATION CENTER (T • C) 03:29, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Far too much of the video game section is unnecessary opinions and guide content - okay, so it's commonly known to be a special sweeper, but that's just an opinion. - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:48, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removed some extraneous details. In any case, try to fix the problems before complaining about them here. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 23:13, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was after a small amount of looking through the article, meaning that there could very well be other similar problems.

Also, I'm simply reviewing the article - no more my job to fix the article than it is to fix a game. - A Link to the Past (talk) 06:04, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's is necesary to have a quarter of the page be about it's pornography? Wouldn't a slight mention be more fitting? Afterall that image is the one that shows in google when visiting this page... 88.8.235.164 (talk) 00:25, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of the character's notoriety is about porn. If that makes you uncomfortable, welcome to wikipedia. As for the google image, that's an issue with it not using the infobox image: the section's size has nothing to do with it.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:40, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

fair enough. 88.8.235.164 (talk) 14:15, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Nominator: Kung Fu Man (talk · contribs) 15:20, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: OlifanofmrTennant (talk · contribs) 06:25, 11 January 2025 (UTC) I'll have this done shortly Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 06:25, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Everything checks out

Explain why the typing was changed

• Added a bit noting the typing was new to X and Y, there's never been a specific reason from what I can find for why Gardevoir's evolutionary line was changed.

"the related anime" feels like a awkard way to phrase it considering how the rest of the section is.

• Reworked this sentence.

"placing 9th on The Pokémon Company's 2020 Pokémon of the Year poll" ref seems to indicate that Google held the poll

• Added a second ref clarifying that it's an official poll by Nintendo.

The way the citations are placed it seems like ref 31 seems to back up the Dualshockers claim

• Reworked the sentence a little to bring up the Dot eSports statement

link TheGamer

• Fixed.

Why is Behind the Voice Actors reliable? It appears to be user generated.

• Behind the Voice Actors has been used in several GAs at this point, as they have a policy of confirming voice actors. That said apparently this was not the case. I replaced it with another ref attributing it to Kei Shindō; Maumaumau is used by other outlets in Japan and I've used it on other GAs.

Why is Fanbyte reliable?

• Fanbyte is recognized as reliable on WP:VG/S and the author of the article has been published in many other outlets according to MuckRack, as well as the related journalists in the article.

Why is Automaton reliable?

• Automaton has been cited by other media outlets on both its Japanese and English ends, and I have used it on other GAs without issue.

Why is this an acceptable use of Dualshockers?

• The source backs up the Dot eSports statement, and cited here specifically for the author's opinion. I've used Dualshockers in similar manner on other GAs without issue.

Weather the website is linked or not is inconsistent

• Should be fixed

Dating format in the refs is inconsistant

• The date template at the top of the article should fix this, unless I mistaken? The formatting seems to be consistent looking through the refs.

Earwig has under 30% overlap

The image license checks out

The lead image needs better alt text. Desribe what it looks like , probably could just copy it from the design section

• Should be fixed.

Image 2 needs alt text

• Should be fixed.

@Kung Fu Man: Ping me when done Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 07:37, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@OlifanofmrTennant: I think I've addressed everything, let me know if there's anything else.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 12:00, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]