This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Film: Japanese / American Start‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This article is supported by the Japanese cinema task force. This article is supported by the American cinema task force. Video games: Nintendo Start‑class 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 Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Nintendo task force. Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks: Pokémon Start‑class Low‑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 Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. United States: Cinema Start‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Comedy Start‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Hey, everyone. I just wanted to inform everyone that Warner Bros. will now distribute the Detective Pikachu movie.^[1]

MatthewRC (talk) 22:21, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NinjaRobotPirate, why did you add Universal and Toho? See the official trailer: Warner Bros. Pictures, Legendary Entertainment, The Pokémon Company. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 12:17, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As I explained to you on your talk page, a trailer is not a reliable source. A reliable source has editorial control. A trailer does not have editorial control. Variety Insight has editorial control. Variety Insight is thus a reliable source. Interpreting what you see in a trailer is original research. Copying what a reliable source says is not. This is why {{infobox film}} says " When possible, this should be cited to reliable secondary sources that explicitly identify the production companies." This is to prevent what you're doing – using original research to interpret primary sources. Universal and Toho are listed by Variety Insight. See, for example, this cached version of Variety's database. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:22, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is outdated information. The movie moved from Universal to Warner Bros. in July (Variety). Also see Pokémon: Detective Pikachu#Production. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 12:24, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just because the film moved from one studio to another does not mean the first studio is not a production company. What makes something a production company is being listed as such by a reliable source – not your own belief. Variety says they're a production company, so they are. It's really that simple. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:39, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Universal was removed from the "production company" at the end of July. The fact that you're just now adding it to the article looks weird. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 12:48, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NinjaRobotPirate, Variety's database does not say that Legendary is a distributor. This calls into question the reliability of the source. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 14:09, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You've got to be kidding me. I'm an administrator on Wikipedia, and I don't have time to get engaged in debates on who produced or distributed films for little kids. I'm just removing this article from my watchlist. Stop pinging me – I'm busy doing other things, and I don't have time to explain to you what a reliable source is. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:30, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There should be a list of all the different Pokemon that appear in the movie.

Something this detailed probably belongs better on Bulbapedia or specific sites; Wikipedia isn't for every information available. Juxlos (talk) 13:51, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Besides, the list is likely to be enormous and very difficult to get 100% accurate, if the amount seen in the background in the trailer alone is anything to go by. Plus, pages for other Pokémon movies don’t have this, aside from some that are a major feature of the movie. GloverMist (talk) 15:21, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the "Marketing" section as seen here per WP:FILMMARKETING. Per the guidelines, such a section needs to be more than customary marketing methods. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 15:20, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What was wrong with it? What do you mean by "customary marketing methods"? The section looked similar to what I've seen on other movie articles (e.g. MCU movies). Maestro2016 (talk) 16:59, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The methods that everyone uses, releasing posters and trailers and TV spots. It's indiscriminate detailing. These can be mentioned if there is more to say that just that these were released. See The Martian (film)#Marketing for an example. I haven't read the MCU movies' marketing coverage, but hopefully they are more than just the indiscriminate detailing that is disallowed. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 18:58, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Another example is Valkyrie (film)#Marketing. Basically, if a film does not have anything besides the usual stuff, there does not need to be a "Marketing" section in its article. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 19:00, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw that the "Marketing" section was restored with view-related details about the trailer. That works great! Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 19:04, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why does it say that Danny DeVito said "What the [heck] is Pokémon" instead of "What the fuck is Pokémon"?

Probably some self-censorship. Anyways, I just added "fuck" into a Wikipedia article. Juxlos (talk) 15:18, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so ... who is executive producing this film? The IPs' cryptic edit summaries make it difficult to tell what they are referring to. Could someone put together a list of sources currently in this article and other sources supposedly available on "the official website" and list the different exec prods given in each? Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 13:34, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.detectivepikachumovie.net/ does indeed appear to have a poster-style production billing visible when one clicks the "legal" in the bottom right, listing Carraciolo, Mendes, Ishihara, Okubo, Miyahara, Matsuoka, and Ota, but with just the names, and no indication that these are executives of TPC. Also (obviously) we can't be including information from this source and falsely attributing it to the Business Insider source, which only gives Caracciolo, Jr. and "The Pokémon Company's Tsunekazu Ishihara". Additionally, this other source currently cited in the article lists Joseph M. Caracciolo Jr., Kenji Okubo, Satoshi Tajiri, Toshio Miyahara, and Tsunekazu Ishihara.

On top of this, the fact that these men appear from their names to be Japanese doesn't really make this an American-Japanese co-production. None of the secondary sources imply that TPC is one of the production companies, and even if we were allowed assume they were I don't see why we would: all our articles on the Japanese animated films suggest that TPC have never acted as the production company for a film, as OLM, Inc. appears to have produced all of them. Owning the copyright on the original IP does not make them one of the production companies by default, and it doesn't make this a Japanese film.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 13:48, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Look, we don't need a citation on the fact that Toho helped produce this film. It says in the production billing that they did. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.255.153.190 (talk) 12:47, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

we don't need a citation on the fact that Toho helped produce this film Yes, we do. I would be incredibly surprised if Toho were involved in the production of this film, given that it's an American film being produced halfway around the world from them, and they weren't even (apparently) directly involved in the production of any of the Japanese animated films. It says in the production billing that they did. Is that what "in association with" means? That seems a bit ambiguous; you will need a reliable secondary source to support your interpretation of that primary source -- otherwise its original research. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 14:30, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Budget $60 million Source: https://bestmoviecast.com/?s=detective+pikachu 173.79.40.106 (talk) 15:18, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: Can't find any other sources to back this up, but new information is bound to come out. Breawycker (talk to me!) 00:37, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. DannyS712 (talk) 20:16, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you remove Khary Payton from the billing block please? He is not on the billing block of this movie — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.255.153.190 (talk) 12:54, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Infos are not according to the official's website credits: https://i.imgur.com/rDXFH1f.png

Legendary Pictures and Toho are the only production companies, as it appears "A Legendary Pictures production in association with Toho Co., Ltd".

The "based on" should be for Great Detective Pikachu and credited by The Pokémon Company and Creatures Inc., as it appears "Based on the Great Detective Pikachu video game developed by The Pokémon Company and Creatures Inc. Youngmiserable (talk) 18:45, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Think about it like DC movies. The company itself isn't credited, even though it's their property. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.255.153.190 (talk) 19:53, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. DannyS712 (talk) 20:16, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, can someone put the wiki page of Carry On in place of “Carry On”?

Not sure why you locked it but there is no colon in the title in and official material, billing or site for the movie. The movie does not have a colon in it. Please remove the colon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fdslkjfdslkj (talk • contribs) 03:28, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Fdslkjfdslkj: Colons are how we conventionally separate titles from subtitles. Wikipedia titles for articles on pop culture topics are not meant to reflect the logo of the film but the actual title. When there is a line break clearly meant to represent a subtitle, we reflect that on a single line with a colon. It's a Pokemon film distinguished from other such films by the title Detective Pikachu; it's not about a Pokemon Detective named Pikachu, which wouldn't make sense in Japanese where the title of the original game is clearly an allusion to 名探偵ホームズ. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 01:38, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Hijiri88: I'm sorry but you are incorrect here. the official text billing on movie posters (the billing, not the logo) does not have a colon. they purposely made a choice to not have a colon, it is not up to you to add one...in addition this is a production by Legendary, the Japanese aspect is not a deciding factor. -Fdslkjfdslkj

@Hijiri88: Look at the bottom of the theatrical poster. There is no colon. Remove it. It's not up to you. That's stupid. We should go by the OFFICIAL title. Detective Pikachu is not a subtitle.

Detective Pikachu is based on The Pokémon Company, not only Creatures, Inc. This is a misleading. All official information shows that The Pokémon Company is in the first position. Please change it. Lucas two (talk) 15:43, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Lucas two: Source? This article's footnote appears to reflect the content of our main Detective Pikachu article. There is nothing stopping you from adding the information to that article if you have a source. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 03:51, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.pokemon.co.jp/ex/meitantei_pikachu/ https://detectivepikachu.pokemon.com/en-us/ They all show that The Pokémon Company is in the first position. Creatures, Inc in here is just the same status as Game Freak in the main series. When we mention Pokemon main series, we will say that it is from The Pokémon Company (or Nintendo). So Detective Pikachu should be like this. (Or at least plus The Pokémon Company.) Lucas two (talk) 06:04, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Whoever added the colon is a dimwit who doesn't know what he's talking about and only trying to push a colon agenda. The title, as shown in the bottom of the theatrical poster AND all marketing material is Pokémon Detective Pikachu WITHOUT the colon. That is the full title. Don't pull that Wikipidea/subtitle excuse out because (1) "Detective Pikachu" is not a subtitle. It is part of the MAIN title. (2) Wikipidea shouldn't be allowed to alter the title of a movie. Remove the colon. https://i.imgur.com/rDXFH1f.png Scott Sullivan (talk) 08:18, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In a less angry tone, I agree - IMDB, Warner Bros, etc all do not use colon. Manual of Style should not get in the way of basically all sources. Juxlos (talk) 08:56, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: page move requests should be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 13:48, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pokémon: Detective Pikachu → Pokémon Detective Pikachu – Colon is entirely a Wikipedia addition. Official media, IMDB, Warner Bros, etc all do not use colon, even when referring to the movie in a sentence. Manual of Style should not get in the way of basically all sources. Juxlos (talk) 20:10, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Wait until release. We're barely a week away from the film's American release, and sources may not solidify for quite a while. This isn't really the right time to make such a move request. ONR (talk) 23:07, 1 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Sources have been around for months now - aside from Endgame, this is probably the most talked about movie of the summer. Juxlos (talk) 06:12, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy support - no reason not to follow sources, today or in the future. Red Slash 03:57, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. The vast majority of sources seem to not use the colon and even the official website doesn't use one, so we should follow how they format the title in text. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 21:29, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support as both official and unofficial sources lack the colon. Raymond1922 (talk) 22:25, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per above reasoning. MacCready (talk) 22:40, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per above, all sources I can see don't use the colon. QueerFilmNerd^talk 02:09, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. I think it’s awkward without the colon, however all the posters, classifications and billing list the official title as not having one. TropicAces (talk) 02:58, 3 May 2019 (UTC)tropicAces[reply]
• Support Yes, it may look weird without the colon. Yes, it may APPEAR to be a subtitle. BUT, if you look at the bottom of the OFFICIAL poster, where the OFFICIAL credits are located as standard, there is NO colon.
• Support Most sources exclude the colon. TheDeviantPro (talk) 03:47, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per above. Rotten Tomatoes also uses the colon-free spelling, including for the critics consensus. –WPA (talk) 04:47, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per the reasonings by Juxlos and Raymond1922A. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:53, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• OPPOSE The release of the film is around the corner, and film credits can verify things like this. Additionally the title would make much less sense without the colon.--DisneyMetalhead (talk) 16:01, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• With the movie having had official media for months now, it's beyond reasonable doubt that he official media does not have colons. And "movie releasing soon" is a pretty moot point - accuracy doesn't care for timing. Juxlos (talk) 17:07, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• The text billing in the poster is always the same as film credits and the billing does not have a colon. It's time to move it. The title does not make any less sense without the colon and even if it did it's not up to Wikipedia.