Okay everyone

[Mugendai]

A bit of encouragement from me, even though I do very little to contribute to glitchology.

Bulbapedia is probably going to defeat us in the wiki-on-glitches thing, and TRsRockin still seems to be accepted as fact. We don't even appear on the first page for "pokemon glitches" on Google, except for an unrelated page.

So... I really think we would find and document much on glitches, but only if people know about it. A wiki is meant to be contributed to by multiple people, and they are rather effective at documenting a lot of things.

We know that we are rather reliable when it comes to documenting glitches, and we freak out whenever people confuse glitches in more recent games with MissingNo. Meaning, we want to see GCL be better-known than it is today, and we already have enough to spread it around. I certainly would like to see GCL be more often chosen for Pokemon glitches over other sites.

So... let's let GCL be known, because we can't advance glitchology with so few people.

[SCf3]

A bit of encouragement from me, even though I do very little to contribute to glitchology.

Bulbapedia is probably going to defeat us in the wiki-on-glitches thing, and TRsRockin still seems to be accepted as fact. We don't even appear on the first page for "pokemon glitches" on Google, except for an unrelated page.

So... I really think we would find and document much on glitches, but only if people know about it. A wiki is meant to be contributed to by multiple people, and they are rather effective at documenting a lot of things.

We know that we are rather reliable when it comes to documenting glitches, and we freak out whenever people confuse glitches in more recent games with MissingNo. Meaning, we want to see GCL be better-known than it is today, and we already have enough to spread it around. I certainly would like to see GCL be more often chosen for Pokemon glitches over other sites.

So... let's let GCL be known, because we can't advance glitchology with so few people.

So basically we need to advertise. Wait is Bulba getting a lot of their glitch information from us or what?

[Tombstoner]

Sadly, their popularity is getting them a lot of stuff we don't have.
For instance, during a pointless lookaround, I found this, which I am about to add to the wiki:

In Generation I, a glitch allowed struggling to be avoided by allowing the game to automatically use a move to attack, which could happen to any attack if a Pokémon attacked immediately after being defrosted, or due to a handful of moves (Bind, Clamp, Fire Spin, Hyper Beam, Metronome, Mimic, and Wrap) because of the auto-selection involved with partial trapping moves. A move that is used with 0 PP in this way will underflow to the maximum possible value of the data that stores it. In Generation I, the PP data for one move was stored as one byte, with the first two bits being how many PP Ups were applied to that move, and the last six being the remaining PP. Due to this, when a move with 0 PP is used, the PP value will roll over to 255. This gives the move 63 PP, (or 26 - 1), and if no PP Ups were used originally, full PP Up status will be applied to the move. (If PP Ups were used beforehand, the move will lose one PP Up instead.) In Generation II and onward, a check was added that prevents execution of a move that has 0 PP if it is autoselected.

[Torchickens]

Looking around Bulbapedia, it seems that a lot of their content in articles focussed on glitches in the Pokémon glitches template and their list of minor glitches article, are less thorough and we tend to already have articles about them but in more detail on most cases.

A lot of those articles just tend to 'touch' the subject, instead of thoroughly evaluating the glitch, and giving technical information for instance. Its a strange case where some of the good content on Bulbapedia is hidden within other articles, which focus on another subject rather than the actual glitches themselves. I guess that its due to having to carefully evaluate the game engine to 'un-stub' some of those essential articles like Power Points. Its a shame that some of those glitches are not too well known, I guess its because of how some people perhaps dogmatically draw a line between what is an oversight and what is a glitch. If you have a look at a lot of Bulbapedia's "glitch" articles, they're not very thorough.

[SCf3]

Eh. Still,
f**k them.

[Zach the Glitch Buster]

Or we could collaborate with Bulbapedia. Become affiliated with each other. Use Bulbapedia to bring in more members here. Because if there are glitches on Bulbapedia that we don't have here then there is a glitch community on Bulbapedia therefor we could attract people.
See them not as a enemy but as an ally. 

[Full Metal Glitch]

Or we could collaborate with Bulbapedia. Become affiliated with each other. Use Bulbapedia to bring in more members here. Because if there are glitches on Bulbapedia that we don't have here then there is a glitch community on Bulbapedia therefor we could attract people.
See them not as a enemy but as an ally. 

I'm just guessing, but Abwayax/Adrian would probably be very reluctant to allow something like that.

[Redstar]

Looking around Bulbapedia, it seems that a lot of their content in articles focussed on glitches in the Pokémon glitches template and their list of minor glitches article, are less thorough and we tend to already have articles about them but in more detail on most cases.

A lot of those articles just tend to 'touch' the subject, instead of thoroughly evaluating the glitch, and giving technical information for instance. Its a strange case where some of the good content on Bulbapedia is hidden within other articles, which focus on another subject rather than the actual glitches themselves. I guess that its due to having to carefully evaluate the game engine to 'un-stub' some of those essential articles like Power Points. Its a shame that some of those glitches are not too well known, I guess its because of how some people perhaps dogmatically draw a line between what is an oversight and what is a glitch. If you have a look at a lot of Bulbapedia's "glitch" articles, they're not very thorough.

What GlitchCity can do is write "presentation" articles on the various glitches while the actual in-depth research can be cited and presented elsewhere for those interested, much like science writers turn research papers into articles for science magazines that casual readers can understand.

Or we could collaborate with Bulbapedia. Become affiliated with each other. Use Bulbapedia to bring in more members here. Because if there are glitches on Bulbapedia that we don't have here then there is a glitch community on Bulbapedia therefor we could attract people.
See them not as a enemy but as an ally.

This is actually an idea SailorClef and I came up with recently to resolve Bulbapedia's PokeGods page problem. For anyone that's looked into it, it's s**t. They rely on hearsay and misinformation on the origins of the phenomenon circulated since the phenomenon itself. After personally talking to many of the page's editors I came to realize they hate the subject.

For a long time we just ignored it but an opportunity came up: Bulbapedia runs guest editorials from site staff and anyone that submits something. We're thinking of writing a short series on the PokeGods to put up and essentially advertise our site, generating traffic to the real source of information. GlitchCity can do much the same: an introductory article on the origins of the glitch-research scene (tie it to MissingNo.'s incredible influence on the fandom for the hook), another on GlitchCity's research and what it's discovered, another on the past and current mysteries, etc.

This is simply the best route to generate interest and garner credit where it's deserved. It's unfortunate that the former webring affiliation system is dead as the three surviving sites (the Big Three of Bulbagarden, Serebii, and PokeBeach) are so locked into their competition and long-instilled self-politics that any new site has trouble gaining ground. Bulbapedia editorials would be a workaround form of affiliation. It's all about playing their politics against them.

[echinodermata]

We, being the original source to so much of the information on glitches, should demand the credit, citation, and linking from bulbapedia that we properly deserve. The keepers of the keys of copyrights at bulbapedia will surely understand what attribution is.

Our 4th page listing on google, however, is a problem that is much more difficult to directly address.

[IIMarckus]

We, being the original source to so much of the information on glitches, should demand the credit, citation, and linking from bulbapedia that we properly deserve. The keepers of the keys of copyrights at bulbapedia will surely understand what attribution is.

You can’t copyright facts. The fact that Glitch W exists and has characteristics X, Y, and Z doesn’t require attribution, even if Bulbapedia found out about it from GCL.

[GARY 'M 9]

We, being the original source to so much of the information on glitches, should demand the credit, citation, and linking from bulbapedia that we properly deserve. The keepers of the keys of copyrights at bulbapedia will surely understand what attribution is.

Our 4th page listing on google, however, is a problem that is much more difficult to directly address.

Lemme just make a site announcement that says POKEMON GLITCHES over and over again.

[Redstar]

We, being the original source to so much of the information on glitches, should demand the credit, citation, and linking from bulbapedia that we properly deserve. The keepers of the keys of copyrights at bulbapedia will surely understand what attribution is.

Bulbapedia is freely-edited. Just create an account, go to each glitch-related article and add to the bottom references a link to the corresponding GlitchCity article for "more information".

Lemme just make a site announcement that says POKEMON GLITCHES over and over again.

Pretty much. Google draws placement from a variety of information, including how often a word is used, different font-styles and sizes, paragraphs, layout, how many sites link to and from the page, etc. It's a very touch thing, though with enough work it could be done.

I believe a series of Bulbapedia articles is the best route to intersect the two sites and get traffic to the right place.

[Adrian Malacoda]

Bulbapedia is hardly an "enemy" but the main reason for even having our own site is because we disagree with some of their policies and views. IMHO we complement rather than compete.

Maybe we could set up something where we get linked to on every glitch page, much like they link to other pokedexes on other sites.

Redstar - I think that's a pretty good idea. I haven't forgotten affiliation - I'm still trying to work out how we'd even go about that. For standard site affiliation I'm thinking a dedicated page, broken into sections featuring either a link or a button/banner and a short description of the site.