tag:danbooru.me,2005:/forum_topics/16744 2020-04-02T09:32:53-04:00 tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/164744 2020-04-02T08:09:26-04:00 2020-04-02T09:32:53-04:00 <p>Should we use <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-4" href="/wiki_pages/gorochu">Gorochu</a> or <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link dtext-wiki-does-not-exist dtext-tag-does-not-exist" href="/wiki_pages/gorochuu" title="This wiki page does not have a tag">Gorochuu</a>? (currently just 2 posts)</p><p>Possible arguments for "Gorochuu" (two u):</p><ul> <li>It's only "officially" known by the Japanese name ゴロチュウ. It's arguably official in the sense that, despite not appearing in the actual games, this name was mentioned in an interview available in the Pokémon.co.jp website.</li> <li>Interview link: <a rel="external nofollow noreferrer" class="dtext-link dtext-external-link" href="https://www.pokemon.co.jp/corporate/pikachu/">https://www.pokemon.co.jp/corporate/pikachu/</a> </li> <li>This Pokémon does not have any official English name or romanization.</li> </ul><p>Possible arguments for "Gorochu" (one u):</p><ul> <li>This would be in like with Pichu, Pikachu, and Raichu. Their Japanese names could also be technically romanized as "Pichuu", "Pikachu", and "Raichu", but they have only a single U in English.</li> <li>Fan websites and news websites have been using "Gorochu" so it would be likely more recognizable by fans.</li> <li>Non-official example, Forbes mentioning "Gorochu": <a rel="external nofollow noreferrer" class="dtext-link dtext-external-link" href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2018/05/05/pikachu-was-originally-supposed-to-have-a-third-evolution-in-pokemon-gorochu/">https://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2018/05/05/pikachu-was-originally-supposed-to-have-a-third-evolution-in-pokemon-gorochu/</a> </li> </ul><p>I'm currently leaning towards keeping "Gorochu" (one U) for the reasons above. I just wanted to check if it's all OK, or if anyone thinks differently.</p> Danielx21 /users/345814