why I am asking for help, it is basically because I am new to anime. I am also a user of other communities like StackOverflow and puzzle exchange. but I don't get the reasons why the questions are put up on hold. please let me know someone who is good with explanations or can provide me better answers with anime meta links...

Question links

I asked krazer but he didn't say a word, I update question still no response from his side...
How Professor ox discovered Ash's pikachu? it is a still Pokemon mystery [on hold]

I don't know what he is trying to say there? all the theories have proper reference.
Is Ash is he Pokemon Master now? after winning Alola league championship? [on hold]

2 Answers 2


I'll try and help you to understand it a bit better.

Lets start off by breaking down your first post: is ash is he pokemon master now?

The question

It is mentioned in many anime theories

Here you mention that there are anime theories, theories are usually opinion based, and not necessarily based on cannon content. Because you did not reference any of these sources by for example, quoting or linking(!) to said theories it also becomes very hard for anyone to determine otherwise.

Without any other context, or details, this sounds like it is based on a opinion, and you are looking to confirm said opinion.

the answer

The answer starts off nice, you convey that you tried to obtain the information directly from it's source, but could not obtain it.

However, the second part of your answer mentions a lot of theories. Yet again without any source of said theories. Just looking at the content tells me that it is most likely copied verbatim from some site. By not mentioning which site, you are actually committing plagiarism. If you wish to quote something, always refer to where you got it from.

Just as the answer, theories implies that it is 'opinion' based. And without any source to really confirm the quotes (manga chapters, episodes, wiki articles, author notes) it becomes really hard to proof otherwise.

Next up, lets cover How Professor ox discovered Ash's pikachu? it is a still Pokemon mystery

The title

The title has me a bit confused. You are asking about a non existing professor, and follow it up by making a statement that it is still a mystery.

A good title would tell somebody that looked at it what the question is about. I think this would have made for a good title, if you would have omitted the part after the ?

The question

You give a pretty elaborate explanation all though I have a very hard time tieing the knots together. Using some of the episodes as a reference as to when something happened, or manga chapters there where applicable would significantly help understanding your explanation there.

Later on in the spoiler block, you mention a theory, once again without a source, which goes and ask (3) different questions from what you tried to ask in your title. By the end of the question, I, personally, am still unclear on what you actually want to ask here. Did you want to know how Proffesor oak found pickachu? Or why pickachu didn't evolve? Or what happened ash was born?

All together it is a fairly confusing question.

Now just because the questions are closed, doesn't mean you won't be able to open them again. However you will need to improve them some what. In the help center you can find some more guidance on what makes a good question/answer as well. And as you have enough reputation already, you can also join us in the chat, where you can also ask people to help if they want and have the time.

  • The movie part I just thought to give some clues ( that is not my question I am just trying to say maybe there is some connection) I found out maybe someone can find answer with the help of it. my question was clear that how they found Pikachu yes I can refer the movies name in which ash travel along with the Pokemon in the past and met professor Oak. Commented Sep 17, 2019 at 18:04
  • The first question is a proper question and pokemon.com gave the proper answer. That is it a still a mystery that's it. the other part is my opinion and also theories given by others... so I don't think so with the proper answer if I add up other theories... there is anything wrong? Commented Sep 17, 2019 at 18:09
  • I know even I make the changes you mentioned the question will not gonna reopen I can bet... Commented Sep 17, 2019 at 18:11
  • I still edited both of them questions are very clear and to the point... Commented Sep 17, 2019 at 19:30

Your questions and answers make very broad and biased assumptions even if you claim to cite a specific reference or references. You are drawing the conclusions you want and then centering the basis of your claim as if they were a fact. They simply are not. A theory based off a theory is what it is, a theory. Without specific canonical sources or references to reinforce those theories they remain a fan-theory, and non-canonical.

While fan-theories based on actual facts are not off-topic, your questions and answers stack theories upon theories. It's much like saying if Theory A, B, D is true then X, Y, Q, must be as well, therefore W, V, F, must've happened.

Whether you like it or not, questions on the Stack Exchange series of sites should be based on facts. How else would you be convinced? By facts or just someone else's opinion? By facts of course. If a question only attracts opinionated answers, it is not possible to distinguish the right answer from the wrong one.

The nuanced presentation your questions have provided reflects your stubbornness to to push an particular idea to an audience. But your articulation of the so-called facts leaves bit to be desired and comes off as unconvincing. IF you feel that you are correct then I would invite you to provide a more detailed explanation of why you believe something is what it is instead of resorting to ad hominem rebuttals.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .