>>54323719>nidoransboth genders have enough differences, both in design and in stats/ability, to justify having different names
them being separate lines is a relic from before pokemon with multiple forms existed. calling each gender their own species would imply that human males and human females aren't the same species by that same logic
>unfezantbasically just color variation and different head feathers.
>plusle & minuni'm pretty sure this was done entirely to waste 2 dex slots
>whatever the fuck is going on with the teapot pokemon and its cloneuh shit I don't think there's any possible reason for this
>sandslashgiven that it's pretty much entirely the same besides being larger, having a different typing, having slightly more optimized stats, and having less scales, it probably doesn't need to be split into its own species
>paradoxesfor the future ones it could probably be justified as just being robots made to resemble the base pokemon, but the past ones would probably be distinct enough to be considered genetically separate from their "descendants"
>persian & perrserkerwhy don't you look at the persians and you look at perrserker and tell me they're close enough to be considered the same species instead of basically split evolutions
>mr. mime clusterfuckthere's not really any feasible way to insert cross-gen evolutions/pre-evolutions into the pokedex without being forced to assign them numbers that weren't currently in use when the original pokemon was made
best you'll get is regional pokedexes
>type: nullthis was originally a laboratory project, without a proper species name, so the codename was used
