Suggestion: Create a pool for posts that are misleading unless you read the artist commentary (with an example from Pokémon)

This is just an idea, let's see if it makes any sense.

As said in the title, I suggest creating a pool for posts that are misleading unless you read the artist commentary. I have only one example at the moment.

(This may be considered somewhat related to pool #1229 - "Misleading Thumbnails".)

Case in point:

• post #409350 (Pokémon Special)

What it looks like:

• At first glance it may seem that Chuchu (female Pikachu) and Kirlia are the parents of that egg. This would explain why Kirlia is blushing. The people in the comments seem to think that this is what's happening, and are trying to make sense of this. The post is currently in the pool "How Is That Even Possible!?", probably based on that interpretation.

What it actually is:

• The artist commentary tells us that the Kirlia is actually Ruru (Ruby's female Kirlia). It also confirms that the egg is Chuchu's child. Both Yellow and Ruru are able to sense others' emotions; they are blushing because they are sensing Chuchu's emotions about her egg.

Incidentally, I think that the post in question should have the trait_connection tag based on the Yellow/Ruru connection explained in the artist commentary.

That sounds too specific for a pool. It would have to exlude every comic since sufficient context is already given there. Also, what would the pool be even called?