Template talk:Pokémon Infobox

Contents

Hide

Close table of contents

• (Return to top)
• Parameters
• Tweaks
• Hidden Abilities.
• Footprint data for X/Y Pokémon
• Missing padding for main page text
• Hoopa's form changes
• How do the heights of the boxes in this template work?
• Some updates
• Alola Dex
• body style
• Is the catch probability still accurate in Generation VI?
• Catch rate formula error
• Why hasn't this template been updated for USUM yet?
• Kanto Pokedex expansion
• USUM Pokedex numbers and ability changes
• Fix for Toxtricity
• Update to hatch time calculation
• Not enough freedom to set experience yields for different gens
• An oversight
• ability1note and ability2note
• 3 or more Body Shapes
• 5+ forms height and weight
• Same link
• Hatch steps update for SWSH, BDSP, and SV mechanics
• Fix for the Meowth Page
• Footprints
• Pronunciation
• Black and White Experience Yields for the Unova First Partners
• Height and Weight for at least 3 more forms needs to be added
• More form params or less form params?
• Adding Z-Crystals and Pokémon-specific items
• Displaying forms

Contents

Parameters

Any parameters which are unused should be left out. Calling but leaving blank unused parameters can lead to errors.

• name : English name. If unknown, leave out.
• jname : Japanese name.
• tmname : Romanisation of Japanese name. Trademarked version if available.
• jtranslit : Transliteration of Japanese name.
• category : Category name, from the Pokédex.
• forme : Number of images to display. Only to be used if the Pokémon has more than one form.
• form1 : Name of form 1, if applicable. Not needed for Pokémon with no forms.
• form2 : Name of form 2, if applicable.
• form3 : Name of form 3, if applicable.
• form4 : Name of form 4, if applicable.
• form5 : Name of form 5, if applicable.
• form6 : Name of form 6, if applicable.
• image : Filename of image, if not at the default location.
• image2 : Filename of form 2 (or Mega Evolution) image.
• image3 : Filename of form 3 (or Mega Evolution 2) image.
• image4 : Filename of form 4 image.
• image5 : Filename of form 5 image.
• image6 : Filename of form 6 image.
• mega : Name of the Mega Stone (first Mega Stone where applicable). Also controls Mega Evolution related displays.
• mega2 : Name of the second Mega Stone. Also controls Mega Evolution related displays.
• generation : Generation Pokémon was introduced
• ndex : National Pokédex number
• jdex : Johto Pokédex number. New number, where applicable.
• oldjdex : Old Johto Pokédex number.
• hdex : Hoenn Pokédex number
• sdex : Sinnoh Pokédex number
• udex : Unova (BW) Pokédex number
• u2dex : Unova (B2W2) Pokédex number
• karea : Kalos Pokédex area (Central, Coastal, or Mountain)
• kdex : Kalos Pokédex number
• adex : Alola Pokédex number
• fbrow : Fiore Browser number
• abrow : Almia Browser number
• obrow : Oblivia (Present) Browser number
• opbrow : Oblivia (Past) Browser number, including prefix
• type1 : Type. (First type listed in the Pokédex, where applicable)
• type2 : Second type, if applicable.
• form2type1 : Form 2 type. (First type listed in the Pokédex, where applicable)
• form2type2 : Form 2 second type, if applicable.
• form3type1 : Form 3 type. (First type listed in the Pokédex, where applicable)
• form3type2 : Form 3 second type, if applicable.
• form4type1 : Form 4 type. (First type listed in the Pokédex, where applicable)
• form4type2 : Form 4 second type, if applicable.
• form5type1 : Form 5 type. (First type listed in the Pokédex, where applicable)
• form5type2 : Form 5 second type, if applicable.
• form6type1 : Form 6 type. (First type listed in the Pokédex, where applicable)
• form6type2 : Form 6 second type, if applicable.
• abilitylayout : The basic desired layout of the Abilities, in the form "cells_in_first_row+cells_in_second_row". (Each cell can contain one or two Abilities per form, or a Mega or Hidden Ability, mainly depending on which Ability parameters are set.)
• abilitycold : If the Pokémon has a Hidden Ability that will be the only cell in the second row, set this to 2 so it spans both cells above
• abilitycolm : If the Pokémon has a Mega Ability that will be the only cell in the second row, set this to 2 so it spans both cells above
• ability1 : First (or only) standard Ability
• ability2 : Second standard Ability
• ability2-1 : Form 2 first (or only) Ability
• ability2-2 : Form 2 second Ability
• ability3-1 : Form 3 first (or only) Ability
• ability3-2 : Form 3 second Ability
• abilityd : Hidden Ability
• abilitydcaption : A caption prefixed to the label for abilityd
• abilityd2 : Second Hidden Ability (for an alternate form)
• abilityd2caption : A caption prefixed to the label for abilityd2
• abilitym : First (only) Mega Evolution Ability
• abilitym2 : Second Mega Evolution Ability
• gendercode : Byte setting for the species' gender ratios:
  • 256 = unknown, 255 = genderless, 254 = all female, 223 = 1 male:7 female, 191 = 1 male:3 female, 127 = 1 male:1 female, 63 = 3 male:1 female, 31 = 7 male:1 female, 0 = male only.
• catchrate : Catch rate
• egggroupn : Number of Egg Groups. 0 if "Undiscovered group" (i.e., no Eggs)
• egggroup1 : Egg Group 1
• egggroup2 : Egg Group 2
• eggcycles : How many Egg cycles it takes for an Egg to hatch.
• height-ftin : Imperial height
• height-m : Metric height
• height-ftin2 : Form 2 imperial height
• height-m2 : Form 2 metric height
• height-ftin3 : Form 3 imperial height
• height-m3 : Form 3 metric height
• weight-lbs : Imperial weight
• weight-kg : Metric weight
• weight-lbs2 : Form 2 imperial weight
• weight-kg2 : Form 2 metric weight
• weight-lbs3 : Form 3 imperial weight
• weight-kg3 : Form 3 metric weight
• expyield : Experience yield
• oldexp : Experience yield prior to Gen V
• g4exp : Experience yield in Gen IV, if Pokémon is available and has a different yield prior to Gen IV.
• lv100exp : Total experience required to reach level 100. Sets levelling rate.
• evforms : Number of forms which have different EV yield.
• evtotal : Total EV yield
• evhp : HP EV yield
• evat : Attack EV yield
• evde : Defence EV yield
• evsa : Special attack EV yield
• evsd : Special defence EV yield
• evsp : Speed EV yield
• evhp2 : Form 2 HP EV yield
• evat2 : Form 2 attack EV yield
• evde2 : Form 2 defence EV yield
• evsa2 : Form 2 special attack EV yield
• evsd2 : Form 2 special defence EV yield
• evsp2 : Form 2 speed EV yield
• evhp3 : Form 3 HP EV yield
• evat3 : Form 3 attack EV yield
• evde3 : Form 3 defence EV yield
• evsa3 : Form 3 special attack EV yield
• evsd3 : Form 3 special defence EV yield
• evsp3 : Form 3 speed EV yield
• evhp4 : Form 4 HP EV yield
• evat4 : Form 4 attack EV yield
• evde4 : Form 4 defence EV yield
• evsa4 : Form 4 special attack EV yield
• evsd4 : Form 4 special defence EV yield
• evsp4 : Form 4 speed EV yield
• body : Body style (number)
• body2 : Form 2 body style (number)
• foot2 : Second footprint file name, not including the leading F or file extension.
• color : Color listed in the Pokédex.
• formcolors : Set to "yes" if any forms have different colors.
• friendship : Base friendship value.
• pokefordex : Name for external links which don't use the standard name or ndex number

Let me know if there are any issues. Werdnae (talk) 08:09, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Tweaks

Just wondered if maybe the border should be made 3px, and also, that the border woudl be that if the Pokémon has a secondary type the border would be the same color as the second type. Just so the Pokémon articles keep cohesive with the templates etc. ----samm :D 15:07, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Also, when I edited Flabébé/Floette/Florges article, there is a mysterious 4 next to one of the images, despite there being no error in the code on the articles (or I seem to be missing) ----samm :D 19:17, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Hidden Abilities.

So Duskull line gained Frisk in G6 (despite being a G4 Ability), while Litwick family got Shadow Tag changed to Infiltrator. There should be something to note that. Uploader (talk) 14:08, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Footprint data for X/Y Pokémon

I'm not sure if this is technically possibly via MediaWiki, but if it is one could make the footprint area disappear, stretching the body style template if the national dex number is above 649. I propose this to remove all those broken file links. Pikachu Bros. (talk) 16:06, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, it's certainly possible, and needs to be done. --Abcboy (talk) 21:11, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

It is possible, but may require some rearranging to implement. I'll speak with the other staff members to see about a solution. Berrenta (talk) 21:27, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Missing padding for main page text

On my end, at least, the infoboxes don't seem to have left-edge padding, causing text in a page to run up to the edge, which makes a bit of text hard to read. I would attempt to fix it, but I am neither very familiar with table formatting, nor do I have the permissions to do so. Can someone who is able to make sure there is enough padding? --TruePikachu (talk) 04:23, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Hoopa's form changes

Would it be possible for someone to please edit the template to account for the names of Hoopa's alternate forms (similar to what was done for Charizard and Mewtwo's dual Mega Evolutions)? The correct form names are "Hoopa Confined" and "Hoopa Unbound", though as it is now, the template displays them as "Confined Hoopa" and "Unbound Hoopa".

Xérnéas (talk) 22:46, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

How do the heights of the boxes in this template work?

Hi, sorry for asking a question like this, but I wonder, how do you make it so that the boxes that display the stats are the same height no matter what, in every resolution, browser and zoom %? For example, in the Sylveon (Pokémon) page, the gender and the catch rate boxes [the white boxes that contain the actual information] are the exact same size--symmetrical--even though the "Gender" box is larger than the "Catch rate" box; I assume that the "Catch rate" box automatically adjusted to the same height as the "Gender" box. How do you do this? I can't seem to find a solution for this problem that's in another wiki I'm part of. Over on that wiki, whenever one box has more info than the one next to it, they don't automatically adjust, and the only solution would be to add exact pixel heights, which would be unbelievably cumbersome for over 2,000 pages. I hope you find the time to answer my question, and if you don't want to, I understand. Thanks! ♥ 493Darkrai (talk) 01:11, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Some updates

I just want to leave this somewhere it will hopefully be easy to remember. There are a couple things that need updating in this template. Whenever an update becomes convenient (perhaps whenever Gen VII info like the Pokedex/region name is added), hopefully these can be incorporated.

Form names

Some Pokemon like Hoopa should properly have "backwards" form names to how most other form names are constructed. The simple solution would be to just do something like replace

<small>{{{forme4|}}} {{{name|{{{tmname|}}}}}}</small>

With:

<small>{{{override4|{{{forme4|}}} {{{name|{{{tmname|}}}}}}}}}</small>

(Or what-have-you. And that for each forme1-5 parameter, and perhaps forme6 for good measure.)

Hatch time

The hatch time has been wrong for a while (but then, so was Egg cycle). To fix this, these two pieces of code:

{{#expr:{{{eggcycles|0}}}*255}}
{{#expr:({{{eggcycles|0}}}*255)+254}}

Should be changed to:

{{#expr: 257*{{{eggcycles|0}}}}}
{{#expr: 257*{{{eggcycles|0}}}+256}}

Tiddlywinks (talk) 03:53, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

As a couple of more trivial suggestions, I think it might be nice to change {{tt|*|Not legitimately obtainable as an Egg}} to <br><small>Egg not obtainable</small> just so that's not hidden (for smartphone users and such); and just for a sort of consistency, <span style="color:#000;">Undiscovered group</span> could be changed to <span style="color:#000;">Undiscovered</span> (this is shown if egggroupn is set to 0, but without that, Egg Groups are just displayed like "Field" and "Undiscovered"). Tiddlywinks (talk) 04:58, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

I am wondering if the parameters have been passed wrongly in some of the existing articles of legendary Pokemon? Hoopa, for example, passes

egggroupn=1 |
egggroup1=Undiscovered |

while if egggroupn was 0 in the first place, egggroup1 would not be necessary and would be automatically filled in by the template, along with the "not obtainable as egg" text. Chenzw (talk) 05:02, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

They're not exactly wrong. But at any rate, I'd ask you to just leave those egggroup1 parameters for now for the possibility of the changes below. =P (Hell, I should probably just make my own userpage for this template.)

Perhaps Ditto/Ditto's Egg Group could also receive a similar note when egggroupn is set to 0... |0=[[Undiscovered (Egg Group)|<span style="color:#000;">Undiscovered group</span>]] could be removed (it'll fall through to call on egggroup1) along with =[[Category:Undiscovered group Pokémon]] (the 0 case will then be grouped with 1, and work the same so long as egggroup1 has been set.

(Also, the Egg Group categories line could be shorter just by using <!--Egg Groups-->[[Category:{{{egggroup1}}} group Pokémon]] {{#ifeq: {{{egggroupn|0}}}|2|[[Category:{{{egggroup2}}} group Pokémon]]}} instead... Again, so long as egggroup1 has been set.) Tiddlywinks (talk) 05:22, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

I've mocked up the changes above at User:Tiddlywinks/Pokémon Infobox, excluding the form override (I'll set about just reworking that entirely later so we just need a parameter for each full form name). You can test it on any species pages by substituting my userspace template name and previewing (it might be quickest to just copy the template call to an empty/dummy page and preview there).

Removing the Not legitimately obtainable as an Egg note from hovertext kind of required an extra parser function to work (perhaps) best, so it may be preferred to leave out that extra #ifeq and the change to the note... Tiddlywinks (talk) 23:40, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Alola Dex

Since the Alola Pokédex is split up into areas like the Kalos dex, should this template be updated to allow for specifying the dex region? N. Onymous (talk) 23:19, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Pokemon can be in multiple island dexes. That would just get too messy to be worth anything. Tiddlywinks (talk) 00:17, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Besides the official numbering from the original Alola Pokédex list remains the same despite the how the Pokémon are listed in each of the different four variants such as Pikipek remaining listed as 010 despite being presented first for the other three variants and therefore unlike Kalos each area does not have it's own separate numbering, which unfortunately renders this unnecessary. -Tyler53841 (talk) 07:19, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

body style

zygarde has 3 body style due to its forme. can someone update the template so we can add the third forme in? the current template only support 2 body style. -Pokeant (talk) 02:52, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Is the catch probability still accurate in Generation VI?

It is noted in the 'Catch rate' page that the formula was changed to make the catch probability approximately the same as in Generation V, which only did three shake checks instead of four. Thus, wouldn't the probabilities be slightly higher than those indicated by this template?

For example, the probability of catching a fully healthy Pidgey with a basic Poké Ball works out to 43.9%, not 33.3%.

- Andrio Celos (talk) 09:56, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

I haven't done the numbers, but I think that article says that basically, the lowered shake probability (exactly) makes up for an additional shake check, so that the overall catch probability remains largely unchanged. I imagine you've just made an error somewhere in your calculation!? Nescientist (talk) 11:15, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Generation V changed the system so that three shake checks were done instead of four. The success chance of each shake check is almost exactly the same ((a/256)^(1/4)). This means that the chance of catching a Pokémon actually increased a little ((a/256)^(3/4)), compared to Generation IV.

Generation VI does four shake checks again, but the success chance of each shake check was increased ((a/256)^(3/16)) so that the overall chance of catching the Pokémon didn't change ((a/256)^(3/4)).

- Andrio Celos (talk) 14:06, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Catch rate formula error

Like Generation V, the catch probability for an ordinary Poké Ball at full HP in Generation VI–VII is very nearly (C / 765)^.75, where C is the species catch rate. However, the formula used in the infobox — C/255 * 1/3 — does not include the exponent. This means the probability given is lower than the actual probability; for instance, Pokémon with a catch rate of 30 are listed as having a 3.9% chance to be caught, when the correct value 8.8%.

To correct this, I'm pretty sure the line just needs to be changed from

| {{#iferror: {{#expr:{{{catchrate|Unknown}}} - 1}}|Unknown|{{{catchrate|3}}} <small>({{tt|{{#expr: ({{{catchrate|3}}}/255 * 1/3 * 100) round 1}}%|When an ordinary Poké Ball is thrown at full health}})</small>}}

to

| {{#iferror: {{#expr:{{{catchrate|Unknown}}} - 1}}|Unknown|{{{catchrate|3}}} <small>({{tt|{{#expr: (({{{catchrate|3}}}/765)^.75 * 100) round 1}}%|When an ordinary Poké Ball is thrown at full health}})</small>}}

Randomwaffle23 (talk) 22:31, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Can someone please correct this? I get at least one person a month asking me why my catch rate calculators (which do the math correctly) don't agree with Bulbapedia. Dragonfree (talk) 07:06, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

I've updated this to use the code provided by Randomwaffle23 (which I checked against the formula on Dragonfree's site The Cave of the Dragonflies to confirm it was correct). I've also explicitly mentioned the generation for which it is applicable in the tooltip now, so that when it falls out of date again, at least it will state the generation for which it was true. It will still be wrong for Ultra Beasts, because standard Poké Balls do not have a 1× catch rate against them (and I'm not really sure whether it makes more sense to show the probability of using a Poké Ball or a Beast Ball on them).

Furthermore, I think it's worth re-evaluating whether a full-health catch rate is actually helpful to readers. The assumptions made are not the conditions under which people normally catch Pokémon. The percentage seems rather pointless. --SnorlaxMonster 12:26, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Why hasn't this template been updated for USUM yet?

Pokemon Ultra Sun and Ultra Moon have been out for two months now. This template still hasn't been updated for those games. What gives? MasterBraixen96 (talk) 21:34, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Bumping this. This and the held items template are still outdated, and should be relatively easy to update.Lanthanum (talk) 17:48, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

7 months and still nothing. I think it's time for an update. Oneofthosedf (talk) 19:59, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

It hasn't been updated as we are working on moving the numbers to the Pokedex boxes. The technicalities of this are taking slightly longer then expected. --Spriteit (talk) 08:16, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Kanto Pokedex expansion

I think that Kanto formula should be updated, as in LGPE Meltan and Melmetal are respectively #152 and #153. Asmod96 (talk) 01:00, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

The problem is that there's no kanto variable in the template. Changing the {{{ndex|000}}} to {{{ndex|{{{kantodex|000}}}}}} in

| style="{{#ifexpr: {{{ndex|999}}} < 152||display: none;}}" | <nowiki>#{{{ndex|000}}}<br/><small>[[List of Pokémon by Kanto Pokédex number|<span style="color:#000;">Kanto</span>]]</small></nowiki>

And

<!--Regional Pokédex-->{{#ifexpr: {{{ndex|999}}} < 152|[[Category:Pokémon in the Kanto Pokédex|{{{ndex|}}}]]}}

to

<!--Regional Pokédex-->{{#if: {{{kantodex|}}}|[[Category:Pokémon in the Kanto Pokédex|{{{kantodex|}}}]]|{{#ifexpr: {{{ndex|999}}} < 152|[[Category:Pokémon in the Kanto Pokédex|{{{ndex|}}}]]}}}}

...would basically do it, I think (kantodex since kdex is taken by Kalos). If a different category was wanted for the two Pokemon in question (ala Black 2/White 2 having separate categories from Black/White), it would even be simpler since you just add another line to the second part rather than messing with an extra #if. - Reboot (talk) 18:33, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

PS: I can't remove the messed-up copy/paste error in the first line of my own post? Seriously? - Reboot (talk) 18:35, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

I fixed for you wrote, as mentioned in the comment above yours however the Number section won't be getting an update as we are planning to display them elsewhere on the page. --Spriteit (talk) 05:13, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

If we are going to update, we need to update the body style too. The template still only show two body style, but with zygarde complete, we need to update it to include three instead. -Pokeant (talk) 09:21, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

USUM Pokedex numbers and ability changes

The template needs an a2dex parameter for USUM Pokedex numbers and some way to say that Pelipper can't have drizzle before Generation 7. sumwun (talk) 18:21, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

The numbers are now in the Pokedex entry templates (if you haven't noticed), the numbers in the infobox will eventually be taken out. We're still working on updating the templates.--ForceFire 04:54, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

The same discussion is happening here, just so we keep most of it in one page. Suic12- (talk) 13:45, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Is anyone still working on making the template say Pelipper can't have drizzle in gen 6? sumwun (talk, contribs) 03:36, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Fix for Toxtricity

Due to the way that the infobox is set up, the form names are incorrect for abilities, types, heights, and weights if there are more than 2 forms, the first 2 forms are in one image, and the data listed are different between forms. This can be seen on Toxtricity's page, where Amped Form's abilities are listed as just "Toxtricity" and Low Key Form's ablities are listed as "Gigantamax Toxtricity", because those are the two images in the infobox.

I have made a fix that (hopefully) should not interfere with anything else, but would fix the above problem and also allow us to implement similar ideas on pages like Urshifu. It adds new parameters, "form1alt", "form2alt", etc, which will change the name of the forms except for the images at the top.

I have tested this with Toxtricity and it does work.

The updated template can be found here. --celadonk (talk) 17:44, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Update to hatch time calculation

As per Egg cycle, an egg cycle is now 256 steps in Gen 7 (no word on Gen 8). This template's calculation currently uses 257 steps per cycle, which is from Gens 5 and 6. This should be a quick fix. ~ Serial Colour (talk) 13:57, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Not enough freedom to set experience yields for different gens

Some Pokémon (like Delcatty) had their exp yields change in gen 7, and others (like Gardevoir) had their exp yields change in gen 8. In the current template, there is no way to display these differences. TotalPotato (talk) 10:37, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

We do have plans in the works for this infobox and I've noted down this issue as well as the previous ones. Increasing changes within the games and forms add an increasing amount of issues. We're trying to come up with a capable compromise. --Spriteit (talk) 04:59, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

An oversight

So I was looking at the page for Slowbro, and I noticed an oversight with this template. Since Galarian Slowbro now takes the place of the "form2" variable, the template says that Galarian Slowbro has the "Pokémon consisting of a head and arms" body shape instead of Mega Slowbro like it's supposed to since Mega Slowbro is now "form3" instead of the "form2" and the "body2" variable only accounts for the "form2" variable, so I think that a "body3" variable should be added to the template to fix this issue. Luigi1234 (talk) 16:17, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

ability1note and ability2note

Can someone add ability1note and ability2note parameters similar to egggroup1note? sumwun (talk, contribs) 05:26, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

This has been added. --Abcboy (talk) 02:27, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

3 or more Body Shapes

As of right now, Slowbro's Galarian form is given the body form of the Mega, as the Mega has a different body form, but the Galarian form does not, which presents inaccurate information. Additionally, in many cases where Pokémon have three or more forms, such as Necrozma and Zygarde, those additional forms are not covered at all. A simple solution to both of these issues would be to add something similar to how Vivillon's different colors are handled:

{{#if: {{{formbody|}}}|<br><small>Other forms may have other shapes.</small>}}

WOLKsite (talk) 11:26, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

This has been added. --Abcboy (talk) 02:27, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

5+ forms height and weight

The template is currently able to display up to 6 different forms of a Pokémon, but height and weight fields can't take more than 4, because of this the article for Pikachu doesn't display height and weight data for it's Gigantamax form, which is set as a 5th form. Some of the other data fields also aren't set to go this high, but maybe they don't all need to. MechaMew5000 (talk) 07:27, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Side note:At least 2 Pokémon have forms that are in different egg groups than the main form, but the template isn't set to handle this. Ash-Greninja, Cosplay Pikachu, and the Pikachu in a hat variations are in the Undiscovered group, while their primary forms are not. MechaMew5000 (talk) 08:36, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Same link

Why is this infobox listing the same Bulbagarden Archive link in two separate locations? As far as I'm concerned, it should really be only one link to qualify for this job. -- PanchamBro (talk • contributions) 17:43, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Hatch steps update for SWSH, BDSP, and SV mechanics

Hatch cycles last 128 steps in SWSH and SV, but 255 in BDSP. Reference 1 Reference 2 Reference 3
Currently the wrong range of hatch steps are displayed for all Gen VIII and Gen IX compatible species, and it also doesn't really specify which length of steps occurs in which generation, and I'm not sure displaying a range like "2,560-5,140 steps" is helpful, since it doesn't tell you which games that occurs in, and Pokemon don't actually have a range of steps, it's an exact number of steps determined by the egg cycles and how many steps are in a cycle per game. Atrius97 (talk) 05:31, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Fix for the Meowth Page

The Meowth page has limitations for the abilities listed in the infobox and has a disclaimer in the article text about the infobox's limitations. I was able to make a small change to the infobox template (modified template) to fix it as seen here. This change won't effect any other page, because if the meowthfixstring field (you can rename this to something more elegant if you want) isn't filled, it continues forwards with the existing code. Nairbnroh (talk) 14:38, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Footprints

A long time ago, this template (or at least an earlier version of it) used to contain habitat information from FRLG, but it was removed because we got to a point where more Pokémon lacked habitat information than had it. We're rapidly approaching that same point with footprints, which haven't been seen since Generation V, so are there any plans for that eventuality? Making it so that there is a parameter that will only display footprint information if the Pokémon has one (this can be done with an #ifexist function I believe) is one way of solving it if you don't want to get rid of it entirely. Biblical Bambi (talk) 01:16, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea; seconding this. Waiting to hear what others think. Anzasquiddles 2222(:D)SSSS (talk) 03:41, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, yes there is a plan! (Well.. at least sort of.) I am/we are currently analyzing the infobox, and in a more general scope than just footprints, too. (The footprint issue was one of the reasons why, actually.)

There's not much more I can say at this point (mainly because it's only just started), but if you'll bear with me, you'll hopefully hear/see something in the next weeks. Nescientist (talk) 16:26, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Pronunciation

Is it possible to include pronunciation in this template? Some Pokémon names are a bit ambiguous as to this, and the information doesn’t seem to exist on this wiki. I could be wrong though… CyberDragonM (talk) 17:57, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Black and White Experience Yields for the Unova First Partners

Snivy, Tepig and Oshawott have a base experience yield of 28 in Black and White, and 62 from Black 2 and White 2 onwards. This is to prevent the player from having a level advantage against Cheren if they defeat Bianca. I think a |bwexp parameter should be added to the template. BeyondTheHorizon (talk) 11:01, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Height and Weight for at least 3 more forms needs to be added

With the recent addition of Mega Floette, Floette now has 7 forms (the five colors, Eternal Flower, and Mega). Mega Floette has a different weight from all other forms. Trying to update Floette's page, I found that this template only supports differing height and weights for 4 forms. Support should then be added for 3 more forms for height and weight. DewGaming (talk) 02:46, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

More form params or less form params?

Trying to bridge the discussion from the Discord server over here as well. Basically the other day I was asked about adding an extra Form param to the Infobox template so that we can display all of Minior's core colors. When I brought it up on Discord some people spoke against the idea of adding more form params for minor color variations (eg. Flabébé) since it was thought to promote clutter and the info can instead be put on the Biology section.

What does everyone think? anZAsquiddles 2222(:D)SSSS (talk) 07:56, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

I'll reiterate what I mentioned there, for the sake of cohesion. I think it might be beneficial to have two versions of the template, since discussion has implied that tabbing the infobox is a no-go for handling loadtimes. We can have one version with form height/weight splits, for forms where that does change (eg, Lycanroc), and one version without, for forms where it doesn't (like the aforementioned Flabébé). I'm pretty sure that infobox migration would take time and concerted effort from a small group of people, judging by what I've come to understand about infoboxes, but it seems the most reasonable approach to me. I personally see no reason to keep other colored forms out of the visuals for the infobox, but redundant numbers feels odd at best and like a formatting mistake at worst. BittersweetVICTORY (talk) 08:15, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Remove the Flabébé/Floette/Florges/Minior forms from the Infobox that are just recolors (meaning one form for Flabébé and Florges, three forms for Floette, two forms for Minior). These are only aesthetic changes, we don't have key art for them and they break the infobox. Abundantly clear choice in my eyes. The forms will still be there right next to the infobox, nobody will miss them. Doesn't have to be a hard rule or anything, seems pretty easy to address this in a case-by-case basis. I would personally remove the Genesect forms as well to make the infobox nicer. After all, the drives have no effect on anything we mention in the infobox, and the table with the forms grouped with the respective drives is more useful. Oneofthosedf (talk) (contribs) 16:59, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Yeah I feel if the extra forms are breaking the current infobox, they should be removed. We can discuss if/how to include them when we get around to fixing/updating the template. Landfish7 17:11, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Worse case, we pick a form to represent all of the forms while keeping all of them under the forms section in bilgoy to make it eaiser. Jacob9594 (talk) 17:24, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

I just want to be clear, a formal decision has not been made here, and unless the number of forms are causing issues with the infobox, we should not be removing functional forms at this time unless decided otherwise. Landfish7 19:49, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

I mean this infobox can get quite messy when there are a lot of forms with conflicting information, and to be honest it could use a little pruning. Infoboxes are at their best when theres only a single image, maybe in rare cases 2. Even then though it should be of the base form of the Pokémon in my opinion. I dont have a problem and would even support the pruning of alternative form images from this infobox (these can and should be documented in the article), but generally I think the base form of each species provides the best representation. I will also say that i think images of "temporary gimmick" forms that are unique to specific situations in generations (think like Mega Evolutions, Gigantamax, Spiky ear pichu etc.) should be cut first before alternative forms that can't be freely swapped around (such as the 3 tatsugiri as an example). 4iamking 20:15, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Right, my point being that these are details we should work out before carrying out any changes. Landfish7 20:17, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Why 4iam does have a nice point but as Land said we need to figure what details specifically before we use this solution and help save less clutter on top pages for each Pokémon. Jacob9594 (talk) 20:31, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

4iamking is right to bring up what aspects need decided, whichever way we end up going with them. Landfish7 20:59, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

We do have a lot of temporary forms than forms are permanent. We could that option or base form option to save room on top pages and keep the rest in biology and form data stuff. Jacob9594 (talk) 21:33, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

I think only including an infobox image for a single "base form" in every case would be a bit shortsighted when it comes to Pokémon like Wormadam, Toxtricity, Lycanroc, Urshifu etc. where the Pokémon having multiple forms is a major part of its identity and the forms are usually treated equally to each other in official material. I feel similarly about regional forms too, I think removing major forms like these from the infobox would be de-emphasising them too much and wouldn't really help anyone. But I'm not too bothered about forms being removed from the infobox for Pokémon like Genesect where they don't even have proper artwork anyway. Hewer (talk) 23:42, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Yeah that is a very good point. Jacob9594 (talk) 00:34, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

I mean for most of those Pokémon they could probably be put on the same image, like we already do for something like Shellos. 4iamking 04:09, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Maybe, but I do think having form names in the infobox is helpful too. Hewer (talk) 10:31, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

The images are gonna be tiny, in the case of three forms or more, tinier than what we have now. Oneofthosedf (talk) (contribs) 14:24, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

I mean the whole thing gets incredibly subjective, which is why in my ideal world I think it should just be the base form in there. Even for something like Burmy, there is only one form of it when you search it on the official Pokédex here. To see the other forms you have to go to the species page and find what you are looking for in a dropdown menu. Ideally I'd prefer we just stick to 1 image of 1 form because that will be the most prominent, but I realize this is probably not something where there will be consensus developing. I will say though that info-boxes aren't galleries, they aren't supposed to be expansive in terms of giving visualizations every depiction, they are supposed to give the most important details of a subject matter at a glance. We already make (subjective) compromises by cutting out most Unown or Alcremie forms, even though if we took a strict Shellos style approach they should be in the picture as well. 4iamking 14:35, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

I would argue that something like Toxtricity's two forms absolutely qualifies as one of the most important details about the subject that should be conveyed in an infobox (certainly more important than some of the other stuff we list in there). If we need an objective criterion, we could show forms only if they have proper official artwork (or images like this that get used in place of artwork in official contexts). Of course, forms that only don't have it due to being new (like the Mega Evolutions from Legends ZA at the moment) would be an exception. Hewer (talk) 17:03, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Adding Z-Crystals and Pokémon-specific items

I'd like to suggest an addition to the template. Since it's possible to see a Pokémon's Mega Stone in the infobox, I feel like it only makes sense to also include its exclusive Z-Crystal and any items that are specific to it (for example, the Pikanium Z, Pikashunium Z, and the Light Ball for Pikachu). How does this sound? Machampionship (talk) 16:55, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

I would support this addition. I don't know if I'd put stat-boosting Pokémon specific held-items though. I would personally leave it to form-changing items & gimmick items. Chaogotchi (talk) 22:46, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Displaying forms

There's been an extensive discussion on Rotom's talk page about which forms should be displayed in the infobox and how they should be displayed. The general rule of thumb we've agreed to is that Pokémon forms should be included in the infobox if they're recognized as separate forms by an in-game Pokédex, with exceptions made for Pumpkaboo and Gourgeist (since their forms only differ in size, which is hard to depict in a context where the size of images varies) and Pokémon that have more than seven forms (because the infobox currently supports up to seven forms, which is enough to cover the use cases for the Pokémon forms we currently have). Questions that still remain to be answered:

• Most forms introduced in spin-off games are excluded on the basis of their games not having a Pokédex, with Pokopia and GO being the only ones with a Pokédex and unique forms. Pokopia's forms have been added to their respective infoboxes already, but should GO's?
• Some Pokémon's forms are displayed in a combined image, while others are displayed in separate images. How should we go about making this presentation more consistent?

Storm Aurora (talk) 20:18, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

The problem with GO's dex is it doesn't really function like most Pokedex's and considers things that would be gender differences or shiny alternatives to be "forms". Since the game really provides no additional infobox data, and the exclusive forms themselves aren't even named, i think its a pretty easy conclusion that we don't need to add them.

As it relates to point two; I would say that i'm not a big fan of duplicating images, I think seperate images for different forms makes the most sense; though merging variations that arent form differences into one image makes sense imo. 4iamking 20:47, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

i've made a proposal for how pokemon with combined images for two "default" forms could be handled , although it got buried

it's on my sandbox page . i proposed having pokemon with combined images to instead have alternating images with captions for what form is being shown. Chaogotchi (talk) 23:39, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

yeah this is what I was thinking (though the order would need to be swapped so the default forms are in the prominent position). 4iamking 03:39, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

well, the order does switch around. this is for forms that are seen as "equals" Chaogotchi (talk) 03:55, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

oh I didnt even see that that was done; but we really shouldn't be doing randomized switches; really anywhere on the Wiki. Also this really isnt necessary because there is a default form. 4iamking 04:07, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

what's the reason against switches? Clavell's page uses it Chaogotchi (talk) 04:12, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

It moves information around in a way that isn't user controllable or intuitive (even if someone purges the page they cant realistically control the new one that loads); and if we do it without explanation it can cause confusion. This would also be reordering information which isn't happening on Clavell's page so even more of a reason not to do it, especially given that there is a clear default form. 4iamking 04:23, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

based off of the previous conversation on Rotom's talk page, i was under the assumption that this was also discussing how Pokémon with two hypothetical default forms would be handled but if it has already been established & agreed on by everyone that every form has a singular default, then ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Chaogotchi (talk) 07:33, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

I think the best solution for such cases would be to allow both forms to be displayed prominently at once (either side-by-side or with one on top of the other) but if we really don't want to edit the infobox to allow for that then I could settle for just having the default form in the prominent spot. I agree with 4iamking that random switches aren't the way to go. Hewer (talk) 14:57, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

I think the main thing I would say is I kinda think another thing to consider is if we'd want to label the forms as they are labelled officially (i.e. Zigzagoon (Galarian Form) instead of Galarian Zigzagoon) TPC has been kinda consistent with this notation across many mediums now (including stuff like legality lists outside the games), so I do think there is some value in paying recognition to it as the formal form name since we really don't do so anywhere. It might get awkward with some species, primarily Rotom where the base form is technically referred to as Rotom (Rotom) but I also think its good to relay it regardless since it is the official notation. 4iamking 15:26, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

I also agree that we shouldn't use random switches for this. As for the suggestion of allowing both forms to be displayed prominently, I don't necessarily mind it, but it wouldn't help pages like Oricorio and Tatsugiri where the Pokémon has more than two forms and no clear default. What about the suggestion where the primary image is a combined image and the forms are displayed individually underneath?

As for the labels, we don't really need to be putting the species name in there (unless the species name is the name of the form) since it's already at the top of the box. The form name being appended to the species name is already implied. Storm Aurora (talk) 17:05, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

I'm fine with that but it still requires auditing each species to align the captions to the actual form names. Oricorio and Tatsugiri both have default forms (Baile and Curly), every species has a default form because the game requires it. 4iamking 17:32, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

I'd be willing to change all the form names to the official ones myself if that's a concern, this is also something I was trying to standardise recently on various Pokémon list pages.
I dislike the idea of having a combined image and then showing all the forms individually because it's unnecessarily repetitive and doesn't really solve the inconsistency problem. But it is a fair point that trying to decide which Pokémon do and don't have "default" forms for this purpose would end up being a bit arbitrary. Hewer (talk) 19:02, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

i enjoy the pitch for having them appear side-by-side, my switch idea was just meant to accommodate the way it currently works. i agree with Hewer on the redundancy issue with having one combined image and individual images below it.

as for the form names, there isn’t one true “official” name though, “Galarian Zigzagoon” (as it is right now) is just as official as “Zigzagoon (Galarian Form)”. i worry about how it’ll appear for something like Paldean Tauros, which would be “Tauros (Paldean Form) (Combat Breed))” following that format according to Champions.

i wouldn’t mind omitting the species name, i feel it’d look cleaner. The Pokédex does this in some games, just referring to a form as “Galarian Form”

We’d still end up with form names like “Rotom” but I think that’s still better than “Rotom (Rotom)” Chaogotchi (talk) 19:23, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

I mean the Pokédex form names are the closest you can get to "one true official name" for every form. Even if phrases like "Galarian Zigzagoon" are uttered officially, I think using the Pokédex form names across the board is better because it allows us to unify them all with a single, consistent set of official names rather than the current arbitrary ones. Also it allows us to convey things like Zigzagoon's regular form lacking a form name whereas Rotom's does have one, which is a distinction that we otherwise can't make (I also think omitting the species name is better here since it allows for more clarity and accuracy, and thankfully it can already be done with the current template). Hewer (talk) 20:53, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

While we're on the subject, a while ago I tried to edit Darmanitan's infobox to match the official order of its forms (which is Standard Mode, Zen Mode, Galarian Standard Mode, Galarian Zen Mode), but couldn't figure out a way to do so without breaking the Abilities section. Hewer (talk) 19:13, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Oh my god everyone brought up all the issues that I also had, including Darmanitan. Organization for it feels like such a mess. Furfrou has a single stock image in its infobox, which is fine, since its form count goes above 7 (it has 8), but this is strange to me, because I had always assumed its other forms were not counted because of that and it's all cosmetic. Except Pokemon like Minior Show its core in the infobox but only the Red Core which is the only one with stock art, again it goes beyond the count we allow (7, which Minor also has 8). There's three pieces of stock art for Furfrou that go unused on main space, and they are the three basic trims that you get in the game without unlocking anything, and the first three beyond the base form. I feel like if a Pokemon has officially recognized stock art it should probably be in the info box, right? What makes Furfrou different from Minior? I personally think all three of those stock art should be used in the infobox, just to sort of illustrate that it can do that.

As for actual layout, I can understand not having duplicate images like I had originally proposed (which I said it'd be redundant anyways from the get go). But I still prefer some sort of merged image for Pokemon with multiple default forms. If that's not something to benefit from, perhaps we can reorganize the actual layout to show multiple images more prominently? Maybe all four of Oricorio's Styles should be the same size in a 2x2 pattern? Something like Lycanroc having a triangular shape, with Midday on the left and Midnight on the right same size, Dusk being on the bottom (perhaps a bit smaller, since I think we can all agree it's not really the default). Something like Meowstic would benefit from that too, the male and female on top, Mega on the bottom. TrainerSplash (talk) 20:17, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

I think the thing with Furfrou is that the "Natural Form" is the only form you find in the wild. Minior can be any form in the wild while you have to take a Furfrou at a hair salon to change forms. Same principal as Rotom really, no one really argues what the base form of that mon is while Minior is up for debate. CrownMyFries (talk) 20:35, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure what being found in the wild has to do with anything. Most of Rotom's forms aren't found in the wild. nether is Cosplay Pikachu and all Mega Evolutions are not found in the wild either, yet they all go in the infobox. Why should Minior (who's in their own case, is actually a mid-battle form change and isn't initially found as its core) and Furfrou be any different? TrainerSplash (talk) 20:59, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Ok I'm gonna be real I though Minior had all its forms in the infobox but it doesn't haha. CrownMyFries (talk) 21:01, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

I feel now may be a good time to bring up this big table I made on my user page a few months ago, which documents every objective metric I could think of to determine the "notability" of all forms, mainly based on how they are presented in official sources. It demonstrates that Minior's core form is included in official sources much more consistently than Furfrou's trims. (Also there actually are some games where you can find Rotom's forms in the wild but I agree that that's not a relevant consideration.) Hewer (talk) 22:20, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

I had added Furfrou’s form art to the infobox myself, but reverted it as I was told it’d be implying there’s something special about those three to show only them and not all. Chaogotchi (talk) 22:18, 2 June 2026 (UTC)