Template talk:PokémoncardInfobox

From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
Jump to navigationJump to search

Using the Template

{{PokémoncardInfobox/Footer|type= |species= }}

Template Infobox Parameters

  • cardname: The cards full name
  • jname: The Pokémon's Japanese name.
  • jtrans: The English translation of the Japanese name.
  • image: imagename.jpg / imagename.gif
  • caption: Normally the illustrator - Illus. [[Kouki Saitou]], for instance.
  • evostage: Basic, Stage 1, Stage 2, LV. X etc...
  • type: The type of the Pokémon. Grass, Fire, Water, etc.
  • hp: Quite simply, just put the number of hit points the card has.
  • weakness: The type the Pokémon weak against. Grass, Fire, Water, etc.
  • resistance: The first type the Pokémon is strong against
  • resistance2: The second type the Pokémon is strong against
  • retreatcost: Number of energies needed to retreat the Pokémon.
  • species: The species of Pokémon on the card.

Template Infobox Expansion Parameters

  • type: The type of the Pokémon. Grass, Fire, Water, etc.
  • expansion: The expansion the Pokémon card is out of.
  • rarity: {{rar|Rarity of the card}}
  • cardno: The card number.

Template Infobox Footer Parameters

{{PokémoncardInfobox/Footer|type=The type of the Pokémon |species= The species of Pokémon on the card}}


First, the above "How to use" should be on the front, with "noinclude" tags.

Also, why is the "Species" box so strange? Why not just a normal colspan=2 box? --Raijinili 21:39, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

The Species box is like that because it's coded to not appear if nothing is added (Trainer Cards, ect.) The "How to use" is probably in the talk page due to it's length compared to the actual template. - Kogoro | Talk to me | 22:16, 9 November 2008
Actually, different infoboxes are used for Trainer and Energy cards, so the width of the Species row...I don't see why it can't be colspan="2", no. We'll have to wait and see what other admins think, as I'm still the baby. Cipher (Talk) 22:42, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Edit request

Edit this template so the automatic image resolution is 180px, but make it so that a user can also choose a different resolution, in case the image is smaller than the mentioned resolution. Chocolate 18:00, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't, really. Images shouldn't be under 180px anyway. As for the Japanese card images, which are something like 162px...not sure, they should be replaced anyway. But it doesn't stretch 'em too much anyways. Cipher (Talk) 18:22, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Sorry if I'm kind of late, but it stays 180 for everything. 180 is the closest we can get to real life card sizes, so it must stay. MaverickNate 20:01, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
But in real life, cards don't look stretched, do they? Chocolate 21:57, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Still no response after a month? Chocolate (Merry Christmas!) 15:24 12/22/2008
If an image is under 180px in width, it must be tagged with {{Bad picture}} tag, not just try to live with the thumbnail-version of the card. Low-res cards are bad. UltimateSephiroth (about me · chat · edits) 15:57, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Wrong, wrong, wrong. It needs to be under 180 and not from the Japanese card tcg site. Those are the smallest size we are going to have without demanding a higher size. The cards from the site are perfectly fine, they should not have the bad image template, because they aren't bad images. MaverickNate 16:04, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Right, didn't I say "put the template if the size is under 180px"? :P UltimateSephiroth (about me · chat · edits) 16:06, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Which is wrong. The Japanese images are slightly smaller than 180, but they should not be labeled as bad. MaverickNate 16:11, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Okay... but then IMO the template size should indeed be modifiable, since they will then become blurry when they're stretched to a bigger size, as Chocolate originally stated. UltimateSephiroth (about me · chat · edits) 16:16, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
It isn't that big of a difference to stretch out the image. MaverickNate 16:19, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

(resetting indent) Why not? Chocolate (Merry Christmas!) 16:20 12/22/2008

Why not what? You're trying to question a stated fact, and it isn't working so well. MaverickNate 16:27, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
And 19px difference of stretch won't do much. ΘρtιmαtumTalk 16:27, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
But that doesn't change the fact that it does still stretch it, even if it's only a little bit. Chocolate (Merry Christmas!) 16:29 12/22/2008
It might stretch it, but the stretch does not screw up the card artwork, which is the most important part. Plus, the japanese images are just placeholders that should be replaced once better scans * are made avaliable. MaverickNate 16:33, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I still think...

There should be a template that would place set info. And it could have the dividerbars, too... TTEchidna 01:24, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I like the divide bars idea, but they would need to go in specific places. MaverickNate 01:28, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
I'll have a go in a couple of days, shouldn't be too difficult. Not been well this weekend, hence inactivity, but I'll have a go later in the week. Cipher (Talk) 11:33, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Thought I may as well do it today. See what you think. Any of the clauses, if unnecessary, can be omitted - so for example, if I were to write the article for Infernape 4 LV.X, I'd be able to use expansion, rarity, English card number, Japanese half deck and Japanese card number. A divider can also be added at the end just by typing "dividers = yes". Having tested the template in an existing article, it works absolutely perfectly. As such, I'll move it into the mainspace if you want. Any comments or suggestions, let me know either here or on my sandbox discussion page. Cheers, Cipher (Talk) 15:33, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
I'd rather not have Japanese card rarity, or the hyphens in the japanese info fields, but...meh. MaverickNate 15:36, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Consider them gone. I always say, it's easier to put as much into a draft as possible and remove what isn't needed than it is to create too simple a draft and have to add stuff in later. =) Cipher (Talk) 15:39, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Also, we need info fields for the two card games, because the old cards that appeared in the games have set info for those. MaverickNate 15:47, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Added, see what you think. Cipher (Talk) 15:56, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Actually, I'm really not keen on that dividers clause, so I've removed it. It can be added in manually after the infobox. It just...doesn't look right, at all. "dividers = yes" is so...blegh. Actually putting the code in would just be better. Cipher (Talk) 16:12, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Okay GUIs, now I know this may be your stomping grounds.

But I, along with several others, think that the infobox needs an upgrade. Yes, it's 5000 cards to upgrade. I know. It sucks. But the information's all there, all that needs to be done is the upgrading of said information to fit in better. It's not like the exhaustive search that had to be done in making these things. TTEchidna 08:12, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

What exactly needs changing? Everything's there, I don't see that there's anything wrong with it. Cipher (Talk) 11:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Maybe there should be a link to the page Retreat cost. Bulbapedian2187 18:51, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm nitpicking here, but...

Could someone please add margins to here as well as TrainercardInfobox? I'm probably going to die if I see another TCG article with the [edit] links too close to the edge of the infobox. D: ~ overgrownsol 05:19, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

This template is the next one to get updated, and it is extremely soon. It won't be looking like this for very long. MaverickNate 13:44, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


Can something be done so weakness sections are half one type and half the other? Looks weird... ht14 23:13, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Very funny. Almost had me going for a sec-- oh wait you're serious.
God, that'd take a hell of a lot of programming... but I'll see what I can do. TTEchidna 03:41, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Requesting Basic Special Stage for evostage

We need an evosatge for basic special because Buried Fossil is read as a Baby Pokémon card when is it should be a Basic Pokémon that can evolve into Omanyte, Kabuto, or Aerodactyl. - unsigned comment from Hawkrai (talkcontribs)

This is why we need English scans. Only pre-EX Tyrogue and Buried Fossil use that specific one... sigh. I guess I'll change it back to being specific to Tyrogue and make a new one for the fossil trio. TTEchidna 03:39, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

One minor request...

Set it so typing in ex in the field yields italics... ht14 03:28, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't it already? MaverickNate 15:31, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Never mind then... ht14 13:03, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I've uploaded a new LEGEND Logo. The only difference between this new one (LEGEND) and the old one is that I've also cleared the white background for Es, G and D. - plau 16:19, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

A little thing

I think it would be really useful if there was a link somewhere here to the Pokémon shown on the card's species page. It's kind of annoying that neither this page, nor the page under the "card name" link, link to the Pokémons species page. I think it would be nice to add it on. --Celadonkey 19:25, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

It's in Template:PokémoncardInfobox/Footer. I'm not too familiar with our TCG pages, but I believe that footer is, or should be, used on most or all of our card pages. Right? Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 19:39, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Wow. I feel stupid now. I still feel like that isn't on all the pages, though. Maybe I'm just remembering wrong. --Celadonkey 19:46, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
The footer is used on every card page because every card has an expansion it was released in. MaverickNate 22:14, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
I...don't understand what you mean by that. Do you mean it's automatically added to every page, or is that just a side note? --Celadonkey 22:21, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Red GX

Is it possible to add Red GX into class section? Kubson302 (talk) 17:16, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

We need to see whether or not this is a distinct class of cards that has any actual gameplay difference or not first. Additionally, it is significantly important to take everything into consideration before adding a ton of bells and whistles to our templates. This new type of card is officially named Ultra Beast GX, not "Red GX", so we will have to double back and correct any fanmade terms used on the articles before moving forward with any more additions. MaverickNate 17:37, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
I'm almost sure that they were called "Red GX" during World Championships, but I might be wrong. Thanks for answer, anyways. Kubson302 (talk) 17:46, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
The only literature I can find is the Japanese website here calling them ウルトラビーストGX. Everywhere else, like the English website and the livefeeds from the event, says something like, Ultra Beasts, or "They". We can add the features, I just am not looking forward to adding them again. MaverickNate 17:52, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

evoname2 field?

Blissey-ex UF and Scizor-ex UF evolve from one of two different Pokemon - should there be an optional evoname2 field to handle this? (Note that in all of these cases the evospecies is the same for all options, so there's no current need for an evospecies2). Mteorman (talk) 01:33, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Suggestion: We should add a "Retreat Cost" category to the template

Basically implementing a "Pokémon cards with Retreat Cost of 0/1/2/3/4" category on the template, which can be toggled by inputting the appropriate number in the "retreatcost=" query. I think Retreat Cost categs are a really useful thing to have on the wiki, especially since we have quite a handful of cards that work based on Retreat Costs (eg. Feather Ball, Heavy Ball, Onix). Anzasquiddles (talk) 05:39, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

M Pokémon EX isn't official, change to Mega Evolution

Exactly what it says on the tin. Turns out, the EX-ness of all Mega Evolution Pokemon is merely implied. Card text, the rulebook, and the glossary insist that the term is Mega Evolution Pokémon, and Mega Evolution Pokémon-EX, while used, is likely a mistake. This means that Template:PokémoncardInfobox/EvomegaEX is displaying the wrong thing. It says "M Pokémon-EX". So this is the request to change that over Salmancer (talk) 15:43, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Alright, lets try this again. Let's put all the proverbial cards on the table, so that we come to an accurate conclusion.

Every Pokemon card has to have a stage. But... what are those stages called? Back in the Neo and E-card, cards printed "[Stage] Pokemon" in the stage field, and this wiki went with this kind of naming for cards. Evolution cards additionally printed just "[Stage]" We can see many examples, and we'll copy them into this page so that everyone can verify.

Neo & E card
Meganium (Expedition) Flaaffy (Aquapolis) Slugma (Neo Revelation) Cleffa (Neo Genesis)
Stage 2 Stage 1 N/A N/A
Stage 2 Pokemon Stage 1 Pokemon Basic Pokemon Baby Pokemon

For convenience's sake, let's call the first of these, "short name Stage" and the second, "long name Stage". But more commonly (as in, in every other series), Stages on the cards are printed only using the "short name Stage", "[Stage]" no matter if it is an Evolution card or not. While not a traditional stage, this argument is supposed to be about Mega Evolution cards from XY, so we'll throw two of them and one Primal here for comparison.

Other series
Alakazam (Base Set) Whiscash (EX Deoxys) Milcery (Rebel Clash) (Archen (Noble Victories) M Heracross EX M Mawile-EX Primal Groudon-EX
Stage 2 Stage 1 Basic Restored MEGA MEGA MEGA

(The cards of Mega and Primal Pokemon have the same stage, but there are two different templates. The one for Mega, Template:PokémoncardInfobox/EvomegaEX says M Pokémon-EX and the one for Primal, Template:PokémoncardInfobox/EvoprimalEX says "Primal Pokémon-EX". But... they're the same stage. We'll get back to this.)

But but, long name Stage is still seen when card text references the stages of card. See these examples for both non-Mega and Mega cases:

Cards referring to Stages
Big Air Balloon Gapejaw Bog Noivern ex Mega Turbo Faded Town Clawitzer (Steam Siege) Stantler (BREAKpoint)
N/A N/A Covert Flight: 70 N/A N/A Mega Boost Big Charge: 30+
The Stage 2 Pokémon this card is attached to has no Retreat Cost. Whenever either player puts a Basic Pokémon from their hand onto their Bench, put 2 damage counters on that Pokémon. During your opponent’s next turn, prevent all damage done to this Pokémon by attacks from Basic Pokémon Attach a basic Energy card from your discard pile to 1 of your Mega Evolution Pokémon. At any time between turns, put 2 damage counters on each Mega Evolution Pokémon Once during your turn (before your attack), you may attach a Special Energy card from your hand to 1 of your Mega Evolution Pokémon. If you have any Mega Evolution Pokémon on your Bench, this attack does 50 more damage.

Our card infoboxes use "long term stage" in all cases, even though that's not what is on actual cards. For instance, Template:PokémoncardInfobox/Evostage1 reads "Stage 1 Pokémon". But it is still in one sense correct, as per these effects calling by for "long term stage". These are infoboxes for specific objects though, so I would actually favor using "short term stage" for them, since that's what is on the card object. But this is a tangent.

(Given this, also it's kind funky that Template:TCG Evolution displays Baby Pokemon as "Baby Pokemon" but every other stages as just "[Stage]", like "Basic" and "Stage 1". Considering long name Stage still exists for every stage, we might as well use the long term in this navigation box. There clearly isn't a maximum width (see Anime characters) and wiki favors consistency (see swapping decklist card type indications from "Tool" to "PT".) But this is also a tangent.)

Now back to the topic, Template:PokémoncardInfobox/EvomegaEX. Neither Pokemon cards nor cards referencing stages use "M Pokémon-EX". That's what's in the infobox, but it doesn't line up with "short term Stage" or "long term Stage". It also fails a text search on Pkmncards. I checked TCG Live, there's simply no equivalent there; only a filter for the "MEGA" stage.

Additionally, there are two rulings from the Compendium which point out that Mega Turbo and Faded Town affect the Primal Pokemon as well, since they have the same stage. (here and here) This indicates that Mega Turbo and Faded Town are indeed checks on the Stage of a Pokemon, because how else do these cards function as per the rules? It can't be a name check, because Primal cards don't share name structure. It also probably isn't a check against the internal evolution chain list, because these cards don't say "evolves" anywhere on them. So for these cards to work, cards depicting Mega Evolution and Primal Reversion must have the same Stage. Which is "MEGA" or "Mega Evolution Pokemon", as per their cards.

All of this is to say that the name of the Stage in Template:PokémoncardInfobox/EvomegaEX should be the "long term Stage" of "MEGA", which is "Mega Evolution Pokemon". And the same goes for Template:PokémoncardInfobox/EvoprimalEX. (How did that get "Primal Pokemon-EX" anyway!? Like, the cards say MEGA on them, why in the world would their Stage not include the phrase "Mega" somewhere in it? I can only assume people were not paying attention.) (Cards referencing Mega Evolution Pokemon did only start coming out after the initial sets, but it's been nearly a decade since. At some point, it would have made sense to double back and confirm things.) Salmancer (talk) 13:33, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

We'll fix this in the infobox rework. glikglak 15:09, 9 March 2024 (UTC)