Template talk:Infobox enemy

From Pikipedia, the Pikmin wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Ah, actually, I was going to ask for one of these when the treasures were done. As if I'm going to be the one to finish them though, huh? Anyway, about the template, should we include weight and max. Pikmin like we have for the treasures? Also, what about treasure value and no. of seeds produced? Of course, those last two boxes would probably end of making a lot of N/A's for enemies that appeared in both games, but only in caves in Pikmin 2. I dunno, just a suggestion. I don't suppose pellets would have a box either, seeing as how it's usually random. —Jimbo Jambo

Right, in addition to that... There's no image size box, and the Size box that does exist (I'm assuming it's the enemy's length?) merely lists the areas the enemy appears in (if no size is specified, that is, as it just says {{{areas}}} in the actual template). Also, is the Attacks box really necessary? Most enemies will kill your Pikmin, and just about all of them shake Pikmin off when swarmed, so I'm just not sure it's really useful information. —Jimbo Jambo

Yep, the {{{areas}}} under size was an error, and I renamed the second size to 'height'. I'm not sure what should be there and what shouldn't; I only copied it from the pages that have the infobox code actually on the page. If there's a decision made on those, you can add it to the template; otherwise, put the outcome here and I'll put in in the template if you're not sure how. GP

Prez, I noticed you've started putting the template onto enemy pages. What do you think about what should and shouldn't be included? —Jimbo Jambo

Great question. I find the size awkward. How are we supposed to know the exact height of all enemies? That should be removed, but the rest is fine in my opinion. Although, what does the first "size" do? I though it would manage the size of the picture, but that doesn't seem to be the case.--Prezintenden
Oh, sorry, now I took the time to read your old comments. Apperantly I added the second "size" without knowing it no-longer existed. I'm in a hurry at the moment, so I'll change that later on today.--Prezintenden
I thought it was really neat to get an idea of exactly how big the creatures were, and I had assumed whoever came up with them just compared them to the size of Pikmin, but you're probably right. Unless it's from an official source (or the measurements were ridiculously accurate), it's not really good information. What about weight and seed/treasure value and stuff? And do you think the Attacks should stay? —Jimbo Jambo
No to the attacks, they are usually explained in the articles. Yes to the seeds and treasure value. I hope we don't have to go throwevery creature in the onions and see how many we get. Or is this shown in the Piklopedia (in-game)?

Man, why didn't I think of this earlier? I wouldn't have had to write as many enemy notes. Anyway, this FAQ has at least all the Pokos.--Prezintenden

Treasure values should be no problem. They're all listed in the Piklopedia. Weights and seeds produced might take a little more work. Instead of doing them one-by-one, just write down the numbers as you encounter creatures in the game. Remember also that a lot of cave-only enemies also appear in 2P Battle mode and do have seed values. Of course, no reason why one person should have to do it all. We can divide work up once the template is figured out.
What I'm more worried about is how to squeeze in the most information possible without cluttering he infobox. For enemies that don't produce seeds (no corpse, only found in caves), should we write N/A, or should we just not include it? And what about differences between Pikmin 1 and 2? Snagrets drop pellets in Pikmin 1. Should we just give the number of seeds produced for Pikmin 2, or should we specify the lack of a corpse in Pikmin 1? Ooh, and what about enemies that cannot be defeated (Flint Beetles, ect.)? I mean, infoboxes should be short and informative at the same time, but there's a lot of variable information. Just N/A could potentially mean a number of things. —Jimbo Jambo
The only real alternatives possible are "N/A - no corpse" and "N/A - not above ground". Are there actually any differences between Pikmin 1 and 2 for the body's size itself? Because we'd just use the Pikmin 2 Burrowing Snagret head weight if there is no head in Pikmin 1. I'm just about to remove height from the infobox; I'll leave the rest.
Oh, and I think that attacks should stay as a quick point of reference, so there's no need to read through the text. As long as it's concise, it's good in there. GP
Corpseless enemies can end up producing a lot of Pikmin if they drop pellets. I think we should at least specify what they drop, if anything (like N/A (Pellets) or something). And I do kind of doubt there are any huge weight differences (closest thing I can think of is max. number of carriers for Sheargrubs), but if one is found, we can easily just slap both weights on there. While I would disagree with you on Attacks, it doesn't really hurt to have it, especially if someone finds it useful, so I guess that stays.
Also, is there any way to get boxes not to appear if nothing is written in them? Most boxes just appear blank if nothing is specified, but some of the treasure infobox boxes won't even show if there's no text in them (like max. carriers). —Jimbo Jambo
Infobox enemy
Scientific Name {{{name}}}
Family {{{family}}}
Areas {{{areas}}}
Underground Areas {{{underground}}}
Weight {{{weight}}}
Max. Carriers {{{max_pikmin}}} Pikmin
Seed Worth {{{seeds}}} seeds
Treasure Value {{{value}}} pokos
Attacks {{{attacks}}}

How's this? I went with the phrase "Seed Worth" because it only took up one line. If that's no good then we can always change it. So anyway, I checked out the treasure infobox and I can't seem to figure out what makes certain boxes mandatory and others not. I'd really rather not have Treasure Value and Underground Areas appear on Pikmin 1 enemy pages. There are only like five, though, so I guess it's not a big deal if we can't do anything about it.

That's fine. I can make rows do that with the {{#ifeq:text|text2|outcome1|outcome2}} code. I'll see if I can get this template completed soon. GP
Wonderful. Could you do the same for seed worth? I thought for enemies that don't appear above ground that we could just not include the seeds, as opposed to writing N/A for corpseless enemies. Oh, er, max. carriers too. :x —Jimbo Jambo
Okay, if we have to add max Pikmin, I would like to know how we sort out differences. Creatures such as Sheargrubs can be pulled with 2 Pikmin in Pikmin (a fraction is even shown), but with only one in Pikmin 2. How do we write that?

|weight=2 in Pikmin, 1 in Pikmin 2

It seems a little long. Should it stay this way, or do we add a another line?--Prezintenden

I could put them in like in the treasures infobox, so you can put in either one weight or two, one for each game. And I'll do the same for max_pikmin. GP
It's fine now; you can either have nothing, one weight and max. Pikmin or weight and max. Pikmin for each game. I just need to see if I can get rid of that extra space. GP
Hey Green, the wei—oh, you already know. Well...like you said, there aren't too many differences between the two games. If the spaces can't be removed, we could just get rid of the variable Pikmin 1/2 weights and max. carriers and just add a note in parentheses where differences occur, like we have for treasures with differing TH numbers. —Jimbo Jambo
It's so annoying: the extra lines were introduced between rows, one per row; that's normally okay, but here there are multiple rows not being shown, so multiple extra lines. I just remove the lines to fix, then, and put the extra lines within the #ifeq - but no, it won't accept that. For some reason, a <br> tag and then a normal extra line works. It's fixed, at least, but I'm not sure how I did it... GP
Great, so...is it ready to go? I realize I'm kind of in the middle of the treasures, but I got really bored after the first 80 or so. Guess I can blame games like this for my attention span, huh? Heh. —Jimbo Jambo
Yep, ready for use. GP

Would it be possible to lengthen the box just a tiny bit so Scientific Name doesn't get broken? It just looks like of awkward since it's only like one or two characters too long. —Jimbo Jambo

Oh, heh, also, are we going to need a special plant template? Maybe it could include plants' actual scientific names, that is, if the actual species can be identified. —Jimbo Jambo

I'm not sure there's any need for a plants one, as there's so little that it could contain; there's only locations and scientific name, and locations are difficult to ascertain anyway and aren't of much use. GP

Jimbo, since you asked about the underground locations, I've been writing a guide for a while, with an enemies section, filling in locations as I go through the game (above and under ground). It's pretty much complete, only missing Dream Den and some of Cavern of Chaos (the information for that last is in a separate document that I've yet to integrate into the main guide). I'll upload that portion of the file for you to refer to.

There's also numbers of them, but you won't need them. I haven't done plants (but have done Candypops) at all, so they're not in. The main file is http://www.hotlinkfiles.com/files/965865_r6m7g/P2_1_.txt here and the Cavern of Chaos (if you can decipher it - in crazy note form) http://www.hotlinkfiles.com/files/965866_doror/tempPik2.txt here. GP

Thanks, this helps a lot. Although, er, Snagrets aren't listed under the White Flower Garden there in your guide. I don't know if any others are missing, but even if they are, they can be added later. —Jimbo Jambo
I knew I'd miss out something somewhere. They should be mostly right. GP

Now finished the enemy locations: file here. Should be complete. GP

Technical name[edit]

What is it and where are you getting it from? Also, before making major changes to a major template, it's a good idea to discuss it.

Note of the changes I just made:

  • reduced amount of code for 'Appears in'.
  • names are never not applicable: changed defaults to 'unknown'.
  • unbolded scientific name - why was it bold?
  • made links black again - this is for aesthetic purposes, considering how the skin's green clashes with the infobox.
  • changed location defaults to 'none'.
  • (re-)capitalised Challenge Mode (as in-game).
  • de-italicised Pikmin 1/2 instances: I've always thought there are (bound to be) so many of each on the wiki that these two particular game names shouldn't be capitalised, for consistency with 1000s of uses already around if nothing else. I've been meaning to bring this up one day, to decide either way...
  • changed 'Pikmin' to 'Pikmin 1' - there was a discussion about this, and the outcome favoured Pikmin 1 in most places. I should really get around to adding these things to Help:Editing#Pikipedia Standards and giving it its own article.
  • your changes to the category inclusion put Bulbmin in cat:Pikmins; fixed that, plus some optimisation.
  • added Pikmin 1/2 plants/enemy cats.
  • removed some whitespace that crept in, pushing down the first paragraph on articles.

Use section:

  • bolded mandatory parameters.
  • italicised parameter names.
  • simplified those multi-parameter fields so they only take up one line.
  • removed part saying to use 'N/A' for no attacks: wouldn't you use 'none' or 'N/A' as applicable (that is, for enemies/plants)?

pikmin/pikmin2/plant parameters are a nice idea and make more categories automatic, which is always good (obviously broken until all infoboxes are updated). I don't like the documentation being inconsistent with that of other templates now, but I guess you need more space here.

I think we should hide a few of the fields for plants (attacks, carriers, seeds, etc.) and change some more N/As to 'unknown'. GP

Yeah, I don't like how you've opted to show 'N/A' in many fields instead of hiding them altogether when there's no data. From further up the page, a sig-less post I think might be Prez's or JJ's, I'd really rather not have Treasure Value and Underground Areas appear on Pikmin 1 enemy pages. GP

...Well, that makes no sense, 'cause they don't. It's just plants that fail, then.

...Actually, why don't they have their own infobox? That would remove a fair few conditionals. GP

I only noticed just now that Espyo added a max. kills parameter, but I don't see any discussion of it anywhere. I am against this, as evaluation is highly inaccurate and it's really unnecessary. I wouldn't add it until we have recorded a substantial amount of the enemies, but I don't think we need to do that.--Prezintenden

I was going to say something, but never had the time when I saw a mention. I agree: how do you ascertain exactly how many Pikmin a Bulborb/Bulbear can eat, for example? And what's the point of it, anyway? GP
Hmmm... I thought this information would be interesting, at least for most enemies. The thing is that this value indicates how many Pikmin can be killed in a single attack. For instance, most people know that the Emperor Bulblax can eat a lot of Pikmin with his tongue. However, some people might be blindly bold enough to let some of their Pikmin get swallowed, thinking he won't eat that many. Well, news flash: the Emperor Bulblax in Pikmin can eat the entire army in a single gulp. Don't you think that's worth mentioning? And I'm not done yet. Those that played Pikmin and learned about his brutal tongue attack the hard way might play Pikmin 2, and be scared of losing a ton of Pikmin. Well, it might be interesting for them to know that only 9 Pikmin can die at a time in Pikmin 2 with the EB's tongue. This could even qualify as trivia! As for the question of measuring, it's quite easy. For instance, with a Red Bulborb, just make your army stay in front of it, everyone as close as possible, and let the Bulborb eat them. There could or could not be a limit to the amount of Pikmin it eats in a single bite. I don't quite see what's too complicated and useless about this value, as I explained.
Also, I know I should've talked about it beforehand. I just felt that I was doing so much to try to improve the wiki that I just felt really confident and went ahead without a second thought. For that, I apologize. My heart was in the right place. {EspyoT} 10:06, 24 April 2011 (EDT)
Well we at LEAST need to find a more professional-sounding term than "Max deaths". Ridly Metroid.gif Skree! 10:46, 24 April 2011 (EDT)
Well, I agree on that. "Killing potential"? "Kill efficiency"? There's no descriptive name that fits, that's why I used a tooltip and the first name that crossed my mind. {EspyoT} 12:28, 24 April 2011 (EDT)
Hm... Numeric Killing Potential (NKP)? Ridly Metroid.gif Skree! 14:04, 24 April 2011 (EDT)
I know what you meant, I just feel that the AoE will force you to squeeze Pikmin together. It's not very representative of how likely you are to actually lose that many. My suggestion would be to put these things, as you mentioned, into the trivia section when they are extraordinary, like EB or Volatile Dweevils, but nobody really cares much about Dwarf Bulborbs and Sheargrubs.
If you're willing to get all the data, go ahead, but I don't think we need it.--Prezintenden

We could do an average... 3 tests of a bunch of Pikmin in a relaxed group... Average Numeric Killing Potential (ANKP)? Ridly Metroid.gif Skree! 20:04, 24 April 2011 (EDT)

I understand all of your points of view. I suppose that if someone decides to gather the data (I know everyone's looking at me), maybe the infobox really isn't the best place for it. I might gather some values, and then decide if they:

  • Should be included in the infobox
  • Should fit in the trivia section, only for enemies with interesting kill values
  • Should be in a table somewhere in the article, possibly in the "Attacks" section.

As of now, we don't know which of the three will be chosen, and there's no guarantee that I'm doing the research, so I'll just add it to the projects. Now, personally, I think a table in the "Attacks" section would be best, so maybe we should really remove this value from the infobox. {EspyoT} 19:55, 24 April 2011 (EDT)

True... I agree for the most part. What we could also do is add a subsection table for attacks to the template, easily removable for harmless enimies. Ridly Metroid.gif Skree! 20:04, 24 April 2011 (EDT)

What do you mean? A table inside the template? That could leave it too cluttered. {EspyoT} 10:27, 25 April 2011 (EDT)
A table in the "Attacks" section - where is this? And yeah, I think for cases like the one you mentioned (EB), it's worthy of going into trivia. Maybe once we get that "enemies" page split out from Piklopedia, we can have some bits there. GP
Oh, it doesn't exist. If the values are interesting enough, we can add a table to the attacks section. If there is no attacks section, we'll create it. {EspyoT} 10:48, 30 April 2011 (EDT)

2-P Battle Mode[edit]

I've always been a bit curious as to why there isn't a 2-P battle mode parameter... Any time I see the name(s) of (a) 2-P battle location(s) in this infobox, they're in the Underground Areas parameter. Is there a reason to this? If so, then why? ~PikFan23

Even though adding an extra section just for 2P areas would be a bit of a waste for some enemies that only appear in one spot, I don't think it would look too bad. And having 2P areas in the Underground Areas section is just dumb. I'm in favor of a 2P areas section. — {EspyoT} 06:08, 2 August 2013 (EDT)

Adjusting the template for Pikmin 3[edit]

Could someone add "|pikmin3=y or n" to the template since we now have pages for upcoming enemies? Also, is there any way to make unfilled sections stay hidden? I was going to add templates t all of the new enemies but it looks ugly with all of the "N/A"s everywhere. --MegaSchmooSticker of a White Pikmin. 05:44, June 15, 2012 (UTC)

Dummy Icon[edit]

I think having Piklopedia zzdummy.png as a placeholder icon for infoboxes missing a specified icon would be beneficial. Of course, when an enemy icon is specified in the infobox, it would overwrite the dummy icon. Thoughts? If it doesn't work out here, it could certainly be put to use on the Pikmin Fanon. – ContributionsCheepy (talk) 16:24, February 24, 2020 (EST)

Not all subjects that use the infobox have an official icon, so it makes sense for nothing to show up. — {EspyoT} 10:29, February 25, 2020 (EST)

What times enemies are active at[edit]

I’ve been trying to add this for a while but to no avail, so anyone with more talent then me, can you add this to the template The preceding unsigned comment was added by The Pikmin Captain • (talk) • (contribs)

I don't think we need a parameter for this. Whether an enemy is active during the day or the night isn't a very important aspect of an enemy, and it would be yet another row in the infobox. The reason {{enemy stats}} and {{enemy other info}} exist is to reduce the size of the infobox, so we should be avoiding adding new parameters to this template whenever possible. — Soprano(talk) 02:28, August 22, 2023 (EDT)

Dandori challenges and battles[edit]

Can we add a parameter for Dandori Challenges and Dandori Battles a particular enemy is found in? I don't see a reason not to have that when there are parameters for Pikmin 2 challenges and Bingo Battles. 03:19, August 29, 2023 (EDT)

Sure, done! — Soprano(talk) 04:54, August 29, 2023 (EDT)
Thank you! 14:40, August 29, 2023 (EDT)

Pikmin 4 - Olimars Shipwreck Tale[edit]

Is it worth adding a section for Olimar's Shipwreck Tale as the enemies present in one area (in the game mode) may not be the same enemies that appear in Story Mode? I would sort of compare them to Side Stories in a way. Chazmatron(talk) 12:56, November 12, 2023 (BST)

I see where you're coming from, but many of the enemies in a given area are present there in both stories (compare the enemy lists for the Blossoming Arcadia for instance). That means we're dealing with a big overlap that would force us to mention the same area twice in many infoboxes, which looks redundant to a casual reader. I'm thinking of another solution: use {{tt}} to note whether an enemy in the shared areas is present in the main story, in OST or in both. We can use wording like "In Story Mode only" or "In Story Mode and Olimar's Shipwreck Tale". CortexCPU242 (talk) 09:14, November 28, 2023 (EST)
That's it. ~ Contributions Cheepy (talk)  10:37, November 28, 2023 (EST)