Bobsican
He/Him- 21,177
- 6,089
Okay, I was asked by @Sniper670 to do this thread.
Anyways, there was this CRT to claim that Arceus has all the powers in the setting of Pokémon, be it from any species or method regardless of if a type was directly involved or not, except it got explicitly rejected.
Why, you may ask? @DontTalkDT has been quite explicit on powers coming from a given source not translating into the source itself inherently gaining all usages of it, but to give a brief summary of points given and debunks directly from him:
No, Arceus isn't omniscient, not only he was unaware where the Jewel of Life was, and even required Ash to yell at him to remind him he already had it even after they time traveled to get it back to him, there's also the matter that as DT said, the concept of knowledge and knowledge per-say just aren't inherently related and DT has even brought up a case to make a example of that, so not only this is an exaggeration to say the least, it's setting a bad precedent while ignoring beraucrat input.
The Cosmic Awareness thing I was sent about Arceus is also poor evidence, not only it's explicit on Arceus just watching over the present, the idea of Arceus having already seen all events from the start to the end not only is way more assumptive, it's also contradicted by the above.
At best I'd advocate for a Nigh-Omniscient rating from stuff like this and the recontextualization on the CA not being that good, which in fact was a previous rating Arceus had.
Also a no, I'm afraid. Merely being the source of a power doesn't mean that the user gets access to any application whatsoever of it, the burden of proof is on the one making the outlandish claim, and it's far from the standard to grant creator deities all powers in their verse to them.
Another argument was also brought up based on the plates being what granted the Pokémon moves and abilities, but as DT also said, such statements don't even lean that way over the plates being merely an energy source, going back to the previous point of that not being usable evidence for this either.
As DT said, no, creation entities are very common and they don't have every power in the setting by default, this sets a bad precedent as well.
Probably the worst argument of the bunch, not only is this misusing scans (that are even noted to not be factual per-say in-universe) to make a false narrative as in reality there's nothing to correlate the example used (Regidrago, which is also dubious in-universe anyways) to the energy of the plates, as DT explains in the thread, there's hardly any precedent for a sufficiently strong Pokémon having every single move of its own type, straight up headcanon aside, especially as there's several attributes necessary beyond just a type to use a move or ability as DT also said.
We also don't grant powers just because a character is called "omnipotent", as it's a blatant NLF for our purposes, which is why we generally restrict to stuff characters have been shown to do in the first place.
Also sets a bad precedent as said by DT, we don't grant powers to a character as if they were inherent aspects of them by just summoning/creating something with a power already displayed in the setting, at best that'd need a separate section on the page, especially to avoid compositing as there's not sufficient evidence to combine every P&A in the series at the same time to Arceus.
----
Apparently even after @DontTalkDT explicitly declined this, this eventually got passed again in this CRT later on. The problem? I've noticed that DT hasn't commented in that thread at all, and that combined with how lower-ranking staff were clearly willing to accept this nonsense over Arceus on the past CRT leans me to believe this isn't accurate, and so here I am bringing up the topic again to see if we should either at best rewrite our site standards or just downgrade Arceus. After reading the OP, it also appears that it's just reiterating the same stuff as the above with just an extra statement saying that the plates have "every type's powers", which is still vague and with the above stuff still rendering questionable the premise, plus a few other things that fall apart without its other questionable premises passing.
I'd also advocate for a Discussion Rule on the matter as it's clear this is controversial and keeps going back and forth, regardless of conclusion.
Anyways, there was this CRT to claim that Arceus has all the powers in the setting of Pokémon, be it from any species or method regardless of if a type was directly involved or not, except it got explicitly rejected.
Why, you may ask? @DontTalkDT has been quite explicit on powers coming from a given source not translating into the source itself inherently gaining all usages of it, but to give a brief summary of points given and debunks directly from him:
No, Arceus isn't omniscient, not only he was unaware where the Jewel of Life was, and even required Ash to yell at him to remind him he already had it even after they time traveled to get it back to him, there's also the matter that as DT said, the concept of knowledge and knowledge per-say just aren't inherently related and DT has even brought up a case to make a example of that, so not only this is an exaggeration to say the least, it's setting a bad precedent while ignoring beraucrat input.
The Cosmic Awareness thing I was sent about Arceus is also poor evidence, not only it's explicit on Arceus just watching over the present, the idea of Arceus having already seen all events from the start to the end not only is way more assumptive, it's also contradicted by the above.
At best I'd advocate for a Nigh-Omniscient rating from stuff like this and the recontextualization on the CA not being that good, which in fact was a previous rating Arceus had.
Also a no, I'm afraid. Merely being the source of a power doesn't mean that the user gets access to any application whatsoever of it, the burden of proof is on the one making the outlandish claim, and it's far from the standard to grant creator deities all powers in their verse to them.
Another argument was also brought up based on the plates being what granted the Pokémon moves and abilities, but as DT also said, such statements don't even lean that way over the plates being merely an energy source, going back to the previous point of that not being usable evidence for this either.
As DT said, no, creation entities are very common and they don't have every power in the setting by default, this sets a bad precedent as well.
Probably the worst argument of the bunch, not only is this misusing scans (that are even noted to not be factual per-say in-universe) to make a false narrative as in reality there's nothing to correlate the example used (Regidrago, which is also dubious in-universe anyways) to the energy of the plates, as DT explains in the thread, there's hardly any precedent for a sufficiently strong Pokémon having every single move of its own type, straight up headcanon aside, especially as there's several attributes necessary beyond just a type to use a move or ability as DT also said.
We also don't grant powers just because a character is called "omnipotent", as it's a blatant NLF for our purposes, which is why we generally restrict to stuff characters have been shown to do in the first place.
Also sets a bad precedent as said by DT, we don't grant powers to a character as if they were inherent aspects of them by just summoning/creating something with a power already displayed in the setting, at best that'd need a separate section on the page, especially to avoid compositing as there's not sufficient evidence to combine every P&A in the series at the same time to Arceus.
----
Apparently even after @DontTalkDT explicitly declined this, this eventually got passed again in this CRT later on. The problem? I've noticed that DT hasn't commented in that thread at all, and that combined with how lower-ranking staff were clearly willing to accept this nonsense over Arceus on the past CRT leans me to believe this isn't accurate, and so here I am bringing up the topic again to see if we should either at best rewrite our site standards or just downgrade Arceus. After reading the OP, it also appears that it's just reiterating the same stuff as the above with just an extra statement saying that the plates have "every type's powers", which is still vague and with the above stuff still rendering questionable the premise, plus a few other things that fall apart without its other questionable premises passing.
I'd also advocate for a Discussion Rule on the matter as it's clear this is controversial and keeps going back and forth, regardless of conclusion.
