- 15,673
- 11,398
No, this is not something to claim that the Pokedex is unusable as a whole or that it was written by ten year olds. I just think we should stop considering Pokedex entries that are demonstrably false.
The Pokedex is, in a nutshell, a collection statements. And on this website, we generally only consider statements when they're somehow backed up by actions in the story.
Kadabra very obviously dosn't passively cause headaches for those around itself, because literally nobody who ever is around a Kadabra complains about Headaches. Shedinja very obviously dosn't absorb souls through it's back, because literally every trainer who ever owned a Shedinja looks into it's back and is totally fine.
Why is it that these statements get to be included on profiles despite being so obviously not true? And what of statements that go completely unsupported in canon despite not being outright debunked? Why is it that these statements get special treatment compared to other statements on this website? Hell, one of our main calcs for Pokémon is Puputar supposedly being able to topple a mountain, even though literally nothing outside of the Pokedex even remotely implies it can do that.
I understand it more for Legendary Pokemon since there's usually only one of them and they aren't generally active, but most Pokémon are wild animals. With all these mountain destruction statements, there shouldn't be a single mountain left in the entire Pokemon world. And yet there's still plenty.
The Pokedex is still fine to use on a case-by-case basis, but I feel like we're being far too generous with the cases where we use it.
The Pokedex is, in a nutshell, a collection statements. And on this website, we generally only consider statements when they're somehow backed up by actions in the story.
Kadabra very obviously dosn't passively cause headaches for those around itself, because literally nobody who ever is around a Kadabra complains about Headaches. Shedinja very obviously dosn't absorb souls through it's back, because literally every trainer who ever owned a Shedinja looks into it's back and is totally fine.
Why is it that these statements get to be included on profiles despite being so obviously not true? And what of statements that go completely unsupported in canon despite not being outright debunked? Why is it that these statements get special treatment compared to other statements on this website? Hell, one of our main calcs for Pokémon is Puputar supposedly being able to topple a mountain, even though literally nothing outside of the Pokedex even remotely implies it can do that.
I understand it more for Legendary Pokemon since there's usually only one of them and they aren't generally active, but most Pokémon are wild animals. With all these mountain destruction statements, there shouldn't be a single mountain left in the entire Pokemon world. And yet there's still plenty.
The Pokedex is still fine to use on a case-by-case basis, but I feel like we're being far too generous with the cases where we use it.
Last edited: