Talk:Arceus (Pokémon)/Archive 1

Um, TTEchidna, you put down that Arseus can become an ???-type Pokémon by holding a ??? Plate. Where'd you get that from?--Pokencyclopedia 21:35, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Man u have got to be kidding me Arceus catch rate should not be 3. I used my Action replay to get the item 4 arceus then i went and caought it on my 5th dusk ball. My friend caought it on him 1st ultra ball. Another friend i gave the item 2 caught it on his 2nd qiuck ball- unsigned comment from Arguntom (talk • contribs)

Man, you have to be kidding me, you can't even spell the word "you" right. Arceus's catch rate is 3. If you'll notice, those balls multiply the catch rate formula by quite a bit, which greatly increases the chance to be caught. Plus, it's all on luck, I've had Magikarp break out of balls before. --TTEchidna 22:36, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I added an alternative origin to Arceus's name that I found on: http://www.serebiiforums.com/showthread.php?t=286767.Draconium 23:42, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Is there a point...

Is there a point of having a table for each of the plates when it is attached to Arceus? We could just have Arceus without a plate, and then have each title with an image and a sentence saying what type Arceus changes to. For Example:

Type effectiveness

No plate equipped

Under normal battle conditions in Generation V, this Pokémon is:

Damaged normally by: Normal 1× Fighting 2× Flying 1× Poison 1× Ground 1× Rock 1× Bug 1× Ghost 0× Steel 1× Fire 1× Water 1× Grass 1× Electric 1× Psychic 1× Ice 1× Dragon 1× Dark 1× None

Weak to: Normal 1× Fighting 2× Flying 1× Poison 1× Ground 1× Rock 1× Bug 1× Ghost 0× Steel 1× Fire 1× Water 1× Grass 1× Electric 1× Psychic 1× Ice 1× Dragon 1× Dark 1× None

Immune to: Normal 1× Fighting 2× Flying 1× Poison 1× Ground 1× Rock 1× Bug 1× Ghost 0× Steel 1× Fire 1× Water 1× Grass 1× Electric 1× Psychic 1× Ice 1× Dragon 1× Dark 1× None

Resistant to: Normal 1× Fighting 2× Flying 1× Poison 1× Ground 1× Rock 1× Bug 1× Ghost 0× Steel 1× Fire 1× Water 1× Grass 1× Electric 1× Psychic 1× Ice 1× Dragon 1× Dark 1× None

Sprite for Fire-type Arceus

With Flame Plate

When the Flame Plate is attached to Arceus, it becomes a Fire type.

etc... Tesh 23:06, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Picture

I have this picture:

I did not draw it. I want to use it on the page. It is much better than trying to stare at a tiny sprite. --Stinkoman 15:08, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Better than a sprite for sure, but it'd be nice if we could find one without such bad compression artifacts. Invisible Shiny Bulbasaur 22:30, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't think we should really be using an unofficial image for the page. What would be nice is if somebody could get a nice, high-quality (as in NOT a photo of the monitor) screenshot of ARceus from PBR.--Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 01:22, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

You mean hack an Arceus and copy it into PBR?

Agent 448^{Talk | DP} 11:46, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Sprites?

Should we include separate sprite templates for all of the forms, or just do it for one? I know that Unown and Castform, among others, would serve the same problem. TTEchidna 22:10, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Art?!

I'd like to know the source of Arceus' picture. Mainly because it hasn't been revealed yet. TinaTheKirlia 02:44, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

It's a piece of fanart. --DarkfireTaimatsu 02:47, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

That's what I thought, although there was an edit that said "Official Art" or something and it was rather confusing. TinaTheKirlia 16:29, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I think we should replace that art with a sprite. It seems inaccurate... Mariocaper 19:19, 20 September 2007

Yeah, and we could enlarge the size of the sprite so it won't be that tiny anymore, right? Optimus35^{Talk | DP} 06:45, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Enlarged sprites look terrible. --DarkfireTaimatsu 06:49, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Couldn't we get a PBR screenshot? And I mean a screenshot, not someone pointing their camera at a television? (We need that for Rosy and Sashay, too...)--Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 07:13, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I can't, my FRAPS only works on full screen games like Maple Story...I think we could take the Arceus photo, enlarge it and sharpen it a little, then put it back on bulba. The only problem with this is that the sprite would be oversize...

I hope that you have permission to use that piece of fan art. --☆ケンジガール 21:27, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

I've got five PBR shots. They're all in my sandbox. Click on the links under 'Arceus'. Tell me which one looks best on my talk page and I'll upload it onto Bulbagarden Archives... Agent 448^{δ | DP} | ☆ 09:01, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Change the pic! Crystallucario 14:54, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

The reason why we're not changing it is because it's nicely done fanart, and it's more easier to look at this instead of a sprite.

Otherwise it'd be absolute hell for me to draw Arceus. Still is, but certainly more easier than looking at a sprite. :p Tina ^δ♫ 16:40, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

hmmm maybe ok whatever... [[User:Crystallucario|CrystalLucario 12:23, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

...except, do we have permission to use the image? The image page doesn't seem to claim it at all, so I'm going to go ahead and guess that we're doing something illegal or at least unethical here. Seriously, why can't we just use a PBR shot?KrytenKoro 00:58, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Since when was pokemon ever ethical? Think about it, the aim of the game is to run away from home at 10 years old (good parenting skills mom) and after having abuse a poor little starly to the brink of death by slashing it over and over again with false swipe you throw something at it, only adding to the poor creature's pain and torture only to trap it inside a small, cramped chamber for the rest of its unnatural life whilst using it to abuse other pokemon. But anyways I digress, the point is the piece of fanart looks nice, is accurate and fits in perfectly with all the official pokemon artwork. Hell when I first visited the page I thought it WAS a piece of official artwork. A PBR snapshot would not be at all as effective as the fanart. So no, we ain't havin a PBR shot. Wikid 16:20, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

No one is questioning the ethics of the series, just in using someone else's work without their consent. Besides, the face is drawn wrong. There should be more lines running across it. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 16:28, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

The artwork in question is drawn by Seyanni of Deviant Art. If no one has contacted him yet for permission, I could see if I can get a PM through, though I'm not sure if this would be the correct thing to do in this case. The fan art is, as mentioned above, not completely accurate, as Arceus has one more line running across its face, and the "wheel" on its body is also conflicting with what is shown not only on the sprite, but what is shown in PBR (a more pointed frame, with gems in the crosses, not green circles). If there's no permission (currently not proven) and because it's innaccurate, isn't the right thing to put the sprite up until the official art is revealed? However, if the quality of the sprite is the concern (many seem to be worried about the overall look of the page), perhaps I could offer you the rights to use my art on this page? It's 100% PBR and sprite accurate, and the quality is clear and it looks professional. I'm not trying to start another image battle here, but I do believe that if the overall look of the page is the concern, coupled with the accuracy of the fan art, then my work would fill the role. If you're willing to look into it, I'm Xous54 on deviant art, and the work I'm willing to allow use of is http://xous54.deviantart.com/art/Official-Pose-of-Arceus-100490528 . I can resize the piece and remove the signatures if this wiki finds the piece acceptable for the replacement.Xous 19:33, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Metronome

My Mew used Judgement through Metronome. Should I include something like this under "Trivia":

Although Nintendo is attempting to keep Arceus secret, it is possible for Arceus's signature move, Judgment, to be used through Metronome, thus potentially revealing the existence of Arceus to otherwise unaware fans.

--Shiny Noctowl^{Talk | Contribs} 20:33, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

i could draw arceus if that would help. i like drawing pokémon. talonclawz new comer!!!!!!!!!!

Shishigami?

Should any mention of the Forest Spirit Shishigami from Miyazaki Hayao's Mononoke-Hime be mentioned in the article? Arceus seems to have a resemblance to Shishigami. In addition, on the illegal hacked Pokémon Diamond (Telefang Power), Shishigami appears on the front, despite not having anything to do with the game (that's the way those criminals work), and then in the real Pokémon Diamond, Arceus was added. Does anyone else think that some trivia should be added about this? ~Kumori Satosuke

Outside of the whole quadrupedal thing, I don't think there's anything else that's official to suggest a connection. For example, Arceus seems to be nothing outside of a creator, while shishigami is given dominion over life and death.--Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 03:27, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. There really isn't anything linking the two other than a vague (And I do mean VAGUE.) resemblance. --Dual 14:15, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

??? type sprite may prevent crash

Just a theory, but the programmers at Game Freak may have drawn and programmmed a ??? type Arceus to prevent game crashes. Anyone with a code patcher can figure out how to change a Pokémon's type. They might have figured that someone would tamper with Arceus's type, and if they changed it to a ??? type, and there was no sprite for it, the game would crash because it would try loading data that does not exist. That's my theory anyway. Fsilone 02:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

That's really logical. figure that by yourself? But I still don't know if we should put that in the article.Pokemaniac102 02:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

im a little iffy on the grammer, but other than that i think its a fantastic theory and should be in the trivia section. excellent. now all i need to do is figure out how to do it myself in my game with the Action Replay... MAGNEDETHTALK 02:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

You can't - you need to edit the rom data - action replay only edits temporary and save data. Think so anyway. 折り紙ガイ - 離す貢献 15:37, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I think I don't see anything grammatically wrong. I copied the words above and reworded it into sentences.Pokemaniac102 02:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

yea, im probibly wrong, im not joking when i say i failed english class......twice...with a 54..... MAGNEDETHTALK 03:42, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

what the heck is shishigami? is it a pokémon?(someone out there?) -talonclawz new comer!!!!! 1:06, 5 April 2008

No. Wait a minute if you don't know that Errr...how new are you to Pokémon?Crystal Lucario 17:43, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

A shishigami is a Japanese god of death. LordKaien 14:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

???-type Sprite

How long has the sprite of ???-type Arceus been pulling that vanishing act? Basically, the only time you can see the sprite is when the white background on PNG-format images is still visible, as seen in the Before shot. Once the white backgrounds vanish, the rest of the sprite should still be there. However, on ???-type Arceus, the sprite vanishes along with the background, as seen in the After shot. Is there a way to fix this?

(The shots in question come from an area of my own user page, specifically a favorite move tag programmed for a ???-type move and Curse with the Arceus sprite in question for a laugh. The 2000-edits in a month tag above it is also shown for comparison.) --Shiningpikablu252 05:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow. That's weird that it just disappears! --Theryguy512 11:59, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I think I figured out the vanishing act. It's due to the filename. Many operating systems don't allow question marks in filenames, and it's probably due to those that caused the image to vanish. I went and uploaded an image to Image:Spr 4d 493-Unknown.png on the archives, and that image works as it should! Every instance of the vanishing image has been changed to the one that doesn't vanish, so you won't be seeing vanishing ???-type Arceus again anytime soon. --Shiningpikablu252 16:37, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Pic

Okay, I remember Urutapu saying something about a screenshot of Arceus from PBR. Well, I got a Wii and PBR for Christmas. And I have *cough*cheated*cough* four Arceuses. All I need now is a good-quality emulator that can screenshot my Wii with. Any suggestions? --Stinkoman

Somehow theres a way of putting a SCART socket into your PC and running it through that. My mate's computer can do that but i think it had the socket when he bought it. OrigamiGuy Lieks Mudkipz

Officially been revealed

Until this Pokemon has been officially revealed (by Nintendo or Coro Coro magazine) this page should be removed, because the only reason why there is proof of its existence is through a hacking or cheating device.

WHAT! This page should be included on here. If it is in the Game, weather or not if it has been reaveled, it IS STILL IN THE GAME WITHOUT HAVING TO BE MADEC Isfor Cookie

Yea, this page is about a Pokémon. In case you don't know (hopefully you do), this is a Pokémon encyclopedia. This page is like mandatory. --Theryguy512 02:12, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. We have pages for all Pokémon officially programmed into the games. Would you come here before Deoxys was revealed and say "NUH UH THERE'S ONLY 201 IN HOENN DEOXYS IS A HAKKER ONLY POKEMAN." Arceus is official, they're just holding off on the official revelation. Besides... plenty of Pokémon from each generation were never revealed through CoroCoro or by Nintendo individually. TTEchidna 07:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I may only be 10, but take it from me. Arceus is real. It is on pokemon.com's pokedex.DaPikanator56 18:47, 22 March 2008 (UTC)DaPikanator56

Well, actually, it's not on the PokéDex on Pokemon.com, but yes, it is real. --Theryguy512 13:17, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

An example of what TTE said would be the Porygons. Optimatum♏^Talk|♊02:32 30 Mar 2008

Oh yeah! It and ummm... Shaymin I think aren't Theryguy.DaPikanator56 18:52, 30 March 2008 (UTC)DaPikanator56

Shaymin has been acknowledged by official Japanese sources. And to address the original point, we are not Wikipedia. Everyone knows that Arceus is real, so this page is a necessity. Hell, we have articles for a lot of glitch Pokémon so a real one definately passes. --FabuVinny ^T-C-S 23:52, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

True...Oh, and by the way, in the summer I will shorten my visits here, but this place rules! It ain't demented like Chuckie Cheese's.

) ^-^DaPikanator56 22:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)DaPikanator56

Arceus is already in the game (I actually have it (with the help of an Action Replay of course)), so this page doesn't need to go anywhere. Little do people know, Arceus is probably watching the whole time the player is beating up Team Galactic and catching Dialga/Palkia, seeing as the platform Arceus is on is floating over the Spear Pillar. Diachronos 18:03, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Picture

I found this picture interesting, but low quality. its on www.pokebeach.com --Britannia's Blade 21:25, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Good find, but it's already linked from the article right here. --Johans 23:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

---

I also just found this one **** Fan art of course but very serious looking, Lots more like it here what do you think? --Britannia's Blade 18:47, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't see how fanart is very notable to put up here.. >_> Tina ^δ♫ 19:06, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

The one we have right now will do us until Arcy is revealed next year. TTEchidna 20:37, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

What about this one? - (1) 折り紙ガイ - 離す貢献 15:45, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

-Gasp- Why not that one! Ooo, take it! TAKE IT!!! Optimatum^Talk|Links13:53 2 May 2008

TTE, Arceus isn't going 2 be revealed 4 two years yet. LordKaien 14:53, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Arceus and Giratina

Aren't Arceus and Giratina sort of opposites of each other because Arceus is God and Giratina is the devil sort of, I mean Arceus didn't create Giratina so that means they were the two entities before time started. Pokémon Master 17:46 15 May 2008

Maybe you're right, but i think that Giratina is part of the Dragon Trio. Arceausams 23:37, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Giratina is the BOSS! It saved the two other Pokamon! Posted by the Θρtιmαtum♏^Talk|Links01:04 17 May 2008

Hold on, there's no reason to get angry. Why can't we just WAIT until Arceus is officially revealed? Isn't that BETTER than argueing? Arceausams 23:37, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

In my eyes it would be

Dialga + Palkia = Rivals (Time VS Space)

Giratina + Arceus = Rivals (God VS Darkness?)

So yeah, regardless of the fact Giratina is part of the Dragon Trio. (Thinking about it, those four are exactly the same as my characters |: Lily = Controls Time. Darkness = Controls Space. Akito = Controls Death. Rose = Controls Life/Is a sort-of God. But anyway, my characters are irrelevant too this xD) Takoto タコト| サソデイ = 愛 14:37, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

So, Arceus is God/JesusHoly Spirit, and Giratina is Satan? O.O It's Da Θρtιmαtum♏^Talk|Links06:03 26 May 2008

Arceus is Arceus. Giratina is Giratina. TTEchidna 07:02, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Meh, that's the Atheist way of seeing it. Hey, wait, am I about to be stone for being anti-atheist? Damn. It's Da Θρtιmαtum♏^Talk|Links07:13 26 May 2008

I didn't say Giratina was Satan, i simply said he was...darkness. Takoto タコト| サソデイ = 愛 02:05, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

My question is, how do you KNOW Giratina is bad, or if Arceus is even good? How do you KNOW Giratina wasn't created by Arceus? You don't. Besides, Neither ot them are from Christianity, and U know what? I'm a devout Christian and I don't care if Arceus wasn't based off of my God. LordKaien 14:56, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Does anybody want to see it this way, "WE SHOULD ALL JUST WAIT"? Arceausams 22:06, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't think Giratina is evil. You don't have too be evil/whatever to control darkness/whatever Giratina controls. I do not think Giratina is evil! Takoto タコト| サソデイ = 愛 22:22, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Is this text INVISIBLE? WE SHOULD ALL JUST WAIT! Arceausams 00:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, good people of bulbapedia, for waiting. Arceausams 00:57, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Giratina isn't bad, or evil, or a demon, or any of that bull****. They make Darkrai seem like he's evil in The Rise of Darkrai, but he wasn't. Just because Giratina lives in a graveyard doesn't mean he's evil. Diachronos 18:06, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm thinking that Giratina will be added to "The Original Story." Remember how, in Ruby an Sapphire, the only ones mentioned in the old man's story were Groudon and Kyogre, with Rayquaza a non-storyline okemon, but then, in Emerald, it became a vital part of the game? Same with Giratina. -Kiryu 02:00, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

WAIT! Arceausams 23:49, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I AM waiting. It's merely a theory, and could be entirely wrong. I'm just trying to soothe the tensions here.Kiryu 23:28, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok, it's been a few months since I last looked up here and I now think that it is wise to wait, but it is also important to FRIENDLY share ideas, instead of course doing something like this,"No, your wrong! BLAH! BLAH-BLAH!" ,also you are right to try to soothe tensions. Arceausams 23:45, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

THANK YOU. Kiryu 04:57, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

More sprites

Ok, so we have all the type sprites for Arceus and it's shiny sprite, but we don't have shiny forms for Arceus' other types. Could someone please tell me if it's possible to get those sprites and if so get them for us? Arceausams 12:08, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

If i could, i would, but i can't, so i can't help you. I'm not even 100% sure Arceus's other-type sprites HAVE shiny versions of them :| Takoto タコト| サソデイ = 愛 14:27, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

They do. And a simple method is to color the sprites the right color. The white portion of the body is the only part which remains constant throughout the non-shiny forms. and when it becomes shiny, the rings are the same color as those of the non-shiny ones. The only thing that differs between non-shiny and shiny is the white portion, which turns yellow. It's Da Θρtιmαtum♏^Talk|Links06:01 26 May 2008

So... could you do that for us as a favor? Arceausams 22:02, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I might have those sprites on my computer somewhere. Want me to upload them? YinYang 20:05, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Why don't you recolor them...it will be easy.--☆Tavisource 00:49, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I dont no how... Arceausams 00:54, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmm...I would do it, but I'm very busy right now, you could go ask hcfx2 for help, he's great at recoloration.--☆Tavisource 00:57, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, i found them on "a:Catagory:Arceus". But thanks :) Arceausams 01:11, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Metronome and Judgement

If a player knows nothing about Arceus, how would they know that Judgement is its signature attack? Even if it is used by a Pokémon using Metronome. So could Metronome really spoil the surprise? ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 02:50, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Not really. ^^; Metronome can do ANYTHING. Even Explosion so...It's the Θρtιmαtum♏^Talk|Links02:54 4 Jun 2008

Well, if they were like "Ooh, what learns that?!" and can't find anyone, they'll suspect it to be some crazy legendary not yet shown. And have lived under a rock since EVERYONE KNOWS OF ARCEUS. TTEchidna 03:03, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, then Singapore must be under a rock. Only two people I know know what's Arceus, that includes me. It's the Θρtιmαtum♏^Talk|Links03:12 4 Jun 2008

Or this is nintendo's way of teasing us. kinda like,

Player:"What pokémon learns this?" Nintendo:"Wait and see" Player:"You suck."LordKaien 12:39, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I only ask because of this quote in the trivia:

"Although Nintendo is attempting to keep Arceus secret, it is possible for Arceus's signature move, Judgment, to be used through Metronome, thus potentially revealing the existence of Arceus to otherwise unaware fans."

Plus, Nintendo has to know that the majority of their fanbase uses the internet. Every Pokémon website except the "official" ones have info on Arceus. A lot of them even before the games were released globally. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 15:57, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

The majority of the fanbase are kids who don't necessarily visit fansites. --FabuVinny ^{|Talk Page|} 16:02, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

No (MathijsP 16:03, 4 June 2008 (UTC))

Yes. --FabuVinny ^{|Talk Page|} 16:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

No (MathijsP 16:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC))

I would have to disagree with that statement. I believe that most fans may have been kids at the beginning when Pokémon first came out, but now have grown as the series has. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 16:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

A similar thing happened to me when I was playing PBR. I ordered my Togepi to use Metronome and out came Judgment. I wondered what Pokémon used this move until I checked this site and I found Arceus. I didn't even know about its existence AT ALL when Metronome was used that one year ago... BlueJirachi 18:01, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Arceus's pattern in the anime?

I didn't get a second look (mainly because I deleted the episode from my DVR), but I heard in the episode "Journey to the Unknown!" that Saturn was holding a cube with Arceus's pattern on it... ShinyRayquaza 19:35, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Arceus + Sky Plate?

If you attach a Sky Plate to Arceus, wouldn't that make it become the first pure Flying-type Pokémon? Wynautluvr 16:53, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

It is the first "permanent" pure Flying-type. The Porygon line can become Flying-types with their Conversion moves, and Kecleon can with its Color Change Ability. These Pokémon, however, revert back to Normal when the battle is over. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 18:56, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

It's not permanent, in that you can change the plate and it loses the pure-flying status... Lord of Origami 15:16, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

It's permanent in that it doesn't go away just because the battle ends. TTEchidna 21:46, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

No its not. Its only a permanent flying type if its natural type (i.e. no plate) is flying. You might as well say its also the first permamnent ??? type since it can become that (potentially) too.Wikid 16:43, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

If you never remove the plate, then it's permanent. Plus, you can't obtain a ???-type Arceus in-game in any normal fashion. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 16:45, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Says you. firstly, the word permanent implies that the typing can never be changed. If you unequip the plate Arceus goes back to normal therefore it's not permanent. At best I would say its semi-permament. Secondly, there might a ??? plate given out at an event or found somewhere in platinum like Glacidia's flower. ??? forme arceus might be the result when you enter the torn world with arceus. It might even be what Arceus looks like when it is a shadow pokemon as there might be a new game coming out to do with shadow pokemon and DPP might be the first generation where you can trade shadow pokemon over. Therefore if you can trade it as shadow poke between DP and platinum then there is a way to get an ??? forme Arceus in a normal fashion.Wikid 17:21, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Fine. "Semi-permanent". ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 17:24, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

The ??? Plate

The ??? Plate exists, It is named mysterious plate by CodeJunkies, It may also be encountered in the underground as a Malfunction, people got this (like my brother) and attached it to ARCEUS, making the ??? type, no weaknesses are found on this type--M.vit 00:10, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Believe me, people code-spelunk like there's no tomorrow...there isn't such thing.--Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 00:10, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

can M.vit at least tell how did his brother encounter such a plate, and how does it function with other Pokémon?and what happens to a Pokémon who knows the move curse

can somebody edit this article . It says that Arceus creted the Pokémon Universe,Dragon trio and lake trio. Till now the dragon trio isn't officially confirmed. so whether I or somebody else should change the Dragon trio to the time-space duo: Dialga and Palkia.--Nobody777 13:56, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

well, seems that nobody is out of topic, BTW, i have seem to find this code in Code Junkies here it is Mysterious Plate x999 94000130 fcff0000 b21c4d28 00000000 b0000004 00000000 00000890 03e70133 d2000000 00000000--M.vit 16:55, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

The plates all have different names on CodeJunkies which are the translated Japenese names. I believe the Mysterious Plate is actually the Mind Plate. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 17:13, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Your right, it is the mind plate. Lord of Origami 16:45, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

There. Is. No. ???. Plate. The only move outside of the gamecube games that is ??? type doesn't do direct damage- so it doesn't need a plate. I for one agree with an above topic- the sprite is used to prevent a crash.Any self-respecting hacker can change Arceus's type into ???.Kiryu 23:00, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

type change

Keckleons ability color change changes its type according to the move done by the opponent so if ???-type arceus used judjement, will it change its type? can anyone experiment?--Nobody777 13:21, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

The fact that you can't get a ??? plate makes it difficult to say. I have no idea what would happen...♪♪Shiny Pachirisu :) ♪♪ 13:23, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

???-type moves have been hacked and have no effect. So Kecleon would probably be unaffected. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 13:39, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, they do have an effect... they just deal minimal damage. Lemme see what it does in Gen III later on... TTEchidna 23:41, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Pal Park

Will it really freeze the game when you put Arceus infront of the party and bla bla bla to the Pal Park? Palkia38 03:48, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Why would it do that? Kiryu 23:02, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I've never heard any such rumor. What exactly is supposed to happen? LordArceus 16:34, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Now...

Isn't what I did so freaking cool? I mean, look at it. And the best thing is that it is totally dependent on the exact second that you save/access the page. TTEchidna 07:32, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

A fine template, indeed. Would it be useful to use something like this to generate random examples in paragraphs?

P.S.: What you did (a calculation based on a clock) is even a good idea for a new ability or move in the game that picks a random type. --Johans 07:53, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Now if we only had the backsprites for the various forms...--Shiningpikablu252 22:49, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Two clock-based calculations would make it even more random. Watch this. 1035

As for random examples... hmm... Well, what are you thinking?

And I wish for the backsprites, too... And the minisprite, does it change with Arceus? TTEchidna 22:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Arceus in My Pokémon Ranch

For a fact,someone in the German forum BisaBoard got Arceus as one of the daily Pokémon!This person was -like me- totally dumbfounded and opened that thread to know more about this phenomena. I've asked some expert in the same message board if this would be really possible.To my surprise,he said that he checked the programme code and Arceus is really included!I think this MUST be put into the Trivia section.Uxie legend

How does one check the program code of a Wii Ware title? And of course Arceus would be there, it can be deposited just like any other Pokémon. Plus, I doubt that Hayley will trade you an Arceus... ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 16:02, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Might be wrong, but I believe there is a set list of Pokémon Hayley will only trade off, which was found and released in dr_nza's FAQ found here. The Pokémon Hayley brings are random, so I guess Arceus is a possibility, but Hayley won't be able to trade it off. - █╬▓◘ ’M █╚▓█ (ţś_łєğǿŧΐм) ^spreche 05:06, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm....

Should we add that Arceus is the most hacked Pokemon? Every hacker I know owns a Arceus and all its plates. Strong Intelligent

No. tc26 14:03, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I own all the plates too. I got them underground. TTEchidna 22:46, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I spent so much time underground that I have more than one of each plate. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 03:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

In any case, the most hacked pokemon is probably Mew...Kiryu 23:03, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Church?

Sui keeps adding an external link to "The Church of Arceus." I'm wondering whether or not this is notable enough, or if it's just an advertisement for an obscure fansite. I don't know anything, so you guys be the judges. --Martonimos_{((Argh|Blargh))} 21:59, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Ūber?

If Arceus isn't offically reveiled, how can it be called Ūber? Can't spell.

☆ShinyPiKa 19:17, 8 August 2008 (UTC)☆

Well, some people hack into their games and can get Arceus that way. So they know that way. ...I really dunno Takoto タコト| サソデイ = 愛 19:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

His stats put him in the league of the strongest Pokemon of all, so he's safe to call that. ~Toastypk - ^Loom. 19:28, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Although that is true, it isn't revealed yet so it can't be under that catagory yet. It's been annoying me, please remove it. ShinyPiKa 19:58, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

It's being used, and people are able to--gasp, shocker--read its stats! And, since its stats (and movepool, for that matter) are pretty decent, it can be classified as "uber," despite it being revealed or not. --gabbie | talk 21:07, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

But people still use Arceus on Wi-Fi. Darkrai and Shaymin were in and are still in the UBER tier so why should Arceus be any different?--Blazevoir 20:59, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Because it hasn't been revealed yet !!! :D ShinyPiKa 22:23, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

You cant use Arceyus in the battle tower. MathijsP 09:30, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Please remove Arceus from the Ūber secion 4 now, when its reveaaled u can add it back.ShinyPiKa 15:00, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Why? Every other website considers it ÜBER. Why should Bulba be any different?--Blazevoir 15:08, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Because people think Nintendo will kill us for actually taking note of their stuff before they officially reveal them. Unlike Platinum's existence before May 15, though, it can be proven that Arceus exists. TTEchidna 17:21, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

The wording differs, but here's the basic definition of an Ūber Legendary: Any Pokémon that is banned by the Battle Tower. This, if you check invludes all definite Ūbers and no definite non-Ūbers. Arceus is banned; therefore, I say he is an Ūber. LordArceus 16:38, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Arceus vs. Mew

This is all that Mew's Pokédex entries say:

• Because it can use all kinds of moves, many scientists believe Mew to be the ancestor of Pokémon.
• Mew is said to possess the genetic composition of all Pokémon.
• Because it can learn any move, some people began research to see if it is the ancestor of all Pokémon.

First off, this kind of stuff didn't appear until Silver. Second off, it is very couched in uncertainty, and it is never said that its actually been shown to possess every type of DNA - only that its ability to perform any move has generated that rumor.

Second off, several Pokémon are completely artificial, such as Grimer/Muk, Castform, or Porygon/Porygon2/Porygon-Z. So, how could Mew be considered their "ancestor", or have their DNA, if its supposed to be the "first Pokemon"? Wouldn't having the DNA of Pokemon who appeared completely separate from any genetic lineage instead imply Mew was their descendant?

Porygon is even said to be "A Pokémon that consists entirely of programming code." So, no DNA at all, and its upgrades are said to simply have had AI installed.

Even allowing for the monstrously egregious interpretations of genetics in the series, the idea that having all the DNA of a group makes you its ancestor is hogwash - its entirely the other way around.

Now, lets look at Arceus, and its info.

• It is told in mythology that this Pokémon was born before the universe even existed.
• It is described in mythology as the Pokémon that shaped the universe with its 1,000 arms.
• "Two beings of time and space set free from the Original One."
• "Three beings were born to bind time and space."
• "Two make matter and three make spirit, shaping the world."
• "The Original One breathed alone before the universe came."

Now, this is much more explicit than the Mew bit ever was. It makes it absolutely clear that Arceus came before even the universe itself, much less other Pokémon, and that it in fact created the world and life itself. Once could claim that this is uncertain do to its status as "mythology", but that would be hilariously in denial of how the series has used mythology so far - as an origin story, not as something by definition uncertain or false.

How is there even a dispute about this? If it's a retcon at all, it's a fairly small one - it was clear from the beginning that the bit about Mew being the origin had a contradictory explanation.

Now, what could work is that Mew is supposed to be god-like like Arceus and other Legendaries - in this case, it would logically be some scion of life, which would in fact explain its design. If the bit about Mew containing all other DNA turned out to be "true", in the context of the franchise, then this would also make much more sense than the pseudo-scientific jargon used in Silver - Mew contains the DNA because it is the ultimate personification of life/birth, and the scientists are trying to force a contradictory explanation for the oddity in order to deny its true, supernatural origin.

So can we please stop claiming things like the D/P Pokedex "still stating that it's the ancestor of all pokémon", or that "it's no different than people believing Arceus is the creator"? KrytenKoro 06:14, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Creationism vs science? In my Pokémon? It's more likely than you think! TTEchidna 06:30, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

ummm... "Uncertain", If I recall correctly, it can learn "Transform", which, unless I'm mistaken, involves the recombination of it's own DNA to match said pokemon that transforms. And, since Ditto's Pokédex entry hints that how it transforms involves it recombining it's DNA to match the pokémon it's trying to match, the same can easily be said for Mew. So, really, considering how it knows transform, and it can transform into a lot of pokémon, even legendaries that were supposedly created before it, it still has merit in regards to having the DNA of all pokémon, and thus being the ancestor of all pokémon.

As for the Porygon/2/z example, considering the mere fact that Mew can transform into these three pokémon DESPITE apparantly not having their DNA, I think that those Pokémon have a miniscule amount of Mew's DNA (otherwise, how can Ditto [Or mew, for that matter] transform into them?].). Besides, just because they are composed entirely of AI (whether it's the free will kind or not doesn't matter) doesn't mean it can't have DNA. Take the Mega Man series (specifically, the Mega Man X subseries through the Mega Man ZX series.), the Reploids were mentioned to be complete Machines (all derived from X's design), and yet the games also mentions that they have DNA (Reploid "DNA" was used to form the Nightmare Virus, and also revive Necromances III, Harumachine, Blizzard Staggoff, and Copy X. Plus, Axl's ability involves him mimicking his enemies (and in the case of Command Mission and [Technically] ZX advent, even bosses.).

And anyways, Mew can also transform into Grimer, Muk, and Castform, which, if Mew didn't have their DNA, then how can Mew OR Ditto even transform into them?

Also, about it's pokedex entries, both of them contradict themselves. I mean, one says that it was born before the universe existed, and yet, the other hints that it was born a little while AFTER the Universe was created, and that all IT did was merely "shape" the universe. Plus, it doesn't even HAVE 1,000 arms in its sprite, and not only that, but It also apparantly can't even learn any attacks involving arms, such as all of the punch variants.

as for the origin book, that ALSO doesn't mention Giratina (yet, anyways, for all we know, Platinum could add it in.), and plus, that same thing hinted that Dialga and Palkia are two halves of Arceus, but then, why cant they merge together (I mean, Dragon Quest, and Mephiles the Dark could do it without much trouble from programming data, so why cant D/P)?

and anyways, the legends also hinted that Legendaries can't be captured by mere mortals, yet most of the crime syndicates, the Pyramid King and even the protagonist has been wielding these pokemon as if they were nothing.

That's my ruling as to how the thing isn't retconned (well, that, as well as the fact that, if it was, then wouldn't they have removed the entry from the Pokédex?) Weedle Mchairybug 10:49, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

lets remember that game physics are different from animé physics. Dialga, Palkia and giratina symbolise physics of the Pokémon world: time, space and dimensions,so if Arceus is the master of them that wouldn't make sense:creationism and science don't go together. Mew can transform its appearance, but not the nature or unique functions of a Pokémon, and if we follow good sense we can also say that it can't copy Pokémon which evolved in a special way because their not original like trading its bioligical fusion of item and Pokémon DNA.--Nobody777 12:40, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that it can copy even those that evolved in a "special" way in even the Anime. Remember, Weavile evolves from Sneasel via the Sharp Claw item, which also fits under the special way, and despite that, Mew STILL transformed into that pokemon in the Lucario Movie. If it can evolve through something like that, I'm pretty certain that it is even ancestral to those pokemon who evolve via special means. Weedle Mchairybug 13:50, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Wait, what? You're saying that because it can do something that Ditto can do, it must be the ancestor of all Pokemon? Wouldn't this also require Ditto to be the ancestor of all Pokemon?

Porygon: Then you are making up things contradictory to the established in-game facts in order to force in your own fan-theory. Almost every Pokedex entry for the Porygon line reiterates that they have NOTHING but programming code.

MegaMan X: It is never, ever stated that the robots are "completely mechanical" - that they have souls, DNA, and can merge with living things pretty much makes that theory impossible. DNA is a very specific thing - it's not a general concept about information derivation, it's a specific organic acid.

Axl: His ability has NOTHING to do with DNA, and is never claimed to. It's essentially analogous to what Transformers do.

Muk: I didn't say that Mew didn't necessarily possess the DNA of all creatures, though that's not the only way to copy them. I said that claiming this meant it was the ancestor was so completely ignorant of evolution and genetics that it deserves ridicule.

However, Ditto is able to copy them because it is an amoeba, and can change the shape of its body at will. To be fair, it is once said to be able to copy the opponent's genetic code - which would only work AFTER seeing the opponent. As that is EXACTLY how Transform is described anyway, that theory is blown out of the water.

Arceus' Pokedex: This is a bald-faced lie. The pokedex entries in no way claim that Arceus came to be after the Universe existed - at best, they claim he came before it, created it, and shaped it.

Arms: Have you considered the fact that it could have lost them, or given them up? It is the only Arceus in existence, by the very necessity of its being, so its not going to be something like "They're all born without the arms". It "set free" all those legendaries from itself - maybe it made them from its arms, like so very many Creation Myths, especially the linked Pangu one.

You could also consider that "1000" is often used in Japanese writing to mean "many", instead of a specific number, and as the trios of matter and spirit are considered extensions of Arceus, they could be its "appendages" in a spiritual sense. Seriously, that part of its Pokedex isn't contradictory at all.

Merge: What does this have to do with anything? Why would Dragon Quest have any bearing on this?

Legends: In the games? No, the legends don't claim that, so the fact that certain legendaries fight with trainers is not contradictory, regardless of your false assertion that it's "like nothing". In the anime, where the legends imply that messing with them is incredibly dangerous to the natural order...well, I'll just let you watch the movies, or something, and try to claim that it's "like nothing".

Remove: Why would it be removed? It never claimed anything that was false - again, it only claims that fictional scientists have a tenuous, uncertain belief based on one of its abilities. The deliberate uncertainty of the Pokedex entries, in contrast to nearly every other Pokedex entry, even for Legendaries, has to be considered. If it's not simply a monstrous misunderstanding of genetics on the game designer's part, then it's almost certainly meant to be a reference to "Supernatural vs. Naturalist science".

"If it can evolve through something like that, I'm pretty certain that it is even ancestral to those pokemon who evolve via special means."

Again, this is inherently contradictory. If these are supposed to be new Pokemon, who only came into existence through a modern item, how could Mew possibly be said to already contain their DNA just because it can copy their form? Remember, Porygon is said to be completely artificial, not an accident like Muk or Grimer.

"lets remember that game physics are different from animé physics. Dialga, Palkia and giratina symbolise physics of the Pokémon world: time, space and dimensions,so if Arceus is the master of them that wouldn't make sense:creationism and science don't go together."'

If Arceus is their master, then that would be in-game science. Science is the pursuit of truth, not the pursuit of purely-materialistic explanations whether it's the truth or not.

Also, Giratina would symbolize the afterlife, or some other term for "The Other", not dimensions - "space", in the concept referred to by the triad, would necessarily contain dimensions already, parallel or measurable.KrytenKoro 05:46, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not SAYING that Ditto necessarily IS the ancestor, I only brought it into the picture since it's the only OTHER pokemon to know Transform. And besides which, the Pokédex entry for Ditto explicitly stated that it can transform by rearranging it's Genetic Structure (in other words, it's DNA) to that of it's target. It ALSO replicates their move set and, unless I'm mistaken, even their stats and natures.

actually, the Pokedex contradicted ITSELF in that case. I mean, if it doesn't have ANY DNA, then Ditto (not to mention Mew) couldn't transform into it OR it's family, and we all know that it can. Try and get a ditto, and try to face off against Porygon or it's family members in your games, and use transform against it if you don't believe me.

Ahem... when I said "Mega Man X" I mean from the Mega Man X saga ALL THE WAY to Mega Man ZX saga. In Mega Man Zero 4: Intro: The Reploids... They were robots designed to look like humans... these technical marvels were given unique personalities and were intended to be the perfect workers and the perfect partners of mankind... Later, Dr. Weil says something that would hint at Reploid being COMPLETELY mechanical. This is when Zero encounters him at the Ragnarōk core: Dr. Weil: Justice!? Freedom!? Worthless ideals! You Reploids are Just Machines, but you started a war a long time ago in the name of freedom! And Humans! Look what they did to me! Driving Me away while spurting the word "Justice!" And don't assume that he knows nothing about Reploid Physiology since he worked on reviving Reploids prior to his banishment from Neo Arcadia, and besides which, the reason why he was banished was because he created Dark Elf and augmented Zero's original body to become the horrific Omega, as well as instigated the Elf Wars. That shows that he knows quite a LOT about Reploids.

as for Axl, it was indeed DNA. in fact, Model A, whose personality (as well as his abilities and the form that Grey/Ashe take on when Megamerging with Model A) is clearly Based off of Axl, and would have easily been labeled as a reincarnation of Axl if Master Albert didn't say that it was actually "Model Albert". Heck, after beating Buckfire in the game, he explicitly mentions that he absorbed Buckfire's DNA, which would allow Grey/ashe to transform and utilize his abilities at will.

It also mentioned that Mew possessed the DNA of all Pokémon, though (and anyways, just saying that it "possesses the Genetic code for "pokémon" pretty much implies ALL Pokemon.). And that's what I was saying about Transform the whole time. I mean, Ancestors have to have the DNA of ALL Pokémon to actually be labeled as an Ancestor of all pokémon.

As for the Arceus entry, the way Pearl's Pokedex entry was worded made it seem as though it Shaped the universe as soon as it was born. And anyways, the Origin Myth implied that Arceus was the creator of the universe, whileas Pearl's Dex entry stated that it merely shaped it.

How can a god lose arms? I mean, Did Ares become one-armed? No, he didn't, and he has fought several wars where something like Decapitation or losing some part of limbs can be considered inevitable, esp. during his time.

Lets see, because the Origin thing mentioned that Dialga and Palkia are two halves of Arceus, and, if they were truly two halves of the same being, then having them both in your party would gain you a new arceus. but it doesn't.

Let's see, because only the Crime syndicates, the Hero/ine, and in one case, a BF leader, was able to capture legendaries. Also, in the Anime, the only time that the legendaries actually CAUSED a natural imbalance was in "Pokemon 2000", which even THEN, it was hinted that it was actually caused by territorial disputes rather than because it was captured in and of itself. most of the other movies and anime related things that featured legendaries didn't have the legendaries causing all Hades to break loose right when they were captured. Besides, as common in many mythos, A god simply cannot be captured by Mortals.

Because, if they didn't HAVE DNA, then Mew and Ditto CAN'T transform, since the move Transform requires the Genetic Code of a pokémon. Besides, that was directed at the guy who said that those who evolve via trades and items can't be related to Mew.

No, it's in game Mythology. The Origin story is nothing more than one big myth.

And yet it's constantly implied that Giratina is listed among Dialga and Palkia.

Anyways, that's all for now. Weedle Mchairybug 11:25, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Ditto: Your logic was that, because it can use Transform, it must be the ancestor. Either this implies that Ditto is also the ancestor (a contradiction), or you need to not make such claims. Its inherently self-contradictory.

While Ditto's profile does sometimes say that it copies (not already possesses) the opponent's genetic code, it also says that it is "Capable of reorganizing its cells to transform into an exact duplicate of its enemy. It is usually a shapeless blob.", and that it can transform to resemble a rock. It is explicitly clear from the Pokedex entries, the description of Transform, and how Ditto is presented in the series, that it is merely reshaping it's own genetic code to resemble something else. Because, as we all know, ROCK's DON'T HAVE DNA.

The description of Transform, and how Ditto uses it, does not require that the opponent has DNA, only that Ditto does. Please keep this in mind.

The definition of "machine" does not require that something be purely inorganic in nature, and neither of the quotes you provided really even claims anything near that. Weil's quote, in that case, is emotional, and almost certainly pointing out his view that Reploid's are inferior and by nature servants of humans. This is the view used by all the villains in the Zero series, and is actually a huge part of the conflict. Play the games again.

Axl: No, it's not DNA. It's never said to be DNA. It's said to be a special ability of his, to transform his body. Model A, while designed to be a callback to Axl, is NOT Axl. However, I grant you that the Shittenou are said to have been derived from X's DNA. As Reploids are never said to be completely mechanical, and DNA is only mentioned as belonging to X and the Shittenou (notice that in ZX, Reploids and organics have been combined anyway - play the game again), it doesn't support your claim that something purely mechanical or programmed can still have DNA.

'Ancestor: No, it says that some scientists claim that based on its abilities. You need to get that through your head, and stop claiming that the Pokedex outright claims these things. You should also learn that your concept of "ancestry" is completely, utterly flawed, with no basis in any kind of genetics, and absolutely ridiculous. I'm sorry to be so harsh, but it's outright folly. That's NOT how an ancestor would be determined.

Pearl: You are again twisting or inserting things into the Pokedex that are not there in order to fit your views.

Arms: Hephaestus. Hercules. Pangu. Ymir. Odin. Please, think before spouting - gods are very prone to lose parts of their bodies.

Halves: First off, it doesn't. It claims they are two parts of Arceus. There is no basis in science or mythology for what you claim - Pangu and Ymir don't suddenly come back just because all the pieces are there. Two halves of an apple don't rejoin to a full apple just because they are there.

Capture: Pokemon 2000, in which the sea itself sprung forth, Pokemon the Movie, in which the world almost drowned, Pokemon 3, in which UNOWN nearly crystallized the earth, Pokemon 4Ever, in which messing with Celebi caused the forest to become a rampaging monster, Jirachi Wishmaker, in which messing with Jirachi caused the earth to come alive as a rampaging monster, Rise of Darkrai, in which Dialga and Palkia being disturbed nearly rent apart time and space...nearly every movie follows this format. Don't be so dense. Why would the world immediately come apart, anyway? If you removed the moon, it would still take some time for the seas to destabilize. As for your assertion that gods cannot be captured - you clearly have no knowledge of mythology. Such a thing is rife throughout Norse, Greek, Roman, Chinese, Japanese, Native American, African....nearly every mythology has such a thing happen. Only Abrahamic religions, where the sole God has absolute power and absolute perfection, has a deity invulnerable to human effort.

New Pokemon: First off, I didn't say all new Pokemon didn't have DNA, only that some of these included Pokemon who are explicitly said to be purely artificial. Second off, you really need to actually look stuff up before claiming things - your claims about, well, damn near everything in this discussion have almost no basis in what the game's have actually said. Transform requires the USER's DNA to be changed to cause the USER to resemble the opponent. There is no intake of DNA, and it would be ridiculous to claim that Ditto already has a databank of all DNA (remember, it can turn into Ash - is Ditto Ash's ancestor?)

...it would be mythology (a story which explains the origin of the world) AND science (an experimentally fact-checked story which explains an empirical truth). Mythology is not equivalent to "lies and untruths".

Giratina: ...um, yeah. Which is why I explained that it can't represent something ruled by one of the others.KrytenKoro 22:37, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

As I said in my previous post, I wasn't implying that Ditto is the ANCESTOR (I only brought it into the picture because it's the only pokémon aside from Mew to learn Transform. Did I SAY that Ditto was the ancestor of all pokemon? no, I didn't.).

And that's why I differentiated between Mew and Ditto, see, Ditto needed to copy the DNA, yet it is hinted repeatedly even in DP that Mew's DNA contains all of Pokemon (more than just moves, also stats and typings to a certain extent [I.E. Transform]. Heck, it can even utilize Judgement if it wanted to (Not by move tutor's of course, but definitely via Metronome.). That's what makes Mew the ancestor. Besides, there's more to being an ancestor than just being there first. You must ALSO be genetically related. I'm not going into the DP thing since you're obviously missing the idea.

Ok, I'l agree with the Norse gods (though to be fair, it wasn't caused by Mortals), but Hercules was a half god, meaning, he can still be mutilated significantly by mortals with visible scarring.

Ok, I already covered Pokemon 2000, and the Unown weren't TRUE Legendary Pokemon. Also, The only thing caused by the capture of Celebi was the forest pokemon being POed, that Mecha didn't count since Iron Masked marauder made that mech. All Celebi did was just act as the core. Heck, Ask Blackjack Palazzo if you don't believe me, since she also mentioned that as well. I'll acknowledge Jirachi, though. As for the Rise of Darkrai, Humans weren't even responsible for Dialga and Palkia fighting, they just met when they ended up in a bad mood. Also, Mewtwo tried to do those actions to try and earn the right to exist (though most of that was eliminated from the Dub, sadly.). As for what you stated, if gods CAN be captured by mere mortals, EXPLAIN why Pirithous couldn't even capture Persephone without having his own butt stuck on a bench for all of eternity?! Heck, name one story where Zeus or any of the PURE gods were captured by mere mortals and forced to do their bidding by the Mortals command. Also, just FYI, I just mastered AP Latin, so DON'T say I'm not knowledgeable in Mythology in the Graeco-roman kind at least.

And for the last time, I didn't IMPLY nor state that Ditto even HAD a databank of DNA, that attribute belongs to Mew, and Mew alone.

Sheesh, sometimes you guys are impossible.Weedle Mchairybug 23:00, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't matter whether you explicitly say that Ditto is the ancestor - you're reasoning relies on claiming that the ability to use Transform is an indicator of having the DNA, and being the ancestor. Just by looking at Ditto, that's false. Being snarky about it doesn't change the fact that you're wrong.

Clefairy also has metronome, so Metronome cannot be an indicator of being the ancestor. To be the ancestor of all Pokemon, all Pokemon must be your descendants. Dialga and Palkia are clearly and explicitly descendants of Arceus only, unless Mew is Arceus' ancestor, which would be contradictory to what we are told. Again, you are confusing something the game frequently reiterates is a rumor, with what the game puts forth as exposition.

...what the hell do you mean "to be fair"? I never claimed that mortals caused the gods to lose body parts, and its completely irrelevant to discussion. As for Hercules, he became a full god after his original death.

....okay, I'm just going to post back your original post on this sub-topic, because you seem to have a bad memory:

"and anyways, the legends also hinted that Legendaries can't be captured by mere mortals, yet most of the crime syndicates, the Pyramid King and even the protagonist has been wielding these pokemon as if they were nothing."

Mewtwo, the only Pokemon I can think of that was actually wielded by a "crime syndicate", caused those actions because it was PO'd about being used by humans.

As far as I can tell, your implication with that passage was that Legendaries weren't the god-like beings that the legends indicated - yet their actions, even in The Rise of Darkrai, explicitly demonstrates that they are. Whether a human actively screws with them or not, they can and will rip the world apart if they're in a bad mood. I'm also unaware of the legends implying that it's impossible to capture them - only that it's impossible to safely enslave them.

Wow...you pass high school latin, and you deem it logical to choose one example from one mythology to claim that all mortals in all mythology will never have the upper hand against any god? I'm definitely out of my league here!

Some other examples:

...Zeus then ordered Hades to chain Sisyphus in Tartarus. Sisyphus slyly asked Thanatos to try the chains to show how they worked. When Thanatos did so, Sisyphus secured them and threatened Hades. This caused an uproar, and no human could die until Ares (who was annoyed that his battles had lost their fun because his opponents would not die) intervened, freeing Thanatos and sending Sisyphus to Tartarus.

Tantalus offered up his son, Pelops, as a sacrifice to the gods. He cut Pelops up, boiled him, and served him up as food for the gods. The gods were said to be aware of his plan for their feast, so they didn't touch the offering; only Demeter, distraught by the loss of her daughter, Persephone, "did not realize what it was" and ate part of the boy's shoulder.

Yes, those who mess with the gods get it in the end - but isn't this exactly what happens to those who mess with the Legendary Pokemon? Even innocent play with pseudo-legendaries like Unown can endanger the world.

...I don't know how I can make this more plain:

You claimed that Mew's ability to use Transform meant it had to be the ancestor, and brought up Ditto as a "evidence" for your interpretation of how Transform worked. Now, when confronted with this, you claim that the ability to use Transform does not imply something is the ancestor. Make up your mind.

Actually, to be fair, you don't actually bring up this glaring inconsistency. You just try to avoid the contradiction, and try to "eat your cake and have it too."

To summarize:

1. Mythology, as portrayed in the series, is quite reliable.
2. Arceus' mythology is neither self-contradictory, nor unique among real-world mythology.
3. The claim about Mew having the DNA of all Pokemon is not only contradictory to the explicit facts about artificial Pokemon such as Porygon, but never even claimed as fact, only as a rumor.
4. Transform, as described in-game and as demonstrated by Ditto, does not require a databank of all DNA. It merely requires the ability to change shape, or to replicate another's DNA.
5. Metronome, as described in-game and as demonstrated by Clefairy, also does not require a databank of all DNA.
6. Claiming that Mew is the ancestor of all Pokemon is inherently contradictory to the stated claims about Arceus, Dialga, Palkia, Mesprit, Axelf, Uxie, and Heatran.
7. Even before considering the contradictions in the total mythology, The idea that having a copy of all of a group's DNA implies you are their ancestor is inherently ridiculous and contradictory. It is the opposite of how genetics and inheritance actually works, even on the most basic level. It can be immediately refuted by a thought-examination of a child and his two, un-related parents.

KrytenKoro 08:08, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Umm... Hello. May I be permitted to submit my own wild abstractions?(*looks around*) Thank you. Well, what if Arceus began by creating the Universe and then created Mew as a template for all Pokémon who then flew off and was disregarded whilst Arceus was busy creating the 'gods' of Time and Space... Or something...Monblazon 21:15, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

That would work. Mew could conceivably be the progenitor or ancestor of most Pokemon, but not all.

Also, I'm sorry, it turns out Axl's Copy Shot does use DNA Cores, so I apologize for being wrong about that bit.KrytenKoro 07:26, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! I am good at filling in inconsistencies in canon like that...Monblazon 18:53, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Do we call this the creation paradox? Θρtιmαtum♏_Talk|Links10:38 3 Sep 2008

I'm not sure what you're referring to, as the only creation paradox I know of would require Mew to have travelled through time and created Arceus, which is in contradiction to what we've been given ("The Original One breathed alone"), as well as not based in any ability of Mew's that we know of. Could you explain what you mean?KrytenKoro 19:33, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

That would be a Temporal Paradox. The actual Paradox here is that since Mew is supposed to be the ancestor of ALL Pokémon, and Arceus is a Pokémon, the original, then one must contradict the other - which is the meaning of the word paradox. More or less...Monblazon 19:48, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

[un-indent] Look, I just feel the need to point this out. Do we have God's DNA? I don't see what's so contradictory about Arceus making Mew which all Pokémon (with the exception of, one assumes, Arceus's five avatars) may have eventually [Darwinian] evolved from. (...I just completely described intelligent design, didn't I?)--Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 20:04, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, and anyways, if we were to go by the definition of "Retcon", the statement of Mew believed to be the ancestor of all pokemon wouldn't even exist in D/P (Heck, they could have gotten to mention one of Mew's OLD Dex entries.) Weedle Mchairybug 20:11, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

check the DP Pokédex entry it says that scientists belive it is not known but believed in, no proof so wait for official information or this will end in a pardox.--Nobody777 16:45, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

It is a paradox. But not a very vicious one.Monblazon 17:43, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, and besides, if we were to mention that we should eliminate the Mew dex thing as proof that it may not be retconned just because scientists believed that it was the ancestor of all pokemon, then by that same token, we should eliminate Arceus's Dex entry as proof that it is retconned since it says that it's believed to be the creator of the universe in MYTHOLOGY, in other words, it's believed to be the creator of the universe by a LIE! Weedle Mchairybug 19:46, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Exumptly. Monblazon 22:35, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I think it's a losing battle to try to make sense of world when it's creators care less about it than you do. Kajillion 02:11, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Here is how I belive it is done It just like the Greek Mythology

Mew created Arceus Then Arceus created the Universe Then he created Time and Space (D and P) it just like how Chaos created Gaia and Gaia created Ornoas and they had the Titans

Its the same thing here all over

Remember in the 2000 Movei the Titan of Fire Ice and Lighting

And I Belive they have called some other Pokemom Titans before also

It all the same thing its Pokemon version of Greek Mythology

After reading this section I do believe that what was stated on the Mew talk page was correct and about porygon having only data don't you think if mew had part data too and porygon's data came from that bit of data--MyUU 01:47, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

I think I figured it out. Ok, so Mew created an egg, which hatched into Arceus; which created the whole world,the Dragon trio, and The Lake Trio; then fell into a deep sleep, leaving Mew to create everything else. Doesn't the myth State that Arceus Created the two sinnoh trios and the whole world, ONLY. it doesn't state that it Created everything else, or that nothing created the egg it hatched from, Does it? §hin¥£iΨ@chµ 22:48, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, Dialga and Palkia and Giratina and Arceus are considered by many as only legends, so the Pokédex programmers didn't know about its existence until the player captured it. But people have seen Mew, and proved its existence beforehand.TorchicBlaziken ^{(talk•edits)} 23:11, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Okay, looky here. This argument is getting too long. Let me just summarise and give a difinitive solution; Sure, many scientists have developed the theory that Mew is the ancestor of all Pokemon because it contains all of their DNA. However, this is proven wrong with the origin of Arceus. Arceus was born before the universe (or very early on, at least) and shaped the universe and created the dragon and lake trio. He then went to sleep for eons at the Hall of Origin. On Earth (in the Pokémon world) the other legendaries came about by their own means and whatever, such as the legendary beasts being created by Ho-Oh. Mew came about of its own accord. It holds the genes of all Pokemon. That does not make it the ancestor of all Pokemon. If anything, it would make sense to say that it came about last since it contains all other Pokémon's genes. In no way should Mew's story crossover with Arceus's. Mew is simply a very powerful Pokemon whose initial theorised origin is wrong.Bttsstewart 04:48, 8 December 2008 (UTC)Bttsstewart

STAB

The movesets seem to automatically assume Arceus is of the Fighting Type. I am unfamiliar with how this is coded, and so don't know how to fix it - is there anyone who can fix it?KrytenKoro 06:00, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Don't you mean Dragon-type? --ケンジのガール 06:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Everything on the page assumes that Arceus is a randomly-generated type. It's a bit of code TTE added.--Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 06:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Arceus is a Steel-type... everyone knows that.

Yeah. My random code that changes depending on the time that the page is last loaded to cache. Takes the Unix time (seconds since 1/1/1970) and then does a modulo division by 18, assigning one of the eighteen forms of Arceus to each remainder. Unown does a similar thing, but you only notice it in the evoboxes. TTEchidna 07:04, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Um, Hello? Arceus is a normal-type. It's only dragon-type when it's holding the Draco Plate, ect.Kiryu 23:14, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Edit: Bah! I hate that time-code-thing. Kiryu 23:34, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Empty

There is no content in the "In the anime", "In the manga" and "In the TCG". So why not somebody delete it? FireHazard 03:07, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

So when it comes out we can put it there.All pages fit a designated templateDCM

Moves

why is the movelist not where its supposed to be???? or is it just my computer????Dion24 11:03, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

It looks fine to me. What problem are you seeing? ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 17:49, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The level up nd TM learnsets appear at the top of the page over all the writing Dion24 07:53, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

that happened to me, and I realized that happened because I browsed all of the arceus formes or most of them.--Nobody777 13:15, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Everything on the page goes wired after you press show sprites and the movelist and everything else goes weird, and this goes for all pages. It might only be my computer, but it should be changed to suit all. --Wowy 00:51, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand... What browser are you using? TTEchidna 07:01, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Sprite and Evolution Sections

I think it's kind of wierd to have the rock sprite in the evolution section when it starts out in normal forme without any items on it. Also I think that in the sprite section it should have every sprite for Arceus's forms. This is just a suggestion. Also on a minor edit why is the rock type the default for this page --Tom 12:12, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

If I remember it right, it depends on the second you go to the page. tc26 12:27, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Exact second the page was last purged from cache. TTEchidna 21:59, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Japanese name

How can there be a romanization if the Pokémon hasn't been revealed? Where did this romanization come from? And don't try to tell me it's just what the kana says, because it hardly ever is. And you can't even write "rs" in kana. Which means this comes from somewhere. So where? Flicky1991 19:06, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

• Not directly, but the u in ル isn't always vocalized (ス　often does this as well, and occasionally シ　and a few others also do). It's impossible to write in kana, but it's not impossible use in roumaji, because roumaji is intended to be written the way it's pronounced (this is also why the official romanization methods collapse (o)(-), (o)(o), and (o)(u) into ō). Strictly speaking the kana are (A)(ru)(se)(u)(su), but it's pronounced 'Arseus.'Sailorleo 03:13, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

That's not the point - it's still not official. I only added the Japanese phonology bit in so no-one would argue about that.

...so, basically, that was a major fail. From now on, ignore anything I said about whether the name is pronounceable, and can someone just answer my original question: how there can be an official romanization for an unrevealed Pokémon? Flicky1991 19:44, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

There's not exactly. But it's the best we've got until we get one from Game Freak. So don't go altering it to the "a-roo-see-uu-suu" thing like we've had a problem with on other Pokémon long after their romanizations were revealed, like Kurabo. Crab. KRABBY MAN KRABBY. TTEchidna 22:01, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I did say to forget about the phonology stuff. *headbang* I never said change it to Aruseusu. If anything, the English one makes more sense, because a) it actually comes from Game Freak, and b) they're pronounced the same. Flicky1991 18:33, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Darkrai

[1] read the darkria section. Atomix26 22:39, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Your point being? No offense meant, but I don't see what you're saying. Rawr I say! 22:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Pure speculation on Serebii's part. Not worth including in this article. --FabuVinny ^{|Talk Page|} 23:12, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah! I mean, we don't even know if that was Arceus speaking. For all we know, that could just as easily have been Darkrai telling the player about his past. Heck, it could also have just as easily been Cresselia, for all we know. Weedle Mchairybug 02:28, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Evolution

Can someone put the Platinum Sprite in the evolution section?--Pokelova 20:39, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

The way we coded the page, we'd need to get sprites of all the forms first.--Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 03:42, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

How?

if Platinum didn't program event Pokémon in it how do we have the Platinum sprite? that is,unless someone traded it to Pt--Ultamatecharizard 18:45, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Hacked for the sprite? User:Phocks phocks 19:14, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

No different Pokédex formes

howcome the Pokédex doesn't show the different type formes as different formes?Ultamatecharizard 18:59, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Just doesn't, I guess. TTEchidna 04:45, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Alpha, not Omega

Should we note that Arceus is the Alpha Pokemon, and not the Omega Pokemon? This seems to imply that there is still another Pokemon that is stronger than Arceus. Master Lucario

Well, its classification as the "Alpha" Pokémon only applies to the English games, as it was classified as the "Creator" Pokémon in the Japanese games. (Right?) Plus, doesn't the English classification simply act as a way to show that it was the first Pokémon, and not as a measure of its strength? Xous 15:51, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

If it is the Alpha pokemon.Then what is the Omega Pokemon.User:ArceusEX

Magikarp? No, wait - it can Bounce. XD TESHIGIGAS 21:59, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

The Omega Pokémon simply doesn't exist yet. Again, the title of "Alpha" was simply used by the English versions because they chose not to dub it the "Creator Pokémon", despite the fact that was its Japanese classification. If there ever is an "Omega" Pokémon, it'll be in a future generation. Xous 20:23, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

thanks

Anyone here know the greek alphabet? Arceus was the first pokémon. Alpha is the first letter in the greek alphabet. See the connection? If there were to be a pokémon classified as Omega, the last letter in the greek alphabet, it would have to be the last pokémon in the last generation. Which I doubt we'll ever reach.Kiryu 23:37, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

This guy was referred to as "the alpha and the omega," and there were quite a few people who came after him. Like, say, us. --((Marton imos)) 21:18, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

I know the greek alphabet~Ποκεμανιακα0β 21:23, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

That Guy is the Alpha AND the Omega because he is going to outlast us all!Monblazon 19:37, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

PLEASE let's not bring religion into this. Kiryu 05:06, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Evolution

Under the Evolution heading, it always shows Arceus in its Water Forme and no other formes. Why? Blueapple128 18:56, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Looks like it's being internally cached. Just add &action=purge to the end of the article's URL and it should change types. - Kogoro | Talk to me | 19:03, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Also, I'm pretty sure that they aren't "Formes". At least, not yet. --((Marton imos)) 19:36, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

I think that TTEchidna should remove the "random type" code. It's a little annoying. Blueapple128 20:10, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Kogoro, when I add &action=purge to the end of the URL, this happens: http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Arceus_(Pokémon)&action=purge

It's ?action=purge--Blazevoir!! 20:37, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

fire?

why is arceus being refferred to as a fire type? i mean like it only automatically shows the type effectiveness for the flame plate, its boxes are orange which are for fire types, judgement is stated as a fire type, and its evolution table only has the fire type sprite. Happizelpom 01:18, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

ok well now its changed to fighting why is arceus' page changing reflecting on its type? Happizelpom 01:20, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Because its designed to change into each of its 17 forms at random each visit to the page. --^Psychic_Rider^☮ 01:21, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

oh ok thank you! Happizelpom 01:22, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

You're very welcome. --^Psychic_Rider^☮ 01:23, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Ghost-favoring?

There are several Ghost-favoring things I found on the page that I want to know why they are there. a) The Pkdx entry has a ghost-coloured heading background and border. b) Location, same as A c) The 'With Spooky Plate Equipped' section cannot be retracted d) Learnset sections are I) Using Ghost-Type borders, II) Using Ghost-Type rather than Normal-type STAB, III) Using Judgement as Ghost-type rather than Normal-Type, to make STAB (but makes sense) e) Using a Ghost-type sprite rather than a normal-type for the Evolution section I want to know who's favouring ghost-types, NNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! - unsigned comment from Giratina's Embodiment (talk • contribs)

*sigh* This has already been covered multiple times, including the section right above this one. It changes whenever you refresh the page. --FabuVinny ^{|Talk Page|} 19:27, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

The type in the infobox is normal. Should we leave it like that, or change it to reflect the type on the rest of the page? --((Marton imos)) 21:50, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

No, to save from misconception~Ποκεμανιακα0β 21:51, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Misconception and the ability for this page to be in 17 categories at once. TTEchidna 03:47, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Tag

what is the tag for the random sprite generator because i wanted to add that to some of my pages for school to impress my friends. i hope this isnt too much to ask for. --Tom 19:47, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Tag? It's wikicoding based off of the time in seconds since January 1, 1970 at midnight, UTC. TTEchidna 21:09, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

I thought it was some type of javascript or css script that was used. it is a simple misunderstanding. Tom 03:42, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Nope, just wiki. TTEchidna 03:46, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

You know... I just had an idea.

What if you had ??? Arceus, and it was confused and hurt itself. Since confusion causes you to deal a ???-type 40-power move to yourself, would Arceus then therefore get STAB on this? TTEchidna 03:50, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Isn't the ???-type super effective on everything? Θρtιmαtum♏_Talk|Links 08:34, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

The ???-type needs to be thoroughly researched. Anyone want to take the responsibility? TESHIGIGAS 21:05, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

???-type does normal damage to any type, including its own. And of STAB, well, it DOES get stab. hfc2X 21:13, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

If a ???-type Arceus is burned while fighting another ???-type, which gets the STAB? Is it the same as being confused? In other words: which Pokémon does the damage for burn come from? LordArceus 17:43, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Burn does always inflict 1/8 of the max HP of the sufferer, so the burn does not get STAB. It's like if Dragon rage was ???-type, it will always inflict 40HP damage anyways. hfc2X 20:49, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

The Horse God?

Anyone other than me noticed Arceus is very similar to a horse? Especially it's Platinum sprite, where it appears to be rearing up. I'm even working on a fandom book series The Pokemon Befriender, and as I am waiting to send this to Nintendo, I decided to put Arceus in there, decepting it as a horse. If you want to get some idea on the series, email me. Giratina's Embodiment 17:27, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Thats advertising. In addition, when i see Arceus, i think of Pan, god of Nature.--DCM_{((Shut the **** upSpy on My Edits))}

I think: Arceus = Legendary mule TESHIGIGAS 17:42, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, Arceus is pretty much a horse. Just watch it in PBR. No question. However, I don't think the fact that it's based off of a horse is important to its role as a Creator Pokémon. Xous 05:30, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I just thought it interesting that Nintendo would put a fancy horse as a god. Giratina's Embodiment 18:09, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Spritebox

Hey TTE, can you use your magic and make it so the Spritebox shows the correctly typed sprites as described on the page? Last time I went on the archives to check, I tink there was pretty well all the normal and backsprites (just not all shiny).--MisterE13 04:51, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

The shiny's the issue... I'll do what I can... TTEchidna 21:49, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Kay, now we need Pt and back sprites for all Arceus forms. TTEchidna 23:13, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Possible name origin

I was reading a thing on Hades and something caught my eye. "One of the three judges of Hades was named Aeceus..." Could this be the origin of Arceus? Kiryu 05:12, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Possibly, seeing as the creator do all this research. ShinyPika <3 ALS 19:28, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Whatever you were reading made a spelling error: it's Aeacus. Judging from the linked article, it has nothing to do with creation myths, so this is unlikely to be the origin of Arceus. Flicky1991 20:36, 13 December 2008 (UTC)