Talk:One-Above-All

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	comics Portal This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Help with current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project talk page.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. Please explain the rating here.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
More information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no This article has been marked as requiring an image. Please add one in accordance with guidance. Related task forces (publisher): Marvel Comics work group

Contents 1 Jack Kirby? 2 The Heart of the Universe versus The One-Above-All? 3 Image 4 The One Above All Problems 5 Hyperstorm 6 Tidy up

[edit] Jack Kirby?

Was there any indication that the Jack Kirby lookalike the Fantastic Four recently met in the afterlife is the One-Above-All? Timrollpickering 20:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

• Because it makes perfect sense! The Living Tribunal is indeed the most powerful in-universe entity, but, being a comic book character (and he probably knows this), would logically answer to the real-life creators of his universe. When you look at it this way, the OAA is pretty much a big in-joke. It's no tangible entity, it's Marvel Comics itself! Also (I've never personally seen it, but this is what I heard), the Jack Kirby Entity gets on the phone with his "associate". Perhaps there's a divine Stan Lee running around, too :) Belgium EO 02:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Heart of the Universe versus The One-Above-All?

Just out of curiosity, I am wondering who would win? I mean, I know the Heart isn't a "living" (possibly innapropriate, but the best I've got) being, what I mean is could the One-Above-All beat "it"? In the article about the Heart of The Universe, it has been stated not even the Living Tribunal, the Celestials, Glaactus... couldn't do anything about it. They all became just a small part of it when Thanos became one with the Universe. Though even Thanos couldn't repair a flaw in the Universe, possibly meaning the Heart can be beaten by a force greater than "it's" (OAA was the first to come to my mind). I quote: "Thanos speculated and it was strongly implied that the whole scenario had been a set-up from the beginning by a far greater power (the original "God" of the Marvel Multiverse)... So maybe OAA or some other god (the Jack Kirby from FF, perhaps) could beat it. Just wondering, that's all. Superfan 410 20:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that the One-Above-All could beat it. The Heart of the Universe is just the Heart of the one main Marvel Universe, yea? The One-Above-All is the God of the entire Multiverse. But then, the One-Above-All never interferes or affects anything but at the same time knows everything as it pre-ordains everything that is to happen. So even if there could be a challenge by Thanos with the Heart in his possession, the One-Above-All probably already knew it beforehand and orchestrated it itself, like you mentioned. Though, you will never see the One-Above-All ever directly involved because the organisation checking up on comics would go berserk and all sorts of religious groups would scream bloody murder. Zuracech lordum 09:23, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image

I've removed the tag asking for an image with the article because there are, to the best of my knowledge, no images available for the Marvel God. He/She/It is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent so there is never any image of him/her/it and never does he/she/it appear in any Marvel Comic. Zuracech lordum 09:37, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The One Above All Problems

Whwere should I start? First of all the article says that the One Above All has appeared before. This is not true. The One Above All was only mentioned once and that was in a Gaurdians of the Galaxy featuring a child who could mimic the powers of godlike beings. In fact, he tried to mimic the powers of this One Above All, but instead took on an offshoot form of the Living Tribunal. Leading one to believe that a higher power than the Living Tribunal is relative at best or at least a circular argument. Finally, the author then goes on to say that there is an official word that the One Above All is actually Marvel? Aside from being silly, there isn't even a reference. MPA 08:29, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hyperstorm

In Hyperstorm's article, it says: "Hyperstorm is the most powerful character in the comic book universe. He stopped the Endless, Krona, Galactus, Eternity, Death, Oblivion, Infinity, the Elders of the UniverseLiving Tribunal, Holy Spawn, Man of Miracles, Superman, Raiden, the Elder Gods(Mortal Kombat), Thanos(with heart of the universe), Chton, Onslaught, Hulk, Thor, Zeus, Metron, Those Who Sit Above In The Shadow, SS4 Gogeta, the In-Betweener,the Beyonder, Magus, all other cosmic entities, all other deities, all other demons, the One Above All, and all other warriors good and bad in the comic multiverse singlehandedly. Hyperstorm is every type of character although he was born human. He has all the abilities of the pinnacle of a human, mutant, robot, cyborg, cosmic character, animal, android, someone affected by radiation, eternal, and a god."

This would mean a) it's about the Celestial b) OAA isn't the most powerful being in the MU

It does have a box above stating that part or all of the article may be a hoax, so can someone look that up? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Superfan 410 (talk • contribs) 15:15, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Yep, just spam. Superfan 410 (talk) 20:48, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tidy up

OK...added correct sources, including the first time the concept is referenced. Now by just going with the facts, the article - unless there is another appearance - is always gong to be at "stub" status and I have marked it as such. If anyone has issue with the cuts, go back and have close look. Unfortunately, it is all ifs and maybes and speculation, not verifiable fact. Also, note that the being that split itself into the Infinity Gems is Nemesis, not God (see article on Gems). The Jack Kirby mention, although warming the cockles of the heart, is only implied, and never stated as fact (also only one writer's take on things). Hope it helps.

Asgardian (talk) 09:23, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Asgardian, thanks for your work, you did a great job. however, just to make sure, I'd like to ask you to provide a more detailed explanation on why the following part was removed:

"It is considered to be the supreme cosmic entity in the Marvel Universe cosmology; above all pantheons of gods, cosmic entities and even the Living Tribunal."

Because there's a bit to get through here, I'm going to cheat and enter answers after each query. Re: the hierarchy - Kubik at one point speculates that it would logical for the Living Tribunal to be simply another servant, but he states "...but of what...none can imagine..." From memory the LT may have said at one point that he serves the will of another being, but I can't insert that without a source.

Asgardian (talk) 04:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't mind the current layout either, although mentioning the apparently retconned(/contradicting?) Infinity Gauntlet affair as a "At one point..., but... apparently..." paragraph might be an idea, as it currently reads like the concept is cleanly mapped out, while it really isn't. If I don't misremember the LT stated in Warlock and Infinity Watch #1 "I represent forces that dwarf even your might", or something similar. Whether that should be taken as the literal and usual 'the M-Body was naturally simply a representative manifestation of this particular force', or 'I'm just a servant' is anyone's guess. (The claim of superior power was immediately put in question by Warlock, and the Tribunal was uncertain of/pondering if it was powerful enough to directly wrest the Gauntlet from him, and the conclusion seemed to be that it might and might not, but the universe would be destroyed if they tried to find out, so Warlock simply gave it up rather than kill everything.) Later the Marvel/DC 'Brother's' were introduced as the 'bosses' of the LT and the Spectre respectively, but were later retconned as a game the Tribunal engineered, which may have given fuel to the notion. I think the Protege stated itself as "the new OAA" after mimicking the LT in Guardians of the Galaxy, whereupon regular Celestials were stated as even higher up the scale/the OAA of the Celestials was inferred as the other guy, but Gruenwald/Quasar later retconned that into M-Body nonsense, as it should be. I can't recall other instances, and am not sure where the name originated. It may be a fanon myth gradually created from loose snippets for all we know. Dave (talk) 19:45, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Also, I'd like you to comment on some things David A. told me in User talk:David A#One-Above-All, namely:

"[the Tribunal] at one point was referred to as the One-Above-All"

He's not. The OAA is the player beyond the LT in Marvel: The End.

Asgardian (talk) 04:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

That's a misunderstanding and thus misrepresentation. The full sentence read "This would rate them above the Gauntlet (and Tribunal) which at one point was referred to as the One-Above-All." Meaning, I was clearly referring to the one outside of the parenthesis. Adam Warlock asked Eternity if it ever made demands of the previous supreme being, and the entire stated premise of the Infinity Gauntlet was that the previous "supreme being" ofthe Marvel Universe committed suicide and split up to the six Infinity Gems. The Tribunal seemed roughly equal in WatIW#1, which was the source of the parenthesis. Later a horrible 'Ultraverse' crossover apparently introduced the concept of a seventh gem and Nemesis, a being that creates universes, so I suppose that this may be a retcon, but regardless, this previous version should probably be mentioned in some respect. Dave (talk) 19:45, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

"One-Above-All/'Infinity Gem Being' referred to as the former master of Eternity at some point if I don't misremember."

That's Nemesis. The relation to Eternity is unclear. It may be that Nemesis was the first Eternity and suffered "loneliness", but again, that's speculation.

Asgardian (talk) 04:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Nah, Eternity stated outright that the previous Gauntlet-being was superior in the hierarchy. That piece is hard to retcon. The Infinites were also stated as higher-dimensional(/roughly "beyond any finite reality" when grabbing Eternity, if I don't misremember) in comparison (at least times one scale of infinity more powerful), which would rate them above the Gauntlet, and thus likely the Tribunal, as Eternity was at least able to give Thanos a challenge when the latter was wielding it. Dave (talk) 19:45, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

And finally, what can you tell me about the Soul Survivors?

http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix/slsur1.htm

They worshipped a different joe with the same name. He was far from omnipotent.

Asgardian (talk) 04:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd point out especially these passages:

"The One Above All has no known connections to: The One Above All, the supreme leader of the Celestials of Earth's Fourth Host, @ Eternals I#7"

"The One Above All is of unknown origin (You can make up whatever you like. I'd guess he could be a Celestial, who got tired of all the judging, etc. and decided to settle down)."

Note that this image http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix/slsur18.gif reads:

"He was called... THE ONE ABOVE ALL. We WORSHIPPED him." "He was our GOD. He was LIFE and the GIVER of life..." "...And I mean that quite LITERALLY."

Cheers, Waldir ^talk 22:19, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

There is a "Prime" Celestial called the OAA, but as we've seen, even the Celestials have bad days (albeit very few). It is also unlikely that God hangs with the Celestials...

Asgardian (talk) 04:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

One more thing: was Doctor Strange #13 really published in April 1974? I am asking this since Doctor Strange says the series started in June: "This series continued into a solo book generally titled as Doctor Strange: Master of the Mystic Arts, which ran 81 issues (June 1974 - Feb. 1987)". Which one is wrong? Waldir ^talk 22:33, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

The entry I posted is correct - I always check the cover date before posting.

Regards

Asgardian (talk) 04:58, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your answers. I have some more doubts, though.

1. First of all: I forgot to ask in my previous post why you removed the "see also" line: "* The Presence, the Supreme Being of the DC Comics Universe."
2. From your first two answers, I would say that it's safe enough to assume that the LT serves the OAA; especially when you take into account his name...And therefore that line stating the hierarchy could be restored.
3. Shouldn't the Soul Survivors' OAA be mentioned at least in a disambiguation note in this article and in the homonym celestial's?
4. Thanks for the confirmation on the date of the Doctor Strange comic. Can you tell me when the series did actually start? If the previous one (Marvel Premiere) ended in March, and was followed by this one ("This series continued into a solo book generally titled as Doctor Strange: Master of the Mystic Arts"), then I suppose it's safe to assume the latter started in April; but is it realistic that 13 issues were published in the same month?

Waldir ^talk 11:35, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

1. The Presence is a different kettle of fish, or rather different universe. It is less clear over there as to who is the supreme being. There's also God from Mike Carey's Lucifer. So, simplicity is best as this article is about the OAA.

2. I'll try and find a source.

3. Nah. It was a one-off and 99% of people will never realise this anyway. It is for this reason that many one-shot characters with the same names as more famous equivalents are never mentioned - to avoid confusion. If they were at least B-grade, OK. But these characters are nobodies.

4. Ah. The first series started in June 1974, and the April issue in question therefore must be from 1976 for the math to work. It was originally bi-monthly.

Asgardian (talk) 15:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation about The Presence. I really don't know much about the DC Comics universe :) I also corrected the date twice more in the article, as you only changed it in the infobox. Waldir ^talk 16:55, 24 February 2008 (UTC)