Talk:Weeping Angel vs SCP-173/@comment-35564842-20181212161308/@comment-28815426-20190428044108

1. "There is no true canon to the SCP universe and even so I don’t think the foundation was created specifically to contain 173."

'''The canon is up to the reader to decide, which makes it very hard to find reliable feats. The best way is to use closely related foundation tales that can support the main article, although SCP-173 being a very early SCP means the article is very very short, so it has few feats.'''

2. "Were the hell does it say that 173 was found in the 19th century. Answer: Not on its bloody page!"

'''Possibly in a related foundation tale. Not all SCP's feats are in the main page. There's a feat in one of the tales where SCP-173 quickly moves across the county at ludicrous speeds apparently. (I might be wrong, as I'm remembering this off the top of my head. Pretty sure it's in the foundation tale where SCP-173 starts duplicating.)'''

3. "That description of a Euclid fits more into a Safe class SCP, Euclids are unpredictable and therefore more difficult to contain."

I don't have anything to add, as this is true.

4. (Just to clarify) "The part about it being unable to move even if you look at it through walls was a Joke presumably based on a glitch in SCP: Containment Breach."

Nothing to add.

5. "There are several SCPs outside of even the 001 proposals that are more powerful and indestructible than 682 such as 2317. But yes it was able to damage 682 enough to make it scared of 173."

It was actually scared of SCP-173 before SCP-173 even attacked it, but yeah SCP-173 is far from some super insanely strong SCP.

Just fun facts:

"There is actually one SCP where you just need to look in its general direction from a distinct distance for it to become immobile and that is 689."

"These two statues similarities are just coincidences. They were made only a few months apart but 173 actually came before."

Huh, I should look that one up.