Talk:Ability heredity - Revision history

imported>Intuitive Empath at 12:37, 21 November 2009

2009-11-21T12:37:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:37, 21 November 2009
(No difference)

imported>Intuitive Empath at 12:37, 21 November 2009

2009-11-21T12:37:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:37, 21 November 2009
Line 80:		Line 80:

	Hi, I just wanted to know why it says that Nana Dawson has an ability (though Unknown). Was there ever any proof in an episode or GN that she did have one?--[[User:Hiroman\|Hiroman]] 06:00, 21 November 2009 (EST)		Hi, I just wanted to know why it says that Nana Dawson has an ability (though Unknown). Was there ever any proof in an episode or GN that she did have one?--[[User:Hiroman\|Hiroman]] 06:00, 21 November 2009 (EST)
			*It has to be removed, it was added when her name appeared in list of people taken in the flight in 314. [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 07:37, 21 November 2009 (EST)

imported>Hiroman at 11:00, 21 November 2009

2009-11-21T11:00:51Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:00, 21 November 2009
Line 76:		Line 76:
	** Thanks. :) I actually went and made a third table for non-inheritance relations, since Peter and Claire, for instance, are not technically an example of inheritance. I looked at the talk page for input first, but didn't notice you responded beneath each question (I just saw the final comment), so I'll understand if it gets reverted. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 07:31, 24 December 2008 (EST)		** Thanks. :) I actually went and made a third table for non-inheritance relations, since Peter and Claire, for instance, are not technically an example of inheritance. I looked at the talk page for input first, but didn't notice you responded beneath each question (I just saw the final comment), so I'll understand if it gets reverted. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 07:31, 24 December 2008 (EST)
	* Just wanted to say i think the pages looks alot better, the tables are fantastic. Well done :) -- [[User:Laughingdevilboy\|laughingdevilboy]]		* Just wanted to say i think the pages looks alot better, the tables are fantastic. Well done :) -- [[User:Laughingdevilboy\|laughingdevilboy]]

			==Nana==

			Hi, I just wanted to know why it says that Nana Dawson has an ability (though Unknown). Was there ever any proof in an episode or GN that she did have one?--[[User:Hiroman\|Hiroman]] 06:00, 21 November 2009 (EST)

imported>MiamiVolts: /* Synthetic evolved humans */ reply

2008-12-27T11:06:22Z

Synthetic evolved humans: reply

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:06, 27 December 2008
Line 59:		Line 59:
	*I'll buy that!--{{User:SacValleyDweller/sig}} 03:02, 27 December 2008 (EST)		*I'll buy that!--{{User:SacValleyDweller/sig}} 03:02, 27 December 2008 (EST)
	On the one hand, the way Angela described it was that Nathan's DNA was predisposed toward having the formula work, so maybe not ''everyone'' can get a power. On the other hand, the future indicated that anyone could attain an ability, so I guess Angela was wrong...again. ;) As for noting them, I think they should be on the page, but not anywhere that references inheritance...more as a note about other relations. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 02:46, 27 December 2008 (EST)		On the one hand, the way Angela described it was that Nathan's DNA was predisposed toward having the formula work, so maybe not ''everyone'' can get a power. On the other hand, the future indicated that anyone could attain an ability, so I guess Angela was wrong...again. ;) As for noting them, I think they should be on the page, but not anywhere that references inheritance...more as a note about other relations. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 02:46, 27 December 2008 (EST)
			**Anyone could get an ability using Mohinder's formula too, but it wasn't a very good ability. Perhaps those without a predisposition in their DNA develop adverse side-effects even with the perfected formula and one of them caused the world to go boom?--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 06:06, 27 December 2008 (EST)

	== Tables ==		== Tables ==

imported>SacValleyDweller: /* Synthetic evolved humans */ buy Ricard's coment

2008-12-27T08:02:53Z

Synthetic evolved humans: buy Ricard's coment

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:02, 27 December 2008
Line 57:		Line 57:

	While synthetic parents is an important thing to note, synthetic children and/or synthetic siblings (Nathan, Niki, Tracy) should not be included. If the synthetic formula can give anyone abilities, then there is nothing noteworthy about Peter and Nathan being brothers. --[[User:Ricard Desi\|Ricard Desi]] ([[User talk:Ricard Desi\|t]],[[Special:Contributions/Ricard Desi\|c]]) 02:05, 27 December 2008 (EST)		While synthetic parents is an important thing to note, synthetic children and/or synthetic siblings (Nathan, Niki, Tracy) should not be included. If the synthetic formula can give anyone abilities, then there is nothing noteworthy about Peter and Nathan being brothers. --[[User:Ricard Desi\|Ricard Desi]] ([[User talk:Ricard Desi\|t]],[[Special:Contributions/Ricard Desi\|c]]) 02:05, 27 December 2008 (EST)
			*I'll buy that!--{{User:SacValleyDweller/sig}} 03:02, 27 December 2008 (EST)

	On the one hand, the way Angela described it was that Nathan's DNA was predisposed toward having the formula work, so maybe not ''everyone'' can get a power. On the other hand, the future indicated that anyone could attain an ability, so I guess Angela was wrong...again. ;) As for noting them, I think they should be on the page, but not anywhere that references inheritance...more as a note about other relations. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 02:46, 27 December 2008 (EST)		On the one hand, the way Angela described it was that Nathan's DNA was predisposed toward having the formula work, so maybe not ''everyone'' can get a power. On the other hand, the future indicated that anyone could attain an ability, so I guess Angela was wrong...again. ;) As for noting them, I think they should be on the page, but not anywhere that references inheritance...more as a note about other relations. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 02:46, 27 December 2008 (EST)

imported>Stevehim: /* Synthetic evolved humans */

2008-12-27T07:46:50Z

Synthetic evolved humans

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:46, 27 December 2008
Line 57:		Line 57:

	While synthetic parents is an important thing to note, synthetic children and/or synthetic siblings (Nathan, Niki, Tracy) should not be included. If the synthetic formula can give anyone abilities, then there is nothing noteworthy about Peter and Nathan being brothers. --[[User:Ricard Desi\|Ricard Desi]] ([[User talk:Ricard Desi\|t]],[[Special:Contributions/Ricard Desi\|c]]) 02:05, 27 December 2008 (EST)		While synthetic parents is an important thing to note, synthetic children and/or synthetic siblings (Nathan, Niki, Tracy) should not be included. If the synthetic formula can give anyone abilities, then there is nothing noteworthy about Peter and Nathan being brothers. --[[User:Ricard Desi\|Ricard Desi]] ([[User talk:Ricard Desi\|t]],[[Special:Contributions/Ricard Desi\|c]]) 02:05, 27 December 2008 (EST)

			On the one hand, the way Angela described it was that Nathan's DNA was predisposed toward having the formula work, so maybe not ''everyone'' can get a power. On the other hand, the future indicated that anyone could attain an ability, so I guess Angela was wrong...again. ;) As for noting them, I think they should be on the page, but not anywhere that references inheritance...more as a note about other relations. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 02:46, 27 December 2008 (EST)

	== Tables ==		== Tables ==

imported>Ricard Desi: /* Synthetic evolved humans */

2008-12-27T07:05:22Z

Synthetic evolved humans

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:05, 27 December 2008
Line 55:		Line 55:

	You saw exactly what I meant, the big question: synthetic ability X normal human/synthetic ability = natural ability? [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] 18:09, 18 October 2008 (EDT)		You saw exactly what I meant, the big question: synthetic ability X normal human/synthetic ability = natural ability? [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] 18:09, 18 October 2008 (EDT)

			While synthetic parents is an important thing to note, synthetic children and/or synthetic siblings (Nathan, Niki, Tracy) should not be included. If the synthetic formula can give anyone abilities, then there is nothing noteworthy about Peter and Nathan being brothers. --[[User:Ricard Desi\|Ricard Desi]] ([[User talk:Ricard Desi\|t]],[[Special:Contributions/Ricard Desi\|c]]) 02:05, 27 December 2008 (EST)

	== Tables ==		== Tables ==

imported>Laughingdevilboy: /* Tables */

2008-12-24T13:46:13Z

Tables

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:46, 24 December 2008
Line 70:		Line 70:
	* The changes generally look good. The page was really beginning to get scraggly. Thanks for contributing to cleaning it up. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 03:01, 24 December 2008 (EST)		* The changes generally look good. The page was really beginning to get scraggly. Thanks for contributing to cleaning it up. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 03:01, 24 December 2008 (EST)
	** Thanks. :) I actually went and made a third table for non-inheritance relations, since Peter and Claire, for instance, are not technically an example of inheritance. I looked at the talk page for input first, but didn't notice you responded beneath each question (I just saw the final comment), so I'll understand if it gets reverted. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 07:31, 24 December 2008 (EST)		** Thanks. :) I actually went and made a third table for non-inheritance relations, since Peter and Claire, for instance, are not technically an example of inheritance. I looked at the talk page for input first, but didn't notice you responded beneath each question (I just saw the final comment), so I'll understand if it gets reverted. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 07:31, 24 December 2008 (EST)
	* Just wanted to say i think the pages looks alot better, the tables are fantastic. Well done :)		* Just wanted to say i think the pages looks alot better, the tables are fantastic. Well done :) -- [[User:Laughingdevilboy\|laughingdevilboy]]

imported>Laughingdevilboy: /* Tables */

2008-12-24T13:45:28Z

Tables

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:45, 24 December 2008
Line 70:		Line 70:
	* The changes generally look good. The page was really beginning to get scraggly. Thanks for contributing to cleaning it up. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 03:01, 24 December 2008 (EST)		* The changes generally look good. The page was really beginning to get scraggly. Thanks for contributing to cleaning it up. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 03:01, 24 December 2008 (EST)
	** Thanks. :) I actually went and made a third table for non-inheritance relations, since Peter and Claire, for instance, are not technically an example of inheritance. I looked at the talk page for input first, but didn't notice you responded beneath each question (I just saw the final comment), so I'll understand if it gets reverted. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 07:31, 24 December 2008 (EST)		** Thanks. :) I actually went and made a third table for non-inheritance relations, since Peter and Claire, for instance, are not technically an example of inheritance. I looked at the talk page for input first, but didn't notice you responded beneath each question (I just saw the final comment), so I'll understand if it gets reverted. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 07:31, 24 December 2008 (EST)
			* Just wanted to say i think the pages looks alot better, the tables are fantastic. Well done :)

imported>Stevehim: /* Tables */ oops; didn't see the comments; leaving it as is for now though

2008-12-24T12:31:49Z

Tables: oops; didn't see the comments; leaving it as is for now though

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:31, 24 December 2008
Line 69:		Line 69:
	: I think we should probably at least go with 1., since it's not technically correct (eg - Peter doesn't contribute any DNA to Claire, and so their relation has nothing to do with inheritance), but I'll leave it for now, pending discussion. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 00:31, 24 December 2008 (EST)		: I think we should probably at least go with 1., since it's not technically correct (eg - Peter doesn't contribute any DNA to Claire, and so their relation has nothing to do with inheritance), but I'll leave it for now, pending discussion. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 00:31, 24 December 2008 (EST)
	* The changes generally look good. The page was really beginning to get scraggly. Thanks for contributing to cleaning it up. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 03:01, 24 December 2008 (EST)		* The changes generally look good. The page was really beginning to get scraggly. Thanks for contributing to cleaning it up. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 03:01, 24 December 2008 (EST)
			** Thanks. :) I actually went and made a third table for non-inheritance relations, since Peter and Claire, for instance, are not technically an example of inheritance. I looked at the talk page for input first, but didn't notice you responded beneath each question (I just saw the final comment), so I'll understand if it gets reverted. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 07:31, 24 December 2008 (EST)