Talk:Freezing/Archive 4 - Revision history

imported>PJDEP at 04:49, 4 March 2010

2010-03-04T04:49:45Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:49, 4 March 2010
(No difference)

imported>PJDEP at 04:49, 4 March 2010

2010-03-04T04:49:45Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:49, 4 March 2010
Line 158:		Line 158:
	********* Not always. In fact, Ryan addressed this on the talk page of naming conventions. When things change in the Heroes Universe (eg - the future has been altered) we can adjust things accordingly, just as long as we keep the information that we had at the time on the old pages (eg - we don't go back and change the Season 1 pages when Sylar kills Charlie (which was shown and stated in canon), but we do use the new information as we move forward (even though in my example case, it was also shown and stated). To take a more recent example...Angela outright stated that Peter could not stop Emma from killing thousands of people...explicitly, canonically, etc. But he did (indirectly), proving her statement false. Iirc, she even maintained her position after he told her that Sylar was the one who was going to save her. Of course, these aren't the greatest examples, as they all involve the same sourcing level (canon), but it (hopefully) illustrates that data can be outdated and need changing. Whether or not the new manifestation of Tracy's ability qualifies is a separate point. (As a side note, the writers are notorious for sarcasm in interviews, even when explicitly stating things). --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 18:49, 11 February 2010 (EST)		********* Not always. In fact, Ryan addressed this on the talk page of naming conventions. When things change in the Heroes Universe (eg - the future has been altered) we can adjust things accordingly, just as long as we keep the information that we had at the time on the old pages (eg - we don't go back and change the Season 1 pages when Sylar kills Charlie (which was shown and stated in canon), but we do use the new information as we move forward (even though in my example case, it was also shown and stated). To take a more recent example...Angela outright stated that Peter could not stop Emma from killing thousands of people...explicitly, canonically, etc. But he did (indirectly), proving her statement false. Iirc, she even maintained her position after he told her that Sylar was the one who was going to save her. Of course, these aren't the greatest examples, as they all involve the same sourcing level (canon), but it (hopefully) illustrates that data can be outdated and need changing. Whether or not the new manifestation of Tracy's ability qualifies is a separate point. (As a side note, the writers are notorious for sarcasm in interviews, even when explicitly stating things). --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 18:49, 11 February 2010 (EST)

	= Naming Convention Guidelines ==		== Naming Convention Guidelines ==

	Under "Ability names":		Under "Ability names":

imported>PJDEP at 23:48, 3 March 2010

2010-03-03T23:48:20Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:48, 3 March 2010
Line 178:		Line 178:
	** I don't. I know it's an unpopular part of the naming conventions, but I feel very strongly that we need to use the name that is given to us, even if it's not the best name. I believe the minute we start to deviate from using what is explicitly given to us, we weaken the integrity of our archiving on the wiki. I'm not sure why the writers told us that Tracy's ability was "freezing" when only 7 episodes later it would evolve and become something quite different...but the fact remains that it's what was given to us. I've heard and read just about every argument against that, and I truly wish it were different--and I would love for a writer to come out and say something like, "Yeah, we made a mistake" or "Oh, yeah, her power has changed and so has the name" or to see an Assignment Tracker that lists her ability with a different name...but until we have something like that, we use what's been given to us. And yes, I've emailed a few different writers about the issue, and I always seem to get the same kind of answer--either they don't reply, or they tell me they'll get back to me, or they tell me they need to check with somebody else. My personal feeling is that the writers know made a boo boo, and they don't quite know how to fix it. But until they do, I think we need to document what we have. After all, I'm only conjecturing that the writers have made a mistake. It could very well be that nothing has been corrected because it was never wrong in the first place. It's completely plausible to me that Tracy's ability to manipulate water is an offshoot of her "main" freezing power--much the way that Matt could paint the future or create illusions, both as offshoots of his main telepathic ability. So in short, the name "freezing" stays until we hear differently. Unpopular, I know... :( -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 21:31, 11 February 2010 (EST)		** I don't. I know it's an unpopular part of the naming conventions, but I feel very strongly that we need to use the name that is given to us, even if it's not the best name. I believe the minute we start to deviate from using what is explicitly given to us, we weaken the integrity of our archiving on the wiki. I'm not sure why the writers told us that Tracy's ability was "freezing" when only 7 episodes later it would evolve and become something quite different...but the fact remains that it's what was given to us. I've heard and read just about every argument against that, and I truly wish it were different--and I would love for a writer to come out and say something like, "Yeah, we made a mistake" or "Oh, yeah, her power has changed and so has the name" or to see an Assignment Tracker that lists her ability with a different name...but until we have something like that, we use what's been given to us. And yes, I've emailed a few different writers about the issue, and I always seem to get the same kind of answer--either they don't reply, or they tell me they'll get back to me, or they tell me they need to check with somebody else. My personal feeling is that the writers know made a boo boo, and they don't quite know how to fix it. But until they do, I think we need to document what we have. After all, I'm only conjecturing that the writers have made a mistake. It could very well be that nothing has been corrected because it was never wrong in the first place. It's completely plausible to me that Tracy's ability to manipulate water is an offshoot of her "main" freezing power--much the way that Matt could paint the future or create illusions, both as offshoots of his main telepathic ability. So in short, the name "freezing" stays until we hear differently. Unpopular, I know... :( -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 21:31, 11 February 2010 (EST)
	*** You say integrity, I say density. [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 16:05, 12 February 2010 (EST)		*** You say integrity, I say density. [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 16:05, 12 February 2010 (EST)

			== Archive ==

			Can someone archive this page from start to the Weakness section (including it)? [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 18:55, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			*Done.--[[User:PJDEP\|PJDEP]] - [[User Talk:PJDEP\|Need further explanation?]] 19:02, 11 February 2010 (EST)

imported>PJDEP at 23:47, 3 March 2010

2010-03-03T23:47:41Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:47, 3 March 2010
Line 157:		Line 157:
	*********In any case, the very naming policy has contradicting terms, this debate can never be resolved until these cracks in the naming policy are dealt with. [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 18:47, 11 February 2010 (EST)		*********In any case, the very naming policy has contradicting terms, this debate can never be resolved until these cracks in the naming policy are dealt with. [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 18:47, 11 February 2010 (EST)
	********* Not always. In fact, Ryan addressed this on the talk page of naming conventions. When things change in the Heroes Universe (eg - the future has been altered) we can adjust things accordingly, just as long as we keep the information that we had at the time on the old pages (eg - we don't go back and change the Season 1 pages when Sylar kills Charlie (which was shown and stated in canon), but we do use the new information as we move forward (even though in my example case, it was also shown and stated). To take a more recent example...Angela outright stated that Peter could not stop Emma from killing thousands of people...explicitly, canonically, etc. But he did (indirectly), proving her statement false. Iirc, she even maintained her position after he told her that Sylar was the one who was going to save her. Of course, these aren't the greatest examples, as they all involve the same sourcing level (canon), but it (hopefully) illustrates that data can be outdated and need changing. Whether or not the new manifestation of Tracy's ability qualifies is a separate point. (As a side note, the writers are notorious for sarcasm in interviews, even when explicitly stating things). --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 18:49, 11 February 2010 (EST)		********* Not always. In fact, Ryan addressed this on the talk page of naming conventions. When things change in the Heroes Universe (eg - the future has been altered) we can adjust things accordingly, just as long as we keep the information that we had at the time on the old pages (eg - we don't go back and change the Season 1 pages when Sylar kills Charlie (which was shown and stated in canon), but we do use the new information as we move forward (even though in my example case, it was also shown and stated). To take a more recent example...Angela outright stated that Peter could not stop Emma from killing thousands of people...explicitly, canonically, etc. But he did (indirectly), proving her statement false. Iirc, she even maintained her position after he told her that Sylar was the one who was going to save her. Of course, these aren't the greatest examples, as they all involve the same sourcing level (canon), but it (hopefully) illustrates that data can be outdated and need changing. Whether or not the new manifestation of Tracy's ability qualifies is a separate point. (As a side note, the writers are notorious for sarcasm in interviews, even when explicitly stating things). --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 18:49, 11 February 2010 (EST)

			= Naming Convention Guidelines ==

			Under "Ability names":

			''The following criteria should be considered '''in order''' when deciding the name for a new ability:''
			*'''''Names derived from Heroes sources:'''''
			**'''''Names given in canon sources:''' If a name is given for a ability in a canon source, that name should be used, regardless of whether it is the best description or not.''

			The very first rule makes it clear. We have exactly one canon name ("freezing"). "Water and ice manipulation" is a near-canon name. It is irrelevant if it is the best description of not, "freezing" is the only canon name we have, thus we must use it. --[[User:Ricard Desi\|Ricard Desi]] ([[User talk:Ricard Desi\|t]],[[Special:Contributions/Ricard Desi\|c]]) 18:37, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			* As I said above, there are two exceptions to this rule already, as you pointed out earlier...Interviews that give explicit names and AT's. Neither of which is addressed in the actual rules themselves. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 18:42, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			** I'm not actually altogether certain that interviews or ATs have ever overturned anything canonically stated in the show. Do you know of any? --[[User:Ricard Desi\|Ricard Desi]] ([[User talk:Ricard Desi\|t]],[[Special:Contributions/Ricard Desi\|c]]) 18:43, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			*** Gravitational manipulation trumped someone saying that Stephen Canfield "created vortexes". [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 18:45, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			**** I do remember that one being a particularly heated debate. I think what it came down to was that "created vortexes" is vague enough to lead to several possible names, whereas "gravitational manipulation" was explicit (and considered canon as a Company file). ... Wait, now I remember how this worked. I believe once ATs were shown on the show itself (at the beginning of Volume Three), they were considered to be weighed equal to the show in canonicity. I may be wrong. --[[User:Ricard Desi\|Ricard Desi]] ([[User talk:Ricard Desi\|t]],[[Special:Contributions/Ricard Desi\|c]]) 18:47, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			*****I'm fairly certain that only Flint's and Knox's assignment trackers were shown. We saw Sandra holding Stephen Canfield's, but we didn't get a good look at it, unless I'm mistaken.--[[User:PJDEP\|PJDEP]] - [[User Talk:PJDEP\|Need further explanation?]] 18:49, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			******The file was never shown like Flint's or Sylar's. [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 18:50, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			**********I'm confused as to what plot details have to do with ability names.--[[User:PJDEP\|PJDEP]] - [[User Talk:PJDEP\|Need further explanation?]] 18:52, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			************ It went a bit offtrack there, but what I was trying to indicate was the need to incorporate new information despite it being contradicted by previous canon, and I see now that I put this in the wrong section...moving it up now.. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 18:55, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			* I think this debate (and 100 others) clearly indicates we need to expand the naming conventions. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 18:52, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			** I don't. I know it's an unpopular part of the naming conventions, but I feel very strongly that we need to use the name that is given to us, even if it's not the best name. I believe the minute we start to deviate from using what is explicitly given to us, we weaken the integrity of our archiving on the wiki. I'm not sure why the writers told us that Tracy's ability was "freezing" when only 7 episodes later it would evolve and become something quite different...but the fact remains that it's what was given to us. I've heard and read just about every argument against that, and I truly wish it were different--and I would love for a writer to come out and say something like, "Yeah, we made a mistake" or "Oh, yeah, her power has changed and so has the name" or to see an Assignment Tracker that lists her ability with a different name...but until we have something like that, we use what's been given to us. And yes, I've emailed a few different writers about the issue, and I always seem to get the same kind of answer--either they don't reply, or they tell me they'll get back to me, or they tell me they need to check with somebody else. My personal feeling is that the writers know made a boo boo, and they don't quite know how to fix it. But until they do, I think we need to document what we have. After all, I'm only conjecturing that the writers have made a mistake. It could very well be that nothing has been corrected because it was never wrong in the first place. It's completely plausible to me that Tracy's ability to manipulate water is an offshoot of her "main" freezing power--much the way that Matt could paint the future or create illusions, both as offshoots of his main telepathic ability. So in short, the name "freezing" stays until we hear differently. Unpopular, I know... :( -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 21:31, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			*** You say integrity, I say density. [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 16:05, 12 February 2010 (EST)

imported>PJDEP: Yes, four topics are taking up 57 kb

2010-03-03T23:45:34Z

Yes, four topics are taking up 57 kb

Show changes

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:47, 3 March 2010
Line 157:		Line 157:
	*********In any case, the very naming policy has contradicting terms, this debate can never be resolved until these cracks in the naming policy are dealt with. [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 18:47, 11 February 2010 (EST)		*********In any case, the very naming policy has contradicting terms, this debate can never be resolved until these cracks in the naming policy are dealt with. [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 18:47, 11 February 2010 (EST)
	********* Not always. In fact, Ryan addressed this on the talk page of naming conventions. When things change in the Heroes Universe (eg - the future has been altered) we can adjust things accordingly, just as long as we keep the information that we had at the time on the old pages (eg - we don't go back and change the Season 1 pages when Sylar kills Charlie (which was shown and stated in canon), but we do use the new information as we move forward (even though in my example case, it was also shown and stated). To take a more recent example...Angela outright stated that Peter could not stop Emma from killing thousands of people...explicitly, canonically, etc. But he did (indirectly), proving her statement false. Iirc, she even maintained her position after he told her that Sylar was the one who was going to save her. Of course, these aren't the greatest examples, as they all involve the same sourcing level (canon), but it (hopefully) illustrates that data can be outdated and need changing. Whether or not the new manifestation of Tracy's ability qualifies is a separate point. (As a side note, the writers are notorious for sarcasm in interviews, even when explicitly stating things). --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 18:49, 11 February 2010 (EST)		********* Not always. In fact, Ryan addressed this on the talk page of naming conventions. When things change in the Heroes Universe (eg - the future has been altered) we can adjust things accordingly, just as long as we keep the information that we had at the time on the old pages (eg - we don't go back and change the Season 1 pages when Sylar kills Charlie (which was shown and stated in canon), but we do use the new information as we move forward (even though in my example case, it was also shown and stated). To take a more recent example...Angela outright stated that Peter could not stop Emma from killing thousands of people...explicitly, canonically, etc. But he did (indirectly), proving her statement false. Iirc, she even maintained her position after he told her that Sylar was the one who was going to save her. Of course, these aren't the greatest examples, as they all involve the same sourcing level (canon), but it (hopefully) illustrates that data can be outdated and need changing. Whether or not the new manifestation of Tracy's ability qualifies is a separate point. (As a side note, the writers are notorious for sarcasm in interviews, even when explicitly stating things). --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 18:49, 11 February 2010 (EST)

			= Naming Convention Guidelines ==

			Under "Ability names":

			''The following criteria should be considered '''in order''' when deciding the name for a new ability:''
			*'''''Names derived from Heroes sources:'''''
			**'''''Names given in canon sources:''' If a name is given for a ability in a canon source, that name should be used, regardless of whether it is the best description or not.''

			The very first rule makes it clear. We have exactly one canon name ("freezing"). "Water and ice manipulation" is a near-canon name. It is irrelevant if it is the best description of not, "freezing" is the only canon name we have, thus we must use it. --[[User:Ricard Desi\|Ricard Desi]] ([[User talk:Ricard Desi\|t]],[[Special:Contributions/Ricard Desi\|c]]) 18:37, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			* As I said above, there are two exceptions to this rule already, as you pointed out earlier...Interviews that give explicit names and AT's. Neither of which is addressed in the actual rules themselves. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 18:42, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			** I'm not actually altogether certain that interviews or ATs have ever overturned anything canonically stated in the show. Do you know of any? --[[User:Ricard Desi\|Ricard Desi]] ([[User talk:Ricard Desi\|t]],[[Special:Contributions/Ricard Desi\|c]]) 18:43, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			*** Gravitational manipulation trumped someone saying that Stephen Canfield "created vortexes". [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 18:45, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			**** I do remember that one being a particularly heated debate. I think what it came down to was that "created vortexes" is vague enough to lead to several possible names, whereas "gravitational manipulation" was explicit (and considered canon as a Company file). ... Wait, now I remember how this worked. I believe once ATs were shown on the show itself (at the beginning of Volume Three), they were considered to be weighed equal to the show in canonicity. I may be wrong. --[[User:Ricard Desi\|Ricard Desi]] ([[User talk:Ricard Desi\|t]],[[Special:Contributions/Ricard Desi\|c]]) 18:47, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			*****I'm fairly certain that only Flint's and Knox's assignment trackers were shown. We saw Sandra holding Stephen Canfield's, but we didn't get a good look at it, unless I'm mistaken.--[[User:PJDEP\|PJDEP]] - [[User Talk:PJDEP\|Need further explanation?]] 18:49, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			******The file was never shown like Flint's or Sylar's. [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 18:50, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			**********I'm confused as to what plot details have to do with ability names.--[[User:PJDEP\|PJDEP]] - [[User Talk:PJDEP\|Need further explanation?]] 18:52, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			************ It went a bit offtrack there, but what I was trying to indicate was the need to incorporate new information despite it being contradicted by previous canon, and I see now that I put this in the wrong section...moving it up now.. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 18:55, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			* I think this debate (and 100 others) clearly indicates we need to expand the naming conventions. --[[User:Stevehim\|Stevehim]] 18:52, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			** I don't. I know it's an unpopular part of the naming conventions, but I feel very strongly that we need to use the name that is given to us, even if it's not the best name. I believe the minute we start to deviate from using what is explicitly given to us, we weaken the integrity of our archiving on the wiki. I'm not sure why the writers told us that Tracy's ability was "freezing" when only 7 episodes later it would evolve and become something quite different...but the fact remains that it's what was given to us. I've heard and read just about every argument against that, and I truly wish it were different--and I would love for a writer to come out and say something like, "Yeah, we made a mistake" or "Oh, yeah, her power has changed and so has the name" or to see an Assignment Tracker that lists her ability with a different name...but until we have something like that, we use what's been given to us. And yes, I've emailed a few different writers about the issue, and I always seem to get the same kind of answer--either they don't reply, or they tell me they'll get back to me, or they tell me they need to check with somebody else. My personal feeling is that the writers know made a boo boo, and they don't quite know how to fix it. But until they do, I think we need to document what we have. After all, I'm only conjecturing that the writers have made a mistake. It could very well be that nothing has been corrected because it was never wrong in the first place. It's completely plausible to me that Tracy's ability to manipulate water is an offshoot of her "main" freezing power--much the way that Matt could paint the future or create illusions, both as offshoots of his main telepathic ability. So in short, the name "freezing" stays until we hear differently. Unpopular, I know... :( -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 21:31, 11 February 2010 (EST)
			*** You say integrity, I say density. [[User:Intuitive Empath\|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath\|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath\|Contributions]] 16:05, 12 February 2010 (EST)