Talk:Portal:Future Characters - Revision history

imported>HiroMystery: /* Inconsistent naming conventions...do we need to stop and rethink, before making a mess */

2008-11-06T07:17:55Z

Inconsistent naming conventions...do we need to stop and rethink, before making a mess

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:17, 6 November 2008
(No difference)

imported>HiroMystery: /* Inconsistent naming conventions...do we need to stop and rethink, before making a mess */

2008-11-06T07:17:55Z

Inconsistent naming conventions...do we need to stop and rethink, before making a mess

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:17, 6 November 2008
Line 30:		Line 30:
	I've noticed that a new standard is emerging, "Hiro Nakamura (future) (II)". While this numerical suffix is a good idea, I think we should be very careful and consistent and be sure to apply it as each differing future timeline is shown and differentiated.		I've noticed that a new standard is emerging, "Hiro Nakamura (future) (II)". While this numerical suffix is a good idea, I think we should be very careful and consistent and be sure to apply it as each differing future timeline is shown and differentiated.

	For example, right now we are calling the Season 3 Future Peter and Future Hiro [[Peter Petrelli (future) (II)]] and [[Hiro Nakamura (future) (II)]]. But that is not correct (numerically). They both '''should be''' (III).		For example, right now we are calling the Season 3 Future Peter and Future Hiro [[Peter Petrelli (exposed future)\|Peter Petrelli (future) (II)]] and [[Hiro Nakamura (exposed future)\|Hiro Nakamura (future) (II)]]. But that is not correct (numerically). They both '''should be''' (III).

	Following is, I believe the correct future and distinct timelines differentiated:		Following is, I believe the correct future and distinct timelines differentiated:

imported>Ted C: /* Inconsistent naming conventions...do we need to stop and rethink, before making a mess */

2008-09-24T21:05:25Z

Inconsistent naming conventions...do we need to stop and rethink, before making a mess

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:05, 24 September 2008
Line 50:		Line 50:
	** Might I suggest what I consider a simpler reference system. "Future Peter (Season 1)" or "Future Peter (S1)". That makes it pretty clear exactly which "Future Peter" you have in mind. --[[User:Ted C\|Ted C]] 20:35, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		** Might I suggest what I consider a simpler reference system. "Future Peter (Season 1)" or "Future Peter (S1)". That makes it pretty clear exactly which "Future Peter" you have in mind. --[[User:Ted C\|Ted C]] 20:35, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	*** That sounds reasonable. I would be concerned if a season dealt with more than one possible future, though--like if Ando and Hiro were arguing with a third Future Peter. Yikes! But I agree, I think we need something more defining than just a parenthetical Roman numeral. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 22:29, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		*** That sounds reasonable. I would be concerned if a season dealt with more than one possible future, though--like if Ando and Hiro were arguing with a third Future Peter. Yikes! But I agree, I think we need something more defining than just a parenthetical Roman numeral. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 22:29, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
			**** I can only hope that the writers won't try to make the story so convoluted that we have multiple Future Peters from different timelines running around at the same time! Even if they did, we could resort to "Future Peter (S3a)", Future Peter (S3b)", etc. --[[User:Ted C\|Ted C]] 17:05, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
	*** I was trying to use terminology that we already call the different future timelines which is seen on this article. I think it would be easier to read and understand if we call each of the futures with the same name consistently. --[[User:Pinkkeith\|Pinkkeith]] 09:59, 24 September 2008 (EDT)		*** I was trying to use terminology that we already call the different future timelines which is seen on this article. I think it would be easier to read and understand if we call each of the futures with the same name consistently. --[[User:Pinkkeith\|Pinkkeith]] 09:59, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
	**I'd have to say that using the numbers is better because the way I see it the Future Peter in this season came from a future that Nathan told about the powers and the future that Hiro saw was part of the butterfly effect where now anyone can get powers that is how Ando got them.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 13:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		**I'd have to say that using the numbers is better because the way I see it the Future Peter in this season came from a future that Nathan told about the powers and the future that Hiro saw was part of the butterfly effect where now anyone can get powers that is how Ando got them.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 13:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)

imported>Pinkkeith: /* Inconsistent naming conventions...do we need to stop and rethink, before making a mess */

2008-09-24T13:59:34Z

Inconsistent naming conventions...do we need to stop and rethink, before making a mess

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:59, 24 September 2008
Line 50:		Line 50:
	** Might I suggest what I consider a simpler reference system. "Future Peter (Season 1)" or "Future Peter (S1)". That makes it pretty clear exactly which "Future Peter" you have in mind. --[[User:Ted C\|Ted C]] 20:35, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		** Might I suggest what I consider a simpler reference system. "Future Peter (Season 1)" or "Future Peter (S1)". That makes it pretty clear exactly which "Future Peter" you have in mind. --[[User:Ted C\|Ted C]] 20:35, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	*** That sounds reasonable. I would be concerned if a season dealt with more than one possible future, though--like if Ando and Hiro were arguing with a third Future Peter. Yikes! But I agree, I think we need something more defining than just a parenthetical Roman numeral. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 22:29, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		*** That sounds reasonable. I would be concerned if a season dealt with more than one possible future, though--like if Ando and Hiro were arguing with a third Future Peter. Yikes! But I agree, I think we need something more defining than just a parenthetical Roman numeral. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 22:29, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
			*** I was trying to use terminology that we already call the different future timelines which is seen on this article. I think it would be easier to read and understand if we call each of the futures with the same name consistently. --[[User:Pinkkeith\|Pinkkeith]] 09:59, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
	**I'd have to say that using the numbers is better because the way I see it the Future Peter in this season came from a future that Nathan told about the powers and the future that Hiro saw was part of the butterfly effect where now anyone can get powers that is how Ando got them.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 13:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		**I'd have to say that using the numbers is better because the way I see it the Future Peter in this season came from a future that Nathan told about the powers and the future that Hiro saw was part of the butterfly effect where now anyone can get powers that is how Ando got them.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 13:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	*My opinion is it's only even important to separate future characters that are fundamentally different. The new Hiro in the future doesn't resemble the original Future Hiro, so there's some logic in separating the articles. In fact at this point I don't think the new future Hiro even needs his own article. We don't know anything fundamentally different about him in the future that can't be said on the main [[Hiro Nakamura]] article. Other than that we shouldn't be creating stubby individual articles for each alternate timeline. We need to consolidate multiple timelines for characters into single articles except where the character is completely different. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 13:52, 23 September 2008 (EDT))		*My opinion is it's only even important to separate future characters that are fundamentally different. The new Hiro in the future doesn't resemble the original Future Hiro, so there's some logic in separating the articles. In fact at this point I don't think the new future Hiro even needs his own article. We don't know anything fundamentally different about him in the future that can't be said on the main [[Hiro Nakamura]] article. Other than that we shouldn't be creating stubby individual articles for each alternate timeline. We need to consolidate multiple timelines for characters into single articles except where the character is completely different. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 13:52, 23 September 2008 (EDT))

imported>Skywalkerrbf: future people

2008-09-24T07:08:00Z

future people

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:08, 24 September 2008
Line 63:		Line 63:
	*** But we don't have an article for him, do we? -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 21:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		*** But we don't have an article for him, do we? -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 21:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	**** That is correct--we don't have an article for him cause we know very little about him.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 22:04, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		**** That is correct--we don't have an article for him cause we know very little about him.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 22:04, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
			*They still need to be named by future not by number. I think there does need to be a page for say 'future peter' but it needs to be different from 'explosion future peter'. 'future peter' should just show all the differnt Peters we have, like a dis-whatever you call it page.--[[User:Skywalkerrbf\|Skywalkerrbf]] 03:08, 24 September 2008 (EDT)

imported>Ryangibsonstewart: /* Inconsistent naming conventions...do we need to stop and rethink, before making a mess */

2008-09-24T02:29:44Z

Inconsistent naming conventions...do we need to stop and rethink, before making a mess

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:29, 24 September 2008
Line 49:		Line 49:
	*You bring up a good point and I agree with you. Although maybe instead of using numbers why not use [[Peter Petrelli (Dark Future)]], "Peter Petrelli (Outbreak Future)", etc. It is also going to be hard to understand if the Peter Petrelli is from the same future that Hiro saw since Peter already started the butterfly effect by then (i.e. shotting Nathan). --[[User:Pinkkeith\|Pinkkeith]] 12:43, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		*You bring up a good point and I agree with you. Although maybe instead of using numbers why not use [[Peter Petrelli (Dark Future)]], "Peter Petrelli (Outbreak Future)", etc. It is also going to be hard to understand if the Peter Petrelli is from the same future that Hiro saw since Peter already started the butterfly effect by then (i.e. shotting Nathan). --[[User:Pinkkeith\|Pinkkeith]] 12:43, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	** Might I suggest what I consider a simpler reference system. "Future Peter (Season 1)" or "Future Peter (S1)". That makes it pretty clear exactly which "Future Peter" you have in mind. --[[User:Ted C\|Ted C]] 20:35, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		** Might I suggest what I consider a simpler reference system. "Future Peter (Season 1)" or "Future Peter (S1)". That makes it pretty clear exactly which "Future Peter" you have in mind. --[[User:Ted C\|Ted C]] 20:35, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
			*** That sounds reasonable. I would be concerned if a season dealt with more than one possible future, though--like if Ando and Hiro were arguing with a third Future Peter. Yikes! But I agree, I think we need something more defining than just a parenthetical Roman numeral. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 22:29, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	**I'd have to say that using the numbers is better because the way I see it the Future Peter in this season came from a future that Nathan told about the powers and the future that Hiro saw was part of the butterfly effect where now anyone can get powers that is how Ando got them.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 13:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		**I'd have to say that using the numbers is better because the way I see it the Future Peter in this season came from a future that Nathan told about the powers and the future that Hiro saw was part of the butterfly effect where now anyone can get powers that is how Ando got them.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 13:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	*My opinion is it's only even important to separate future characters that are fundamentally different. The new Hiro in the future doesn't resemble the original Future Hiro, so there's some logic in separating the articles. In fact at this point I don't think the new future Hiro even needs his own article. We don't know anything fundamentally different about him in the future that can't be said on the main [[Hiro Nakamura]] article. Other than that we shouldn't be creating stubby individual articles for each alternate timeline. We need to consolidate multiple timelines for characters into single articles except where the character is completely different. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 13:52, 23 September 2008 (EDT))		*My opinion is it's only even important to separate future characters that are fundamentally different. The new Hiro in the future doesn't resemble the original Future Hiro, so there's some logic in separating the articles. In fact at this point I don't think the new future Hiro even needs his own article. We don't know anything fundamentally different about him in the future that can't be said on the main [[Hiro Nakamura]] article. Other than that we shouldn't be creating stubby individual articles for each alternate timeline. We need to consolidate multiple timelines for characters into single articles except where the character is completely different. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 13:52, 23 September 2008 (EDT))

imported>MiamiVolts: /* Inconsistent naming conventions...do we need to stop and rethink, before making a mess */

2008-09-24T02:04:58Z

Inconsistent naming conventions...do we need to stop and rethink, before making a mess

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:04, 24 September 2008
Line 61:		Line 61:
	** Separate articles sounds like a good idea, but I think the future scenario is repeating often enough now that it could be kind of ridiculous how many articles we will have for a single character. I would recommend that we consider using subpages or templates so we can include all of the future versions of a character on the same page by inclusion. That way, typing in Future Peter in the search box would take you a page that lists all of the Future Peters. I think that's the best way to handle it. PS: there was a Peter Petrelli in the Outbreak Future, but he had died before our Peter had arrived and we know very little about him.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 18:50, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		** Separate articles sounds like a good idea, but I think the future scenario is repeating often enough now that it could be kind of ridiculous how many articles we will have for a single character. I would recommend that we consider using subpages or templates so we can include all of the future versions of a character on the same page by inclusion. That way, typing in Future Peter in the search box would take you a page that lists all of the Future Peters. I think that's the best way to handle it. PS: there was a Peter Petrelli in the Outbreak Future, but he had died before our Peter had arrived and we know very little about him.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 18:50, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	*** But we don't have an article for him, do we? -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 21:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		*** But we don't have an article for him, do we? -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 21:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
			**** That is correct--we don't have an article for him cause we know very little about him.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 22:04, 23 September 2008 (EDT)

imported>Ryangibsonstewart: /* Inconsistent naming conventions...do we need to stop and rethink, before making a mess */

2008-09-24T01:32:56Z

Inconsistent naming conventions...do we need to stop and rethink, before making a mess

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:32, 24 September 2008
Line 60:		Line 60:
	* I think separate articles are necessary for the characters from different futures. The two Future Peters may appear the same, but they both live at very different times (one is a recluse who is dating Niki, the other is hunted and wanted in prison), and have different abilities (the one from ''Five Years Gone'' has pyrokinesis, electromagnetism, and enhanced speed; the one we meet in Season Three can create illusions). I think different characters warrant different articles. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 18:16, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		* I think separate articles are necessary for the characters from different futures. The two Future Peters may appear the same, but they both live at very different times (one is a recluse who is dating Niki, the other is hunted and wanted in prison), and have different abilities (the one from ''Five Years Gone'' has pyrokinesis, electromagnetism, and enhanced speed; the one we meet in Season Three can create illusions). I think different characters warrant different articles. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 18:16, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	** Separate articles sounds like a good idea, but I think the future scenario is repeating often enough now that it could be kind of ridiculous how many articles we will have for a single character. I would recommend that we consider using subpages or templates so we can include all of the future versions of a character on the same page by inclusion. That way, typing in Future Peter in the search box would take you a page that lists all of the Future Peters. I think that's the best way to handle it. PS: there was a Peter Petrelli in the Outbreak Future, but he had died before our Peter had arrived and we know very little about him.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 18:50, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		** Separate articles sounds like a good idea, but I think the future scenario is repeating often enough now that it could be kind of ridiculous how many articles we will have for a single character. I would recommend that we consider using subpages or templates so we can include all of the future versions of a character on the same page by inclusion. That way, typing in Future Peter in the search box would take you a page that lists all of the Future Peters. I think that's the best way to handle it. PS: there was a Peter Petrelli in the Outbreak Future, but he had died before our Peter had arrived and we know very little about him.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 18:50, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
			*** But we don't have an article for him, do we? -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 21:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)

imported>Ted C: /* Inconsistent naming conventions...do we need to stop and rethink, before making a mess */

2008-09-24T00:35:35Z

Inconsistent naming conventions...do we need to stop and rethink, before making a mess

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:35, 24 September 2008
Line 48:		Line 48:

	*You bring up a good point and I agree with you. Although maybe instead of using numbers why not use [[Peter Petrelli (Dark Future)]], "Peter Petrelli (Outbreak Future)", etc. It is also going to be hard to understand if the Peter Petrelli is from the same future that Hiro saw since Peter already started the butterfly effect by then (i.e. shotting Nathan). --[[User:Pinkkeith\|Pinkkeith]] 12:43, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		*You bring up a good point and I agree with you. Although maybe instead of using numbers why not use [[Peter Petrelli (Dark Future)]], "Peter Petrelli (Outbreak Future)", etc. It is also going to be hard to understand if the Peter Petrelli is from the same future that Hiro saw since Peter already started the butterfly effect by then (i.e. shotting Nathan). --[[User:Pinkkeith\|Pinkkeith]] 12:43, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
			** Might I suggest what I consider a simpler reference system. "Future Peter (Season 1)" or "Future Peter (S1)". That makes it pretty clear exactly which "Future Peter" you have in mind. --[[User:Ted C\|Ted C]] 20:35, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	**I'd have to say that using the numbers is better because the way I see it the Future Peter in this season came from a future that Nathan told about the powers and the future that Hiro saw was part of the butterfly effect where now anyone can get powers that is how Ando got them.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 13:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		**I'd have to say that using the numbers is better because the way I see it the Future Peter in this season came from a future that Nathan told about the powers and the future that Hiro saw was part of the butterfly effect where now anyone can get powers that is how Ando got them.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 13:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	*My opinion is it's only even important to separate future characters that are fundamentally different. The new Hiro in the future doesn't resemble the original Future Hiro, so there's some logic in separating the articles. In fact at this point I don't think the new future Hiro even needs his own article. We don't know anything fundamentally different about him in the future that can't be said on the main [[Hiro Nakamura]] article. Other than that we shouldn't be creating stubby individual articles for each alternate timeline. We need to consolidate multiple timelines for characters into single articles except where the character is completely different. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 13:52, 23 September 2008 (EDT))		*My opinion is it's only even important to separate future characters that are fundamentally different. The new Hiro in the future doesn't resemble the original Future Hiro, so there's some logic in separating the articles. In fact at this point I don't think the new future Hiro even needs his own article. We don't know anything fundamentally different about him in the future that can't be said on the main [[Hiro Nakamura]] article. Other than that we shouldn't be creating stubby individual articles for each alternate timeline. We need to consolidate multiple timelines for characters into single articles except where the character is completely different. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 13:52, 23 September 2008 (EDT))

imported>MiamiVolts: /* Inconsistent naming conventions...do we need to stop and rethink, before making a mess */

2008-09-23T22:51:11Z

Inconsistent naming conventions...do we need to stop and rethink, before making a mess

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:51, 23 September 2008
Line 58:		Line 58:
	****** That way it is distinguishable, and numerous. Choice is yours though. --[[User:DocM\|DocM]] 15:39, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		****** That way it is distinguishable, and numerous. Choice is yours though. --[[User:DocM\|DocM]] 15:39, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	* I think separate articles are necessary for the characters from different futures. The two Future Peters may appear the same, but they both live at very different times (one is a recluse who is dating Niki, the other is hunted and wanted in prison), and have different abilities (the one from ''Five Years Gone'' has pyrokinesis, electromagnetism, and enhanced speed; the one we meet in Season Three can create illusions). I think different characters warrant different articles. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 18:16, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		* I think separate articles are necessary for the characters from different futures. The two Future Peters may appear the same, but they both live at very different times (one is a recluse who is dating Niki, the other is hunted and wanted in prison), and have different abilities (the one from ''Five Years Gone'' has pyrokinesis, electromagnetism, and enhanced speed; the one we meet in Season Three can create illusions). I think different characters warrant different articles. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 18:16, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	** Separate articles sounds like a good idea, but I think the future scenario is repeating often enough now that it could be kind of ridiculous how many articles we will have for a single character. I would recommend that we consider using subpages or templates so we can include all of the future versions of a character on the same page by inclusion. That way, typing in Future Peter in the search box would take you a page that lists all of the Future Peters. I think that's the best way to handle it. PS: there was a Peter Petrelli in the Outbreak Future), but he had died before our Peter had arrived and we know very little about him.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 18:50, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		** Separate articles sounds like a good idea, but I think the future scenario is repeating often enough now that it could be kind of ridiculous how many articles we will have for a single character. I would recommend that we consider using subpages or templates so we can include all of the future versions of a character on the same page by inclusion. That way, typing in Future Peter in the search box would take you a page that lists all of the Future Peters. I think that's the best way to handle it. PS: there was a Peter Petrelli in the Outbreak Future, but he had died before our Peter had arrived and we know very little about him.--[[User:MiamiVolts\|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts\|talk]]) 18:50, 23 September 2008 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:05, 24 September 2008
Line 50:		Line 50:
	** Might I suggest what I consider a simpler reference system. "Future Peter (Season 1)" or "Future Peter (S1)". That makes it pretty clear exactly which "Future Peter" you have in mind. --[[User:Ted C\|Ted C]] 20:35, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		** Might I suggest what I consider a simpler reference system. "Future Peter (Season 1)" or "Future Peter (S1)". That makes it pretty clear exactly which "Future Peter" you have in mind. --[[User:Ted C\|Ted C]] 20:35, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	*** That sounds reasonable. I would be concerned if a season dealt with more than one possible future, though--like if Ando and Hiro were arguing with a third Future Peter. Yikes! But I agree, I think we need something more defining than just a parenthetical Roman numeral. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 22:29, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		*** That sounds reasonable. I would be concerned if a season dealt with more than one possible future, though--like if Ando and Hiro were arguing with a third Future Peter. Yikes! But I agree, I think we need something more defining than just a parenthetical Roman numeral. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 22:29, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
			**** I can only hope that the writers won't try to make the story so convoluted that we have multiple Future Peters from different timelines running around at the same time! Even if they did, we could resort to "Future Peter (S3a)", Future Peter (S3b)", etc. --[[User:Ted C\|Ted C]] 17:05, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
	*** I was trying to use terminology that we already call the different future timelines which is seen on this article. I think it would be easier to read and understand if we call each of the futures with the same name consistently. --[[User:Pinkkeith\|Pinkkeith]] 09:59, 24 September 2008 (EDT)		*** I was trying to use terminology that we already call the different future timelines which is seen on this article. I think it would be easier to read and understand if we call each of the futures with the same name consistently. --[[User:Pinkkeith\|Pinkkeith]] 09:59, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
	**I'd have to say that using the numbers is better because the way I see it the Future Peter in this season came from a future that Nathan told about the powers and the future that Hiro saw was part of the butterfly effect where now anyone can get powers that is how Ando got them.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 13:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		**I'd have to say that using the numbers is better because the way I see it the Future Peter in this season came from a future that Nathan told about the powers and the future that Hiro saw was part of the butterfly effect where now anyone can get powers that is how Ando got them.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 13:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:59, 24 September 2008
Line 50:		Line 50:
	** Might I suggest what I consider a simpler reference system. "Future Peter (Season 1)" or "Future Peter (S1)". That makes it pretty clear exactly which "Future Peter" you have in mind. --[[User:Ted C\|Ted C]] 20:35, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		** Might I suggest what I consider a simpler reference system. "Future Peter (Season 1)" or "Future Peter (S1)". That makes it pretty clear exactly which "Future Peter" you have in mind. --[[User:Ted C\|Ted C]] 20:35, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	*** That sounds reasonable. I would be concerned if a season dealt with more than one possible future, though--like if Ando and Hiro were arguing with a third Future Peter. Yikes! But I agree, I think we need something more defining than just a parenthetical Roman numeral. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 22:29, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		*** That sounds reasonable. I would be concerned if a season dealt with more than one possible future, though--like if Ando and Hiro were arguing with a third Future Peter. Yikes! But I agree, I think we need something more defining than just a parenthetical Roman numeral. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 22:29, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
			*** I was trying to use terminology that we already call the different future timelines which is seen on this article. I think it would be easier to read and understand if we call each of the futures with the same name consistently. --[[User:Pinkkeith\|Pinkkeith]] 09:59, 24 September 2008 (EDT)
	**I'd have to say that using the numbers is better because the way I see it the Future Peter in this season came from a future that Nathan told about the powers and the future that Hiro saw was part of the butterfly effect where now anyone can get powers that is how Ando got them.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 13:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		**I'd have to say that using the numbers is better because the way I see it the Future Peter in this season came from a future that Nathan told about the powers and the future that Hiro saw was part of the butterfly effect where now anyone can get powers that is how Ando got them.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 13:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	*My opinion is it's only even important to separate future characters that are fundamentally different. The new Hiro in the future doesn't resemble the original Future Hiro, so there's some logic in separating the articles. In fact at this point I don't think the new future Hiro even needs his own article. We don't know anything fundamentally different about him in the future that can't be said on the main [[Hiro Nakamura]] article. Other than that we shouldn't be creating stubby individual articles for each alternate timeline. We need to consolidate multiple timelines for characters into single articles except where the character is completely different. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 13:52, 23 September 2008 (EDT))		*My opinion is it's only even important to separate future characters that are fundamentally different. The new Hiro in the future doesn't resemble the original Future Hiro, so there's some logic in separating the articles. In fact at this point I don't think the new future Hiro even needs his own article. We don't know anything fundamentally different about him in the future that can't be said on the main [[Hiro Nakamura]] article. Other than that we shouldn't be creating stubby individual articles for each alternate timeline. We need to consolidate multiple timelines for characters into single articles except where the character is completely different. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 13:52, 23 September 2008 (EDT))

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:29, 24 September 2008
Line 49:		Line 49:
	*You bring up a good point and I agree with you. Although maybe instead of using numbers why not use [[Peter Petrelli (Dark Future)]], "Peter Petrelli (Outbreak Future)", etc. It is also going to be hard to understand if the Peter Petrelli is from the same future that Hiro saw since Peter already started the butterfly effect by then (i.e. shotting Nathan). --[[User:Pinkkeith\|Pinkkeith]] 12:43, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		*You bring up a good point and I agree with you. Although maybe instead of using numbers why not use [[Peter Petrelli (Dark Future)]], "Peter Petrelli (Outbreak Future)", etc. It is also going to be hard to understand if the Peter Petrelli is from the same future that Hiro saw since Peter already started the butterfly effect by then (i.e. shotting Nathan). --[[User:Pinkkeith\|Pinkkeith]] 12:43, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	** Might I suggest what I consider a simpler reference system. "Future Peter (Season 1)" or "Future Peter (S1)". That makes it pretty clear exactly which "Future Peter" you have in mind. --[[User:Ted C\|Ted C]] 20:35, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		** Might I suggest what I consider a simpler reference system. "Future Peter (Season 1)" or "Future Peter (S1)". That makes it pretty clear exactly which "Future Peter" you have in mind. --[[User:Ted C\|Ted C]] 20:35, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
			*** That sounds reasonable. I would be concerned if a season dealt with more than one possible future, though--like if Ando and Hiro were arguing with a third Future Peter. Yikes! But I agree, I think we need something more defining than just a parenthetical Roman numeral. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 22:29, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	**I'd have to say that using the numbers is better because the way I see it the Future Peter in this season came from a future that Nathan told about the powers and the future that Hiro saw was part of the butterfly effect where now anyone can get powers that is how Ando got them.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 13:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		**I'd have to say that using the numbers is better because the way I see it the Future Peter in this season came from a future that Nathan told about the powers and the future that Hiro saw was part of the butterfly effect where now anyone can get powers that is how Ando got them.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 13:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	*My opinion is it's only even important to separate future characters that are fundamentally different. The new Hiro in the future doesn't resemble the original Future Hiro, so there's some logic in separating the articles. In fact at this point I don't think the new future Hiro even needs his own article. We don't know anything fundamentally different about him in the future that can't be said on the main [[Hiro Nakamura]] article. Other than that we shouldn't be creating stubby individual articles for each alternate timeline. We need to consolidate multiple timelines for characters into single articles except where the character is completely different. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 13:52, 23 September 2008 (EDT))		*My opinion is it's only even important to separate future characters that are fundamentally different. The new Hiro in the future doesn't resemble the original Future Hiro, so there's some logic in separating the articles. In fact at this point I don't think the new future Hiro even needs his own article. We don't know anything fundamentally different about him in the future that can't be said on the main [[Hiro Nakamura]] article. Other than that we shouldn't be creating stubby individual articles for each alternate timeline. We need to consolidate multiple timelines for characters into single articles except where the character is completely different. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 13:52, 23 September 2008 (EDT))

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:35, 24 September 2008
Line 48:		Line 48:

	*You bring up a good point and I agree with you. Although maybe instead of using numbers why not use [[Peter Petrelli (Dark Future)]], "Peter Petrelli (Outbreak Future)", etc. It is also going to be hard to understand if the Peter Petrelli is from the same future that Hiro saw since Peter already started the butterfly effect by then (i.e. shotting Nathan). --[[User:Pinkkeith\|Pinkkeith]] 12:43, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		*You bring up a good point and I agree with you. Although maybe instead of using numbers why not use [[Peter Petrelli (Dark Future)]], "Peter Petrelli (Outbreak Future)", etc. It is also going to be hard to understand if the Peter Petrelli is from the same future that Hiro saw since Peter already started the butterfly effect by then (i.e. shotting Nathan). --[[User:Pinkkeith\|Pinkkeith]] 12:43, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
			** Might I suggest what I consider a simpler reference system. "Future Peter (Season 1)" or "Future Peter (S1)". That makes it pretty clear exactly which "Future Peter" you have in mind. --[[User:Ted C\|Ted C]] 20:35, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	**I'd have to say that using the numbers is better because the way I see it the Future Peter in this season came from a future that Nathan told about the powers and the future that Hiro saw was part of the butterfly effect where now anyone can get powers that is how Ando got them.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 13:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)		**I'd have to say that using the numbers is better because the way I see it the Future Peter in this season came from a future that Nathan told about the powers and the future that Hiro saw was part of the butterfly effect where now anyone can get powers that is how Ando got them.--[[User:Iceman\|Iceman]] 13:32, 23 September 2008 (EDT)
	*My opinion is it's only even important to separate future characters that are fundamentally different. The new Hiro in the future doesn't resemble the original Future Hiro, so there's some logic in separating the articles. In fact at this point I don't think the new future Hiro even needs his own article. We don't know anything fundamentally different about him in the future that can't be said on the main [[Hiro Nakamura]] article. Other than that we shouldn't be creating stubby individual articles for each alternate timeline. We need to consolidate multiple timelines for characters into single articles except where the character is completely different. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 13:52, 23 September 2008 (EDT))		*My opinion is it's only even important to separate future characters that are fundamentally different. The new Hiro in the future doesn't resemble the original Future Hiro, so there's some logic in separating the articles. In fact at this point I don't think the new future Hiro even needs his own article. We don't know anything fundamentally different about him in the future that can't be said on the main [[Hiro Nakamura]] article. Other than that we shouldn't be creating stubby individual articles for each alternate timeline. We need to consolidate multiple timelines for characters into single articles except where the character is completely different. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 13:52, 23 September 2008 (EDT))