Talk:Symbol necklace - Revision history

imported>Admin: /* More than one? */

2007-10-28T02:16:23Z

More than one?

← Older revision	Revision as of 02:16, 28 October 2007
(No difference)

imported>Admin: /* More than one? */

2007-10-28T02:16:23Z

More than one?

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:16, 28 October 2007
Line 11:		Line 11:
	********** Good point. Added to the theory.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 21:50, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		********** Good point. Added to the theory.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 21:50, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	*********** I suppose that there's also a Mexican evolved human who can turn into [[Claire's necklace\|the Mexican necklace]]? I mean, all Mexicans are related, right? -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 22:14, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		*********** I suppose that there's also a Mexican evolved human who can turn into [[Claire's necklace\|the Mexican necklace]]? I mean, all Mexicans are related, right? -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 22:14, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
			************ Please. An evolved human who can transform into the symbol necklace makes perfect sense. One that can transform into a necklace without the symbol? Well, that's just silly. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 22:16, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)

imported>Ryangibsonstewart: /* More than one? */

2007-10-28T02:14:39Z

More than one?

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:14, 28 October 2007
Line 10:		Line 10:
	********* Oh, yeah, sure, and he can alternately turn himself into Hana's [[:Image:Symbol ring.JPG\|ring]] and [[:Image:Symbol earring.JPG\|earring]]. :) -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 20:54, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		********* Oh, yeah, sure, and he can alternately turn himself into Hana's [[:Image:Symbol ring.JPG\|ring]] and [[:Image:Symbol earring.JPG\|earring]]. :) -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 20:54, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	********** Good point. Added to the theory.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 21:50, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		********** Good point. Added to the theory.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 21:50, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
			*********** I suppose that there's also a Mexican evolved human who can turn into [[Claire's necklace\|the Mexican necklace]]? I mean, all Mexicans are related, right? -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 22:14, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)

imported>Hardvice at 01:50, 28 October 2007

2007-10-28T01:50:35Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:50, 28 October 2007
Line 9:		Line 9:
	******** I'm immediately suspicious of any Note which begins "it is unknown..." "It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace" is my new favorite example of why.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 20:23, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		******** I'm immediately suspicious of any Note which begins "it is unknown..." "It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace" is my new favorite example of why.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 20:23, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	********* Oh, yeah, sure, and he can alternately turn himself into Hana's [[:Image:Symbol ring.JPG\|ring]] and [[:Image:Symbol earring.JPG\|earring]]. :) -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 20:54, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		********* Oh, yeah, sure, and he can alternately turn himself into Hana's [[:Image:Symbol ring.JPG\|ring]] and [[:Image:Symbol earring.JPG\|earring]]. :) -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 20:54, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
			********** Good point. Added to the theory.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 21:50, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)

imported>Ryangibsonstewart: /* More than one? */

2007-10-28T00:54:36Z

More than one?

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:54, 28 October 2007
Line 8:		Line 8:
	******* I've seen notes in other articles that do that. I don't usually care for pointing out unknown information since that often smells like speculation disguised as a fact. (It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace) I suppose in cases where there's confusion it's helpful to point out that the fact is truely unknown to help prevent people from coming to the wrong conclusion. Either way... ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:57, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		******* I've seen notes in other articles that do that. I don't usually care for pointing out unknown information since that often smells like speculation disguised as a fact. (It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace) I suppose in cases where there's confusion it's helpful to point out that the fact is truely unknown to help prevent people from coming to the wrong conclusion. Either way... ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:57, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	******** I'm immediately suspicious of any Note which begins "it is unknown..." "It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace" is my new favorite example of why.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 20:23, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		******** I'm immediately suspicious of any Note which begins "it is unknown..." "It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace" is my new favorite example of why.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 20:23, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
			********* Oh, yeah, sure, and he can alternately turn himself into Hana's [[:Image:Symbol ring.JPG\|ring]] and [[:Image:Symbol earring.JPG\|earring]]. :) -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 20:54, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)

imported>Hardvice: whoops ... missed

2007-10-28T00:23:38Z

whoops ... missed

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:23, 28 October 2007
Line 7:		Line 7:
	****** It could probably stand a Note saying that it's unknown if it's the same necklace ... though that sounds like a theory, I guess.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:48, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		****** It could probably stand a Note saying that it's unknown if it's the same necklace ... though that sounds like a theory, I guess.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:48, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	******* I've seen notes in other articles that do that. I don't usually care for pointing out unknown information since that often smells like speculation disguised as a fact. (It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace) I suppose in cases where there's confusion it's helpful to point out that the fact is truely unknown to help prevent people from coming to the wrong conclusion. Either way... ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:57, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		******* I've seen notes in other articles that do that. I don't usually care for pointing out unknown information since that often smells like speculation disguised as a fact. (It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace) I suppose in cases where there's confusion it's helpful to point out that the fact is truely unknown to help prevent people from coming to the wrong conclusion. Either way... ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:57, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
⚫	* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	******** I'm immediately suspicious of any Note which begins "it is unknown..." "It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace" is my new favorite example of why.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 20:23, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		******** I'm immediately suspicious of any Note which begins "it is unknown..." "It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace" is my new favorite example of why.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 20:23, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
		⚫	* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	*** Ok, cool. I don't see a problem with it either. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:45, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		*** Ok, cool. I don't see a problem with it either. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:45, 27 October 2007 (EDT))

imported>Hardvice: /* More than one? */

2007-10-28T00:23:20Z

More than one?

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:23, 28 October 2007
Line 8:		Line 8:
	******* I've seen notes in other articles that do that. I don't usually care for pointing out unknown information since that often smells like speculation disguised as a fact. (It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace) I suppose in cases where there's confusion it's helpful to point out that the fact is truely unknown to help prevent people from coming to the wrong conclusion. Either way... ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:57, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		******* I've seen notes in other articles that do that. I don't usually care for pointing out unknown information since that often smells like speculation disguised as a fact. (It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace) I suppose in cases where there's confusion it's helpful to point out that the fact is truely unknown to help prevent people from coming to the wrong conclusion. Either way... ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:57, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
			******** I'm immediately suspicious of any Note which begins "it is unknown..." "It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace" is my new favorite example of why.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 20:23, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	*** Ok, cool. I don't see a problem with it either. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:45, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		*** Ok, cool. I don't see a problem with it either. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:45, 27 October 2007 (EDT))

imported>Admin: /* More than one? */

2007-10-27T22:57:45Z

More than one?

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:57, 27 October 2007
Line 6:		Line 6:
	***** Yeah, I was wondering if we'd seen The Haitian still with his then we'd know there's two of them, but not seeing a necklace isn't sufficient at all for determining. In either case I was wondering for the purpose of article naming, but then I realized the standard is to go singular anyway unless the name needs to be plural in order to make sense. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:45, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		***** Yeah, I was wondering if we'd seen The Haitian still with his then we'd know there's two of them, but not seeing a necklace isn't sufficient at all for determining. In either case I was wondering for the purpose of article naming, but then I realized the standard is to go singular anyway unless the name needs to be plural in order to make sense. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:45, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	****** It could probably stand a Note saying that it's unknown if it's the same necklace ... though that sounds like a theory, I guess.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:48, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		****** It could probably stand a Note saying that it's unknown if it's the same necklace ... though that sounds like a theory, I guess.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:48, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
			******* I've seen notes in other articles that do that. I don't usually care for pointing out unknown information since that often smells like speculation disguised as a fact. (It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace) I suppose in cases where there's confusion it's helpful to point out that the fact is truely unknown to help prevent people from coming to the wrong conclusion. Either way... ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:57, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)

imported>Hardvice at 22:48, 27 October 2007

2007-10-27T22:48:59Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:48, 27 October 2007
Line 5:		Line 5:
	**** The Haitian is not wearing it in ''Lizards'' or ''The Kindness of Strangers''. He does not appear in ''Four Months Later'' or ''Kindred''. He doesn't appear to be wearing it in ''Fight or Flight'', but his shirt collar is closed. No confirmation that it's the two necklaces, but like Major Despard says, no confirmation that it's the same one, either.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:38, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		**** The Haitian is not wearing it in ''Lizards'' or ''The Kindness of Strangers''. He does not appear in ''Four Months Later'' or ''Kindred''. He doesn't appear to be wearing it in ''Fight or Flight'', but his shirt collar is closed. No confirmation that it's the two necklaces, but like Major Despard says, no confirmation that it's the same one, either.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:38, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	***** Yeah, I was wondering if we'd seen The Haitian still with his then we'd know there's two of them, but not seeing a necklace isn't sufficient at all for determining. In either case I was wondering for the purpose of article naming, but then I realized the standard is to go singular anyway unless the name needs to be plural in order to make sense. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:45, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		***** Yeah, I was wondering if we'd seen The Haitian still with his then we'd know there's two of them, but not seeing a necklace isn't sufficient at all for determining. In either case I was wondering for the purpose of article naming, but then I realized the standard is to go singular anyway unless the name needs to be plural in order to make sense. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:45, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
			****** It could probably stand a Note saying that it's unknown if it's the same necklace ... though that sounds like a theory, I guess.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:48, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)

imported>Admin: /* More than one? */

2007-10-27T22:45:13Z

More than one?

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:45, 27 October 2007
Line 4:		Line 4:
	*** According to the [[Help:Naming_conventions\|naming convention]] we should make it singular anyway because, while there may or may not be more than one, it can be referred to in the singular without changing its meaning. I'll go rename it now, though I am curious to find out whether there's definitely more than one or not... hmm. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:37, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		*** According to the [[Help:Naming_conventions\|naming convention]] we should make it singular anyway because, while there may or may not be more than one, it can be referred to in the singular without changing its meaning. I'll go rename it now, though I am curious to find out whether there's definitely more than one or not... hmm. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:37, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	**** The Haitian is not wearing it in ''Lizards'' or ''The Kindness of Strangers''. He does not appear in ''Four Months Later'' or ''Kindred''. He doesn't appear to be wearing it in ''Fight or Flight'', but his shirt collar is closed. No confirmation that it's the two necklaces, but like Major Despard says, no confirmation that it's the same one, either.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:38, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		**** The Haitian is not wearing it in ''Lizards'' or ''The Kindness of Strangers''. He does not appear in ''Four Months Later'' or ''Kindred''. He doesn't appear to be wearing it in ''Fight or Flight'', but his shirt collar is closed. No confirmation that it's the two necklaces, but like Major Despard says, no confirmation that it's the same one, either.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:38, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
			***** Yeah, I was wondering if we'd seen The Haitian still with his then we'd know there's two of them, but not seeing a necklace isn't sufficient at all for determining. In either case I was wondering for the purpose of article naming, but then I realized the standard is to go singular anyway unless the name needs to be plural in order to make sense. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:45, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
			*** Ok, cool. I don't see a problem with it either. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:45, 27 October 2007 (EDT))

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:16, 28 October 2007
Line 11:		Line 11:
	********** Good point. Added to the theory.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 21:50, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		********** Good point. Added to the theory.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 21:50, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	*********** I suppose that there's also a Mexican evolved human who can turn into [[Claire's necklace\|the Mexican necklace]]? I mean, all Mexicans are related, right? -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 22:14, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		*********** I suppose that there's also a Mexican evolved human who can turn into [[Claire's necklace\|the Mexican necklace]]? I mean, all Mexicans are related, right? -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 22:14, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
			************ Please. An evolved human who can transform into the symbol necklace makes perfect sense. One that can transform into a necklace without the symbol? Well, that's just silly. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 22:16, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:14, 28 October 2007
Line 10:		Line 10:
	********* Oh, yeah, sure, and he can alternately turn himself into Hana's [[:Image:Symbol ring.JPG\|ring]] and [[:Image:Symbol earring.JPG\|earring]]. :) -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 20:54, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		********* Oh, yeah, sure, and he can alternately turn himself into Hana's [[:Image:Symbol ring.JPG\|ring]] and [[:Image:Symbol earring.JPG\|earring]]. :) -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 20:54, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	********** Good point. Added to the theory.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 21:50, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		********** Good point. Added to the theory.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 21:50, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
			*********** I suppose that there's also a Mexican evolved human who can turn into [[Claire's necklace\|the Mexican necklace]]? I mean, all Mexicans are related, right? -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 22:14, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:50, 28 October 2007
Line 9:		Line 9:
	******** I'm immediately suspicious of any Note which begins "it is unknown..." "It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace" is my new favorite example of why.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 20:23, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		******** I'm immediately suspicious of any Note which begins "it is unknown..." "It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace" is my new favorite example of why.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 20:23, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	********* Oh, yeah, sure, and he can alternately turn himself into Hana's [[:Image:Symbol ring.JPG\|ring]] and [[:Image:Symbol earring.JPG\|earring]]. :) -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 20:54, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		********* Oh, yeah, sure, and he can alternately turn himself into Hana's [[:Image:Symbol ring.JPG\|ring]] and [[:Image:Symbol earring.JPG\|earring]]. :) -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 20:54, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
			********** Good point. Added to the theory.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 21:50, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:54, 28 October 2007
Line 8:		Line 8:
	******* I've seen notes in other articles that do that. I don't usually care for pointing out unknown information since that often smells like speculation disguised as a fact. (It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace) I suppose in cases where there's confusion it's helpful to point out that the fact is truely unknown to help prevent people from coming to the wrong conclusion. Either way... ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:57, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		******* I've seen notes in other articles that do that. I don't usually care for pointing out unknown information since that often smells like speculation disguised as a fact. (It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace) I suppose in cases where there's confusion it's helpful to point out that the fact is truely unknown to help prevent people from coming to the wrong conclusion. Either way... ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:57, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	******** I'm immediately suspicious of any Note which begins "it is unknown..." "It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace" is my new favorite example of why.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 20:23, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		******** I'm immediately suspicious of any Note which begins "it is unknown..." "It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace" is my new favorite example of why.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 20:23, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
			********* Oh, yeah, sure, and he can alternately turn himself into Hana's [[:Image:Symbol ring.JPG\|ring]] and [[:Image:Symbol earring.JPG\|earring]]. :) -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 20:54, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:23, 28 October 2007
Line 7:		Line 7:
	****** It could probably stand a Note saying that it's unknown if it's the same necklace ... though that sounds like a theory, I guess.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:48, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		****** It could probably stand a Note saying that it's unknown if it's the same necklace ... though that sounds like a theory, I guess.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:48, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	******* I've seen notes in other articles that do that. I don't usually care for pointing out unknown information since that often smells like speculation disguised as a fact. (It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace) I suppose in cases where there's confusion it's helpful to point out that the fact is truely unknown to help prevent people from coming to the wrong conclusion. Either way... ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:57, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		******* I've seen notes in other articles that do that. I don't usually care for pointing out unknown information since that often smells like speculation disguised as a fact. (It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace) I suppose in cases where there's confusion it's helpful to point out that the fact is truely unknown to help prevent people from coming to the wrong conclusion. Either way... ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:57, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
⚫	* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	******** I'm immediately suspicious of any Note which begins "it is unknown..." "It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace" is my new favorite example of why.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 20:23, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		******** I'm immediately suspicious of any Note which begins "it is unknown..." "It's unknown whether the necklace is actually an evolved human with the ability to transform into a necklace" is my new favorite example of why.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 20:23, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
		⚫	* Also should we have a separate article for the necklaces or should any relevant info on them just be merged into the [[Symbol]] article? ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:30, 27 October 2007 (EDT))
	** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)		** Since it's actually being used as a plot point now, I think it merits its own article. When only the Haitian was wearing it, it probably didn't--just like Jessica's tattoo wasn't really worth an article until it became important in the show (when she was covering it up). But now that Peter's sporting a necklace which may-or-may-not be the same, and it has its own Theory page, I'd say it's a keeper.--[[User:Hardvice\|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice\|(talk)]]</small> 18:41, 27 October 2007 (EDT)
	*** Ok, cool. I don't see a problem with it either. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:45, 27 October 2007 (EDT))		*** Ok, cool. I don't see a problem with it either. ([[User:Admin\|Admin]] 18:45, 27 October 2007 (EDT))