This wiki is a XML full dump clone of "Heroes Wiki", the main wiki about the Heroes saga that has been shut down permanently since June 1, 2020. The purpose of this wiki is to keep online an exhaustive and accurate database about the franchise.
Talk:Electromagnetism: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Content deleted Content added
imported>MiamiVolts →Consensus Check: moving vote |
imported>Ryangibsonstewart redirect -- this page is already archived at Talk:Electromagnetism/Archive 3 |
||
| (194 intermediate revisions by 27 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
#redirect [[Talk:Electric manipulation]] |
|||
{| border="2" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="4" class="wikitable" |
|||
|- |
|||
! Archives |
|||
! Archived Topics |
|||
|- |
|||
| align=center | [[Talk:Electromagnetism/Archive 1|Nov/Dec 2006]] || Name · Re: Ted's power · The dying patient. · Split? · To Summarize the Above · Rename Template · Then let's get the vote down. · Consensus · Note, Events & Archival · Electrogenesis · Bliss and Horror All Over Again · If which ever side wins, WINS |
|||
|- |
|||
|} |
|||
{{tocright}} |
|||
== Lightning == |
|||
* I know this is a touchy subject at the moment, but on several instances they've referred to his power as "lightning" with 1-2 of those instances being in episodes themselves. Hardvice pointed out that lightning is more of a manifestation of the ability, which I do agree with... however in light of the continuing references to this power as "lightning" in canonical and near-canonical sources we may need to go with this name for the power. Any discussions in this particular section should '''not''' suggest alternate names for this power unless those names have been mentioned '''in an episode''' since we currently have terms that are being used in episodes and those canonically trump any other source. Preferably the only discussions that should take place in this section involve whether or not "lightning" is a canonical term for the ability. ([[User:Admin|Admin]] 22:16, 12 November 2007 (EST)) |
|||
**I wouldn't mind that until a better name is mentioned in canon.--{{User:Baldbobbo/sig}} 22:19, 12 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
**I think at this point we're pretty much stuck with "lightning". It's been used rather consistently in the show, in the graphic novel, and in the commentary.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 23:31, 12 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
* Ok, since it looks like the power Elle and Peter are demonstrating needs to be called lightning, do we want to split off the other examples into a different article? If not we can rename it right now. If we do want to split them off, then let's do that expeditiously so we can get this article renamed quickly or perhaps just move Peter and Elle into a new article named Lightning. ([[User:Admin|Admin]] 19:02, 13 November 2007 (EST)) |
|||
** I'd opt for a new article named lightning. It'll mean fixing more links, but it still feels wrong to call the agent's power "lightning".--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 19:10, 13 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
*** I agree. The question is whether the other two examples will likely remain electromagnetism for now or if they'll be changing, too. Since what to call the other two examples is much more subjective, I think we're better off just splitting Elle and Peter into a Lightning article as well. Then we can deal with the other two separately since it may take more time to agree on a name (or names) for their abilities. ([[User:Admin|Admin]] 19:23, 13 November 2007 (EST)) |
|||
* I agree 100%. --{{User:Heroe/sig}} 20:18, 13 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
== A good solution to the electrical name calling! == |
|||
How about all of the powers get categorized to one page named "Electrical Abilities" then get sub-catergorized by: |
|||
-Electrokinesis (Electrogenisis) |
|||
<br>{{plus}} Elle |
|||
<br>{{plus}} Peter(absorbed) |
|||
-Electromagnetism |
|||
<br>{{plus}} Future agent |
|||
-Electrical absorption/distrbution |
|||
<br>{{plus}} Graphic novel-Blackout; patient |
|||
i agree that all three examples manipulate/absorb/generate/distribute electricity, but just in different ways--[[User:Anthony Gooch|Anthony Gooch]] 16:37, 13 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
* I tend to agree that we're seeing three similar electrical powers. At the very least, the patient's power seems completely different; the agent might just be a more developed version of Elle's. However, at this point I'm convinced we're (hopefully temporarily) stuck with "lightning" for Elle's since they keep calling it that in the show and the comics and the commentary.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 16:40, 13 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
* I think this may be the first of a trend. If, like other genetic traits, super powers are slightly different for each individual then classification will start to get crazy. Take for instance Nathan and West's powers of flight. They may end up the same, they can both fly. But there may be subtle differences like speed, propulsion 'type', control, altitudes, etc. Just like you can classify eye color and finger prints but each is unique to an individual. Elle, Patient, and Agent may all have electrical manipulation but each with a specific "twist" of sorts.--[[User:MishBaker|Mish]] 16:46, 13 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
**Thats what I'm trying to say...perfect example: West is more a peter-pan levitation while Nathan is more of a straight edge jet-flight but in the end both are Flight....Elle, Agent, and patient are all the same "Electrical Ability" but with differences, maybe the page could have Limitations, Examples, or Differences for each character. |
|||
* my 2 cents on the pros and cons of this approach |
|||
{{plus}} good umbrella approach to sort discrepancies between the manifestations of electromagnetic abilities and confine them to one page at the same time<br> |
|||
{{minus}} might be too technical/confusing for those of lower IQ that use this site.<br> |
|||
{{minus}} would be a bit strange to have in the [[Portal:Powers|Portal]] and the [[Powers|Golasary]]<br> |
|||
all in all I'm for this approach because the plus outweighs the minuses. I would however substitute "Lightning" for "Electrokinesis (Electrogenisis)" for sake of simplicity.--{{User:SacValleyDweller/sig}} 20:15, 13 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
*See [[User:Heroe/electromagnetically-based abilities]]. --{{User:Heroe/sig}} 20:16, 13 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
**I like this approach a lot too. Sub-catergorizing sounds like it could set a good precedent for later conflicts. [[User:Random guy|Random guy]] 23:21, 14 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
***I don't like the idea of subcategorization (we don't do that with any other similar powers, and it opens the door for fan speculation rather than reporting what we know), but I do like the idea of three separate powers. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 23:31, 14 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
***I have to agree with Ryan. The same argument could be made to combine illusion and telepathy (and maybe dream manipulation and mental manipulation), or pyrokinesis and induced radioactivity (and maybe cryokinesis), technopathy and EDT, etc. Implying a stronger connection between similar but distinct powers seems speculative.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 01:20, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
==Split== |
|||
* I archived the old talk since we've moved on from the debate re: Elle's version of this ability. New topic: should this article be split between the agent and the patient? I think it should be; "electromagnetism" fits the agent, but not the patient, and the patient is the only one we've seen who's able to absorb electricity. We even have a mention of a name for the patient's power in a secondary source: [[Mark Sable]] called it "[[Interview:Blackout|his electrical absorption ability]]". I suggest we split it into "Electromagnetism" and "Electrical absorption".--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 23:40, 14 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
** I agree with the split and the names. Seems very logical and not at all speculative. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 23:47, 14 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
** Before the no doubt pages and pages of shameless wank begin, let's state what we have, in terms of the [[Help:Naming conventions|Naming conventions]]: "Electromagnetism" is a descriptive name. There are no canon, near-canon, or secondary source names. Any name which someone nominates should be able to explain both aspects of the agent's power (hovering, shooting sparks) ''without'' implying he can do things he can't. "Electrical absorption" comes from an interview. As a secondary source, it can only be "trumped" by names from a canon or near-canon source, which we don't have. Any other names we might consider need to come from another secondary source, not be merely descriptive names. Also, of course, if anyone can come up with a ''good'' reason to keep these on the same page, do so. Now, let pandemonium begin!--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 00:44, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
*** I agree. Both suggested names look good to me and follow the guidelines. ([[User:Admin|Admin]] 01:01, 15 November 2007 (EST)) |
|||
**** I agree too. I've alwaysthought the patient's ability was different from the agent's. --{{User:Heroe/sig}} 11:08, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
* Isn't it assumptive and speculative, to split these two apart, solely because they have shown the patient absorbing electricty? Just because the other electro-heads haven't been shown to absorb any electricity, doesn't preclude them from that aspect of it. '''Electromagnetism''' is a good, generic term that everyone understands, that labels all who wear it with a clearly understandable power. For me, I just think it is too speculative, based on little evidence, to warrant splitting this power yet. We have simply seen different aspects of this power utilized in a couple of different ways. <small>--[[User:HiroDynoSlayer|HiroDynoSlayer]] ([[User talk:HiroDynoSlayer|talk]]) 11/15/2007 11:38 (EST)</small> |
|||
** Splitting a power is less speculative than claiming that two people possess the same power. When differences exist in how a power is observed it's safer to categorize them as two separate powers initially (since based on observation they are indeed two different powers) until there is evidence that they're indeed the same power. ([[User:Admin|Admin]] 11:45, 15 November 2007 (EST)) |
|||
***Right. If we keep them on the same page, we're definitely saying they have the same power. However, if we split them, we're technically not saying that they have different powers. It's a fine line, I know. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 13:19, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
* I guess my question at this point, is why does it even matter with this example? In other words, we may very well never see the hospital patient anymore, especially this season. What harm does it do presently, do leave the page as one power focusing on electromagnetism...at least until the patient, or some other new character shows up, and gives us significant examples of this supposed variant of the power? Electromagnetism is a general term that does cover all the people who have manifested some form of electrical control....and right now, there are no active characters in any environment, that are displaying distinct and clear variations with this power. Wouldn't a simple note in regards to the hospital patient, on the Electromagnetism page, stating that he is the only person to manifest an absorbtion aspect of electromagnetism sufficient? <small>--[[User:HiroDynoSlayer|HiroDynoSlayer]] ([[User talk:HiroDynoSlayer|talk]]) 11/15/2007 13:26 (EST)</small> |
|||
**I could ask the same question about what the harm is in splitting them, and putting a see also to the other electric-related powers. But I ''do'' see harm in keeping them on the same page, since it would be a possibly incorrect assumption that there is a magnetic component to the patient's ability. He didn't levitate, and it would be wrong to keep him on the same page as the agent. I would feel very differnt if Mark Sable or somebody said that they are the same power, just in different stages--but that's not been said anywhere I know of. Just because the patient might not be seen again does not mean we can/should lump him with another character who has a similar power. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 13:34, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
*** I agree with splitting this into "electricity absorbtion" (teenage patient) and "electromagnetism" (future agent), as they obviously have different powers, and I like the new subpage listing the sources of power names (it looks like it could be helpful as a reference guide).--[[User:MiamiVolts|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts|talk]]) 17:41, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
**** The problem with "electricity absorption" is that "electrical absorption" is a direct quote from a secondary source (Mark Sable used it twice, in fact), and "electricity absorption" isn't. That makes it descriptive, and secondary sources trump descriptive names.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 17:49, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
***** Can Ryan confirm it is a direct quote? I mean, it's from an interview he jotted down from a recording, but only Ryan can tell us how clear it was. If Ryan confirms the recording is clear, then I will change my vote.--[[User:MiamiVolts|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts|talk]]) 18:15, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
****** I'll check the audio file. Gimme a few minutes. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 18:17, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
******* Indeed, [[Mark Sable]] called it his "electrical absorption power" once, and [[Jason Badower]] called it a "cool electrical absorption thing". -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 18:53, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
******** While I think "electricity absorption" sounds better, if we have sources that have called it "electrical absorption" then it's pretty clear that it needs to be named electrical absorption then. ([[User:Admin|Admin]] 19:03, 15 November 2007 (EST)) |
|||
==Split or Rename== |
|||
Actually, now that I think of it, the choice really ought to be between renaming it "Electrical absorption" (a name used in a secondary source) instead of "Electromagnetism" (a descriptive name), ''or'' splitting it into two articles. If it remains one article, that article needs to be named "electrical absorption" because that name comes from a secondary source while "electromagnetism" does not.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 18:46, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
* We pretty much have consensus that they needs to be a split, but I don't see any harm in rewording the consesus call. Still gonna wait and see if Ryan gets the confirming on the name from the audio file, but that's a different issue.--[[User:MiamiVolts|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts|talk]]) 18:51, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
** Jinx. Yep, they each called it "electrical absorption". -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 18:55, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
==Consensus Check== |
|||
<u>Split into "Electric<b>al</b> absorption" and "Electromagnetism"</u> |
|||
# [[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 17:45, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
# {{User:Heroe/sig}} 17:48, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
# -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 18:17, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
# [[User:Random guy|Random guy]] 18:18, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
# [[User:Admin|Admin]] 19:05, 15 November 2007 (EST) (due to source ranking defined by [[Help:Sources]] and [[Help:Naming conventions]]) |
|||
# [[User:MiamiVolts|MiamiVolts]] ([[User_talk:MiamiVolts|talk]]) 17:47, 15 November 2007 (EST) |
|||
<u>Split into "Electric<b>ity</b> absorption" and "Electromagnetism"</u> |
|||
<u>Rename to "Electrical absorption</u> |
|||
Latest revision as of 02:34, 18 December 2008
Redirect to: