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:Timeline:October 2006: Difference between revisions

From Heroes Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Older edit
Content deleted Content added
imported>Baldbobbo
imported>Masterhiro
 
(31 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{tocright}}
==Few things==
{| border="2" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="4" class="wikitable"
So the first thing is the template. That won't be too hard to make, just didn't feel like shelling out code that isn't necessary until something's decided upon.<br>
|-
Next thing is span id's. I didn't include them just because they need to be cleaned up anyway. Personally, I don't see the need for them since you can refer to the section of the article. We know Homecoming is Oct. 11, so when pointing to it on the timeline, why point to Timeline#Homecoming when you can easily do Timeline#October 11, 2006. It's only a few more characters on one page instead of having to do code on two pages.<br>
! Archives
Last thing is commenting. When I was copying, I noticed someone commented on something that was a justification for a specific date for an event. I like that, and I think it should be standard for things that are unspecified.<br>
! Archived Topics
Anyway, any feedback, and I'll start to build the other pages once I get input.--[[User:Baldbobbo|Bob]] 14:15, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
|-
* Ahhh, this is much better! [[User:Heroe|<span style="color:green">Heroe!</span>]]<small>[[User talk:Heroe|<span style="color:#000000">(talk)</span>]]</small> 14:19, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
| align=center | [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1|Apr 2007-May 2007]] || <small>{{ArchiveLinks|Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1}}</small>
* The span IDs only become important if we activate the Wikipedia date reflexes, which would allow user's preferences to format dates (things like the date episodes first aired, characters' death dates, and the like. I've talked to [[User:Admin|Admin]] about it briefly. If we had the reflexes in place, we wouldn't need sixteen different span ids (or any, really -- we could just redirect the date to the proper section) because <nowiki>[[October 11, 2006]] and [[11 October 2006]]</nowiki> would be the same article. That way, we could standardize the date format across the site (it's really messed up right now) and get nice, clean links to the timeline articles at the same time.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 14:53, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
|}
** Ah gotcha. Well in that case, I'll go ahead and add them if it's decided upon that my suggested articles be used. I'll go ahead and make the template, the pre-eclipse and after I eat, I'll go through and add tags. My question though is what should the tags be for? Just a date? If so, which format should I use?--[[User:Baldbobbo|Bob]] 14:57, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
***I think it looks much cleaner, much more organized. The navbar template: Good call, we can wait a bit. The span ids: Hardvice is right, we don't need them for [[Timeline#Homecoming]], we need them for all the variations of dates that are out there: [[Timeline#October 11, 2006]], [[Timeline#October 11]], [[Timeline#October 11th]], [[Timeline#11 October 2006]] etc. Comments: they're a good thing. You can't get all the math for dates etc. with just a citation; notes help a lot. I'm liking what you've done, Bob--nice job. Let's let it sit and stew for a bit to see what feedback people have. &mdash; [[User:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 14:59, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
****Actually, if we turn on the date reflexes, we don't need them for variations of the date at all. We can have one article for <nowiki>[[October 2006]] and another for [[October 11, 2006]]</nowiki>, point them to the proper sections (with or without span id's), and links to <nowiki>[[October 11, 2006]] and [[11 October 2006]]</nowiki> and whatever other date formats [[Special:Preferences]] support would all go to the right place.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 15:07, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
****Wait, so elaborate on what tags should be put in. Should there be tags for each section/date?--[[User:Baldbobbo|Bob]] 17:45, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
*****I think what [[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] is saying is that we should probably hold off on tags for just a bit until we find out if we can turn on the date reflexes. &mdash; [[User:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 18:04, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
***Also, I agree with Ryan and Heroe: one million percent better. Great job.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 15:09, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

== Template:Timelinearticle ==

I looked at the template and can't really figure out how to add a clean link that works on a template.--[[User:Baldbobbo|Bob]] 18:21, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
*"A clean link" to what? To the timeline? I'm not sure I understand exactly what it is you're trying to do. Do you want to change the [[Template:Timelinearticle|template]] so it points somewhere else? I guess we'd have to add a "month" variable so it points to the right timeline article. &mdash; [[User:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 18:27, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
**Well what I meant is that the template points to one article. If we use this format, the timeline is split into 4+ articles. So there would have to be some way for the template to either know which article to point to, or what have you. On a side note, once Nov. 8th does occur on the season finale, we'll have two Nov. 8ths that took place: the future possibility and the real one (unless the time travel concept of the show doesn't allow for change, which I doubt). Once that happens, which article would the template redirect to?--[[User:Baldbobbo|Bob]] 18:37, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
***The template: a simple <tt>page=October</tt> (or whatever) would work. However, I think the whole thing should be incorporated into [[template:infobox event]]--that way it can jump right to the date that's entered. November 8th: Let's have it direct to the [[November 8th]] article for now, and then see what happens. I have a feeling it's going to be something like the [[Homecoming Series (painting)]]: what we saw earlier will transpire, but in a way we're not expecting. Let's wait until after the finale in May to make a more informed decision. &mdash; [[User:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 18:53, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
****Didn't think about the infobox event. Good idea.--[[User:Baldbobbo|Bob]] 18:57, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
*****The only problem with adding [[template:timelinearticle]] to [[template:infobox event]] is that I don't think you can force the timeline link to go to the bottom of the page, and I don't really like it at the top of the page. &mdash; [[User:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 20:04, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
******Well all events are part of the timeline, correct? For the infobox on the date, could it have a link to the timeline? There wouldn't be a need for the [[template:timelinearticle]] if we did that. So in other words, at the top for date, it displays the date and it links to the appropriate portion of the timeline. --[[User:Baldbobbo|Bob]] 20:25, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
*******Not all events are part of the timeline--some are kind of thrown in there because they don't really fit anywhere else ([[Linderman's prosecution]], [[Message]], [[Visions]]) and some are really more than one-day events ([[Ted's escapes]], [[Campaign]]). The infobox already links to the timeline with a jump to the date. You're right, maybe timelinearticle isn't needed. I guess we'll just leave it as is, or maybe we could just tweak it a little if people feel it should stay. &mdash; [[User:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 22:02, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

==''Trial By Fire''==
In this graphic novel, one night Nathan is walking in NYC and ends up rescuing a girl from a burning building. Where to place this in the timeline?

Well, in this issue, a chat Nathan had with Peter that went (paraphrasing) P: ''We flew. Aren't you curious how this happened?'' / N: ''I've got an election to win.'' is on his mind. This dialog is from the TV episode ''One Giant Leap'', the morning of the fundraiser, which is almost certainly October 4. So ''Trial By Fire'' must have happened at the earliest on the night of October 4.

But the night of October 4 (the fundraiser) it was raining in NYC. Also, we see Nathan go to a parking structure with his men. So October 4 doesn't work for ''Trial By Fire''.

The following night, October 5, doesn't work either because Nathan is in Las Vegas with Niki.

The night of the 6th also seems to be a rainy night in NYC (seen when Peter is at Isaac's loft in ''Hiros'')...

The night of the 7th (which would correspond to ''Better Halves'') is the earliest night which would work (no bars that I saw) and also happens to be an episode where Nathan doesn't appear. So I'm thinking that's the best approximate fit. --[[User:Mercury McKinnon|Mercury McKinnon]] 16:07, 23 April 2007 (EDT)
*I would definitely say that it was October 4th, and the rain either stopped, or it was overlooked by the GN writer/artist. I can't think of an instance where any GN has jumped 4 or 5 days into the future. They often go into the past, or they will tell the "next event", but not days ahead of what was seen onscreen. Since ''[[Trial By Fire]]'' was [[User:Ryangibsonstewart#Order of Release#released]] immediately following ''[[One Giant Leap]]'', it's pretty safe to assume that the events of both occurred on the same date: October 4th. The rain was probably an oversight. &mdash; [[User:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 20:46, 23 April 2007 (EDT)
**Hi. You might be right, but it's very much arguable whether there really is a pattern/rule to how a GN relates in terms of timing to that week's TV episode (and in particular that GNs would definitely not show a scene meant to take place around 3 days later). ''How Do You Stop an Exploding Man?'' came out right after ''Godsend'', but the GN seems to take place at the very earliest 3 days after the episode.
** What it looks like to me is that GNs were commissioned more to explore and spotlight each lead character, rather than to necessarily continue the action of the recent episode. Between 2 ways to approach how to determine timing, I prefer to give weight to in-story/canon elements rather than to off-story assumptions, as with your take.
** Next, in addition to rain and fire not mixing well physically -- storytelling-wise the rain and fire seem significant, deliberate elements in their respective stories (in ''One Giant Leap'' the rain accompanies the dark, gloomy scenes of the NY-based characters and allows for the red umbrella) rather than casual details of the type that could be overlooked. The GNs go through an editor, right?
** And then the rain isn't the only thing I thought worked against October 4. In the fundraiser, Nathan and his entourage are in an area that (to me) seemed to be an area where they were waiting for Nathan's vehicle. So the idea was that he was about to take a ride, probably home (since the fundraiser was already at his campaign HQ). And why would Nathan be walking about NY either before or after the fundraiser that night?
**To play devil's advocate to myself, are there in-story clues from ''Trial By Fire'' to suggest October 4? Well, on the first page Nathan seems to be wiping his face with a handkerchief, so maybe he was bleeding from Peter's punches. But countering that counter, we also see Nathan wiping his face (if I recall right it was on the rooftop when Peter levitates before Nathan, in ''Don't Look Back'') even when he wasn't bleeding, so there's as much basis as not to put weight on the hankie.
**In sum, several story elements are incongruous for ''Trial By Fire'' and ''One Giant Leap'' to be on the same night, and there is no strong reason in-story (or even off-story) that the GN couldn't have happened on the night of ''Better Halves''. --[[User:Mercury McKinnon|Mercury McKinnon]] 02:13, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
***I just don't think there's enough evidence to pin it down to a specific date one way or the other. October 7th makes as much sense as any, but it feels a little odd that they would release a graphic novel set three or four episodes in the future. I don't see any reason it ''can't'' be the same night as the fundraiser, but I agree it would be an odd decision for him to ditch his cronies and suddenly walk around. I think this is one of those cases where we're just going to have to be happy with a very rough estimate (like "early October"). Once we break away from the release order chronology we don't have much to go on ... it really could be any day before the election.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 02:40, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
****I agree that we can't pin a specific date, but we can (and do) indicate approximate, reasonably accurate dates in the Timeline articles. If we give more weight to in-story indicators over off-story (as I think we have generally done in the Wiki), it just makes a lot more sense to put in October 7.
****(As to your comment that the GN could happen any day before the election... yes, that is not impossible, but a nearer date to October 4 is suggested in the GN itself because the chat with Peter ("Aren't you curious how this happened?" and getting the answers from Suresh) is still weighing heavily on Nathan's mind. Nathan and Peter don't have any new interaction between October 4 and 7. (They briefly meet the morning after October 4 at Peter's place but they still talk about Suresh). Nathan doesn't see Peter again until October 8 (the family brunch), and by then Peter's focus has shifted to future Hiro's message and specifically getting the missing painting from Linderman. Reasonably this new confrontation would have preoccupied Nathan's mind from that point.)
****I have to reiterate that the release order doesn't convey a pattern/sequence at all. The GNs are set at various times relative to the week's episode. And don't we already have the case of ''How Do You Stop an Exploding Man?'' which seems to be set closer to the episodes ''Run!'' and ''Unexpected'' -- a good 3 or 4 episodes after ''Godsend'' (the episode the same week as GN)? --[[User:Mercury McKinnon|Mercury McKinnon]] 03:45, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
*****Again, no date can be confirmed. Our best estimate is early October. Yes, it could well be the 7th, but if we put it on the 7th, that sounds like that date is confirmed, which it isn't. Nowhere on this Wiki do we state what's most likely as if it were fact; this is no exception. This is not the same as extrapolating a date from a receipt or a newspaper or how many times night has passed; there's simply no event in the graphic novel that grounds it to a specific date by anything but speculation. Other approximate dates in the timeline are reasoned from known events; this is pure supposition based on what's most likely.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 04:44, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
******I absolutely agree that the Wiki should never cite unconfirmed statements as if they were fact. What I don't see is how including a statement such as "''Trial By Fire'' took place ''approximately'' on October 7" would violate this principle (i.e., that this is an instance of an unconfirmed statement being passed off as fact).
******I can see how the statement "''Trial By Fire'' took place on October 7" is violative; it's an unconfirmed statement, and the way it's worded presents it as definite fact. The other statement, in contrast, is both (a) verifiable/confirmable demonstrably, and (b) its wording clearly is of a subordinate level as to whether the 7th is ''the'' singular/specific date of the action. By either of these reasons, it doesn't seem to go against the principle. The word ''approximately'' makes all the difference. In wikis, the language and construction used to present information is key always.
******The word ''approximately'' here is not the same as ''possibly''; it does not indicate simple supposition -- rather, that the info was arrived at after a (logical) process of approximation. And October 7 ''is'' reasoned from known events. Nathan's thoughts on the first page indicate that the story is set proximately after October 4. The lack of rain, Nathan walking at night by himself... These are all particulars to be considered that make the 7th a reasonably good approximation.
******Isn't this just like Linderman's cop picking up Niki and Micah in ''One Giant Leap''. We know for a fact they go to Sakamoto on the 5th. But the cop scene can take place on either October 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th. There isn't enough to unquestionably ground the scene to a single specific date, but the best approximation is the 5th. Still, we list these 2 pieces of information in the timeline to reflect their respective levels of accuracy:
:::::==October 5, 2006==
:::::* (''approx.'') Linderman's cop picks up Niki & Micah.
:::::* Niki meets Sakamoto and is instructed to rendezvous with Nathan.
::::*I see the goal of the Wiki as to provide the most accurate information possible. The standard need not be just "100%-certain truth" but a "reasonably high degree of accuracy". The inclusion of approximate information, that is clearly indicated as such, is still useful and desirable, without misrepresenting the false as true, which I think is the essence of the principle. --[[User:Mercury McKinnon|Mercury McKinnon]] 19:02, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
:::::* Is it possible to say whatever you've just said in a comment shorter than six paragraphs? Every time I express an opinion, it seems I'm accosted with a largely unnecessary essay that merely repeats much of the last largely unnecessary essay.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 20:05, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
::::::* I have to say I agree with Hardvice (on more than one count) here. If we can't pin it down, putting it under a general "October" heading will have to suffice. I already have an issue with all the "''approx''" notes (a date is a date--somebody did something on a particular date, not on an approximate date) but that's another story. Putting it under October 7 or any other date really is speculation, or at least leads the reader believe that that was the particular day. It's best under a general heading. &mdash; [[User:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 20:46, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
:::::::*Hi. I'm sorry, but again I really don't see why you claim a reader would be misled which dates are approximate and which are certain when which is which is clearly indicated (as in my example for the Linderman cop and Sakamoto scenes above). And, with all respect, do I really have to point out that tagging as "approximate" doesn't mean that an event didn't happen on a particular date. It means the event happened on a particular date, but that date, being uncertain, has been approximated as date X. (It's having to address these kinds of responses that make one have to [[User_Talk:Hardvice#Talking at length|talk at length]].) --[[User:Mercury McKinnon|Mercury McKinnon]] 09:00, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
::::::::*Or you could, y'know, ''not'' feel the need to respond to every single opinion expressed on a talk page. Just a suggestion.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 14:21, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
::::::::*Quite simply (hmm), if a date's not certain, it should go under a more general category. It either did or didn't happen on date X, not "''approx''". If it can't be confirmed, the reasoning should be in the notes of an appropriate article, or the event should go where we can confirm it--like "Early October" or "October 24-31, 2006".... But approximating dates is not really the issue here, is it? &mdash; [[User:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 15:35, 25 April 2007 (EDT)
:::::::::* OK. If you've noticed I've been trying to get the basis of your objection against indicating approximate dates. I've been addressing the objections in turn, and (where I thought they don't hold up) have offered rebuttals. (Your 2 most recent points being that "approximate dates are misleading to readers" and "indicating a date as ''"approximate"'' makes no sense as things don't happen on an 'approximate date'". I guess you're indirectly acknowledging my counterpoints since you've switched tack -- let's just make that clear please). On your new point, that a more general date ''should be'' used even over a well-supported approximate date... again, what is the rationale for saying "should be"? I thought it didn't have to be pointed out that such a perspective runs counter to the established use of approximate dates in the field of chronology -- whether it be for real-world history or fictional ones (such as the ''Lord of the Rings''). This is precisely why there's the word "circa", indicative of an approximate date, which you must have heard of before. I do agree that a footnote is desirable to clarify the approximation. --[[User:Mercury McKinnon|Mercury McKinnon]] 01:36, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
::::::::::*I've given you the basis of my objection and don't care to rehash what I've already said. If you really want to know what I think, read above. Please don't make faulty assumptions--I acknowledge your counterpoints, but don't agree with them at all. I haven't switched tack. I just don't feel the need to reply to every post or take issue with every thought expressed in a thread. I'm growing very very tired of this discussion. As I tell my second graders, I refuse to repeat myself. &mdash; [[User:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 02:46, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
::::::* Hi. Please clarify why you seem to be saying that absolute certainty is the only standard for inclusion in the timeline -- that a reasonably/demonstrably high degree of accuracy (as with some well-approximated info) is not acceptable. Thanks. --[[User:Mercury McKinnon|Mercury McKinnon]] 09:02, 25 April 2007 (EDT)


==Trial by Fire==
==Trial by Fire==
* Ignoring the entire mess of pointless crap above, the only thing that can be said with any certainty is that TBF takes place after the morning of October 4, when Peter and Nathan have the conversation referenced. Therefore, I have updated the timeline to reflect a date of "after October 3". We should not state, imply, infer, or otherwise assign any special significance to that which we don't know, and saying the novel took place on "approximately" any single date does exactly that. What we know is that the earliest it could be is the evening of October 4.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 05:06, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
* Ignoring the entire mess of pointless crap above, the only thing that can be said with any certainty is that TBF takes place after the morning of October 4, when Peter and Nathan have the conversation referenced. Therefore, I have updated the timeline to reflect a date of "after October 3". We should not state, imply, infer, or otherwise assign any special significance to that which we don't know,
** "'''We should not state, imply, infer, or otherwise assign any special significance to that which we don't know.'''" WOW. You really need to take a good look at yourself and this Wiki you police before you make statements like that and "'''[http://heroeswiki.com/index.php?title=Talk:Timeline:October_2006&diff=57556&oldid=57549 Nowhere on this Wiki do we state what's most likely as if it were fact.]'''" Too easily you expose yourself to be full of it. "[[David]] was murdered by Sylar in Chicago", "[[Hyde Park]] is 100 miles north of NYC", pagefuls of timeline dates without those annoying "''approx''"s... These and so much more must all be certainties so you never saw fit to remove or qualify them. Heaven forbid that they are in fact speculative approximations or else *gasp* you'd have to admit you've been wrong and arbitrary. --[[User:Mercury McKinnon|Mercury McKinnon]] 09:31, 9 May 2007 (EDT)
*** This really is delightfully entertaining. Not only am I now somehow personally responsible for "policing" all of the content on the entire Wiki, but the examples you've selected aren't even all that close to this one. First, neither of them is actually my edit, or an edit I've defended particularly strenuously. Second, "Hyde Park" has three options, not thirty, and only one of them is really all that likely (New Mexico is not Mexico, and New Hyde Park is not Hyde Park; the other one is 200 miles away--a bit of a drive for a weekend brunch), and as for "[[David]]", this is all explained during your "Ichi" silliness--articles need titles, and the "David" article never once claims that his name is ''actually David'', unless you count the lead text, which merely needs scare quotes. Your ability to "reason" by inapt analogies and irrelevant information is really fun to watch.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 13:03, 9 May 2007 (EDT)
*... and saying the novel took place on "approximately" any single date does exactly that. What we know is that the earliest it could be is the evening of October 4.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 05:06, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
**Thank you for your completely arrogant, all-knowing tone! That is such a great substitute for sound arguments to support your pronouncements! We know more than the earliest possible date of ''Trial By Fire'', we know which dates it cannot be, and saying it happened "after October 4" is misleading because it includes even those impossible dates. Only a dense person would say that a statement of events occurring on a defensible approximate date is misinformative, rather than well-established academic practice. The webcomic does give clues that narrow down the date but you chose to ignore them to further your own claim that the-only-thing-we-know-is-"after October 3". But I'm done trying to appeal to the reason of those who are totally closed to it and dismiss contrary reasoning as "crap". --[[User:Mercury McKinnon|Mercury McKinnon]] 09:31, 9 May 2007 (EDT)
***I personally don't see what's so arrogant or all-knowing about merely saying what we know, and not what we don't. Nathan stays one night in Vegas, so there's exactly one night in the month of October after the conversation which we can eliminate. We could come up with some mangled way of saying that it's "sometime after October 3th, excluding the one night Nathan's in Vegas, which might be the night of the 4th or the night of the 5th depending on what evidence you follow", but it seems pretty unnecessary to do so. No other night is "eliminated", and we have yet to even lock down the single "eliminated" night.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 13:03, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

*Completely agree Hardvice. Thank you for being a voice of reason. &mdash; [[User:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 21:59, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
**Well, isn't that a surprise. It's easier for the weak-minded to just say "I agree" and to bully those who question them than to actually address and prove such questioners wrong. --[[User:Mercury McKinnon|Mercury McKinnon]] 09:31, 9 May 2007 (EDT)
***Personally, I'm very glad you're done trying to appeal our reason. Don't you know that there is no reasoning with weak-minded people like me? &mdash; [[User:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>RyanGibsonStewart</font>]] ([[User talk:Ryangibsonstewart|<font color=#0147FA>talk</font>]]) 11:58, 9 May 2007 (EDT)


==String Theory and October Timeline==
==String Theory and October Timeline==
Line 76: Line 28:
Her timeline still isn't perfect; she has to have left Micah at Tina's overnight and it still takes the cop an entire night to bring her in, but it's less absurd.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 13:07, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
Her timeline still isn't perfect; she has to have left Micah at Tina's overnight and it still takes the cop an entire night to bring her in, but it's less absurd.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 13:07, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
**I doubt the receipt is wrong. More than likely, not everything in the episode occurs on the same day. All we do is move the instance of Hiro visiting peter to Oct 4.--[[User:Baldbobbo|Bob]] 13:25, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
**I doubt the receipt is wrong. More than likely, not everything in the episode occurs on the same day. All we do is move the instance of Hiro visiting peter to Oct 4.--[[User:Baldbobbo|Bob]] 13:25, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
***Actually, it pretty much has to push all of the events of ''OGL'' and ''Collision'' back a day, because Peter and Mohinder have earlier interactions with Nathan, Eden, Isaac, and Simone (putting all of them on the same timeline; for example, since F.Hiro visits Peter the same day and shortly after Peter tried but failed to visit Isaac, Isaac's ''Collision'' events are locked on Oct 4 as well). Since Peter wakes up with Simone at the beginning of Collision, we know that morning takes place the day after ''OGL''; Nathan's already leaving for Vegas that day (campaign manager tells him to "have a safe trip"). The only way to disconnect Nathan (and everyone he interacts with) from the same timeline, and to rectify the receipt, is to assume Nathan spent the rest of the day (and a night) in Vegas before visiting the Casino (if `we assume the receipt's date are correct, then if he went to the casino on the day he travels to Vegas the receipt would be Oct 4-6, not Oct 5-6). Nathan's events sliding back a day affects Niki's timetable Matt, Claire, and Hiro's events aren't tied to Peter & co., but all of their dates until ''Fallout'' are based only on the receipt, so if Nathan's timeline is off, then so is everybody else's. Moving ''just'' F.Hiro/Peter both creates unexplained gaps ''and'' forces events in which Peter or Mohinder (also on the train) have interactions with others that must take place before the meeting, but would be listed as taking place after the meeting.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 15:29, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

*With Mohinder confirming that Oct 4th was when he received his father's ashes, that puts Collision on 4 Oct. What I find in the problem that arises is that we assume all the events of an episode occur within the same day. We need to toy around a bit to shift individual events with time markers (like the receipt) so that those fit.--[[User:Baldbobbo|Bob]] 20:28, 1 May 2007 (EDT)
** Right. I'm not saying we should assume all of the events of ''Collision'' take place on Oct 4. I'm saying that moving Peter and Mohinder's events necessarily moves Simone, Isaac, and Nathan's events. Moving Nathan's events moves his trip to Vegas since he leaves that day. Moving his trip to Vegas pretty much invalidates the hotel receipt, and that's the only basis for everybody else's dates. Here's how it's all hinged together:

Oct 4.
Nathan/Mohinder --> Peter/Simone/Nathan --> Peter/Mohinder/Eden --> Peter/Mohinder/Isaac --> Peter/Mohinder/Future Hiro

Before Mohinder arrives, Nathan and his campaign manager discuss his trip to Vegas to get Linderman's contribution. As the limo pulls away, the manager tells him to have a good trip. (This is moderately weird in any case, as the campaign manager also goes to Vegas, but maybe they're just not on the same flight). It's possible Nathan doesn't leave for Vegas until the 5th, I guess, but that makes the whole conversation even weirder. If he goes to Vegas on the fourth, the receipt is wrong (or he slept at the airport or had a red-eye flight). If he goes to Vegas on the fifth, it's correct (they bill him for the sixth, but I'm guessing he missed checkout time, what with the whole attempted kidnapping and all). I haven't followed it down the line for the other characters who are locked on the 4th if we leave Nathan, Hiro, Niki, and Claire on the 5th (Claire's tied in because of Bennet's phone call from Sandra; Hiro's tied in because of his meeting with Nathan at the Fly By Night), but we should do so and see if having these characters a day apart for some events in ''Collision'' and ''Hiros'' creates problems the next time they interact. For example, Peter, Isaac, Eden, and Mohinder's ''Hiros'' events take place on the 5th (Peter tells Isaac they tried to visit him last night). The next big interaction between these two groups is in ''Better Halves'' when Eden calls Mr. Bennet. For this to work out, we have at least one missing day for Peter/Isaac/Eden/Mohinder: Peter and Isaac were last seen discussing the missing painting on the 5th in ''Hiros'', a conversation which carries over to the opening of ''Better Halves''. Mohinder was last seen on the subway on October 4th; he and Eden could be discussing his departure on the 5th (Peter's timeline), the 6th (one ep per day from the subway scene), or the 7th, but it has to be the 7th to fit with Claire/Bennet's timeline if we assume the receipt was correct (accident on the evening of the 5th, hospital on the 6th, fake parents on the 7th). Even if we put everybody on the same timeline, it's been at least one full day since he left with Peter (since Eden has to be on the same timeline as Bennet, this conversation has to take place on either the 6th (if the receipt is wrong) or the 7th (if the receipt is right).

This requires mapping it out character by character, I think.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 13:13, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
* This weekend, I'll put up a bunch of strings around my apartment for the timeline of each character and where they connect. How does that sound? Haha.--[[User:Baldbobbo|Bob]] 15:53, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
** It's actually not far off from my plans, which is to print them out, cut them out, and lay them out on a big piece of butcher paper. Evidently Future Hiro knows how confusing this timeline is, even without possible dark futures.--[[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] <small>[[User talk:Hardvice|(talk)]]</small> 16:58, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

== Niki's Timeline ==

I agree with [[User:Hardvice|Hardvice]] about Niki's timeline, however I arrived at the same conclusion from an entirely different start point. Let me elaborate:
# The [[eclipse]] in Tokyo, happens the morning of 2nd October. During the eclipse, [[Hiro]] is in the rooftop of the Yamagato Industries where they're doing exercises. As the train for work arrived at 07:42:14 a.m. exactly, the time of the eclipse must be around 08.00 a.m. earliest -- as they also do those exercises before starting to work in the cubicles.
# Tokyo, Japan; is GMT+9 (UTC+9) whereas Nevada, LV, USA is GMT-8. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daylight_saving_time DST] is ended in the last Sunday of October, which was [http://h10072.www1.hp.com/dst/index.htm 29th of October in 2006]. Thus LV was GMT-7 then, thus we get a total of 9+7=16 hours of difference between Tokyo and Nevada during the beginning of October.
# Therefore, if the eclipse occured around 08.00 a.m. in the morning in Tokyo, it means that then it was around 04.00 p.m. in Las Vegas, 06.00 p.m in Odessa and 07.00 p.m. in New York (Time of the Eclipse).
# Niki was at home (Nevada, LV) during the eclipse watching it through Micah's pinhole camera. (Around 04.00 p.m.) The thugs then attacked her, forced her to strip in front of them and the camera. Then Jessica came instead of Niki, tearing apart the thugs in the garage. Niki is unconscious, unaware and asleep. Then she wakes up to find the bodies, locks the garage and goes to pick up Micah.
# We have 2 options here: OR she woke up immediately and picked up Micah the same night, OR she woke up in the morning and then pick him up. In this timeline the first option is considered. However at least 4 hours pass on the way when she goes to pick Micah up. (Micah: ''Mom. Where've you been? I called you like four hours ago.'') So, 4 hours + the time in the garage + the time on the way = AT LEAST 4.5 hours has passed. It's around 08.30 p.m.
# If you watch the [[Episode:Don't Look Back|episode]] again, you'll see that in both of the time (when Niki gets out of the garage and when she gets out of the car for being blacked-out), it's shiny, there's sun in the sky; it's day-time. Therefore the episode itself informs us that it's no more the same day, no more the day of the eclipse. We have nevertheless, no alternative then to consider option two; that's Niki overslept at the garage and pick up his son the in the morning (actually noon time) next day.
# Given the fact that also Future Hiro pretty explicitly says he returned to October 4, 2006, as Hardvice explained up, I suggest that we change the timeline of Niki. She can in no way have picked up Micah in October the first, as clearly seen in the episode. She did it on October 2.

--[[User:Janrodrigo|Janrodrigo]] 10:27, 17 September 2009 (EDT)
*Hm, this is a nice break-down of things. The only thing I can think of is that Jessica talked to Micah before blacking out as Niki, and told him to spend the night there, and...no, there's no way to fix it. :(--[[User:Citizen|Citizen]] 06:35, 21 September 2009 (EDT)
**Yes, there's a way to fix it. Everything is SO connected. I think even the producers/writers did some little errors. We have to take [[Episode:One Giant Leap|One Giant Leap]] to October 3... and so on. It's explicitely stated that [[Future Hiro]] time-traveled to October 4 - not 5. We have to sometimes accept that some things in the same episode does not occur on the same day. Actually putting One Giant Leap on October 4 (which is actually Oct. 3) and the following episodes onward has been because of these two:
# Ando asking Hiro "Where have you been the last two days?" and
# The receipt of Montecito hotel.
But I tried each and every possible way on dozens of papers, accepting those two correct. It never worked in a rational way. The only rational and logical way using all the other canon sources, made it work -- but with the refutal of the above two. However I've a very sytematic idea about way it would have been very probable that these two are wrong. I'll explain it down. --[[User:Janrodrigo|Janrodrigo]] 07:16, 21 September 2009 (EDT)

== One subtle thought by Kring, probably misunderstood by Loeb and followed by Green ==

First I want to make something clear. The title is just a theory or an assumption. It's definitely not said in order to blame any writer. The names could be different. It's just a possible example of how something might've been easily confused among the writers.

Secondly, I want to point out a concept. During the beginnings of the volume Genesis, a lot of events were occuring simultaneously both in the States and in Japan. In October; EST and Japan has 13 hours of difference and if you compare Nevada and Tokyo, they've '''16 hours''' of difference. Sometimes during a rush (of the crew I mean), it's very probable to forget that when it is day ''x'' in the States, mostly it's day ''x+1'' in Japan, depending on the hour.

So, let me elaborate how I told it's probable that the above two so-called canon info.s could have been prepared wrongly and how I came to that point.
# I was thinking some events separately, but somehow I'd to connect them. So, I'd few other questions in my mind, separate from those two.
# In [[Episode:Don't Look Back|Don't Look Back]], the [[NYPD detective]] asks [[Hiro]] when he teleported to NY. He answers '''Yesterday'''. That answer shocked me. I started to think whether he stayed in NY for a day and then went to Isaac's loft and whether he arrived to NY on November 7th. All the other evidences speaks against these...(First of many his watch wouldn't show Oct 2.)
# Then, I realised. Our perception of days as human beings is different than the perception of the earth herself. What I mean is that, for the earth, in some specific region, it becomes a new day exactly at 00.00 a.m. But for us, a new day starts with the sunrise e.g. or when we wake up. It was nothing but natural for [[Hiro Nakamura]] to feel that he teleported/time-traveled the previous day. Because it was almost midnight. Then suddenly it's morning time, a new shiny day. It's nothing but natural that he would feel that he teleported the previous day.
# But if Hiro would've thought deeply while speaking with the police (which he couldn't have done, due to the shock of the dead Isaac and everything) he would've said that he came "today". Plus, probably he took his watch to 13 hours earlier, which means he had a total time of 1 hour and 9 minutes in New York (as his watch was showing 11.52). I supposed that "Tim Kring" must've thought about those thoroughly.
# But let's say that the writers has an understanding about some special things... like that Hiro came back to talk to [[Ando]] at Yamagato, in the morning of October 4th. (I'm now all speaking according to the Japanese Time, EST+13 hours) and that the same day they save the [[Japanese schoolgirl|girl]] and then they fly.
# Then very naturally, in the rush of the production Loeb (or someone else) could've easily forget that the eclipse happened in October 2 in Japan and that the night of Oct. 2 Hiro time-traveled; instead thinking that it happened at October 1, further confirming his assumption (which he wouldn't take as an assumption but a fact) when Hiro says that he arrived "yesterday", thus misundersting Kring's subtelty.
# If we overlook all of these and accept the first canon-source above correct. (Ando, asking Hiro: ''Where've you been in the last two days?'') Then Hiro arrives at Yamagato in the morning of October 5, speaks with Ando, saves the girl from the truck, flies to Los Angeles at least for ten hours (I also checked it out), they don't take any rest, they rent a car, they drive to Las Vegas (at least 4 hours, assuming they know well the roads), they go to the casino (when it's not afternoon yet -- there, Sakamato tells Niki that ''a politician is arriving this afternoon'') and they gamble for hours, they cheat and they're thrown out of the casino; ALL AT THE SAME DAY. To me, it really makes little or no sense. I don't know if it make sense to others...
# Even if you add 16 hours because of the time difference. It's really very hard to conclude that it could be because then we would've to assume that they find a ticket immediately, they fly immediately and without transition and that they do all of these things in such a rush and without taking any rest. Even if we accept it such way, it becomes only consistent in their own timelines. It contradicts with other timelines, thus becoming inconsistent!
# OK, coming back to where I left: two episodes after that. Naturally Michael Green (or someone preparing [[Episode:Hiros|Hiros]]) must've taken naturally Ando's sentence as a reference point and thus must've prepared that bill paper for Nathan, showing him arriving at the Montecito Hotel on the 5th and leaving on the 6th. But unfortunately this is wrong too. We've to accept that Nathan arrives on the 4th and leaves on the 5th. If not tons of inconsistencies occur in the timelines of many characters, not just of Niki and Hiro; also of [[Peter]], [[Isaac]], [[Claire]], [[Mohinder]], [[Noah]] and even [[Matt]].
# We should not forget that all the characters are intertwined, they're connected. For example just after Isaac fights with [[Simone]] and after she leaves, Hiro calls Isaac, leaving him a message in Japanese. At that moment Hiro&Ando are on the spot where they'll save the schoolgirl from the truck. And again when Claire crushed the car with [[Brody]] and they're in the hospital, [[Sandra]] calls Noah. At that moment Noah and [[the Haitian]] is actually abducting Nathan. There're so many similar examples and thus canon sources in the episodes. Many other details also should be considered in '''each scene''', such as whether it's day-time or night-time; whether it could be day time both in NY and in Tokyo; whether it's raining or not or is the sun rising or setting... thus we get many a clues directly from episodes.
# In the present form of the timeline of October 2006, there're many inconsistencies, dozens of questions and can-not-bes. And the only way to resolve almost ALL of those questions and inconsistencies, I found out, was to refute the correctness of the above two info (Ando's sentence and the bill). That is why I started to analyse why those two canon info.s could have been wrong. And thus I came to these points.
# I know that it's not easy to accept for some (even for me sometimes), that something shown or said in the episode could be wrong. However, if we take them as "correct", we're automatically refuting many other similar canon info.s from episodes and also creating lots of questions and how-comes. And I do not/and did not actually enter much into the inconsistencies here, as then I would've to write a really very long essay :)!
# I know and repeat that what I wrote in the title above is just a suggestion, but that's like a reflection of what I could conclude as the best. And that's not my point. My point is actually lies in the inconsistencies of the timelines.
# Therefore, I invite everyone to reflect deeply on these above written points. We should not forget that '''HeroesWiki''' is very important and also significant for the writers/the crew, as they easily can take a look at the wiki for information. If the wiki contains wrong canonical information or not prepared with enough care and attention, it might affect them, creating even more wrong canonical informations for the future, guided by the other ones here.
# So, what does everyone say?
# Do you (in plural), let me slide the dates of the episodes, each for one day, in condition that they are consistent with each other and all the canonical info.s, except those two? You can be sure that I WILL take back my action or accept when shown something really logical and correct. And I'm also willing to refute everything I said if proven wrong. That's the scientific and logical stand point.

Thank you and Sorry for the length, <br>
Friendly & sincerely to everyone, <br>
--[[User:Janrodrigo|Janrodrigo]] 10:11, 21 September 2009 (EDT)

*O.0 Wow, wall of text. From what I can gather (not everything though, too much info at once), your timeline appears to be correct, I mean, it makes sense. [[User:Intuitive Empath|Intuitive Empath]] - [[User talk:Intuitive Empath|Talk]] - [[Special:Contributions/Intuitive Empath|Contributions]] 12:29, 21 September 2009 (EDT)

== Charlies Andrews death is now an alternate timeline. ==

The facts as simply as can be stated;

As we see in 'Homecoming' Charlie is killed by Sylar and witnessed by Hiro and Ando. Hiro's response is to time travel back 6 monthes in an attempt to save her. At which he fails.

But, as we see in 'Once Upon A Time In Texas' Hiro is both able to save Charlie and have her healed of her condition. Meaning that all evens from the moment Charlie starts opening the can to Hiro's return are now in another timeline. further Hiro is able to meet with and talk to Charlie in the episode 'Brave New World' demonstrating that she is still alive and her life was altered by the events of Volume 5.

I suggest this creates a temporal event, specifically an altered past. Her children, who would not have been born in that past, create an alternate future (i.e. her altered past is an altered future from the perspective of the shows timeline).

Just some food for thought, but potentially a consideration for the HeroesWiki staff as the 'Charlie Dies Timeline' is certainly not in the mainstream (only Hiro retains any knowledge of it).

Masterhiro
* Yes, I agree that Hiro changed the course of events, and Charlie's death is now part of an altered timeline. Similarly, so are [[Hiro Nakamura (explosion future)|Soul Patch Hiro]], [[Claire Bennet (exposed future)|Leather Clad Claire]], and [[Caitlin|Caitlin's existence]]. :) -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 20:48, 7 March 2010 (EST)
**I think what Masterhiro is trying to say is that we should consider somehow splitting information from the "Charlie Dies Timeline" from the ultimate "real timeline" presented in the show since "Once Upon a Time in Texas" (kind of like we do with the possible futures). That doesn't seem possible or feasible right now, but there are a few projects currently in the works that could revamp the timeline pages, and hopefully acknowledge the problem of our three-season "alternate timeline."--[[User:Tim Thomason|Tim Thomason]] 23:43, 7 March 2010 (EST)
*** I don't think we need to split the character. It's the same character....as opposed to the alternate future timelines, which feature characters who are markedly different than the characters in the present. That's not the case with Charlie's non-death. -- {{User:Ryangibsonstewart/sig}} 01:00, 8 March 2010 (EST)
**** So here we go, I think I have this straight in my head (The ep. is not available for my to review in detail currently.), have your favored pain releiver handy.

The current official timeline proceeds as such; Hiro and Ando arrive at the BTD. Hiro meets Charlie they start to fall in love. Sylar meets Charlie and covets her power. Sylar attempts to kill Charlie, but is saved by future Hiro who sends him to Odessa via bus. Future Hiro returns to Charlie, after sending himself to 6 months in the past to get to know her, who is starting to die from her condition. Future Hiro retrieves Sylar and has him repair the damage. Sylar finds a new sense of fear for dieing alone and unwanted. Charlie becomes angry with Future Hiro then they reconcile, they leave to go to Otsu but Samuel has Charlie transpported to the past where she has a family...etc. Hiro returns from the past, perhaps with somewhat less regret at having failed to save a Charlie he had no knowledge was about to die.

The Alternate timeline is as follows; Hiro and Ando arrive at BTD. Hiro meets Charlie they start to fall in love. Sylar meets Charlie and covets her power. Sylar kills Charlie and Hiro travels back 6 months to save her. Hiro fails teleporting back to Tokyo from which he sets out to rejoin Ando at the BTD, he is powerless and mournful because of his failure.

I don't believe Charlie should have seperate personas as a result of the events, but her lack of continued existance does create an alternate future. I.E. no descendents (that we know of), no spouse (that we know of) no life long freinds that would have developed , etc. So in the same sense that we would still call the explosion future an alternate 'future' even though the catalyst is in the shows objective past, it could be considered that the Charlie dies future fits the same alternate future criteria (lacking only in the regard of having canonical evidence of the results in the altered future, since we have to assume all canonical events post catalyst are the same). The events of the alternate future would be, Charlies death (Seven Minutes To Midnight) and Hiro's 'need' going back to the past to save her from Sylar only to fail (Seven Minutes To Midnight, Saving Charlie). These events in the normal timeline would be replaced with the new alterations (Sylar attempts to kill Charlie but is saved by future Hiro, Hiro travels to the past to foster a relationship with Charlie).

And to correct something I had stated before; the alternate past is something noone, not even Hiro would remember, considering that his experiences would be different when he went back to 'save' Charlie.

--[[User:Masterhiro|Masterhiro]] 03:46, 9 March 2010 (EST)

Latest revision as of 08:47, 9 March 2010

Archives Archived Topics
Apr 2007-May 2007 [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The error|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The error]] • [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The error|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The error]] • [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The error|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The error]] • [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The error|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The error]] • [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The error|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The error]] • [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The error|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The error]] • [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The error|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The error]] • [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The error|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The error]] • [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The error|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The error]] • [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro]] • [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro]] • [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro]] • [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro]] • [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro]] • [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro]] • [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro]] • [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro]] • [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro]] • [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro]] • [[Talk:Timeline:October 2006/Archive 1#

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro|

Extension:DynamicPageList3 (DPL3), version 3.6.1: Error: MediaWiki\Extension\DynamicPageList3\Query::buildAndSelect: The DynamicPageList3 extension (version 3.6.1) produced a SQL statement which led to a Database error.<br/>The reason may be an internal error of DynamicPageList3 or an error that you made; especially when using parameters like 'categoryregexp' or 'titleregexp'. Usage of non-greedy <code>*?</code> matching patterns are not supported.<br/>The erro]]

Trial by Fire

  • Ignoring the entire mess of pointless crap above, the only thing that can be said with any certainty is that TBF takes place after the morning of October 4, when Peter and Nathan have the conversation referenced. Therefore, I have updated the timeline to reflect a date of "after October 3". We should not state, imply, infer, or otherwise assign any special significance to that which we don't know,
    • "We should not state, imply, infer, or otherwise assign any special significance to that which we don't know." WOW. You really need to take a good look at yourself and this Wiki you police before you make statements like that and "Nowhere on this Wiki do we state what's most likely as if it were fact." Too easily you expose yourself to be full of it. "David was murdered by Sylar in Chicago", "Hyde Park is 100 miles north of NYC", pagefuls of timeline dates without those annoying "approx"s... These and so much more must all be certainties so you never saw fit to remove or qualify them. Heaven forbid that they are in fact speculative approximations or else *gasp* you'd have to admit you've been wrong and arbitrary. --Mercury McKinnon 09:31, 9 May 2007 (EDT)
      • This really is delightfully entertaining. Not only am I now somehow personally responsible for "policing" all of the content on the entire Wiki, but the examples you've selected aren't even all that close to this one. First, neither of them is actually my edit, or an edit I've defended particularly strenuously. Second, "Hyde Park" has three options, not thirty, and only one of them is really all that likely (New Mexico is not Mexico, and New Hyde Park is not Hyde Park; the other one is 200 miles away--a bit of a drive for a weekend brunch), and as for "David", this is all explained during your "Ichi" silliness--articles need titles, and the "David" article never once claims that his name is actually David, unless you count the lead text, which merely needs scare quotes. Your ability to "reason" by inapt analogies and irrelevant information is really fun to watch.--Hardvice (talk) 13:03, 9 May 2007 (EDT)
  • ... and saying the novel took place on "approximately" any single date does exactly that. What we know is that the earliest it could be is the evening of October 4.--Hardvice (talk) 05:06, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
    • Thank you for your completely arrogant, all-knowing tone! That is such a great substitute for sound arguments to support your pronouncements! We know more than the earliest possible date of Trial By Fire, we know which dates it cannot be, and saying it happened "after October 4" is misleading because it includes even those impossible dates. Only a dense person would say that a statement of events occurring on a defensible approximate date is misinformative, rather than well-established academic practice. The webcomic does give clues that narrow down the date but you chose to ignore them to further your own claim that the-only-thing-we-know-is-"after October 3". But I'm done trying to appeal to the reason of those who are totally closed to it and dismiss contrary reasoning as "crap". --Mercury McKinnon 09:31, 9 May 2007 (EDT)
      • I personally don't see what's so arrogant or all-knowing about merely saying what we know, and not what we don't. Nathan stays one night in Vegas, so there's exactly one night in the month of October after the conversation which we can eliminate. We could come up with some mangled way of saying that it's "sometime after October 3th, excluding the one night Nathan's in Vegas, which might be the night of the 4th or the night of the 5th depending on what evidence you follow", but it seems pretty unnecessary to do so. No other night is "eliminated", and we have yet to even lock down the single "eliminated" night.--Hardvice (talk) 13:03, 9 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Completely agree Hardvice. Thank you for being a voice of reason. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 21:59, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
    • Well, isn't that a surprise. It's easier for the weak-minded to just say "I agree" and to bully those who question them than to actually address and prove such questioners wrong. --Mercury McKinnon 09:31, 9 May 2007 (EDT)
      • Personally, I'm very glad you're done trying to appeal our reason. Don't you know that there is no reasoning with weak-minded people like me? — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 11:58, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

String Theory and October Timeline

Given that Future Hiro pretty explicitly says he returned to October 4, 2006, I think we're going to have to accept the fact that the dates on Nathan's hotel receipt are off by one (says Oct 5-6; should be October 4-5). This would shift everything up one day; not only would this fill in October 3 (the "missing" day in most people's timelines, but it would place Future Hiro's visit on the evening of October 4th (end of Collision/beginning of Hiros) where it belongs. It also makes the hole in Niki's timeline slightly less problematic:

  • October 1 -- Drops off Micah; sees eclipse; kills thugs
  • October 2 -- Wakes up with dead thugs; picks up Micah; leaves
  • October 3 -- Buries thugs, visits Paulette; picked up by cop
  • October 4 -- Brought in by cop, seduces Nathan as Jessica

Her timeline still isn't perfect; she has to have left Micah at Tina's overnight and it still takes the cop an entire night to bring her in, but it's less absurd.--Hardvice (talk) 13:07, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

    • I doubt the receipt is wrong. More than likely, not everything in the episode occurs on the same day. All we do is move the instance of Hiro visiting peter to Oct 4.--Bob 13:25, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
      • Actually, it pretty much has to push all of the events of OGL and Collision back a day, because Peter and Mohinder have earlier interactions with Nathan, Eden, Isaac, and Simone (putting all of them on the same timeline; for example, since F.Hiro visits Peter the same day and shortly after Peter tried but failed to visit Isaac, Isaac's Collision events are locked on Oct 4 as well). Since Peter wakes up with Simone at the beginning of Collision, we know that morning takes place the day after OGL; Nathan's already leaving for Vegas that day (campaign manager tells him to "have a safe trip"). The only way to disconnect Nathan (and everyone he interacts with) from the same timeline, and to rectify the receipt, is to assume Nathan spent the rest of the day (and a night) in Vegas before visiting the Casino (if `we assume the receipt's date are correct, then if he went to the casino on the day he travels to Vegas the receipt would be Oct 4-6, not Oct 5-6). Nathan's events sliding back a day affects Niki's timetable Matt, Claire, and Hiro's events aren't tied to Peter & co., but all of their dates until Fallout are based only on the receipt, so if Nathan's timeline is off, then so is everybody else's. Moving just F.Hiro/Peter both creates unexplained gaps and forces events in which Peter or Mohinder (also on the train) have interactions with others that must take place before the meeting, but would be listed as taking place after the meeting.--Hardvice (talk) 15:29, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
  • With Mohinder confirming that Oct 4th was when he received his father's ashes, that puts Collision on 4 Oct. What I find in the problem that arises is that we assume all the events of an episode occur within the same day. We need to toy around a bit to shift individual events with time markers (like the receipt) so that those fit.--Bob 20:28, 1 May 2007 (EDT)
    • Right. I'm not saying we should assume all of the events of Collision take place on Oct 4. I'm saying that moving Peter and Mohinder's events necessarily moves Simone, Isaac, and Nathan's events. Moving Nathan's events moves his trip to Vegas since he leaves that day. Moving his trip to Vegas pretty much invalidates the hotel receipt, and that's the only basis for everybody else's dates. Here's how it's all hinged together:

Oct 4. Nathan/Mohinder --> Peter/Simone/Nathan --> Peter/Mohinder/Eden --> Peter/Mohinder/Isaac --> Peter/Mohinder/Future Hiro

Before Mohinder arrives, Nathan and his campaign manager discuss his trip to Vegas to get Linderman's contribution. As the limo pulls away, the manager tells him to have a good trip. (This is moderately weird in any case, as the campaign manager also goes to Vegas, but maybe they're just not on the same flight). It's possible Nathan doesn't leave for Vegas until the 5th, I guess, but that makes the whole conversation even weirder. If he goes to Vegas on the fourth, the receipt is wrong (or he slept at the airport or had a red-eye flight). If he goes to Vegas on the fifth, it's correct (they bill him for the sixth, but I'm guessing he missed checkout time, what with the whole attempted kidnapping and all). I haven't followed it down the line for the other characters who are locked on the 4th if we leave Nathan, Hiro, Niki, and Claire on the 5th (Claire's tied in because of Bennet's phone call from Sandra; Hiro's tied in because of his meeting with Nathan at the Fly By Night), but we should do so and see if having these characters a day apart for some events in Collision and Hiros creates problems the next time they interact. For example, Peter, Isaac, Eden, and Mohinder's Hiros events take place on the 5th (Peter tells Isaac they tried to visit him last night). The next big interaction between these two groups is in Better Halves when Eden calls Mr. Bennet. For this to work out, we have at least one missing day for Peter/Isaac/Eden/Mohinder: Peter and Isaac were last seen discussing the missing painting on the 5th in Hiros, a conversation which carries over to the opening of Better Halves. Mohinder was last seen on the subway on October 4th; he and Eden could be discussing his departure on the 5th (Peter's timeline), the 6th (one ep per day from the subway scene), or the 7th, but it has to be the 7th to fit with Claire/Bennet's timeline if we assume the receipt was correct (accident on the evening of the 5th, hospital on the 6th, fake parents on the 7th). Even if we put everybody on the same timeline, it's been at least one full day since he left with Peter (since Eden has to be on the same timeline as Bennet, this conversation has to take place on either the 6th (if the receipt is wrong) or the 7th (if the receipt is right).

This requires mapping it out character by character, I think.--Hardvice (talk) 13:13, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

  • This weekend, I'll put up a bunch of strings around my apartment for the timeline of each character and where they connect. How does that sound? Haha.--Bob 15:53, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
    • It's actually not far off from my plans, which is to print them out, cut them out, and lay them out on a big piece of butcher paper. Evidently Future Hiro knows how confusing this timeline is, even without possible dark futures.--Hardvice (talk) 16:58, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

Niki's Timeline

I agree with Hardvice about Niki's timeline, however I arrived at the same conclusion from an entirely different start point. Let me elaborate:

  1. The eclipse in Tokyo, happens the morning of 2nd October. During the eclipse, Hiro is in the rooftop of the Yamagato Industries where they're doing exercises. As the train for work arrived at 07:42:14 a.m. exactly, the time of the eclipse must be around 08.00 a.m. earliest -- as they also do those exercises before starting to work in the cubicles.
  2. Tokyo, Japan; is GMT+9 (UTC+9) whereas Nevada, LV, USA is GMT-8. DST is ended in the last Sunday of October, which was 29th of October in 2006. Thus LV was GMT-7 then, thus we get a total of 9+7=16 hours of difference between Tokyo and Nevada during the beginning of October.
  3. Therefore, if the eclipse occured around 08.00 a.m. in the morning in Tokyo, it means that then it was around 04.00 p.m. in Las Vegas, 06.00 p.m in Odessa and 07.00 p.m. in New York (Time of the Eclipse).
  4. Niki was at home (Nevada, LV) during the eclipse watching it through Micah's pinhole camera. (Around 04.00 p.m.) The thugs then attacked her, forced her to strip in front of them and the camera. Then Jessica came instead of Niki, tearing apart the thugs in the garage. Niki is unconscious, unaware and asleep. Then she wakes up to find the bodies, locks the garage and goes to pick up Micah.
  5. We have 2 options here: OR she woke up immediately and picked up Micah the same night, OR she woke up in the morning and then pick him up. In this timeline the first option is considered. However at least 4 hours pass on the way when she goes to pick Micah up. (Micah: Mom. Where've you been? I called you like four hours ago.) So, 4 hours + the time in the garage + the time on the way = AT LEAST 4.5 hours has passed. It's around 08.30 p.m.
  6. If you watch the episode again, you'll see that in both of the time (when Niki gets out of the garage and when she gets out of the car for being blacked-out), it's shiny, there's sun in the sky; it's day-time. Therefore the episode itself informs us that it's no more the same day, no more the day of the eclipse. We have nevertheless, no alternative then to consider option two; that's Niki overslept at the garage and pick up his son the in the morning (actually noon time) next day.
  7. Given the fact that also Future Hiro pretty explicitly says he returned to October 4, 2006, as Hardvice explained up, I suggest that we change the timeline of Niki. She can in no way have picked up Micah in October the first, as clearly seen in the episode. She did it on October 2.

--Janrodrigo 10:27, 17 September 2009 (EDT)

  • Hm, this is a nice break-down of things. The only thing I can think of is that Jessica talked to Micah before blacking out as Niki, and told him to spend the night there, and...no, there's no way to fix it. :(--Citizen 06:35, 21 September 2009 (EDT)
    • Yes, there's a way to fix it. Everything is SO connected. I think even the producers/writers did some little errors. We have to take One Giant Leap to October 3... and so on. It's explicitely stated that Future Hiro time-traveled to October 4 - not 5. We have to sometimes accept that some things in the same episode does not occur on the same day. Actually putting One Giant Leap on October 4 (which is actually Oct. 3) and the following episodes onward has been because of these two:
  1. Ando asking Hiro "Where have you been the last two days?" and
  2. The receipt of Montecito hotel.

But I tried each and every possible way on dozens of papers, accepting those two correct. It never worked in a rational way. The only rational and logical way using all the other canon sources, made it work -- but with the refutal of the above two. However I've a very sytematic idea about way it would have been very probable that these two are wrong. I'll explain it down. --Janrodrigo 07:16, 21 September 2009 (EDT)

One subtle thought by Kring, probably misunderstood by Loeb and followed by Green

First I want to make something clear. The title is just a theory or an assumption. It's definitely not said in order to blame any writer. The names could be different. It's just a possible example of how something might've been easily confused among the writers.

Secondly, I want to point out a concept. During the beginnings of the volume Genesis, a lot of events were occuring simultaneously both in the States and in Japan. In October; EST and Japan has 13 hours of difference and if you compare Nevada and Tokyo, they've 16 hours of difference. Sometimes during a rush (of the crew I mean), it's very probable to forget that when it is day x in the States, mostly it's day x+1 in Japan, depending on the hour.

So, let me elaborate how I told it's probable that the above two so-called canon info.s could have been prepared wrongly and how I came to that point.

  1. I was thinking some events separately, but somehow I'd to connect them. So, I'd few other questions in my mind, separate from those two.
  2. In Don't Look Back, the NYPD detective asks Hiro when he teleported to NY. He answers Yesterday. That answer shocked me. I started to think whether he stayed in NY for a day and then went to Isaac's loft and whether he arrived to NY on November 7th. All the other evidences speaks against these...(First of many his watch wouldn't show Oct 2.)
  3. Then, I realised. Our perception of days as human beings is different than the perception of the earth herself. What I mean is that, for the earth, in some specific region, it becomes a new day exactly at 00.00 a.m. But for us, a new day starts with the sunrise e.g. or when we wake up. It was nothing but natural for Hiro Nakamura to feel that he teleported/time-traveled the previous day. Because it was almost midnight. Then suddenly it's morning time, a new shiny day. It's nothing but natural that he would feel that he teleported the previous day.
  4. But if Hiro would've thought deeply while speaking with the police (which he couldn't have done, due to the shock of the dead Isaac and everything) he would've said that he came "today". Plus, probably he took his watch to 13 hours earlier, which means he had a total time of 1 hour and 9 minutes in New York (as his watch was showing 11.52). I supposed that "Tim Kring" must've thought about those thoroughly.
  5. But let's say that the writers has an understanding about some special things... like that Hiro came back to talk to Ando at Yamagato, in the morning of October 4th. (I'm now all speaking according to the Japanese Time, EST+13 hours) and that the same day they save the girl and then they fly.
  6. Then very naturally, in the rush of the production Loeb (or someone else) could've easily forget that the eclipse happened in October 2 in Japan and that the night of Oct. 2 Hiro time-traveled; instead thinking that it happened at October 1, further confirming his assumption (which he wouldn't take as an assumption but a fact) when Hiro says that he arrived "yesterday", thus misundersting Kring's subtelty.
  7. If we overlook all of these and accept the first canon-source above correct. (Ando, asking Hiro: Where've you been in the last two days?) Then Hiro arrives at Yamagato in the morning of October 5, speaks with Ando, saves the girl from the truck, flies to Los Angeles at least for ten hours (I also checked it out), they don't take any rest, they rent a car, they drive to Las Vegas (at least 4 hours, assuming they know well the roads), they go to the casino (when it's not afternoon yet -- there, Sakamato tells Niki that a politician is arriving this afternoon) and they gamble for hours, they cheat and they're thrown out of the casino; ALL AT THE SAME DAY. To me, it really makes little or no sense. I don't know if it make sense to others...
  8. Even if you add 16 hours because of the time difference. It's really very hard to conclude that it could be because then we would've to assume that they find a ticket immediately, they fly immediately and without transition and that they do all of these things in such a rush and without taking any rest. Even if we accept it such way, it becomes only consistent in their own timelines. It contradicts with other timelines, thus becoming inconsistent!
  9. OK, coming back to where I left: two episodes after that. Naturally Michael Green (or someone preparing Hiros) must've taken naturally Ando's sentence as a reference point and thus must've prepared that bill paper for Nathan, showing him arriving at the Montecito Hotel on the 5th and leaving on the 6th. But unfortunately this is wrong too. We've to accept that Nathan arrives on the 4th and leaves on the 5th. If not tons of inconsistencies occur in the timelines of many characters, not just of Niki and Hiro; also of Peter, Isaac, Claire, Mohinder, Noah and even Matt.
  10. We should not forget that all the characters are intertwined, they're connected. For example just after Isaac fights with Simone and after she leaves, Hiro calls Isaac, leaving him a message in Japanese. At that moment Hiro&Ando are on the spot where they'll save the schoolgirl from the truck. And again when Claire crushed the car with Brody and they're in the hospital, Sandra calls Noah. At that moment Noah and the Haitian is actually abducting Nathan. There're so many similar examples and thus canon sources in the episodes. Many other details also should be considered in each scene, such as whether it's day-time or night-time; whether it could be day time both in NY and in Tokyo; whether it's raining or not or is the sun rising or setting... thus we get many a clues directly from episodes.
  11. In the present form of the timeline of October 2006, there're many inconsistencies, dozens of questions and can-not-bes. And the only way to resolve almost ALL of those questions and inconsistencies, I found out, was to refute the correctness of the above two info (Ando's sentence and the bill). That is why I started to analyse why those two canon info.s could have been wrong. And thus I came to these points.
  12. I know that it's not easy to accept for some (even for me sometimes), that something shown or said in the episode could be wrong. However, if we take them as "correct", we're automatically refuting many other similar canon info.s from episodes and also creating lots of questions and how-comes. And I do not/and did not actually enter much into the inconsistencies here, as then I would've to write a really very long essay :)!
  13. I know and repeat that what I wrote in the title above is just a suggestion, but that's like a reflection of what I could conclude as the best. And that's not my point. My point is actually lies in the inconsistencies of the timelines.
  14. Therefore, I invite everyone to reflect deeply on these above written points. We should not forget that HeroesWiki is very important and also significant for the writers/the crew, as they easily can take a look at the wiki for information. If the wiki contains wrong canonical information or not prepared with enough care and attention, it might affect them, creating even more wrong canonical informations for the future, guided by the other ones here.
  15. So, what does everyone say?
  16. Do you (in plural), let me slide the dates of the episodes, each for one day, in condition that they are consistent with each other and all the canonical info.s, except those two? You can be sure that I WILL take back my action or accept when shown something really logical and correct. And I'm also willing to refute everything I said if proven wrong. That's the scientific and logical stand point.

Thank you and Sorry for the length,
Friendly & sincerely to everyone,
--Janrodrigo 10:11, 21 September 2009 (EDT)

  • O.0 Wow, wall of text. From what I can gather (not everything though, too much info at once), your timeline appears to be correct, I mean, it makes sense. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 12:29, 21 September 2009 (EDT)

Charlies Andrews death is now an alternate timeline.

The facts as simply as can be stated;

As we see in 'Homecoming' Charlie is killed by Sylar and witnessed by Hiro and Ando. Hiro's response is to time travel back 6 monthes in an attempt to save her. At which he fails.

But, as we see in 'Once Upon A Time In Texas' Hiro is both able to save Charlie and have her healed of her condition. Meaning that all evens from the moment Charlie starts opening the can to Hiro's return are now in another timeline. further Hiro is able to meet with and talk to Charlie in the episode 'Brave New World' demonstrating that she is still alive and her life was altered by the events of Volume 5.

I suggest this creates a temporal event, specifically an altered past. Her children, who would not have been born in that past, create an alternate future (i.e. her altered past is an altered future from the perspective of the shows timeline).

Just some food for thought, but potentially a consideration for the HeroesWiki staff as the 'Charlie Dies Timeline' is certainly not in the mainstream (only Hiro retains any knowledge of it).

Masterhiro

  • Yes, I agree that Hiro changed the course of events, and Charlie's death is now part of an altered timeline. Similarly, so are Soul Patch Hiro, Leather Clad Claire, and Caitlin's existence. :) -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 20:48, 7 March 2010 (EST)
    • I think what Masterhiro is trying to say is that we should consider somehow splitting information from the "Charlie Dies Timeline" from the ultimate "real timeline" presented in the show since "Once Upon a Time in Texas" (kind of like we do with the possible futures). That doesn't seem possible or feasible right now, but there are a few projects currently in the works that could revamp the timeline pages, and hopefully acknowledge the problem of our three-season "alternate timeline."--Tim Thomason 23:43, 7 March 2010 (EST)
      • I don't think we need to split the character. It's the same character....as opposed to the alternate future timelines, which feature characters who are markedly different than the characters in the present. That's not the case with Charlie's non-death. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 01:00, 8 March 2010 (EST)
        • So here we go, I think I have this straight in my head (The ep. is not available for my to review in detail currently.), have your favored pain releiver handy.

The current official timeline proceeds as such; Hiro and Ando arrive at the BTD. Hiro meets Charlie they start to fall in love. Sylar meets Charlie and covets her power. Sylar attempts to kill Charlie, but is saved by future Hiro who sends him to Odessa via bus. Future Hiro returns to Charlie, after sending himself to 6 months in the past to get to know her, who is starting to die from her condition. Future Hiro retrieves Sylar and has him repair the damage. Sylar finds a new sense of fear for dieing alone and unwanted. Charlie becomes angry with Future Hiro then they reconcile, they leave to go to Otsu but Samuel has Charlie transpported to the past where she has a family...etc. Hiro returns from the past, perhaps with somewhat less regret at having failed to save a Charlie he had no knowledge was about to die.

The Alternate timeline is as follows; Hiro and Ando arrive at BTD. Hiro meets Charlie they start to fall in love. Sylar meets Charlie and covets her power. Sylar kills Charlie and Hiro travels back 6 months to save her. Hiro fails teleporting back to Tokyo from which he sets out to rejoin Ando at the BTD, he is powerless and mournful because of his failure.

I don't believe Charlie should have seperate personas as a result of the events, but her lack of continued existance does create an alternate future. I.E. no descendents (that we know of), no spouse (that we know of) no life long freinds that would have developed , etc. So in the same sense that we would still call the explosion future an alternate 'future' even though the catalyst is in the shows objective past, it could be considered that the Charlie dies future fits the same alternate future criteria (lacking only in the regard of having canonical evidence of the results in the altered future, since we have to assume all canonical events post catalyst are the same). The events of the alternate future would be, Charlies death (Seven Minutes To Midnight) and Hiro's 'need' going back to the past to save her from Sylar only to fail (Seven Minutes To Midnight, Saving Charlie). These events in the normal timeline would be replaced with the new alterations (Sylar attempts to kill Charlie but is saved by future Hiro, Hiro travels to the past to foster a relationship with Charlie).

And to correct something I had stated before; the alternate past is something noone, not even Hiro would remember, considering that his experiences would be different when he went back to 'save' Charlie.

--Masterhiro 03:46, 9 March 2010 (EST)

Retrieved from "https://heroeswiki.ddns.net/index.php?title=Talk:Timeline:October_2006&oldid=173118"