Talk:Susan Amman

Suzanne's last name

Is this what we decided her name is? I see "Suzanne Amman". -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 19:04, 20 November 2007 (EST)

• To me, it looks like it could be either "Ammaw" or "Amman". The handwriting is not clear, but it does look like it could be a "w" as the last letter.--MiamiVolts (talk) 19:10, 20 November 2007 (EST)
  • "Amman" is a much more common last name than "Ammaw". But it could be a number of things, so it worries me that we're saying it's Ammaw. I'd rather move the article to just "Suzanne" and put the last name in the notes since her last name is ultimately unknown. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 19:20, 20 November 2007 (EST)
    • Yeah, if we're not sure possibly best to make it "Suzanne" and add both last names as redirects. I'd like to get some more input before we move it, though, so I'll add a rename tag.--MiamiVolts (talk) 20:13, 20 November 2007 (EST)
      • I've just never heard of "Ammaw", but I have heard of "Amman". However, I don't want to say it's one or the other, or that it's not one or the other if we don't know/can't read the writing. A rename tag is a good idea. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 20:16, 20 November 2007 (EST)
        • It definitely looked like "Ammaw" to me. Maybe you're just getting old. :) --Hero!^(talk)_(contribs) 20:18, 20 November 2007 (EST)
          • The name is in the episode, so if someone with HD can get a better closeup, we might be able to tell for sure.--MiamiVolts (talk) 20:18, 20 November 2007 (EST)
            • I sharpened it a little, not much help (a little clearer but only a tad), but I did notice that the last letter matches the N's in Daniel, Linderman, Parkman, and Angela. I definitely think it's Amman.--Riddler 20:22, 20 November 2007 (EST)
              • So do I, but it's still not really perfectly clear, now, is it? I'd much rather see this page simply named "Suzanne" with the possible last names in the notes...that seems like a much better alternative than trying to figure out what the name really is, or having a bunch of zealous fans--yes, even us old farts--"decide" what it says. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 20:29, 20 November 2007 (EST)
                • Gramble isn't clear at all either (though I did make that call myself, I can sort of make out the letters myself) but people might argue it... same for Mendez... Would we do the same for them?--Riddler 20:30, 20 November 2007 (EST)
                  • I don't care about Carlos--I can read "Mendez" very clearly, so I'm personally fine with it as is. "Gramble" is less clear, but because it matches a name on the list, it seems confirmed to me ("Out of the mouth of two or more witnesses..."). If there were a person on the list or somewhere named "Suzy Ammaw" or "Sue Amman" or something even slightly resembling the name, then I'd make the leap of faith. But since it seems like a completely novel name, written in poor handwriting and viewed as very grainy even after an HD transfer, I'd say we shouldn't try to guess it. Let's just report what we know. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 20:36, 20 November 2007 (EST)
                    • The shot we have now is from HD. It isn't blurry because it's lacking resolution. It's blurry because it's moving. That frame was the least blurry. I'll see if I can grab any others where her name is clearer, but it's not likely possible.--Hardvice (talk) 22:42, 20 November 2007 (EST)

                    • 

                      I took shots from a few frames here. I'm about 90% sure it says Amman, which is more sure than I am of Suzanne (Suzette? Sue Ellen? Samantha?), but still far from confirmed.--Hardvice (talk) 22:55, 20 November 2007 (EST)

Any chance it could be 'Aswan'? Because that would make it match another name on the list (Abu Aswan, and it would make all three be consistent members of the list. (Assuming she is either the wife of Abu, or Abu is her nickname). --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 11/20/2007 23:14 (EST)

• While I can't be sure what it is, I'd say it's definitely not Aswan (unfortunately). The first two letters are definitely "Am", and it really looks like "Amman".--Hardvice (talk) 02:15, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Consensus Vote: Amman or Ammaw

We've all had time to now review closely her last name...let's do a consenus vote, is it 'Amman' and not 'Ammaw'? --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 11/21/2007 08:33 (EST)
1) Vote for Amman

2) Vote for Ammaw

I really don't like the idea of a vote. A last name is not something that's decided by consensus. Her last name is one thing and one thing only, and no amount of voting is going to change that. It's not like a power name, which really is different than a person's name because powers don't necessarily have names, and certainly more than one name can describe the power (hence redirects). But the lady's name either is Amman or Ammaw or something else--even if we have a unanimous vote that it's one thing does not mean it's necessarily right. I'd rather move the article to something we can be pretty sure about, and then discuss the name in the notes, or at least present the facts in the notes. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 12:37, 21 November 2007 (EST)

• It's really simple, and shouldn't be a big deal. Just pick whichever name seems to be the most consensus, and keep it until something more clear in canon comes along and says our variation needs adjusting. Until then, we keep it, and wait. This should be similar to when we started with 'Candace'....which at first seemed to be the proper canon name, and then later, after more canon evidence pointed to 'Candice', we switched it. Keeping one of the two variations until a more concise one might come out, is better than removing the name altogether. At least with a name, people have something to reference the woman with in discussion. A note doesn't help with that. Heck, if the last letter is really the uncertain point, then rename her lastname to Amma* until more clarity comes around. Any form of the name, is better than no last name. --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 11/21/2007 15:07 (EST)
  • I agree. Let's pick the most likely name, my vote is for Amman. The first name is actually more uncertain. Make the main article the most likely contender, put redirects on the secondary contenders, and put a note in the first paragraph of the article stating that the name is not certain (similar to what wikipedia does when the title of the article is incorrect because of the way the database formats title capitalization). --Jackdavinci 15:26, 22 November 2007 (EST)
  • Candice's name was unmistakably spelled "Candace" on the list. We weren't guessing at the spelling, we knew it. Right now we're guessing at it. I disagree that any form of the name is better. I think accuracy is better than having a name just for the sake of having a name or for the sake of referring to her in discussions. We don't know her name and we're discussing her just fine. I wouldn't mind redirects from all variants to the page, but I think it's really important to strive for accuracy over completeness. What's wrong with having just a first name, especially if all variants of the last name redirect to her? -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 15:22, 21 November 2007 (EST)
    • We can't read Suzanne clearly either, by the way guys. We should just name her "Blonde of the twelve" or something, and mention in notes that her initials are S.A., but the name is illegible.--Riddler 15:35, 21 November 2007 (EST)
      • I'm not sure why she needs an article right now. We have no confirmed name, no name on the list, no power, or anything. I think anything that can be said about her at this point can be said on Group of twelve.--Hardvice (talk) 15:36, 21 November 2007 (EST)

AfD

• The article can't be named "Suzanne Ammaw" or even "Suzanne" since the source of the information is way too unclear to make either out with any certainty. We can wait until after tonight's episode, but if it's not clarified by then this article needs to be renamed to something generic like "Group of twelve female 1" like we do with Chandra's journal entries or deleted entirely until we have some accurate portion of her name to work with. Since the article doesn't really provide any useful information above and beyond what's on the Group of twelve article I'd suggest just deleting it until there's more information. (Admin 16:07, 26 November 2007 (EST))
  • I think that's probably the best solution. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 16:20, 26 November 2007 (EST)
  • I concur.--Bob (talk) 16:23, 26 November 2007 (EST)
  • Ditto. Incidentally, is it time we begin to formalize a cruft policy?--Hardvice (talk) 17:00, 26 November 2007 (EST)