Talk:List of Articles related to Sylar

Sylar as Patient Zero

• Red may have a point here. In Genesis, Mohinder says that his father was close to discovering Patient Zero. However he had already met Sylar six months prior. So doesn't this mean Sylar probably isn't Patient Zero? (Admin 00:24, 8 January 2007 (EST))
  • We have also NO Formal declaration that the Sureshs' said that Sylar is PZ.
    ~ ~ ~ ~ Red = 00:35, 8 January 2007 (EST)
  • Mohinder does tell Eden that his father told him he'd identified a patient zero, "a man called Sylar", when he tells her about the tape in Don't Look Back. His exact words are "I found a tape of a conversation my father had with a man named Sylar, a man he believed was Patient Zero."--Hardvice (talk) 01:03, 8 January 2007 (EST)
    • See, now, this is why it would behoove me to actually watch all the episodes. :) There is no formal declaration that Sylar is Patient Zero, true. But we know that Chandra believed Sylar was PZ (see Hardvice's comment above). As well, we know from 6MA that Sylar (um, Gabriel Gray) was the first evolvie Chandra met. That's enough evidence to call him Patient Zero. As for the "being close to discovering" comment, Chandra was still figuring out whether or not Sylar actually was. In the end he didn't know - but he believed Sylar to be PZ. We have to go with that. Otherwise, we should scrap the whole Patient Zero article. - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 01:18, 8 January 2007 (EST)
    • The tape could be six months old, and the reason why it got left behind or dumped on the floor.
      ~ ~ ~ ~ Red = 01:20, 8 January 2007 (EST)
      • Well, it has to be from at least after Gabriel killed Brian Davis, because it refers to Sylar, not Gabriel Gray. But either way, something on the tape makes Mohinder say that Chandra believed Sylar was Patient Zero.--Hardvice (talk) 01:22, 8 January 2007 (EST)
      • And I for one have come to believe the whole "I'm close to discovering my Patient Zero" statement was just Chandra trying to distance Mohinder from his research again. He wanted to protect Mohinder from ridicule and ostracism, as we saw in 7MTM and Homecoming. Being purposefully vague about his research is just another way to do so.--Hardvice (talk) 01:24, 8 January 2007 (EST)
        • • Again Mohinder's statement maybe based on CS's old Notes. Also Brian Davis Also proves that he developed his powers earlier than Gray's, not to mention Claire, Eden, Haitian, Hana, Nathan, Peter and Sanjog.
            ~ ~ ~ ~ Red = 01:28, 8 January 2007 (EST)
            • But we have no idea what Chandra meant by Patient Zero. Mohinder says his father was close to finding "his" Patient Zero, not "the" patient zero. It's possible he merely meant his first evolved human ... which would be Gabriel Gray. All we know for sure, then, is that according to Mohinder, at some point, Chandra believed Sylar was "his" patient zero. That's all the article can positively state at this point.--Hardvice (talk) 01:31, 8 January 2007 (EST)
              • We need to remember that we're not trying to figure out who Patient Zero is. We're just reporting what Chandra believed. And that fact was pretty clearly stated by Mohinder, even if it is erroneous. - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 01:35, 8 January 2007 (EST)
                • I've made it clearer in the Patient Zero article that what we have is effectively hearsay ... it's Mohinder reporting Chandra's beliefs. We can't know for sure that Chandra didn't later change his mind, or that he wasn't lying to Mohinder, or anything of the sort. All we know is that Mohidner believes that Chandra believed Sylar was Patient Zero.--Hardvice (talk) 01:43, 8 January 2007 (EST)

For the Elements Section

If a template exists, should we just put that in there instead?

Template:Sylar would look good in that section instead of 7+ big boxes. Nevermind, it would link back to itself. --Bob 18:11, 26 March 2007 (EDT)

Eek

Not a big fan of moving this one since it's the "list page" for the template. I'd rather have a redundant portal-style article and the list article, to be honest. It's more consistent with the other article series, not all of which are going to have Related Articles portals. At the very least, we should update the template to point to the proper page, but it seems like there's not a 100% match between the article series and the portal.--Hardvice (talk) 18:26, 26 March 2007 (EDT)

See Also

The See Also section doesn't appear to be corectly placed. The table must be broken. It needs repair! --FrenchFlo(talk)(contribs) 18:30, 26 March 2007 (EDT)