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:List of evolved humans
| Archives | Archived Topics |
|---|---|
| Jan-Feb 2007 | David Berman(Actor) - Brian Davis(Character) • Sanjong/Sanjonp Iher • Shanti • Niki • Distinguish Between Show, Map, and List • Pam/Pan Green • Valcek... Valcan • Clairvoyance • Unnamed 3 (male) • More New Unnameds (from HD Screen Caps) • Potentiallys • Interactive list • Thirty Six Individuals. • Future Hiro • Eden McCain • Listing acquired powers • James Walker (confirmed Freeze Power) • Why Not Include the Genesis Files as Source Material • Asterick infinite |
Linderman
- Just to further compound things: the clip they showed at the Paley Festival doesn't confirm that Linderman is an evolved human. It confirms that he claims to be an evolved human. He should be added to this page when he displays a power, not when he says he has one.--Hardvice (talk) 15:59, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
- That's why I entered it commented out. Hopefully it will keep others from coming along after seeing the spoilers that he will have a power, and adding him prematurely, when the see the commented entry already there. This is no difference than the precedence we have done in the past with Candace and Dale. Both of them were listed before it was confirmed, yet commented out to deter anyone from adding them prematurely. --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 03/15/2007 16:06 (EST)
- Right. I just don't want somebody to see that scene, which doesn't prove he's evolved, and restore it.--Hardvice (talk) 16:24, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
- I just added clarification comments within the comments themselves...hopefully that will be enough to prevent any premature showing of that row by any semi-conscious, non-trolling person. --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 03/15/2007 16:36 (EST)
- Technically, the difference is that Candace and Dale were true spoilers--we already knew they had powers before they appeared. Heck, Candace was on the list, so we knew she had powers months ago. Here, Linderman is saying he has powers, and that's not always to be trusted. ... However, Malcolm McDowell did tell Entertainment Weekly he had a power, which I tend to believe a bit more than the scene referenced.... Personally, I don't mind having Linderman here commented out, I just don't think it's necessary. If somebody comes along and adds him to the list, then we should either delete it until it airs, or comment it out. By putting it in early, I feel it encourages adding spoilers to pages early. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 17:48, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
- Right. I just don't want somebody to see that scene, which doesn't prove he's evolved, and restore it.--Hardvice (talk) 16:24, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
- That's why I entered it commented out. Hopefully it will keep others from coming along after seeing the spoilers that he will have a power, and adding him prematurely, when the see the commented entry already there. This is no difference than the precedence we have done in the past with Candace and Dale. Both of them were listed before it was confirmed, yet commented out to deter anyone from adding them prematurely. --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 03/15/2007 16:06 (EST)
Reformat
If we get rid of the actor column (which is out-of-world info in an in-world article), and merge the status column with the name (i.e. "Brian Davis (deceased)", then we can get rid of the cryptic codes in the source column and opt for things like "The List", "The Map", "The Journal". Thoughts?--Hardvice (talk) 02:10, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
- So you can see the difference and to make maintenance easier, I added a template. Here's a version of what I'm talking about:
- The "deceased" reflexes are automatic, and allow for either just a "deceased" notation (like Felipe Acerra) or a link to Sylar's victims (like Charlie). The links for powers, names, and locations are also automatic. See Template:Evolved for a rundown of how it works. Having a template will also allow us to make major changes to the formatting of the table with minimal adjustments to the template itself, so we should probably switch to a template even if we keep the current layout.--Hardvice (talk) 02:39, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
- Your proposed changes to the table improve it I think. --Mercury McKinnon 06:17, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
- Yeah I also can't disagree but we need to add CM and CC in the Glossary but CM is already used for Company Man so what's next ? -- FrenchFlo (talk) (contribs) 06:23, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
- Great changes. I, for one, am so glad to see the actor's name removed from this list...I find the parenthetical "(deceased)" note a bit superfluous. If the name is italicized, that should be enough. Maybe have a note at the top that says "Names in italics represent deceased characters". — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 07:06, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
- Sounds good but italic isn't enough euh... visible ? I mean the page should be clear in a 1second look, and italic vs non-italic isn't pretty easy to see unless you stay a moment reading. Can't we just
"dont know the word"them ? -- FrenchFlo (talk) (contribs) 07:09, 28 March 2007 (EDT)- That's fine. Personally, I think the italics stand out enough, but if you don't, then can leave the "deceased" on there. I don't think
strikingthem out would be a good idea since it kind of gives the impression that they don't even belong on the list. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 07:21, 28 March 2007 (EDT)- Well that's up to, I didn't thought about that face of the striking thing and I agree but I still believe that italic isn't enough. I mean, when they were in red, it was clear who was or wasn't alive, but italic isn't fast as red to detect. That's just my point of view and I don't think it should be considered as a consensus :) What do you think of something like that, using the ascii cross alt+0134 :
- That's fine. Personally, I think the italics stand out enough, but if you don't, then can leave the "deceased" on there. I don't think
- Sounds good but italic isn't enough euh... visible ? I mean the page should be clear in a 1second look, and italic vs non-italic isn't pretty easy to see unless you stay a moment reading. Can't we just
- Your proposed changes to the table improve it I think. --Mercury McKinnon 06:17, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
| Name | Power | Location | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
| <span id="† Diego Vela5">† Diego Vela5 | Unknown | Unknown | The List |
As you wish! -- FrenchFlo (talk) (contribs)
- Looks good, much cleaner list. --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 03/28/2007 07:57 (EST)
- I'd rather just have the italics or "(deceased)". I don't think the "†" is necessary. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 14:18, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
- Looks good, much cleaner list. --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 03/28/2007 07:57 (EST)
Footnotes
Currently "Chandra's journal entries" are out of sequence and "Amid Halebi"'s note may not be needed anymore. I was going to change them but was wondering if there was a better way. Would it be possible to use footnotes like at Wikipedia? Would this require a plugin or is it a template? -Lөvөl 13:02, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
- Heh, I thought about that too. I justified it by telling myself that they're pretty much in order by column, not alphabetically. (Though footnote #3 is still out of whack). I don't think we should get rid of the Amid note. Without doing any research into wikipedia's footnote system, I think they use templates, but I'm not positive. However, we are not real heavy on the footnotes -- if we don't use the episode or GN as a reference, we cite our source right in the article. And I only know 2 or 3 other pages that utilize footnotes -- I'm not sure it's worth trying to copy Wikipedia. ... I'll change the numbers now so I don't feel so bugged about it. :) — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 13:09, 29 March 2007 (EDT)