User talk:Referos/proposal

After the fact....

I'm assuming you want comments for the draft posted here as opposed to the talk page for the current naming conventions. I was thinking of things that could be added here and one rule I thought of (concerning my Flint/water-control analogy) would be that if an ability is given a canon name BEFORE a major ability development, it may no longer be appropriate after.

To use the aforementioned hypothetical situation, Flint's ability was explicitly named "pyrokinesis" in an assignment tracker, which is something we generally regard as the most reliable source for ability names. However, if (in a universe where Flint was still alive) he suddenly was able to control water along with fire, could we honestly let his ability remain pyrokinesis just because it was named before the development (and, ostensibly, before whoever named the ability was aware of this aspect) happened? In my mind, at least, we wouldn't be going against a canon source because the source was simply no longer relevant. An exception to this rule, however, would telepathy. Parkman's ability turned from simple mind-reading to thought control, thought projection, mental insertion, dream manipulation and precognition, but it was still referred to as telepathy by multiple sources. Therefore, while Flint's ability should be up for debate again, Parkman's ability would have to remain telepathy. Just a possible guideline we could keep in mind.--PJDEP - Need further explanation? 19:25, 25 December 2009 (EST)