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.

Difference between revisions of "Talk:List of evolved humans/Archive 2"

From Heroes Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>PJDEP
(New page: {{archivepage}}{{tocright}} ==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 tha...)
 
imported>PJDEP
(New page: {{archivepage}}{{tocright}} ==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 tha...)
(No difference)

Revision as of 14:21, 5 March 2010

Archive.jpg WARNING: Talk:List of evolved humans/Archive 2 is an archive of past messages. New messages should be added to Talk:List of evolved humans. Archive.jpg

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)

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 striking them 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 :
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)

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)
  • The <ref> system does not appear to be built in to MediaWiki, but it doesn't use templates. It maust be an add-on. It might be worth getting, though. It would make this a lot easier to maintain.--Hardvice (talk) 14:15, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
    • Ah, others looking for footnotes! I've been meaning to use the <ref> and </references> system (called Cite.php) at this Wiki for the longest time. (It was what I had in mind as a way to include and mark several canon statements that are seemingly conflicting by using a linked footnote to easily point out the conflict to readers.) Yes, Cite.php is an extension. You can find out more about it here.

Location tab

We need some clarification on this section. First, is it a birthplace or last known location? Since our heroes are moving around the country/world throughout the series, I think the location to refer to a permanent residence of sorts. For example, Hiro resides in Tokyo, was born in Osaka, and is currently in New York. I think Tokyo would be the correct location to place. Hana resides in Montana, though she's been all over the place lately. So, I think we should stick with what people would consider "home" for location: the location of their main domicile.--Bob 17:44, 3 May 2007 (EDT)

  • Agreed. Given several of the character's seeming ability to cross the globe in seconds (i.e. HRG in Genesis), I think noting current locations is asking for trouble. I for one would prefer just confirmed residences--which works nicely since the whole reason the column is there is for people from the list and the journal, which list home locations.--Hardvice (talk) 17:51, 3 May 2007 (EDT)
    • Absolutely. I mainly added this due to the back and forth with regards to the Crane boy and others whose residence may not be known, but a location is. In this case, a simple "unknown" or nothing at all would be sufficient.--Bob 17:54, 3 May 2007 (EDT)
      • When I first added the location column to this page as it was being morphed into the grid, the intent was of 'prominent' or 'important' location; not birthplace. In the case of crane-boy, the only reference location we have on him is Odessa, so it should remain until another more prominent location is given. 'unknown' gives no information.....and is worthless as a resource tool. This page is a resource page on evolved humans and should help give us info on them, not hide info about them. IMO. --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 05/3/2007 18:01 (EST)
        • The location column should really match the "Home" line from the character boxes. (In fact I think "Location" should be changed to "Home" on the list of evolved humans.) When we start saying that something is "prominent or important" it opens up a huge window of speculation and subjective judgments. Hiro has been in NYC and Vegas much more than he has been in Japan, but it would not make sense for him to have anything but Tokyo as his location. Some characters have lived in more than one place (we know Hana lived in Israel and Montana, Eden lived in LA, NYC, and Utah) so it would make sense that they have more than one location listed. But just because a character is seen in one place or because they spend a lot of time there does not make it their home. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 15:26, 4 May 2007 (EDT)

Canon and Near-Canon Inclusion

Historically, this page has been an all-inclusive listing of Canon (Episodes) and Near-Canon (GNs, Heroes 360, Journal). I just found today, that the Heroes 360 AE site has a new Mailbag tab, (that is uneditable by the public unlike the AE wiki), that lists two new people with evolved powers that should probably be listed on this page for documentation. (Rick H., and Matt S.) Perhaps we should bust this page out into two lists, a confirmed primary canon list, and a suspect/secondary canon list....I'm not sure if that is best or not. But if we only hold this page as a list of primary canon only, we would have to remove alot of people from it. I think it best serves the Heroes community as an all-inclusive resource list for documentation; not one that is too scrutinized so that it only contains primary canon sources.

This page, is the most inclusive and fully documented list that exists that I am aware of, from all Heroes sites, for documenting Evolved Humans, or possible/suspected evolved humans. I would hate to see it diminish instead of grow.

Regardless, we should probably update the leading paragraph of this page explaining the 'canon' criteria, and linking to the Canon page so others will be clear on the inclusion rules. --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 06/26/2007 16:28 (EST)

  • I don't think we need to link to a help page from the intro text of a page. That seems really awkward and unnecessary--one's an actual content page, the other is a behind-the-scenes meta page about this Wiki. And I don't really think the mailbag falls within the "near canon" scope of other Heroes 360 content because it appears to be fan-submitted (according to the AE.org main page), so it's really no different than me saying I'm an evolved human and adding myself to the list.--Hardvice (talk) 16:43, 26 June 2007 (EDT)
    • I agree 'if' it is possible to submit emails to the mailbag...but from what I can determine about it, it is no different than Hiro's blog....only official NBC Hero people can update it....not regular people like you and me. It therefore is a list 'they' have created, no different than Hiro's Blog entries....or Hana's entries....or the entries on the other 360 sites. If you can determine that regular people like us can submit to the mailbag, then I agree that Rick H. and Matt S. should not be listed. --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 06/26/2007 16:47 (EST)
      • It's more like the tips on Hana's blog. On Hana's blog, you sent text messages, and NBC posted them. Some were pretty ridiculous and definitely not canon. On AE.org, you send an email to Mohinder's address (which used to be on the front page of the wiki, with a suggestion to email him, back when I could get the wiki to come up--screenshot here) and NBC posts them. It's still fan-created content, even if it's moderated through NBC.--Hardvice (talk) 16:52, 26 June 2007 (EDT)
        • The letters seem to be written in universe, so they are ether written by NBC or they only picked fan letters that were in universe (which they didn't seem to do on Hana's website), they also removed any way for fans to send more so the frist is more likely. They are still non cannon though, but so are the names on the interactive map, especially Joe Landers. Ether all the non canon should be moved or include these and have a note like the others. -Lөvөl 13:05, 29 June 2007 (EDT)
          • Since this is ultimately an encyclopedia/resource site for all things Heroes, I think we should be inclusive not exclusive in our list of Evolved Humans. Otherwise, who is going to have a more complete and thorough documented resource? Before we ever got to a point of considering exclusion or removal, we should simply restructure our list(s) to be explanatory enough to allow all Evloved Humans to be included and documented. The webspace isn't suffering, and until NBC starts to through out evolved humans by the hundreds that we can't keep up with to document, we should do our best to have the most complete list. My point in starting this discussion really had nothing to do with inclusion/exclusion from the list based on canon, but moreso whether separate groupings of the list should be made with consideration of the levels of canon. --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 06/29/2007 13:16 (EST)
          • Reading through them they appear to me to be fan-created. It looks like they just picked ones that were well-written and in-universe. Since they're fan-written and not mentioned elsewhere their canonicity (even extending as far as near-canonical sources) is highly suspect. They shouldn't be included on this page unless we see them mentioned elsewhere on a truely canonical or near-canonical source. When canonicity is in doubt, err on the side of non-inclusion. On pages focusing on canonical information (which is virtually every page short of user pages, fan creations, theories, and spoilers), the canonicity must be satisfied primarily above all other things. It wouldn't make sense, for instance, for me to call myself an evolved human on a page focusing on canonical information just because I want to pretend to be one. (Admin 13:21, 29 June 2007 (EDT))
          • Your latter reasoning is sound, but here is where your former reasoning falls short. In this case, the NBC powers-that-be who choose to populate near-canon information (Heroes 360 sites in this case), chose to populate the AE Mailbag with two evolved humans. That puts the NBC near-canonical stamp on it, in a way none of us could do to any other webpage. NBC decides which mailbag entries it chooses to show for Heroes 360 in no different manner as it decides what to show on Hiro's blog or the Primatech Paper website. It isn't fans choosing what is listed there. So if we say Heroes 360 is near-canonical, and there is no way for regular joes like us to submit and approve a listing of an evolved human to a Heroes 360 page, then it should still fall in the realm of near-canonical....(if Heroes 360 continues to be handled as near-canonical). Right now, both of us could try as hard as we possibly can to create and get a Evolved Human character added to any of the Heroes-360 sites, but unless NBC decides to allow and 'stamp it', we can't do it. Since NBC chose to publish a mailbag on 360 with two evolved human entries within it, we should allow NBC's choice to stand, because they (NBC-Heroes), not you, I, or some other fan 3 months ago....had the final say on that inclusion on that 360 site. See my point? --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 06/29/2007 14:09 (EST)
            • However Hana's blog is also Heroes 360 and received a large number of postings that wouldn't realistically be considered near-canon. We can't assume that fan content posted on a Heroes 360 site has any type of implied approval in terms of canonicity. (Admin 14:29, 29 June 2007 (EDT))

Just to say

I have my own list that was made before I knew about this. It only has named people and as IO state at the beginning, I've made my own personal guesses (i.e. David Berman was killed my Sylar) so please don't edit it, it's for my use and I'll just get rid of it later. Therequiembellishere 03:46, 20 November 2007 (EST)

U got a couple of the names wrong -_-" --(. .') 05:53, 19 February 2008 (EST)

No, I make the Petrelli's more of a family. :-) Because I'm sure you have every thing perfect in your infinite knowledge of the show. Therequiembellishere 18:19, 19 February 2008 (EST)

Power Names

If one was to click on Digital Communication for Hana on her article or on this list it takes you to Electronic Communication. Shouldn't Digital Communication link to Digital Communication or shouldn't the list and and her article say Electronic Communication? Right now Drucker on this list and on his article both say & link to Electronic Communication.--Snow Leapord 08:23, 28 February 2008 (EST)

  • They are different names for the same ability, the names were given on their Assignment Tracker case files on primatechpaper.com. Electronic communication is a more general term and Digital communication is more modern. -Lөvөl 10:57, 28 February 2008 (EST)
    • It's ridiculous that we have one person listed as Electronic and another as Digital and they both link to Electronic. It should be consistent. --Snow Leapord 20:08, 28 February 2008 (EST)
      • I agree, I wish it could be consistent, but we didn't make the distinction. Whether purposeful or accidental, the primatechpaper.com tracker files list them as such, therefore we do too. But it actually does make a bit of sense to me: if Drucker had been using his powers back in the '70s or earlier, the term "digital" would have made very little sense--his power would have been manifest through electronic devices. Hana discovered her power in September 2006, well into the digital age. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 20:22, 28 February 2008 (EST)
  • Since Drucker used his in the Digital Age as witnessed in the GNs then his is also Digital and thus should be changed to Digital as well and the article for the power renamed. --Snow Leapord 20:34, 6 May 2008 (EDT)
    • Not exactly. We need to list them how the assignment tracker lists them, since they are both mainly Heroes Evolutions characters; and the assignment tracker lists Drucker as "electronic".--MiamiVolts (talk) 20:45, 6 May 2008 (EDT)
      • Take that first sentence and get rid of Not and you will be correct. Both have the same power and both used them in the digital age thus they are either both electronic or both digital, both ways won't cut it. --Snow Leapord 20:47, 6 May 2008 (EDT)
        • But they don't have the same power. Their abilities are so similar we have the same article but that doesn't mean they are exactly the same, and if the Company thought they had the same power they'd name it the same but they don't.--MiamiVolts (talk) 20:54, 6 May 2008 (EDT)
          • The GNs show differently. They showed them doing exactly the same thing. Drucker's file was obviously written as if it was written before the digital age, and since the last update The Company did they had no reason to revise his file further except to mark him deceased, at that point it would be moot to clarify the power as digital. They have the same power just like the Father & Son Parkman have the same power. --Snow Leapord 21:02, 6 May 2008 (EDT)
          • Huh? Bob knew Drucker was alive. That's why he tortured Goose and turned him into a golden statue.--MiamiVolts (talk) 21:11, 6 May 2008 (EDT)
            • Knowing one is alive and and having something to update a file with is another. Now Bob knows he is dead since he intentionally had the computer he consciousness was in destroyed. --Snow Leapord 21:16, 6 May 2008 (EDT)
              • They learned he was in the computer mainframe. That was new information.--MiamiVolts (talk) 21:20, 6 May 2008 (EDT)
              • And then they killed him, unless they expected him to some how miraculously survive adding that to his file would be pretty much be a waste of time. --Snow Leapord 21:25, 6 May 2008 (EDT)
                • Stranger things have happened. ;)--MiamiVolts (talk) 21:43, 6 May 2008 (EDT)
        • Heroes Wiki does not exist to determine whether or not two people had the same power, to "create" names for abilities, or to guess the nature of what evolved humans can do. We are exist to chronicle the world of Heroes. The power names come from the assignment tracker pages. Since the files list their powers as different names, so do we. It's also mentioned that they have the same power, so both digital communication and electronic communication link to the same page. This is the best way to note that they have the same power, yet different names for the same thing. Think of it as calling a carbonated beverage "soda" if you're from one area of the country and "pop" if you're from another. Same thing, but we respect the language used in different areas. Same power, but we respect the names given in the assignment tracker profiles. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 22:38, 6 May 2008 (EDT)

Suspected by the Company?

Why are these in a separate list? We have had others who have been mentioned as having a power but they never demonstrated it, like Khufu and the Middle school boy. What makes these different? If you want them differentiated add a footnote or something. -Lөvөl 03:10, 22 May 2008 (EDT)

  • I agree, it's really odd to separate them. Many of the people on this page come from the list, which really is just a list of people suspected by Chandra, I suppose. I mean, Claire was originally on that list until her father asked for her to be removed (Six Months Ago), and that was before she ever manifested any ability. I think if the Company says the guy in Levittown can teleport, then he can teleport. If Penny, Elle, and Thompson II go after a Croatian who can manipulate weather, then he's an evolved human, just like everybody else on this page. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 07:37, 22 May 2008 (EDT)
    • I was thinking a separate list for those suspected by the Company but that had not demonstrated an ability to the viewer was appropriate. I removed the separation for now.--MiamiVolts (talk) 12:34, 22 May 2008 (EDT)
      • In general, I don't think it's always necessary to see a manifestation of a power to have confirmation that the individual is an evolved human. The Crane boy is a good example--he had a test performed which confirmed his status, but he never manifested a power. Many of the people on the list fall under this category, too. I don't know how the agents of the Company know what they know, but if they say somebody has a power, I think at this point in time we should take that as confirmation enough in most cases....Thanks for making the switch back over. Looks good. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 21:22, 22 May 2008 (EDT)

Posthuman

The German's Assignment Tracker profile says "the subject was a posthuman capable of manipulating metal" so apparently we now have an explicit term to refer to those who have special abilities. Should we change all instances of "evolved human" to "posthuman"?--Referos 13:55, 15 July 2008 (EDT)

  • (bump)--Referos 13:01, 21 July 2008 (EDT)
    • Hmmm how cannon are the Assigment trackers? Have they not been called evolved humans from more cannon sources?--Skywalkerrbf 13:08, 21 July 2008 (EDT)
      • Any content from Heroes Evolutions is near-canon, so episodes are above the Assignment Tracker, but I think we consider the webisodes and graphic novels more reliable in case of a contradiction. In any case, I don't remember if "evolved human" was used in a canon source or if it's just a fan-created term.--Referos 13:17, 21 July 2008 (EDT)
  • Ok, I've added the rename template just to call some attention since this topic remains unnoticed.--Referos 18:17, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
    • I think evolved human was a term mentioned by Chandra/Mohinder in an episode.--MiamiVolts (talk) 18:29, 23 July 2008 (EDT)
        • Assignment tracker is a near-canon source and episodes are the top canon source so we stick with evolved humans. There are plenty of different names for these people but evolved humans is the most frequent so I think we should stick with it. Homo superior is technically what they are, but w/e. lol. Jason Garrick 23:33, 24 July 2008 (EDT)
          • Homo superior is just a stupid designation used in X-Men, while "posthuman" is a term used in transhumanism.

Anyway, after searching a bit to see where the term "evolved human" originated, I've found (more like unearthed, actually) the following comment from Ryan in the archive of the empathic mimicry discussion, dating from 1/30/07:

[...]Metahuman is not a real word (though it makes a lot of sense). Here at Heroes Wiki, we've been using "evolved humans". It's all made up by fans, anyway. And we need to remember that Tim Kring has made it very public that he is not a "comic book guy", and purposely stays away from the genre so he remains unaffected by popular comic book themes and ideas. - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 17:35, 30 January 2007 (EST)

Which means "evolved human" is a fan-term, so, unless someone remembers seeing it in an episode from Season Two, we should stick to "posthuman". Or maybe I'm missing something?--Referos 10:39, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

  • Mohinder in (Genesis) states: Teleportation, levitation, tissue regeneration. Is this outside the realm of possibility? Or is man entering a new gateway to evolution? A first-level canon example specifically tying the powers to man's evolution or the abbreviated version we have always used of evolved human. A much higher Canon naming convention than "posthuman" IM0. --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 07/26/2008 23:13 (EST)
    • I agree with HDS.--MiamiVolts (talk) 23:37, 26 July 2008 (EDT)
      • Hmm, seems reasonable, but my main complain is that he didn't say "evolved human" explicitly. He just say that man is evolving. Actually, based on Mohinder's comment, we should call them "evolving humans", since he used present continuous ("man is entering evolution", not "man has entered evolution"). My point is that he is just describing them, not naming them. And, besides, "posthuman" is also a term related to human evolution.--Referos 12:26, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

My take: Evolved Human is a fan created term constructed from a level 1 canon source, Mohinder's lecture. Posthuman is a Level 2 canon term, coined and in use by the Company, one of the leading experts in these people. In my opinion, explicitly named terms should always trump constructed terms, regardless of the source for the terms in question. --SacValleyDweller (talk) 21:49, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

  • I agree. I don't think our naming conventions cover this, but it seems to me that there are three factors when considering names for things: the canonicity of the source, the explicitness of the term (whether is constructed by fans or explicitly used) and the in-world credibility of the source (for example, Mohinder's "adoptive muscle memory" trumps Micah's "muscle mimicry"). In this case, "evolved human" was made by fans based on a canon source, while "posthuman" was used explicitly. Both come from credible sources, since Mohinder and the Company conduct research on people with abilities.--Referos 22:16, 27 July 2008 (EDT)
  • I agree SVD, that's one of the flaws in the naming convention. But we've also used episode references over direct interviews: for example, Elle's power of Lightning when an interview with Aron and Joe said electrokinesis. Or when Tim Kring calls Maya's power a plague but we changed it to poison emission. Maybe we should think about re-wording the naming convention and edit it while we're trying to solve the post human.

My last thought is that we should wait to see if the word posthuman is used again. If it is, then we should definitely change it. Jason Garrick 23:19, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

  • Miami's contacted RGS about transcripts. He can see if there's been something from the shows. Therequiembellishere 13:45, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

I've found something: a near-canon source is contradicting another near-canon source! According to Bridget Bailey's first email, Chandra used the term "evolved human" is his book Activating Evolution. Yes, Bridget was created by BBC, but since she was "adopted" by NBC we have considered her canon. I suppose we should just ignore "posthuman" for now.--Referos 21:21, 30 July 2008 (EDT)

    • On the other hand, it could be argued that Primatech Paper is a higher-canon than Bridget because it is an older source that comes directly from NBC, not just through a partnership. Also, posthuman came second, which supersedes evolved human (pending the transcript search). Therequiembellishere 00:17, 31 July 2008 (EDT)
      • Posthuman again used in Echo De Mille's Tracker, this time as post-human. Therequiembellishere 18:00, 1 August 2008 (EDT)
    • Evolved Human It may be a question of perception, but evolved human refers to a human with additional capabilities, while posthuman is a species that comes after humans. Could a posthuman and a human mate and produce viable ofspring?--Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 14:50, 2 August 2008 (EDT)
  • I've searched the transcripts for Seasons One and Two. The word "posthuman" was never used, nor was the term "evolved human", though Mohinder talks extensively about humans and evolution together (Genesis). Assignment tracker files use the term "posthuman", but also refer to "evolutionary anomaly class". In the end, I think this is a case of two near canon sources both using similar terms. Neither source is ranked above the other (nor should be), and one does not negate the other (thankfully). There is no reason the two can't coexist. It's kind of like using the word ability or power to describe the same exact thing. Six of one, half-dozen of the other. I say leave good enough alone. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 20:42, 2 August 2008 (EDT)
    • Gaarmyvet: Monty/Simon Therequiembellishere 21:22, 2 August 2008 (EDT)
    • In light of RGS' last comment, I'd still like to say that evsdropr has used posthuman in his/her latest email. It seems like it's becoming the new term. Therequiembellishere 23:49, 5 August 2008 (EDT)
      • Agree. I still don't think we need to make a widespread change, but it does seem like a very purposeful shift in terminology (or at least the beginning of a coined term). I'm still fine with either choice, but we might want to think about moving this page and the category (ugh!). Other narrative instances can probably left alone, but title should probably change. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 00:32, 6 August 2008 (EDT)
        • Is it purposeful, and by whom? The last post by evsdropr points to a map file. All the entries that are blue/green were not entered by fans, and they all use the term "evolved human", not posthuman. It doesn't seem that purposeful a change to me.--MiamiVolts (talk) 01:23, 6 August 2008 (EDT)
        • I don't think we should do any renaming of this unless we get word from the writers that it's the new "official" term they're using rather than just a few occurrences of it. If it's just a few occurrences then it's almost the same as "ability" and "power" where we could use either. If it comes down to that then it'd be a lot of work for a pretty superficial change and I'd be skeptical that consensus for the change would be reached. (Admin 02:00, 6 August 2008 (EDT))
        • Yeah, I guess we should wait. Miami, it links there but evs uses the word posthuman. Therequiembellishere 03:06, 6 August 2008 (EDT)
          • Evs's messages are still part of Heroes evolutions.--MiamiVolts (talk) 03:12, 6 August 2008 (EDT)
            • I know, I didn't think you'd seen it. What blue/green entries? I didn't see those. Therequiembellishere 03:20, 6 August 2008 (EDT)
              • Make sure all the checkmarks of the legend are checked.--MiamiVolts (talk) 03:22, 6 August 2008 (EDT)
                • Whoa. They were before but didn't show up until I added one. Therequiembellishere 03:23, 6 August 2008 (EDT)
                  • Now that I've seen the map, it's true that both terms are coexisting. Before I didn't see the map, and the term "evolved human" had never actually been used anywhere in the world of Heroes, so far as I could find. The only thing I saw was some ATs and an email that definitely used the term "posthuman". Since both terms are being used (and "evolved human" seems to be taking the lead in the number of times it's used), I don't see any reason to make a big switch. I think "evolved human" is fine for the category and article titles; either term can be used in a narrative setting. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 13:58, 6 August 2008 (EDT)
                    • I agree with RGS for now leave it as evolved human unless specified otherwise. There is no point of us going in and changing from evolved human to posthuman (though personally i like posthuman better) for Mohinder to just go out and use evolved human. Though posthuman is more canon, a direct near-canon term vs indirect (even fan created) near-canon term, do you really want to have to change EACH individual use? If it does seem to big of a chore just try a random pae and look for the word evolved human it will probably be there somewhere. Shoyru1177 20:42, 6 August 2008 (EDT)
  • Though the majority on the map do not, I will say that the Haitian's entry does use "posthuman". Therequiembellishere 09:51, 6 August 2008 (EDT)
    • Actually, I've found a few now that use posthuman, though the majority use evolved human. I hadn't noticed that you could zoom in.--MiamiVolts (talk) 12:32, 6 August 2008 (EDT)
      • The Map pretty much confirms that the two terms can coexist at the same time. For instance, the one about the Haitian: "The Haitian is an evolved human agent with the ability to suppress other's posthuman abilities.". I will remove the rename template.--Referos 15:53, 6 August 2008 (EDT)
        • For now, yes, I think that's the best thing to do. I'd personally like to see one become the higher name in time. Miami, other blue/greens? Therequiembellishere 16:09, 6 August 2008 (EDT)

Interactive map

I don't have access to this new interactive map (which I'm assuming is in the assignment tracker page mentioned by evsdropr last night). Can somebody either upload an image of it, or just let me know the contents? It would certainly help me be better informed on the above discussion. Thanks! -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 10:10, 6 August 2008 (EDT)

  • Did you try the link in the above discussion? (Admin 10:26, 6 August 2008 (EDT))
    • Yep. Can't access it from camp. 'Sides, from what I can gather, it would probably be good info to either reproduce or have a snapshot image of. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 10:46, 6 August 2008 (EDT)
      • I'll try and grab a few screenshots, but it's a big map...--MiamiVolts (talk) 12:33, 6 August 2008 (EDT)
        • Nevermind, I think I found a way to hack in...plus, I'll be home from camp next week. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 13:40, 6 August 2008 (EDT)
          • Good; not sure if it's the traffic, but the map is giving me some loading troubles today.--MiamiVolts (talk) 13:41, 6 August 2008 (EDT)
            • My connection is super super slow at camp. (Just check the time between my edits...Yikes!) I kept getting a blank AT page that would say "Loading" even after an hour or two. I finally got it to come up, and now I just keep the page open, and nothing is slow at loading anymore. Yippee! -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 13:55, 6 August 2008 (EDT)
  • Since it is admitted that they are using fake entries and labeling them as real ones, how can we use this map as canon? Just a thought.--Bob (talk) 22:55, 11 August 2008 (EDT)
    • The user-created entries are a different color.--MiamiVolts (talk) 23:14, 11 August 2008 (EDT)
      • Did you see the email from evsdropr though? It appears they are promoting fan-created entries. I haven't looked at the map, but I would imagine some of the entries that haven't been mentioned before or in GNs are the ones they've promoted.--Bob (talk) 23:42, 11 August 2008 (EDT)
        • Right, they are verifying some of the fan-created entries. That isn't a bad thing, is it? Anyways, the verified entries are a different color from the other entries.--MiamiVolts (talk) 01:13, 12 August 2008 (EDT)
          • Can the new assignments (agent info) be trusted? -Lөvөl 01:54, 12 August 2008 (EDT)
            • The verified entries and assignments can both be trusted. It's the unverified markers that can't be trusted. I think Bob was reading too much into evsdropr's comments. Evs just meant that we had entered fake entries and they were accepted for investigation by the Company.--MiamiVolts (talk) 02:43, 12 August 2008 (EDT)
              • What I was talking about is Bridget B's partnet in London and a few others that I've never heard of.--Bob (talk) 02:56, 12 August 2008 (EDT)

Both of whom come directly from NBC, they can be trusted. Therequiembellishere 10:32, 12 August 2008 (EDT)

  • I don't really understand why ppl like Markus Gaines isn't considered confirmed. Anyhow - the confirmed names only appearing on the AT-map (e.g. Markus Gaines) and the confirmed names only appearing on the interactive Suresh map (e.g. Arthur Dowland) should be treated the same, no matter if we decide to list them as confirmed (which I think, and which is the way we list the Suresh map names) or unconfirmed. Pierre 19:05, 12 August 2008 (EDT)
    • I agree. They are the "verified tips" which means some research has gone into them. Therequiembellishere 19:36, 12 August 2008 (EDT)


Pages for minor evolved humans

Felipe Acerra, Byron Bevington, Penkala Burton, Tracy Chobham, Pam Green, Adam Soo Hoo and Michelle Valcek all have their own pages. Some people think that they should be delted. I think they should all be put onto one page, seen here. --Skywalkerrbf 07:39, 14 August 2008 (EDT)

  • I don't think they should be deleted at all. I think the pages as they are look fine. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 11:25, 14 August 2008 (EDT)
    • Most important is that the same goes for every character - as it is now, some have their own articles, some are linked to this articles, and some only appears on the list. Not good at all... Pierre 14:55, 14 August 2008 (EDT)
      • Now that some of the Company agents have been given portraits in their tips, shouldn't they get their own page?--Referos 20:20, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
        • I don't see why not. We have quite a bit of info about them, and now that we have some pictures, it sure seems like they'd make some good articles! :) -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 21:18, 19 August 2008 (EDT)

Can Wiki do a "Counter"?

Not sure if Wiki can do a counter, but it would be nice in the confirmed/unconfirmed table at the top, if we could have a auto-counter that told us how many EHs we have catalogued. --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 08/14/2008 10:06 (EST)

Sortable table?

Would it be useful to have the table sortable? I have made a template that would allow it here: User:Level/Evolved. Some entries would have to be fixed and we may have to use some hidden sort codes for the name of some of them. -Lөvөl 14:47, 14 August 2008 (EDT)

  • The more I've seen the sortable tables that you're so fond of, Level, the more and more I like them. I think it's worth a bit of an overhaul or adding extra code to make it sortable. It would certainly help with sorting multiple locations and multiple abilities. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 15:07, 14 August 2008 (EDT)
    • Sortable tables are my favourites. :-) Therequiembellishere 16:45, 14 August 2008 (EDT)
      • I added the sortable table to the List of Suspected Evolved Humans for people to see. I had thought that because the list could now be sorted it didn't need to be in "last name, first name" order, so I removed it, it looks like Chrisyu357 changed it back manually, I can make it do it automatically again if it still should be displayed like that. -Lөvөl 13:02, 20 August 2008 (EDT)

Level 5

Has anybody noticed Jesse Murphy's file in the season 3 promo next to Knox's file? Maybe he is not deceased but prisoned in a level 5 cell. Check out the snapshot I took.Level 5 Files.jpg--Rvsdl 11:38, 18 August 2008 (EDT)

  • See here. Who's to say Jess is Jesse? --Bob (talk) 14:36, 18 August 2008 (EDT)
  • And who's to say the Company doesn't keep files on people even after they are dead?--MiamiVolts (talk) 14:53, 18 August 2008 (EDT)

A new list

Those who have powers gained through a formula like the one Mohinder has or the one The Company has should be listed seperately from the truly Evolved Humans. They are not evolved they are merely enhanced through science. --Snow Leapord 21:49, 22 September 2008 (EDT)

  • Agree...or at least a new section. As a note, Sylar is an evolved human with the power of what we call intuitive aptitude. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 21:53, 22 September 2008 (EDT)
  • What does Sylar have to do with a new list? He is listed as such on the current list. --Snow Leapord 22:12, 22 September 2008 (EDT)
    • I just want to avoid anybody thinking that he is not evolved since so many of his powers are forcefully and unnaturally obtained (like Mohinder's). I'm just pointing out that Sylar, too, is evolved. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 22:29, 22 September 2008 (EDT)

Anyone with half a brain who has watched the show would know that. You have to assume a level of intelligence, and not state the obvious. When someone proves themselves that retarded then point it out. --Snow Leapord 23:10, 22 September 2008 (EDT)

Couple of corrections

  • Just wanted to make sure before changing these (especially the first one): Considering recent events, do we know for certain that Linderman is dead? Also, I think it's safe to assume 'Jess Murphy' = 'Jesse Murphy.' Stevehim 11:32, 5 October 2008 (EDT)
    • Linderman is dead, and Jess Murphy is actually Jesse Murphy's father.--Bob (talk) 12:58, 5 October 2008 (EDT)
      • Was that said in the tracker page? Therequiembellishere 13:19, 5 October 2008 (EDT)
        • Linderman being dead was shown when D.L. killed him, and considering no one but Nathan can see him right now, we have to assume he's a figment of his imagination due to Nathan's current condition. Jess Murphy was noted on Heroes Evolutions. Personally, I think this was them muffing up, and their way of correcting it. Jess Murphy would have made better sense as his mom, though.--Riddler 13:58, 5 October 2008 (EDT)

Something's broken

No idea how to fix it. Therequiembellishere 03:59, 8 October 2008 (EDT)

  • I think I see what you mean. The known and suspected EH's are being put under the Suspected heading. --SacValleyDweller (talk) 23:53, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
    • Yep. Therequiembellishere 23:56, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
      • Fixed.--Matchu 00:14, 12 October 2008 (EDT)
        • Yeah, someone had deleted the closing "|}" for the List of Evolved Humans wikitable. Nice catch, Matchu.--MiamiVolts (talk) 00:16, 12 October 2008 (EDT)
          • Took me awhile! XD --Matchu 00:17, 12 October 2008 (EDT)
            • WOW! 2 missing characters fouled up the whole works! *shakes head* --SacValleyDweller (talk) 00:23, 12 October 2008 (EDT)

speculation...needs fixing but I don't know how

  • It's speculation that the Constrictor has the snake mimicry power, as he has only displayed contriction, and his page lists his ability as such, whereas the Snake man displayed the ability to mimic different types of snakes. I don't know how to remove whatever is linking snake mimicry to constriction, but the linking should be deleted. Stevehim 07:41, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
    • It's an old redirect we used for the Constrictor before we really knew much about his power...but since it's not really the name of his power, I'll go ahead and delete the redirect. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 08:10, 10 October 2008 (EDT)

Samedi

At what point would it be the right time to add Samedi? When he first appears on the show or in a graphic novel? Now since we know who will be playing him? After it has been spoiled what power he has? --Snow Leapord 13:13, 29 October 2008 (EDT)

  • After he appears in some form, whether it's a graphic novel or an episode. If he's only mentioned in some way (like we see a folder with his name on it, or Bennet says, "Okay, now I gotta go get that other villain Samedi!") then we would make a page about him but not include the actor's name. If the actor appears (like we see his assignment tracker profile but we don't actually meet the live guy), we would include the actor but say he was just mentioned. Basically, we wait until there is some mention of the guy by name within the world of Heroes. Since he hasn't appeared anywhere I'm aware of, he's still a spoiler and we don't include him at all. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 15:51, 29 October 2008 (EDT)

Evolved Human Page

Am I the only one who believes that there be a page about WHAT an evolved human is? Something that shows what makes an evolved human (lineage/eclipse/formula) and things that have meaning to E.H.'s (helix symbol/eclipse). We have pages for basically every aspect of E.H.'s but I think it would be good to have a page that groups everything together and has links to the other articles. Am I alone in this opinion? -- Elemental Manipulator [ U | T | C ] - When in doubt, ask BTE 02:24, 16 December 2008 (EST)

  • In no way whatsoever, i completely agree -- Halfreed1426
    • What would the page look like? I don't think a page called "list of evolved humans" should attempt to explain what makes an evolved human. I'm also not sure there is one simple way to explain that phenomenon. That's why we have a page about ability heredity, or about the eclipse, or about the formula. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 01:34, 12 March 2009 (EDT)
      • You may want to check out User:Tristan0709/Abilities. It's a sub-page I never really polished, but quite decent, and probably what you're looking for. -- Tristan0709 talk 01:43, 12 March 2009 (EDT)
        • If this happens (which I don't think it needs to), I'd rather see something more along the lines of a portal, or one of the Related Articles Pages. That would be "one page that groups everything together an has links to the other articles." :) -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 01:50, 12 March 2009 (EDT)