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.

User talk:Themightytruk/SPOON

From Heroes Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I love this page--completely and totally.--Hardvice (talk) 12:38, 20 October 2007 (EDT)

  • Not a fan of it. I dont find their occurence in the show to be notable in the least. Rather this be a user subpage. (Admin 12:41, 20 October 2007 (EDT))
    • I agree with Admin. I don't see Spoons as something worthy of pointing out, any more than plates (I can think of a dozen more uses where plates are used) or any other kitchen utensil for that matter are. I actually thought this was going to be a parody.--  Lost Soul   talk  contribs  12:47, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
      • This is stupid. --Hero!(talk)(contribs) 12:50, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
        • Any more so than these pages?--Bob (talk) 12:54, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
          • Do we have a Parody template?--  Lost Soul   talk  contribs  12:58, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
          • Bob, those pages are Theory pages. They have different criteria for inclusion and are by their very nature lower quality than most of the other articles here. The best comparison is to Waffles which, while I wouldn't mourn if it were ever gone, does show a number of more conspicuous references to a less commonplace item. With the exception of demonstrating Bob's ability they've never directly mentioned or focused on a spoon. Like Lost Soul said, why point it out over say plates? (Admin 13:00, 20 October 2007 (EDT))
            • Plus, Waffles are actually directly mentioned by two characters in the show - Sandra and Hiro. Spoons are not. Their only relevance seems to be with Bob's power, and as we already have a page for that, I don't see this article is neccessary.--  Lost Soul   talk  contribs  13:04, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
            • The thing is--would we even notice waffles if there wasn't an article? I know every time I get excited when waffles are mentioned on the show, my partner looks at me like I'm an idiot. As far as he's concerned, there's nothing particularly noteworthy about waffles, either. Now you can bet the next time a spoon shows up, I'll be sure to notice it. Do we need an article to track spoons (or waffles) throughout the show? No, probably not. Does it hurt anything? No more than any of the other reference articles--which, as we've previously noted, are not necessarily conscious/intentional references, but are references that can be identified and tracked nonetheless.--Hardvice (talk) 13:18, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
              • What sets this apart from other articles that we move out of the main namespace and into user subpages, though? There are a lot of generally insignificant things that some people notice that they'd like to see articles on, but since they're not relevant enough they end up as subpages. This seems like just such an example. I see no significance to spoons within Heroes whereas at least waffles have been specifically mentioned (and even conspicuously so with Hiro's conversation with his father). Were you a fan of The Tick? I suspect this article is mostly of interest to fans of The Tick and is essentially just an attempt to interpret scenes involving a spoon (which again is so commonplace) as relating to the show. If there's an article on this then there could be an article on plates, jackets, shoes, televisions, chairs, etc. I suspect very few people would agree there's anything significant or interesting about those items within the context of the show. (Admin 13:28, 20 October 2007 (EDT))
                • What sets it apart is that I don't ever recall deleting a references article for being unremarkable. We've deleted characters for being spoilers or moved them to user creations for being, well, user creations. But I don't recall ever deleting a reference merely because it wasn't enough of a reference.--Hardvice (talk) 17:05, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
                  • I guess Friday Night Lights and Psycho were deleted not because they weren't significant, but more because they weren't really referenced in Heroes....In talking with my wife, I realized that this is really a much bigger issue: What is too trival to chronicle? Surely spoons are mentioned more than Ishi Nakamura, but Ishi's significance as the mother of a main character far outweighs the significance of an eating utensil. When do we draw the line? The argument could be made that this is not just an article about a random insignificant item, it's about the object Bob turned to gold, the last thing James Walker touched, and a part of Isaac's heroin kit. What complicates this even more is that Hiro's blog really does reference The Tick.... I guess after giving this some though, I'm fighting a bit harder for it than I would have imagined. :) -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 17:18, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
                    • Right, exactly. FNL was based on a location in common and a misunderstanding of how the mascot was chosen, but FNL was never directly referenced, nor did it appear. Psycho I still think was a valid reference, but it was entirely subjective and never directly appeared. Spoons have appeared, and have been important to the plot, more than once. Even compared to waffles, they seem somehow significant. We have a ton of spoon appearances and images and a very intentional reference in Hiro's blog. It's probably a curious coincidence that spoons keep popping up in important scenes (in a way that plates, cups, or sheets don't), but there's no harm in noting it.--Hardvice (talk) 17:24, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
              • At the very least our default position has been for these types of pages to originate as user subpages and then be moved to the main namespace if they gain support, so I think we should do that for now and then discuss its merits as the page evolves.
            • Not disagreeing, and you're correct. My point was that we have obsurd pages regardless. Personally, I could go either way with keeping it or scrapping it. As long as it's a reference (like it is now), then I don't have a problem.--Bob (talk) 13:23, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
              • Personally, I like the page. I'm not going to fight tooth and nail for it, but it's fun and light. It's also well-written, and I don't think it hurts our credibility. I'm a fan of minutiae and trivia, and I don't think there's anything wrong with an article that tracks the appearance of a utensil. Plus, Hiro really does reference The Tick in his blog--not that that's a reason alone for the page, but it does strengthen the argument. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 14:23, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
                • Where's the line, though? What distinguishes the pages we've opted to move into userspace from this one? If this page exists in the main namespace then so can articles on all the other mundane objects I mentioned before and I'd hate to see that happen. (Admin 14:34, 20 October 2007 (EDT))
                  • You're right, it's not a well-defined line. And I'm not going to lobby hard for this one. All I can say is that it just "feel right" to me. But if it gets moved, I'm not going to be too upset about it. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 14:54, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
                    • I'm not gonna read through every thing here, but I'm gonna put my two cents in. We have a page for waffles, we have no page for Spock or various characters who have been directly referenced. Many things have been directly referenced, doesn't mean we need a page for it. Waffles, as well as this page, while good for humor, are utterly useless. I mean, are we gonna make a page if another common item or breakfast is mentioned? If that's the case, I can't wait til they show Lucky Charms, we can make all kinds of references to Cork, Ireland and have another crazy theory page.--Riddler 18:18, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
                      • But we do have a page that talks about the Spock references: Star Trek. What other characters are directly referenced but have no page? (If you're referring to Rey Mysterio, we have a page for the actor, and a page for the wrestler.) -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 19:03, 20 October 2007 (EDT)
                        • Looks like this page is staying, so can we get rid of the rename template on it?--MiamiVolts (talk) 22:13, 18 November 2007 (EST)
                          • I'd say so, but then again, I'm kind of a supporter of the page, so I'm not really giving an objective opinion. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 22:20, 18 November 2007 (EST)
                            • Even though I actually purked up when Noah used a spoon for his yogurt I'm still against this page. I also thing we need to add a Planet EArth page. After all. The evolved humans are residents AND notable visitors. Jason Garrick 22:31, 20 November 2007 (EST)
  • The page is awesome.=)--Ice Vision 22:44, 1 December 2007 (EST)
    • We need to stop exposing the spoons so they can be used to defeat the evil Waffles



I'm not sure how it was decided that consensus had been reached, but from what I could tell of the above discussion, we are not all agreed, or even mostly agreed. It looks like there are more people in favor of losing the article, but there are certainly those who are in favor of keeping it, myself included. From what I can gather, 5 don't want the page and 3 don't mind it. That's not consensus. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 23:08, 20 November 2007 (EST)

  • So vote?--Riddler 23:13, 20 November 2007 (EST)
    • I recommend using the term "poll" instead of "vote" since there isn't voting here. Anyway, I'm withholding a definite position pending any discussion of a general policy to determine what material is appropriate for inclusion and what is "cruft". In any event, if there is lack of consensus then the default action needs to be for this to become a user page since the precedent is for content like this to start out in user space and then to move into the main namespace when there is consensus on the move, not the other way around. (Admin 01:10, 5 December 2007 (EST))

Keep it

  1. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk)
  2. --Ice Vision 22:44, 1 December 2007 (EST)
  3. --Shoreline83 00:27, 5 December 2007 (EST)
  4. --Tim Thomason 23:27, 5 December 2007 (EST)
  5. --Hardvice (talk) 00:46, 6 December 2007 (EST)

Lose it

  1. --Riddler 23:13, 20 November 2007 (EST)
  2. --Jason Garrick 00:10, 21 November 2007 (EST)
  3. --Hero!(talk)(contribs) 16:45, 1 December 2007 (EST)
  4. --User: Bertz
  5. --Chrisyudbsname.JPGChrisyudbstalk.JPG 23:04, 5 December 2007 (EST)
  6. --SacValleyDweller (talk) 02:26, 6 December 2007 (EST)