Talk:Peter Petrelli/Archive 1

message: Are we recognizing tv.com as a reputable source?  I remember reading somewhere (I believe it was the Main Page, talk section) that someone was reviewing the necessity of tv.com links.  Any comments/thoughts on this? --DJ Chair 11:46, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it was a press release. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 22:02, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: I've rewritten Peter's bio, just like I did Niki's. It's much shorter now, and I tried to encapsulate everything that is important to the character in fewer paragraphs.
I wish people to go through it and edit it (Primogen?). Particularly, I was trying to squeeze in the bits about Peter's family history, how his father commited suicide, etc. but am unsure of where to better put it. Renenarciso 20:53, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I did some clean-up on it and added back in some more information about his father and mother.  I think there's too much detail about interactions between Peter and Nathan, but nothing about Peter and Mohinder.  This well need several passes by various people to get the right information in. Primogen 21:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think Peter's interactions with Nathan have been, so far, more character-shaping than his aborted attempt to connect to Mohinder, but I agree that it would be nice to add somewhere how Chandra's book led Peter to seek out Mohinder. Renenarciso 22:23, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewriting Peter's bio 

message: "Sylar survives the fall, but it seems as if Peter hasn't. When Claire shows up, however, Peter absorbs her powers and quickly recovers."
He absorbed her powers before he fell off the school. If he was dead, his power to mimic her wouldn't have worked. So, he absorbed her power when he told her to run. dposse 18:13, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: that seems better now. thanks.dposse 14:14, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is based entirely on a flawed assumption, ie. that peter's powers only work while he is alive. Claire's powers work when she is so dead as to be laying on an examination table with her chest sliced open and she came back, so who is to say that peter couldn't do the same thing? The program certainly seems to imply that peter was dead and came back to life when claire came near. WookMuff 09:01, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, but Claire was closer to him before he jumped. After he jumped, she was scared and a good distance from him. Also, if he was dead, his power to mimic Claries power wouldn't have worked after he jumped. I'm sure that if Clarie jumped, she would have been fine because her power would have kicked in. However, Peters powers is the power to mimic and not the power to survive a fall off a school. He only survived because he mimiced Claire's power before he fell. Saying that "Peter fell off the school, and then copied Claire's power" is wrong.  dposse 19:04, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

text: By saying "it appears that Peter hasn't [survived the fall]", the article is conveying the show's implication that Peter is dead without taking a stand about whether or not he actually died, since he was not verified to have survived or died from the fall; we just saw him lying motionless with pool of blood forming around his head and his body horribly twisted.  We have no idea what the limits of Peter's mimicry powers are (can he mimic Clair's abilities to their full extent?) or for that matter, the limits of Claire's healing powers (was she really "dead" when she was brought into the coroner's office, or was she in a state that just made her appear dead, even to medical professionals?), so we shouldn't make assumptions or conjectures about these powers in the article.  Primogen 19:17, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Also, if he was dead, his power to mimic Claries power wouldn't have worked after he jumped." FLAWED ASSUMPTION AGAIN. Did you even read what i said? WookMuff 19:31, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We don't know if Peter's ability to mimic Claire's power wouldn't have worked after he died.  We do not know at what point he acquired Claire's healing abilities or how long he retained the abilities to use them.  We do not know how either the mimicry or healing abilities work with regards to Peter or Claire being dead.  We should not be making any assumptions or doing any kind of analysis of the scenes when writing about them. Primogen 19:39, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Mm hmm, i am not saying peter's powers work after death, i am just saying that saying "peter is dead so his powers don't work" is wrong. the first part of my last comment was quoting Dposse, in case that wasn't obvious, so i went back and put quotation marks in there. WookMuff 20:02, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

text:  One thing we might know, however, is that Peter retains those powers for at least a few seconds after claire leaves, because he fixes his leg and is able to walk when claire has already run off. WookMuff 20:04, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

text: He says he would have died if it wasn't for Claire. It's still unclear whether or not he mimicked her power before or after his fall, although since he mimicked Sylar in the hallway after a few seconds (the writers confirm he used Sylar's telekinesis to deflect the lockers on Comic Book Resoures), I think it's safe to say that he was still mimicking Claire before he fell. --Stabbey 22:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Even so, Peter should have been mimicking Claire before he fell, he was close to her seconds before he fell. The writers essentially confirmed that Peter mimicked Sylar's telekinesis in the hall to fend off the lockers, and he was only around Sylar for a few seconds. --Stabbey 18:03, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  small rewrite, please 

message: Guys, Peter appeared in 9 episodes (all of them, except for "Seven Minutes to Midnight"). Please, don't revert the change. Renenarciso 20:57, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As of the episode airing 12/4/06, though, the number would be 10. Samer 04:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The appearance count for several characters (Peter, Nathan, Matt, Mohinder, Niki, Mr. Bennet, and Simone) was wrong even before episode 11, coming short 1 or 2 episodes. But I'm trying to avoid visiting these pages until I'm able to see Episode 11. :) Don't want to acidentaly read some spoiler. Renenarciso 14:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of apperances

message: I think it's too early to have him listed as deceased above his picture.  At the end of Fallout, he had collapsed and stopped breathing.  A police officer in the scene was shown radioing (presumably for medical help).  Until episodes start up again January 22nd, it should probably be left at that he collapsed at the end of Fallout, and his current health/status is unknown.  CeladusThrace 03:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Moreover, saying he's dead contradicts reports in TV Guide that state that Peter ends up in a coma. Samer 03:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  and the previews at the end of the show —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.165.36.81 (talk) 03:56, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

text:  and next weeks previews —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.165.36.81 (talk) 03:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  And other sources that say Peter will be around and learning more when the break returns. He's not dead, Jim. --Stabbey 06:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

text: The comics are produced in concert with the program.  While it is certainly possible that some small detail mentioned in a comic might end up being contradicted by the show, it seems that at the very least, the plots are assigned/approved by the producers of the show.  --ΨΦorg 08:16, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deceased? 

message: There are video interviews (found by clicking links on the Interviews Page at NBC.com. When the video player loads, click the Fallout one which talks about Peter's dream. Milo Ventimiglia says that the reason he collapsed was because he was overwhelmed after being close to three supers in close sucession (Matt, Claire, Nathan). I would put this on the page, but that claim would require a source or else it'll get edited out, and I'm not sure what the URL to that video is. --Stabbey 13:36, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He may also have still been mimicking Sylar's power (of which he has several), I'm not sure how long it takes to wear off. --Stabbey 22:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Also what about the haitian, dont forget the haitian was there as well Totallycharged
Which may also be what happens in the future where he apparently catches on fire. He's not the only person who could do that. The radiation-emitting man could do that; Peter and Sylar could do it, if they gain his power.--Syd Henderson 05:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too many powers mimicked are dangerous 

message: It doesn't seems to say that he loses his powers when the other person leaves, just that he gain powers when he is near. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fre k (talk • contribs) 09:58, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that should be added. How about this: "An article from the October 9-14 TV Guide explains that Peter actually mimics the powers of other nearby heroes. The mimicked power fades away as time passes, but it takes several hours for it to completely wear off". (the sources for the "several hours to completely wear off" are Peter's future-predicting sketch in the hospital several hours after last seeing Isaac, and the fact that he fell ill when Nathan came for him, even though that was hours after he last saw Matt and Claire. --Stabbey 18:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Still speculation. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 21:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Really? I gave my reasoning - direct from the show, with additional information based on the NBC.com interview Milo Venimiglia gave. The show indicated that's what happened in "Don't Look Back" and an actor also indicated that's what happened in "Fallout". I'm not starting an edit war, but how is it speculation to say that he retains powers for a few or several hours? Is there some other evidence that I'm missing? --Stabbey 05:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I know this place isn't a democracy, but I'm with Stabbey. However, I think that what ACS was doubting was not that he kept the powers for a few hours, but that he lost them after a few hours. Branfish 05:51, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  He couldn't mimic Nathan's flying the day after the roof incident, and he was trying hard to do that. --Stabbey 18:03, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Powers

message: Alliteration is a common factor in the naming of many prominent western comic book characters I won't name any of them because the alliteration article covers just about all of them. Heroes is heavily inspired by comic books, western comic books especially where naming alliteration is at it's gratest concentration. Peter Petrelli is the only example of alliteration in the series and he is one of the main most characters in the series. Bringing this up here in the discussion page is really just a formality. Ace Class Shadow seems to have some kind of fixation on flexing his editorial might and removed my short mention of alliteration from the main article, so i figured I would bring it up here to see what the conscensus is and avoid an edit war. --Bushido Brown 00:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree wholeheartedly that a mention should be made of the alliterative nature of his name, even if only in trivia. It is a very common occurance, though i think thats largely because stan lee was lazy, but still. WookMuff 04:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If all or most of the main characters had alliterative names, I'd say it might be worth mentioning.  However, only one out of the eleven main characters has an alliterative name (unless Mr. Bennet's first name is something like Bob, Bill, or Beauregard).  At a bare minimum, the odds of a single character having the double initials is only 1 in 26; that's assuming all letters are equally likely as first and last names, but it's really more, since certain letters are much more common than others.  Assuming that the odds are closer to 1 in 19, the odds that out of eleven characters, none of them would have a double letter, is around half.  It's nothing out of the ordinary.  --Psiphiorg 04:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Flexes* I'm going to pahmp- *Stretch* you ahp! Heh. Seriously, though, I reverted a poorly written, irrelevant addition to the intro. It's highly trivial and possibly unintentional. To claim intent is OR and to state the obvious—believe it or not, others might have come to alliter conclusion upon seeing his name.—is just pointless. My first feeling when I saw the addition was "observant and informed." My second was "innappropriate." Micah Manders, Hiro Hakamura and Peter Petrelli would be significant. One "Peter" in a family of Petrellis and sea of differently named characters looks more like pure chance. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 05:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

text: "Lies, damn lies, and statistics" to Psiphiorg. Thats a false assumption, because in order to say "blah blah blah statistics say" you would have to go and take every single current given name that exists on earth, maybe throw in a few older names that might come into fashion again, then compare them to every single surname on earth. One would assume that Peter Petrelli has less chance of occuring than, say, John Jones but more chance than Constantine Corleone or Leonardo Lichtenstein, to make up some alliterative names. To ACS, i say that i think it would be neither irresponsible nor irrelevant to add a trivia section mentioning this allusion, as it has long been pointed to in comics that first last name alliteration is very common. John Jones, Reed Richards, Sue Storm, Matt Murdock,  Peter Parker and of course Clark Kent WookMuff 06:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See below. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 06:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

text: It's random and insulting to the reader. A person can figure out something like this themselves, as I stated above. You're just trying to force unwanted, unnecessary data into the article. No offense. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 06:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Random and Insulting? That's one of the most absurd reasons I have ever heard given by upidity, busy body editors to justify their removal of info from articles. --Bushido Brown 16:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ha, ha! "Upidity"? You mean "uppity"? Or was that an attempt to say "uppity" and "stupiity" at the same time? Heh. Anyway, I'd be careful with those words if I were you. If removing your addition makes me a "busy body", I dare not imagine your perception of vandalism revertions. Seriously. dude, try decaf or something. This ain't the end of the world and naming calling is like...so elementary school. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 22:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Will you please give it a rest. I am sick and tired of the editors on the heroes pages with their sense of superiority. Remember "heroin-induced"? Remember being anti "spontaneous regeneration"? You are hardly infallible. What you are doing is implying that Bushido is childish and stupid, and thats hardly in line with wikipedia policy. Oh, and i just changed "there" to "their" so you wouldn't tar me with the same brush. I don't know if this counts as a personal attack, but i consider it more of a personal defense. Lay off the belittling people. WookMuff 23:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Also, if you wanna be picky, "Or was that an attempt to say "uppity" and "stupiity" at the same thing?" is hardly a work of grammatic art. WookMuff 23:03, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Chill out. It's not a matter of superiority. The content just isn't suitable. I really don't see why you two are getting so worked up. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 23:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I think i was fairly clear why i am getting worked up. Maybe this is your baby, hell maybe you created all the heroes articles, but you don't own wikipedia yet you constantly act like it, judging what is and isn't fit for the pages. It is a fact that the alliterative qualities of Peter Petrelli mirror those of real comic characters, and whether this is on purpose or not it is still trivia worthy, because it DOES mirror them. WookMuff 00:19, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: At the risk of getting embroiled in all this, I checked many of articles for the characters listed in the Alliteration, and I couldn't find any character articles that bothered to mention the alliteration.  It seems to me (and others, apparently) that the observation is more interesting to someone reading about alliterations in general than it is to someone reading about the character having an alliteration.  Maybe the alliteration would be marginally interesting if Peter were the main character, or if any other character names in the twelve-person cast were alliterations, or if there was evidence that the writers purposefully made his name an alliteration to mirror comic book tradition, or even if Peter also had the same number of syllables or letters in his first and last names (like Clark Kent, Peter Parker, or Lois Lane).  But as it is, it's a big so what?, and I'm concerned that the inclusion of trivial observations like this brings down the quality of the article. Primogen 01:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Relevance of alliteration in name

message: How about adding a comparison to Synch (comics) then, rather than rogue, who is a much better example considering how peter's powers appear to work. WookMuff 04:20, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As stated throughout the Heroes talk pages and in my edit summary, the consensus is against almost any comparisons. For starters, Wikipedia is not a journal or a publisher of some sort. We try not to add original research or otherwuse unsourced opinions/statements to articles. Aside from various differences between Everett and Peter, we should be able to explain Peter's powers to a certain extant by eleventh episode. Furthermore. Synch is arguably an obscure character. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 04:39, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see it as original research. If one of the characters could fly, had heat x-ray and tele/microscopic vision, superbreath, superstrength, superresilience, etc, a superman comparison would be likely. Ditto if someone could stretch there would probably be a reed richards or plastic/elongated man comparison. Everett, may he rest in peace, needed proximity but not touch, and could often use the powers he synched with instinctive skill outshining the owner of the powers. But i agree that if thats the way the pages lean then so be it. Damnit, he should be less obscure also, but thats neither here nor there, poor dead deus ex machina. WookMuff 05:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparison 

message: I know this is probably OR, but does anyone else think that Peter's vision is more of a symbolic representation rather than a straightforward vision of the future? I mean woud Matt and Claire really be in uniform on an empty New York Street? Would the characters all turn away from Peter as he is seemingly is about to burst into flames? WookMuff 07:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wouldn't this be best addressed on one of the forums relating to the show?  (I found several while looking for the music they played.)  I've gathered the impression that Talk pages aren't supposed to be forums, but a look at WP:TPG shows no such direct statement.  --GargoyleMT 14:50, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This sounds direct to me: "Talk pages are not for general conversation. Keep discussions on the topic of how to improve the associated article. Irrelevant discussions are subject to removal." Primogen 19:11, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

text: To clarify, the article makes not direct assertion that what Peter saw will happen, or assumes much in the way of its meaning. Thus, there's not reall Wikipedia issue. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 17:22, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It calls it a vision twice, and generally in heroes articles visions mean precog eps like Isaac's. Noone else sees it that way? Wouldn't dream be more accurate? WookMuff 21:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Then that is the fault of "heroes articles".  In fiction in general, "vision" covers a multitude of sins. Branfish 05:58, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia tries to avoid excessive detailing of fictional events. The article should not attempt to be a substitute for the show. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 20:16, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, this should be part of the episode desc. talk in a cut down format. I wonder what the point of the wiki episode description is if the foreshadowing elements are left out? 202.72.187.152 16:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Peter isn't wearing Sylar's watch, they're clearly different watches - Peter's is square, Sylar's is circular. And I don't think the vision should be taken as what is literally going to happen. But it is a good point that Peter's vision could be seeing through the eyes of another like he did in his flying dreams. I don't think we need many details from the vision on this page, not even on the episode page.  --Stabbey 18:03, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I take it back about Peter possibly seeing the vision through the eyes of someone else. The other characters, Simone, Claire, and Nathan seem to react as if it's Peter they're seeing. --Stabbey 13:24, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Precognitive episode, literal or symbolic? 

message: Direct quote from Brian Fuller regarding a Sylar question. "...where Peter is Empathic where he can absorb other peoples abilities..."
Quote is from about three quaters of the way through the interview. "http://www.comicspodcasts.com/?p=500"
Just wondering if this changes things, I'm sure both his power absorbtion and his apparent clairvoyance could be somewhat linked by empathy, anyone want to include this into the article or wait? Jacobshaven3 02:20, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: One word which you can misappropriate is hardly much to go one, Jake. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 04:57, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't forget Spontaneous Regeneration, ACS WookMuff 08:55, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well Ace. It is one word, true. It's one word which shows the writer calling Peter an Empath. He could just have easily used another word to describe Peter and Sylar's abilities similarities. If a character is called a Telepath, but only shows the ability to read minds, should they not be called a telepath just because it could be misappropriated by others to mean they can control minds? I merely mentioned combining his apparent abilities under Empathy, because it's possible, and because several sources have said all Heroes have only one power, although Sylar's and Peter's allow them to mimic other peoples.Jacobshaven3 11:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm still iffy about using an embrella term. Fuller could have meant empathic as a description, not a catch-all title. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 20:37, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you listened to the source, ACS? (This isn't a dig, i am just asking... i haven't) If the sentence is as Jacobshaven describes it, and there is no missing context, then I would say its a slam dunk. WookMuff 21:00, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think I can see why you don't want to use the term Ace, and to be honest, after thinking about it, using it to combine his clairvoyance and mimicry is kind of close to OR since only the ability mimicry is mentioned, however it should be included as the source of his mimicry ability, as that is what Brian Said. Unlike Sylar who mimicry's by absorbing the power in some way, Peter empathically senses the ability, and uses it. I'm guessing somewhat remeniscent to how Synch does it. In fact, Synch's ability matches Peter's very well, since Peter was able to Prophetically draw the future before Issac was. Rambling now, but do you get what I mean?Jacobshaven3 21:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't think the way you've described either Peter or Sylar's power.  Peter doesn't just "sense" the power and then mimic it, his DNA is more or less chameleonic in nature, allowing him to appropriate other powers simply by being in their presence- his DNA will dynamically re-script itself and include those gene markers that he encounters that are linked to powers.  Sylar's power-appropriation isn't exactly a gift; I'm pretty sure we all know what he does with those brains when he takes them, even if we don't want to admit it.  Furthermore in "Six Months Before" he can see the "broken" parts of Brian Davis' brain (more than likely what he was seeing was the unusually active part of his brain, the part that isn't active in non-powered folk)- and it's a well known fact that if you try to fix something that's broken you will learn something along the way.  I'm guessing Sylar's ability to pick powers up is a direct result of his ability to fix watches, almost as a side effect or an added feature, a different way the ability can be used.  As to why he wants to keep doing it, to what ends... who knows.  But anyway my point is neither power is simple mimicry, especially Peter's.  He's almost a better, more refined version of Sylar. 61.69.209.180 16:29, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

text:  Sounds like the whole "persuasion" versus "mind control" thing with Eden. All the sources tell me is that Peter can—intentionally or otherwise—mimic powers by being within close range with their inherent user(s). This mimicry has no known effect on the "supplier" so to speak and generally does not result in any sort of dream/trance state. Whether Peter is "suppose to" have one power, or the two he's displayed are explicitly connected, I don't believe the sources we've found give much weight to this whole "empathy" thing. From an encyclopedic standpoint, we've got nothing. I'm open to different wording and description of Peter's power(s), but "empathy" would be more an ambiguation. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 21:33, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  This is the reason I didn't just put it in myself. I don't personally think empathy is a great description, however, thats what the writer of the show used as a direct description. It's true he was talking about Sylar's power foremost, but he said that above quote word for word. Peter's ability is empathy. why does the term "empathy" have no weight in this article? What about it goes against previous sources? And no, from an encyclopedic stand point, we do have something, a writer of the series quoting that Peter is an Empath. That can't just be ignored. Maybe if it was an expert in fiction giving his presumptions, but it's not, it's one of the people behind the entire creation. Thats why I don't understand why your saying we shouldn't use it, this is as close to the program explicitly saying it as possible.Jacobshaven3 22:07, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let me clarify. It doesn't help. We found a source ages ago which used the term "power mimic" and it stuck. I don't honestly believe Fuller's wording supercedes what we've been using. To pit it simply, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 22:23, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I concede- yet still hold to my opinion on this matter. Jacobshaven3 23:15, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Wook, you've been warned about this...63.3.4.129 22:43, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ? wtf? "Go nuts" means go for it, what are you talking about, mysterious stranger? WookMuff 22:48, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think they're referring to your trolling warning, Wook. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 04:57, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I got that, it was more of a "how is that in any way negative?" WookMuff 08:55, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Uh-huh. So, what does all that mean? Can you verify that they're trying to link his powers under one term? As far as wording goes, we have no need- stratch that. No real reason to copy their wording. The best out of all that is  "super empathic/empathy," and that's still ambiguous. We generally shouldn't go out of our way to use their words. Plus, they themselves are probably just pulling that wording out of their [expletive]. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 20:08, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems to me that, regardless of which source should be considered (although something coming directly from the writers of the show is, to me, the be all and end all of arguments), the concensus description of Peter's primary power is that of "empathy," and the fact this this IS Wikipedia, an information source fueld by a community, shouldn't consensus get the nod?  Regardless, I honestly feel that the idea of "empathy" will become more and more prevalent.  This is ONLY speculation on my part, but I feel Tim Kring was saying more than we originally perceived in that Peter's power may not necessarily be based on genetics solely, but also on his personality.  Peter is able to mimic Claire's healing ability only after he remembers the way he "felt" around her.  It's not something that just "happens" to him.  He, whether he is aware of it or not, seems to trigger it based on his biological AND emotional makeup.  My tow cents, anyways.  Windmillninja 00:48, 03 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Peter is Empathic

message: Think we should make a list of the people Peter has come in contact with (and thus who's powers he theoretically can use)? Similar to the list on the Sylar page where it lists who he's killed and the powers absorbed. As far as I can remember offhand, he's interacted in some way with Nathan, Claire, Matt, Claude, Isaac, Hiro and Sylar. 160.39.30.190 21:42, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's stay away from speculation, ok? The list on Sylars page is the known list of people he's killed because we were told/shown that in the show. Let's just wait and see what powers Peter has before creating a list. dposse 14:51, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: we know he has the healing factor due to the last episode... -Xornok 17:23, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: True! However, his potental for powers is still largely unknown at this point in time. It would be better to just wait. dposse 19:11, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then perhaps, to avoid speculation, list powers he has explicitly displayed at some point? This would include invisibility, flying, drawing the future, healing factor, and mind-reading. 160.39.30.190 19:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He has also absorbed radiation emission as evidenced by his flash of all his powers just before Claude punches him. Twinotter 16:14, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No he hasn't, the powers you see in that scene, in order, are invisibility, the ability to read people's minds, and precognition.  He starts shouting "I'm losing it" and then Claude hits him.  At NO POINT do you see radiation emission - which is correct as he has not encountered Ted yet.  If you feel I'm wrong then please prove me wrong. 61.69.203.155 10:04, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

text: No. That's speculation. We should stick with powers Peter has displayed on the show or in the comic. --Kmsiever 20:09, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I did add a note saying that since he aquired TK from Sylar there may be other powers he has but is not aware of.  I think this covers the requisites of not assuming anything (that someone watching the show couldn't nominally assume) and it mentions the "anomoly" of aquiring an aquired power.  I don't think we need to make Peter some kind of superman but we do need to acknowledge the extent of his power. Padillah 16:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Only that's not true, is it?  He copied precog from Isaac when Isaac wasn't using it.  He also copied flight from Nathan before the scene where they both flew, as he said to Nathan in the first episode "I hovered for a split second".  The powers don't have to be in active use for them to be appropriated - his DNA can recognize gene markers for powers and rewrite itself to contain those gene markers from that point on.  I'd say the initial mimicry only happened when the powers were in active use - like Claude said, it's a reflex, like Pavlov's dog salivating when a bell rings.  His body just activates the new power when it senses the same power being activated near it, like "monkey see monkey do". 203.14.180.100 02:53, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't think the single power theory works either.  It only looks that way because Sylar is the only one with more than one power.  Peter can't get TK and healing from Claire simply because that's not what powers she has.  Padillah 16:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Sylar's freezing abilities have been confirmed as mentioned in his article. And the rest is speculation since Peter hasn't used any of Sylar's other powers. (Did you really have to list all of those examples?) --Pentasyllabic 06:03, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Absorbed Powers

message: Dposse, It is not original research to state that Peter has demonstrated radiation emission - the thing that he fears the most.  In the flash of multiple powers he shows at the end of Distractions he comes close to exploding.  Also, it is not original research to state which characters Peter has interacted with and that he has not demonstrated the powers of these characters. Dposse, please see your talk page for more about this...  Thanks, Twinotter 16:28, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, he comes nowhere close to exploding.  Please refrain from drawing incorrect conclusions based on your own misunderstandings or lack of attention to the subject matter.  Claude thinks that Peter will explode when his powers go crazy, either because he is aware of Ted or because he's got a lack of understanding of Peter's power.  At the very worst, all that can happen to Peter if he calls on too many at once is he'll become overloaded and go comatose until his body works out the mess and recovers.  In EVER SINGLE SCENE revolving around Peter's possibly exploding, it is shown to be a perfect copy of Ted's power (which was further confirmed when Ted himself lost control of his power in the Bennet's household).  As Peter has not yet encountered Ted, it is completely impossible for him to have radiation-based powers at this point.  Please pay more attention before you start speculating.  And yes, it IS original research, Twinotter. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.69.203.155 (talk) 10:08, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I guess its fair to say now that he does acquire radiation emission, since he DOES infact explode above new york city.Baaleos 12:02, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Radiation Emission

message: How come when Peter is using Matt's power you hear feedback, when Matt isn't even around? (Like the episode "Distractions") —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.16.89.117 (talk • contribs) 22:18 February 15, 2007, User refers to himself as "Red Spiderman". - Comment copyedited by: - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 04:15, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Although it's speculation I guess thats got to do with the fact that the first time he was near Matt, and Recalling that feeling recalled the feedback that occured. There currently is no explained reason though. Jacobshaven3 22:28, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Telepathy 

message: Is there an official source that confirms Peter's age is 26? In an interview on NBC's website with creator Tim Kring (I can't find the exact link right now, but I'll produce it later if someone else doesn't beat me to it), when asked about Peter and Claire ever getting together, he said no because Peter is 30 and Claire is 16.--76.179.82.128 00:40, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the reference in List of characters in Heroes, Godsend gives his age as 26. Jacobshaven3 01:18, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Ummm...the other reason why Peter and Claire will never 'get together' is that he's her uncle.;)DiScOrD tHe LuNaTiC 13:45, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peter's Age 

message: Peter Petrelli's name, like the names of many comic book superheroes and supervillans such as Clark Kent and Lex Luthor, is alliterative. The only other Heroes character that has this same distinction is Gabriel Grey.
I'm thinking that's going to be more of a direct reference later on in the series. Peter is beginning to hone his "stored" powers so that he can use them at will, making him the only one we know of that is going to be capable of taking Sylar out. The Superman reference should become a direct one when they become bigger enemies with each other, ala Clark Kent and Lex Luthor. Goroliath
:I'm glad you added in the alliterative part I did that awhile back and some clown kept removing it. On the other hand I didnt even make the connection that Sylar's real name is also alliterative good catch --Bushido Brown 03:16, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: dposse removed that mention under the guise of "original research". Im bringing it back as no part of that trivia is original research --Bushido Brown 00:18, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia

message: I added some details from Unexpected (others beat me to it). Was that actually Peter stopping time on the roof of the building, or did he 'catch' the taser gun darts with telekinesis? I couldn't tell. Also, did I miss an instance of a character with Sonic type abilities? I added the appearance of those when Peter's "scream" sent Isaac flying backwards, but I can't think of what character that is tied to. Presumably he got that from Sylar. - Denny 06:33, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought it was a Sonic Scream as well, but others seem to think that he threw Isaac back with telekinesis and the vocal distortion was a result of his absorbing Eden's powers (whom he contacted briefly in Suresh's apartment). That makes sense to me, but I like entertaining the idea that he absorbed a sonic scream from Sylar. All signs point to Eden, though.   Anticrash  talk  16:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In the cast/crew commentary on NBC.com, this is attributed to telekinesis.  No mention of Eden is made, but that doesn't mean it's not related. -Big Smooth 18:38, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additions 

message: If one person can give verifiable evidence, which does not include what is visible on the episode (since people can't agree on what they saw or heard, and it wasn't shown explicitly), that this was Telekinesis or Time Manipulation, then one can be chosen, however so far all people are giving is OR and Speculation. Until one can be verified, please refrain from placing a specific ability, and leave it neutral. Jacobshaven3 19:31, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In "Parasite", the way Sylar stopped Mohinder's bullet, and made it fall to the ground, looked just like what Peter did to the tazer wires. 67.167.127.178 23:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is easy. In "Unexpected" when the tazer stopped moving, look at Claude closely. He was in pain, and he moved. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 01:06, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Both comments are first person perspectives of what happened. People disagree with the above observations, and therefore the source isn't verifiable. Once again, are there any other sources proving one way or another? Jacobshaven3 09:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Good point. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 08:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Thank you for pointing that out. :) Jacobshaven3 09:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Seeing as (theoretically) Hiros power is manipulation of the gravitons in the area around him, the taser wires momentum could easily have been affected, albeit in a way that mimics telekiniesis, making it totally ambiguous. Blkmasta 03.19am, 21/4/2007 GMT
i think he used TK at that moment since he just discovered he got it from sylar and he knew how to use powers by thinking of people he met with powers and he didnt even mention Hiro on that scene so he didnt stop time, and that slow-motion is just dramatic effect —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.60.241.167 (talk • contribs) 14:23, April 29, 2007
As Benett did react when the tazer suspended, my guess is that he used Telekinesis. FMN92 00:08, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Verifibility 

message: Other readers/editors, please chime in on the question:  Should the entry for Peter Petrelli list other heroes that Peter has interacted with? Twinotter 04:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Such a section would be really fan-crufty. All of his interactions and potential powers should be incorporated into his character history and/or powers sections in prose form. EvilCouch 09:58, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I believe it is important.  The purpose of recording known facts is so that we know where the research ends and the speculation begins.  The more facts we have, the better one can tell if their theories even have any basis.  I've unfortunately missed a couple episodes, so I couldn't be sure if Peter and Eden had even met.  If a fact is unconfirmed that I understand, but after reading this discussion, I now know that he and eden have been in the same room.  I see no reason not to state such a simple fact.4.229.150.68 15:35, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Including such a list is tantamount to speculating what his powers are, due to his nature.  I think only verifiable powers should be included as they're revealed in the show or online graphic novels.  --GargoyleMT 22:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, GargoyleMT. That's what this whole argument is based on, speculation vs fact. dposse 12:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not tantamount to speculating what powers he has.  It's giving readers information that is lacking in other places that lets them decide the situation for themselves.  Right now, there's nothing on Nathan's page that says that he's interacted with Eden - even in the history section.  But given the nature of his powers, that's an important piece of factual (not speculative) information that's missing.  It would be like not listing a character that Sylar had killed.  Ask yourself this, is it fact or speculation that he interacted with Eden?  Is it fact or speculation that he has been near the Haitian?  The wiki is a place for facts, not drawing conclusions.  Let the readers draw whatever conclusions they want.  Twinotter 00:10, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you meant Peter, not Nathan.  You just keep getting it wrong, don't you. 203.14.180.100 05:16, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks for the correction, anonymous.  Yes, Peter's page, not Nathan's. Twinotter 21:39, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peter's Interactions 

message: Hey, maybe we should go directly to the producers and writers mouths.  On the page comicbookresources.com, after every new episode they have an article called "Behind the Eclipse" with questions from viewers to the writers, and sometimes they actually answer them directly.  For example, this weeks article directly answers the whole "Super Yell" question that you guys have been debating over regarding Sylar and Peter.  The question and answer that was asked was:
:Benjamin Spears writes in with a whole host of thoughts and questions. “Thanks so much for the BEHIND THE ECLIPSE series! What can you tell us about the Uluru creature that has been subtly referred to in the series and seen in one of the graphic novels? Also, what's the significance with the Heroes' voices changing? Aside from Eden (whose voice changed when she used her power of suggestion) we've seen Sylar and Peter's (last episode) voices change. Is there a deeper reason for this or should we just chalk it up to the ‘coolness’ factor?” 
:{answer} The Peter and Sylar changes should be credited to coolness factor. And as for Uluru – we know that it is the native name for Ayers Rock in Australlia. Maybe people should look into the mythology of Uluru and then ask the question again. 
You can find the rest of the article(s) at http://www.comicbookresources.com/news/newsitem.cgi?id=9817
Check it out. 192.139.221.204 13:05, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since when does Australia have 2 L's?  GB2/geography/. 203.14.180.100 05:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Direct Answers to your questions 

message: Originally posted at Talk:Unexpected (Heroes), reposted to help with Peter's ability discussions.
(Indent reset!) It took four friggin tries, but I was finally able to watch most of the commentary. Sendhil (Mohinder), Zachary (Sylar), and Jeff Loeb do the commentary this episode. Notes in particular to Peter:
* During the scene where HRG finds Claude and Peter: Sendhil, Zachary, and Jeff comment on how cool the night vision is, Jimmy Jean-Louis's (the Haitian) name, that Peter "froze the tazers", and that flying away was so Superman. As a side note, HRG and the Haitian's tazers are flashing different colors when they shoot Claude. As Peter freezes the tazers, the camera eventually swings to an over-the-shoulder view. Where the Haitian is standing, his tazer gun's color is frozen on red. 
* During the end scene at Isaac's apartment: Peter knocked back Isaac with "telekinesis" according to Jeff. You can hear Peter's voice change as he tells Isaac "Don't lie to me!". (This could mean that Peter used Brian/Sylar and Eden's powers simultaneously.) It definitely means that Isaac's knockback is not from Eden's power. Jeff also points out a continuity error: The dinosaur painting, which is supposed to be torn up and in Hiro's tube, is on an easel in the apartment while Isaac is trying to aim for Peter. Jeff said he did not notice it until someone pointed it out after the scene was shot.  
Hope this info helps clear up some of the questions- fmmarianicolon | Talk 22:40, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you will look at the interview above, it has been stated that neither Sylar nor Peter has Eden's power. It should be chalked up to "coolness factor". Valaqil 15:16, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notes from "Unexpected" commentary (re: Peter) 

message: I'm trying to add information to each of the character's articles on how the character role was developed.  (See Simone and Mr. Bennett for better examples, or the trivia sections in Hiro and Niki's articles for so-so examples.)  For Peter, the role was originally designed to be Nathan's twin.  (Source:  The Powers That Be (page 3)). I remember before the show debuted that the character chart (when it was back on the main article (doesn't that somewhat seem like forever ago?)) also listed Peter as a twin.  Does anyone else know of other sources about the characters being twins, or any info on how "Peter" came to be? - fmmarianicolon | Talk 00:14, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character role development 

message: Please list a source(like episode and scene) that shows Peter using more than one ability at once.  I have seen every episode (love DVR) multiple times and cannot find this.  I have seen him use one power right after another, but not at the same time.
The statement that Peter can use multiple powers at the same time should be removed unless/until that statement is cited/verified.   Steveo9009 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.222.58.14 (talk) 06:26, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: agreed -Xornok 05:01, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been shown that he can use two powers at once - invisibility and telekinesis ("Unexpected").  It's pointless debating the point anymore when there's a verifiable piece of evidence that is 100% canon.  It's like arguing that blue is red.  If you want to plead that it wasn't clear enough, think about this - if Peter hadn't been using invisibility, then he no longer would have been able to see Claude and therefore neither would we - also, we never saw either of them alter their visibility, and at this stage the invisibility was still in "automatic response" stage.  If he didn't use the telekinesis, he would have copped a pole to the face, which he didn't, and it's hard to get more obvious than THAT.  Therefore, if we're going to go with Occams Razor here (which I think would be reasonable), the simplest explanation for what we saw is that he was using 2 powers at once. I honestly think it's completely pointless to keep debating something once it has more or less conclusively been shown. 203.14.180.100 05:09, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

text: No, not quite.  A glass is moved by something we can't see.  He may have simply reached over and grabbed the glass while invisible and dragged it clear across the bar to where he sat.  There is nothing that makes the display specifically TK.  Padillah 16:06, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Remember Peter wasn't trying to explode....if he could have stopped he would have. This means that he at that point (as he stated) he had no control of his powers. This doesn't stop him from being able to use two powers at once when he is in control, but when he's lost control of one power I assume he's lost control of HIS power and therefore ALL powers. (Rekija 06:46, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peter using multiple abilities simultaneously 

message: I simply want to add the events that took place on last night's episode.
:After fleeing from Isaac's studio, Peter goes to speak to Nathan and tells him of Simone's death. Nathan suggests calling the police and begs Peter to stay so that he might help, but Peter runs away again, now feeling that anyone he cares about is in danger as long as he lives.</br>Peter stops by Mohinder's apartment to find it empty, with papers and furniture astray as if a fight had taken place. A few drops of blood fall on Peter's head and discovers Mohinder pinned to the ceiling, whispering, "Syler."</br>Peter turns around and Syler has him cornered, telekinetically pushing him into the wall.</br>"You're the one that's like me (paraphrase)... I wonder how that works..."</br>Syler begins to cut open Peter's forehead, revealing the method by which Peter obtains his scar. The episode ends as a couple of drops of blood and a loch of hair falls to the floor.
Even though the page is protected, we should remember to add details to Peter's bio as the show progresses.
</br>Watemon 22:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not Syler it's Sylar.  Say it with me - SYLAR. 203.14.180.100 05:25, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done; that's not about the character, that's an episode guide. Neil (not Proto ►) 13:36, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Thats a very good point.  I think it should be said that he can use multiple powers simultaneously, but he may be having some trouble learning how - he only seems to do it as a reflex, which at least is a step up from calling up ANY power by reflex. 203.14.180.100 08:26, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments on Parasite 

message: I simply want to add the events that took place on last night's episode.
:After fleeing from Isaac's studio, Peter goes to speak to Nathan and tells him of Simone's death. Nathan suggests calling the police and begs Peter to stay so that he might help, but Peter runs away again, now feeling that anyone he cares about is in danger as long as he lives.
:Peter stops by Mohinder's apartment to find it empty, with papers and furniture astray as if a fight had taken place. A few drops of blood fall on Peter's head and discovers Mohinder pinned to the ceiling, whispering, "Sylar."
:Peter turns around and Sylar has him cornered, telekinetically pushing him into the wall.
:"I remember you.  You're like me, aren't you? I'd like to see how that works."
:Sylar begins to cut open Peter's forehead, revealing the method by which Peter obtains his scar. The episode ends as a couple of drops of blood and a lock of hair falls to the floor.
this was deleted earlier by "Neil" without any explanation or viable reason, I just think that while this page is protected, we don't forget to update this page as new episodes air.
 
Even though the page is protected, we should remember to add details to Peter's bio as the show progresses.</br>144.96.88.41 00:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I told you once, no - and I didn't remove your comment, I put it at the bottom of the page. Neil (not Proto ►) 12:07, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments on Parasite 2 

message: I liked it when there achart showing Peter's asorbed abilities so what if we bring it back but like this (in grapg form because i can't get a graph on here [already tried the graph button on top])- Red 3/15
Peter’s Absorbed Powers 			
Absorbed #- 5
Power-Telepathy
Power absorbed from-Matt Parkman
Absorbed in-Fallout
Notes-When Peter and Matt are by each other using Telepathy they both experience an overload
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.16.89.117 (talk • contribs) 21:40, 15 March 2007
:I tried to address that by a chart that is under discussion. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 22:45, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please sign your comments. Add 4 tildes (this symbol - ~ ) after your post.  Or refrain from posting. 203.14.180.100 00:18, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  i wonder if it's correct to call it "absorbed" powers, because the original person who possessed the power does not "lose" the ability. i.e. the power does not get taken away from the original person and put in Peter's body. Although i do think Peter in the episodes called it himself. Z3u2 04:06, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Where is the chart? --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 13:07, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chart 

message: Okay. So, this is an issue again. First, I would like to direct you toward the archives. Please review that before commenting here. After all, save a brief summary, which I am about to give, there would be no point in wasting time re-stating the same (counter)arugments.
Previously, for some period of time, the alliteration issue was dropped. Presumably, the discussion in the archives contributed to this cessation of alliterative additions. Reasons I see as being listed for not including the alliteration note include: (1) It's not that noteworthy. Peter is only one character in the whole show with alliteration. He's not the primary main character, nor do the syllables of his name match in count. This is barely related to the comic book alliteration phenomenon. (2) An entire list of comic book characters that are listed on the alliteration page do not have similar notes in their articles. Why should Peter be any different? (3) How does that really contribute to the article? (4) Avoid Trivia sections. Valaqil 13:18, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm all for it. But the issue is sourcing it. It could be added to a section between Peter and Gabriel, as the two of them share a lot in common and are opposites etc, we've even now got quotes from HRG in the show saying (paraphase here) "Peter is the only one that can stop Sylar". I'ld rather see this kind of stuff here then what we currently have, which is a giant plot summary. (Rekija 05:16, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alliteration Again? 

message: I know this isn't related to the main page but: Can someone PLEASE teach him how to properly sign and edit his posts please?  He doesn't even have a talk page to bring this up because he DOES NOT SIGN HIS POSTS.  And I've seen several people, myself included, instruct him directly on how to do it.  All he's done is link his screen name to the wiki page for the colour red.  I'm seriously getting narked off with having to pick through the messes he makes in order to comprehend the talk page. 203.14.180.98 22:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  User RED/RedSpiderman 

message: OK I now have a screen name, ok everyone it's RREDD13 so you can get of my back ok- RREDD13 00:40, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just Use the signature button in the toolbar (next to the crossed out W) or type --~~~~ As for the spelling mistakes, correct the article, but please don't edit other people's contributions on the Talk pages. --GargoyleMT 18:14, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  RED 

message: In the online graphic novel no. 30, String Theory, Hiro from the future said Sylar exploded after stealing Teds power, but as this future could be some sort of alternate timeline, it's not definite, but it's possible. Blkmasta 18.22 GMT 24/04/07
:That was the history from Future Hiro's timeline, one where Peter was never told to save the cheerleader. Future Hiro messed up though, instead of stopping the explosion, he just changed who exploded. 192.203.136.254 16:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We don't know that he will be the bomb. All we know is that he dreamed his was the bomb. For that matter, both Isaac and Simone were in his dream and they are both dead. --Kmsiever 18:49, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  I'm not convinced that a person explodes.  If a person explodes, I'm confused as to whether it is Peter or not.  I have also not ruled out a person exploding a device.  I invite discussion.--Raymm 05:52, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Peter actually the bomb?

message: When we first see Peter fighting Sylar, Peter turns invisible and Sylar says "cool trick, can't wait to use it" does this mean Sylar gets all of Peter's asorbed abilities or was he bluffing to make Peter scared?- RREDD13 22:01, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If Sylar killed Peter, he would be able to get all of Peter's powers, including invisibility.  It was not a bluff, though the statement might have been meant to be intimidating.  Arwen undomiel 00:09, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is speculation.  We don't even know how Sylar aquires others powers, killing might not be necessary just something Sylar does.  We don't know.  Whereas, we do know that Peter can aquire "secondary" powers from Sylar as he's shown using TK quite often.  (Of course the argument could be made that he aquired the TK from someone else and simply thinks he got it from Sylar because that's the person he remembers using it.)  All of which is speculation.  Sylar has never had the opportunity to aquire more than one power nor do we know if Peter aquires others powers in a way that's exploitable by Sylar. Padillah 16:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I think Sylar could use invisibility if he killed Peter. True, we don't know how Sylar aquires his powers, but he does.  If Sylar simply took all Peter's powers, not knowing Peter had invisibility, it is possible Sylar would not discover that power until he met Claude.  However, even if Sylar didn't know it, he would have the capability to become invisible.  Sylar did know Peter could become invisible however, so it is extremely likely he would quickly learn to use it.  Arwen undomiel 21:24, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

text: It is not conclusive that Sylar needs to kill to aquire powers.  It may simply be that he doesn't care enough not to kill, so he just kills them.  The actual machanics of his aquireing others powers is not clear.  That he has to examine the others brain to determine how the power works suggests that he would need to open his brain and "fix" it in order to gain the others power.  This has never shown to be the case.  Padillah 17:36, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Interviews with Bryan Fuller have stated he does need to kill (they have previously been included, should be in the archives), and he eats the brains to acquire it, although this hasn't been shown on screen to prevent fears of it being compared with zombies et al. Jacobshaven3 18:22, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you provide a reference to Bryan Fuller have stated he does need to kill, please? --Raymm 05:55, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sylar in 0.7% 

message: What consensus can we reach regarding ditching the episode names?  I say we present the bio as a bio and cite the episodes as references.  This is more in line with many other articles on TV characters (see William Adama, Laura Roslin, and Gregory House).  However the FA on Andrew Van De Kamp has references to episodes within the article it's done in a different fassion than we have here.  What say ye?  Padillah 11:49, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're ditching the episode names, then you need to ensure it still reads like the bio of a fictional TV character and not like the bio of a real person. --Kmsiever 13:21, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For that, you could just have a tag at the top reserved for fictional characters 220.244.208.204 12:12, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ditching the Episode names. 

message: Peter's fight with Sylar appears to exhibit Cryokenesis vs. Pyrokenesis (at least to me)... Can we get a consensus on this? Or has there been confirmation from another source? Laxrulz777 06:04, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to also agree that in the end of the latest episode Peter exhibits the use of pyrokenetics. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.124.139.205 (talk) 06:59, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Therefore, you should add Meredith Gordon to the list of peoples... 211.30.223.128 07:20, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Sylar would have had to pull him through the door. PureSoldier 17:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

text: If they'd taken that screen cap about half a second later you'd have clearly seen FLAMES jumping up from Peter's hands... if you've got it on DVR go back and watch... I think it's pretty clearly fire and not radiation (it doesn't look like ANYTHING that Ted's ever done) 74.167.228.68 11:06, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Per the discussion on Talk:Sylar, I have come to the conclusion that is was, in fact pyrokinesis that Peter used in the fight with Sylar. He used Sprague's radiation to melt the locks on Niki/Jessica's cell door. - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 03:26, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Umm, no. Peter with burning hands doesn't mean Peter must use that power in that specific scene. --Pentasyllabic 18:06, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Seeing as that cover was released a week or two after the episode in which he is shown with a similar power, I'd say that it does mean that he was using pyrokinesis. 151.199.195.52 18:12, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Umm, no. You're affirming the consequent. --Pentasyllabic 18:43, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Okay, I see what you're saying. The covers are supposed to be hints and stuff, so it at least shows that he will most likely get her power, though. 151.199.195.52 18:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

text: The edit summary suggests this discussion on the Sylar page: Talk:Sylar#Cryokinesis in "Five Years Gone".  Or, actually, a couple of the other talk sections on that page.  --GargoyleMT 20:40, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Okay, but I think that the article should at least mention that he had more powers in the future. Ophois 23:15, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't really know but I think the Heroes writers were intending the future Sylar vs. Petrelli battle to be a battle of opposites (Sylar definitely has Ice so Peter should have fire) but this is really the fault of the SFX artists making the FX for Ted's power look too much like a really big fire or something 220.244.208.204 12:18, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Future Powers

message: The main-series timeline has not yet shown Peter to be able to use Hiro's powers. Only the Five Year's Gone timeline Peter was able to. Therefore, that entry on the list should be moved down, unless someone can prove that he's used it before. 68.81.104.194 20:02, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The time freeze wouldn't cause the tazer to fall down from loss of inertia. The tazer falling coincides with blocking via telekinesis, which he displayed earlier in the episode. –– Lid(Talk) 14:49, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  In the graphic novel "Walls part 1", Peter states him and Hiro have to start up time again to move people, which must mean only Hiro (and Peter) can be affected by his time freezing power. Therefore Peter must have Hiro's power in order to speak to him when Future Hiro visits him. I'm not sure how close that reasoning borders on OR though, so I won't include it until a consensus is reached. Jacobshaven3 17:23, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then Ando has Hiro's power as well 'cause one of the first times he uses his powers is to save the girl at the bus stop.  Apparently Hiro can pull people out of the freeze at will.  Padillah 17:35, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Hiro has moved objects, including people, many times while time was stopped, on the show. I don't know why the graphic novel says otherwise. --Pentasyllabic 18:02, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The caption in "Walls" actually says they'd have to move "a lot of stiff time-frozen bodies" (the prisoners), which is consistent with Hiro's abilities. --Pentasyllabic 21:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry for miswording, I meant that since he would have to move them as stiff bodies, he must not be able to allow them to leave time, which means for Peter to have spoken to him at the train, Peter has to have acquired his powers. Jacobshaven3 09:18, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

text: But the Walls comic happens only a year after the bomb, so the Hiro that visited Peter on the train would have had four more years to train his power, where he could have learned to pull someone else out of time. 192.203.136.254 13:55, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thats true, but in the past Peter has never had any difficulty controlling peoples powers once he's got them, the beginning might take a bit to transition, but after it he normally has full control. (Like painting instantly, et al) So in a year of knowing Hiro, I'd say he should ave gotten perfect practice, though that is a bit OR so I can see why it wouldn't get into the article. Jacobshaven3 14:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

text: The other assertion I'd like to make is that Peter has never (and there's no reason for us to believe otherwise) absorbed "half" of a power.  If he's come in contact with Hiro, he has Hiro's power.  If he has Hiro's power, he has ALL Hiro's powers.  Just because he hasn't exhibited other manifestations doesn't mean he only absorbed half a power.  Just because he's never cut someones head open doesn't mean he didn't absorb that part of Sylar's TK.  Peter has never done anything to lead me to believe he would only absorb half a power.  Padillah 12:29, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hiro's Powers 

message: Can we please stop adding the blatant speculation regarding Peters ability to absorb Sylars powers or find a way to refer to it that does not speculate.  I admit that, since Peter is shown to have absorbed Sylar's TK it is notworthy to mention that this is an aquired power and NOT Sylar's own.  However this needs to be mentioned without the speculation of him absorbing any of Sylar's powers we have no noticed in the show (or online comic).  Padillah 18:28, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Theres another interview where it's been said Peter only absorbed the telekinesis, thouh it's back during the hiatus so not sure on relevance. Jacobshaven3 07:13, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speculation regarding Peter absorbing Sylars powers. 

message: In the Hard Part, Peter begins absorbing Ted's power, so should this be listed as his current powers?
Also, in Walls pt. 2, Peter absorbs a lightning power and a speed power.  Should these be included in the alternate future section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.161.73.106 (talk • contribs) 22:43, May 8, 2007
:Yes to the first question.  As for the second one, if they're changing the future, does it impact the Peter we watch every Monday?  The "alternate future" Peter could be handled the way various alternate reality versions of comic book heroes are covered - but do we know enough about him through that one episode?  And are the graphic novels that could supplement the section even canon?  (The most handy example is the death of papa Suresh, which happened differently in the graphic novel and on TV.)  --GargoyleMT 16:33, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, seeing as Hiro and Peter were breaking out other superpowered people any list of Peter's powers is suspect.  He now has any power they want to give him since he easily came into contact with "just shy of two hundered" people and their powers.  He therefore has over two hundred powers waiting to be discovered.  Padillah 17:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To Gargoyle, the "traffic accident" was the only way the cab company could explain Suresh's death.  As Mohinder said in the graphic novel "It wasn't an accident. It was one of them."  As for the state of the taxi, we can only speculate. Likely, it was Sylar covering his tracks. In any case, the graphic novels are supposed to be canon. PureSoldier 19:50, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New Powers

message: Could it be possible that part of Peter's gaining control of his abilities came partly from Sylars understanding of how things work? And by the same token wouldn't that power allow him to tell Hiro when to go back to fix the timeline? Also, the dreams that he's had happened long before he absorbed Issac's power 
(he saw Nathan's car accident fiver years before) and when he saw himself explode, he wasn't painting. As far as I can tell, Peter's precog ability through Issac only works when he's in a trance, not sleeping. Perhaps it was his mother's ability? Wererat42 04:12, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to an interview (There are so many now I can't recall which one), Mrs. Petrelli's power is "similar to another Hero's, but it's easier to get from point A to B" or something like that. So I'm guessing she has a teleportation ability. Though if she had prophetic powers, it would make sense. Jacobshaven3 11:24, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

text: That's very possible, considering teleportation alone is a "Hero" ability. On Mohinder's map there was at least one person identified with the power of teleportation. Navex 01:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm sure we'll find more out about Charles Deveaux and whatever happened to Peter next season.  There are Heroes discussion boards that might be a good place to toss around ideas.  Wikipedia discourages the use of talk pages as forums.  --GargoyleMT 12:32, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Absorbing Sylar's 'original' power, and prophetic dreams

message: On a Google search on the extent of Peter's powers I found a few well-made points about the taser incident in "Unexpected": There is a distinctive electrical flicker on the taser guns from the moment they are fired, and this is visible when the electrodes strike Claude. Yet it's not there when (I say, and others hotly deny) Peter stops time. There is movement, but the only thing moving is Claude, and Peter's in direct contact with him, which is the way Hiro has been able to teleport Ando around. Bennet, who is trained and highly competent, does not move or react at all for ten seconds while Peter stops the electrodes, yet he does so immediately afterwards, and from his gestures he seems surprised. Not to mention the click of the taser which slows to a stop. In fact, the tailing coils are not affected by gravity during the time they just hang there. Then there are the very, very similar special effects for Hiro's and Peter's time stop. And just to drive the point in further, the competent-seeming official Heroes website explicitly states in a caption that Peter Petrelli stopped time. --Kizor 05:30, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I will check this out when I get home tonight but the photo caption is pretty lucid and concrete.  I will, however, fix the content to have correct links.  Padillah 21:17, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peter's time stop 

message: If Peter hasn't displayed Dale's super-hearing by the Landslide episode, then this power should be added to his list for this episode. Sylar spied on Claire, Peter, and Ted by using super-hearing, and I'm pretty sure that when Sylar talked out loud, Peter's mimicry of super-hearing kicked in, allowing him to detect Sylar's presence. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.65.165.102 (talk) 18:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not necessarily.  To me, it appeared that Sylar thought his plans, and Peter merely used telepathy to hear them.  I highly doubt Sylar would have verbalized his plans--someone might overhear.  Arwen undomiel 20:02, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

text: The proper time for adding it to the article is after Peter unambiguously demonstrates its use.  What you say makes sense, but it is only a theory until proven.  --GargoyleMT 20:08, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

text: It was implied by Tim Kring tonight in a live blog (http://blog.nbc.com/heroes/) that Peter does have Sylar's other powers, specifically hinting at the freezing ability. Also, Peter doesn't need to just think about the person. Accessing a power is based on necessity, too, as shown when Peter uses telekinesis against Claude without even thinking of Sylar. Ophois 06:01, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Landslide episode 

message: I think it is important that there be some note on the similarities and differences between Sylar and Peter. They have been noted by both Tim Kring outside of the show, and characters inside the show, and there is most definitely a symbolic value to the two (another fact confirmed by Kring). I posted a section to this effect in both entries and tried to do it with direct references from the show and other articles. However, some of it is admitedly original research. I am trying to re-edit it and compile a series of references to make it fit in more properly with the series, and have less speculation. However, I am still in my opinion a rather amatuer user, and if anybody thinks they can perform this task better I would be much obliged. My primary concern is the point that this is an important aspect of both characters that deserves some level of notice.epocalypse 07:49, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comparison To Sylar

message: Why didn't Peter just fly up into the sky on his own before he "went off"?  He could do it since he's absorbed Nathan's power.  That way no one would die.  Nathan didn't have to fly him up there. HipHopLives 00:29, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm pretty sure that controlling the radiation so he didn't explode at that exact moment was using all of Peter's energy and concentration.  Before Nathan lifts him, Peter says, "I took his power, Nathan.  I can't control it.  I can't do anything."  I think this statement implies that Peter could not prevent the explosion, nor could he do anything else, including using another power--if he tried to use a power, he would probably lose control and explode then.  Someone else was required to fly with him.  Arwen undomiel 00:55, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: ATTENTION!

message: Peter Petrelli, in the alternative time-skip DID NOT have electric manipulation. If people on here think he turned off the TV set in the bar with it, that was telekinesis... Other than that there was not a single part in "Five Years Gone" where he used this "power".
Chozen1 11:06, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's in the comics. Ophois 17:28, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That may be, but the electric manipulation was not shown in the actual television episode Five Years Gone.  Therefore I removed the reference to it in the paragraph that talks about the events of that particular episode. I would recommend that items found only in the comic book should be clearly labelled as such in the article, if they are even included at all. Dugwiki 18:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

text: One other note. If information from the comic books is included in the article, please remember to provide a proper reference for them.  In fact, right now the article only has one listed reference, and that's just "The Fix". Dugwiki 19:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They are canon, so it's probable that we'll see more references from the comics showing up here - especially if they continue over the summer as intended. ZZ 19:34, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Can someone please put a reference for electric manipulation on the page? I don't have time right now, though if it hasn't been put up later, I'll try to. Ophois 19:45, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Regardless of whether or not the comics are "canon", the passage you reverted says that his electric manipulation was revealed in that television episode.  It wasn't. Dugwiki 20:04, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree - but it wasn't my edit. I was just remarking on the issue, since it'll come up again. Since there aren't episodes over the summer, but there will be comics, there shouldn't be any further  confusion between the two, which means fewer problems to fix on an already edit-heavy article. ZZ 02:52, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Had you read the article before you posted your sarcastic remark, you'd have noticed that I did make the change you requested already. Dugwiki 22:43, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Found the specific issue, Walls part 2, where Peter mimics a super-prisoner's "lightning attacks".  There seems to be no mention of electrical manipulation other than these lightning attacks.  I modified the paragraph accordingly and added the reference. Dugwiki 22:53, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electric Manipulation 

message: Although I'm not sure since in Five Years Gone, he exploded and survived, it's possible that he survived How To Stop An Exploding Man. However, that's just a guess. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.123.169.110 (talk • contribs) 21:45, May 23, 2007
:He definitely survived, but until it's shown in the comics or show that he is still alive, it counts as speculation. Ophois 02:52, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm guessing that they'll probably clarify it one way or another in Season 2. ZZ 02:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  His Survival 

message: I'm not sure on the whole matter since I've seen the show only once so please be reasonable if I (and will probably) do mistakes.
#Claire "died" when the branch pierced her skull and brain.
#Claire "resurrected" after the removal of said branch.
#Peter "died" when the shard pierced his skull and brain.
#Peter "resurrected" after the removal of said shard.
#Peter asked Claire to shoot him if he goes nuclear, saying "you know the spot", inidicating the back of his skull.
Maybe I'm reading to much into this but the idea keeps nagging me: When Claire/Peter is shot at the indicated point and therefore separated from it will they die permanently? In the occurred cases a specified section of the brain was hurt and after removing the obstacle for proper healing the tissue regenerated. But if the responsible part is effectively removed from the brain (by whichever means) wouldn't they stay dead?
Furthermore I think the abilities should be divided in active and passive. As far as it was shown that would be plausible since Advanced Hearing is always "On", much like Advanced Regeneration while Flight and Telekinesis take conscious effort of the empowered person. Maybe another row in the already existing table would be sufficient. --213.54.151.27 18:43, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes it does appear to be their weakspot. The writers don't want us thinking that these characters could never die and therefore are never in any risk. And while I agree it should be noted that Peter's healing is passive...you could almost say the same for his radiation as he doesn't really want to do that either...so until Peter actually gains true control over his power any one of his collected abilities could go off at any time. (Rekija 21:52, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  As you've said, Peter heals after the shard has been removed, so if he had been shot he could have healed if someone took out the bullet (i.e. in the morgue, like with Claire), but maybe if it takes too long Claire's power doesn't work anymore. FMN92 00:41, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Permanent Death 

message: I noticed a revert battle going on with a "hidden powers" section.  The issue brought up was that it would be speculation to guess what hidden powers Peter might or might not have.  On the other hand, the section did seem to have a valid and useful point, which is that the potential for these hidden powers does exist and this potential makes Peter unusual among most of the Heroes on the show (ie most heroes have static powers that, once revealed, you pretty much know what they are).
To that end I tried a rewording of the section to try and explain this better.  Basically I wanted to make clear that we shouldn't speculate on what powers Peter might or might not have, but it is useful to mention his potential as a whole to have hidden abilities that could appear in future episodes unexpectedly.  Hopefully I got that across, but feel free to edit or revert as desired. Dugwiki 22:27, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks good to me. Good job. However, would it be more appropriate to be under "Powers and abilities" rather than have its own section? Ophois 23:23, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm.. while I appreciate the effort, the text should be brought here for discussion first. The present version still contains a lot of speculation, and could be considerably shorter while delivering the same information. --Ckatzchatspy 23:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  While I agree that Peter most likely has abilities he doesn't even know about yet, and can/has picked up the rest of Sylars abilities, the problem is soucing. Remember Wikipedia isn't about what we think could happen, it's not even about common sense...it's about whats creditable...what we can source. Even us making judgements by putting two and two together is original research. Unless it's mentioned in the show, graphic novel or a reliable link then we shouldn't be using it. Now I love to sit back and chat about Heroes and give my opinions and theories but thats for the water cooler and message boards, not an Encyclopedia.(Rekija 12:39, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree there's a need to talk about it, but even the most recent wording doesn't seem very encyclopedic.  We're still assuming we know how Peter's power works, we don't really know.  It would be better if we used what people said in the episodes about Peter's power, instead.  This wording is a lot less speculative, but it still reads like original research.  --GargoyleMT 15:34, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The original research policy also describes OR as "synthesis of established facts, ideas, opinions, or arguments in a way that builds a particular case favored by the editor, without attributing that analysis or synthesis to a reputable source."  This is how I'd classify what you added.  Please don't try to redefine original research (or think your way around rules).  Wikipedia itself allows you to break the rules, just see WP:IAR.  It should be a last resort.  --GargoyleMT 22:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Funny, I'd say you're attempting to do exactly what you're telling me not to do - trying to define WP:OR in a way that suits your own particular agenda.  My interpretation is that I am not "buidling a particular case favored by myself", but simply making an obviously logical conclusion based on already verified information.  There's no apparent dispute that the conclusion drawn is in any way inaccurate.  So before you start to chastise me on redefining policy, I'd recommend taking a step back and considering we simply disagree on where the borderline is. Dugwiki 14:53, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  A simple sentence of "Due to the Automotive nature of his power, Peter may have any amount of currently unknown abilities." should suffice. If you mention specific powers then it might get messy, since we don't know if Sylar can "switch on" his powers to make them work, meaning Peter wouldn't have been able to absorb them ( and thus why when Sylar was captured they could only find telekinesis in him). Which would account for why the super hearing doesn't seem to affect him much now and how he easily could control the radiation power. (yeah yeah, that's OR I know) Jacobshaven3 08:27, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tried a compromise rewording on the Potential Hidden Powers section 

message: At the bottom of the section outlining his powers, I added a sentence after the comment about Claude's belief that recalling too many powers could be what causes Peter to explode.  Seeing as this was eventually proven to be incorrect, I believe a short comment to that effect was needed - even though at that point in the series neither Peter or Claude have encountered Ted and therefore do not know of his power. KoNP 12:45, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor Addition 

message: There is a lot of contention about whether to use what the comics say and what the TV shows us and I think we should do it like this; TV episodes first, then comics if the information isn't in the show. 220.244.208.204 12:29, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comics or Episodes?