Talk:Heroes (American TV series)/Archive 6

message: Why isn't The Philippines under the Asia category in the stations broadcast section? Please correct this I am a Filipino and it is quite an ignorant mistake. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 122.49.164.78 (talk • contribs).
: First, start a new topic at the bottom of the page. Secondly, sign with your name. Thirdly, it's organised by the channel broadcasting Heroes. The countries in "Asia" are all broadcast on the same network, this is a different network to the one Heroes is shown on in the Philippines. Jacobshaven3 14:44, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philippines/Asia 

message: I noticed that the episode count is set to 22 - shouldn't it be 23? There are 23 known episodes.
Coolspot 06:32, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Episode Count 

message: Oh, come on. If it's not, then neither are the symbol, the two marks, or the eclipse. If it weren't notable, they wouldn't make a special effort to make sure the viewer is able to recognize that specific gun every time it appears on the screen, complete with long closeups that no other gun in the show ever gets (and there have certainly been plenty of opportunities). Anything that has been specifically shown that many times definitely has more significance than something that hasn't. --Robotech_Master 02:15, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to have to agree with you, though perhaps not to the same degree. The gun has been re-used in several places throughout the series, is distinctive in appearance, and has repeatedly received comments during the commentary episodes available at NBC. If only as a bit of trivia, the gun _is_ notable and should have some mention. I don't think that it is _as_ notable as the symbol/eclipse/marks, but it definitely deserves some mention.Valaqil 14:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm inclined to agree with Valaqil, The gun is notable, but only for the current storyline. This page is meant to general and board topics revolving around the whole show. The gun is not connected to every character. The symbol, the mark, and the eclipse all connect to the characters. (Mrja84 18:42, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

text: No, the funky-looking travelling gun that always seems to shoot sympathetic characters but not unsympathetic ones. Lately used by Isaac to accidentally shoot his girlfriend, and by Mohinder in an unsuccessful attempt to kill Sylar. There are apparently more than one of these guns, as they seem to end up in multiple places at once; perhaps they're the standard-issue sidearm of The Company. --Robotech_Master 05:34, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Also, if anyone wants to see the Usenet topic, it is here. Also, see the articles about (drilled) pistol slide and (extended) compensator aka muzzle brake.  I do not know yet what a double stack is.  According to the M1911 article this weapon is extensively customizable, so perhaps those three modifications are not really notable. Luis Dantas 11:23, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Handgun not notable? 

message: Do we have a Heroes timeline somewhere?  Considering that the show plays a lot with dates, I thought this would be relevant.  I found this and this to be helpful as examples. GameCreator 21:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We have the episode articles and the character articles. I think that's enough. dposse 20:40, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: This is a wiki, we can never have enough! Maybe have a link to the timeline, this sort of information does not need to be on the main page.--Lostcause365 14:52, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually we can... Wikipedia is indeed a wiki, but also a Encyclopedia, not a fan guide to a television series. As such, there CAN be too much at a point. If you can create a detailed timeline, that clearly illustrates some of the plotlines, and ties it all in with the various episodes, then I think it can be useful. --TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 15:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

text:  Now that you make that point, I do see your logic. And I agree with your assessment of what a timeline page should entail.--Lostcause365 15:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  In defense of a possible timeline: the fact that we have so many individual articles would seem to justify (to me) the need to have something besides the main page and episode list that tie them together on a single page.  And because this is not strictly a linear show (i.e. the episode titled Six Months Ago, Hiro's time travel, Peter's visions, etc.), a timeline would be that much more relevant.  Just my thoughts. GameCreator 15:37, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

text: It would be nearly impossible to create a timeline on wikipedia. According to the director, he is using the theory used in many Science Fiction shows (most notably, Stargate SG-1) where there are an endless number of universes and timelines, due to the decisions that we make altering reality. That's the first huge problem with this plan. The second might be very well what wikipedia is not. Oh, and may i mention again for the record that it's unnecessary to create one, due to the episode and character articles? dposse 13:38, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timeline 

message: Forgive me if someone has mentioned this, but... I was under the impression that the main character was someone who events revolved around.  As such, perhaps Hiro is a main character, as he is often a driving force to make things happen, but as has been said previously, Ando is a sidekick.  A supporting character.  As the journey Hiro took was, in fact, Hiro's, it doesn't really place Ando in any "main character" role.  Originally, he was just Hiro's friend in Japan, and wasn't until Hiro took him with him to America that Ando really did anything notable.  And even then, it wasn't that big.  As opposed to Bennet, who certainly started off as a secondary character who showed up in various characters' stories (not unlike Linderman), he nevertheless began to have a larger role as the story itself focused on him for good portions of the time.  Sorry if this was something of a rant, I just felt it was necessary to point out what a "main character" was.  I mean, yeah, Ando is certainly an important character, but it's not necessarily a "starring" role.  Now that I think of it, shouldn't we have a section for notable guest stars? -- MasterXiam 23:16, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, you'll have to be prepared to support your "standard of evaluation" against Wikipedia's guidelines for notability, verifiability, and "no original research" (among others). If you make any sort of claim as to the notability of a character, it has to be based on what a reliable third-party source has written, *not* on your own assessment of screen time, number of episodes, and so on, and you will have to provide proper references. (By the way, it is in no way "grossly misrepresentative" to omit supporting actors from this article. Keep in mind that this is the main article, an overview of the series. We limit the list of characters in the same way that we don't go into extensive detail about the show's plot - that is what the "see also" links to related articles are for. Characters are in the "list of characters" article, and this page should *not* attempt to duplicate that page.) --Ckatzchatspy 17:12, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Your addition has been removed. It is excessive and subjective - there is no need to double the length of the section. If any characters are added at all, they should be as simple name mentions with links. Please discuss this further. --Ckatzchatspy 17:19, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

text: We appreciate your desire NOT to argue. It's really simple, man. Even if WP guidelines are vague, regular editors on the page have repeatedly established and maintained a consensus that NBC's press releases and official listings of Main Characters by their crediting is a good threshold for our list on this article. Matching that is the most concrete way to avoid the very discussions that we keep repeating over and over anyways. Not using that guideline would at first let, reasonably, Ando and Sylar in. But soon we'd see people demanding Ted, because his character's power was central to the big boom. Then Hana, because she's so important to the story, (see thi comics, of course) if not the show. Then someone else, and so on and so on. It'd get huge fast: Charlie's death inspired Hiro's quest... Matt makes choices to save his wife... Thompson knows a lot more than he's saying... and so does Angela... and on, and on, and on. Using the credits is a simple binary solution. either they're listed by NBCas a main character or not. ThuranX 11:44, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ando etc. (arbitrary section break)

message: Why do the edits stating Simone's death get removed? It is a confirmed plot element and a part of her character's story.--Lostcause365 20:32, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd wonder that myself...if we're going to stick with NBC's cast stratification and call her a main character, than I can't see how her death is "unneccessary information".--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 21:41, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm actually more concerned that we seem to ignore crucial information simply because the network has not published it on its various sites. This is the 1st edit, however, that I felt worthy of defense, due to its factual accuracy.--Lostcause365 21:54, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, if its verifiability that somebody is making an issue of, one can always just use Template:cite episode as a citation.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 21:57, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree.  The question has "edits" with a 's', which should never happen.  Debates must be discussed in the talk page.  Articles are not fight zones.  As for my point of view on the matter, I also agree that this piece of information should not be there because it doesn't describe the character of Simone, but rather state a moment of the show.  It's like if we needed to say "Niki is the one who killed the men who went to get her money". -- Lyverbe 13:38, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Lyverbe. The infomation about Simone's death is not needed here because it's an unnecessary spoiler which deserves to stay on that character's own page. This page is basically a portal which gives a brief description of what Heroes is. The main ideas and nothing else. Details should go where details are supposed to go, on the character pages and episode pages. Any infomation about deaths have no place here. dposse 20:47, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I also agree with Lyverbe (and Dposse) about the main article being an overview. By the same token, we should start making plans for Season Two, given that there is talk of a large-scale shift in the character list. If this is the case, I'd like to see the "main characters" section here sub-sectioned into "Season One" and "Season Two". That approach (I hope) might help to avoid a series of changes and reverts as editors remove Season One actors in favour of Season Two actors. Thoughts? --Ckatzchatspy 22:11, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If that's true, then that sounds like a good idea. dposse 00:24, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

text: We'll cross that bridge when we come to it. For now, all we know is that she's dead. We just have to wait for a more reliable source (like actually waiting to see what happens in the show) before we do anything. dposse 12:52, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simone Deveaux 

message: Could i suggest removing the fact that Nathan Petrelli is Claire Bennet's biological father from the main Heroes page? Personally I don't think the main page should contain any big spoilers as if any new viewer (for example, Heroes won't be shown on terrestial UK television until June) was to come on to this page they stand the risk of ruining future episodes - and the identity of Claire's real father is a big spoiler to read if you've only seen a handful of episodes. By the same token I think its a great thing that it doesn't say beside Simone's name that she's now dead. A little bio info is ok but not to the extent that it actually spoils the enjoyment of the show.
What are your views? <The dead don 18:26, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, and I've removed it. There is no particular reason why this one detail needs to be on the main page, as opposed to many other facts about individual characters. --Ckatzchatspy 18:29, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh... there is a spoiler warning... Wikipedia is not censored for people who haven't seen a show yet. I have to avoid all Stargate articles because most episodes have already aired in Canada, but not in the US. It's inconvenient, but we don't censor those pages for US citizens either. If information has been aired in a show, it's fair game to mention in articles about that show. - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 19:14, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Apologies if I wasn't clear - I'm not anti-spoiler. However, there is a place for things, and details such as Claire's parentage - when they are such a major plot twist - arguably do not need to be in the main article. Her article, Nathan's article, the episode where it happens - certainly. This page, however, is a brief overview of the characters and the show in general. --Ckatzchatspy 19:46, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I also agree.  Even if there's a spoiler warning, it doesn't mean that we must put spoilers.  We still only put them in if we really need to.  Someone who only wants to know what the show is about doesn't have to have all the picky details.  -- Lyverbe 01:39, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with CKatz. Major plot twists like who someone's parents are or who dies should stay on the character and episode articles. dposse 17:42, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I disagree.  That's what the spoiler warning is for.  If you (or anyone else) doesn't want to know, don't read the page!--Gillespee 17:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The page however lies. The current cast does not consist of all these people. Tawny Cypress and Santiaga Cabrera's characters are dead. If people don't want to be spoiled, they should go to an censored page, which Wikipedia is NOT. I'm not saying we need to mention their deaths in the article, but we should remove them as main characters from the page. --71.239.131.201 20:45, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're forgetting that the article reflects the series as a whole, not as a moment in time. Those twelve are the main characters, and being dead as of one particular episode doesn't remove you from main character status in the larger work. --Ckatzchatspy 21:13, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character Details 

message: How about we remove the dead charater from the home page. We wouldn't delete the entries in the List of characters in Heroes also when we edit the pages we don't have to go through the dead characters?- RREDD13 00:40, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Per the discussion three sections above that would constitute a major spoiler. Major spoilers should not appear on the main article. - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 00:43, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Also, as per another spoiler, certain "dead" characters will be returning.PureSoldier 15:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

text: I would not go with the deletion of dead characters.  Just because their dead, doesn't removed them as a main cast member. 207.160.251.38 12:56, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove deaths 

message: A new noticeboard, Wikipedia:Fiction noticeboard, has been created. - Peregrine Fisher 18:22, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This noticeboard has been deleted per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Fiction noticeboard. Please disregard the above post. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 11:27, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Fiction noticeboard]] 

message: Are they working on including http://yamagatofellowship.org/index.shtml Kaito Nakamura's website? and doesn't Linderman have one too and also Nathan P.?OuryLN 23:19, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Information on such would be at the Heroes 360 experience article. It's got a link in this article, look there. (I also reformatted your comment for space.) ThuranX 02:11, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Yamagato Fellowship 

message: Why is there no mention that this show is clearly influenced by and probably inspired by the X-Men films?  Tayquan hollaMy work 02:01, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It has. Many Times. read the talk page, read the archives. There are NO meritorious citations about it, and given the fact that Stan Lee and the early X-writers looked to other characters and such, and that since then, thir innovations have become pervasive, making such ties would be difficult. Anything done here first would be Original Research. ThuranX 02:08, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The shows creator has said several times he has never read a comic or seen a comic book film. He was inspired by watching The Incredible's and I think another film he watched straight after. Although the writers have done comics before, I'd say that means that in no way is it based on X men, though some stories (Five years gone = days of future passed) may have a comic book origin. Actually, I believe theres a citation for that episode and that comic being compared by the writers... I'll go find it. Jacobshaven3 11:34, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  X-Men 

message: There is an erro in the article. In the right menu, there are 23 episodes.
::Sorry, but what are you talking about?  I don't see an error.  And please, sign your comments. —  « hippi ippi » 10:17, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error 

message: A few weeks ago, someone posted the list on the recurring elements page.  It was taken down about five minutes later.  Why is that?  I think the list i extremely important.  The third story arc of tghe series was based on the list.  Also, I think we need to change the Primatech paper page to the COMPANIES Page.  Wouldnt that make more sense, because a lot of the company was revealed in the HARD PART and we know Linderman has ties to the company, primatech and thompson.  Please consider adding these important elements to the show.  I think THE LIST would be interesting to have posted, because tim kring has been taking names off the list and making them minor characters like sparrow, candice wilmer and charlise andrews —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.168.220.243 (talk) 05:58, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ARE YOU ON THE LIST? 

message: If anyone can find any extra infomation on this new spinoff, please add it to the article. thanks. dposse 17:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not much about at the moment, but I'll keep an eye out. Berym 23:50, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heroes: Origins 

message: Surely he's a formerly escaped criminal? If Peter is a former nurse, after all. Berym 23:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He still is an escaped criminal. - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 23:52, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Actually, when Niki handed herself in she told them where the bodies were and that she did it. So DL is a free man. Otherwise, why wouldn't Micah have been put into a home whilst his mother was in prison. Jacobshaven3 13:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then he'd be a former convict, former criminal immplies he was guilty. - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 14:44, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: True. They do, IIRC, mention at one point that he's a free man(and the police stop hunting him); he tries to get work and so on and raise Micah honestly after Nicki goes to jail. Technically he -was- an escaped criminal... then he was absolved of his crimes, though we don't know to what degree (whether he was given accessory and time served or what). Regardless, it remains so that he is no longer an escaped criminal. Berym 23:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually, since he was unjustly placed in prison, he's not a former criminal... Jacobshaven3 11:02, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Regardless if he was unjustly placed in prision, he still commited criminal acts.  65.42.26.190 15:14, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  "Escaped criminal" implies that he remains on the run. He was released and absolved of his crimes. He is -not- an escaped criminal. He was tried and convicted of crimes he did not commit (I'm actually trying to remember if he's actually performed crimes in the show, beyond the break and enter and petty theft stuff that most of the characters seem to have performed at some point - such as Hiro and the sword). I've altered the entry to report "jailed for crimes he did not commit" - which is entirely true (since Jessica was the actual guilty party for the crimes he was jailed for), and avoids the grey area of assuming information or OR.  Berym 22:36, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The term "ex-con" could probably be best used to describe DLThe dead don 15:40, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DL 

message: I'm not really sure how to do this, but all of the information about the season 1 DVD of Heroes has been released if someone would like to post it. Thanks! Here is the link: http://www.tvshowsondvd.com/newsitem.cfm?NewsID=7322 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ajwhales2007 (talk • contribs) 01:46, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heroes on DVD 

message: I was thinking over the edit made by Thedemonhog today about Ando being one "most notable recurring character" among Sylar. I really don't see why it can't be that way, neither I see that is "not our call", as Ckatz said when reversing. Ithink if it's not our call to consider Ando one of the most notable, then it's not our call to determine Sylar as the "most notable" (after all, what would be the criteria for one being most notable than the other?). What do you guys think? I would prefer either Ando and Sylar being noted as "most notable" or neither of them there. Garavello 03:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm... well Ando is in many, many episodes, and is apparently considered something of Hiro's innocence and joy of life (see the Future episode). I don't know if I'd consider -any- character being most notable, honestly; they all have their parts in the play, without any forming a lead role. I'd say that neither Sylar nor Ando qualify. Berym 04:00, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reworded the text so that it is not a question of "notability" - instead, Sylar is mentioned due to his role as the primary antagonist. This is how it now reads:"The main antagonist in season one is Sylar (Zachary Quinto), a serial killer who hunts "heroes" in order to take their abilities. The series also features many guest and recurring characters, including friends and family of the main cast, criminals and villains, and other individuals with remarkable powers."Thoughts? --Ckatzchatspy 08:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Sylar himself calls his victims "special" individuals, as opposed to "super" or "heroes". - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 16:28, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops... I saw Garavello's note and made that change, then saw SigmaEpsilon's comment. Which way should we go? (I'd like to see a reworking of the second sentence in that paragraph as well... I just did a quick once-over yesterday, so it's certainly not polished in its present form.) --Ckatzchatspy 16:49, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Ando has appeared in the third most episodes out of any character.  I think that qualifies him getting a mention in the characters list.  Isaac is dead and he is listed.  --thedemonhog talk • edits • count 06:39, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  When one considers Heroes as a static television series that is always in the present rather than real life, it doesn't matter if any one is dead. If you watch the first episode, none of them are dead. You can't verify that Ando is a main character, saying it is subjective. However we can confirm that Ando is not paid as a full time cast member and is still cast as a special guest, therefore he's not put here as a main character. Simple really methinks. :) Jacobshaven3 09:58, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ando is in many episodes, though.  That is not subjective.  --thedemonhog talk • edits • count 07:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's true he's in quite a few. But lots of other chracters are in a lot of episodes too, when does an amount of episodes become less important or more important? It's easier and more verifiable to go by whether an actor is paid as a guest or as a main star. Plus, Ando is never given his own story, he's always a part of Hiro's, even Niki, DL and Micah have had seperate off shoots to their stories and work independantly of each other. Ando is also shown as Hiro's friend, nothing more. Jacobshaven3 17:08, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree completely.  As I stated in a previous section here (from myself and others), Ando is a sidekick, a minor character.  Sure, he's in every episode, and some of Hiro's decisions revolve around Ando, but the fact is that compared to Hiro, Ando is still a supporting character.  And compared to Sylar, Ando is far from most notable. -- MasterXiam 23:22, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Characters - Ando 

message: I think we need to add something to the Emerson Lawsuit section. 
On May 20th, 2007 when Sci-Fi Channel aired the Heroes Marathon, the scene where Claire Bennet placed her hand in the emerson garbage disposol was NOT edited out of the scene.  It was shown as it was originally shown on NBC.  I think that needs to be noted.
Chrisisinchrist 21:24, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Emerson Lawsuit 

message: I don't know how many of you are still hard over about Heroes Wiki, but I figured you guys should know: A few of the members of the Heroes production team, and a few of the actors and actresses of the show, have accounts there. Beyond that, one of the lead admins, RyanGibsonStewart, had a night club named after him in the the most recent Graphic Novel, The Death of Hana Gitleman. (RGS) - Tim Sale himself has mentioned Ryan in his blog, thanking him for help with research.
Just hope you guys realize this means it's not a shithole of a website, that it IS a good source. Otherwise, such people wouldn't be there. -Rob
: I don't believe that anyone actually hates HeroesWiki, but the standards for this site and HeroesWiki are different.  Wikipedia must have verifiability.  HeroesWiki has their own set of guidelines on what is accepted on their website and what is not.  I check HeroesWiki from time to time, as they have more theories and such. PureSoldier 00:51, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: FYI it was Jason Badower, one of the graphic novel artists, who mentioned Ryan in his blog thanking him for the help, not Tim Sale.  --69.248.190.107 18:20, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just a heads up. 

message: If anyone knows (via a reliable source) when the premiere for Volume Two, entitled "Generations," is supposed to air for the first time, please add this information to this article. Considering that this is an ongoing series, and a second season is already guaranteed by NBC, it would make sense to include the expected premiere date of Volume Two (when it becomes known officially of course). Homologeo 06:13, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expected Date of Volume Two Premiere? 

message: I was a bit suprprised that noone had commented on this before?
A couple of things seems very inspired by Watchmen apart from the fact that both are attempts to take a more serious approach to superheroes than the standard fare:
(Spoliers here)
Heroes : A mysterious and powerful group that has lost their belief in humanity wants to cause an explosion in new york that will cause the death of million and trigger the uniting of people (under their new leader). All for the greater good.
Watchmen : A former masked crime fighter (think batman or such) has constructed a fake alien that will be teleported into new york causing the death of millions thus stopping the nuclear threat and uniting the people in world in the fight against the nonexistant alien invaders. All for the greater good.
Heroes : One of the main villains is a watchmaker that can pick a part people to learn their powers, has the fixing of watches as a reocurring theme.
Watchmen : One of the main characters Dr Manhattan (indeed the only one with superpowers) is a watchmakers son that learns how to put himself together after a nuclear blast, watches and cogs are a reocurring and important subject in regards to his charater.
Also note that Watchmen is *the* comic to read if you would want to make a tv series about superheroes so I would mark it of as impossible that the makers of heroes hasnt read Watchmen. 
I'm sure someone else can comment more on this?
Found this outside wiki:
http://www.nypost.com/seven/04242007/entertainment/heroes_pulls_rug_from_under_watchmen_entertainment_stephen_lynch.htm
:It has been discussed on several occasions, but the reality is that it is nothing more than speculation on our part. Wikipedia's guidelines for verifiability (and against original research) rule out making comparisons. (If you're interested, you might wish to look through the talk page archives for past conversations about comparisons to comic book heroes.) Cheers. --Ckatzchatspy 08:56, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To see superheroism portrayed with reliance on acting and steady drama with solid camera work rather then special effects and Razzle-Dazzle-McTazzle I feel Bryan Singer is a larger influence. If they really were inspired by Watchmen wouldn't have Angella Petrelli be *correct* about New York? Vis a vis the endings of Watchmen and Heroes season one. And wouldn't they have more supercostumes and Peter be clothing optional and sit around on Mars? ^_^ Neutralaccounting 00:31, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inspiration from the comic Watchmen by Alan Moore 

message: Kirby Plaza has been nominated for deletion. Please discuss it at the AFD page. Thanks. dposse 22:06, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Kirby Plaza]] nominated for Deletion. 

message: I've posted a note here on the Heroes project page. It is in regards to an editor who has embarked on a unilateral campaign to eliminate most individual episode articles. Please read it and help discuss how to approach the matter. Thanks. --Ckatzchatspy 05:10, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As much as I hate to say it, DO individual episodes actually conform to wikipedia guidelines? WookMuff 10:41, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed they do, indeed they do. I've done some reverting of the redirects this morning. Matthew 10:43, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But are the individual episodes noteable? Do they all have external secondary sources? I hate the way wikipedia treats fiction and I think this may be an accurate reading of the wikipedia rules... they may not fit. They are more concerned with plot and in-universe stuff than real world noteability and, as much as I dislike that particular set or rules, I believe that makes them bad articles. WookMuff 11:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Multiple millions of people tuning in to watch a television episode, that's pretty darned notable to me! Matthew 13:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To counter, though, notability in this context is not the same as "popularity".  Rather, notability is a function of the subject of the article having been written about by reliable publishers (ie having been "of note" to reliable publishers).  In the case of individual television episodes, it's quite possible that the series as a whole have been written about, but that most of the individual episodes have not beyond just the plot summary and cast list.  Thus it follows that one can reasonably argue that individual episode articles are not necessary and are at risk of overly relying on original research for their construction (since the only resource would be the episode itself) and thus should not generally have individual separate articles about them.  Rather, a list article summarizing episodes for the entire series, possibly divided by season, would be preferable. Dugwiki 17:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The overriding concern, from my perspective, is the manner in which it is being done. There was no warning, no discussion, and no attempt to examine articles on an individual basis. --Ckatzchatspy 17:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Yeah, unilateral deletion isn't the polite way to do things by any stretch. WookMuff 21:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warning regarding possible deletion of *all* episode articles 

message: Tonight (Thursday) heroes is on at 8:30pm, AEST, as I believe was the case last week. This is in response to the editor who asked when it was on thursdays in Australia. WookMuff 05:49, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: Australian show times 

message: I'm new to Wikipedia Discussions, so I don't know if this has already been mentioned, but the Helix was also seen..
- Drawn on the bottom of CLAIRE's geometry book in one of the early episodes
- On the poker chips used in the LINDERMAN casino —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sariandra (talk • contribs) 
:First, welcome to Wikipedia :)  Second, please end all your comments with four tildes to sign them.  Now, for the Helix appearances, yes, it's been mentionned before.  We try to keep the list to a minimum because there are so many.  Managing this list has been a nightmare. Lyverbe 11:29, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We keep the Helix apperances section to only plot significant apperances. dposse 17:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How is the jewelry plot significant? 67.167.126.102 00:34, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We are NOT going through this again, aren't we? -- Lyverbe 13:33, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More Helix Appearances 

message: should syler be on the list of main charaters? Kiran90 03:45, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We've discussed this before. Unless NBC lists him as such, he is not a main character. dposse 13:10, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of main characters 

message: Anyone interested in expanding the production notes section of the article should check it out:
http://gregbeeman.blogspot.com/
It's really extensive, but if you have the time, browse through it and see what can be added to the article.
Also, my apologies if this has been brought up before. The no erz 09:54, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  source for "production notes" 

message: Is there any basis for this? The show was very clear that Ted was confused when he thought that the company gave him his powers. Matt used his powers before being abducted and showed no significant imporvement immediately afterwards. I think that line should be deleted. (Slick023 11:52, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  From what we know the scar is nothing but a tracking implant. The Company does work with its captives to improve/control their power, and gives them the scar to find them later. So while improved powers and the scar are connected, saying that the scar causes improved powers would be wrong. Matt didn't stick around so thats why his powers never improved. So anything suggusting that the scar gives power should be removed. (Rekija 03:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The scar and improved use of powers after abduction? 

message: An editor has requested deletion review on this template after a decision was made to delete the template at TfD. You are invited to participate in the discussion at the DRV if you so wish, see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 July 4#Template:Dated episode notability. The original TfD is located at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 June 24#Template:Dated episode notability. Ursasapien (talk) 05:47, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template:Dated episode notability 

message: I did a little work in my sandbox trimming down the table and came up with this version of the table. It should display cleanly for most people. EvilCouch 05:43, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I like it even better than Jax's, but if Ckatz and ThuranX are saying that tables are not well received by WP standards (I don't feel like searching for that statement), perhaps it's better to leave it the way it currently is, even though I personally find it ugly! -- Lyverbe 11:32, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed table

message: I noticed throughout the series that at several times the background music contains what sounds like a prepared piano, and sounds extremely similar to John Cage's works with the instrument. Is there any info about that?  ZOUAVMAN LE ZOUAVE  12:23, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! I'll take a look at it.  ZOUAVMAN LE ZOUAVE  12:23, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Music 

message: "A move to the 8.30 Thursday timeslot in the cities of Sydney and Brisbane has seen a significant increase in its numbers in those markets, especially in Brisbane."
Not really. There was barely an increase. Ratings can be found at tribal mind
Does anyone know the music playing at the begining of series one, episode three?
Jamesigoe 12:24, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Australian ratings 

message: It was already mentioned before and I think that division by seasons (like it is done in many other series) helps organizing information. At this point I'm only concerned in adding information about the plans for Season 2 like release date and it's connection with Origins but that approach should work better for next seasons and even for other topics that are relevant to the series and not a specific season. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.180.222.103 (talk • contribs) 22:21, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split between seasons 

message: I rewatched the pilot the other day.  No mention of "Volume 1".  Just Chapter 1: Genesis.  Milchama 03:34, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am pretty sure you are correct. I don't think Volume 1 had a title. --Bill W. Smith, Jr. (talk/contribs) 06:32, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is an interview with Masi Oka, where he says that Volume one is called Genesis. ThePoorGuy 10:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think thats credible enough.  Perhaps he was mistaking the name of Chapter 1 with Volume 1...  Milchama 20:55, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where's the proof that Volume 1 is called "Genesis"? 

message: DVD section reads like an advert. Mention the unaired pilot's inclusion, if anything, and get rid of the rest. --24.19.144.93 06:01, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  It should be short and straight to the point. -- Lyverbe 16:48, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DVD section 

message: You don't have Simone's Dad down here as a character of any sort, yet he is a pivotal plot device for Peter, letting Peter acquire his own ability to use dreams as a medium for showing people premonitions and historical events, like the conversation between himself and Angela Petrelli on his balcony. Those abilities and events where crucial to Peter's decisions during the season 1 finale. Shouldn't he get mentioned as a secondary (or tertiary) character?64.90.198.6 18:14, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simone's Dad 

message: I just got the latest TV Guide with a feature article about Heroes and a few hints regarding Season 2. I will try to come back and add some specific info in the next few days. --Bill W. Smith, Jr. (talk/contribs) 06:33, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Season 2 

message: This article is over 32 kb long. I think that we can split off the recurring elements section into its own article at this point. If there are no objections I am going to do so. --iTocapa t 03:35, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Objection - primarily because if we do so, we are essentially creating an entire article that will just be a magnet for 'cruft edits. 32 kb isn't too long by far, and at least with the "elements" here we can easily keep some control over how long it is. (I'm referring to the way the section attracts every single non-notable helix occurrence, for example.) --Ckatzchatspy 05:19, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split off recurring elements 

message: *I'm very surprised to see there's not a mention on this page of the Heroes World Tour coming up.... Anyone willing to contribute to a small section on this page? --  16:53, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heroes World Tour 

message: Shouldn't we put the season 2 cast up yet?  They were announced at Comic-Con 2007.
They are:
Ali Larter, Jack Coleman, Hayden Panettiere, Noah Gray-Cabey, Adrian Pasdar, Masi Oka, Milo Ventimiglia, Greg Grunberg, James Kyson Lee, Sendhil Ramamurthy, Greg Grunberg, Dania Ramirez, David Anders Specialk22 17:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We must not repeat the information.  For example, Ali shouldn't be mentionned in a section called "Season 1 cast" AND another one called "Season 2 cast".  Perhaps just add a comment, like "Ali Larter - [description] (Season 1, Season 2)", "Jessica Collins - [description] (Season 2)", etc.  Article must not be bloated.  Keep it simple. -- Lyverbe 18:16, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we should just take away the first season cast (or put it in its separate article) and put the second season cast on the main page. Specialk22 04:37, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm... have two separate articles for each volume? Like "Heroes (TV series) - Season 1" and "Heroes (TV series) - Season 2"? I don't know if each season/volume will be THAT different enough to have their own articles. -- Lyverbe 11:21, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since we have List of characters in Heroes we don't need a list of the Season 1 characters that aren't returning. The list does need some updateing too actually, it needs a new section for former main characters.≈ Seraph 13:24, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I agree, I think that's the best way. Specialk22 19:03, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

text: That would probably make sense. In the interim, I've cleaned up Specialk22's changes as there was a lot of duplication between seasons. (Now, it just lists the changes.) --Ckatzchatspy 18:38, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Check the reference... according to Reuters, "Dana Davis has joined NBC's hit sci-fi drama "Heroes" as a regular, playing a new young hero." --Ckatzchatspy 17:25, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Season 2 Cast 

message: I was thinking of creating another archive and realized the archive box is bigger than some articles ;).  When looking at the archives, I saw that most of them were done way too fast, like archives with very few topics in them.  By the dates, archives #2 to #9 (inclusively) have a span of only a month worth of stuff.
What I'm thinking of doing is merge from #3 to #9 into #2, and merge #11 to #13 into #10.  That would greatly reduce the size of the archive box, that thing nobody ever use :)  Objections? -- Lyverbe 11:48, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I object... Nah, seriously great idea. ≈ Seraph 13:24, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archiving archives 

message: There are so many actors who left months ago or have been confirmed dead and they're still on the main cast list, why? Isn't it time that got updated? There are heaps of new regulars too that should be added.
They're not on the main cast anymore, so why do they need to be on the sidebar under main cast?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.172.17.43 (talk • contribs) 03:39, August 11, 2007
:It's been said several times: the "main cast" list is defined by the producers. Even if someone dies, they're still "main cast for season one" because the producers have said so. Besides, it would be unnecessarily spoilery to change the list to reflect character deaths. - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 16:19, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not really a spoiler, IMO. The page itself states the characters that aren't returning. And it's not like they're being put on a list of the dead, where someone merely glancing at it can see. Unless someone took the time to read the list, they probably wouldn't notice the missing names. Ophois 01:43, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dead, departed, whatever - they are still part of the cast (and thus the list) from Wikipedia's out-of-universe, "perpetual present" perspective. (Take a look at M*A*S*H (TV series) for one example.) --Ckatzchatspy 06:16, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm fine with changing this page to something like the example you provided. My problem with this page is that is implies that everyone on the list is currently a cast member. Ophois 06:46, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No other TV show puts their old cast members on the list and I don't see why this should be any different.  With the eventual kill-offs and adds this list wil  get pretty lengthy. Specialk22 16:40, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead characters still on main cast list -- why? 

message: WP:SPOILER also does say "where consensus demonstrates the need for their use." So hey, let's do a straw poll and see what the consensus is. I'm willing to go with consensus either way.
Should there be either a  or  tag placed on second season information until the information is aired?.
* Support until the episode airs, I believe it's the responsible thing to do. --Nealparr (talk to me) 08:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Straw poll

message: It seems to me that the characters that are in a show doesn't have too much to do with what NBC says are the cast of a show.  Whatever NBC says, it's really inexcusable to not have Ando in the characters list, not to mention Linderman, Ted, and other such significant characters.  You could always rename that section "Cast" and have a seperate section for "Other Significant Characters".  Anyways, it's pretty late for me here, but maybe I'll create an account and/or take a more active role in Wikipedia from now on.  (I dunno)  
207.172.135.71 07:10, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New here, but Characters != Cast 

message: I think the plot summary section is too long for each season. I know I should not compare this article to the LOST article, but they seem to be able to sum up an entire 23 ep season in a few sentences, whereas, we here seem to do it in several paragraphs. Can it be summed down to give the two or three basic plot points, without giving detail to the characters story and development, which can be read on  a character page or episode synopsis?--76.168.220.243 (talk) 20:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Plot summaries on main TV articles do not need to be short.  Those at featured articles The Wire and The Office are quite long (in fact, they should be cut down).  On another note, many users here like to compare this article to that of Lost.  While the main Heroes article should strive to become like the main Lost article, keep in mind that the Lost article is not perfect and is in need of a featured article review.  Also, please read iTocapa's essay on the state of this WikiProject and comment on it.  –thedemonhog talk • edits 20:28, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot summaries