Talk:Heroes (American TV series)/Archive 4

message: Wizard Universe is publishing a series of Q&A interviews with the cast and writers over the next few days.  The first Q&A  with Jack Coleman was published today.  These interviews may be good sources for references and additional article information.  - fmmarianicolon | Talk 00:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The second interview, specifically the second page may or might not offer something. With regard Wizard stated: "One of Sylar’s powers was his ability to freeze someone, which implies that he killed someone who had that power." Writer Aron Coleite did not deny this, but wasn't really give much chance to respond to it directly, either. Not an encyclopedia grade slam donk, but something. Furthermore, question related to the Haitian was given the round about response that "he has a lot of control." Said response wasn't really a good answer for the question, which was basically "the Haitian’s powers are a little confusing", but at least said something concrete. Overall, I think we're probably not gonna get much. Jack Coleman gives great interviews from I've read, but otherwise, I'm not hopeful. Thanks for mentioning it, though. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 00:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The writers did confirm Sylar can freeze people in this interview. They also confirmed his memory will be getting better as a result of absorbing Charlie's power.  --Stabbey 15:07, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wizard Universe interviews 

message: This is kinda stubbed. I'm going to edit this while I'm at work. I added the Season 2 Premiere info. I think Canada has a 2007 Season 2 Premiere. Anyone care to quote a website? Imper1um 18:36, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't really understand this – the List of Heroes episodes lists all episodes, also those from 22 January on, for season 1. Also, Fallout didn't really seem like a real end of a season to me ... Can anyone enlighten me? --hangy 19:54, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The reason for that is because it isn't Season 2 thats being released, but part 2 of Season 1. Jacobshaven3 20:38, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

text: There's a complete article about Genesis - no need to have the information twice ... --hangy 20:17, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The article isn't stubbey regarding the episode summaries, it's just condensed the current information, anything extra isn't really required, in my opinion. though other areas of the article may require more information, I'm not too sure. Jacobshaven3 20:38, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2007 Updates to the Page 

message: Hey. I just thought I'd give a heads up that the redirect page of  has been fought over a bit. The issue, put simply, is whether it should redirect to Heroes (TV series) or Hero (disambiguation). You can see that page's talk for more details. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 22:31, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I toook a look, and the page was protected. I'd further say thanks to Ace for actually reverting the changes back. They were set to aim here, and Ace instead fixed the page to go back to the Hero Disambig.  This edit helps show that the regular page editors are not fanboy zealots, but instead continue to be good contributors to Wikipedia who don't place excess value on our own pages. Seems like Ace's promise is in effect still. ThuranX 01:02, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I feel it should go to this page. Its the same as an issue I had with the Random Disambig page. It was changed so that looking up random would lead to the page on randomness, rather than the Random disambig page. If someone types in something, I think the benefit of the doubt should go with the word they type in rather than attempting to define what they "meant" WookMuff 01:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I'm sorry. I think it's right to redirect to Hero(disambig). There are many connotations to Heroes as a word. Giving hte widest sset of options is far better. Disambig pages function as a sort of index feature, and should be used whenever there's reasonable conflict. It's one click and a few lines to read as it is. Further, the page has been protected against redirecting here. You'd have to go appeal a decision at WP:RGM to get it redirected, apparently. I can tell you, though, that it's clear that two regular editors of this page will support the current disambiguation page redirect over going to a straight redirect. ThuranX 02:39, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Guys, could you take it to Talk:Heroes? Gees. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 06:34, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I was just weighing in :) I am done. WookMuff 07:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Heroes" redirect 

message: Dposse, I am confused as to why the  tag was added to the top of the article.  Is there something specific in the article that is not up-to-date (prior to tonight's episode airing)?  - fmmarianicolon | Talk 20:11, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Minus that "hiatus" statement—which was inherently wrong and poorly worded anyway—I can't see anytthing. Thus, I removed it. Tags shouldn't be used willy nilly. The article seems in good shape. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 21:09, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You should've asked this on my personal talk page. Anyway, i was unsure about what to do with the "hiatus" statement. I felt that simply deleting it was wrong. So, i left the update template there. Perhaps that wasn't very bold of me, i know. Sorry. dposse 00:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's an article issue. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 01:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a comment directed towards me, though. dposse 01:53, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update template at top of article 

message: I hate the term, it's just a fancy word for symbols and it doesn't really apply to the mark or the eclipse.  While "symbols" would be an improvement, I think something more general like "recurring elements" might be better.  --Milo H Minderbinder 23:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that "Sigils" is a poor choice for a section name. If anyone can come up with any better suggestions, then please post them here. dposse 00:43, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I incorporated the term sigils before the addition of the eclipse section.  I used it, as Minderbinder says, as a synonym for symbols, which is no longer appropriate because eclipses are neither sigils nor symbols.  I tried "Recurring images," but ThuranX didn't like that, apparently favoring a very technical definition of the term images.  I still think "Recurring images" is fitting since these are all visual elements.  But I'm not deeply invested in the article, so I'll pretty much leave it up to all of you to hash it out. --Stormraven 03:23, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Frankly, SYMBOLS is the ideal, because sigils are marks with a single specific meaning, whereas symbols evokes both symbolism, logos, and sigils. Until we know the story-purpose of each, and it's significances, we should keep it as symbols. Further, your tone above is unneeded. mocking me for being careful with the article by suggesting I'm 'very technical' isn't needed. ThuranX 04:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No mockery intended, ThuranX.  Apologies if it came across that way.  --Stormraven 14:27, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually, "the mark" is neither a symbol nor a sigil... it's a scar from a pair of incisions (as per the latest two issues of the Heroes comic).  It's only notable because there are two cuts right next to each other instead of just one.  --ΨΦorg 08:37, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, the eclipse isn't a symbol either.  Recurring elements?  Recurring visuals?  Recurring stuff?  I'd settle for symbols over sigils, but I think we can do better.  --Milo H Minderbinder 13:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Recurring Imagery, perhaps. Though ThuranX doesn't like Images, imagery is possibly the most correct term, in so far as combining aspects of both visuals and symbolism. Of course, thats just how it seems to me. I have no issue with Images. An image only means a still picture in computer terms, to my knowledge. WookMuff 19:14, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd be fine with imagery.  --Milo H Minderbinder 19:41, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sigils 

message: Hey. Ace here. Okay, I know I haven't exactly been spreading the love lately, but I've got a new project that I think we all can agree on. Admittedly, this was first touched upon last year by EnsRedShirt. However, we all agreed it was way too early.; I even questioned the point. Still, a lot has changed since then, including my opinion of Wikipedia:WikiProjects in general. Between a second season being a lock, the overall success of show—including it's recent slim victory over 24—and the number of editors already working together on this, I think it's time. WikiProject Heroes, specifically its talk page, could help ease some of the traffic this TP has gotten as the unofficial collaberation page. Other TV series projects should indicate that its only a matter of time before one is made. And, looking at that project page, we already have a lot to manage/work with. So, what do you say, guys? Either way, we'll going to be working together for a while. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 22:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm warming to the idea, but is the project going to be more then a banner? will we actually as a project collaborate to make articles on Heroes better? :-) thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 22:28, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Matthew, it's just a WikiProject. Don't make a friggin existential question out of it! Heh. But yeah, that was the idear. But now that you mention banners, those might be a good way to get people's attention. The support exists, I just need to point it in the right direction. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 23:36, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm interested and will definitely get involved if it does go ahead. Jacobshaven3 23:48, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

text:  That is exactly my point ACS, It's just another WikiProject, I support it but I'd like to be part of something bigger and better, something that doesn't just sit there gathering members, i.e. Wikipedia:WikiProject Lost which I created and hasn't done anything. So yea I think before creation we should go in there with ideas/plans :-) - please don't take my messages as trying to make things difficult, I'm not, I like the idea, but I'm just expressing my opinions. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 23:50, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm fine with your opinions, Matthew. I've also reached my bark/bite quota for today. I do think this project will do more than "sit there". For one, the open tasks section is a good place to highlight a problem/improvable article. I'm excited. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 23:55, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds like a good idea, Ace. The Wikiproject might actually help to calm this arguments between the editors here and also help to make sure this tv shows article is up to scratch. dposse 01:52, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: May I propose the SGS as the pic for the banner/tag? :) --Bill W. Smith, Jr. (talk/contribs) 06:56, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Heroes 2.0 

message: These are symbols, signs, and sigils. They are single icons, in the graphical element sense. They are not Imagery. In the visual arts, Imagery specifically refers to connotations in the image united. For example, if when Peter fell from the ledge fighting Sylar, he had landed on his back, arms extended laterally, legs together or slightly bent in the same direction at the knee, but extending downward, we would have 'Crucifixion imagery', esp. as referential to his 'sacrifice' and Near-Death Experience. If after Hiro's jump back to the 'present', he had landed with a hand clutched over his chest, and his other hand held aloft, we might have a prophetic imagery, of a man holding the truth close and holding it aloft for others. However, we have what are essentially graphic design elements. They are little different from typographical characters, or corporate logos. As such, they re logos, symbols, sigils, and so on. Runes, even. They are not, however, Imagery. I hope this clarifies the situation. ThuranX 03:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it doesn't. It clarifies your flawed opinion. An eclipse is not a rune, a surgical scar is not a sigil. WookMuff 03:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ELement better defines, as they...are. PureSoldier 03:45, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I thought I made it pretty clear. I've given a fairly solid explanation of the difference between Imagery and a symbol, sigil, character, rune, or whatever synonym for scribed insignia you prefer. A further clarification: = is a character in most fontsets. The Pieta, Anunciation, and Adoration are not. What we see in the show are NOT imagery. They are symbols. As for my opinion being flawed, your attitude should be curtailed fast. You're pulling for ridiculous technicalities. 'Now it's a scar, and that's a Naturally occuring phenomena, not imagery, so YOU are wrong.' ThuranX 04:03, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "your attitude should be curtailed fast. You're pulling for ridiculous technicalities." Yeah, sure, ok. WookMuff 04:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I support my idea of using "Element" by this definition: "a component or constituent of a whole or one of the parts into which a whole may be resolved by analysis"  Which seems to define what you're trying to. PureSoldier 04:10, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah ok, i didn't get what you meant in your previous comment, but i agree that elements is a perfectly viable word, i just feel that it should be noted they are visual elements that (for two of them at least) possibly contain deeper meanings. WookMuff 04:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I realized that after a few minutes...thought it'd better be clear than not.PureSoldier 04:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

text: No, I was good with 'Elements', and left it while fixing other things in tht section. I Just decided it was necessarry to make clear my objections to the wholely erroneous use of 'Imagery', to avoid it being reinserted. ThuranX 04:37, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think elements is the best choice, but I'd like to point out that "imagery" in my dictionary is "visual symbolism" which seems perfectly appropriate for all three.  And a scar or eclipse isn't a sigil by any stretch of the imagination.  And Ace, what's up with removing the explanation of the symbol given by the show?  --Milo H Minderbinder 13:19, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of the term 'Imagery' instead of 'Sigil' , 'Symbol', and so on. 

message: The note about Emerson's lawsuit is an interesting tidbit -- I think a small note should be added that inserting body parts into a garbage disposal unit *will* almost certainly result in bodily harm.  Emerson apparently just doesn't like to have this displayed on T.V.  I wouldn't want anyone to interpret Emerson's claim as a suggestion it's safe to reach into a garbage disposal unit (although it would serve Emerson right to get a large injury claim leveled against them due to their IMHO frivilous lawsuit).
The article is apparently protected so I can't add it myself, but basically I'd like to see a note added to the effect of: The In-sink-erator user manual makes it very clear (bottom of page 6) that you should not reach into the waste disposal unit, and that you should disconnect power from the unit when doing maintenance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ejtttje (talk • contribs) 08:17, January 29, 2007
:There would be two or three problems with adding that.  First off, it would probably be considered original research, and may be a non-neutral point of view, adding information in order to support a position rather than to neutrally state the facts.  Second, Wikipedia already disclaims that it is providing legal or medical advice, so to add another one here would be redundant.  --ΨΦorg 22:09, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  In-Sink-Erator 

message: The first reference to Simone calls her 'Isaac's ex-girlfriend' before Isaac is mentioned.  Can someone fix the order of the character list so this isn't as awkward.  Thanks
--   Matt--64.42.209.81 22:31, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not a place for requesting general edits to Heroes-lated articles. Furthermore, the episode just aired. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 07:12, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Characters section 

message: * Not sure if anyone's interested, but it looks like the episode summaries over at NBC's Heroes wiki have been lifted right from Wikipedia with no attribution.  Plus their wiki doesn't appear to say under what license they're presenting the material on the site either.  See their episode articles and compare to the episode articles here.  Parts of their Sylar article also appear to have been lifted from here as well.  Looking around the site it looks like a bunch of other articles are also using content right from Wikipedia without attribution. :( --Inexplicability 05:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no create-account button. That's annoying. You can only log in if you already have an account. Avt tor 22:16, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The NBC Heroes Wiki shares its accounts with the NBC Forum. Just create a forum account and you can use that username/pass for their wiki. --Joshtek 01:23, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia articles improperly reproduced on NBC's Heroes wiki 

message: Does anyone else agree that the Plot section is badly written and is not an actual plot summary?  It doesnt actually tell anyone the plot, instead it talks about the tag-lines and phrases like:'kicks off the second arc', and such.  I am in Australia and have only seen the first episode so far... and this plot summary on here isnt clear to me, so wouldnt be clear to anyone who hasnt ever seen Heroes.  This is an encyclopedia, remember?  Not a clique fan-site where it's to be expected that everyone knows what it's all about.
Regards,  Matt
:(from Wikipedia:Talk page) Please sign and date your contributions on all talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~). When you save the page, those four tildes will be converted into a signature and time.  The "Post a comment" feature (the small "+" sign on a separate tab, at the top of a talk page) allows you to start a new section without needing to edit the whole page. --Diluvial 01:31, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot 

message: Would anyone mind adding the picture format of the show to the infobox, or mind if I did it? I'm not exactly sure how to source it other than I've watched the broadcast over the air, and it's 1080i (as most of NBC's shows seem to be). Uagent 06:37, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox 

message: When getting into the car at the end of the Feb. 5th episode, the license plate on Sulu's Car reads NCC 1701.
This is the number of the Original ENTERPRISE.
12.197.58.243 03:02, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I caught that also, that is a great tribute! :) --Mjrmtg 03:11, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  License plate on Sulu's Car 

message: The 7PM Friday showings of HEROES have been pulled from SciFi's schedule.  It won't be on this week (Feb. 9th), and there's nothing currently listed up thru the end of March.  That means the listing showing what channel the show airs in what country is no longer correct for the United States.  One airing per week now. Mondays on NBC only. *sigh* —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.3.65.1 (talk) 04:52, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Sci FI channel in America takes multi-month breaks, does it not? thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 08:23, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. Sci-Fi isn't the primary network, so it can't really "drop" a show that's on the NBC schedule. As long as it's on NBC, it will be on Sci-Fi from time to time. Even Sci-Fi's most important programs like Stargate, Battlestar Galactica, and Doctor Who fade on and off Sci-Fi's schedule from time to time, but this doesn't mean they are cancelled. Assuming that editors wish to update Wikipedia on a weekly basis, it would be possible to add and delete entries as information became available. When it comes back (as it certainly will), it might be on a different day. Avt tor 15:43, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should update the "where does it air?" list...SciFi U.S. has dropped the show. 

message: The latest episode has it on her right after she finds out about she's leaving prison. Nightwkr 20:54, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's already there, has been for months, but thank you. If you reread the section, you should see it. ThuranX 21:24, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Niki/Jessica Sanders needs added to the list of characters that have the sigil for "Godsend" 

message: Now that the mark has apparently been explained away as a surgical scar, does it really need to be on this page? I mean its no longer a mysterious and unusual occurance, and its certainly not a recurring element on par with the symbol or even the eclipse. How does everyone else feel about this? WookMuff 20:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I feel that it does belong on the page. It's a reaccuring element in the sense that it's a unexplaned piece of the Mr. Bennet/The Hatian puzzle. We now know the what, but we still don't know the why. dposse 01:59, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur.  It still is mysterious, we don't know why it was used, all we know is what made it. PureSoldier 02:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you are both missing my point, but thats due to my point being hazy at best. It just doesn't feel right. I dunno. I will accept your rationales unless i can say exactly what i mean. WookMuff 02:39, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I believe it is needed, because new viewers may watch or read a novel with Ted/Matt and believe it something. By displaying the data here we are tell new viewers that is was explained and it is important to the show. We have at the very least 3 characters (Matt, Ted, Hana) who are hunting down H.R.G. for answers. The mark is apart of their story. Mrja84 17:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Mark 

message: Could someone provide a source on Niki only having a tattoo while "Jessica"?  I assume we've seen her without it since she's had a couple scenes with skimpy clothes, but a specific cite of an episode or scene would be great.  --Milo H Minderbinder 20:05, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Uagent's example's the first one I thought of as well. It switches back and forth from there to not there as she switches from Niki to Jessica and back. ThuranX 12:36, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

text: In Run! Jessica is using make-up to cover the tattoo. This seems to explain that the tattoo is only there when Jessica is dominating their body, and that others can only tell the difference through this tattoo. It seems like proof that only Jessica, not Nikki, has the tattoo. Bio 19:34, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tattoo 

message: When set in India, Heroes uses many different ethnic groups to represent indians. In the background can be seen Oriental Asians, Afro Americans, Japanese, Arabs and even what appears to be a Samoan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.247.129.62 (talk • contribs) 
:Perhaps to some people all non white people look the same? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.201.117.59 (talk • contribs) 
::Why presume such a thing? In today's multicultural society, I would think it odd NOT to have a mix of ethnicities. (If you were to shoot a scene in a North American city, you certainly wouldn't populate the set just with Caucasians.) --Ckatzchatspy 21:33, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe peter picked up the Haitian's power somewhere along the way, although that's complete speculation.
Hold on, didn't "Claude" state that "You wake up in the morning and it's on, you can't turn it off"? Substatic 19:34, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Any episode trivia  should be on the episode page.  It's already mentioned in the Distractions (Heroes) article, there is no need to be mentioned here. EnsRedShirt 22:57, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Goofs 

message: He's currently listed as "an escaped criminal".  However, he's not wanted any longer for anything.  Is anyone averse to me changing it?  Suggestions as to what to classify his current status AS would be good, too.  Thanks!  Mel21clc 20:17, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that it's been changed to something else since he was acquited. However, the infomation that he was a escaped convict needs to stay in since he used to be one. dposse 01:54, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

text: It seems to me that we should at least change the wording. He's a former construction worker, and, in the same manner, a former fugitive. He's not an escaped criminal any longer, and to leave it that way may be confusing. --Valaqil 14:22, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the graphic novels, he was in prison, so that would make him a convict. He was framed for murder and for stealing two million dollars, after all. However, considering his "good guy" nature, I don't think 'convict' or 'former convict' do justice to his character. I find 'former fugitive' to be a better fit, though.   Anticrash  talk  15:07, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  D.L.'s occupation 

message: It appears an admin (out of process I may add) has come along and deleted all the screen capture. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 17:51, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know. We have to do something about this. We need those pictures back. Is there anything that we can do? I can't believe that those idiots deleted them even though we had a rationale! Someone needs to upload the pictures again, and this time make sure that every single one of them will pass inspection. And listen, please upload the SAME pictures as last time. dposse 23:10, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think they need to be uploaded again, looks like they can be undeleted like articles.  See Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion and looks like they'd be listed on WP:DRV.  Go for it.  --Milo H Minderbinder 23:27, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're asking me if i wish to get a deletion review started, I suck at that type of thing. Someone else who is more experienced can do it.  dposse 00:03, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't either.  Matt, you want to get it rolling?  --Milo H Minderbinder 00:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[List of Heroes episode]] 

message: I'm not sure if anyone has noticed, but the hyperlinks on some/most of the words until just before the plot section have been replaced with some rather inapproiate ones. As I am still new to this whole editing thing could someone please help clear it up? Thanks ````
I saw that another editor is cleaning them. I ran down the culprit, User:Batmangreen, and have reported him to AIV. --Bill W. Smith, Jr. (talk/contribs) 05:08, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism to links 

message: Hey in Godsend there were two not very noticable sightings --- one with the branch in Mohinder (lizard) tank ---- the other in a plate of pasta --- here is the link if you would like some proof   http://www.9thwonders.com/boards/index.php?showtopic=49615&hl=helix   just thought i would tell you guys —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.77.45.237 (talk) 14:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Helix Sightings 

message: In the episode "Fallout" Nikki seems to access Jessica's powers to break a night stick. Though it may not be conscious, she still access the power. The bio currently says that she hasn't accessed Jessicas powers. 161.185.1.100 22:12, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It seemed to me that Jessica appeared and broke the chains, and then became Nikki again, not that Nikki had super-strength. Avt tor 16:27, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not the way I saw it, it seemed to me that Niki instinctively used that power because she felt her child needed her. Or it could just be a mother's natural instinct to use extra adrenaline and in that instant she did. So the show's producers could be messy with us. But I doubt it. It's a hint, of her true power. Remember Niki doesn't remember her Dad killing Jessica when they were younger. Who knows how long she had this "other" personality in development. What she saw her power of strength, it frighten her and she created another persona to be the "protector" / evil counterpart with full access to that power. (Mrja84 16:20, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Addition to Nikki's bio (not plot summary, bio) 

message: I suggest we split Heroes 360 in a seperate article. -- Magioladitis 17:31, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  It's not directly related to the TV show as if it was part of it. -- Lyverbe 17:41, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

text: agree Z3u2 19:25, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree Bio 19:29, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree it is very much apart of the show. Through it we have learned that certain people will be meeting up in the next episode. Also it is a way for viewers who saw the clip during Deal or No Deal to be informed as to what exactly Hana is doing with her time. I admit it's not a vital part of the show, but with so many characters it's an extension of the show like the graphic novels. And since the graphic novels have their own page. I agree to the seperation. Mrja84 17:20, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Disagree. It's only purpose is as a promotional exercise for the series. There's no reason to give this relatively small idea a full article. Instead, work to expand and refine it within this article. ThuranX 17:28, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Lost Experience, a part of Lost, is a seperate article. Even Beyond Jericho, an extension of Jeriho, is a different article. Why not Heroes 360? -- Magioladitis 18:21, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree that it should have a separate article as well. I was also thinking that it would work better as a merge with the Primatech Paper article as that is the primary focus so far of the 'experience' -- Marcsin | Talk 18:35, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Agree.  It's a part of the show, but also not. PureSoldier 21:19, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Agree. Better separate article.--Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 14:04, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Agree. It's not the show, it's an extension of the show. Avt tor 16:30, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Agree. Same reasons as above. --Careax 19:49, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Agree. This user-interactive thingy isn't really part of the show though the setting is. --Addict 2006 01:41, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

text: thanks!! Z3u2 07:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split Heroes 360 in a seperate article 

message: Why does it say that her ability is to "immediately heal", when it's definitely not "immediate" when the thing that has caused the injury is still in her body? AnonMoos 13:06, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, it should be changed to something like rapid cell regeneration as used on the Heroes Wiki.--Master Bob 14:30, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How do you know her cells are regenerating? I don't believe its been stated in an episode.. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 14:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Her ability, as coined in the series, is "Spontanious Regeneration" I think the regeneration in the title alludes to cells regenerating... and if not, how on earth does she heal without her cells regenerating? Jacobshaven3 16:36, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Spontaneous regeneration. as given in the series, is exactly how is should be listed. The writers of the show have not seen fit to explain the particular bio-mechanics of the power, so we shouldn't hypothesize at all. in the written text of the paragraph, where synonyms are needed for flow, be accurate. We've seen her rapidly heal from physical injuries ranging in severity from minor cuts to fatal head wounds, though wounds do need to be clear of obstruction before her power is able to complete the healing. Keep spec out. ThuranX 21:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Claire power description 

message: I've readded Takei to this list, but would like to poll to see if there is consensus to remove the section and leave the cameos in the "other characters" section of the list of Heroes characters. ('Cameos' was really created as a compromise for the "trivia" section which was being 'warred' over.) Kyaa the Catlord 13:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I will remove Takei again as it is not a cameo, the producers said as much, and so has he.  Do we really need to go over what the definition of a cameo is?  (For those interested see: Cameo appearance.)  Takei is reccurring and as such should be treated like that, not as a cameo.  EnsRedShirt 14:03, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: His appearances to date have been precisely the definition of a cameo, just like the others in the subsubsection. Personally I've suggested adding him to the list of minor characters on that page.... Being preachy makes you look like a... Kyaa the Catlord 14:20, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the Cameos section is more appropriate for the characters list page.  Takei is already listed in the Minor Characters section under his character's name. The Cameos section be a third header, joining Main Characters and Minor Characters. - fmmarianicolon | Talk 15:14, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Which seems like a sensible and correct course of action to take.  EnsRedShirt 15:15, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cameos 

message: On BBC Radio 1 on 19th Feb 2007 they interviewed someone from heroes and he said that a lot of people recognised him in the UK despite the series not having been aired here yet. Should this go in the article somewhere? (preferably with some of the blanks filled in) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by  62.31.72.96  (talk • contribs).
:On a related note, this press release notes that the U.K. debut of Heroes gave Sci Fi UK its highest ratings ever.  Should this be mentioned in the reception section or the in the intro paragraph with the U.S. ratings? - fmmarianicolon | Talk 22:59, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  BBC Radio 1 

message: I think we need to get this page semi-protected.  Newbies and anonymous IPs are starting random edit wars with random speculation, cameos, and theories. --EXV // + @ 03:24, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be a good idea, although you might also want to warn User:Sammyj to stop adding that POV/original research. dposse 04:32, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Two thoughts - one, the level of additions probably isn't enough to get semi-protection, especially given that the majority of the edits are content-related (as opposed to vandalism.) Secondly, keep in mind that Sammyj - while persistent - has only been here for a few hours. A warning might be warranted if there is a pattern of disruptive behaviour, as opposed to a one-off difference of opinion regarding content. --Ckatzchatspy 04:39, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected 

message: I removed the australian poster image. It was added withotu talk apge or edit summary, and doens't really add to the page. ThuranX 21:54, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  advertisement 

message: I've removed the following text from the article for discussion:"===Nissan Motor Company, North America=== Nissa Motor Company has been the most notable promotional campaigns for the Heroes series.  On July 21st, 2007, it was announced that Heroes and Nissa would embark on a cross promotional campaign, resulting in Nissan sponosoring the Heroes World Tour, as well as presenting the season two premiere with limited commercial interuption<http://nbcumv.com/entertainment/release_detail.nbc/entertainment-20070621000000-nbcuniversallaunch.html.  Nissan vehicles have been present on the show since the pilot, including the Nissan Rogue, which was used in several storylines in season two.http://nbcumv.com/entertainment/release_detail.nbc/entertainment-20060728000000-nbcmakesinnovative.html On December 21st, 2007, Nissa awarded six winners of an interactive promotion on NBC.com, with Nissa Rogues, signed by Tim Kring. Barbara Blangiardi, Senior Vice President of Strategic Marketing & Content Innovation for NBC Entertainment states, "One of the elements we liked best about our Nissan partnership was our ability to involve our viewers. Through their support of this innovative interactive concept, Nissan helped everybody win."http://nbcumv.com/entertainment/release_detail.nbc/entertainment-20071220000000-christmascomesearl.html"While referenced, this seems to be too much like an ad. The television articles don't usually do write-ups about product placement within shows. Thoughts? --Ckatzchatspy 17:39, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm. A trimmed down version (less undue weight) might be ok. -- Ned Scott 18:17, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, maybe it is rather long. A trimmed version might work.  Missan has a huge pressence on the show.  I suppose that is the same with any show that has a huge sponsor.  However, Nissan has really been pushed in most promotions for the show, including the world tour.  So, it may or may not be that important, but i think if it was trimmed down, it would still be very encyclopedic. It is well sourced information. Any more thoughts?--Chrisisinchrist (talk) 22:22, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with above, it needs to be trimmed but Nissan have had a notable enough presence. But it def shouldn't sound like an ad like it does above. Rekija (talk) 23:21, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think one of the critical things to remove to stop it sounding like an advert is to get rid of the model types, as I don't think they really add anything to the entry Ged UK (talk) 23:30, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nissan product placement text 

message: For several countries there are no citations, so we should probably remove the lines with uncited information. QuasiAbstract (talk) 13:40, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, but I think we should wait a bit so we can find sources. Australia has no citations, but I live there, and I can 100% confirm everything that has been written. I also doubt that any of the other countries have false information. Again, I think we should wait for some citations, but we should put a tag on the unsourced info; then finally if the statements are unsourced, we will delete them. ЩіκіṚσςкЗ(ťáŁκ) 14:01, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ratings 

message: The section on Volume Three says it will air in 2008.  Has this been verified?  The ref links to a blog entry for epi 10 that talks about how epi 11 was always going to be the end of Volume Two and if the strike ends quickly Volume Three will be back in the spring.  That's not verification of it returning, especially since the ref is from before the strike anyway.  Padillah (talk) 21:11, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this falls under common sense. We know that either as the beginnign of season 3 in the fall, or as a late second half of the second season, volume three will start. Short of NBC cancelling Heroes, it will air in 2008. we're not 'predicting' a date, just a common sense year. ThuranX (talk) 22:39, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed it - it was added a short while back without any proof. (While it may well be likely, we can't make the claim without some sort of proof.) --Ckatzchatspy 01:26, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually ,we can. Only controversial or contested facts need citation. While it's preferable to have it in other cases, Common Sense is still allowed to work. The only conditions for it NOT airing in 2008 are a year long writer's strike or cancellation, both of which are incredibly unlikely. I'm not going to re-add it, but remember that citation is encouraged, but not an absolute for uncontested, common sense items. ThuranX (talk) 05:48, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's why I asked.  It didn't say "Spring 2008" so it could happen any time during 2008.  But I don't know how far we want to take some of this stuff.  Thanks for the info.  Padillah (talk) 06:33, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not sure if this conversation is finished or not, but I must say I agree with ThuranX. What are the chances of Heroes not airing in 2008? I think we should add the statement again....[please note that as I am writing this, I have not checked the page, and I don't know if the statement has been re-added]...because as said prior, it is just common sense. :-) Щіκі RoςкЗ(talκ) 06:54, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Once again, we cannot say "Villains will air in 2008" as we do not know that for a fact. "Common sense" or not, there are too many variables to consider. When will the strike end? When will production resume? Will Kring etc. change their plans for the series (as per a previously stated desire to rejuvenate the show) and delay "Villains"? Simply put, we have no proof. Beyond that, what is the point of the text? We don't change the number of episodes in the infobox until a new episode actually airs due to these sort of uncertainties; why change procedure just to make a claim about an entire volume? --Ckatzchatspy 11:50, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What are the chances of Heroes not airing in 2008? I'd say there is a greater that 0% chance that is doesn't come back till 2009 which means we can't say it'll be on in 2008. harlock_jds (talk) 12:14, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Though this may be considered OR or speculation, we could say "Heroes should come back in 2008." QuasiAbstract (talk) 13:06, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Wait a tic - didn't NBC itself say that Heroes will Return in 2008? I seem to remember a trailer right after the season finale that said "In 2008, Heroes Returns". That's official and authoritative, since it's NBC itself making the statement. I'd add the line "Promotional materials for the series indicate that Volume 3 will air at some point during 2008". It's non specific, but backed by NBC's promotional materials. Thoughts?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ultraexactzz (talk • contribs) 13:47, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Now that you mention that, I remember the same thing.  It aired after the last episode.  QuasiAbstract (talk) 14:04, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was added initially on that basis. However, it now appears Ckatz is demanding an online ref cite, making it a 'controversial' statement. A quick review shows that the statement was at one time sourced to Greeg Beeman's blog. Perhaps Ckatz would like to chekc that out and find out what that source said, and restore it. ThuranX (talk) 15:19, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For what it's worth, I already did that.  That's what made me question the citation in the first place (ref opening statement of this entry).  Padillah (talk) 16:21, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

text: FYI, I'm not "demanding" anything... just saying that we can't make claims that we can't support, as with Padillah's comment. Furthermore, look at some of the text in the WGA strike article:"CEOs are determined to write off not just the rest of this TV season (including the Back 9 of scripted series), but also pilot season and the 2008/2009 schedule as well."and"if the new media issue is not resolved to their satisfaction by the DGA or WGA by July of 2008, SAG is likely to join the writers in striking when their contract expires, a move which could potentially bring the Hollywood film industry to a near-complete standstill."Stating that it absolutely will return in 2008 is not verifiable. If you really must add it, stating something like "NBC says the series will return at an unspecified point in 2008" (or something similar) would be more encyclopaedic. --Ckatzchatspy 22:13, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Verified Volume Three