Talk:List of characters in Heroes/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Trivial characters

a recent edit tried to add some ridiculously small characters, and was properly reverted. However, characters like Brody Mithcum, or Charles Deveaux seem to be unneeded, esp. as one's dead, and thus, unlikely to return unless a new character with the powers of a medium is introduced. Should we look to review this list, if not now during the hiatus, at least at the season's end? ThuranX 22:06, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

There are many characters who might not return, but it's speculative at this time to they absolutely won't return. Charles, Charlie, and Jackie are dead, but so are Suresh and Shanti who have been in Mohinder's dreams/visions. Brady and Zach lost their memory, but so did Lyle and Sandra. Molly was last seen in FBI protection, but she may or may not be now. Tina ran from Jessica, but they may meet again. Hank & Lisa might have been actors, or are they part of Mr. Bennet's organization? I think by the end of the season we'll have a better idea of who is less likely to return next season (which in itself is likely but not confirmed). My question is where should those characters go? I don't think they should just be deleted as all the characters so far, major and minor, have had some importance to the season 1 plot. fmmarianicolon | Talk 22:42, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
We may, inevitably, have to seperate the content into at least two pages again. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 23:42, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Referencing

are you serious? we reference fictional characters myspace profiles now do we?

"Zach's MySpace profile describes him as an 18-year-old sophomore who is a Wiccan and unsure of his sexual orientation (although NBC has since stated that the character is heterosexual[23]), for which some of Claire's fellow cheerleaders tease him."

sure u gotta mention the gay thing, but quote some where remotely respectable for gods sake...

Time Magazine: http://time.blogs.com/tuned_in/2006/12/setting_heroes_.html TV Guide: http://www.tvguide.com/News-Views/Columnists/Ask-Ausiello/default.aspx?posting={C0A6A661-5EA8-4F30-BF05-CE9C2F22CAB3}

i mean my myspace profile lists me as a 1cm tall wiccan, and im a REAL PERSON. ---Viva43 13:08, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Zach's MySpace page is a promotional website created and run by those behind the show. It's as respectable and reputable as any other official site about the show. --ΨΦorg 15:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
I believe that Viva's point was that people do not necessarily tell the truth on their myspace pages. Branfish 06:21, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, but this isn't a normal Myspace page. This is a myspace page created by the writers of Heroes, and as such, it's just as official as any other website created by a tv shows creators. It's part of the shows story, even if it's not a major part. dposse 00:06, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
What I meant was that, even though the page is intended to be Zach's genuine MySpace page, that doesn't mean that the character necessarily told the truth on it. Branfish 01:23, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Bran ideas

Lyle

"Only after Claire says that she would have to be taken away if her parents found out does Lyle finally exit the vehicle and grudgingly hand her the tape." - Claire doesn't actually say that she'll be taken away, she just says that they "wouldn't be a family any more". While that could be interpreted as saying that they would be physically separated, it could just as easily have referred to an emotional separation. Branfish 06:24, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Heidi

"She doubts Peter's story with an innocent explanation of the woman, but when Nathan confirms it in private, she believes him." - I don't know about anyone else, but I got the distinct impression that she didn't really believe him, and that he knew this. I took the exchange in question as an unspoken agreement to put it behind them and not talk about it again. I know this is speculation, but I think it is also speculation to state that she believes him. I suggest altering the final clause of that sentence to read "she says she believes him" or something along those lines. Branfish 06:45, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

"Texas" Tina

I don't recall her being referred to this in any episode. I'm not saying she hasn't been, but if she hasn't, why is it mentioned here? Could anybody give me a quote showing this nickname, or at least tell me which episode it's in? Branfish 08:09, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Credits. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 17:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
She's in the credits as "Texas Tina"? I'll have to review that on one of the online episodes. Anticrash / Talk 18:59, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
Aha - as in live in Englisherland, I download the episodes from t'internet, so I don't see the credits. Branfish 01:25, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

IsaacMendez image

where'd his thumbnail go? ThuranX 01:00, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair use dispute issues. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 04:47, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

How is it all the others are fair use, then? if the original image was tagged for lack of documentations, why hasn't someone remade it with full fair use tags? ThuranX 05:10, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I can't tell you the specifics as the dispute was deleted with the image, but the best on going example would be "Image:Clairebennet.jpg". Something to do with improper sourcing, and maybe image ripping from a non-NBC source. It could be further complicated by Wikipedia's the whole "images of actors/people don't need to be fair use" thing. (Thus, the crappy images so many bios of living people have.) Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 21:10, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
I hope someone can find a fairuse picture of it soon. dposse 17:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)


Sylar

Shouldn't Sylar be under the Main Characters section? After all, a lot of the story does revolve around him. Several charactes, both minor and major, were killed or in some way affected by him, notably Eden and Jackie Wilcox. Many of Mr. Bennet's actions were determined by Sylar. Matt and Audrey spent a lot of time directly or indirectly involved in Sylar's murders, and so on and so forth. I could think of a dozen more reasons, but don't have the time to list them. --Arwen undomiel 05:09, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

The "main characters" section is based on an actor's status as a "fulltime cast member" or "season/series regular". Also, they all have articles, so it's easier to list them the that way. Sylar is by no means unimportant, but having been captured and restrained,—not to mention his limited appearances and Quinto's "guest star" crediting—he's not exactly "main". And before anyone brings up Simone yet again, let me just say that Tawny is a regular, and we don't make the rules. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 05:39, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
like ACS said "main" status is confired not by us as wiki editors but by the producers of the show. So even though we may think that Sylar is a main character or that Simone is a wasted piece of script that doesn't mean the producers see it that way and to maintain NPOV we have to go by the official credits. -- Argash  |  talk  |  contribs  07:38, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Claude

I don't think it's appropriate for such spoilerific information on Claude - who hasn't been in any episodes or comics - to be displayed yet. There's a difference between information already available, from already-aired episodes or online comics, and spoilers for things that are three weeks from airing. So I have commented out the spoiler parts, but not deleted them. Discuss here if you want. --Stabbey 14:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not censored. We have templates to "warn" readers of "spoilers", but we do not comment out or otherwise remove content so arbitrarily. If you have a question in the future, just state it first. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 18:05, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
What's the source on it, if the character hasn't appeared on the show or even in the comic? --Milo H Minderbinder 18:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
The media. I've read a bit about the coming eps, myself. This all seems legit. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 18:57, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
I do not agree. If I wanted to read spoilers about characters who haven't appeared on the show/comic yet, I'd go to spoilerfix.com or some other site, not Wikipedia. Is it really too much to ask to keep some of that information off the List of Characters page for a week or two, or at least limit it to the "Godsend" page? It's a courtesy to readers, not all of whom want to read spoilers weeks in advance. --Stabbey 18:59, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

The warning is up. The free encyclopedia—not fansite, reviewer, etc.—does not withhold information. By the logic that we could be "spoiling" others, we'd have to remove a vast majority of the verified data we have in relation to fiction. Really, where's your head at? Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 19:21, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know about that. Most fiction is either available or it isn't - you have either read a book or you haven't. TV shows are a unique situation where people have watched all the episodes, but there are still upcoming ones. If they've watched it, they may expect that the article is safe to read, and should be warned if there is info on upcoming episodes. --Milo H Minderbinder 19:38, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
There is a difference between information that has been shown on the air and information that has not been shown on the air. It is incorrect to claim that there are only two choices - either publish spoilers or to remove all information; that is a strawman argument, and all the veiled insults in the world won't change that. --Stabbey 19:55, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

If an episode hasn't yet aired, the information isn't going to be especially reliable. Even if a source is generallyt rock-solid, there's no assurance that there won't be a last-minute change before the episode airs. I also agree with other editors who've pointed out that there's a significant difference between "spoilers" from episodes that have already aired and true spoilers from episodes in the future. SuperMachine 20:21, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with SuperMachine regarding the inherent unreliability statements regarding future content. The scope of articles on creative works should generally be the works as they have been presented to the public, i.e. published or aired. I don't think the characters or events of unaired episodes of a television show are appropriate for inclusion.--Trystan 20:35, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Gents, to put it simply, it's not up to you, or a vote. By including the information, we are following Wikipedia's policies, guidelines and mission statement. Withholding it, however, would be certainly not be kosher, so to speak. I also direct you to WP:CITE and Wikipedia's stance that "verifiability comes first." Legally, Wikipedia doesn't claim it's accuracy. To be more clear, we don't claim to be infallible. We state we sources tell us. Sources can be wrong, though we aim to use reliable ones. Furthermore, I have not noted one situation where a reliable source was inaccurate with regard to the Heroes articles and data. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 21:09, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Are you saying that Wikipedia policy requires the inclusion of information about unaired television episodes? I certainly hope I'm misunderstanding your point. Just because Wikipedia doesn't have a legal responsibility to be 100% accurate doesn't mean that we shouldn't strive for such a goal whenever possible. If ensuring accuracy means waiting until an episode actually airs, this seems like a small price to pay. SuperMachine 21:20, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia's aim is amass wealth of knowledge and remain up to date. Furthermore, your claims of possible inaccuracy are not valid. Can you give any reason why the source—not the data—is not reliable enough to cite? Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 22:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
WP:V: "The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material."
There is certainly more to whether or not something is included than whether or not it is published somewhere. I would challenge the notability of events and characters from unaired TV episodes, as well as the reliability.--Trystan 22:48, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
I do not see how withholding this unaired information until the episode containing it actually airs would damage the credibility of the article. The only thing that including it now will accomplish is to annoy people who did not want to know the information in advance. You have yet to demonstrate any reasons why the information must be included "right now", when nothing will change in the next 19 days. --Stabbey 22:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
The data is verified by the citation. That's the evidence. What more can you ask for? Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 00:34, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Trystan and Stabbey raise some very good points. It's rather doubtful that a character who has not yet appeared or been mentioned in the show is notable enough to be included in the article. When the episode does air, I'd fully support the inclusion of any verifiable and notable information about him. There no rush to include information in Wikipedia, it's not a fan or spoiler site, nor a message board. Keeping up to date does not mean including things that haven't yet occurred. The fact is that Wikipedia operates on consensus, and there simply isn't a consensus to include information from not-yet-aired episodes.SuperMachine 00:04, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Consensus and common sense, not railroading with faulty logic. You're removing a whole entry subjectively. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 00:34, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Can you explain why our logic is "faulty", yet yours is beyond question? Why our "common sense" is wrong and yours is right? Why is there such a pressing reason to publish so much information on the site, when the episode where it is revealed is in 20 days? Can you answer that? --Stabbey 01:23, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't obligated to include all information, even if it is verifiable. The editors of an article determine if it is notable and appropriate. At this point I don't think it adds anything to the article. --Milo H Minderbinder 16:37, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Split proposal

Reverting edits by a somewhat misguided user today, I may have found a viable way of splitting the content. Would Non-powered characters of Heroes and Superhumans of Heroes be okay? While it's not really a good way to section the content on this page, it would cut the content in half and help readers find the type of character they're looking for easier. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 22:55, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure a split is necessary right now. This article is a fairly reasonable length, especially when compared with ones such List of characters from The Sopranos - Friends and Family. Perhaps after the first season is over we should revisit the idea of splitting the article. SuperMachine 23:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
I'd agree with SuperMachine - the article size doesn't warrant splitting the content into two separate articles. A split would actually make it more difficult for casual readers to find a specific character, especially if they don't know whether or not the character has powers. On a related note, be careful not to bite the newbies - there's no reason to label Hiro Dynoslayer as "somewhat misguided". While his/her bio entries needed some work, the first edit here (using section headers to divide powered and unpowered minor characters) was actually a pretty good idea that is worth considering. --Ckatzchatspy 23:37, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
You're joking, right? It's pointless to divide them like that in one article. It just makes more header TOC clutter. Plus, the user thought "Sylar" was a redirect, among others. "Misguided" was putting it nicely. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 23:59, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Rather than just saying "it's pointless" - could you explain WHY you think it isn't worthwhile? One extra entry in the TOC, when there are already almost thirty entries, hardly constitutes "clutter". I looked at the edit, and found it to be a clear, simple way of keeping all of the minor characters in one place, while quickly and easily identifying which ones were powered and which ones were not. I'd prefer to discuss the idea, and see what the group thinks, rather than just dismissing it outright. --Ckatzchatspy 00:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
It's fine in princible, I guess, but it seems kinda meaningless with all the characters on one page anyway. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 00:39, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Inevitably, the page will have to end up split again. Just because the Sopranos page is long doesn't mean we have to wait that long before splitting. The question for me is whether Non-powered / Superhuman will cause less edit-warring than the Major / Minor split did (with Simone, Ando and Sylar). Thinking back through the first part of the season, had the Non-powered / Superhuman split existed instead of Major / Minor, there might be more edit warring. Did Micah have a power or was he just a genius? Did Eden have a power? Was it Mohinder who had the visions or (as we later find out) Sanjog? On a side note, waiting until the season's end in May will provide us a better idea of how to split the page. fmmarianicolon | Talk 19:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

All characters are presented as powerless (by us and the show) until proven/presented otherwise. Also, it helps that at least two guest stars (Zach/Dekker and Tina/Quinn) have left while others are just dead (permanently, I hear). Others are family, and the show made clear who of them had powers off the bat. Plus, I don't really think there was edit warring so much as differences of opinion and debate. Separating this way wouldn't be bad or premature. We might still need to state somewhere that certain characters are of a different status than the ones played by guest stars, but feh. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 01:11, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

If the split occurs as non-powered / superpowered, I don't see a problem with each of the two pages still having the status division as it is currently (main at the top, recurring below). fmmarianicolon | Talk 02:01, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Negative on the split, por favor. How about we just create an icon to place beside each character's name to designate "Powered" and "Non-powered". Pleeeease? Anticrash / Talk 16:10, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Lame and amateurish. We're not a fansite. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 19:15, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I oppose any sort of split at the current time and 'strongly oppose any split based on powerer/non-powered. It's simply not a useful way to split characters. In order to find information on a specific character, a reader would already have to know if they had superpowers. Also, we're only a dozen episodes into the show and know relatively about superpowers in the Heroes universe. How do they originate? Can they be lost? How many people have superpowers? What if it turns out that the majority of characters have latent superpowers? I suggest waiting until the end of the first season before we seriously discuss splitting the article along any lines. It's a quite reasonable size and the pace of characters introduction is bound to slow from the first half of the season. SuperMachine 02:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Aww man...okay. Supe, you make some good points. I suppose this little proposal of mine has been denied. Aw well. If worse comes to worst, we can always separate by something different. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 02:44, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
"Separate by something different" as in..... Powered/Non-powered designated icons, perhaps? Anticrash / Talk 08:52, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
How old are you? Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 09:48, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Old enough to be adult and have a sense of humor about things when some people choose to be condescending and elitist. I could care less if you differentiate between Powered and Non-powered characters, but don't try and demean me for offering my input. Anticrash / Talk 03:24, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

New Eden McCain image

Can someone either edit this image or create a new one of the same dimensions as the others, and upload and link it, so as to maintain integrity of design and alignments? Thank you. ThuranX 02:16, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll take care of it.. I put up a lot of streamlined images for other characters already (including Eden) so I'll put up another pic for her. What happened to the one that was there before? Did I forget to source it? Anticrash / Talk 16:01, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
I suspect so. There seems to be a large wave of legelists cascading over wiki pately, doing big image reverts and removals to protect copyrights or just remove unlabelled images. it's a pain in the rear, but at least at the end wiki won't have to go through it again. I hope. ThuranX 20:28, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Main character

Who is the main character? --theDemonHog 03:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

There are actually twelve main characters. Are you asking about the actor that plays a particular character, or about which of the twelve is the "main" main character? Anticrash / Talk 03:42, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
The main "main." --theDemonHog 03:50, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
I'd say Peter Petrelli is the main protagonist. He seems to have the most important role in saving the world. Anticrash / Talk 04:04, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Not a forum, guys. Anti, your intentions are good, but questions such as this should be generally decouraged. Furthermore, it might not be best to response with idle speculation, supposition or original research. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 05:15, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Hog, how does your question relate to improving- no...even editing the article? Any encyclopedic information you would need should be in the article. As a role of thumb, if no character is stated to be "the protagonist", there probably isn't one. (Also, it's "Heroes", not "Hero".) Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 05:15, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your help, Ace Class Shadow. I do know that the show is called Heroes, and my question could potentially help "impriving" and "editting" this article. For the casual reader, it is important to know who the main character is. I now know that this show does not have a main character, which is unheard of. --theDemonHog 19:41, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Just thought I'd add that lots of television series have no "main" character. An example is "Charmed" which have three, or Roswell, Lost, Desperate Housewives etc. Jacobshaven3 20:33, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Lost's main character is Jack, though not by much, and Desperate Housewives' Teri Hatcher gets paid more and has her name at the top of the credits. --theDemonHog 21:57, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Once again, this is not a forum, guys. Hog, you can be incivil if you want, but the bottomline is that you asked a question with no obvious encyclopedic value. Your intentions are debatable, as you're just now saying "I was only trying to improve the article!" (I'll disregard the implication that we needed you to realize and write up who the supposed "main main character" is.) Also, a biased perception—in this case, that TV series usually/always have one clear protagonist—isn't the best basis for question, as this is, once again, not a forum. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 22:18, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I apologize. You can remove this section if you want (as it says at the top). --theDemonHog 03:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
No big. I don't think this is really a stain on the page, so I see no reason to remove it at the moment. I would like to gladly consider this discussion closed. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 04:30, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Move

I suggest that this page be moved to Characters of Heroes or Characters in Heroes like Characters of Lost. A list is more like List of Prison Break characters and List of characters in 24. --theDemonHog 20:30, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that it really makes that much of a difference. What we have here is still a "list," even if its not like the Prison Break or 24 lists, but a list nonetheless. Though I do see your point, and how it would streamline the formats of similarly titled articles. But, I just think it's unnecessary. Besides, Characters of Heroes already redirects here. Anticrash / Talk 21:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
List of is usually the preferred format lately. I'd instead suggest posting to those pages about their titles, or just wait around till the adminds get a series of AfD- Renames about the whole lot.ThuranX 21:44, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Beautiful job!

Whoever placed those new pictures there in the list, thank you! It seriously makes this article jump, in a good way. It's very impressive. Great job, guys!! dposse 21:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, kind sir. The page was due for an image rehash, since most of those older pictures were so diminutive. I appreciate the feedback.  Anticrash  talk  21:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../l/i/s/Talk%7EList_of_characters_in_Heroes_Archive_3_baa2.html"