Talk:Peter Petrelli/Archive 5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 What was archived 2 Power Resistance 3 Proposal to add 'Other Heroes with this power' column to Powers table. 4 Peter/Sylar's Powers: Where does one end and the other begin? 5 Proposal for Addition to Powers and abilities Table

[edit] What was archived

• Don't add Elle - the need for citing plot points while, though clear to us, is speculative to add
• Semi-Protection - request for semi-protection of the page
• Chart - discussion of the cruft-attracting powers list
• Plot length - discussion of in- vs. out-universe article style
• Artwork of Peter Petrelli - discussion of PP's artwork as contributing to the article
• Enhanced memory? - again, discussion of including info deduced, not cited
• "Healing_factor" - how it heals an exploding man
• Memory of his mother - discussion about how PP recovered his memories
• How many categories are we going to add to this poor guy? - discussion as to capping the limit of powers PP uses through his passive ability of mimicry/absorption (and not empathy)
• Extra Boxes - more discussion of the the crufty nature of the benefactor cateogry
• Space/time manipulation exhibited in Collision - revisiting whether PP can time travel
• Is Wikipedia the appropriate place for topics based on a fictional universe - discussion over where fictional elements even need to be in Wikipedia

[edit] Power Resistance

"Powerless" shows a couple instances where Peter is unaffected by the powers of others that he has absorbed: first, Hiro's time-stop leaves Peter active, and second, he ignores and refutes Matt Parkman's mental suggestions. This is a pretty important aspect of the character's abilities, but at what point can it be included in the article? That he is unaffected is pretty clear on-screen and is vital to the plot, so that much should at least be mentioned. I'm okay with not detailing why until it's explained further, but the Character History and Powers sections should agree - either both explain why, or neither does. Slurms MacKenzie 19:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't believe it's as clear as you see. His being active while Hiro stops time is simply an aspect of the power itself, not a "resistance". He is active simply because he has the same power and can remove himself from the timeline like Hiro does. As far as resisting Matt is concerned I think he was, but only until he could incapacitate Matt. Angela resisted Matt too, up to a point. It's not like Matt had no effect on him, it's simply that he resisted until he was able to incapacitate Matt. Peter was visibly affected by Matt's suggestions, same as Angela was. He just resisted, same as Angela did. Padillah 19:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if resistance is the right word for it, as it would start to imply that he couldn't be hurt by someone elses power...I guess the only way we would ever know for certain without a comment from producers was if he was up against someone like Niki.

If Niki punched him, would he have resistance to her superstrength? Likely not. He would be able to fight on equal ground as her because they both have the same power, but he wouldn't have resistance to the power itself. That's how it could of gone down with Hiro and Matt.Rekija 20:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I highly doubt that Peter is resistant to the powers of others. He is probably immune to the shifts and manipulations of time like Hiro and Future Hiro are and since he is a telepath, can resist Matt's mind control and counter it. When Matt told Peter to let Hiro go, Peter did but started to say no when Matt tried to compel him to go after Adam. It was made pretty obvious that a telepath is a threat to another telepath. As for the resistance thing, in .07% and at the end of Parasite, Sylar was able to use his telekinesis to cut Peter's forehead and if Niki punched him, he would definitely feel it. Elemental5293 (talk) 20:43, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal to add 'Other Heroes with this power' column to Powers table.

I noticed that the "Benefactor" column keeps being added to the Powers table, and subsequently being removed again. As I understand it, the benefactor is always speculative, and therefore should not be added as per the No Original Research policy. However, the fact that it keeps being added back in indicates that there is apparently a demand for this information in this section.
In a previous discussion there was a suggestion to add a 'Other people who possess this power' column instead. That would effectively have the same information, without contravening WP:OR. As a side benefit, the article would not have to be reverted quite so often.
This suggestion elicited some positive reactions back then, but as far as I can tell it was not included in the resolution of that discussion. Would it be out of order for me to put this back on the table? InfintyMinusOneMRV (talk) 23:31, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

You just have. Just don't add it to the article until we can come up with some consensus. the recent crazyness between Tabor, Pharm and some anon ass-clown reverting back and forth demonstrates (if naught else) the imperative of clear consensus and clearer lines of communication between us all. You've made a good suggestion, one worthy of consideration. Thoughts from others? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 23:00, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with your points for it, however what I'm concerned with is lumping heroes together as having the same power. Do we really know the full extent of Nathan or West's powers? What if they evolve further however both seperately. Was Linderman able to heal himself? Was his ability a further developed version of Claire or Adams? These are the kind of OR questions that will get raised. The bottom line is that we don't have proof of who's power is identical to whos. Rekija (talk) 23:21, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I think it would be a bad idea to add the column. No disrespect intended - it's just that it would be a magnet for speculation, theories, etc. Given the all-out war on television content these days, we're better off keeping articles clean so that we can defend their right to exist. Thoughts? --Ckatz^chat_spy 23:33, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

With respect to InfinityMinus, I think that the article is about Peter Petrelli, and Peter Petrelli alone. there are other articles that list the other characters within the Heroes wikiproject and detail their abilities. I also agree with CKatz and Rekija that it creates more problems than it solves. i will admit that the idea as an alternative was the best so far suggested, so please don't feel discouraged. That was just one idea; I am sure you have tons of others rattling about. :) - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 23:51, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I will admit, when this was first proposed I thought it was a great idea and supported it 100%. Since then I've been introduced (through my efforts to learn the admin side of things) to "OR by synthesis". The column, by itself, wouldn't be OR - we're just stating who has a power and who doesn't - but what will happen is when people read the article and see the column they will think "Oh, West has flight, that must be where Peter got it"... it's kind of helping others do the OR. I appreciate the efforts in trying to stop all this back-and-forth (believe me, it's driving me nuts) the problem is they make it so difficult to meet them halfway. In the end it's simply not notable either. What difference does it make where Peter got flight? Heck we didn't officially know where he got the electricity for almost three episodes. If the writers want to give him a power all they have to do is say someone walking down the street had it and Peter picked it up, POOF, instant new power. Thanks for the effort, just knowing someone sees is a good sign. Padillah (talk) 05:59, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

As regards the "OR by synthesis" argument, I'm not sure that holds, since there is only a single source involved (the show). And while the column would undoubtedly be suggestive, it would actually be less suggestive than the show itself regarding where Peter copied his powers from (which means we would not be, ehrm, originating anything). But the non-notable and will-create-more-problems-than-it-solves arguments seem convincing to me.

A final suggestion: probably some of the people that re-added the benefactor column did so because the relevant discussion was archived. So if and when the talk page is archived again, it might be a good idea to place a summary of the conclusions of the various third-column discussions on the new talk page. InfintyMinusOneMRV (talk) 22:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

The WP:SYN argument is valid, since we are taking the source of the observable phenomena - the show - and extrapolating where Peter's powers are coming from. Did Peter pick up unaided flight from Nathan, and Radiation Manipulation from Ted? It seems pretty clear to anyone with a pulse that that's true. If we were writing a blog or in a fan forum, we could post that to our heart's delight. However, we edit in Wikipedia, and we aren't allowed to bring our own opinions in with us. We need to cite someone else who connects all the dots. That's the only way we can note that sort of stuff. It's the hardest part of Wikipedia to adapt to (after learning how not to pummel some felch-monkey in dire need of it); some never do. We cannot cross that line, though. Its a short walk from adding in a personal observation to this. Really, we're better off without it. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 05:45, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I still don't think that 'OR-by-synthesis' is the right label. While your argument is valid, it merely indicates that extrapolation of the source of Peter's powers would be WP:OR. As the GGP states, adding a column for 'other heroes with this power' is not strictly speaking OR, but could be considered 'OR-by-suggestion'. But 'OR-by-synthesis' is not the right label for this type of thing. There is nothing in the WP:SYN definition that is applicable here. By definition (both common-language and WP:SYN), synthesis involves joining together two different sources. It seems to me that as long as there is only a single source involved, while you can have OR, it is flat-out impossible to have OR-by-synthesis. InfinityMinusOneMRV (talk) 23:10, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

WP:SYN doesn't need to be two articles, it just needs to be two facts joined to create a third fact. Fact A (Nathan has flight) plus Fact B (Peter gained flight from someone) equals Fact C (Peter gained Flight from Natahn): That's WP:SYN. You synthesised Fact C from two different facts. Padillah (talk) 02:17, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

The proposal is merely trying to list Fact A and Fact B. You seem to be the one synthesising those facts to create Fact C. - Josh (talk | contribs) 22:23, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

That's why I said it's helping the reader do the OR. Can you really believe that casual readers will make that distinction? As such I vote for not misleading the reader. Padillah (talk) 13:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I beg to differ. WP:SYN states 'Synthesizing material occurs when an editor tries to demonstrate the validity of his or her own conclusions by citing sources that when put together serve to advance the editor's position'. That clearly refers to multiple sources, not multiple facts. If a single source produces two facts without explicitly drawing a conclusion, and the article lists the two facts without explicitly drawing a conclusion, then WP:SYN is not applicable. And while it may be suggestive, the suggestiveness comes from the grouped-togetherness of the two facts, and the grouped-togetherness is itself already present in the source material and is therefore not something added by the article. InfinityMinusOneMRV (talk) 11:40, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

You are allowed to have a different opinion; however, your example doesn't necessarily validate it. Using your example, listing two facts in the same article doesn't draw a conclusion. Okay, let's take that idea out for a spin:

Sexual predators also live in the same community.

You live in that same given community.

I don't need to paint a picture as to the proximal inference. Rather untidy and misleading, isn't it?

It doesn't matter whether the different information is from one source or twenty. If it doesn't specifically state the connection, then we do not close our eyes, add the info and wish for the best. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 15:28, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

What I believe Arcayne is getting at is this: inference is inference. Be it from 2 sources or twenty or one. To allow an inference to overshadow a fact is what we are trying to restrict. Anyone that has seen the show can tell you where Peter got each power, it's made pretty clear. The real question I have is Why do we care? What does it matter if he got his healing from Claire or Adam? What impact would this have on the plot? How would the show be different? Say he got flight from some guy on the street and not Nathan, would that make him not able to save Nathan when he exploded? What use is this information? Given the exposure to WP:SYN vs. the usefulness of the info, I gotta say, the WP:SYN wins. This is not important enough to risk the violation. When it's Sylar and taking the power means murdering the victim I'd say we can infer that a person with no top was killed by Sylar for their power. That is an inference (we didn't actually see Sylar kill James Walker ) but the fact that Sylar killed the Walkers trying to get to Molly is more important than trying to ignore the inference. It's a question of significance, is the fact you are trying to communicate more important than the possibility of misleading readers? In this case, I say "no, it's not" Padillah (talk) 16:58, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Peter/Sylar's Powers: Where does one end and the other begin?

My apologies if this issue has already been covered in my absence, but a thought occurred to me. Peter's basic empathic power allows him to mimic the abilities of superpowered individuals, either through proximity or, after his training with Claude, recall. Sylar, on the other hand, physically 'steals' the powers of individuals by "eating their brains", as Molly Walker puts it. Peter has shown that he can mimic Sylar's supposed baseline power, telekinesis, (it was used against him during their confrontation in "Homecoming",) but a question comes to mind. Has it been confirmed that Peter can access a) any/all of Sylar's acquired abilities, or b) only those abilities that Sylar has used in proximity of Peter? Naturally there is going to be an overlap, but I think the question is valid. Radical AdZ (talk) 13:53, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

No apologies necessary. It's always good to ask. However, the questions you posed is outside the purview of this article and our mandate as editors, as any answer that could possibly be provided would be little more than speculation. We can only include reliably-cited, verifiable information here. Your question is best posed to a fan forum, where there are no prohibitions as to speculative discussions. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 18:32, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I was just checking to see if there was indeed any official confirmation, but I think I will pose the question to some of the guys on Tim Sale's forum. ;) Radical AdZ (talk) 01:39, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Right before the end of season 1 there was an interview with King, it was posted on the Hero NBC site, he states that peter has all of Sylar's abilities, not counting any he many gain in season 2, I think Peter has only use telekinesis so far is that 1. He doesn't know about of any other of Sylar's powers and, thus, 2. Peter recalls other abilities by when he thinks of them and how they made him feel, so he would have to feel differently about Sylar on some things to use that power- RREDD13 (talk) 05:28, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

You pretty much hit that on the head? But I still doubt that since, no one can find any genetic evidence that Sylar has any other ability besides telekinesis. None. Elemental5293 (talk) 20:43, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually there is an indication: in the episode Matt found Molly Sylar killed her father by freezing him to death, also he has displayed many other powers. I agree that Peter probably absorbed all of Sylar's powers but so far has only accesed telekinesis since that's really the only one he knows about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.44.146.95 (talk) 06:49, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal for Addition to Powers and abilities Table

I propose the addition of Episode Number and Season Number to the column, "Episode first exhibited". It appears to be displayed in the right order but it would be nice to be specific and it doesn't appear that it would hurt. Antelope In Search Of Truth (talk) 03:54, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I think it isn't really necessary. More important than the grab bag of what powers Peter acquires is the actual story. Don't you think? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 04:53, 3 January 2008 (UTC)