Talk:Sylar and User:Ultimate Entrepreneur: Difference between pages

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Difference between pages)
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
 
personal sandbox setup
 
Line 1: Line 1:
Useful links:
{{talkheader}}
{{WikiProject Heroes|class=start|importance=mid}}
{{Heroes discussion}}
{{Archive box|
[[/Archive 1|Archive 1]] Oct 10 2006 - Dec 23 2006<br>
[[/Archive 2|Archive 2]]<br/>
[[/Archive 3|Archive 3]]<br/>
[[/Archive 4|Archive 4]]<br/>
}}


*[[Wikipedia:Tutorial]]
== Freezing ==
*[[Wikipedia:Sandbox]]


Sylar killed molly walker's father (or mother?) for the ability of freezing. He has used it on several occasions, like just before he killed his mother (he frose water into snow and levitated it) or (i think) when facing off against future peter. [[User:Timebender13|Timebender13]] ([[User talk:Timebender13|talk]]) 21:26, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
:Where did you see this? We know he killed the Walkers but we've never been able to prove he got the freezing power from Molly's father or mother or if he got it from some unnamed individual before he even got to the Walkers. If you've got some kind of citation let's see it so we can end this. That'd be great. [[user:Padillah|padillaH]] <sup>([[Wikipedia:Editor_review/Padillah|review me]])</sup><sub>([[H. Tomàs Padilla|help me]])</sub> 13:02, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


== Personal pages ==
Yes He had the power BEFORE Mollys Father...and until you can cite it I am taking it off...even with the knowledge of Sept 22nds episodes, he had to know it before cutting off his head...where he got it from is unknown.[[User:HeroesAccuracySupport|HeroesAccuracySupport]] ([[User talk:HeroesAccuracySupport|talk]]) 06:05, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
*[[User:Ultimate Entrepreneur/Personal sandbox]]

== Eden's voice ==

Hi, I've started watching Heroes late, but one thing I noticed towards the end of season one was that before Sylar kills Isaac, he uses Eden McCain's voice to command him to do something (show him a particular picture, I think it was). The same sound effect that was placed on Eden's 'command' voice was used, but it's implied from Eden's final scene that she shot herself to deny Sylar her power.

So, what do we think? Is this just a continuity error, or was Sylar able to take Eden's voice regardless of the bullet wound?[[Special:Contributions/217.207.239.245|217.207.239.245]] ([[User talk:217.207.239.245|talk]]) 11:10, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
:It's neither, Tim Kring has said the voice effect was exactly that, a Dramatic Effect. He just did it because it sounded cool, nothing more. Sylar is not believed to have obtained Edens power (several people are casting aspersions about Peter, but Sylar has been ruled out). [[user:Padillah|padillaH]] <sup>([[Wikipedia:Editor_review/Padillah|review me]])</sup><sub>([[H. Tomàs Padilla|help me]])</sub> 13:00, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

== Alternate future ==

Why exactly was the alernate future section removed a while ago? Other articles such as Peter Petrelli and Angela Petrelli have sections about the alternate timelines. [[User:Ophois|Ophois]] ([[User talk:Ophois|talk]]) 04:06, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
:Sorry, but I'm all for taking the bloody things out. Not that I removed it but it was the plot of one episode and has not been revisited for an entire season. Yes, there are indications that the future will be revisited this season but there is no indication that it will be the one that was left in season one. In fact the point of season one was that the future that was depicted will not come to pass now. So, between it's limited exposure and the fact that it has been rendered moot I don't see why we have sections devoted to it. I say get rid of it altogether, in all the articles. [[user:Padillah|padillaH]] <sup>([[Wikipedia:Editor_review/Padillah|review me]])</sup><sub>([[H. Tomàs Padilla|help me]])</sub> 13:05, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


== demonic voice ==

any one else notice that sometimes his voice takes on a distorted, alsmost demonic tone in some instances, like before he killed the car mehcanic for he super hearing she said "whats that sound?" and he said "murder!" in a warped tone, there have been other instances too, is this a power, or just dramatic effect? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/81.149.127.90|81.149.127.90]] ([[User talk:81.149.127.90|talk]]) 12:44, 19 September 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:If you check the archives you will see '''everyone''' has noticed it. It has been described by Tim Kring as artistic license. I believe his direct quote was "It sounded cool". Should we make mention of this in the article if we're just going to get asked this over and over? [[user:Padillah|padillaH]] <sup>([[Wikipedia:Editor_review/Padillah|review me]])</sup><sub>([[H. Tomàs Padilla|help me]])</sub> 13:18, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
::Absolutely not, unless you obtain a specific citation noting Kring's manipulation of the audio track. With other marketing tools, like a [[phantom ring]] and [[ARG]], I wouldn't be at all surprised if there were a citation speaking to this. - [[User:Arcayne|<span style="color:black">'''Arcayne'''</span>]] [[User talk:Arcayne|<small><span style="color:gray">(<sup>'''cast a spell'''</sup>)</span></small>]] 13:28, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
:::Ithought there was an interview (way back when this happened) where he said he took artistic license and some other stuff about how it's not her power. Can't for the life of me remember when it was but it was on that writers blog... crap, I can't even remember the name of that now. [[user:Padillah|padillaH]] <sup>([[Wikipedia:Editor_review/Padillah|review me]])</sup><sub>([[H. Tomàs Padilla|help me]])</sub> 14:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

== Absorbed isn't the word to use ==

I believe the word to use is acquire. Absorb is more for peter. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Paramount X|Paramount X]] ([[User talk:Paramount X|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Paramount X|contribs]]) 03:48, 23 September 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:I don't think it's appropriate for Peter, either. Both learn or mimic, Sylar on a conscious level, Peter on a subconscious or instinctual level ... [[User:Fredmdbud|Fredmdbud]] ([[User talk:Fredmdbud|talk]]) 19:11, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
::while this hinges dangerously close into OR, allow me to explain the difference. Absorption is a passive thing, and Peter doesn't mean to absorb the powers he receives, he just does, Sylar goes out to fetch them, cutting off gents and gems' skullcaps to poke an prod their brains - something of an active seeking, if I may say so. Peter absorbs the ability, not understanding them when he gets them (ergo, the whole "exploding man" thang). Sylar doesn't struggle with how the abilities he ''takes'' work - it is the process of acquiring them that he understand their form and function, and loses sight of his subsequent actions. Steal, appropriate, acquire - all apply to how Sylar gets his power, none apply to Peter's absorbing. - [[User:Arcayne|<span style="color:black">'''Arcayne'''</span>]] [[User talk:Arcayne|<small><span style="color:gray">(<sup>'''cast a spell'''</sup>)</span></small>]] 04:00, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm confused. The way Sylar takes a persons power means that the brain is left intact. However Sylar's victims are found without a brain. Does he take them or what? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/91.108.133.135|91.108.133.135]] ([[User talk:91.108.133.135|talk]]) 20:33, 1 October 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

==Base ability vs. acquired ability==
I've removed the list box of abilities that Sylar has acquired through the use of his base ability. As adding them creates an opening for cruft, speculation (do we really need to revisit the cryokinesis issue to illustrate this?). As well, the list was fostering the overcategorization of abilities. Lastly I purged the cat addition of fictional US Presidents; while Sylar was in fact a president in one of the alternate futures presented, it wasn't as Sylar, he was masquerading as Nathan Petrelli. - [[User:Arcayne|<span style="color:black">'''Arcayne'''</span>]] [[User talk:Arcayne|<small><span style="color:gray">(<sup>'''cast a spell'''</sup>)</span></small>]] 13:44, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
:The article is better served by just listing the powers (which is factual) and not their origins, which avoids a certain point of contention. [[User:Fredmdbud|Fredmdbud]] ([[User talk:Fredmdbud|talk]]) 15:49, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
::And if we could keep people to that we'd be fine but the problem is we can't (see cryokinesis refered to above). It doesn't add as much to the article as it takes away. [[User:Padillah|Padillah]] ([[User talk:Padillah|talk]]) 15:51, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
I have no problem with the absence or the presence of the acquired powers list, as long as it ONLY lists acquired powers. In either case, we're going to having problems with people either adding the list if it's removed or adding speculative and trivial information if the list is there. ~<font size="3" face="Calibri">[[User:QuasiAbstract|QuasiAbstract]]</font> {[[User talk:QuasiAbstract|talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/QuasiAbstract|contrib]]} 15:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

:::(ec) The article - ''no'' article in Wikipedia - is served by adding speculative information. Honestly, how many characters in Heroes have to lose , regain, add to or swap powers before we realize that the basic ability is ''all'' that we need concern ourselves with. Wikipedia is not a list of crufty information. We have a link to Heroeswiki. Let the fanbase seek the extent of the stolen abilities there.
::::But then you are effectively leaving out and undocumenting some significant information, namely what Sylar is capable of doing. As far as people people harping on stuff that is speculative, that's where vigilence comes in. And removing the box seems pretty unilateral, too, because I didn't see a consensus form before it was taken away.[[User:Fredmdbud|Fredmdbud]] ([[User talk:Fredmdbud|talk]]) 15:58, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
::::By that rationale, are we going to do the same to the article for Peter Petrelli? If you want things to be consistent ... [[User:Fredmdbud|Fredmdbud]] ([[User talk:Fredmdbud|talk]]) 16:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
:(outdent) Absolutely. It only attracts cruft in the form of folk continually wanting to add the speculation as to where the acquired ability came from. This is exactly the same situation. Peter copies abilities, whereas Sylar steals them (or rather, acquires them, killing the target in the process). We should focus on the abilities, and refer to the acquired abilities in the body of the text in a general way. - [[User:Arcayne|<span style="color:black">'''Arcayne'''</span>]] [[User talk:Arcayne|<small><span style="color:gray">(<sup>'''cast a spell'''</sup>)</span></small>]] 16:07, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
::So how is that different from a list of acquired abilities that does not list their origins? If you don't list the origins, it doesn't invite people to add their two cents as to where they believe they got them.[[User:Fredmdbud|Fredmdbud]] ([[User talk:Fredmdbud|talk]]) 16:12, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
:Er, I agree that it ''should'' be removed. Let's focus on one article at a time. Once this bit of kerfuffle is complete, we'll fix Pete's page as well. :) - [[User:Arcayne|<span style="color:black">'''Arcayne'''</span>]] [[User talk:Arcayne|<small><span style="color:gray">(<sup>'''cast a spell'''</sup>)</span></small>]] 16:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
::I disagree, I think the table in the Peter Petrelli article is desirable because it objectively lists the power and the episode it was first exhibited - facts which are decidedly not speculative. Not showing the capabilities is at the least casting them as trivial, and at the worst sticking one's head in the sand.[[User:Fredmdbud|Fredmdbud]] ([[User talk:Fredmdbud|talk]]) 16:25, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
:::Actually, it isn't really objective. Yes, we know that he got the radioactive ability from Ted, and Claire's healing ability from Claire. But there are so many other abilities that Syler (and Peter) display that we don't know the origins of (ie,, they are most assuredly speculative). As well, the time-shifting treats these abilities like a grand [[Etch-a-Sketch]], and the two start from scratch with a whole new set of powers. By listing the base power, and leaving the rest of the fannish Bag o' Crazy™ accessible through the link to the HeroesWiki, we have done our encyclopedic duty whilst allowing for those acquired/ stolen/ appropriated via creative license to be noted.
:::We should note Sylar's acquired TK, though. He uses it enough that it has become something of a defacto power - the desire to control. - [[User:Arcayne|<span style="color:black">'''Arcayne'''</span>]] [[User talk:Arcayne|<small><span style="color:gray">(<sup>'''cast a spell'''</sup>)</span></small>]] 16:47, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
::::Please re-read what I said regarding Peter Petrelli article, and how its table would serve in the Sylar article. The table lists 1. '''the power''', and 2. '''what episode it was first demonstrated'''. Nothing about from whom he got it.[[User:Fredmdbud|Fredmdbud]] ([[User talk:Fredmdbud|talk]]) 00:50, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
::::I strongly disagree with this. Sylar's acquired abilities are a large part of the series. So what if an anon occasionally adds Molly's father as the source for cryokinesis? That's what we editors are here for. Removing the powers just because someone adds speculation in once in a while is a bad move, and greatly detracts from the article IMO. [[User:Ophois|Ophois]] ([[User talk:Ophois|talk]]) 04:01, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
:::::I do think that this article is different from Peter's article, given that for eight of the nine powers he's shown, we have on-screen evidence (either by seeing him kill the person, or he flat out says it ["Look what your father used to be able to do"]). There's not the wide opening for speculation that there is for Peter, just the one ability. [[User:EVula|EVula]] <span style="color: #999;">// [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|<span style="color: #366;">&#9775;</span>]] //</span> 14:55, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
::::::But that is not the point, EVula; the abilities that Sylar kills to obtain is - for the most part - superfluous to the plot. The main issue - that he kills to take them, and isn't at all bothered by that - ''is''. As Sylar (and Peter, for that matter) tends to lose/gain x number of abilities each season, it becomes less about the abilities and more about what ''else'' is going on. They are only tools; let us focus on the folk using the tools instead. Its far more encyclopedic, and less likely to be mired in the endlessly fancrufty minutiae. - [[User:Arcayne|<span style="color:black">'''Arcayne'''</span>]] [[User talk:Arcayne|<small><span style="color:gray">(<sup>'''cast a spell'''</sup>)</span></small>]] 14:39, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Hold on... when have Peter or Sylar ever lost abilities? Other than future versions of the characters, which are covered in different sections, they have had a constant power base... [[User:Ophois|Ophois]] ([[User talk:Ophois|talk]]) 01:44, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
:There's no proof that either has. There's simply rumor that, because of the virus and since Sylar hasn't yet used several of the powers he gained in the past, he's lost them. It's speculation at best and most likely wrong. In any case the virus never infected Peter, it's just confusing which Peter we're talking about having what powers. The "other future Peter" never exhibited the illusion power that "this future Peter" one does. This future Peter has more than a couple of powers the other future Peter didn't exhibit, yet doesn't seem to have the pyrokinesis/red energy the other future Peter had... it quickly turns into a mess trying to keep up with which Peter had what power when. On top of which we've noted several times that there's nothing we can say until he exibits a power because we simply can't tell if he has any given power from the outside (i.e. Eden McCain's "Voice" logically we know he has it he simply has failed to realize this). I don't think we should do away with the list of powers, they are integral to the characters (the hunger for more power is being established as a major motivator for Sylar). But I don't think we need to keep track of which power what version of which future Peter has. that's too much and thus far none of the possible futures has been approached. Thus far they are plot devices for the heroes to fight against, nothing more. [[User:Padillah|Padillah]] ([[User talk:Padillah|talk]]) 13:23, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

==Alchemy Vs. Midas Touch Vs. Chrysopoeia==
I believe the technical term for the ability listed as alchemy is [[Chrysopoeia]]. I will change the page to reflect this. This is the technical term for the ability more commonly known as the Midas Touch.<br>
Additionally, although the creators referenced his power as alchemy, I see this as speculation on the characters further development, that was not realized due to the character's death. We can only confirm, based on the television series, that the ability is currently Midas Touch, or Chrysopoeia.
[[User:Radicaledward101|Radicaledward101]] ([[User talk:Radicaledward101|talk]]) 01:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
:Great. When you cite that reliably as the power, we can include it. Not one nanosecond before. We cannot include ''your'' connection of the dots. We cite only those connections which can be cited. Period. :) - [[User:Arcayne|<span style="color:black">'''Arcayne'''</span>]] [[User talk:Arcayne|<small><span style="color:gray">(<sup>'''cast a spell'''</sup>)</span></small>]] 04:29, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
::One question about your choice of the word "reliably:" what exactly does that mean? There are [http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/berg/cash/2006/00000003/00000003/art00003 articles] that list chrysopeia as the ability to change the base metals into gold. While that isn't the main article it does list the pages in the book that do speak on the subject. [[User:Kinsoto|Kinsoto]] ([[User talk:Kinsoto|talk]]) 22:22, 2 October 2008 (UTC) <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.72.65.48|71.72.65.48]] ([[User talk:71.72.65.48|talk]]) </span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::Sorry if I was unclear, anon. the notation of chrysopeia has to be occur in a [[WP:RS|reliable]] article about the television series, which "connects the dots" between the ability name, and the program. As your link doesn't do that, it is no more useful than a a statement about historical inaccuracies present in the films ''[[300 (film)|300]]'', ''[[Alexander (film)|Alexander]]'' or ''[[Braveheart]]'' backed up by citation from history books. It is you noting the connection, not someone else. As Wikipedia relies solely upon secondary sources (not us), we cannot use citations in this way.
:::I hope that helps. - [[User:Arcayne|<span style="color:black">'''Arcayne'''</span>]] [[User talk:Arcayne|<small><span style="color:gray">(<sup>'''cast a spell'''</sup>)</span></small>]] 13:09, 3 October 2008 (UTC)


:::In other words, we don't doubt that the ability you are describing is called Chrysopoeia nor that Chrysopoeia is the ability toturn stuff into gold, we need someone to say that is the power Bob has. And it really should be as blatant as that - "Bob has Chrysopoeia" (as said by the director or some writer). This is because that fact that you want to put in the article isn't about Chrysopoeia, it's about Bob. So we need some citation that says Bob has Chrysopoeia. [[User:Padillah|Padillah]] ([[User talk:Padillah|talk]]) 19:21, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

== Cannot acquire abilities from the dead. ==

I removed the line "though he cannot acquire an ability from a dead person." for the following reasons:<br>
A) There's no citation supporting this, and as far as I can tell it's speculation.<br>
B) It's been stated on the show that he removes the brain of the victim (though he didn't appear to have to do this with Claire)...that would pretty much kill them, leaving him to examine a dead brain. Of course that assumes that he removed the brain before acquiring the new ability, and not after. All this too is speculation, but it's enough to prevent me from changing the statement to "though it is unclear as to whether or not he can acquire an ability from a dead person."
<br><br>
Point is, there's no reason to include "though he cannot acquire an ability from a dead person" at this juncture. -{{unsigned|75.82.12.177}} '''EVR''' ([[User talk:75.82.12.177|talk]]) 01:45, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
:It is shown in the latest graphic novel that he can't. [[User:Ophois|Ophois]] ([[User talk:Ophois|talk]]) 05:07, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
::Which is indicated before that sentence. ~<font size="3" face="Calibri">[[User:QuasiAbstract|QuasiAbstract]]</font> {[[User talk:QuasiAbstract|talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/QuasiAbstract|contrib]]} 07:51, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

:::In the future, it might be splendidly helpful to actually ask if we see a fact that doesn't seem accurate - it saves a lot of time with all the reverting and whatnot. Asking ''before'' removing makes a person seem like something less of an ass. - [[User:Arcayne|<span style="color:black">'''Arcayne'''</span>]] [[User talk:Arcayne|<small><span style="color:gray">(<sup>'''cast a spell'''</sup>)</span></small>]] 15:25, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
:::And in the future, "EVR", please actually create an account, instead of masking your IP address with a fake name. It tends to erode a lot of good faith when you do such. - [[User:Arcayne|<span style="color:black">'''Arcayne'''</span>]] [[User talk:Arcayne|<small><span style="color:gray">(<sup>'''cast a spell'''</sup>)</span></small>]] 15:27, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

== Separate columns for acquisition and use ==
IMO we should use separate columns for power acquisition and power use. IIRC he hasn't used Bridget Bailey's psychometry power yet. -- [[User:Gordon Ecker|Gordon Ecker]] ([[User talk:Gordon Ecker|talk]]) 00:51, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
:Has it been established that the current "Episode" column is for both, and not just acquisition? - [[User:Josh the Nerd|Josh]] ([[User talk:Josh the Nerd|talk]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Special:Contributions/Josh_the_Nerd|contribs]]) 16:46, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
::I thought the "Episode" column was for first use because there are times that Sylar has aquired powers both in a graphic novel and between episodes (i.e. Cryogenics). [[User:Padillah|Padillah]] ([[User talk:Padillah|talk]]) 17:50, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

== "Suppressed" Abilties ==

I understand that this information came from the future part of the show, but Gabriel is shown using (I'm assuming) Ted's ability. Granted, we don't know that it is actually Ted's ability. It could very well be someone he's met over the next four years, but should we really separated his acquired abilities into before and after the virus? We don't know that he cannot access those abilities, all we know is that he hasn't demonstrated their use on camera since the virus. His base ability is being able to understand how things work. As long as he understands how those abilities work, then it shouldn't matter whether he gained the ability before or after the virus. He's able to do it with Knox without even cutting his head open.
I just don't think we need to suggest with the separate lists that he doesn't have those abilities that he acquired before the virus. ~<font size="3" face="Calibri">[[User:Auzemandius|Auzemandius]]</font> {[[User talk:Auzemandius|talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Auzemandius|contrib]]} 09:03, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
:Nothing has even suggested that his powers are different or suppressed. His first use of a power is not his base power but TK suggesting that there is no loss of prior ability. This "Shanti virus reset his abilities" is pure speculation and it's gone. [[User:Padillah|Padillah]] ([[User talk:Padillah|talk]]) 12:18, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
::He was also shown using Isaac Mendez's power; that's two of the "originals".<br />For what it's worth, though, I totally agree; he just hasn't been shown using any of those powers, but it doesn't mean that he doesn't still have them. (and until someone on-air states that he can't access them, we shouldn't say that he can't) After all, how often does he really need to use "liquification"? (I also took his instant recognizing of Peter's presence at the end of "I Am Become Death" to be a result of his superhuman hearing, but that's just speculation on my part). [[User:EVula|EVula]] <span style="color: #999;">// [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|<span style="color: #366;">&#9775;</span>]] //</span> 15:09, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
:::Hmm, [http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=18281 on the other hand]... I haven't had a chance to read it yet (I'm at work), but apparently that's the source for the "old powers are gone" speculation. [[User:EVula|EVula]] <span style="color: #999;">// [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|<span style="color: #366;">&#9775;</span>]] //</span> 15:29, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
::::I just read through it, and though it never says "Sylar has started the season off with only TK and Figuring Out How Powers Work by Scalping SuperHuman People (FOHPWSSH, coincidentally the sound that the brain makes when he removes it), it pretty much says that he started over. I'm just not sure which question that the response "Nope that’s right" goes to: "Has his slate of powers been ‘wiped clean’ and does he have to start all over again?" or "Does Sylar mean that he permanently lost all of his acquired powers except for telekinesis?" or "Or am I reading into things?”
::::I wonder how and if they'll explain why he kept the one ability, seems contradictory. ~<font size="3" face="Calibri">[[User:Auzemandius|Auzemandius]]</font> {[[User talk:Auzemandius|talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Auzemandius|contrib]]} 15:49, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
(outdent)That's the same thing I saw - they say, "He's starting with a clean slate" but he's obviously not. (unless he found someone with TK again). [[User:Padillah|Padillah]] ([[User talk:Padillah|talk]]) 16:47, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
:Tests on the show have shown that Sylar's TK appears to be permanent, so it makes sense for him to only regain those two. Now, if Present-Sylar starts using the old powers, then the writer is obviously wrong in the Q&A, but until then we are supposed to go on reliable sources. [[User:Ophois|Ophois]] ([[User talk:Ophois|talk]]) 17:20, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
::The [http://comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=18343 second week Q&A] touches on this, and implies that the telekinesis is special because it's his first acquired power. [[User:Ophois|Ophois]] ([[User talk:Ophois|talk]]) 18:08, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
:It's possible that Claire's blood has overwritten any lingering effects of the virus and that we just haven't seen present Sylar using his other abilities. --[[User:Maitias|Maitias]] ([[User talk:Maitias|talk]]) 19:13, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

::Ladies and gents, we are walking a pretty fine line between discussing improving the article and speculating. I've said it before, and I will say it again: ''we are not in a hurry''. Encyclopedias move at a notoriously slow pace, and with good reason - fact-checking takes a while, and if there are no supporting facts, it doesn't go in. The only way WP differs from this is that we allow citations (not facts) to support our statements. We do not have to be first; We are not a newspaper, where a [[Scoop (term)|scoop]] makes the discovery of information time-critical. As it is, virtually all of our information comes from these sources, so we are necessarily going to be the last to know. And frankly, if anyone is not okay with that, then Wikipedia may not be the place for you (though [[WikiNews]] might be).
::The information, in solid, citable form will arrive or it won't. Until then, it isn't our place to speculate about it. - [[User:Arcayne|<span style="color:black">'''Arcayne'''</span>]] [[User talk:Arcayne|<small><span style="color:gray">(<sup>'''cast a spell'''</sup>)</span></small>]] 21:18, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
:::But...I don't wanna! Agreed (though I was walking that line as well). ~<font size="3" face="Calibri">[[User:Auzemandius|Auzemandius]]</font> {[[User talk:Auzemandius|talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Auzemandius|contrib]]} 23:28, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
::::Lol! Yay, as I was about to release the ''+4 Hounds of Whupass'' on ya. (jk). I look forward to a time when it is all spelled out nice and clear. Has someone tought to look through the video commentary? I don't have the seasons on DVD, but with movies, you can often get a running commentary during the eps. If something juicy (and relevant) is found, it can be added, within considerations, using the CiteVideo template. - [[User:Arcayne|<span style="color:black">'''Arcayne'''</span>]] [[User talk:Arcayne|<small><span style="color:gray">(<sup>'''cast a spell'''</sup>)</span></small>]] 13:46, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
:::::Well, the interview does say "Sylar’s starting over." But that is contradicted by the fact that he's not, he still has TK. And it's a little too ambiguous to clear the question off the table. So, do we believe the show or the writer of the show? [[User:Padillah|Padillah]] ([[User talk:Padillah|talk]]) 13:59, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
::::::The final product, as always, which means not the program, but others' (meaing reliable, verifiable sources) interpretations of the programs. What the writer thinks is valuable, though, as they might know what the long-term goal of the season, series or (in the special case of 'Heroes'', where each character has one or two writers) character is.- [[User:Arcayne|<span style="color:black">'''Arcayne'''</span>]] [[User talk:Arcayne|<small><span style="color:gray">(<sup>'''cast a spell'''</sup>)</span></small>]] 14:23, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

== Grammar issues ==

Fredmdbud edits ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sylar&diff=243835437&oldid=243821575 1], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sylar&diff=243904918&oldid=243895338 2]):
<blockquote>
:"Sylar later manages to get inside the Company headquarters, '''kills''' Bob Bishop and '''acquires''' his power."
</blockquote>
whereas I posit the following ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sylar&diff=243886140&oldid=243885729 1], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sylar&diff=243915606&oldid=243904918 2]):
<blockquote>
:"Sylar later manages to get inside the Company headquarters, killing Bob Bishop and acquiring his power"
</blockquote>

I think my version is grammatically correct in both tense and meaning. Fred seems to think his version describes a series of events in (presumably) chronological order, whereas I think that summation is both more technically correct and streamlined, leading right into the next sentence. I recall something in MOS that talks about using the infinitive tense (as its more encyclopedic), but someone could check it out and prove me wrong, I guess. I thought I would bring it here, as Fred is absolutely sure he is correct. - [[User:Arcayne|<span style="color:black">'''Arcayne'''</span>]] [[User talk:Arcayne|<small><span style="color:gray">(<sup>'''cast a spell'''</sup>)</span></small>]] 16:10, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
:The latter sentence is more "dynamic", in my opinion; while the first sentence ''is'' grammatically correct, it sounds really plain. [[User:EVula|EVula]] <span style="color: #999;">// [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|<span style="color: #366;">&#9775;</span>]] //</span> 18:19, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

:The first sentence is an ordered list of events as they took place (first one, then the other, and finally the last). The second sentence is more of a recap of things that happened irrespective of chronology. Even without the order there's no reason to believe anyone would misunderstand either one. This is really a simple function of MOS. My two-cents? I like the second sentence. [[User:Padillah|Padillah]] ([[User talk:Padillah|talk]]) 18:59, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

::Let's try a similar construct and see if you think they are the same:
::*She comes on the stage, sings a song, and dances a dance.
::*She comes on the stage, singing a song, and dancing a dance.
::On the one hand you have a sentence that is simple and unambiguous. On the other hand you have something that might sound more stylistic and pleasing, but can be interpreted two ways. [[User:Fredmdbud|Fredmdbud]] ([[User talk:Fredmdbud|talk]]) 03:52, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

:::Aside from the superfluous comma in the first sentence (after "song), I prefer the first; again, it's more dynamic than the rather dry "this happens then this happens then this happens". [[User:EVula|EVula]] <span style="color: #999;">// [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|<span style="color: #366;">&#9775;</span>]] //</span> 03:59, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

::::There is no hard consensus on the [[Serial comma|serial comma]], but the elimination of the comma after "song" in the first sentence makes it sound like she did the two things at the same time. But you get the general idea of the example. [[User:Fredmdbud|Fredmdbud]] ([[User talk:Fredmdbud|talk]]) 04:14, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
:::::Well, if interpretation is what you are worried about then it should be phrased like so:
:::::*"Sylar later manages to get inside the Company headquarters. He then '''kills''' Bob Bishop and '''acquires''' his power."
:::::There, no ambiguity. I guess I just don't feel that the ambiguity is loose enough to make this kind of impact and, in point of fact, is in line with how much we know (we never see him break in or kill Bob). At best someone could think Sylar broke into the Company by killing Bob or that he broke into the Company, found Bob then killed him. Either way we don't know enough to enforce a chronology so we can't reinforce the argument. [[User:Padillah|Padillah]] ([[User talk:Padillah|talk]]) 12:35, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
:I prefer the second option. We don't KNOW at what point the person dies as it is technically possible to remove part of the skull with a person remaining alive for a short period (or so I've been led to believe). Therefore chronological order is irrelevent as it is speculation. I admit it's LIKELY to be true... but not definite. --[[User:Worm That Turned|WORM]] | [[User talk:Worm That Turned| MЯOW]] 13:28, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Or the sentence could read:
*"Sylar later manages to get inside the Company headquarters. He then kills Bob Bishop, acquiring his power."; or
*"Sylar later manages to get inside the Company headquarters. He then acquires Bob Bishop's power, killing him." [[User:Fredmdbud|Fredmdbud]] ([[User talk:Fredmdbud|talk]]) 14:07, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

== regeneration ==

Is there any explanation for the apparent regenerative powers he has in season 1? Surviving a volley of gunshots and getting back up and running away.. getting stabbed by that sword... etc. etc. [[Special:Contributions/134.197.22.98|134.197.22.98]] ([[User talk:134.197.22.98|talk]]) 22:11, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
:It is a mighty power indeed, my anonymous frind - that of Plot Device. ;) - [[User:Arcayne|<span style="color:black">'''Arcayne'''</span>]] [[User talk:Arcayne|<small><span style="color:gray">(<sup>'''cast a spell'''</sup>)</span></small>]] 00:08, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:08, 10 October 2008

Useful links:


Personal pages

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sylar&oldid=244403780"