Talk:Flight

From Heroes Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Ability Naming Conventions
The following sources are used for determining evolved human ability names, in order:
Episodes
2. Near-canon Sources Webisodes,
Graphic Novels,
iStories,
Heroes Evolutions
3. Secondary Sources Episode commentary,
Interviews,
Heroes: Survival
4. Common names for abilities Names from other works
5. Descriptions of abilities Descriptions
6. Possessor's name If no non-speculative
description is possible

Note: The highlighted row represents the level of the source used to determine flight's name.
Source/Explanation
Mohinder explicitly names it "Flight" in The Second Coming.

Wind Manipulation

Could be the possible Power of Nathan to Explain why his body & Clothing is still Intact after his Flight [1]

~ Red = 6:05PM Jan 3, 2007
  • My personal opinion has always been that we're looking too far into the powers. I suspect we're supposed to suspend disbelief... afterall how do you explain through physics how Sylar can pick up and throw a locker door? :) Trying to find explanations (or what I tend to call "consequencial powers") for all the consequences of their powers will, I suspect, lead people to make the wrong assumption about the nature of the person's powers. Does Jessica have super-durability? It would require that in order to be able to rip a door off of a safe without breaking every bone in your hand. However, I'm willing to bet that if Jessica ever got shot in the hand it would go right through. Just my personal take on it. :) (Admin 18:17, 3 January 2007 (EST))
    • The Final Vision that Peter Had in Chapter 11 "Fallout" where Nathan steps close to Peter and a rush of Air Blows up; It could be Nathan's Power along with Peter going Critical mass.
~ Red = 02:35, 4 January 2007
      • This would explain the middle school boy's deoxygenation in the future, perhaps he also have Aerokenisis and used it take away air.
~ Rybo5000 = 12:11, 31 July 2008

Main Image

The main image should really be a picture of the originator of the power, in my opinion. I really like the picture of Nathan flying, even if you can't see him. There are better pictures of him from Genesis if we wanted to use one of those ... but I don't see anything wrong with the one we have. — RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 21:41, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

  • I was hoping for something in which the user was more than a dot, and the image I was at least Nathan in appearance (theoretically). If we can find one in which he is flying and recognizable (as opposed to a dot or a blur), that would be my preference. --Ted C 22:03, 9 May 2007 (EDT)

I think the main image should be this picture. It really shows flight and we did see him before West. --Catalyst 20:43, 20 January 2009 (EDT)

That's not a bad picture either. I was confused about why we were using West as well. I mean, when you think of "flight," the first thing that comes to mind isn't really "hovering." At least, just for me. We could also use a picture of Peter, as well. My main suggestions are this one or this one.Sincerely, Thrashmeister [ U | T | C ] 21:50, 20 January 2009 (EST)

I like the first picture you chose there. of Peter carrying Claude. That really does show flight. --Catalyst 20:26 21 January 2009

Alright, here is an image of the original holder, Nathan, flying. Not a dot and in the air. You can clearly see the street far below him. Let's change the picture of West to this.--Catalyst

Talk 06:53, 14 March 2009 (EDT)

    • brighten it up a smidge and I think it would be fine, as it is now, it a little dark and you cant see things very well --SacValleyDweller (talk) 01:35, 22 March 2009 (EDT)
      • Someone please brighten up this picture. I have no idea how to do it, so someone else has to.--Catalyst 11:53 23,March 2009
        • Alright, i just keep messing up. the second reversion is brighter, but for whatever reason it didn't show up that way. so i tried to do it again and again. someone please help.--Catalyst 17:46 23,March 2009

"Originally Held By"

Well... how do we work with this with multiple people sharing a power... aside from those who've absorbed? Noone can say who manifested their power earlier, so we can't say Nathan is original over West. On top of that, West seems to fly much smoother, like a bird - Nathan shoots off like a rocket. Maybe we actually have two different forms of flight here? --Riddler 22:59, 24 September 2007 (EDT)

  • We can list multiple people under "originally held by". It technically means more along the lines of "natively held by". It's just making a distinction between people who have the powers naturally and those who stole (Sylar) or mimic (Peter) them. (Admin 23:02, 24 September 2007 (EDT))
    • -Salutes- Aye Aye, Sir.--Riddler 23:03, 24 September 2007 (EDT)

On a related note, we had a policy of having the infobox image be one of the first person in the series to manifest the power on screen. Given that we may not have a better image of Nathan in flight, do we want to relax that rule? --Ted C 14:36, 3 October 2007 (EDT)


Limits Separated by user

  • Really like this change. Much simpler and clearer.--Hardvice (talk) 17:20, 16 October 2007 (EDT)
    • Agreed. Should we do this for other powers when there seems to be a difference? STM can use it, I would think (with Future Peter and Hiro).--Bob (Talk) 17:23, 16 October 2007 (EDT)
      • I've implemented this change at space-time manipulation. It's a little different there because it involves Future characters as well as regular characters. --Ted C 17:50, 16 October 2007 (EDT)

Levitation

I think that levitation would be a more appropriate name.

levitation (noun) 1. the phenomenon of a person or thing rising into the air by apparently supernatural means 2. movement upward in virtue of lightness

Not only is this term a well known term for what Nathan and West can do, but it is also used in the show. Mohinder mentions evolved humans who can levitate several times. So I vote we change the name to levitation because it is a term used on the show, and sounds more official than flight. --phoenixautumn 15:54, 7 November 2007 (EST)

Anybody going to discuss this? --phoenixautumn 13:49, 9 November 2007 (EST)

  • I also like the word levitation, but I would rather use the word flight. You say the name should be changed because the show uses the term levitation. Sorry to burst your bubble, but a lot more characters have used the word "fly". "You can fly?!"; "I think I can fly!"; "Flying man!"; and so on and so forth... They keep saying "fly."--Ice Vision 15:58, 9 November 2007 (EST)
    • Well true, but people also say to Claire "you can heal?", and yet her power is not healing, but rapid cell regeneration. And Matt says "I can read minds" and yet his power isn't mind reading, it's telepathy. So what I'm saying is that people say things like flying, healing, and mind-reading because it's simpler terms, whereas levitation is more of a technical term.

--phoenixautumn 14:11, 9 November 2007 (EST)

  • Also, for most people, levitation equals lift. It does not necessarily equal propulsion. Look at your definition: "rising into the air", "movement upward". There's no indication of an ability to travel forward--just an ability to hover.--Hardvice (talk) 16:09, 9 November 2007 (EST)
    • I agree with Hardvice. Levitation just describes hovering, whereas flight shows their actual movement through the air; they are not just levitating, they are flying. In my opinion.--  Lost Soul   talk  contribs  16:14, 9 November 2007 (EST)
      • Here are some other definitions. All support the levitation=hovering, flight=movement divide:
        • "To rise or cause to rise into the air and float in apparent defiance of gravity." (American Heritage)
        • "the process by which an object is suspended against gravity, in a stable position, by a force without physical contact." (Wikipedia)
        • "the raising or rising of a body in air by supernatural means." (Random House unabridged)
In contrast, "Flight" is:
  • "The motion of an object in or through a medium, especially through the earth's atmosphere or through space." (American Heritage)
  • "the process by which an object achieves sustained movement ... through the air" (Wikipedia)
--Hardvice (talk) 16:22, 9 November 2007 (EST)
    • Alright well thanks for clearing that up for me. I does make sense now. I still think that levitation sounds better, but you're right, that term is too limited and doesn't imply moving through the air. Thanx. --phoenixautumn 18:44, 9 November 2007 (EST)

I know the dissucussion has come to a conclusion but David Blaine shows he can levitate, if you want to call it a hoaxs which I think it is, but that does not means he can fly.--50000JH 10:08, 1 October 2009 (EDT)50000JH

I know he doesn't I'm making him an example of Levitation, that he can make people believe he can levitate but he can't fly.--50000JH 10:08, 1 October 2009 (EDT)50000JH

Hardvice is saying leviation is hovering through the air, I'm saying this is the same with David Blaine.--50000JH 10:08, 1 October 2009 (EDT)50000JH

Different versions of flight

I think we shouldn't assume that West gained his ability naturally. We don't know when that practice of artificially inducing abilities stopped. Also, we are assuming Nathan has the same version of the ability as West...and as Ryan reminded me, the fact that Nathan is capable of supersonic flight isn't proof of a different version as West may be similarly capable but not know it (the fact that West has much more experience is irrelevant).--MiamiVolts (talk) 22:03, 22 October 2008 (EDT)

  • Likewise, we shouldn't assume that he didn't gain his ability naturally. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 22:43, 22 October 2008 (EDT)
    • Agreed. I think I've removed the speculation without adding any.--MiamiVolts (talk) 22:55, 22 October 2008 (EDT)

Power name source

For the Power names template, Ryan noted: One of the folders in the Genesis Files is labeled "Human Flight Potential". In Genesis, Peter says, "So I went to the library to see if I could find anything on human flight." Then he reads from Activating Evolution itself: "Genes determine obesity, blood pressure. Out of the 30 billion possibilities, one might contain the potential for human flight."--MiamiVolts (talk) 20:42, 24 October 2008 (EDT)

  • Now, I'm against using that as the source. Though the Genesis Files could potentially pertain to them, they didn't directly link Peter or Nathan's abilities to flight, and neither Peter nor Nathan say that "flight" is their ability...they did both say that they can "fly", so I think the current source is fine as-is.--MiamiVolts (talk) 20:42, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
    • I'd agree with that personally, though accepting this is a clear platform for arguing that it's ok to make minor grammatical changes to make the names fit. Which, as I've stated before, I support. However it's only fair for me to disclose this point. :) If you ask yourself whether we shouldn't be able to call it flight just because they didn't happen to use the word in part of a sentence that necessitated it it's kind of odd to me. It doesn't change the word, it's just a different usage of it in the sentence and as a result it should be covered by the aspect of our convention where we determine tense, plurality, etc. instead. (Admin 21:27, 24 October 2008 (EDT))

If we're allowed to do that, why is puppet master still puppet master?--ERROR 13:41, 14 June 2009 (EDT)

Usage

I am really hoping they start to use this ability more often, it is one of my favorites and I like watching Nathan and Peter fly. Those two move pretty fast, while every other example of flight seems kind of weak. Bring back supersonic flight soon please! (Alchemist 16:56, 28 October 2008 (EDT))

Shouldn't it be: Human Flight Potential?

  • I'm confused. You guys based the name of the ability from Peter's words, while the name of the abiltiy is all over the List in Suresh's folders and stuff.

I know you are gonna say that this is what Peter said, but I can't help but remember, Micah also stated that his Mom have "Super strength", but then you changed it to 'Enhanced Strength' because its what's written in HRG's computer...I'm confused....--NiveKJ13 20:00, 21 November 2008 (EST)

    • HFP and Flight are in the same level in the ability naming convention, I guess flight was chosen cause it's simpler. Intuitive Empath 20:03, 21 November 2008 (EST)
      • Actually, flight was chosen because Peter said he can fly. The Genesis files including 'Human Flight Potential' didn't have much to do with it as they were never directly connected with Peter or Nathan. Flight also happens to be a common name for the ability, but that's not why it was originally so named.--MiamiVolts (talk) 20:07, 21 November 2008 (EST)
        • If the Mosaic file is related to Peter, then Human Flight Potential should really be meaning the potential for a person to have human flight. Therefore flight is the ability, HFP is the potential to have the ability, or it could mean that one potentially already has the ability.--FlamingTomDude 23:23, 3 December 2008 (EST)
          • At any rate, Mohinder also named it "Flight" explicitly in The Second Coming, so there's no need to change.--Referos 14:32, 21 January 2009 (EST)

Revision to what I did

Yes, I agree, but it was done wrong and the whole sentence was italicized so I fixed that but forgot to fix the italics on the title of the episode.--WarGrowlmon18 23:21, 25 February 2009 (EST)

Fight or Flight?

Alter added "One interesting note is that Nathan seems to fly involuntarily in danger." followed by Nathan's first manifestation and when he was forced to reveal himself as an evolved human for Danko. Did he really did it out of reflex or was it a conscious choice? I watched the episode only once, but it seemed to me that Nathan flew because he wanted, can someone verify that? Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 12:36, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

  • The way I see it is that it's simply a reflex now, akin to when you are about to hit the ground you brace yourself for impact. He simply flies instead of bracing himself. That and he would have died had he hit the ground.--Steely McBeam - (talk) 12:43, 11 March 2009 (EDT)
    • He still had to fall quite a distance to hit the ground, enough for him to use his ability consciously. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 13:45, 22 March 2009 (EDT)
      • I think some abilities will automatical kick in times of danger but that the person needs to know they are in danger. These are abilities that The Haitain cannot block.

In the first series he flew away from The Haitain and Noah but compare when Hiro tries to teleport from the Haitain he can't. Nathan and Hiro have both been shot at, When Nathan was force to reveal himself as a evolved human as you mentioned "Intuitive Empath" he stop in mid air, without conscious effort. When Hiro was shot by Hope, his ability did not kick in and to activate it himself.--50000JH 10:08, 1 October 2009 (EDT)50000JH

        • There's no confirmation that the Haitian can't block flight. When Nathan escaped from him and Noah, the Haitian was answering to Angela Petrelli, suggesting he had instructions to let him flee. Also, when they meet in Haiti, they thought the Haitian had blocked his flight, and when they met, the Haitian said something like "I'm not blocking you, my powers are blocked as well", suggesting the Haitian can in fact block flight. What I'm putting in question, is that he had enough time to make a conscious choice to use his ability, which puts the statement of him using it as a reflex in question. We can't say anything unless it's beyond reasonable doubt. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 11:23, 25 October 2009 (EDT)

I said, I "THINK" some abilities may kick in and these are the abilities that the Haitain can't block.--50000JH 10:08, 1 October 2009 (EDT)50000JH

New Main Image?

What do people think of this shot of Nathan flying for the main image? http://heroeswiki.com/Image:Powers_flight_SOG.JPG I like it, I think it's a great "flying" shot and not just "hovering", and be great as the main image. I also like the idea of the main image being from the original "flying man!" --Powermimic 22:32, 22 March 2009 (EDT)

  • Except for the black line on top, I like it. Looks good. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 22:35, 22 March 2009 (EDT)
  • I love the New image but could someone get a copy how the same screen but it moving, same with Shape-shifting?-skyeatsout

I LOVE this new image. Very intense. Kudos to whoever chose it. --Peter 17:17, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

Quote

I think

"Ya know, they say girls are attracted to men just like their father."

"...you mean because he can fly..."

"No, i mean her real father"

-Sandra and Noah (Cautionary Tales)

should be included in the quote section. --NuparuMahnika 05:02, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

  • Not so sure about that one....what does it say about the power itself? --Crazylicious 17:23, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

an invisble thread reference.

OK, WHICH IDIOT PUT THAT SYLAR STOLE THIS ABILITY FROM NATHAN IN AN INVISIBLE THREAD.I AM ANGRY. THIS HAS NOT BEEN CONFIRMED YET!--Sly 22:27, 27 April 2009 (EDT)

  • Nobody here is an idiot; it's an on going discussion and all theories are valid. I think we should just make a note that Sylar appeared to be using flight, with the disclaimer that it might have just been advanced telekinesis. Then we should do the same for the telekinesis page (only, you know, reversed). --Crazyaspie 23:10, 28 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Given it had the flight sound effect it sounds like you might have to eat your words.
  • Ok, flight sound effect = flight. If that's the case, Sylar has puppet master. Both Sylar and Matt have invisiblity. Jessica has the ability teleportation. Charles doesn't have telepathy. The haitian has teleportation, just like jessica. That's what happen if you judge on sound effects. --JLYK 12:43, 2 May 2009 (EDT)
  • Also, if you can remember Sylar had decided to kill people to gain their abilities. He couldn't have stolen it from Nathan as Nathan was still alive when he was levitating also Nathan died before Sylar had the chance to take it. -- By Leckie at 06:33, 3 June 2009 (EDT)

Yes, through empathy. This is what I believe.

And yes, Elle really did die eventually, but Sylar initially used "empathy" to get her ability.--ERROR 13:25, 14 June 2009 (EDT)

Shadowboxing

So I guess it has been confirmed that Sylar has flight...-Vampirate68 | Talk | Contribs | 21:58, 9 November 2009 (EST)

This must be a pretty special case of 'empathic aptitude' compared to other examples. -Barbedknives (talk)22:01, 9 November 2009 (EST)
Why is it listed under Shadowboxing though? Shouldn't that be An Invisible Thread? DigitalCount 22:18, 9 November 2009 (EST)
It should, Shadowboxing was only the confirmation. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 14:00, 10 November 2009 (EST)

Remove Future Sylar

Or add Future Peters.--Kleith 07:07, 18 November 2009

  • And why's that? Green.gif AltesUTC CH
    • I think he's saying that Future Peter also had flight, so if we're adding Future Sylar we should add Future Peter. The only issue I have with this is that we never saw F Peter use flight, so while he probably still had it it's possible he didn't, making listing him speculative. Also, Kleith, you should probably add your signature to your comments in the future.--PJDEP 02:09, 3 December 2009 (EST)
      • Agreed. We saw Future Sylar fly, but not Future Peter. It's possible (albeit unlikely) that he no longer had flight. --Ricard Desi (t,c) 03:44, 3 December 2009 (EST)
        • Wow, this is interesting. We have to ask which would be more speculation, to assume Future Peter had the ability or that he lost the ability?--OutbackZack 05:26, 3 December 2009 (EST)
          • If he did not perform the feat, we cannot assume it's there. It's the same rule that applied to whether or not Peter had duplicated other abilities without using them (like Persuasion). --Ricard Desi (t,c) 09:43, 3 December 2009 (EST)
            • We're talking about the same Peter, just older. Remember, the same Peter who did have the power to fly. I personally think listing Future Peter under Unconfirmed would be okay. Maybe just put him in the notes. --OutbackZack 11:20, 3 December 2009 (EST)
              • The same Peter who once had the power of induced radioactivity no longer does. We cannot assume, particularly for a character whose power is as fluid as Peter's what he does or does not have. Additionally, Future Sylar having flight is notable in that he did not normally have flight (at least, not at the time when that was a possible future). Peter did have flight at the time, thus making his future self having it no longer notable. --Ricard Desi (t,c) 11:57, 3 December 2009 (EST)
                • Er guys, Peter had invisibility, super strength, telekinesis, time and space manipulation, healing (Future Peter from volume 3 had regeneration, and still had the scar), a lot of powers, why wouldn't he have flight in the future ? O_o how is that speculative... He didn't have to fly since he could teleport, that's just logic. But you seem to like "demonstrating" things, so that's cool, because Future Peter from volume 3 also flew, and we SAW it this time (when he saved Claire from the train). And I don't really care about the "it was unlikely Sylar would have the flight at that time" since we update all the pages to fit the story. So add Future Peter(s) or remove Sylar since the present one has it now, acquired from the same special. There is just absolutely no reason to let one and not another. O_o --Kleith 12:16, 3 December 2009 (EST)
                  • Exposed Peter flew, yes. Explosion Peter, however, did not. Again, the reason we would include Sylar is because he did not have flight at the time that future was seen. Thus we would include "In a possible future, Sylar had absorbed flight from Nathan Petrelli". But if we include a future version of Peter at a time when Peter could already fly, all we could say is "In a possible future, Peter Petrelli can still fly." It's not a change from what was the status quo when that future was observed. We don't include Explosion Future Niki as having enhanced strength, why would we include Exposed Future Peter as having flight? Meanwhile, we show that Explosion Future Peter had pyrokinesis, because Present-Day Peter had not had it at the time. --Ricard Desi (t,c) 12:42, 3 December 2009 (EST)
                    •  ??? Funny story, I didn't see no future Sylar here : http://heroeswiki.com/Regeneration ...--Kleith 13:08, 3 December 2009 (EST)
                      • Funny story, I do. See "Future" on that page. --Ricard Desi (t,c) 13:56, 3 December 2009 (EST)
                        • So perhaps, I do say perhaps, you could have figured out I was talking about the main info, with "absorbed by" and not the page itself ?--Kleith 14:09, 3 December 2009 (EST)
  • You would include Exposed Future Peter, because the future has now change. The Peter now no longer has the same ability to let him hold more than one power. So it's worth noting that in a possible future Peter would still have the ability to fly. At least in the notes section. --OutbackZack 22:40, 3 December 2009 (EST)

Adding the future Peter's would be redundant because he presumably had the ability in both futures. However, although Sylar now has this ability, his future self is worth mentioning because he obtained the ability in a completely different way.--PJDEP 23:26, 3 December 2009 (EST)

  • you guys seriously won't list him as having it because it is somehow speculative? I swear you guys are going to make me blow my brains out some day.Gamerelite1 19:48, 7 December 2009 (EST)
    • Why do these things always turn into big discussions. Yes he probably had flight, but we didn't see him use it so it's unconfirmed. Our best bet would be to add something about it in the notes section. - Jenx222 | U / T / C | <inlcudeonly>08:00, 7 January 2012 (EST) 19:55, 7 December 2009 (EST)
  • Not just because it's speculative, it's also somewhat redundant.--PJDEP 20:09, 7 December 2009 (EST)
    • Let me try make this clearer. Future Sylar is in this page because at the time this Future Sylar was first seen, the then-present day Sylar didn't have flight. Since then, Sylar has acquired flight, but it doesn't change the fact that when Future Sylar was shown having flight, present day Sylar didn't. It's a forked timeline, so Explosion Future Sylar should stay. Peter got flight very early, so his future selves aren't listed, because Peter had flight before any of them appeared, he had flight before the forks in the timeline appeared. Was that clear for everyone? Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 11:52, 8 December 2009 (EST)
      • Couldn't have said it better myself. --Ricard Desi (t,c) 11:54, 8 December 2009 (EST)
        • Guys, that still doesn't explain why Future Sylar is in the main frame for Flight, but not on "Regeneration" since it's the exact same situation. I wouldn't bother if he was just on the page, but why do we have two Sylar listed in the main frame on flight (And I think it's useless since the timeline is outdated) while there's only one on Regeneration ?--Kleith 12:08, 8 December 2009 (EST)
          • What to you mean Future Sylar in in the main frame? The confirmed/future sections in the beginning of the page? Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 12:47, 8 December 2009 (EST)
          • Although we saw him take the ability from Claire, he never actually used it in the explosion future (unless I'm mistaken). I'm not doubting that he took the ability, but I'm not sure that's enough to list him.--PJDEP 15:15, 8 December 2009 (EST)
            • We list Sylar as having the ability because unlike Peter, we know for a fact he has the ability due to the nature of his acquisition method. Otherwise we would never list Sylar as having disintegration, or as having had Trevor's ability. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 15:21, 8 December 2009 (EST)
              • I meant the info just below the "power's picture" (Absorbed by :). One Sylar here is enough in my opinion (it's like that for Regeneration.)--Kleith 15:28, 8 December 2009 (EST)
                • We list like that because of what I already explained. Listing only Sylar would imply that all future Sylars have flight. Exposed future Sylar didn't have flight, so listing only one doesn't work. This works for telekinesis and intuitive aptitude, for example. As original ability and first ability taken, and as never losing them, every incarnation of Sylar so far has those abilities, so his future selves aren't listed in the infoboxes as having those abilities. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 15:32, 8 December 2009 (EST)

Tidying...

Just tried to tidy up Peter's section on the possesors list, as mammoth as it is what with him having replicated it 6 times now. Is there any way we can shorten it down some more, or are people fine with the way it is?--Evil Maldini 08:15, 9 February 2010 (EST)

Characters#Peter Petrelli

Do we have to be so detailed? Do the abilities he discarded flight for really have to be listed? --Boycool Two little mice fell in a bucket of cream. The first mouse quickly gave up and drowned. The second mouse wouldn't quit. He struggled so hard that eventually he churned that cream into butter and crawled out. Amen. 14:24, 23 June 2010 (EDT)

Hovering

With Heroes Reborn, there has been a distinct difference between characters who can hover and characters who can fly. For instance, the Chinese Guy flies (moves through the air, gains elevation, sonic boom). However, Donna, Rob Brewer, and the hovering boy are examples of characters who only hover (staying in a relatively stationary spot, no forward propulsion). I mean, the hovering boy is even credited as a "hovering boy", not as a "flying boy". And The Odessa Report says that Donna is a "hovering girl" not a "flying girl. I think we need to split these characters off and make a new power called "hovering". It's a canon word that has been used several times. Flight implies propulsion and movement, and those other three characters really haven't demonstrated that yet. If they do show they can propel themselves, like every other character listed on the page, then we can move them to the flight page. Any thoughts? -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 16:53, 28 September 2015 (EDT)

  • I can't say I see the need for the split at this time. Those with the flight ability are able to hover. Peter did it (accidentally) when he was talking with Nathan early on for instance. I would say IF they're currently limited to hovering then it's because they're still experimenting with their powers. If you could fly wouldn't you stay close to ground at first? :) That being said those last two sentences are speculative/opinions, though Peter (and probably others I'm not remembering off the top of my head) do show that at the very least flight appears to imply the ability to hover. So I don't see a firm enough and definitive distinction between the two that I would support a split at this time. Also how people are credited or refer to themselves should be taken into consideration, but in my opinion it's poor quality reference information and only really wins out when there's little other evidence. (Admin (talk) 17:15, 28 September 2015 (EDT))
    • I agree - none of the characters that we have seen "hovering" actually have experience with using their abilities (with the possible exception of Rob, but he was still inexperienced enough that he had to make "attempt" videos). The iconic scene with Peter on the roof comes to mind when I think of someone inexperienced with the flight ability using it to hover, but there's also Aiden, who could only hover at first before discovering he could propel himself in different directions. As for Donna's video being titled "Hovering girl", that's probably just because she didn't fly in the video in the traditional sense - titling the video "Flying girl" would have been misleading when she's only using her ability to travel a few feet off the ground. -Kon (talk) 18:29, 28 September 2015 (EDT)
  • The boy is actually credited as "floating boy". -Lөvөl 04:12, 1 October 2015 (EDT)
  • I don't think there needs to be a hover ability, and I actually see hovering as commonly held aspect of flying rather than the rule... most airplanes are built to fly from place to place, but the majority of them do not hover... On the other hand, helicopters are built with the capacity to hover, but I think their main purpose is to fly from place to place. That said, there is also an ability for those who can only hover themselves and/or other objects and it's called levitation (the character agent (electric manipulation) was able to levitate as an aspect of his ability). For those that can move around/fly through the air, there are already at least two abilities: flight (for flying in general) and weather control (as an aspect/feat by Alice Shaw). In theory, I think telekinesis could have as an aspect/feat both levitation and flight.--MiamiVolts (talk) 17:22, 11 December 2015 (EST)

Fiona

Regarding Fiona, the image from Graphic Novel:Vengeance, Part 3 of her hovering shows her with her hair extended up vertically, as if the ends of each thread of her hair were being lifted. Also, the bottom of her t-shirt is lifted past her navel on one side... I think these things point to a localized wind effect but they could have other causes, I guess. I'm noting this here as I think it's related to the above hovering discussion and cause flight was something Alice Shaw could do through weather control, and if Fiona starts starts sending gusts of wind at people there might at some point be a need to rethink whether her ability is primarily flight or whether her flight is just a feat (like Ted performing an EM burst) of a different ability, such as wind manipulation.--MiamiVolts (talk) 17:22, 11 December 2015 (EST)

  • It could be that she was descending from the sky, so her hair and shirt was just trying to keep up with momentum for a second.--Sekobro (talk) 19:42, 12 December 2015 (EST)
    • Based on the upside down evo hanging from the ceiling, I'm not sure it's plausible that she descended from the sky. However, since I think her demonstration to Father Mauricio is likely being done in the area below Gutierrez and Sons, then the wind might be explained by her falling from garage level to the basement instead of taking the ladder down... Looking at the image, not knowing the context, to me it looks like the ends of her hair are being raised as if she's electrified... but that wouldn't explain her t-shirt, which is why I thought and still think wind makes for a better explanation. I think a fall could have produced enough wind to cause her t-shirt to be raised as it was illustrated. I'm not sure such a fall would cause her hair to be shown as elevated as it is but I think it's worth noting and have noted this possibility in Fiona's section in the flight article. Thanks, Sekobro.--MiamiVolts (talk) 00:01, 13 December 2015 (EST)