Talk:Ability heredity

From Heroes Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Article revamping

This article needs some help. First, it's nowhere near standard format, and has no category (nor does it fit well in any of the existing ones). Second, it should, following naming conventions, be "Second generation heroes". Third, we try to avoid using the word "Heroes" to describe people from the show because it's loaded, morally speaking.

I would suggest we make it into "List of second generation evolved humans", put it in Category:Lists, and expand it to include a list of ID'd second gens. Thoughts?--Hardvice (talk) 01:43, 30 January 2007 (EST)

Feel free to change it. I didn't know how exactly to format it and was at a loss for a synonym for people with powers. I was just trying to get the thought out due to the revelation of Janice Parkman's pregnancy and the impact that may have on a new generation of evolved humans. Sorry about that!! Disney42 01:46, 30 January 2007 (EST)

  • No problem. It's a great idea for an article (especially since Claire and Micah are confirmed second gen evolved humans). It just needs some work, and it's probably best to solicit some ideas for how to clean it up, so I thought I'd ask.--Hardvice (talk) 01:48, 30 January 2007 (EST)
  • Molly Walker was also a Second Generation metahuman.--Yoshie (talk) 10:33, 30 January 2007 (EST)
    • I would be very careful about purporting that just because somebody is the child of an evolved human, that they are evolved themselves. The term "evolved" denotes that the change has already taken place — we have been using the definition that they have already exhibited powers. It's fine to mention Molly or the Petrelli boys as kids of an evolved human, but I would just caution against making the jump between 2nd generation and evolved. - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 11:32, 30 January 2007 (EST)
      • True. According to genetics, only 50% of the children of a metahuman will be metahuman. The other 50% will be carriers but not exhibit any abilities. In Molly's case though, we know her to have been a metahuman because of how badly Sylar wanted her - persuing her all the way to the hospital and nearly getting himself killed in the process. --Yoshie (talk) 11:36, 30 January 2007 (EST)
        • While it's almosty certainly the case, it's not confirmed. She hasn't been shown on the list, she hasn't been shown on the map, and she hasn't shown any powers. All we know is Sylar wanted her ... we don't even know why, though it's almost certainly because she has powers. But then, why not just kill her in the FBI Headquarters? A brain is easier to take with you than a struggling child. It's possible he took the whole child because he needed the whole child, and therefore had another reason for taking her. Too little is known at this time to say with any certainty that she is or isn't evolved.--Hardvice (talk) 13:05, 30 January 2007 (EST)
        • Where does this word "metahuman" come from? I'm not sure it's the best word. Is this the normal usage for it?--E rowe 11:46, 30 January 2007 (EST)
          • "Metahuman" is the word DC Comics has used to describe their "super humans" for quite a while. According to Wikipedia: a "metahuman" is any human being with what are commonly described as "super powers". The justification for this alternate phrase is that "super" implies a value judgment—is super-strength somehow "better" than normal strength? Moreover, it implies that the ability is an enhanced version of a normal human ability—by which definition, telekinesis (for example), which is not possessed by normal humans, is not a superpower. These powers are referred to as metahuman abilities. The more common term for meta human is superhuman. :) You decide. --Yoshie 12:43, 30 January 2007 (EST)
        • I agree Molly is most likely an evolved human. Still not confirmed. I believe she is, but there's absolutely no proof. Maybe Sylar was going after her because he believed she might be (50% chance, right?), or because she, um, well, witnessed him murdering her parents? ... It's also poor genetics to say that a child has a 50% chance of taking on a parent's traits. If it's a recessive gene, it's only 25%. And we don't know that this is a "gene" that is hereditary.... These are great theories, but none are validated. - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 13:07, 30 January 2007 (EST)
  • I've got a strong hunch that Peter and Nathan are second generation. But that's still just a hunch. I think there was a clue or two, but nothing that warrants putting it anywhere besides the theories section. Interesting point a bout Molly.--E rowe 11:44, 30 January 2007 (EST)
    • Which could prove interesting if Nathan turns out to be Claire's birth father, as it would make her a 3rd generation.--Yoshie 12:50, 30 January 2007 (EST)

Article title

My suggestion would be "Power heredity" or something similar. --Ted C 10:25, 30 January 2007 (EST)

Much better title - good job. - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 11:32, 30 January 2007 (EST)
Yes, many thanks! I just had a mind freeze when trying to name the article. Sorry again!! Disney42 20:54, 30 January 2007 (EST)

Lead Image

A lead image here would be great so we can add this to the portal. Any ideas? Here are a few I can think of, none of which really fit that well:

  • A shot of DL, Micah, and Niki (probably from Fallout or Six Months Ago)
  • A shot of Claire and Meredith on the phone (The Fix)
  • Something genetic. (A Mendel box with Niki, DL, and Micah is probably too cheesy, huh?)--Hardvice (talk) 16:22, 30 January 2007 (EST)
    • Oh, if only somebody could photoshop the three using their powers together. It would be such an Incredibles moment. .... Just the 3 of them - I think there's a shot of the fam in Fallout, after Jessica/DL's fight, & before NIki turns herself in. But maybe there are better ones? - RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 17:10, 30 January 2007 (EST)
  • This is going to sound corny, but how about the RNA symbol since RNA has to do with genetics, which in turn has to do with heredity? Disney42 20:56, 30 January 2007 (EST)

Reformatting

I've attempted to merge random notes that had been added to the bottom of this article into the prose of the article itself, based on the organization structure that already existed in the article. I'm not sure if that makes it easier to read or more convoluted, but the notes were good examples of what the rest of the article tried to convey so they belonged together. If anyone disagrees with my attempts to salvage the page please feel free to do something better with it. - ZachsMind 21:40, 26 October 2007 (EDT)

  • That's all well and good, and it looks great, but information from interviews should not be included within the body of an article because interviews are not canon sources. See Help:Sources and Help:Perspective.--Hardvice (talk) 21:51, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
  • I don't know why the page was in need of salvaging in the first place since it generally seemed fine to me (though I hadn't read through it for a few weeks, I'm sure). I haven't read through all the changes and don't care to at the moment (no offense meant, I'm just not in the mood). However, any theorizing on this page, particularly about one Hispanic being possibly related to another Hispanic, should be removed completely. I appreciate the removal of any possibly racist remarks, of course--but the issue is that the page should be reporting what actually occurs on the show and how heredity really works, not how it could work, should work, or might work. Bottom line, if we don't know they're related, we should guess about it, and certainly shouldn't extend theoretical thinking to generate more speculation. It looks like the theory in sheep's clothing was removed. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 21:52, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
    • Yeah, I rewrote that particular section before realizing that it was, no matter how worded, entirely a theory. Someone just beat me to the punch in deleting it. -- Paronine 22:16, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
    • Reading through it, it looks OK, apart from a few perspective and person problems. I'm also not sure what was wrong with the old one, but it does read more smoothly.--Hardvice (talk) 21:58, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
      • I cleaned up the perspective, moved the interview comments back to Notes (it's not a canon source and breaks perspective). I also removed the note about Niki and Hal because it's not relevant to power heredity--obviously non-evolved parents can have evolved children (that's why they're evolved), so power heredity does not mean that all evolved humans have evolved parents (otherwise, ultimately, Adam & Eve/Lucy Leakey would be evolved humans, right?). Some parts of the article still seem a bit speculative. I'll give it another pass when my cat's not trying to walk on the keyboard.--Hardvice (talk) 23:34, 26 October 2007 (EDT)
      • I also removed a ton of items from the "Examples of inheritance". Being the child of a member of the group of twelve is not an "example of inheritance" because the group isn't confirmed to be all evolved humans. Nothing is known about Elle's father, so she doesn't belong on a list of "examples of inheritance". If the section is retitled, some of these can be added back (Nathan and Peter are evolved siblings, but siblings don't inherit anything from one another because they aren't descended from one another).--Hardvice (talk) 23:43, 26 October 2007 (EDT)

Levitation

It should be noted somewhere that levitation is, along with telepathy, the only power to be passed along a family line. I would do it, but I'm in a hurry right now. --Hero!(talk)(contribs) 18:15, 5 February 2008 (EST)

Synthetic evolved humans

With the concept of synthetic abilities, how exactly should humans who got their abilities with the formula be considered in this page? If they have children who have abilities on their own without the formula, they should be noticed, but if they got if from the formula while having a parent with abilities, should they be noted? Nathan is Angela's son, he has a synthetic ability, so it's not really an example of heredity, but Micah is the son of a mother with a synthetic ability and a father with a natural ability (as far as we know). Everyone getting my point? Intuitive Empath 17:16, 18 October 2008 (EDT)

  • I think I see where you're going with this, but take a look at this:
  1. Nathan (Synthetic EH) X Meredith (Natural, as far as we know) = Claire (Natural)
  2. DL (natural AFAWK) X Niki (synthetic) = Micah (Natural)
It is still heredity, it just may not be from both parents. Now if DL turns out to be synthetic as well, then we'd have something more to scratch our heads on. --SacValleyDweller (talk) 17:40, 18 October 2008 (EDT)

You saw exactly what I meant, the big question: synthetic ability X normal human/synthetic ability = natural ability? Intuitive Empath 18:09, 18 October 2008 (EDT)

While synthetic parents is an important thing to note, synthetic children and/or synthetic siblings (Nathan, Niki, Tracy) should not be included. If the synthetic formula can give anyone abilities, then there is nothing noteworthy about Peter and Nathan being brothers. --Ricard Desi (t,c) 02:05, 27 December 2008 (EST)

On the one hand, the way Angela described it was that Nathan's DNA was predisposed toward having the formula work, so maybe not everyone can get a power. On the other hand, the future indicated that anyone could attain an ability, so I guess Angela was wrong...again. ;) As for noting them, I think they should be on the page, but not anywhere that references inheritance...more as a note about other relations. --Stevehim 02:46, 27 December 2008 (EST)

    • Anyone could get an ability using Mohinder's formula too, but it wasn't a very good ability. Perhaps those without a predisposition in their DNA develop adverse side-effects even with the perfected formula and one of them caused the world to go boom?--MiamiVolts (talk) 06:06, 27 December 2008 (EST)

Tables

I reformatted the tables to look a bit neater (I hope), and split them up, since siblings don't have anything to do with inheritance. I also removed Jesse, since we don't know his father's ability, and left Barbara off for the same reason. I considered adding her with something like 'Unknown ability,' but since her page lists her ability as none, I left her off (with a note in the code to add her once we know what she can do) for consistency. I also split the Haitian and Baron Samedi, since they are only half-brothers. A couple of things to consider changing:

  1. Remove siblings and anyone not contributing DNA to the person from the top list (eg - Nathan from Peter's, Peter and Flint from Claire's, etc).
    • I don't think there needs to be a broad rule about this. Sometimes it's helpful to know that brothers and sisters share (or don't share) genetics. Flint and Meredith didn't contribute to each others' DNA (let's hope not!), yet isn't it interesting that these siblings are both powered? Doesn't it make you wonder about their parents? Or, Claire and Monty/Simon are half-siblings, one is powered and the other is not. I'm curious about that. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 03:01, 24 December 2008 (EST)
  2. Move the 'synthetic' links outside of the power links' parentheses.
  3. Change the powers in the Parents/Relatives section to lowercase.
    • Yes. This is a big pet peeve of mine. Power names are not capitalized. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 03:01, 24 December 2008 (EST)
  4. Removing the punctuation (periods) in the last section of each table. I wasn't sure about that one, so I left it, but if we're not supposed to, it can be easily fixed by undoing my last edits (though I did something similar on the formula page, and that one would need to be manually fixed, since it came with some other alterations.
    • They're not sentences, so there shouldn't be any periods. If they were the continuation of a sentence (like the captions on The Symbol), that'd be one thing. But they're appropriately fragments, so they shouldn't have any periods. Oh, and once somebody else makes an alteration to the same line of text that you edited, your original edit can't be undone. At that point it has to be done manually. Believe me, I know! :) -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 03:01, 24 December 2008 (EST)
I think we should probably at least go with 1., since it's not technically correct (eg - Peter doesn't contribute any DNA to Claire, and so their relation has nothing to do with inheritance), but I'll leave it for now, pending discussion. --Stevehim 00:31, 24 December 2008 (EST)
  • The changes generally look good. The page was really beginning to get scraggly. Thanks for contributing to cleaning it up. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 03:01, 24 December 2008 (EST)
    • Thanks.  :) I actually went and made a third table for non-inheritance relations, since Peter and Claire, for instance, are not technically an example of inheritance. I looked at the talk page for input first, but didn't notice you responded beneath each question (I just saw the final comment), so I'll understand if it gets reverted. --Stevehim 07:31, 24 December 2008 (EST)
  • Just wanted to say i think the pages looks alot better, the tables are fantastic. Well done :) -- laughingdevilboy

Nana

Hi, I just wanted to know why it says that Nana Dawson has an ability (though Unknown). Was there ever any proof in an episode or GN that she did have one?--Hiroman 06:00, 21 November 2009 (EST)

  • It has to be removed, it was added when her name appeared in list of people taken in the flight in 314. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 07:37, 21 November 2009 (EST)