This wiki is a XML full dump clone of "Heroes Wiki", the main wiki about the Heroes saga that has been shut down permanently since June 1, 2020. The purpose of this wiki is to keep online an exhaustive and accurate database about the franchise.

Talk:Activation and deactivation

From Heroes Wiki
Revision as of 20:17, 16 July 2009 by imported>Leckie (→By touch)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Ability Naming Conventions
The following sources are used for determining evolved human ability names, in order:
1. Canon Sources 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 activation and deactivation's name.
Source/Explanation
Matt, Jr. can activate and deactivate things.

Name Suggestions

Of course. Well, my suggestion would be simply Activation. I'm not sure of any adjectives we could add to it that would be nonspeculative, but Activation by itself would suit the ability fine, imho. -Sincerely, Thrashmeister » talk- 22:02, 23 March 2009 (EDT)

  • I agree that Matt Jr.'s ability should be named Activation. As Hiro said, Matt Jr. touches things and they 'go', meaning they turn on and activate.

User:Phodson/Autosig 22:50, 28 March 2009 (EDT)

Of course activation isnt noncreative in the least look i changed it to Ignition--Radiowarm2 10:08, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

    • IceGhost78 ovulation
    • Activation sounds good --Gibbeynator 22:04, 23 March 2009 (EDT)
    • It can't be activation. The TV needs electrical power to turn on--something that Matt's ability provided along with 'activating' it. --Formless 22:58, 23 March 2009 (EDT)
      • It also appears to be an indefinite energy supply as none of the toys stopped doing what they were doing during the duration of the show. --Formless 22:58, 23 March 2009 (EDT)
        • Hey! Who deleted my comments? --Formless 22:58, 23 March 2009 (EDT)
          • I don't think it was done intentionally; looks like an intervening edit got lost when multiple people posted simultaneously.--MiamiVolts (talk) 23:02, 23 March 2009 (EDT)
  • My suggestion is Jumpstarting.--The Empath 22:06, 23 March 2009 (EDT)
  • I personally didn't really hear anything in the episode that could be used as a canonical name for this ability without coming off as pretty silly since they were more or less nicknaming the ability jokingly. I think we're going to have to hope for some kind of assignment tracker entry or something before we're able to legitimately rename this. (Admin 22:08, 23 March 2009 (EDT))
  • I like "Activation" or "Toddler Touch n Go", rofl. I think they did say activation once though....--(P)uerto (R)ican (K)nock(O)ut 22:10, 23 March 2009 (EDT)
    • I'm fine with anything that isn't "Matt Parkman, Jr.'s ability". I'm going to watch the episode again to see if I can find anything that can be used to identify this ability. I would really like to see this page renamed to either Activation or Genesis, but that's just me. ---- - Bender · Talk-
    • Going by what we know so far about his power "activation" fits best. That said, however, next episode (or GN) more light will probably be shed on this power and we'll have to change the name again. --Peter 22:15, 23 March 2009 (EDT)
  • If we are to consider the 'joking' names for the abilities, Genesis has my vote.
  • Another suggestion: Tactile activation? Clarifies that Baby Parkman's abilities are channeled through touch. -Sincerely, Thrashmeister » talk- 22:20, 23 March 2009 (EDT)
    • Why is Genesis considered a 'joking' ability. The definition of it is: 1. The origin or coming into being of something. It works with Hiro's powers coming into action as well as with the electronics. Plus, it was mentioned in the show.(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/genesis) ---- - Bender · Talk-
      • Hiro was making a joke, comparing it to the Genesis Device in Star Trek which "creates life from lifelessness." (Admin 22:23, 23 March 2009 (EDT))
  • Please don't call it "Touch and go".  :)--Cro Magnon 22:25, 23 March 2009 (EDT)
  • I checked the episode and I didn't see/hear the word "activation", so unless there happens to be consensus it's not really a term we can use at this point. ...and consensus on ability names is usually very difficult. (Admin 22:25, 23 March 2009 (EDT))
    • You're right Admin, I just thought the name sounded cool, it's also the name of one of my favorite bands. ---- - Bender · Talk-
  • Here's a tidbit for ya, it also deactivates. He turned on the TV, touched it again, and turned it off. Also, when he activates something, it remains activated; constant touch is not necessary. So "activation" isn't good, since he also "deactivates". --(P)uerto (R)ican (K)nock(O)ut 22:26, 23 March 2009 (EDT)
    • Touche. Then I guess we're stuck with Baby Parkman's ability... -Sincerely, Thrashmeister » talk- 22:27, 23 March 2009 (EDT)
    • Wait, hang on. I was under the impression Hiro was the one turning the television off again and again? Can I get some clarification on that? -Sincerely, Thrashmeister » talk- 22:28, 23 March 2009 (EDT)
      • I think Baby Parkman turned the TV on then hiro turned it off then the baby turned it on again hiro unplugged it then the baby turned it on again then turned it off again while it was unplugged, well that's what i think happened.--Icykidd 22:50, 23 March 2009 (EDT)
        • Either way, the toys are left on; which brings us back to my original point. --Formless 23:27, 23 March 2009 (EDT)
          • How is the fact that the toys were left on relevant? "Activation," or any derivation thereof, does not suggest a temporary incitement. "Activating" a credit card does not mean you can use it only right after you activate it. "Activating" an account on a website does not mean you can use it only right after you activate it. Same thing with Matt's ability. I fail to see how the toys being left on is relevant to the discussion. -Sincerely, Thrashmeister » talk- 00:12, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
            • Maybe it should be about technology like Micha's after all if he can activate a t.v what other electrical things can he activate Adz
  • I think "genesis touch" is the best name we have. I also think Admin is right in that the name was used jokingly, but that it does apply (though only as a description).--MiamiVolts (talk) 22:38, 23 March 2009 (EDT)
      • I would go with "Touch and Go" just like we had to go with "Bliss and Horror". I actually kind of like the name anyway... :) --Action Figure 00:08, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  • I definitely think that Genesis is the best name since it was mentioned on the show and many people seem to agree. Rather than coming up with something out of thin air (like Activation) we should stick to the script and do it by the book. User:Themunchkym
  • I also think "Touch and Go" is a suitable name. The article itself mentioned that is what Hiro called it. Doesn't that make it canon? --Elemental Manipulator [ U | T | C ] - When in doubt, ask BTE 00:23, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
    • I don't think the issue is whether or not it's canon (it most certainly is), but whether or not it's a valid name in and of itself. I mean, it was obviously not used as a serious name for the ability. -Sincerely, Thrashmeister » talk- 00:25, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  • Given that we have witnessed Matt Jr. use his ability to enable the existing functions of objects and people (a television set was made to display images; a former time manipulator was able to freeze time), I propose that the ability be temporarily entitled "functional enabling" or "functional activation." --Jeffrey the Red 00:38, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
    • That's actually pretty good. Maybe functional genesis as well? So that it has a basis in canon? -Sincerely, Thrashmeister » talk- 00:48, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
      • Personally I like Genesis Touch as a descriptor. Genesis was mentioned in the episode, while touch describes how it is used. Spencer 01:29, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
      • That's still a very made up name. We can't apply non-canonical words like "functional" just because they look nice. There has to be either a basis in canon or it has to be a common term that legitimizes its use. Hiro's reference to Genesis was more of a sci-fi reference. They used "Touch and Go" much more frequently. I wish there were some way to use that as the basis for the name, but I don't think that would work too well. (Admin 01:32, 24 March 2009 (EDT))

I actually think Touch and Go is the best name for the ability if we are trying to move up the ladder. It's probably going to be the most searched for term when folks are coming to this site wanting to read about this particular ability, and is in league with names like Bliss and horror. Now, for those not liking calling this, consider wording the introductory lines thusly: "Touch and Go is the term used by Hiro to describe the toddler Matt Parkman Jr in relation to his strange ability." Phrasing it that way does not claim that we know more than Hiro does (Which would be implied by the other sugestions). --SacValleyDweller (talk) 01:36, 24 March 2009 (EDT)

  • Yes it may have basis in canon but as Admin already stated it just doesn't work as an ability name. I hate having soandso's ability, but in this case there isn't really another option which is correct.--Steely McBeam - (talk) 04:15, 24 March 2009 (EDT)

User:Shadowulf1 09:31, 24 March 2009 (EDT) Activation sounds good to me; plz just nothing dumb like Touch-and-Go-- that would be ridiculous, and it would take literal ability-naming too far...

  • Hey, if baby Matt also deactivates objects, his ability shouldn't be called "Touch and Go". Because he can stop what he made work. How would you name his ability then? "Touch and Go, Touch and Stop"? You know, I prefer Activation only because I can't see any better name for it. Once we find it, we'll change it. And now... It's called now MPJ's ability, but it's difficult both to write and to pronounce. Maybe Activation for now? --Altes 09:37, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  • I personally prefer "Activation", "Touch-and-go" seems to be a silly name that only makes sense when you consider the only known holder is a baby. Activation can encompass both electronics and suppressed abilities.--Falrinn 11:36, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  • I'd like to put in a vote for Energization. Going back to what Formless said, his ability seems to provide the energy needed for the toys and things to move. Plus it could have given Hiro's biological mechanisms the kickstart they needed to restore his ability at least partially. --Joker
  • How about Touch Activation? The touching seems to be a key part of the process. --RedScharlach 20:25, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  • I can live with Activation. Don't call it Touch and Go, that's like calling Peter's ability; Ability Copy & Paste. --Fandango, March 27, 2009, 23:37 (EDT)
  • Activation does not include the deactivation aspect of Matt Jr.'s ability. So I would suggest the name Dynamic activation which includes both activation and deactivation. --Valoo, April 21, 2009, 10:33(EDT)

I would suggest the name Empathic Activation. I think that it properly explains the nature of the ability. Activation is not descriptive enough since we know the ability depends on Matt's mood. -- God

  • That name has already been suggested and declined on the consensus. --posted by Laughingdevilboy

Talk 10:14, 25 April 2009 (EDT)

How he got it

Apparently the second eclipse gave powers as well as took them away: it gave Junior here his power.--WarGrowlmon18 00:48, 24 March 2009 (EDT)

  • Should a section be added under the character picture that says which eclipse they started showing their powers? It seems to be an important turning point within the series. There is the "Genesis (Volume 1)" eclipse, the "Generations (Volume 2)" eclipse, and the "Villains (Volume 3)" eclipse. Only one known person developed abilities right after the generations eclipse (Adam Monroe), but several gained abilities in the first and third ones.--Spencer 01:40, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
    • There are many characters which we don't know about when they manifested their abilities: Angela, Arthur, Bob, Elle, Meredith, Flint etc. Thus we have no eclipses to describe for them.

Consensus

Ugh, here is the part I hate. --Piemanmoo 01:22, 24 March 2009 (EDT)

  • I think you should have presented the arguments instead of calling for a consensus check, which doesn't really help us cause it's already stated above that we are already divided. Choosing a name doesn't happen by vote and doing this check in such cases just tends to make concrete that divisiveness as it encourages people to line up which one they prefer without a reason.--MiamiVolts (talk) 04:34, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
    • Well said, Miami. The point is not to find a majority, but to find a complete consensus (or pretty close to it). Voting doesn't get that job done. Everybody agreeing on one name--or at least not opposing a name--is the ultimate goal. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 00:57, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
      • In fact, maybe that's how we should be doing things--instead of finding consensus for a name, maybe we should see if there's consensus against a name. For instance, there are one or two names on this page that I would oppose, but most I'm fine with. My guess is that when it comes down to it, there are a lot of people who would be fine with a couple of names on the page. If instead of asking people what name they do want, and we ask people what names they don't want (or which ones they're opposed to), we might be able to find consensus a little easier. We're casting a wider net with what seems like more choices. For instance, there might be a name that is the second choice for a lot of people--most won't "vote" for that name with the way we're doing things now. It's rare that I see somebody put their name more than once on a consensus check. And visually, it would be a lot easier to tell who opposes a name rather than who is "for" a name. That's really what we're looking for--any opposition and things that will stand in the way of a name, not knowing which pet name everybody things is the best one. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 01:03, 3 April 2009 (EDT)

Activation

  1. My vote goes for this one: simple, concise, and it fits. --Piemanmoo 01:22, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  2. I think this ones best. --Monroej 02:34, 24 March 2009
  3. I'm with activation. --Lolwut 03:42, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  4. It activates everything doesn't it? --JLYK 17:51, 24 March 2009 (EST)
  5. The best. --Scorvi12 05:54, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  6. That's what this ability does - it activates and deactivates various objects. And it describes the ability far better than "Touch and Go". --Altes 08:43, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  7. I'm putting in my vote for activation. Touch-and-Go is more of a satirical nickname then anything else.--Falrinn 11:43, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  8. I like this one. - Hive 13:22, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  9. --IronyUTC CH 13:30, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  10. Matt Parkman Activate! --Isaac Mendez 13:34, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  11. --NiveKJ13 (talk2me) 14:01, 24 March 2009 (EDT) Please not another soandso's ability
  12. Yes! This is the best name. "Touch-and-Go" is so shallow like "Bliss and Horror" (I hate this name). Hiro tell "Touch and Go" the baby, no the ability. --Gabrielense 15:48, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  13. Defiantly Activation, fits perfectly, and is the best Fred1793 15:52, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  14. -- Psilaq R.- \m/ -_- \m/- 20:55, 24 March 2009 (EDT) Naming conventions won't stand for this, but whatever.
  15. Nice and simple. Seems the most intuitive after "Touch and Go" --Hero!(talk)(contribs) 21:30, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  16. I'm cool with "Activation," though maybe something just a little more descriptive (i.e. "Tactile Activation"?) would be awesome. --Whizzles 21:53, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  17. Activation is the best option, but, as another user said, System Activation would fit better IMO. --Litox 08:33, 25 March 2009 (EDT)
  18. This is a really good option as he seems to be able to activate just about anything, although Whizzles idea of "Tactile Activation" is pretty awesome too.--Obelisk52 13:30, 26 March 2009 (EDT)
  19. I prefer only "Activation", not "Tactile Activation", just like Ishi's ability isn't "Kiss Healing", but simply "Healing". Mateussf 18:15, 28 March 2009 (EDT)
  20. I totally agree with Activation, im ok... with System Act. also i see how Hiro is a system because of his power and all but i do agree fully--Skyeatsout 23:32, 2 April 2009 (EDT)
  21. I vote for Activation, also. His ability is described as ACTIVATING on the Matt Jr.'s ability page. User:Phodson 2:29 3 April 2009 (EST)
  22. I like this name better than the rest.-- Catalyst · Talk · HL 18:33, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
  23. me likey--Sly 22:50, 14 April 2009 (EDT)
  24. Best name so far. --Isaac Mendez 15:03, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

"Touch and Go" (a la "Bliss and Horror")

  1. It'll be the most searched for term, and is the closest thing we have to a canon name at this point. --SacValleyDweller (talk) 01:36, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  2. It's just as good as naming a power "freezing", "bliss and horror", or "lightning". Its what it was called multiple times throughout the episode, and "genesis (device)" is not only a reference that seems to be going over most people's heads (its a JOKE people), but it would get confusing what with the volume and episode of the same name. --Action Figure 04:19, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  3. This IS the canonical name that has been given. --Radicell 05:58, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  4. I agree, it doesn't matter what we think is stupid or not, canon is canon. --User:fourletterfame 14:25, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  5. Or this. --Hero!(talk)(contribs) 21:30, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  6. --Yamawhata? 15:24, 29 March 2009 (EDT)
  7. --Nax 00:16, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Matt Parkman Jr.'s ability

  1. No canonical name has been given yet nor any other name that complies with the naming convention. (Admin 01:27, 24 March 2009 (EDT))
  2. For the reasons stated above. If the ability is mentioned again, a more canonical name may be given or found. -- Tristan0709 talk 01:29, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  3. I agree that we should wait for a while before deciding on a final name. We can wait a bit for a more canon name. Perhaps the Graphic Novel will elaborate further.Spencer 01:32, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  4. --Steely McBeam - (talk) 04:15, 24 March 2009 (EDT) We simply don't know enough about the ability nor a canon name or description which can be used as the basis for a name.
  5. "Touch and Go" was not the name given for the ability, it was the name given to the child. Different than the Bliss and Horror situation.--Riddler 06:16, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
    • But Hiro also stated that "Toddler Touch and Go touched me and made my powers go".--NiveKJ13 (talk2me) 14:56, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  6. I have nothing against the other names (I personally LOVE 'Touch and Go'), but policy is policy and we simply do not know if a canonical name will arise. I say we give it some time and change it once we think that Heroes isn't going to name it. Touch & Go FTW! Also, Activation doesn't work cuz he does more than activate, he deactivates. --(P)uerto (R)ican (K)nock(O)ut 14:35, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  7. My vote's on this one simply because Activation just doens't sound cool enough. --Formless 20:44, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  8. This one seems most logical at the moment. The ability will most probably be elaborated on soon enough, till then just leave it and wait for a canon.
  9. I vote for this because even though they called him "Baby Touch and Go", they also noted that when he was sad he made things stop. Thus it's the only logical name falling under the naming conventions. --Crazyaspie 15:06, 22 April 2009 (EDT)

Object Manipulation or Object Activation or Supercharging

  1. I feel this is the best name for the ability Gabriel Bishop 13:51, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  • Hiro is not an "object".--NiveKJ13 (talk2me) 14:58, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
    • How about just Supercharging Gabriel Bishop 15:10, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
      • "Supercharging" was not mentioned whatsoever and is neither demonstrated in any kind of way in the episode. Supercharging relates more to Ando's ability than this one. And please don't forget to sign your edits. --NiveKJ13 (talk2me) 15:05, 24 March 2009 (EDT)

State Control or Status Manipulation

  1. I think this name fits the theme of the ability thus far, he is able to modify the sate of an object, such as on, off etc. This could also include Hiro's power, he turns it on and off, doesn't power it up like including teleportation as thats a byproduct of bending time and space (more or less). It also means he is able to turn the tv on and off as well as the toys. One thing im struggling with is the power supply for the tv, whereas most other things such as Hiro and the toys have energy (battery etc) the tv was unplugged?--Fr0z3nB0nes 15:27, 24 March 2009 (EDT)

Hey, I had two things I wanted to ask/put forward...1st)does this ability just part a prescribed, somewhat self-sufficient, electrical field allowing the tv to be turned on or does it also allow interaction between the tv and say a cable box/satelite dish?? Because it seems like merely turning something on and allowing the machine to operate with other machines are two distinct modes of operation?? Maybe not..2nd)this ability seems like basically the same or atleast very similiar to micahs ability. I know the baby touched hiro, but im still thinking back to season 2 when micah touched monica and the next day she had complete control over her power...we've seen that the same abilities can be wielded to varying degrees by different people...could this not be technopathy??? I mean micah was like five when we first saw him use his ability??? Just a thought...-Babio123

  • I noticed the similarities as well. Another thing to consider is ability supercharging - an ability that allows the user to make an evolved humans power stronger using some kind of electricity. Makes me think the ability to manipulate electrical equipment and Matt jr.'s aren't that different.--BardinessBoy 06:31, 24 March 2009 (EDT)

How long does a consensus check last for a final decision?-- Catalyst · Talk · HL 22:21, 10 April 2009 (EDT)

  • Basically, until everyone agrees. Sometimes (often), we never agree, so we give up on the idea. --Yamawhata? 23:26, 10 April 2009 (EDT)

System/tactile/whatever Toggling

This would fit, would it not? It describes his ability to change the state of a system from on or off through touch. --Barbedknives 8:44, 24 March 2009 (EDT)

  1. Actually, Toggling is the best word I've seen yet, since he can turn stuff on AND off. Still for his name, but this is the best suggestion yet.--Riddler 23:50, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  2. That's actually pretty good. It's an exact description of the known aspects of his ability. Gets my vote. -Sincerely, Thrashmeister » talk- 00:56, 25 March 2009 (EDT)
  3. Toggling is just the term I was looking for to replace the Activation. Nice job, Barbedknives. You have my vote. --Altes 09:30, 25 March 2009 (EDT)
  4. Hehe, far better than my one, my vote goes here --Fr0z3nB0nes 03:55, 26 March 2009 (EDT)
  5. Perfect. Absolutely perfect. -- Psilaq R.- \m/ -_- \m/- 10:12, 28 March 2009 (EDT)
  6. Better then the rest.--Johan12330 13:55, 25 April 2009 (EDT)

I know no consensus was found, but I wanna bring attention to BarbedKnives's suggestion, since the suggestion was late into the consensus check. He mentioned Toggling (actually, he mentioned Tactile Toggling, but we don't need to over complicate it in my opinion. We don't use Tactile in any other ability name where touching is required.) While Activation was a good term, and I'm still personally for "Matt's ability", Toggling does in fact describe the ability. To toggle something is to turn it on OR off. Matt does both. Just wanna see what everyone thinks.--Riddler 07:44, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

  • Toggling is fine too, I just had tactile in there because most powers use two words to describe the effects unless it's explicitly obvious like freezing. And for the alliteration. The term toggling is also broad enough to cover everything we've seen him do while not limiting it to mechanical systems. -Barbedknives (talk)10:29, 27 March 2009 (EDT)
    • It's understandable why you put it in there, but it's unnecessary. :P --Riddler 10:49, 27 March 2009 (EDT)
  • Toggling is a fine choice of name for the ability. So are many of the others. I won't personally stand in the way of any of the names on this page. But unless the community can come to consensus, none of the names will be used, unfortunately. I'd love to see some more discussion with people coming to a mutual decision on one name... -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 21:29, 27 March 2009 (EDT)
    • My pick is for Toggling because it does hit all parts of the ability. My reason for bringing up the point again though was that the suggestion was made late into the consensus check and people may not have seen it or had a chance to think about it. :)--Riddler 08:23, 28 March 2009 (EDT)

That's my suggestion for the name of the power. Think about it. He touches something and makes it work - therefore, it's more specific and clear than just "Activation," but still explains what the power does. To account for turning off the TV, we could call it "Tactile Toggling". EValentino 13:16, 31 March 2009 (EDT)

  • I already suggested this, people didn't get a consensus on the 'tactile' part though so we dropped it. Barbedknives (talk)02:39, 1 April 2009 (EDT)

Just throwing that out there. I liked Toggling and System manipulation. Activation was a great idea, but Matt Jr. can turn things off as well (I think). Toggling things on and off sounds good, but more specifically certain "systems". System manipulation was good, but the comments above reminded me that to "manipulate" could mean to change how something works and Matt Jr. hasn't really changed the way the systems work, just toggled parts of them. I do think that Matt's ability to toggle systems on and off could mean that his power could be called System toggling. This is not a consensus check, but let me know what you guys think. ---- - Bender · Talk-

Jumpstarting?

Meh, just a thought... ;) --Action Figure 12:36, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

What is Matt Parkman jr's ability.

His ablity is blats activation as the tv isn't plugged in and it's on so mpj can obvs activate anything like activating hiro's powers.

I think we know this already. -Sincerely, Thrashmeister » talk- 07:45, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
Yup, just a tip mate, add your signature by adding -- followed by 4 tildes. Another point - try to use correct English and grammar here on the wiki, it makes it easier to read and respond to your comments.--Steely McBeam - (talk) 07:46, 24 March 2009 (EDT)

Ignore the TV - what about the Toy Plane!

I find it interesting that people focused on the TV, the most amazing thign to me was that he made the toy airplane FLY. Unlike the TV or the monkey (which is battery powered) or even Hiro's missing ability - he didn't just turn it on, he granted it the ability to do something it was not really designed to do - actually fly.

  • Yeah, i saw that too and was like, wait, he touched the other stuff, but its flying without him touching it, but it isn't flying in a line, like he was controlling it? Im thinking he has a power like Control or Electromagnetic manipulation, he can control electrons such as the steering mechanism, or the power supply on the tv. He could also restore Hiro's power because he could rewrite his dna, or reset it back to its unremoved state. SO im going for State control, such as on, off.--Fr0z3nB0nes 13:22, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  • I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the toy itself was designed to fly for short distances, and he just stuck it in the "on" position. --Ted C 13:43, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
    • It doesn't seem wise to make a baby toy that can actually fly.
      • Doesn't seem wise to use lead paint in baby toys, either. ;) (Admin 22:54, 25 March 2009 (EDT))
        • The toy plane is clearly a stubby little playschool type plane that would be unable to fly. Look at it. That is NOT a real, flying, toy plane.--Wiseman 13:14, 30 March 2009 (EDT)

Revive the dead?

What do you think? If Matt activates inactive objects, can he make the dead if not come back to life, then at least move? --Altes 12:29, 24 March 2009 (EDT)

  • No. By that logic, Micah would control people like Eric Doyle does so well.--Isaac Mendez 13:37, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  • Young Matt's ability has not been shown to affect things that are too damaged to work. --Ted C 13:42, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
    • And if a man dies for natural reasons, no killing or anything? And also, Isaac, Micah only controls machines. He admitted to Monica that he couldn't fix her nightmares for her, so he doesn't manipulate human beings and has nothing to do with this theory. --Altes 13:57, 24 March 2009 (EDT)
  • It's unlikely that he would be able to revive the dead. The human body is a system, and in order to activate its functions it would need to be fully intact. Matt Parkman Jr. has not been shown to be able to repair damaged or destroyed systems, only to 'activate' them. Barbedknives 12:33, 25 March 2009 (EDT)
    • But Matt did restore a part of Hiro's lost ability, doesn't that count as a 'repair'? --Altes 13:43, 25 March 2009 (EDT)
    • Perhaps, but again we have to remember that Hiro was not actually harmed when he lost his power, he just could not access it. I have a feeling that we will be seeing more episodes going into Baby Matt's ability and articulating on it. If his father's history of expanding on his ability is any indication, Matt Parkmen Jr.s ability could have profound and innumerable effects. It may just be the most potent ability we've seen yet if drawn to it's fullest conclusions. For example, if he really can control any system, he could theoretically kill a person by touching them, disable their abilities, revive the dead, stop disease, etc. I doubt they've thought much into the nature of it.Barbedknives 15:49, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

I personally don't think it's likely that this ability can revive someone who is truly dead. However I think it's very likely that he could wake someone from an unconscious state even from in a coma. --Falrinn 12:15, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

  • Ah, now here's a nice idea. :) --Altes 12:57, 28 March 2009 (EDT)

Here's an Idea...

User:Shadowulf1 15:35, 24 March 2009 (EDT) Personally, I'm for the Activation, but if that seems to be too vague, then it should probably be called System Activation

Start and Go

Wikipedia refers to it as Start and Go--WarGrowlmon18 17:36, 24 March 2009 (EDT)

  • Anyone can edit Wikipedia. --Formless 21:48, 24 March 2009 (EDT)

So. I once saw something like John Dillinger was the greatest fart in the 1930s. It's hard to go by wikipedia.-- Catalyst · Talk · HL 18:00, 24 March 2009 (EDT)

  • Wikipedia sucks. It describes Angela's ability as 'enhanced dreaming'. --Altes 09:28, 25 March 2009 (EDT)
    • Wikipedia sucks just like Heroeswiki, but here people correct other peoples mistakes. Mateussf 22:17, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

A side effect ?

How come little Matt was not frozen in time (he can drink the milk on his own!) ? Is this some kind of side effect of his power? That he is immune from abilities that he activated? Kevinmhk 00:27, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

  • Sadly not mate, Hiro was holding him when he froze time and as we've seen before if Hiro is touching someone when he activates his ability they come along for the ride too.--Steely McBeam - (talk) 00:30, 25 March 2009 (EDT)
    • Oh.. I thought Hiro's power extension only applies to the teleportation aspect of his ability.. When was the rare occasion that the person touched by Hiro did not get frozen in time? I could only remember Hiro interacting with Peter and Daphne when time froze (thanks to their own powers) --Kevinmhk 00:50, 25 March 2009 (EDT)
      • He's frozen time with Ando before, aside from that I can't really remember.--Steely McBeam - (talk) 00:53, 25 March 2009 (EDT)
        • Yeah, somebody isolated Ando from this ability in Five Years Ago - either Future Hiro, or Future Peter. --Altes 09:27, 25 March 2009 (EDT)
          • Huh? When Future Peter went to Bennet's place to rescue Future Hiro and Ando, everybody except Future Peter was frozen (Future Hiro got knocked out); and during the battle at Homeland Security they didn't freeze time because Future Peter said he "hasn't had a good fight in years". --Kevinmhk 09:40, 25 March 2009 (EDT)
            • I'm not sure, but I remember this isolating thing happened in the future. --Altes 10:51, 25 March 2009 (EDT)
              • Didn't Hiro touch Yaeko when he froze time in season 2? --Johan12330 14:00, 25 April 2009 (EDT)

Kinetic Distribution

The ability to give off kinetic energy, which is the energy of motion. In electronics there is always motion whether it be the hands moving in Sylar's watch or electrons traveling through the wires of the TV. In biologic systems cells us kinetic energy to digest, replicate, and any other function. Therefore the gene for Hiro's ability is created and can be activated.

  • Although im usually all for speculation, that is just ubsurd. --Lolwut

Is a last name necessary?

Until we get a new name, shouldn't this be just Matt Jr.'s ability or even just Matt's ability? We haven't included last names for any other Soandso's abilities we have. Thoughts? -- Psilaq R.- \m/ -_- \m/- 17:11, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

  • That is what I thought too. I was the one who had put it in the abilities portal page and had to shortened it, because the box was longer than the others.-- Catalyst · Talk · HL 17:33, 25 March 2009 (EDT)

More advanced type of Technopathy

When I first saw the episode I said to myself "his power is technopathy" but then when he restores partially Hiro's power, I recalled that the writers said that Matt Parkman Jr would be the world's salvation... So, can anyone think of a name that translates this: manipulating various systems including biological and mechanical. ? -- Meteoritu 21:27, March 25th 2009

The Name is FINE.

  • Although i usually detest seeing the abilities called xxxxx's ability, the current name is fine. There simply is NO way of naming it without failing hard, we just havent seen enough of the ability, but will eventually, may aswell be patient lads --Lolwut
    • I agree. Before, I hated specific people's abilities, but this one really can't be named yet because the limits to his power are vague and no proper name has been suggested in the show. We should wait for the next episode of Heroes to lay down some more information because at this point, there isn't enough to name it. I don't care about the power belonging to one person because that one person is a baby and he does what he wants. :-) ---- - Bender · Talk-
      • I STILL don't like xxxxx's ability, but at this time, it looks like the best we can do. Hopefully, the show will eventually give us something better than "Touch and go".--Cro Magnon 17:30, 26 March 2009 (EDT)
        • I agree, since this ability is not yet fully understood. As already said, it might have to do with energy, though to say that energy would be able to reactivate abilities would make the laws governing abilities even more vague (then again, the solar eclipse already made energy an integral part of them). I thought perhaps animation or reanimation might be appropriate names, but I'd rather wait and see if the show might explain the nature of the ability somehow. —Ampere 07:17, 28 March 2009 (EDT)
          • See Talk:Matt's ability#Toggling :)--Riddler 08:19, 28 March 2009 (EDT)
            • I agree with this, currently Matt is just a baby. I don't think we would truely be able to name it until he is older and has more control of his ability, then we would know the extent of it. - User:TheTheif 14:00, 28 March 2009 (EDT)

Not necessarily, just because of his age doesn't mean we can't identify his ability. From what we've seen so far with more examples and a little commentary from the characters we should be able to adequately name it.--Steely McBeam - (talk) 10:03, 28 March 2009 (EDT)

No consensus

There is no consensus on a descriptive name. Therefore, the name will have to stay "Matt's ability". Unless the community can come together and decide on one name (majority doesn't count--it's pretty much all or nothing), a "vote" for a different name is a vote for "Matt's ability". Personally, I'm not really "for" or "against" any name on this one. No clear canon name was given, and there is no common name for the ability. But if the community wants a particular name, the community will have to get on board together. :) -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 16:36, 26 March 2009 (EDT)

  • It's a shame, it would be nice to get a simple consensus once in a while. --IronyUTC CH


Power

Honestly... his power, is power. Think about all the things he "turns on". Toys with batteries... an unplugged televison... and Hiro's power. He is applying power to all of these things. Eh? Angielynne - talk dirty to me... 15:57, 27 March 2009 (EDT)

  • This is a bit too vague, isn't it? Power to do what, in what way? Matt is not a human battery from what we've seen. He doesn't appear to emit any type of energy. Just some thoughts. ----Barbedknives (talk)16:15, 27 March 2009 (EDT)
  • Well, he must manipulate energy somehow, otherwise how did the television stay on when it had been unplugged? Matt's ability had to have sustained it somehow, unless it ran on batteries, which doessn't seem to be the case.blkmasta 11.:36, 7 April 2009(GMT)
  • Power on and off — Power switch! (We should not be too technical, "Genesis" is as serious as episode 101, regenerate the show with youth and apocalypse.) --Juba 06:56, 10 April 2009 (EDT)

System manipulation

  • I think that system manipulation would be a good name for Matt Parkman, Jr.'s ability. He seems to be able to controle/toggle even non-electric systems such as the clockwork monkey that starts in Cold Snap. does anyone else think this would be a good name? -User:Tsmarg 27 March, 2:14
    • Unfortunately, this doesn't cover his activation of Hiro's power. --Yamawhata? 16:12, 27 March 2009 (EDT)
      • Couldn't Hiro's ability be considered a system? after all Sylar can understand complex systems and therefore understand abilities. User:Tsmarg 27 March, 2:20
        • System manipulation suggests that he can change the way a system works, not just on or off.--Riddler 13:06, 28 March 2009 (EDT)
          • Who says that Matt Parkman Jr. can't change the way systems work. after all he turned on a tv when it wasn't plugged in. that in its self is manipulating a system. also we have not seen his abiliy very much; it could develop to be something more.--Tsmarg 7:19 pm, 2 april 2009 (EDT)
            • He also made a toy plane fly, which wasn't something the plane could normally do.--Ikkian 13:35, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

Query's

  • Could abilities be considered systems, as they are part of the brain? --TheTheif 10:48, 28 March 2009 (EDT)
  • What effect would Matt's ability have on someone with an ability that had not been lost? Or on someone with a synthetic ability, for example Peter?--TheTheif 10:48, 28 March 2009 (EDT)
    • yes, im pretty sure that abilities are systems; as i was saying before, if abilities were not systems then how would Sylar be able to understand them? Intuitive aptitude is the ability to: understand the structure and operation of complex systems without special education or training. as for your second question it might turn off the persons ability, though i dont think that it would make any difference if the ability was synthetic or not.--Tsmarg 10:02, 28 March 2009 (EDT)
      • Yep, abilities are systems, just keep in mind that brains are major systems that include many minor ones. Abilities, etc. --Altes 14:42, 28 March 2009 (EDT)
        • The brain is not a system. The brain is an organ which is part of the nervous system. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 18:41, 28 March 2009 (EDT)

I just thought the perfect name that fits in the "Description"

Mechanism manipulation! No? At least until we hear something that fits in "Near-canon" or "Canon" source... I was thinking Mechanism Activation but seeing though he turned off the TV, I'm thinking "manipulation". It's the best way to describe it up until now. -- Meteoritu 23:03, 29 March 2009

  • How is Hiro's DNA a mechanism?--Steely McBeam - (talk) 00:49, 3 April 2009 (EDT)
    • I forgot about that. How about "System"? -- Meteoritu 21:19, 4 April 2009

Stop name spamming!

People need to read the previous discussions, many names being posted have already been discussed, it won't change it if you spam your name several times!

  • Some of the names are similar, yes, but there are differences in words that could change the description of the ability entirely. I've read the discussions above and I've stated my opinion in my article that was moved to the other section. I don't consider my suggestion as 'name spamming'; I've discussed my suggestion and my word choice. The reason that people create new categories at the bottom of the page is that the new additions aren't immediately noticeable if they were to be grouped in an old category. It would be hard to notice a new suggestion if you grouped it in with an older category. On a side note, remember to sign your signature when you leave a comment. --Bender 23:09, 2 April 2009 (EDT)
    • I agree with whoever put the comment. Name spamming is both annoying and unnecessary. There had to be at least one canon name mentioned in Cold Snap. -- User:BoomerDay

The Name Game

Activation, Jumpstarting, Touch and go, Genesis, Tactile activation, Functional genesis, State control, Toggling, System activation, Kinetic distribution, Power, System manipulation, Mechanism manipulation, and Matt's ability.

These are the names people have come up with. Can't we just pick one and get on with our lives? BoomerDay

  • Aren't you impatient? There's an episode on Monday. Hopefully, it'll shed some more light on what he does.--Bob (talk) 18:46, 4 April 2009 (EDT)
    • I personally like Tactile Activation, but we'll see tonight i guess... TracyStraussFan 18:44, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

Oh look! People have added more names: Empathic empowerment, Empathic toggling, System mimicry, Ignition... Really? What does he do? Turns things on and off! --BoomerDay 15:50, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

Name Suggestions

--Dedsmiley 23:20, 6 April 2009 (EDT)what about spontanious activation? it sounds reasonable to me.

    • The only problem I see with that is the Activation part. Matt's ability allows him to deactivate mechanical and biological systems as well. I still stand by my earlier name suggestion of System toggling. We've seen him toggle systems on and off or "activate and deactivate" them, so this name works with the description. Yeah, so this will probably be moved back to that article System/tactile/whatever Toggling to prevent "name spamming", only to be buried and forgotten. I'll give it about a day or so. --Bender 01:56, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

Examples

With the latest episode, there are more than 8 examples, which warrants an example page for the ability. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 18:52, 7 April 2009 (EDT)

  • If we can add only 4 images representative of the demonstrations of the ability in the latest episode, we'd have 12, which can hold off an examples page until more demonstrations. --Radicell 10:30, 9 April 2009 (EDT)
    • Talk with the sypops, policy says that no more than 8 ability images are allowed for selected examples. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 15:46, 9 April 2009 (EDT)
      • Look at water mimicry. Generally, what we've been doing is something like this:
If there's 8 or less example images, show all of them.
If there's 9 example images, show only 8 of them and hide 1.
If there's 10 example images, show only 8 of them and hide 2.
If there's 11 example images, show only 8 of them and hide 3.
If there's 12 example images, show all of them.
If there's 13 example images, create an examples page.

I'll begin uploading powers images from the latest episode soon, it'll be sorted out. --Radicell 03:51, 10 April 2009 (EDT)

Ok

I know X Men and Heroes have nothing to do with each other, but Matt's ability looks a lot like the young mutant in X2 and X3 that could turn on and change the channel on the T.V by blinking. It is probably not the same power considering Matt seems to be able to turn on and off any system he interacts with. I just thought that both powers seem to be similar,and this wouldn't be the first time one of the Heroes exhibited a power similar to one used in comics. I think with Matt meeting his son, it won't be long until we have a canon name to this power:)--Sylar Fan09 15:44, 11 April 2009 (EDT)

Empathetic Empowerment

Matt's emotions change wether or not something has power.. whether it be a vehicle, person, or persons ability. This is an exact definition of his power with only ONE flaw: Does his power allow him to shut a human off, as far as life is concerned? - Cendagg

  • BTE kinda shot this down. Adding a new name is likely not to get a consensus since so many others didn't. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 19:23, 11 April 2009 (EDT)
    • BTE only said that this will never be shown. But what does it mean: Matt really cannot kill with his ability, or the writers won't make a killer baby? --Altes 03:15, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Matt's power effecting Ando

Ive heard theories on Matt's power giving Ando the ability to use his Supercharging as a weapon. What is everyone's take on this? - Cendagg

  • Ando does that on his own already. Sign your comments with ~~~~ or with the signature button, second from right to left when you make an edit. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 19:22, 11 April 2009 (EDT)

Empathic Toggling

I think his ability is described best by empathic toggling, though at this point I doubt there will be a name change. his ability concerns emotions (when he is happy he makes systems go, when he is sad he makes them stop.)so there for empathic and toggling describes the way he makes things start and stop. anyone? --Tsmarg 13, april 2009

  • This is not completely correct, since he was seen turning off a television in his first appearance, despite being perfectly happy at the time. It's probably not directly connected to his emotions, but rather is influenced by them somewhat, because of his age.--Laudo 11:39, 14 April 2009 (EDT)
    • I don't remember him turning it OFF, but only ON.--Ikkian 00:39, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

Ok Guys How about System Mimicry?

  • I think it sounds right, What do you guys think about it?--Skyeatsout 23:18, 16 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Mimicry is when somone used somones elses ability? So that names doens't fit WaterRatj 23:27, 16 April 2009 (EDT)
  • i thought it meant some thing else lol--Skyeatsout 23:30, 16 April 2009 (EDT)
    • now you know it isn't :pWaterRatj 23:41, 16 April 2009 (EDT)
  • System Control Hows that?--Skyeatsout 23:33, 16 April 2009 (EDT)
  • My suggestion: "Ignition," possibly with a more descriptive adjective in front of it, but that depends on what some of these discussions conclude! --Dfcrux 19:20, 18 April 2009(EDT)
        • In what way does he mimic systems? he can obviously control them in some way but mimic is to say Matt Parkman Jr. somehow copies them. anyway at this point new names are not going to help the consensus. --Tsmarg 19, April 11:12 am (EDT)

New Consensus Check using New Concensus Process

Please sign and give a reason to the name you are opposed to. If no conscenus is reached then this will remain Matt's ability. --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 04/22/2009 13:12 (EST)

  • Since a lot of names have been put forward and many opposed I will strike out the names that will not be used (not including Matt's ability as this is default) so to direct peoples attention to the new names and spark up some discussion. --posted by Laughingdevilboy

Talk 07:45, 25 April 2009 (EDT)


Matt's ability

  • Opposed, we have enough details about the ability, to give it a proper descriptive name. --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 04/22/2009 13:12 (EST)
    • Good idea to hold a new consensus check here, since we now have the new info. that Matt Jr. can turn things both on or off (we didn't know that when we started the discussion for this ability).--MiamiVolts (talk) 14:47, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed, too basic Barbedknives 15:26, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed, I agree. We have enough information to give this ability a proper name. --Bender 20:07, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
    • I agree with MiamiVolts, this new consensus check is great idea. It looks like it can actually get things done. --Bender 20:07, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
  • This is a reminder that one should not be opposing a valid name. "Matt's ability", though not the best choice, is still valid. It worries me that we're opposing valid names. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 20:17, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
    • I agree with you. This name shouldn't be listed as one of the possibilities as it can't be opposed. I think we're just going to have to strike these comments when we decide the consensus check is over.--MiamiVolts (talk) 00:34, 23 April 2009 (EDT)
      • Yes but I thought in the naming list this comes at the bottom and that commonly used naems comes above, making touch and go better than this? --345tom 08:32, 25 April 2009 (EDT)
        • We generally hold consensus checks for descriptive names (and occasionally for other names on the hierarchy). The reason the possessor's name is at the bottom is because it's pretty much a last resort for an ability name. However, "Matt's ability" is not wrong--it is neither too broad nor too narrow. By definition, this name cannot be wrong, and thus shouldn't be opposed. In fact, it shouldn't even be in the mix here. The possessor's name should only be used if we can't come to consensus on another name. The possessor's name might not be the best name, but it's certainly not wrong, and definitely shouldn't be opposed. It worries me that if we're opposing legitimate names like this one that we're also opposing other legitimate names. Opposition should be based solely on a name's validity, not whether another name is better, or what our personal preferences are...I'll work on Help:Consensus checks later on, probably after the finale. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 20:24, 26 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed, for reasons stated by others. --Laudo 00:04, 23 April 2009 (EDT)


Activation

  • Opposed, Matt doesn't just activate things... he can turn them off too.--MiamiVolts (talk) 14:47, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
    • That could arguably be implied by the term (and its opposite, "deactivation"), and could be acknowledged on the page itself. In addition, Maya's power, which exudes some form of poison, was intended to do the opposite at the end of Exodus. Perhaps reversal is an extension of some powers? --Ricard Desi (t,c) 21:09, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
      • Hmm? Deactivation isn't implied by activation... What Maya's power was intended to do doesn't count as canon in Heroes, so that's a bad example.--MiamiVolts (talk) 00:55, 23 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed, same Barbedknives 15:26, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed, same as above. --Bender 20:07, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed, ditto --Crazyaspie 00:43, 23 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Agreed! If you're gonna want to imply deactivation on the name you might as well rename "Enhanced Strength" to "Enhanced Strength when wanted with different amounts of power". Yes because "Puppet master" is such a great name for an ABILITY (which is not a PERSON). -- Meteoritu =D- 27 April, 2009 22:06
  • Opposed - he deactivates things too. - Josh (talk/contribs) 17:48, 27 April 2009 (EDT)


Jump starting

  • Opposed, Matt turned the TV off. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 14:20, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed, ability serves dual functions Barbedknives 15:26, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed, his ability allows him to do more than just jump start systems --Bender 20:07, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed, this name serves the same purpose as the more scientific activation, while carrying the same flaws. --Ricard Desi (t,c) 21:09, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed, same as above. --Crazyaspie 00:43, 23 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed, he turns things off too. - Josh (talk/contribs) 17:48, 27 April 2009 (EDT)


"Touch and Go"

  • Opposed, while acccurate and sort of canon, there are better names that are also correct. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 14:20, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
    • Other names being better will not be counted as a valid reason for opposing this name.--MiamiVolts (talk) 15:10, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed, better names than this one, though I do like this one. --Bender 20:07, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed. It's a nickname for the power. We don't call the Haitian's power "making you forget", despite it being referred to that way several times on the show. --Ricard Desi (t,c) 21:09, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed, Hiro acknowledges that he also makes things stop. --Crazyaspie 00:43, 23 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed - He stops things too, and no, it's not a canon name for the power. - Josh (talk/contribs) 17:48, 27 April 2009 (EDT)


System toggling

  • Opposed. "Toggling" refers to a physical piece of machinery, which in and of itself does not necessarily involve a system turning on or off. --Ricard Desi (t,c) 21:09, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
    • Power toggling? - Josh (talk/contribs) 00:58, 23 April 2009 (EDT)
      • Incorrect. Toggling means to switch something from one state to another state, generally on or off. It has nothing to do specifically with machinery.--Riddler 03:51, 23 April 2009 (EDT)
        • Riddler's right, "Toggling" doesn't specifically refer to a piece of machinery. --Bender 15:38, 23 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed, same as above. --Crazyaspie 00:43, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

I like this name. This is what I call the ability.--ERROR 21:42, 5 June 2009 (EDT)


System mimicry

  • Opposed, Matt doesn't become like the system. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 14:20, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed, agreed Barbedknives 15:26, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed, agreed, he never mimics the system, but rather turns it on and off. --Bender 20:07, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed, for reasons above. --Ricard Desi (t,c) 21:09, 22 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed, agreed --Crazyaspie 00:43, 23 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed - Why was this even carried over to the new consensus check after the person that suggested it realized it doesn't mean this? - Josh (talk/contribs) 17:48, 27 April 2009 (EDT)

System mimicry? That's like calling Gordon's ability sand mimicry, or shockwave emission telepathy.--ERROR 21:42, 5 June 2009 (EDT)


State inversion

  • Opposed, could mean the states of matter. --345tom 08:36, 25 April 2009 (EDT)
    • Huh. What does it mean to invert a state of matter??? That matter inversion (whatever you mean by that) is a possible implication doesn't make it a bad name.--MiamiVolts (talk) 17:06, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed - Too vague. - Josh (talk/contribs) 17:48, 27 April 2009 (EDT)


Technopathy

  • Opposed - His ability also affects biological mechanisms. Technopathy is solely technological. --Elemental Manipulator [ U | T | C ] - When in doubt, ask BTE 00:13, 24 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposedm same as EM. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 13:52, 24 April 2009 (EDT)
  • He's not talking to the machines (heck, he can't talk at all), and Technopathy was shown in I Am Sylar to be useless in power outages; Matt turned on the unplugged TV, so this is different. Advic 13:18, 25 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed - Technopathy is the name of a different ability. - Josh (talk/contribs) 17:48, 27 April 2009 (EDT)


Empathic activation

  • Opposed - The only reason his ability had the affects when he was angry or happy was because he's an infant and he wasn't in control of his ability. --Scorvi12 07:15, 25 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed - same as above. - Josh (talk/contribs) 17:48, 27 April 2009 (EDT)

Ditto. Also because he can deactivate, too.--ERROR 21:42, 5 June 2009 (EDT)


Circumstance inversion


Circumstance manipulation


Situation inversion


Situation manipulation


System activation

  • Opposed - same reason as activation. --Elemental Manipulator [ U | T | C ] - When in doubt, ask BTE 06:58, 26 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed - He deactivates systems. This is getting old. - Josh (talk/contribs) 17:48, 27 April 2009 (EDT)


Power toggling

  • Opposed - power seems to indicate it only works on abilities. --Elemental Manipulator [ U | T | C ] - When in doubt, ask BTE 06:58, 26 April 2009 (EDT)
    • It's "power" like a power button. - Josh (talk/contribs) 20:45, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

...Or like an ability. I like. This and "system toggling" has my vote.--ERROR 21:42, 5 June 2009 (EDT)


Toggling

  • Opposed, vague --345tom 15:43, 27 April 2009 (EDT)


System inversion

  • Opposed vague and could refer to inverting to original for. So yeah, VAGUE --345tom 15:43, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
  • He doesn't invert systems. He inverts whether they are on or off. - Josh (talk/contribs) 17:48, 27 April 2009 (EDT)


Ignition

  • This name doesn't cover all aspects of Matt's ability. He can turn things on, but he can also turn them off. I'm opposed to this name. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 20:19, 26 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Agreed. --Crazylicious 20:49, 26 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Opposed - implies that he creates fire. - Josh (talk/contribs) 17:48, 27 April 2009 (EDT)


Functional intervention (see below)

  • Opposed - Based on speculation. - Josh (talk/contribs) 17:48, 27 April 2009 (EDT)


Activation and deactivation


Logical state inversion

  • Opposed, it doesn't exactly sound like the same ability. --Crazyaspie 20:01, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
    • I striked your comment. What it sounds like doesn't matter. It's what it means that matters.--MiamiVolts (talk) 16:36, 28 April 2009 (EDT)


Binary state inversion

  • Opposed, when I think of binary I think "mathematics" and that doesn't seem to explain what Matt's doing. --Crazyaspie 20:01, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
    • It is a mathematical description of what Matt Jr. does. That doesn't make it wrong.--MiamiVolts (talk) 16:36, 28 April 2009 (EDT)
      • But that doesn't mean his reason for opposing is wrong. You can't strike out someones response because you think they're wrong. This is why I think this system is flawed. Everyone thinks they're right over someone else. It's not about discussion anymore, it's about I'm right, you're wrong. Unstriking this opposition.--Riddler 02:06, 14 May 2009 (EDT)
  • How do we know its only two states he cna change it into? Binary means composed of two parts or two pieces. --345tom 12:33, 6 May 2009 (EDT)

State inversion

Added 'state inversion'... a power or electrical device is normally either in the state of being "on" or "off"; 'state' means 'the condition or circumstances of a person or thing'. Inverting that state means to switch it from being on to off, or from off to on.--MiamiVolts (talk) 02:08, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

  • Added 'logical state inversion' and 'binary state inversion' since 'state inversion' by itself was accused of being too vague, possibly meaning a state of matter.--MiamiVolts (talk) 19:23, 27 April 2009 (EDT)

"Functional Intervention"

Notes to consider:

  • function, as defined: "the kind of action or activity proper to a person, thing, or institution; the purpose for which something is designed or exists." [dictionary.com]
    • Matt Jr. changes the ability of an object or person to function according to its design.
  • intervention ("intervene"), as defined: "To involve oneself in a situation so as to alter, or hinder, an action or development." [dictionary.com]
    • Matt Jr.'s actions can best be defined as intervention because he can enable, disable, and manipulate/control the object/person's functional ability.
  • Not simply a matter of "on" or "off"
    • Matt Jr. was able to fly the toy plane and drive the toy cars in circles; this is much more influence on the objects than simply activating them-- he can manipulate/control them, but only within the bounds of their designed function. Matt Jr.'s infancy may simply mask the full spectrum of his ability since he is not in full control of it.

--Dfcrux 20:54, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

Talk 15:47, 27 April 2009 (EDT)

    • DING DING DING we may have a winner! --345tom 16:08, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
      • Are we sure he was manipulating them and he wasn't just turning them on?--MiamiVolts (talk) 17:11, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
        • To turn them on is a form of manipulation. --OutbackZack 17:12, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
          • If that were true, we would be able to group him with Micah as having technopathy. I don't think it's the same ability.--MiamiVolts (talk) 17:33, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
            • He manipulates both electronics and people. Micha "talks" to electronics. --OutbackZack 17:38, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
              • Is that so? Couldn't it be said that Micah turned on his cousin's ability? Didn't he tell Sylar he could fix him? Both are as speculative as what you are trying to say about Matt's ability. I think you are reaching, and that we have normally accepted that control/manipulation means much more than to just turn on/off. The Haitian's ability of mental manipulation is a good example, cause he alters things in the mind... he doesn't just turn it on/off.--MiamiVolts (talk) 18:34, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
                • Why are we talking about manipulation? When the ability topic is called Functional Intervention?--posted by Laughingdevilboy

Talk 18:58, 27 April 2009 (EDT)

                  • Because Dfcrux said that Baby Matt could manipulate things within the bounds of their function, meaning Baby Matt would likely have turned the Ando's and Hiro's rental car around and forced it to go towards his mommy rather than just stopping it. Of course, that didn't happen cause that's not part of Baby Matt's ability.--MiamiVolts (talk) 19:28, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
  • All very good points--but please remember that while Matt Jr.'s ability is primarily turning something on/off, he could also control where the toy plane flew, and where the toy cars drove. That surely shows some kind of influence other than on or off. I've omitted the word "manipulate" from my previous explaination to avoid confusion; the relevance of the meaning of "functional intervention" still stands, though. --Dfcrux 23:15, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
    • As I was pointing out, I think it's speculative to say that he controlled where the plane flew or how they moved. It could have been programmed to move like they did.--MiamiVolts (talk) 23:34, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
      • touche... but along those lines, "it could have been programmed" is just as speculative, and falsely omits the possibility that Matt Jr. did influence where the toys went. The rule for speculation needs to apply in both directions. And unfortunately, that may mean leaving the name alone until the character/ability are more developed next season... :/ --Dfcrux 23:50, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
        • I know this is Heroes, a show with superpowers, but I think it should be common practice to always go with natural causation rather than allow for so many possibilities. If next season, the toilet in Janus's home suddenly stops working and the plumber can't find the problem, are we going to assume Matt Jr.'s the cause? Or would it be more likely that there's a broken pipe the plumber can't find?--MiamiVolts (talk) 00:18, 28 April 2009 (EDT)
  • Can we get a checkuser to make sure no sock puppetry is going on? Oh and as a side note, I don't think this new consensus system is any more effective than the last one. In fact, I'd say it's probably worse. Very good names can be shot down with a single 'No' with little to no discussion, and any discussion just makes it look like the name has more opposition. -Barbedknives (talk)Barbedknives 23:19, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
    • If you think someone is abusing multiple accounts, you can inform Admin at admin -at- heroeswiki dot com. I don't think either consensus system is perfect; but I think we are having more discussion on the names now than before, which is good. Also, just saying you oppose an ability's name isn't enough. You have to give a valid reason that it can't be used. In this case, saying that Matt Jr. controlled where the toys went is speculative.--23:34, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
    • Not sure what you mean by "checkuser," but if there is anything I need to do let me know. --Dfcrux 00:02, 28 April 2009 (EDT)

WHY ALL THE FUSS?!

JUST PICK A NAME, nothing we find is ever going to be 100% perfect, and appearently finding the next best thing is taking ages. Why the hell is the "Description" level up here on this page if no one ever uses it?! If we're going to wait for a canon source or semi-canon source to shut our mouths, we're going to end up with a crappy name like Eric's ability got "Puppet master"... basically if u have a nice name, rename this, if u don't, just leave it alone!! (btw I vote for "Activation"... it's simple, and don't throw the "he deactivates things too" fact, or else ur gonna call enhanced strength "enhanced starting fisting power and stopping fisting power"...) Meteoritu =D-

  • Knox's power is to enhance his strength. This makes his fist more powerful. His ability does not start or stop fisting. - Josh (talk/contribs) 17:48, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
      • Let's just call Matt's ability "Fisting" --Action Figure 22:29, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

Honestly, I was on your side there, until I read what was in the parentheses. Reading that made me go "Moron," honestly (Though to be fair, I didn't go "Moron" until the "enhanced strength" part... The "activation" thing just made me go "Huh?"). Why do you think that if we bring up the fact that he deactivates things, too (Which is actually a valid argument against calling this ability "activation," believe it or not), then we're going to call enhanced strength "enhanced starting fisting power and stopping fisting power?" Just imagine... "Enhanced starting fisting power and stopping fisting power is the ability to exert greater-than-normal physical force"... Or something like that. See what I mean? We're not idiots (And I hope you're not one, either.).

Back on topic... You actually have a point, though, as I already spent a paragraph saying, you don't when it comes to what's in the parentheses (Although your point is no longer valid, as this ability already has a name - "activation and deactivation." Happy with that?). Also, what IS "fisting?" And why would we call this ability "fisting?"--ERROR 20:48, 7 June 2009 (EDT)

What else could this power do?

I wonder if he touched someone's chest he could make their heart stop working... O_o --Master Dave 11:03, 30 April 2009 (EDT) If Matt Jr touch Hiro again, would he deactivate time stop and activate another one of his powers? [User:50000JH]

Activation and deactivation

I see my suggestion has gone unopposed for a week. How long do we have to wait? - Josh (talk/contribs) 17:28, 5 May 2009 (EDT)

  • There are still two other unopposed names as well as yours. Be patient. We all want to see the name changed. --Elemental Manipulator [ U | T | C ] - When in doubt, ask BTE 01:49, 6 May 2009 (EDT)

Vote on unopposed names

This is a vote people, there are three unopposed names, that have been there for a week now without opposition. The name with the most votes will become the new name. So please add your name under the name you prefer. --posted by Laughingdevilboy Talk 01:58, 6 May 2009 (EDT)

Activation and deactivation

  1. Simple, straight to the point, no speculation, not complex. --Elemental Manipulator [ U | T | C ] - When in doubt, ask BTE 02:04, 6 May 2009 (EDT)
  2. My favourite --posted by Laughingdevilboy

Talk 02:06, 6 May 2009 (EDT)

  1. Same as EM said. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 12:06, 6 May 2009 (EDT)
  2. Best One-User:monroej
  3. The other two are obscure. This one's reasonable. Advic 01:57, 7 May 2009 (EDT)
  4. If we can't have 'Touch and Go' this is the next best thing. The others are way too wordy. --Nax 05:31, 7 May 2009 (EDT)
  5. The best name basically, straight forward, makes bliss and horror stand out less. --Tommo 17:07, 7 May 2009 (EDT)
  6. My vote goes here. basic and straight forward. --Tsmarg
  7. Easy to understand. and I don't need a dictionary to know what it means. --OneOfThem 23:27, 11 May 2009 (EDT)

Logical state inversion


Binary state inversion

  1. I like this name better --IronyUTC CH 12:12, 6 May 2009 (EDT)

Toddler touch and go --Cj31094 13:17, 13 May 2009 (EDT)

Flawed Consensus System.

I'm going to write this here, because this page has the best example of it. This new consensus is, with all due respect and no offense intended, flawed. First and foremost, as you can see above, it's more cluttered and disorganized. But personally, the problem I see is that just anybody thinks they can cross out a name because it has one or two oppositions. Matt's ability has four oppositions, but all of the conversation around it makes it look like it has a dozen. System toggling has two oppositions, one of which had a valid counter-point. State inversion has two oppositions. It goes on like that. In fact, alot of them are crossed out by one opposition by the same person. The way I see it is that people will take advantage of this system by using it in such a way where if they think it's wrong, it IS wrong. And now, in the "new consensus check", we have four names that went unopposed because people gave up on finding a name, not because they were good ideas, similar to Alejandro's ability. Beyond that, it's turned into a "vote on unopposed names." There is no "consensus" in a vote, which is why we switched systems; in reality we're just delaying the inevitable. We need to find a new system or just go back to the original system.--Riddler 13:41, 13 May 2009 (EDT)

  • If there's a valid counterpoint, you can uncross-out the name when you express it, which I've done on a number of occasions. You can't oppose a name just cause you don't like it, it has to be a valid reason. I think the new consensus check worked well here. Activation and deactivation may not be the best name, but it is an acceptable one that encompasses what Matt's ability can do. As far as organization is concerned, I find this method a bit more organized than the method we used previously. When there are a number of valid names that can be used, there doesn't need to be consensus on which is the best one. There just needs to be consensus on which ones are valid.--MiamiVolts (talk) 13:52, 13 May 2009 (EDT)
  • Well, opposed names don't get used, so it sounds like they can and should be crossed out. It doesn't matter if there are 4 or a dozen oppositions to a name; what matters is whether there 0 or 1+ valid oppositions. What's wrong with state inversion having two oppositions? What's wrong with the same person opposing several names? This system does not allow people to declare a name wrong without explaining why it's wrong. As MiamiVolts said, if an opposition is invalid (which would be the case if someone wrote something such as "Opposed - I think it's wrong."), it gets crossed out, and the name gets uncrossed if there are no valid oppositions. If someone finds a better name than the one that was chosen, a new consensus check can be started. There's no need to find a name that everyone thinks is best before we switch from Matt's ability. I really don't think there's anything wrong with voting to decide how we accomplish something there is a consensus for. (There's a consensus that we should use a name that's better than "Matt's ability", but we need to decide which one to use.) - Josh (talk/contribs) 14:46, 13 May 2009 (EDT)
    • If one person thinks it's wrong and crosses it out, it becomes a "I think this wrong, so it is wrong." situation, because if it IS crossed out, people scroll right past it thinking it's a done deal. With the amount of people on this site, I hardly find two oppositions enough to say that it's an option to be thrown away. As for "Matt's ability" having four, my point was that it looks like it's highly opposed due to the discussion, when it's really not. The three choices above were not chosen because there was a consensus that they were the top choices, but because people gave up on this name around April 27th, if you'll note the signatures in each category. And the reason people are actually voting on names above is because they think it's a legitimate consensus, but I can see through it. If I were to put a random name up for consensus 2 weeks ago, it wouldn't have any oppositions either, because no one cared enough to check in on it. Like I said, this is just like Alejandro's ability. We gave up on that. If we are to use this system, we need to do away with crossing names out. No one should be allowed to take something like that into their own hands.--Riddler 15:44, 13 May 2009 (EDT)
    • On the vote thing Riddler, Ryan has said (see here) that if two or more names go unopposed, there will be a traditional vote, as the community has decided they are both acceptable names. We're not voting because we think it's a legitimate concensus, once you get to the voting stage the concensus is over. We vote on the name we think best suits the page. --Elemental Manipulator [ U | T | C ] - When in doubt, ask BTE 01:35, 14 May 2009 (EDT)
      • And again, the names that were "unopposed" weren't unopposed because they were the best options, but because they were added after everyone put down their oppositions. People gave up and stopped coming to the page. I could have written in "Powerkinesis" or something silly like that at the same time people wrote the above options, and it would be in the poll right now as well.--Riddler 02:02, 14 May 2009 (EDT)
      • I take full responsibility. When the consensus check first started people were continusously opposing names that would not be used. I therefore started governing the consensus checks and crossing out names that would not be used, I therefore realise I should have waited for at least 2 oppositions before striking, but as I was the only one doing it (with Ryan's agreement) I simply crossed out the names which had one opposed signature, however I noticed Miami was going around and checking peoples arguments so I didn't see this as a problem, what needs to be remembered is this is a new system, not everyone will like it, not everyone liked the old one. It is flawed however as you pointed this out I am sure it will be taken into account and possible will not be allowed in the future, by me or anyone. But it should be remembered that it wont matter what system we have in place it will be flawed. --posted by Laughingdevilboy

Talk 16:29, 13 May 2009 (EDT)

Ability supercharging

How is it similar to Matt's ability? --Altes 06:21, 22 May 2009 (EDT)

They both affect abilities. He can activate abilities, whereas he can amplify abilities. See the similarity?--ERROR 21:12, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

  • And Arthur could steal abilities, yet his power is hardly related to Matt's. Still, I understand what you mean. -- Altes 05:44, 9 June 2009 (EDT)

Not to be rude, but your point is?--ERROR 21:42, 19 June 2009 (EDT)

Main Page

On the main page, it still lists this ability as "Matt's ability." This should be changed to "activation and deactivation," or whatever the ability name is when this post is noticed. I'd do it myself, but I don't think I'm allowed to (And I think that because I tried it, but it didn't work... Yell at me if you want, but don't insult me.).--ERROR 21:18, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

Oh... Thanks!--ERROR 21:44, 5 June 2009 (EDT)

By touch

On the list of abilities, it lists Matt's ability as 'The ability to activate and deactivate various objects by touch'. We've seen that he doesn't necessarily have to be in physical contact with the object, so shouldn't this be changed? --Laudo 15:04, 3 July 2009 (EDT)

  • Dealt with. Intuitive Empath - Talk - Contributions 19:51, 3 July 2009 (EDT)
    • I am probably being really dumb by saying this but...... When have we seen him use this without touch? -- Leckie -- Talk16:17, 16 July 2009 (EDT)
Retrieved from "https://heroeswiki.ddns.net/index.php?title=Talk:Activation_and_deactivation&oldid=279648"