Talk:Electromagnetism/Archive 2

WARNING: Talk:Electromagnetism/Archive 2 is an archive of past messages. New messages should be added to Talk:Electromagnetism.

Lightning

• I know this is a touchy subject at the moment, but on several instances they've referred to his power as "lightning" with 1-2 of those instances being in episodes themselves. Hardvice pointed out that lightning is more of a manifestation of the ability, which I do agree with... however in light of the continuing references to this power as "lightning" in canonical and near-canonical sources we may need to go with this name for the power. Any discussions in this particular section should not suggest alternate names for this power unless those names have been mentioned in an episode since we currently have terms that are being used in episodes and those canonically trump any other source. Preferably the only discussions that should take place in this section involve whether or not "lightning" is a canonical term for the ability. (Admin 22:16, 12 November 2007 (EST))
  • I wouldn't mind that until a better name is mentioned in canon.--Bob (talk) 22:19, 12 November 2007 (EST)
  • I think at this point we're pretty much stuck with "lightning". It's been used rather consistently in the show, in the graphic novel, and in the commentary.--Hardvice (talk) 23:31, 12 November 2007 (EST)
• Ok, since it looks like the power Elle and Peter are demonstrating needs to be called lightning, do we want to split off the other examples into a different article? If not we can rename it right now. If we do want to split them off, then let's do that expeditiously so we can get this article renamed quickly or perhaps just move Peter and Elle into a new article named Lightning. (Admin 19:02, 13 November 2007 (EST))
  • I'd opt for a new article named lightning. It'll mean fixing more links, but it still feels wrong to call the agent's power "lightning".--Hardvice (talk) 19:10, 13 November 2007 (EST)
    • I agree. The question is whether the other two examples will likely remain electromagnetism for now or if they'll be changing, too. Since what to call the other two examples is much more subjective, I think we're better off just splitting Elle and Peter into a Lightning article as well. Then we can deal with the other two separately since it may take more time to agree on a name (or names) for their abilities. (Admin 19:23, 13 November 2007 (EST))
• I agree 100%. --Hero!^(talk)_(contribs) 20:18, 13 November 2007 (EST)
  • I personally think that the Agent should be under Lightning while the Patient should be seperate. For the agent, it's PURELY speculative that it's magnetism that makes him rise, he may have some other power or the lightning may have some other force that lifts him. For the patient, Mohinder explicitly said that his power was absorption, while the writers explicitly said Elle's was generation, so they're clearly different.--Riddler 15:05, 16 November 2007 (EST)
    • The thing is, the Agent must have a single power that accounts for all of his abilities, and Electromagnetism accomplishes that. The producers have said that with two exceptions (Peter and Sylar, who both absorb/steal powers from others), everyone special person in the show has just one power. --Ted C 15:45, 16 November 2007 (EST)
      • And it is entirely speculative to say it's magnetism that makes him rise. --Riddler 16:22, 16 November 2007 (EST)
        • We're willing to entertain suggestions for other single powers that would encompass both aspects, of course. Unless you'd rather settle for "Agent's power". <sarcasm>Of course, in the BTE everybody is so in love with, the writers didn't deny that the agent's power was electromagnetism, so it must be true!</sarcasm>.--Hardvice (talk) 17:05, 16 November 2007 (EST)
          • But what about the Haitian, who appears to have two different powers (removing memories and cancelling abilities)? PaulP 11:50, 26 November 2007 (EST)
            • Actually, the Haitian seems to have one power, the ability to interfere with the mental functions of other people; he's just able to use it in different ways. Similarly, Hiro has just one ability: he can bend space-time, but it gives him the ability to do different things -- move through time and/or space -- depending on how he uses it. --Ted C 12:16, 26 November 2007 (EST)
• Remember, in Fallout, Mr. Bennet said, "Everyone else we've met has had only one ability." He hadn't met Hiro, but he'd certainly met the Haitian. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 14:52, 26 November 2007 (EST)
  • Agent's not included, we have 4 powers that give the user multiple tools in one package: Space-time manip = Teleport, time travel, and controlling the speed and flow of time; Telepathy = read thoughts, force others to do what you wish, and generate nightmares; Mental manip = memory erasure and power negation; and TK = move and cut objects without touching them. Great stuff!......and you know, the thought just hit me. Unlikely as it may be, the artists may have decided to give Agent the levitation because he had the electric generation. "They go together in other works , so they probaly do here?" they may have thought.--SacValleyDweller (talk) 18:10, 26 November 2007 (EST)
    • In what other works can someone with electric generation levitate himself?--MiamiVolts (talk) 18:40, 26 November 2007 (EST)
      • You know, it occurs to me that, for all we know, somebody else was levitating the electric agent. PaulP 13:19, 29 November 2007 (EST)
        • As previously stated, the other agents are all busy doing their own thing, and this agent was clearly using the levitation to chase after people.--MiamiVolts (talk) 15:17, 29 November 2007 (EST)

A good solution to the electrical name calling!

How about all of the powers get categorized to one page named "Electrical Abilities" then get sub-catergorized by:

-Electrokinesis (Electrogenisis)
+ Elle
+ Peter(absorbed)

-Electromagnetism
+ Future agent

-Electrical absorption/distrbution
+ Graphic novel-Blackout; patient

i agree that all three examples manipulate/absorb/generate/distribute electricity, but just in different ways--Anthony Gooch 16:37, 13 November 2007 (EST)

• I tend to agree that we're seeing three similar electrical powers. At the very least, the patient's power seems completely different; the agent might just be a more developed version of Elle's. However, at this point I'm convinced we're (hopefully temporarily) stuck with "lightning" for Elle's since they keep calling it that in the show and the comics and the commentary.--Hardvice (talk) 16:40, 13 November 2007 (EST)
• I think this may be the first of a trend. If, like other genetic traits, super powers are slightly different for each individual then classification will start to get crazy. Take for instance Nathan and West's powers of flight. They may end up the same, they can both fly. But there may be subtle differences like speed, propulsion 'type', control, altitudes, etc. Just like you can classify eye color and finger prints but each is unique to an individual. Elle, Patient, and Agent may all have electrical manipulation but each with a specific "twist" of sorts.--Mish 16:46, 13 November 2007 (EST)
  • Thats what I'm trying to say...perfect example: West is more a peter-pan levitation while Nathan is more of a straight edge jet-flight but in the end both are Flight....Elle, Agent, and patient are all the same "Electrical Ability" but with differences, maybe the page could have Limitations, Examples, or Differences for each character.
• my 2 cents on the pros and cons of this approach

+ good umbrella approach to sort discrepancies between the manifestations of electromagnetic abilities and confine them to one page at the same time
- might be too technical/confusing for those of lower IQ that use this site.
- would be a bit strange to have in the Portal and the Golasary
all in all I'm for this approach because the plus outweighs the minuses. I would however substitute "Lightning" for "Electrokinesis (Electrogenisis)" for sake of simplicity.--SacValleyDweller (talk) 20:15, 13 November 2007 (EST)

• See User:Heroe/electromagnetically-based abilities. --Hero!^(talk)_(contribs) 20:16, 13 November 2007 (EST)
  • I like this approach a lot too. Sub-catergorizing sounds like it could set a good precedent for later conflicts. Random guy 23:21, 14 November 2007 (EST)
    • I don't like the idea of subcategorization (we don't do that with any other similar powers, and it opens the door for fan speculation rather than reporting what we know), but I do like the idea of three separate powers. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 23:31, 14 November 2007 (EST)
    • I have to agree with Ryan. The same argument could be made to combine illusion and telepathy (and maybe dream manipulation and mental manipulation), or pyrokinesis and induced radioactivity (and maybe cryokinesis), technopathy and EDT, etc. Implying a stronger connection between similar but distinct powers seems speculative.--Hardvice (talk) 01:20, 15 November 2007 (EST)
• My idea isn't really categorizing powers, it's just comparing and contrasting the three separate abilities with each other. --Hero!^(talk)_(contribs) 22:01, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Split

• I archived the old talk since we've moved on from the debate re: Elle's version of this ability. New topic: should this article be split between the agent and the patient? I think it should be; "electromagnetism" fits the agent, but not the patient, and the patient is the only one we've seen who's able to absorb electricity. We even have a mention of a name for the patient's power in a secondary source: Mark Sable called it "his electrical absorption ability". I suggest we split it into "Electromagnetism" and "Electrical absorption".--Hardvice (talk) 23:40, 14 November 2007 (EST)
  • I agree with the split and the names. Seems very logical and not at all speculative. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 23:47, 14 November 2007 (EST)
  • Before the no doubt pages and pages of shameless wank begin, let's state what we have, in terms of the Naming conventions: "Electromagnetism" is a descriptive name. There are no canon, near-canon, or secondary source names. Any name which someone nominates should be able to explain both aspects of the agent's power (hovering, shooting sparks) without implying he can do things he can't. "Electrical absorption" comes from an interview. As a secondary source, it can only be "trumped" by names from a canon or near-canon source, which we don't have. Any other names we might consider need to come from another secondary source, not be merely descriptive names. Also, of course, if anyone can come up with a good reason to keep these on the same page, do so. Now, let pandemonium begin!--Hardvice (talk) 00:44, 15 November 2007 (EST)
    • I agree. Both suggested names look good to me and follow the guidelines. (Admin 01:01, 15 November 2007 (EST))
      • I agree too. I've alwaysthought the patient's ability was different from the agent's. --Hero!^(talk)_(contribs) 11:08, 15 November 2007 (EST)
• Isn't it assumptive and speculative, to split these two apart, solely because they have shown the patient absorbing electricty? Just because the other electro-heads haven't been shown to absorb any electricity, doesn't preclude them from that aspect of it. Electromagnetism is a good, generic term that everyone understands, that labels all who wear it with a clearly understandable power. For me, I just think it is too speculative, based on little evidence, to warrant splitting this power yet. We have simply seen different aspects of this power utilized in a couple of different ways. --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 11/15/2007 11:38 (EST)
  • Splitting a power is less speculative than claiming that two people possess the same power. When differences exist in how a power is observed it's safer to categorize them as two separate powers initially (since based on observation they are indeed two different powers) until there is evidence that they're indeed the same power. (Admin 11:45, 15 November 2007 (EST))
    • Right. If we keep them on the same page, we're definitely saying they have the same power. However, if we split them, we're technically not saying that they have different powers. It's a fine line, I know. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 13:19, 15 November 2007 (EST)
• I guess my question at this point, is why does it even matter with this example? In other words, we may very well never see the hospital patient anymore, especially this season. What harm does it do presently, do leave the page as one power focusing on electromagnetism...at least until the patient, or some other new character shows up, and gives us significant examples of this supposed variant of the power? Electromagnetism is a general term that does cover all the people who have manifested some form of electrical control....and right now, there are no active characters in any environment, that are displaying distinct and clear variations with this power. Wouldn't a simple note in regards to the hospital patient, on the Electromagnetism page, stating that he is the only person to manifest an absorbtion aspect of electromagnetism sufficient? --HiroDynoSlayer (talk) 11/15/2007 13:26 (EST)
  • I could ask the same question about what the harm is in splitting them, and putting a see also to the other electric-related powers. But I do see harm in keeping them on the same page, since it would be a possibly incorrect assumption that there is a magnetic component to the patient's ability. He didn't levitate, and it would be wrong to keep him on the same page as the agent. I would feel very differnt if Mark Sable or somebody said that they are the same power, just in different stages--but that's not been said anywhere I know of. Just because the patient might not be seen again does not mean we can/should lump him with another character who has a similar power. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 13:34, 15 November 2007 (EST)
    • I agree with splitting this into "electricity absorbtion" (teenage patient) and "electromagnetism" (future agent), as they obviously have different powers, and I like the new subpage listing the sources of power names (it looks like it could be helpful as a reference guide).--MiamiVolts (talk) 17:41, 15 November 2007 (EST)
      • The problem with "electricity absorption" is that "electrical absorption" is a direct quote from a secondary source (Mark Sable used it twice, in fact), and "electricity absorption" isn't. That makes it descriptive, and secondary sources trump descriptive names.--Hardvice (talk) 17:49, 15 November 2007 (EST)
        • Can Ryan confirm it is a direct quote? I mean, it's from an interview he jotted down from a recording, but only Ryan can tell us how clear it was. If Ryan confirms the recording is clear, then I will change my vote.--MiamiVolts (talk) 18:15, 15 November 2007 (EST)
          • I'll check the audio file. Gimme a few minutes. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 18:17, 15 November 2007 (EST)
            • Indeed, Mark Sable called it his "electrical absorption power" once, and Jason Badower called it a "cool electrical absorption thing". -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 18:53, 15 November 2007 (EST)
              • While I think "electricity absorption" sounds better, if we have sources that have called it "electrical absorption" then it's pretty clear that it needs to be named electrical absorption then. (Admin 19:03, 15 November 2007 (EST))
• Shall I go ahead and make the split then? --Hero!^(talk)_(contribs) 21:45, 15 November 2007 (EST)
  • Let's give the vote at least a little more than 4 hours. :) I'd say we could probably go ahead and make the split before Monday's episode if there's consensus. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 21:53, 15 November 2007 (EST)
    • I farmed out electrical absorption here.--SacValleyDweller (talk) 15:02, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Split or Rename

Actually, now that I think of it, the choice really ought to be between renaming it "Electrical absorption" (a name used in a secondary source) instead of "Electromagnetism" (a descriptive name), or splitting it into two articles. If it remains one article, that article needs to be named "electrical absorption" because that name comes from a secondary source while "electromagnetism" does not.--Hardvice (talk) 18:46, 15 November 2007 (EST)

• We pretty much have consensus that they needs to be a split, but I don't see any harm in rewording the consesus call. Still gonna wait and see if Ryan gets the confirming on the name from the audio file, but that's a different issue.--MiamiVolts (talk) 18:51, 15 November 2007 (EST)
  • Jinx. Yep, they each called it "electrical absorption". -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 18:55, 15 November 2007 (EST)
    • Ok, thanks for checking.--MiamiVolts (talk) 20:02, 15 November 2007 (EST)

Consensus Check

Split into "Electrical absorption" and "Electromagnetism"

1. Hardvice (talk) 17:45, 15 November 2007 (EST)
2. Hero!^(talk)_(contribs) 17:48, 15 November 2007 (EST)
3. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 18:17, 15 November 2007 (EST)
4. Random guy 18:18, 15 November 2007 (EST)
5. Admin 19:05, 15 November 2007 (EST) (due to source ranking defined by Help:Sources and Help:Naming conventions)
6. MiamiVolts (talk) 17:47, 15 November 2007 (EST)
7. --Mish(Talk) 20:09, 15 November 2007 (EST)
8. --SacValleyDweller (talk) 22:21, 15 November 2007 (EST) (agreement with the existing arguments for this split)

Rename to "Electrical absorption

Rename to "Electric(al) based abilities"

1. --Anthony Gooch 21:00, 16 November 2007 (EST)

Rename to "Electricity"

1. -Lөvөl 04:26, 19 November 2007 (EST) (looks like I am to late, oh well)

*cough*, *cough*

Okay, according to the Power Naming Conventions, this receives a five because there is apparently no canon, near-canon, secondary, nor common name for this ability. However, according to Peter in Walls, Part 2 (as brought to my attention by Hardvice in the now equally convoluted Lightning talk page) this power is explicitly called (in a level 2, near-canon source) "Lightning." Here's the quote:

"Lightning. That ought to come in handy."

- Peter Petrelli (here)

So, technically this page should be at Lightning (via re-merge?) or at some sort of lightning (electromagnetism) page or something. I hate hassling youse guys, I just thought I'd bring it up.--Tim Thomason 00:57, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Damn it, he is right. I think, I am so horrible at these conventions things. Random guy 01:06, 21 November 2007 (EST)

(sigh) Oy! Elle, both Peters, Agent, and Patient; What a monkey wrench they are in all this.--SacValleyDweller (talk) 01:59, 21 November 2007 (EST)

So when is the page going to be merged? :-) --The Empath 16:56, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Game... set... match. Touche the fullest extent, Tim.--Riddler 17:03, 21 November 2007 (EST)

You seem to mistakenly believe people are somehow opposed to this merger. I think it's possible to distinguish (canon mention of "lightning" by Peter notwithstanding), and we have confirmation from the writers that they are two separate powers, but if you want to merge them under "lightning", then by all means go ahead. In fact, as Tim points out, I'm the one who raised this very point. They will not be merged under anything other than lightning, of course. And the teenage patient's power will need to remain "electrical absorption" because it's a notably different power (as we've seen, Elle can't even absorb her own electricity, let alone outside electricity).--Hardvice (talk) 17:14, 21 November 2007 (EST)

The page would be merged with lightning if it explains the levitation aspect of the power. Since it does not, I don't think it will be merged.--Ice Vision 17:05, 21 November 2007 (EST)

"By means unknown, the Agent is also able to levitate himself using his power." "The Agent is able to levitate himself by using his lighting." "The Agent, unlike Elle and Peter, also seems to be able to levitate."--Riddler 17:08, 21 November 2007 (EST)

I'm fine with that. My only objection is that the two powers are not the same. As Hardvice pointed out, the writers have confirmed that they are two separate powers. Having two different powers on the same page doesn't seem right.--Ice Vision 17:36, 21 November 2007 (EST)

The writers never pointed out they were different powers though. They said that Elle's power had nothing to do with Magnetism. It's speculation that the Agent's ability requires magnetism.- Unless you're talking about the patient, 'cause I'm on the side that his power is different.--Riddler 17:48, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Oh no, an "near cannon source" trumps an interview. This page should be merged with Lightning. As some one said above, "Game...Set...Match". And before you go saying somthing about the levitation, I second that its speculation.--The Empath 21:00, 21 November 2007 (EST)

I'm with Ice Vision on this, that the levitation is definately not part of the lightning power. The Agent either has both lightning and a form of flight, or a seperate power which is best called "electromagnetism", imho. That being said, if we can't agree to call the Agent's ability "electromagnetism", I would be willing to support renaming it to just "Agent's ability".--MiamiVolts (talk) 21:06, 21 November 2007 (EST)

No, as said to me five million times, a "near cannon source trumps a description".--The Empath 21:15, 21 November 2007 (EST)

Except that the person who said "lightning" in Walls was Peter, not the agent himself. And since Peter didn't levitate, it is conceivable that future Peter absorbed "lightning" from someone else who was fleeing the DHS, and the Agent was the one with "electromagnetism". Only the Agent levitated, not Peter. Thus, Peter's description only counts towards his own "use".--MiamiVolts (talk) 21:20, 21 November 2007 (EST)

That's just another speculation case. Never the less it's still called Lightning.--The Empath 21:23, 21 November 2007 (EST)

I agree that future Peter absorbed "lightning" in Walls, but to say it came from the Agent is speculation, as it appears the Agent either has a different power or more than one power due to the levitation.--MiamiVolts (talk) 21:30, 21 November 2007 (EST)

I'm sorry, I didn't really want this issue to be bogged down by the other issue of "electrical manipulation" and re-combining all three pages again (I believe that electrical absorption is a different unnamed ability). The use of "lightning" to make one levitate seems about equal to the use of "telepathy" to mind control and give people nightmares, or the use of "rapid cell regeneration" to have miraculous, healing blood. There is nothing that implies the agent couldn't simply have more experience (although it is admittedly hard to imagine) at his power. The intent of the writers (an important point) seems to indicate that Peter picked up the lightning from the agent (the same way he picked up his enhanced speed, something explicitly stated). It may be vaguely, vaguely, plausible that a future Elle was imprisoned there (although, she was in New York at the time of the explosion...), and was one of the prisoners broken out (Peter would've absorbed a whole slew of powers).

Peter didn't levitate, but neither did the agent half the time. Also, levitating with the super-speed (and his known flight ability) would've been pointless at that point. He likely picked up twenty different powers from the other evolved Humans that day.--Tim Thomason 20:39, 22 November 2007 (EST)

• That's incorrect. The Agent was levitating the WHOLE time until Niki knocked him unconscious. I think it is reasonable to expect that if Peter did absorb this power, Peter would have levitated as well. So my opinion is that you are thinking of Peter's mimicry the wrong way. Imho, to NOT levitate when using the Agent's power would mean that Peter had gained control over the Agent's ability immediately after obtaining it, and I think Peter's experience with Ted's power shows that he has a learning curve with each new ability he gains. Thus, it is more plausible, imho, that he was using a different electrical power from one of the 200+ inmates he had rescued, or someone else he had encountered before.--MiamiVolts (talk) 21:22, 22 November 2007 (EST)
  • Though there were others around him, it would take a fool not to realize that the writers put The Agent in there for Peter to copy his ability. o_O--Riddler 21:28, 22 November 2007 (EST)
    • Who is to say that no one else in the prison or someone else Peter knew before had an electrical ability too? Peter could be accessing that ability when he is thinking of using the lightning similar to the Agent. In addition, the writers have said that Elle's and the Agent's powers are different. So to me, that isn't a foolish thought. It's a response to the new info. the writers have given us in the BTE.--MiamiVolts (talk) 21:37, 22 November 2007 (EST)
      • You're misinformed. The writers NEVER said that Elle and the Agent had different powers. Not ONCE. They said that Elle's power had nothing to do with magnetism, and once again, it is entirely speculative to say that the Agent uses magnetism to levitate. He could be exerting his Lightning in such a way that it lifts him, note that he doesn't levitate ONCE without having electricity coming out of his hands.--Riddler 21:41, 22 November 2007 (EST)
        • True, the writers didn't comment on the Agent's power in that BTE. But it's not speculation to believe that lightning would never lift you in that manner, it's observation! If you will allow the Brennan Mulray example from Mutant X, he could use lightning-like ability to fly in bursts cause it's a very powerful ability, but not to levitate and this was clearly levitation. The name "electromagnetism" is a descriptive name, and there's nothing wrong with having a seperate descriptive name for the Agent's power and disassociating it from future Peter's due to the different effects, imho.--MiamiVolts (talk) 21:51, 22 November 2007 (EST)
          • It's a "Speculative description" which goes against the naming conventions. Even though they didn't mention it against it, they didn't mention anything for it either. There is NO canon, near canon, or secondary source to say it's Magnetism.--Riddler 21:53, 22 November 2007 (EST)
            • But the name was picked before the conventions existed, LOL. And the convention has been that if we can't agree on the descriptive name, to rename it as "Agent's ability", and that's my second choice. It should not be grouped with "lightning" cause it *could* be magnetism, and my opinion is that it is magnetism.--MiamiVolts (talk) 22:02, 22 November 2007 (EST)

The Agent levitates here: [1], [2], [3] (well, more kicked in the air from levitating)

The Agent may be levitating, but he is awfully close to the ground here: [4]

The Agent is standing on the ground here: [5]

So it is false to state that he is levitating "the WHOLE time." Panel 3 shows him using his electricity powers while standing, and it's not much of a stretch (and reasonable) to believe that he was easily capable of doing so. Perhaps one of the other agents made him levitate? With time-warping powers?--Tim Thomason 23:49, 22 November 2007 (EST)

• Which is this "panel 3" you are talking about? [3] shows him on the ground cause Niki has just kicked him there using her "pole dancing" technique, so it doesn't count. In [4] and [5], you can't see his feet. As for the sumo-agent or someone else doing the levitating, it's possible but it appeared in the GN that everyone was doing their own thing.--MiamiVolts (talk) 00:18, 23 November 2007 (EST)

I meant "Page 3," sorry. Well, I'm out. Sorry for the hassle, see ya guys next week.--Tim Thomason 00:21, 23 November 2007 (EST)

• Not trying to call anyone out, but y'all need to chill out a bit. I'm reading some pretty rude statements. Keep in mind what you're arguing about. That being said, I agree that a) it's speculative to assume that the Future Agent uses magnetism in a way to levitate, and b) Peter does call it lightning, and only uses a power similar to Elle in the GN. So I'm for merging.--Bob (talk) 02:45, 23 November 2007 (EST)
  • What do you think of the option #2 of renaming it to the "Agent's ability" since it is obvious it encompasses both levitation and electricity? Or option #3 of deleting it and adding the Agent to both "lightning" and "flight"?--MiamiVolts (talk) 03:07, 23 November 2007 (EST)
    • I'd say merge it with lightning on the premise of "The use of "lightning" to make one levitate seems about equal to the use of "telepathy" to mind control and give people nightmares, or the use of "rapid cell regeneration" to have miraculous, healing blood." -- Lulu (talk)
      • Cause each case needs to be examined individually, and cause a split instead of a merge makes more sense, but since we didn't split the Haitian's ability (we still don't know how his impairing the use of abilities relates to his mind erasing) we might want to not split this one (that's how we ended up with electromagnetism in the first place).--MiamiVolts (talk) 03:35, 23 November 2007 (EST)

Do it like flight

• Do it like flight (or, a better example, how we did Telepathy before Matt started expanding his powers); spitting each person up and explaining how developed they are and what they've demonstrated. With the agent, we can put the misnomer that we don't actually know 100% why he is able to levitate but it may or may not have to do with his lightning ability (unless we've come up with some other explanation) and that we haven't seen this trait in any other person with the lightning ability. -- Lulu (talk)
  • Right, but since they only show this Agent in a gn four years from now, we can't say that the lightning is the main power. It could be that the levitation is.--MiamiVolts (talk) 15:09, 29 November 2007 (EST)

Electricity Manipulation

• See the "lightning" coming from his hands? Yeah thats the same thing Peter is doing there. On a side note, why can't we all agree to merge all three articles under the name of Electricity Manipulation? You wanna know why? Because we have some stubborn ass people here, seriously.--The Empath 21:35, 21 November 2007 (EST)
  • You see Peter flying there? No, so the Agent has a different power. We can't just combine the three as Electricity Manipulation cause the writers clearly stately that the Agent and Elle have different powers, and I'm inclined to believe the teenage patient's power works differently as well.--MiamiVolts (talk) 21:54, 21 November 2007 (EST)
  • Yes, "stubborn people" is why we aren't going to ignore our established rules and go with some made-up umbrella term for at least two, possibly three separate powers, when we have near-canon descriptions for "lightning" and a secondary source name for "electrical absorption". *rolleyes* --Hardvice (talk) 02:13, 22 November 2007 (EST)

On lumping and spliting las pesonas electricos...

On this debacle, here is my 2 cents. I once thought that Lumping Agent, Patient, and Elle's abilities was a good Idea. I now believe that this would have been a bad idea. here are my arguments and evidence
1) Empirical observations of Elle's power and Agents power: Agent levitates and therefore can levitate, Elle does not levitate and therefore WE DON'T KNOW. It is my belief that until we know if she can levitate, the safest approach is to assume that she cannot AND leave her power separate. WHEN she does levitate, the two powers can be assumed to be the same.
2) on any thoughts that Agent has 2 powers: though possible, It hasn't been claimed by entities studying Evolved Humans or shown in the narrative that it happens. The purpose of articles in the Mainspace of our site is to DOCUMENT, not SPECULATE. Therefore, he does not have 2 powers.
3) It is the shortest, simplest, and most logical step that F_Peter absorbed what he described as "lightning" from Agent. Therefore, F_Peter absorbed Electromagnetism while present-day Peter absorbed Elle's "lightning"
4) It is stated In an interview with the writer of the GN that Patient absorbs electricity. We can see that he also releases it. The safest approach is to assume that this is all that his power can do, and therefore we have his power split off.
5) To have multiple powers lumped into one article would be inconsistent with other Power articles and difficult for the simpler folk that use this site to understand.
--SacValleyDweller (talk) 22:29, 22 November 2007 (EST)

• I agree with the above except for #3a (F_Peter absorbed what he described as "lightning" from Agent). I don't think we can say anymore that Peter absorbed the "lightning" from the Agent due to the Agent's power's added levitation effect.--MiamiVolts (talk) 22:42, 22 November 2007 (EST)
  • On the contrary, Miami. Keep in mind that F_Peter and P-D_Peter are not/will not be the same person since November 8th, 2006. What F_peter absorbed and shot out of his hands was new to him. it is a larger streach of the imagination to think that he got that "lightning" from one of the prisoners or an earlier source rather than Agent on count of it's novelty to him.--SacValleyDweller (talk) 22:58, 22 November 2007 (EST)
    • The novelty would be from absorbing but not using the "lightning" power until then. For an example that has not played out, say Peter thinks his mom has some persuasive ability, he may think he is mimicking her power when he is actually mimicking Eden's and his mom's ability could be something else altogether. Peter met Eden but never knew she had an ability.--MiamiVolts (talk) 23:07, 22 November 2007 (EST)
      • Valid points, however, I'll stick to my guns and say it was Agent that F_Peter got his Lightning from. For GP just to be safe though, we could put F_peter in both articles with footnotes in places indicating something to the effect that it is unclear what it is & where he got it.SacValleyDweller (talk) 23:22, 22 November 2007 (EST)

Archive the above mess?

looks like this debackle over the nameing/spliting is over. might we archive the above mess?--SacValleyDweller (talk) 00:38, 28 November 2007 (EST)

• Sure. Would you like to take care of it, or would you like me to do it? -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 00:43, 28 November 2007 (EST)
  • would like to, but don't know how, would you please?--SacValleyDweller (talk) 00:59, 28 November 2007 (EST)
    • Sure but at this point, I'd rather just wait until the end of the month so we can make an even break between November and December. By the way, I put some basic directions for archiving on my user talk page (here's the direct jump), in case that helps. It's for talk:lightning, but the basic guidelines are there. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 06:31, 28 November 2007 (EST)