Talk:Unexpected (Heroes)

Peter's power

Does anyone know which power Peter used when he raised his voice at Isaac? ("Don't LIE to me!") The effect might have just been telekinesis, but what was his voice? Michiel 14:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

It could've been just the telekinetic powers he was using. If Peter ever met Eden, there is a possibility that it was her Mind Control ability, but that's only speculation. dposse 15:17, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

You're right. He did meet Eden once, when he visited Mohinder Suresh. So Eden's power has been salvaged, huh. :) Of course, it's all speculation. No one knows for sure but the writers. Michiel 15:26, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Eden's power seems to have been salvaged the "bad" way, too. It appears that Sylar used "the voice" when attacking Mrs. Bennet in the episode "Distractions". An honest quixtar ibo 18:26, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

That's only speculation, though. dposse 19:50, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

i figured the psychic power also does that. i didn't think that sylar was using the voice, since eden's brain was scrambled and not functioning. and i don't know if peter knew eden well enough to use her powers... or who knows how his powers work or even are. he's got clairevoyant dreams and all kinds of jazz. maybe empathic, since he had to feel for claire to use her powers, etc etc.

Regarding Eden's power. Interviews have stated that Sylar does not have Eden's power. And even if Peter has only met Eden once he would still be able to use it, especially since it was only one meeting he had with Sylar in the past. So it is possible Peter acquired it, especally since he was trying to order Isaac to tell the truth, and that Isaac instantly became completely honest. Jacobshaven3 18:22, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Is it worth mentioning that the scene in which peter stops the tasers is a clear reference to the scene in the matrix where Neo stops Agent Smith's bullets? 83.70.254.19 16:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

When Peter stopped the tasers, are we certain that was Sylar's telekenesis? I thought he stopped time to make them fall, like Hiro.

Stopping time wouldn't make them fall. They would pause in the air while time was stopped, then continue their forward movement at full speed when time was restarted. An honest quixtar ibo 18:26, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

hiro pushed the bullet back into the gun, so in addition to localized time manipulation, he can manipulate something's frame of refference without affecting his own, relative to everything else. i have no idea how hiro's powers actually work, either, so we can't say anything conclusively. from watching the episode, time seemed to slow down. because nobody else reacted.

I've changed the wording to say that Peter stopped time. I have the episode downloaded and have watched to confirm this. The clicking of the taser guns slow to a stop, the wire doesn't sag (as it would if he just held on to the darts) and the lights that click on and off on the guns are frozen (in time) when the camera pans around to show them. To me this is very clearly the effect of Peter freezing time. GameCreator 07:14, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

And i reverted it. Since Peter was using telekenesis before the attack, it's logical to say that he still did. There's no evidence to say that he stopped time. dposse 16:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Either address my points or stop editing. Why did the sounds of the guns slow down and stop? Why did the lights stop flashing? Everything was stopped. Not just the darts. And your statement is illogical. Peter is not obligated to keep using the same power just because he used it (earlier that day, actually). Seconds after the attack he flew. So what? GameCreator 17:13, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Please, be civil. Everything was not stopped or slowed down, only the two projectiles that was shot at Peter. Claude was still moving behind him, i believe. That scene is very similar to the one in Homecoming where Sylar threw the metal doors at Peter. It's the same thing as that. It was telekenesis, not stopping time. Also, my argument is logical because he hasn't stopped time once in the show. He was learning to stop objects when he was getting the crap beat outta him by Claude. Why is stopping a metal stick any different than him stopped two projectiles shot at him? dposse 17:44, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Can anyone else chime in on this and what I stated about the sounds and lights? GameCreator 18:58, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Here's your answer: He did not stop time as you can not cite it, we do not presume, we do not use logic nor do we speculate, at all. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 19:03, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

And it's not speculation that he used telekinesis? So far it seems I'm the only one who's offered solid proof for my case (sounds and lights stopping) which directly disprove telekinesis. GameCreator 19:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Just my two cents, but I believe it was time stopping, not telekinesis. Simply because, the darts didn't get pushed away, they stopped, in mid flight, whilst everything else was in slow motion, then dropped to the ground. (Watch the episode again, everything was) Even the electricity coming from them was slowed down to a visible level. It's possible it was telekinesis, but he's have had to hold them there for the amount of time passing, and since we see how quickly the darts hit Claude, it's fair to say that all of this must have at least had time manipulation involved somehow to account for Peters reflexes. Jacobshaven3 18:22, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

If everything slowed down or stopped, not just the tazer darts, that would be time stopping. --Milo H Minderbinder 19:52, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Hiro, in the same episode, uses his powers by manipulating time in a different way than previously seen. There is no proof it wasn't time manipulation. However theres no proof it wasn't telekinesis, so I fixed the article so it's no longer either of those abilities, but neutral. Jacobshaven3 19:56, 21 February 2007 (UTC) (ARGH!!!! how come everytime I forget I get auto unsigned, but so many pages hare covered in unsigned comments!!!)

Great compromise, Jacobshaven3! dposse 21:04, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Why thank you, dposse :) Jacobshaven3 22:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

The lights did stop, the darts and wires stayed straight in the air, and then they dropped out of the air without any momentum left, and Bennett threw his taser away in frustration. Looks to me Peter stopped time and then, having had a moment's breather, used TK to "really" stop the darts. JoPf 23:22, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Good enough for me. When the article is again available to modify, I will update it to reflect that Peter stopped time and then followed it up with telekinesis to have the darts drop. GameCreator 15:59, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Can we say for sure that Hiro reversed time and this caused the bullet to go back into the gun? Is there other evidence in the scene that time reversed? After all, his power affects both time *and* space. Is there any way to know, for sure, that Hiro did not use telekinesis to simply push the bullet back into the chamber? In fact, perhaps he did that and Hope was reacting to the force of the bullet going back into the gun. Does anyone know if the scene clearly shows the gun misfiring vs. this taking place? An honest quixtar ibo 18:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Whatever it was, it was definitely not telekinesis. Not only did the bullet return to the chamber, the explosion (discharge) that followed it out also got smaller and returned as well. GameCreator 20:02, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Good point. Unless the explosion just died out normally, while the bullet was being pushed back. I haven't reviewed the scene. Do you know if the explosion appears to travel backward? An honest quixtar ibo 22:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I just reviewed the scene, and the explosion really rolls back into the gun, but the gun also seems to get knocked back and push Hope's hand away. It definitely was more than just reversing time. Maybe Hiro reversed time just locally and the gun's recoil was messed up due to that? In any case, yes, it definitely was something new. JoPf 23:22, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, Hiro manipulates time and space, whatever that means. Remember that he's teleported himself in the past. I'd say this is related. GameCreator 16:03, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

The debate heremight be worth taking a look at. GameCreator 01:18, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

A fan wiki full of theories and opinions has no weight here. dposse 05:05, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

To the contrary. It proves that other people saw the episode and heard the sounds stopping (meaning you remembered it wrong). GameCreator 19:37, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, you're wrong. It violates WP:OR, WP:NPOV, WP:V, WP:RS, ect. The reason why we do not allow fan wikis and fan sites on wikipedia is because they involve opinion and speculation, and not fact. dposse 19:20, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

The sounds slowing down and stopping and the lights stopping are verifiable right in the episode. That's a fact (it was confirmed by others). (Watch the episode again, if you need to.) And telekinesis can't do that. He stopped time. So what are you arguing? GameCreator 22:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

If it helps put it in perspective, when Hiro stopped time on the subway, the sounds and lights stopped there as well. GameCreator 23:13, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, here's the final word. Sylar used his telekinesis to stop the bullet Mohinder shot at him in "Parasite" in the same fashion Peter used the power in "Unexpected" to stop the tazer. I hope you can see the sense I've brought to light (Or rather Tim Kring has clarified), but I'm trying to stop the arguing and get something done for the WikiProject. I wish that both sides of the argument can see that they used the same power in the same fashin and therefore it was telekinesis and not space/time manipulation. There is more proof supporting because Hiro and Sylar have not "met" yet in present time or this timeline. They were in the same diner, but I mean "met" as in when he "met" Charlie and "met" Zane Taylor. Please get back to me on this either (hopefully) agreeing or disagreeing. Since there is sound proof, I will fill you in on omre specific details as need be. Thank you.--TheChrisParker 18:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Believe me when I say that I would like to see this debate end, and am not trying to draw it out. However, you have not brought any sense to light nor issued a final word. First of all, where did Kring clarify? Can you provide a source? Secondly, Hiro stopped a bullet, which looked like Sylar stopping a bullet, which looked like Peter stopping the tazer. How can you determine, from the way the item is held in mid-air, that it was telekinesis? That is not clear to me at all. Hiro used his power in the same fashion as Sylar did, but that does not mean that they are the same ability.

Until we have something verifiable, such as a source, "sound proof" does not exist. We either await a source, or use vague language to describe the event. One last note? While Peter may not have received the power from Sylar, since Sylar and Hiro have not "met", Peter and Hiro _have_ met while Hiro was using his ability. Peter has _both_. I'm sorry, but I disagree. Unfortunately, this is not closed. :-/ Valaqil 19:30, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Alright, Hiro caused the bullet to travelback into the chamber, causing it to misfire, but did not stop it. Kring did not clarify in an interview, but rather through inference in the show by using the (Apparently) same power with Sylar and Peter in separate episodes. Hiro made the explosion from the muzzle of the gun travel back in time as well, whereas Peter and Sylar did not alter anything other than the projectiles they were stopping in mid-air. I am not drawing this from _how_ something looked, but at the things around it at the time. Hiro was moving forward, but the bullet was moving back. The tazer stopped, but things were still moving. The bullet was in mid-air, Mohinder and Sylar look around and speak. As a side-note, Peter is not aware of Hiro's power. Nathan is, but Peter was still incredibly confused on how Hiro stopped the train when they first met. How could he use emotion to muster a power when he doesn't know that person's power? I agree that he didn't openly know what Sylar's power was in Homecoming, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out what it was and that he indeed had one. I apoligize for the "sound proof" statement, but it's as hard of evidence as we can get, as far as I know. Peter may well have Hiro's power, but he doesn't know what it is or how to use it at this time. --TheChrisParker 20:49, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Those are decent counter-arguments, but the point I was making is that it still remains uncertain. "I am not drawing this from _how_ something looked, but..." As I said before, we need a verifiable source, or an agreement to sweep this under the rug, so to speak. Drawing inferences is OR. Valaqil 02:36, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Attribution states that verifiability (a published source) states that the threshhold for inclusion of information into Wikipedia is verifiability via a published source, not truth. We currently have no published source to conclude which power was used. The commentary does not specify which of the two powers was used. Therefore, the article should simply state that he "froze the tazer", which is the only verifiable quote from the commentary. It should not state either power as the cause of the effect. I can't create a citation template for the commentary tonight (leaving work right now), I will tomorrow if someone needs me to do so. -fmmarianicolon | Talk 03:04, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree 100%. I probably shouldn't've sparked this thing up again. I apologize. I was just trying to make a point. Anyhow, I believe that that is the best, and really, the only thing that we can do to reach a fair compromise and achieve the task of getting a consensus on this page. If you want to stop the bickering, please cooperate. No one will "lose" this arguement, but we will all win by just saying he stopped the tazer in mid air. If you agree, please post a comment saying so under mine and sign it with your name (four ~'s).[P.S., would we then be able to say that Sylar stopped the bullet with TK or would we have to also say he stopped it in mid-air?]--TheChrisParker 03:20, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Sylar doesn't have time/space manipulation, so it would probably be safe to call it TK. ;)

Thanks for the clarification fmmarianicolon, and I think that your suggestion is definitely an acceptable compromise. Following TCP's request, I agree. Valaqil 15:14, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, great. Out of curiousity, how many users do we need to achieve a fair consensus? We have three so far.--TheChrisParker 20:50, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Consensus shouldn't be a vote, it's the side with the "best" argument. I agree with omitting any specific power and merely saying "stopped in mid air". Since any other option would be subjective without a third party source, I'd also say its the only NPOV example too. Jacobshaven3 17:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

None of you answered, or even addressed, the original question: "Is it worth mentioning that the scene in which peter stops the tasers is a clear reference to the scene in the matrix where Neo stops Agent Smith's bullets?" 76.247.106.7 (talk) 18:49, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Peter's specific power.. Unnecessary!!!

Please stop this childish behaviour. There is no verifiable way of telling if it was time manipulation or telekinesis. There was a compromise made which has been replaced and ignored. Please, since neither side can agree, leave the post with no specific ability. This is not saying one side is right over another, it's saying that it doesn't really matter. This is an encyclopaedia. Why does it matter one way or another, if Peter has Hiro's powers, he will use them soon. Do not ignore the wikipedia rules because you disagree with them, unless it is to further the article, and it really isn't. If a page has to be protected because of bickering, it is only making the page worse because it can no longer be edited when necessary. Thankyou. Jacobshaven3 19:25, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. The best thing for us to do is to compromise and not list any specific ability, unless we gain comfirmation from a reliable source. dposse 20:01, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

What's not reliable about watching the episode and hearing the sounds come to a stop and the lights on the guns stop flashing? GameCreator 22:52, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Your interpretation of that event. We can't just take your word on it. Since the power used is disputed, why can't you just accept the compromise of not stating any specific ability? dposse 00:08, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

You don't need to interpret when a sound or lights stop. And you don't need to take my word for it. Watch the episode yourself. It's available on the website. Or belive JoPf, as he/she stated the same thing. And in answer to your question, it's important because this is the first time he stops time by himself. He demonstrates all of his other powers and those are noted. So must this. GameCreator 00:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

If it makes you happier, I'm fine with discussing this with dposse over IM. dposse, I tried emailing you from your user page a day or two back but my email wasn't returned. GameCreator 02:06, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

GameCreator, it seems pretty straightforward. No proof, no power. Without some sort of confirmation - whether it's Peter saying "Wow, I stopped time" or Tim Kring explaining what happened - we're only guessing. The guesses might be accurate, they might not - but the fact we have to debate them should be the clearest indicator that we can't claim to know them. --Ckatz^chat_spy 06:51, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of whether you or anyone else believes you have seen him stop time, no one can tell for definate without someone saying it. I thought he'd stopped time the first time I watched it, but the fact is, someone else, and not just one person, interpretted it differently. Wait for the next few episodes, and we will find out. I don't live in america, so I can't watch the episodes on the internet, but there should be a commentary about the episode on the NBC website, does this explain whether he uses time manipulation or telekinesis? Until a consensus can be reached (consensus does not mean "more people say this") then leave it be. And it's possible dposse doesn't wish to discuss it further, since there is no new information available about it. It would merely involve running in circles. Jacobshaven3 17:41, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I rarely check my email, but I will not read your email, since this issue must be discussed here, between all of us. dposse 19:55, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Can anyone here watch the commentary? What do they say about it there? (It doesn't load any of the commentaries beyond the first part for me.) And dposse, I was going to send you the clip to review it for yourself as you didn't believe me when I said the sounds and lights stopped (but since then it was confirmed by someone else). GameCreator 21:12, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

unfortunately, the videos on nbc are extremely glitchy and is unwatchable on my computer. If the people on the commentary do comfirm if it was telekenesis, time stopping, or niether, then we can add it as a source, unless it's completely unwatchable by everyone, then it becomes unuseable as a reference because no one will be able to verify the infomation. dposse 22:51, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

(Indent reset!) It took four friggin tries, but I was finally able to watch most of the commentary. Sendhil (Mohinder), Zachary (Sylar), and Jeff Loeb do the commentary this episode. Notes in particular to Peter:

• During the scene where HRG finds Claude and Peter: Sendhil, Zachary, and Jeff comment on how cool the night vision is, Jimmy Jean-Louis's (the Haitian) name, that Peter "froze the tazers", and that flying away was so Superman. As a side note, HRG and the Haitian's tazers are flashing different colors when they shoot Claude. As Peter freezes the tazers, the camera eventually swings to an over-the-shoulder view. Where the Haitian is standing, his tazer gun's color is frozen on red.
• During the end scene at Isaac's apartment: Peter knocked back Isaac with "telekinesis" according to Jeff. You can hear Peter's voice change as he tells Isaac "Don't lie to me!". (This could mean that Peter used Brian/Sylar and Eden's powers simultaneously.) It definitely means that Isaac's knockback is not from Eden's power. Jeff also points out a continuity error: The dinosaur painting, which is supposed to be torn up and in Hiro's tube, is on an easel in the apartment while Isaac is trying to aim for Peter. Jeff said he did not notice it until someone pointed it out after the scene was shot.

Hope this info helps clear up some of the questions - fmmarianicolon | Talk 22:40, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh my gosh! Thanks for telling us this! Hopefull, this was stop the disputes as well! ♣Tohru Honda13♣ 23:34, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Great job on finding this, User:fmmarianicolon!!! Now we can finally put this fight to rest. By the way, does "froze the tazers" mean telekenesis or time stopping? Because he could easily freeze the tazers with telekenesis just like Sylar stopped the bullets that Matt/Audrey fired at him earlier in the show. dposse 13:44, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the quote from the commentary was "He froze the tazers". None of the trio specifically stated whether telekinesis or time control was used. Sorry, dposse. - fmmarianicolon | Talk 18:47, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I would just like to point out, as it has been on Peter's talk page, that the voice effect has been denied as a use of Eden's power in an interview: http://www.comicbookresources.com/news/newsitem.cgi?id=9817

More on topic, having watched all of the episodes and commentaries, even searching for interviews, I can find no one explicitly listing which power was used. Perhaps a simple consensus to avoid using words that describe the power, or even using something vague like "froze" resolves the dispute? Valaqil 21:20, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

It was doing that in the first place that started the dispute. I agree with everything you just said, we just have to make sure that the two who are complaining about this agrees also. dposse 13:02, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm done. Do as you wish and thanks for at least considering my arguments. GameCreator 20:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

hana

Why isn't the part with Hana (Wireless) first meeting Ted in his cabin in this article? Brand Eks 19:41, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Because we're not perfect. Be bold and do it yourself. While you're at it, put any other details you can think of in the article as well. Don't go overboard, please. dposse 19:55, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Simone Dead?

It says on the page: "He is shocked when he realizes he accidentally shot Simone twice in the chest when she suddenly enters through the door. Peter cradles Simone in his arms as he and Isaac watch her die."

So Simone is dead? - Migospia

Dead as a donkey. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.49.121.202 (talk • contribs)

Actually, the actress said in an interview that she'll be in two more episodes, this may mean she hangs on for another episode or two, or it could be a vision or similar. [1] Also, in the latest TV guide Ausiello rumor column, he says that she's shot but doesn't die until the March 5 episode. Take that with a grain of salt. But either way, looks like if she's not dead she will be soon enough. --Milo H Minderbinder 19:51, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I bet Peter goes back in time to save her though —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.99.67.135 (talk • contribs)

The actress said in the interview that she's off the show after a couple more appearances. Game over. --Milo H Minderbinder 20:30, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I've just seen the rumour re: when she dies as well. To be accurate, the article shouldn't say "watch her die" as we don't know that for a fact yet. (A similar problem arose regarding Jericho when one of the characters was shot at the end of an episode. The initial reaction was to say "she died" - which had to be reworked when it turned out that she didn't actually die until the subsequent episode.) Perhaps the last line should say something more like, "As Peter cradles Simone in his arms, her hand opens to reveal Isaac's key." --Ckatz^chat_spy 21:11, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

"subject tracking"

I remember Hana saying that they used the radio isotopes to track animals in Africa or something. Isn't there a specific word that people use to describe that? dposse 16:58, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Tag

Trivia is inherently non-encyclopaedic, and one will always be "too much" - per this I re-tagged the article. I believe (and thus will do it) that point one can be integrated with the lead-in. Point two just seems irrelevant and non-notable. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 18:57, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. Re-added both lines. Brand Eks 09:32, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

And please stop deleting the trivia! It's only two lines, both relevant whether you think so or not, and It's not harming anything by being left alone. Brand Eks 21:36, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Trivia section

Please don't revert war over this, get a consensus on the talk page. Both of you are approaching WP:3RR if not already beyond it. --Milo H Minderbinder 21:38, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Got a consensus behind my back in the form of a guideline, also see above section and WP:AVTRIV, notable piece has been merged, another editor removed the second. Also yes the guy has violated 3RR, even though warned not to. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 21:42, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Seeing as you reverted my reverts you should have been warned too, asshat. And why is it that the trivia in this episode's entry is deleted but in the previous episode's entry there's still trivia? Where's this consensus you speak of, and why aren't all of the articles conforming to it? THATS why I was reverting. Because it seemed like only this article was being screwed with. But whatever... goddamned wikinazi. Brand Eks 21:47, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

The guy just won't stop deleting the trivia when there's no good reason to do so. Therefore, as far as I'm concerned it's staying. Brand Eks 21:39, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

As far as you're concerned is irrelevant. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 21:42, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow. Were you born a jerk or did it take years of practice? Brand Eks 21:44, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Revert warring, bad. Name calling, bad. Cut it out already, all of you. "No good reason" is no excuse for violating 3RR, you will get blocked if you violate it. And while the trivia guidelines recommend integrating information where possible, they don't recommend deleting trivia sections wholesale, and don't outright forbid trivia sections. This just needs to be discussed on the talk page and the page needs to be edited per that consensus. --Milo H Minderbinder 21:58, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm done. I just didn't understand why a trivia section was being deleted/integrated on one page and not another in the same series of articles. In my experience it seems like some people just revert for the hell of it, and it pisses me off. Also, since there was no consensus that I could see regarding this it was just one person's opinion versus another and I usually don't back down... sometimes to the point of being blocked. But again, I don't have the energy or patience to keep doing this all day, so fine - Matty boy wins this one. Brand Eks 22:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Just to add my two cents, i agree with Fenton, Matthew. If the trivia can be integrated with the article, then do it. Adding a trivia section is, in my opinion, a last resort in case it's not possible to integrate it into the article. Also, the Trivia in this article gained a little bit of OR with the reference to Earth-616. dposse 22:27, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

• Comic book legend Stan Lee makes a cameo appearance as the Greyhound Lines bus driver that picks up Hiro the morning after the shootout.

Plot cleanup

The section needs to be trimmed down. It should focus on the main plot elements and not a scene-by-scene review of the episode. See WP:NOT#IINFO for official policy against plot summaries. --Madchester 18:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

learn to spell

The last line in the article says files instead of flies and phase instead of phrase. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.131.97.22 (talk) 03:01, 26 February 2007 (UTC).

I'm sorry, but the last i looked, everyone on wikipedia is human, and is not perfect. I'm glad that someone who isn't human and never makes mistakes caught those two extremely large errors. dposse 15:36, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Simone lives?

Considering they showed Simone walking around in the preview for next week's episode, saying in this article that she's dead seems a bit...wrong. Can we agree to change this to something more accurate? --Milo H Minderbinder 13:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

No. We see her hand fall, limp. In that one episode, she die's. We have a source that says that she dies. We shouldn't ruin the ending of this episode with what happens in a future episode. Simone being alive is obviously a surprise plot twist that begins in the next episode (two episodes after she "died"). dposse 21:31, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

We see her hand fall - that doesn't mean she's dead, that's just an assumption on the part of whoever wrote this. That source also says she appears in two more episodes which means we should be cautious about saying she's dead if we're going to see more of her. --Milo H Minderbinder 21:38, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

What i'm saying is that she appears to be dead in that episode. We shouldn't start changing details because of what happens in a future episode. do you understand what im trying to say? Changing details of past episodes because of new developments in future episodes is wrong. It's like what happens with Lost (the tv series on ABC). Just because we know more about a event doesn't change what happened in that event. Does that make sense? dposse 22:45, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't agree that she appears to be dead in that episode - the episode doesn't make it clear either way, so declaring her either dead or alive is just assumption. And that's not based on the promo, there was dispute that she was dead even before that came along - see above. --Milo H Minderbinder 23:02, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I thought you are all for assumptions, Milo? thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 23:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

If that's what you think, your comprehension skills need work. --Milo H Minderbinder 23:14, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Haha.. you're the one starting sentences with conjunctions. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 23:19, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Simone could be dead, possibly Issac is hallucinating and has probaly taking heroin again.Temari of Wind13 01:06, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

She could be dead, she could be alive. We don't know. This article makes an assumption that could turn out to be wrong. --Milo H Minderbinder 13:13, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Has Simone every shown manifestation of power, is it possible for her to be related to a hero or maybe have some power of her own. If we're wrong, it won't be like the end of the world or anything, will it? --Temari of Wind13 18:03, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Simone is indeed dead. First, it appears the "body" that asks about the shooting is just a figment/dream/wahatever, as the real dead body is in the background visible. Second, Kring stated in a TV Guide interview they were killing her off. http://www.heroes-tv.com/modules/news/article-530.html Third, in another interview with Tawny Cypress (Simone) in Guide she even confirmed she was. She hinted she may appear in another way at some point (like in the preview), but physically she's dead. http://www.heroes-tv.com/modules/news/article-664.html --Navex 04:24, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

It's just Candice, a shape-shifter, that impersonated her so Mr. Bennet and Primatech can "clean up the mess." Candice just takes it too far, and that is the "Wanna shoot me again?" thing we saw on the preview. So, as of now, she is dead/in Europe indefinitely.--TheChrisParker 20:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Simone is dead

Can we unlock the page now? Mathiastck 02:41, 11 March 2007 (UTC)