Talk:Five Years Gone

NBC press release info

I've removed the following text:

" Official from NBC.com: HAVING STOLEN THE SWORD AND TELEPORTED FIVE YEARS INTO THE FUTURE, HIRO AND ANDO BEAR WITNESS TO A GRIM, HARROWING FUTURE FOR THE "HEROES"-- Thrown five years in the future, Hiro and Ando discover that people with extraordinary abilities are not only widely known about -- after the destruction of New York City and the deaths of millions -- but are being registered, imprisoned, hunted and even killed as "terrorists." As the President takes his first step towards a "final solution," the pair get swept up in what could be the "Heroes" final battle and encounter a range of new and darkly familiar faces. If they survive the experience, can they still get back to the present and save the world?"

It would appear to be sourced directly from an NBC release, so there's probably a copyright issue. However, it could well be rewritten and incorporated into the existing text. --Ckatz^chat_spy 20:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Title is actually "String Theory"

Per NBC's schedule the actual title of this epsiode is "String Theory". See also here and here for more sources. The article should be moved to String Theory (Heroes). ChazBeckett 11:36, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Or String Theory (Heroes episode) - but for consistency I'll use the existing convention. -- Chuq (talk) 12:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

The EPK clip link Jasonbres provided in an edit comment at Five Years Gone has "Five Years Gone" in the body of the show (over a shot of NYC from Isaac's studio). Perhaps we should wait until the episode airs before rearranging things? --Ckatz^chat_spy 17:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

The clip is odd, as the download page and title card at the start of the clip both have the title "String Theory", but it's "Five Years Gone" in the body of the clip. Given this discrepency, it's probably best to wait until the episode has actually aired to make any further changes. ChazBeckett 17:38, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

-it IS called five years gone- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlz_UGEFhqw&mode=related&search=

Oops ... sorry for screwing things around guys .. NBC's website must be out of date! -- Chuq (talk) 00:20, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

My Tivo has it labeled as "String Theory" -Ravedave 03:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

As does mine. Coppro 03:14, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

NBC video has it as "String Theory" [1] -Ravedave 06:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Urm, it may well be "labelled" as String Theory, but in the actual episode it says "Five Years Gone" Id say that makes it pretty conclusive the episode is called "Five Years Gone". Jacobshaven3

String Theory was the name of the graphic novel. Five Years Gone is the name of the episode, as seen in the episode. I think we should go by what we see in the episode. GraniteJJ

Timeline Inconsistencies

The future portrayed in this episode is the result of an inconsistent timeline. Claire Bennet is alive and in hiding, having been saved by Peter Petrelli in a previous episode. However, Future Hiro still remembers that he was unable to kill Sylar five years earlier, because Sylar had killed Claire and taken her healing factor. Also, Peter Petrelli, in this future, has a prominent scar across his face, while in previous episodes he is shown using Claire's regenative ability to heal major wounds leaving no trace of injury.

This section is unnecessary, since it's only Future Hiro that remembers the original past. This is most likely because he was in the past when he changed it, and when he went forwards in time it was to a future that was slightly different, just not be enough to notice. However he was still the Same Hiro, so his memories would be the same. Also, its impossible to tell if Peter keeps the scar as a memento, or if exploding could have caused his regenerative power to not work as much as it did. So far they have written the plots so well it would seem unreal to have such a glaring plot hole introduced. Jacobshaven3 10:04, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Stuff like that is completely POV and OR. dposse 12:53, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

One strange thing I did notice was when Suresh was in Isaac's apartment and Parkman keeps asking him what Hiro said. Surely Parkman could've just read Suresh's mind to find that out :P Wafflecop 15:24, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't go overboard and say the show is well plotted. For instance, Hiro seems to believe that Candice and DL are in hiding. Bennett gives the impression that they are. But Candice has had her brain eaten by Sylar since before "Nathan" was elected president. I guess Hiro is really out of the loop. And DL's brain had been eaten at some point, too. Is that a flub or did Hiro really not know Candice had been dead for multiple years? Mykll42 16:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Hiro didn't know DL and Candice had been killed because he didn't know Mr. Bennet was working with the government. When Parkman and Bennett talked in the episode, Bennett said "That's the deal, right? Give you the dangerous ones..." So he gave up DL and Candice to Parkman, who in turn gave them over to Nathan/Sylar. Hiro was completely unaware of Bennett's betrayal.Ghola8

Also, there is no guarantee that Sylar got Candice's power before Nathan was elected. Nathan was likely President before Sylar got to him. Think about it. Sylar has no political savvy. How could he get elected? But if Nathan already had the post, and Sylar got Candice's power, then it would be a different story. Sylar mimics people to get close to Nathan, kills him, takes his power and assumes his identity. Done deal. GraniteJJ 23:37, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I strongly disagree. The fact that Sylar has aquired Claire Bennet's powers is clearly stated, and is necessary to the entire season's continutity; according to future Hiro, Sylar healed after being stabbed in this timeline, and that he had gone back to tell Peter Petrelli to save the cheerleader so that Sylar wouldn't have the power. The fact that Claire is alive, in hiding, in this timeline is patently inconsistent. Mention of these inconsistencies is therefore merited. Bolddeciever 05:24, 20 May 2007 (UTC)bolddeciever 5/19/2007

Fan forum, yes. Heroes wiki, yes. Wikipedia, no - unless it actually becomes an issue in the show. If the characters talk about it in a future episode, or if a commentary on the DVD mentions the goof-up, then we can revisit the issue, but as of right now it is not notable. --Ckatz^chat_spy 06:46, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

But there is no inconsistency. In the original future Syler was the bomb. Hiro tried to stop him but he regenerated, killing everyone. When Hiro went back to the present, he changed it so Sylar could no longer regenerate however it also changed the future in such a way that Peter became the bomb. Very similar outcomes happened, someone with regenerative powers exploded, but it wasn't the same person that did it. There is no inconsistency if you can think of it in context of alternative futures. The future Hiro went back to wasn't the same future he left, no matter how similar it may have seemed. Jacobshaven3 10:37, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

No, the episode is plainly presented as an alternative future that could happen if Sylar had killed Claire, taken her powers, and was not killed by Hiro before blowing up. The fact that Sylar regenerated and that Claire is still alive in the same alternative future timeline is an inconsistency. He can't kill her twice in the same timeline. This makes the main article read rather strange, due to the phrase "There Sylar, under the guise of Nathan, kills her and once again obtains her power in this alternative timeline."
— Loadmaster 14:35, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Read the graphic novel. It's not the same timeline. In the Five Years Gone timeline, Peter is the bomb. In the Syalr-kills-Claire timeline, Sylar is the bomb. They're two different timelines. There is no inconsistency. - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 14:41, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

There are inconsistencies, but just with episodes ocurring after this one. Some examples are that in this episode, DL, Niki, and Hana were alive past the bomb. However, following this episode, Hana dies in the comics and Niki and DL would have died had the bomb gone off. Ophois 16:29, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree with Jacobshaven3. They make it clear they is no inconsistency. I've seen the episode, in it most of the world assumes that Sylar was the bomb. However Peter reveals to Niki in the middle of the episode that he was the bomb, not Sylar (Peter says "It was me, I was the bomb, I killed Micah"). Also,Sylar mentions to Peter how he got blamed but both of them knew the real story. Nathan just lied to the world about who exploded, before been killed by Sylar as a means of protecting his brother —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.223.11.192 (talk) 09:03, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

"the hard part" in the last paragraph.

Can someone rewrite the last paragraph to make it flow better and to include Hiro's "the hard part" quote? It's very important for the next episode, since that quote sets off Hiro's plan to kill Sylar. dposse 17:11, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Exploding Mutant or Bomb

Is the New York explosion a result of a mutant exploding or a mutant exploding a bomb? Pictures suggest a mutant explodes. But if Peter exploded, is he back together because he was able to regenerate after exploding (laughing incredulously)?--Raymm 17:49, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

The Mendez painting of the exploding man seems to indicate that the explosion (or at least the explosive force) emanated from an individual. Ted Sprague was able to detonate a transport van (when he escaped from the FBI) and a research facility (How do you stop an exploding man, Pt 2) without suffering physical damage. Assuming it is Sprague's power that causes the explosion (whether controlled by Ted, Peter, or Sylar), then the individual causing the explosion might be immune from its effects. Further, there has been no mention of a nuclear device except for the FBI's assumption that Sprague had access to Nuclear material due to his high radioactivity. Until we see the explosion, it's all speculation - but the characters seem to assume that a person will cause the explosion as a result of powers. ZZ 18:12, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it's not speculation. Well, not all of it. Right now, we know that Peter absorbs an ability (possibly Ted's) and accidently blows himself up due to his inability to control the power and he survives using Claire's power of healing. That's what we know from the entire first season, especially this episode. dposse 18:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

With respect to dposse, how do we know Peter "accidently blows himself up"?--Raymm 02:33, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

With respect to ZZ, re "the explosion (or at least the explosive force) emanated from an individual" -- I agree the pictures and comments by the characters could be interpreted this way. However, in my view, the picture and comments are equally consistent with a person standing in front of a device exploding. I am still unclear as to whether the New York explosion a result of a mutant exploding or a mutant exploding a bomb. --Raymm 02:37, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

my revert of User:Raymm edits.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Five_Years_Gone&diff=127482863&oldid=127480834

I want to include some of that infomation that the user added, but it obviously violates copyright. We need to be very careful about what we write here. We need a plot summary, not a play-by-play of what happens. If anyone can perhaps include some of the infomation from those edits and merge them within what we already have, instead of going overboard and basically writing the entire script, then please do so. dposse 18:47, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

My apologies and thank you for your thoughtful handling. I'm a wiki-nubee. I'd be grateful for a little more guidance on where I went off the rails, to improve my wiki-skills.--Raymm 02:22, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Sylar powers at the end

I'm pretty sure that at the end in his battle with peter, he uses Ted's powers of radiation, correct me if i'm wrong 66.215.99.135 20:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Although that may be possible, it seems that his hands become like ice. This suggests that he's using "cryokinesis," which would be consistent with the first crime scene that Matt Parkman visited, where a person was "frozen solid." Homologeo 20:43, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Sylar is using cryokinesis. The simulated noise that is made as he uses the ability is the sound of a cold wind. Peter, on the other hand, appears to be using Ted's power. Because, as we've seen, Ted can actually irradiate his own body and become quite hot and flammable. However, Meredith Gordon has only shown manipulation of flames around her body, not as part of her body. GraniteJJ 23:25, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I have your proof. Look at the damn photo for the page. It clearly shows Peter's hands on fire and Gabriel's hands chilling the surrounding air. Common sense is not outlawed on Wikipedia, though many people like to pretend it is. Did you see the episode in HD? It becomes even more clear. Should we write that we're unsure how Gabriel pulled Peter through the door? Are we sure it was phasing? What if he created a wormhole on each side of the door and used that? Can you prove he phased? Also, in regards to Meredith, I seem to recall she generated flame in her hand to demonstrate her power to Claire. --Billywhack 02:21, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Wow. That was a little uncalled for. You're probably right, Billy, but there's no need to attack the other user. And, although I know it seems simple, I'd just go with the "Blue for Ice" "Red for Fire" method of determining powers. 207.12.238.59 13:59, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Bily, look at the picture before you attack others. It shows Peter's hands glowing. Although his hands do become enflamed later, they aren't in the picutre. Meredith created flame, but her body didn't glow the same way Peters did prior to enflaming. However Ted's power does glow, and can create enough heat to enflame. Don't abuse others because of your own beliefs, it goes against Wikipolicy. Jacobshaven3 17:10, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

LOL. Where's the abuse? The picture clearly shows fire and its opposite number. I'd hate to see how you'r act if there really was abuse. Check out Sylar's page. It's been settled there. Billywhack 23:35, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Sylar thinks Peter is dead

I didn't notice any part of the episode suggesting that Sylar (in Nathan-guise) thought that Peter was dead. IIRC, Parkman just calls Sylar/Nathan, and tells him that "[his] brother is holding [them] off". I'm under the impression that Sylar/Nathan knew that Peter was alive, and that Peter may have thought that Sylar was dead (although that's not entirely important). I think Sylar/Nathan took flight not out of surprise, he did so just to get there quickly. ~Cat

Hmm. Actually, i think you're right. Peter thought that Sylar was killed in the blast, not the other way around. Does anyone else wanna weigh in here and tell us if we're mistaken? dposse 22:49, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I didn't get that impression either, I thought Sylar flew off because Parkman asked for reinforcements and (with the Haitian dead) Sylar thought he himself stood the best chance of stopping Peter. --Pentasyllabic 23:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing. 142.150.109.181 00:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC)Cat

The segment with Sylar's supposed assumption about Peter's death has been removed from the article. Homologeo 00:14, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

It's clear from the episode that Peter thought that Sylar was dead. As for Sylar, there's no for-sure way to know whether or not he knew that Peter survived the explosion. In regards to Sylar's flight in front of the crowd of people, a number of reasons could have prompted him to do that. Pentasyllabic may be onto something, for Sylar would indeed be the only one capable of stopping Peter and the others. Likewise, it's quite possible that he was shocked, surprised, and in a hurry (as Cat suggested). We also need to keep in mind that Sylar probably still wanted to absorb Peter's ability, along with all the other abilities that Peter had gathered along the way. Besides, if Sylar was to absorb Peter's abilities, he would definitely have noone to fear - no military might would withstand him. Lastly, flying away as the President of the United States could work to his advantage, for the public's ensuing reaction and disbelief would likely intensify the persecution of individuals with special aiblities. This would work in Sylar's favor, hastening his self-declared "elimination of the competition." Homologeo 00:14, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Wasn't it firmly established that "Nathan's" (who was Sylar the entire time) abilites were unknown to the public? I believe he said so while talking with Mohinder. That's why i replaced the small addition which said that he revealed his superpowered self to the public. dposse 00:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Yep, that works =) I even added "effectively" and "too" to that same segment. Homologeo 00:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I think everyone is ignoring what Matt Parkman says specifically to Nathan/Sylar over the phone. Matt tells Nathan three things:

1. The Haitian is dead.

2. Peter is holding off the police.

3. If Matt does not get reinforcements, Hiro will escape.

And this tells us that:

1. Hiro is now capable of travelling through time.

2. Peter is protecting him from harm.

3. If Matt does not get reinforcements, Hiro will escape to his time where he will be able to kill Sylar.

And I think that is what Sylar fears most. If Hiro escapes to the past and murders him, then everything he has done will be undone. If Sylar lets Hiro escape, then Sylar is a dead man. He was playing it cautious before, because he needed to maintain the ruse. He needed the position of the President in order to fulfill his plans. But, if he is running the risk of losing it all, it was safer for Sylar to fly to Homeland Security and stop Peter and Hiro.GraniteJJ 23:33, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Good point! And, on top of that, getting Hiro's ability would definitely be the cherry on top for Sylar. If this were to happen, he would trully be unstoppable. This may be his only opportunity to eliminate both Hiro and Peter, and to get their powers in the process. Homologeo 07:08, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Convinces me. Good and careful reasoning.--Raymm 02:28, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Removal of production trivia / music

If information about an episode's production (like locations, music, etc.) doesn't belong here, then where does it belong? Should there be meta information episode pages that include things like this? Although this sort of information (locations, source music, set pieces, etc.) is completely useless to the average viewer, it can be extremely useful to industry people. This is a direct question to the people that remove this sort of information from these pages. If you don't think it belongs here, then where? 207.47.100.106 23:14, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

dposse - the WikiProject Heroes (linked from your page) says something about expanding the production notes stuff for the show. How about reverting some of your deletions (like the club and music) back into a "production notes" section for every episode? I'm not going to spend the time to do it since there are people obviously policing these entries, and it would be a waste of my time (again) to try to put useful industry production information on the pages if the editors are just going to strip it out. 207.47.100.106 23:22, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Please see WP:TRIV, WP:N and WP:V. That's why the infomation doesn't belong here. The infomation belongs on a fan-created wiki, like http://heroeswiki.com/Main_Page, not on an encyclopedia. Also, the "expansion of the Production notes" is in reference to Heroes_(TV_series)#Production_notes, which is about the series as a whole. Minor things like what music they used is not notable. dposse 00:06, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

whoa. that picture kicks ass.

I just want to take this time to thank whoever uploaded that kickass picture in the infobox. That's probably the best screenshot that could have been taken for this episode. So, thank you. ^_^ dposse 00:27, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, kudos to that person! OMG! Sylar kills Claire, DL, Nathan and soooo many others. This was probably the best episode so far! Just putting in my two bits. 121.44.204.229 08:06, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Is it Future Hiros sword?

"Mohinder pushes Future Hiro's katana into his hands" Present Hiros katana is in the same room isn't it? It could have been that one. Blkmasta 16.53 GMT, 2nd May 2007

Can't say for sure, but I seem to remember Parkman taking off with Past Hiro's sword and Mohinder grabbing the recently shot Future Hiro's sword and then handing it to Past Hiro (if your head's swimming about now, you're not alone). To make a long story short, what's in the article is what I got out of it as well and unless something pretty compelling comes along to prove otherwise, it should probably stay in. Guse 20:38, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's one of the Hiro's sword. If you wish to change it to make it more neutral, then go ahead. dposse 01:55, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Wouldn't that mean that there are now two katanas? --Raymm 02:46, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but technically there were always two katanas, one in the present and another in the future. Anyway, it doesn't really matter, because, if the article is correct, Hiro has Future Hiro's sword, and Future Hiro would have Present day Hiro's sword. Although it would be cool if Hiro could have two swords... Vic93 20:18, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

article Alternate Future (Heroes)

I strongly oppose this article for many reasons. 1) all the info on this alternate future relates only to Five Years Gone. 2) There can be multiple alternate futures, due to Hiro's time-traveling. 3) The entire article is bits and pieces copy/pasted from other articles ("Niki has a romantic relationship with Peter Petrelli, who has a distinct scar across his face which starts on the right side of his forehead down to his left cheek.[6]") and as such contains no new information. --Pentasyllabic 17:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I've created an AFD for the article, since it seems to be a direct copy of this article with some OR added. Also, it violates WP:PLOT. You can find the AFD discussion here: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Alternate_Future_(Heroes) dposse 19:06, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

The consensus was Delete, and the page was indeed deleted. ZZ 17:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

where's Linderman?

Slightly forum-ish, but does anyone else find it strange that Linderman wasn't even mentioned in this ep, given that he's such a significant behind-the-scenes character? --Pentasyllabic 20:11, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

He was mentioned, briefly. On the news report, they talked about the passing of the Linderman Act. 129.97.231.131 23:21, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

List of Deaths

I believe a list of heroes death's would be interesting. 10 characters are killed before or during this episode. Micah(bomb), D.L.(Sylar), Candice(Sylar), Nathan(Sylar), Ando(Bomb), Hana(Matt), Bennet(Matt), Future Hiro(Matt), Claire(Sylar), Haitian(Mohinder). It would help show that the future is a grim place for evolved humans. User: BioYu-Gi! 4:39 p.m. May 2, 2007

As long as it's obvious during the recap, I see no need Ytoabn 00:03, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Timeline

I believe we need a timeline,see discussion under "Timeline" here: Timeline Discussion --Raymm 02:44, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Powers used by Sylar and Peter

This survey is an attempt to get a consensus on whether or not cryo/pyrokinesis is verifiable for the battle between Sylar and Peter at the end of the episode. Billywhack 22:33, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Survey

Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" or other opinion in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion with "~~~~".

• Support. My vote is for cryo/pyro. Billywhack 22:33, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support. It is fairly obvious that Sylar uses cryogenesis (kinesis is wrong) but I believe that peter just uses Ted Sprague's powers WookMuff 00:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support per official NBC commentary. - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 03:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

• What's the point of this survey? If something isn't verifiable, a survey isn't suddenly going to change this. -- Chuq (talk) 01:07, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I imagine it is because people have used their eyes to verify what has long been a debated power of Sylar's, whilst other people still cling to the fact that sylar doesn't have cryo-related powers and so can't accept that when someones hands turn icy-blue and start putting off fog, that probably means icy! WookMuff 01:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

"Using our eyes" is not a reliable source for this infomation. I asked Billy days ago to please look through plot summaries/reviews written by critics by searching on Google/Google News, but he refused. Unless this infomation can be verified with a Reliable Source, it is speculation and cannot be added to this articdle, or any of the Heroes articles. dposse 02:40, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Wanna know what constitutes a reliable source for a fictional television program? The program. WookMuff 03:04, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Not if the images from the show are vague. It's one thing if, for example, we see Sylar's hands "turn icy-blue" immediately before he actually freezes something. It is something entirely different to see the "icy-blue" colouring without seeing a demonstration of the resulting power, and then assume it must be "power X". As Chuq outlined, it is all about verifiability. --Ckatz^chat_spy 06:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

you forgot the fog. People have been saying that Sylar has cold/ice powers since the second episode, and people have been fighting it. Sure, maybe there was a tiny blizzard that froze that guy before sylar sliced open his skull. Maybe his hands turn icy blue and make fog for some un-cold related reason. A+B therefore C might be frowned on, but 2+2=4 is a classic. WookMuff 07:32, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

The discussion isn't about whether or not Sylar has cryogenic capabilities, or whether or not editors choose to accept it. It is solely about whether or not this particular incident is verifiable as being that particular power. Given that there is no demonstration of the power being used, it would appear to fail the verifiability test. --Ckatz^chat_spy 07:45, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

So, you agree that sylar has some form of ice/cold power, in the future? WookMuff 08:49, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Can you guys please give up on the neologisms, it's cold/ice manipulation or cold/ice generation. Pyrokinesis has long been established in science fiction history, however cryokinesis/ cryogenesis is only used in small circles and is almost completely unheard of out of the circle. There should be no dispute that Sylar's ability to freeze was used. The only dispute I can see is if Peter used Ted's power or Merediths. Jacobshaven3 03:46, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, wasn't my intent. I don't like neologisms unless they are accurate. I think psychokinesis is stupid, as the overwhelming majority of usage is telekinesis. In this instance, I think that -kinesis is wrong, because they aren't just controlling fire/ice, they are creating it also. But yeah, by all means use the accurate terms. Also, I forgot about Meredith's power, so maybe it is her's and not Ted's that Peter displays. WookMuff 05:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm still personally of the opinion it was Ted's, but I can see why people might believe it was Meredith's power used. Sorry if my post sounded rude, btw. It's just I've mentioned it a couple of times now on this and relevant pages and I've noticed it make no effect what so ever. Jacobshaven3 09:32, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm dumbfounded as to why we can't use accurate words simply because they are new? "Toaster" was a new word at one time but you don't see people ranting about that. So was "flashlight" and it's OK now. Where is the measuring stick for when we can use the "real" words and stop with the long-winded kiddie explinations? Isn't current use how words stop being neologisms? I think this is a silly restriction. If people don't know what it means just click the link, that's the beauty of Wikipedia. Padillah 11:59, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with the rule. But its there and must be upheld. Why must you use cryogenesis (a word which literally means creation of low temperatures), when only people with an understanding of the specific ancient greek prefixes and suffixes will understand it. A word loses it's neologism status when it is placed in an official dictionary. By that time it should be known in a variety of groups rather than just a few. Wikipedia is not a place of original thought, and therefore it is not a place to coin new phrases. If you can find the word in a dictionary (not a wiki dictionary either, btw) then it's useable, but as far as I'ma ware the word isn't. Jacobshaven3 13:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

From what I understand this will be a moot point by the end of the episode tonight. I remember reading an interview with Tim Krieg (foisted as support for Mrs. Petrelli's powers but it doesn't) that said We'd get a look at Sylar Cryogenesis powers some in the episode 20 ("Five Years Gone") but a lot in episode 21 (tonight). Padillah 11:55, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

As already said, there's no longer an argument for Sylar's powers, it's Peter's thats causing confusion. :) Jacobshaven3 13:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

The closest thing i could find to a source for what powers are used is this blog-type review, which i'm not sure meets WP:RS requirements. dposse 16:17, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Argh, it's not that useful regardless, although I guess it could be interpreted as meaning pyrokinesis. what does the episode commentary say? Jacobshaven3 17:17, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I would for a reliable source along the lines of the DVD commentary. Anything else is speculation and original research at best. Remember that the main guideline for inclusion is verifiability not accuracy. --Madchester 01:15, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

The official NBC commentary refers to their battle as "fire and ice". I think that counts as reliable sourcing. - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 03:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I can't view it myself (outside the USA), but that looks reliable to me. Fire seems to imply Meredith's power and not Ted's. -- Chuq (talk) 04:09, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

In The Hard Part, Sylar changes water from a hose to snow, thus, cryokinesis (call it -genesis if you want, I'm sticking with kinesis until NBC say otherwise).Blkmasta 16.48 GMT, 8th May 2007

How about getting rid of the neologisms and calling it cold manipulation, since he can manipulate the temperature of the water, and then use his telekinesis to move the frozen water molecules around. Jacobshaven3 16:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Alright, I'm changing it back to cryo/pyro based on NBC and the extreme lack of any evidence to the contrary. Billywhack 00:10, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Before you arbitrarily change it, please provide some proof. Given that the NBC commentary is only accessible in the United States, it would be appropriate to post the text addressing this issue here. Thanks. --Ckatz^chat_spy 00:52, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd also like to see the source. Thanks! Matthew 02:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

SHow me where in the policy it states that if somebody doesn't have access to a website because of where they live, that nullifies reality. Matthew, the link is a couple of lines up. Thanks for your input. Billywhack 02:22, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Verifiability: "'Verifiable' in this context means that any reader should be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source." (emphasis mine), how's that :-)? Matthew 02:24, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Wait, so if somebody lives in a country where they don't allow you to access certain parts of the internet (Iran for example), then it can't be used? That's patently absurd and you're just being argumentative. Billywhack 02:26, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't know, I have no interest in Iran. Sorry mate. Matthew 02:28, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Matthew, you're just arguing for arguing's sake. Ckatz, sorry you can't see it but I could tell you that they specifically called you out by name, said you were wrong and if you can't see it, what's the point? Plus, in the latest graphic novel(http://www.nbc.com/Heroes/novels/downloads/Heroes_novel_032.pdf), Peter is shown using pyro. Billywhack 02:37, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

"Shown" isn't good enough. WP:NOR. Matthew 02:40, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

What are you talking about? It's not original research. It's on the official commentary and an example of him having and using the power is given there. You now have 2 official sources that future Peter not only has the power, but is using it in this specific instance. And yes, it's completely obvious that you are misusing official policy to try to support your argument because you have no basis in fact. Billywhack 02:45, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Billywhack, I asked you to put up the text as a courtesy to the many people who can't access the feed. Why you see this as some sort of challenge, and why you feel the need to be so aggressive with anyone who dares to question you is beyond me. Personally, I'd like to know what the source says, and if it pertains to this matter. I'd also like to see that source properly referenced and cited, so that this debate won't surface again. Remember, this discussion is *not* about whether Sylar has the ability to freeze things, or whether Peter can generate fire. It is *only* about whether or not we can conclusively prove that the fight at the end of "Five Years Gone" involves those specific powers. You could end this right now by supplying that proof, and I can't understand why you refuse to do so. --Ckatz^chat_spy 03:25, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict)It's audio commentary. I'm sorry that you can't hear it, but NBC's official website the the best secondary source we're going to get. - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 03:32, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm certainly not questioning NBC as a source. However, given that editors here have apparently heard the commentary, and given that this issue is contentious, and given that many, many people can't access it, I think it's fair to ask that someone takes a few seconds to post the few sentences that support the claim. It would also help to resolve other issues, such as what sort of terminology the show's producers use for the powers. --Ckatz^chat_spy 03:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok. Fair enough. We considering it settled as of meow? Billywhack 04:09, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Transcript of commentary

(edit conflict) This video commentary consists of Jack Coleman, Sendhil Ramamurthy, and Greg Grunberg discussing the episode. The left side of the screen shows the episode, the right side shows the commentators sitting in chairs.

...[Several minutes of dialog. Transcript begins when Sylar drops the "Nathan" illusion.]

• Coleman:This is fantastic!
• Ramamurthy: This is awesome!
• Grunberg: Here we go.
• All: Yeah!
• Coleman: It's just ... every scene, it get better!
• Grunberg: It does get better.
• Coleman: Yeah....Pete?! Wow, that's the first time I've ever heard ... no, no ... I guess Nathan calls him that.
• Grunberg: Now at some point, wouldn't I see Sylar and go, [turns head] "Wait a minute..." Yeah, you know? Certain characters get left behind, sort of, when that story happens.
• [Sylar and Peter "power up"]
• Grunberg: How great is this?
• Coleman: This is great.
• Grunberg: This is un-- wow ... oh!
• Coleman: Ice... fire and ice. Right here. [laughs]
• Ramamurthy: And I had Dennis, the grip, pounding on the other side of the door, and i was trying to keep it shut.
• [Suresh is holding the door closed as the lights flash behind it.]

...[Commentary continues]

The commentary is much longer, but that's the relevant part - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 04:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

The point shouldn't be what kinds of powers each emits should be listed, but whether that bit should even be listed as all. We're dealing with an encyclopedic entry regarding an episode of a television show. These shouldn't be play-by-play analyses of each episode. Windmillninja 04:37, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Second Source

After extensive searching I finally found another source. The relevant part is as follows:

Was there anything that was written in the script that was too grandiose to make it to the screen?

Nope. Ground Zero. Homeland Security. Nathan Flying. Fire. Ice. Peter stopping time. Even a packed strip club. The whole can of worms were in there…

Now is this settled? - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 04:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Plot Hole?

Yes, there are several opportunities for plot holes caused by time travel, etc.; but this one seems rather glaring. How did Hiro and Ando learn that "Save the Cheerleader, Save the World" succeeded? I thought they were left with the impression that the future was unchangeable after they arrived "too late" at the scene of the homecoming crime. --68.46.120.170 02:22, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a forum for discussing Heroes. Please find somewhere else to discuss your ideas. dposse 12:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I'm not trying to start a large discussion or a lengthy thread on temporal mechanics -- as I had hoped to make clear with the first sentence of my previous paragraph. I was simply wondering if this was a genuine contradiction, or something that I had simply missed in one of the previous episodes. I was hoping that somebody well-versed in Heroes (the type of person that would seem to be common on Wikipedia) would be able to provide a clarification. Forgive me if this would require too much effort to answer. --68.46.120.170 04:50, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a encyclopedia, not a forum. This talk page is for discussing how to create a better article, nothing more. I suggest that you check out http://www.9thwonders.com/boards/. The people over there are fanatics, and should be able to answer any question you have. dposse 12:04, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Fan is short for fanatic dude, so anyone who watches the show would be a 'fanatic' by your use of the word.

Don't delete

Please don't delete this article. I've seen the whole first season & half of the 2^nd season & this is my 2^nd favourite episode (just behind How to Stop an Exploding Man). Series premiere (remake) (talk) 08:45, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Is it possible to link events in this episode to S2, S3 and S4.

SPOILERS...

Sylar is Nathan, using an ability to change his form.

Claire neatly lists out all the places she has been in S2, S3, and S4.

Is it possible that this may still happen in like Season 6 (If there is one?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.23.141.235 (talk) 23:06, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Five Years Gone. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070626120429/http://goldderbyforums.latimes.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/1106078764/m/53610293 to http://goldderbyforums.latimes.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/1106078764/m/53610293

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:08, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Five Years Gone. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070518065506/http://www.nbc.com/Heroes/video/commentary_120.shtml to http://www.nbc.com/Heroes/video/commentary_120.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:47, 1 October 2017 (UTC)