Gabriel in another reality? Edit

So, I was watching the episode in Season 6 where Sam and Dean are on the set of Supernatural, in an alternate reality, when I noticed something. In one of the scenes where the Angel is shooting at them, a person who looks very much like Gabriel appears for a couple of seconds, ducking out of the way. What do you lot think? 2.24.69.43 15:58, July 6, 2012 (UTC)

Gabriel's powers Edit

Would it be too speculative to put "White Light" under Gabriel's powers? I mean, one can only assume he has the ability to do so. SilverRain (talk) 04:53, November 30, 2012 (UTC)

From my lens, it would be. I mean, we wouldn't put "Electrokinesis" on Lucifer's page, but it's obvious that he has it seeing as Raphael possess it. Or it'd be like putting "Super strength" on Naomi's page -- it just simply doesn't belong. I will argue, however, I'd quite confident Gabriel has it, he just never displayed it. -- ImperiexSeed, 12:01 AM, November 30th 2012
Gotcha. While we're here, should Gabriel's "Superhuman Strength" be "Immense Superhuman Strength" to coincide with his fellow Archangels? SilverRain (talk) 15:08, November 30, 2012 (UTC)
I would say no because "immense" is better suited using in the description of Superhuman Strength such as "Gabriel possesses immense strength". However, based on how his super strength is currently described, the addition of "immense" is unneeded. 107.201.16.199 20:36, November 30, 2012 (UTC)
SilverRain, I honestly don't care how the power of enhanced strength is displayed under character's 'Powers and Abilities' heading. However, lately I've noticed under a vast assortment of characters, users are using "Supernatural strength" or "Immense Supernatural strength. But like I always say, if someone's going to make an edit, we better make sure it's right. For instance, Super strength is an individual possessing strength greater than humanly possible. Immense Super strength would signify that the character possesses Super strength but to an extreme level. As for Supernatural strength, it could easily be equated or consistent with Super strength. -- ImperiexSeed, 5:45 PM, November 30th 2012
I will make this short very short. Chronokinesis by meaning is time manipulation. And at it's base level or standard one is the ability to reverse, slow, stop, or speed up time to various degrees. Like, how Atropos can stop time. But, and this is the quote from Castiel from to Dean on the first Time-Travel and not the mystery spot time-loop. "Time is fluid Dean, it's not easy but we can bend it on occasion." We said bending when is another word for a way of controling, altering, manipulating etc. Yes, nip picking, but ithat is not sepecualtion on what a word means.
So this is my stance, Time-Travel is just one if not the highest form of Chronokinesis. But, not everyone or thing that can manipulate time is able to time travel. Like, I wouldn't list Atropos able to time travel as she has only shown time maniuplation, not the power to maniuplate through it into different times. [[User:Twilight Despair 5|]] ([[The God of Creation]]) (talk) 01:15, March 5, 2013 (UTC)
Yes, they're extensions of each other--but, not the exact same thing. Chrokinesis is the ability to freeze or halt time's cordial. Time Travel is the when something goes through time, whether forwards or backwards. That's the difference. From the wise mind of, -- ImperiexSeed, 9:01 PM, March 4th 2013
Than why doesn't Chronokinesis have it's own page with what can be done under it. And Time Travel with it's own as they are while similar are two separate powers as you say. But, by putting it under Time-Travel you are saying that Time-Travel is the base of Chronokinesis. When it's the opposite. Just Time-Travel has two things that makes it different that Chronokinesis. One, you can travel through it, and two it's a more advanced version of it. What makes it more advance isn't the point. But, kind odd to have, Chronokinesis details on the Time-Travel page when you separate it [[User:Twilight Despair 5|]] ([[The God of Creation]]) (talk) 02:27, March 5, 2013 (UTC)
Yes, it's the base of Chrokinesis. That's why it's conjoined with Time Travel on it's page. I, personally, see no need to separate them. -- ImperiexSeed, 9:49 PM, March 4th 2013
Umm, how is traveling through time the base of maniuplating it? Like, even the first time of time based magic was Gabriel as a Trickster using time-loops. As everytime Dean died it restarted the day for Sam and Dean. (But I will say that it seemed, more like using both powers on them. ) But,  sorry I see it the other way. As if you want to nip pick than Chronokinesis is the base meaning foundation marker of Time-Travel. As its maniupulatin, influencing, moveing, altering etc time." As traveling through is only one form of it, hence why it's called time-travel and not Chronotravelkinesis. 
As per your statement, than by it being on the time-travel page than Chronokinesis is a weaker form of it. When, Time trave is a directly limited power to moving backwarrd or forward in time. So how does that equal influence the time the user is in as in controling it? Inshort, even if you separate them down to two separate powers. Chronokinesis comes as the foundation, as the mainpulation of time, while time travel is moving through but that in some for is controling it. As, you cannot simply just travel through time. You need to manipulate in someway to be able to move through. Now do you see my point?[[User:Twilight Despair 5|]] ([[The God of Creation]]) (talk) 03:09, March 5, 2013 (UTC)
Inshort, by your definitions as I understand it. All those, than can travel through time can maniuplate and that if you cannot travel though it you cannot alter it. But, Atropos only stopped time, never traveled through it. So, I see as the opposite. That those that can maniuplate time, can also travel through it if they are powerful enough like an Archangel or an Angel with Heaven's power. But, if you cannot alter time at all, you cannot travel through. As even weakened due to lack of tributes Chrono could alter measure objects of time as well as travel through it.[[User:Twilight Despair 5|]] ([[The God of Creation]]) (talk) 03:20, March 5, 2013 (UTC)

Loki?Edit

Is Gabriel actually Loki (in the sense that every account of the trickster loki was actually gabriel undercover) or did gabriel replace the trickster loki who already existed? Because if he replaced loki surely one of the gods like Odin or Thor or Baldur would have noticed that Loki looked different or was abnormally more powerful but if he has always been the only Loki how could he have the reputation of Odin's son because obviously odin didnt conceive gabriel? ny thoughts?

Being as Loki was a trickster, he had the ability to shapeshift and warp reality anyway. So he would have just told them he shapeshifted or something.

Loki wasn't Odin's son in mythology; that's something Marvel Comics did to make hero Thor vs. archenemy Loki brothers. I might be basing too much information on a book concerning Norse mythology that might not have been that reliable, but I think that in the mythology, Loki was sworn brothers with Odin himself. In any case, Loki wasn't Odin's son so Gabriel wouldn't have had to claim to be such. He probably wouldn't have shown off his true power as Loki or otherwise the gods would get suspicious and possibly kill him to stop him from being stronger than they were. I think that there was never a real Loki in the first place, that Gabriel simply introduced himself as such to the gods and they accepted him--somewhat: the gods in HotG didn't seem thrilled to see him and, based on mythology about Loki's shenanigans, I can't really blame them. Speaking of myths about Loki, it'd be interesting to find out more about Loki's supposed wife and children and how they turned in Supernatural. Apparently there's a Hel in the books, but it'd be neat if they had her in the show as a nephilim (along with Fenrir and that snake guy whose name I won't even try to write out).--NaiflidG (talk) 10:17, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

I don't know about the Nephilim part, but in the book, Hel asserts herself as a Goddess. I mean the show can make her to be whatever they want, but yeah, she'd be a solid antagonist. RaghavD Born Sinner, the opposite of a Winner 10:41, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

The Migard Snake is called Jormungand and I agree fully. Seeing as Fenrir, Jormungand and Hel are meant to bring the Norse Apocalypse they'd be ideal antagonists. Although seeing as Loki and Odin are dead they'd have to alter a good chunk of it. 

Huh? I thought the fire giant chief, Surt, was meant to trigger ragnorok?

Princepurple (talk) 06:04, December 16, 2013 (UTC)

Stealth/ perception alteration? Edit

Should Gabriels ability to fool the norse gods about his true identity be a power? he was also capeable of porting into the room lucifer was on, with the older Archangel knowing and telekonetically throw him, which could also be due to his stealth ability.

Lucifer may have been mad and preoccupied, but surley he would notice his brother entering the room.

Princepurple (talk) 06:03, December 16, 2013 (UTC)

I suppose we can. FTWinchester (talk) 15:21, December 16, 2013 (UTC)

Nope. How can you even premise that? I never saw that as a particular power but rather a skill. You realize Lucifer's not all-knowing and Gabriel, also an archangel, can hurt his kind with success opposed to, let's say, a cupid and archangel battle. -- ImperiexSeed, 6:46 PM, December 16th 2013

God's greatest messenger? Edit

I have noticed it stated on here a few times that Gabriel was Gods greatest messenger..this is not proven, sure in classic christian mythology, he has that role, but the show has it's own rules and lore and it was never implied or said that Gabriel ever held this posistion, in fact all the archangels positions and traits have been altered, why do people keep filling in the unproven with facts from real life lore?

Princepurple (talk) 03:23, February 19, 2014 (UTC)

While it hasn't been mentioned in the show, he was ascribed as such in the fifth season companion guide, which also is where we get the order between Gabriel and Raphael. -- ImperiexSeed, 10:29 PM, February 18th 2014

Is that the same companion guide that calls Samhain a 'blue eyed demon'?

Princepurple (talk) 03:50, February 19, 2014 (UTC)

Not real sure on that one, but I know that's where we get how the archangels are barred in age and that he was God's greatest messenger. -- ImperiexSeed, 11:17 PM, February 18th 2014

Samhain was called 'blue-eyed demon' in Bobby Singer's Guide to Hunting. I don't know about the companion. I'll check the Essential Supernatural later when I have the time. FTWinchester (talk) 09:55, February 19, 2014 (UTC)

Okay ImperiexSeed, I'll not argue, IF you can inform me of how consistant the companion guide is to the show.

Princepurple (talk) 19:13, February 19, 2014 (UTC)

I'm going really try an not address Samhain being some 'blue-eyed' demon. I'm unaware of the consistency between the books and the show cause I don't own any, but I will say, if it's relative or less, I really wouldn't count them as canon. And, although I agree with FTWinchester that either all is canon or none is, I use them for, like, platforms of things that are otherwise significantly untouched (the placement of order of Gabriel and Raphael). Which I find far less copped compared to other information in the books. -- ImperiexSeed, 6:08 PM, February 19th 2014

It's not the Essential Supernatural. No word at all on Gabriel other than he masqueraded as Loki and Samhain was explicitly described as a 'pagan god' of Halloween on that book. Bah. FTWinchester (talk) 01:28, February 20, 2014 (UTC)

Typo there, agan confused me, can't believe there are some stupid pagans who actually believe samhain was a God rather than a personified event, if there gonna call themselves pagan, they can at least read the myths, but okay, might aswel leave his status as messenger.

Princepurple (talk) 07:50, February 20, 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about the typo. I have lost much of the care I used to have in proofreading since the show degraded in quality. And most of the time I just check for changes; I no longer have the luxury of time to spend here. FTWinchester (talk) 12:03, February 20, 2014 (UTC)

Dude, chill, the lower Quality is not so much a bad thing, alot of other good series never get passed a 7th series that are in the fiction/paranormal sector, this show has done the rounds, sure it's gotten rough, but the writers have helped bring all manner of monsters, angels, gods, spirits and demons ect. to our screens like never attempted before, and have pulled it off well, but the longer anything goes on for, the more the material gets tired and stretched, I can forgive the inconsistencies, it gives us something to speculate on, building bridges in our minds, no different to the writers, I still love the show, dissapoints from time to time, but it is my 2nd favourite TV series ever, I think it's good points massively out balance the bad, It has a dedicated, loyal fanbase and rather than crash and burn, it has done wonders to stay afloat, plus i think despite the problems plot wise, i like the amount of suspicion in the air, I just wish they would come full circle on issues before starting new arcjs off that clash with established lore.

Princepurple (talk) 06:36, February 23, 2014 (UTC)

Gabriel's statues "unknown" instead of "deceased"? Edit

Hey, after the latest episode, wouldn't it make sense to change Gabriel's status to "unknown" instead of leaving "deceased" there? I mean in the Trivia it says that the producers said he is aive and after "Meta Fiction" he COULD really be. I am not an admin and I don't want to edit anything, especially not without asking.

  • Not at all. As much as we love him, he's really deceased. First of all, I thought everyone felt that Gabriel wasn't being portrayed well in this episode, it was just out of character and hence more evidence that he was nothing but an illusion being depicted by Metatron's idea of Gabriel. Second, fooling Lucifer and then hiding for 4 seasons?! Third, the show producers didn't confirm anything. Fourth, Metatron makes it clear enough that Castiel was under an illusion so everything he saw there doesn't confirm anything whatsoever and it's all questionable. Ultimately, unless the producers or the actor really state that he's alive after all, he remains deceased. Winterz (talk) 15:14, April 18, 2014 (UTC)

-And then It turns out you were wrong, and he was confirmed by the show to still be alive. Dang, sucks about you being so smug about it, huh??

It wasn't that he outsmart Lucifer, it's retecon. He was surely dead in Kripke's glorious masterpiece, but if the current writers say he's alive then he's alive. -- ImperiexSeed, 1:19 AM, May 9th 2014

  • I believe Richard Speight Jr. has said in several interviews that when your character 'died' Kripke used to tell you (the actor) whether the character was alive or dead. Richard Speight Jr. apparently said that he was told that Gabe was alive. I can't find the article at the moment, I'll add it if I do, so I'm not 100% sure it's true/reliable.--Grace King (message,talk) 18:14, May 11, 2014 (UTC)

At this point, nothing in the established lore is respected so might as well just change everything we have labored on willy-nilly and it wouldn't matter as much. FTWinchester (talk) 13:22, May 10, 2014 (UTC)

I can't find anything online confirming Gabriel to be alive aside from vague inconclusive tweets. If someone has something substantial, could they throw a link in here? Otherwise, I think Gabriel's status should be reverted to "deceased" or at least "unknown" Ravenfirelight (talk) 22:35, May 29, 2014 (UTC)

Man, you better be defining "inconclusive" rightly. If the descriptions used in the tweets are moot, then I'll change everything back to "deceased" but only if they're really inconclusive. -- ImperiexSeed, 7:18 PM, May 29th 2014

The most I've seen is a vague tweet saying something about not being able to keep a trickster down, though I think that was before Gabriel appeared in "Metafiction" and may simply have referred to that appearance (Which was almost definitely an illusion). I've seen people claim that the producers confirmed it, but I can't find any source for that. In any case, there's nothing I can find ironclad enough to warrant changing his official status to "alive" Ravenfirelight (talk) 00:43, May 30, 2014 (UTC)
He should definitely be classified as deceased, then, if that's all there is concerning the issue. But please give users a chance to comment on this before making the change. -- ImperiexSeed, 8:59 PM, May 29th 2014
Okay I've found a few interviews (not tweets, interviews) fron Richard about it (here and here) hopefully that'll clear it up - Grace, Sovereign, M (message,talk) 18:34, March 9, 2015 (UTC)

Confirmation of Life Edit

Ok to those that state by actor and staff Gabriel is alive, show me a CREDITABLE article or link. I will leave it as it for two days. If nothing is put here or messages to my talk page, I will change it.[[User:Twilight Despair 5|]] ([[The God of Creation]]) (talk) 00:51, April 3, 2016 (UTC)

Request of slight status changeEdit

Change Gabriel's status from "Decreased (?)" (lol) to "Unknown". They mean the same thing, but "Unknown" is more elegant.

He is dead. Lucifer confirmed it and no writer or producer confirmed that Gabriel is alive. SeraphLucifer (talk) 14:13, April 6, 2016 (UTC)SeraphLucifer

Gabriel's not dead, he's surley alive.

Powers Edit

Can someone update Gabriel's powers section, it is still under the presumption that he is alive. Probuscis (talk) 09:46, May 25, 2016 (UTC)

Anyone. Probuscis (talk) 07:16, May 26, 2016 (UTC)

Locked? Edit

Is this page going to be locked for much longer? Kajune (talk) 12:50, June 1, 2016 (UTC)

Well, people keep harrasing the page and changing his status to alive. If you want to change some info, write to TD5, he can edit it. SeraphLucifer (talk) 13:42, June 1, 2016 (UTC)SeraphLucifer

I think the page should be unlocked. Yes some will put in bad information, like he's alive. Which he's not. But others will put in, good information. You, have to take the, good with, the bad. Zane T 69 (talk) 16:54, June 13, 2016 (UTC)

It's sad, really, how many people wish to mess up these pages. Now all four Horsemen are locked too. Shame. :( Kajune (talk) 13:18, June 20, 2016 (UTC)

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.