Talk:Jughead (Lost)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Jughead (Lost) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Television: Episode coverage / Lost Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Lost task force (assessed as Low-importance).

The real "Jughead" H-bomb test-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Yankee

It was May 5, 1954 at Bikini Atoll. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.82.131.34 (talk) 03:27, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The only negative (not including mixed) Lost review that I have read since the third season

Here you go, Sceptre. –thedemonhog talk • edits 06:36, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong. You'll find plenty of negative reviews of all these "perpetual mystery without answers" shows like Lost, X-files, etc. Lost will never reveal any major answers, nor reach any major resolution, simply because such moves aren't profitable. Real critics with real understanding of literature don't view such shenanigans highly.

I'd also say this review isn't negative per se, he's just complaining that he's not quite sharp enough to grok the time travel aspect. But I'd say the major strong point of this episode is how it depicts time travel, perfect without contradictions, ala 12 monkeys. If you want crap, look how they're justifying returning all the 6 to the island? wtf? total garbage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.88.0.25 (talk) 20:52, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I meant review by a professional critic. –thedemonhog talk • edits 02:35, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The two redshirts

My edit mentioning the death of the two unamed Oceanic 815 survivors was reverted as reptitive. Did I miss something? Was the deaths mentioned elsewhere in the article? Because I think it is very important and I would like to add it back in. Lots42 (talk) 17:38, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted it because the death of two extras has little to no impact on the plot of this episode. I do not recall why I called it repetitive (but I must have had a reason at the time....). --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 23:06, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, heck. I strongly disagree, I think it's very important to the episode and to the entire series itself. There's only so many redshirts -left-. People keep track of things like that. Like with Star Trek: Voyager, they couldn't go to a starbase and conscript new redshirts when they lost some. Plus, the deaths show the extremes that the opposing characters go to. The very -fact- that the area is land-mined in that time period is important as well. Plus, other Lost episode articles 'record' the deaths of redshirts. In conclusion, I think it's important. Lots42 (talk) 02:06, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation page for term "Jughead"

I don't know how to add a disambiguation page for the term Jughead, which has had many uses. Are only admins capable of adding such elements to an article? Francsois (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:30, 27 April 2009 (UTC).[reply]

There is already a disambig page at Jughead, which lists this article among others. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 18:34, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]