Talk:List of Lost characters/Archive 10

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Disclaimer

Disclaimer: I do not know what happened, but when I copied and pasted the text from the original talk page, everything was moved around a bit, so now there are awkward paragraph breaks and markup. Sorry, –thedemonhog talk • edits 14:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Philosophers

RE this edit[1], shall we put everyone's namesake on this page or leave it at Lost (TV series)? OrangeDog (talk • edits) 15:46, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

In the long run, we should. –thedemonhog talk • edits 16:52, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Granted we have a source for it. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 17:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Why doesn't Charles Widmore have his own article?

Keamy has got his own article for God's sake, but Widmore doesn't? We know enough about Widmore to give him his own article now. Probably enough for Frank too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.157.7.195 (talk) 21:20, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

I concur that Frank Lapidus should get an article. Be bold and start one! Schoop (talk) 16:58, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I created the article for Frank Lapidus an hour ago. Hope its good enough to keep. Ross Rhodes (T C) ^Sign! 19:34, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

The article you created is a blatant copyright violation, and is certainly not allowed on Wikipedia. Please, in the future, if you were to begin an article, do not completely copy and paste information from the corresponding article on Lostpedia. -- Wikipedical (talk) 04:43, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

From the Variable, we know more than enough information about Widmore for him to have his own article. Is someone going to make an article for him? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.157.7.195 (talk) 22:59, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I'll probably do it tommorow. Or has it already been done.--Spongefrog (talk) 21:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

No it hasn't been done. Please make one. I don't know how to, so please do it!-Dr. Whiskers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Whiskers (talk • contribs) 22:31, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I've done it. If you don't read this D.r whiskers, ill leave a message on your talk. --Spongefrog (talk) 19:42, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Gault

Boldly added a little entry for him (I'm quite a fan of Grant Bowler, so I was surprised/a bit disappointed that there wasn't one already). Hope that's all right. Don't fall asleep ^zzzzzz 18:38, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

My personal opinion is that though he's a likable character, he's simply not notable enough within the entire scope of the show to appear here. I removed him before when cleaning up the page. That being said, I'm not going to remove him outright just because of our difference of opinion - I'd like to hear what others think on his inclusion? Tphi (talk) 18:45, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Why then (as a loosely related point), is there an entry for Alvar Hanso? Like I said in my edit summary, he appeared for 5 seconds without speaking (and without even being physically present in the scene) in one episode. He would seem to me to be a pretty unneeded entry (sure, he's crucial to the story, but so too is, say, Locke's mother). I don't think Gault is any less (or more) notable than, say, Dr. Arzt or Bea Klugh or Stuart Radzinsky. Don't fall asleep ^zzzzzz 18:55, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

I guess Locke's mother is actually on the page. Is there anyone who wasleft off? Don't fall asleep ^zzzzzz 18:57, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Well personally I think several of those characters you name could definitely be contested, but since the page has got *a lot* better of late I'm inclined to leave them be rather than go through the hassle of arguing for deletions case by case. That said I am mindful of letting new characters creep in lest the page becomes too bloated again, which is why I asked for more opinions in this case. Tphi (talk) 20:37, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Charles and Penny Widmore and Frank Lapidus

I think these these have become prominent enough to warrant articles. Certainly Charles. --T smitts (talk) 18:40, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

So write them. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 19:31, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I created Charles Widmore. Frank Lapidus was created but deleted. I don't know about penny. --Spongefrog (talk) 19:40, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Widmore redirect

I tried to create the charles widmore article but it just redirects to this page. I'm sort of half-new so not good with redirects. Please help me!! Just create the page, I'll fill in the information.--Spongefrog (talk) 21:13, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Go here and then click "edit this page" at the top. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 21:28, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll give you a barnstar later.--Spongefrog (talk) 16:40, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Steve

Much of the internets disagree on the fate of Steve, beleving him to still be alive. Just sayin'. Lots42 (talk) 04:37, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, well, especially after tonight I think we have more central people to speculate about regarding who is alive and who not... Tvoz/talk 09:10, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Jacob and the cabin / Is episode counting Original research?

After finding out in "The Incident" that there is some sort of Anti-Jacob and that Locke being "brought back to life" was just this Anti-Jacob possessing him, it seems that it should at least be removed that Jacob lives in the cabin that moves around the island. It's quite obvious that he lives in the Foot Statue and that the resident of the cabin is probably the Anti-Jacob (the only other supernatural being that isn't the smoke monster that could be inhabiting the cabin). Whoever was in the cabin needed help escaping from that cabin (the circle of ash, saying "Help me" to Locke in the first appearance of the cabin), and it's obvious that Jacob didn't need any help escaping from anything as evidenced by his flashbacks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.62.98.171 (talk) 14:18, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Either way, the episode count for either of them should be "1" (or "2" for Jacob if the finale is counted as two one hour episodes). -- Chuq (talk) 14:02, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

It seems that episode counting is WP:Original research. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:40, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Explain that to me. –thedemonhog talk • edits 22:01, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Is "Jacob" credited in the episode? Is there any source writing how many appearances does any character have or it is done by "simple counting the appearances"? Because the second would be improper synthesis, IMHO. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:07, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Jacob is a special case; generally, episode counting has needs no original research. Caesar first appeared in "316"; thus, Caesar had appeared in one episode up to "316". How can that piece of information possibly be disputed? –thedemonhog talk • edits 23:29, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

For example some questions: Why is the number of appearances of Jack different from Kate? I think they are both credited in every episode. I think the numbers are result of original research. Some anonymous editor went and really counted the appearances. In some cases is not also clear if a short flashback of already seen footage can count as an appearance or not. Why Jacob had 1 appearance if never was credited? How can another editor verify the numbers if there is no reference in the literature? -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:58, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Once we decide "if a short flashback of already seen footage can count as an appearance or not", there is nothing debatable about episode counts, as the sources are the episodes themselves. –thedemonhog talk • edits 00:56, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree that unless there is an official source, they are OR - I just mentioned it since the ep count was already next to the characters names and Jacob was marked as being in 4 of them, even though he was only introduced in the 2-part season finale. There is a lot of ambiguity in Lost. Was John Locke actually in any episodes from LaFleur onwards (notwithstanding the scene at the beechcraft or in the crate at the end)? -- Chuq (talk) 01:19, 24 May 2009

I noticed that Jacob's appearances was just set to one. First off, "The Incident" is two episodes, and he appears in both halves so I changed it to two. Anyways, should we count the time when he was voiced by Carlton Cuse as an appearance? It was confirmed in a podcast, so it isn't necessarily OR, but an appearance does imply you can "see" him. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 14:19, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

An anonymous IP just changed two numbers. Which are the correct the old or the new ones? -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:14, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

WP:Reliable sources reads "Articles should rely on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. This means that we only publish the opinions of reliable authors, and not the opinions of Wikipedians who have read and interpreted primary source material for themselves.". I think this answers the question if we can agree of what an appearance means or not. There is a lot of ambiguity in the "appearances" concept. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:33, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I just noticed that "Jacob's Rival" has episode count... 6. Any explanation about that? -- Magioladitis (talk) 17:17, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

He took Locke's form. –thedemonhog talk • edits 22:57, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

So... at least 6 since we don't know whose else form had or hadn't. Moreover, we had to reduce Locke's number which we were sure some time ago about it. This just confirms that these numbers are result of improper synthesis not just trivial calculations. Doesn't it? -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:47, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I am going to say that this was a special case. –thedemonhog talk • edits 00:42, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

At some point are we going to change Cristian's number as well? What about Alex? -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:38, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

"Centric character" as original research.

There is a discussion in Talk:Lost (season 5) in the section called "Is centric character original research?". -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:10, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

The episode count is something similar. Considering the ending from season 5, it becomes speculative.Tintor2 (talk) 19:43, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree. See above. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:51, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't have an issue with the centric episodes being removed from this page, but I'm a bit unsure about all centric characters being OR. For the majority of episodes it's pretty clear that the episode focuses on a character, so I think references are only needed for the ones that are ambiguous or have a bit of debate surrounding them, like "Follow the Leader" and "The Incident". Sanders11 (talk) 20:48, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Some centric episodes are not OR. We have references to interviews, magasines, etc. An effort to gather this information already started for season 5 and I hope it's expanded to all seasons. This doesn't mean that there is always a "centric character" unless the producers have stated that explicitly. Removing this column from this article makes sense. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:02, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I think this might have been a bit extreme, i.e. to remove them all at once from this article, instead of the season articles, without discussing on this page first, but whatever. I have been sidetracked lately and haven't been able to do more "research" for the centric-characters, but it has always been my understanding that for the first three seasons, at least, there is consensus that centric character is the one shown in flashbacks. I see your point about original research, as I have stated previously, but the producers themselves rarely directly state, for example, that "Tabula Rasa" is a Kate episode. I think we need to discuss whether secondary sources are acceptable for centric characters, otherwise there will be very few episodes for which we can state the centric character. Your opinion has always been that one must watch an episode and analyze it, in a way, to determine its centric character (or if there is a centric character). My opinion is that secondary sources that analyze the plot and make verifiable statements about it, are citable in this instance, as long as they agree with each other, as is customary in other articles on fictional subjects. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 21:57, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

I see what Magioladitis is trying to prove, but I agree that his action is extreme and agree with Jackieboy87 in general. Sure, we have one episode in which we are speculating and need to come to some sort of a decision, but the other hundred are not debatable. –thedemonhog talk • edits 23:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, it's not like this. In season 4 finale "Jack, Hurley, Sayid, Sun & Kate" are given as featured characters. Is it or not original research? Anyway, if you think I was a bit hasty you can revert it. One way or another I think we don't need this column on the table here. I believe we are putting pieces together where we shouldn't (WP:SYNTHESIS). It seems that Wikipedia concludes that every single episode of Lost features a specific character and it's our task to determine who. -- Magioladitis (talk) 00:07, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

First, not all episodes have specific characters featured—this is reflected with "Because You Left", etc. Second, it was not Wikipedia who first concluded that episodes have featured characters. –thedemonhog talk • edits 00:21, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Jacob, a frequent visitor?

It states in the article that Jacob has visited the main characters (Jack, Kate, Sawyer, Locke and Sayid) at "multiple points in their lives." This simply is not so. As far as we know he has only visited each of them once. If this error in perception of Jacob is widespread among viewers, it might stem from them remembering Richard Alpert visiting Locke at several points in Locke's life. --Ashrawi (talk) 05:22, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. –thedemonhog talk • edits 05:29, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Season 6 cast sources

I don't get it. Is the information cast of season 6 based on E! online? A site that is about gossip and rumors? I checked the site and the second article is called "Conspiracy corner"! Why can't we wait for the official press release? Wikipedia is not the news, it's an encyclopedia. -- Magioladitis (talk) 10:09, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

The one I just added is just a review of what happened at Comic-Con. If needed, we can probably find other sources, but if it's just a "this is what happened" I don't see how that isn't reliable. I will search for other sources if need be though. --HELLØ ŦHERE 10:17, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Main characters

I'm just wondering what make a character important enough to become a "main character." I think Rose and Bernard should be listed as main characters and Nikki and Paulo should be "minor" characters. Also some characters were only important for one season like Boone Carlyle or Ana Lucia Cortez and i'm not sure they should be listed as a "main character." --74.222.32.67 (talk) 21:18, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

They're identified as 'main characters' by the fact that they are listed as "starring" and not "guest starring" or "co-starring". --HELLØ ŦHERE 21:28, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Merger proposal

Cut a long story short; I don't think Karl is really notable enough in the show to have his own article here, Lord Spongefrog, (I am the Czar of all Russias!) 19:33, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

I very much agree. Why not just merge the article yourself? --HELLØ ŦHERE 19:37, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Okay, just wanted to get a bit consensus first, Lord Spongefrog, (I am the Czar of all Russias!) 19:41, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

 Done There wasn't really much important info to add, just a sentence. If anybody wants to add more, you can find it at the history of Karl (Lost) (you'll have to get round the redirect), Lord Spongefrog, (I am the Czar of all Russias!) 19:49, 22 October 2009 (UTC)