Talk:Lost season 6

Redirect

I see that the page was flipped back to the redirect and that a note was posted linking to a starter page here. I have to say, I knew the page I drew up would be deleted. But I am wondering why exactly. Especially if there is already major work being done on it. Why wait? M. H. L. in S. C. * Talk * Contributions

Well, certain parts of the information wasn't necessarily correct. I mostly did it because, if we have a starter page, with more correct (but still not complete) information, we should not have a page in the mainspace that is not correct. --HELLØ ŦHERE 00:02, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Press Release

Dark UFO lists the press release, which states that Henry Ian Cusick is not main cast but Zu-Zul-Ilana (:P) is in and credits the ABC site...now WHERE it is, I dunno. Can someone else find it and put in that information? Also I bet this means we should have a page on Ilana now...--CF90 (talk) 22:11, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw that too, I was hoping someone would post the link to the actual press release so we can finally source it. --HELLØ ŦHERE 22:15, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

The Substitute Centric Character

Could the centric character of the episode "The Substitute" be Locke or Jacob's Enemy, since Locke was a substitute for Christian? Jal11497 (talk) 14:06, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Only if a reliable source says so first. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 15:25, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Caption for Season 6 poster

One of the people on the poster isn't named in the caption. Counting the people on the poster from the left edge until Kate, there are 11 people but only 10 names. That picture's too small for me to tell, but I'm guessing that the missing character is Walt.

Someone should correct that caption. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.149.127.157 (talk) 00:13, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

I count 26 names and 26 people. --HELLØ ŦHERE 00:16, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

The order of the people is different in the new promo picture; I have fixed it. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 15:20, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Started airing promotional commercials

Should we update the last portion of the production section sense ABC has started to air promotional commercials of the upcoming season? I may be inadvertently thinking of the commercial as promotional, as why am asking here. I will attempt to find reliable sources to validate this, unless ofcourse I'm wrong. :) Calmer Waters 23:50, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

From what I can see, the last few sentences mention that not a new frame will come out? From everything I see, that's still true. --HELLØ ŦHERE 23:55, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good. just wanted to check. Kindly Calmer Waters 00:02, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Special

A special Lost The Begining of the End aired on January 10th. It was a primer for the final series and should be placed in the specials chart. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooly123 (talk • contribs) 16:10, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Unknown Airdate

Should the air date for the first episode be said if The President's speech is going to go over it? Should the first episode air date be pending as of right now? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.198.227.132 (talk) 20:06, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

The White House has confirmed that the speech will not take place on February 2.[1] --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 20:18, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Join WikiProject Lost

For those who have been updating this page, there are lots of other Lost related articles which need condensing, updating, or general editing. Please consider joining Wikipedia:WikiProject Lost. Thanks. -- Wikipedical (talk) 22:26, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Reliable Source?

http://www.tvovermind.com/spoiler-guy/lost-episode-6-09-title-revealed/14472

Someone else can make the changes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shortguy457 (talk • contribs) 03:51, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

They cite "DarkUFO" which isn't reliable. --HELLØ ŦHERE 03:55, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

http://www.abcmedianet.com/primeschedule/ABCGRIDS_Jan25_Feb21.pdf - Confirms episode 604, which is much more reliable source. Shortguy457 (talk) 22:46, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I have just updated the article, using the schedule as a reference. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 23:27, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Found source for 605 - http://www.abcmedianet.com/primeschedule/ABCGRIDS_Feb1_Feb28.pdf - Shortguy457 (talk) 02:39, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

"The Final Chapter"

I checked my television for the upcoming Lost episode, and found "The Final Chapter" starting at 8 o'clock on February 2, 2010. It said that it was a new episode, but I was wondering is it a special or something? I'm not so sure, because this is my first time actually watching Lost on tv. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.237.12.66 (talk) 21:49, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes. They almost always have a special, to chat with producers, actors, etc. and to catch up new viewers, after the series has taken a hiatus. I believe the only time there wasn't a special was after the return from the writer's strike. But to answer your question, yes. --HELLØ ŦHERE 22:23, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

First 4 minutes

There is a promo video that shows the first four minutes [2] of the first episode in "LA X". It's real (look at the official website. I decided to not post in on the main page to avoid spoilers. It starts with the final moments of "The Incident", then shows Jack in the plane, asking a cocktail from Cindy and then talks to Rose. They then experience turbulence, but never crashed, unlike "Pilot, Pt. 1". Jal11497 (talk) 07:10, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, we don't necessarily avoid spoilers here, but we'd have to figure out how to write it and source it properly. I know ABC officially linked it on their site, so that shouldn't be a problem. I also know IGN did an interview with Darlton where they talked about it, how it all came to be that it got out there, and the differences. I'll try to find that interview and I'll post the link here. But I think, if we cite those two things, and write it properly, I don't see why we couldn't add it into the article. It's part of the marketing. Also, if we're going to add that ,we should also mention the Sunset on the Beach event, which I believe they also make mention of in the interview. --HELLØ ŦHERE 18:04, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Here's that article. They mention some amazing things. Especially for those of us who didn't get to Sunset on the Beach. --HELLØ ŦHERE 18:09, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Cusick credited with the main cast in LA X

I can't be the only one who noticed – Henry Ian Cusick was credited with the main cast in the season six premiere, between Nestor Carbonell and Emilie de Ravin. The other former main cast members who appeared in the episode (Elizabeth Mitchell, Dominic Monaghan, and Ian Somerhalder) were all credited in the guest cast. Does this mean Cusick is still a main cast member? It would contradict what this article currently says. Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 01:27, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I actually noticed that too. I thought someone fixed it? Any explanation? --HELLØ ŦHERE 05:05, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Basically, Cusick is contracted as a guest star, but he is still being credited as a regular, as he has not really left. I bet that Mitchell would have been credited in the main cast too, if she was not credited on V. I say that Cusick counts as guest cast, as he has appeared as a guest star everywhere but the on-screen credits. –thedemonhog talk • edits 05:07, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, Iwasn't saying it should necessarily be changed, I'm just saying I thought someone had changed it already. Personally, I feel that we should see how the rest of the season unfolds. Perhaps someone will clarify at some point. --HELLØ ŦHERE 05:30, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Certainly, I wasn't suggesting that the article be changed on the basis of what somebody saw on screen (if you're curious, doing so looks even more ridiculous than you might think). Just that further discussion and/or research be had. Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 07:23, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

We need to change it to reflect that he's a regular. He was listed in episode two (on Hulu) and didn't appear, so he is a regular. This is a similar situation to Nikki/Paulo in season 3 and the freighter people in season 4...but we still list them as main cast. I think Cusick and the rest have/had an episode-specific contract (reports said Davies and Mader were in for 8/16 originally planned episode in season 4) and since it's less than the whole season, ABC doesn't count these people as main cast. But legally, they ARE. Alexisfan07 9 February 2010

Can you provide any reliable sources that back up what you are saying? If not, we have to go with what other reliable sources have said, per the policy on verifiability. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 22:37, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

The on-screen credits aren't proof enough? I don't understand how they were with the Nikki/Paulo in season 3 and Faraday/Miles/Charlotte in season 4 situations. Neither of those had any other sources of main cast status, either. I don't think promotional photos can be trusted, as Kiele and Rodrigo are in the same boat as the freighter people and Cusick in the final season but had promo photos when the rest didn't. Alexisfan07 9 February 2010

The episode itself is enough of a reliable source, but the utter lack of Ian Cusick from any press material, especially when he had been in the main cast for the last three seasons, unlike the freighter folk or Nikki and Paulo, is influencing my opinion. –thedemonhog talk • edits 00:23, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

I was referring to the part where Alexisfan07 said, "I think Cusick and the rest have/had an episode-specific contract (reports said Davies and Mader were in for 8/16 originally planned episode in season 4) and since it's less than the whole season, ABC doesn't count these people as main cast. But legally, they ARE." None of that information can be gleaned from the credits. I asked because if there were sources saying that then the matter would easily be put to rest, however, this is apparently not the case. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 00:37, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Henry Ian Cusick was credited on What Kate Did. He is a regular, even for episodes he doesn't appear in. As such, we have to call him main cast...unless we're gonna go and say Kiele Sanchez, Rodrigo Santoro and Rebecca Mader were guest stars. If you accept them, you have to accept Desmond.--76.208.71.124 (talk) 17:50, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

(outdent) The article looks good now, mentioning that Cusick was not revealed as a main cast member before the season began, but has been credited as one on-screen. Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 02:34, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Why are episode numbers listed under a column with the title "Season #"?

Doesn't this imply that Episode #7 is Season #7 ... ? --82.31.164.172 (talk) 07:15, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Both numbers refer to an episode #, to avoid confusion the first is the number within the current season, the second is the number within the series as a whole. Otherwise, both columns could technically be called "Episode #". --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 14:03, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Episode 3, Locke-centric.

Okay, so here is the deal. People continue to keep changing it and whatever with no basis except like DarkUFO and such. Well, I'm currently listening to Jorge Garcia's new podcast series, "Geronimo Jack's Beard". In it, he and his girlfriend, "SideKick22", discuss the episode which has just aired. Their podcast is mostly recorded months in advance, when they were shooting that particular episode. In the second one, near the end, they begin to discuss how online numerous people were talking about how the centric character episodes are mirroring the first season. SideKick22 then goes on to state how episode one is somewhat multi-centric, episode two is Kate, and episode three will be Locke. I'm not necessarily sure if we can site a podcast, but she states it. Also, since he is a part of the show and doesn't deny or conflict it, I personally think it's correct. Just my thought, opinions, and a possible reference. Thanks for your time. --HELLØ ŦHERE 19:53, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I think that will work as Garcia is the publisher, he is bascially the one who stands behind what she says. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 20:58, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Richard Episode

Hate to be the naysayer, but the article linked two as a source for episode 9 being Richard-centric only says it's his "guess" that episode will be about Richard. That's not confirmation. I am removing Richard from the chart now. 130.127.255.224 (talk) 20:49, 17 February 2010 (UTC) JML

Lighthouse Central Character

The central character of Lighthouse is Jack Shephard. Look it up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.161.112.45 (talk) 18:46, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

To be able to add things like that, we need sources. Not just 'look it up'. --HELLØ ŦHERE 19:37, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Well it's quite obvious that you did look it up, seeing as it's now been changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.161.112.45 (talk) 19:13, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Edit request

{{editsemiprotected}}

The bomb that was detonated on the island was NOT a Hydrogen bomb but rather a thermonuclear bomb ("Atom bomb").

The bomb that was brought to the island and burried was a Hydrogen bomb alright, and Daniel Faraday did say "I'm going to detonate a Hydrogen bomb", but the Hydrogen bomb was too heavy and could not be carried to the Swan. However, the detonator of a hydrogen bomb is a "regular" thermonuclear bomb (it's the only way to produce the pressure and temperature needed for hydrogen fusion). The detonator was taken out of the Hydrogen bomb and was eventually detonated by Juliet.

All three references to "Hydrogen bomb" in this article should be replaced with "thermonuclear bomb".

Amirams (talk) 23:32, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I believe we've had this 'debate' before and I'm pretty sure the reason it's been kept as hydrogen bomb was because that's how the producers and the show itself refers to it. They mention that the hydrogen bomb was detonated, not the core, or an atom bomb or anything else. It couldn't necessarily hurt to have another discussion, but I'm pretty sure it'll stay as what the producers and the show itself call it. --HELLØ ŦHERE 23:38, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree, the producers, ABC and the show itself, as well as several third-party publications, refer to it as a hydrogen bomb, so we must go with what it is commonly known as, not only by the production team, but also by third parties. Interestingly enough, Popular Mechanics even says that the science on Lost is "rock solid" and refers to the device solely as a "hydrogen bomb".[3] --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 02:10, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I was under the impression that Wikipedia is about accuracy, not about "several third-party publications"...

Season 5, episode 16, some 7:20 min. into the episode:

JACK: Is there anything in there about how we were supposed to move a ten-ton bomb across the Island?

SAYID: Actually, it's twenty tons. Fortunately, it seems Faraday never intended freight the device in its entirety.

ELOISE: What?

SAYID: He left detailed instructions on how to remove the plutonium core...and how to detonate it.

JACK: Faraday told me that we needed to wipe out some kind of pocket of energy. Is only part of the bomb going to be enough to do that?

SAYID: The core itself is a thermonuclear weapon. It'll be more than enough.

If you insist on ignoring this and sticking to a common error, please modify the rest of the articles in Wikipedia (e.g. the summary of season 5 that says "modified nuclear bomb") to refer to a Hydrogen bomb. Otherwise please correct the errorneous information in this article.

BTW, the reference in Popular Mechanics to the claim that a Hydrogen bomb was detonated is in the header of the article only (which was probably written by someone who wasn't aware of the details), not in the interview itself. All that's said in the interview is that a Hydrogen bomb was left on the island, which is true.

When Faraday suggested to detonate a bomb, it made sense for him to refer to a Hydrogen bomb, since this is what the audience knew about. The details came in later, when the bomb was actually dismantled.

Amirams (talk) 15:10, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I think you are mistaken, please see the policy on verifiability, which opens with, "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—what counts is whether readers can verify that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true." Also, see the policy on original research, which states "Wikipedia does not publish original research or original thought. This includes unpublished facts, arguments, speculation, and ideas; and any unpublished analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position." These are the core policies of Wikipedia, as such, if no third-party publications say "thermonuclear" then neither should we. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 17:39, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, my fault. I now understand that an actual, authentic script from the series is not "verifiable" but rather my own "original thought" or "unpublished fact" or "speculation", whereas a single word written by an editor (who is probably not a member of the Lost team) in the subtitle of some magazine article is "verifiable". I stand corrected.

But I'm not going to give up. There's a limit to what I'm willing to take and this argument has gone too far. Sorry.

Amirams (talk) 22:53, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Escalation Request

{{editsemiprotected}}

I opened an Edit Request above to correct a factual error in this article. I backed up my request by using a clear, unambiguous actual quote from a conversation that took place in one of the episodes.

To my surprise I was told that this is "not verifiable" and is considered to be a "speculation".

(The request was to replace all occurances of "Hydrogen bomb" with "thermonuclear bomb" and the reasons are given above).

I would like a senior editor to look into this, and if indeed a direct quotation from the series is considered "unverifiable" - I would like to know why. I'm aware that I'm using an "editprotected" template on a semi-protected article, but I don't know of another way to have an editor look into this matter.

My quote was taken from a manuscript of the episode [4] and I verified it by watching a recording of the episode.

By the way, other Wikipedia articles such as the Season 5 summary Lost (season 5) use the correct term (or an equivalent term), it's only this article that has the error.

Amirams (talk) 23:20, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I do agree with your request (and was about to make a similar one before I read it) ; however, "the term thermonuclear refers to the high temperatures required to initiate fusion" (as explained in the page : Nuclear weapon design). So it should accurately be called a "nuclear" bomb. I have to say that I was a little shocked to read in the discussion above that "the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth" -- especially considering that your point is easily verifiable ! And I'm grateful that some people like you are willing to defend the truth, even on such an arguably insignificant matter.

Abolibibelot (talk) 10:13, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I only used the term "Thermonuclear bomb" because this term was used by Sayid to describe the detonator that was taken out of the H-bomb. Nuclear bomb is fine, Hydrogen bomb is not. For some reason this page cannot be edited by "regular" people like me, and those who are fortunate enough to have the power to edit - should exercise special care to be accurate. Amirams (talk) 12:04, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations, you are now one of those fortunate people. The last edit you made was your tenth edit and you can now edit semiprotected pages for yourself. However, you should find reliable sources to back up all the edit you make, then no one can or will argue or disgree with you. Happy editing. Set Sail For The Seven Seas 303° 47' 45" NET 20:15, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Episode 15 info

Thought this might be relevant to put somewhere in the episodes list or similar? Page protection means I can't add it myself.

Episode 15 - no series regulars —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rob691 (talk • contribs) 12:47, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Finale.

Should we add the finale to the episode list? We know when it is, and I don't currently have a source, but I'm about 99% sure someone can find one where it cites that Damon and Carlton will be writing it. And I know there are several which state Jack Bender will be directing it. --HELLØ ŦHERE 05:21, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

This is an interview, but still. --HELLØ ŦHERE 05:28, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed airdate, director, writers—add it in (with citations, of course). We even have confirmation for the writers of the penultimate episode (part 1 of the series finale title). –thedemonhog talk • edits 05:48, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

2009-2010 or 2010?

Okay, I know this a little silly, but a while back there seemed to be a bit of minor edit warring on a topic, so I thought I'd bring it here. In the first paragraph under the "production" section it says that the season/series will end in the "2010 season". I personally have a problem with this. Although shows start and stop production at numerous times and the term 'season' has become skewed within the last decade or so, it's still the "2009-2010 season". The cycle of shows began in 2009 and will end in 2010. It's the same with numerous other shows. Our articles here at Wikipedia even center on beginning year and ending year television seasons (2008–09 United States network television schedule for example). Although the show wasn't on in 2009, it is still part of the 2009 season, which concludes in 2010. --HELLØ ŦHERE 00:31, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

I think you are right, "2009-2010" refers to the standard television season cycle, which is what is being referred to, rather than this particular season of this particular show. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 04:33, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Mr. Eko.

So, the article currently says Adewale wants to come back, but in this article it says that Damon and Carlton have said he isn't coming back. Should we also note this, or just not make note of it at all? --HELLØ ŦHERE 05:50, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Side-note on the article I linked above, it overall has many things (and other news sources like E! and Entertainment Weekly have also noted them) that pertain to the season and the series overall. Things including who will be back, who won't be back, some things they'll be answering, etc. --HELLØ ŦHERE 05:53, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Danielle Rousseau

For the life of me, I can't figure out how to create citations. But this article -- http://ausiellofiles.ew.com/2010/03/10/ask-ausiello-spoilers-good-wife-glee/ -- states that the character of Rousseau will be returning for the final season. Can someone add this information, along with the reference, to the section about returning recurring characters? Danflave (talk) 17:31, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I added her. If you want to learn how to cite sources, check out Help:Footnotes and template:cite. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 18:34, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Edit Request

"TV/Film actor and cartoon voice-over artist Jonathan Mankuta (Depraved, SNL, Marvel Super Hero Squad) also plays one of "The Others" stationed at the temple this season, in an uncredited role. Mankuta is now one of the Others who survived the Temple massacre and are now Locke's "Dark Army"..." —Preceding unsigned comment added by JOKEYSMURF711 (talk • contribs) 21:46, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Can you provide a reliable source that states this information? --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 23:10, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Edit Semi-Protected

Episode 16 is without a title. This can be remedied though. According to tv.com, the name of the episode is The Candidate, which can be found at this link. [5] I'd edit it myself, but I lack the privilege for editing semi-protected articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Teimoshi (talk • contribs) 22:02, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

TV.com relies on user-generated content and is therefore not considered a reliable source for Wikipedia. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 00:31, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Um

A third of the way through the final season, the two time lines will be "solidified into one" and "will be very linear – no more flashbacks, nothing." This is kind of verifiably false, isn't it? I don't imagine the flash-sideways is done, but even if it is, it ran 8 of the 18 episodes. Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 05:07, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Verifiability over truth; however, we could probably place something that states that this apparently hasn't been the case. Calmer Waters 05:24, 24 March 2010 (UTC).

Thinking about it more, the two lines have seem to have converged. Also, It may have been the producers being coy. The lines are very linear now and are the same time line (just different realities or something); except for the recent episode, I don't believe there has really been any flashbacks since the first few episodes of the new season. Calmer Waters 05:30, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Remember that that quote was from Matthew Fox before any of the season was even written. –thedemonhog talk • edits 07:41, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Right, I forgot that that was from before the season. Either way, though, it's verifiably false. If it refers to 1977 vs. 2007, that was over a second into LA X. If it's the flash sideways vs. the prime timeline, that's not been resolved yet. Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 03:56, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Reference 13 is a dead link

Reference 13 leads to a "page not found": http://www.philly.com/2010/02/02/fans-search-on-waikiki-for-answers-to-lost/ 193.126.167.84 (talk) 03:11, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Also, reference 24 is linked to the general News page of the TV Guide website, not the news piece it should be refering to. 193.126.167.84 (talk) 03:29, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Mandabear807, 5 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} Season Finale 2.5 hours, 9 PM to 11:30 PM Source: http://news-briefs.ew.com/2010/05/04/lost-series-finale-will-expand-to-two-and-a-half-hours/

Mandabear807 (talk) 03:38, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Changed 3 hours to 2.5 hours with ref.  Chzz  ►  12:47, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

 Done

Featured character of "The Candidate"

There are different points of view. Some say it's no one, some say it's Jack and Locke, others just Locke. There's no point in having an edit war over it, so let's hash it out here and come up with a compromise. For my money, I'd put it as Jack simply because both the island story and the flashsideways are told more or less from his point of view. To me he's the emotional center of the episode, in spite of other events but if you guys have different opinions, here's the place to sound off. Let's get this thing resolved. SchrutedIt08 (talk) 04:18, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

It is not Locke for the same reason that "House of the Rising Sun" is not Jin, "Hearts and Minds" is not Shannon, "…in Translation" is not Sun, "Abandoned" is not Boone, "The Whole Truth" is not Jin and "D.O.C." is not Jin and to a lesser extent why "The Man Behind the Curtain" is not Roger, "Cabin Fever" is not Emily, "The Lie" is not Frank and "Jughead" is not Faraday. –thedemonhog talk • edits 04:54, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

The writers consider the episode to be Jack and Locke centric. Wired magazine shows a photo of their whiteboard. It says "Jack/Locke," for The Candidate, not just Jack. -- Wikipedical (talk) 01:40, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

That board also said that the centricity of "The Last Recruit" was "roundelay"... –thedemonhog talk • edits 05:57, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

...Which means all/none of the characters. We consider that "none" for our list's sake, which is consistent with the board. I don't understand how we can excuse the writers' on this one. If they consider it a Jack/Locke episode, that's what Wikipedia should reflect. Would you agree that the writers' room is a verifiable source? -- Wikipedical (talk) 21:58, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 85.228.195.19, 12 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}}

"Jacob throws his brother into the source of electromagnetism after being made the island's guardian, turning the Man in Black into the smoke monster."

Please change "turning the Man in Black into" to "thus unleashing". The Man in Black dies and is buried in the episode. What happens is that the smoke monster is unleashed and takes the shape of the Man in Black.

85.228.195.19 (talk) 12:48, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Do we really have any idea as to what the circumstances surrounding the smoke monster and MiB are anymore? It seemed they were the one and the same, but this episode seems to show the contrary. We still don't know exactly what's what so I suggest taking the whole thing out, or writing it exactly as we saw it, ie. MiB is thrown into that "life source" and the smoke monster is shown rushing out. Corn.u.co.pia • Disc.us.sion 13:48, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Done I have editted the page. Hopefully in a satisfactory way to all parties. I wrote that the Monster is shown rushing out. Zell Faze (talk) 20:20, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Espisode summary says "Jacob and the Man in Black are revealed to be twin brothers." Thanks for the spoiler! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.201.91.156 (talk) 02:41, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Mega-main cast for the finale

Sam Anderson, L. Scott Caldwell, Jeremy Davies, Fionnula Flanagan, Maggie Grace, Rebecca Mader, Elizabeth Mitchell, Dominic Monaghan, Ian Somerhalder, and Cynthia Watros, maybe I'm even missing some, were all stuffed in the credited main cast for the finale, despite the fact that Anderson, Caldwell, and Flanagan were never part of it in any season, and the others (except Grace) had all appeared as "special guest stars" earlier this season. Not everyone in the episode was credited as a main player – Neil Hopkins, Dylan Minnette, and a name I didn't recognize were credited as guest stars.

Given that the oddity of Cusick's crediting was included in the article, does any of this bear mentioning? Maybe on The End (Lost) (or maybe nowhere)? Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 04:32, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Aha, I did forget one. Add François Chau to that list. Nosleep (Talk · Contribs) 05:02, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Himanshubahl, 7 June 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} in the section production, second para, second last line. it states. " He also claimed to be the only cast member to knew the ending of the series" this should be changed to " He also claimed to be the only cast member to know the ending of the series" because The English is incorrect. himanshu bahl (talk) 23:28, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Done. Thank you for your contribution to Wikipedia. Intelligentsium 03:09, 8 June 2010 (UTC)