Talk:Others (Lost)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Episode Summaries/Character Synopsizes (Organization)

For organizational purposes the "list of others" section should be for the character itself and not what the character has done in interaction with the castaways. However, the "Encounter" section should be used as a brief over-look at episodes involving the others and their interaction with the castaways. Be sure to organize the two when editing The Others.

Thanks

Also someone should take the time to reorganize Henry Gale. There is to much on the episode and not enough on the character. If someone gets the time please split this sub-article on Henry gale into two articles.

The Other 48 Days

Is it necessary to have such long description of events from this episode on this page? There may well be a lot references to the 'Others' in the coming episodes, so going into so much detail about exact plot events would make the article to long winded. I'm not sure how you all might want it cutting back though, so I'm reluctant to have a go at doing it. Evil Eye 02:23, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

> I agree, about 90% of the info here is already in the season 1/2 summaries. Thus, I think this section should focus on theories of the others etc because the show has said very little so theres not much info anyway

Just my two cents

- Zakaloot

Unless said "theories of the others" are mainstream or confirmed, they are original research and belong on the Lostpedia site.

"Face of the enemy"

In the other 48 days, when the tail section survivors kill some of the Others do you see their faces (of the Others). I live in Ireland and can't see season 2 till next year

Yes, you do see their faces. They look just like ordinary people. Phoenix-forgotten 04:46, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Encyclopedic? Notable?

I'm wondering if "the Others" from Lost really merit their own article (It seems like there's been a cambrian explosion of Lost articles lately). Anyone want to make a case for it? For now I'm just going to move this to [Others (Lost)]. There's at least one other fantasy/scifi usage of the term "Others" with a capital "O" that I know of (the ice-demons of A Song of Ice and Fire), and I'm sure there are more I don't know about somewhere. Phoenix-forgotten 04:51, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

I'd have to agree with you to an extent. What is the point of this article? As it stands, it's a narrative of every encounter the survivors have had with the Others, which I think is overly detailed and doesn't get the point across, which should be "this is what is known about the Others." The best way to go about making this more encyclopedic would be to look at Wikipedia entries of other fictional groups from tv series or movies, such as the entry on Klingons. As opposed to detailing every Star Trek scene ever depicting a Klingon, the article states that Klingons are fictional, and then proceeds to detail what is known about Klingons (as though they are real), using episodes to back up these "facts." Granted a lot more is known about Klingons than the Others, but then once we've crafted a concise encyclopedic article, we can determine if this topic does, in fact, need its own article.

If anything, a first step might be to cut out the fluff, because the descriptions of the encounters with the Others are getting longer and filled with unnecessary story support to set the scene for the encounters. This is expected in an episode guide, but is just diluting the integrity of this article. Really, we should be asking ourselves, "What did this encounter tell us about the Others?" and then write about that. Juliamae 15:11, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I re-looked at this article this afternoon, and my thoughts are that it should be deleted. Almost all of the information included is already in the episode summaries section. And as it is, it's poorly written and bloated. Anyone want to nominate it for AfD? Danflave 17:54, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

No, I don't think the article should be deleted yet. I know it is very bad, but I do feel that as the series progresses a good article could be created on this topic. For now, a major re-write is in order to make it encyclopedic. I'm a bit reluctant to do that right now as I know the article contains spoilers for what I've seen and also is such a huge job I think someone with more detailed knowledge than me is needed to sift through all the stuff there already. Evil Eye 18:13, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Honestly, I think that if this article was rewritten the right way, there wouldn't be enough information, nor a large enough split from the information in the Lost article, to consitute its own article. So putting it up to vote is probably a good idea, although it would be interesting to see it (or an "Others" section on the Lost article) evolve into something more informative. Juliamae 18:22, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

• I'd say the article should remain. While it currently may be a retread of material from the main LOST articles, "The Others" do appear to be a "group character" appearing with increasing regularity and importance to the series, and will likely have much more revealed about them soon— as a new plot-line has kicked off, with Jack apparently planning to "train an army" to go up against them. I agree that the article needs to be trimmed back to basics, to aim for a more "biographic" format, that discusses the Others' characteristics, and known members, as presented on the series. My personal speculation is that they are The Dharma Initiative's researchers (and children) who have "gone native." However, until such a link is revealed or referenced elsewhere, it wouldn't be appropriate to add. If no one else steps up to the plate, I may take a stab at a rewrite. —LeFlyman 18:50, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Even though the's little info on them, The Others are a vital part of the Lost mythos, and while article requires work. It shouldn't be discarded just because some people think there are too many Lost articles.--Gonzalo84 02:35, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

There is no doubt that this page is both unencyclopedic and desperately non-notable. Of the 4 references, 1 is a reference to wikipedia, which is a firm no-no. 2 others are references to the show itself, and finally the fourth reference is a magazine rating them as 98th best villain. That means there is one obscure outside source for this entire article, and that source has nothing to do with the rest of this article. This page fails Notability completely. Delete immediately. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.255.201.211 (talk) 14:32, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Rewrite

This article desperately needs a complete rewrite. The way it is now, this article is a synopsis of the episode synopses we already have. My suggestion is that we divide the article into these sections: Ethan Rom, Mr. Friendly, The tail section experience, and Henry Gale. In each section we describe the events The Others had in those particular story lines. For example, in Ethan Rom, we describe how he kidnapped Claire and Charlie. The lead should describe how they first came to learn about The Others through Danielle. If you have other ideas please post them here. Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 03:13, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Hear, hear! I don't even like making edits to it now in the form it's in, and do so only to remove the most glaring of issues/errors. As with the character bios, it appears that people have a driving need to summarize the episodes again and again. I like the structure you propose, in that it gets away from a chronological focus (Season 1, Season 2), and divides it into chunks related to the Others whom we have "met" so far. --PKtm 03:17, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I took a stab at rewriting the article. However, I would like someone to copyedit it. I think it's a huge step in the right direction, though. Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 02:01, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Henry Gale / Wizard of Oz

Why is there any doubt that Henry Gale's name is a reference to the Wizard of Oz? There's no "may" about it. I don't understand the hostility to including this information. We know that the name of the main character in the Oz books is named Dorothy Gale (her surname is revealed in the third Oz book, "Ozma of Oz"), and we know her closest relative is her Uncle Henry. We also know that off-course hot-air balloons figure prominently in Oz and that the Henry Gale character in Lost claims to have been blown off-course in his balloon. Do the producers have to beat us over the head with it? They don't make mistakes like that. It's obviously intentional, and it's worth including here because it is strong evidence that Gale is lying about something. Whether or not he's truly an Other, he's hiding something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.175.61.17 (talk • contribs) March 2, 2006

Everything that you just said is considered original research, which is strictly forbidden in Wikipedia articles. However, on the March 2 podcast, Damon and Carlton said that this is a reference to The Wizard of Oz. That doesn't necessarily mean that it should be included here, though. We must first decide if this information is encyclopedic. I will add this information to Henry's bio on the character page because we include name orgins for other characters, however I do not think it's noteworthy enough to include everywhere we mention Henry's name. Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 14:36, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but has it been confirmed that he is indeed an Other? I believe he is, but it's just speculation until revealed as truth. Duke Starhopper 19:32, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure why Henry Gale is listed here at all. The way the article is written, it takes the view that he is an Other, and somebody has added a comment that we shouldn't mention that he hasn't been confirmed as an Other...which makes no sense at all. If Gale is kept, it seems to me that the article should be broken into two sections: "Confirmed Others" and "Suspected Others". Thoughts? -- MisterHand 15:54, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

When I rewrote this article, I defined "The Others" as such: Danielle Rousseau coined the term The Others, which the survivors of Flight 815 have adopted to describe anyone on the island they have not previously met. In addition, the episode One of Them built up the idea that Henry is an Other, so unless that is disproven I'd like to keep him here. Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 16:05, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

In that case, why isn't Desmond listed as an Other? ~~

Desmond was never identified as an Other by anyone. An Other is identified by the characters in the show, whether they are correct or not. If they (Danielle, Sayid, Eko) think that this guys is an Other, then it should be assumed for encyclopedic purposes so far as any other fictional topic would be....... until futher notice. ~~

Well, there is no denying that the massive influence of many fictions, scientists, etc that go into an episode of Lost by it's writers. Yes, those Writers that said that the name Henry Gale came right from the Wizard of OZ. I don't see any more relevence to it then, for example to claim that the list given to Michael Dawson by the Other's to bring back Jack, Kate, Sawyer, and Hurley (5 total, including Michael) was anything more then a direct reference to the show that actor Matthew Fox used to be on called Party of Five. Whippletheduck (talk) 03:01, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Zeke

Maybe we should add the fact that Mr Friendly is know as Zeke by some people e.g. sawyer —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.217.89.117 (talk • contribs) March 3, 2006

This information is already on the Characters of Lost page. There's no need for duplicate information. Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 13:15, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Mr. Friendly is the "official" character name. Zeke is just a nickname, like "Shaft" for Eko or "Rambina" for AnaLu--Gonzalo84 02:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

The page explains Sawyer's choice of the name Zeke by saying it is the name of a stereotypical rustic. However, because Wizard of Oz has been referenced many other times in the show I believe that Zeke is a reference to the cowardly lion from the Wizard of Oz. I didn't want to go ahead and change it because I couldn't find any evidence to prove or disprove that Zeke is the name of a "stereotypical rustic", so does anyone know where that came from? --IAmUnimaginative 09:17, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Verb Tense

The verb tense in these articles are all mixed between present tense and past tense.. we should standardize a tense and stick with it. I say past tense, since its a part of a story that has been told already. Any objections?

Yes, many objections. See the discussion at Talk:Lost (TV series)/Present tense. Use of present tense is standard when discussing works of fiction and works of art in general. --PKtm 16:29, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

OK, I can handle that.. we are gonna have to make some edits here then...

An Other?

Just read this article and the phrase 'an Other' strikes me as extremely inelegant, surely 'one of The Others' would be a better way to go?

I agree. I think they should be referred to as "the Others" in plural form, and "one of the Others" in singular. -AWB

Michael?

Should we mark him down as possibly being one of the Others, or wait for more "proof"?

Any sign at all would be a good start. -- Happydrifter

How could he be one of the Others? Wouldn't Walt know? He may collaborate with them but it makes no sense that he would be one of them. My theory - the Others are the remains of the Dharma Initiative Operatives who have become a sort of crazy Neitzschean cult because of their isolation on the Island. We know the Dharma Initiative are a sociological-anthropological group exploring human behavioural patterns. That's why they have become obsessed with children and think they can judge people as 'good' and 'bad'. On the other hand, its possible I should just get out more. ThePeg 11.7.2006

Ms Klugh? Miss Klugh? Now it's Mrs

There is a continuity problem here between the Others article and the Season 2 episode synopses article. What is the correct character name?

Also, what evidence is there that she is the leader of the Others' camp? Mr Friendly called her over to Michael and he still seemed to be in charge.

The way Mr. Friendly asked Alex to go "get her". As if she was of importance. She is in charge and that is, though unsaid, very clear.

The correct character name is "Ms. Klugh", because that's the name that has been given on two ABC press releases. To infer that she's in charge is Original research. --Kahlfin 05:46, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Excess of Original Research

Slight rant:

This article, while containing much that is interesting, has become cruftified with Original Research— content that has no place on Wikipedia. For editors who are adding such material, please understand that while fans may enjoy reading theories and speculation, without verifiable sources, including such guesseses in encyclopedic articles can be a wasted effort: they'll eventually be deleted— if not by me, then by the many other experienced editors who are aiming to keep articles in line with Wikipedia policy. —Leflyman^Talk 06:24, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Theories and fanon should be kept on the actual Lostpedia website. That's what it's there for. Levid37 23:40, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Well I think some 'original research' should be included- its the entire point of lost. The most common theories should get a passing mention.--Josquius 21:06, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

"The Others" or "the Others"?

This article is inconsistent in whether the word "the" in "the Others" should be capitalized or not. My own inclination is that it shouldn't be. Anyone disagree? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:06, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Upon reflection I'm just going to be bold and change all the superfluous capitals to lowercase. There's no need to capitalize "the good guys" or "the island" either. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:31, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Anyone get this week's TV Guide?

There's a good picture of the Others posing that I think could be used for this article.--CyberGhostface 19:24, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

New Pic

I uploaded a new pic for the main article. I cropped and resized it a couple of times. I thought the picture was too wide so I removed the last guy who as far as I know isn't that big of a character. If you want to see the different versions, then check out the previous versions on the file.--CyberGhostface 02:20, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Pala Ferry

Are we sure that the jetty that the captives are taken to is in any way related to the 'Pala Ferry'. And before we say 'what else could it be?', remember, this is Lost. DJ Clayworth 21:05, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

There's a sign on the dock that says Pala Ferry? Jon Hart 22:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Encounters with the others: Ethan Rom

Shouldn't the whole business with Ethan Rom be added to 'Encounters with the others'. Ethan was an other, and they sure as hell 'encountered' him. Should we add it?

Ethan in an Early Episode

I'm not skilled at editing wikipedia pages, but I think this deserves to be in the article. I am as yet unsure of its significance. In an early episode (I believe it is episode 4, or maybe episode 5) when John Locke is in the Australian walkabout tour office, the tour guide he is talking to explains that he cannot go because he is disabled. Ethan Rom then wheels John Locke out of the office.

maybe it would be best 2 delete encounters with the others and put the events in the chracters bio's, there are more encounters withe the others that aren't recorded. --82.36.192.224 15:05, 30 August 2006 (UTC) Cleveland

Ethan didn't wheel Locke out of the office. (Russell29)

Add New Other

A Character that has been named on the future episode list her name is juliet --Maestr06 13:11, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

It has been confirmed in interviews that Juliet is actually a survivor of the crash that has just been ignored up to this point. I'm sorry, I don't have a source off the top of my head. But it doesn't matter, because even if what I just said wasn't true, we couldn't consider Juliet an "Other" until a source told us that she was an Other. --Kahlfin 20:24, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Pickett and Walt's Blood

I cannot exactly recall, but didn't Walt's mother die from a blood disorder? If so that is worth mentioning in the section on Pickett where it mentions his unknown motives for taking Michael's blood. Atfyfe 20:17, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

"Him/He" statement removal

The following should be taken out:

""He/Him" is also mentioned directly by the current occupant of The Swan at any one time. When Locke first enters the hatch, he is confronted by Desmond who asks "Are you him?" followed by "What did one snowman say to the other snowman?". Likewise, when Desmond is rescued and taken in to the hatch by Kelvin, the first questions he is asked are the same, and it appears that "He/Him" is in a position of authority over the proceedings in the hatch."

Because it has nothing to do with the Others. I belive "he/him" in this case is mearly refering to the Swan's replacement, not a leader.

He/Him

Has "He" been confirmed as a character? because I was thinking that the dialogue from the episodes may have been miss interpreted. What I mean is when Ethan and Tom mention "him" they are actually refering to "Henry Gale" meaning "Henry" is "He". When "henry" was being held in the hatch and he says "If I told you about them, you have no idea what he'll do", and "he'll kill me" he may have been saying that as an excuse for not revealing any nformation about "the others".

Basically I can see two possible senarios:

1. "He/Him" is an as yet unnamed/unseen character and is the leader of the others or is at least someone that "Henry" fears and the current article is correct.

or

2. "Henry" is the leader of the others and the comments he made in the hatch were excuses.

I see no definitive evidence one way or the other so unless I missed something (completely possible) it seems that the "He/Him" section of the article is trying to pass off assumption as fact. Doc711 22:26, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

I know it's been a while, but still..while Ben Linus was obviously refering to "our leader" as Jacob, we don't know whom specifically Tom was refering to when he and Ethan were discussing the botched grab of Claire. He may have been referring to Ben, or he may have been referring to Jacob. Whippletheduck (talk) 05:32, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Amelia

What's the source on her being Juliet's mother? There's nothing referencing this in the short scene in ATOTC; I presumed she was simply an elderly neighbour... Radagast 19:56, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Connection with the outside world

Isn't it likely that the others aren't at all isolated on the island? They probably make trips to and from the civilized world and clearly have communication (how else would Juliet have all that information about Jack?). I think the opener of this article should take that into account. -VJ 17:43, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

At the time of your comment, no, it would have been original research. But as of the airing of The Glass Ballerina, it's been confirmed, and yes, I definitely agree that we should add something to the beginning of the article. --Kahlfin 20:21, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

To say that they had contact with the outside world when Juliet had that huge file on Jack containing information that nobody on the island knew or talked about would hardly have been original research (no moreso than most of the content of these articles), but yeah, it's moot now. -VJ 04:52, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

It would be original research to say that they have "back and forth" contact with the outside world. All we know is that Juliet had a file on Jack, which could have been comprised of papers which were already on the plane (like the autopsy report would have been transported with his father's coffin). And as for the "modern" news, all that indicates is that they're able to receive U.S. television broadcasts. That's all incoming information, with no indication of anything outgoing, so I'd be uncomfortable with the phrasing "contact with the outside world," since that implies two-way communication. --Elonka 05:32, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Colleen

It has said that her and Pickett are romantically involved, but I recalled Colleen comming out of a building saying Daddy, and then Pickett kisses her on the check. Did I mis-hear something? Please answer thanks. Danny.

• I'm pretty sure it's Danny, although I also thought it was Daddy originally. Colleen doesn't look like she couldn't be his daughter, that would make Pickett pretty old though. I don't know. ShadowUltra 20:16, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
  • According to the closed-caption subtitles, she said "Danny", and was telling him about how she was to take the Galaga to go find the other boat. As far as being romantically involved, I'm not willing to signoff on that yet. Yes, they obviously have a "kiss on the cheek" connection, but that doesn't mean romance -- they might be family. --Elonka 08:36, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Karl an "Other"?

an official podcast as stated that Karl is one of them.82.36.192.224 14:26, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

actually it said the complete opposite of that?? Jwebby91 15:27, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Mr. Friendly is pretty important...

i think at some point, he should get a page of his own. he's been on the show in many episodes, and at some point i think he should get his own page (he might get a flashback episode for example). not now, but i'm just putting the idea out there. Jwebby91 15:27, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Our consensus agreement is that characters get their own page if they are either main characters (per the ABC listings) or if they've had at least one flashback giving some insight on their backstory. This is why Danielle Rousseau doesn't have her own page yet. And neither of those criteria applies to Mr. Friendly/Tom at the moment. -- PKtm 16:49, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with PKtm, and would add that it's not just about whether or not a character "deserves" a page, but whether or not there's sufficient information that it needs to be split out separately. In other words, even if we moved him to his own page, we still don't have much more than a paragraph of information about him. If he becomes more important to the plot later, there will be more information, and then it'll make more sense to split it out to a separate page. --Elonka 20:42, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Rousseau?

Should Rousseau really have a blurb on the "Others" page. It's pretty well established that she crashed on the island as well. If it turns out that she really is a spy for the Others, then she can be returned, but unless that happens, she should be removed from this page. Wackojacko1138 22:53, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Update

shhouldn't sum1 update characters like tom. Oh and in the 9th october podcast lidelof confirmed Karl is a "Legitamate Other" 82.36.192.224 17:26, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Villain group?

Should we have a category link to "villain groups"? They say that they are "the good guys", but I doubt it and I'm sure a lot of people will doubt it.

Also, on Lostpedia, they say that one of the nicknames for their village is "Mysteria Lane".- JustPhil 20:10, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

We don't know what the Others truly are and their intentions. I wouldn't go and call them villains just yet.

Also, Mysteria is a fancruft name and shouldn't be listed here.--CyberGhostface 00:32, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Jason

I was watching Every Man for Himself on ABC full ep. streaming and I noticed another Other named Jason took part in Sawyer's "needle/bunny" torture scene. I'm pretty sure that he's the one who accompanies Pickett in the latest episode. Anyone object to me adding him in? YnoBluepages? 20:32, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm gonna revert because I found all that information on Jason on a legitimate source (the show). The actor I just Googled and the IMDB gave me his name. If anyone has a problem, please tell me before you change it again. YnoBluepages? 19:57, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, nev mind, I just added him to the "Less Important Others" section YnoBluepages? 20:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I don't think he, as well as Aldo, should be on the list, or at least moved to the bottom of it. There are heaps of Others - roughly about 30 of them. I don't think we'll need each and every one on here. Zeldanum1 09:47, 29 March 2007 (EST)

Patchy

Someone put "Patchy" on here. I don't think he goes here, as we have no idea who he is...yet.- JustPhil 02:12, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Karl and Alex

When was it revealed that Karl was Alex's boyfriend ? Siemgi

Alex's last name

Since it's been revealed she was raised as Ben's daughter shoud it be changed to Linus? Or should it just be removed altogether until it's confirmed which one she uses? (or maybe Rousseau's been confirmed already and I just forgot) - DocNox 04:22, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Good point. I like her having Rousseau as her last name, but it might not be accurate. I would rather that she have a last name than none because we're unsure. --thedemonhog 05:13, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Or maybe since she has lived her entire life on a remote island, maybe she doesn't use a last name. Tough call on this one, I don't care that much it uses for now. --Milo H Minderbinder 14:14, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

As for Ben being her dad, assuming that he and Rousseau are telling the truth, he is only her "adopted" father since Rousseau was pregnant before she got to the island and Ben has lived on the island his whole life. Not to mention that Rousseau captured Ben and the two acted like they had never previously met. --Milo H Minderbinder 15:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I know, that's why I said "she was raised as Ben's daughter". The idea of him being her biological father never even crossed my mind. The point is irrelevant anyway since she could still have his name in either case. Personally, I'm for just removing it until it's confirmed. - DocNox 23:37, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

My second comment is about the article itself (or its previous state, which simply said Ben was her father), not your comment. I probably should have started a new header, it's hard to tell with just indents. Sorry for any confusion. --Milo H Minderbinder 23:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

someone making a joke?

Someone think it's funny. "Originally captured by Darth Vader during Season 2" If sometone could correct this,please. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ivan Ivanković (talk • contribs) 12:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC).

The Hostiles

If I recall correctly it was no fully confirmed that the others are indeed 100% the hostiles. It seemed vague to me with open possibilities.. Matthew 08:19, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I have just reverted the page from "The Hostiles". The name "Hostiles" is not their official name, just the name Dharma (and people pretending to be Dharma) labelled them with. Please do not change the title again without a better reason. Tphi 14:37, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

WP says to use the most common name, and they are most commonly referred to as the others, both by the show itself and fans. PLEASE don't rename pages without discussing it first! --Milo H Minderbinder 12:11, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I think it will be misleading to say that the hostiles are the others.

In de first sentence it is stated that "the others" are also known as the hostiles. I think that is (or will turn out to be) incorrect, after seeing episode 20 of season 3.

Ben is an Other, he was helped by the Hostiles who lived on the island before them.

Ben said that he was born on the island (a lie). The other people are from our world.

The Hostiles lived outside the fence... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.46.55.70 (talk) 13:50, 12 May 2007 (UTC).

Why does Tom have his own page?

While I think it's cool and all that Tom has his own page (he is the most recurring guest star), where was the consensus to do this? I know it's been mentioned before here, but should he really have his own page? ShadowUltra 20:30, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

If minor characters like Paulo and Nikki who do little more than bitch at the recurring cast have articles, a major Other like Tom should have one.--CyberGhostface 21:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

With Rousseau becoming the first character to get her own page despite not being a regular or having a flashback episode, its opened the way for others. Tom is an important character who has been in all three seasons, and looks like he will feature strongly for a while yet. Tphi 21:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I created-wrote the article because Tom has also been in more episodes than Rousseau, Rose, Bernard, Nikki, Paulo and Juliet, and it does not seem that he will be killed off soon. --thedemonhog 21:47, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. But why do Danny and Ethan (who are both dead) now have their own articles? Einbierbitte 18:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Don't know about Danny, but Ethan Rom has been appearing consistently in various Other-related flashbacks.--CyberGhostface 21:39, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Jacob?

The unseen character previously labeled only as "Him" is now titled 'Jacob' in the article. When was this established? Did I miss something last night during the episode? I'd like some kind of reference on this... Radagast 01:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I think the link is tenuous at best, at least until more is revealed. This is close to original research. Until a consesus develops, I think that this section should revert back to Him Einbierbitte 14:52, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

It was confirmed in the most recent podcast by Damon Lindelof and Carlton Cuse. - DocNox 20:35, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad to hear there's an official source; can we get the podcast referenced in the article? Radagast 01:19, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Here's the link if you want to add it. [1] - DocNox 03:15, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Delete/Condense "Encounters with the Others"?

Am I the only one thinking that the "Encounters with the Others" section is just getting too massive and unwieldy? It was fine when the Others didn't make up two main cast members and we "encounter" them every week. I'm also unsure what merit is of listing the entire plot of the series which relates to the Others, when it can be found in the episode guides as well. I think it needs to be majorly condensed, especially as its only going to get much longer. What do other people think? Tphi 03:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

If we delete "Encounters with the Others," I see little purpose for this article and propose that the character descriptions be merged into Characters of Lost. --thedemonhog talk contributions 22:40, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Could do actually, I've thought for a while that there's little point the Others' character bios being on a separate page makes little sense. What are other people's thoughts on this? Tphi 14:38, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Does John Locke now count as an Other?

Opinions?--Occono 14:02, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

No. Locke may (or may not) be working with them, but "the Others" are a separate group that existed on the island before the crash. - SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 23:25, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Nope Look at the definition we have for The Others: term to describe anyone on the island not from the plane, with the general use of the term meaning "the enemy", or people to be feared and avoided at all costs. Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 01:04, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, unfortunately this definition is no longer accurate, look at the tailies, they're as much Others as all the Others (no pun intended), if only a bit new at it. --Sauron18 04:38, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

But the tailies came from the plane? Tphi 14:37, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, which is why the definition of an Other used here is not accurate, because people from the plane have already become part of their group. --Sauron18 20:22, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Additionally, Locke stated that he is on his own journey now, so he is not an Other. --thedemonhog talk • edits • count 21:25, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Alpert's own page

I'm not saying to add it now since there isn't enough information on him, but at the end of the season (2 episodes left) do u think an article should be made on him? He's got the right # of episodes. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.147.223.85 (talk) 05:12, 10 May 2007 (UTC).

I guess its something we can address at the end of the season. If the writers are just building him up at the moment to serve as cannon fodder in the finale then obviously not. Tphi 14:36, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

BIG CHANGES

I think that after all that has been revealed in the man behind the curtain, this article needs to be completely resorted/retitled, perhaps even ditching the term "others". I think seperate articles need to be on DHARMA initiative & the hostiles, who are evidently the current "others". Greengiraffe 13:26, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

The Others is the best name for them as its the most widely and most commonly used. There's already an article on DHARMA. If you're talking about changing the "encounters with the others" part, see my section above Tphi 14:39, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

If it were possible, then I would agree. We could make one section for people from the Dharma Initiative (like Ben Linus (and maybe Mikhail Bakunin)), one section for people who were native to the island since before the Dharma Initiative (like Richard Alpert), and one section for people who were brought to the island after the Dharma Initiative ended (like Juliet Burke). The problem with that is that, in many cases, we don't know which people belong in which group. So I think it might be too soon for that. - Shaheenjim 13:26, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Home of the others

Shouldnt the Hydra station be mentioned in this as they lived there or thereabouts at the begining of the third season?

Isabel

Hey, please do not keep adding her to this page. She appeared in a single episode. Yes, you can say that she was important to "Stranger in a Strange Land," but so was Achara. --thedemonhog talk • edits • count 04:24, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Isabel is an Other, and if she was important to "Stranger in a Strange Land", then she should be included. It was pretty obvious in the episode that she was a high ranking member, and much mroe important than the likes of Colleen, Ryan, Bonnie and Greta. I see no reason why she can't be put in.

Ryan, Greta, Collen and Bonnie were in multiple episodes. --thedemonhog talk • edits 18:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Mikhail/Richard

Okay, the finale has aired and to pre-empt any further edit wars over article creations, I think we need to establish a consensus as to whether Mikhail or Richard are to be granted their own articles.

Personally, I'd say yes and yes, since both have large sections already and both look like they'll be featuring a good deal next season. There's certainly a lot more to both than meets the eye (ie. Mikhail's seemingly indestructible status / Richard's non-ageing, and the fact he was once seemingly the leader of the Others before Ben somehow took power.

What are other peoples' thoughts? Tphi 17:56, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Richard and Mikhail are becoming more prominent and their sections are too long for this article too. Give them their own articles.Azn Clayjar 20:44, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

=Make Pages!

Richard yes, but Mikhail no because he appears to have died. --thedemonhog talk • edits • count 00:37, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Which time, lol? He's pretty alive and kicking after surviving the sonic fence, and a harpoon in the chest. I doubt being in close proximity to the grenade when it went off underwater did him much damage. One might argue its his apparent immortality which deserves him an article Tphi 01:11, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it is funny how it seems he gets beat up or dies in every one of his episodes, but I would argue that it is speculation to assume that he is alive and not enough to give him an article yet. --thedemonhog talk • edits • count 03:14, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Richard and Mikhail deserve their own articles. The actor who plays Richard has been contacted to be a regular next year, and Mikhail is just the Jaws of the Lost universe, so he certainly deserves it (even though I'm sure he'll be back).

Yes the extent to which Mikhail has beaten has become somewhat comical, almost as if the cost of his invulnerability is a jinxing of his hand to hand combat skills, or at the very least has been cursed with a glass jaw, all of which is even stranger see as he has been shown to be somewhat compent with firearms and explosives, able to swim from the shore to the Looking Glass with relative ease, have some combat training, possibly have been a member of the Soviet Army during their conflict in Afghanistan, and have had access to the records of all the Oceanic crash survivors, and thus would have known of Jin's work as an enforcer/hired thug, and Sayid's years in the Iragi Guard as a torture specialist, and thus been able to counter them in combat. Sadly Mikhail has become the Hulk of the show, somewhat of a fall guy. User:Six-forty 22:21, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Clarie's Kidnapping

Why isn't there anything on Claire being kidnapped?

Article re-write

I've re-written a big portion of the article, changing "Encounters with Others" to a "Fictional History" of the group. The "Encounters" section was far too long and parts of it were nothing to do with Others themselves. I've tried to condense it and make it more relevant to the Others, and where possible focus on things from their point of view.

The lead-in has been shortened, with information moved down into the Fictional History, though more that wouldn't fit there added on their motives and background.

Finally, as the "Home of the Others" section now contained information on other locations, I've changed that sections' title as well. Tphi 00:57, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Nice start. This article is much too long. I think that the character biographies should be merged with Characters of Lost and the rest of it should just be deleted. --thedemonhog talk • edits • count 03:36, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the merge of character biogs, there is no real reason for a this portion of Lost's characters not to be listed on the Characters of Lost page. It would certainly clear up any worries of where defected Others (Karl, Alex, Juliet) or survivors-turned-Others (such as Cindy) should be placed. But just like the DHARMA Initiative has a page explaining its background, history and motives, so should the Others. Maybe still in not as much detail as the history here, though I have tried to condense it as far as possible. Tphi 17:25, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Is the guy in the image Jacob?

OK, in an interview with E's Kristin, Damon Lindelof is answering the questions with true, false, or "Hell no, I won't tell you."

When Kristin asks if Jacob has been cast yet, he says "False." When Kristin mentions the guy you see for a split second, Lindelof replies, "You do see a guy, but...I'm still sticking to my false." --DrBat 21:30, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

His answer is really open to interpretation... More factually, he does say that Alex isn't Ben's biological daughter. --Pentasyllabic 03:48, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

The producers insert a ton of easter eggs into every episode. That is Jacob. --thedemonhog talk • edits • count 04:46, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Status

I removed the "Status" field because it is in-universe -- they may die in episode X, but if I go watch episode X-1, the character is alive. --EEMeltonIV 20:33, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you and re-removed the status column. --Magioladitis (talk) 02:08, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Poll: Richard and Mikhail's pages

Here's a poll: Should we give Richard and/or Mikhail their own articles?

Richard

• Agree, because he's still alive, is going to be prominent next year, and might even be a regular. Pickett had his own page and wasn't too important, Richard clearly is important. ShadowUltra 01:53, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
• Support per above. --thedemonhog talk • edits • count 02:28, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
• Agree his apparent importance to the over-all Lost mythology as the only known Other pre-purge also makes it likely his character will feature more in future Tphi 22:50, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
• Agree his character will appear in more episodes and summary is already long. -- Russell29 17:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
• Agree Richard is defiently becoming a promenient character, especially after the revelation that he was one of the original hostiles, and even if he doesn't become a regular (I'm predicting he will), he's still likely play a huge role in season 4 and onward.ArchangelRJ
• Strong disagree: As far as anyone knows at this stage, he could be killed off first episode back! Just because he seemed important doesn't mean he needs his own page. -- SilvaStorm
• ""Agree"", because he is going to be on Season 5 and there is no denying that whatever mysteries of the Island that have yet to be revealed to us, that Richard is unquestionably going to be involved in it's revelation. Whippletheduck (talk) 05:13, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Mikhail

• Disagree, unless we get any info that he's still alive. It's speculation to assume he survived a grenade exploding in his hand, and until someone says otherwise, we shouldn't assume he's alive. ShadowUltra 01:53, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. --thedemonhog talk • edits • count 02:28, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
• Agree, his info is already getting long, and I feel he's got enough impact in the latter half of the second season to deserve one. And also, this guy has nine lives.. he'll be back.. -Tphi 22:54, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
• Agree, what with Alpert seemingly immortal, Mikhail at least partially invulnerable i would count on the both of them playing a major part in future seasons, Mikhail the ying to Alpert's yang so to speak. User:Six-forty 21:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
• Concur, he's contributed to several major plot lines, has been one of Ben's most loyal operatives, and can seemingly survive anything so logic would dictate that he will be returning in the future. Flag-Waving American Patriot 23:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
• Wait Let's wait until we hear of his status. If he died, then chances are we won't be seeing him outside of flashbacks, so we probably shouldn't give him one. However, if he did survive, we should defiently give him his own page... he's just as prominent as several other characters, and his survival of not only the sonic fence but the harpoon and the grenade defiently shows he has some kind of special healing ability, and will likely play a huge part in seasons to come.ArchangelRJ

Okay, so how long do we usually wait before making the articles? ShadowUltra 17:53, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Let's get a couple more people to vote. It is pretty clear that Richard will get his own page, but Mikhail can still go either way. --thedemonhog talk • edits 18:45, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Separate page for the members of the Others?

Should a separate page be made for the members of the Others? This would be to make the main article smaller. --DrBat 16:49, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

They should just be merged back into the Characters of Lost page. There's no real reason why they should be kept separate any more when there's so many grey areas Tphi 22:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Tphi. And we need the pictures restored over there. --thedemonhog talk • edits 07:26, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Charlie in the last paragraph

I'm iffy over the phrase 'drowning Charlie'. He didn't die under the water. Well, not that we saw. We saw very well that Charlie can survive for a long time submerged and that's all that happened. Water went over his fuzzy little head.

Lots42 03:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Good one! --thedemonhog talk • edits 23:54, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Character?

Shouldn't the Others be under organizations with DHARMA, Hanso, and Oceanic?

Members of Others merged

As discussed several times above, I've been bold and gone through with my idea of merging the Members of the Others back with the Characters of Lost. As I'm also writing on the Talk page over there, this was done for several reasons:

• The Others are characters in Lost - it makes sense to have them all on one page, together. There isn't a separate page for "Flashback Characters", for example.
• With everyone on one page, it clears up the problem of grey area characters somewhat, such as Cindy, Karl or Juliet who appear to have switched "sides"
• The DHARMA page is just about the group as a whole, rather than bios of individuals. I wanted to make the Others page the same.

Tphi 14:45, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Whispers and Sickness

Rousseau claims the Others were the carriers of a disease that they passed on to her crew, and that they whisper in the jungle without being nearby.

Sources and Verification

I attempted to source quite a few of the statements in this article by the episode they were featured in predominately. Does that mean that we can take off the heading at the top of the page? --   No. 1 Chelsea Fan   talk  contribs  email  10:25, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey, good job. And you even cited them properly, except that if you are citing the same thing more than once, cite it the first time like this: <ref name=Curtain>"[[The Man Behind The Curtain (Lost)|The Man Behind The Curtain]]." ''[[Lost (TV series)|Lost]]'', [[American Broadcasting Company|ABC]]. [[May 9]], [[2007]]. [[List of Lost episodes|Episode 20]], [[Lost (season 3)|season 3]].</ref> and everytime after, cite it like this: <ref name=Curtain/> I will fix those, and I removed the banner. --thedemonhog talk • edits 17:09, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

• Ok, thanks a lot for that. I'll bear that in mind next time. :) --   No. 1 Chelsea Fan   talk  contribs  email  08:35, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

the real hostiles

the hostiles and dharma are not the same! the hostiles where thier first! the person who made this page has messed up ALL the facts! The hostiles are not scientists! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kalebv (talk • contribs) 16:27, 2 June 2008 (UTC)