Wikipedia:WikiProject Lost/Banner

Archives

Feb 2005 to Sep 2005 Sep 2005 to Feb 2006 Feb 2006 to Apr 2006 Apr 2006 to May 2006 Jun 2006 to Dec 2006 Jan 2007 to Apr 2007 Apr 2007 to ___ 2007

Until we can actually confirm that Locke is really dead, lets keep him off of the 'Former Main Characters' list. In lost, they generally show someone die all the way, and we left Locke while he was still gasping for air, definitely not dead [yet at least]. Artemis11 03:41, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A new page has been created for the character. How exactly are we deciding which characters get a page and which are just in a character list? It seems like eventually every character who shows up more than once may end up on their own page. Opinions? --Minderbinder 14:39, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe A. Cooper is notable at present for his own page, I wouldn't say he meets Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) as Rousseau does. Matthew 14:45, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Give it a couple more episodes. Maybe he'll play a bigger role in the future. - Charleca 15:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I'm going to merge back the information in the Anthony Cooper article and redirect. Tphi 16:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its being decieded by the amount of info on their pages. I dont create pages but that is how other people decide. - Russell29 (Contributions) (talk) 17:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

No it's decided by Wikipedia policies, guidelines and consensus. Matthew 17:02, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cooper has appeared in 4/60 episodes right now which is not very much and is not in at least the next 3 episodes according to ABC Medianet. He will play an important role once he returns, however for all we know, he may not last to the end of the episode. Take Mikhail, Ms. Klugh or Isabel for example, they appear in a few episodes and suddenly get killed or disappear. Once it is confirmed that Cooper will play a major role in the final quarter of the season, then create a page. --thedemonhog talk contributions 00:42, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He will be in the Brig and it is confirmed that he is the Original Sawyer. He is extremely important in the Lost universe, and is at least as important as Christian Shepard. If Cindy and Gary Troop get their own page, Anthony Cooper certainly needs one.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.74.238.51 (talk) 21:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I disagree. I still don't think 5 episodes is enough and it is likely that he will not get to 6. --thedemonhog talk contributions 22:54, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whether he dies in his next episode or not, I guarantee that Anthony Cooper will appear in flashbacks til the very end of the series. I'd say at the end that if he dies in his next episode (I think he will be prominent til the season finale) he will get at least 3 more flashback episodes (I guarantee that he will appear in a Jack or Sawyer flashback, and he may have conned someone else off the island).

Just because someone dies in Lost, doesn't mean they stop appearing. Look at Juliet's recent episode - appearances from Ethan, Mikhail, Goodwin ... Christian Shephard has been dead since before the first episode and he has become a very important character. -- Chuq (talk) 00:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, it doesn't mean that they will stop appearing, but they might. --thedemonhog talk contributions 01:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, I wasn't stating an opinion on whether a separate page is warranted - just commenting on some of the above comments about people dying after only being introduced a few episodes earlier. -- Chuq (talk) 02:04, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also Pickett has his own page and he only has 6 episodes and isnt very important in the overall Lost universe. Anthony Cooper has at least 5 episodes and he is very important in the Lost Universe.

Pickett has been in 7. --thedemonhog talk contributions 23:18, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He may only be in five episodes, but Anthony Cooper is an extremely important character in the Lost universe and certainly has enough information on his profile to have his own article. If Pickett and Cindy have their own pages, Cooper should too. Put Pickett back in The Others section and give the page to Cooper, since Pickett is forgetable and a worthless thug and doesnt advance the story at all. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.66.135.230 (talk) 06:18, 3 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

You have to look at it in terms of the whole show. If Cooper gets a page now, that page will be around for the entire series, and he just isn't worth it as he's not likely to appear again. As for Pickett, he should have been merged back long ago. We really need to limit the number of pages for secondary characters before it gets out of hand again, and we see pages for Sarah Shepherd, Mikhail, Naomi etc. Tphi 13:07, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a safe bet to assume that Cooper will be in another characters flashback.

Why? And whom? Its fairly safe to say the Original Sawyer/Cooper storyline has now been fairly comprehensively closed Tphi 03:58, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One flashback could be of Young Sawyer meeting Mr. Sawyer and the aftermath of his parents death. Also, like Christain Shephard, just because he's dead doesn't mean he won't appear in someone elses flashback. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.74.238.51 (talk) 08:04, 5 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

5/123 episodes - You know, you're right. We should make a page a for him. --thedemonhog talk contributions 08:14, 12 May 2007 (UTC)117 is you count each finale as a single episode.[reply]

How exactly is the status of characters categorized?

For example, why is Nikki and Paolo classed as 'main characters', yet Rose & Bernard are classed as 'Supporting Characters'. Rose & Bernard (Or Rose at least)have probably been in more scenes then Nikki & Paolo. Just seems a bit odd to me! Paul Norfolk Dumpling 12:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• • Sorry, I see the jist of this has been discussed above, I just couldn't be bothered to read it! :-) Paul Norfolk Dumpling 12:41, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This may have been discussed before, but that appears to have been pretty much in anticipation of season 3. No way Nikki and Paolo should be classified as "main" - they should be supporting. Any objections to the move? Tvoz |talk 17:47, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was just wondering this, and obviously didn't go ahead with it because I know that it might have caused a rucus, but should Vincent get his own page?--Animé Dan 13:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• hehe! Thanks for that, thats's the best laugh I've had in ages. Paul Norfolk Dumpling 21:37, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why are people like Anthony Cooper and Naomi uner Island inhabitants? They both came to the island and weren't there before the crash.
2.2 Island inhabitants
2.2.1 The Others
2.2.2 Danielle Rousseau
2.2.3 Anthony Cooper
2.2.4 Kelvin Joe Inman
2.2.5 Naomi
≈ Seraph 20:42, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There you go. I changed it from "The following are residents of the islands who arrived prior to the crash of Oceanic Flight 815 or were brought to the island by separate means." to "The following are residents of the islands who were not aboard Oceanic Flight 815 and arrived by separate means." --thedemonhog talk contributions 04:06, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good change to the text, but the header is still wrong - and if season 4 has Naomi's "rescue" team they are certainly not Island inhabitants - so let's try "island inhabitants and arrivals" Tvoz |talk 17:51, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the Heroes Characters Page there is a section for recurring characters. Should there be one in this page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DECBOY23 (talk • contribs) 19:08, 5 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Uh, have you scrolled through this article? --thedemonhog talk contributions 08:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I mean a box thingy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.41.244.228 (talk) 12:56, 12 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Oh, I see. Yeah, that's a good idea and there should be. --thedemonhog talk contributions 22:16, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean a navigational template, then there already is one? Tphi 22:30, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think he means a box like the one for the main characters with occupation, origin, etc. but this one would have Rose, Bernard, Cindy, Christian and others. --thedemonhog talk contributions 23:00, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, fair play. Yeh, I agree then Tphi 23:06, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm currently re-writing the Others page, what's the consensus for her being moved to there, or staying here? Tphi 00:59, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think consensus is for her staying here, but I think there are some who would like her moved. Personally, I think that she should stay here and Juliet should stay there. --thedemonhog talk • edits • count 03:34, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History has to count for something - and we don't know where their true allegiances lie - so I think they need to remain as Cindy survivor, Juliet Other/arrival, becuase of that we are certain: Cindy survived Oceanic 815 and Juliet was brought to and lived among the Others. Tvoz |talk 13:54, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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 20:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, come on! --thedemonhog talk • edits • count 02:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see this policy I was using to remove the images. Pretty much, the images were used for decoration and had no context in the list when the images were used. This is a violation of the non-free content policy. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They cannot be replaced. If the images are permanantly removed, we should describe what each character looks like in text. That is ridiculous. I can see the thumbnails of the heads at the top being removed, but the supporting character pictures are necessary. Also, thanks for immediately deleting every image after removing it. --thedemonhog talk • edits • count 02:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Almost all of the supporting casts just had pictures and how they relate to the story; the images need to have context on why they are there. If not, they are gone. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could have notified editors and given them a chance to make the appropriate corrections beforehand, but you don't. --Pentasyllabic 02:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They relate to the story because they are pictures of important characters. I thought that was understood. --thedemonhog talk • edits • count 02:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The pictures contribute to the article, as it gives the reader a insight as to what the characters look like. Put them back. --The monkeyhate 14:30, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The images add so much to the article! -- Russell29 19:10, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks bland and boring without the pictures.

Why did you have to delete them, Zscout370? That was really unnecessary. So who will take on the task of re-adding them? --The monkeyhate 12:07, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because the ones that were not used in any articles, they were deleted by others since we cannot have orphaned fair use images. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 01:10, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am seeing a recurring theme on Wikipedia. There are many editors that are working, in good faith, but at cross-purposes. Some claim "this is not a fan site" and favor getting rid of almost every episode article of every television program ever produced in the English speaking world. Others do not think this article should even exist, as it is not notable. Sadly, sometimes "be bold" is at odds with "gain consensus." I agree that we, the editors of this enormous encyclopedia, should not get bogged down in bureacracy and voting. However, I think there is also a danger in a lone editor or small group of editors making wholesale changes that are not reversable. If someone blanks an article, it is easily reverted. Deleting these pictures is not.

I feel very strongly that the pictures in this article served an encyclopedic purpose. If, we are going to have an article about "Characters of Lost," who would be most likely to read it? Die-hard fans of the show? I think not. They already know the characters very well. The most likely candidates would be people who have a passing interest and cursory knowledge of the show and want to learn more. For these people, the pictures illustrate which character is being referenced. This reader may not know the character by their proper name, but if there is a picture (even a thumbnail) they will be able to follow which character the article is about. Therefore, I hope the pictures are replaced and I hope that there will be some discussion before changes like these are made in the future. Ursasapien 01:49, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Although I don't think there's much harm done, seeing as the pictures can easily be found elsewhere, so they could be replaces faily quickly.--The monkeyhate 18:19, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]