Talk:Daniel Faraday

Timeline by actual timeline, or Seasonal Time Line

This may need to be discussed on a larger basis.

In Sawyers Character biography, we have his character's history/arc done on a Season by Season basis.

For Faraday, we seem to be doing it on a "TimeLine Arc", where we try to put everything in context of how it happened, when it happened. As a result, things that were done in the 1970's, should remain in the 1970's/Prior to the Island part; and going from there. Granted, Faraday is the one that has said that you can't change the past and what ever happened...happened, which I know is frustrating as hell at times, but still. Is there a reason/mandate on how to do timelines? Whippletheduck (talk) 05:46, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

This is going to be tricky, no matter how we do it. WP:WAF says that a plot summary should follow "the author or creator's perspective", which is hard to determine for Lost, as we don't know yet know what the writers are planning. I think for right now that it would make the most sense if we followed the order in which Daniel experiences season five. I wouldn't do a strict chronological timeline because most of the time the flashes occurred mid conversation or in the middle of important scenes and the timeline would be disjointed. Also, I would put this new section towards the end of the article because it would make more sense to the reader. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 12:18, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, thanks for the input. I'm not sure, as people with better heads for this can decide how to do it.

Because LOST is an intellectual show that requires a lot of active participation from viewers to really "get it"......I actually like going back and putting stuff in chronological order from an Arc standpoint and less on a "Season by Season" basis. It definitely means we editors here at Wikipedia have to be ready to get back and amend or change things as they become available on newer episodes. Yes it will get confusing for a casual, less then hard core fan to be sure. Whippletheduck (talk) 01:31, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I think we should just have one "Arc" section for each character with sub headings broken up by events in their life in chronological order; I agree with you that the season-by-season structure isn't always adequate to describe things properly. However, for the time shifts part I think it would make the most amount of sense if it was described in the order the character experiences it. Also, I think we should wait til the end of the season to see how the "Whatever Happened, Happened" mantra plays out. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 14:10, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, your definitely right about seeing "Whatever Happened Happened" playing out. I was trying to think about how to edit this, and even with how it starts right now, with the events of LA FLEUR, the fact is I would have to start it chronologically earlier with the events of JugHead.....and it seems that the entire incident with the chase at sea on the outrigger canoe's took place AFTER the island was moved after Daijiri Airlines crashed in 20007 and I was like....hmm....yeah lets see how this turns out. Whippletheduck (talk) 16:15, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

I see that the current timeline is primarily following a chronological order rather than a personal timeline, which I disagree with anyway - at the least it causes massive problems for the period when he was rapidly time jumping. Anyway, the current narrative seems to completely miss the point, he doesn't "transist" from the past to the present, he started off in the present and travelled to the past. I seriously doubt that it will turn out he's locked in a time loop having never been born (he has a mother for starters). Writing from the character's personal perspective is the only way to do it sensibly, especially from the perspective of character development. OrangeDog (talk • edits) 11:47, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

The truth is that I love the time traveling jaunts, but it does make me get a lot of headaches when I try to connect things. Your right that a Season by Season Arc, with a "Pre-Crash/Original Arc" that deals with Farraday from as best as we know was BEFORE he went back in time, would work best. Whippletheduck (talk) 13:10, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Just imagine trying to write-up Desmond's story from a strictly chronological perspective considering the events of "The Constant" and the fact that he did some of it twice. Or Locke: gave Richard back his watch, was born, Richard gave him his watch, crashed on the island, met Richard for the first time, etc. OrangeDog (talk • edits) 15:52, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Ultimately I think the way it is done with Sawyer, where there is an Arc for his activities pre-Oceanic Flight 815 Crash, followed by an seasonal summary of season 1, then season 2, etc, etc. It is just a matter of finding the right way to write it up. For example, I just tried it with Miles and I believe his arc worked best with a "Pre-Freighter Mission" arc which had as much of his background up to the moment he left the freighter; and then a Season 4 and 5 summary arc. Thanks for the feedback, let me know what you think. I think JB is right though about waiting till the season is over and see how the whole "Whatever Happened, Happened" works out. For example, I was afraid of tinkering with Ethan Rom's page because I was terrified of doing a "Complete Arc" because there was a theory that he by rescuing Amy, she was supposed to have been captured by the Other's and now time had been changed completely theory which I was nervous about. Whippletheduck (talk) 04:36, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Did not read everything above—sorry. Let's do the "arc" sections by the order that the characters experience it, i.e. Locke is born, Locke thinks that the knife belongs to him already, Locke gets shoved into a locker, Locke meets his dad, Locke gets into a wheelchair, Locke ends up on the island, Locke goes in the hatch, Locke meets Jacob, Locke lives in the Barracks, Locke is held at gunpoint by Ethan, Locke gives Richard a compass, Locke pushes the wheel, Locke visits Walt, Locke dies, Locke tells Ben about a "land of the living", Locke takes Ben to see Smokey. –thedemonhog talk • edits 06:09, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, Whippletheduck. I'm quite indifferent here, but I like thedemonhog's approach. I used this format for Danielle Rousseau, which makes things quite easy. Oh, and also, should we have a centralized discussion at the project page? There are too many threads going on every character's page (at least I think there are). Corn.u.co.pia • Disc.us.sion 06:16, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, the thing is that for Rousseau, whom is NOT a main character, and thus her appearances are sporadic thru out the series, yes an overall arc would work best. For the characters that have been there since season 1 and done a lot, I believe an arc set before their story essentially began. For Locke and Jack and most Oceanic 815ers, an arc called "Pre-Crash" that sums up their past before it, all flashbacks set in that time, etc works. Then have a season 1 arc that lists their activities season 1, another for season 2, etc. Desmond I admit is a problem, same with Farraday, and a lot of this hinges on how things are going to turn out. I hear there is a Farraday flashback episode coming, which I am very interested in seeing. HOpefully it will answer some questions and shape this debate on how to proceed. If it is possible to change time, then it will make effect their history's obviously. Sort of like in BACK TO THE FUTURE 1, where by standing up to Biff, there is now a timeline divergence that no longer exists (the one where McFly is subservant to Biff, etc). Thanks for the feedback. Whippletheduck (talk) 13:06, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

What is wrong with my suggestion? It seems that you are trying to present it as it is presented to the viewer, but that will never work if there is a pre-crash section. –thedemonhog talk • edits 17:01, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Well it is not as much a "Pre-Crash" as much as a Pre 'Before their arc on the show began'. This means we would do flashbacks in characters past, to be sure. But we would stop short of their first apperance on the show where their adventure began. For Farraday, I think his arc should be "Pre-Arrival on Island, 2004" which would encompass his backstory as we know it, including at least his first appearance with Desmond and maybe even being on the island and warning Desmond in that one message he gave. But his actual adventures need to be in a seperate arc, from the time he parachuts on the island. We tried it in Miles character with a season-by-season arc but I did not really like it and neither did most of the rest of viewers and changed it back, it just did not look or read "right". Whippletheduck (talk) 19:52, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

It won't make any sense to the reader if you try to arrange his history in the order the show presents it. The only logical way to present a character's history is from their beginning, then middle, up to the present. If you start trying to write from the show timeline then no one will have a clue what's going on. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 20:44, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I think what is needed is a "Starting Point" for each character, and a "Before starting point" that covers any back story of a character before their adventures on the show begins. For most of the main characters, that to me means a "BEFORE FLIGHT 815 CRASHED", and we have to find a suitable starting point for each character. For the characters that have been there since season 1, whether we do a "Season 1 Arc, Season 2 Arc" like has been done with Sawyer, I think it works for his character. For characters introduced later, we have to find a different way to do it. For example, for Miles and Farraday, their "starting point" should be the Freighter Science Team mission. And so on. Whippletheduck (talk) 05:27, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

To early to name?

Like Locke, he may go by his last name instead of his first. Think we should wait until Confirmed Dead to put him in the LOST box at the bottom of the screen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.19.131.166 (talk • contribs) 06:20, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

He may end up going by Faraday, but it is better to have a link than no link at all to him in the Lost navigational template. –thedemonhog talk • edits 06:29, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

In a Lost promo for Confirmed Dead, either Jack or Kate call him "Daniel". I think it's pretty safe to bet that the majority will be referring to him the same way. Zeldanum1 17:44, 6 February 2008 AEST —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.18.201 (talk)

Why does he even have his own article, anyway? Naomi was a more important character, and she doesn't have one. 209.147.114.202 (talk) 14:34, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Davies has been promoted to the main cast so his character will be significantly expanded, but Naomi is dead and there is not enough information on her to create an article. –thedemonhog talk • edits 18:33, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Can we rename his template name to be Faraday instead of Daniel? They're calling him Faraday more frequently now, and not just with Charlotte's last name, but like "Faraday and Charlotte". Besides, there is obviously a philosopher connection to the name, as there is to Locke, and when casting went around, the first name wasn't even Daniel. This should illustrate that the more important name of the two is Faraday. And the fact the producers refer to him solely as Faraday when speaking in reference. Alexisfan07 9 March 2008 —Preceding comment was added at 02:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I am from the year 2010. He will be called Faraday. 128.211.198.168 (talk) 09:41, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Re-writing Fictional Character Biography

I wrote the biography as it is now, but I feel that the last 3 paragraphs stretch for far too long considering it's only about one episode. Anyone care to rewrite it? zeldanum1 February 09, 2008 10:48 AEST —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.116.95 (talk) 23:48, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Sure. –thedemonhog talk • edits 00:12, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Memory Problems?

Does he actually have memory problems, or is it him just being kind of an odd guy to begin with? And with the end of the Constant, is it possible that Daniel has been flipping between time periods as well? 76.248.153.9 (talk) 03:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

• I don't think he's been flipping through time periods as well, but it's certainly possible. In my opinion, all that diary note at the end of the episode showed us was that Desmond actually DID visit Daniel in 1996. As for the memory problems, I think that should be left out of the article as it's only speculation. zeldanum1 March 01, 2008 AEST

• The show hints that Desmond may have time switches too. The crew member that took the phone from Desmond said that "Faraday couldn't even help himself." insinuating that there is something wrong with Faraday. This may end up being a red herring or a major plot point. Either way, it is unconformable until more episodes are shown. USS Stingray (talk) 06:18, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, the problem is also that daniel's mental problems may not have had anything to do with his actual experiments and may just flat out be human guilt. It is possible that his 'breakdown' he had was not the result of his experiments but because he felt guilty about what happened to that assistant that he did the experiment on. The fact that he seemed to show a similar breakdown AFTER Charlotte died on the Island and was probably down for the count for a while suggests this could be. I know it is not enough to put in the article though.

Name Origin

Danny boy is definitely named after Michael Faraday, the scientist in the field of electromagnetics (pun intended). However I'm not sure where to mention this; it would be a bit strange to put in his opening paragraph. Does he need another section? "Miscellaneous" or "Trivia"? NickRinger (talk) 06:23, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

In the future, it should go in some sort of a behind the scenes section. For now, a mention in the lead is fine. –thedemonhog talk • edits 07:33, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Reception Article?

The other freighters have a reception article and I felt that Faraday was arguably the most well recieved, and he has no section on it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by CharismaInjection (talk • contribs) 20:22, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Faraday's fate

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dkggC3k862A most people seem to think thats faraday voice behind the camera. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.26.248.225 (talk) 03:34, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Nationality

Does this character count as "English", being the son of two English characters and having spent a great deal of his life in England? He seems to have an American accent. So, Daniel is possibly American-born (or likelier, Island-born with fake American status) who then grew up in England? Is he a naturalised citizen of the UK? ~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 10:34, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see the category Category:Fictional English Americans in place.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 11:03, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Degree

An Oxford doctorate is a DPhil, not a DSc. I've corrected it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tommurphy86 (talk • contribs) 20:06, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Daniel Faraday/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Canada Hky (talk) 19:16, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I'll be reviewing this. Upon a first inspection, there are no problems with the quick-fail criteria, so I will procede to a full review. Canada Hky (talk) 19:16, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Quick notes

• There are DAB links to Matthew Fox and Stephen Williams.
• There are issues with some links, including a dead link and several redirects - please check them out using the tool on this page.

General notes

In addition to the more mechanical notes detailed above regarding links, here are some things that need to be fixed up on the article.

• The lead is perhaps a touch short. I think it would be possible to remove the citations in the lead, and properly reference the material later. Saying the character was inspired by Michael Faraday without the quotes would suffice. The second cite is not controversial, but it is not repeated later in the article. Is the material covered by a different cite? Y
• The writing is usually in the present tense, rather than descriptive. Is this common to TV articles? A more passive voice would contribute to a more encyclopedic tone. Y

  A good copy-edit woudl likely clear up some grammatical issues as well "The Others mistake them as military personnels", etc. Y

• In the section "Arc", a subheading for the firt paragraph would be helpful. It could be included in the subheading for the season in which it was revealed. Or possibly included in a section "Background". Y
• "Oxford expells Daniel and quietly removes all references to him ever being at the university." Students are typically expelled, profs or researchers are fired. Y
• "Around this time, Daniel realizes the Secondary Protocol" - what's the Secondary Protocol? Y
• "internal character piece, "The Variable" was not "so much a great ending for Daniel.[40] - Dropping a "not" in front of a quote that in isolation seems to mean the opposite is confusing. That needs to be cleaned up, either with a more direct quote, or remove the quote to just express his general opinion. Y

  Bigger problem with this one - that sentence is taken almost verbatim from the source. Please fix this, and check for any other instances of close paraphrasing. Canada Hky (talk) 02:42, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

• There are inconsistencies in how numbers are written out. Generally, anything under ten is written out in words, greater than ten is in digits. But, consistency is key. Y
• Ref #41, the title should be rendered in Title Case, rather than all caps. Y
• Images all look good, FUR for first, appropriate license for second.

That's a fair bit to work on for right now, I am going to put this on hold, and give the nominator (or anyone else) a chance to clear these things up. As some of the broader issues are cleared up, I will likely have some pickier things to point out. Good luck, and thanks for the interesting read. It brought back some good LOST moments. Canada Hky (talk) 19:46, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Okkies, a lot of your problems have been sorted, I've yet to expand the lead, so I'll get right on that. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 20:58, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Completed the lead now. Anything else you'd like me to do, please let me know. That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 21:15, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

OK, the bigger issues have been addressed, so let's get down to the more formal review and see how it shakes out. As a note, there is still the issue with teh very close paraphrasing that needs to be cleared up.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

"After time traveling to 1977, Faraday is unknowingly shot and killed by his mother Eloise Hawking (Fionnula Flanagan)." Unknowingly shot? She knows she shot him, what's unknown is that he is her son.

Also in the lead, two consecutive sentences start with "Davies" - keep an eye for that in the rest of the text as well.

1. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

2. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   This is a tough area for me to evaluate. I think I will ask for someone a bit more unfamiliar with LOST to check in with their opinions, because I know what is going on, but it might be unfamiliar to someone less familiar with the finer details of the show.

3. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

4. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

5. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

6. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   I am going to put this on hold. There are a few things to address, and I will ask for a second opinion for clarity on plot and other details.

Second Opinion: I would appreciate it if someone could comment on the clarity of the character development sections regarding what happens on the TV show. LOST is a rather complicated show, and as an avid fan, I feel I might be taking some things for granted that are not properly explained. Canada Hky (talk) 17:40, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Everything has been addressed, including the issues raised by the reviewer who provided a second opinion. Congrats on a good article!Canada Hky (talk) 03:45, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Second Opinion

OK here goes:

• During his tenure, Daniel encountered Desmond Hume (Henry Ian Cusick), who was suffering from temporal displacement trapping him between 2004 and 1996. - Why not " between 1996 and 2004"? Y
• While in Essex, Massachusetts, Daniel saw a news report covering the discovery of the apparent wreckage of Oceanic Flight 815 in the depths of the Sunda Trench. Widmore approached Daniel and urged him to go to the island, which he said would heal him of his plight. Confusing - reckage discovered "in the depths of the Sunda Trench", yet Daniel was urged "to go to the island". Which is it - a deep sea trench or an island? Y
• Faraday first arrives on the island on December 23, 2004. How does he arrive? Y
• Later, the corpse of the freighter's doctor washes ashore. Jack Shephard (Matthew Fox) confronts Faraday and he is forced to confess that the freighter was not sent to the island to rescue the survivors.[ What is this "freighter"? Y
• In the afterlife, whereby Oceanic Flight 815 does not crash on the Island, Faraday has a different background. Needs re-writing in good plain English, presently an ungrammatical mess. Y
• After overhearing Eloise persuading Desmond to stop pursuing Penelope Milton (Sonya Walger),... Very poor prose. Try reading it out aloud! Y

Well, that's it. Jezhotwells (talk) 08:55, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

I've now implemented all suggestions here and mentioned above by User:Canada Hky. --That Ole' Cheesy Dude (Talk to the hand!) 15:57, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Daniel Faraday. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://goldderbyforums.latimes.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/1106078764/m/340102161

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:36, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Daniel Faraday. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080213170314/http://www.time-blog.com/tuned_in/2008/02/lostwatch_weve_got_company.html to http://www.time-blog.com/tuned_in/2008/02/lostwatch_weve_got_company.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://chud.com/articles/articles/19227/1/THUD-REVIEW-LOST---quotTHE-VARIABLEquot/Page1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:27, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Daniel Faraday. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081217192900/http://www.nypost.com/seven/02242008/tv/10_reasons_why_lost_is_found_98856.htm?page=0 to http://www.nypost.com/seven/02242008/tv/10_reasons_why_lost_is_found_98856.htm?page=0
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081014045725/http://community.tvguide.com/blog-entry/TVGuide-Editors-Blog/Ausiello-Report/Ausiello-Rant-Problem/800032708 to http://community.tvguide.com/blog-entry/TVGuide-Editors-Blog/Ausiello-Report/Ausiello-Rant-Problem/800032708

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:45, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Daniel Faraday. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120311085635/http://www.ugo.com/tv/best-tv-nerds?page=2 to http://www.ugo.com/tv/best-tv-nerds?page=2
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081210112200/http://community.tvguide.com/blog-entry/TVGuide-Editors-Blog/Ausiello-Report/Exclusive-Sopranos-Scenestealer/800020628 to http://community.tvguide.com/blog-entry/TVGuide-Editors-Blog/Ausiello-Report/Exclusive-Sopranos-Scenestealer/800020628
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081003214616/http://blogs.news-journalonline.com/fanboy/2008/05/the_lost_report_something_nice.html to http://blogs.news-journalonline.com/fanboy/2008/05/the_lost_report_something_nice.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090505160018/http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/tv-for-movie-lovers/tv-review-lost-the-variable.php to http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/tv-for-movie-lovers/tv-review-lost-the-variable.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:26, 5 May 2017 (UTC)