Talk:The Brig (Lost)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Brig (Lost) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Television: Episode coverage / Lost Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Lost task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Untitled

Does anybody actually know if this is a Jack centric episode? The second citation in the article does certainly not lead to a reputable source. It would make far more sense if this was a Locke centric episode. Can anybody find an official source on whose flashback this will be, or at least a point in the right direction? Also, I have seen every episode of season 3, and not once has anybody ever stated who or what The Brig is. If nobody contradicts all this, then I will start to make edits in 48 hours. Thanks --Pinknoise 15:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was speculated to be a Jack flashback but there are also reports that it will not be a Jack centric episode. TV.com can be edited by anyone so therefore is not a reputable source. The centric of this episode is not even confirmed by SpoilerFix.com. The flashback character will become a lot more apparent and official when the press release for this episode is released on Monday 16 April. Matt
- It now looks apparent that this episode may not have a flashback, however this has not yet been confirmed by any official sources Matt 22:10, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - It does seem like this will be a no flashback episode and taht the finale will be Jack centric 172.207.194.164 14:54, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trivia

A brig is a military prison that is on a ship or navy base." adds nothing to the artivcle(Black Dalek 11:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)).[reply]

Ideas?

Did Sawyer ever find the the 'original' Sawyer? I bet that Anthony Cooper is the true 'Sawyer'.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.68.128.165 (talk) 09:23, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

me too--70.189.175.84 05:48, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that that would make a lot of sense, seeing as how if Anthony Cooper=the original Sawyer, then the whole Locke and Sawyer have a common enemy thing makes sense.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.239.114.197 (talk) 04:58, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is Nikki a Main Character or Not?

The debate was dead, but it has risen from the grave! Bring your garlic and wooden stakes to Talk:Nikki Fernandez! 63.215.29.15 23:57, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some Additions and Modifications

Added image to article, please leave it there or suggest/upload a better one. Also moved the article to The Brig (Lost) as to keep with the correct format for lost episodes. Other than that :D R0ck1t 15:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC) °!°[reply]

We don't disambiguate individual episode articles unless it's necessary. Since there is no other article simply titled The Brig "(Lost)" isn't needed. - DocNox 20:17, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry bout that just the last lad of episodes are in the "Episode Title" (Lost) format but probably for the reason you stated, shame there can't be some continuity though. R0ck1t 23:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Naomi and Desmond.png

Image:Naomi and Desmond.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 00:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified 3 external links on The Brig. 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:

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) 23:53, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 10 April 2018

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: consensus to move the page, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 11:25, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Brig → The Brig (Lost) – There are a number of entries at the Brig (disambiguation) page and one other entry specifically titled "The Brig", The Brig (play). The TV episode is not the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for a common word such as "brig" and "The Brig" should redirect to the dab page. Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 05:43, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support and speedy close This isn't even controversial, The Brig should definitely be redirected to the disambiguation page._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 07:42, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support The Brig (play) in Gbooks far more notable. So redirect to dab. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:20, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support obvious. -- Netoholic @ 12:34, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support and speedy close - pretty obvious. No clear primary topic for "The Brig". Paintspot Infez (talk) 15:03, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support move per all above. No clear primary topic. ONR (talk) 04:58, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Changing plot listing order

"In the jungle" mentions Naomi talking about plane's dead passangers, but chronologically it happenned before meeting Cooper. So what about changing plot order and putting Locke story after beach one? Gevorg89 (talk) 18:08, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]