Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television/Lost task force/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Request for today's featured article

I have nominated Lost: Missing Pieces at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests#January 22. I know that "The Beginning of the End" was the most popular choice, but I was taken aback by that choice and kind of vetoed it. Heh heh, sorry. Anyway, it would be great if you showed some support or opposition! Thanks, –thedemonhog talk • edits 15:30, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Infobox of List of Lost awards and nominations

Could u please create a general template to be used throughout all of "list of xx awards and nominations"? This would make wikipedia a lot better.

Thank you--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 12:53, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

There is one for music, but you have to remember that there are a LOT more awards out there for television awards, so it would be difficult. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 15:48, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:52, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Plot

Special (Lost)

that just looks like the best way to do a plot, especially for the early episodes which is what the episodes comprises of, as opposed to the italic things. What you guys think? IAmTheCoinMan (talk) 07:33, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

That looks pretty good and I think that the plot section without subsections would work as well. –thedemonhog talk • edits

Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 09:21, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

Sourcing question

I expect this has been discussed before, but I'm not finding it in the archives, so.... what is the policy on this project about using material that has been written or discussed about the show (such as the Lindelof/Cuse podcast interviews) as sources for things like backstory or definitive character identification when the actual episode dialog is vague on a point? thanks Tvoz/talk 07:00, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure I understand what you're asking, but I know we do source the podcasts by Damon and Carlton. I would say one of the specific reasons is because they're the driving force behind the show and they write the majority of the episodes. I would say they're the most credible source on certain information. --HELLØ ŦHERE 14:27, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry if I wasn't clear (shouldn't post notes when I'm half asleep!) ... what I'm asking is if information is not clearly expressed in what we see on the screen, but when they are asked in an interview Lindelof/Cuse reveal something, do we include that information in articles, or do we go only by what we see on the screen? For example, on screen the Goodspeed baby is identified as being named "Ethan", but on screen it hasn't been confirmed that it's Ethan Rom - however, apparently L/C confirmed this in a podcast - so the question would be do we go by what has been stated on screen (the baby is named Ethan), or do we go by what they tell us (the baby is Ethan Rom)? There's always a lot of speculation swirling around Lost, and I've seen arguments on both sides, so I am asking if the Project has taken a position on this. I would assume it's fine to go by L/C, but thought I'd ask. Tvoz/talk 23:30, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

As far as I know, I don't think any specific "rule" has been laid down, but as I said, I'm willing to bet that we could take what they say. I mean, for all intensive purposes, they are the show. They oversee everything, write the bulk of the episodes, and do the podcasts/answer questions/tease us more. I'd say if they confirm that it is in fact Ethan Rom, we should go with it. And I know at least this season and most of season four was the same way when viewing podcasts as sources. But, that's just what I see and my interpretation. --HELLØ ŦHERE 01:41, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

• I would say that whatever Lindelof/Cuse say in interviews should be treated as canon to Lost, since, as JpGrB has said, they basically are the show. -- Wikipedical (talk) 03:30, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Timelines?

You no it would be interesting and informative to create timeline type things as to the history of the characters. Like you have Mr Echo/Eko or whatever his name is, and you put in order, to the best you can the order of his flashbacks and form his linear history. So you have what he did when he was like 10, and you also have what he did right before the plane, and all these things. plot them on a timeline type thing and state what episode he was what age/what happened, and yeah.... i think i explained craply, but it would be very informative and would easily convey the depth of these characters back stories in a very simple way. IAmTheCoinMan (talk) 13:02, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lost island timeline. Such things are also already covered in depth in fanwikis, e.g. at http://lostpedia.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline . – sgeureka ^t•c 13:50, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

lame IAmTheCoinMan (talk) 10:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Cast

i strongly think that List of Lost (TV series) cast members should really look more like List of Desperate Housewives cast members, the lost one is so ugly and bright. What you think?IAmTheCoinMan (talk) 10:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Our format was taken from List of Harry Potter cast members, which happens to be a featured list. If you want to change the colors around, go ahead, but I prefer the current format. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 12:12, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I prefer it too.--Spongefrog (talk) 19:23, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

The Variable is episode #100

For those following the previous discussion about episode numbering here, Damon and Carlton have confirmed that "The Variable" is episode #100 in the latest podcast. Any help changing the numbers in all of the episode articles would be appreciated. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 20:51, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Charles Widmore

There was a lot of demand for a Charles Widmore article, so I created one here. Writing an article about anything to do with Lost is extremely difficult. I really need help. I've begun the story arc section (it's not that well written), added an image, but that's about it. HELP ME! --Spongefrog (talk) 20:34, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that thing I said above. I hardly did anything (in a good way). --Spongefrog (talk) 19:23, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Sayid

At the top of the Sayid Jarrah article, there is a redlink template which I can't get rid of. I don't know where else to put this message. Please do it! --Spongefrog (talk) 19:42, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Seems to have gone away itself. Never mind. --Spongefrog (talk) 20:33, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

"The Variable"

I've worked really hard on the article and I think it's close to GA status. Could you guys take a look and tell me what you think? Also, the article lacks ratings information, so if anyone could help me with that, then that would be great. :) TheLeftorium 20:05, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

It does need ratings and some citations for parts like "Daniel was introduced in the fourth season and was originally intended to be a minor character only. However, his quiet demeanor and seemingly good heart made him a favorite with the fans, so Lindelof and Cuse decided to expand Daniel's role". I would also drop any reviews from websites that do not have an article on them, as there are so many reviews out there from more famous sources. Great work, –thedemonhog talk • edits 00:42, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! :) I added the citation for the Daniel part and some ratings information. I've searched for more reviews but I haven't been able to find any, though. I'll nominate the article now and search a bit more. Also, the June edition of the official Lost magazine will be a "hundredth episode special", so there might be some production information in that. TheLeftorium 18:32, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Is centric character original research?

I doubt that the featured character of season's last episode is Jacob. I need proof by a press release or a podcast. Otherwise, I think that is just WP:Original research. WP:OR reads "To demonstrate that you are not presenting original research, you must cite reliable sources that are directly related to the topic of the article, and that directly support the information as it is presented." The whole idea of centric characters is an example of improper synthesis. That the producers stated that some articles are X-centric that doesn't mean that every is X-centric. (WP:SYNTHESIS reads: "Do not put together information from multiple sources to reach a conclusion that is not stated explicitly by any of the sources." Some days some editors added a reference that the show focuses to Jack, Juliet and Kate, this was replaced by an unsourced statement given by plot's observation. Does anyone have a proof that there is a centric character in this episode and that is Jacob? I think the whole concept of "centric character(s)" contains a lot of original research.

The same goes for the Mythology of Lost article which is not based in literature and magasines but in plot observations by the audience. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:33, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

For most episodes, the producers have specifically commented on who the centric character is in the podcast, interviews, etc. However, since they go into "radio silence" following the finale every year, then they aren't going to comment on "The Incident" until Comic-con in July. The reference for the episode being Sawyer (not Jack), Juliet and Kate-centric came from TV guide before the episode aired.[1] TV Guide is not a definitive source for this kind of information, especially before the episode airs, in my opinion. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 12:31, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I won't disagree. 1) The key-words are "for most". That's exactly the situation WP:SYNTHESIS describes. If it wasn't explicitly stated that every episode has a centric character then it doesn't. We know that some episodes centralise to a character. We should not "fill the gaps". 2) My comment about the TV guide in fact it was a WP:POINT. This kind of references should not be used as trusted third-party sources. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:07, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Weekly podcast about television: you're invited

On Thursday, at 11 am EST (15:00 UTC Wikipedia time), there will be a podcast discussion on Skype with television scholar Jason Mittell, who has written extensively about Lost (and wikis). If you'd like to participate, please sign up: Wikipedia:WikipediaWeekly/Episode76. --ragesoss (talk) 05:38, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

A number of your articles are in plainly terrible shape

Partly as a reaction to a loosely related matter, I've looked through the Wikipedia articles on episodes of LOST. A good number of them are little or nothing more than simple plot summaries. This is problematic, and though in my perfect world they would be deleted, I can understand why that will never happen. Given that you have numerous GA's and FA's on LOST episodes, this Project clearly has editors who know what they're doing. I covered the articles with tags, holding my nose while I did it, but in the interests of responsible tagging, I felt it best to leave word with interested editors as well. The problem articles are Born to Run (Lost), The Greater Good (Lost), Deus Ex Machina (Lost), Numbers (Lost), ...In Translation, Outlaws (Lost), Homecoming (Lost), Special (Lost), Hearts and Minds (Lost), Whatever the Case May Be, All the Best Cowboys Have Daddy Issues, Raised by Another, Solitary (Lost), Confidence Man (Lost), The Moth (Lost), House of the Rising Sun (Lost), White Rabbit (Lost), Walkabout (Lost), Tabula Rasa (Lost), Exodus (Lost), Man of Science, Man of Faith, Adrift (Lost), Orientation (Lost), ...And Found, Abandoned (Lost), The Other 48 Days, Collision (Lost), What Kate Did, The Long Con, One of Them, Maternity Leave (Lost), The Whole Truth (Lost), Dave (Lost), ? (Lost), Three Minutes, The Glass Ballerina, Further Instructions, The Cost of Living (Lost), Tricia Tanaka is Dead, Enter 77, Par Avion, Left Behind (Lost), D.O.C. (Lost), and The Brig. There are also quite a lot of fair use images, beyond just infobox usage, in some of these articles - Par Avion, for example, has three fair use images (including the infobox). For a 10k article, three fair use images really is pushing it.

Anyway, I'm not saying these need to all be FA's by tomorrow, but some serious work needs to be done with these articles. Give them a look. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 21:54, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

We know, but we have other priorities. –thedemonhog talk • edits 23:22, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Really? How many articles do you really have under your purview? 150, maybe 200 if there's a lot I don't know about (always possible!)? Doesn't really seem like that many. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 00:11, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Other priorities include the character articles and real life. –thedemonhog talk • edits 00:57, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

And as some people say... be WP:BOLD! -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:35, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I'd love to if I had the time. And that's not me copping out, I really mean that. Is there a guideline you folks use to write an article on a TV episode (something I've never done)? Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 00:11, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

There is WP:MOSTV, although that has only been around for a year and most of the project's featured and good episode articles were written before that. –thedemonhog talk • edits 00:57, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Template

Members of this project may be interested to know that User:XLinkBot has been programmed to remove any insertion of the {{Lostpedia}} template in Wikipedia articles by new/unregistered users. I have raised an issue about this on the bot's talk page, but another user has taken the strong position that these links are "spam." --R'n'B (call me Russ) 10:43, 19 June 2009 (UTC)