Talk:Charlie Pace

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Charlie Pace article.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~). New discussion topics go at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Frequently asked questions. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Talk page guidelines Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Don't bite the newcomers!

This page falls within the scope of the Lost WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve all Wikipedia articles relating to Lost. All information on future developments needs to follow the Lost policy regarding sources. Episode articles must comply with the Lost television series guidelines.

The spoken word version of this article is part of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, an attempt to produce recordings of Wikipedia articles being read aloud. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and find out how to contribute.

Contents 1 Themes 2 Removed Trivia 3 On the Island 4 Origins of the character 5 Oasis 6 Does not fail FUC.

[edit] Themes

Yes, I know the Music theme is a stretch, but I'm not sure whether the info in that section should be deleted as trivial or is really part of an over-arching theme for Charlie. Baryonyx 23:45, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Removed Trivia

I removed the speculation that Charlie is based on Naveen Andrews' life. This is neither confirmed nor pertinent, especially since the IMDB trivia page (and interviews with Mr. Monaghan I've read) indicate that the part of Charlie was part of the original show concept, but was re-written from a middle-aged fading star to a 20-something after TPTB saw Mr. Monaghan's audition. Occam's Razor would indicate to me that the character of Charlie is more based on the many other rockers who lived Charlie's lifestyle than on Naveen Andrews. In fact, as Damon Lindelof said at Lost-TV, "And the first thing we wrote for the show before there was even a script were character outlines. Like Charlie, for instance. We constructed him as a has-been musician, late 40s who'd been in a band in the '80s and then Dominic Monaghan came in and read and it was like wow! He was so amazing we changed the character and write for him (Dominic)." This pretty much kills any speculation, IMHO.Baryonyx 07:30, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] On the Island

The second half of this (In "Adrift"...) really needs to be fixed up a bit... There are quite a few spelling mistakes and it doesn't read well. --Casiotone 14:23, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Origins of the character

Charlie has alot of parallels with Eddie Dean from Stephen King's Dark Tower Series. They are both heroin addicts thrown into a completely different enviornment. Also when they were young their mother and big brother took care of them and then later on they end up taking care of the big brother. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.255.130.146 (talk • contribs) January 25, 2005.

[edit] Oasis

Should the obvious Oasis connections (band from Manchester led by brothers - lead singer named Liam and another one who writes the songs, etc.), be mentioned here? It's mentioned in the article on the (fake) band. john k 18:29, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Nope, that would be WP:OR -- PKtm 18:39, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

The article on the fake band notes the parallels and cites them to the Lost Season 1 DVD. See Drive Shaft:

The fictional band Drive Shaft and their music were intentionally modeled heavily after real-world band Oasis [2] and many of the details of Drive Shaft (two brothers from Manchester form a rock band and hit it big, having to battle with stardom, sibling rivalry and drug addiction) mirror some of the experiences of Liam and Noel Gallagher of Oasis.

One would assume that press comments that say the band is similar to Oasis could be found, given that the similarities are fairly obvious. Why do you say it constitutes original research? john k 00:31, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

It's not original research: it's on one of the "making of" documentaries accompanying the boxed set for the first series of the DVD, as is the fact that they intended charlie's character to be older, but cast him on spec. I have therefore removed the "citations required" from this section. ElectricRay 17:30, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, it's not original research, but "citations needed" means, well, that a citation should be provided! A reference to the DVD is what's needed here. -- PKtm 21:20, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

It's such a piffling fact that a citation isn't necessary: you don't need to footnote every item in this encyclopaedia (and in any case this discussion should serve as citation enough). The original complaint here was that it was original research: it isn't. It's trivia - which perhaps justifies deletion - but it isn't original research. ElectricRay 21:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I completely disagree. See WP:Verifiability. Way too often on Lost articles, people post the darnedest theories as fact, on the order of "Jack's character is based on Ernest Hemingway", with no citation. You can't tell the sheep from the goats, especially on things like that, without citations. The other article has the citation; I plan to add it when I have a free moment. -- PKtm 22:15, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

ok; whatever. ElectricRay 10:51, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Does not fail FUC.

Due to the nature of the show Lost (as Edward knows all so well) there are no suits or leaving the island to pop to a movie festival, the image portrays a fictional character in the fictional surroundings, You could not portray the character with a photo of the actor doing general things because that wouldn’t be portraying the character at all. Matthew Fenton (talk) 13:36, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

If our goal is to portray the character, then a description that says "this guy, but without the suit and in need of a shave" would do the exact same thing, just not as pretty. The crazy thing about this is that I've suggested that we can use a character image as long as it's something a little bit more character specific than what we are using. At this point, including the old images is just plain lazy, and not out of necessity. -- Ned Scott 02:47, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

The goal is to portray the character, and there is no better way to do that than use an image of the character. This article, and the others that you are needlessly removing content from, are prime examples of where fair use images can be used. Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 13:20, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

We can use an image of the character, but it's got to be slightly better than just them standing around. That's all. -- Ned Scott 20:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Why? Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 20:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

It would make it more of a character-specific image, making for a stronger fair use rational. -- Ned Scott 20:39, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Can you provide a specific example of what you believe would suffice for a photo? Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 01:31, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Personally, promotional images are best for portraying the character on the show. And I think you going around and removing them solves nothing. -- Depressed Marvin

It doesn't matter what you or I think , this is policy. -- Ned Scott 21:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, Ned, it's your interpretation of policy. The discussion at Wikipedia talk:Fair use#TV/Film characters who look the same as the actors who portray them shows that there's not really a consensus on this issue. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 02:31, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

That only means that it defaults to our current policy on living people and fair use images. I'm trying to give you guys a way around this, as I'm sure many editors would rather enforce "no fair use" at all on such an article. All we need is something that is a little more "them" and then we have a stronger rationale for fair use. A little work and we'll save ourselves from a headache down the line. This isn't a big request here. I'll do it myself, when I have the time to look through episodes on DVD. -- Ned Scott 07:36, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps it's because I'm an actor myself, but I really do see a difference between an image of the actor and an image of the character, and I don't think that necessarily means showing them doing something character-specific. It does mean showing them in costume and make-up, if applicable — but I don't see why a character portrait has to be treated differently from a character screenshot. Both are copyrighted images, both are used under fair use, and both are designed to show the actor as the character.

My understanding of policy was that fair use images are acceptable for characters but not for actors. That doesn't mean that character images need to look noticeably different from the actor; just that we can use an image with a fair-use claim on Charlie Pace but not on Dominic Monaghan. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:58, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't see it as much of a problem, but we did lose all the screen shots on List of Lost episodes, and it would be nice to not make the character articles the next targets. Showing that we are "tough" on our articles will show that we are not willy-nilly with these images, and gives the impression that the images do show something more than just any 'ol image. But if you guys really want to use those images, then go ahead.. -- Ned Scott 08:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Ned you are beginning to get way ahead of your self now with your interpretations of policy, I will say this as bluntly as possible: You are wrong. — I've reverted your removal of the character image. if you wish to begin using actor images to portray a character then get a consensus as laid out in WP:CONSENSUS. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 10:44, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

PS: This is the only request I will make towards you: If you make unconstructivee dits to these pages again I will not hesitate to create a user conduct RfC as your recent behaviour is becoming intolerable. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 10:46, 21 November 2006 (UTC)