Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lost/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Lost episodes

Lost WikiProject editors, I just nominated List of Lost episodes for Featured List status again and was hoping you could support or comment on the nomination at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Lost episodes. Thanks. -- Wikipedical 07:16, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Good job, it has passed with 14 supports and 0 opposes! --thedemonhog talk • edits 04:41, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Oceanic Flight 815 deleted

The AfD, which can be viewed here apparently happened on June 24 - 26. It was still on the navigation box five days after it was deleted (I just removed it). I would have voted delete anyway, but it would have been nice if a notice was posted here. It was discussed by all non-Lost editors so that's why we didn't know. --thedemonhog talk • edits 02:28, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Peer review for Lost: The Journey

In case you missed the link on the project page, see it here. --thedemonhog talk • edits 17:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

AfD for popular culture references list

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of references to Lost in popular culture (2nd nomination)‎. --thedemonhog talk • edits 17:15, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Sr13 closed the debate on July 8 with "The result was delete, no redirect. Unlikely that anyone would type List of references to Lost in popular culture." --thedemonhog talk • edits 20:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject revamp

So, I renovated the main page. I think it looks nice. If you have the WikiProject page on your watchlist, I suggest adding Wikipedia:WikiProject Lost/Left panel and Wikipedia:WikiProject Lost/Right panel becuase no changes with be made to the main WikiProject page now. --thedemonhog talk • edits 17:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Nice work! It's now the most attractive WikiProject I belong to! :P •97198 talk 15:04, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Peer review for Through the Looking Glass (Lost)

See it at Peer review/Through the Looking Glass (Lost). I am hoping to get the article featured soon. --thedemonhog talk • edits 16:34, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Richard Alpert (Lost) up for speedy deletion

User:.NERGAL claims Richard is "not a major character" even though this has already been discussed here and here. I wrote that page so I could not remove the banner, so could someone else? --thedemonhog talk • edits 16:57, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

The banner was removed. Ironically, less than three weeks later I transformed the page into a redirect after it was announced that he will probably not appear in season 4. --thedemonhog talk • edits 20:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

How short is short?

Barring Nikki and Paulo how short should each plot synopses for each character be? I hink I messed-up at Libby (Lost).23prootie 01:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Featured article candidacy for Through the Looking Glass (Lost)

Please have your say at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Through the Looking Glass (Lost). See also the other featured episode articles at Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/Episode coverage#Featured articles. --thedemonhog talk • edits 05:07, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I still think you should wait until the DVD is released, but I think otherwise the page is pretty good, so I'll change my vote to neutral. By the way, I think it's best to try to avoid project vote stacking, as the goal of an FAC is to make a page as good as it can be, and random people who only support without really reading the article or leaving any constructive comments aren't helpful. -- Scorpion0422 05:18, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
But project vote stacking worked so well for Nikki and Paulo (12-0) and List of Lost episodes (14-0).  ;) Yay, neutral! --thedemonhog talk • edits 05:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
I was thinking more of List of Lost episodes, which say 14 supports, and half of the supporters left no comments. -- Scorpion0422 05:37, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
"Through the Looking Glass" has been promoted with 16 supports, 1 neutral and 0 opposes. Expect it to appear on the main page on February 6, 2008. --thedemonhog talk • edits 03:47, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Here is the request: Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests#Through the Looking Glass (Lost). --thedemonhog talk • edits 19:38, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
The featured article director has changed the format of the page, so the above link no longer works. –thedemonhog talk • edits • box 00:09, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Commentaries

Does anyone own the first season DVD set? I do not and cannot add more to the "Casting" section in Boone Carlyle. --thedemonhog talk • edits 21:20, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

AfD- Thematic motifs of Lost

I have listed Thematic motifs of Lost for AfD due to excessive original research. The AfD page can be found here. -- Wikipedical 02:51, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

The August 12 result was delete, but move to Ursasapien's sandbox. --thedemonhog talk • edits 20:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

DHARMA Initiative stations

The article DHARMA Initiative stations is in need of a desperate overhaul. I ask members of this wikiproject to take a look at it. It needs tons of sources and the plot summary needs to be trimmed. I just reduced it from 40,909 bytes to 17,499 bytes. If you could lend a hand, that would be great. -- Wikipedical 02:37, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Good job cutting down so much. Is the plot summary section, "Uses of stations after the Dharma Initiative" actually needed? --thedemonhog talk • edits 02:40, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
No, I was going to cut it too but thought I'd get more feedback. What do you think? It is a smelly plot summary, isn't it. -- Wikipedical 02:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Now it's 9,531 bytes. Much better. -- Wikipedical 02:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Should "Summary of stations" just be merged into the Dharma Initiative article now? --thedemonhog talk • edits 02:47, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Yep, I was considering just merging the pages now too. Both of them are crufty enough to be one. -- Wikipedical 02:50, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
I can't see why anyone would object. --thedemonhog talk • edits 02:51, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Good work, now we should copyedit the hell out of it. -- Wikipedical 02:58, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
The reason for the move from DHARMA Initiative → Dharma Initiative can be found here and here. Others may challenge your move back to all capitals. --thedemonhog talk • edits 03:04, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Should "As mythology on Lost" be kept? --thedemonhog talk • edits 03:13, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

My intention was to have a section about the writers' use of DHARMA in the series so the page wouldn't just be a complete plot summary. Like the "Creation" section in Nikki and Paulo, I guess. I think we should keep it, but yes, perhaps rename or change it. -- Wikipedical 03:17, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Image of cast listed for deletion

Please comment and vote at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2007 August 21#Image:Lost cast (season 3).png. --thedemonhog talk • edits 03:28, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

On August 30, Quadell closed with "Kept, no clear-cut violations, and many users believe this passes NFCC#8." --thedemonhog talk • edits 20:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Nikki and Paulo: the final battle

Head over to Template talk:LostNav#Straw poll: Nikki & Paulo as main characters. --thedemonhog talk • edits 00:05, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Ongoing disputes between Ursasapien and 70.189.74.49

See also: User:Ursasapien, User talk:Ursasapien, Special:Contributions/Ursasapien, User talk:70.189.74.49, Special:Contributions/70.189.74.49, User:Ursasapien/Sandbox/Lost, User talk:Ursasapien/Sandbox/Lost, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thematic motifs of Lost, User talk:Qwerty7412369, User talk:Gscshoyru#Re: Thematic motifs of Lost, User talk:Burnside65, Lost (TV series)#Thematic motifs, Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Reliable sources, and Wikipedia:Verifiability

70.189.74.49 is an anonymous user, with an edit count of less than 100 since his first edit on June 10, who wishes to remain anonymous and has an understanding of NOR and RS. His second edit to Wikipedia was reverting Ursasapien, a member of this WikiProject since May 23. They engaged in several edit wars at "Thematic motifs of Lost," which has since been deleted but has been moved to Ursasapien's sandbox, where they continue to battle it out with others, most notably Qwerty7412369, there and on its talk page. At Ursasapien's request, 70.189.74.49 was blocked a couple times. Currently, they are fighting over a sentence in the themes section on the Lost page. If any of you have the main Lost page on your watchlist, you know what I'm talking about. 70.189.74.49 keeps removing a true sentence because the source that Ursasapien is citing is irrelevant. It appears that both have good intentions, but this seriously has to stop. Hopefully, this message will bring the attention of other editors and there will finally be some conflict resolution. --thedemonhog talk • edits 19:01, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

  • I requested semi-protection for the main Lost page, and it was granted for two weeks until Sept. 9th. -- Wikipedical 02:00, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
You are precisely correct that we (User:70.189.74.49 and I) have been in an extended battle over "Thematic motifs of Lost." A good deal of the debate is contained here. As you can see, I was originally believed this could be WP:OR, but I have since been persuaded that this is not the case.
I believe the "BuddyTV" reference is there to simply verify that "The Lost Experience" was canon. There are other references that talk about the influence of The Stand and The Watchmen on Carlton Cuse and Damon Lindelof. I believe references to the Lost Experience count, as well. On top of this, Qwerty has argued that the primary source (the show itsself) demonstrates this apocalyptic theme. Ursasapien (talk) 04:02, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
For more, see Talk:Lost (TV series)#Thematic motifs of Lost. --thedemonhog talk • edits 20:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Recent good article nominations

In the past month, four articles from this WikiProject were either passed of failed as GA's. Boone Carlyle and Lostpedia were promoted, and Lost: The Journey was not because it is not comprehensive, a problem that is unlikely to be solved. I nominated Lost (season 4), but it was literally failed in a minute. See the discussion here. --thedemonhog talk • edits 21:01, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Lost (season 1)

I have decided to work on getting the season to FL status, but it would involve adding a chart of episodes and making it look a little something like this and I will be working on it here. I will not be merging any pages or taking any info away from other pages, I'm simply adding a chart. I am told that there has been a lot of debate over the season pages in the past and I wanted to see if anyone had any objections to this. -- Scorpion0422 22:56, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

If we add the information to the season page, I think it should be removed from the list page, turning it into something like this. I will help out with the page, but I would rather get it to featured article status than featured list status (more like this than this). --thedemonhog talk • edits 23:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Part of the reason we could never get a Simpsons season to GA or FA status is because it isn't a very media reviewed show, so it would have been hard to find sufficient info for a season page. Plus, every episode has its own page, so info relating to a specific episode can just go there. In the case of season 8, EVERY SINGLE episode is a GA or higher, so if we did make the page similar to the Smallville one, it would have made all of the episodes kind of redundant.
I think it should be more on the list side and only include info that is too general for the episode pages. If we put production info about every episode on the page, it would render individual episode pages pointless. -- Scorpion0422 23:24, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
All right, I now agree with you. --thedemonhog talk • edits 23:49, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
This sounds good to me. In fact, I proposed this same idea at the Lost episode mediation, but the former Lost editors didn't think it was a good idea. If we were to implement this, my two conditions are that a) the process of moving the list of episodes summaries to the season pages takes place simultaneously to all season pages. And b) we carry this out before season 4 begins. I also think it's important to gain consensus first before this happens, and we should allow all members of the Wikiproject to share their opinions before this begins. -- Wikipedical 00:54, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
I'd have no problem with moving over the plots from the master list, but the plots on season pages will be mini-summaries. And, I am already working on the chart at my Bigger page o' messin around so if anyone would like to help, they should go there. I have the columns all done, I just need to add plots. -- Scorpion0422 01:03, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
What do you mean "mini-summaries"? -- Wikipedical 01:06, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Rather than just being a single sentence (or two) about the plot, it should be a brief paragraph long outline of the episode. like The Simpsons (season 8), although it will be trickier in this case because Simpsons episodes are much shorter and less complex. -- Scorpion0422 01:10, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
I am working on season 3 in my sandbox. --thedemonhog talk • edits 06:57, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
On the 15, I will run season 3 through FLC. –thedemonhog talk • edits • box 19:01, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I've been away for three days, so I've just taken a look at the season 1 and 3 pages. I think they look great, however, I don't know why the 'Impact' sections were removed. Here's the version of the Season 3 page before thedemonhog replaced it, and take a look at the impact section. If we could reinstate those sections as opposed to having huge lead sections, the pages will be good to take to FLC. -- Wikipedical 23:09, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Scorpion's FLC can be found at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Lost (season 1)‎. –thedemonhog talk • edits • box 21:23, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
It has been promoted by Circeus with four supports and one oppose. –thedemonhog talk • edits • box 23:40, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
I have nominated season 3 for FLC here. –thedemonhog talk • edits • box 02:56, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Now that seasons 2 and 3 have been promoted, the group is nominated for featured topic status here. –thedemonhog talk • edits • box 03:48, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Crossovers at AfD

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of crossovers on Lost, started by Will (Sceptre). –thedemonhog talk • edits • box 15:40, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

The final tally was three votes in favour and one objection. –thedemonhog talk • edits • box 18:06, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

To-do list?

I just joined the project and could not find a to-do list. I was wondering if there is such a list of articles which would serve to guide project newcomers on what needs attention. Havelok 21:28, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

There was a to-do list because all it said was to revert vandalism. You can see "Tasks" on the project page, which serves the same purpose. –thedemonhog talk • edits • box 22:44, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Spoiler sources

Should we change the policy that was agreed upon two years ago? Of the twelve who discussed the policy in November 2005, all have since left the project (and sometimes all of Wikipedia). The twelve users decided that spoilers will only be allowed on the condition that they have been confirmed by ABC, crew or cast. Lately, some users want to include "The Beginning of the End" in Lost articles. Should we change the policy to allow spoilers from The Hollywood Reporter, Variety, TV Guide, E! and DarkUFO, or at least some of them? –thedemonhog talk • edits • box 17:48, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

  • No, the policy fights off speculation. The reporting of those sources, especially for a show like Lost, will tend to speculate, and there is no reason to change a policy that states the most reliable sources for the show are official sources. -- Wikipedical 16:21, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
    • The policy was made specifically to stop people from putting unreliable information and speculation from spoiler sites into articles as if it were official information. Official information only comes from official sources. However, I don't see why we can't also include reportings from notable and reliable sources such as TV Guide. Meaning even though we still can't include "The Beginning of the End" as the official title and cite TV Guide as a source, we can say that TV Guide has reported it as the title. There's a difference. I'm not even sure the policy needs to be changed because I don't think this goes against it. --DocNox 03:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
      • DocNox, that's a good idea in principle, though it might open the floodgates if left unchecked. Reportings made in TV Guide could be noted, though there's a line between something like that and a spoiler blog which needs to be made clear. Tphi 23:55, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Citing episodes

Hi all, I notice you have citing episodes on your "tasks" list. To facilitate this process I'm working on producing a citation for each episode and appending it to the plot summary in the episode list (I've done season one) so that they are available centrally and can be copied and pasted out to the main articles. I know from experience working on The Wire (TV series) that these can be used a lot and extracting them from an episode list wikitable can be tricky. I'm keeping them on an excel spreadsheet but wonder if I there is a way to share them with the community? Is it worth keeping a copy of the citations on a sub page of the project for even easier use?--Opark 77 17:22, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

All episode citations are now on the season pages.--Opark 77 19:14, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, but I do not see the purpose for episode citations in season pages. It seems redundant to include information twice. –thedemonhog talk • edits 22:01, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Firstly, as I said above it centralises the citations but not in the most user friendly way. So once the citations are on the season page you can go there whenever you need to grab a citation and cut and paste it instead of having to write it or think of other articles where it might be cited. Secondly, it is not intended for including the same information twice it is a matter of verifiability. Every episode list on wikipedia asserts information like writers, directors and plot summary for an episode. Often this information is copied from unreliable sources like IMDb and TV.com. The facts asserted on an episode list should be backed up by sources and citing the episode as a primary source fulfills this requirement. Surely per WP:CITE having a source for information in an article is preferable to not having a source? Even if you feel the season pages are a bad place for the citations what do you think about having a centralised resource of the citations for WP members to use for quickly citing episodes? Would it be appropriate to included that on a subpage of this wikiproject?--Opark 77 22:42, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
I think it's a great idea to make a subpage with all the citations on it, but I do not see the point of having "title: Through the Looking Glass, airdate: May 23, 2007, writers: Damon Lindelof & Carlton Cuse, director: Jack Bender, featured character: Jack" and then having a citation that says "title: Through the Looking Glass, airdate: May 23, 2007, writers: Damon Lindelof & Carlton Cuse, director: Jack Bender, network: ABC." –thedemonhog talk • edits 22:46, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Ok, where should we place the subpage? How about WikiProject Lost/citations or WikiProject Lost/episode citations. Do you think it is worth citing a source for the plot summaries in the season pages at all? I agree that it is unfortunate that the information in the citation is duplicated in the article but I don't think it completely negates the value of having a citation in place.--Opark 77 23:27, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Trying to explain my reasoning a bit more. I think the purpose of the text of the citation is to allow the reader to identify the source and track it down if necessary. The purpose of the citation itself is to state a source of the information in the article and is therefore not duplicating the function of the episode list itself. If the text of the citation mirrors something in the article so be it - it is nevertheless fulfilling an important function.--Opark 77 23:32, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
I'll cast my votes by saying that there should be no episode citations in the season pages (as I believe it to be common sense that a plot summary of an episode is summarizing the episode – the source) and that the subpage should be at Wikipedia:WikiProject Lost/Episode citations. I can help out with this. –thedemonhog talk • edits 23:41, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I've started the subpage at the link you suggested and non-wikied each citation so we can go through and subdivide them a bit more for ease of locating the required one. Thank you for the offer of help.--Opark 77 00:02, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Nice work. This will be very useful. –thedemonhog talk • edits 00:30, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Did you know?

The Beginning of the End (Lost) is currently being featured in the new articles section of the main page and will be for the next few hours. After that, it can still be found in the recent additions archive. –thedemonhog talk • edits 18:04, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Status

According to WP:FICTION infoboxes must not have a status field. I'll remove the status field from all characters' infoboxes. Please check a similar conversation in Heroes Talk page. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:27, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I removed the "Status" field from all characters' articles. A character in a fiction universe maybe is "Deceaced" in episode X but "active" in episode 1. -- Magioladitis 16:22, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Good job. –thedemonhog talk • edits 21:49, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Last appearance

I removed this field in the character infobox because it is not reflective of how long the character is on the show and because it is always changing with new flashbacks and dreams. –thedemonhog talk • edits 22:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Thumbs up! -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Discussion about multiple episodes on WT:EPISODE

Hi. A discussion on the episodes MoS is here. As an article under the project's scope is used as an example, you are encouraged to contribute. Will (talk) 15:28, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Also see a separate lengthy discussion and request for comment on the WP:EPISODE guideline. –thedemonhog talk • edits 05:43, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Hehe, and also Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (writing about fiction)#Needs revision and Wikipedia talk:Notability (fiction)#RfC: Acceptable direction for WP:FICT guideline. -- Wikipedical (talk) 05:56, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

New to this WikiProject

I figured I would introduce myself. My name is Brian. I'm a fan of LOST of course and i'm glad to be a part of this project. -Brian Alexander (talk) 05:39, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

We're glad to have you with us :D -- Ned Scott 07:34, 29 December 2007 (UTC)