User:Robert K S/Archive 1

From Lostpedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Thanks

  • Noticed you were doing a bunch of great minor edits, with very good judgment. Good work and thanks! -- C¯ _Santa_ ¯T02:47, 30 October 2006 (PST)

Short lists

Hey, I'm surprised (but relieved) to see that someone besides me is paying attention to the recent epidemic of short list-type articles erroneously tagged as disamb pages. I've been thinking for some time about what to do with those lists and wasn't quite sure, as they may require a case by case approach. Some could be turned into disamb pages, in the few cases where one is needed (or turned back into disambiguation pages, which is what some of them actually were before they were transformed into lists). Some could remain as list-type articles, when the list in question seems to present a real interest, thematically or otherwise, and when it contains additional information that does not exist in practical form elsewhere (some those could possibly be renamed "List of..."). And some could be deleted, when they merely duplicate identical information better found in another article, or when the grouping theme of the list doesn't seem especially significant (lists created for the sake a creating lists), or when they seem to merely list articles and have been created merely to duplicate a category of articles. -- Cheers 15:06, 30 October 2006 (PST)

Adding to Sayid's

Hi. I noticed your small, but significant addition to Sayid's article. I also noticed how after making your inital edit, you changed it to a better one as you noticed the content in "Faith" (many others might just throw something in, and then I would have to re-edit it). Really liked your approach. -- 06:46, 2 November 2006 (PST)

Good idea, I'll see to it in the pages I'm working on, I think i'll go for the ("Episode Title") approach, I think it looks nicer, do you agree?
I just hope in the future people agree on one style for all references, otherwise things will keep on getting messy as you said-- 06:53, 2 November 2006 (PST)
  • Sure, I'll be using the MoS format then. Thanks for pointing that out. For future reference, can you send me a link to the MoS ? -- 07:05, 2 November 2006 (PST)

New Font

Hi Robert, see Plkrtn's reply to your message at my talk page. It most probably has to do with the new Attention header that Jabberwock has added to all pages. -- 06:55, 15 November 2006 (PST)

Further to previous, it seems like it isn't just Lostpedia. We think its a Windows update gone awry. Its true that the same problem is happening to me on other webpages. It seems to only be affecting Internet Explorer --Nickb123 (Talk) 07:48, 16 November 2006 (PST)
Yep, I've left a message today at Admin's talk page, and he promptly figured the problem out and solved it! We should have obviously pinged him earlier :) I'm pretty glad that this hectic issue was finally solved and everyone now can use whatever browser in accessing the site. Thanks for the note. Regards-- 11:58, 21 November 2006 (PST)


Incomplete Sentences

I don't disagree that incomplete sentences shouldn't be finished with a full stop, however I don't consider the caption on the picture on the Charlie article to be an incomplete sentence. Its a sentence. It might be a descriptive sentence, but its still a sentence. -- Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  01:43, 22 November 2006 (PST)

Fine, keep it without the dot. However, next time you are patronising and condescending to me, or any other user on this site (then slyly removing the comments) you're getting a 24 hours respite from editing. Is that clear? -- Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  02:36, 22 November 2006 (PST)
Fine. But once again, if you can't write anything nice, don't write anything at all. I would hasten to add, a verb isn't required for a sentence, as you'll find there are no rules for the english language per say. English is a constantly changing and evolving language. Try reading 15th century texts. -- Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  02:42, 22 November 2006 (PST)
For example "Charlie, a drug-addicted, weasily Mancunian" is a sentence, but contains no verbs. -- Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  02:44, 22 November 2006 (PST)
It definitely is correct, I guess it just depends whether you are a language purist, or whether you believe in the evolution of language. As I said, try reading 15th Century texts and compare it to English today. -- Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  05:15, 22 November 2006 (PST)
And there you go. You think the English language is a static thing, whereas I think it evolves continuously. -- Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  05:50, 26 November 2006 (PST)
Loose like his wife's vagine? OK, I get you now... Peace! :-) -- Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  01:51, 27 November 2006 (PST)

Hobnobob

I've told three admins to ban him quickly, but they're not online! --SilvaStorm

I got him.--CaptainInsano 18:09, 3 December 2006 (PST)

MoS

Ahh, I see what you mean now about my internal linking things in disambiguation pages. I went back and read the MoS page like you suggested. Now I see the error of my ways, and I will try to fix problems I come across. Sorry I didn't get back to you earlier; I was caught up with something else and it slipped my mind. Have a good day.--LOCI!

You make it sound really serious too. :P--LOCI!

Episode titles

  • Hi, I didn't mean to single you out in a negative way. In fact I've noticed, applauded, and pointed out to other sysops what good work I've seen you doing here in Lostpedia. In a Strunk & White sort of way, I agree with you on this issue. The other reasons I noted give me a different opinion on its practicality, usability, and the resulting aesthetics with regard to episode titles alone. I can be nit-picky too, and started the whole "capitalization police" drive-- before that we had about 50% of article titles and subheads with every word capitalized (it was very inconsistent). But some issues I don't feel the need to tackle in a Lost wiki, e.g. italication of all foreign-derived words including Latin abbreviations and their punctuation (e.g., i.e., vs.). Anyways wanted to drop a note to doubly emphasize what great work I think you've been doing on this wiki, and to just say I wanted to start a dialog on that issue, but that it's not an issue I take personally. Thanks again! -- C¯ _Santa_ ¯T12:06, 13 December 2006 (PST)~
  • Hahaha, I thought you would take it as a task list, rather than anything else =) -- C¯ _Santa_ ¯T14:51, 14 December 2006 (PST)

Re:Name Sections

I just don't think it should have its own section in every character page. I wouldn't be opposed to an article about names, but most of the name origins seemed irrelevant to me. Also, as far as I can tell they were added by User:Browndog until he was asked to stop. If you'd like, we could create a name article or just add it to the trivia sections. Tell me what you think. --Mr. Crabby (Talk) 18:35, 5 May 2007 (PDT)

Re: Foxy's Tattoos

Hey, you did a great job with regard to Foxy's tats on his page, but I thought I'd better mention he has one more. It's on his left shoulderblade and he's had it for at least 15 years. I don't know if you've ever seen that student film he was part of, if not you can see it here and the tat is visible. I've never been able to get a good shot of it, but I think it features the letters K and S. I have the Haunted series where you can see it, and I'm sure I've seen it in Lost too, especially in the Pilot, uncovered. Too bad there's not enough topless Foxy around if you ask me, LOL! *wilts* --Blackannis 07:44, 2 June 2007 (PDT)

Thanks, glad there's an expert among us. Please update the Matthew Fox page to reflect your knowledge of all things topless Foxy. :-) Robert K S 07:46, 2 June 2007 (PDT)
Will do, once I get a decent enough shot of it! :) --Blackannis 08:37, 2 June 2007 (PDT)

Ben's Diary

note

  • Just a quick note to say (again) that I like and appreciate your edits to Lostpedia. Keep up the good work, and thanks for sticking around during the hiatus. -- C¯ _Santa_ ¯T 22:40, 8 August 2007 (PDT)

Re:Pics and Videos

Hey, first off I don't remember removing any pictures, but if I did feel free to add them back in. Most of the videos I removed were just a random scene involving the article subject. For example, the video I removed a video from the character secrets article because, it was a video of Locke turning out to be disabled, which for one disrupted the flow of the article and two is fully described above. If you feel that I shouldn't have removed the videos you can either

  1. Re-add the videos and see what is done about it
  2. Make a proposal at Lostpedia:Ideas

Thanks --Mr. Crabby (Talk) 08:54, 9 September 2007 (PDT)

  • I will stand in here and say we do not accept videos of clips from episodes on Lostpedia as it is illegal. Images are fine as they are allowed (without galleries) to illustrate a point under fair use laws in the United States. However videos are not allowed under fair use as us showing clips from episodes of Lost could directly affect the commercial activities of ABC who allow viewing of episodes on their websites, and Itunes and leaves us open to prosecution, and therefore we have to remove all content that could possibly be a problem to us. The YouTube and Google Video functionality was introduced for fan created content, promotional material and Lost Experience content to be included in Lostpedia, and was no way intended to enable episode content on the site, both whole episodes and fragments of the episode. Thanks, I hope you understand and if you have any questions feel free to ask. -Mr.Leaf 09:29, 9 September 2007 (PDT)

Why revert my contribution?

Could you explain why you removed my addition of the question regarding Jacob's visibility from the Jacob#Unanswered_questions section? It wasn't a theory as you suggested. Besides if you watch "The Man Behind the Curtain you will notice that Jacobs doesn't become visible after Locke turns on the torch, but after he pushes Ben away. - Inspirator 16:04, 30 October 2007 (PDT)

Disambiguations

  • You're right, I don't know what I was thinking. Probably it was an article that was somewhere between a list article and a disambig page. Some disambig are so obscure that they require explanation b/c they don't have an article of their own, but I think in that case the episode or the episode transcript only should be wikified. Anyways good call, I rolled my MoS edit back. -- C¯ _Santa_ ¯T 18:15, 21 November 2007 (PST)

Re:Drive Shaft

  • Done, if you find any more related Driveshaft articles that need changed let me know. I'll take a quick look now but may miss some. Thanks -Mr.Leaf 17:09, 6 February 2008 (PST)

sailboat question

I removed the question under "elizabeth" based on the following conversation from the episode:

BEN: How?!

COLLEEN: I have no idea.

JULIET: So they have a boat -- sailing in circles will keep them busy.

COLLEEN: They could find us. [long pause] Ben?

The script seems to answer the question of why Ben wanted the boat. (i.e. "they could find us"). Its doubtful that the show is ever going to give a better answer than that. Dharmatel4 10:28, 7 February 2008 (PST)

Last Appearance

The last appearance thing is definitely a bit confusing. It's basically used for when an island-going character dies, and we have no reason to assume they'll be back (even though they could return in flashbacks or something). If they do come back, we just update the last appearance part. Minkowski isn't dead and is still appearing (sort of), and we have no reason to assume he won't keep appearing, so his last appearance is blank. Christian's template is different, as he's technically a flashback character. There's a part in his template called "hallucination appearances," where his island appearances are put. I hope that clears it up a bit. ShadowUltra 13:16, 7 February 2008 (PST)

Drop me an email

Hi Robert, can you drop me an email please. I want to ask you something (Use the email link on my sig). Thanks.  Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  10:19, 11 February 2008 (PST)

You are now a SysOp!

Welcome to the team Robert!  Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  10:34, 11 February 2008 (PST)

Congrats on being made a SysOp for all your hard work around here! --Nickb123 (Talk) 13:17, 11 February 2008 (PST)
Welcome aboard, you've had great edits for a long time, this is well deserved. -- C¯ _Santa_ ¯T 13:57, 11 February 2008 (PST)
Congratulations -- Dharmatel4 14:42, 11 February 2008 (PST)
Congrats right back at ya. -- Graft   talk   contributions  19:19, 11 February 2008 (PST)
Congrats Robert. Welcome aboard. -Mr.Leaf 19:47, 13 February 2008 (PST)
Thanks for all the congratulations and I'll try my best to keep up with all the great people who build Lostpedia! Robert K S 20:39, 13 February 2008 (PST)
Congratulations!! --   Steff    talk    contribs    email   11:34, 15 February 2008 (PST)
PS- do you have access to sysop forums yet? -- C¯ _Santa_ ¯T 01:42, 28 February 2008 (PST)
Yes, that's where to talk out any issues like that. I wanted to have your opinion on some of those threads (e.g., the most recent one), but noticed I hadn't seen you there yet. -- C¯ _Santa_ ¯T 02:00, 28 February 2008 (PST)

Unlocking

Thanks for catching those unlocks last night. I've set the expiration times for the articles for next week, so they should just unlock right after the episode airs. -- Graft   talk   contributions  09:36, 22 February 2008 (PST)

For un-protecting, you can set "Edit" to "default", as admin has it set up so unregistered users cannot edit. "Move" you don't need to change, since only sysops can ever move. -- Graft   talk   contributions  14:08, 22 February 2008 (PST)

references

  • I think we can leave those primetime grid references out of the character and cast articles. We only had them in their prior to broadcast to "prove" that it was officially released information. This will likely cease to be an issue with an updating of our spoiler policy in the near future. -- C¯ _Santa_ ¯T 12:38, 22 February 2008 (PST)

Jack error

Thanks! User:Sauronsmatrix found the California degree though, but he didn't notice that it clashed with Juliet's remarks. --Blueeagleislander 00:46, 25 February 2008 (PST)

T. Hanso

  • Fine by me, go ahead and remove it. My only worry is that the first name is educated speculation at this point, and some note of that fact should be made; CCs are simply not an authority of any sort. Even a footnote like we did with the O6 article previously might be a compromise here. What do you think? -- C¯ _Santa_ ¯T 16:45, 1 March 2008 (PST)
  • I'm still undecided on this one. The fact is that the spelling didn't come from written source such as ABC Medianet or script, and that it is a non-standard foreign name, the spelling of which therefore must be inferred from a single utterance or CCs. Putting it as the name of the article is a IMO significant step, and the uncertainty of an article's title is an issue strong enough to include in the main article as a bullet somewhere for general readers, who do not look at talk pages. My opinion is that treatment of sources is still "encyclopedic" rather than "fan discussion". What about a minimal footnote, simply stating that the source of the name's spelling is closed captioning? -- C¯ _Santa_ ¯T 20:51, 1 March 2008 (PST)

Southfield's

I had noticed your correction. My mistake, I didn't see the apostrophe (in fact: I haven't seen the episode at all. I'll have to wait a couple of months before) ;-) --Hunter61 22:23, 1 March 2008 (PST)

What does the signing thing do?

I've never used the tisdales before I didn't know what it did, so that's why I didn't put it down.

But I will for now on.--Frink 19:55, 4 March 2008 (PST)

Thanks!!!!

Hey, thanks for your kind words. But, you know, i can't do all the work by myself. So, please, do your best to expand the article Daniel's machine. Together, we can really make it great!! ^__^ dposse 17:46, 6 March 2008 (PST)

DVD help?

Hi there,

Seeing as you've reviewed some of my recent work, could you give me some feedback for my changes to this longtime vagrant page?--Nevermore 06:52, 9 March 2008 (PDT)

RE: Hatnotes

Ah, sorry. My mistake. I had been looking for the Black Rock article, and accidentally typed black rocks instead. I thought that maybe others had made this mistake in the past, and so I added the hatnote. Ah well. Thanks for the correction, I'll keep it in mind. -- Sam McPherson  T  C  19:49, 9 March 2008 (PDT)

Meh, I'll just leave it for now. If I make the same mistake again, though, I'll add it. Thanks,  Sam McPherson  T  C  20:08, 9 March 2008 (PDT)

Other Woman transcript

That's no problem. I haven't looked over the whole article but I have noticed it doesn't make clear when a scene changes in places. I'll try to fill in a few more gaps later.--Baker1000 09:32, 10 March 2008 (PDT)

Go into "My Preferences", it's on the User profile tab.--Baker1000 14:25, 11 March 2008 (PDT)

Re: Harper status

In the most recent podcast, Carlton Cuse reads out the question "Is this the last we've seen of Harper?", and Damon Lindelof replies "No, she's an Other, she's still on the Island, we didn't kill her"--Phil (talk) 11:50, 11 March 2008 (PDT)

Sign posts template

Just thought I should let you know about template:signpost - similar to the template:pleasesign you made. Saw it today after TechNic used the talk page. -- Graft   talk   contributions  21:30, 11 March 2008 (PDT)

crossrefs

The Template:Ep and Template:Crossref both reference subpages of template:ep. For example, creating Template:Ep/4x06e solved that problem. Sorry I was a bit slow in answering, I've been on catch-up mode. -- C¯ _Santa_ ¯T 14:50, 15 March 2008 (PDT)

Moving theory pages too

Remember to move theory pages along with main article pages - they don't automatically go with like talk pages do. -- Graft   talk   contributions  03:01, 16 March 2008 (PDT)

Delete

can you take care of Aaron_a_son_of_KAte? it's not needed and it looks terrible. --Gluphokquen Gunih ▲ 02:58, 21 March 2008 (PDT)

Oceanic Flight 815 changes

Hey there, my use of the italics in some of the sub-sections of the Oceanic Flight 815 page were intended to differentiate between in-universe (normal text) and "meta" (italics) details. Personally, I think this helps to better differentiate between the two perspectives.--Nevermore 14:20, 22 March 2008 (PDT)

Omar Redirection

Hey Robert. Sorry about jumping the gun - I've now posted a blurb on the Talk:Omar (freighter crew) page. Check it out. Thanks!--Overworkedirish 23:45, 22 March 2008 (PDT)

Who survived according to the "official" story

Regardless of what you choose to call it, Aaron did not die in the crash, making him one of the O6, and therefore one of the 8! Anything else involves mental gymnastics and looking for error where none exists. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 00:46, 23 March 2008 (PDT)

Sparks That Could Become A Flame War...

Hey Robert. As SysOps, you may want to check out some of the recent back-and-forth history/edits on the Talk:Meet Kevin Johnson page between myself and Macosx. I hope it's diffused itself - I've decided to just ignore it. If you feel it's right to tell him to "watch himself" on his Talk page or something, be my guest, I'd rather not do it myself and escalate the situation. Thanks.--Overworkedirish 16:48, 23 March 2008 (PDT)

Image uploads

Hey, that's no problem. I go through all the recently uploaded images usually about twice a week, just to make sure we're keeping up with image categorization and getting rid of duplicates or unnecessary images. For a quick rundown, I think the instructions on Special:Upload are a pretty good introduction, in terms of using the image template for adding categories. It's not necessary to be familiar with all the available image categories, but the most important ones to get on there would be the copyright, episode number, and characters, like so: {{image|copy=tvs|4x08|Michael|Sayid}} ("tvs" stands for "screenshot"). You can just copy one of the examples on the upload page as a template, and swich out relevant parameters. Any other questions, just let me know. -- Graft   talk   contributions  19:52, 23 March 2008 (PDT)

Theories

Hahaha, thanks Robert! Yeah, I moved someone else's theory there from the talk page. Thanks for the info - sorry 'bout that.--Overworkedirish 22:20, 23 March 2008 (PDT)

Oops!

Ahh, thank you for clarifying in a most polite way, Robert K S (users here seem to be much more polite than in Wikipedia!) I thought that "talk" meant discussion about the episode, not discussion about the page itself. I had that theory about Ben setting up Danielle & Karl, but I couldn't quite word it into a succinct sentence, and wanted to open it up for discussion. I'll use the forums & theory pages for this next time.

Thanks for the heads up! --Michaelisinthecoffin 07:45, 24 March 2008 (PDT)

Darn you for being one step ahead! :) I didn't remember that, about Karl saying he thought Ben had set them up. Good catch. ALSO, since you're a SysOp here, I have another question about practices here, since it seems to go either way on Wikipedia: Now that we have a mini-conversation started here, should I reply to you on your talk page, or should both of the replies I've left on your talk page stay on my talk page, since you first started the conversation there? Please let me know. Thanks! 31 more days!!! :) --Michaelisinthecoffin 09:53, 24 March 2008 (PDT)

RE: Elsa & French

OK ... I honestly didn't even remember adding that but I likely did. --Jeff 10:00, 25 March 2008 (PDT)

Sorry about time difference

Hey thanks for fixing my mistake about the time. I was comparing the two "seperate" shoots of the clocks. I thought that the seperated pictures were taken at the same time, that is how I calculated the difference.

Again thanks for the correction. --Frink 15:03, 25 March 2008 (PDT)

Re: Confirmed Dead UQ

Hopefully this is the proper way to respond here... Yep, I noticed after the fact in posting there'd been some traffic/controversy on the discussion/theory pages on whether or not the change in frames/pics in Miles' flashback was deliberate or was a simple production error on the part of the LOST team. Seems like fan consensus here won out on the production error side. I would personally disagree here for several reasons:

1) The camera work in the scene lingers on the pics BOTH before and after Miles' visit. Classic setup for establishing something in the audience's mind -- and changing it after. 2) There's a brief shot where Miles very deliberately glances at the pictures on his departure. 3) While being unfamiliar with shooting schedules and what goes into the production of such television shows, given Miles' flashback takes place in one chunk (as opposed to being spread out throughout the episode) taking place just outside and inside Mrs Gardner's (if I recall correctly) home. The scene is pretty short -- and it seems highly unlikely that a production team would have made a major gaffe of this magnitude. All downstairs scenes could have been shot easily in a day. The scene could have been shot without even showing the stairway.

I think #1 & #2 are fairly strong, but the rest is speculative and, of course, only my opinion at the heart of things. Does it mean anything? Is it important? Should it be a UQ? I doubt this UQ will be directly answered in another ep down the road; I think it's just a minor setup in the flashback to help highlight Miles', er, unusual abilities -- and, potentially, a sign that the entity he was conversing with has moved on (aka "You can go now."). Anyhow -- at the root, this is but my two cents. If you feel strongly enough to pull it as a UQ, then please do. --Spiral 23:25, 25 March 2008 (PDT)

Black Rock Painting

By all means. But now you still have an unsourced article. --Hunter61 11:43, 26 March 2008 (PDT)

Adding songs

Ok... I'll use the templates from now on! ;-) And I'll update the previous articles I added. Thanks for the tip! / Dreamingtree72 14:49, 26 March 2008 (PDT)

signing post

Sorry, I thought I did, I'll double check to make sure for next time, thank youMapper 06:38, 28 March 2008 (PDT)

sorry dude

I forgot to sign my post, thanks for reminding me. --bq 12:57, 28 March 2008 (PDT)

4x01e picture

Heh, I had just opened ABC's episode viewer. ;) I can get it. -- Graft   talk   contributions  23:04, 28 March 2008 (PDT)

Feedback needed (again)

Since no-one ever bothered to reply, I made my own proposal, but obviously I wouldn't try to declare it official Lostpedia policy without any sort of feedback. Link --Nevermore 06:08, 29 March 2008 (PDT)

Webisodes

Hello-
Could you please redirect 'webisode' to the Missing Pieces page? The Lost magazine and other sources keep refering to the Missing Pieces as 'webisodes' and not 'mobisodes'. I think it might be a good idea to redirect webisodes to that page.
Thanks! - --CTS 15:17, 29 March 2008 (PDT)

Alright, thanks. I didnt know how to redirect articles. --CTS 15:22, 29 March 2008 (PDT)
It does redirect to LOST: Missing Pieces, not just Missing Pieces. --CTS 15:27, 29 March 2008 (PDT)
Alright. I dont know how to fix that though, because the page name is "Missing Pieces". --CTS 15:32, 29 March 2008 (PDT)
Okay, thanks for the help! --CTS 15:36, 29 March 2008 (PDT)

Infoboxes

Hey Robert - question about character infoboxes. I've noticed that some characters have all seasons "crossed-out" at the bottom of their infoboxes (see: Keamy, Omar, Dave) - why is this? Is there any way I can help insure links for them being provided on the Character appearances page like other characters?--Overworkedirish 16:14, 29 March 2008 (PDT)

It's that Region 2 DVD boxset article again

I finally managed to get a scan of the South African DVD boxset cover as-purchased-in-stores. Discussion page Now could we plase rename the article, so I can proceed with articles for the other boxsets?--Nevermore 02:42, 30 March 2008 (PDT)

Question Regarding Confirmed Theories...

Hi Robert, I have a question about Lostpedia Policy for you...

When a theory is confirmed, it can move onto the main article page. However, for cleanliness' sake, should it be removed from the theories page? For example, we now know that the island made Jin fertile, thus removing the need for a section on fertility on Jin's theory page. Should this be removed? The official policy doesn't seem to make this clear, and I don't want to remove anyone's work that might still have a place. Please let me know. Thanks! 23 more days!!! --Michaelisinthecoffin 10:11, 1 April 2008 (PDT)

The Eye of the Beholder

I have been thinking about some points you raised at Talk:Mindfuck. How do you define ‘plot’? I think ‘plot’ (in the context of narrative film, including television etc.) should be defined as events that happen within the fictional universe, expressly excluding matters relating to how the fictional universe is depicted to the audience. So in “The Eye of the Beholder”, the plot points are: Janet Tyler appears humanlike, she has had various surgeries to make her appearance more porcine, which is common and considered beautiful in the place where she lives, the surgeries have been unsuccessful, the bandages are removed from her latest surgery and that too has been unsuccessful, and then she runs away with a male to be with people who have a humanlike appearance similar to hers. The order in which the plot points occur (within the fictional universe) is also a plot point. However, the order in which the plot points are presented to the audience is not itself a plot point. That the audience, until nearly the end of the program, doesn’t see the faces of the doctors and nurses, is not part of the plot: rather it is a matter of how the plot is presented to the audience. If you accept this definition of ‘plot’, then there is no ‘plot twist’ in the episode; it is some other kind of twist. (For the moment I will use the word ‘nonplot-twist’ to describe a twist that is not a plot twist.)

In Lost, looking at the finale of Season 3 there are a few twists, some of them plot twists and some nonplot-twists. In particular, consider these two twists:

  • Jack has left the Island and returned to Los Angeles, where he is depressed and yearning to travel to the Island again.
  • The part of the story set in Los Angeles, although presented in the same way that every previous episode presented flashbacks, is revealed at the end of the episode to be a flashforward.

In my view, it is clear that the first of these is a plot twist, and the second is a nonplot-twist. I don’t object to calling the second a ‘twist’, as long as we recognize that the term ‘twist’ is not synonymous with ‘plot twist’.

Do you agree with me that this twist (i.e. we’re led to believe we’re seeing a flashback but it’s really a flashforward) is different in kind, not just degree, from a clever plot twist you might see in an episode of Law & Order, for example?

Personally I think the term mindfuck is great to describe this type of twist that involves points external to the fictional universe, but related to the relationship between the audience and the author (or between the audience and the fictional universe). As I mentioned in the other discussion, I would be inclined to say that the ending of Planet of the Apes (the 1968 movie) is not a true mindfuck because the discovery is made by one of the characters and therefore part of the ‘plot’.

Back to “The Eye of the Beholder”, and off-topic a little, I don’t quite understand something. If Janet Tyler is having her bandages removed after plastic surgery, then wouldn’t her face be all swollen? And how is it that the doctors are unaware that the surgery resulted in no change at all to her appearance? I can understand that the doctors don’t know whether the surgery will result in her looking normal, but surgery that radical -- even if it doesn’t achieve the desired result -- would certainly result in some change to her appearance.

You can reply here if you like; I will monitor your talk page for a while. --Kuzak 10:39, 2 April 2008 (PDT)

Okay.
Apparently, Janet Tyler had the most inept plastic surgeons in the history of Pigworld. One hopes her insurance secured a refund from St. Hogworth's Hospital. But I know you were joking about all of that, because that's hardly the point.
I agree there is a distinction between "plot twists" and other storytelling devices that distort, obfuscate or confuse in order to surprise.
I have a hard time seeing the impetus or the consensus to call such twists "mindfucks" when (a) an older, more-established, non-explicit term has been in use for at least 45+ years for describing the same devices, and when the metaphorical meaning of the older term is metaphorically identical, (b) there doesn't seem to be an established record of the use of the term to refer specfically to storytelling devices*, and (c) no precise definition of the term "mindfuck" has yet been elaborated that could definitively distinguish mindfucks from other sorts of twists.**
* I say this having conducted only a cursory search. If there are instances of the use of "mindfuck" to refer to devices rather than stories themselves, references would be appreciated. Lack of references shouldn't necessarily preclude use of the term by extension--but the case therefore would be weakened.
** The mindfuck article has apparently been repeatedly and consistently plagued with bogus insertions and subsequent removals. If there was a hard and fast rule as to what constituted a mindfuck and what didn't, there would be no such problem, or at least removals of non-qualifying material wouldn't require discussion. A clear definition would be all one would need to point to, to say "This belongs, this doesn't."
You know what my introduction to the word "mindfuck" was? Frank N. Furter uses it in the song "You Better Wise Up, Janet Weiss" in The Rocky Horror Picture Show. You know what's a good mindfuck movie? The Machinist. Get a bonus mindfuck by watching that and Batman Begins in sequence and being blown away by how Christian Bale managed to go from shrimp to hunk in just a few months.
Robert K S (talk) 14:08, 2 April 2008 (PDT)
Just to clarify, the older, more-established term you are referring to is “twist”? I would say that the problem with that is that it is too general; it can refer to a twist in the plot, or to something unique about the work as compared to others of the same genre (e.g. “The twist in Jeopardy! is that contestants are given the answers and must supply an appropriate question”). But I agree with you that different people have different definitions of “mindfuck”. --Kuzak 18:12, 2 April 2008 (PDT)
Well, what is your definition of "mindfuck" as it would apply to the article? Robert K S (talk) 18:14, 2 April 2008 (PDT)
Something like this: “In film and television, a mindfuck is a literary device whereby the audience (but not the protagonist) is misled about a key aspect of the fictional universe being depicted. In general, a mindfuck does not expressly lie to the audience, but rather exploits conventions of the medium (or conventions of the specific program), causing viewers to make incorrect assumptions (about the fictional universe being depicted) without consciously acknowledging the assumptions until they are proven false.”
It isn’t ideal as a definition; it is rather verbose and also vague in that it does not explain what a ‘key aspect’ is. Nevertheless, it’s how I think the term mindfuck should be used, even if most people don’t use it that way.
Here’s an example that Prison Break has used but I don’t recall whether Lost has used it or not: a character (either the protagonist or some other character in whom the audience is emotionally invested) is hiding, perhaps in a closet, perhaps in a motel room. We are shown a sequence intercutting between our hiding character and the bad guys seeking him out; the bad guys are approaching the outside of a closet (or a motel room) and we assume that it is the same one in which our hero is hiding, but then it turns out to be some other closet or motel room entirely. (Maybe No Country for Old Men used this? I can’t remember.) I mention this example because I consider it a mindfuck, and it fits the definition I gave, but many other people probably would not consider it a mindfuck.
Examples of mindfucks in Lost, according to my definition:
  1. At the beginning of the flashback in "Maternity Leave" we open on Claire, pregnant, getting a medical exam and we assume it is before the Oceanic 815 crash, but then we see Ethan and realize it is on-Island when she was kidnapped.
  2. At the beginning of "A Tale of Two Cities" we are shown a woman in some kind of suburban house with a book club, we don’t know who she is but everything leads us to believe she is in the United States, and then they are revealed to be the Others, on the Island on the day of the crash.
  3. At the beginning of the flashback in "Exposé": we are meant at first to believe we are watching a scene set in a strip club, but then we learn that we were actually watching a scene set in a studio where they were filming a scene (of Exposé (TV series)) set in a strip club.
  4. At the end of "Through the Looking Glass", we find out that the off-Island storyline of that episode, which we assumed was set in the past, is actually set in the future.
  5. Near the end of "Ji Yeon" we learn that Jin’s and Sun’s off-Island stories were not contemporaneous, as we had assumed, but set years apart.
I would say that the episode "Dave" does not have any mindfucks according to the definition I gave, but I am open to persuasion on that point. (Similarly for movies like The Machinist and A Beautiful Mind; I feel that if we are perceiving pretty much what the protagonist is perceiving, then it is not a true mindfuck. But cf. this essay, for example, which refers to “the mindfuck in A Beautiful Mind”.) --Kuzak 01:38, 3 April 2008 (PDT)

Revert rule

Okay, thanks for the explantion! --CTS 18:34, 2 April 2008 (PDT)

Sorry

I wasn't clear. My fault. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 21:28, 4 April 2008 (PDT)

Enhanced

Beats me. Enhanced states "it is unknown whether the captioned information should be considered canon", so I thought it was okay to use the information, but I was reverted by Dharmatel4 for that reason. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 07:32, 7 April 2008 (PDT)

That's a far cry from "explicitly non-canon". See my message to Dharmatel4's talk page. Robert K S (talk) 07:36, 7 April 2008 (PDT)
I agree. It was added to canon under non-canon on 4 April [1] -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 07:36, 7 April 2008 (PDT)

enhanced episodes as canon

As of right now at least, canon says that the enhanced episodes are non-canon. For the timeline, I think they can be brought up in discussion, but not directly cited in the timeline article. I don't have a strong POV on the enhanced episodes being non-canon, but I am in favor of having one standard for it. Dharmatel4 07:44, 7 April 2008 (PDT)

I'm not reversing the revision to my entries to avoid edit wars but I disagree with not using the material, and I do think it's canon until proven otherwise. I am, however, working on a sandbox version, so I'm content to leave the enhanced information there as I suss out the timeline for my own benefit. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 07:57, 7 April 2008 (PDT)

Delete (change my opinion)

I have thought about this a few days now, and I must say I have changed opinion about the articles One of Us (song), Born to Run (song) and The Internationale. There would be, as you all say, a big risk that there will be a lot of speculative articles with unconfirmed information. I think it would be a good idea to have this "possible" references listed in the Music/Theories instead. If there are anything mentioned about this "possible" references in the episode articles it would be nice if someone would make a crossref to Music/Theories instead of crossref to Music.

I have also a few other articles that might be subject of deletion. Check out The House of the Rising Sun, Ladytron (song) and Purple Haze and mark for deletion if you think so. Theres also some songs, that I haven't created articles for yet, that I'm unsure of. Can you give me your opinion about them before I create them please. Check out Music#Referenced songs and musicians. There have been discussion about one song earlier on the Talk:Music#"In Your Eyes" by Peter Gabriel. While you are there you can have a look at the references to musicians (without song) on the list. Have a nice evening! / Dreamingtree72 13:49, 8 April 2008 (PDT)

Re: Songs (Deletions)

Thank's... I hope you have time to review the other songs/musicians at the list at Music#Referenced songs and musicians. / Dreamingtree72 06:47, 9 April 2008 (PDT)

Go ahead and delete

Hi again! I think we have got enough votes for deletion an the articles we have discussed earlier. No one seems to disagree. So I think it's time to go ahead and delete the articles now. Or what do you think? I guess that you have the authorization to delete articles... / Dreamingtree72 11:17, 13 April 2008 (PDT)

Ok... thank's! Could you delete the pictures associated with the articles as well? / Dreamingtree72 13:57, 13 April 2008 (PDT)

Bob Dylan

The song "Subterranean Homesick Blues" by Bob Dylan is on the list on the Music article (Referenced songs and musicians).
The context is; The video that Juliet plays for Jack on the Hydra television, in which she holds up cue cards, is reminiscent of Bob Dylan's video for "Subterranean Homesick Blues".
Do you think this is to speculative or should it be in the article? This is the last song on the list that don't have an article yet. Thought I discuss this before I create that article. / Dreamingtree72 06:11, 16 April 2008 (PDT)

The user Dagg made this notation to the Music article; This reference was confirmed in the 11/06/06 podcast. So I guess it's not speculative anymore... ;-) / Dreamingtree72 00:20, 17 April 2008 (PDT)

Goodwin

"Sorry--I guess I was thinking of Sawyer's "You and me ain't done, Zeke."" No worries. I thought it might be what you were thinking :) -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 06:54, 18 April 2008 (PDT)

Answered question re: sub

  • Answer to "did Ben want Locke to blow up the sub?": [Ben, said to Locke after Locke blew up the sub:] ... Well get this: there I was, shaking hands with Jack, and thinking I'd give almost anything to come up with a way to stop him from leaving... because to let him go would be a sign of weakness, of failure, of defeat. People would see that. They would know it. And that, John, would be the end of me. But to kill him... that would be cheating, because my people also heard me make a promise, and to break my word... that would be the end of me too. And then you came striding out of the jungle, John, to make my dream come true." ("The Man from Tallahassee") -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 19:19, 18 April 2008 (PDT)
    • Oops, LOL, my spell checker was set on Australian.-- LOSTonthisdarnisland 20:24, 18 April 2008 (PDT)

Missing Pieces

Hello. On the Lost: Missing Pieces page, under the contents section it lists the second mobisode as HURLEY AND FROGURT. Is there a way you could change it to add the Adventures of? --CTS 16:47, 19 April 2008 (PDT)

Thanks! --CTS 18:46, 19 April 2008 (PDT)

Story/Plot

Thanks for the information. It's much clearer for me now. --     c      blacxthornE      t     17:54, 19 April 2008 (PDT)

LOSTscape

Did you compare your finds to the list on Lostscape? I found 35 actually, also, but I put discover Swan and Swan hatch on the same line, assuming it was the same find. Perhaps I was wrong and the game actually does have 35, while indicating 34. Good catch -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 12:10, 20 April 2008 (PDT)

  • I saw Vincent, but did he pop up as an item on the list in the lower right corner of the game? -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 12:16, 20 April 2008 (PDT)
    • I didn't try it, LOL. Very cool Easter Egg. Did you get anything different from it? So if I did the list correctly, there are at least 36 items (Swan hatch is different line than Discover Swan, although it still only records 34 of 34 items). Annoying I'm not eligible to win *cries* -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 12:22, 20 April 2008 (PDT)
      • LOL :) I went through it quickly again, and "Discover Swan" is definitely on the list, but "shotgun" is a special item, showing 35 of 34 when you get Vincent as well. I'm tired, so will you doublecheck to see if I got them all correct now? The Key isn't listed as an item, even though you use it like you use the dynamite. So technically 36 items, but registering 35 of 34 with the special item, the shotgun. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 12:41, 20 April 2008 (PDT)
        • There are about 5 items which don't have popups (Sawyer's tent, camp fire, etc.). I've moved the list to a linked page, so we don't spoil the game for anyone. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 12:50, 20 April 2008 (PDT)

ARG

That's fine then. Feel free to remove :) -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 18:28, 20 April 2008 (PDT)

Unreliable narrator

Hi Robert, I noticed you deleted this article on 6 April and it was recreated the same day. Could you please provide some background to those actions so I don't jump to any wrong conclusions? The recreator is the one arguing against the flow of deleting it, and I just don't want to misrepresent from ignorance what went on before I was involved. Thanks :) -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 22:24, 20 April 2008 (PDT)

Talk:Literary techniques

Would you please look at this, Robert? I don't want an edit war, but Dagg keeps readded material against the general consensus from Talk:Unreliable narrator. Thank you. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 08:34, 24 April 2008 (PDT)

  • When 5 editors have repeatedly told the single disputing editor that in-Lost examples are not appropriately refered to as unreliable narrator, additions like this have to stop! Can you do anything about this? He's just determined to keep adding this across the wiki, arguing the same refuted points on new talk pages, obviously "asking the other parent". It's bloody annoying now, because he's the only outstanding editor, which wouldn't be a problem really, if he weren't also completely wrong. ---- LOSTonthisdarnisland 20:31, 28 April 2008 (PDT) And no matter how you try to fix it to the appropriate matter, he does it again and again [2] [3]. 22:04, 28 April 2008 (PDT)

RE: Keamy

Sorry. I didnt know that. --CTS 19:35, 25 April 2008 (PDT)

  • I don't think it says that promo for upcoming episodes are spoilers on LP:SP. --CTS 19:38, 25 April 2008 (PDT)
    • Okay, thanks. --CTS 19:40, 25 April 2008 (PDT)

Delete Keamy/Theories

Hey, could you please delete Keamy/Theories. I moved all its theories to Martin Keamy/Theories and changed the Minor Characters Theory nav to reflect the new name. --Blueeagleislander 00:52, 26 April 2008 (PDT)

User violations

Hey, thought I might want to point out this user to a sysop, so someone could keep an eye on them after this post which breached four policies. I left a message on the talk page, and you can take it further if you want. --Blueeagleislander 19:35, 27 April 2008 (PDT)

Desmond article

Yeah, another editor was insisting on "fixing" the bullet I added, and that editor broke the sentence structure. Regarding whether the tidbit is interesting enough to post to the article is debateable. I figured it was an interesting enough point to make the trivia section, but you are entitled to your opinion. There is definitely info on that page that is much less relevant (the full lyrics to a song, for example). Another editor suggested that I add my tidbit to a few other articles, so maybe I'll do that later. -- Dagg talk contribs4 8 07:07, 29 April 2008 (PDT)

Spammer

This user spams his blog all over Lostpedia. --Xbenlinusx 16:49, 29 April 2008 (PDT)

Although advertising and adding external links isn't good, this isn't bad spam. The links posted were all pertinent to the articles and contained interesting analysis. Given the nature of the 'spam', it seems like the user is not a vandal and would be a valuable contributor to the wiki. I request that they are unblocked and allowed to enter into dialogue about this. If they continue to spam after the warning then go ahead and ban, but this seems like an innocent mistake of not fully understanding the policies.--TechNic|talk|conts 19:12, 29 April 2008 (PDT)
I agree with Nic's assessment, thinking the user might be using his own external links, but not meaning it as advertisement. Could he receive a chance to redeem himself before a block is enforced? The reason I'm asking is because it's long been a LP practice not to "greet" newbs, advising them of the rules, wanting a more relaxed atmosphere than Wikipedia. Shouldn't we extend that to a more forgiving nature as a result, allowing they might not be aware of a rule if we didn't inform them of it? -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 23:08, 29 April 2008 (PDT)
No I didn't read Nic's page; I just looked here and at the editor's page. Your bits and piecs of the complete picture make it a different story, thanks. I just didn't want to see a newb run away if he was one. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 05:47, 30 April 2008 (PDT)

Re:Broken link

Thanks, I've set that page as a redirect now. As you rightly say, writing it in the search bar automatically links to the non-capitalized page. However, hyperlinks go to the exact pagename, and in the URL changing it to capital would take you to a redlink, etc. Random I know, wiki is weird. Also, you should seriously consider archiving your talkpage man! --Nickb123 (Talk) 07:53, 30 April 2008 (PDT)

Retrieved from "http://www.lostpedia.com/wiki/User:Robert_K_S/Archive_1"