This is an archive of past discussions about List of Lost characters. 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.
This archive page covers approximately the dates between September 21, 2005 and February 2, 2006.
Flashback Characters
The Flashback Characters section feels like a great big mess to me, and with Season 2 introducing new characters and continuing the tradition of flashbackery, it seems like this section will simply continue to grow. Anyone else think it's time to give it a trim? Baryonyx19:26, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
To clarify, what I believe we need to do is determine which Flashback Characters are critical, and which aren't. If they're there simply for background (like, say Lily in Charlie's "Exodus" flashback, or the couple in Sun and Jin's flashbacks), they don't need to be here. Nor should hypothesized things like "Unnamed woman". IMHO, the MAJOR flashback characters are obvious: (I know all the names of these characters, just not using them to make it clear who I mean) Jack's father and wife, Locke's mother and father, Charlie's brother and lady friend, Jin's father, Sun's father, Sawyer's partner and his target, Sayid's friend and lady friend, Kate's childhood friend, her mother and the farmer, Claire's boyfriend and the psychic, Hurley's psych ward friend and the wife, and Walt's mother and step-father. I realize that's still a steep list, but these are the biggest ones. The way I think we can reformat this is into some sort of tabled list, including Character Name, Actor Name, Related To, and Episodes. We don't need the mini-biographies, I think. Baryonyx19:43, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
I agree with this. It is quite a mess and no doubt will continue to get worse. These "extras" are why we link to IMDB most of the time, IMHO. K1Bond00719:48, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
Would it make sense to limit it to characters who appear in two or more episodes? Those who appear in only one episode are self-contained, and maybe they could be mentioned on the major character page for the flashbacker if appropriate. So far we have only five recurring (multi-episode) flashback-only characters: Jack's father, Jack's wife, Locke's father, Hurley's mother and Walt's mother. Ahkond18:35, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
I actually cut this section down that day, under the Be Bold proviso. The table you see now used to be a long list of text. The characters there now are the ones who have pretty strong influences on the lives of the characters. Could it be trimmed down more? Yes... but when making the current list, I had to ask myself which was better: having a longer table, including perhaps a couple more that could be excised, or having a shorter table that will be crufted to death because someone was upset I ignored say... Locke's mother. I went with the longer list. There have been additions to that list that I don't think we're necessary (Jack's mother, for one... she is of minor importance compared to Christian and Sarah). We can discuss which ones can be cropped out if you'd like. Baryonyx03:23, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
Marvin Candle? Why is he there? He is most certainly not a flashback character. He appears in a film the main characters see in "real time", as it were. If we include Marvin Candle in this section, why not also Alvar Hanso, and the DeGroots? I honestly think he has no business being in this section, as that is not what the section is there for, and if that slips by its only a matter of time before the section starts looking like it once did. Comments? Baryonyx20:44, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
Baryonyx -- I think the flashback section is in need of another trim. It's just going to get more and more out-of-hand. Your thoughts? Danflave16:29, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree. Looking over the list, it seems to have begun taking on less than pivotal people again. People I think should be left: Christian Shephard, Sarah Shephard, Liam Pace, Nadia, Essam, Richard Malkin, Susan Lloyd, Brian Porter, Hibbs, Frank Duckett, Mr. Paik, Mr. Kwon, Leonard Simms, Martha Toomey, Emily Locke, Anthony Cooper, Helen, Sabrina Carlyle, Sam Austen, Wayne Jansen, Diane Jansen, Tom Brennan, Jason McCormick, Yemi. Even that's 24 people... but it drops 17. If we wanted to be really hard on this one, there's an even tighter group that should be there because of their centrality to a specific character: Christian and Sarah Shephard, Liam Pace, Nadia, Susan and Brian, Sam Austen, Emily Locke and Anthony Cooper. These are probably the most central flashback characters, because of the extreme influence each exerts over the character in question. I could also see an argument for Mr. Kwon, Mr. Paik, and Sabrina Carlyle on similar grounds. This, however, could be tied into another question: perhaps we should create sub-sections on individual character pages for these major flashback characters, and remove the section from here? I do not think, with the possible exception of Dr. Christian Shephard, any flashback character will ever merit their own page, but there's got to be another solution besides forever cutting this down. Baryonyx01:26, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Holy shit -- you read my mind. *JUST* tonight, while I was watching the show, I was thinking, "We really should just list the flashback characters ON the individual character pages." What do others think? Danflave03:36, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
I think listing such flashback characters under the Episode they appear may be more appropriate. People are more likely to find (and be interested in) the minor characters, based on a particular episode they appear in, versus looking for them under the main character's page. However, I'd also suggest that we still need a list, significantly shortened, of those characters which have appeared more than once. In other words, removing all the one-time flashback characters here, and leaving only those who have been featured in multiple flashbacks and/or played an important part in the life of the main character. That would cut out a significant number, which matches Baryonyx's list above-- although I'd suggest Brian Porter (single appearance) could be left out, while Diane Jensen (twice appeared) should be included. —LeFlyman01:47, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, I am on board for either idea. The only question now remains: Who is going to do this and when do we start? :) I'd be glad to help, but I am not entirely knowledgeable on creating tables in WP or some of the other more technical aspects. If we want to divide up the work, just let me know what to do! Danflave19:11, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Pending the decision in regards to whether or not the episode guide will be split up into multiple pages, I think we should hold off on this. Should we create separate pages for each episode, then I definitely feel that is the proper place for flashback characters. Danflave19:48, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Flashback Crossovers
I have added a brief section on flashback crossovers. Those keen-eyed observers amongst you may be able to pick up more of them. I think the frequent motif in flashbacks of the TV playing in the background provides more clues into the nature of the show regarding coincidences, and should not be overlooked.
I'm also of the opinion that the information contained in the Non-Televised Characters is of little value and probably falls beyond the scope of what is appropriate for this page (should be fansite material), and with the exception of Dr. Arzt and US Marshal Mars, the Other Survivors section is also unneeded. IMHO, this page should focus only on those characters that have proven pivotal to the plot, be it on or off the island, in some way. No one in the Non-Televised Characters section has, and I'm not of the opinion that most of the Other Survivors have really stood out yet (being a running joke, half of which is dead doesn't count). When characters like Scott, Steve, Tourniquet Man, etc. begin having major speaking roles and influencing action, we can add them back. But for now, I'd say remove those two sections entirely, and move Dr. Arzt and US Marshal Mars to Secondary Characters. Baryonyx21:30, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
I decided to remove the sections I discussed above under the be bold Wikipedia convention. I am not replicating the removed material here to save on talk page space. Baryonyx04:17, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
This information went back up again in much compressed form. I am inclined to leave the canonical ones, for now, but the non-canon ones are outta here. I hope that this section doesn't get too crufty again. Baryonyx06:43, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
Does anyone think some of the more prominent and reccuring flashback characters (Dr Christain Sheppard, US Marhsall, Susan Porter) should have their own pages or something, because it would be nice to have an area were some further infomation about them could be avalible
Original Research
Time again to remind folks that Wikipedia is not the place to try out novel theories, suppositions or guesswork, all of which falls under the Wikipedia:No Original Research Policy. While some uncited material may slip into the Lost character articles due to its nature as a "mystery show," that shouldn't suggest it's ok to further add one's own ideas of the meaning or nature of characters, without citation from an authoritative source. Thus, I've removed the new speculative "Name Origins" by anonymous editor 70.27.35.171. If someone can provide verifiable and reliable sources that the "meaning" ascribed to the character's names actually reflect the writers' process in naming them (referenced in series' promotional materials, for example), I'd be happy to see the sections re-included. While they may be interesting and thought-provoking, such material is probably best left to fan Web sites. (That's not to say, of course, that they shouldn't be brought up for discussion on the Talk pages, for possible inclusion in the articles.) LeFlyman15:35, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
About Desmond
As Flashback
The section heading indicates that these are people seen ONLY in flashbacks, not on the island. If we wanted to be technical, Desmond is not the only flashback character to appear on the island. Through Boone, Sawyer is both a flashback character and a main character. Similar conclusions can be reached concerning all the main survivors (including Rose, Arzt, and the marshal). I personally do not think we need repetitious information on the same page, and placing an entry for Desmond in Flashback Characters and Secondary Characters does just that. Citing these two reasons, I've removed him from Flashback Characters. Baryonyx03:57, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
Symbols and Designs
I noticed that someone has identified by name and possible reference, the symbol on the locker used by Desmond in his underground lair-- although, I did not see it on his uniform. However, there was also a very unusual design on Desmond's shirt in the "stadium running" flashback with Jack, which I've screencapped here:
Can anyone identify what this is, as it was shown repeatedly and clearly in multiple shots while Desmond was holding up Jack's ankle? Is it just me, or does it seem to be reminiscent of the "Anarcho-punk" symbol, such as this one: http://www.ahherald.com/images/news/2004/anarchy.jpg ? There's even what looks like an "A", in black, on the right of the design, turned on its side -- LeFlyman16:55, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
The two-headed eagle is an old symbol for various things. It was introduced by Charlemagne as a symbol for his kingdom (the original Holy Roman Empire) with the two heads signifying Rome and Germany, but it was also used by the latter Byzantines. It was later used as a symbol for the Holy Roman Empire and for Austria and/or Germany, as well as imperial Russia (which saw itself as a successor to the Byzantine empire). It is also a symbol for a type of high-level Freemason; see http://scottishritemasons-can.org/eagle.htm. Similarly it was used as a symbol for the Order of Saint John of Jerusalem, Knights Hospitaller (see http://www.netpages.free-online.co.uk/gms/eagle.htm). Ahkond17:59, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
It's a pentagon surrounding what looks to be a representation of a phoenix. The pentagon is significant because its interior angles are 108°. Beyond the mythical symbolism of rebirth, I'm not sure why the phoenix would be significant at this time. I'm ignoring the bar at this moment, since it is perfectly horizontal, does not conform to the contours of the shirt, and looks to be overlaying the entire image. I'd need a bigger screencap including the bar before I'd consider it part of the image. On another note... that looks exactly like a lightened version of an image on The Fuselage. Did you post it there too? If not, there's a thread there about this as well. Baryonyx18:06, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
Double-headed eagle... hadn't thought of that one. Good call Ahkond. Makes it seem even less likely that this is meant to reflect the anarchist symbol to me then, given the heritage of the symbol. Baryonyx18:10, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
File:Smallscreen.jpgI did a screencap and clipped out the symbol from the shirt. I increased the contrast in order to improve the visibility-- thus it appears lightened. The horizontal bar is actually a design element on Desmond's knit shirt... but the double-headed eagle-phoenix and strange pentagon shape are clearly "overlayed" on the shirt. Here's a reduced version of the full screen cap.
In looking at the larger one Baryonyx pointed out on The Fuselage, I think it may be as likely to be a phoenix/firebird-- with the second "head' looking more like a crown-- than a two-headed eagle, particularly as it is colored red, Plus, the symbolism of a phoenix is more appropriate. Compare, for example to this: http://www.singaporerooms.net/images/phoenix-logo.jpg --LeFlyman19:49, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
I removed information claiming that Desmond appears in an as of yet unaired episode. Even if the contributor does have advance knowledge of episode information, the cite is not verifiable, and therefore does not meet Wikipedia guidelines for inclusion. --DropDeadGorgias(talk)16:37, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
Scottish?
He kind of sounded Welsh to me.
Deceased section
Why is Ana-Lucia listed in the "Deceased" section? The section serves as a running headcount total, where we keep track of how many survivors of the plane crash are on the island. I would propose that the section be renamed "Headcount", where additions like the tail section group and the birth of Aaron would fit more sensibly. Ana-Lucia already has a separate page, but we should list other members of her party (Libby, Bernard, etc.) above in the Secondary section. If they take on strong roles, they could then be promoted to primary characters with their own pages; either way, a "headcount" section could simply refer the reader elsewhere. Ahkond16:22, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
Headcount section, as opposed to deceased sounds better, given what the section is becoming. As for Ana-Lucia, Michelle Rodriguez is listed as a cast regular this season, which is why this character has earned a separate page already (as we've discussed on the main talk page). Everyone else from the tail section (including Bernard, and other guests with sizeable roles), should be listed in Secondary Characters or left for the IMDB Guest Stars page. Baryonyx19:20, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
I think that "Writers Assistant Matt Ragghianti" shouldn't be deemed a more reputable source than Locke in Orientation, saying there were 43 in his group. Ethan was part of the count when it was declared there were 48. Also, when Hurley did the census after Marshal Mars died and another girl drowned, he says this:
Hurley: We've got a problem. The manifest, Jack, the census, the names of
everyone who survived, all 46 of us. I interviewed everyone. Here, at the
beach, got their names. One them, one of isn't... Jack! One of them isn't
in the manifest. He wasn't on the plane.
Hurley counted Ethan, and thus Ethan was part of the 48. That means there's presently 43 mid-section survivors, with 4 who went rafting, and Locke was correct in Orientation.--Trypsin20:13, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
The tail section survivors were miscounted (They are 5, not 6): As later episodes reveal, the "Man at the beach" is Bernard. Cindy has also been named in episode 5.
Take another look. I removed some of the repeated information. I think this is a valid section as people regularly ask "how many survivors are there?" and "who else is on the island?" Rillian18:12, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
I think it has gone overboard, and could stand a trimming down. The section has gotten out of control. And, the questions above, for an encyclopedia's purposes, have a two sentence answer: "A total of 73 people survived the crash of Flight 815, and 25 have subsequently died on the island, while one has been born. They are joined by at least 3 other people on the island at the time of the crash." These three people are Desmond, Danielle, and Ethan. I hesitate counting ANY of the Others, because I consider thinking them definitively human is speculation at this point. If you guys want to count the Others, that's fine... but it still only needs 2 sentences. Everything else is cruft. Baryonyx20:26, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
Cruft is the new spam. Just when you think you've gotten rid of it, more shows up. I saw your earlier comment about Marvin Candle-- should his appearance in one scene qualify for "Secondary character" status? By that token, nearly all the flashback characters should get their own paragraph (particularly Jack's father). And should deceased characters (Ethan Rom, the Marshal, and Leslie Arzt) whose stories are currently "over" even be grouped with the main -- "secondaries?" LeFlyman10:31, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
Well, remember, I was talking about Marvin Candle's listing in Flashback Characters... he most certainly isn't that yet, unless we want to consider the survivors watching a video a flashback. However, I see he has been added as a secondary character, which, at this point, he most certainly doesn't deserve, since 1.) he's not even technically on the island and 2.) one scene, no matter how important, does not a secondary character make. In fact, most everything he says is already written up on the pages for The Hanso Foundation and The Dharma Initiative. As for how we handle deceased characters with a big enough role to count as a secondary character (which Ethan most certainly is, the Marshal and Arzt less so) that is certainly up for debate. I mean, the question in each of their cases should be: how much is the info in their sections duplicated in other sections on the main characters. Some, like Desmond, Danielle, and perhaps Ethan cross too many characters, and perhaps deserve a write-up so that we're not endlessly repeating their stories in the main character pages. Just link it and you're done. Thoughts? Baryonyx17:11, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
And just like that the "Island Census" is turning repetitive again. Perhaps we need to consider breaking out the section into its own article? LeFlyman17:00, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
Well, first, I'm removing the "Other Survivors" section again. If this section is in place when "The Other 48 Days" airs, it'll probably end up being a cruft-o-rama. I also think the Island Census section needs a good trimming, but I really don't think this information is deserving of its own article. Do we really need a page that lists anyone and everyone ever to come onto this island? That list might get pretty long before the show is over. Flashback Characters is OK because we can impose a tight constraint on who's listed there, but saying "Everyone on the island" might be troublesome. I'd personally trim it down to simple informational sentences like I wrote above. Baryonyx00:16, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
This section has gone up again several times. I will remove it as cruft and duplicated information every time. For the benefit of those who feel that these truly minor characters need to be on the page, I have left those who are not dead in the section restored by Rillian. If dead characters start showing up there again, they will be removed, because they already have entries under the Island Census section. Baryonyx23:31, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Why are we removing "Other Characters" from the list when they die? We don't remove major or secondary characters once they die. If so, Boone's page should come down and the Marshall's section should be removed. The top of this page is a list of characters: major, secondary and other. The bottom section is a census of how many people are still alive from the crash and those already living on the island. The names of the characters who have died are repeated simply to show how the accounting works. Rillian19:04, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
This section has come down several times for its crufty nature. These characters are so minor that some of them don't even have names. However, I'll leave it alone for a few days, until after "The Other 48 Days" airs. If, however, this list suddenly balloons after that episode (as I expect it will), the whole section will be wiped as the cruft it is. Baryonyx02:08, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
I'd also like to point out that some of the "Others" that were glimpsed from the waist down (by Jin and Eko) could have been former tail-section survivors who've been taken by the "Others" and infected with the weird mind disease that Danielle was talking about. The teddy bear image seems to support this; maybe some people who are taken by the Others become part of whatever weirdness affected Danielle's crewmates. If this is the case then the total island census numbers are off because it counts the silent barefoot people as pre-crash inhabitants. I know that the basis of this argument is speculation; nevertheless I don't think the census can state for certain that these people were on the island before the crash. Ahkond15:50, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
What makes a character a "main" character? It seems kind of black-and-white to me. Main characters are those that have had flashbacks featured. I disagree that Ana-Lucia, Eko, and Libby are "main" characters. They belong in the "Tail-Section Crash Survivors" area.
And why the need for such exhaustive profiles of Ethan, Rousseau, and Desmond? This ought to be a LIST with brief descriptions, not a COMPENDIUM. If someone wants to provide comprehensive biographies on everyone, they ought to start a fan site, not clog up Wik.
First, please sign in when leaving a comment. Second, new sections go at the end. Third, main character listing is determined by those who receive star billing. If they're important enough to the producers to be listed as primary stars in the credits, then they count as main characters. By your logic, Shannon did not count as a main character until "Abandoned", because she had no "featured flashback episode" all her own until this past week. Sure, she had appearances in "Hearts and Minds"... but that was Boone's episode. Also, by your logic, Walt is still not a main character, since "Special" is Michael's episode, not Walt's.
Of course, your interpretation of these episodes may be different, which is exactly why we need an objective criterion (offical cast listings) established by the show's producers to determine who counts as a main character. All three of the new characters listed as mains (Ana-Lucia, Mr. Eko, Libby) are also listed in the opening credits as stars, with Michelle Rodriguez having been listed as such since the start of Season 2, before her character even appeared. I've noted in the past that I want to hedge my bets on including Mr. Eko and Libby as main characters, since they did not receive star billing until "Everybody Hates Hugo", but they've been added anyway, and I'm inclined to leave them there for now, especially since some upcoming episodes indicate an increased role for Eko (working with Locke).
As for "exhaustive profiles" of Ethan, Rousseau, and Desmond, they're not really that long (well, I'd agree that Danielle can be trimmed somewhat), and these are three examples of important, recurring characters who have been central to several plot developments. What's there is for the most part pretty good. If fact, I'd go so far as to say that I'm pleased that these characters have remained here, meaning that fans have avoided the temptation to go for the full on cruft and break them out into separate pages, which would just lead to their deletion. These sections used to be much, much worse, including individual entries for such major secondary characters "Tourniquet Man" and "Sullivan". These three are actually significant players in the island story to date, and I'm quite content leaving them where they are. Baryonyx21:59, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
Tail Section Census
Libby stated to Michael that 23 people survived the tail section crash. The census section on this page originally assumed that she was including Goodwin in that total and so the actual count was 22. This would mean that Ana-Lucia did not tell Libby the truth about Goodwin. However, in "Collision", Libby chastises Ana-Lucia about her treatment of Sayid and questions Ana-Lucia's ability to judge a person's character, saying "I saw you put Nathan in a pit to starve him." This would only be a criticism if Libby now knew Natha was not an "Other". From this, we can infer that Libby knows Natha was a fellow survivor, that Goodwin was the true spy, and so she would not have included him in the count she tells Michael. It also seems unlikely that Ana-Lucia could have returned from killing Goodwin and not have told the other survivors what happened. Consequently, I've updated the tail section count. Your thoughts? Rillian18:19, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
No. It's the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing. Just because Libby disapproves of Nathan being poorly treated doean't mean she KNOWS he was innocent, it just means she doesn't KNOW he was guilty. However they made a point of Ana-Lucia not telling them when she innitially came back so if they were to later find out it would have been shown. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.233.160.131 (talk • contribs) 18:59, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Libby is being critical of A-L's ability to judge character (A-L thinks Sayid won't stop until he kills her). Using Nathan as an example in the criticism only makes sense if Libby knows that Nathan is innocent and that it shows A-L was a poor judge of character in that instance. Besides, A-L must have told the other survivors what she learned and the "ten minutes after the crash you come out of the jungle dry" clue. A-L says "we're safe now" when she returns from killing Goodwin. The other survivors have to ask "where's Goodwin?" Scenario 1: A-L says that the Others killed him. If so, if the Others were just a short climb away, how could they be safe now? Scenario 2: A-L says that Goodwin was an Other, she killed him before he could reveal their new location, and that's why they're now safe. Scenario 2 seems the only likely version. Rillian14:52, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Any scenario is speculation; and constitutes Original Research -- the statement "we can infer" is a tell-tale sign that you are making a leap of reasoning not based on what's actually presented in the episode. Unless it's shown explicitly, we should not overlay our personal "theory" of what a character knows or doesn't know. —LeFlyman01:14, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Then it is also Original Research to say that when Libby says there were 23 survivors, she is including Goodwin. There is no evidence that Libby did not know Goodwin was an Other. She would not include him in the count if he was, so ergo, the 23 survivors do not include Goodwin. Rillian02:50, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Again, you are making inferences, as indicated by "She would not..." The best thing to do is to stick to what is shown/said on the series, without projecting your own explanation of what you think a character meant. Writing "Libby says there were 23 survivors" is factual. Adding "she is including Goodwin" or "she is not including Goodwin" is speculation, as you don't know one way or another. —LeFlyman15:50, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
Agreed. I've updated the page to reflect the fact that Libby says there were 23 survivors. Whether Goodwin was included or not is speculation. Rillian19:09, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Rillian - please see my notes on the edit page. Simple math proves that Libby had to have included Goodwin. Otherwise, there is a completely unaccounted-for passenger. Danflave23:15, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Rillian - also, the events of "Collision" happened after Libby's revelation to Michael that there were 23 survivors of the tail. A-L could have told her about Goodwin after Libby's revelation to Michael. Danflave23:18, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
"Could have told her" is speculation. We don't know if she was told or not. All we know is that she told Michael there were 23 survivors. Does that mean there must be one more tail section survivor? Maybe, the 23rd person could be either Goodwin or another survivor who died prior to them leaving the beach for the jungle. Both are certainly possible. Until we know for certain, any theory is just speculation and not up to Wikipedia standards. Rillian00:57, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
If that is the case, then PLEASE enter in "tail section survivor - whereabouts unknown" in the census section. Because it is very, very clear there is an unaccounted-for passenger in your take on the events. In actuality, you are being stubborn here -- the math works out. The producers and writers would not have gone to all of that trouble of mentioning that "three others died" before Donald if it wasn't necessary to explain the number 23. I find it much, much more unlikely that there is an unaccounted-for passenger (which, by the way, is YOUR opinion). Since we're never going to agree on this, I am going to make changes that will try to serve as a compromise. Danflave05:02, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
Keep in mind that 23 is one of 'the numbers', which seems to make it a more likely tally than 22. The producers and writers go to great pains to create these coincidences. ericg✈14:53, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
its 22 not 23 she included Goodwin obviously! (unsigned comment)
I'd just like to note that in later episodes (206, I think), Libby and the rest of the tail section know that Goodwin was an 'other'. I just saw the episode the other day, and while I don't remember the exact line, it's there. Not counting Goodwin, the tail survivors originally numbered 23. ericg✈08:37, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
I disagree. First of all, I'd like the actual quote and episode you are basing this on, because I don't recall this at all. In any case, what happened in later episodes does not change what Libby knew (or did not know) at the time that she made her initial statement to Michael. I think what is on Wikipedia right now is a good compromise. I personally think it is very unlikely there is an unaccounted-for tailie, but I also understand why we should not include OR theories. Danflave16:26, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Removed Non-televised "characters"
The following was removed, as non-canon; previous talk has already covered the removal of this section:
Survivors not mentioned in the television series
The producers of the series and the broadcasting network have released promotional material related to the series. Some of this material mentions additional characters who haven't been mentioned within the series itself. However, this material is authorized and controlled by the producers and network and can be considered as semi-official.
Janelle Granger - From the ABC promotional website's [diary]. The site also has a character named Larry.
Bob Jones, Sally Rafflethorpe, Jake Smith, Robert D. West - From the promotional website [oceanic-air].
Faith Harrington - From the novel Lost: Endangered Species by Cathy Hapka. The book also has a character named George.
I thought The Lost Diary and Oceanic-Air.com are Canon. The Lost Diary is written by an assistant writer, while the producers supervise oceanic-air.com and design it as a clue site.
First, please sign your comments. Second, the diary is most certainly not canon, as David Fury explained on The Fuselage, and was once written here. For clarity, I went and dug up the old text about the diary.
"Though some fans treat these as canonical, co-executive producer David Fury has explained on The Fuselage that the diaries "bare no relation to the actual show, except that they sometimes tease upcoming things."
Finally, though the Oceanic Air website is an official site, it cannot be confirmed that anything pertaining to the security system or other passengers is canonical, because none of it has appeared anywhere else. In fact, the site is probably more full of red herrings than it is of clues. As such, they have no place here, because of their place in the mythos is uncertain (and hence claiming either way is speculative). The trailer for the 2nd season showed no new material, so it can't be considered anything more than promotional material. Baryonyx02:55, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
What about driveshaftband.com, is that cannoncial/official? There's an interesting passenger by the name of "Harold Wollstein" mentioned there. LamontCranston04:48, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
This is, admittedly, original research at this point, but...how can we be sure that Rousseau has been on the island for approximately 16 years? Yes, Sayid makes his calculations and comes up with a pretty exact date, but that 16 year figure is only the time that the numbers message has been broadcasting, not how long ago Rousseau changed the message. In fact, when Sayid tells her that it has been 16 years, Rousseau accepts it, but is at first taken aback. She says in an incredulous voice, "has it really been that long?" Like I said, I've not been through any other sources so I wouldn't want to change it. So...any thoughts? --Easter Monkey10:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I think this is a reasonable point-- and not original research, at all: you have accurately criticised the assumption that the length of time the message has been broadcast is equivalent to the Rousseau's time on the Island. Clearly, it's not; as the message reflects events that happened over a uncertain period (i.e. the "death" of her colleagues). Thus, it would be fair to say that she has been on at least 16 years. Incidentally, the message is partially mistranslated. A fan's analysis can be found here: [1]—LeFlyman00:40, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Interesting and thanks for the link. I'd still make the point though that one couldn't argue for any length of time, 16 years, 4 years, 8 years, 15 years, etc. (oops, I just subconciously wrote those. Seriously. Maybe the numbers really are bad.) :) Anyway, anything short of her telling us what "iteration" the message had been on when she changed it (thus we'd be able to subtract from what it is currently on and then make Sayid's calculations), there is no way of telling how long she has in fact been there. If we ever meet Alex (was she the one that threw the homemade bomb onto the raft? -speculation of course) then we could have a much better sense. Interestingly though, I rewatched the season 1 finale last night, seems that Sayid at least is convinced that she's been there for 16 years (when Charlie gets knocked on the noggin while looking for Aaron...) Anyway, it's fun guessing...--Easter Monkey02:45, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Ah, I see what the confusion is: Sayid is basing his 16 year calculation not on the Numbers message, but on how long he believes Rousseau's SOS message had been playing. Recall that each iteration of her message included a count, which Sayid multipled by the length of the message to get "16 years." Thus, she definitely has been on the Island at least that time.It seems to be a given-- but perhaps shouldn't be-- that the iteration was reset when Rousseau recorded her SOS. We have no idea (yet) just how long ago the "Numbers" were broadcast, prior to her changing the message-- although, we might speculate (which does become Original Research) that it was contemporary to the arrival of the Dharma Initiative on the Island c. 1980. --LeFlyman02:57, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Former Residents
The Nigerian drugrunners are no longer as they originally seemed. The one who parachuted from the plane was the pilot of the plane, the member of Eko's group who kicked Eko off the plane. The one who was found inside was Eko's brother, but since there's a chance he was already dead before the crash, then saying that he was a "former resident" doesn't really work, since it's speculation. Then again, calling the member of Eko's group a "resident" is a massive stretch too, since he didn't actually live on the island very long, considering he died in the trees. But I'll leave it for now. Baryonyx05:54, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree, it is very much a stretch to call him a "resident," but I would keep it as is. I think, more accurately, it is a list of those who have died on the island prior to the arrival of 815. (Or in the case of Eko's brother, those whose bodies at least reached the island!) Danflave17:06, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
How do we know that Goldie (the parachutist) was the pilot of the plane? It certainly appeared in the epsiode that the plane was moving at about the same time that Goldie was pulling Eko's brother through the hatch? Wasn't there a body in the cockpit when Boone crawled to the front of the plane? Rillian13:00, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
I just re-watched the episode. The plane was most definitely not moving when Eko was tossed off it. It does not begin rolling away until after Eko is on the ground. We watch from his perspective as it begins slowly rolling away. Further, the plane is already running while they're loading, but there's no good shot of the cockpit to rule out anyone being there. However, rewatching the episode "Deus Ex Machina" shows that, after Boone enters the plane, it tips forward. When it tips forward, Yemi's body falls on him from the back of the plane. Boone is at this point just about between midsection seats directly behind the cockpit.
Boone then makes his way to the back of the plane where the body came from and discovers the statues. He then turns around and heads forward. When he arrives at the front of the plane the pilot's chair is empty, with Boone having only to move ivy out of the way, not another body, as shown here, which I SSd from the Lost DVDs at Title 4, Chapter 6, 0:33:27 of Disc 5. For your reference, if you want to watch the sequence yourself to verify this, it starts at T4, C6, 0:31:04 of Disc 5 and ends when the plane falls about 3.5 minutes later. Baryonyx00:51, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Alas, alas -- we FINALLY have confirmation from a member of the production team (Writer's Assistant Matt Ragghianti) regarding the actual number of Tailies. Everyone, please visit The Fuselage. Libby DID mistakenly include Goodwin in her count. The actual number of survivors is 22! I am so glad to FINALLY get this straightened out. Danflave21:19, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
Good find. I wish his comment was a little more definitive though - "Your math seems to check out to me. So I think we can safely say you are correct," It still leaves the question as to why Libby would include a traitor and killer in her count. Not something you would easily forget. Rillian00:39, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Rillian, I considered that, but as a staff member who works directly with the writing team, I am sure Matt knows if there was an extra (previously unknown) Tailie. I think, truthfully, that we fans are often more picky about details than those who actually create the show! :) We can only speculate why Libby included him -- perhaps, in the confusion of meeting a whole new set of 815 survivors, she mis-spoke (the woman IS under a lot of stress!); perhaps (as some have theorized), she never heard the truth from Ana Lucia; perhaps 23 is the number that "stuck" with her when they first made the census in the first few days after crashing and she forgot to omit Goodwin when talking to Michael, etc, etc. Of course, that is all OR, and won't be included in the article. I just think this has provided some closure (and remember, if there is anything in future episodes that refutes this, we can always change it back! It's Wikipedia!) Danflave01:31, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Not sure how to handle the citation request for Rose. All she has ever said is she is from the Bronx (the question asked of her is "Where are you from?"), in the very first episode after the "security system" makes its presence first known. This raises two dilemmas concerning what's written on the page: 1.) That does not mean she resides there, so it may be inaccurate to have the information there to begin with (and thus, should be excised) and 2.) if it is accepted, do we really need a citation of something that appears within the show itself (and is thus canon), and if so, how do we go about citing the DVD on WP? Personally, I'm in favor of just dropping that line, but the 2nd question remains. Baryonyx01:35, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
I am of the opinion that it does not need to be cited, she clearly said she was from the Bronx on the show. That's canon. But I also do not think it needs to be removed (Maybe re-phrased?) But I think you are putting too much thought into it! :) Danflave03:32, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Mr. Friendly?
Am I the only one unsure about the moniker "Mr. Friendly"? They certainly did not use that name in last night's episode. Does anyone know where this originated? Was he billed that way in the credits? If it was in TV Guide or on the IMDb, we can't consider that the definitive source. They've made mistakes in the past. I can't even find him referred to as "Mr. Friendly" on the ABC site. What do people think? Danflave11:53, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
He's credited as Mr. Friendly (see IMDB's list of guest stars for Lost). Zeke is a Sawyer given nickname that pokes fun at The Other's resemblance to hillbillies. Jtrost18:22, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
"Zeke" is definitely just a nickname Sawyer came up with. But again, with the "Mr. Friendly" issue, the IMDb has not always been right. I feel calling him "Mr. Friendly," when his name was never given in the episode, might not be canon. Just my opinion... Danflave18:53, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
He has no "canon" name, so Mr. Friendly is as good as anything. It's certainly the name he's been known by in fan circles since his initial appearance at the end of season 1. -- MisterHand19:06, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
It's very likely that "Mr. Friendly" was made up on some forum, and IMDb chose to use it, given the lack of any published name for the character. Maybe something like "Bearded Man" or "Bearded Boat Captain" would be better. If "Mr. Friendly" or "Zeke" are used, they should be in quotes, as they are both nicknames for the character. android7919:11, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
It's the name that's being used by Lost fansites and message boards. I think it's the best name to go with for now. Jtrost19:59, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
"It's the name that's being used by Lost fansites" -- If that is the case, then that is complete Original Research, and is most certainly not "as good as anything." Danflave20:42, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Here's what it boils down to: websites that Wikipedia regularly references such as IMDb and TV.com use that name. It is hard to believe that those websites, along with every other Lost website on the Internet, would arbitrarily adopt that particular name for him. It will eventually be the name that people associate with that character. For us to use any other name would be confusing. This is not a case of original research because the name has been published at accredited websites and we can reference those websites if necessary. Additionally, the keywords "Mr.Friendly"+Lost return over 10,000 hits on Google. I think it's safe to use this name. Jtrost20:59, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Like the controversy over Kate's real name, we can always correct it later. I say we use "Mr. Friendly" (in quotes), as that's the closest to "official" we have for him, via IMDB, until something more authoritative comes along. —LeFlyman20:14, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
But... I don't like the fact that it's not used in the episode at all, or even anything Lost or ABC related. Like Android said, something like "Others" Boat Captain would be much more suitable. At least in that case, everyone knows who that is, and just for accuracy's sake, "Boat Captain" is undeniably correct, even if it's not the full description, while "Mr. Friendly" may be proved entirely wrong in the future. Even if we find out Mr. Friendly is his name in the future, wouldn't putting it now be just like "speculating" on what will unfold in future episodes, regardless of how true the source may be. I'd like to change the name to Bearded Boat Captain or "Others" Boat Captian, if there's no objection in a couple of days. Tejastheory05:05, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
I object, for all the reasons stated above. The character is well-known by the moniker of "Mr. Friendly," and the article explains exactly who he is for those who might be unfamiliar with the nickname. Note the results of Jtrost's google search above. -- MisterHand14:19, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't think the characther is "well known" by that moniker. I might guess, that for people on fansites or forums, he might be called Mr. Friendly, but certainly, no viewers who watch the show would have any idea of that name. I'm a fairly rabid Lost fan, but had never heard the name until seeing it on wikipedia.Tejastheory17:11, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree that "Mr. Friendly" is not well-known. As regular contributer to these pages and a reader of some Lost forums, I had never seen the name until reading it in this article. I suggest "Boat Captain" as more accurate and not speculative. Rillian19:02, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, "Boat Captain" is more speculative than Mr. Friendly, which is just a descriptive nickname. Boat Captain presumes that he was captain of the boat, but that's never explicitly stated or even implied. -- MisterHand20:52, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
You are correct. I thought it was listed that way on the IMDb, but I was wrong. In that case, I am of the strong opinion that "Mr. Friendly" is OR, but I will let it stand as is. My biggest concern is that someone doing research on Lost (perhaps a reporter or author) will use Wikipedia and refer to the character as "Mr. Friendly" in their work, only to have the character's proper name revealed in a future episode. However, it will be too late, and "Mr. Friendly" will be "immortalized" in actual print. Danflave20:32, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Given that we have a specific policy on this page regarding fansite information, the use of the term on other fansites is not reason enough to use the term here. I would prefer "Zeke" (quotes included), until the show's canon or official information provides a real name for him. --DDG21:36, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Following the "Be Bold" mantra, I've changed Friendly to "Zeke". (Ok it wasn't that bold) We can always change it once another name within the show is applied to the "bearded guy who seems to speak for the Others". Rillian21:46, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Looks good. BTW, this is as good a time as any to clear up a common misconception about IMDB and TV.com. Though they look pretty official at times, and are certainly great sources of information, their content is largely user-submitted. Many people assume imdb is official due to its commodity use in the mainstream public. It is for this reason that we specifically rejected its use as a source for episode names on the Episodes of Lost articles. --DDG21:52, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Can anyone confirm or deny that he was referred to as "Mr. Friendly" in the credits of "The Hunting Party"? Based on what I could find online, it appears that this is how M. C. Gainey's character was referred to in the credits. btmtalk06:59, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Those people were probably referring to imdb, which up until a week ago listed "Mr. Friendly". You'll notice that they have now changed it to "Bearded Man". --DDG20:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
After all this excellent discussion, I've changed it back to "Mr. Friendly" as Carlton Cuse and Damon Lindelof reveal in the latest Lost podcast that the writers do refer to the character thus. Until he gets a proper name, it's safe to use "Mr. Friendly."—LeFlyman18:03, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I also just noticed that "Mr. Friendly" was the name on the ABC press release for that episode: [2]. I guess we can use that to resolve naming controversies in the future. --DDG20:47, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
Danielle: Our ship went aground on this island 16 years ago. There were 6 of us - my team, 6. At that time I was already 7 months pregnant. I delivered the infant myself. The baby and I were together for only 1 week when I saw black smoke - a pillar of black smoke 5 kilometers inland. That night they came - they came and took her - Alex. They took my baby. And now, they're coming again. They're coming for all of you. Danflave17:37, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
