Jump to content

Talk:Pilot (Lost)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articlePilot (Lost) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 3, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
October 15, 2009Good article nomineeNot listed
February 2, 2012Good article nomineeNot listed
March 8, 2014Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article

Plot summaries and What Wikipedia is not

[edit]

I'm tagging this article with {{plot}}, since the majority of the article is a plot summary. I'm also tagging the "Production notes" with a {{plot}} tag, since it reads like most "Trivia" sections. I'm tempted to nominate this article for deletion, but I'll give editors some time to improve it first. --Phirazo 03:13, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Pilot (Lost)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
  5. It is stable.
  6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
    a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
  7. Overall:
    a Pass/Fail:

Comments

[edit]

Although this article has all the solid beginnings of a Good Article, it cannot currently be promoted, for the reasons outlined below. I believe the extent of work needed is such that it would extend beyond a week's holding period, and so am failing the article for the time being. Once the following concerns have been addressed, the article can be renominated. If you disagree with this decision, you may request reassessment at WP:GAR.

  • Prose.

A number of sentences read awkwardly, including but not limited to:

  1. premiered on ABC in September 22 - on September 22 would read better.
  2. directed by J.J. Abrams, and written by J.J. Abrams and Damon Lindelof - immediate repetition could be worded better.
  3. The pilot introduces the survivors of Oceanic Flight 815, that after the crash of their plane end up on an mysterious island. Again could be reworded to improve the flow of the sentence.
  4. a scene involving a stuffed polar bear was freeze framed and mocked on the internet, making ABC replace it with a CGI bear. - Use of the word making here seems inappropriate, as it does in sentence making Keaton give up the job. Prompting, leading to, resulting in may be better alternatives.
  5. Awards won included three Emmy Awards, Outstanding Drama Series, Directing for a Drama Series to J.J. Abrams and Editing for a Drama Series, with additional nominations to Sound Editing and Writing for Drama Series, an Artios Award for casting, a VES Award for visual effects and two Golden Reel Awards for Effects & Foley. Could stand to be broken up from a run on sentence into a couple of shorter sentences.
  6. Many special effects were used, specially bluescreen. - especially?
  7. Avoid contractions outside of quotations - it's appears twice.
  8. Numerous short sentences make the plot summary read in a stop-start, "bitty" fashion, and could be reworded so as to flow better.
  9. Also carefully check comma usage throughout.
  • Manual of Style.
  1. Per WP:MOS, citations should follow directly on from punctuation, with no space as has been left in some instances here.
  2. Images should not be placed directly below subsection headings, as is the case with the third image of Shannon.
  3. WP:WAF recommends no more than 100 words for every 10 minutes of air time with regards to plot summaries - while the airtime of both episodes combined is around the 80-85 minute mark, the plot summary runs to almost 1000 words and should be reduced accordingly.
  4. "Part 1" and "Part 2" should always be written enclosed in "quotes", per stylistic conventions on episode names.
  5. Lead section could stand to be clearer - the relevance of the usage of flashbacks to the series is poorly conveyed.
  • Focused coverage
  1. Close to a pass, but see above notes on the length of the plot summary section.
  • References.
  1. The first reference actually states the pilot to have been the most expensive in ABC history, not television history as claimed in the lead.
  2. "Lord of the Flies-inspired realistic show about a society putting itself back together after a catastrophe." Requires reference.
  3. "not be a normal island" Requires reference. Article cited at the end of the sentence contains a similar but far from identical quote.
  4. References 5 & 6, to special features on the series one DVD, should ideally make use of the cite video template or similar, rather than simply linking to the series list wiki page.
  • NPOV.
  1. While I am satisfied the article is written from a NPOV, the Reception section deals solely with positive reviews. Did the episodes receive no criticism or critical reviews whatsoever? The section should be expanded so as to present both points of view, if any such opposing view does exist.
  • Images.
  1. All three images fail WP:FUC#10c - fair use rationale needs to be provided for use in this specific article in all cases.

All the best on improving the article further to meet GA standard! Frickative 03:14, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Pilot (Lost)/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    Check for dabs.
    "Pilot" constitutes the first and second episodes of the first season of Lost, that premiered on September 22, 2004 (Part 1) and September 29, 2004 (Part 2) at ABC . Extra space at the end. Wording also needs to be fixed; try "Pilot" constitutes the first and second episodes of the first season of Lost; Part 1 premiered on September 22, 2004 and Part 2 premiered September 29, 2004 at ABC.
    The episodes were directed by J.J. Abrams, and written by Abrams along with Damon Lindelof, based on story by them and Jeffrey Lieber. is also not grammatically sound. Try The episodes were directed by J.J. Abrams, written by Abrams and Damon Lindelof, and based on a story created by Abrams, Lindelof, and Jeffrey Lieber.
    Three of the characters, Jack Shephard (Matthew Fox), Kate Austen (Evangeline Lilly) and Charlie Pace (Dominic Monaghan), are featured in flashbacks to their experiences as the plane breaks apart in midair; these scenes established Lost's distinctive use of flashbacks. makes no sense to me.
    As he attempts to gather his thoughts, he discovers a small bottle of vodka in his suit pocket. Finally able to stand, he crashes through the jungle vegetation and emerges onto an expansive beach, where he is confronted by the carnage of the airplane crash of Oceanic Flight 815. How does he go from "as he attempts to gather his thoughts" to "Finally able to stand" with no logical connection?
    All is in chaos, and in the confusion, one survivor gets sucked into a still spinning turbine. "All is in chaos" really isn't an Encyclopedic phrase.
    In quick fashion, he rescues a man pinned under wreckage, assists the pregnant Claire Littleton (Emilie de Ravin) and enlists Hugo "Hurley" Reyes (Jorge Garcia) to watch her, and administers CPR to Rose Henderson (L. Scott Caldwell), saving her life. "In a quick fashion" is not Encyclopedic either.
    While huddled there, a young Korean man, Jin-Soo Kwon (Daniel Dae Kim), tells his wife, Sun-Hwa Kwon (Yunjin Kim),in Korean that she should remain close to him at all times. is missing a space.
    After the monster disappears, Kate, Charlie and Jack reunite and find the pilot, his bloodied corpse suspended in a tree top. Try After the monster disappears, Kate, Charlie and Jack reunite and find the pilot's bloodied corpse suspended in a tree top. Also, this seems almost advert-like.
    in a flashback, it is revealed that Charlie had been doing drugs in the bathroom, and attempted to flush his stash but had been prevented by the sudden onset of turbulence. Why is this italicized?
    After he shows Michael the cuffs, Sawyer attacks Sayid, who he believes is an Iraqi terrorist who blew up the plane. has unclear pronouns.
    They are soon stopped by Michael and the now returned Jack. "now returned" should be "now-returned", but the wording is still awkward.
    While reading a letter sadly, Sawyer decides to go with Sayid and the group Err, what? Jump of logic again.
    He then explains that he got the gun from the body of a dead U.S. marshal. Is this important?
    A flashback shows the final moments of the flight. Kate is talking to the marshal, the same injured man to whom Jack had been tending, on the beach. On the plane, it can be seen that Kate is wearing the handcuffs that Walt found in the jungle. As the turbulence hits, the marshal is knocked unconscious by a falling suitcase. Kate uncuffs herself, and puts the marshal's oxygen mask on him before attaching her own, at which point the tail end of the plane suddenly breaks off and falls away. Why is this italicized?
    "Where is she?". should not have a period after a question mark.
    ABC had also premiered a short lived series about plane crash survivors in 1969 called The New People with the opening episode by Rod Serling. should have "The New People" italicized. You might also want to try The New People, with an opening episode written by Rod Serling. or something similar.
    Yet, before it had even been aired, Lloyd Braun was fired by executives at ABC's parent company, Disney, partly because of low ratings at the network and also because he had greenlighted such an expensive and risky project. should be Yet before the episode aired, Lloyd Braun was fired by executives at ABC's parent company, Disney, because of the network's low ratings and his role in greenlighting such an expensive and risky project.
    The world premiere of the pilot episode was on July 24, 2004 at Comic-Con International in San Diego. Try The pilot episode's world premiere was on July 24, 2004 at Comic-Con International in San Diego.
    After Matthew Fox's casting as Jack, Make this active.
    Overlinking terms like fired, supernatural, southern accent, etc.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Check dead links.
    The "TV Q&A: ‘LOST’—JACK BENDER". Wizard. 2007-03-27. http://www.wizarduniverse.com/television/lost/004036830.cfm. Retrieved 2007-10-03. ref should not be in all caps.
    You link dates in refs 2 and 20, but not for others. Also, the date formats are inconsistent.
    Ref 13 is just a link.
    Is there a reference for the airdate(s)?
    Does anything cite primarily due to the expense of purchasing, shipping, and dressing the actual decommissioned aircraft body used to represent the wreckage.? Because otherwise, it seems like WP:OR.
    A great deal of the plot seems to be WP:OR too (After the initial shock of the crash passes,, Kate curiously observes Jack, while an uninterested James "Sawyer" Ford (Josh Holloway) looks on., etc).
    Example text You're going to need either a better reference or a better way to format that reference.
    The series began development in January 2004, when Lloyd Braun, head of ABC at the time, ordered an initial script from Spelling Television based on his concept of a cross between the novel Lord of the Flies, the movie Cast Away, the television series Gilligan's Island, and the popular reality show Survivor. ABC had also premiered a short lived series about plane crash survivors in 1969 called The New People with the opening episode by Rod Serling. Is there anything to reference those statements?
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Several scenes in the Season 3 finale, "Through the Looking Glass," were shot in Los Angeles, including a hospital set borrowed from Grey's Anatomy. How is this relevant?
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    I'm going to assume that there simply aren't any negative reviews of this series.
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    File:Lost102.jpg is going to need a better free use rational.
    Images need alt text.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail: Fail

I did not reach the end of this article; there were simply too many problems. This article can conceivably pass, but it requires a thorough copyedit and a good deal of polishing. Good luck. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR talk // contribs 22:50, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Major Fixes

[edit]

I have made some major fixes as was mentioned in the feedback from GA nomination. The only thing I haven't done are the references, so if they are completed and perhaps a few more images added, we can go for GA again. Calvin (talk) 20:30, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Pilot (Lost)/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs) 07:57, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA1 issues

[edit]
  • The following issues from GA1 remain:
  1. Per WP:MOS, citations should follow directly on from punctuation, with no space as has been left in some instances here.
  2. WP:WAF recommends no more than 100 words for every 10 minutes of air time with regards to plot summaries - while the airtime of both episodes combined is around the 80-85 minute mark, the plot summary runs to almost 1000 words and should be reduced accordingly. (I count 1001 words as of 1/16/2012)
    Still 937.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:28, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  3. "Part 1" and "Part 2" should always be written enclosed in "quotes", per stylistic conventions on episode names.
  4. Lead section could stand to be clearer - the relevance of the usage of flashbacks to the series is poorly conveyed.
  5. "Lord of the Flies-inspired... needs a references--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:40, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA2 issues

[edit]
  • The following issues from GA2 remain:
  1. The episodes were directed by J.J. Abrams, and written by Abrams along with Damon Lindelof, based on story by them and Jeffrey Lieber. is also not grammatically sound. Try The episodes were directed by J.J. Abrams, written by Abrams and Damon Lindelof, and based on a story created by Abrams, Lindelof, and Jeffrey Lieber.
  2. "Where is she?". should not have a period after a question mark.
  3. The "TV Q&A: ‘LOST’—JACK BENDER". Wizard. 2007-03-27. http://www.wizarduniverse.com/television/lost/004036830.cfm. Retrieved 2007-10-03. ref should not be in all caps.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:54, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Check dead links
  5. Ref 13 is just a link.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:59, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Is there a reference for the airdate(s)?
  7. Does anything cite primarily due to the expense of purchasing, shipping, and dressing the actual decommissioned aircraft body used to represent the wreckage.? Because otherwise, it seems like WP:OR.
  8. The series began development in January 2004, when Lloyd Braun, head of ABC at the time, ordered an initial script from Spelling Television based on his concept of a cross between the novel Lord of the Flies, the movie Cast Away, the television series Gilligan's Island, and the popular reality show Survivor. ABC had also premiered a short lived series about plane crash survivors in 1969 called The New People with the opening episode by Rod Serling. Is there anything to reference those statements?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:05, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Images need alt text per the alt text tool.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:09, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I decided to help out whoever nom'd this and I believe I fixed issues from GA1 #1, 2, and 3, and issues from GA2 #1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.--Gen. Quon (talk) 23:53, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA 3

[edit]
WP:LEAD
Plot
Production
====

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Pilot (Lost)/GA4. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Pakaran (talk · contribs) 21:47, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Review in progress GA Status granted March 8 2014

Hello, I was asked by User:Newyorkadam to look at this article, and did raise some minor flow and sentence structure issues with him on IRC, which have been fixed. I'm still actively checking, but at this point, I see no reason why this is ineligible for GA status. It's not unreasonable to be concerned about the article being illustrated with a fair-use screenshot, but the lead of the article discusses in depth the huge production cost created by the crashed plane listed. The facts are well cited, and a spot check reveals no copy-paste plagiarism (though at least one blog plagiarized the article itself).

The article is still quite actively being improved, and I'm still talking with the author, as well as rechecking in case I'm missing something (the GA process is one of the areas of Wikipedia I haven't been too active in, so I figure erring on the side of caution is wise). One issue raised in GA3 is that the plot summary was too long. It's now about 50 words longer than it was at that time, but it's reasonable to say that that alone should not be cause for failure.

I'm still actively discussing issues with the user on IRC, and he's still actively improving the article to an extent that makes it both unfair and infeasible to review fully at this point. Pakaran 21:47, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Many of the issues mentioned in past reviews have been fixed prior to nomination. Others, including some that I identified before reading those reviews, have been corrected during further discussions with the nominator via IRC. The most prominent remaining issue, though I strongly suspect not the only one at this point, is the length of the plot summary. There's a case to be made that the pilot of a series is in some sense more significant, but hundreds of words over the recommended length doesn't seem appropriate (though as I said, I don't feel that that, of and by itself, should be fatal). Pakaran 22:58, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

After further IRC discussion, the article is in a much better state. I've asked the nominator to cut the plot summary to 1000 words, at which point I'll review it for anything that seems to need cutting, and if not, I'm not seeing any other issue precluding GA status. Pakaran 00:58, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I reduced the plot summary (along with other fixes), see if it's good enough now. igordebraga ≠ 13:10, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

After half an hour reading the summary several times, I didn't see anything that clearly required cutting. At this point, the length of the plot summary appears compliant with GAC subcriteria 1a and 3b, which were the most worrisome ones. I'll be honest and say I'd prefer a still briefer plot summary, but considering that flashbacks are a major trope in the entire series, there's no cause for failing this nomination on that basis alone in view of the state of the rest of the article. I'll pass it now. Pakaran 16:31, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pilot (Lost). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:15, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pilot (Lost). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:53, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Pilot (Lost). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:04, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pilot_(Lost)&oldid=1206356885"