Talk:Meet Kevin Johnson

Image

I propose the image be removed or swapped for something that is less of a spoiler. It's not a censorship issue, it's just a question of what is appropriate to represent an episode that nobody has seen yet. --Minderbinder (talk) 19:46, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

You say that it's not a censorship issue, yet you want a picture that is less of a spoiler. –thedemonhog talk • edits 20:13, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm saying it's an episode that none of us have seen yet. Editors can use discretion to choose what image accompanies an article, and I think this one is a poor choice. --Minderbinder (talk) 20:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't complain when I read the Lost episode pages before the episodes air on Sunday. Partially because I watch them on Friday, but the point is, "not airing" is not a candidate for removal. WP:NFCC#4 is, but the image passes that criterion by virtue of being in the press pack. The spoiler is only a spoiler to those who don't pay attention, as well. Will ^(talk) 21:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

For the record, I'm not saying it's a policy violation, it's not that we can't use the image. It's that as editors we can and should use our discretion - in this case, I think that discretion is lacking - I think it's tacky. --Minderbinder (talk) 21:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Tacky, schmacky,- The image, as far as I can tell, is the perfect representation of the episode. There are spoilers in the text as well. Wikipedia does not censor for spoilers! This issue has been settled by consensus. We are not a spoiler site or a fan site. We are an encyclopedia and should present encyclopedic information. The image seems to do a great job of representing the episode. Ursasapien (talk) 09:14, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

As long as the "potential spoiler" tag is there, it shouldn't matter. (Although, on a minor note, did anyone else picture Karl as wearing a red shirt for quite some time?) Samer (talk) 13:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Reviews?

Is Dos Santos really a reviewer, or at least one to take seriously? She's mainly a gossip columnist and hype machine. Reviewer implies actually giving real honest opinions on something, and everything I've ever read from her has been cheerleading. Should a "critic" who says positive things about everything really be included here, much less leading off the section? --Minderbinder (talk) 20:48, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Dos Santos does review shows too. Besides, there's nothing wrong with sourcing a critic who likes the show; Harry Venning of The Stage consistently gives Doctor Who good reviews, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't discount his opinion. I've got no bias, to be honest. It's the order I got them from Google News. Sceptre ^(talk) 21:30, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

My objection isn't that she likes the show, it's that she likes every episode of every show. She's the equivalent of those people you've never seen a review from who like every movie and get quoted on every movie ad. Not to mention neither he bio here at WP nor the one at eonline even refers to her as a critic. Her job is to hype TV shows, if she actually wrote an article about a show that was critical I'd be more inclined to consider her a critic. I'd appreciate opinions from other editors on this, thanks. --Minderbinder (talk) 21:40, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but isn't this meant to be an encyclopaedia? It reads like a High School magazine. You need to purge this section. Seriously. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.100.164 (talk) 10:02, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Plot Summary Addition

The plot summaries for the Lost series are always highly reliable and succinct, but this episode did not note that Ben urged his daughter to leave Lock's camp to avoid an impending attack in a private conversation after the big revelation about Michael on the freighter. This was the set-up for the climax of the episode. Marcd30319 (talk) 21:38, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Someone should add this information. Seeing as we are in "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit", that someone could be you! –thedemonhog talk • edits 22:32, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Paul Karl is dead

As it's going to be another month until "Shape" airs, how are we going to address this in the mean time?

• Karl and Rousseau are both dead.
• Karl is dead, Rousseau isn't.
• Neither are dead.
• We leave it ambiguous.

I'm not too happy with doing the first. We don't get confirmation that Rousseau's dead (she falls to the ground, yes). Either's fine, but in the interests of reliability, I think we should keep it ambiguous until the episode airs. Thoughts? Sceptre ^(talk) 20:31, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Karl is dead. In the episode, Rousseau states that "he's gone" three times in a row. The promo after "Ji Yeon" states that someone will die and Damon Lindelof verifies this with Entertainment Weekly.[1] Blake Bashoff also confirms Karl's death with E!.[2] Rousseau's fate is ambiguous for this article. Simply state that she is shot. There are a number of reasons why Rousseau is alive, but none are good enough to say in the article that she is alive. The promo and the EW confirmation say that someone will die and Lindelof and Carlton Cuse have been saying for a while that she will get a season 5 flashback. –thedemonhog talk • edits 21:13, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm accepting Karl's dead, it's Rousseau that's controversial. Sceptre ^(talk) 21:15, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The producers also said that Libby would get a flashback and we all know how that ended. I agree that Karl is probably dead, but we should leave it ambiguous for now. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 22:08, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Though Furlan didn't get a DUI. Watros, Rodriguez, and the guy who played Eko did. Sceptre ^(talk) 22:15, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Small correction: Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje was caught driving without a license. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 22:21, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Libby and Ana Lucia were not killed because of the DUI's. –thedemonhog talk • edits 23:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Flashback

The episode does not contain the longest flashback in the show's history, simply because it's not a flashback at all. It's a narration by Michael Dawson and the things we see are the things he tells Sayid and Desmond. However, the episode is historic because it is the first time that any of the writers make use of this plot device. Ashrawi (talk) 17:35, 25 March 2008 (UTC)(talk) 17:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I would say that a narration is one form of a flashback. –thedemonhog talk • edits 17:43, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

It's also longer than Flashes, by about two or three minutes (though you can claim that was Desmond's mind slipping - for the purposes of Wikipedia, I call it a "lucid flashback"). And while TLI is normally a theorymill, that statement was in the intro to the podcast, and I think that Lee and Terry did their research for that. Sceptre ^(talk) 18:19, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Reviewers' happiness

I don't think this last sentence should be in the article's lead. A few isolated reviewers' opinion that the show wouldn't have made a good finale (and thus presuming them to be "happy") seems very unnotable in the context of the article's lead. I think anyone's opinion of the episode, press or not (especially about a hypothetical situation that did not come to pass), should stay in the section dedicated to that topic. Since this episode did not end up as the finale, reviewer or fan opinion about whether or not it would have been a good finale is moot and shouldn't be included as important lead info. TheHYPO (talk) 22:03, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

It's supposed to summarise the reception. I could add a note about Darlton being just as happy. Sceptre ^(talk) 22:24, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

The lead is supposed to summarize the article. –thedemonhog talk • edits 23:07, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

GA pass

Congratulations. I believe this article to meet the GA criteria at this time. After some copy editing, I have decided to pass the article. The article is thorough and completely sourced. Good work! Nikki311 16:53, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Ratings

Just a question, why aren't there ratings for this episode and "Ji Yeon"? Now I know you are going to say that I should do it, but I can't find official rating sources, so I was wondering if someone else could please do it. Thanks. Corn.u.co.pia ♥ Disc.us.sion 13:54, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I think it's too late now, ABC deletes their press releases about ratings a few days after they post them. Most other sites only keep the current week's ratings at any given time. Jackieboy87 (talk) 20:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

It is not too late because ABC does not delete their press releases a few days after they post them. That is how we have ratings with sources on all the other fourth season episode articles. –thedemonhog talk • edits 01:42, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Well that's great, but can someone please add them? Corn.u.co.pia ♥ Disc.us.sion 04:21, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I added them. Corn.u.co.pia ♥ Disc.us.sion 03:41, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

yes Cai Jin Lian (talk) 04:02, 20 March 2023 (UTC)