Lostpedia has arranged a string of interviews with characters from The Lost Experience. Follow the links to submit your questions for Speaker and Javier Grillo-Marxuach!
Do you have an idea for a new wiki? Please share it with us here

From Lostpedia

Perfect. Great work. --Blueeagleislander 02:25, 4 March 2008 (PST)

• You're the best. I'll give it a careful read through next, but upon perusal it certainly fills a need. -- ^C¯ _Santa_ ¯^T 02:49, 4 March 2008 (PST)
• We could certainly use this as the basis of an expanded UQ area on the policy  Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  04:59, 4 March 2008 (PST)
• I hereby fully support this essay as a basis for an official Lostpedia ppolicy. Any chance of getting you people help me with this annoying issue?--Nevermore 14:20, 7 March 2008 (PST)
• Looks good Robert, would love to see this moved into one of the official policy articles! --Jackdavinci 07:16, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

Proposal - change UQ to Mysteries

I have a proposal idea for changing the UQ concept. Right now it's being used as just kind of an informal way to point out things that are puzzling about an episode. This puts them on the same level as theories in my opinion. And it seems kind of silly that they are impermanent - if a question gets answered then it just gets deleted, it doesn't seem to serve much of a long term purpose. My proposal is that we get rid of the UQ section and replace them with a *Mysteries* section. This will be much more in tune with why the UQ section was started to begin with, and will utilize it to it's full potential. I'm thinking of something similar to things like the DarkUfo mysteries pages. Within the Mysteries section there will be two subsections: Unsolved (or open or unresolved or whatever) (or for episodes New) Mysteries, and Solved Mysteries. These will be the sorts of mysteries that it seems like the episode is purposely setting up to be revealed in a future episode (like what Kate did, what does the smoke monster look like, why Jack thinks they have to go back to the island, etc.) and not just curiosities. When a mystery gets solved, it will remain on the page but be moved to the Solved section, and will indicate in which episode it was solved. If you click the ep-ref link then you get sent to the Solved section of that episode. If an episode solves a mystery, it can say "solved in this episode" and even give a brief statement of the solution. Or perhaps two sections for regular articles - Open, and Solved ... and three sections for episode articles - New, Solved (in future), and Resolved (in this episode). What do you think? --Jackdavinci 07:16, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

I've been thinking about proposing Robert's essay as official policy for quite a while now. We should implement it as a policy at least for now. Then, we can expand it further, or we can change the UQ concept as you suggested, which seems like a great idea.

• This would definitely solve one of the problems that many people seem not to understand, that not every unanswered question should be in unanswered questions. Calling them mysteries would probably discourage people from adding things too trivial or irrelevant ("what is Claire's real hair color?") and more importantly, theory baiting ("is he REALLY dead?"). To further restrain theory baiting, we should explicitly say that implications are true until disproven. If Ben says something, whether or not he's telling the truth shouldn't be a mystery, and should be regarded as the truth, until we have further evidence contradicting.
• Moreover, the unanswered questions (and I mean the more important ones) being deleted as they're answered (which happens quite often under debate) is also somewhat unfair, since probably having the mysteries presented in Lost listed even when they're solved would be more appropriate for the wiki of a mystery show.
• If implemented, "Mysteries" sections could have subsections like "Locations", or "People", which could be useful for unidentified things presented throughout the show. We could just have the names listed under those subsections, without commenting on the nature of the mystery since it's too obvious. An example for the People subsection would be man in the coffin, just as the Temple for Locations. It's obvious what is mysterious about these: Identity and nature.
• Regardless of whether we use subsections, each listed item should have the notes Presented: and Solved:, indicating in which episodes they were presented and solved. We could also mention the false solutions with a different note.
• We could also rename Portal:Mysterious to Portal:Major Mysteries to differentiate between the new concept with the portal's contents, which should be about bigger mysteries that often raise not only the question "what", but also "when", "why" and "how" (like Adam and Eve, the Monster or the Island).

Of course, this would probably better go into Lostpedia:Ideas, but I guess nothing really happens there anymore.--     c      blacxthornE      t     11:00, 13 May 2008 (PDT)