# Talk:Tom Friendly

? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hippi ippi (talk • contribs) 10:49, 19 March 2007 (UTC). (Dont worry about this) — hippi ippi++++ 09:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

So, what is wrong with the article and how do we fix it?  It even has a lead, unlike many of the Lost character pages.  --thedemonhog talk contributions 00:01, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Needs more out-of-universe information. We probably have some interviews and other such stuff to get that kind of information from. I'll see what I can dig up. -- Ned Scott 01:29, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

In his "position" in the hierarchy section, he is subordinate to "Isabel" which links to a page about the others, which does not mention the name Isabel. TheHYPO 15:42, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

It used to.  I guess Isabel should be linked to Stranger in a Strange Land (Lost).  --thedemonhog talk • edits • count 01:44, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I really have no idea what to do with this  

M.C Gainey's portrayal as Tom has received quite a large fanbase, with his most famous quote being "You got yourself a fish biscuit! How'd you do that?"
Any ideas?(Black Dalek 18:33, 6 June 2007 (UTC))

What is wrong with the Appearances section for it to be removed? It's an easy way of showing which episodes Tom is in.(Zeldanum1 22 December 2007)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.31.87 (talk) 01:12, 22 December 2007 (UTC) 

Image:Tom (Lost).PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 18:27, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

 Done –thedemonhog talk • edits • box 04:20, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

It is stated in the article that he was never called "Mr Friendly" on-screen, but I remember clearly that someone did, I believe in one of the four last episodes of the Season three. I think it was Sawyer (surprise, surprise), I'll see if I can check that up. Arny (talk) 09:41, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

He continued to be called "Mr. Friendly" in closed captioning but never in dialogue.  –thedemonhog talk • edits 09:43, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
This should have a disambiguity page as "Mr. Friendly" is also a children's book character.
We don't have CC here, so I believe it actually is in dialogue... arny (talk) 12:16, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
I don't think so.  –thedemonhog talk • edits 22:56, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Anyone else see his blink-and-you-miss-it dead body in the quick shot of Juliet digging at the beach? His head is clearly visible poking out of a blanket behind her. Can this be added as a (albeit uncredited) appearance? Tphi (talk) 11:44, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Sure.  –thedemonhog talk • edits 16:47, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Just because he was gay doesn't mean he belongs in the Category:Fictional gay men.  Unless it's notable for some reason, the category isn't serving any purpose.  See WP:OVERCAT. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 15:42, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

My understanding about reading WP:OVERCAT was about making overtly broad category definitions. I.E "Horror writers who eat broccoli" or some such thing. It never said to remove existing categories from valid articles if said category was accurate.--CyberGhostface (talk) 15:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
OVERCAT also applies to putting categories on an article when the classifications don't play a significant role in the article.  We don't put Category:Fictional gamblers on every character that rolls some dice.  We don't put Category:Fictional orphans on every character who's parents have died.  Only if it plays a significant part in the character's development or back-story or is in some way important.  In this article, we only find out he's gay in season four, and evidently it hasn't played a big part in either the character's development or in the storyline.  Is there a reason for the cat that I'm missing? -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 19:57, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, we found out he was gay in Season 4. He only really appeared in the third season (having some cameos in Season 2) which hinted at him being gay and it was revealed that he was in fact gay in Season 4. Nothing on OVERCAT says to remove valid categories from existing articles. They just don't want trivial categories to exist. Just because his sexuality isn't the driving focus behind his character doesn't make the classification any less valid.
And if anything, the character is undercategorized.--CyberGhostface (talk) 23:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
I agree with CyberGhostface and I have added a paragraph to the article in the "behind the scenes" section.  –thedemonhog talk • edits 01:27, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Should we add him to Category:Fictional left-handers, Category:Fictional blue-eyed men and Category:Fictional gamblers?  That's what I mean by overcategorization.  There's no reason to put him in a cat if it's not a significant part of the character's development. -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 06:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
"Fictional blue-eyed men" isn't a valid category. "Fictional gay men" is. There's nothing to suggest that valid categories should be removed from articles if the category is accurate for the article.--CyberGhostface (talk) 12:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
You've missed my point.  The simple fact that he is gay is not enough to put him in the category.  It has to be significant to the character or the show.  TheDemonHog has added some good material that explains that situation, so I agree with the cat. Thanks, -- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 22:18, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

C'mon guys, is imdb really a reliable source for Tom's surname. Sure, it could be Friendly. It could be Hobbs. But until I hear it in the show or from Damon/Carlton, we need to keep in mind that imdb's content relies on upkeep from fans. Tphi (talk) 19:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. IMDB by itself should never be a reliable source.--CyberGhostface (talk) 20:04, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
I've moved it back. The source was just an instance of a website amalgamating the character's known name with his fanon nickname was not a confirmation from the creators to the effect of "Tom's surname is actually Friendly."~ZytheTalk to me! 19:56, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
And furthermore, as far as Wikipedia naming conventions go, even if some minor video misspells one character's name and assigns "Smith" and "Martin" as surnames for Libby and Karl, they do not qualify for the article's title anywhere apart from Lostpedia due to the WP:COMMONNAME and WP:WAF. See a similar discussion at Talk:Faith (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)#Name redux.~ZytheTalk to me! 20:08, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
It is not a misspelling—his last name actually is Friendly.  The video in question was created by the Lost production team under Damon and Carlton and nicknames in the video have quotation marks (compare Neil "Frogurt").  Having said that, that discussion that you have linked is very interesting.  I did not read it and I disagree with it, but it may apply here.  –thedemonhog talk • edits 21:42, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
He was credited as "Mr. Friendly" for the first two seasons, before his first name was ever revealed, so the article should be called "Tom Friendly". --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 04:14, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
By Wikipedia policy, even if a video shown to a few people at Comic-Con and subsequently copied to Youtube proclaims a particular surname, the character of "Tom from Lost" is still not known to the public consciousness by that name as he would by by "Tom" and "Mr. Friendly". In the case of the Faith article, the character's surname was always a mystery/unspecified by the show, but later the creator Joss Whedon later gave the canonical surname "Lehane", but this was deemed by application of policy to not be a defining aspect of the character.~ZytheTalk to me! 10:24, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
My point is that before he was ever called Tom, his name was Mr. Friendly, he was credited as this by ABC, and referred to this by the producers in the podcasts. He was widely known as this for the first two seasons. Just because we learn his first name is Tom at the end of the second season, does not mean we should discard his last name. As to your other point, I can not recall a single time in the Star Wars movies where Princess Leia is called Princess Leia Organa, but that is what the article is titled because she is primarily called that in other media. --Jackieboy87 (talk · contribs) 14:02, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
Yes, but of course we have sourced that indicate that "Friendly" was not orginally conceived as his surname. The character has been known separately as "Tom" and "Mr Friendly" (to a lesser extent, mostly amongst fan communities) definitively but never as "Tom Friendly".~ZytheTalk to me! 16:35, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm not familar with the character but, as Zythe says, we need to go with the common name.  Forgot canon for a second and ask what is he commonly referred to as in third party sources, what is he credited as on the show?  From the sounds of things, "Mr Friendly" was how the character was orginally concieved and known so that's probably what we should go by.    Paul  730 17:10, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Tom (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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080310232215/http://www.wizarduniverse.com/030708gettinglost.html to http://www.wizarduniverse.com/030708gettinglost.html
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) 04:30, 5 May 2017 (UTC)