Talk:Dharma Initiative/Archive 2

message: Since I'm a self-confessed poor judge of what is/is not speculative, I'd like to know if this, which is also linked to from the article page, is or is not speculative. It clearly (at least in the clarified version) says, among other things, that station 4 is The Flame? Can we use this? I don't want to get shot down for trying... -Litefantastic 23:37, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's not from a verified official source. -- PKtm 02:33, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't mean that particular screenshot (which has been edited, I know); I meant from the map - which, being part of Lost, should count as official. I think. -Litefantastic 00:25, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You have a point, but then only with information that can be reasonably read from the unaltered map - which is not much, unfortunately. Arru 22:32, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Welcome to Dharmaland

message: Where did the link for 'the Goblet' come from? Any idea to it's authenticity? Blade 07:06, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Goblet 

message: As a trivia question, I'd like to know if anyone other than Hurley has even actually spoken the name of this project alloud (He did it when reading the name of a food product). Marvin Candle doesn't count. -Litefantastic 14:06, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: And 'Dharma' was the name

message: hey there all - I just thought I'd mention that the trivia section on the main page says that Dharma is a term used to describe the later buddhist teachings. This statement isn't really true; in Buddhist ideology there is a clear distinction between "Dharma" as the notion of duty or social responsibility and "the dharmas" (notice it isn't capitalized) which is a somewhat general term used for the collection of later buddhist texts thought to be (although there is no proof) the actual words of the Buddha as recorded by his students. I think this is an important distinction, and what do we have if not factual correctness? thanks.69.139.196.247 07:26, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Inaccurate trivia

message: There used to be pictures of the DHARMA logos; they have since been removed for reasons I have no doubt were good. However, I'd like to see them brought back, since we're up to a total of four known stations with three logos. Since each station now has its own section, it would be good for each one to have its own logo, too. Thoughts? -Litefantastic 14:19, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Logos

message: Whoever wrote up the DHARMA stations section doesn't get it. The Arrow is the bunker that the tail section survivors found. First seen when they bring Michael, Jin and Sawyer there. The Staff is the bunker that Claire was brought to in the first season when she was captured. This is first seen in "Maternity Leave" when she remembers what happened to her and they revisit it. Make the necessary changes. If you want to put a less concrete bunker on the list you can add the Pearl which is mentioned on the blast door map but first encountered as a symbol on the shark in episode 2 of the second season. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.2.176.2 (talk • contribs) 
*It is assumed that the station in those episodes are those names, but the article section deals with when the names are actually revealed. It still is not concrete that those places visited are the same even those most assume they are the same. Coffeeboy 19:04, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Sure there's no way to prove they're the same, its also true that there is no way to prove that the logo of the 'swan' in the orientation video is the same as the one thats on all the food items. See my point yet? Are we talking about how clear the image is, because it was never said explicitly on the show that the orientation video belonged in the hatch that they are at, so it could belong to a real 'The Swan' hatch with a logo almost identical. I dont believe that, but my point is: what is your definition of proof? if its just visual, then i think the map logo looks visually like the one on the hatch they're at. If proof is them saying it, then they haven't explicitly said the one from my example above either. We have to maintain consistency, what should we decide on as a rule for these posts? ArgentiumOutlaw 23:54, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *The stations on the map are clearly the same as the ones we've seen.  "The Arrow" is the tail-section station, and "The Staff" is Claire's adoption agency.  I can't see not merging these sections and adding more information from the map.  --SFoskett 17:03, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *My own personal opinion is that Jtrost has got us erring so far on the side of caution that we're into the guard rail at this point. If - if - we can agree, or at least receive a majority opinion on this, I'd like the other side, whether it be pro or anti map, to throw in the towel. Otherwise this will just become a pitched battle that degenerates into an edit war. Believe me here. -Litefantastic 23:10, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *I dont mean to seem pessimistic, but there is no way on earth you're getting either side to 'concede' like that. I disagree that there will be edit wars (at least sever ones anyway). Also, I dont quite understand what you mean by 'got us erring so far on the side of caution'. Unless the wikipedia admins themselves come down and tell me that what I'm doing is wrong, I'll continue to edit the way I do, there is no halfway point. It is basically impossible for me to sit back and watch this part of wikipedia be destroyed. Dont even bother commenting that that's not whats happening, and especially dont tell me this stuff about how wikipedia will become too much like a fansite (have you seen Stargate, Startrek, and all the other tv show sections?) ArgentiumOutlaw 11:09, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

text: If you can provide irrefutable proof from official sources without any original research that the drawings on the map correlate with previously visited stations then you can add that information.  But as far as I know, such proof does not exist, so until we have proof this information is considered speculation. Jtrost (T | C | #) 12:19, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Map-stations correlation

message: *In an attempt to mediate this disagreement I've added a disclaimer which will lead to the best of both worlds: we can list the alleged stations without making readers believe that they are known to exist. Arru 17:02, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Disclaimer

message: There are two station sections in the article.  Is there any good reason to keep them both? Coffeeboy 12:02, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *There was a small stations section and a larger section for each station.  Got cleaned up fairly soon after I posted.  Coffeeboy 17:32, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Two Station Sections

message: #Litefantastic 12:48, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Support merge

message: #Though my original AfD vote was to merge I'm content to leave the article where it is after a no consensus.  If this had been a POV fork from The DHARMA Initiative, I'd probably feel differently, but as it is not, I'd say just leave it for now (well, let it move to a more logical name as is being discussed).  Per things the creators have said this will likely be a big enough plot point that it will likely end up forking eventually anyway if it does get merged.--Isotope23 17:39, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Note: I would support a merge with an article written only about "The Swan Hatch" (or other such name). Remember this article is about "The DHARMA Initiative" and should focus on that. Adding more information to "the Swan" only shows that this subject should be expanded on in another article (another reason why I oppose a merge). The title of this article after all is not "The DHARMA Hatches." -- UKPhoenix79 03:42, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Oppose merge

message: :1. I don't watch or care one iota about Lost, so I'm utterly impartial. Feel free to ping me on my talk page for mediation or to ask for a conclusion of the discussion. Stifle 12:46, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Other comments

message: The alarm in the Swan does not sound like, or look like a klaxon. In the Lockdown episode the speakers are also used for transmitting speech, which is not possible with a klaxon. Arru 07:53, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a klaxon 

message: There seems to be sufficient support for
#breaking out The Swan
#merging the UV map into it
I'm going to be bold and do this very soon. Arru 15:46, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see good consensus that Ultraviolet map should not be its own article, less consensus about splitting off The Swan. I think that for the moment Ultraviolet map should be merged into The DHARMA Initiative. If the section on The Swan gets much longer, put  on it. Also, remember that Wikipedia is not for speculative interpretations, please use WikInfo or something for that. Stifle (talk) 16:53, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I support this. If the other stations can ever be officially aligned with their names (as they appear in the Map), and if they become notable, they can follow. -Litefantastic 23:07, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

text: My feeling is (to reiterate what I said above) that the Map article should be merged into here first and then the decision about what parts might be split off can be made. —LeflymanTalk 06:16, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Doesn't seem like the article is long enough to split.  What is the point?  I would only split if each station becomes large enough in size to justify it's own page and the DHARMA page is too long with all stations listed.  Otherwise, it just seems like extra clicking and a less powerful article.  Morphh 20:06, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I gotta agree with you Morphh.  The article as is isn't long enough to split off.  Only when/if there is any information provided on other hatches with the detail of the Swan should there be a split. Radagast83 07:16, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree too - after the Map got a taste of the chainsaw of verification, it fits just fine. I revert my support of splitting the Swan, for now. An idea though, was to break out the Swan (still >50% of this article) and instead merge the Hanso Foundation here. But this better wait until the end of the season.  Feel free to remove the breakout proposition box. Arru 09:37, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point Arru, perhaps in late May or early June when the season is complete there might be some possibility to merge Hanso with DHARMA, all depends on if there is any clear explanation on their current connection.  From what I gathered the Hanso foundation funds DHARMA, and from what we have seen from onscreen, there isn't much about them that doesn't directly involve DHARMA.  I think looking at this next month would be a good idea. Radagast83 22:51, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging/breakout consensus 

message: The technical part of the merge is done, and I've taken great care to preserve all content of the Ultraviolet article except dupes of course. I think it is a good plan, as suggested in the discussions above, to first edit the Map information and then decide on breaking out the Swan. Preserving all content does not mean I think it's all accurate or warranted, but editing should be done collaboratively. 
While merging, I realized that there is close to a complete duplicate on the synopsis of the Film. This must be fixed. Arru 11:00, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge of the Map 

message: For totally unencyclopedic purposes, I'd just like to snap together a list of all the Dharma stations that never were:
*Catbird Station
*Goblet Station
*That rather elaborate spoof with four made-up stations.
And please, if you've found more, add them to the list. -Litefantastic 16:36, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: For My Own Twisted Amusement

message: The map section has become quite slim. And, the Entertainment Weekly disclaimer stays. Arru 23:40, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed factual accuracy warning

message: there are not. At least not the "CVIII" etc. In roman numerals 109 is CIX, not CVIV. As someone noted (but has since been removed) the inscriptions are more likely CV I, CV II and so forth. Arru 09:49, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roman numerals on the map 

message: The links to Lostpedia and TV IV wiki were recently removed by Synflame. I replaced it, since I think it's perfectly good to link to notable fan sites, especially when they are clearly marked as such.
While I think Wikipedia should not contain fan speculation or even probable but unverified information, sites like Lostpedia serve a purpose for collecting this - obviously of interest to a lot of Lost fans.  Arru 19:44, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linking to fansites 

message: :To vote, please use the format: #~~~~ - <comments>
#LeflymanTalk 20:19, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Support merge

message: :To vote, please use the format: #~~~~ - <comments>
#Elwood00 T | C 14:19, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Oppose merge

message: :To vote, please use the format: #~~~~ - <comments>
#UKPhoenix79 10:53, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Support split

message: :To vote, please use the format: #~~~~ - <comments>
#Jtrost (T | C | #) 11:46, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Oppose split