Talk:Losted
Back to page
Contents |
I removed the reviews, unilaterally 
Edit
I honestly believe you have to let viewers decide if it is funny or not, I know my lostaways and they will go and see your work and decide if it is funny and discuss it in the forums. I will withhold my personal opinion, having viewed it myself. I know you are the creator of the cartoon and want people to see it, no problem with that. Never believed in reviews, anyway. --†††GodEmperorOfHell††† 14:00, 6 August 2006 (PDT)
- Yeah the reviews were a bit of a plug. To be honest I didn't find the first episode that amusing, I was more captivated by the amazing LOST music you'd managed to get for it. However, episodes 2 and 3 did make me kind of chuckle, particularly with Eko and Henry Gale --Nickb123 (Talk) 14:39, 6 August 2006 (PDT)
The Finale EpisodeEdit
Omg it answers everything lol!!! And I knew it wasn't namaste, its nestle fools! Brilliant finale dude, and I'm impressed you picked up on the fact that the Others controlled the radio tower, I thought only I noticed that before adding it to Lostpedia --Nickb123 (Talk) 12:44, 27 August 2006 (PDT) And you EVEN noticed that weird island when the boat took off from Pala Ferry. How persceptive are you. Very impressed --Nickb123 (Talk) 13:39, 27 August 2006 (PDT)
DeletionEdit
- We should have a rule that creators of Lost parody videos can't make articles about their own movies. This was self-promotional to begin with and just four YouTube videos. --Mr. Crabby (Talk) 17:03, 19 March 2007 (PDT)
- Delete Agree with Mr. Crabby. A rule reguarding self-made vanity articles would be good. This subject could be included in maybe an article that lists fan-videos, but does not need its own article. Hooper talk contribs email 22:44, 20 March 2007 (PDT)
- Note: There is no such rule here at Lostpedia, nor at Wikipedia, nor are we likely to implement one. If this is in any way unclear, please review the WP links below on COI and SPAM for a detailed explanation. Articles by content-creators are not by default SPAM, given: 1) determination of significance by community consensus, 2) NPOV (avoidance of SPAM and vanity content) following community editing (therefore avoiding ownership of edits by the content-creator), and ideally 3) well-referenced third party sources for information in the article copy. -- Contrib¯ _Santa_ ¯ Talk 01:41, 25 March 2007 (PDT)
- Keep - IMO the criterion of fan content should be significance within the fan community. Losted is well-established and well known. Articles about fan content that are started by the creators immediately have the issues of conflict-of-interest (COI), vanity, and self promotion (SPAM). However, if these issues are remedied by other editors, the article itself need not be deleted for the sole reason of who originally created the article. -- Contrib¯ _Santa_ ¯ Talk 20:10, 24 March 2007 (PDT)
- Keep for Santa's reason --Blueeagleislander 20:17, 24 March 2007 (PDT)
- Keep Santa makes a lot of good points. LOSTed is a very well-known fan video. It doesn't hurt to have a few of the better known and higher-quality videos about Lost on the site, we just can't have some that are blatant self-promotion. As I stated before, it is a well known video. Even Daniel Dae Kim, a premier star of Lost, guest starred if you will on this video. --Marik7772003 20:33, 24 March 2007 (PDT)
Link Edit
The link at the bottom of the page leads to an advertising website. (I think.) Maybe it should be removed? 73rd survivor 17:58, 9 March 2008 (PDT)
Storyline?Edit
Don't detailed non-Lost synopses exceed our scope? We don't provide them for fanfic. Fan parodies seem to deserve them even less. Besides, each is just an 8-minute video that's viewable online for free worldwide and has no copyright. If someone wants to know what's in an episode, they can just watch it. --- Balk Of Fame ♪ talk 20:27, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
Then it must be deleted!! I was just bored and couldn't think of anything to do ¬.¬ Wednesday nights are soo boring. Julietfan2626 Talk Blogs 21:03, December 22, 2010 (UTC)
