Talk:Pop culture references
Back to page
Contents |
Simple list with mini-portal 
Edit
I changed this article to a simple list with a mini-portal at the top. I'm not real happy with some of the images in the mini-portal. Ideally, each image would be the same size and would also be a little brighter. Feel free (as always) to change them out.--Dagg 15:53, 22 January 2007 (PST)
Rename Edit
- Wikipedia does it best, so I propose a rename to the more simple References to Lost in popular culture. --SilvaStorm
- The problem (and reason behind the unusually unwieldy name) is because it is a list of exclusion, and does not inclue other pop culture references, such as literature, music and art. Also, your proposal has the "List of" prefix, which we've been taking off with the new MOS. That title isn't much shorter than this one, but I would be open to hearing other ones that are shorter (and don't include LIST OF), but also make it clear that it is not a comprehensive list. --PandoraX 18:30, 27 January 2007 (PST)
- Okay, I've changed it. Didn't know about the removal of the "List of" prefix. --SilvaStorm
- Why not just have Pop culture references? We don't need "in Lost" either, this is assumed. The only thing about that is that people would have to understand it doesn't include literature, music, etc. --PandoraX 05:07, 28 January 2007 (PST)
- True, but it's possible that if we put Pop culture References, people will think it's about music and music only? -- Lost Soul talk contribs 05:12, 28 January 2007 (PST)
- Misc. pop culture references, then? You guys can see my problem with naming the article, now. :) --PandoraX 05:15, 28 January 2007 (PST)
- I see the problem you've got... it's a difficult one. How about just calling it Allusions to Popular Culture? -- Lost Soul talk contribs 09:09, 28 January 2007 (PST)
I like Lost Souls idea. --Princess Dharma (banned) 06:22, 4 February 2007 (PST)
Different structure Edit
This article is basically a set of about 20 bullet points. It seems unnecessary for these 20 or so bullet points to take up 8 pages (that's on my 1024x768 laptop) when scrolling. Can anyone suggest a more concise structure that fits more info to a page? -- Dagg talk contribs4 8 10:42, 20 June 2007 (PDT)
The removed italics Edit
Names of books, movies, TV shows, etc are normally italicized, and yet the italics have been removed from the article. Can someone add them back?-- Dagg talk contribs4 8 05:31, 21 June 2007 (PDT)
- At the beginning half of them were italicized and the others were not and it was kinda messy so i removed the ones that were so they would all be the same, but now it's OK, i added them back. -- Steff talk contribs email 09:26, 21 June 2007 (PDT)
Renamed to "Pop culture references"Edit
- A speedy rename was performed, moving the article (and talk page) from "Pop culture misc. references" to "Pop culture references". Several issues are explained below. The abbreviation "misc." is undesirable in an article title, so the option was to remove it or expand the abbreviation. However, in reviewing the previous talk page discussion about renaming the article (it used to be something like "List of pop culture references in Lost"), the justification for using the term "miscellaneous" was to clarify the intent of a new, small, and incomplete article (see above). However a year and a half later, the argument that future editors will mistake the article to be about "music" no longer is valid because the article is now quite large, complete, and spans a diverse sample of popular culture beyond music. -- Contrib¯ _Santa_ ¯ Talk 02:05, 25 September 2008 (PDT)
Back to the futureEdit
I changed what was there previously under BTTF from a really obscure "reference" to a very direct one. But this can be expanded and discussed.Mister vijay 14:24, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
