Talk:Timeline:Pre-crash

Talk archives
Archive 1 (Since Time- October 3, 2008)

Order

Sorry to be a pain, but would this be better if organised chronologically, or similarly to the timeline page for time after the crash? Russell 14:45, 12 April 2006 (PDT)

Merge with Event Chronology? Both pages have very similar content.Russell 05:24, 14 April 2006 (PDT)

Juliet's arrival

I think we're getting ahead of ourselves with the Sept. 11, 2001 date for Juliet's arrival. Based on the Island Chronology, the day in this episode (day 73) is Dec. 3, 2004. By my math, she left on Sept. 5, 2001.

• The producers just said it was a significant day. Maybe they really like three day weekends, and enjoy labor day more than most? -BearDog 15:07, 21 February 2007 (PST)

• I agree with Juliet's arrival date of Sept. 5, 2001. However, there are some related inconsistencies within the episode "One of Us". In that episode, Juliet is in bed with Goodwin one day before the 3 year anniversary of her arrival. That would make the date, Sept. 4, 2004. She then receives Ben's x-rays and goes to his house to show them to him. The inconsistency is with information presented in "The Cost of Living". Within THAT episode Ben claims that two days after he learned he had a spinal tumor, a spinal surgeon fell out of the sky. So if we use the information from "One of Us" and "The Cost of Living" the crash is on Sept 6. 2004 which we all know is impossible. Can anyone clear this up for me? Or should I add this as a continuity error? If I've misunderstood or overlooked something please let me know. Thanks.--Bigfunkymonkey 00:20, 14 April 2007 (PDT)
  • I asked myself the same question: did Juliet come to the island on Sept. 5 or Sept. 22? In any case, it seems there is a problem. So could anyone give a reason to put Juliet's arrival on Sept. 5 rather than on Sept. 22, please? Thanks in advance.  Nico  19:25, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
    • Well, in "One of Us" she told Goodwin that in one day it would be three years since she came to the Island. Then the next day, 815 crashed. Seems pretty obvious to me that she arrived on September 22, 2001. --Crash815 Talk 19:53, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Mikhail's Age vs. James Ford's Age

Both are listed in the timeline as having been born in 1969, but that would make Mikhail a little too you to have fought in Afghanistan, wouldn't it? And I have a hard time believing that he is the same age as James Ford. (Of course, I also had a hard time believing that Anthony Cooper and Emily Locke are old enough to be Locke's parents, but...)--sockmonkey 09:48, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

• The Soviets were in Afghanistan through 1989, when Mikhail would have been 20. If he enlisted at 18, he could have been in Afghanistan for two to three years. Emily Locke was 15(!) when she conceived Locke, and 16 when she gave birth to him. Cooper is described (by Emily's mom) as "twice" Emily's age, making him about 32 years old in 1954. The problem is only the age of the actors vs. their characters. Mature Emily Locke is played by Swoozie Kurtz, who is four years younger than her character. Cooper is played by Kevin Tighe who is 20 years younger(!) than Anthony Cooper is supposed to be. Meanwhile, John Locke is played by Terry O'Quinn, who is four years older than Locke.--Marksman 07:00, 13 May 2008 (PDT)
• Where exactly does the info about Mikhail been born in 1969 come from? I must have missed it. He sure doesn't look like a 35 year old, and Andrew Divoff was born in 1955, which makes him 51/52 at the time of season 3. I know that some actors are playing people a few years younger than themselves, but 16 years younger?! Come on! TimeTravellingRabbit 09:18, 1 November 2008 (PDT)
  • In Par Avion, Mikhail says "I was recruited [by the Others] when I was 24" and he was immediately stationed at the Flame. This couldn't have happened until after 1992 (the Purge). In "Enter 77" Mikhail states that he was recruited a few years after the Cold War. In addition, he stated that he served in Afghanistan. The Soviets left Afghanistan in early 1989. The Cold War ended around that time. So 1992 was likely the year he was recruited. He was either born in 1968 or 1969. I don't know why he's listed as being born in 1969 specifically. But Michail the character is a lot younger than Andrew Divoff the actor who played him.--Marksman 12:22, 1 November 2008 (PDT)
  • Why do people assume that Cooper was really twice Emily's age?! That would make him 80 at the time of "Man From Tallahassee" and 50 at the time he conned James Ford's parents. It's far more likely that he was about Emily's age when they conceived the baby. The whole idea of Cooper being born in the late 1920s rests on the assumption that he was the same man Emily was dating when she was already 6 months pregnant, and there is no evidence of that. (Also, that man might not have been really twice her age either, it might have been an exaggeration.) TimeTravellingRabbit 18:11, 3 October 2008 (PDT)

David's death

Libby says that David died a month before she met Desmond. Desmond says that he has eight months to prepare for the race when he met Libby. Desmond told Locke that he was in the hatch for three years. That puts David death in 2000/2001 (2004 - 3 years - 9 months) or possibly late 1999. Any further evidence to pin this down? --Mescad 10:47, 25 May 2006 (PDT)

Image:Callsheet.gif shows Desmond and Libby talked about the Elizabeth in 2000. I'm changing the timeline accordingly. ---- LOSTonthisdarnisland 09:46, 25 April 2008 (PDT)

Hurley

Bought a Hummer H2 with the money he won, the production for H2 started 2003. --skks 17:45, 23 April 2006 (PDT)

Did production start in 2003 for the 2004 year model, or was it a 2003 year model? In the U.S., the model year for 2003 would have started selling in late 2002.
   Jabberwock    talk    contribs    email   - 19:44, 23 April 2006 (PDT)

The Hummer H2 went on sale in April 2002. --Pedxing 13:00, 25 April 2006 (PDT)

Wikipedia says the production started in 2003. --skks 12:18, 26 April 2006 (PDT)

I wrote that Wikipedia article!  :) Seriously, production started in 2002 with first sales in the second-half of the year[1]. --Pedxing 12:22, 26 April 2006 (PDT)

I'm not disagreeing or even doubting you, I'm just pointing out where I got the info from. --skks 12:24, 26 April 2006 (PDT)

No offense taken. That's model year 2003, not calendar year per Wikipedia standards. --Pedxing 12:32, 26 April 2006 (PDT)

iPods?

I thought sure Hurley was using a CD walkman (round clamshell thing) not an iPod. Anyone? --Pedxing 13:00, 25 April 2006 (PDT)

I think so too. --skks 12:19, 26 April 2006 (PDT)

Definitely a CD walkman. --kaini 12:20, 26 April 2006 (PDT)

Did the writer maybe mean he had one in a flashback? Someone go check the DVDs... --Pedxing 12:22, 26 April 2006 (PDT)

I remember a behind-the-scenes photo where some of the actors are shown listening to iPods. It wouldn't surprise me if an iPod would be used in Lost (because of the co-operation between ABC and Lost (Lost on iTunes) ), but I don't remember any iPods in any episodes... --Jambalaya 04:04, 27 April 2006 (PDT)

Locke

Where did we find out that Locke became paralyzed in 2000? I'm trying to date his backstory. His dad's car (these S-Class Mercs seem carefully selected to me) places the Lockdown flashback after 1991 but of course before he is paralyzed. I'm especially curious to place the kidney operation, since I suspect that was the origin of his paralysis (pure speculation).

Roughly, we have this story, in order:

1. Anthony Cooper finds him and asks for the kidney
2. Locke has the operation
3. Cooper abandons him again and he meets Helen
4. Locke and Helen spend a few months together
5. Cooper's funeral (post-1991)
6. Locke works at the home inspection service and meets Nadia; Cooper returns
7. Locke gets the money, meets the bad guys, and hands over the money
8. Helen leaves him
9. Locke is paralyzed (2000?)
10. Locke works at the box factory under Randy after Hurley wins the lottery (2003?)
11. Locke talks to a phone-sex operator named Helen
12. Locke goes to Australia for a walkabout (2004?)

--Pedxing 12:30, 26 April 2006 (PDT)

Would any of these dates contradict the theory that the balcony collapse caused Locke's paralysis, thus eliminating it? --manicpaniccomix

Jumping to conclusions

In the sixth and seventh season of MacGyver, Angus Macgyver drives a pickup truck manufactured in the 1940s, the show is set in the 1990s. Just because a car or any other item is manufactured or sold a certain year, that alone isn't a basis for many valid timeline facts. The only thing it tells us that if someone is using the said item, it happens after it's being manufactured/sold, how long after can just as well be 1 week or 1 decade. --skks 12:32, 26 April 2006 (PDT)

Indeed. So since Sawyer and Gordy both are seen with 1999 or newer vehicles, we can place those events after 1999, correct? Since the crash is said to have happened in 2004, I think saying "in the five years before the crash" is a valid statement. --Pedxing 12:34, 26 April 2006 (PDT)

I'm not a fan of stating the obvious, but if you feel like the obvious needs to be said - you can edit it in. There has been some questions about the year of the crash also. --skks 12:38, 26 April 2006 (PDT)

Conclusions vs. facts

I think we ought to decide on a standard for determining the strength of a date (or any other fact here). For example, we could use something like the following to prioritize the soundness of a fact, in order of soundness:

1. An event that is shown on screen during the show
2. Artifacts created for the show and shown on screen (the lottery ticket, medicine bottle, maps, etc)
3. Events discussed during the show but not shown
4. Conclusions drawn directly from the above
5. Official discussions, web sites, or publications
6. Circumstantial evidence (cars, props, etc)
7. Conclusions drawn from any of the above

In other words, deciding that Hurley won the lottery after 2002 because of the car he bought would be firm, but not really solid - the producers could have just messed up with the prop. --Pedxing 13:00, 26 April 2006 (PDT)

1944

D-Day is supposed to be June 6th, 1944. Is this a Lost inconsistancy or wiki user error? --Thesmallman

If Nils Christer Benson joined the Marine Corps and remained a Marine, it would have been very difficult for him to die on Omaha Beach because there were no Marines in the Normandy invision.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 10:09, 5 June 2008 (PDT)

1987

Hugh McIntyre states that the Hanso Foundation funding of the Dharma Initative was cut off / cancled, not that the project was cancled / closed down, it may have continued in a limited manner from other funding sources Joesoap

1998

The Oceanic web page shows Sepember 22 as being Tuesday. That would make the year 1998. http://www.oceanic-air.com/

Or 2009... I think we need to change this up into relative dates and absolute dates. Relative means things like the few days Anna Lucia and Jack's dad were together in Australia before the crash, while absolutes mean things like the dates on items and such. I'm sure the timeline won't weave together exactly, but it'll be close. --Pedxing 14:03, 8 May 2006 (PDT)

The date of the crash was 22 September 2004, we found that out in the last episode when Locke told Desmond. So there are some defininte inconsistencies with the dates. Stuartgr 12:40, 30 May 2006 (PDT)

Jack's luggage tag shows 21st as the date of the flight, the international date line is involved, does Monday the 22nd or Tues the 21st give 2004 as being a possible year ? Joesoap

orientation films produced in 1980

I don't think it can be said for sure that the orientation movies were produced in 1980 just because their copyright dates are 1980. --Ernest 11:24, 12 May 2006 (PDT)

815 Take-off

What is the source for "Oceanic Airlines flight 815 took off 22 September 2004 at 2:55pm..."? Presumably this is wrong if you consider the fact that the blastdoor map has a entry with a date of 1/6/05. Assume this is U.S. Date format so it references January, 6th, 2005. If the plane took off September 22nd 2004, and the first season = 40 days and the second season was roughly 17-20 days by the time the blastdoor map was seen... that means the date on the blastdoor is in the future. The blast door could be wrong, but since the writers/producers have been coy about when the plane took off and when the show actually takes place... September 22nd 2004 is probably an incorrect date/year. :From a writer standpoint they are probably setting this show well in the future (2009 as mentioned by Pedxing is probably close to the mark). This frees them up to do flashbacks that date reference timeframes current to the episode airtimes without running into continuity problems. If they set this in 2004, eventually all flashbacks would have to be "period pieces". This way they can do more current flashbacks and keep the crashdate as a moving target in the future.--Isotope23 12:20, 12 May 2006 (PDT)

It might not be 1/6/06 at all :-) (see Hidden Map Timeline) --Jambalaya 12:31, 12 May 2006 (PDT)

still looks like a 5 to me... regardless, I'm still curious as to the source of the the "22 September 2004 at 2:55pm" statement since the writers/producers have been extremely non-commital about when the crash actually happened.--Isotope23 18:53, 12 May 2006 (PDT)

I think it's 03 not 05; look at the 3 in 23 just above it, nearly identical. That also fits the timeline correctly. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 20:27, 19 May 2006 (PDT)

I'm going to agree on the '03 since it is now confirmed by Live Together, Die Alone that the flight did indeed take off 22nd September 2004. Guy has as bad of handwriting as I do.--Isotope23 05:00, 25 May 2006 (PDT)

The date is definitely 03 according to many sites I've read, despite it looking like 05 apparently if you compare it to the way other 3's and 5's are written on the door you can see it's a 3. That's what I read anyway... Also the date of the crash was confirmed as 22nd September 2004 as Locke told Desmond this was the date and it appeared in the logs. Stuartgr 12:46, 30 May 2006 (PDT)

The computer in The Pearl

Does anyone recognize the model? Is it another Apple II? --Jambalaya 12:42, 12 May 2006 (PDT)

Sayid, Nadia, Locke

Sayid faciliates the escape of Nadia, who has her house inspected by a mobile Locke. Sayid tortures Tariq, and (source: One of Them) states that he continued torturing for the next 6 years (age 23-29). Sayid was in Sydney to infiltrate terrorist cell for CIA-sting to get Nadia-information; how long had he been actively looking for her before that point? Why was he on tele (source:What Kate did) while Kate was in Sam's office (after killing Wayne, then was on the run for several years)? How long was Locke in the wheelchair prior to the crash? Four years? LOSTonthisdarnisland 11:18, 16 May 2006 (PDT)

You should add those to Unanswered Questions! --Ernest 11:34, 16 May 2006 (PDT)

I was actually looking for feedback to determine a tighter timeline, if possible. 01:38, 17 May 2006 (PDT)

September 22

So they take off at 14:55 in Sydney. Sydney is GMT+10, so takeoff is at 04:55 GMT. The plane encounters turbulence six hours later at about 11:00 GMT. They turn back to the South (so they will be East of Fiji per Desmond's sailing directions) and two hours later are roughly 900 miles off course, 1500 miles from Fiji, near Bora Bora and the plane crashes at about 13:00 GMT. This is about 03:00 local time since Bora Bora is GMT-10, but they are past the international dateline, so is the morning of September 22. Sunrise in Bora Bora on September 22, 2004, was at 05:56. But the sun was shining when the plane crashed! Oops, continuity error...  :) --Pedxing 12:19, 31 May 2006 (PDT)

Another possibility was raised at Talk:Log printout. If the timestamp in the log printout is correct and the flight crashed at 4:16 PM local time, everything changes. This would mean that the flight was somehow redirected to the West rather than the East, placing the island near East Africa! The time would correlate well to the daylight (and daytime remaining) after the crash and would explain how the Nigerian drig smugglers plane got there! Could we have a major plot breakthrough or is this simply a continuity error? --Pedxing 07:10, 1 June 2006 (PDT)

This possibility is also supported by the Electromagnetic malfunction thingum from The Swan; If the overload started a significant amount of time before the plane crashed, it could explain why their insturments failed, and would also offer an explanation as to why they were going entirely the wrong direction: Their compass was off.--NotARedHerring 14:01, 26 September 2006 (PDT)

See below, #Location of the Island: which Ocean?. --Kuzak 10:07, 25 May 2007 (PDT)

Jack and Sarah -- Shannon (also Desmond!)

OK. Shannon is 20 in the series. She is 18 when her father dies. Jack meets Sarah at the same time. That would put that somewhere around 2002. Jack and Sarah knew each other for two years before being married. That would put it in about 2004 when they were married, not giving them very much time to get a divorce. Also -- it was the same time in 2002 when Desmond was training for his race around the world. He was in the hatch for two years. That would be consistent with my timeline. Any thoughts? Should the info be changed (the timeline lists Jack's as being a year earlier)? -Platypus Man | Talk 18:33, 28 September 2006 (PDT)

In Flashes Before Your Eyes, the old woman (Ms. Hawking) says that Desmond will be in the Hatch for 3 years. Of course, I don't understand the whole bizarre "Lost Time" thing so it might not be an inconsistency. But if he was in the Hatch for three years, he would have gotten there in fall of 2001.

• Not sure if this is really an inconsistency. I think all the events you're describing happened in late 2001. If Shannon's birthday was for example, Nov 28, she would have turned 20 years old on Nov 28, 2003. That would still mean she was 20 during her time on the island. Also meaning that she is just about to turn 21 before she is killed. That would also mean that she would be 18 for the last month of 2001, ie. December 2001. The car accident, Jack meeting Sarah, Jack meeting Desmond, Adam Rutherford's funeral could have all happened in Dec 2001. That would give Jack and Sarah two years to court and get married in 2003. Also, Desmond could leave on his trip in 2002 and crash on the island, giving him two years to spend there before flight 815 arrives. I realise my suggestion doesn't fly with what Ms. Hawking said but I think it fits all the other data. Nov 28 was just a suggestion. Any day after September would work really.--Bigfunkymonkey 00:19, 14 April 2007 (PDT)

Jack's pre-crash timeline

• I changed the dates of Jack meeting Sarah, Jack meeting Desmond, Desmond meeting Libby and Sarah & Adam's car crash to 2001. It has been consistently stated that Desmond has been on the island for 3 years as of season two. Considering he was found in late 2004 it doesn't make sense for the dates to be listed as 2000 as opposed to 2001. If Desmond came to the island on let's say December 2000 it still wouldn't work out. It would be three years and 9 or so months...and would make more sense to round up to 4 years than to round down to 3 years. This also means that Jack and Sarah's marriage was a short one. Jack met Sarah in Man Of Science, Man Of Faith around the same time he met Desmond (three years prior ). Sarah said they married two years after that In Do No Harm. So a huge chunk of Jack centric episodes took place roughly a year before the crash. After Do No Harm there was The Hunting Party where Sarah leaves Jack. After that episode there was A Tale Of Two Cities where Jack stalks Sarah hoping to find out who she left him for. Then he next goes to Thailand in Stranger In A Strange Land presumably to get over Sarah and while there he sleeps with Achura. Finally two months before the crash (July 2004) in All The Best Cowboys Have Daddy Issues Jack rats out his father for operating while drunk. Jack's mother confronts him about this two months later a short time before the crash in White Rabbit. -Meteor December 14, 2008.

Cleanup or Rewrite

This article is very poorly written and inconsistant. I suggest it be cleaned up or rewritten. Possibly separate TLE dates and the tv show dates.--Dicola 22:35, 17 December 2006 (PST)

1896 - Death of Magnus Hanso

2004 minus 108 is 1896. Alvar Hanso is reportedly born by then. Black Rock arrived before that. Makes sense that what got the ball rolling was the death of Magnus. That's the big event that set everything else into motion. Of course no proof of this in the canon, which is why I didn't put this in the timeline. -- ZachsMind 12:44, 2 April 2007 (PDT)

Kate, Cassidy, and Sawyer's timeline

I added some 2001/2002 stuff for Kate, Cassidy, and Sawyer. Since they're all linked, and we have a few long events (a pregnancy and a jail sentence), these events can be placed reasonably well.

• Since Kate killed Wayne and ran from the law in 2001, the events of "Left Behind", meeting a not-too-pregnant Cassidy in Iowa, must have happened shortly after that, possibly in late 2001 or early 2002. Cassidy would have turned Sawyer in to the authorities around this time on Kate's advice.
• Working backwards, we can assume that Sawyer's con of Cassidy in "The Long Con" ended around the end of 2001 or beginning of 2002.
• Clementine would have been born later in 2002, with Cassidy visiting Sawyer in prison, and the events of "Every Man for Himself" happening in late 2002 or 2003, with Sawyer released from prison after serving about one year of his 7 year sentence.
• The Tampa job would have happened around 2003 - it couldn't be much later since there has to be time for him to lose Hibbs, get tracked down, and the events of "Outlaws".
• Sometime in 2004, Sawyer headed to Australia.

Thoughts? --Pedxing 09:13, 6 April 2007 (PDT)

In "One of Us" Juliet says Sawyer shot and killed someone "the night before (he) got on the plane". Wouldn't that make the murder on the 21st? Tebor 17:16, 14 April 2007 (PDT)

Christian Shephard

If Sawyer killed Duckett on the 21st, wouldn't he have met Christian earlier that day. The same day he and Ana Lucia parted ways? Tebor 13:17, 15 April 2007 (PDT)

Claim that Ben was born in 1963

There is no canon source for Ben being born in 1963. The 1963 date is a theory from an anonymous person associated with the production. Beyond not being canon, its possible for up to 1963 cars to indicate a 1962 or 1963 date since its december. Dharmatel4 01:54, 12 May 2007 (PDT)

Cars made in 1963 or before do not indicate or confirm the year being 1963, it can only suggest it and therefore should not be included. Personally, not enough cars were shown to get a good enough percentage. The Kombi can't justify this date. MightyHealthy 00:30, 15 May 2007 (PDT)

Graphical Representation

I think that some sort of graphical representation could be a good feature to add, probably as an off-shoot article or a just as an added picture. I'd like to have a crack at this; I'm studying graphic/communication design and a graph/timeline of this magnitude would be crazy. I'm not talking about a simplistic timeline bar with arrows and text, I mean a statistical graph as well as an event timeline that would depict location. I might be rambling at this point, so I'll come back once I have a clearer idea of the information and a stylish means in which to depict it. »MightyHealthy 22:57, 14 May 2007 (PDT)

Rousseau's Story

I've been trying to get Rousseau's story to mesh with the numbers broadcast and such, and something just doesn't sit right. Is there any information about the numbers broadcast that contradicts her arrival in 1988? For example, was there anything in the episode "Numbers" that specifically stated when Sam Toomey and Leonard Simms were stationed in the Pacific, or was the date given for that (1988) just based on Rousseau's story (a bit circular)? It just looks to me like a lot of what's here is based on what she's said, and I'd say that her character is more than a little unstable and that she's been out of touch for a long time - probably doesn't have any idea what the current year is. Then again, time might not be relevant at all on the island. --Doc 13:24, 21 May 2007 (PDT)

Location of the Island: which Ocean?

I am going to delete the "note" in the timeline saying that Oceanic Flight 815 may have been flying west rather than east, in which case the Island is in the Indian Ocean (near East Africa).[2] In Live Together, Die Alone (Part 1 and 2) transcript, Desmond says that when he left the Island, he travelled due west at 9 knots, and he expected to be in Fiji in less than a week. Thus Desmond believes the Island to be in the Pacific Ocean (not the Indian). Desmond originally shipwrecked on the Island during a storm, and he certainly would know which ocean he had been in at that time (see Elizabeth (sailboat)). Also, in "Numbers", it is specifically stated that the numbers had been broadcast from the South Pacific. --Kuzak 10:05, 25 May 2007 (PDT)

See also The Island/Theories#Location and Flight path of Oceanic 815.--Kuzak 10:18, 25 May 2007 (PDT)

See also the article Twenty dollar bill, showing that Henry Gale arrived on the Island while crossing the Pacific in a balloon. --Kuzak 22:34, 25 May 2007 (PDT)

Locke's commune flashback - 1996?

Why is Locke's flashback to his commune dated as occuring in 1996? In 'Further Instructions', Jan states that Eddie the cop was recruited "fresh out of the academy", and the close up picture of Eddie's records ([3]) indicates he's been a cop, "1994-PRESENT". So wouldn't that mean that Locke's flashback occured in 1994, not 1996?

Danielle,Kelvin,Mikhail's arrival vs. The Purge

I think these three arrivals pinpoint the purge. To make this work, we have to assume that Danielle isn't telling the real truth why she is on the island, or the events surrounding her loss of Alex. I believe that Danielle and her team came to the island as new recruits for Dharma. Danielle gave birth to her daughter, but she was taken away by Dharma for tests. Danielle losses it and is exielled from the group. She fights back and kills some of her captors. She tries to alert Dharma to the issue and leaves a cryptic message at the Radio Tower. Now, Dharma is still in control on the island, and I can't explain why they leave the signal alone. Kelvin comes to the island to man the Swan in 1992. The Purge occurs on December 21st, 1993. The submarine is currently bringing the next group of recruits, including Mikhail. They arrive on the island to the Hostiles in control, Mikhail joins up with them. They take on additional personnel and/or knowledge of how to arrive/leave the island and contact the outside world. The Dharma personnel that don't join up are shot and dumped in the mass grave( explains the bullet-hole body ). No more Dharma personnel show up, so Kelvin/Radsinsky start exploring the island. If anyone can assist in explaining the distress call, this would tie up these years leading up to the Purge. Samhain99 09:38, 18 October 2007 (PDT)

Jack's Age

How did you know that Jack was born in 1967? Had the fact was told in the episodes? Am I the only one who missed it? I'm really really curious about it. Please anyone help me. Thanks in advance. --Foxysmile 00:42, 22 October 2007 (PDT)

Christian died on September 21st? Sawyer met him in a bar that day?

Wait. This doesn't make sense:

• Sawyer bumps into Ana Lucia and Christian outside the cocktail bar. Christian and Ana Lucia part ways. ("Two for the Road")
• Sawyer meets Christian inside the cocktail bar. Christian talks Sawyer into finishing his business. ("Outlaws")
• Christian dies of a heart attack. (offscreen during "White Rabbit" flashbacks)
• Sawyer kills Frank Duckett. ("Outlaws")
• Sawyer is arrested following a bar fight. ("Hearts and Minds")
• September 22nd, 2004: After spending three days in a police cell, Sawyer is deported to the USA. ("Exodus, Part 1")

So this would suggest that Sawyer's killing of Duckett occurred on September 19 or earlier, as Sawyer surely didn't shoot Duckett while he was in a police cell. And I doubt the Australian police let a man they were going to deport walk around Sydney freely, giving him the chance to commit a murder.

Of course, the problem here is "One of Us", where Juliet claims that Sawyer killed a man the night before he boarded the plane...--Nevermore 02:02, 30 January 2008 (PST)

Oh wait. There's more to this: In "Exodus, Part 1", Sawyer estimates his meeting with Christian as "about a week before we all got on the plane".--Nevermore 02:11, 30 January 2008 (PST)

Yemi's plane, Eko's childhood

Just read the pre-crash timeline and I noticed the following is missing. I don't know which episodes they occured in though sorry, maybe someone who has the episodes can work out what dates the events happened?

• Eko as a child shoots someone to prevent his brother from being forced to kill. I think they mentioned how old he was at the time so we can work out the year based on the year he was born (already determined).
• Yemi is shot and taken away in Eko's drug smuggling plane and crashes on the Island, and Eko starts becoming a real priest

--Malthor 07:59, 6 March 2008 (PST)

"...and Eko starts becoming a real priest". A nitpick on the above but Eko never did more than impersonate a Catholic priest. Eko continued his impersonation of a Catholic priest on the island. --Maureen in mukilteo 12:46, 5 August 2008 (PDT)

Desmond's timeline & Sarah McLachlan's "Building a Mystery"

Hi everyone; I'm new here, so I'm not sure if I'm posting this properly or in the right place -- anyway, I was recently watching Season 3's "Flashes Before Your Eyes," and noticed Sarah McLachlan's "Building a Mystery" playing in the background. As the page for it here on Lostpedia says, it's from the "Surfacing" album, released in 1997. Now, the flashback scenes in "Flashes Before Your Eyes" have Penny and Desmond together, so they take place BEFORE the events in "The Constant" where Desmond has broken up with Penny and is in the military. And yet we're told in "The Constant" that Desmond is in the military in 1996 -- so how could "Building a Mystery" from 1997 have been playing on the radio (or CD player or whatever) in the earlier scenes from "Flashes Before Your Eyes"?

Ironically, we seem to be "Building a Mystery" here. ;) I suppose this was just an oversight on the writers' part? If so, they should do a better job of planning out things like this ahead of time. I wonder if they ever check Lostpedia to help them keep track of things? ;)

Brendan815 22:37, 13 March 2008 (PDT)

dates based on ages

I notice there are some dates given based on character's ages (i.e. Locke at ages 5 and 16). Obviously anyone who is not born on January 1st will experience parts of two different calendar years at any give age. So Richard's test for example could happen anytime between May 30th 1961 and May 29th 1962. I changed parts of the timeline to reflect this. --Jackdavinci 06:21, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

• This makes sense for the "age 5" entry, but Locke is clearly in the Spring term of school in the "Age 16" flashback because they're discussing plans for the summer. Locke turned 16 May 30, 1972, which makes the Spring term of 1973.--Marksman 06:51, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

• Good catch! Though I wonder if back then people made their summer plans so far in advance as we do nowadays. Just throwing around the conceivability of a post-May-30th-1972 decision regarding summer plans. Can you give some other indicators of time of year from that scene? I don't have the time at the moment to go back through the ep. I will later today if I get a chance.--Overworkedirish 07:08, 13 May 2008 (PDT)
• They could be discussing summer plans on June 1, 1972 or May 1, 1973 and he would still be 16 and in the Spring term. --Jackdavinci 08:02, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

• Doubtful. In the early 1970's, school years end before Memorial Day, which was May 26 in 1972. Tustin High School still ends its school year before Memorial Day, according to its website.--Marksman 10:07, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

• Sometimes, plans were made earlier back in "the good ol' days." There were no PCs and we couldn't jump on the Internet and fill out an application. We actually had to mail stuff! Class lists were produced on typewriters.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 06:02, 13 June 2008 (PDT)

Style Consistency

Why are some entries in the timeline listed with the date and then "-th," "-nd," "-st", etc. ("March 2nd," for example, rather than "March 2") and some are without? One way or the other, it doesn't matter to me, but we should decide on a style and be consistent throughout.--sockmonkey 11:37, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

The suffixes are superfluous--let's nix 'em. $0.02 Robert K S (talk) 19:52, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

Personally, I like them, and I'll say that the "Post-crash Timeline" uses them very consistently (admittedly I did some massive clean-up on that article myself...). We should stay consistent throughout all timeline pages.--Overworkedirish 06:28, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

After some thought. I agree. Edited "Timeline:Post-Island" to fit this style. Also reformatted first bit of this article to match format on "Timeline:Post-Island" which has worked very well for organization.--Overworkedirish 09:23, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

Purge vs. Alex Abduction

• I was just skimming the message board on ABC where people post questions for the podcast and came across an intriguing one. In "Cabin Fever" Horace says he's been dead for 12 years. Hence Purge date being December 19th, 1992. But Alex is 16 in 2004, born in 1988, supposedly abducted at birth by Ben / the Others. BUT THE OTHERS WERE THE HOSTILES THEN. So why doesn't Danielle know about DHARMA??? How did she and Alex survive the Purge??? And furthermore, how could Danielle put her recording in the DHARMA radio tower if DHARMA WAS STILL OPERATING??? I don't think the writers would overlook this date/timing - especially because they've been explicitly saying lately that we're going to see Danielle's backstory soon. Personally, I think that what we THINK we know about Danielle's history may go out the window come the beginning of Season 5...--Overworkedirish 06:25, 13 May 2008 (PDT)
  • One possibility is that Ben had made contact with and allied with the Others before 1988 and was acting as a double agent, during which time he abducted and adopted Alex, who stayed with the Hostiles. We don't know a lot of what the Hostiles were like pre-Ben, but Ben has hinted that they were even more ruthless than he. So here's my theory: In 1988, Rousseau and team crash on the island. Rousseau's team dies of time-dilation sickness, but the unborn Alex is Rousseau's constant, so she lives. The Hostiles decide that Danielle and Alex must die. Ben makes it appear that he killed Rousseau (but he doesn't) and then takes Alex as his own, telling the Hostiles some lie so they agree not to commit infanticide. Four years later, the Purge happens. How does Rousseau survive the poison gas? Good question. I wonder if the gas was concentrated only in the barracks, which is why Ben had to kill his own father when they took their trip in the van.--Marksman 06:46, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

• A simpler theory is that one of the Dharma workers found Danielle and took infant Alex believing Danielle to be one of those barbaric hostiles. A healthy newborn would be a rare and precious commodity on that island and it's not unlikely she would have been given to the highest ranking couple. Alex would have grown up in the barracks with her adoptive parents where she would have known Ben. At the Purge Alex would have been about 4 years old. Afterward she would have only known a few people and Ben would have been one of them. Maybe Ben took her because he had already formed a friendship with her. Or he believed he owed a debt to her adoptive parents which he would pay off by taking care of their daughter (the Goodspeeds?) as if she were his own. Or he wanted to use her to replace a "lost" daughter of his own. Or both of them just needed someone to love them. Maybe she just came with the leader's house that Ben took. There are no baby pictures of Alex in Ben's house which is odd given how many photos he has of her 4 years and older on the walls, on the tables, on his desk and even carried with him. Ben was a proud father but apparently not before the Purge. In a deleted scene with Locke Ben claims: I did not kidnapped Alex; I was just the person who raised her. TPTB wanted us to assume Ben kidnapped Alex just as they want us to assume other things regarding Ben. --Maureen in mukilteo 13:51, 5 August 2008 (PDT)

• But then what about Rousseau's radio message? That radio tower was DHARMA operated, and Rousseau put the message in there 16 years ago. Not 12. Confusion in my brain.--Overworkedirish 07:03, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

• Good question. Maybe Dharma had abandoned the radio tower in 1988 to the Hostiles and Dharma blocked the signal using the Looking Glass. This is an oddity, though.--Marksman 08:00, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

• There is other evidence that the Purge occured after Danielle's arrival. Danielle's original discussion with Sayid about the distress signal indicates that possession of the transmitting location had changed hands since she altered the message. From the transcript of season 1 episode "Solitary" (emphasis added):--Eyeful Tower 09:36, 15 May 2008 (PDT)

SAYID: What is this place? Those batteries -- they wouldn't be able to produce enough power to transmit your distress call all these years.

DANIELLE: I broadcast from somewhere else. But they control it now.

SAYID: They?

DANIELLE: You. And the others like you.

• I like that theory about Alex being Danielle's constant. But then again, if her time-transported conciousness only brought her to a time when Alex was "in utero," Danielle's boy-toy/husband Robert could also be her constant (he'd be around too).--Overworkedirish 07:03, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

• That's true. So either Robert or Alex could be her constant. And is Robert was sent to a time before he met Danielle, he wouldn't have a constant and would go nuts, which is why Danielle had to kill her own constant!--Marksman 08:00, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

A constant doesn't have ot be a person. In fact, Desmond had to ask Faraday if it could be a person. I heard a theory, at one point, that Danielle's constant was actually her music box. Plus, if she was pregnant she would have avoided radiation, so she might not have even needed to find a constant. Crash 03:08, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

"Explanations" within Article

• I have a bit of a bone to pick with this article. After many of the entries there are parenthetical "explanations" as to why a date fits in a certain place. It is not the objective of this article to provide reasoning for specific chronicling, it is meant to provide a clear-cut chain-of-events. If there is controversy over reasoning behind a certain date, it should be brought here, to the discussion page, otherwise I feel that "explanation" information should be relegated to the subject's specific page. I'll wait to hear from others before doing any drastic edits.--Overworkedirish 06:38, 13 May 2008 (PDT)
  • I apologize to the extent that those parentheticals were made by me. I'm a bit new to the wiki-style editing and only just figured out these talk pages. It won't happen again. (Well, not by me, anyway.)--Marksman 06:47, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

• No sweat - I wasn't getting on anybody's back or anything, just want to get it out there so we can have Lostpedia looking its best. ;-) --Overworkedirish 07:04, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

Rename

• Rename to "Timeline:Pre-Crash" following this article's title in the Timeline Nav-Bar, and the format used for "Timeline:Post-Island." I'll note that when you type in "timeline:post-island" in the Lostpedia search textbox, it automatically reads it for capitalization and is the same as "Timeline:Post-Island." This rename is really for aestetic value of the article and coordination between articles.--Overworkedirish 18:36, 15 May 2008 (PDT)

• Rename. To "Timeline:Pre-Crash"--Overworkedirish 18:36, 15 May 2008 (PDT)
• Rename because of reasons stated already. BETTYFIZZW (Talk) 18:36, 16 May 2008 (PDT)
• Renamebecause of reasons stated already. --DJVok 05:01, 18 May 2008 (PDT)
• Rename because of reasons stated already --Hostile108 06:01, 23 May 2008 (PDT)
• Huh? The basic idea here is that we've been capitalizing the show's island as the Island in lieu of a proper name for it on the encyclopedia, but we haven't been capitalizing the crash. (It's worth noting that between the two choices, we should probably move toward decapitalizing Island, not capitalizing crash, since Enhanced captions and other official sources do not capitalize "island".) Robert K S (talk) 08:47, 23 May 2008 (PDT)

• This has more to do with the prefixes. "Post" vs. "pre". Personally I think "Timeline:Post-Island" and "Timeline:Pre-crash" would be completely reasonable.--Overworkedirish 14:32, 28 May 2008 (PDT)

• Rename as per above. --CTS 19:30, 4 June 2008 (PDT)
• Rename as per above. --Blueeagleislander 00:39, 13 June 2008 (PDT)

Result is rename. --Nickb123 (Talk) 17:03, 19 June 2008 (PDT)

• Since we now know that the 'sideways' were not an alt timeline, shouldn't the whole 'original: plane crash' etc be changed to something more correct. Because it's not another time it's more a dream/construct/limbo time.

Dharma's Creation

• In Orientation, the video specifically says "Dharma was created in 1970."--Marksman 07:46, 27 May 2008 (PDT)

Actor Data

"6 April [1937]: Billy Dee Williams in born."

I think it's a big mistake to start loading the timeline with information about actors. From the Lost perspective, these people do not exist; only their characters exist.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 18:04, 21 June 2008 (PDT)

• Billy Dee played himself as well as Mr. Lashade. --LeoChris 18:39, 21 June 2008 (PDT)

• Remember, Billy Dee Williams played as himself in Lost. Nikki referred to his name after finishing acting in Exposé. Williams only had a fictional character, Mr. LaShade, in the show Exposé. Hope that explains why he is mentioned. (Looks like LeoChris beat me to explaining it, editing conflict.)-- #1LostFan  talk  contribs  Lost Wiki  18:41, 21 June 2008 (PDT)

Okay, I goofed. But, moving on <grin>, does it matter what day Williams was born? Does it move the plot forward?--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 18:49, 21 June 2008 (PDT)

Agreed. Even if he is a character on the show and we know his birthday, it isn't relevant to the timeline because he's a minor character. Crash815 16:54, 19 August 2008 (PDT)

Anthony Cooper's age

I don't believe that late 1920s are the correct date of birth for Anthony Cooper. In any case, I think that it shouldn't be listed in the timeline since it has not been confirmed, and it only relies on assumptions: that the man Emily Locke was dating at the time she gave birth to John was Anthony Cooper, and that he was really "twice her age" as her mother said, , which could have been a big exaggeration from a disapproving mom. There is no doubt that Cooper is John Locke's father, but there is no evidence that the father of the baby and the man Emily was dating when she was already 6 months pregnant were the same person. It is extremely unlikely that Anthony Cooper was 30 years older than his son John Locke, and he certainly didn't look like he was 80 years old in "The Man From Tallahassee". It would also make him 50 at the time he conned James Ford's parents, and he says he was "young" back then. TimeTravellingRabbit 18:06, 3 October 2008 (PDT)

Beechcraft Crash

I am not sure what information was used to determine a "late 1990s" date for the crash, but "Because You Left" seems to indicate that it was later than that. The same timeshift which puts Daniel and Sawyer at the Swan while Desmond was living there (that is, between 2001 and 2004) also put Locke back on the same day the Beechcraft crashed. I say it's the same day (meaning that Lock is back only a matter of minutes or hours after Ethan shot him in that same location) because the plane's engine is still smoking the way it was when Ethan shot him. --JDMCMAMC 04:01, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

• Actually it must be 2002-2004. Desmond asks if Faraday is his replacement. He crashed on the island in 2001 and his term in the Swan was 540 days, which is a little less than a year and a half. Desmond wouldn't be expecting a replacement right after he crashed. Changed the timeline to reflect the time flashes in the season 5 premiere. Gutsdozer 20:54, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Emily Locke's Birthday

Changed from 15 July 1940 to 15 October 1940 to match Emily Locke page information, confirmed by image of Santa Rosa Mental Health Institute admission form. --Thoaar 14:27, 29 Jan 2009 (CST)

November 15th 1987

Not sure if this was mentioned anywhere else but Gregg Nations made a confusing statement on TheFuselage: "I can see how this would be confusing. Jin asked when they left, and Rousseau said November 15. Jin actually wanted a year, so his next question was asking what year it was, and Rousseau said 1988. The two answers aren't meant to go together. So Rousseau's team left Tahiti on November 15, 1987, and it was 1988 when they crashed on the island". [4] --Hugo815 15:25, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Ok, we're going to have to have a clean up of the timeline.--Baker1000 21:09, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

But the trip from Tahiti to the Island only took 3 days, so if it was 1988 when they were on the island (November 18, 1988), then it was obviously 1988 when they left Tahiti 3 days earlier.

Agree. It was three days. We need to collect our summation data from our pages, not from other web sites.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 21:44, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Richard in the Dharma Days

In this article we have Richard meeting Ben around 1977/78, but in Richard Alpert's article, it places the meeting prior to the 1974 events seen in 'LaFleur.' Thoughts?--DesmondExMachina 18:01, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

• I don't think we can know anything yet. I'm guessing we'll see young Ben soon and it will be after 1974, but we have no idea for sure when he arrived. I think the move on Alpert's page should be reverted. -JamesyWamesy 19:04, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
• The Alpert page should not be reverted unless someone can demonstrate that it's incorrect by referring to an original source. Timeline pages have been and should continue to be extracts of original source data.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 21:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Ben's arrival on the island

The timeline states that Ben arrives on the island "1976/77" and that he meets Richard "1977/78". What is the evidence for these dates?

I noticed that these dates are given on this timeline page, but not in the The Man Behind the Curtain or Ben Linus articles.

Based on the information from LaFleur, it would certainly be nice if Ben's arrival could take place after the point in time that Juliet and Sawyer and company left the Dharma Initiative, which is in 1977 (or possibly later). Otherwise we'd have to accept that Ben lived in the village of little yellow houses at the same time they did, and it's hard to see how he would have forgotten their faces. (It's not impossible that he remembered their faces, but it seems really really unlikely. He seemed truly jealous of Goodwin and Jack, but not Sawyer, and truly concerned to keep Juliet from leaving the island in 2001-2004, which is sort of bizarre if he knew all along that she will travel back in time and live with Sawyer for three years.) — Lawrence King ^(talk) 01:43, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree, until there is any evidence of Ben's arrival date (which I think may come next episode Namaste), we should keep the dates ambiguous - born in the 1960s, arrived on Island in 1970s. -JamesyWamesy 04:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Present Tense

I noticed that many entries in this article were written in past tense, so I just changed all of them to present tense. When writing timelines, it is considered proper to write an entry as if writing it in the year that the event occurred. Please keep this in mind for future reference, and do not change it. –Nahald 19:58, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Charlotte's 1979 birthday

• Shouldn't it be listed on the timeline ? Something like Ben claims this is Charlotte Lewis' birthday ? While the date might be wrong, it has still been stated as canon, so basically it's both a production error, and canonly, a mistake and / or lie made by the character. Casual viewers could be confused if they come to check this article and notice Charlotte's birthday is missing from the in-show stated year on the timeline. --LeoChris 01:22, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

• I agree. I put it back on a couple times, but someone keeps removing it. -JamesyWamesy 02:52, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Something doesn't add up rearding Alex's age & what Widmore said

I having trouble reconciling some of the dates surrounding the birth of Alexandra Rousseau. It hinges with when Widmore was banished form the island. I'll start with that. In Dead is Dead in the present day-that is January 2008 in "Lost"-Widmore was talking on the phone with Ben who just called him to tell him that he was about to kill his (Widmore's) daughter. Before that Ben told Widmore of his intent to go back to the island. Widmore basically said good luck in getting back, he had been trying for nearly 20 years. To me "nearly 20 years" is at least 18 years after the actual event taking into account human inaccuracy, like it is 2009 in reality and therefore "nearly 20 years ago" would be 1990, 1991, within two years of 1989. For "twenty years" exactly would be of course 1989. Taking this into account, in "Lost"'s "now", January 2008, "nearly twenty years" ago would be about 1989, 1990. Reasonably speaking, more like 1990 if he was a little more accurate and he seems to be a man to value accuracy. That is when we saw Ben see Widmore off in the Submarine. Now according to the timeline Alex was supposed to have been born in 1989 making her about a year old or close to her birth depending, supposedly when Widmore was being "shown the door" so to speak. Trouble is we saw earlier in a flash back that takes place on the same day as the Widmore exile Ben pushing his "daughter" on a swing. She had to be no less than five years old at the time, maybe even older, so if Widmore saying he was for "nearly 20 years" trying to get back to the island is close to numerically/chronologically correct then Alex was born in 1984 or '85 (and of course Ben abducting Alex from Danielle at that time), not 1989 as shown in the timeline. The only explanation is it seems is that this is a mistake by Widmore or the "Lost" writers-or am I missing something? Please correct if I am going down the wrong trail. Hunter2005 23:44, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

I completely agree. I think that we can take Alex's birthdate as fixed in stone (because her age and the length of time Rousseau has been on the island were mentioned many times). So either Widmore's statement was an error on the part of the writers, or it was an error for Alex to be old enough to push on a swing on the day Widmore was exiled.

Ironically, the whole flashback sequence felt to me like the writers trying to fix an earlier error, wherein they put the Purge in 1992. This caused two big problems: (1) Alex was stolen as a baby in early 1989, but Ben didn't join the Others until after the Purge in 1992, so who raised Alex in the intervening three years? (2) In seasons one and two, when Rousseau saw the Hatch and later the Dharma medical station, she was amazed and had clearly never seen anything like them. But if the Purge was in 1992, then during the first four years that Rousseau lived on the Island, there were Dharma cars zooming along Dharma roads to reach the non-camouflaged Dharma stations; how could she not have seen them?

In Dead is Dead, the writers "fixed" problem # 1 by telling us that Ben (and probably Ethan) lived with the Others part-time even before the Purge. So Ben could have been a part-time dad to Alex when she was young. But that doesn't address problem # 2. Personally, I think it would have made more sense to declare that the Purge was in fact prior to 1989... that makes a lot more sense, especially since the Dharma folks never replaced their 1970s music and cars. Oh well.

Anyway, since the Purge is apparently staying in 1992, we know that Widmore didn't leave the island before then -- since he was the Leader of the Others during the Purge. Ergo, Alex was in fact old enough to push on the swing then, and the error lies in Widmore's "twenty years" exaggeration. — Lawrence King ^(talk) 01:40, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Widmore left the Island between December 1992 and sometime in 1994 (Daniel said Widmore started funding his research in this year). So say, he left early 1993 (Alex has just turned 4). Early 2008 would be 15 years later. "Nearly 20 years" still fits. -JamesyWamesy 03:44, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Regarding point two... DHARMA might not've been "zooming" around as much in the late '80s as they were in the mid '70s. They might've been stuck to their little corner of the island with Rousseau on the other side and the Others ruling everything else. Rousseau was still "insane" and probably "sick," so she probably wasn't into "investigating" as much as simple survival and motherhood instincts. After Alex was taken, she became greatly more delusional and secluded and might not've gotten to her map-making until years later (after '92 and the camouflaging of the DHARMA stations).--Tim Thomason 04:03, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Sun & Jin

Does anyone know where the date of 2000 came from for the Kwon marriage? As near as I can tell it happened in mid-2003, no earlier than 1.5 years before September 2004. Jin said Mr. Paik wanted him to work one year management training and one year in the factory. ("House of the Rising Sun") At the wedding reception, Jin said he had 6 months of management training left, ("...In Translation") meaning the marriage was half a year later and he had 1.5 years left to work. Jin still seems to be in training when he delivers the message to Byung Han in 2003 (same time Hurley won the lottery as seen on the TV). ("...In Translation") The next year goes downhill as Sun has an affair with Jae Lee and Jin is under Mr. Paik's order to deal with him. ("The Glass Ballerina") By September 2004, the end still doesn't seem near as Jin's father tells him to leave Mr. Paik when he is in America. ("...In Translation") Any thoughts?

• In "The Hunting Party", it was mentioned that they had been married for 4 years. --Crash815 Talk 01:41, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Libby and Hurley's committal

I just want to know:
- Why did you put Libby's committal in 2002?
- Why did you put Hurley's committal in 2003?
Thanks in advance.  Nico  20:30, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

…Anybody knows?  Nico  20:55, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

august 15, 1973

Why was this date added as the day the truce was signed? --Crash815 Talk 01:02, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

• The info comes from the Dharma Intiative Orientation Kit special edition of the season 5 DVDs. See The Truce for more details. --LeoChris 03:43, November 25, 2009 (UTC)

Banner

I put the banner up on the top of the page for original timeline but there are some arguments to be made that the flash-sideways timeline did not split off untill 1977 so maybe that banner isn't entirely accurate and so i wanted to try and get some discussion started on the issue. Jdray 13:23, March 13, 2010 (UTC)

Inclusion of "The Lost Experience"

WHY are we including semi-canonical information, some of which is known to be false or misleading, in this timeline? It seems completely contradictory to what we're trying to display here. If people are so attached to the information, why can't "The Lost Experience" have it's own separate timeline page that clearly states the information is semi-canonical? --Overworkedirish 11:29, March 26, 2010 (UTC)

• I agree. Semin-canonical and non-canonical expanded universe should not be included in the timeline. WikiaHenning 23:35, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

Shipwreck Chronology

Why is the construction of the statue of Tawaret listed as having occurred after the shipwreck of the Romans. That doesn't seem feasible. Given that Claudia is Roman (since she speaks Latin) and named her son "Jacob", a Judeo-Christian name, Claudia's shipwreck would come only after the Romans were generally Christianized, which means the second century at the earliest. The Romans conquered the Egyptians in the first century, and worship of Tawaret would have ceased around that time. So the statue of Tawaret (and all the other hieroglyph-strewn ruins), to have been constructed by Egyptians, would have occurred before Claudia's shipwreck, not after. --Marksman1 13:13, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

We know the Egyptian settlement definitely occurred after the shipwreck because Egyptians were the ones who completed the Frozen wheel construction started in the episode by the Man in Black, because the frozen wheel chamber is decorated with hieroglyphs. There are also references to the MiB in his Smoke Monster form in the Egyptian art we see. There are several explanations for the Latin thing. First is that it might not necessarily be an error: the oldest records of Latin go back to around 400 BC. At this time some Egyptians, especially in the rural south of the country, still worshipped old Egyptian gods and retained knowledge of hieroglyphs. It would not be completely unbelievable, in the context of the fiction of the show, that some of these people would flee to the island as a safe haven in the hope of re-establishing Egyptian civilisation there at a later date.

Another thing to remember is that objects that come to the island sometimes suffer from time dilation or other effects (the flash on the Ajira flight) that cause shifts in time. The Latin speakers, including Claudia, may have approached the island in the 1st century but were flung back in time, or alternatively the Egyptians approached the island in the distant past but landed centuries later, after the events of Across the Sea.

We could also just chalk it up to a simple research error, or intentional choice on the part of the writers to deviate from history. They wanted to get Latin into the episode to explain why the Others speak it as their secret language, so they could have ignored real world history in the interest of telling a good story. --Krsont 17:49, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

• • There are no facts on the show to back up a firm statement that the statue was before or after the shipwreck. And no citation of Damon, Carlton or anyone else in the know clarifying that information. Also, we don't KNOW who completed the wheel or exactly when outside of after the events of the episode. Also, we never saw a time dilation of more than a couple of days, certainly not decades or centuries. Claudia is a latin name, she spoke in latin and was dressed in Roman style garments. The statue, the hieroglyphics etc could have been because Mother was Egyptian (or perhaps her mother was) and that's what she knew and taught to the boys. IF they came after the shipwreck at all. The statue could have been there and we just never saw that part of the island --Jayerb 21:30, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

I had forgotten the donkey wheel room had hieroglyphs. I guess you're right. There goes my theory. --Marksman1 20:51, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

The senet game found on the beach implies that Egyptians *might* have been to the Island before Jacob and MIB, while the wheel hieroglyphs and the Temple Smoke Monster drawing implies later. We don't know if the Statue or the Lighthouse exist during the Roman era or show up during a "second Egyptian settlement." Contrary to popular belief, Egyptian hieroglyphics were still in use in the 1st century AD and a little bit beyond, so dating the episode there (as Mark Pellegrino apparently did) isn't really a problem to me.--Tim Thomason 09:06, May 14, 2010 (UTC)

Ultimately, we don't know nuttin' ... or even that the scriptwriters are seeking historic accuracy.

• In addition, the frozen wheel chamber could already be in existence somewhere when MiB is "re-inventing" it. I doubt this, but cannot rule it out. Conceivably, the adoptive mother came with people, who built the "Ruins" or other things, which are simply left unseen in Across the Sea. Alternatively, lets say, Claudia's people are Romanized Jews or Jewish Romans, among which were also worshipers of Isis, but all very much pre-Christian. They could be Roman traders on the Indian Ocean, or even 7th-century Romano-iberians. The best guess would be that the shipwreck occurs between 200 B.C. and 500 A.D. So, barring something from the show producers, the insertion of 1 BC as specific year is very disturbing!
• Notwithstanding the possibility for more ancient arrivals' having built statues and been the adoptive mother's people, the Temple and other items could still bear Egyptian symbols, as adherents and practitioners of such rites were not extinguished until the spread of Islam in the 8th century. Or, you have latter-day revival of such mysteries, through which others learn about the Island, or that the hieroglyphics reflect the influence of Jacob or the MiB. I'm suspecting that ancient Egyptian contact may have led to later discovers of the Island, just as the Black Rock voyages might link to the Dharma Initiative, which also employed hieroglyphics and other references to antiquity. There could be potentially very long-term continuity among (potentially rival) Off-Island societies. Who knows?
• Finally, the variously old structures on the Island in bearing hieroglyphics or the image of ancient Egyptian deities does not mean that the supposed creators were true believers; rather, they could be admirers of such beliefs systems, interested in making a point or using some sort of mystic code. The statue, however, would suggest zealous and resourceful builders. Nevertheless, the temple, wheel chamber and other elements are not strictly Egyptian, but bear the markings of Classical, Mesopotamian, Persian, Indic, Khmer and possibly even Mayan or other influences. How or when can this be plausibly explained? (Atlantis anyone?) --Man-of-the-Wold 17:34, May 14, 2010 (UTC)

• The theory that the statue was built after the shipwreck of the Romans has been debunked. During the time flashes, Sawyer and the left-behinds were at the site of the well before it was built, and saw the statue in the distance at that very same time, therefore we know conclusively that the statue predates the well, and the arrival of Claudia's people.

• Not necessarily at all. We don't know how far back in time that flash-back with the statue is supposed to have occurred. Yes, construction of that well near the Orchid station came after the statue's erection, but we don't have any evidence about the chronology of that well relative to Claudia's people. Notwithstanding time anomalies, the Orchid well apparently came after even the frozen donkey wheel chamber — i.e., it is not necessarily the original point of access from the surface, see Orchid well — since it does not exist at all when Locke is (concurrently?) in the chamber. In fact, possibilities with respect to the statue abound either way:
  • If the chamber and that well reflect the very same location and intent of Jacob's brother, then their "Mother's" disruption of those efforts means that they must have been constructed by subsequent arrivals, who perhaps, first built the statue, or it was erected by even another intermediary group inhabitants.
  • Conceivably, of course, the chamber, statue and eventually the Orchid well all precede the arrival of Claudia's people, and that Jacob's brother could have found the well and visited the chamber, but either he never came across it, or he figured out that it didn't do what he wanted, but he endeavored to create something similar at a different spot.
  • One of my favorite theories is that that chamber (and very likely the statue) already did exist when Claudia's people dwelt on the Island, which is when the Time-Flash occurred. They might have been constructed by people related to Mother. Somehow Jacob's brother connected with or learned about them, or figured out some of the same discoveries as they had, which he tried to similarly harness with what the villagers might have begun as an ordinary attempt to find water. Years later, the Orchid and other wells were excavated by simply curious, pre-modern folks with compasses like what he told Desmond. Conceivably, the site of the well into which he threw Desmond (and not the Orchid well) was the same as his original works when alive.--Man-of-the-Wold 19:46, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

*But we do see the well built by the MiB and villagers, even after Mother destroyed everything. The well wasn't leveled. It was filled in and the stone structure still existed. So we do know when the well was built - by MiB and the villagers.

• Your point defeats my first sub-bullet above, if one assumes that: (1) the Orchid well is a restoration (by someone) of Jacob's brother's well and at the exact same place, and (2) the ruins from Mother's destruction would still have to be visible. Granted she did not obliterate all traces, but in a few hundred years, vegetation, the build-up of sediments and so forth could overwhelmingly alter what is visible on the surface, and people will carry away cut stones. In addition, with the 14th time flash we see nothing more than Sawyer holding a rope running into the ground at his feet because it traveled back in time with him. We do not know if there are not remnants of earlier well works close at hand.
• Moreover, what is the basis for assuming that one well is the direct successor to the other? I can't recall the show ever implying that they are even the very same site. For what it's worth, the terrain at which shooting occurred suggests that they are not even generally the same location. MiB and the villagers are working in something of a depression, from which although it is rather open, we do not see glimpses of the statue in the background. The Orchid Station is at an elevated point, which makes it all the more realistic that the statue can be seen through thick jungle. What the show does imply is that there are multiple pockets, at which extreme energy/The Source can be accessed, and that ultimately, multiple wells were dug. The Swan Station seems like a better candidate for where MiB and the villagers were constructing their well.
• Either way one can, among other possibilities, make a case for the following chronology: Shipwreck/Jacob's birth in 50 B.C. while Julius Caesar is in Gaul. Three hundred years later, Jacob brings to the Island Hellenistic adherents to any number of ancient Near Eastern cults or mysteries, including Egyptian ones, and they for some reason erect the statue. Hundreds of years later, he brings South/East Asian people, who dig various wells, build Temple, ....
• Nevertheless, that most of the structures on the island pre-date Jacob and were built by ancient Egyptians or other even more original peoples, involved with first discovering and dealing with The Source, is a very attractive theory.--Man-of-the-Wold 00:22, June 10, 2010 (UTC)

• The date 23AD needs to be removed until someone can find a firm citation on the show or said by the producers. --Jayerb 21:24, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

Juliet's Parents

I've been trying to figure out what year it is when Juliet and her sister's parents get divorced in The Incident flashback. Is there any indication as to when this took place? I'm guessing sometime either late 70's or early 80's, but I haven't noticed many clues as to how old Juliet is. Themanthing 01:55, June 2, 2010 (UTC)

Some time after 1986: look closely on the table, there is a book published in 1986! {{SUBST:Utilisateur:SGC.Alex/autosig‎}} 11:40, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

Judging by the decor, it definitely happened post-2000... --- Balk Of Fame ♪ talk 12:23, December 27, 2010 (UTC)

French team

Gregg Nation wrote on The Fuselage: "I can see how this would be confusing. Jin asked when they left, and Rousseau said November 15. Jin actually wanted a year, so his next question was asking what year it was, and Rousseau said 1988. The two answers aren't meant to go together. So Rousseau's team left Tahiti on November 15, 1987, and it was 1988 when they crashed on the island."

The same idea is represented in the Lost Encyclopedia, where they say Rousseau lived on the Island for 16 years and 10 months. This chronology is not currently reflected in this page. It is reflected in the Alex Rousseau page, where her date of birth is listed as April 1988, along the lines of the Gregg Nations/Lost Encyclopedia route.

So right now there's a contradiction in our Encyclopedia. What do we do about that? Can I change this page to list the entire "This Place is Death" adventure as occurring in February-April 1988?

--Valenzetti_FTW

Yes, change it to Feb-April 1988. We had quite the debate about these dates on the pages for the Lost Encyclopedia and Alex, but the sources proved conclusive. --- Balk Of Fame ♪ talk 22:11, April 16, 2011 (UTC)

Birthdays from the Encyclopedia

I just finished reading the "Lost Encyclopedia" cover to cover. A few addendums / corrections, for anyone interested:

- Ben was born 12/19/1962, not 1964 as Lostpedia suggests.

- Claire's birthday is 10/29/81, not 10/27. (Note that this also affects the October 2004 timeline - it means that "Numbers" takes place two days later.)

- Boone was born in 1982.

Is it worth adding / changing these?

Kelvin's beard (talk) 06:54, September 17, 2012 (UTC)

Let's take them individually.

We have Ben down as 1964 because Sayid referred to him as 12-years-old in mid-1977. He may have just been estimating, but he had also had a talk with the boy. And if the show intended Ben to be older in that scene, they probably would not have used those particular words. Sayid could have said "a teenage Benjamin Linus" (or even "an adolescent Benjamin Linus" - try saying it in Sayid's voice).

We must have assigned Claire's birthday as the day we had down for "Numbers" rather than the other way around. We currently have nothing happening on October 28 or 29. I don't see what her birthday needn't be the 29th.

I can't see any info for how we decided on Boone's year of birth. --- Balk Of Fame ♪ talk 15:28, September 19, 2012 (UTC)

The 14th Time Flash

The fourteenth time flash is currently listed under "Very likely before Jacob's birth."

Is this correct? Even though the Orchid Well is for some reason covered up, doesn't this have to take place after Man in Black "invents" the Wheel as a method of harnessing the Source? Jamie Jones54842 (talk) 02:14, August 25, 2013 (UTC)

Formatting Issues

• Well, you'll have to accept my sincere apologies, but in trying to make the September 2004 section of the article consistent with other timeline articles, I have screwed up some formatting and cannot for the life of me figure out how to fix it. Can anybody take a look at it and make a suggestion?--Master Tej (talk) 00:45, January 21, 2015 (UTC)

Only just by looking at how it looks now I can tell you what's wrong. You've used the EP tags to insert episode titles. This is what we call the "parser function" and it's pretty amazing, except it has a limit on how many times it can be used on a single page. You'll notice the page is now listed under the category "Pages with too many parser function calls". In order to get around this limit you will have to edit the tags you used and manually type each episode title and make them bold to fit the formatting of the other pages. I trust you know how to do that.--Baker1000 (talk) 00:54, January 21, 2015 (UTC)