Sorry, that's not an official source. Read LP:TP for details on what is considered an official source. -- Jabberwock talk contribs email - 07:54, 31 January 2007 (PST)
OK, after further research I did find the press release mentioned in your article. The source is on ABC Medianet, and that is an official source. word doc. -- Jabberwock talk contribs email - 08:02, 31 January 2007 (PST)
I'll second that. Another one that will get nominated for deletion without sourcing. --Minderbinder 08:04, 5 November 2006 (PST)
I'm pretty sure SecretAgentMan has said this and he's not usually wrong. We can just keep it up and if the title is changed then we'll change it here too. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bettyfizzw (talk • contribs) .
Is that a rumor site? If this is rumored, put it on Lost Season 3/prespoilers, and link to the source. "Not usually wrong" isn't good enough for a main article, facts need to come from ABC or directly from the creators. --Minderbinder 08:24, 5 November 2006 (PST)
Deletion nomination[]
Delete unless a source is added ASAP. LP is not a rumor site, and articles like this damage the credibility of the site. --Minderbinder 08:16, 5 November 2006 (PST)
Why is this page still here? I'm marking it for deletion (which will have to be here since the article is locked). --Minderbinder 15:10, 20 November 2006 (PST)
Page Protected[]
This page is protected. Lostpedia does not allow rumoured episode titles, only episodes confirmed by ABC Medianet. -- Plkrtn talk contribs email 15:25, 20 November 2006 (PST)
IMDB[]
Hey i know that IMDB isnt an official source or anything, but I thought id put this information somewhere anyway, on alot of the actors pages, both Not In Portland and Tricia Tanaka is Dead are listed titles that the actors have been credited for, maybe it gives evidence that its a possibility that episode eight will be Tricia Tanaka Is Dead. --lewisg 07:12, 13 December 2006 (PST)
Unless there's official citation we're not adding it - IMDB is updated by users and shouldn't be seen as any kind of "proof" (though that said it'll probably be the title I reckon - Spoiler sources on ep titles have been pretty good this year) --Nickb123(Talk) 07:35, 13 December 2006 (PST)
Ah cool, no problem then i wasnt asking for it to be added hehe. I didnt know IMDB was updated by users lol, learn something new everyday :D --lewisg 07:36, 13 December 2006 (PST)
See LP:TP for the theory policy. ABC Medianet is generally the only official source for episode dates, titles, etc. -- Jabberwock talk contribs email - 10:03, 13 December 2006 (PST)
Why do I need to see the theory policy *confused*.. thanks anyway.. and yes i know, which is why i started off this talk with "I know that IMBD isnt an official source". --lewisg 11:18, 13 December 2006 (PST)
Hurley flashback[]
Wasn't it confirmed on the LOST podcast that ep10 was a Hurley flashback? --Blueeagleislander 23:34, 5 February 2007 (PST)
It turns out it was, 30th of Oct 2006 one. Where's a sysop where you need one? --Blueeagleislander 02:01, 6 February 2007 (PST)
Hello! Why do you need a SysOp? There is no mention of the podcast on this page, and really, there isn't any need for one, is there? -- Plkrtn talk contribs email 02:20, 6 February 2007 (PST)
The Hurley flashback needs to be added to the infobox. See the 30th of Oct podcast. --Blueeagleislander 19:21, 6 February 2007 (PST)
Cheech![]
Woo! Cheech is going to be in the episode, according to the promo stills. Should be hilarious. --Marik7772003 17:16, 8 February 2007 (PST)
Aren't Nikki and Paulo part of the main cast? Maybe they've been dumped cos they're boring. --Blueeagleislander 22:58, 12 February 2007 (PST)
In response to Blue Eagle Islander's comment -------> PLEASE GOD YEs!!! Princess Dharma(banned) 09:04, 21 February 2007 (PST)
Just watched the episode and Rodrigo Santoro and Kiele Sanchez are both among the regular cast listed, they aren't guest stars, so I removed their names from the info box.--Nathalia Mueller 14:39, 1 March 2007 (PST)
Spoiler[]
Can we have a spoiler warning atop the page please. Princess Dharma(banned) 09:04, 21 February 2007 (PST)
Young Hurley[]
The 'Y' in young on the guest list needs to be a capital. I wonder if young Hurley is fat? --Princess Dharma(banned) 09:10, 21 February 2007 (PST)
I'm 99.9% sure it wasn't Apollo. The wrapper was way lighter blue, and the lettering didn't seem the same. LM doesn't have any good screencaps of the bar; if you have found a pic, analyze it and see what it is. --Marik7772003 21:42, 28 February 2007 (PST)
I couldn't tell what the wrapper said, but the chocolate bar itself appeared to be a Nestle Crunch bar. Jabberwock talk contribs email - 21:47, 28 February 2007 (PST)
Looking over it several times it seems to say GL???R BAR... Looking at it when he opens it you can see the GL pretty well and what seems to be an A. When he eats it you can see the R and the BAR very clearly. Possibly GLAMOR BAR? Also, you can see the bar gets opened at the GL side and gets eaten by the BAR side-- ooooops! -- MCouto
definatley a CRUNCH bar but the wrapper said GRIZZLY Bar. There you go.10panichellia 09:29, 1 March 2007 (PST)
Why did someone call it Glacier Bar ? TheAma1 11:52, 1 March 2007 (PST)
If you look at good screencaps, that's what it says [1] --Jackdavinci 12:45, 1 March 2007 (PST)
It's definitely a Glacier Bar; underneath was Nestle Crunch. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Re Caden (talk • contribs) .
Thanks for the details Caden, clears up a mini-mystery. --Marik7772003 14:52, 7 March 2007 (PST)
Mr Cluck posters[]
I wonder if the Mr. Cluck posters ([2]) feature production staff? --Jackdavinci 03:32, 1 March 2007 (PST)
Mr. Cluck's van numbers[]
Doesn't seem to mean anything but the numbers on the Mr. Cluck's van were 513937 and the license plate was 3PCI017. --Jackdavinci 03:38, 1 March 2007 (PST)
Unanswered Questions[]
Content removed from article for discussion
How come "Roger" has his name and job title on his jumpsuit, but Kelvin did not, when they both were in the Swan station?
I think this fact is insignificant and most likely a creative choice. Kelvin's jumpsuit was generic and Roger's was personalized. Jabberwock talk contribs email - 10:31, 1 March 2007 (PST)
How do we know that Roger was in the Swan? Where are you getting this information from? ~~Saukkomies 12:34, 7 March 2007 (EST)
How did the dart that Sawyer stepped on get in the jungle?
Most likely from the hatch implosion/explosion. Kate and Sawyer were close to the beach at the time and we already know that items such as the hatch door were thrown at least that far when Desmond turned the key. Jabberwock talk contribs email - 10:31, 1 March 2007 (PST)
At the time, when this car crashed, there was still a working infrastructure on the island (Streets ...). So why did no one come for Roger? I guess the onliest solution would be, that there was an accident and the people didnt want to risk their lives to look for Roger. Maybe a virus outbreak?--LugPaj 04:34, 2 March 2007 (PST)
Where was David Reyes for the 17-years?
I don't think this should be considered an unanswered question. The show has made no indication that this matter is at all significant. David Reyes is not the first man to leave his family. The unanswered questions should be those that we would expect the writers to answer during the run of the show. We don't have a reason to believe this is a question that needs to be answered, or rather, an issue that needs to be resolved for the show to come to a conclusion. It has no significance for the main story (unless the writers decide to make it so), and probably the whole reason it is even mentioned is to provide Hurley with a parental issue.-- c blacxthornE t 20:09, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
cars = roads?[]
Why was no one interested in a car, when Hurley came running out of the jungle? Wouldn't anyone want to go looking for the road it drove off of? Does anyone even want off this island anymore? Are they just so used to the bizarre that it's not even worth looking at anymore? -BearDog 12:48, 1 March 2007 (PST)
Exactly what I thought. Frankly I don't think the survivors' behavior is realistic now (maybe the sickness ? :p). TheAma1 12:51, 1 March 2007 (PST)
I disagree; I think that the existence of the hatch was enough to tell the survivors that there had been some degree of civilization before them, and a faulty van with little likelihood of working isn't exactly a way to get off of the island anyway. And, on a more hypothetical note, after two months on the island I think it's more realistic for the survivors to be lukewarm about risking their lives or health to escape. (just putting myself in their position)
The car itself is bound to be useless, and the fact that Hurley could just pop the clutch after several years in the jungle, on its side, should be included in the miracles article. What I'm talking about is a road. A VW Bus isn't the prime of all off-road vehicles, so there must have been a road. Roads go places. Places with phones and radios. It just seems worth investigating. If it seems too dangerous, send Nikki and Paulo- they're expendable! -BearDog 13:26, 1 March 2007 (PST)
There's also the possibility of gleaning further information about the Island, stuff in the glove compartment and whatnot. Wasn't the van littered with paperwork? Sawyer even found some kind of map, then ditched it! If only Edward Mars was still alive. And had Lieutenant Columbo's email address. But I guess if that were the case, LOST would be over in 80 minutes!Burt Gummer
If I were on the Island the last thing I'd wanna do is find out about the place it's freaky! Best to keep to the beach and fold tarp like a good extra. Princess Dharma(banned)
Gregg Nations (Lost's script coordinator) stated in a posting[3] to the Fuselage chat group that the papers in the van are not meant to be "Easter Eggs", meaning they were used by the property people just to make the van appear to be cluttered. Any and all writing that may be discerned on any paper in the van must not be considered relevant to Lost in any way whatsoever. This is solid Canon, coming from Gregg. His statement does not include the map, however. ~~Saukkomies 12:42 7 March 2007
Synopsis[]
Is there any reason why our synopses are specifically excluding a sentence about the flashback? They are pretty much half of every episode. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jackdavinci (talk • contribs) .
Flashbacks do go in the synopsis, we just give them their own section for clarity. -BearDog 13:26, 1 March 2007 (PST)
No, lol, I mean the brief summary at the beggining. There's usually one sentence about each major plot thread, but never a sentence about the flashbacks. --Jackdavinci 09:35, 2 March 2007 (PST)
See I tried to add it just now and NickB123 deleted it without explanation. --Jackdavinci 10:05, 2 March 2007 (PST)
And so he should. What other episode pages have a flashback summery? Princess Dharma(banned)
Maybe he should delete it, if there's a policy about it. But deleting it without explanation was confusing. Can someone point me to the policy so I can familiarize myself with it? If it's an informal policy which I suspected it was, I'd just like an explanation so I understand where it's coming from. If we're just doing it out of habit, I'd rather go back and add a sentence about the flashback to all the summaries since it seems to make more sense to me than deleting all reference to 50% of the episode. I think the most logical policy is to:
Have three sentences, one for the A story, one for the B story, and one for the flashback story. If there is just an A story then it can take up to two sentences if needed. If it's a double length episode one or two more sentences can be added if needed.
Otherwise it comes across as arbitrary and we might as well take out the beginning summaries completely. --Jackdavinci 10:20, 2 March 2007 (PST)
We do have policy on the topic, but we haven't made it common linkage yet. It was being discussed during the Season and mid-season break, where we were debating episode guide structures. See Lostpedia:Episode Manual of Style (proposed). The flashback description isn't necessary, and we're more inclined to mimicing the DVD descriptions, where we simply say a brief on-island synopsis which teases the audience. Flashback teasing isn't really that thrilling --Nickb123(Talk) 10:24, 2 March 2007 (PST)
Ah ok so we're going to be aiming for a TV guide style teaser intro rather than a brief episode summary. Gotcha. Thanks for the policy/style guide link! --Jackdavinci 10:31, 2 March 2007 (PST)
Yup, not saying your idea is bad, its just not what we prefer - the TV guide thing is what we have as more appropriate. Its just part of policy. At the time of writing, everyone who usually wrote episode guides was involved in the discussion, and we agreed we needed a strict rulebook as we all had conflicting opinions --Nickb123(Talk) 10:34, 2 March 2007 (PST)
Input Shambala?[]
This site has a flash player playing the Shambala recording heard in the van
why Roger had a delivery of beer on a truck, and no longer the parachute-restocking system was used for it? maybe the air-restocking was applied later some kind of sorpresive incident that killed roger, and for this cause, was impossible to get food by car?
fluids out of order in a upsidedown car: brake fluid, batt-fluid, oil, gasoline. the air of the tires, still ok? this car looks like years abandoned in the middle of the jungle.... it never could works again with only a ride downhills... --Fuzter lost 21:47, 1 March 2007 (PST)
And actually, why was Hurley only able to steer the car, when the power went on? This is an old VW-Bus. Steering is only a mechanical thing and should always work.--LugPaj 04:40, 2 March 2007 (PST)
When Hurley is dismissing the waitstaff at his mother's house, he addresses tham as "Mister Tran, Lady Tran". Especially the way Reyes fluctuates his rate of speech between the two, that we're getting a reference to the band "Ladytron". I'd wager more an amusing nod to a liked band than relevant to Lost mythos. But it's cool. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by That Hanso is so hot right now (talk • contribs) .
The main page says that the Hurley Bird came out of the water in between Charlie and Hurley. Is there a picture of any other mention of this on other pages I didn't see? - rburton
Dart[]
I removed the "cultural reference" of the dart that Sawyer stepped on as I don't think we know that it was really from a game of darts. Thus, it doesn't seem to belong there. Hazel 22:34, 3 March 2007 (PST)
if.... if that dart will kill sawer? maybe is an old poisoned dart, lost in the jungle by the primitive inhabitants of the island....--Fuzter lost 15:24, 4 March 2007 (PST)
Young Hurley's toolkit[]
According to a friend of mine who is more knowledgable about mechanical stuff than I am, the tool set used by young Hurley at the beginning of the episode was not accurate to the time period. The handles on the screwdrivers, in particular, are modern. Don't know if this information needs to be added anywhere or if it was merely a production error. Belle42 12:51, 4 March 2007 (PST)
Well, it's getting a bit into the weeds for this article, but if your friend is positive and can be more specific, maybe it'd be worth a mention on the continuity errors page? There are quite few... --PandoraX 14:56, 7 March 2007 (PST)
This is the worst episode of the show[]
..."tricia tanaka is dead" is an episode where nothing important occurs.
the flashback is irrelevant, with no new information....
there is a lot of mistery in the show, to tolerate this kind of episodes.... a time-filler..
this episode is the opposite idea of others, like "lockdown" where you increase the expectations of the next week....--Fuzter lost 15:24, 4 March 2007 (PST)
On the contrary, I actually quite enjoyed it, especially the DHARMA vehicle bit. Funny :) --Gateboy42 16:12, 4 March 2007 (PST)
I do not agree, that Hurley+Charlie thing was interesting, they change their fate. And flashback was not so boring as previous one. According to thefuselage worst eps from season 3 was "I Do" and "Stranger in a Strange Land", and I feel the same. --Znch 06:13, 5 March 2007 (PST)
I enjoyed the episode, not all lost episodes have to centre on the mythologym, i can say that that episode was one of the best for a good episode, parts had me upset, like hurley confiding in Libby confessing how much he misses her, and the fact that his dad abandoned him then came back just for money. But also had me laughing at others. and not many episodes of anything do that. I thought it was a very well written episode. --Lewis-Talk-Contribs 06:28, 5 March 2007 (PST)
This episode I felt provided a much needed rest from fast paced episodes where a lot is learnt. We needed a break from that or our headds would pain. Plus we havent had a good comedic episode since.... FOREVER!!! Princess Dharma(banned)
And you're the worst contributer to Lostpedia, Fuzter :) Nah, i'm kiddin'. But this comment was pointless and showed no appreciation for the nature of the show. Besides, there were mysteries (spelled with a y, by the way) exposed. For example, there are VW Buses on the Island. There's a blue roadmap in the bus, apparently of the island. Rousseau knows that her daughter is alive now. A hellova lot happened. And if you think beyond the simple mysteries of the show (such as whether or not they're on an island at all, and what the Dharma initiative is all about), we now know that Charlie is not going to die whenever the universe decides that it's able to kill him. It showed that the heroes CAN make their own luck.--Ex-Pope Cardinal Richard Corey 19:41, 7 March 2007 (PST)
ok! thanks to my contribution, everybody talks about this episode. i think one thing: it´s an episode where we saw the first impossible thing, like the vw-van, abandoned, could work again after so many years....so easely!..... if the writers think we could believe this, they´ll try to write everything in the future... they don´t must think we´re an audience ease to cheat--Fuzter lost 10:09, 15 March 2007 (PDT)
The first impossible thing was that anyone survived the plane crash. The island is supernatural. Anything is possible, believe it or not.--Paleored 17:58, December 15, 2010 (UTC)
AMAH theory[]
It says in the lostpedia :
Hurley's father's motorcycle seems to be a Yamaha but missing letters makes it read "AMAH", which is the name of a rock in Hong Kong, According to legend, a faithful wife waited loyally for her fisherman husband, not knowing he had drowned and was turned into a rock by the goddess of the sea.
It could be that if it's really confirmed by the creators but i've got another theory.
Maybe i'm thinking too much and maybe i'm wrong. But we can see thru all the seasons the influence ( direct or indirect ) of the island and Dharma Initiative on the Losties before the crash.
For me, AMAH is something else than a Rock :
David Reyes rides an AMAH motorbike ----> D.R. rides an AMAH ----> DRAMAH-----> DHARMA.
It could mean that the influence of the island on the Losties did start when they were kids ( at least on Hurley ) and could mean that the Losties have been choosen by the island a long time ago, maybe when they were kids or babies.
Olumsiz ( HK 26.03.07 )
Timeline of episode[]
Because of timeline issues, Kate's conversation with Rousseau at the end of the episode was moved to the next day. There was a problem in the timeline in that there were too many days between Kate/Sawyer returning to the camp and Par Avion. Under the old timeline, Kate gets back to the beach and then immediately turns around (same day) to talk to Rousseau. Then nothing happens on day 76 and 77. Then they leave for the barracks on day 78. We know that they reach the Flame on day 80 after two days walk. It seemed better to push talking to Rousseau out a day and giving them one day of prep for the walk. There isn't any direct evidence in the show for this change, neither is there any evidence for the two-day gap if the change isn't made. Dharmatel4 10:24, 1 May 2007 (PDT)
Images[]
Okay, I replaced all but one image with HD images from the episode. Congested 10:25, 3 May 2007 (PDT)
Why[]
"# When Sawyer is complaining about Hurley's insistance on getting the VW van started, Hurley comes back at Sawyer saying "Shuddup, Red...neck...Man". This actually impresses Sawyer. "
Why is this under "trivia"? It happened in the episode and I didn't think it was that meaningful. Am I missing something? Dhalia 17:52, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
First, in trivia it says that there is a white blur moving around the screen when the drive the van down the hill.
I'm almost 100% sure that is Vincent, as we see him almost constantly throughout the episode following Hurley and/or the van. If this is true, imho that should be removed from the trivia
Second, Am I the only one who believe the episode title is a reference to the Family Guy Reporter Trisha Takinawa? Not only are the names extremely close, but the reporter in this episode carries a lot of resemblance to the reporter in Family Guy, and even talks like her
--AquaFruzion 19:07, September 6, 2009 (UTC)
Ring pull?[]
The article says this:
The beer cans in the van have one of the newer-type, litter-free, ring pulls. These weren't invented in around the time the beers were being transported.
While at the time the episode aired, it seemed that the van was from the 70s or so, and the ring pull (I'm assuming it's referring to a modern-day stay-tab) should've been old-fashioned. However, we later find out that the van was from a much later period (1992) by which point modern-day stay-tabs had been developed and heavily utilized (even on most beer cans). Since the producers commented on it, it should be reworded somehow to acknowledge the fallacy and not outright removed.--Tim Thomason 07:38, February 10, 2010 (UTC)
Picture change[]
1
2
3
4
5
The current pic does represent Tricia Tanaka dying. But surely this episode deserves a shot of Hurley and the Dharma van.
I had some trouble finding a good one... many of the shots look through the windshield. --- Balk Of Fame ♪ talk 03:11, August 9, 2010 (UTC)
None of those pictures look like very good alternatives. I'm fine with the current image unless more options are available.--Baker1000 12:10, August 9, 2010 (UTC)
I don't like any of these either. Wondering if anyone else can spot something better. --- Balk Of Fame ♪ talk 06:09, August 10, 2010 (UTC)
Not 1, 2, or 3. I've added 4 and 5... how about one of those? I'm not sure which one I like better... I'll go with 5. If neither, then stick with the current. (Kdc2 23:49, August 17, 2010 (UTC))
I like either 4 or 5. If the image is changed I don't mind which we used.--Baker1000 20:32, August 18, 2010 (UTC)
Pointless Nikki and Paulo trivia?[]
The trivia section includes this: "When Hurley asks for volunteers to help him with the van, Nikki tries to step forward, but Paulo pulls her back." What is the point of mentioning this? --Celebok 23:21, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
It's gone now. --- Balk Of Fame ♪ talk 03:18, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
Foreshadowing in hindsight[]
This is probably a huge stretch and not something the writers were thinking when they wrote this episode, but given the fact that Hurley eventually becomes the Protector of the Island, one might look at this episode and speculate that his eventual destiny is the reason why Hurley survives his foolish, nearly suicidal stunt in the van. In a sense, it's an unintentional foreshadowing that the Island wasn't done with him yet. I'm not sure if it would be appropriate to mention this somewhere. Any thoughts? --Celebok 23:36, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
It's a nice thought, but I think it's too vague to mention. Non-protectors evade death / experience miracles just as often. --- Balk Of Fame ♪ talk 03:19, September 6, 2010 (UTC)
Not 1, 2, or 3. I've added 4 and 5... how about one of those? I'm not sure which one I like better... I'll go with 5. If neither, then stick with the current. (Kdc2 23:49, August 17, 2010 (UTC))
I like either 4 or 5. If the image is changed I don't mind which we used.--Baker1000 20:32, August 18, 2010 (UTC)
