In Live Together, Die Alone her name is mentioned after she reveals that Mr. Friendly's name is Tom. I thought I heard "Dee" as her name but I am not certain. Did anyone have on closed captioning to be certain?
I heard "Bea", but I did not have CC turned on however Nickvd 20:31, 24 May 2006 (PDT)
Closed Captioning said "Bea". The CyberSlug 21:53, 24 May 2006 (PDT)
"Bea" is a common nickname for "Beatrice" or "Beatrix". --MikeF74 08:05, 26 May 2006 (PDT)
Her name is Bea Klugh: BE A CLUE.--Phil 11:27, 5 December 2006 (PST)

Bad Pun, or something to make our ears perk up

A character whos name is a homonym. Maybe someone we need to pay close attention to? PanSavant 19:15, 17 May 2006 (PDT)

well, i definitely thought it was "clue" the first time I saw it, maybe the losties have to figure out who-done-it dto get off the island. Kman       talk contribs                   19:16, 17 May 2006 (PDT)
Mr Hanso in the kitchen with the candlestick. Oh, wrong game :D -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 08:28, 20 May 2006 (PDT)
Yeah, I also thought it was "Clue" until I got on here nad saw the correct spelling. Maybe it's because the losties have to figure out that it was Michael with the gun in the Swan, not Henry Gale with the rope. :D -- Ramirez Selvarn

I look forward to the introduction of her previously unintroduced sister, Getta Klugh. ;) Bellemichelle 12:34, 16 March 2007 (PDT)

Ms. or Miss?

What does the closed captioning say? I would think that if she introduces herself as "Ms." then she's implying she was once married...--Bremerton 05:03, 18 May 2006 (PDT)

If I remember correctly it said "Ms."--Isotope23 05:13, 18 May 2006 (PDT)
I'm pretty sure that's what it said too. --kokuou 18:06, 18 May 2006 (PST)
Miss is a single woman, Mrs. is a married woman, and Ms can be either. --skks 01:04, 20 May 2006 (PDT)

Yes, Ms. is what you use when you don't know (or used by yourself when you don't want other people to know) if the woman is married or not. Ms.LostCat 13:25, 22 May 2006 (PDT) ;)

It's also a term thatnever really caught on after being briefly in vogue during the 70s, another indication that these people are in some kind of metaphorical, if not literal, time warp.--Tricksterson 09:06, 23 May 2006 (PDT)

Right... I sort of took it as a reference back to that usage and the Women's Lib movement of the 60's/70's rather than an indication of her unknown marital status or that she was a divorcee or widower. For whatever reason the Others seem to be projecting an affection for that time period in addition to their "Lord of the Flies" image. Personally I don't think they've been on the island all that long though... at least not all of them.--Isotope23 09:18, 23 May 2006 (PDT)
hey, this may be a long shot BUT what if she is Jennifer? The wife of the real Henry Gale? She was clearly on the island with her husband when they crashed (according to the fake henry's story) and according to the dollar bill that had the real Gale's last word. Maybe she was taken by the others and made to be one of them? Just a thought...
I don't think it is at all clear that Jennifer was ever on the island... I take Henry's $20 bill note to imply that she was NOT with him when his balloon crashed, and he wanted her to know if/when his body was found by a rescue party that he was thinking of her.

Related to Eko?

Ms. Klugh clearly has an american accent, and it appears that american english is her first language, so how could she be related to eko? he has been all around the world (well australia and england confirmed) and he still speaks with a rather heavy accent. silly theories are just anoying, a theory should be a reasoned extension of current facts, not a stab in the dark because she is Black (i'm sorry if this affends any african-americans), and eko is black, should not mean we can automatically say, "well she may eb related to eko, just because lost is comlicated. it is complex, but it is certainly not random - Mikey 18:31, 18 May 2006 (PDT)

I think whoever placed it there did so because of the woman resembling Klugh in his Smoke Flashes.

- Sauron18 23:20, 18 May 2006

I agree; removing it. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 19:45, 19 May 2006 (PDT)
Also removed 'related to Susan' because of the obvious reason that Klugh stated Michael didn't know his son very well was not because of relation to someone, but rather because Michael couldn't answer the questions she was asking about Walt. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 08:26, 20 May 2006 (PDT)
The woman in the smoke DOES look very similar to Ms. Klugh. Furthering this theory. Everyone on the island is connected in someway. Does it seem so unlikely that Eko and Ms. Klugh are related. Also, if they are related that does not mean they have to have the same accent. For example, Jack and Claire (presumably) are related. Yet, Claire grew up in Austraila while Jack grew up in a America. So they have diffrent accents. I find it very offensive and rude that people are removing a theory that is plausible. It may not be TRUE but there is so far no evidence AGAINST it. So therefore, I would greatly appreciate if the people who keep removing my theory keep it there. because It is a THEORY! --L0ST
There are infinitely many possible theories about events on Lost which there is no evidence against. To be worth mentioning on the main article, there must be a positive reason to believe it, not just the absence of a negative reason. TortureMeSayid 23:26, 21 May 2006 (PDT)
I find it inherently racist that whenever a black person is introduced into the show some people automatically start questioning whether they're related to any/all other black people on the show. Why?! Because the same doesn't happen when a new white person is introduced to the show. I don't see any theories about Mr. Friendly being related to Malkin, etc., etc. Thinking about black people differently than white people wreaks of racism and I'm removing it from articles unless there is some evidence other than skin color that it may be true. --Xsg 23:46, 21 May 2006 (PDT)
How can you find it racist? The color of someones skin is something that distinguishes a persons nationality. Which is evidence for relation. That is like saying that it is racist to assume that Claire and Jack are related. One of the main reasons that she is thought to be related to Jack is because the woman whos house she went to had BLONDE hair, just like Claire's. The place of origin also comes in the play because he was in Austraila. But saying that for certain a character is related to one another because of race that is in NO way racist. And the race of Klugh is not the only factor that comes into play. Also, the woman that Eko saw in the smoke looks EXTREMLY similar to Ms. Klugh and as the producers told us earlier in the season, the images in the smoke will become relevant. I think that this theory has enough information to be considered plausible and I find it racist and offensive that people are only assuming the reason she may be related to Eko is because she is African American. Maybe, you should take a look at yourself if you are only thinking that the reason thats she may be related to Eko is becaus she is African American. There is further back-up info that continues to allow this theory to be plausible and I think it is stupid that people are removing this theory because the only info they have related to this is they think the only reason they could be realated is because they are both African American. If that was the reason I added this theory, then couldnt I add thats she is realated to Micheal, Walt, and Susan? But no I did not because I am furthering on the hypothisis of Eko's smoke flashbacks.
You say "The color of someone's skin is something that distinguishes a person's nationality." I disagree. What color are people from South Africa? What color are people from the United States? If you see a white person, what is their nationality? If you see a black person, what is their nationality? You cannot give me a definitive answer to any of these questions, and I maintain that generalizations based on skin color are inherently racist. That being said, I struck the "Eko might be related," theory and re-wrote one a bit more plausible, backed by evidence (some of which you mentioned). --Xsg 20:40, 22 May 2006 (PDT)
I assumed that this person meant ethnicity and not nationality. Not even the most insanely agressive lamarckian biologist would claim that residing in one particular nation state would inherently alter ones biology. That said, the fact that there are two characters of the same approximate age, both of whom are of African descent does leave some room for speculation that they are related, given the numerous familial themes present in the show. Lacking further evidence I'd say it's more of a discussion theory than an article theory, but that's just from a lack of supporting evidence, not on editorial grounds. The theory is racist in the sense that it of course relies on race or ethnicity, which is a fact of human biology and must be considered in this context. It's not racist in the sense that it fosters discrimination and prejudice. --Frieze 09:30, 23 May 2006 (PDT)

We have no reason to believe she's related to anyone... For that matter, I could theorize that she's related to Jack. I don't think it makes sense to add it to this page until such time as there is some indication other than one user's gut feeling. --Admin 20:46, 22 May 2006 (PDT)

I don't think she looks like the woman in the smoke...despite being black.C.m. 06:44, 25 May 2006 (PDT)

Thank you! I am not alone! The woman in the smoke looked both older and chunkier IMHGO--Tricksterson 09:48, 25 May 2006 (PDT)


should we rename this "Bea (Ms.klugh)" just like we named mr friendly, "tom (mr.friendly)"? P.h 06:17, 28 May 2006 (PDT)p.h

  • Yes, good idea. You may also want to disambiguate since there are a few links out there with "Dee" in them. Dmuk § 13:00, 28 May 2006 (PDT)
    • Yep, but I think we should go with "Ms. Bea Klugh" - she emphasised the "Ms" in 3 Minutes so it should be included, but we only include Mr Friendly in brackets as it was his unofficial name until Live Together, Die Alone --Oliyoung 22:43, 28 May 2006 (PDT)

In the unanswered question section of her page, it's written that she doesn't appear in Otherville. I thought there was a glimpse of her in the book club meeting. Any confirm this?? AW

4 Toes

She may only have 4 toes. This is seen when the Others are leading the Jack, Kate, Hurley, and Sawyer to the Pala Ferry. The 5th toe is definitely missing and/or blacked out. There is also a piece of material resembling a sandal similar to the 4-toed statue on the top of the foot.

  • Can we get a screencap of that?
-- Chris 14:41, 7 September 2006 (PDT)
  • I re-watched the episode and she definately has 5 toes... on both feet.
-- Beeth 12:36, 11 October 2006 (PDT)

Question moved from Theory section of Article

  • Where are Bea, Pickett and Alex in A Tale of Two Cities, why aren't they with the others? Are they new "members", and if they are does this mean that the whole thing is a hoax?
    • They are probably dealing with the other survivors that were part of the events at Pala Ferry.
      • Aren't the only other survivors present Hurley, Michael and Walt, all of whom were sent to their various destinations?

Confusing item in theory section

The following item in the theories section of the article is unclear. What is supposed to be implied? --Snarf 10:36, 11 October 2006 (PDT)

  • When talking to Michael about Walt, Ms. Klugh questions him in the same way Susan's Lawyer also questions him. Also says "For someone who wants their child so badly, you don't seem to know much about him."
    • Pronounced "Bee" not "Be a", so unlikely.
    • Also known as Ms. Klugh; or Misclue, meaning the Others are fake!

Bea was supposed to die!!

- The initial plan for the Epiosde "Glass Ballerina" was for Sun to kill off an Other--not Colleen,who got it in the gut from a suddenly spineful Sun.

So, which Other was supposed to die? Any guesses? It was not Benry (as if)...nor Juliet...nor Alex...

It was none other than the mysterious Mrs. Klugh. That's right: She was going to get a Klugh.

Source: Kristen

Do you think this should be added to Bea's Page. The fact that she was supposed to 'bite the dust' but she didn't, Why?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Craiggy (talkcontribs) .

Nah, not released by an official source.--CaptainInsano 11:05, 14 October 2006 (PDT)

Bea was in 3x01! Its Bea! O_o

  • Uh that's not her, just another black woman. (Arjayoh 07:53, 21 April 2007 (PDT))

In Season 3?

Why doesn't she appear in Season 3 yet? CBenoit 07:45, 20 October 2006 (PDT)

She was, as a member of the book club. But she hasn't had a speaking part yet. Look at the photo above. Its Bea. -- Plkrtn  talk  contribs  email  07:49, 20 October 2006 (PDT)
Thats what I mean. And that was a flashback to Day 1 of the show. Why hasn't she appeared in-time frame, not even as a background bit. The end of Season 2 made her seem to be a very important figure in the Others society. Maybe she's a teacher and hidden back somewhere? CBenoit 07:51, 20 October 2006 (PDT)
Sorry, folks, that's not Bea Klugh in that book club picture. That's a black woman, but it's not Bea. Bea is a much more slender woman than the book club woman. Bea has more angular features, higher cheekbones, and smaller breasts, and she looks quite a bit older. There's a tendency I notice to conflate Bea with all minor black/female characters. I'm also positive that Bea was not the nun who disciplined Eko as a child. C.m.Nov. 9, 2006
I know what you mean about that tendency, C.m. I remember reading a theory somewhere on here that Eko was Rose's younger brother, with absolutely no evidence to back that up. --Amberjet11 12:33, 9 November 2006 (PST)
It's just the whole "all black folks look alike" syndrome. Pretty dumb, really, because they don't. C.m.Nov. 9, 2006
Yeah, at the time I think I wrote a mini-rant about how Claire and Shannon are never mistaken for each other even though they're both blond women. "Dumb" is an understatement here! --Amberjet11 14:30, 9 November 2006 (PST)
Bea hasn't been seen so far in Season Three, because the actress (April Grace) is busy with other work. But TPTB have promised that she will return later in this season once the actress is available again. Remus Lupin 22:42, 11 December 2006 (GMT)

Not that nun

Bea wasn't the nun who disciplined the juvenile Eko. They look quite different. I'd recognize Bea if it was her. Bea does not have a Nigerian accent. Also, Bea and Eko look to be close in age, and indeed, her actress is 5 years older than Eko's actor (they were born in 1962 and 1967, respectively). The nun actually looked older way back when Eko was a boy, then Bea looks "now" (or more accurately, in 2004, the year that LOST takes place in). C.m. Nov. 9, 2006

Infobox Image

There are two promotional photos of Bea - one from Three Minutes and one from LTDA. I personally prefer the second one, as I don't think Bea is the "smiling" type of person. I would like to have a vote for the promotional image.

Definitely the 2nd pic, which was the one used before. It looks more like her, and the 1st one is awful--it somehow makes her look fat, which she is certainly not.C.m. 07:07, 8 February 2007 (PST)


Soooo I guess now they have no black cast members? Wtf. littlemisssunshine 21:50, 7 March 2007 (PST)

Oh yeah, forgot about her... they've been neglecting the beach people. littlemisssunshine 21:57, 7 March 2007 (PST)

Does it matter if there are no black cast members? We have other races. >__>; :: Kitsune

Was this user about to accuse the show of racism? With such a large international cast I don't find that remotely plausible.Princess Dharma (banned)

Help me Understand

Her whole involvement in the episode with mikhail Bakunin made no sense to me. What was she doing lurking in that dark basement the whole time Sayid Kate and Locke were there? And she seems (seemed) to be extremely intelligent, so why was she so foolish as to attack Kate? Didn't she know Sayid was down there?...Anyway I was disappointed. She pops back into the show, and immediately she's killed. WTF? I was kind of intrigued by her character, but I guess there are no more mysteries in store about herC.m. 06:17, 8 March 2007 (PST)

"Fluent Russian"

So if she spoke to Mikael in fluent Russian, what did she say? Does anyone speak Russian? TRGibbons 11:48, 8 March 2007 (PST)

Death/Producers Thought

Does anybody else find it weird that she got killed off after being gone for so long? To me it just seemed that the producers wheeled her out as an afterthought. And I can kind of back that up.. In a podcast during the first 6 episode of season 3, the producers were asked where Bea was, when answering they seemed very taken aback, like they'd forgotten about her, and they didnt really answer the question if i remember correctly.. and now shes been wheeled out just to die. Ah well, just a thought, poor April Grace lol --Lewis-Talk-Contribs 14:25, 9 March 2007 (PST)

Yes, it did seem odd didn't it? I have a hunch that the producers just wanted to try and tie up a loose end and answer all the fan questions wanting to know where she was. It was a great shame though as I thought she was a great character. Maybe April Grace wasn't available for the time commitment they had hoped to get from her. This could possibly explain the introduction of the new 'sheriff' character - a function amongst the Others which would have seemed a lot more appropriate to Ms Klugh. --TechNic 19:25, 10 March 2007 (PST)


Do we really need the translation from the Enter 77 episode. It is on that episode's page. I think this page should be character-centric, and that is a bit much. Thoughts?   Hooper   talk    contribs    email   18:40, 26 March 2007 (PDT)

Reason for Death

In the first paragraph, it says that Bea sacrificed herself so that the Losties would not find the Barracks. However, we don't really know the reason why she asked Mikhail to shoot her. It's merely a *guess* that it had to do with the Barracks, but it could have had a completely different, yet-to-be-revealed reason. Bookhouse88 10:30, 18 September 2007 (PDT)


In the latest mobisode titled "The Deal", Bea's full name is revealed to be 'Beatrice' by Juliet. So I propose this page be renamed to either Beatrice 'Bea' Klugh or just Beatrice Klugh. --SilvaStorm

Rename - Beatrice Klugh is her name, so it should be changed.--Baker1000 03:55, 27 November 2007 (PST)

Rename - I think the second option is the best (Beatrice Klugh), and then we put Beatrice 'Bea' Klugh in the first line. Whatever option you choose, the most important is that we have to rename it. Calick

Rename to Beatrice Klugh --Phil (talk) 09:34, 27 November 2007 (PST)

Keep - We had this discussion a while back it caused some strong opinions. In the end we decided on the person's most commonly used name (if it is a shortform of full name) to be the title. See Ben Linus or John Locke for example. I'll create some redirects and IMO that should suffice. She is known as Bea, not Beatrice to most people. Just as Ben or John. No one calls them Benjamin and Johnathan (at least not very often. Keep as is. -Mr.Leaf 12:29, 27 November 2007 (PST)

  • But, Ben and John are actual names, whereas 'Bea' is not actually a real name, just a nickname for Beatrice. It's okay to call Ben and John by these names, whereas calling Beatrice 'Bea' is just like when people called Juliet 'Jules'. And also, Hurley is more commonly referred to as Hurley, but his page is titled Hugo "Hurley" Reyes. --SilvaStorm
  • Bea, is a commonly used short form. The Hurley point is invalid as per my comment on "if it is a shortform of full name". Meaning nicknames such as Hurley or Sawyer are not used as first name. They follow different formatting rules, being if the nickname is used more commonly that the given name is is shown in quotations between given and surname. But Bea is a commonly used short form for Beatrice. Look it up in any dictionary (for example here). I think you miss the point/definition of my comments so let me explain. Although technically John, Alex, etc are nicknames we don't use that logic at LP. We use the following commonly accepted and known logic. A short form for a person's name is a named used by that person for ease or liking (as opposed to saying a full name out) by that person. A short form of a name must have be derived from the full name or must be a common short name associated with the full given name. Common examples of this are Alex for Alexandra (as is derived from full name), John from Johnathan, Tim from Timothy, Dick from Richard (the commonly accepted name), etc, etc. I am sure you know many more. Bea is an example of this meeting all criteria to be considered a short form of a given name, and is still referred to as a short form. What this means is the name is still technically your orignal given name. This allows to to write it on important documents, sign with the name, and be known by it, even though it is not technically your given name. As opposed to a nickname which has nothing related to a person's given name but is rather a title associated with a person based on a character, event, etc, etc. Such as Hurley or Sawyer. These names are not your real name, you must use your real name for anything important, so Hugo or James however you can be called by nicknames. Therefore on articles for characters whose nickname is used more then the given name we use the full name with the nickname in quotations to indicate it is used more commonly. When however the name used more commonly is a short form (as Bea IS) and is not a nickname the short form can be used in the making of the article. That is how most people have agree to make the wiki. Examples are profound throughout the wiki, Alex, Kate, John Locke, Ben, Libby, the list goes on. If we agree to change this name of this page to Beatrice Klugh you would also be implying we should change Kate Austen to Katherine Austen, John Locke to Johnathan Locke, Ben Linus to Benjamin Linus, Alex to Alexandra, Libby to Elizabeth. Now with some research it is quite noticable most of the above pages have been nominated for renaming before only to be shot down by the users due to the above points. Therefore it would go against our already established style and common logic. Most of the visitors to this wiki during the season are casual viewers of Lost. Most do not know the full names, such as Beatrice, or really don't care. It would be like watching a show with a main character named Dick, having his real name Richard mentioned once, briefly then going online to find all pages about him have the name Richard and not remembering the mentioning of the name Richard. It doesn't make sense and therefore I stand by original opinion. It seems most people do not realize Bea is a short form, if everyone really does agree it will not only go against the numerous days of discussion we had over common naming policies a few months back but will mean about 15 other rename votes will have to be started. IMO sticking to common logic and what we have done for every other name on the wiki is the best idea. -Mr.Leaf 12:28, 29 November 2007 (PST)
  • Okay, I can see you are getting quite serious with this, so I'll just put my point as short as I can. John, Ben, Alex, and Kate are all actual full names. They don't necessarily have to be Johnathan, Benjamin, Alexandra or Katherine as you have pointed out. However, Bea is shorthand for the name Beatrice or Beatrix (the former in this context) and is in no way classified as a full proper name. Much like how you said Sawyer and Hurley are just nicknames, which is why their pages have their speech marked nicknames in between their actual names of James Ford and Hugo Reyes, respectively. In this way, it would make the most sense to have Bea's page either Beatrice Klugh or Beatrice "Bea" Klugh, although the former is better as Bea is more name than nickname ("Hurley" is not an actual name so it is definitely just a nickname). Bea, which as I said is more name than nickname, does not need to be in the page title if it can be replaced by her proper name of Beatrice. Otherwise it would be a contradiction to other pages such as Sawyer's which would make his page Sawyer Ford or just Sawyer, an obviously unproper title considering that is not his real name. Beatrice is Bea's proper name. Therefore her page should be titled by her real name of Beatrice Klugh and not the shorthand nickname of Bea, which itself is not an actual name, unlike the previously mentioned John, Ben, etc. which are. Just to further this point, when a child is born, a parent can call it Alex or Kate or Ben or John and that can be its full name for life. A child cannot be called Bea without it being shorthand for Beatrix or Beatrice. I hope you understand. --SilvaStorm
  • Why can't a child just be named "Bea"? There was a girl at my highschool named T9C. Parents can name the child whatever they want (in most cases), and I see no reason a couple couldn't name a daughter "Bea" without it being short for something. --Gluphokquen Gunih 04:22, 8 December 2007 (PST)
  • I'd like to address Silva's point. "Beatrice is Bea's proper name. Therefore her page should be titled by her real name of Beatrice Klugh and not the shorthand nickname of Bea, which itself is not an actual name, unlike the previously mentioned John, Ben, etc. which are." Your point seems flawed to me. As according to Oxford dictionary and numerous other resources (and yes I have looked this up, just to clarify) Ben is not a proper first name, it is just a short form for Benjamin, Kate is also not a proper first name (depending on where you look), where as John and Alex can both be used as proper first names. Which seems to undermine your point of Bea being the only non proper first name in the list which is a false belief. However my point was not what is a proper first name according to some people who sit in offices and define words all day but rather a short form is a common derivative of a full given name. A parent could give a child a random name, such as argojosephaldehyde (hypothetically). Would you not agree a short form for that name could be "Argo" or would that be a nickname as well? In real life I use a short form from my real name and am allowed to sign papers using it, go to school registered under it, etc, etc. My point is that a shortform in most cases in society is still considered a person's name, where as a nickname is not. In society if I called a guy named Benjamin by his parents Ben, is that a nickname (according to your definition it is)? The same general acceptance should be applied here that bea is a shortform of Beatrice and as with numerous other articles this article title should stay. I'm not even going to venture to the fact that 85% of the people visiting this page will more likely know her as Bea Klugh which in itself should be a push in the direction of keeping the page name the way it is. -Mr.Leaf 17:50, 8 December 2007 (PST)
  • However, "Bea" is just a nickname in the same way that "Jules" or "Cole" are short for Juliet and Colleen respectively. We don't usually call Juliet "Jules" and so if we were first introduced to Ms Klugh as Beatrice, that's most likely what we would be calling her now, even if she was referred to as Bea later on. It just doesn't make much sense to me that we should keep the page title with her nickname instead of her real name. --SilvaStorm
  • I don't know how much clearer I can be on this. So I will leave it at this. To sum up. Bea, is not a nickname, it is a shortened form of her real name, is included in numerous dictionaries, is widely accepted depending on what part of the world you are from and is no different than John or Alex. Or for that matter Jules and Cole (although Cole is usually a male name) which are also widely accepted full names (look at a dictionary). This article naming already is based on the naming standards at LP. Millions of people know her as Bea, thousands know her as Beatrice. In the interest of ease of access, understanding and to adhere to the already established policies and common accepted ideologies (which you do not understand) this page shall remained named as it is. Please contact me via email and I will be more then happy to provide a full explanation on this matter. -Mr.Leaf 13:02, 10 December 2007 (PST)
  • All I'm saying is that the page should be Beatrice Klugh, not Bea Klugh, as the former sounds more like a proper name (even Ben and John do) while the latter sounds more like a shortened nickname. I am not doubting that it is a name, I just think it should not be used in this case as the page title. The first line of the page could be "Beatrice Klugh, also known as Bea,...". With that said, I do not appreciate you telling me what I don't understand as everyone has a different point of view. However, I can see this not going anywhere considering you are an admin and therefore make the final decision, but by my count, the votes are 6:2 in my favour. --SilvaStorm
  • I'm sorry if I come off rude, it's not my intentions. And I appreciated you POV. However my base was off the current rules and format we use as well as IMO logic. I will send you an email fully explaining my opinion as soon as possible. However in the mean time, i am going to go back on my original decision only because in the most recent mobisode (mx06) from what i hear she is referred to again as Beatrice. This makes it 2:1 for Beatrice:Bea which I have no problem with renaming for. However I will wait until I've actually seen the clip to confirm and rename. -Mr.Leaf 20:17, 10 December 2007 (PST)
  • That's quite alright. There is nothing wrong with some healthy opposition! I look forward to receiving your email. And yes, Bea is refered to as 'Beatrice' in the latest mobisode. --SilvaStorm
  • REname WarthenMan
  • Rename as per SilvaStorm's logic. --Berethor222 08:50, 28 November 2007 (PST)
  • Agree Beatrice is her name, but a redirection from "Bea" is offcource necessary    Lash  talk  contribs 
  • Still thinking - What I think we have are two issues: 1) usability for "typical" users of Lostpedia 2) precedence nomenclature standards on Lostpedia. Briefly: With regard to 1), certainly the commonly known name is more usable for the typical visitor of Lostpedia-- in this case "Bea". With regard to 2), our naming standards have evolved to be a bit complex. Typically for very minor characters we use the name given by official credits according to ABC Medianet. For main characters we have made exceptions using the nickname in quotes, even though it is a bit cumbersome, for example: James "Sawyer" Ford. In these cases the nickname is the most "usable" by the typical visitor of LP, therefore the nickname should appear in the majority of references such as the infobox, image captions, and article body text. The case of characters that are neither "extremely minor" nor "main characters" is a gray area. In the case of Ms. Klugh, I would argue that the usability criterion (1) (leading to the naming by nickname "Bea") probably supercedes any technical argument for conformity/precedence for the naming of the article using any longer form unfamiliar to most casual visitors of Lostpedia. I would argue for this with other similar minor (but important enough to be recurring) characters such as Alex. Non-recurring characters should simply use the ABC Medianet name. I am open to being convinced otherwise but the arguments above for 1) a full name that does not appear in an Episode (only a mobisode), and 2) conformity with main character naming conventions, are not compelling.-- Contrib¯ _Santa_ ¯  Talk  13:24, 29 November 2007 (PST)
While i agree the Bea is not a main character argument is enough to give a bit of doubt to the follow the main character naming format, IMO whenever we learn more about the name of a minor character or non prominent character (Bea is a relatively minor character with only 3 appearances) then is released in the ABC Press releases we update the articles. In this way i think we can no longer say the reference is ABC medianet. This article has already been renamed due to information learned throughout the show (she has only ever been credited as Ms. Klugh however the name Bea was said in an episode). IMO this means we have taken charge of the name (as opposed to ABC) because the info ABC has provided is not updated. In that way your point Santa "Non-recurring characters should simply use the ABC Medianet name" then this is not true for this article, also i am not sure whether we should consider 3 episode recurring or not but is definitely more then a simple guest star. In this way I think we are in essence already using main character naming conventions for her and should continue to do so. -Mr.Leaf 13:39, 29 November 2007 (PST)
  • Keep So, just clarifying a couple things in my head here- 1) the "Enter 77" press release lists her as "Ms. Klugh"; but in episodes, she has only been referred to as "Bea" once, by Tom. So we're already breaking from the minor character nomenclature standard of going by ABC Medianet. 2) For main characters which are more commonly known by their shortened given name, i.e. Ben Linus and John Locke, the article title goes by the shortened name, but the first sentence includes both the full given name and the more commonly known shortened given name, like Benjamin "Ben" Linus. Given point 2, that not even articles of main characters are titled by the less common full given name, and that I think we can take a one-time episode usage of "Bea" as overruling a one-time mobisode usage of "Beatrice" (at least for now), it seems there is no precedent to title the article "Beatrice Klugh". And since she probably falls into the category of recurring minor character, just above one-time guest appearance, it seems ok to keep it as "Bea Klugh" instead of "Ms. Klugh." -- Graft   talk   contributions  17:27, 29 November 2007 (PST)
  • Yes, those facts are correct. -Mr.Leaf 17:50, 8 December 2007 (PST)

Why are we arguing about an issue when we have clear rules for naming. How about we just follow the rules we've layed down? --Gluphokquen Gunih 21:03, 10 December 2007 (PST)

Has anyone confirmed that Klugh is actually her name? I always assumed that when she introduced herself to Michael it was as Ms Clue and that that name was an alias.

Bea has met Sayid, not Locke.--Station7 14:40, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


Okay, I heard the other day that Klugh was meant to have Juliet's role in the plot and be a regular in season 3 (and beyond) but the actress was busy, Juliet was created, and Klugh was killed off in her sole season 3 episode. But is there any truth to this at all, given that I can't find any other sources saying this? --Golden Monkey 21:54, October 3, 2009 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC BY-NC-ND unless otherwise noted.