Talk: Hindsight

Cleanup

I would just leave it as a stub, but if something isn't put on the page soon I'll just nominate it for deletion cause right now there is no link to the show --Nickb123 (Talk) 06:10, 15 July 2006 (PDT)

never mind, found how its relevant. It can stay a stub --Nickb123 (Talk) 06:12, 15 July 2006 (PDT)

Which One?

• There is another book called Hindsight that I think would fit in better witht he other books in the Hatch[1].--CaptainInsano 19:57, 30 November 2006 (PST)

• The correct Name reffering on ABC's Lost Book Club (which on my knowledge is Canon) should be Hindsights: The Wisdom and Breakthroughs of Remarkable People from Guy Kawasaki. Namaste! --Anis Ben Amor 07:02, 23 July 2008 (PDT)

Publication Date

I'm reading this book right now, and the publication date is 2005, not 2003. I don't think I have a newer version or anything; the cover matches the picture that's here. So, since this is in the future of the show's events, should this book be classified as definite prop error? I.E. Rainbow Six, After All These Years, etc. still could have made it there somehow, but maybe Hindsight should be deleted from the list of books relevant to the show. If I'm mistaken about the dates let me know. Burnside65 10:25, 17 December 2007 (PST)

Deletion

The book referenced in this article has the following information on Amazon[2]:

1. Author: Dr.Peter Wright
2. Publisher: iUniverse, Inc. (February 7, 2005)
3. Language: English
4. ISBN-10: 0595331424
5. ISBN-13: 978-0595331420

However, the book on the official ABC LOST Book Club[3] is as follows, according to Amazon[4]:

1. Author: Guy Kawasaki
2. Publisher: Grand Central Publishing (September 1, 1995)
3. Language: English
4. ISBN-10: 0446671150
5. ISBN-13: 978-0446671156

-- Roobydo  talk  contribs  19:24, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

• Rewrite if we have the wrong book. --Blueeagleislander 04:07, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
• Rewrite --LOST-Hunter61 13:22, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
• Rewrite cgmv123TalkContribsE-mail 13:43, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

yeah....i agree

Yeah, no. This should be changed, since its not the book used, can't we just delete the article? It seems like it not being canon, and of so little significance, we prob could. JulietIsMyConstant 03:57, November 10, 2009 (UTC)