You should delete the before the flight because you don't know if what happened in the original timeline happens in the flash sideways timeline. for example Hurley says that he is the luckiest guy in the world in the flash sideways timeline but in the original timeline he says that he is cursed
Merge[]
February Discussion[]
I don't know who proposed this merger (and merging all the other "flash" character articles with the original articles), but I support it. Separate pages will be way too confusing. This is also being discussed at Talk:Flash-sideways_timeline#Proposal_to_merge_character_articles. -- COMPOSSIBLE Talk Contribs 01:43, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
How do we know Flash-sideways Jack was a surgeon? {{SUBST:User:jdray/autosig}} 02:23, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
- ...him saying to Locke that he's a spinal surgeon and giving him a business card? --Pyramidhead 02:30, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
- o geeze what an idiot thanks pyramidhead sorry. {{SUBST:User:jdray/autosig}} 02:53, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
For clarity of each article, the two seperate universes should be seperated. -- Plkrtn talk contribs email 11:52, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
I couldn't disagree more. Just add a new section in each character's page titled "Alt 2004" or whatever. 2 articles per character is ridiculous. LEHLegacy 13:17, February 4, 2010 (UTC)LEHLegacy
I think it's okay to have these articles as we can have extra sections for personal differences in the characters lives because of the alt time. Plus Jack's, Kate's, Sun's and Claire's articles are already too long and have problems with parser function calls a problem that will occur in other character articles soon as the double storylines of Season 6 get written there, unless someone doesn't mind going through their (and also Locke's, Sawyer's, Hurley's, Jin's, Ben's, Juliet's, Desmond's etc.) articles and changing every single {{crossref|XxXX}} template to <small>("[[XxXX]]")</small> links I think having alt articles works fine, from technical and aesthetical perspective. --Orhan94 13:35, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
Definitely merge. These characters are the same people. If they were somehow distinct, the alternate timeline or flash-sideways or whatever you want to call it would be meaningless. Michael Lucero * Talk * Contributions
Not the same characters, the one is On the Island, the other one in LA X. No merge. I completely disagree.--Station7 19:22, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
Merge. Add a section in each character's page. Are they "separate characters?" They are both Jack. Do we have a separate page for "Jack before flight 815" and "Jack on the Island" and "Jack after returning home"? No. They're all Jack. --Ghtx 19:35, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
There is a difference bwetween the original timeline and the flash-sideway timeline.--Station7 19:37, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
Are they seperate characters? Yes, they are! They don't share the same personality traits, which we've already seen, and behave and act differently, in different circumstances. Two completely seperate timelines now. This is completely different from having an article called (flashforwards) or (flashbacks) they have their own lives to lead outside of the original time line. -- Plkrtn talk contribs email 22:05, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
Separate articles for characters is completely confusing. This would also suggest that there needs to be separate articles for each and every location that's different between the timelines. Tedious!! Spiral77 07:04, February 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Locations didn't change between timelines, save the Island. The Island may justify an article about it's submergence but the on-Island locations don't deserve their own as they will be covered by the ALT Island's article and the the off-Island locations such as airports , hospitals and cafe won't because the new sans-Island timeline wouldn't affect them. --Orhan94 10:31, February 5, 2010 (UTC)
The character being presented to us now is one who didn't crash and therefor isn't the same character that we've been watching for the past 5 seasons. I don't think that it should be merged yet, if we find that there isn't enough to sustain a page for alternate Jack then we can merge but there may be enough information availble in the upcomming episodes to justify seperate pages.--WhyDidntUKnow 13:08, February 5, 2010 (UTC)
I am against a merge. It looks like we are going to have a nearly full season of X Universe activity; filling the existing character pages with events that did not happen to them will only foster confusion. Keeping an X article for everyone who appears in the X universe, and having a link between the two versions on each page is the best way to compare and analyze the differences. --BlueBeard 13:51, February 5, 2010 (UTC)
This is a no-brainer. Will we have separate pages for every timeline that comes up in this show? What if there are six timelines? Silly to have different pages for the same characters (they aren't completely different people, they are the same person with the same DNA that look the exact same, in a different timeline.Charles widmore 17:10, February 5, 2010 (UTC)
They are different. Those 2 timelines are very different from each other. Or is the Jack from the Crash this Jack? No. So, they are different.--Station7 17:12, February 5, 2010 (UTC)
If the differences are enough (and it seems like we'll get a season full of them) it seems like it'll need its own page. We're talking about the potential for completely different reasons for being on the Island - different family members, different lots of things. Maybe a new tablet would legitimize this most. --Alilamba 17:19, February 5, 2010 (UTC)
This is ridiculous. Jack Shephard is Jack Shephard, no matter how old he is, what time period he may be in, or what alternate reality may be taking place. Merge the articles. Shawn4168 17:48, February 5, 2010 (UTC)
I like the idea of splitting the characters. These characters are clearly not the same... But I think we need to separate the articles in a clearer way. The banner in the top of the article is a great example but it's still hard to separate, maybe change the title? Nha, dunno... We also need a better and clearer way to change a character article from timeline 1 to timeline 2 because I did find it hard to find a way to do so. Emmanrulesit 19:55, February 5, 2010 (UTC)
I think there should be a separate article for the character in the separate X Universe but everyone is voting here on merge or not merge and the banner says delete or keep. I would then be voting keep not delete. The information should be deleted from the character page in the first universe. The vote when i posted this was 6 for merge and 9 for not merge.{{SUBST:User:jdray/autosig}} 21:25, February 5, 2010 (UTC)
- Merge. This was an idea implemented without community concensus and needs to disappear before it gets worse.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 22:17, February 5, 2010 (UTC)
The producers themselves have stated that all these characters are still the same people at their core despite the minor differences. Jack is Jack. Kate is Kate. No matter what timeline they're in, they're not different people, so hence it should be in the same article.--Nick40292 17:41, February 6, 2010 (UTC)
- If we were prohibited from using ideas simply because they were implemented without comunity consensus this site would be absolutely awful. {{SUBST:User:jdray/autosig}} 01:14, February 10, 2010 (UTC)
Do NOT merge it. Of course they are the same character at core, but the simple fact that their backstories are different changes them. Two stories are being told, therefore, I am in favor on the "two pages" thing. It would be an absolute disaster to add these along with the regular character pages.--Atarada 18:05, February 13, 2010 (UTC)
I agree. There is no reason for there to be two character pages for each person who shows up in a flash-sideways. Just put that information in a new Flash-Sideways section on their main page. --sugarraydodge (UTC)
Is too early to decide to merge or not, is more appropiate to wait until more information will be released--Veracrux 21:51, February 20, 2010 (UTC)
Definately merge. Creating a separate article for Jack in the alternate timeline is almost like creating an article for Jack as a child. The information regarding Jack can easily fit into the main article. Besides, we're kind of making an assumption that this Jack is even necessarily from an alternate timeline to begin with. Usually I wouldn't question something that seems pretty obvious, but Miles's reading of Juliet's message, "it worked," makes me second guess this theory a bit. To give an example, I'll use that underwhelming remake of The Prisoner that aired on A&E a few months back: Throughout the miniseries, the main character, 6/Michael, would have what seemed to be flashbacks of events that occurred before he arrived in the Village. This was significant because although he was aware of there being an entire world outside of the Village, which was unusual because nearly everyone else in the Village simply thought that the Village was all that there was. The nature of these visions are a bit ambiguous at first, we are lead to believe they're flashbacks, while everyone around him is just telling him that they're illusions. Then toward the end of the series we find out that the events in the Village and the so-called "flashbacks" in New York are actually happening concurrently, because, as it turns out, the Village is just some kind of dream world. Now I'm not saying this is the case for Lost, but I don't think we should go making separate character articles for the "counterparts" appearing in these sequences when we aren't even sure of the exact nature of these visions just yet. For all we know, the Jack that appears in these visions is more real than the Jack on the Island. –Nahald 23:53, February 24, 2010 (UTC)
Post-Finale Discussion[]
They are the same characters just post-death the 'flash' articles were useful when it was believed to be an alternate timeline but no longer apply. 'Flash' articles should just be a section on the main articles.--Thelamppost 19:10, May 28, 2010 (UTC)
- I really have no opinion on this, but if we do merge the two articles, we should at least do it correctly, not just write a redirect, in order to preserve edit history.--Tim Thomason 00:54, May 30, 2010 (UTC)
The main Jack article now covers the entire afterlife - even more than this article does. --- Balk Of Fame ♪ talk 07:44, May 31, 2010 (UTC)
- I agree but be careful, the original Jack page has already been completed with the information on the sideways page, and added more info (about the end and what the sideways is). Also, the images changed too. So we definitely CAN'T merge it that simply. It's more like a delete, but we should keep the history...--Atarada 22:27, May 31, 2010 (UTC)
Eye[]
was it just me or was this Jack's eye much more brown? --Gluphokquen Gunih ▲ 05:10, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
Should we state Sidways Jack appearing in all 6 seasons?[]
It seems to me that we should only state him as appearing in season 6, as this was not the same Jack Shephard. If it was, it would not have a separate article. This should be the same for all Sideway's characters.
- That's an artifact of some confusing design in the Infobox Character template. I'm working on a possible solution. --Pyramidhead 06:47, February 22, 2010 (UTC)
Delete[]
Most of the important data is on the "real" Jack Shephard page.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 01:42, February 6, 2010 (UTC)
I think there should be a separate article for the character in the separate X Universe so I would vote keep not delete. The information should be deleted from the character page in the first universe.{{SUBST:User:jdray/autosig}} 03:36, February 6, 2010 (UTC)
The Exec Producers have made it clear that this is a different timeline from 1977 onwards. We cannot use one article to account for two seperate steams of history that are so encompassing. There will be massive differences that should be documented separately to keep things clear in an already confusing show. -- Plkrtn talk contribs email 14:32, February 6, 2010 (UTC)
- They have also made it clear that these are the same people. They have also stated that the two timelines will be reconciled by the end of the series. Furthermore, this change has been made without community consensus, and at the very least, should be removed until we figure out a proper way to handle the split timelines. Shawn4168 23:39, February 7, 2010 (UTC)
I agree with the Administrator above me. They are different.--Station7 14:34, February 6, 2010 (UTC)
They are different, We have already seen differences in them already The new pages are Great --Mystrios 22:36, February 6, 2010 (UTC)
I agree with that on you, Mystrios.--Station7 23:05, February 6, 2010 (UTC)
- I've made the case against these pages in numerous other places. Here I'll only say that if we decide to keep them, I will officially be giving up on Lostpedia as a credible and reasonable source. Michael Lucero * Talk * Contributions
- We have parallel storylines. Its fitting to have parallel articles--Gonzalo84 04:46, February 10, 2010 (UTC)
- with merge, with delete. Jimbo the Tubby talk contributions 17:46, February 10, 2010 (UTC)
- The deletion should take place. Spliting chatacter pages is useless and confusing. It also doubles the work: Each time you want to change something that was not affected by the Incident, you have to do it twice. Same for discussions, theories, ect. All the information Lostpedia has on Jack Shepard should be on one page. Take as an example Wikipedia's pages on comics characters present in different realities. I mean come on, are we going to do a separate article for the Sonic fence, the Barracks, the statue and everything? This is in no way efficient. And this is not even considering that the two timelines will merge, as hinted by the producers. User:Spoutnik 44
- If there is a drastic change in the circumstance of each (other than the sunken island) then yes, you would. But as the island is destroyed in this time line, then no. The point is, when the information about a character in that dramatically different, then there is a need for said article for clarity and less confusion. -- Plkrtn talk contribs email 20:01, February 12, 2010 (UTC)
- Is too early to decide to delete or not, is more appropiate to wait until more information will be released--Veracrux 21:51, February 20, 2010 (UTC)
Grammar/Syntax Revisions[]
Sorry if this is an inappropriate proposal for a discussion page -- I'm pretty new to wiki editing and not totally clear on editing protocol and etiquette. There are some grammatical problems and awkward syntax throughout the first section of this article (Aboard Flight 815), making for a pretty labored read in my opinion. I'd like to rewrite the Aboard Flight 815 section-- I don't plan to change any of the content (with the exception of possibly adding more detail) but I'd like to try to make it a smoother read. I'm by no means a grammar expert... just someone who appreciates clear writing. Is that alright? Littlecitadel 07:11, February 25, 2010 (UTC)
- It's a wiki. You're a editor. Go for it, but be wary of pride of authorship.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 13:53, February 25, 2010 (UTC)
Timing[]
Can i just ask how we know that the events we saw in Happy ever after occured before the events in the lighthouse? Or before sundown? Or that the events in sundown occured before the lighthouse? Or that the lighthouse and sundown did not occur on the same day? thanks Jdray 23:27, April 8, 2010 (UTC)
Picture[]
So, now that we have more material for the sideways, I think we can now have a better picture :
instead of 
It's more recent, it's not dirty, he doesn't close his eyes, Jack looks great on it... It's a beautiful portrait. But I'm sure there are a tons of other pics from the candidate that look as good. Anything is better than the Lighthouse shot ;) . --Atarada 13:45, May 11, 2010 (UTC)
UQs[]
I removed the two remaining UQs, as I believe both have been addressed. Jack remembers Desmond because his memories of his life are buried, but present. He does not remember his appendix being taken out because the memories of his life are almost completely buried. Michael Lucero * Talk * Contributions