Do you have an idea for a new wiki? Please share it with us here
Take the Dharma Wants You test, all about Lostpedia, here

From Lostpedia

Premature Birth

I wonder if Locke fighting off all those infections and surviving a premature birth was because the island wasn't done with him, similar to Michael? -- Sam  T  C  08:42, 24 May 2008 (PDT)

Life Experiences

First the link between Desmond and Locke, here, can be made between any of them. They are all destined to be there and play some significant part. Second, I offer Jack:

Kate: Daddy issues, death of [presumed] father, mom sticking up for dad I Sawyer: Daddy issues (Locke's Dad being a sort of surrogate for Sawyer as Sawyer did make him in Conner's image, thus both striving to live up to their fathers' image), conning (the lie about the Oceanic 6 is a con and was Jack's doing)

Hurley: More daddy issues (abandoned by Daddy, literally or emotionally), visitations by dead Christian (visits from the dead, I'm pretty sure, well qualify as unique life experiences!)

Sayid: The loss of and struggle to retain the love of a woman

Charlie: Both destined to save the lives of the Losties, both do so.

Jin: embarrased by their parentage but still, both, striving to honor their fathers

Sun: manipulated by their fathers

Claire: Umm, yeah, same daddy. Pretty sure that half of what it takes for a person to even exist counts as a major contribution to one's life experience.

Shanon and Boone: Jack had to choose who should die and their [step]Daddy was the one whom he chose.

Michael: Destined to save the lives of the Losties, estranged from parents

Walt: Both estranged from fathers and reconnected with them

Rose: Her belief counters his skepticism. Of all these connections this really matters. Locke's belief counters Jacks but in a crazy way. Rose's stability, logic, and calm give Jack more pause than Locke can ever hope to.

Bernard: Both saved lives of loved ones. Jack saved Sarah through surgery, Bernard saved Rose by bringing her to Australia and putting her on 815.

Nikki and Paulo: Seriously? Who cares? They simply don't count. They were added to make up for characters that died and killed off because they added nothing to the story and the fans hated them. Mucho gracias to the writers for listening to us.

Eko: Monster, drugs, reluctance to accept anything spiritual

Ana Lucia: Both on the Island because of Christian.

Desmond: Constantly fighting to prove they are good enough, resistant to accept their responsibility to The Island et alia

Ben: Ummm, yeah, entrusted with the responsibility of leadership and awareness of the hardships and sacrifices that entails

Juliet: Doctors, save lives of people, feel intensely responsible for deaths they could not have prevented, promised off the island only to have that hope exploded

Oh, yes, and Locke: Daddy issues, thrust into leadership roles, believe they are responsible for saving everyone

The point is that this link can be made between any and all individuals on the island if you want to see that link. They are all there because they all share something in common with each other besides just being there. This is, in no way, something unique to Locke.

• Agreed. Tis a silly section.--Chesebrgr 08:21, 3 June 2008 (PDT)

The future is now the present

Okay. I believe that the last scene was a catching up point was a catchup between the future and the present. We have the important details of the events between the last real time scene and the last future scene. There is no way flash-forwards could continue with Locke not being dead. Therefore, he is dead IN THE PRESENT, as well as Nadia, Mr. Avellino, Elsa, Ishmael Bakir, etc. -- Sam  T  C  23:16, 29 May 2008 (PDT)

I agree, his status should be changed to deceased. --Mapleleaf50 10:33, 30 May 2008 (PDT)

We don't really know how the show will handle time in the future, whether island is "past" and off island "present", or island is "present" and off "future". What about something like alive in 2005/deceased in 2007? --Minderbinder 11:11, 30 May 2008 (PDT)

While that certainly is possible, we don't know for sure how the writers will proceed. I see no harm in doing something like what Minderbinder suggests for the time being. --Compossible 11:18, 30 May 2008 (PDT)

Putting the date of death and leaving the status as alive seems to look good. Good idea, Compossible. --Connor401 13:36, 30 May 2008 (PDT)

This should say dead. the timeline is now filled in and we know for a full fact john locke is dead in the present --Hostile108 15:06, 31 May 2008 (PDT)

I entirely disagree with the statement that the future is now the present and that Locke is dead now. The present right now is the time where the O6 made it off the island. Locke dies 3 years ahead. So, with regard to the present, Locke's dead is in the future. In the present, John Locke is alive and on the island. I vote for keeping his status alive, because he is STILL alive.--Salvora 06:29, 1 June 2008 (PDT)

I vote for changing the status. Here's the issue: to the viewers of the show (who read LP), he's dead. To the island inhabitants in the past (since they have shown us into the "future" on the show), he's alive, but to the 06 off-the island, he's also dead. The question is, which time period is right, since we don't even know where/when the island is. As LP is a gathering source for information on all of this, I would vote for the wiki entry to be altered to reflect this issue. The only people he's alive to are the non-06 people left on the island, and we don't even know where/when they are, to be honest. AlaskaDave 16:15, 4 June 2008 (PDT)

I vote for a change of status. He was shown dead, and even if that changes, he is dead until season 5 starts in my mind. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by A Dawg (talk • contribs) 2008-06-05T20:22:40.

Aren't Bakir and Nadia considered dead on the wiki? Are we just considereding life status based on the view of the non-06, on-island people? I mean, we don't even know where/when the island even is, or what the status of the island is. AlaskaDave 19:30, 5 June 2008 (PDT)

The last we saw of "present" time, it was January 7, 2005. Unless the "bad things" happened within a week and John killed himself immediately thereafter, we can assume he is still alive at the moment the O6 landed on Sumba. So he is alive, and his date of death is April 2007. --Pyramidhead 10:45, 6 June 2008 (PDT)

I don't remember having the discussion and arriving at the decision that the "dead" vs. "alive" distinction relied on 2004 being counted as "the present". I do remember making various arguments that it is silly to call flashforwards "the future" based on actual chronology (2007 is the past for us) and based on the remarks of the producers (the show is "a mosaic" and past, present, and future are all one timeline). Is Mr. Avellino alive? Robert K S (talk) 11:43, 6 June 2008 (PDT)

Bentham reference

Besides being the founding father of utilitarianism, the real-life Jeremy Bentham is known for his stuffed carcass (auto-icon) on display at Oxford University. Though I don't think it's significant to the plotline of the show, I do think the writers were clever enough to name one "famous" cadaver (the mystery coffin) after another (the real Bentham.)

Oh, and here's a pic of the real Jeremy Bentham. Lovelac7 13:28, 30 May 2008 (PDT)

I'm not sure where else to ask as I'm new to all this, but does anyone have a source for the historical John Locke's father working for Bentham? So, I take it he was from the Island? A relative of Richard's perhaps? Look at the dates. --Sarahwolf 17:08, 31 May 2008 (PDT)

Change A.K.A. to "Alias"

I'm not really sure how to do this as I haven't done a lot of wiki work, but I suggest that "A.K.A." for the Bentham name be change to "Alias" as it better describes the situation. Bentham is an alias and not his actual name after all. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Poke4christ (talk • contribs) 2008-06-01T08:08:24.

Where'd he die?

Was it LA or New York? Decboy 10:30, 2 June 2008 (PDT)

its doesnt have to be either --kalebv 17:47, 2 June 2008 (PDT)

It could be New York, and maybe his death tied in with Cloverfield! (unlikely, but between the two cities this would make NY more likely)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Peatymasta (talk • contribs) .

If he died in New York, how did the body end up in California?--Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 06:14, 8 September 2008 (PDT)

Status?

I'm still unclear as to how flashforward-revealed deaths are being handled on this Wiki, but perhaps someone could explain... Why is Locke's "status" still listed as "Alive"? Clearly, he's dead at some point in the show's timeline... Has there been some consensus about this? -Jslost 18:16, 18 June 2008 (PDT)

It appears to be the best option, as of right now, to just list the date of death. Statuses are based on current island time. --   Connor401    talk    contribs    email   18:23, 18 June 2008 (PDT)

Fair enough, but it appears that the next season will be a combination of time on the island immediately after the Oceanic Six (and others) left, and flashforwards to three years later, after the future events of season 4, and after Locke is revealed as the man in the coffin. It would be prudent to reach a consensus regarding this issue, as it's likely the "current island time" will be a less and less solid concept as the show goes on. -Jslost 16:14, 19 June 2008 (PDT)

I agree, We should change it to Deceased. Him being shown in the coffin dead is canon so we should change it. --JPB. T. C. E.

String disagree.Every single character in Lost (probably minus Richard) is deceased in the future, because everybody dies sometime so if list Locke as deceased then we should list Jack, Kate, Juliet and everybody else deceased in the future because as I stated everybody has to die sometime in the future.Plus he's deceased in the FUTURE not the Island PRESENT which is the current timeline on Lost (not flashbacks, not the flashforwards, the Island timeline).--O r h a n 9 4 10:07, 22 June 2008 (PDT)

That logic is kind of silly. We've seen Locke dead in the course of the storyline, and that's what should matter. I think we should make some kind of notation that Locke is presently alive, but that he is deceased in the future.--   AmarilloLostFan    talk    contribs    email   08:22, 24 June 2008 (PDT)

Date of Death???

I understand where you get the date of death from, but there's some inconsistancies. When Kate yells at Jack at the beginning of There's No Place Like Home, Parts 2 & 3 she says she's been trying to forget what happened for 3 years, that would put the events of that flashforward to early 2008/late 2007. Since the conversation with Kate happened a few days after Locke's death, the death would have occurred somewhere between September 2007-March 2008.

Birthday?

Where is the birth date referenced? It should be noted that Buddy Holly's "Everyday" was not released until late 1957... perhaps it's a production error. Optimusprime 22:35, 12 July 2008 (PDT)

• The birth date is referenced in the section on paperwork. BETTYFIZZW (Talk) 07:35, 13 July 2008 (PDT)

Johnathan?

Do we have a reason, other than the application for a firearms permit, to refer to Locke as "Johnathan Locke, more commonly known as John" in the article? As far as I can remember he has never been called Johnathan by anyone in Lost, including himself. The application is referenced on the John Locke page as being displayed on the "Further Instructions" page, but it's not there. (I think it once was.) It's the same application that had Locke's date of birth off by ten years and may have been another gift of the prop department. As the baby Locke was being carried away at his birth, his mother yelled, "His name is John." She did not say, "Johnathan."--Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 11:01, 5 August 2008 (PDT)

(Added) It's also important to note that:

• The firearms permit is also the document that contains the incorrect date of birth and is associated with Locke's activities while growing marijuana at the commune.
• The ZIP Codes on the drivers license (which may actually be Terry O'Quinn's) and the application don't match.
• When Locke is applying for disability benefits, he tells the social worker that his name is "John."
• "John" is not a nickname for "Johnathan" as "Jim" is for "James."

"Johnathan" belongs in the footnotes.

--Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 11:38, 6 August 2008 (PDT)

Rename

I think it should be renamed to John "Jeremy" Locke--DF3 Talk 17:28, 25 August 2008 (PDT)

No. He's known almost exclusively as Locke. We don't name the Ben article Ben "Dean" Linus. -- Sam  T  C  17:38, 25 August 2008 (PDT)

No. There is nothing in the track record to suggest that he ever used "Jeremy" or any middle name until he was seeking an alias.--Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 17:45, 25 August 2008 (PDT)

No, John Locke is his name, and as Sam said, he's almost always known as Locke. -- CTS  Talk   Contribs 17:54, 25 August 2008 (PDT)

No, Are you serious. "" means nickname he mostly goes by. If anything it would be "Locke" in those parenthesis. Until the latest episode, he has not gone by Jeremy. In fact his first name is never said alone, but Bentham is.

No, It's just an alias, imagine if we'd rename Sawyer's article...--Eruyauve|talk|contributions 01:25, 26 August 2008 (PDT)

Alternative solution. I agree that we shouldn't rename the article, but I liked it when the infobox on the right said "aka Jeremy Bentham" the same way Michael page said "aka Kevin Johnson".--Lauridsen77 12:38, 26 August 2008 (PDT)

• Possible use of the aka, but only if we ever see "JB" interacting with someone who doesn't know his real name.--Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 14:55, 26 August 2008 (PDT)

Nope, When they start listing "Jeremy B.." in the credits or "John 'Jeremy' Locke" in the casting notes -- then maybe. The character is still J-Lo in all of his Present and FB appearances. In FF appearances, we only have one reference to 'J.B.'. Think CHANG, WICK..., CAND.., ...WAX. Then think of "duplicate" bodies running around the story arc. Maybe JeremyB and JLocke ARE separate entities.

• DocH@DocTalk&DonorBank 16:02, 26 August 2008 (PDT)

No as noted above, not unless they list the character as such. --Sarahwolf 00:23, 28 August 2008 (PDT)

No It should always remain as John Locke. It is stupid in my opinion to rename the article to Jermey, which was only referenced basically once in 2 seperate episodes. We haven't even seen Locke (alive) as Jermey yet. --Frink 00:20, 31 August 2008 (PDT)

No: --   Steff    talk    contribs    email   02:03, 31 August 2008 (PDT)

Consensus: No Rename --Blueeagleislander 02:22, 31 August 2008 (PDT)

Picture

Is the latest lead-in picture of John Locke or of Terry O'Quinn? There's a subtle difference.--Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 06:01, 1 September 2008 (PDT)

Jeremy Bentham- should it be moved to the "philosophers" article?

There is a whole section (http://www.lostpedia.com/wiki/John_Locke#Name_reference_to_philosopher_Jeremy_Bentham) which could easily fit on the Philosophers article. It seems odd that it is not included on there as Bentham was a philosopher himself. Thanks! --Jonty 12:16, 25 September 2008 (PDT)

• I agree, although I fought and lost this battle earlier. Including Bentham on the Locke page makes the page bigger. I can't think of a benefit.--Jim in Georgia Talk Contribs 09:41, 26 September 2008 (PDT)