Talk:Lonelygirl15 characters

From LGPedia
Revision as of 17:03, 2 August 2008 by Zoey (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Character categories

Okay, with the addition of the "Random Girl" character, I wonder about a number of things. (I was about to make a page for her, but then I realized that if she will not be recurring, all one needs to know about her is on the Truth Or Dare page.) Does she need her own category on this page? If so, is this the right category? It occurs to me that while "Supporting Characters" says "nor do they have speaking parts in general", in fact, I'm pretty sure this is the first time any non-blogging character has spoken on camera. While she is supposedly only appearing in this one video, in a way she has a status above Bree's parents or Lucy because of this fact. --Brucker 18:04, 19 January 2007 (CST)

I think the Guest characters section is a good idea. Random Girl's role is really quite different than any of the other supporting characters. Plus, who knows... we may be having more such guest characters. That would be interesting! OwenIsCool 12:22, 20 January 2007 (CST)

Should "The Cowboy" be added to this page? Also, should this cowboy have his on page? -- LGFAN 11:02, 5 February 2007 (CST)

The Cowboy should definitely be on here. For now I just linked him to the video The Cowboy but since it looks like he's going to be making a few more appearances we should probably create a "The Cowboy (character)" page, or actually, we should move the video to "The Cowboy (video)" as we did with Purple Monkey (video) and Aleister Crowley (Video). Hmm... just noticed our capitalization is inconsistent. Video should be lowercase.--JayHenry 11:13, 5 February 2007 (CST)
That sounds good. I also figured it was too early to make an article for the cowboy, especially since all we know about him is pretty much summarized in "The Cowboy" video. I kinda jumped the gun with Uncle Franklin and that was pointless =(
OwenIsCool 17:03, 5 February 2007 (CST)

shouldnt we add like a whatever u would call it section for like all the canon people that just post the videos like tachyon and brother?

Yeah, we definitely need to add them... I guess I'm still sorta in denial that they're canon. Ugh.--JayHenry 18:41, 13 February 2007 (CST)
Amen to that JayBrotha haha. HyeMew 18:43, 13 February 2007 (CST)

Hows that? --Iris2009 18:47, 13 February 2007 (CST)


Shouldn't Alex replace gemma as a main character by now?

Alex hasn't even made a blog. OwenIsCool 20:58, 17 March 2007 (CDT)

Well, shouldn't Gemma be at least moved out of Main Char.'s section considering she isn't on the main page with BD&J anymore? Chelseyrl 00:35, 8 April 2007 (CDT)


ok now that we finished with the list of videos redesign, i thought, ok its time for a redesign of the list of characters. So I created a redesign page. ignore the stuff i did at first, it was just to get something started and is totally lame. can someone with some design talent work on it? -Misty 17:45, 1 April 2007 (CDT)

The redesign is live, I'd like to thank everyone for thier help. -misty 10:42, 8 May 2007 (CDT)

what about the creators?--TJ Marsh 16:34, 9 May 2007 (CDT)

This page is for characters within the series, not people who help make it. In other words, these are characters in the Breeniverse. The Creators don't fall in that group.--Jonpro 21:31, 9 May 2007 (CDT)

Other Blogging Characters

It's now obvious that Nikki B, Jules and taylor are all now canon character so they balong on the list of characters. The description under ARG characters best fit those videos, so i figured they bleonged in that group, but there is no more ARG, and these characters were never part of the ARG, so I renamed the group "other blogging character", which would be more apropriate. -misty 11:43, 27 April 2007 (CDT)

I cropped the pictures of Carl and Sonia so they would fit better -FH14 3:01, 05 June 2007 (EST)

Animal Characters?

Animals don't have pages, with the exception of Gemma's dog, and they aren't "characters" persay. But if it is necessary, then by all means, tell me. silverX3 15:18, 24 May 2007 (CDT)

I've actually been building pages for Gemma's dog, Piglet, and Colossus. It might be kind of neat to include them at this point... --Zoey 01:11, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
If stuffed animals have pages, real animals should certainly get them. --slinky 01:15, 7 June 2007 (CDT)

Is it Just Me, or are the boxes screwed up for the Animals. --FH14 12:12, 17 June 2007 (EST)

Fixed. --Zoey 23:52, 16 June 2007 (CDT)

Cool Page

I really like the design of this page! The pictures are awesome. :) Wingless earthbound 14:13, 1 June 2007 (CDT)

Trivial characters

There has been an increase of trivial characters added to this page that I think should be removed. Just because someone is mentioned in passing (e.g. Sam). doesn't make them a character. I think we need to limit this page to characters that matter to the plot. -misty 17:40, 2 June 2007 (CDT)

I agree, but how about we keep them on THIS page and take out the links in their name, since some of the characters (like Sarah's Jay) have all the information we currently have on them in their little boxes anyway. That way, we don't get redundant character pages that only have a sentence or two. --Pheon 18:18, 2 June 2007 (CDT)
I don't think they belong on this page even. -misty 21:16, 2 June 2007 (CDT)
Well, this is an encyclopdia. We've got to be comprehensive without being redundant. --Pheon 21:21, 2 June 2007 (CDT)
I suppose you think we should have a character box for Rosencrantz, Gildenstern, Alestair Crowley and Pluto. All of those as as much LG15 characters as Sam, Jay and Gemma's flatmate. -misty 22:24, 2 June 2007 (CDT)
As I see it, this is absolutely non-negotiable. There is no other Lonelygirl15 wiki and we have to be comprehensive. If you would like minor characters to be listed, rather than put in boxes, okay. But deleting minor characters is absolutely unacceptable. There's nowhere else that has the functionality to track the minutiae of the series -- that's our purpose. --JayHenry 22:27, 2 June 2007 (CDT)
There's no page about Crowley or Pluto?!?!? --slinky 01:17, 7 June 2007 (CDT)
Yes, there is a page about Aleister Crowley, there's a page for Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead, but there's not a character box as their are not essentially characters. silverX3 10:23, 19 June 2007 (CDT)

Wel;l since everyone seems to think that trivial characters belong, I made a separate catagory for them since the don't meet with the criteria of "mentioned in several of the videos" for Unseen characters. -misty 17:37, 8 July 2007 (CDT)

'Stuffed' Characters??

I like the addition of Taylor's trolls, but since they aren't really 'stuffed,' is there a possible solution for the category with a misnomer-ish title? "Toy Characters" perhaps? --Pheon 01:27, 30 June 2007 (CDT)

That's not a bad idea.. does anyone have any thoughts about this? --Zoey 13:25, 14 July 2007 (CDT)

Official character colors

It has become apparent that we need to establish official colors for each character. That color should be used everywhere that color is used to represent character/actor, and should be unique to that actor. once established, I propse, that there should be a rule that no changes can be made unless there is a consensus after a minimum of 3 days of discussion on this page. Currently the colors are

Bree = DeepPink Daniel = MidnightBlue Jonas = DarkOrange OpAphid = #627d6d
Gemma = CornflowerBlue Tachyon = #B7D5B9 Brother = #61B167 Nikki Bower = DarkViolet
Owen = Green P. Monkey = Purple Thor = Crimson Daniel's puppy = Chocolate
Jules = LightSalmon Sarah = #976 Taylor = SkyBlue Spencer = LimeGreen
Lucy = Orange Alex = Red Carl = DarkOliveGreen Sonia = Plum

Please Propose any additions/Changes. -misty 06:45, 2 July 2007 (CDT)

I support the idea that each character/actor has a unique color. That said, I also restate my opinion that I would like to see a bigger difference between Bree's and Jules' colors, since they are rather similar looking on the videolist. --Pheon 01:01, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

Ideas for Jules:

I can get more if no one likes these.. but what do people think? --Zoey 01:19, 3 July 2007 (CDT)
I was going to suggest salmon, but lightsalmon is good too. How about LimeGreen for Spenser since Lime is too bright -misty 12:35, 3 July 2007 (CDT)

Lightsalmon (CMJ) and LimeGreen (LALR) sound good to me! Any last minute objections, or should I go ahead and make the changes? --Zoey 17:34, 4 July 2007 (CDT)

I'm happy with Lightsalmon and LimeGreen as well, even though I'm still wary about Spence's initial (but that's another story :) )--Pheon 23:44, 4 July 2007 (CDT)
Okay, going ahead and making the changes! --Zoey 00:06, 5 July 2007 (CDT)
OK a couple more suggestions, Carl = DarkOliveGreen , Sarah = RosyBrown , Daniels Puppy = Chocolate, Taylor's Troll Dolls = Fuchsia --misty 20:31, 6 July 2007 (CDT)
Cool colors, Misty! (But I like Sarah's current color) How do you even know those guys exist?? --Pheon 21:11, 6 July 2007 (CDT)

well I'm going to interpret this as support for the changes, pheon it didn't seem to me you were trying to object to changing sarah, if i'm wrong correct me. SO I'm adding them to the list and with no objections I'll make the changes al around tomarrow -misty 02:05, 10 July 2007 (CDT)

I would have to say I agree with Pheon, I'm not crazy about the new Sarah color. I think we should stick with what we had for her. The rest look good! --Zoey 02:27, 10 July 2007 (CDT)
Yes, to clarify, I'd ask to keep Sarah's colors as is. But I will say I enjoy the other changes --Pheon 03:18, 10 July 2007 (CDT)

Misty, I saw that you made the changes for Sarah's color, but I was under the impression that the consensus was to leave it as is? --Zoey 12:47, 12 July 2007 (CDT)

I have reverted Sarah's color, as the consensus was to leave it as is. --Zoey 13:25, 14 July 2007 (CDT)

Ok we need to think about colors for the KM characters, and Warpylol needs a color I'm going to make suggestions tomorrow but I thought I would give someone else the chance to jump in first. -misty 02:05, 10 July 2007 (CDT)

Okay, with KateModern, I actually made all the pages in that ae2301 color on PURPOSE. I felt like it gave it some uniformity (and I know how much you like uniformity ;)) within the series and just kept everything neaty and tighty and.. from getting overly complicated. Maybe that color could become the official "KateModern Project" character color? And what about ForestGreen for War? I'm pretty sure we don't have that color yet... and it seems... "suiting"? Ugh I need to go to bed now, this probably wasn't terribly coherant, but hopefully it all made sense and sounds good :) --Zoey 02:27, 10 July 2007 (CDT)

Issac Gillman?

He should be under unseen characters, right? Yes, he has been "heard" in a voicemail, but that shouldn't count. I'm getting the official O.K. from everyone now before I do anything. Love, -R- 19:28, 11 July 2007 (CDT)

I agree. I can also se the other side, he is after all dead., but personally I don't think the fact of his dying is merits promoting him to a higher catagory. -Mistymisty 04:12, 12 July 2007 (CDT)
Exactly, I see what you mean. Love, -R- 04:15, 12 July 2007 (CDT)
Even though he isn't that noteworthy, he is deceased. If you put a deceased character in the unseen category, it totally defeats the purpose of categorizing characters.   •Silver•   Talk | Contribs 11:34, 17 July 2007 (CDT)

The L is Missing

Maybe it is just my computer but the L in List is missing when i go on this because it is hidden or cut off. - Houdini

Hmmm . . . I seem to be getting the same thing too.--Pheon 18:21, 24 July 2007 (CDT)
The L is cut off on my computer as well. I think it is hidden.   •Silver•   Talk | Contribs 21:06, 25 July 2007 (CDT)


I added Daniel's grandma (as mentioned in Comfort Food) to the Trivial Characters section, and the characterboxes are now over to the right, and the Trivial Characters section is messed up. Help?   •Silver•   Talk | Contribs 14:07, 26 July 2007 (CDT)

Deacons + unseen = meep!

I'm pretty sure that the Deacons are not unseen characters. Bree told us that the Deacons (and the Elders) were at the Ceremony (the fake Ceremony, that is), plus the individual Deacon that Kenneth Goodfried portrays is in On The Run and The Unthinkable Happened, alongside Lucy. I'm going to move them to Guest Characters.   •Silver•   Talk | Contribs 10:02, 27 July 2007 (CDT)


I would add LaRezisto myself, but I'm not exactly sure where to put him (maybe Supporting Characters), and I would probably mess the whole page up. Help?   •Silver•   Talk | Contribs 00:09, 12 August 2007 (CDT)

DB's folks

We did technically see an arm & shoulder of Daniel's dad. Does that move him and/or Daniel's parents from "Unseen" to "Guest" ?? ~ JBSHRYNE 11:00, 15 August 2007 (CDT)

I think that merits Daniel's Dad to get moved to seen. --FH14


Mallory picture

If you need to promote Mallory from unseen to supporting then here is a cropped picture in the right ratio. Psmith 17:50, 30 August 2007 (CDT)

--Has Mall always been a supporting char? or only after Daniel found that she was cheating on him? Surfthetsu

Former Character Section?

  • The Supporting Characters Section is getting quite bulky. Maybe we could make a "former characters" section for characters who will most likely not appear in the series again but aren't deceased (i.e. Alex, Jules, amd *sob* Spencer; plus, it might be a better place to put OpAphid, Brother, and Tachyon.) What does everyone think? --FH14 20:48, 10 September 2007 (EST)
Added Section, though the alignment seems to be a bit off. --FH14 16:35, 11 September 2007 (EST)
  • Is the "Former Character" section considered tentative? I wondering why Mallory and Dr. Hart are in that category? (Mallory's story seems unresolved, she just kind of disappeared after her last video from Daniel's room. And although it did appear Dr. Hart was going to be captured at the end of Season 2, and he seemed to be saying his farewells, it is not conclusive that he was killed.) Maybe the category should be "Former or Inactive Characters" or something like that? ~ QtheC
  • All of the Former character have the "possibility" to return to the series. The person who played Dr. Hart said somewhere that Bloodlines Part 4 was his final episode, and Mallory hasn't appeared in over a month. Sure she might return, but so could Alex, Jules, Spencer, etc, as some could argue that their exit didn't provide much closure either. --FH14 11:13, 15 February 2008 (EST)

Supporting Characters

So, I've been thinking about this a lot, and I've come to the conclusion that we have been a bit over-zealous as we've been adding characters to the "Supporting Characters" section. To me, a supporting character is someone who has "been in many video blogs" and "contribues to the plot". Just because Carla and Toby appeared in two video blogs, doesn't qualify them as significant supporting characters, imo. They were both cameo roles, and did not contribute a great deal to the plot either way. I mean, Watchers are still under guest characters, even though we've seen them a lot more, and they've contributed a great deal more to the plot. I just cannot see justification for Carla and Toby being up there. I also removed Jonas's parents from that list, at least for now. They seem to be phasing out as Emma moves on and joins TAAG. They have been only in a few videos, and just don't seem important enough for now to constitute a top-spot listing on the character page. Hey, I am actually hesistant about leaving Mallory up there, but I thought I would give her some time... I have a feeling she may grow into something more significant, so I didn't want to remove her just yet.

I was also kind of iffy on Barb, but she has appeared in a number of videos, and along with Carl and Sonia at Jonas's parent's house that one time. Depending on how much playtime she gets in the future, I might be able to see moving her down, but for now, I thought I'd leave her up there, since she seems to be part of the "young Hymn of Oneies" along with Carl and Sonia.

Anyways, I just wanted to explain my changes to you. I'd love to hear thoughts and feedback on this. --Zoey 02:15, 22 September 2007 (CDT)

I agree, Zoey. We've been adding to the Supporting Characters section a lot lately. Currently these are the people that are in the section:

Actually, now I see that someone cleaned up the section. I'm fine with Lucy, Nikki B, Carl, Sonia, LaRezisto, Emma, and Mallory staying (Mallory's only been in two videos but I think she is something important). I mean, Barb has been in a lot of videos, but does she contribute to the plot as much as Carl or Sonia? I don't think so. She's just another Hymnie! And about Watchers... does anyone think that maybe instead of Barb we could have Watchers up there since we've seen like a million Watchers? I like the idea of it. 10:49, 22 September 2007 (CDT)

I'm fine with moving down Barb, if that's what people agree on. She was iffy for me, I wasn't sure. I wasn't trying to make an argument for moving Watchers up though. I think they're too... mysterious at this point. Plus, with Shadows coming in and all, who knows which Order members will be most important... oh, and also, they're like.. a group of people.. not just.. one person. And yeah, I don't think we should move Watchers up, but I'm okay with moving Barb down. What do y'all think? --Zoey 14:46, 23 September 2007 (CDT)
I agree! And I'll be more careful about the KM people too - I got a bit overzealous earlier tonight! -- Theresa 16:19, 23 September 2007 (CDT)
I still think that Watchers should be in the Supporting Characters section. Seriously... lately, Watchers have been popping up in just about every video - there's Watchers in KM now too (Michelle Clore's bodyguards)! Anyhow, Watchers have been around since GEMMA... think how long ago that was... and they still make regular appearances and contributions to the plot. Barb can be moved down, and replaced with Watchers? Also - a quick thing, I don't think Spencer's coming back. We should move him from Main Characters to Former Characters.   •Silver•   Talk | Contribs 08:58, 24 September 2007 (CDT)
I agree with everything that has been said... well, except for the Barb thing (with the watchers I'm not leaning either way). She isn't just another Hymn of Oneian, (like Chris), she has appeared numerous times in Bree's recruitment videos and possibly was the fifth person at the table in "The Family Affair". Also, May I be so bold as to suggest that Emma be moved to the main character section? --{FH14 15:44, 25 September 2007 (EST)


Barb, yes she's been in a few videos, but I'm actually thinking she should be taken down on further speculation. She hasn't really contributed to the plot. I mean, think of her compared to Carl or Sonia. She just isn't contributing enough yet. I think that for now, I'd move her down... and if she becomes a more prominent character in the future, it can be reconsidered then, methinks.
Watchers still against this. They really are just a series of characters who lurk in the background. They dont contribute much to the plot other than scaring the group into running. With the Shadows and all the other crazy order members coming out of the woodworks, I just dont think Watchers need to be up on this list right now.
Spencer - Yeah, he should be moved down to former characters and taken off the front page/top characters for the navigation bar etc. He will still be on the navigation bar though.. ugh this might be easier to just do and get opinions on after the fact.
Emma - Not quite enough of her yet to officialy make her worthy of main characters.
Now I need sleep. So I'll make some of these changes and we can talk on the talk page in the mean time. Just to get it up and see what everybody thinks. Can be reverted if there is serious objection tommorow for further discussion!

--Zoey 00:33, 26 September 2007 (CDT)

Status Changes

Should Claire be added to Supporting Characters? She has had a major impact on the story, a few appearances, and a likelihood for a larger future role... what does everyone else think? --FH14 20:21, October 1 2007 (EST)

EDIT: I'd also like to propose that Nikki Bower and Taylor be moved to former characters for now, seeing as they haven't been seen in a WHILE, until further notice. --FH14 13:06, 4 October 2007 (EST)

My List For Statuses

I have prepared a whole list of characters for their "statuses" or categories, I guess. Here they are.

Main Characters
Daniel, Jonas, Sarah, Emma, and Mallory
Supporting Characters
Lucy, Nikki Bower, Carl, Sonia, Watchers, Claire, and LaRezisto
Missing or Deceased Characters
Bree, Drew Avery, Gemma, Alex's parents, Daniel's grandma, and Isaac Gilman
Former Characters
OpAphid, Tachyon, Brother, Jules, Taylor, Alex, and Spencer
Stuffed Characters
Purple Monkey, Owen, Thor, The Other Monkey, Daniel's puppy, Taylor's Troll Dolls, and the Dancing Turtle
Guest Characters
Bree's mom, Deacons, Random Girl, the Cowboy, David, Damien, Carla, Toby, Beth, Will, Finn, Claudia, Seth|Seth, Cameron, Rebecca, Jennifer, Barb, Chris, the Mistress, Terry, Shadows, Elders, Swallow, Jerry, Jonas's dad, Jonas's mom, Jill, the adopting couple, Daniel's dad, Mark, and Steve
Animal Characters
Gemma's dog, Sascha, Kitty!, Piglet, Colossus, Herman, and the Coyote
Unseen Characters
Cassie, Paul, Andrea, Daniel's mom, Gemma's mom, Bree's birth parents, Franklin, Jules's parents, Taylor and Sarah's parents, Taylor's BFF Sam, Spencer's mom, and Scott
Trivial Characters
Gemma's flatmate, Gemma's crush Sam, Walter, Kira, Jay, Vanessa, the bartender, Britanny, Perry, D-C-cubed, Ira Cronenberg, Jack, Joe, and Garett Lovett
Ambiguous Mystery People

So, I hope that helped a bit. Just my opinions.

  •Silver•   Talk | Contribs 14:25, 14 October 2007 (CDT)

Watchers and Supporting Characters

I know, there's about 15 sections discussing status changes, but because there's been so much desputing over The Watchers and Supporting Characters. Now I know Zoey's put her foot down about this because watchers are a group and not an individual character, and I agree with this. But I know some people are still strongly believe that the watchers belong there. I got to thinking, Maybe a separate page could be created for the Watcher played by Joe Rubin as, unlike other watchers, He's had a speaking part and had a somewhat individual involvement in the plot. I dunno. It's just an idea. I'd like to see what everyone else thinks. --FH14 10:41, 21 October 2007 (EST)

Recurring Character Section?

I've been thinking about this for a while, and I finally decided to propose it: a Recurring Character Section. I know what some of you may be thinking: Supporting and Recurring Characters are the same thing. Well, some do consider them the same thing, but they can also be used to classify two different categories. If considered two categories, then Supporting Characters would be considered characters that appear a good amount and contribute to the plot, though not to the extent of the main characters. (i.e. Lucy, Nikki B, Sonia, Carl, etc.) Recurring Characters are characters who appear more than normal guest characters but have less of an impact than Supporting Characters. (i.e. Jonas's Parents, Chris, Barb, etc.) What does everyone else think? (BTW, even though I'm the one proposing this, I'm on the fence about it) --FH14 12:02, 3 November 2007 (EST)

I was acutally thinking about the same thing. Strong support.
  •Silver•   Talk | Contribs 13:08, 4 November 2007 (CST)

Eh, I'm not so sure about this... I kind of feel like we have WAY more sections than we need as is. I've actually been thinking of ways to condense the sections instead of expand them... but that's just me? --Zoey 02:30, 10 November 2007 (CST)

Condensing the Character List

In my opinion, the character list is a mess. We have so many categories that overlap, it's just a nightmare to try and figure out where to put things. So I want to simplify it. Here are my thoughts:

  • We should combine former characters with the Missing and Deceased characters into one big "Former Characters" category with a description of "For various reasons, these former characters no longer appear in the series." That way we don't have to worry about whether they're dead or not, we just know that they're not appearing in the series anymore. And we can also get rid of all those ugly boxes with the "No picture available" and just move them down to unseen characters, where they really do belong, as they are unseen. We, as an audience, have no real emotional connection to them.
  • I'm having a tough time understanding the difference between unseen and trivial characters. I just.. where do you draw the line? And how do you know? I mean, Gemma's mom is pretty trivial at this point in the story, but back then for all we know she could have developed into more. I think it makes most sense to just combine the two and not worry about how significant they are, otherwise we're going to drive ourselves nuts on a case-by-case situation.
  • I also think we should better define what makes a character as far as Animal Characters and Stuffed Characters goes. My thoughts:
    • P Monkey, Owen, and Thor were characters. they were Bree's friends. She gave them names and personalities. T.O.M., Daniel's puppy, Taylor's troll dolls, and The Dancing Turtle, they were props. They were gifts, they were something to snuggle with at night maybe. But they were just toys. They had no names, they were not personified in any way. They were not characters.
    • For animal characters, the same thing should apply that does for human characters. A person's pet or an animal they have a significant emotional attatchment to is a character. A random kitty you see on the side of the street isn't. Like if Bree pointed at someone and said tall! that wouldnt make "Tall man" a character. It would just make him someone she observed.

I think these changes will help clean up the page and make it more understandable to new people who are trying to make sense of things. I'd love to hear your thoughts before I go ahead and make the changes though, so please comment! Thanks! --Zoey 02:53, 10 November 2007 (CST)

I see what you mean. Here's my take on it:
1) I agree that the trivial and unseen characters should be combined.
2) Maybe we could create a condensed list page of characters... that sounded weird... I mean like how most of the party guests don't have their own page, and their info is on the party guests page... ugh... I'm having a hard time explaining this. I'm going to try to design what I'm trying to say on my sandbox... --FH14 13:01, 10 November 2007 (EST)
Okay. Basically, here's what I'm suggesting for the Stuffed Characters, and maybe others... --FH14 13:50, 10 November 2007 (EST)

Hm, I'm not really sure how I feel about that actually. I feel like characters should be a total comprehensive list. I just think we need to define what makes a character. I mean, how is Daniel's puppy any more of a character than... Jonas's boxing gloves? Or his guitar? I mean, that just doesn't make sense to me. I'm also not crazy about dividing the guest characters into season one and season two, because there's already a fair amount of overlap and... how do we treat those characters? I feel like that will get messy and end up making things harder instead of easier... that's just me though. --Zoey 15:14, 10 November 2007 (CST)

I actually agree with you on the guest characters thing (I was just seeing how it would look). Random Thought: Maybe there should be a non-human character section combining the Animal and Stuffed Character Sections. Maybe There should be a "Props" page too. I'm sorry, I'm rambling X_X --FH14 16:36, 10 November 2007 (EST)
Non-human characters isn't a bad idea! But I still think we need to stick with what the definition of a character actually is. And I think props page would probably be taking things too far. Can you imagine? Every single prop that appears in a video? Eek, my brain aches just thinking of all the trouble that could cause.. :X --Zoey 15:41, 10 November 2007 (CST)

New Look

Looks awesome! Love the former characters and non-human characters, but why is Virgil a supporting character? And is there a reason we don't have the picture of Gemma's dog and Herman the squirrel? Nancypants 21:21, 16 November 2007 (CST)


Should Chris be moved to Supporting Characters? His role has been semi-prominent lately... What does everyone think? --FH14 11:06, 18 November 2007 (EST)

  • I don't know, I think he should be at the same level as Barb. 12:00, 22 November 2007 (CST)
I agree that he's not a supporting character yet, he needs to be in more videos first. The supporting characters need to have a certain prominence in the overall storyline in order to get there, if you ask me. - Shiori 19:04, 24 November 2007 (CST)

Mallory and Taylor

So I know some people have been pushing to bump Taylor up to "Main Characters" but I do not think this is accurate. She is currently a supporting character. She posts vidoes from Zavalla giving them advice, but she's not a main member of TAAG, she's not actually /living/ the drama. And I know that right now everyone is seperated, but really, they all call California home right now, but Taylor, she doesn't. I just see her as a supporting character.

That said, I actually think it's time to move Mallory down to a supporting character as well. Right now she just exists to be Daniel's girlfriend... "Support" his role. She's not fighting the Order really, she's off doing her own life and just pops up to do girlfriendly things. I don't really know how to explain it better than that, but really, she has dropped to supporting in my mind.

So I think I'm going to move Mallory down to supporting... and I'm actually going to move Virgil down to guest again. Because unless he comes back and starts appearing in more videos long term, he could only even possibly be considered "supporting" during his own arc. In fact, I suppose there's always the chance that if Mallory leaves after she and Daniel break up (I'm sure Daniel will realize she's having an affair... ahem xD) then she might need to be moved down too. But since we originally treated her as "main" I say we can give her the benefit of the doubt for now and put her at supporting.

But yeah, basically I think supporting characters should be characters who outlast their one arc (and popping in for a quick cameo here and there after said arc doesn't really count) and contribute to the story long term. Just my thoughts.

I'll make the changes, but certainly feel free to reply with your thoughts! :) --Zoey 01:44, 29 November 2007 (CST)

I agree that Mallory and Taylor are definately more of supporting roles at this point. The supporting role definately needs to be defined, as there are many characters that are in a gray area between supporting and guest. The biggest one I see is Jonas's parents. If they appear again, I'm tempted to say that they should be moved up to supporting. --FH14 08:01, 6 December 2007 (EST)

Carl, Sonia, and Jennie

I think based on what we've seen lately (including the Jonas Conference Call and the behind the scenes holiday photos), we should make some changes to the character page. I think Carl should be moved down from supporting characters, as he's not really a major supporting character, and hasn't been for some time (not since Bree's death). I also think we should move Sonia down to "Former Characters," as based on the Jonas Phone Call, she seems to have vanished, possibly long term. I also think we should move Jennie up to Supporting Characters, as she was in the holiday BTS photos, which implies that she's going to be sticking around... and she's also made a bunch of solo video blogs lately, so it really does seem that she's going to be a stronger character coming up. Actually, based on the BTS photos, we might eventually end up moving both Jennie and Mallory up to Main Characters... but I think we should wait and see what happens before doing that. Let me know your thoughts! --Zoey 17:40, 21 December 2007 (CST)

EDIT: You know, upon further thought, I'm actually thinking that maybe we should move Dr. Calvin Hart up to supporting characters too. And maybe it is time to make a recurring characters section... which I would propose includes Lucy, Carl, and both of Jonas's parents. I'm going to look at the list one more time just to be sure... but yeah, this is what I'm thinking about right now... thoughts? --Zoey 17:53, 21 December 2007 (CST)

Sounds good, but what makes Lucy more of a recurring character than Sonia?
Also, I wouldn't consider Mallory's appearance on that pic as any sign of a long-term commitment - while I am part of the fraction that voted "yes", it could also be just a "current cast" snapshot, and Mallory gets written out next month...
Not saying it happens that way, I just think that the opposite way might've been an unwanted spoiler - i.e. if Mallory has already been written out, and they hadn't put her on the picture, people would've started asking "why isn't Mallory on the christmas pic? Hmm, guess she doesn't return then :(".
~ Renegade (talk | contribs) 19:50, 21 December 2007 (CST)
I completely agree with this proposal. Though about the recurring character section, should Chris, Virgil, and (possibly) Claudia be included as well? --FH14 22:36, 21 December 2007 (EST)


Mallory - I agree, she may not be around... or she may. That's why I think she should stay a supporting character until we can see long-term where she stands.

Sonia - I would consider Sonia a "former" character for a few reasons. Unlike Lucy, who often pops up unannounced and then leaves for long chunks of time, Sonia was featured heavily and then just vanished. Also, on the Jonas Conference Call, someone specifically asked about Sonia's whereabouts, and Jonas answered with a vague "I don't hear from her anymore" kind of an answer. To me, that kind of implied that she wasn't sticking around. However, if she comes back, we can always un-former her.

Chris/Claudia - I do not really think Chris and Claudia can count as "Recurring" to the same extent as Carl does. Carl has played a much more prominent role in the story for a much longer time. Those two just seem like.. current supporting characters to me, not really recurring (they haven't been around very long at all, they aren't the ones whose names are mentioned... like when Jennie mentions kissing Carl and his black aura, etc). I don't think, at this point, we can really consider them recurring, but maybe with time that will change.

Virgil - I agree, good call.

--Zoey 22:23, 21 December 2007 (CST)

Here's a sample of what it could look like with the proposed changes: User:FH14/Sandbox --FH14 02:39, 23 December 2007 (EST)
My thoughts on the following characters:
Mallory - She should stay at supporting unless her roll is increasingly less and less, she might be moved to Recurring (which should really be created) or even Former, if need be.
Sonia - She was once a supporting character. However, from the Jonas Conference Call, it sort of seemed like she's not going to be on the show anymore. Move her to Former. However, if she comes back a few times, move her to Recurring.
Chris/Claudia/Carl - They can be at Recurring, just as Carl can be.
Virgil - Recurring.
Lucy - Recurring.
Nikki - Recurring.
Jonas's parents - Recurring.
  •Silver•   Talk | Contribs 13:13, 23 December 2007 (CST)
Nikki seems to best fall under supporting actually. She posts her own videos and has a lot of camera time. (Plus, I think there'd be a outcry if Nikki were moved down to recurring. As for Chris and Claudia, Chris is borderline at this point, as there is a strong argument for either guest or recurring at this point. Claudia really hasn't had enough camera time or significance beyond the number of times she has appeared to merit recurring. --FH14 12:51, 24 December 2007 (EST)
I like the above characters to be "recurring" (which should probably be created soon) that Silver mentions. I also think we need Jennie as either Supporting or maybe-even main character (seeing as she's been posting a good amount of vids and she's got a Forum-name and she'll be giving a chat today) --Pheon 01:41, 2 January 2008 (CST)

Okay, I am really opposed to having Chris and Claudia as recurring. Recurring means they are significant characters who keep coming back with a variety of story arcs. Claudia has only been around for this story arc and Chris has never been a significant character until this story arc... heck, I don't even think he's a significant character IN this story arc... more like a recurring character within the story arc. Heh, yeah I actually kind of like that. They are so minor that they are just recurring characters in ONE story arc. They just don't make sense to me in the "Recurring" section at all! (Sorry if this didn't make much sense.. I'm really tired, I'll try to clarify in the morning if it was confusing... but yeah... hopefully I got across what I was trying to say!) --Zoey 00:12, 11 January 2008 (CST)

Agreed Zoey. But due to recent developments, some of the categories where we deemed characters should be have merited change. (Sorry if that sounded odd, I'm not 100% right now :P)
Lucy - Due to her recent surge of activity, I think we should leave her as supporting for now at least.
Nikki Bower - Now that she's popping up even less than before, I'm tempted to say that she should be recurring.
Taylor - Leave her as supporting for now, seeing as she just made a new video, but if she goes two weeks without posting another, maybe she should be moved to recurring.
Mallory - If she doesn't reappear in the next week, I say she should be moved to former. Her last mention was rather... final...
Jennie - She's a main character on the main page, so I'm going to go ahead and move her up on this page too.
Carl - Same as Lucy
Virgil, Jonas's parents - Recurring as before
Gina, Chris - they should stay guest for the time being, until they merit activity and relevance considerable enough for moving up.
Jack - I added him to guest because footage of him was seen in Taylor's video (other non-canon-in-canon-context characters are listed under guest also (Jerry, Jennifer)) If he appears interacting in a canon video, or is deemed canon by the creators, he should be moved to supporting. --FH14 13:05 14 January 2008 (EST)


Gina does not belong in guest characters, she is with TAAG, and she is just too important. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TraverseTown123 (talkcontribs) .

As of now Gina's only been in a few videos and hasn't had a major role. You're right that she probably is going to be important, but maybe we should wait until Season 3 starts to determine exactly where to place her.--Jonpro 20:54, 28 January 2008 (CST)

Guest Characters

First of all... this list is quite lengthy and could be livened up with pictures (seeing as we have actually seen these people)

Secondly... I think this should either be put in alphebetic order or significance...because right now it just looks disorganized. --Kericanfly 11:13, 30 January 2008 (CST)

The reason there aren't picture is because the page would get unruly and take forever to load. Anyone that has been seen has a picture on their character page. I've tried alphabetizing things before, and everytime it gets reverted. Maybe someone else would be better to answer that question, as I'm quite curious myself. - Shiori 11:41, 30 January 2008 (CST)
The Order they are in is the order they have appeared in. Alphabetizing creates more work every time a new guest is added because the list has to be re-formated. Also, order of significance is a debatable issue that could cause a problem in the future. I think the lack of pictures has something to do with the size of the page, but I can't be sure. --FH14 14:21, 30 January 2008 (EST)

Unseen Characters

Not all of the unseen characters are unseen anymore. Paul and Andrea were seen in the episode Missing Friends and haven't at least part of Daniel's parents been seen on camera at some point? DrZoidberg

As the Paul and Andrea seen in Missing Friends were fanfic characters who received shoutouts moreso than actual official characters who were made by the Creators, we decided to leave them as unseen. Also, since we only ever saw Daniel's dad's arm, we decided to leave him as unseen as well. --Zoey 20:27, 3 February 2008 (CST)
Except that you are not considering that P&A are real show characters regardless. They were originally mentioned and then they were shown in the show. What exactly P&A is according to their LGpedia page is ambiguous as to how much creator-input and interaction went into their show so I don't think they can be dismissed as 100% fanfic either. A regular shoutout of mentioning a fan is one thing but showing people as being characters who have been mentioned on the show in the past is something different. DrZoidberg
Paul and Andrea are real characters, but Paulmark18 is a fanfic creation. To suggest otherwise is akin to saying that cassieiswatching is official because Bree mentioned that her friend Cassie used to say "I was here." ..Which would also make itscassie official, for that matter. --Zoey 21:34, 3 February 2008 (CST)
Bree never flashed a picture of Cassieiswatching on the screen when talking about Cassie, Daniel flashed a picture of Pm18 when talking about P&A. Therefore, fanfic or not, Pm18 and canon P&A became one in the same while ciw and Bree's Cassie remain different entities. This was the point I was trying to make why this is different than all the others. PS thank you for all the work you do here Zoey, you don't get enough thanks. DrZoidberg

Currently, it says, "Garett Lovett - A boy who Mallory once kissed." It might be easier to list the ones she hasn't kissed - just a thought. ~ QtheC

Seriously, back when the show didn't have that many episodes listing anyone ever even mention off-hand is one thing, but now that were in the number of hundreds of episodes it just doesn't make sense to mention inconsequential characters like Garett who play no role what-so-ever besides getting a quick mention but no purpose.

Carl to recurring

He isn't notable enough right now for supporting

Merging of Supporting and Recurring

I know, I know, if you read the rest of this page you can see that I was the main advocate for a recurring section and now I'm contradicting myself. It's just that the page seems so cluttered now. I'm proposing a merge of the two sections, (not sure what to call it at the present moment), into one supporting/recurring block. This would also broaden the definition of "Supporting" (These supporting characters have been seen in many of the videos. Some of them videoblog, while others are not videobloggers but still contribute to the plot. Some are not always around, but they reappear often, and influence the story when they do.) I have an example of what I'm proposing on my Sandbox (I know, Gina's under main, I was testing to see how that would look). --FH14 25 February 2008 (EST)

Character Images

I fuss over this section a lot don't I? I was just going to point out that recently we've had a lot of press photos provided for the lgpedia, and they could be put to use the way they have in the KateModern Section. Proposed Images:

Also, we have Images from Season two that were never put to use:

Please Note: I would manipulate the images myself, but I don't have the programs required to do it well.

Another thing, After seeing the KateModern Character page, I think that maybe we should stick with the image shape that is currently used on this page, as opposed to making them square like on the KateModern Character page, because the images seem to take up a lot of space and make the page seem less compact, but that's just me. Thoughts? Suggestions? --FH14 11:48, 16 March 2008 (EST)

Well, here's my two cents: I like a healthy variety. That doesn't mean I don't like uniformity, because I love how all the character pages are the current season 3 press photos. But seeing that the the current images on the Character page are the same as those on the LG Portal, I do beleive we have room for variety (like you said, there's plenty of images that don't go into use).
So that said, I wouldn't want to see the Season 3 Press Photos used again, and I'm not a fan of the Season 2 press photos being used (with the possible exception of Mallory, who we're probably not going to see again). Maybe some fresher photos from the videos? (not likely, but that is how we used to get them, we'd wait till we found the best shots!) The key is asthetics, its all a matter of what looks right. :) --Pheon 12:34, 16 March 2008 (CDT)
The season 2 images have already been discussed and the season 3 images, because of their ratio, could not be modified in a way that looked good on this page. I think we're much better off finding some solid images from videos and updating this section with them. --Zoey 02:52, 21 March 2008 (CDT)

After months of messing around with getting the right shots, I think I may finally have figured something out. Personally, I really like them, but I'd love to hear everyone else's thoughts! --Zoey 20:30, 22 March 2008 (CDT)

Steve - supporting character?

I know Steve technically is a guest character from KM, but he's not a minor character and he's in loads of videos, and posted some. Shouldn't he count as a current supporting character? Bobby G 17:57, 3 May 2008 (CDT)

Nope, because he's not. He is not a supporting character of LG15, he's a main character of a series LG15 is crossing over with.
~ Renegade (talk | contribs) 19:54, 3 May 2008 (CDT)
Oh, OK. But doesn't that mean the description of guest characters needs changing? Because it doesn't suit Steve at all, he's much more major than that, and he is currently supporting the TAAG (well that might change as of Alone in the Woods, but still)? Bobby G 06:49, 4 May 2008 (CDT)
To be honest, I don't see how the guest characters description doesn't properly encompass Steve. He was of minor significance to the plot line overall, and he will be gone now, following Alone in the Woods, maybe with the occasional reference. - Shiori 12:00, 4 May 2008 (CDT)
OK, fair enough. He did post a few videos though, and he was the one who helped find out about Carruthers. But yeah, the crossover's over, so he's probably gone back to London. Bobby G 12:39, 4 May 2008 (CDT)