Talk:Lucas Scott

Protagonist

I think it should state somewhere in the article that Lucas is considered to be the protagonist of the series, as it does in the Nathan Scott wikipedia article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.5.181.228 (talk) 21:22, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Untitled

• I am the guy for you you Brooke Davis and one of these days your going to realize it.

I think it should be:

• When all my dreams come true, the one I want next to me. It's you. It's you Peyton.

Episode count

Shouldn't it be 82 if he was only not in one episode?

Fair use rationale for Image:Oth321.jpg

Image:Oth321.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:26, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Oth409.jpg

Image:Oth409.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Lucas scott seaon five.jpg

Image:Lucas scott seaon five.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:21, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

The WB/CW

I must agree with anyone who is against the wording in the heading. Exactly why is it needed, when The CW is the The WB? We have links for a reason, and The CW link shows readers this information without us having to state it. Basically, "the WB/CW" is not needed and just looks sloppy to me.

On a side note, why is Wren Valmont going around doing anything he or she wants to these articles, such as adding the above wording and changing the color of the infoboxes, without any type of discussion about it? This user clearly needs to be informed of how Wikipedia works. We aren't supposed to just go around reverting others without any good reasons to do, doing things only based on WP:ILIKEIT. At least this user is adding the same color for all the infoboxes. Flyer22 (talk) 18:29, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

The user won't listen and just reverts, so I couldn't be bothered to get into any disagreements as I don't personally mind the color changes. As for The CW/The WB, they are still two separate networks. The character was created by The WB and continued on The CW. If anything, I'd say The WB should stay over The CW as it had its highest ratings with the network and is more prominent for them. The WB also exists still as an online-only network. Jayy008 (talk) 18:36, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

The networks aren't that separate, seeing as The CW is simply The WB merged with UPN. Yes, The WB reopened as an online network, but that's only with regard to reruns and is only accessible to people in the United States. The network mainly operates as The CW now. But I don't mind leaving it as "the WB/CW" much. I'll leave a note for Wren Valmont about how Wikipedia is supposed to work. Flyer22 (talk) 19:08, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

The user will not take note. And I have had more of a think as I posted on your talk-page and to be more "current," I think The CW is fine. Jayy008 (talk) 19:15, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lucas Scott. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://newsroom.mtv.com/2009/05/19/one-tree-hill-finale-how-we-would-have-said-goodbye-to-leyton/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100114111008/http://blog.zap2it.com/ithappenedlastnight/2009/09/one-tree-hill-growing-pains.html to http://blog.zap2it.com/ithappenedlastnight/2009/09/one-tree-hill-growing-pains.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:24, 8 January 2018 (UTC)