User talk:Blue Rook/Archive 10

Welcome to my Talk page, 24 fans!
 * While you're here, feel free to rummage through the archives of previous discussions:
 * 7 (newest), 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 (oldest)
 * To pose a question or discussion topic:
 *  click "Leave message" to drop a new thread at the bottom. 

JavaScript
Hi, apparently the JS to stop the image popups I gave you via irc doesn't work, so you'll prolly want to remove it, in case it breaks something. I'll keep looking for the right way, though-- Austin (Talk) 01:26, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

About Heather Nauert
Is it okay to identify Heather Nauert Norby as playing "herself" during Episode 8x21? Isn't the custom here to identify real-life news reporters as fictitious characters within the 24 universe, even if they're playing similar characters with even the same name? For example, Rick Garcia (character) as opposed to Rick Garcia (actor)... Thief12 02:29, May 12, 2010 (UTC)


 * If you're talking about the disambig tag in the article title, it isn't necessary since her full name wasn't visible on the screen. 03:08, May 12, 2010 (UTC)


 * No, I said it because in the article about the episode, it reads "Heather Nauert Norby as Heather Nauert/herself (live broadcast)". Thief12 03:35, May 12, 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah yeah if that's not standard your can just pull that part down. 03:47, May 12, 2010 (UTC)

Uploads
Would you object me uploading a Spooks split screen screencap and add it in the background notes section of the Split screen article? If I am to make an excuse, it's that I believe the inclusion is encyclopedic. Thanks. -- Matthew R Dunn 15:24, May 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * Noting the similarities between the split screens is encyclopedic but the upload would still be against the image policy (it isn't from 24). There is a way you can link to external images so that it looks like it's been uploaded. Someone did it on their userpage years ago, and it's still around, but there are so many userpages now that I cannot spot which one it was. 16:25, May 17, 2010 (UTC)

The images you deleted that were mine, I was just wondering how they violated the policy so I don't make the same mistake again. --Dunit1014


 * I got tired of telling you on your talk page; it's the third time now. Just read Wiki 24:Image use policy, it's all spelled out there.  01:09, June 9, 2010 (UTC)

my notes on the format of the seasons
why did you remove them, i think they are relevant and neccesary and i think its good to know who was the main antagonist(s) of each season. they are not subjective because the main antagonist of the season is made very clear by the showrunners, for example Stephen Saunders in Season 3, or Victor Drazen in Season 1, or Alan Wilson is Season 7. these men were behind everything that happened during each day therefore are the main antagonists of each season. i dont get why you think my notes are uneccesary, when i think its a great addition to include each season overall main antagonist.(Delta Paradox 19:56, May 19, 2010 (UTC))


 * It's definitely not that simple, except in the case of Season 4 where it is clear that Habib Marwan planned and executed most of the plot himself. What makes someone the "main antagonist"? The guy who planned things? Or the guy who managed most of it? Or the guy that Jack Bauer went up against most of the screen time? Many times, the planner of the conspiracy isn't even seen. You can re-insert those notes but you must use a more descriptive phrase than "main antagonist". There's no simple "main antagonist" for seasons like 6, where Gredenko and Markov were using Fayed as a pawn, but then they were wiped out and the balance of power fell directly to Fayed after that fact... only to have him replaced with Cheng Zhi and Phillip Bauer in an entirely different plot. Run some ideas here and we can sort out the best one, before you reinsert the same stuff. 20:11, May 19, 2010 (UTC)

well how about we include the main antagonist of each act as the overall main antagonists of each season for seasons such as 6 or 2. but for Seasons 1, 7, 8, and 5 im pretty sure its clear who the main antagonists are. how about this

Season 1:- Victor Drazen: he was behind all the other antagonists Season 2:- Peter Kingsley: he was behind the bomb and was the main antagonist in Act 3 Season 3:- Ramon Salazar, Michael Amador, Stephen Saunders: the whole threat of the day had to do with all of them. Season 4:- Habib Marwan: its very clear Season 5:- Vladimir Bierko and Charles Logan: Logan was behind the whole conspiracy and Bierko behind the attacks. Season 6:- Abu Fayed or Dmitri Gredenko, Phillip Bauer and Cheng Zhi. Season 7:- Alan Wilson: i think its pretty clear since he was behind everything that happened. Season 8:- Yuri Suvarov: he was also behind everything that happened.

so what are your thoughts? maybe you have some other ideas. (Delta Paradox 20:21, May 19, 2010 (UTC))


 * I definitely disagree with including this. It doesn't add more to the article than what is being said above in the description of the acts and the listing of the major subplots. Besides, as Blue Rook already said, not every season is as clear-cut as, say, Season 4. So what's the point in complicating the article by putting a single line to say "this character was the main antagonist of this act, but this act the main antagonist was this other character". You also mention several good examples about this. For example, you say Peter Kingsley was the main antagonist of Season 2, but some people would say that Kingsley was a rung or two below Max and Alexander Trepkos, who seem to be the actual masterminds. And Blue Rook might get picky with the unnamed conspirator that was always with Trepkos. Also, Season 5 complicates everything because it's such a "messy" conspiracy. You forgot to mention that Vladimir Bierko sorta double-crossed Logan and went rogue with the Sentox canisters. Plus, Logan was ultimately responding to Graem Bauer and the Bluetooth cabal. And let's not forget Christopher Henderson's crucial involvement in the logistics of everything. All in all, I don't see how this would improve the article further. If anything, it would be either more complicated and/or redundant with what is there already. Thief12 01:24, May 20, 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree with everything Thief12 said. -- SignorSimon (talk/contribs/email) 10:25, May 20, 2010 (UTC)

It's been awhile but it seems 3 editors are actually on the same page about something! Delta Paradox don't be discouraged, everyone has ideas that can't work completely from time to time, and it's worth noting that Season 4 still gets to keep this kind of note. 20:22, May 20, 2010 (UTC)

Previously on 24/Season 1
This was my first edit on Wiki 24. I couldn't find a page on this aspect anywhere on the site, but I thought it was relevant information. Is there a page for Jack's season 1 narration (that were originally aired instead of the Previously on 24)?--Emgee1984 20:47, June 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Trusting that it's accurate, I moved that note right up to the top of that page, nice edit man. If you're interested, you could add that information over into the Day 1 section of Previously on 24 article itself too, in my opinion. To answer your question, I don't believe there is a page for that individual introduction (from the looks of it, I don't think it really warrants one). But your info is definitely in an appropriate place. 20:58, June 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * The Previouslies were in fact there from the original airing. I know because I have all of the original airings taped.  I've corrected the information.  I'll add the text of the different narrations later if no one beats me to it. --proudhug 21:29, June 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * Ah good, I was simply trusting that the info was from the airings. But Proudhug something comes to mind: did you tape those in Canada or the US? At this point I'm wondering if perhaps the US and Canadian airings differed in whether the Previously's were there. 22:16, June 9, 2010 (UTC)


 * I taped the first 18 episodes myself off of Global in Canada, but missed the last 6, so I had a friend online from the U.S. send me the final episodes, taped off of Fox. Also, living near the border, my provider had both a Fox and a Global station and, although the Fox channel would usually simulcast the Global airing so as to show Canadian commercials, there was at least one occasion where Global showed the episode an hour earlier than Fox, so the Fox channel didn't switch over to Global when it aired the episode.  So suffice it to say, I can definitely 100% confirm that the previouslies appeared before the episodes in the original airings in Canada and the U.S.  Also, if you watch the episodes on DVD, you can actually tell they've been edited out because the music usually flows from the Previously to the "The following takes place..." and so in a lot of the episodes there's a jarring music jump where the previously has been edited out.  Check for yourself. --proudhug 01:40, June 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * No need to, I definitely believe you. I'm glad you took note of that phenomenon... I guess we'll never know why they would edit out these things even from the DVDs? Silly monkeys. 02:01, June 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * And what's even stranger is that my DVDs do have the Previouslies... -- SignorSimon (talk/contribs/email) 08:58, June 10, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, the R2 DVDs are unedited. Furthermore, the R2 VHS set contains extra footage that was shown on the BBC, but not in the U.S. or Canada. But it wasn't included on the R2 DVDs for some reason. --proudhug 16:44, June 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * They certainly do. I have the VHS sets :) -- SignorSimon (talk/contribs/email) 17:20, June 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * On this subject, SignorSimon, would you mind filling in the running times for the Season 1 episodes with the Previously sections included? I don't have access to the "complete" versions, which is probably what should be used there. --Pyramidhead 17:24, June 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * Sure I will do, but do we need to somewhere explain that is where we got the info from, or will it just be obvious that we mean the full running time of any edition available? -- SignorSimon (talk/contribs/email) 17:26, June 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think it's okay to assume the full time - all the other seasons will use that, after all. --Pyramidhead 17:29, June 10, 2010 (UTC)

Used where, Pyramidhead? Are we adding the running times to the episode pages? If so, I think we should use all available running times and specify where each one comes from. So this will apply to the three different versions for S1 and the two different versions for Redemption. --proudhug 18:28, June 10, 2010 (UTC)

Nice to meet you kamran.mazaheri

Hey there
Hey there Blue Rook, I did edit the page from George Mason, because 2 times the date of his death was seen on his page.--Station7 20:45, June 21, 2010 (UTC)

Something I don't understand
Well, where should I start with? OK, Ira Gaines worked for Andre Drazen, just like Nina Myers. Nina Myers killed Jamey Farrell, who worked for Ira Gaines, and she worked so indirectly for the Drazen family. So, Nina killed someone who worked for Ira Gaines. Ira Gaines did know that Nina Myers excist. But Nina Myers didn't know about Ira Gaines. Both worked for the Drazens. Why didn't know from each other? This reunited their plans, I think. Also Jack Bauer should kll Nina Myers in orders from Ira Gaines! I hope you understand what I mean??--Station7 14:15, June 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * First as an OOU note, the writers of the show decided to make Nina the final mole much later, after many episodes had aired, as I understand it. But in-universe, it works like this: Jamey knew nothing about Nina's connection to Drazen, and framed her when she reported that the key card was Nina's early in the season. Only to protect herself, and not knowing that she was incriminating the worse mole. Also, it's backwards, what you said: Nina definitely knew about Ira Gaines, and I don't recall anything about Ira knowing about Nina.  16:14, June 27, 2010 (UTC)

OK, but is it then stupid to not know from Ira Gaines to Jamey Farrell that he didn't said that he worked for the Drazens. Then Jamey never should die, if Jamey was aware of that Nina Myers was a mole. Nobody shouldn't being killed what so ever!--Station7 21:09, June 27, 2010 (UTC)


 * But Blue Rook is saying that Jamey did NOT know that Nina was a mole. That's why Nina killed Jamey; to protect her cover. -- SignorSimon (talk/contribs/email) 23:04, June 27, 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, English is not my first language.--Station7 05:18, June 28, 2010 (UTC)

Protest
Hey, I really don't know much about the reason you're leaving since I don't delve that much in non-canon stuff, but it's a shame to see you do so. If you feel so strongly about it, more power to ya; but I hope to see you return soon. Thief12 00:16, July 16, 2010 (UTC)


 * I disagree that you should leaving. You're great on this Wiki, no further words. But if you want it, I can't stop you. Don't leave please :), we need you, even if I have not much edits.--Station7 12:55, July 16, 2010 (UTC)

I will get soon also I hope a new job. Pymidhead is not the only one. They are searching for me. Just 2 days left: Monday and Wednesday and then my job is over.--Station7 09:36, July 17, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm watching at the moment season 2, it's from my teacher (I'm highly trusted :)). I love connections.--Station7 14:04, July 18, 2010 (UTC)

Can I explain myself?
To start: I've been gone for most of the last two weeks, due to my getting a new job, so I literally just found out today that you had left. Just to make it clear, I was not intentionally avoiding doing anything just to spite you, I honestly didn't know that this was even a problem.

Now: I want to clear up a misconception that I might have given you and some other users. The bot can be used to automate a great many things, but a lot more things are simply too complex to make happen without a lot of coding. That includes changing over the appearances templates. I tried a lot of things, but in the end I decided that the best way to do it was to literally do it by hand: change over every single character page, add the correct seasons, and the correct episodes. Bottom line: The change you were asking for wasn't somethin I could do just by pushing a buton, it would require going through a dozen or so pages and changing them back one by one. After spending nearly three days doing nothing but that, I was in no mood to do it again, even for a relatively small group of pages.

I want to make this clear: my reticence to change back the non-canon character pages was NOT intended as some personal insult against you, nor was I willfully ignoring your request. In fact, after your second message, I fixed the template and corrected both of these pages, as a sign that, no, I wasn't ignoring you, and yes, I fully intended to eventually do as you had asked. At the time, I was so fed up of doing it that I was eager to focus on other tasks that were more interesting and, frankly, more pressing than fixing a few deleted character hardly anybody looks at.

Yes, I certainly should have communicated better with you regarding my plans, but honestly, so should you. I literally had no clue that you had departed, let alone that it was because of something I had done, or failed to do. The only reason I found out at all was because SignorSimon posted on my talk page today, threatening to ban me for something I was completely oblivious to. If he hadn't, I would've kept on editing like it was business as usual for a week or a month or God knows how long, looking like even more of a colossal asshole than I already must. I really, really wish you could've just written your farewell message to my talk page, so I could understand why you were so upset and fix the damn pages, or at least explain to you why I had been putting it off for so long. I hope we can avoid this kind of thing in the future. Please? --Pyramidhead 18:50, July 16, 2010 (UTC)


 * No need to apologize, I just wanted the fixes done. I understand you didn't mean it intentionally but you need to remember that I repeatedly posted in several places about it for a long-ass time which is why I eventually left. Now it's done, I definitely consider this whole thing finished. I'll be back as normal. Congrats on the new job, I might be getting one myself soon. And thanks for the support Thief12, Station7, and Simon! 02:30, July 17, 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry to have come across so heavy-handed Pyramidhead, obviously I didn't realise that you weren't aware of Blue Rook's situation. -- SignorSimon (talk/contribs/email) 13:24, July 17, 2010 (UTC)

Userpage
Do you like my userpage. Jack Bauer holds the record with killing different persons who also kill another person etc. If you don't understand I will explain it a second time. However Star Wars holds the record with 7 person, from 6 person who kill each other.--Station7 10:47, July 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * I love that one! But I especially love the list of Character Kills. It's actually extremely useful to find all those listed carefully like that, in such a readable format. I'm very happy you're making that personal project. But you should know, that User:Station7/Ironic deaths, on that one I cannot read the text; the words are white on a very light color background. Try to make the text black. 22:26, July 24, 2010 (UTC)

I hope you like it now more. It's red and it sats with the theme: ironic deaths. Well, I like it more then before. I hope you to :) --Station7 08:23, July 25, 2010 (UTC)

No, I don't mind, as long as you like it and by the way, you're the boss. I know it's "my project", but you're the boss here.--Station7 18:56, July 25, 2010 (UTC)


 * Not the boss at all! Just figured you'd like to know that guy could be linked too. You can always revert edits to your user stuff. 05:13, July 26, 2010 (UTC)

SignorSimon
I did read at a forum, that they don't let him in an internet café. It's seems like he has a problem. This can being read here. What now?--Station7 21:49, July 24, 2010 (UTC)


 * That's just a temporary inconvenience, as I understood it. He was unable to log in, at that place, so was just letting us know it was him (even though it was just some random IP). I didn't take that to mean some long-term problem. 22:26, July 24, 2010 (UTC)

Tasks?
hi dear blue rook. I have a question.are there any tasks for me?please tell me. I have one more question.what is your name and where are you from and how old are you? leaved message by kamran.mazaheri 06:41, 2010 July 28


 * Tasks, sure, there is much to be done. The biggest task for this project, and any established wiki in my opinion, is to go through the content and quality-check the writing. Make sure the major character articles and all the episode guides have complete sentences, no misspellings, and appropriate flow. Check to see if the writing is consistent: some pages have paragraphs that were clearly written by kids, and a few lines away you may find highly complex sentences. Don't be discouraged; this task has no start point, so pick up anywhere. Go with your favorite character first and proofread the page. Watch an episode and make sure the details are all present in the guide here.
 * For more specialized tasks, the primary place to look is Wiki 24:Bullpen.
 * To answer your questions about me, my name is Mike, I'm from New Jersey USA, and appropriately enough, my age is 24. 19:55, July 28, 2010 (UTC)

Question
How do you think about editing the characters that are killed in the Game of 24? Should they being edit to the list of Character kills?--Station7 20:04, July 28, 2010 (UTC)


 * An idea put forward (by Proudhug, or possibly Simon) was that we should eventually only include those kills which are necessary for the advancement of each mission. It would be a difficult endeavor to sort out, because I recall being told that a very large number of enemies can be killed if you choose, but don't have to be. I definitely disapprove, however, of *counting* any kills from The Game into the total count from the show. Adding The Game kills into the tally would be unacceptable. 00:36, July 29, 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your meaning. I wouldn't do it.--Station7 08:59, July 29, 2010 (UTC)


 * all right.but I don't know what do you mean exactly.you mean I can't leave an other message on station7's talk page?


 * You can, it has to be about this project however. Pretty standard rules, it's been this way since the beginning here. 15:44, July 29, 2010 (UTC)

Hi dear blue rook.I leaved message about other wiki cuz one of users on that wiki blocked me and I must leave message on this wiki.I never do that again sir!