FANDOM

9,368 Pages

Template:SituationRoom

Character Article Standards: Background Information

When I added the three new characters in Day 6 (Sandra, Thomas, and Nadia), I enterred background information (experience, education, etc.) in paragraph format instead of in a resume style. Other characters have background information in a resume format (bullets, etc.). Is there a standard for how this information should be displayed on character pages? If we don't have one yet, what is the general consensus? I see merits in both styles, and I currently don't have a favorite. --Wydok 00:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Fox.com profiles

The Fox.com character profiles for Season 6 have been updated. We can play this two ways. Since it's already on the official site, we can consider the information fit for inclusion on Wiki 24. Or, if some still consider these spoilers, we can wait to post the information after the premiere airs. Thoughts? --Proudhug 03:36, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I say just add them to the Season 6 article as main characters. Don't change the indiviudal articles until the episode.--CWY2190 03:47, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm talking about the more specific information, now who the main cast is. Like, a certain couple being married, what school certain people went to, where they were previously employed. Even the name of the new VPOTUS is in there. --Proudhug 03:51, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Sure. Thats great about Bill and Karen. Where is the name of the new VPOTUS? And wouldn't that be a spoiler since we made a big deal about Wyane's page being updated?--CWY2190 03:54, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
This is what I'm asking. Since this is an official release of an original piece of IU information, not a preview or a trailer, would people have a problem including the information right now, or should we wait until Sunday night? I don't really see why it's not fine now, but I figured I'd ask first.
And the name of the new VPOTUS can be found under Lennox's profile. He worked on the campaign for two presidents. --Proudhug 04:03, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
I can add the main cast right now. Yes or no? I got it typed up, just give me the word.--CWY2190 04:41, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, that's not what I'm talking about. The main cast can't be determined from the list of characters on the site. Someone listed on the profiles page could mean they're a Main Character or it could mean they're a Guest Character. It could mean they're on board for all 24 episodes, or it could mean they'll get written off after two or three. We won't know the main cast until the show airs. What I'm talking about is not the list itself, but rather the information in the list. --Proudhug 04:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Oh yeah, you answer a minute after I post. :) --CWY2190 04:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
If it is decided to go ahead and add articles from the Fox.com profiles, I can get articles started for three new characters which I had been preparing in advance. --Wydok 16:56, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, it's the day before and no one's objected. --Proudhug 20:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Then it's away I go. :) --Wydok 21:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

New admin nomination

I've made a nomination for adminship. With season 6 coming up and undoubtedly drawing in new readers and editors, it would be a good idea to have another admin. Head on over to Wiki 24:Requests for adminship and vote for CWY2190! --StBacchus 22:40, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the nomination.--CWY2190 04:53, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Presumed CTU branches

I vote we delete the pages for CTU Seattle, CTU Denver, CTU Phoenix and CTU Las Vegas. I don't like the idea of having articles for things we don't even know for sure exist. They've never been mentioned by name, so we don't need articles for them. I think it's sufficient to mention their possible existence on the pages for their respectives cities, as well as a similar note on the main CTU branch page. --Proudhug 04:52, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I noticed that and a few days ago, I went to those pages and said that they probably exist. I agree in deletion, though. --69.133.24.51 03:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
CTU Seattle and CTU Phoenix were both referenced in either the novels or comics. The information is on the CTU Seattle and CTU Phoenix pages. A crazy place to put it, I know, but what are you gonna do? --StBacchus 22:40, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
On Milo's profile on the FOX Site, it mentions the he worked for CTU Denver, so i guess that ones ok.
Morris's profile on the FOX Site mentions that he worked for CTU Seatle. I think Bill and Michelle may also have worked there.

Question about episode credits

Is it too soon to post on-screen credits information for the first 4 episodes of season 6? I've never felt this is spoilery, but some do. Some guidance before I post and risk getting kicked out would be appreciated.--Telly1138 23:45, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Crew credits are probably fine (unless someone else opposes), but cast credits are definitely spoilers. If I saw that Mandy or Kate are going to appear in the next episode, I'd be spoiled. --Proudhug 02:28, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Insufficient Information

I was just wondering what people thought about improving our Insufficient Information system. I was thinking that we could add a feature to it so that editors can add key bullet-points about how the article can be improved in the box. It would be a bit like like Wikipedia's peer review system. Any thoughts? --24 Administration 18:12, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not fussy about how we do it, but I've never liked the current system at all. Of course, I think of nearly every page as needing improvement. --Proudhug 19:56, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Well I was looking at some pages today and thinking "this article needs an info-box" or "the grammer in this article is terrible". If we had some way to actually say this in the Insufficient Info box then people would know what's wrong with the article. At the moment I think quite a lot of people must often question why the article has a certain Insufficient Info status. --24 Administration 23:00, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
There are alot of articles that can be extended, but on the flip side, there are alot of articles that cannot be extended either. --CWY2190 23:06, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps people could start making a note on the Talk page when they add the notice, explaining what needs to be done. --Proudhug 23:47, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Spoilers

I hope that Curtis spoiler posted isnt true. Anyway, who knows how many spoilers will be posted in the final week. We may need to make the "Do not post spoilers" thing even bigger and say that any spoilers posted will result in a permanent ban. Agree or disagree?--CWY2190 17:17, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Excellent idea. Done. --Proudhug 17:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Commercials/Trailers

Should we consider these spoilers? While we have in the past, they have aired in the United States and I think we should put information down as to what we know. This doesn't mean Jon Cassar's interviews or anything like that, simply commercials and trailers put out by FOX. The only problem is if we use this, we stick to WHAT WE KNOW, not what we assume. --BauerJ24 16:49, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I would say no.--CWY2190 16:51, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
There's no question about it, commercials and trailers are spoilers. I realize they're officially released by Fox and so most people probably watch them, but since they spoil events in future episodes, they're considered spoilers. I know a lot of people disagree with this (myself included, to some extent), but it's best to err on the side of caution. I never considered stuff like this to be spoilers in the past, but having frequented many message boards, I've come to realize that most people do, especially on the official Fox.com 24um. Those folks are crazy about the most minor things being spoilers! --Proudhug 18:54, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
While they spoil events in future episodes, they have aired in the United States, which is our policy. Since they were officially released by FOX and not fan fiction, they are real. The only thing I would want is the trailer online, because then it is based on what we can hear and review as opposed to a passing commercial and what we THINK we hear. I think the trailer released, since it has aired, should be allowed on the basis that our policy allows exceptions, we just have to mark it. This is an exception as to the future of the show and as long as we mark pages with it, we should be okay. I'm not talking about revamping any page like Jack Bauer, just maybe adding a few pages that have been shown and proved in that trailer ONLY that can help us stay up to speed once the show airs. --BauerJ24 20:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Trailers aren't required viewing. If you don't watch a trailer, you're not missing anything, since all of it will eventually air on TV in the manner it was meant to. The episodes are the official release of all clips, so that's the only place information should be extracted. Trailers aren't edited in a manner to tell a story, as episodes are. There's no narrative. They're meant to promote the show by teasing you with exciting clips. Since they're mostly taken out of context, it's never possible to confidently assertain facts from trailers. Sometimes trailers are even meant to mislead us. I mean this is a trailer using official footage, yet it's clearly manipulative. Fox does the same thing, only for a different purpose (and to a decidedly less comedic degree, of course). Like I said, I don't have a problem watching trailers and officially released promotional stuff myself, but the fact remains that they are spoilers. --Proudhug 21:01, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Portals

I was proposing different portals for different zones ie US and UK portals. We could then create template for 'aired in US' and 'aired in UK' that could be added to the day summary pages when they air. These could then link to a dynamic page list so us poor people in the UK can see only episodes that have aired in UK so we dont get the spoilers. Thanks --Markie 21:49, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Don't take any offense from this, but if you dont want spoilers from U.S. episodes, stay off the site. I mean that in the nicest way possible. Will your idea work? I dont know...because I have no clue what a portal is.--CWY2190 21:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
A portal is kind of different areas for different content. Kinda the same as the Day 1, Day 2 etc grouping. I think it would work and i do want to be on here to remeber what happened and check stuff. But during the middle of the series i dont want to be seeing the ending. --Markie 21:59, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
While I understand it must be frustrating for overseas viewers, there are several problems with this. 24 airs in a lot more places besides the U.K. It would seem ludicrous to cater to the individual schedules of every country, not to mention confusing for readers. Presumably you're referring to only episode guides, so you'd still be unable to read pages for Jack Bauer, CTU, etc. And even information contained in episode pages isn't free of spoilers from later episodes. Background notes such as "This is so-and-so's first appearance before becoming a villain two episodes later" aren't impossible. --Proudhug 22:34, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
I have just looked on our local broadcast times and have now changed it here but we seem to be airing 24 a day before the US so there is actually no need for this. However does this mean i can upload images of the show on the Sunday night/Monday morning as in line with the spoiler policy?? Cheers --Markie 11:04, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
That has to be a mistake. There is no way that fox will allow any other station to air the show before the U.S.--CWY2190 16:35, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
It's not the day before. Read it carefully. --Proudhug 18:39, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Ah yeah. My mistake!--Markie 19:19, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Music

I think the page could be a lot better if we added a music player. We could use Sean Callery's music from the 24 soundtrack. This is just a request but I really think it would intrigue 24 fans. --JackBauer24 20:00, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Is that even possible with wiki programing?--CWY2190 21:45, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't know. I suppose it could happen if a "music" page was created and a code was put in. You should ask someone who sort of runs the place.--JackBauer24 23:37, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't really like the idea unless we rerout it to a different page or something. Possibly put an option on whether or not we want music in the background, but not like put on every page and without option, because I listen to my music on here and I feel that 24 music, however awesome it is, might become redundant. --BauerJ24 04:23, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I completey dislike music playing on webpages. Call me old-school.--Wydok 22:00, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.