Main Image Edit
How about one where the clock is 00:00:00? I kinda don't like the look of this one for some reason. --MistahWhippy 04:12, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you're asking/saying. 04:17, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
- I think he's referring to the episode's picture. I think he wants it to be the 00:00:00 that was shown during the show's last second. --Bonzi77 05:15, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
I've never posted a comment on a wiki but I must say the 0:00:00 picture should absolutely stay there is no other picture that says that this was the ending as much as that did.
I agree 100% with this suggestion. In addition to the reasons listed above, using this picture would bring the main images in a full circle. The main image for the very first episode was "The following takes between Midnight and 1:00 A.M., on the day of the California Presidential Primary" and it was the first thing we saw on 24 besides the "24" title. Now, the 00:00:00 is the last thing we saw on 24, besides the closing credits. XStationCube 18:21, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
I don't like this one. It's neat, sure, but it's a pretty dull image and it doesn't say anything about the tone or actual events of the episode, which were pretty emotional. Since the main focus of 23 was Suvarov arriving and Dalia finding out about the cover-up, I think either of these two plus Jack on the monitor would work well together. --Pyramidhead 21:53, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
- The third one, definitely. Either that or mine below. Needs to be of Jack, doesn't it? --SignorSimon (talk/contribs/email) 22:32, May 25, 2010 (UTC)
- I suppose, but as someone said, the very first image was the title card for the first hour. It would've really brought it full circle. --MistahWhippy 07:36, May 26, 2010 (UTC)
- I dunno. If using the 0 hour pic on this one is boring, then the pic on episode 1 should be changed too. --Bonzi77 13:47, May 26, 2010 (UTC)
jack dissolves Edit
Does someone have a screencap of the last ever moment we see Jack? When he looks up to the drone the last time just before he dissolves?
Where should we put the unnamed commandos? "Unnamed military personnel", "Unnamed civilians"? Thief12 00:45, May 28, 2010 (UTC)
- Last night I uploaded two pictures of the two unnamed commandos, but didn't use them because I wasn't sure where to add them. I just added the commandos to the "Unnamed civilians" article, but didn't notice that SignorSimon had already addde them, with pics, to the "Unnamed terrorists" article. We can delete whichever entry and pics are less suitable for this characters. Thief12 13:55, May 28, 2010 (UTC)
- This one's been on my mind for awhile now. They have been removed from Terrorists, and I agree, since they were sanctioned by the President and really had none of the motivations that classify a terrorist. The only remaining difficulty is to determine if they were civilian contractors or actually part of the military. "Commando" doesn't mean much, given the history of the term in the show. Thief, also Simon? what do you think?
- Also, your uploads were quite good as usual but Simon's turned out to be just a bit sharper this time. I did what you recommended and went with 1 of the pair.
- Simon, one of your edit summaries about the second commando was "there is no way this guy is a civilian". Do you mean to say he's military or terrorist? 06:02, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
- Update: Reading the FOX summary of the episode has reminded me of something. These were "Logan's men" and he had no influence in the military, he used civilian contractors. Indeed this guy and Nantz are civilians, just like Bledsoe and his goons. Heck it could even be the same company! 06:15, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
- I know what you mean: the way we all instinctively assume Unnamed terrorists is the same as an "Unnamed antagonists" page, is the same way everyone instinctively assumes Unnamed civilians is equivalent to "Unnamed innocent bystanders". I partly wish these pages did exist but it wouldn't produce any real benefits, just more work moving stuff around and fixing a billion links. 17:30, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
- Yeah, I agree. But we addressed this same issue when Bledsoe and his goons appeared. Blue Rook even offered an example about another character in another season that acted antagonistically, and yet is classified as civilian. It's just our perception of what a civilian is. And Blue Rook, don't worry about the pictures. The picture I uploaded of Nantz was virtually identical to the one that Simon uploaded (albeit a bit blurrier, as usual). I do think the picture I uploaded of the other commando could be used in another place, but that's up to someone else. Thief12 14:17, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
- Thief, your images were fine it was just that I hadn't seen them when I uploaded mine. I wouldn't have bothered if I had seen yours because they certainly are good enough. The only reason mine are higher quality than usual is because I downloaded the HD version of the show rather than the usual standard definition because I wanted to see it in the best quality possible :) The shot you got of the other commando was my original one as well but I couldn't get a great shot of it. I used the one I took instead just because it's easier to see his face. But by all means, if you can find a place to stick yours that would be great. --SignorSimon (talk/contribs/email) 15:24, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
- Don't worry. I created the links to the civlian page before I noticed you had already created links to the terrorists page. Either way, it's no big deal which image is used. I don't have an egotistical desire for my pictures to be used exclusively, hahaha! Like I said, and Blue Rook said first, you're picture was significantly sharper and I prefer to keep that one instead of mine. Thief12 15:58, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
- I know this isn't really the right place but I dislike how unnamed characters are represented on this show (i.e. by them all being on one page). It really makes it hard to include much information about them, one of the best examples being the unnamed Season 6 ambassador who was in quite a lot of episodes. Many other Wikis just use names that the characters are credited with or by a distinctive feature of their character. I know this isn't very encyclopaedic are we are defining them and we shouldn't do that, but I don't see how it is any different than how we define them on unnamed character pages. In any case, I don't know if I could find the support to change all unnamed characters to give them their own page and if I did, this is the wrong place to look for it! --SignorSimon (talk/contribs/email) 15:24, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
- Simon it's probably a good idea to post a new Forum topic about that idea, of separating out the Unnamed characters into individual articles. Proudhug's around and we can have a fuller discussion about it. Tentatively I think it sounds like a good idea but as usual with me I'd like to throw ideas around. I tried to find the old precedent discussion when those pages were started, but all I found was this delicious little old thread. Haha it's so fun to read some of those original ideas! "Unnamed peace officers", "Unnamed politicians". 17:30, June 2, 2010 (UTC)
Final split screen Edit
Even though it said there was no final split screen at the end of this episode, couldn't the President's phone conversation towards the end count as one?
- It was either a split screen or it wasn't; "split screen" refers to the boxes that appear. 09:10, January 24, 2011 (UTC)
Taylor's talk with Jack Edit
- He assaulted a Secret Service motorcade, disemboweled a man, and broke into the UN buildings to blow away a foreign head of state. He's still a wanted man. Frankly, President Taylor should have just given him a blanket pardon before stepping down, but it seems that he's on the run again. 09:10, January 24, 2011 (UTC)
Kevin L. Carvell Edit
I stumbled upon this guy while searching for stunt, extras, etc. and he is listed as appearing in this episode as a CTU agent. I don't have access to the episode right now, but someone might want to check it out. He is also listed as working as a "project consultant" on other 24 episodes/seasons. Thief12 18:20, July 4, 2011 (UTC)
- Kevin confirmed this by e-mail. He said it was a "blink and you'll miss it" cameo, but someone had managed to spot him on the dvd--Acer4666 18:29, July 4, 2011 (UTC)