9,386 Pages

m (William.Y.Fremont moved page Talk:Deaths on 24/Archive to Talk:Deaths on 24/Archive 1)
(No difference)

Latest revision as of 06:51, 13 April 2020

Two things:[edit source]

As I am currently watching Season One, I will double check everything and I'll move onto a different season, maybe Season Four and get those unless anyone already is working on it and objects?

Also, has it been confirmed that there is a co-pilot? I don't know if there is always a co-pilot, but I don't recall anything about it.

I'm currently double checking S1 too, but another pair of eyes is always helpful. I'm pretty sure it's as accurate as I can get it, with times, etc. The toughest parts to document were the prison raid in 8pm-9pm and the unseen Jack kills in the finale. As for the pilot/co-pilot thing, I've never really liked it and am going to change it. --Proudhug 14:32, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

PNA[edit source]

I'm removing the PNA for this page. I think they should be reserved for pages that need fixing, rather than just completing. It's already evident by looking at the page that it's not complete and needs work, so adding the PNA doesn't actually do anything. Besides, it's one of my current "works in progress," so it hasn't been abandoned or anything. --Proudhug 13:36, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about that. OneWeirdDude 23:35, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Help[edit source]

Do you want me to start with another season? --CWY2190talkcontribs 21:17, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

If you like, but I'm already going to be going through them all anyway, so if you think there's a rush to get it done, or you've got nothing else to do, you can go ahead. --Proudhug 17:00, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Should Victor Rovner be added?---CWY2190talkcontribs 19:48, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think so. It's probably best to avoid "unknown" characters. The introduction says "everyone known to die." Besides, I don't believe he's dead, and according to Jeff Ricketts in 24: The Official Magazine, neither does he. --Proudhug 23:30, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Fixing mistakes[edit source]

I think you missed one early in on Day 3. Is that right? And can it be fixed? OneWeirdDude 02:52, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

And also, is there some way to have a running counter, so that you don't have to keep track of indices? Some of the numbers are off, and it's a pain to fix. OneWeirdDude 17:46, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't think you can do it in a table. The numbers are off, but I'm personally going through and verifying every single kill, albeit slowly. The chart is 100% accurate up to 5pm on Day 2. I'd started the list from the beginning, but others began adding to the later days ahead of me. I only vouch for the work I've done so far. :P --Proudhug 17:58, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
My main issue is when, and if, you-know-who is revealed to still be alive on Day 7. That will not be pleasant to fix, I think. OneWeirdDude 02:15, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, definitely right. It will require a full-fledged Florida-style "recount". I don't look forward to it, but, it looks like we'll have to do it when the time comes. – Blue Rook 02:53, 25 August 2008 (UTC)talkcontribs

Are CTU search and rescue team died in day 2 following 370-373?[edit source]

I just watch this episode and I found that after Jack asked them to drop down the weapons, they should be killed by Nina. They are latter than 370-373. I heard that someone in CTU reported that 7 hostages died and Jack became the hostage of Nina. Or those people later on shoot Nina and rescue Jack are the same people? But I think they are sent by Palmer. (The preceding unsigned post was made by on 11:35, 4 March 2008)

If you are asking whether the CTU rescue team was killed by Nina before she took Jack hostage, nope, I do not believe they were. They were standing around with guns trained on Nina while she was negotiating for a pardon, so the 7 deaths you are referring to must be the Coral Snake soldiers who died earlier. - Blue Rook 00:16, 5 March 2008 (UTC)talkcontribs

Page length[edit source]

The server was griping about the page size when I edited it, so should we think of splitting it? There seems to be no easy way to do that with a page like this. OneWeirdDude 02:17, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Funny you mention it: check out the Special:Longpages for our wiki, and look at what's on top :) I am also confused on how a split would be done. Visitors with slow/old computers might have a genuine problem loading the edit page if we let this page continue to grow. From the looks of it, I think Seasons 4 and 5 are the biggest? We might want to divide the content from Seasons 1-4 and 5-7. We could also do sub-pages for each season. But for now, unless someone comes forward with legitimate loading issues, I'm tempted to leave it alone. What do you think? – Blue Rook 02:53, 25 August 2008 (UTC)talkcontribs
I like the subpages idea; I think that's what they did with the On-screen kills by Jack Bauer page. But as for the wait-till-it-becomes-an-issue problem, I'm not sure that's wise. How long would we have to wait until someone complained? OneWeirdDude 16:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
  1. Check out Special:Longpages now, you might get a pleasant surprise :)
  2. Personally, I like the way this page is, but if you guys think splitting it up is the right way to go, by all means do it. --SignorSimon (talk/contribs/email) 17:37, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Simon, OneWeirdDude, I'm going to split the page into templates like On-screen kills, as OneWeirdDude recommends. I was the only person who was hesitant about it so I'm going to forge ahead. OneWeirdDude thanks for the recommendation! Blue Rook  talk  contribs 21:23, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Nuclear bomb death count[edit source]

All the characters and the news were talking about how at minimum, 12,000 were killed. That's a minimum. Therefore it's a known number. I don't understand the reversions that are discounting that recalculation. Those deaths need to be counted! Blue Rook  talk  contribs 16:07, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

So um...should we just leave it at that or change it back to unknown? Ggjk 01:39, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Why would it be unknown? We know of 12,000 deaths, so those 12,000 are included. The article is about known deaths, not unknown deaths. --proudhug 16:42, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
You sure? I remembering hearing from one episode that the death toll was nearly 13,000, not 12,000. Plus, if people were infected by the radiation, the death toll might've gone up. Ggjk 19:33, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Well, if you find the reference to that number, you can change it. --proudhug 21:56, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Table of Contents[edit source]

Maybe it's just me, but I think the TOC needs a custom look to it—one that isn't quite so long (but wider), nor so hideous. Like, two columns, one for the charts, one for the "Not Included" sections. (I'd do it myself but I don't know how.) OneWeirdDude 22:18, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree that it's ugly on this page. However the only thing I know how to do regarding the TOC is the trigger for suppressing it on tiny pages. To do what you recommend would entail altering the headings on that page specifically, or perhaps to dig around in MediaWiki. Even on pain of death I won't touch mediaWiki messages with a ten-foot pole. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 22:35, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Day 7: 2:00pm to 3:00pm Deaths[edit source]

Okay, about that shootout, does anyone know who killed how many of who? All I know is that Renee killed Nichols and there were a total of 10 casualties (excluding Michael Latham and Dubaku's technician). Everything was chaotic and going too fast for me to count.Ggjk 03:34, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Speaking of 2pm-3pm deaths, I don't agree with John Brunner's death being listed as a suicide. Even though he manually released the gas himself, it was not an intentional suicide (he was wearing a gas mask and tried to get up and leave but couldn't) and it would've never happened had Dubaku not targeted the plant in the first place. SeanPM 14:42, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
I agree with SeanPM. Suicide is intentional, this was accidental. He even said that he was wearing the gas mask and was clearly hoping to escape. He died of accidental gas exposure, it wasn't homicide. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 15:13, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
My bad. I thought John was sacrificing himself to protect his workers. Ggjk 20:25, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
That's a defensible position for sure, and I'm confident that others might come and bring this up again too. Right now, however, the scene indicates to me that it wasn't intentional. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 20:41, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
It doesn't make sense to list "suicide" for any of the entries, anyway. All the other entries refer to *who* it was who killed a character, whereas "suicide" is a *manner*. I've changed entries to reflect this. ( 18:18, 25 May 2009 (UTC))
Ggjk to answer your question, check out this link, it's the episode free online with just a few commercials. It's legal and everything, and you can examine the scene very closely if you'd like to investigate the answers. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 03:21, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, about the shootout, there appears only 7 deaths (thugs, mercenaries) listed in the table but I counted 6 by Jack only. Tony shot at least 2 more if I'm not mistaken, while Bill got one I think. That's not counting the two security guards. So it looks to me more like 9 or 10 deaths there. Thief12 02:25, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I just watched the shootout scene again, going through it slowly frame by frame. Tony got the first kill (on a receptionist), then Bill killed a guy who ran to the receptionists desk. Jack had six kills in the server room (three with a handgun and three with a machine gun). Renee killed Nichols. Tony killed two people in the server room (making 3 total for him) and Bill killed a guy in the server room too (making 2 total kills for Bill). SeanPM 07:26, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
If you say so, but doesn't the BauerCount say that Jack only killed four guards? Also, I thought Renee killed another person besides Nichols. Ggjk 03:29, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Strange[edit source]

How come kill #144 in Day 5, it says that Christopher Henderson shot one of his own thugs? Are you sure that's right? Sk84life 03:48, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

That doesn't really seem right. Will you verify it? Blue Rook  talk  contribs 04:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
If I remember it right, Christopher didn't shoot his own thug; he ran him over. Christopher was so focused on running away from Jack and Wayne that he hit his own thug with his car. I'm pretty sure he died, since I didn't see him get up again. Ggjk 00:53, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
If that's the case, then this remains as it is. I just can't verify it myself at the moment. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 01:16, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Secret Service Agents[edit source]

Deaths 299-300 mention two Secret Service Agents. Where there two Agents in the car? Thief12 01:02, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I fixed this. There were two people in the car that was blown up, the white driver and the black Matobo-lookalike. Both of them were named, Secret Service agents. I just think the original editor assumed someone was in the passenger seat up front, but I'm pretty sure there wasn't. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 03:07, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

???[edit source]

There's a couple of questions that are confusing me at this moment:

  • Who the hell shot David Emerson???
  • When did Dubaku's technician die?
  • Were there four or five (including Elemu) guards guarding Henry Taylor?

As far as I know, Tony killed Emerson, the technician died after Latham was detonated, and there only four guards at the warehouse where they were holding Taylor. Ggjk 05:00, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

1. I'm beginning to think Tony overcame his sense of brotherhood and shot Emerson. 2. Dubaku's technician was a black man with no facial hair, and was bald. He was certainly killed in the major shootout and he didn't leave with Dubaku. The dude who was killed when Latham exploded was lighter skinned and had a mustache. 3. I don't know for sure, but I remember Elemu getting struck once by Jack, surviving, and then was cut down for sure the second time. That's probably what's confusing you. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 05:03, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
1) I still stand by my appreciation that Jack shot Emerson; 2) I missed when the technician was killed; 3) and there were five guards (including Elemu) guarding Taylor. When Jack peeks at the cellar, he sees four guards watching TV and that's what he signals Renee. As Renee was walking down the stairs, another guard came from the other side (the bathroom?) and noticed her. Jack then shot him. Then they shot the other four, with Elemu being shot two times. Thief12 05:29, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Day 2[edit source]

In day 2, there are many deaths includes that weren't seen on screen. like the 1:00am-2:00am, 11am-12pm, 7pm-8pm and more. Why nobody put them in "not included"?

What deaths are these? --Proudhug 21:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Yeah. I'm pretty sure that me and several other users have confirmed all the deaths that were on that day. Ggjk 02:44, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Re-check on gunfight[edit source]

Okay, just recently bought the 7th Season and I watched that gunfight around 2:26pm several times over and I made a mistake. Jack killed six mercs, Tony two plus a security guard, Bill one plus a security guard, and Renee killed Nichols, making it twelve, not ten.

Also, there's a mistake with Dubaku's technician. He was supposedly killed by Tony, but when I watched the scene, I noticed all the mercs were wearing vests and had some form of hair. Tony killed two of these mercs. I also noticed that the technician was wearing a sweater and an ear-piece and was bald and black. There were only two mercs wearing sweaters without vests and both of them were the first two that died...and were killed by Jack. The second person that died looked white and had hair, so I think the technician died first.

Unless he died when the roof exploded, I near certain that Jack killed the technician, not Tony. Ggjk 23:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Seasons 5 and 6[edit source]

5 - Aboard the Natalia... there were 4 men that succumbed to the Sentox gas, so it is not unknown

6 - In the mall bombing... they said at least 200, so like the hotel... shouldn't these be counted?

Thanks, Mjs1103 03:31, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Ah very observant. Yes, minimums should be observed. If nobody adds them really soon, feel free to insert them with a "will be tallied" notice in case you're not able to correct the full countdown. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 20:48, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Well I added the Day 5 deaths and tallied up Day 5 fully... but the template changes isn't showing up on the page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mjs1103 on 21:09, 2009 July 29
On my screen the changes are showing. You probably just need to do a full/forced page reload, delete your cache, or wait a few minutes. It will turn up. Thanks for changes Mjs1103. But take a look, the hard part is updating the other death counts for the following seasons! Someone will get to it eventually. It's always annoying doing that... I wonder if there is an automatic way to tally them all? Blue Rook  talk  contribs 01:20, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
I see it now... but I don't know if there is a way to do it automatically... you would have to contact someone who knows this better. I may get to it if I have the chance. Mjs1103 03:03, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Day 7 Body Numbers[edit source]

Around 9:10 a.m. during Day 7, Larry said there were three bodies, but I'm pretty confident that only Schector and Ari were killed. Can anyone confirm the 3rd body, or if there even was a third one? Also, after the shootout at the convenience store that occured around 3:57 p.m., six bodies were reported but I only saw five go down. I'm pretty sure one of the bodies was the unconscious store owner, but I'm still unsure what they meant by this. Ggjk 21:43, January 16, 2010 (UTC)

Day 8 explosion count[edit source]

The first time we see Sergei Bazhaev, he's watching a news reporter who says that the fatalities after Davros's bomb were 3, including a police officer. How do we know that she's referring to 3 people who died at the scene? Is it possible she's talking about Jim (the cop) & Maggie & then Davros, because they were related fatalities? Blue Rook  talk  contribs 06:25, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

That's what I initially assumed it was referring to. --SignorSimon (talk/contribs/email) 10:40, January 28, 2010 (UTC)


Maybe the third one is him, Omar's limo driver. So the 3 fatalities were Jim, Maggie and this driver. --William.Y.Fremont 06:22, March 13, 2011 (UTC)

Air Force One casualties[edit source]

I watched the 18th episode(12:00am-1:00am)of day 4.When Logan talked on TV,he said "By god's grace,president Keeler survived,but more than 75 others did not."Should we assume that there were at least 75 people died when the plane was shot down? --William.Y.Fremont 05:13, April 17, 2010 (UTC)

Yes actually, this is an excellent find. If you heard that correctly then we have a good number to add to the count! Blue Rook  talk  contribs 05:21, April 17, 2010 (UTC)

Can you do me a favor bro?I'm not quite familiar with this template.--William.Y.Fremont 05:29, April 17, 2010 (UTC)

Day 2: 10:00am-11:00am Deaths[edit source]

When George called Tony in the warehouse,he said"We have three dead bodies.See if they match anybody on our watch list." So there were three bomb makers killed by the terrorist,not just only two.Any thoughts? William.Y.Fremont 14:35, July 27, 2010 (UTC)

Couldn't that mean the 2 bomb-makers + the 1 terrorist that killed Barber? Blue Rook  talk  contribs 19:09, July 27, 2010 (UTC)
You're absolutely correct, Rook. --proudhug 01:39, July 28, 2010 (UTC)

McLennen-Forster commandos[edit source]

When Curtis asked Castle how many hostiles inside,Castle said 6 down oustide.But we only see Jack killed 3 commandos.Any thoughts? William.Y.Fremont 14:59, August 14, 2010 (UTC)

Also I'd like to ask about the Rockland Building stuff.When Jack got out of the elevator,a body was lying there.Lee also took down a guy seconds before killing Ali.Were those two guys dead? William.Y.Fremont 15:02, December 30, 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure; can you give me the respective episodes on these so I can check too? (It's always possible there were deaths that occurred off-screen. Maybe Castle took them out?) Also, did you take into account Adam and Jason (Forbes' goons) for the second question? Blue Rook  talk  contribs 19:25, December 30, 2010 (UTC)
The first one: Day 4: 7:00pm-8:00pm around 07:53:52.
The second one:Day 4: 5:00pm-6:00pm around 05:45 (After Jack got out of the elevator) and 05:54 (Before Ali was spotted) William.Y.Fremont 08:26, December 31, 2010 (UTC)
Interestingly, after Curtis killed Adam and Jason and knocked out Forbes, during the phone call to Jack there was a guy down the hall who Curtis seemed wary of. Possibly one of Forbes' men, and probably the guy on the floor after Jack got out of the elevator. Don't know about the second guy, but probably another of Forbes' men that Lee stealthily killed. --ASHPD24 10:21, January 1, 2011 (UTC)

Mistake[edit source]

There a misatke. Add this page it says that Jack Bauer killed Duman, while the marines killed Faress. However on On-screen kills by Jack Bauer it says never that Jack killed Duman. it's unknown.--Station7 14:58, October 23, 2010 (UTC)

Ontario Airport terrorist[edit source]

For some reason, the Season 5 table mentions that a terrorist died with Ibrim when Jack detonated his vest. As part of the Wiki 24 Ultimate Project, I've watched and rewatched that episode 3-4 times and there's not a single mention of another terrorist dying from that blast. I still have to watch the next episode to see if there's any mention of it, but I doubt it. There is a terrorist that is seen being knocked down by the blast, but I think he's too far away to be fatally wounded by it. Plus, there's no mention of him dying anywhere. In any case, he shouldn't be listed as a "death" if there's no concrete mention of it. Thief12 20:31, October 23, 2010 (UTC)

It is good you're checking in to this one. There was a guy that fell over dramatically when Ibrim exploded, so it's a question of whether he gets back up again, is otherwise seen moving, or reappears later walking around. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 00:27, October 24, 2010 (UTC)
For the record, I checked this out, and at 10:34, almost an hour after the guy fell over, he is still seen lying on the ground. If he wasn't dead, you would think the others would at least move him from his face down position on the ground. Also, there were no survivors from the airport assault, so he would've died shortly after anyway.--Acer4666 15:34, May 13, 2011 (UTC)
Nice work getting the final answer on this one. It always bothered me. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 03:36, May 16, 2011 (UTC)

Should we add those minimums?[edit source]

There are at least 4 crew members dead aboard Natalia and we added them into the page.So we should also add the 800 deaths in Chandler Plaza,Derek's co-workers' deaths,75 deaths of Air Force One,200 deaths of Baltimore shopping mall,and at least 1 death of FBI agent from Galvez's bombs. William.Y.Fremont 03:36, January 9, 2011 (UTC)

Yes, if you are absolutely positive about the specific numbers, with zero chance of ambiguity/speculation. I'm willing to help with the recounts, if necessary, so please keep me updated here if you plan to add em. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 21:34, February 19, 2011 (UTC)
Actually, I'm not sure about these numbers, and I can't confirm these numbers for the time being. But I think we should check these previous talks before adding em. BTW, about 353-354 deaths (Farhad and Shareef) , should we add the helicopter pilot? -William.Y.Fremont 03:28, February 20, 2011 (UTC)

White house gas explosion Day 7[edit source]

Someone just edited the page claiming that 4, not 2, of Juma's men die when Bill blew himself up. I reverted it until we can confirm that number properly - I don't have the dvd so if you can confirm that number, or if anyone else can support/deny it that would be great--Acer4666 22:34, January 27, 2011 (UTC)

Extra kill[edit source]

The earliest 5 posts of this discussion were moved from User talk:Blue Rook

I noticed that under your new unnamed terrorists entry you reversed an edit about how one other man escaped with Henderson. I watched that scene many times, and I always see that guy getting into the car, though strangly I never see him in any other shot, and I don't see his body on the ground. I figured he was always out of shot, but you said he was killed offscreen. --ASHPD24 00:56, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

I deduce that he must have been killed offscreen because Jack and Wayne run straight for Henderson, as if there were no other hostiles. When do you see him getting into the car? I never saw that, but if he does, then you're correct. Can you describe exactly the point? (Such as: right before it cuts from Jack and after Henderson runs over that loser, or something). Blue Rook  talk  contribs 06:22, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

I'll describe in detail a breakdown of that scene.

1. Jack shoots 2 mercs with a sniper rifle. 2. Wayne shoots the clown who had a personality. 3. An overhead shot shows Henderson with 2 other mercs. 4. Shot of Henderson getting in the car, however there's only 1 other merc outside. 5. Henderson runs over the other loser with the car. 6. Jack chases Henderson on foot, and in the wide shot there's no other body on the ground apart from those four. It's also clearly visible that no one else is in the car when Jack and Wayne shoot at Henderson.

This leads to me to one conclusion. Since that 1 guy isn't shown getting killed, isn't shown dead in the wide shot, isn't shown in the car, and was too far away from the car at the time Henderson got in (he was no longer in the shot at that time), I conclude that he escaped on foot. --ASHPD24 14:38, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

You're conclusion is a good one, but there are some things I think you may have missed. If I recall right, you see the mystery guy's shadow moving on the left of the screen at (4), just as Henderson is climbing into the car. That means he's off to the side (not center) but Wayne and Jack still come running down into the open. They wouldn't expect that guy to be fleeing, rather, they would have to be worrying if he was just finding cover. This is why I still think he must have been shot off-screen, almost certainly by Wayne. Additionally, though this last point is not evidence in itself, since when do terrorists/mercenaries escape on foot? It seems totally unprecedented.
(Not that it matters, but this is clearly an issue of bad film editing, in my opinion. Of course we are stuck to reconcile the details!)
As a third option neither of us considered, although seems impossible, but maybe the guy climbed into the car and was laying low? We should check the later episode with Henderson in the car just to be sure. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 16:07, February 27, 2011 (UTC)
I thought so at first myself, but it just seems impossible given that the merc is quite a few feet away from the car and would have to have superhuman speed to get into the car and not be seen in the next shot, and I also watched any other scene with Henderson in the car and there was no one there. I don't think he was out of shot either, because both the backseat and the passenger seat are empty.
But on the other hand, what's wrong with terrorists escaping on foot? Marwan did so several times back in Day 4! --ASHPD24 19:21, February 27, 2011 (UTC)

So our alternatives are: he is shot off-screen or escapes on foot. The way I see it, it is a huge assumption to claim he ran off: how could Jack and Wayne know if the guy was fleeing or simply ducking for cover? They wouldn't come down from their firing perches and be vulnerable to a shooter that could merely have been going for a better firing position. I'm still convinced he was probably killed by Wayne. And, though, you mention Marwan escaping (and yes, other characters like Cheng have gotten away temporarily) but it's always the masterminds that escape. The whole context of that scene was an "everything is safe now, even though Henderson got away" atmosphere. It wouldn't be safe with one armed guy still running around, right? Blue Rook  talk  contribs 22:51, February 28, 2011 (UTC)

Right, but the problem is that they would have liked to have killed that guy quickly, and I didn't even hear any gunshots. This could just be a result of poor editing on their part. --ASHPD24 23:42, February 28, 2011 (UTC)
Whatever the conclusion, our confusion is definitely the result of poor editing. It's important to get this correct because it affects the count. Sincerely I cannot fathom a reason why Jack and Wayne would run out and expose themselves if anyone else was left standing. Can you reply to that specifically? Blue Rook  talk  contribs 09:15, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
I don't think they'd risk running out with 1 guy left standing either; the problem being the poor editing, like the 4 guys killed during the last hour of Day 1, it's impossible to tell and given that it all happens in a certain amount of time, it leave you wondering how it happens at all. --ASHPD24 17:32, March 3, 2011 (UTC)
I've just watched this scene, and think I can help out with the confusion. Other than Henderson, there were 4 guys standing in a square. Jack shoots twice, and the two guys closest to Henderson go down. Then Wayne shoots, and kills the "clown with personality" (longish blond hair). Then Evelyn gets shot, Henderson runs towards the car - then comes the badly edited troublesome shot - we see a wide shot of the blond long hair guy still alive, along with the one remaining guy. Then the rest of the scene plays out with that blond guy dead and the remaining guy getting run over (incidentally, Jack and Wayne do run out when there is someone left standing). So I think this has to be chalked down to a continuity error of the blond bloke coming back to life for one shot, and keep it as 4 dead guys in that shootout, with none of them escaping (except henderson)--Acer4666 17:36, May 5, 2011 (UTC)
A continuity error? I never noticed the blonde guy standing afterwards. But that seems like a logical answer. --ASHPD24 17:50, May 5, 2011 (UTC)
Yeah check it out if you can. Shot number 3 on your breakdown, one of the guys is the clown killed in the previous shot!--Acer4666 17:55, May 5, 2011 (UTC)
Continuity error as a result of bad film editing sounds like the only solution that makes sense to me, too. So this doesn't effect the count, right? Blue Rook  talk  contribs 03:55, May 6, 2011 (UTC)
I don't think we can claim that this affects the count. Only four guys were ever seen with Henderson, although one briefly came back to life I don't think we can make a case to say that's a different person in-universe. I'd say the count stays the same--Acer4666 14:58, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

Suvarov Motorcade Attack[edit source]

There were at least 5 terrorists there. (Ostroff's lieutenant, one guy with automatic weapon,one RPG guy on the ground, one RPG guy on the roof and the flamethrower guy) However only 3 deaths were shown. Can someone verify that? --William.Y.Fremont 15:53, March 7, 2011 (UTC)

If that is correct it means we have to add 1 to the count, then, yes? Currently only 2 are counted.
Also William how did you type that comma, it's a different comma, the one you put between "one guy with automatic weapon,one RPG". I can copy it and paste it, but I cannot figure out how you typed it to begin with. What keys did you press? Blue Rook  talk  contribs 16:01, March 7, 2011 (UTC)
It's Chinese Input Method. I forget to switch it.
I mean what about the other two? They fled away or killed by police officers and Secret Service off-screen? -William.Y.Fremont 09:51, March 8, 2011 (UTC)
We only see 2 guys killed by Aaron. He shoots Ostroff's lieutenant and the flamethrower guy with two shots, then the flamethrower guy (who isn't quite dead) looks up just before the fuel tank explodes, and we see a dummy dressed up in Erik Rondell's clothes explode. Then when the police arrive, we see one of the automatic weapon guys (wearing black coat) run away. However in the next episode, when Curtis is doing the post mortem, he has a dead body that is not the lieutenant or flamethrower guy, so William is right that 3 guys died (though the 3rd one must have been killed by police not Aaron Pierce as he has bullet wounds in his chest). But the other two guys must have escaped, as evidenced by the fact the black-jacketed guy ran off.--Acer4666 17:23, June 13, 2011 (UTC)
3 guys were killed. The first 2 were shot by Aaron and then he shot at the flame man, killing him. --Station7 19:12, September 21, 2011 (UTC)
Acer was saying, yes 3 terrorists did turn up dead. Only 2 were shot by Aaron, including the flamethrower guy. The third was killed offscreen. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 19:58, September 21, 2011 (UTC)
Indeed - watch closely, and you'll see that one of the first 2 shot is actually the flame man, so aaron only killed 2.--Acer4666 20:54, September 21, 2011 (UTC)

Day 1 Siege[edit source]

Something that seems to be inaccurate about the detention centre siege in Day 1 was that there were only 6 people there other than DeSalvo and Jack - in fact, two more guards came out of the helicopter with Victor Drazen and followed him into the facility. That means that other than DeSalvo and Jack, there were 8 guards in the prison when Andre invaded, and they too were presumably killed. Before I go down changing all them numbers, does anyone have any objections to this?--Acer4666 10:31, March 8, 2011 (UTC)

This is further evidenced by the fact there are 5 unnamed guards around DeSalvo when he calls both Ray and Lawrence--Acer4666 10:36, March 8, 2011 (UTC)

Let's stop the itemized full tally[edit source]

This list is constantly changed and updated, and it will pretty much always be fluid and changing. Editors show up with relative frequency and reveal stuff that is missing. Because of that, I just realized that it's insane that we insist on sustaining the "running Total number" death count within each season. In other words, why the heck do we keep a running tally of prior seasons inside another season's count? It's madness. No one can disagree that it's a complete bitch to manually alter.

Does anyone disagree with this idea: we completely delete that left-hand column of "Total number", and instead just type out a single-line final total per season at the bottom of each template respectively. Then, we simply calculate a grand total down at the bottom of the page itself underneath all the seasonal counts.

It shouldn't be a shuddering nightmare to edit an article, so this proposal cuts the trouble in half. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 04:41, March 15, 2011 (UTC)

I'm baffled why it even is an issue. We've got a pretty clear-cut definition of what can and can't be included, so this list shouldn't be changing too much. Where is the fluidity coming from? --proudhug 05:12, March 15, 2011 (UTC)
Pretty much any of the threads above this one include what I mean. Due to shoddy editing, hitherto unseen corpses, and newly-remembered mentioned death counts, there are lots of stuff missing. The list is fluid because its perennially incomplete: numerous count issues mentioned above remain unresolved. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 05:16, March 15, 2011 (UTC)
But a definite set amount does exist, and there's no way it's drastically far off from what we have. It's not like unknown stunt performers where we're always going to be discovering new ones and others will remain a mystery. All of this information is immediately verifiable and countable. --proudhug 05:19, March 15, 2011 (UTC)
I'd probs be in favour of just having season totals. If anyone wanted to know what number death someone was in the whole of 24, it's a simple case of adding the number in that season to the running season total from the last season. Whereas editing this page is a bit of a nightmare. I'm of the opinion that any page on a wiki is never complete - there is always room for someone to improve upon it. I think that's why I'm not a big fan of the ultimate project--Acer4666 09:54, March 15, 2011 (UTC)
What's your current position on this proudhug? Can we get rid of the full tally? There are a few changes that I would like to make to the list--Acer4666 18:47, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
I still don't understand why it's necessary to remove. The more time passes, the chances of the tally changing becomes exponentially smaller and smaller. --proudhug 13:06, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
well I think we need to decide whether we want anyone editing this page. If you think our count is fine, and the page is as complete as you'd like it, then we should protect the page and not let anyone edit it. If you acknowledge that editing should be done to the page, and we want people improving it, then we should make it so it isn't an absolute nightmare to edit. In my opinion anyways, I just think that's how wikis work. The necessity of improvements to any page gets exponentially smaller with time, and I think we need to make it manageable. As I said I don't think too much would be lost by losing the full tally--Acer4666 13:13, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
Haha, suddenly the tally is the only thing that one could possibly edit on the page? By that rationale, since John Keeler's character status is never going to change, we should just lock his page, too. --proudhug 13:20, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
Haha ok bad argument. But the community has discussed and decided on John Keeler's status - it hasn't done so for every single number on this list. Reaching consensus for the count is something we can't do - so we leave it open for editing. If we leave it open for editing, then we need to make it something that is practical to do, without having to change the whole count for each number change--Acer4666 13:25, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
While I personally like the tally, I do understand that it's a bitch to have to change the tally every time a new kill is added or subtracted. But my point is that the tally is an empirical number that, by definition should only be changed on rare occasions. Is it unacceptable that we have annoying chores come up once in a blue moon? And unfounded user alterations aren't a concern at all, given how simple it is to revert edits. --proudhug 13:35, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
I also personally like the full tally. But I'm not sure it is as empirical as all that - some of it is open to interpretation, and debates come up over whether the man standing 10 foot from the explosion definitely died, and that sort of thing (Ibrim's vest explosion I think has come up somewhere, just off the top of my head). Also saying that all the information is immediately verifiable and countable - in order to verify the count, takes a minimum of 130 solid hours of watching, plus all the freeze framing of the gunfights to see exactly how many people go down - not what I'd call very immediate! I just think the list is so big, and so unmanageable, that I'd say it's necessary to remove the full tally.--Acer4666 10:06, April 27, 2011 (UTC)

Inclusion Criteria[edit source]

This is partially a move of the discussion at Talk:On-screen kills by Jack Bauer, about the inclusion criteria for these "lists of deaths" pages. Now as it happens, I am personally very much in favour of the current inclusion criteria at the top of this page: it is a "list of deaths confirmed to have happened during the 24-hour periods covered by each season of 24". But according to that, I should delete the entire "Redemption" section, because it doesn't meet the criteria, and I feel people would have something to say.

Clearly it needs to change. The question is - do we also include the prequels? How about The Rookie, conspiracy, other live action stuff? If we don't change it to include these other things, how do we word it? "only deaths that are confirmed to happen in the 24-hour periods covered by the seasons, plus the two hours of redemption, oh and also that little bit at the start of redemption that isn't in real time"? Tough one.

Hopefully whatever is decided with this change can help solve the dispute over at the on-screen kills page too.--Acer4666 18:32, April 21, 2011 (UTC)

I tried to discuss this with proudhug, but he's not talking to me because I wouldn't accept his footnote mention as a compromise. My idea is to include all of what you said and make it something along the lines of "Covered by the 24 hours of each season, plus Redemption, the prequels, Rookie series, and Conspiracy." Short, sweet, and to the point. --ASHPD24 18:42, April 21, 2011 (UTC)
The problem is, this list includes mentioned kills, so we have to very specific about the time frame of deaths that we accept. The current policy is very neat and tidy for this, but doesn't include redemption. If we just say "plus redemption" then do we include the mentioned people butchered by Juma in the past however many years leading upto it?--Acer4666 18:54, April 21, 2011 (UTC)
The criteria for kills that happen out of seasons and are not shown anywhere in any canon, is to mention them in footnotes. --ASHPD24 19:01, April 21, 2011 (UTC)
Redemption happens entirely out of the seasons, do you think those kills should be excluded?--Acer4666 19:04, April 21, 2011 (UTC)
I said kills that are not shown anywhere in canon. Redemption is canon. --ASHPD24 19:22, April 21, 2011 (UTC)
But this isn't "shown" deaths, or "on-screen" deaths. We include the 6 guys killed by Jack at the end of Day 1, but they weren't shown to be killed in canon--Acer4666 19:25, April 21, 2011 (UTC)
Ok, I see you're suggesting deaths that are shown on-screen, as well as deaths that are mentioned to have happened within the 24 hours of each season. That seems a very arbitrary and random inclusion criteria--Acer4666 19:27, April 21, 2011 (UTC)
I'm not the one who made it so. The people who made up the damn page has that as their inclusion criteria. Not me. --ASHPD24 19:52, April 21, 2011 (UTC)
It seems to me that this isn't that difficult to phrase. I changed it to reflect how we currently do it with the inclusion of Redemption. --proudhug 19:56, April 21, 2011 (UTC)
So it's okay for you to change what you don't like but you don't want to change anything else? --ASHPD24 19:59, April 21, 2011 (UTC)
Nothing's changed. I just fixed the wording of the introduction because it didn't reflect the current criteria. Feel free to discuss changing said criteria if you like, however. --proudhug!
What's the point? You don't like any of my ideas. --ASHPD24 20:12, April 21, 2011 (UTC)
Just to check we don't get any sticky situations with this new wording - was anyone mentioned to have died in the time period between the opening scene of Redemption and the "real-time" part? God I hate redemption, why did they decide not to bother with real-time stuff :P--Acer4666 22:43, April 21, 2011 (UTC)
No to the first one.
And it was in real time. Remember all the clocks? --ASHPD24 22:57, April 21, 2011 (UTC)

If a person was mentioned to be killed, they get listed here, even if the body wasn't seen. That's always been the case. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 00:11, April 22, 2011 (UTC)

And, regarding Redemption and stuff (the prologue that occurred outside of real time), it is acceptable because it was filmed and aired. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 00:34, April 22, 2011 (UTC)

It's not that simple though Blue Rook - we need to ascertain that their mentioned death happened at some point during one of the episodes. If someone says "yeah, my father died", we don't include it, as we assume the death happened prior to the season starting (thought we don't know for sure!)
For the tv show episodes, this is dead easy - each episode corresponds to one hour of time. I will admit, given my snarky comment about redemption, that the episodes last 40 minutes and so are no more "real-time" than redemption, but I have other reasons to dislike redemption haha.
However, how long does the episode of redemption correspond to? Two hours? Then we need to remove "prisoner cockroach". Longer? We are given no indication of how much time passes in between the night section and the day section. For all we know, cockroach was the first man killed by the Juma regime, then the 300,000 people he butchered came after that but before Jack being deported. Therefore, "including deaths that happen in the time period covered by the episode", would include these people. This is why it is problematic to include Redemption - we don't know what that time period is, where as we do for the Season episodes.--Acer4666 07:41, April 22, 2011 (UTC)
It would not include the thousands killed in between the prologue and the 2-hour part, because those events weren't shown. We only care about what's shown and what's accounted for within the presented framework. For Redemption, the framework has a gap, nothing really crazy there. Plus, you can't verify any claim like that anyway since we don't know how far in the "cockroach" story happened before the first Real Time minute.
Whatever the wording, the point of this page is for kills in the televised, live action content time frames. (And the Redemption times were explicitly retconned with the DVD release so we go with the Extended Version of it.) Blue Rook  talk  contribs 07:59, April 22, 2011 (UTC)

The matter is simple, Acer. If we can't confirm it, we don't include it. We can't confirm a single death that happened between the Redemption prologue and the "real time" part, so we don't list it. End of story. One might be able to present an argument for a BGIN, but that'd be it. --proudhug 09:00, April 22, 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I may be slow, but I find it very complicated given the fact we include some mentioned deaths and not others. I take "the time period given by each episode" to mean from the IU time it begins to the IU time it ends, but this is flawed because no-one can tell me what that time period is for Redemption. Perhaps you mean "the time period given by each individual scene". In that way, any deaths that happened in the advert breaks of the show must be excluded. --Acer4666 09:15, April 22, 2011 (UTC)
Update on my position - actually there isn't anything inherently wrong with not knowing the exact time frame of Redemption. But were any kills confirmed to have happened in between the prologue and 3pm, then they would have to be included. Blue Rook seemed to be disputing this because that period was never shown on screen?
And yeah, the 300,000 deaths can't be confirmed to be during that time period, but I think we need to alter the BGIN to say that they feasibly could have happened during Redemption's time scale--Acer4666 10:15, April 22, 2011 (UTC)

I haven't watched Redemption in quite a while, but yes if deaths can be confirmed to have happened between the prologue and 3pm we should include them. The page is for deaths that occur between the first scene and the last, regardless if they were shown on-screen. Any that can't be confirmed are excluded. If a terrorist attack results in many deaths but we can only actually confirm one of them, then we'd only include that one. In other words, this page is for the minimum number of deaths on the show. --proudhug 12:17, April 22, 2011 (UTC)

Oop, just thought of a conundrum - if the time period of an episode is between the first scene and the last scene, check out Day 3: 1:00pm-2:00pm. First scene is Palmer collapsing, last scene is Jack taking heroin, so the time period of that episode is 3 years, and we need to include all the deaths that happened during the Game. This isn't even a "previously" segment, it just shows those scenes in order. Any thoughts on a re-wording that gets around that?--Acer4666 11:58, April 23, 2011 (UTC)
That's just a flashback. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 12:10, April 23, 2011 (UTC)
No it's not - the episode starts at that time, then it says "3 years later". The one at the start of season 5 is a flashback yes, as that says "18 months earlier", but the Day 3 opening is no different to the Redemption one--Acer4666 12:13, April 23, 2011 (UTC)
It's a recap; reused footage from Day 2: 7:00am-8:00am, obviously. The Redemption prologue is new footage. I'm assuming you don't honestly believe people would try justify adding inter-season kills because of that reused footage, do you? --proudhug 02:15, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
I'm being very pedantic, yes, but the rules we set need to be consistent and make sense. Just because footage has appeared before, doesn't mean that alters when it takes place. Does 24: Conspiracy not actually take place on Day 4, because that time period has already been shown? Is it, in fact, all in flashback? Does Audrey and Jack in the hotel room take place sometime else because a shot happens to have been re-used from the Season 4 Prequel?
Whether or not something is re-used footage can't alter how we view it. Anyone watching Season 3 for the first time, would see a scene set on one day, then the timeline jumping forward 3 years and scenes set on an another day, no different to how Redemption plays out. Dramatically, to long-term fans of the show, it may be a "recap" - but that doesn't change the time period it happens in. And I am currently justifying adding those inter-season kills right now; I'm suggesting that the wording of the introduction be changed.--Acer4666 09:10, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
My personal preference would be to change the wording to "time periods mentioned in Kiefer Sutherland's introductory narration" or something like that, as in the times of "the following takes place between...". That would mean removing the "kill the cockroach" death, but including deaths from prologues seems to be an unmanageable thing. If there are scenes tacked onto the start and end of something, outside of the real time parts, then including them just leads to problems--Acer4666 09:34, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
How is the inclusion of prologue deaths unmanageable. The "cockroach" death is sitting there just fine, and has been for awhile. This idea that you have, that the non-real-time prologue component of Redemption somehow isn't worthy of inclusion, is quite far out there in left field. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 21:45, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
Do you not see my logic though? If we treat that prologue as part of the episode, we must do the same for the Day 3 prologue. If we don't count parts when the episodes jump forward in time, we have to remove Gael Ortega and anyone else that died in an ad break.--Acer4666 21:52, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
But that's different. The ad breaks and the Redemption prologue are part of the same episode. The Game, while true it does take place between the end of Day 2/beginning of Day 3 and those 2 scenes are shown in the same episode, the events of The Game are not, and it's like a seperate season altogether. --ASHPD24 22:03, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
I agree that I am being very pedantic - but I feel strongly that the inclusion criteria should be rock solid and impervious to ambiguity. Although the Game feels like a separate season, and was released on its own media etc, look at the timeline completely objectively and you'll see that under the current criteria they should be included. Take, for example, the 257 deaths from flight 221. They weren't mentioned in season 1, they were from a novel - which definitely isn't the "same episode", but we include them because of their place in the timeline.
My other option would be to include all mentioned deaths, regardless of when they occurred. But, only use the TV show as a source (to avoid deaths from the Game and novels etc which would be unmanageable). After season 2 aired, I once made a similar list, and those were my criteria. I realise that is a vast change, but at least it has consistent inclusion rules--Acer4666 22:10, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

I can sense I may be being very irritating here with this discussion, so how about, to satisfy me, we change the inclusion criteria to "list of deaths confirmed to have happened during the 24-hour periods covered by each season of 24, as well as the time period covered by Redemption". I know it's wordy and not very punchy, but it isn't open to interpretation by awkward arseholes like myself ;)--Acer4666 22:27, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

I'm all for inclusion of all of 'em from every media (though I don't see how the books would be unmanageable; though The Game could only include named kills and cutscene kills since you have the option of arresting people) and that's a good idea to change the current criteria to allow kills from all media. But what is your list? --ASHPD24 22:25, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
The events of the ad breaks are considered part of the narrative of each season, and this is clear by the chain of events which are seen and on account of the dialogue. Whatever happened between the Redempt Prologue and the real time Redempt stuff is unspecified and quite emphatically not a significant part of the narrative by any stretch. Yes, stuff occurred, but it's not shown for a reason. And this recycled footage from season 2... I just don't see how it has a place in a discussion about forcing The Game kills into this page. This page is for "deaths on 24", not deaths in the 24 Playstation Game. Or deaths in an openly lighthearted parody of 24 that advertises underarm deodorant. These can receive their own deaths pages. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 22:32, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
If this is "deaths on 24", then it isn't "deaths from Findings at CTU", so the casualties from Flight 221 should be removed. And yes, the Redemption prologue doesn't specify how long elapses between it and the main action, but the Day 3 one definitely does - it says "3 years later", and that jump is certainly part of the narrative.
What about that alternate wording I suggested? If only to keep me happy...--Acer4666 22:39, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
Ah, another good reason is during 1x24 at the end there's a flashback to the beginning of the season. Should we re-include all of the kills from that point to the current point? --ASHPD24 22:34, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
Ah no, that is different - The episode begins at 11:00pm, and ends at 12:00am. Any jumping of the timeline in between then doesn't change the time period of the episode, whereas Day 3 premiere starts at Day 2, and ends at Day 3. And even if you were right, we wouldn't "re-include" the kills because the kills fit the inclusion criteria, just because they do it twice over doesn't mean we put them on the page twice. Teri's death is mentioned numerous times, but she's just on the page once--Acer4666 22:39, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
To me this discussion is starting to split hairs for the sake of splitting hairs. The Flight 221 deaths occurred during Season 1, plain and simple, yes? They did not occur during the live testimony of Findings. (Both are canonical sources for the purposes of this project so it is okay to establish a number of deaths from Findings.)
Acer if all you're looking for is to type the words "and Redemption" in the intro, then you're welcome to do it because it reflects the truth about this page and its purpose too. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 22:51, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
I wasn't trying to split hairs for the sake of it, or just wanting to type "and redemption", I was trying to set a consistent inclusion policy wording that made sense and could not be mis-interpreted. Including some mentioned deaths and not others is, to me, an extremely complicated business, but I am happy now and everything on the page is now in line with the wording of the intro paragraph, so looks like we're sorted hopefully--Acer4666 22:56, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
(and if you're wondering, the Game kills happened during Season 3, just as plainly and simply. Like it or not, Season 3 takes place over the course of 3 years)--Acer4666 22:58, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
No.....the Game is a separate thing from S3. It's an interquel. --ASHPD24 23:07, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
To claim that Season 3 takes place over 3 years is madness. Season 3, like all other seasons, is only 24 hours. Using your argument, we should move everything from Day 2 and everything from Day 3 and label it Days 2 & 3 & the three years that occurred between it simply because a recap of recycled footage occurred before the first scene. It's simply another version of a Previously on 24 summary for the benefit of the viewers.
And with the Game, everyone's opinions are different. In my opinion The Game is a silly spun-off Playstation game that insinuated itself between Seasons 2 and 3 and blithely conflicted with Season 3 details. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 23:15, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
I think you're confusing the terms "Day 2" and "Day 3" with the terms "Season 2" and "Season 3". But this is my final say in this, I don't wanna needlessly wind people up. I am no longer gonna participate in this debate - our opinions differ, but that's fine, the page is good, I think we're happy. Do feel free to respond to this post, you may have the last word, but I won't labour the point haha!--Acer4666 23:20, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
Wait, Blue Rook. Why do you say The Game conflicted with S3 details? It seemed to fit overall. --ASHPD24 23:48, April 24, 2011 (UTC)
Wayne says to David in the Season 3 premiere that "the man behind the attempt on your life" was "arrested" (as well as his "top-tier people"). Absent from this quote is anything about a risible plot causing West Coast earthquakes with bombs and Max being shot to death on his yacht. Since Max is beyond any shadow of a doubt whatsoever the "the man" Wayne is talking about, he therefore was arrested. But at this project we equate a silly console game on par with the canon of the television series, and worse, we accept that Max's fate was actually death instead of an arrest as a retcon since the Game came out after Season 3. Nobody should take this as an introduction to a proposed change, however, as I have no intention of trying to alter the policy on matters like this again—I'm just outlining my opinions on it since you asked. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 00:04, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
Well to be fair, TG was made after S3, and while it was no doubt Max who Wayne was talking about then, he more or less was on the same level as Trepkos - they seemed to be equals and in a way, Trepkos was in charge, even if it was a triumvirate between him, Max, and his unnamed buddy. --ASHPD24 00:19, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
Max was superior to Trepkos and the unnamed guy, it is demonstrated in the dialogue. Trepkos's first line to Kingsley is "Max is very unhappy" — he is the messenger for his own boss. He didn't say "I'm unhappy" or "we're unhappy". And later, it was shown that Trepkos had absolutely no idea what Mandy was going to do for Max — he didn't even know his own conspiracy's "Plan B". So while it is true that Max/Trepkos/Unnamed-guy were a triumvirate of bosses over Kingsley, when you look among the three themselves, Max was certainly the chief. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 03:51, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
True, from a standpoint of there always being "one man" at the top. Max was a first among equals, so to say. --ASHPD24 05:03, April 25, 2011 (UTC)

Wow. I don't even have a clue what just happened here. --proudhug 05:31, April 25, 2011 (UTC)

Felsted shootout casualties[edit source]

Check this out, regarding Felsted shootout casualties, may need a little change to this page. --William 16:13, July 7, 2011 (UTC)

I checked it out - seems like we do need to change the page, but I don't quite get the same numbers you do. There are definitely 7 distinct bodies of Felsted employees (one is Gary, the others are not identified). You've added Mitchell (Day 4) onto that to get 8 - but many of the unidentified bodies are wearing Mitchell's clothes and could easily be him. I don't actually think we get any concrete proof that Mitchell is dead other than his absence - he may have run off, or just knocked out, we never see a body or hear that all the felsted employees died (Jack only says that "our security detail was taken out", meaning CTU).
Also, you've counted 5 CTU guys killed. Only 3 were seen at the place, and those 3 were seen dead. Craig Erwichsays there are 4 people in his team - as soon as I watched that I took it to mean he was including himself as part of them team, ie Craig plus 3 others. I think you've interpreted it as Craig plus 4 others, but because of the uncertainty we go with the lowest number of definite deaths, ie 4 CTU guys (including Craig and Rick).
Therefore I get - Gary, and 6 other felsted guys (one of which might be Mitchell), Craig, Rick, and 2 other CTU guys.--Acer4666 23:45, July 11, 2011 (UTC)
I agree with you about the felsted thing —— though I think it would be strange that Mitchell's body was found in the corridor. I think he was the first casualty —— killed in the parking lot while having a smoke, then the hitmen killed the CTU agents at the front gate so we can't see Mitch's body, but that's assumption and never mind.
About the CTU deaths, I think we should count 5. Craig is the team leader and there are four men in his team, that's what I understand. And Jack said "our security detail was taken out", which means they are all dead.
No need to edit this page hurriedly. The Rockland building two missing kills, three unseen MF commandos' deaths, 4 other deaths besides Derek Rosner, Air Force One's 75 casualties... There're still a lot need to check out. --William 02:12, July 12, 2011 (UTC)
I think with Craig's team, it's true he could mean either thing. But if he wasn't including himself in the team, I don't think he would've gone on the mission. Jack was asking for a number of people coming with them really, and Craig said 4. If he meant "4 plus me", he would've said something to that effect. If I may, I'll make an analogy with the Beatles:
If someone had asked John Lennon, "how many people in your band?", he would have undoubtedly said 4 (counting himself). And when went out on stage to play, John went with them. It's true that if someone had then said to George Martin (their producer), "how many people in this new band of yours?" he would have also said 4 (not counting himself), but the reason he doesn't count himself is, when they go out on stage to play, George Martin didn't go with them. So I think if Craig wasn't counting himself in the figure of 4, that meant he wouldn't be going on the mission, but we know he did go because Jack radioed him later.
Whether this analogy makes any sense, or is applicable at all, is questionable haha! But that is how I interpret Craig saying there are 4 people on his team. I also think it is supported by the show makers only showing 3 other CTU agents besides Craig.--Acer4666 11:59, July 12, 2011 (UTC)
That does make sense. I agree with you. I just want to see more deaths on this page. --William 14:16, July 12, 2011 (UTC)
Haha, it's good to make 24 look bloodthirsty! There's actually a similar case when Mike Novick talks about the size of the Operation Nightfall team that Jack led (which doesn't actually affect this list but still needs noting on various pages). However in that case I think it's a little more ambiguous: rather than "how many people in your team? "four", like in the craig erwich case, in the operation nightfall one we get the line "[Jack] led a six man team into Kosovo". I think the context of this one leaves it more open to interpretation of whether Jack is included in the 6 or not. Nightfall interprets this as Jack included in the 6, and findings at CTU says that there were 8 people in the team which is patently wrong. But this discussion is probs not relevant on this page!
I agree there are lots more still to add to this page. Something like the compound shootout with the marines in season 4 - we are told there are no survivors of the terrorists there, so do we make a note of every different person's face seen at the compound during the raid, and then list that that many people died (even if they weren't explicitly seen killed)? Also, there are several instances of people saying "All the people were killed" (eg. when the nuclear warhead is stolen by Marwan). You wouldn't say that if 1 person, or 2 people were killed, so I guess the minimum number of deaths that could relate to is 3. So I guess we have to add 3 deaths every time someone says "all my team are dead " or something, which might look a bit funny. Anyway, thats just some of my thoughts on additions to this page.--Acer4666 15:06, July 12, 2011 (UTC)
You thoughts are great. This page really needs to be added some new info. I think we didn't miss any day 1 deaths so we should start with day 2 —— Shareef and Farhad Salim. Is there some helicopter crew members aboard?
Also let me ask a silly question: How do we tell a person whether he was simply knocked out or killed? Like Scott the sniper, maybe he was just knocked unconscious by Jack? --William 15:54, July 12, 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, I guess with many of the "visual" deaths we don't have 100% concrete proof that they actually died. I guess we go with the spirit of the scene as it were - in the coliseum scene Jack killed all of Kingsley's other men, and afterwards we see Jack in the ambulance but no-one else, so we kind of assume Scott wasn't knocked out & arrested. Similar to Mitchell's death that I mentioned above not being certain, but the drama of the scene implied he was killed. It's not a silly question - as how strict we are with confirmation of deaths is a grey area, but generally it seems the rule is - "if someone gets shot, or is seen sprawled on the floor, and we don't get any indication they survived, we list them as a death".
As for the season 1 tally - check out an above post of mine where I think I found a couple of missing deaths from the day 1 detention centre siege.--Acer4666 16:09, July 12, 2011 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.