9,369 Pages

Another possible actor found Edit


I'm almost certain that Navi's henchman (pictured right) is Nick Hermz. Anyone not think so?--Acer4666 19:07, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

That really looks like him. I'm 100% sure that that is him. --Station7 20:24, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

Yep, his hair is slicked back in that photo but the face looks very similar. By the way Acer, where do you find out these things and know who to look for? --ASHPD24 21:42, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

The list at User:ThomasHL is a massive help, I am very much in his debt for that. But if you get a 24 episode up on imdb, then click on the full cast and crew, and look under "stunts", you'll get a list of stuntmen that supposedly were in that episode. It's normally wildly innaccurate, but normally lists people that were in 24 at some point. In this case, Nick Hermz was credited as "thug" for the two episodes this guy appeared in (it also said he did stunts in 11-12 and 12-1, dunno if that's true). But yeah, if you find names off Tom's userpage or imdb, try looking for their stunt reels on youtube which may have 24 work on it, and if you have someone you think might be them it's always worth finding an e-mail or facebook page to ask them about it. I find it a lot of fun hunting out these background guys!--Acer4666 21:54, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

That's him. All these new extras developments are really exciting. And the best part is, there are so many more to be done... Blue Rook  talk  contribs 03:31, May 7, 2011 (UTC)

Yay, another additon. Added. You're good with identifying photos immediately Blue. --ASHPD24 03:33, May 7, 2011 (UTC)

Possible actor found Edit


Phillip Bauer's mercenary from S6 4am-5am was uncredited, but one of the stuntmen from that episode, Chris Gann, looks identical to me and I think that's the actor. See Gann's IMDB page. Let me know if you think Gann is the mercenary; I want to get feedback before I post this. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 17:51, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

A new picture of Gann has appeared on IMDB, and now I'm certain that it's him. Hell, the actor is even a water sports expert, and this character operated a boat in the episode. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 05:16, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Conspiracy addition Edit

I've added the blond-haired guy from Conspiracy. Now, I'm pretty sure he doesn't have any lines, which conflicts with the inclusion criteria for these Unnamed characters. But he should be an exception, given that, unlike other uncredited extras without lines, he is actually important to the plot. Since he was working alone, we can't credit anyone else. Any rebuttals? – Blue Rook 22:32, 3 July 2008 (UTC)talkcontribs

False, I take it back. He's not permitted, plain and simple, so I just slid him over to my Forbidden list. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 06:32, April 24, 2011 (UTC)

Topic of interest Edit

See Talk:Kenneth Choi for a topic about Cheng's operative, one of these terrorists. – Blue Rook 04:06, 31 March 2008 (UTC)talkcontribs

Chinese agent Edit

Hey, I was thinking the Chinese agent in the Day 5 finale should be moved to unnamed non-CTU government agents, because at this point Cheng wasn't a terrorist. He became a terrorist in Day 6. That's just my viewpoint. What do you think? Comp25 19:46, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

I remember considering that when I made the entry for him. Two things kept me from adding him there: first, I regard Cheng to be a terrorist in Day 5 because he kidnapped an American with the help of illegal mole President Logan and the corporate criminals in the bluetooth cabal (this was revealed in Logan's last D5 conversation with Graem). Second, we don't know for certain that the "Chinese agent" was really a Chinese government agent. Cheng used an army of mercenaries in Day 6. The only reason this character is labelled "Chinese agent" is because he was a Chinese man impersonating a Secret Service agent, not that he was an agent from China himself. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 20:42, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
I agree with moving the agent to a different page. Cheng was not a terrorist in Season 5 - kidnapping someone isn't terrorism (that's exactly what the commandoes/contracters in S8 did and we have them in civilians), and the fact Logan was helping Cheng was not revealed, it's complete speculation and doesn't make any sense.
The question is where to put the guy - clearly Cheng was operating in some sort of covert government role during Season 5, and I don't think listing his man as an "agent" is miles from the truth. They were committing foreign espionage for the purposes of gaining American intelligence.--Acer4666 (talk) 16:27, January 19, 2014 (UTC)

Move to Unnamed antagonists Edit

Per the category, shouldn't this also be adjusted to reflect that not all of the people on the list count as terrorists? --Pyramidhead 19:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Nope. This page is to list terrorists only. An antagonist who is not a terrorist would fit into a different category, depending on what they do, such as their occupation or affiliation. --Proudhug 19:25, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
That's the reason why Juma's rebel army soldiers, The Rookie bank robbers, and Rossler's security guards, etc., are on other unnamed character pages. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 19:29, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Bledsoe goon Edit

The goon on the roof that found Mullins and reported to Haigney, if I remember correctly had lines and good camera time. Does he have a name? Thief you've been rocking out on the character stuff this most recent episode, whatcha think? Blue Rook  talk  contribs 05:23, May 5, 2010 (UTC)

I was checking it out last night, but I didn't hear him being called by any name. I took a snapshot of him, but hesitated to add him because of that. Anyway, glad you did. Thief12 00:52, May 6, 2010 (UTC)
Yes also I added him over on Civilians, because there's no flipping way that guy could ever be remotely considered a terrorist. I posted it here because sometimes my mind falsely construes this page as "Unnamed Antagonists" instead of "Terrorists" and I get carried away. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 03:35, May 6, 2010 (UTC)

the commandos in the last episode Edit

someone should add them to this page or an unamed antagonists page, the commando leader played a very important role in the final moments of the episode, id add it but i dont know how to add pictures.

Actually, according to the Fox recap, the commando leader's name is Nantz. I don't know this wikia's policy on the Fox recaps, but if it counts, I think we should give someone his own page. --G-reaper 22:13, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure by examining the canon policy that it's acceptable. The episode guides can be contradicted by the actual episodes, but we can take information from them. Just like those old Research Files, the content is permissible here. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 01:29, May 30, 2010 (UTC)
See Talk:Day 8: 3:00pm-4:00pm for the updated discussion on this topic. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 05:50, June 2, 2010 (UTC)

Crewcut separatist & friends Edit

After finding out that Sam Hunter possibly appeared in Day 5: 9:00pm-10:00pm as Bierko's thug, I looked into it. I have a picture here with two photos of crewcut on the left, and two photos of sam hunter on the right. I'm just not sure of it. One Sam Hunter pic comes from imdb, the other comes from his cast profile on this website. It describes his 24 role as "terrorist thug" who "is killed by Jack Bauer" (which the crewcut guy isn't, on-screen at least). Anyway I thought I would just throw this out there, perhaps Sam Hunter played a different terrorist at the gas plant--Acer4666 23:46, June 5, 2011 (UTC)

Well, he certainly looks like crewcut-guy. Thief12 00:13, June 6, 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, after studying them for a while I think they look pretty identical.--Acer4666 00:26, June 6, 2011 (UTC)
Looks like the guy, but isn't he killed by Jack? The second guy killed by him at the wilshire shootout? --ASHPD24 00:58, June 6, 2011 (UTC)

Acer this is incredible. These two look so dramatically similar that I agree it is the same man. I recall a thought that came to me when I made the entry for him: "there's no way such a background-y performer is ever going to be identified". Shows me! Blue Rook  talk  contribs 06:48, June 6, 2011 (UTC)

Haha excellent! I think what was confusing me was that the top two pics looked different to the bottom two (the top looked all American marine, and the bottom looked all russian separatist, if that makes any sense?). But if both the actor and the character can look like two different people then I'm convinced.
And ASHPD24, the guy was never seen to be killed on-screen. Check out the on-screen kills list, you'll see everyone Jack shoots has longer hair than the crewcut guy. I assume he was filmed to be shot and it was cut like in the Day 1 port shootout, hence why Sam Hunter included being shot by Jack in his bio--Acer4666 11:24, June 6, 2011 (UTC)
5x15 perimeter guard 9.54pm

Also not killed

Yep, Crewcut was 1 of at least 2 (possibly 3) separatists not explicitly seen to be killed in my estimation.

The bottom line to remember from this shootout is that it was edited poorly and there does not seem to be much consistency between the extras who played the separatists seen infiltrating the Gas Company and those seen during the gunfight less than half an hour later. (It's not the only season 5 shootout that was poorly edited, remember the filming of the Amy Martin hostage rescue scene we recently sorted out?)

The other 1 not seen killed: the guy in the picture I added here, who I believe someone has already identified in the recent Stunt Actor Bonanza. Additionally, there is File:Bierkothug.jpg, who is currently listed as a Jack kill. However, if you watch this dude, you'll see he merely pulls back rapidly behind the corner for cover. Therefore I'm pretty darn sure this guy is not killed by Jack; later, we see Curtis take a few shots, and in my mind it's Curtis who drops him off-screen. Take a look guys, we may want to consider changing this? Blue Rook  talk  contribs 15:31, June 6, 2011 (UTC)

No, he's not merely pulling back in cover, he's flinching in pain and falling down. --ASHPD24 15:49, June 6, 2011 (UTC)
Hmm interesting about the on-screen kill. He looks like he's about to slide to the ground in a dramatic death way but the shot cuts off too early, so he could feasibly just be ducking for cover. He definitely dies soon after, but as you say we don't know if he was killed by Curtis's "cover fire". There was a similar thing in the day 2 alley shootout (the one with jonathan wallace) where one of the shots could have just been someone ducking back as opposed to dying because of the camera cutting early, but I took the view that these shootouts are edited "jack shoots - guy gets hit - we don't see guy again" so it seemed as tho the show makers were putting it forward as a Jack kill. However this wilshire gas scene is a bit more ambiguous than that because of the clarity of the shots. I don't know about this one.
I'm not sure who plays that surviving sentry bloke. It looks a bit like the guy I asked tom about here, but I think that guy is Theo Kypri whereas this wilshire sentry guy isn't. Hmm not sure if that was where you thought he was identified; or somewhere else?--Acer4666 16:58, June 6, 2011 (UTC)
That guy actually looks quite a bit like Kohler, but it seems odd that they'd re-use him--Acer4666 17:14, June 6, 2011 (UTC)
To keep things simple, I'll happily buy ASHPD24's explanation.
And this "ignorant sentry" guy, damn I really thought the actor came up recently. I looked at the guy you linked on Tom's talk page, and I am very unsure if it's him. The resemblance is easy to see but the shape of the head and other features don't seem to match. Ah well. We might want to make a project page of "mystery stunt guys" as our home base perhaps? Putting too much of this kind of thing in user space might be a bit too exclusive. We're also overdue putting those "OOU character names" like Nikolai in a project page, like we talked about in the Forum. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 18:53, June 6, 2011 (UTC)
Just to run some names past you for these project pages: Howabout "Wiki 24:Character names" for the one about the source of certain names, and "Wiki 24:Unidentified performers" for background and stunt guys that we see popping up and wonder who plays them?--Acer4666 09:18, June 7, 2011 (UTC)
Perfect! Blue Rook  talk  contribs 15:13, June 7, 2011 (UTC)

Bierko's technician Edit

I watched Day 5 on netflix and the subtitles called him "Petrov". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) .

Very interesting... do you recall the episode specifically? We can use the name if it comes up on DVD subtitles, so let me know so I can check. But at the moment, the policy does exclude closed captions/subtitles from outside sources such as HULU. This is why Taylor's AttGen was never moved to "Davenport", which is what the HULU captions apparently claimed. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 19:49, August 2, 2012 (UTC)

Starkwood commando, Collier's assassin, Graem's goon, Oil rig mercenary, Saunders' mercenary and PFA in Redemption Edit

All the Starkwood mercenary did was detain someone in an unauthorized area. Collier's assassin killed Hodges, nothing else. Graem's thug murdered two CTU agents and tried to murder Jack and Phillip, thats it. Just to clarify, I'm talking about the mercenary in the Zodiac, not the spotter at the base of the rig. He kidnapped Josh and defended the platform and thats about it. I'm wondering how those guys could qualify as terrorists. One of the masked henchmen, specifically the one that scanned Ryan's body, reported to his commander that there wasn't any bugs or tracers on him, so he should be included as well. Also why are the unnamed African rebels listed under "Unnamed military personel"? There is no way in hell they could be considered soldiers. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) .

(Before I begin, please remember to sign your posts, by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~.)
Now these are pretty good points, but I have considered these kinds of things before, and I was never really convinced any of them needed to be moved. Here are my rationales for each of them, let me know what you think:
  1. Starkwood commando: of the ones you mentioned, this is the one I'm somewhat amenable to moving. But what keeps me from agreeing outright is the fact that this guy apparently asked Hodges if he should send Knowles to Stokes for interrogation... and everyone who was loyal to Stokes was definitely in on the conspiracy. The idea that a guy who was unaware of the conspiracy would even think of sending the Chairman of the Board (who is structurally the most powerful person in perhaps every corporation) to some low-level thug for interrogation is ridiculous. Given that detail, to assume he was an active conspirator working beneath Stokes like Greer and Dolen is much less speculative in my opinion then to assume he wasn't.
  2. Collier's assassin: the key to remember about the Hodges car-bomber is that Renee said "...obviously somehow the people he was working for found out he was still alive." And, also: Jack Bauer agreed with this assessment. Unless it can be proven otherwise, I'm going to agree with the characters that the assassin was most likely connected with the Prion variant cabal. How this connection exists is certainly a plot hole, yes, but who am I to disagree with the Renee and Jack?
  3. Graem's thug: which other Unnamed characters page can he go? Graem, Phillip, and their limited circle of people conspired to steal nukes, obstructed an active terrorism investigation, murdered federal agents, and abetted terrorists. I can't imagine a better spot for this guy.
  4. Zodiac mercenary: the white dude you're talking about was in bed with Phillip the whole time he plotted a terrorist attack with Cheng on CTU LA. He was on the oil rig right alongside Chinese terrorists and died fighting alongside them. To me it is pretty clear.
  5. Saunders mercenary: if that's right he should definitely be added too, I'll check the scene again soon unless someone beats me to it and add him. To be clear, you do want this guy to be added, right? I'm unsure because everyone else in the list is a proposed removal.
  6. The Sangalan rebels: these are listed in military personnel because they were part of General Juma's rebel military faction. The plot indicates that Gen Juma was once a legitimate general, but became a rebel and a chunk of the Sangalan martial forces took his side. I do agree that they are antagonists, but they never stopped being a military organization, which supersedes any interpretation about their motivations. This is the same logic why Rossler's evil guard is not listed on Unnamed terrorists, but is listed in Unnamed security guards.
Blue Rook  talk  contribs 06:37, August 21, 2012 (UTC)
I do want the second Saunders' Mercenary added to this list. As for Collier's assassin, he was hired by Olivia, not Cara or Wilson. Olivia had Hodges killed because she thought Hodges shouldn't be given Witness Protection after killing Roger, almost killing Henry and helping Juma. There is no evidence that the assassin she paid was connected to the conspiracy. Jack and Renee assumed the assassin was working for the cabal because it was the most plausible explanation and they didn't know Olivia didn't like the idea of Hodges living out his life in some fancy house in Montana or wherever after everything that happened. And don't give me the idea Collier was working for the conspiracy, he tried to talk

Olivia out of it and when she changed her mind and didn't pay he ordered the go-ahead because Hodges was about to get away. As for the Juma goons, several of them are kidnapping children and are wearing civilian clothes, so I fail to see how that makes them soldiers. And if they are an atcual military organization, why is Juma's commando at the White House a terrorist? The soldier was in uniform, part of a military command structure, and carried his weapons out in the open.

I have to disagree that Collier's assassin was most likely connected to the prion variant cabal. It's quite clear why Renee thought that - there had just been an assassination attempt by the prion variant, but we know specifically that wasn't who implemented the second assassination (it was Olivia Taylor). As much as I'm loth to label a contract killer as a civilian, I don't think he qualifies as a terrorist.
As for Graem's thug - I'm sure Phillip and Graem did not conspire to steal nukes (that was solely darren mccarthy), or abet terrorists (they were trying to stop them themselves). So that leaves them obstructing a terrorism investigation and killing federal agents. Does that make them terrorists? I'm unconvinced.
I can't comment on the sangalan rebels, perhaps that discussion should be had on Talk:Unnamed military personnel. But I will say about your comment on Juma's troops in the white house - yes they are also military personnel, and also terrorists. Often people fit into more than one category (eg, most of the medical personnel are also civilians), but we choose the most descriptive and apt category to label them with. Military personnel who commit terrorism are best described as terrorists.
And the Saunders mercenary said "he's clean. There's no tracker", which I guess makes him eligible for an entry on the page, if anyone gets round to it--Acer4666 (talk) 11:00, August 23, 2012 (UTC)
About Graem's henchman - I've just realised what you mean about stealing nukes and abetting terrorists. What happened (as far as I can tell) is that Graem and Phillip were blackmailed into stealing nukes and supplying them to Gredenko, which they believed were to keep for use in war. That's treason, not terrorism. And although technically they abetted terrorists, they did so unknowingly (as did this guy and others). Compare it to Jacob Rossler, who knowingly abetted terrorists, and the guys working for him attempted to kill federal agents too, but as you say they belong in security guards.--Acer4666 (talk) 23:05, August 26, 2012 (UTC)

Unlisted Omar (day 4) Compound GuardsEdit

There are some guards seen being killed by Secretary of Defense James Heller and yet they are not listed here. Should I add some snapshots of them?--Gunman6 (talk) 07:20, April 22, 2013 (UTC)
Are they "significant characters with dialogue", as per the Inclusion policy?--Acer4666 (talk) 18:09, April 22, 2013 (UTC)

Cheng's henchmen, Tokarev henchmen Edit

Shouldn't the Chinese agents working for Cheng be listed under Government agents?

We only list the characters on one page - and if they fall into more than one category, we pick the most descriptive one. For example, most of the terrorists on this page are "civilians", but listing them all on the Unnamed civilians page would be confusing, so we list them here as they were involved in acts of terrorism. Cheng and his henchmen held a load of people hostage, killed some others, and generally committed terrorist activities in America so the most descriptive place for them is here on the terrorists page. Although they were maybe government agents, they definitely were terrorists and that is the most apt way to describe them--Acer4666 (talk) 14:58, July 30, 2013 (UTC)

If that is the case the Russian agents at Turner's Department store are also terrorists, since they were part of a conspiracy to murder a foreign leader and sell nuclear rods to a terrorist organization and later tried to cover it up.

I think I probably agree with that assessment - anyone else for/against this move?--Acer4666 (talk) 17:37, August 10, 2013 (UTC)
Agree with the move for the Russian spooks. Not sure why I didn't think of this myself. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 02:18, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

Wallace henchman and Morrison assassin Edit

Do Jonathan Wallace's accomplice and Robert Morrison's hitman qualify as terrorists?

Morrison's hitman yes, without doubt - Morrison was launching a nuclear missile at America and his hitman was sent to murder someone so that that authorities would not find out and stop it.
Wallace's accomplice is a little hazy - Wallace definitely committed terrorism by smuggling a nuclear bomb into America and making sure it went off. His accomplice was only seen working for him after he had done that and changed his loyalties, so it could go either way - but working for a known terrorist seems good enough for inclusion here, to me. Any other thoughts?--Acer4666 (talk) 17:41, July 31, 2013 (UTC)
Hmm, I really do want to put Wallace's guy here on the terrorists page, but shouldn't we take into account our total lack of awareness of his intentions, knowledge, motivations, etc? Not sure what to think yet. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 02:32, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

Red Square Edit

Do the Red Square hitmen and lesser henchmen really qualify?

Yes, Red Square was smuggling in nuclear fuel rods for use against New York City, they definitely qualify as terrorists--Acer4666 (talk) 16:44, August 1, 2013 (UTC)

Omar terrorist Edit

Jack briefly interrogated one of Omar's guards who pointed him in the right direction toward Heller.

Indeed, but these unnamed character pages have criteria as per our inclusion policy - only characters with spoken lines, or whose actors were credited, can be listed here, otherwise we would have every background actor who ever appeared on the show here. The guy you're talking about (played by Michael Hilow) did not have lines, nor was Hilow credited--Acer4666 (talk) 16:44, August 1, 2013 (UTC)

Tokarev henchmen Edit

If the Chinese agents in Day 6 qualify as terrorists, shouldn't the Russian goons in the department store qualify, since they were part of a plot to assassinate a foreign leader and sell nuclear fuel rods to a terrorist organization and later tried to cover it up.

Agreed, but since you mentioned this in the "Cheng's henchmen" thread earlier, I have added "Tokarev henchmen" to the earlier thread's heading and this one should be deleted shortly, to keep all the discussion in 1 place. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 02:54, August 15, 2013 (UTC)

I believe I found the actor/stunt performer who played Ostroff's lieutenant! Edit

Feel free to tell me I'm wrong as I can't find any other versions of his resume nor is "24" listed on his IMDb profile but I think this is him for certain:

IMDb profile Promotional photos --Gunman6 (talk) 08:41, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

Wow, that certainly looks like him! I can't seem to find much info about him online but the resemblance definitely matches up--Acer4666 (talk) 13:14, December 27, 2013 (UTC)
Alright, I noticed this site listed in search results and managed to click on this resume here which cites several different shows he worked on with "24" being one of them. He doesn't have the companies right on any of them but I hope that's solid proof.--Gunman6 (talk) 21:00, December 27, 2013 (UTC)
Alright, sorry to update continuously but on that second link where it shows his resume, there's some quicktime videos that can be played and the first one just so happens to be his character on "24" in that key scene. --Gunman6 (talk) 21:08, December 27, 2013 (UTC)
Awesome find!--Acer4666 (talk) 22:00, December 27, 2013 (UTC)

Affiliation categories Edit

It's a bad idea to add affiliation categories to these list pages - the only categories that can be added are ones that apply to every character on the page. This was already discussed about adding "roles by unknown actors", and the resolution was to add links to relevant characters on the actual category page--Acer4666 (talk) 15:30, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I saw it too, but I wasn't sure about how to handle it, so I let it over to you. Gunman6 did these edits. I think you have to check some other pages aswell, or I will remove those categories. --Station7 (talk) 22:42, January 18, 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry, it's been awhile as other wikias I'm on try to tag anyone who is a member of the organization. To be fair, it's getting increasingly difficult to find all the various members of each terrorist organization and when the members of Cheng's agency are listed on the main terrorist groups organization, I don't really see the point in separating them since if someone were randomly browsing the site, you'd think they'd want to find and locate all of the various members on one page or by the appropriate category.

We keep using the term "relevant" but that's subjective. Anyone who's part of a group is going to be an important member whether major or minor so why leave room for argument when we can just tag anyone associated with them. It's like saying that Tony Almeida isn't a relevant member of Emerson's group since he turned out to be a traitor. He was still a key member in some fashion at one point and to discredit anyone else simply because they're played by an unknown background actor is like saying that the various unknown guards at CTU are irrelevant since they're not part of the main cast.--Gunman6 (talk) 00:51, January 19, 2014 (UTC)
I think you've misunderstood what I mean - when I said "relevant" characters, I did mean the characters on this page! Take a look at the Category:Female antagonists for an example of what I mean. We wouldn't add "female antagonists" to this page that largely contains men. But we can link to the relevant characters from the category page itself. To add the entire page to the category would mean anyone looking through would not easily be able to find the relevant characters - to any one single category you added, most of the people on this page are irrelevant. So, all that needs to be done is to add a simple link on the category page that points to the right place. That way, all the members of the organisation are together on the category page--Acer4666 (talk) 00:58, January 19, 2014 (UTC)
How so if the certain specified unnamed characters don't have a link to redirect here to begin with?--Gunman6 (talk) 06:41, January 19, 2014 (UTC)
Just hasn't been done yet!--Acer4666 (talk) 11:51, January 19, 2014 (UTC)

Crewcut seperatist Edit

I'm wondering is the man on the left the crewcut terrorist? --William (talk) 10:24, June 28, 2014 (UTC)

That's a great question. I'm leaning towards "no", but would like more opinions for sure. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 01:01, June 30, 2014 (UTC)
Well, whoever he was, his role seems to be replaced by Garrett Warren's character. --William (talk) 03:40, July 7, 2014 (UTC)

Classification Edit

I no longer believe these Russian operatives are government agents since Anatol had hired bunches of mercenaries aboard Letitcia. I think terrorist category is more suitable for them, like how we treat Pavel Tokarev's operatives. --William (talk) 07:32, July 16, 2014 (UTC)

I agree that Anatol and Cheng were working together to kill thousands of people in order to incite a third world war so they, and anyone working for them to assist them in their plan, are definitely terrorists. This includes those mercenaries who ambushed Jack and Kate--Acer4666 (talk) 11:01, July 16, 2014 (UTC)

Nina's German contact Edit

Not to be nitpicky, but I don't think Nina's contact was German. They spoke German together, but then Nina said to her "why Germany? Why can't I come to you directly?". She was most likely from another German speaking country such as Austria or Switzerland. Anyone object to changing the name of this entry?--Acer4666 (talk) 18:26, August 11, 2015 (UTC)

Just refer to her as "an unnamed contact" unless there's dialogue that might indicate she's from Austria or Switzerland.--Gunman6 (talk) 18:35, August 11, 2015 (UTC)
Yeah that's what I'm suggesting, removing any assertions that she is German--Acer4666 (talk) 18:35, August 11, 2015 (UTC)
I do not believe there is any assertion that this woman is German. I always took this to mean "German-speaking contact". Same reason you can call a Latino person "Spanish" because they speak Spanish, and you are not asserting in any way that they are from Spain. Blue Rook  talk  contribs 20:17, August 11, 2015 (UTC)
Really? I didn't know about the Spanish/Latino thing (I've heard of "hispanic"), but I'm pretty sure "German" definitely means "from Germany". I think if you referred to an Austrian or a Swiss person as a German they'd be offended! Would you ever describe yourself as "English"?
Even without that there are definitely assertions on this page and elsewhere that Nina is working for someone in Germany, which is contradicted by the show. I know changing these headings is sometimes a pain but I think I can catch all the links--Acer4666 (talk) 21:35, August 11, 2015 (UTC)

Description of this page Edit

SuperBowserX has tried to change the inclusion criteria of this page from "terrorists" to include mercenaries, assassins and others. I disagree - there has been a lot of discussion about not making this merely a catch-all antagonists page, and why the entries on here do all count as terrorists. Are there any specific entries that need to be moved?--Acer4666 (talk) 22:32, November 9, 2015 (UTC)

I'm just saying that that sentence (assassins or terrorists) would describe the page's characters a bit better; a perfect example of this is the "Contract killer" under Day 7. If you'd pref to keep it like this, then no prob, just putting the suggestion out there. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SuperbowserX (talkcontribs) .
Actually the contract killer would be better off this page - I suggested it on this talk page (above), and there was consensus for the move but I never got around to it. He belongs better alongside the mercenaries who were hired to kill Jack at the end of Season 8. Any other specific people you don't think should be listed as terrorists?--Acer4666 (talk) 18:58, November 10, 2015 (UTC)

There's Wallace's accomplice. All in all, I'm just saying that retooling the description of the page to say "terrorists or mercenaries" would simply be a more all-inclusive description.--SuperbowserX (talk) 00:59, November 18, 2015 (UTC)

Again, this has been discussed above - I still believe he does belong on this page. Jonathan Wallace was in charge of making sure a nuclear bomb destroyed Los Angeles, which is terrorism by any reasonable definition, so his right hand man certainly belongs here. Note we don't always need to see someone explicitly performing an act of terrorism on-screen, often their affiliation and aiding of terrorists lands them here.
As for generally changing this to "terrorists and assassins" - that's not just changing a description, but the page title and all the links and the whole purview of this page. "unnamed terrorists and assassins" is too clunky and long a name in my opinion, and I don't know how many more people it would really allow (note that wallace's accomplice would not belong here any more if you included the assassins label). There's no need for this big change of this page - I don't know who you want to include that isn't here already. As I say, I can discuss specific examples but you're not giving any strong reasons to overhaul the inclusion criteria of this page--Acer4666 (talk) 18:57, November 18, 2015 (UTC)
Re-reading your comment above I now see you're changing from "terrorists and assassins" to "terrorists and mercenaries" - still a problematic description. Depends what definition of "mercenary" you go off - general definition seems to be someone who takes part in an armed conflict for money, which the general guards, henchmen etc. often aren't really doing. It often seems to be used as a generic "baddy" label.--Acer4666 (talk) 19:03, November 18, 2015 (UTC)

Unnamed Military PersonnelEdit

First off, since they're an insurgency-rebel group and not an official military, couldn't all those People's Freedom Army operatives listed under Unnamed military personnel during Redemption be moved here? And secondly, shouldn't the traitorous Palmdale sergeant from Day 6 be moved here since he had actually begun working for the terrorists?--SuperbowserX (talk) 00:43, December 7, 2015 (UTC)

I agree the Palmdale sergeant should be here as he was in league with the terrorists.
As for the PFA people - I think military is the right spot for them, as Juma and his followers formed a military coup so they were all legit military of Sangala who split off to fight a war against the government. What they did during Sangala I think probably qualifies as war crimes but not terrorism...they were raising an army to fight a war rather than terrorism--Acer4666 (talk) 00:52, December 7, 2015 (UTC)

Russian truck driverEdit

9x10 Russian driver

I think the Russian truck driver is played by either Adrian McGaw or Jonathan Cohen. The former is more likely, but I'd like to hear you guys' inputs. --William (talk) 07:46, January 11, 2016 (UTC)

I agree, looks a lot like Adrian McGaw!--Acer4666 (talk) 23:36, January 13, 2016 (UTC)
I think it could be McGaw based on the description of him on the IMDb headshot picture and the image on here. In his IMDb credits, he is listed as uncredited in Day 9: 4:00pm-5:00pm. He is also listed as an uncredited stunt performer Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation and Star Wars: The Force Awakens. He has appeared in Game of Thrones at the episode The Mountain and the Viper, so you might want check that out and see if it is him as the Russian driver. BattleshipMan (talk) 00:58, January 14, 2016 (UTC)

What do you guys think of a new category?Edit

I haven't decided on a label, but I think it'd be a good idea to create a new label that lists antagonists who were never confirmed to have faced justice (i.e. Dar, Robert Morrison, Mandy, Jonathan Matijevich, a bunch of these unnamed terrorists, Graem's cabal and whatnot). I think it'd be a fun category to read or put together because I do find it an interesting one. What do you guys think of it? --SuperbowserX (talk) 08:43, January 13, 2016 (UTC)

Only information that can be sourced from the show is eligible for inclusion on this site. The fates of characters like Mandy, Morrison, Jonathan, et al. are disputable, and to assume they all eluded capture would be speculation. There's a reason the ambiguity surrounding these characters' fates is noted in the BGIN, because we simply don't know what happened to them. They could've gotten away, sure, just as any number of other scenarios could've occurred. But unless it was explicitly seen on the show, books, comics, game, whatever; it unfortunately doesn't belong on here. This is precisely the reason we don't have an "arrested" category.
However, this would be fine for something on your userspace, kinda similar to what Blue Rook has.     Nitromancer  (Talk)     17:18, January 13, 2016 (UTC)
I agree that would be quite a speculative category--Acer4666 (talk) 23:36, January 13, 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure how I feel about the category, yet, but I need to mention that the reasons put forward to reject it at this time don't seem to match up with our other categories. For example, the idea behind Superbowser's proposed category is that Mandy was last seen at large. I don't believe the purpose of the category would be to state positively that they "never faced justice" (which we all agree is wrong to do) but rather how we last saw them. This is the precise reasoning behind our very own 3 status categories: Chloe was last seen to be living; Simone Al-Harazi was last seen to be in a life-threatening situation (Simone Al-Harazi). If what I'm saying is accurate, then we would need to put forward other reasons to reject it right? Blue Rook  talk  contribs 15:42, January 14, 2016 (UTC)
I guess if we refer to the status policy, which defines 3 possible statuses and doesn't allow further clarifications like "arrested", "catatonic", whatever, that sort of extends to the categories we are going to list people under. We currently don't categorise everyone based on whether they were last seen arrested or not...and if we did, the proposed category would be an intersection of the "antagonists" category with the "not arrested" category. What about "protagonists who were last seen free"? "Antagonists last seen dead"? "Protagonists last seen arrested"? "Antagonists last seen arrested"? It's kind of an arbitrary combination of two features--Acer4666 (talk) 18:38, January 14, 2016 (UTC)

Russian ops?Edit

IIRC the Russian ops listed under Day 9 weren't necessarily allied with Cheng Zhi/Anatol Stolnavich's Chinese-American war crisis. So like the Russian government agent who tried to arrest Jack at the end of Day 9, don't these guys belong in the Unnamed government agents category? I mean the guy who tricked Jack into being kidnapped by Zhi is there as well.--SuperbowserX (talk) 18:57, February 14, 2016 (UTC)

They definitely were - Mark Boudreau provided Stolnavich with Jack's comm signal to track him, then Russian agents arrived to kill Jack. Who else would they be working for?--Acer4666 (talk) 19:14, February 14, 2016 (UTC)

Conspiracy Edit

Similar question to the one I asked in the Mole talk page; if we were to add the blonde-haired assailant from 24: Conspiracy (played by David Orth), should it be within the Day 4 list, or on a separate heading? Thief12 (talk) 01:49, June 18, 2016 (UTC)

when that entry used to be on this page it was in a separate conspiracy section, but it was removed because he didn't have any lines. Does the character actually have lines?--Acer4666 (talk) 22:24, June 18, 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, you're right. He doesn't have any lines, unless grunts count. He grunts a lot while struggling with Martin Kail. Thief12 (talk) 04:30, June 19, 2016 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.