FANDOM

9,378 Pages

Proudhug

Bureaucrat Founder
(Difference between revisions) | User:Proudhug
(Disambig)
Line 8: Line 8:
   
 
:I don't speak for Proudhug, but as an admin, I think that there are two possible solutions. Either we disambiguate Graves, we isn't horrible, but not particularly preferable, or we fix all of the redirects to Graves and then delete that redirect. I'm sure Proudhug can decide which is best, but it's not an issue you should worry about too much. [[User:Xtreme680|Xtreme680]] 07:20, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 
:I don't speak for Proudhug, but as an admin, I think that there are two possible solutions. Either we disambiguate Graves, we isn't horrible, but not particularly preferable, or we fix all of the redirects to Graves and then delete that redirect. I'm sure Proudhug can decide which is best, but it's not an issue you should worry about too much. [[User:Xtreme680|Xtreme680]] 07:20, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
  +
  +
::God I'm an idiot, you're an admin as well. That's what happens when you've been gone as long as I have. I honestly think that we should just fix all the pages which might link to Graves and then delete that redirect, but I'm not as familiar with our policies as I used to be. I think we can just assume no one will ever search for Graves. Proudhug? [[User:Xtreme680|Xtreme680]] 07:31, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
   
 
== Not citations ==
 
== Not citations ==

Revision as of 07:31, October 21, 2007

Welcome to Proudhug's Talk page. Feel free to pose any questions, concerns or comments you may have about Wiki 24, Proudhug himself, or any of his actions here and he'll do his best to reply. You can view the Talk archives here and here.

Please keep the newest topics at the top of the page.

Disambig

Just a question about disambig pages: the name Graves refers to at least two characters. Because of what it says in the Manual of Style, we can't make a disambig page for "Graves" because they both have last names. So, typing in Graves takes the user directly to Kevin Graves. What rules do we follow to decide which of the two characters gets the redirect when this situation arises? It seems pretty arbitrary. It also stinks for the guy who's trying to look up Agent Graves (and doesn't have the cards for the first name "D.J."), no? – Blue Rook 01:35, 21 October 2007 (UTC)talkcontribs

I don't speak for Proudhug, but as an admin, I think that there are two possible solutions. Either we disambiguate Graves, we isn't horrible, but not particularly preferable, or we fix all of the redirects to Graves and then delete that redirect. I'm sure Proudhug can decide which is best, but it's not an issue you should worry about too much. Xtreme680 07:20, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
God I'm an idiot, you're an admin as well. That's what happens when you've been gone as long as I have. I honestly think that we should just fix all the pages which might link to Graves and then delete that redirect, but I'm not as familiar with our policies as I used to be. I think we can just assume no one will ever search for Graves. Proudhug? Xtreme680 07:31, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Not citations

There's nothing wrong with those notes on the discussion pages; they aren't citations. They are just for edification. People will look there to ask the question "where did that last name come from" and their answer will already be there. – Blue Rook 00:21, 16 October 2007 (UTC) In other words, I'd like to leave up those talk pages, for the following reason: when someone questions where the information came from, there will be no need for a dialogue since the topic will already have been addressed. I think this is logical. Yes/no? – Blue Rook 01:23, 16 October 2007 (UTC)talkcontribs

Of course, they're citations. What else would you call them? We don't do this with anything else, so why with the TCG? Wiki 24 culls its information from many sources and we don't cite what came from where. Currently, the policy seems to be that unless a citation is specifically requested, one isn't needed. Provided the information is verifiable, of course. If someone needs to know, they can ask, but otherwise, I don't think there's any need to randomly source certain pieces of information from certain locations. Besides, you already cited where it came from in the Edit Summary box, no? --Proudhug
Notes, I guess? My intention isn't to cite, or change/alter policy; I think there is a convenience here to specify stuff from the card game because everything else is easily traceable to its source. Information under Day X is from the TV show, info under Before/After Day X is the all from the appropriate Prequel/spin-off, etc... yet these newly revealed names are data that are not as easily traced. As such, I still think it's useful for it to be noted somewhere, and what better place than the very page the people will go to in order to ask?
My end here is a rational one; those discussion page notes, of course, won't stand up to strict policy scrutiny, so you'll win that every time, but they are not intended to be policy, or analyzed as such, in the first place. Also, it does not harm, right? – Blue Rook 01:38, 16 October 2007 (UTC)talkcontribs

Do you seriously expect a lot of people to wonder, or care, where the heck we got Nasir Trabelsi's last name from? And is it really that much of a pain to provide an answer to the first person who does ask? It just seems silly to me to arbitrarily try and preempt possible questions from site users. I'm sure there are TONS of pieces of information on Wiki 24, from the novels, comics and games, that aren't easily traceable (Where did Jack's birthdate come from? How do we know where Teri went to school? How do we know Elizabeth Nash was reading a book about LBJ?). Should we go out of our way to source these facts just in case someone asks? I would say no. I realize it does no harm, but it does no good either, since we'd be answering the question anyway if asked. Scenario 1: Answer two asked questions, vs. Scenario 2: Answer twenty-five unasked questions. I say it makes sense to only provide sources when someone actually wants to know. Unless of course, you do have a desire to change our policy about citations, in which case we can discuss that. --Proudhug 01:59, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Before I start, rest assured that you're not the only one pissed at Wikia; this evening I've sent more than my share of contribs into that yawning, inaccessible chasm where your text goes when Wikia is all fustigated. Also I haven't been able to load pages properly for a few hours.
Back on topic, since those talk pages suck, what if I did propose a minor appendix to the policy? Something small and unobtrusive, like: whenever we get someone's name from TCG, we note it in BG/notes? I believe this is interesting to note, and also, provides exposure to that new 24 medium out there, which is always exciting and doesn't happen often. – Blue Rook 02:18, 16 October 2007 (UTC)talkcontribs

So, if we get someone's last name from the TCG, we put a note, but not if we get it from the TV show or a novel, comic book, board game, website, video game, TV commercial or amusement park ride? How does that seem fair? I guess I just don't understand why we'd center out one medium, but not others. I could see if you were proposing we cite all information, but I don't understand why just this one. I personally think of the 24verse as one big thing; it doesn't matter where the information came from, so long as it did. --Proudhug 02:29, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

No, the original point wasn't we put a note as a matter of policy (that was only brought up later), it was me (Blue Rook) putting a note for the edification of others in a completely non-obtrusive place, while exercising my own discretion (read: not enforcing policy). Later, I brought up the minor policy idea, and as expected, the argument you put forward against that was coherent and acceptable... since it was never supposed to be a policy consideration in the first place.
First I will address any general statement that "what Blue Rook posted isn't permissible on those Talk pages":
Talk pages are for discussion of the article as it pertains to Wiki 24. Not characters and plots and theories, but matters of the in-universe, factual character/place/thing and matters germane to its article. Those pages simply meet those criteria. You and I have both left up non-germane whole threads on Talk pages, and instead of deleting them, left a note saying essentially "this is not the place for this". Well, I'm saying here that my brief statements were much more germane than some of the crap left on the talk pages, and yet were all deleted wholesale.
In summary, I'm pointing out the strangeness that we can leave non-germane discussions on the Talk pages, but then delete things which are perfectly germane (i.e. my brief statements for clarification).
Second, look the specific claim you made that they are citations. I've already addressed this: if I wanted to cite something, I would have put it in the BG/Notes. But I didn't. It's just helpful for those people out there like you, me, and Deege who care about this type of thing. I wasn't "being an admin who was enforcing policy" either. Just commenting on something in the place where comments go.
Third, this is not a slippery slope. I have no intention or desire to do stuff like this for anything other than "names revealed through TCG". It's not a gateway for some kind of citation-mania, which I (perhaps just as well as you) realize would be foolish, unnecessary, and also utterly impossible to implement.
I'm convinced that if you understood that there is simply no slippery slope here, and with the other two points in mind, you would have no problem with me resurrecting the notes because they are germane and do the two goods of 1 edification without being policy-changing citations and 2 serve to promote awareness of TCG. I also think, more basically, the deletions disregarded a user's right to post comments germane to the articles on the Talk pages. I know you don't like them, but you can't possibly argue that they aren't germane.
This goes both ways: if you, or anyone, set out to open discussion on pertinent Talk pages for, let's say, each time a fact came from a comic book, I wouldn't delete it. Providing answers and opening discussion for a new medium is always a good thing. – Blue Rook 20:57, 16 October 2007 (UTC)talkcontribs

You're probably correct that you do have the right to make that notation, and for that reason, I probably shouldn't have removed it. I do understand why you did put the notes there, I just don't agree that there's any real reason for it. To me, it almost seemed like borderline spam, despite your belief that it served a purpose. You weren't posing a question (good or bad... and we do get a lot of bad questions, which is fine), you were just making a comment. Despite the comment being relevant to the article, it was still a seemingly random statement of fact and not a question or suggestion to improve Wiki 24. Personally, I'd rather have an off-topic innocently dumb question posed on a Talk page, than a simple statement of fact that may or may not be common knowledge to some, or unimportant to others, but that's just me. Perhaps you disagree, but I believe the Talk pages should be reserved strictly for things like:

  • Proposing ways of improving the article
  • Questioning anything about the article that may be incorrect or missing
  • Questioning whether or not an article should be deleted
  • Posing questions about sources or unclear aspects of the article or of the show itself
  • Storing FA notices

I know that the TCG information came from a legitimate source and you know that it came from a legitimate source, so why would you go out of our way prove this to anyone, unless requested to do so? I don't see as it's any more "unclear" than lots of other obscure facts on Wiki 24. A better way to promote awareness of the TCG would be to beef up its article and nominate it for FA, no? --Proudhug 14:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

That's where we disagree: yes, beefing up the article is great, but it isn't the only way to promote awareness. How's this for a resolution: I bring back 2 of those talk pages and leave the rest deleted, but then beef up the TCG Article itself by making a section describing in a paragraph the list of characters whose names were expanded upon by the cards. – Blue Rook 01:35, 21 October 2007 (UTC)talkcontribs

Email

I sent a reply a few days ago to the response ya sent not too long ago to my original email. Did it go through? Blue Rook 04:09, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

DVD's

3 questions.

1: Should I remove the Region 4 section I made on the DVD page, or at least the images as they are extremely similar to those in the Region 2 bit?

2: If I keep the Region 4 DVD images, should I scan and add the outer box images as they are different to that of the inner cover for season 5 & 6?

3: Haven't the Season 6 DVD sets come out in America yet?!

--BillBuchanan24 13:22, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

1. No, that's awesome that you put the table in there. I did some minor tweaking to it, but it's good work.
2. One cover image is enough probably enough, but it's up to you if you want to put both on the individual DVD pages. Are they really that different?
3. Season 6 comes out in December in Region 1.
--Proudhug 13:55, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! And thanks for th extra editing help, both in the table and in the linked articles.

--BillBuchanan24 15:03, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Tony Almeida

Hey ProudHug... Just a quick question... I'm a new user on 24 wiki and I'm unsure on protocol... It says not to post spoilers, and I'm not sure whether I am able to post the following info... 1: Carlos Bernard is part of the Main cast in season 7. 2: Tony (as stated by I think it was Loceff) is not dead and will return, as he did not receive a silent clock and was not actually pronounced dead.

Can I change his status to "Alive" and add this info to his notes, or should I just leave it out? --User:BillBuchanan24 07:58, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Spoilers are forbidden on Wiki 24. This is a spoiler. Where is the confusion? --Proudhug 09:03, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok... thanx. Just defining spoiler between plot and character, but when I think about it, it is a spoiler... sorry about that!!! 58.179.154.212 10:29, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Better to ask than risk being banned. --Proudhug 12:59, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

So, we're allowed to realease spoilers on this page?

Technically, no. --Proudhug 06:24, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

                                                                                      I made my own profile. I not sure if I'm allowed to, but I went ahead and made it. I accidently called myself Spencer t when I meant to call myself Spencer Rhodes. Can you help me with that?

What's TCG?

What's this now? Sounds awesome...– Blue Rook 05:28, 22 September 2007 (UTC)talkcontribs

24tcg.com. You'll be happy to know that one of your favourite characters now has a name. --Proudhug 08:36, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
My head is absolutely spinning. Excellent find, man! And thanks for saving me the fun of starting his page. Anything else left to do from that list of cards? Also, do you know if the writer of that material happens to be one of the episode writers (out of curiosity, not that it matters since it's still canon). – Blue Rook 17:14, 22 September 2007 (UTC)talkcontribs

No, the TCG writers aren't the writers from the show, but they work with Fox. They've been given permission to assign first/last names to some one-name characters. I've got all of the new stuff changed so far, but there are only 144 cards released so far in the "Day 0 Tactical Packs" and less than half of them are characters. Next week, over 260 new cards are to be released in the "First Edition" packs, so we'll almost definitely have more then. So far, the only one I can't place is this guy. Also, Haas's card doesn't have a picture of him on it. I'm just assuming this is supposed to be Jeff Kober's character. --Proudhug 18:05, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

That stuff is good to know. I look forward to adding info from the next release. With respect to that first card you linked to, Sabir Hussain, it's definitely a picture of (and quote from) Samir, so it seems we've found the first discrepancy. Do you agree that it is fair to assume that the card is overruled by the character as listed in the credits, at least in this case (which means he is Samir Hussain)? And the Haas card isn't even showing any one of the three dudes Haas was seen with (one was bald, the other two are bearded, and that's not the "spotter" either) so I agree it's probably just a big guy they asked to pose as Kober the photo. Fun stuff!– Blue Rook 17:24, 23 September 2007 (UTC)talkcontribs

Yeah, I'd say we go with "Samir Hussain." This discrepancy and the Haas one might be interesting bg notes on their pages. --Proudhug 18:56, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

The rampant Almeida status abuse

What do you say we make Tony's infobox a protected template, to ensure that the continuous flow of wanks who keep changing his status is finally cut off? Making countless reverts when no end is in sight is a bit silly imo. Btw, welcome back ;). (On a separate note, would your opinion of me drop if I said I went to Mama Mia and actually had fun? It's all Abba music, lol.) – Blue Rook 15:24, 20 September 2007 (UTC)talkcontribs

Sounds good to me. At this point, I'm almost willing to protect the entire page.
(And ABBA is evil, btw.) --Proudhug 17:35, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
For what it's worth I added the protected infobox. I'm fascinated to see how people will try to get around it. My guess is they'll just add a line saying "omg he'z aliveee" right underneath the box, at which point I'll second your vote to protect the whole damn thing. Hey did you catch the whole "pelican sh*t" vandal attack? Apparently he came back, and struck the same pages he hit sometime ago. From what I can tell, he's vandalized wikipedia in the past. – Blue Rook 21:39, 20 September 2007 (UTC)talkcontribs
We've done this in the past and the way people got around it was to delete the template from the page and add the infobox right back into the article. Or do what you just said. It also doesn't prevent people from changing his category to "Living characters."
And, yes, I saw the pelican shit vandal again. It's a form of copycat vandalism that's as old as Wikipedia itself. --Proudhug 21:46, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

E-mail address

Proudhug, This is Gangsta1542. I forgot my password and I didn't post a e-mail address to send it to me even though I have one. Right now, I can't login. What can I do to fix this problem? -- User:98.196.61.16 19:49 pm, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

My email is warden-2007@hotmail.com. Please, send me my password so I can login. -- User:98.196.61.16 16:08pm, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm not aware of any way we admins can know people's passwords. But you can solve this yourself: at the Login menu, type in your exact username (Gangsta1542). Then, leaving the password area blank, click Email Password button, which is next to the regular Enter/Login button. You should then receive your password in your email inbox (whichever email you used to register here). Let me know how that works out, you can post here even though PH seems to still be out/vacationing for a bit. If it doesn't work, I'm pretty sure you'll need to just make a new account. – Blue Rook 23:52, 9 September 2007 (UTC)talkcontribs

August FA

Hey, now that you've proven you're not dead, please end our suffering and select the August FA (even though the month's essentially 1/4 over). --Deege515 03:56, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

VANDAL ALERT

82.27.26.154 just totally destroyed the Russian consulate page by posting i's all over it. I checked and very recently 82.27.24.154 made similiar changes as well as 82.27.18.17 and 82.27.21.39. Same person? They all start with 82.27. - Protocol Red 18:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

It wasn't "totally destroyed." It takes two seconds to revert the page to a previous edit. Let me know if you're unsure how to do that. The way I look at it, stopping vandalism is everyone's responsibility here. :) --Proudhug 22:24, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
How do you do the instant Revert. - Protocol Red 01:40, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Only an admin can do the instant revert, but any user can go into the page history and edit an older version of a page. --Proudhug 01:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

220.237.182.13 just deleted the categories on Christopher Henderson's page. I fixed it. Protocol Red 23:19, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Cool. No need to let me know, though. :) --Proudhug 02:20, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

File Size

Is there a way to view the file size of a page? Protocol Red 01:56, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Um, there is, but I can't remember how. Sorry. --Proudhug 02:20, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Reason for revert...

Wondering why my edits to the "24: Original Television Soundtrack" article we reverted... Why was wrong with the edits? --58.179.158.49 06:46, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

The spelling errors are probably best left in, as it's how it appears on the packaging. And the other tracklisting information you added wasn't for that album, it was for the second one. --Proudhug 08:27, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

FA Help

Oh, how I wish I knew how to 'switch 'er over,' but I don't! I added the FeaturedC thing to the top of Ontario Airport and took it off of Victor Drazen's page, but I don't know how to make Ontario Airport be on the main page template instead of Victor Drazen. Please tell me how to do this! MoChan 22:19, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I've never actually switched over a FA myself, I always let someone else do it, but it's not really that hard. You just edit Template:FeaturedArticle with a bit of the article and change the previous FAs at the bottom. In addition to moving the FeaturedC template, Template:Featured gets added to the top of the Talk page of the previous month's (Victor Drazen's) article. Try you hand at it and if you mess it up someone can easily fix it. --Proudhug 02:12, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I tried it, and while it's not perfect at all and probably will improved, I'm still srota proud of myself for finally figuring something out without completely screwing up. Thanks a lot, Proudhug! MoChan 03:06, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

You did great. I'm proud as well... and not just because that's my name! --Proudhug 03:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Great Resource

Hey there. I thought it was about time I thank you and all the contributors on Wiki 24 for such a great site and rich resource. I'm a fan of 24, and I'm also an administrator at Heroes Wiki, a wiki about the NBC show Heroes. I often use your site as a resource for information about cast and crew. In fact, I get really excited when I see that a Heroes cast or crew member has worked on 24 because chances are they've got some good information on this site. Keep up the good work! RyanGibsonStewart 03:46, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words, Ryan. It means a lot. I checked out your site and it's pretty great, too. --Proudhug 02:12, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Argumentative

It had just occurred to me that I've been supposedly argumentative lately. It probably has to do with the fact that the show's done for the year, and I don't really have anything else to write about. But please don't take it personal, if you are. I've been tending to argue just for the sake of argument, and not necessarily believe in what I'm saying. I don't know, it's probably good to have some sort of devil's advocate instead of some yes-man persona. But yes, my apologies for my otherwise drunkenly retarded contributions. --Deege515 03:02, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Ditto across the board. I do the exact same thing. Everyone I know knows me as the devil's advocate, so I'm used to arguing with people, often for a side I don't even agree with. Don't worry, I'd never take anything personal unless you made it very clear that was your intention. And even then, as long as it's in the best interest of the site, it's all good. Yes-men suck. --Proudhug 03:32, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes. --Deege515 03:41, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Trojan Horse Insufficience

I do not think that the Trojan Horse page merits a Level 1 Insufficient Information grade. I think it should be an Level 3 at the least if not totally OK. --70.107.93.253 03:22, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Well then change it. O_o I personally don't like the Level 1-3 Insufficient Information thing, so I don't bother with them. They're basically outdated stub messages from the early days of the site. I prefer to use PNAs, which are usually more specific. --Proudhug 03:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

New Character Pages

I am trying to create a category for Chaos Theory characters and I ran into some trouble. Can you either create the category or tell me how to? It would be greatly appreciated.

All that needs to be done to create the category is put some text onto the page. Do this by clicking the red link at the bottom of the Christopher Henderson page and adding an introduction similar to the ones for the other novels. Good luck and I hope this helps! --Proudhug 18:59, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

User list

Was Special:Listusers always so massive? I remember it being much smaller.. I'm stunned by how many users there are now. Was it some kind of vandal-bot that registered all those accounts, or did we absorb all the accounts from all the wikia out there for some reason? If it is an error, let me know how to go about culling out the fake accounts and I'll hop to it. – Blue Rook 06:50, 8 June 2007 (UTC)talkcontribs

Yeah, it's always been massive. I guess it's a list of all Wikia users. Or perhaps all who have visited Wiki 24? I see no useful purpose for the list. Fortunately now there's Special:Activeusers which is a little more useful. --Proudhug 08:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

MI5

MI5 was mentioned in Day 1 2:00pm-3:00pm when Ellis said that he noticed Milo opened some sockets to MI5. So you can revert the edit where you took that article out. --BauerJ24 20:13, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I was literally just watching this episode moments ago. The MI5 article that was deleted was merely copied from the Research Files on Fox.com, so I won't revert it, but feel free to recreate the page with relevant information. I see the Talk page still exists. --Proudhug 20:26, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

U.S. Presidents

The IP, 75.57.197.186, who you asked why he deleted the list of Presidents has the same ISP as the IP I blocked yesterday for the same offense. (75.57.197.186). Probably the same person. ---CWY2190talkcontribs 02:21, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing this. Subsequent occurances with the same ISP will be blocked. --Proudhug 02:40, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

72.136.104.254

Perchance thou smiteth this vandal? Funny thing is, I could swear I read this exact example of vandalism before... same dude striking from another place? – Blue Rook 00:33, 4 May 2007 (UTC)talkcontribs

Deege515 has it covered. --Proudhug 03:00, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

68.108.218.180

It appeared to me that this user was criticizing the fact that Tony survived, but Curtis died, which led me to interpret it as vandalism. --Deege515 06:17, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I thought the edit was a little naive, but probably in good faith. The user's previous edits seemed the same way. I think this behavior deserves at least a warning before banishment, but it's possible it was deliberate vandalism. We'll see if it persists. --Proudhug 13:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
And it seems it did! --Proudhug 16:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Protocol Page?

Proudhug... should there be a page for Protocols? We could have a level, not dissimilar to the DHS advisory system. As each day goes by or each situation arises, we could adjust the system. The level could be viewed on a sidebar on each page, or just the Sit Room, Main Page, etc. What do you think?

Here is a preview of the protocol page. We can always delete it later. We can also adjust the levels on the list.

PROTOCOLS are the policies we have in place at Wiki 24.

  • Level One: All Infractions Yield Permanent Ban
  • Level Two: All Spoilers/Vandalism Yield Permanent Ban, Other Infractions Dealt With on Individual Basis
  • Level Three: All Spoilers Yield Permanent Ban, Vandalism Yields Temporary Ban, Other Infractions Dealt With on Individual Basis
  • Level Four: All Spoilers Yield Temporary Ban, Vandalism/Other Infractions Receive First Offense Warning, Later Dealt on Individual Basis
  • Level Five: All Rule Infractions Dealt With on Individual Basis
I'm afraid I don't understand what it is you're proposing. Are you suggesting that sometimes we're more rigid with our rule enforcement than others? If so, I don't see what would affect the changes in Levels. Isn't it best to be consistent with punishments, rather than have it be dependant on a Level system? --Proudhug 21:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Before Day 6, we had a notice go up saying that anybody with spoilers would be permanently banned, no questions asked. If this has always been our policy, it just wasn't very clear and it wasn't posted anywhere obvious. Otherwise, we could do this so that everybody knows what the consequences are of their actions. --BauerJ24 01:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, before S5 started, the site was still quite new and our base of editors was extremely small. The site caught on during S5 and it wasn't until filming of S6 started that spoiler postings became a problem. It was then that most of us agreed that we needed to dissuade people from doing this, so the main page spoiler notice was posted. So far it's worked quite well, as we rarely get people posting spoilers. I hadn't figured we'd change the notice, since S7 will presumably start filming in a few months. But, I'm still confused about what's being proposed, though. --Proudhug 04:44, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
This would just be an easier way for people to see what the consequences are of their actions. I proposed this thinking that sometimes we were more strict than others, depending on the period we are in the season or offseason. If we had this, people could look on the side of the screen and see what our level of security is. --BauerJ24 02:04, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, spoilers during the off-season are no different than spoilers during the regular season. We've been operating under a zero tolerance mandate, which I fully support. Even minor spoilers can severly ruin someone's enjoyment of the show. Besides, it seems pretty silly to post the consequences for things as some sort of guide for vandals and spoilers. Someone looking at the chart might think, "Oh, right now spoilers only result in a one week ban. I can handle that." If someone has malicious intent beforehand, they're not a welcome member of this community. I think the consequences should be consistent no matter the time of year or situation. --Proudhug 20:19, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi there Proudhug..

I'm a huge fan of 24, and I'm currently updating IMDB's 24 list.. (They had some errors on their page.. I really admire your work with 24, however I do have some questions. Regarding episode 16 of season 6 you've got two actors: Anthony Michael Jones & Bob Morrisey, did you find out what character these two are playing??? Or where they simply just "Cabinet Members" like the ones played by Brenda Wehle and Joseph Hacker..

Also, do you colaborate with people from Fox Entertainment or even contacted writers/producers of the show during your work?

I also enjoy that you're not involving any spoilers at all.. Since this is not a "spoiler" page, but you try to keep the site as professional as possible, and I admire that.

Let me know if you find out what characters these are playing so that I can change them on IMDB's site.

Welcome to the site and thanks for the kind words. I'm afraid I don't have an answer for your first question, as I don't have the episode recorded and I didn't create the page. Why not post your question on the Talk page for that episode and see if anyone else knows. To be honest, I think people are waiting for IMDb's update before adding it here! Yikes, it's a cyclical nightmare. Be sure to check back, as I'm sure someone will have an answer soon. Otherwise, you might have to look for another source.
To answer your second question, no we're not associated with Fox or anyone working on the show. There's a note on the main page at the very bottom. It'd be awesome if some of the creative team visited the site, but if they have, they've never given any indication.
Thanks also for the comment about our spoiler policy. It's something that myself and others have fought vehemently for, and unfortunately it's caused some tension here in the past, so it truly means a lot to hear positive words on the subject. --Proudhug 03:34, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

On this day...

I'm not sure if your struggling to find any information for the "On this day..." feature but I'm sure I could find the UK air dates if you were. --24 Administration 19:25, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I've actually got tons of information, I'm just lazy with updating it. But as long as I stay ahead of the current day, I'm not concerned. :)
As for the UK airdates, I hadn't planned on including them. I'm only posting the original airdates for all episodes, plus the date that the show premiered in various countries. The only sort-of exception is for Pure 24. The show aired after each second season episode on the BBC, so I tried to find airdates for all of them, but couldn't find a complete list. I basically had to guess at a bunch of them. So if you're able to confirm the second season's BBC airdates that'd be wonderful, as I could cross-check it with my "estimated" Pure 24 airdates. --Proudhug 01:20, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Funnily enough, I can't help but notice that several other wikis, including Memory Alpha and Wookieepedia, have now added this feature. Interesting.... --Proudhug 01:58, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Comic Character Pictures

I deleted that? I honestly don't remember--oh wait. I know what happened. My cousin must have got on and done stuff. I am totally sorry about that. I'm not sure how much damage he did, but I am soooooooooo soory about it. --Vinny2 19:25, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I was just confused as to why you thought comic characters weren't worthy of a photo or something. --Proudhug 20:32, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Permission

First, I want to apoloogize for my behavior. It would be great if we could just forget this ever happened. Anyway, I wanted to know if I or anyone else can start a Day 6 terrorist cell article. It would be great even though Season 6 is still progressing, we could update it weekly. What do you think? --Gangsta1542 18:31, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

As I've said in the past, I'm not much into categorized character lists, myself. However, you can always bring it up on Requested Pages or try it out yourself in the Sandbox. --Proudhug 01:35, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Arizona

Did the cities in Arizona have to be mentioned in 24? I am sorry I just knew them and though the page could use the information. I won't make that mistake again, thanks for telling me! Vichy101 16:01, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, we want to archive all of the information from 24, so mixing in other stuff makes it confusing. --Proudhug 01:46, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Revelation

I just found my identity when I wrote Season 4 Prequel. It was 24.174.66.18. Sorry you had to edit that profanity. I would never try to make this website a street club or whatever. You all deserve better and this site deserves to live on without intolerable language. -- Gangsta1542, 19:14 21 Feberuary 2007 (UTC)

Membership

Thanks! But I do have a membership... I just can't remember it. But I am still devoted to contribute to stuff that needs edits, because of my love for 24!

SWEET COLLECTION BY THE WAY. MINE'S JUST MISSING A COUPLE OF THOSE THINGS. LOL

FA

Since I'm not entirely familiar with the 24 wiki, I wasn't sure if the featured article was protected. Also, I was unsure where the template was located. Thanks for informing me, even though I read it far too late. - 87.211.75.45 19:09, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Article of the Month.

Comes down to you again this month. ---CWY2190talkcontribs 16:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello Again

Just telling you that I've Returned. Haha. Anyway, I've learned a lot since I was last on the Site, and am glad to be back. Tony Almeida 24 11:21, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

New User-Page Layout

I like it, and it seems that it would be great for more Users to have, if they wanted to. Tony Almeida 24 12:43, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

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