Talk:24 season 7

message: Okay, what's the utility of the "Previous Season" and "Next Season" in the callout box?  Because the seasons are only identified by number, there is no added benefit to noting that Season 7 is preceded by Season 6 and followed by Season 8!  This convention only makes sense when Seasons or Episodes in a series are identified by name (eg. Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back) and the sequence isn't obvious. Let's deleted the numbers here.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.229.30.188 (talk) 23:48, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Previous Season" and "Next Season" 

message: I am surprised that all of the delay is being attributed to the WGA strike. Undoubtedly, this effects production immensly, but so does the abscence of your main character. Kiefer Sutherland was in jail for 48 days serving a no contest to a DUI charge. I would attribute this to the delay more than the writer's strike. -- Ownage2214
:No, it's definitely the writer's strike causing the delay.  They currently do not have all the episodes filmed, and they won't go on until they have the writers back so they can continue the practice of uninterrupted seasons.  Check the source if you need confirmation; if there really is something to your suggestion then post a source so that we could suggest it as a contributing factor. Bradkoch2007 (talk) 22:58, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The judge was fine with him serving the sentence in 2 chunks that would not affect production however when the WGA strike came up Kiefer instead elected to serve it all at once which includes Christmas, New Years, and his 41st birthday.CoW mAnX (talk) 00:13, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Premiere Delay  

message: I'm thinking Jon Cassar is joking about the Quebec terrorists; especially since just a bit above that someone else says the villain won't be a terrorist. -WarthogDemon 02:36, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I removerd it completely. It has been confirmed as a joke over and over. Please do not add information that is so clearly false. Just because Jon Cassar said it doesnt mean it was without sarcasm. Get a clue. WikiChloesLove 11:14, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to note, I wasn't the one that put it there in the first place. -WarthogDemon 17:05, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terrorists Not Being Terrorists . . . Wait, Huh? 

message: I saw the mention from digital spy source (or whatever) that Gary Oldman has turned down the role of a villain for season 7. I thought I'd see for myself, so I followed the footnote (it's footnote #7). However, I do not have access to view it, and if I don't, others don't as well. Is there a way to make it so that everyone can view it, because if not, the footnote and the statement should be removed because it cannot be verified. Anakinjmt 19:15, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There was a rumor that was put on this article saying that Kim was going to die mid season. Was that rumur true, or did someone just put that there for no reason? 69.131.145.228 (talk) 17:52, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No confirmation yet - and unless it is reported by a reliable source (which excludes self-published fanzines and fan sites), it should not be mentioned here. 147.70.244.134 (talk) 23:34, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unable to check source 

message: Various comments were unsigned, some were not indented, and some were stretching the page. I've fixed all of these issues. Please sign your comments by typing four tildes (as indicated at the top of the page). Also, this page is to discuss the Wikipedia article in general, but not the subject of the show. JamminBen 01:05, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have also removed a few irrelevant discussions that relate to the subject matter rather than the Wikipedia article. If you want to discuss the show, there are plenty of TV forums on the Internet. JamminBen 01:25, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fixed the talk page 

message: IMDb states that Alberta Watson will return as Erin Driscoll. I can't find any source for it, does anyone know if it's true or not? 83.86.73.158 13:43, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but on the same note it is possible that every other character that has appeared on 24 could return to testify for or against Jack. Without a reliable source, which IMDb isn't, then it can't be used. --Vinnyvinny2 02:42, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Alberta Watson's returns

message: Where in the citiation does it state that Morris is returning? SignorSimon 21:10, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Morris O'Brian Return

message: This article previously stated that Tony Almeida would act as the main antagonist this season. Is there any legitimacy to this claim, or is it a fan theory of some sort? 24.24.90.148 21:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, apparently it is legitimate. 24.24.90.148 23:30, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tony Almeida, this season's main antagonist 

message: according to 24s offical site day 7 is still starting in 2008 so why does thi sight say it is prosponed indefanely plese versfy 64.222.112.135 (talk) 03:35, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Look up the definition of indefinitely.  Obviously, Fox wants to get 24 back on the air ASAP, but until they can resume filming the unwritten episodes, they can't put them on the air.  They're just saying 2008 because like everyone else they don't expect this strike to last longer than a year.  Also, please use proper English and grammar on Wikipedia from now on.  Bradkoch2007 (talk) 22:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusion 

message: Is any effort at all being made to keep this spoiler-free for people who don't want to know all the things that are SUPPOSED to surprise us? It's completely ridiculous that I come here to see when the season is airing, and BAM - very beginning of the article, I'm hit with two enormous spoilers. Please, PLEASE make an effort to keep this page spoiler-clean - spoilers belong somewhere specially marked, like the "plot" section, NOT the very beginning of the article. AdamSolomon (talk) 00:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you didn't want it spoilt for you, then coming to this page was the worst decision you could have made. Do not remove information just because of your personal grievances; Wikipedia is a place for information and removing it is a vandalous act. We are not going to try and keep this page, or any other, spoiler free in any capacity whatsoever. asyndeton talk 01:22, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not everybody wants all information. I see no reason not toit is generally expected that the subjects of our articles will be covered in detail. Therefore, Wikipedia carries no spoiler warnings except for the Content disclaimer" keep spoilers separate from other information about the season. Put it in the plot section - what's so wrong with that? I don't think it's vandalism to remove it, it's a way of making Wikipedia more useful for everybody. People who want to be spoiled can look down the page a tiny bit, and people who want to know when the season's going to air don't have to. AdamSolomon (talk) 16:53, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to have to disagree. That specific piece of information is important to the article. It's the point of the season. Is it a spoiler? Yes, of course it is, but there are other websites on which you can find the start date and time that don't give you spoilers. I'm sorry for spoiling you, but something as important as that shouldn't just in the plot section. His return is a big part of the season. It's like asking to remove Graem Bauer's last name from the title of the page because it's a spoiler for those who haven't seen season 6. --Vinnyvinny2 (talk) 19:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: it would make sense to put SPOILER in big red words on the top page. :D  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.232.201.134 (talk) 01:10, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

text: As much as I agree with AdamSolomon, according to Wikipedia:Spoiler "it is generally expected that the subjects of our articles will be covered in detail. Therefore, Wikipedia carries no spoiler warnings except for the Content disclaimer".  I personally would still like to see it moved down the page to the plot section, but that is not required.  The best way to deal with this would probably be consensus, which by my count is currently tied 2-2, and unless that changes significantly I don't think that any change should be made.Bradkoch2007 (talk) 02:02, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Hi, that may be the case, but please see WP:SPOILER.. "It is not acceptable to delete information from an article because you think it spoils the plot. Such concerns must not interfere with neutral point of view, encyclopedic tone, completeness, or any other element of article quality". Hope this explains things. Best, Steve Crossin  Talk/Help us mediate! 23:37, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  SPOILERS 

message: I can't find anything indicating they are back, so unless someone shows something, they will be taken down. Puppet125 (talk) 17:40, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources for Novick and Wayne returning?

message: I searched through the ninth issue of the mag and can't see anything about Aaron anywhere. Does someone want to shed some light as to where it says this? SignorSimon (talk) 19:36, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aaron Pierce 

message: Why does there seem to be an edit war going on regarding Mary Lynn Rajskub's position in the cast list. Am I missing something? Does it really matter?! ChimpanzeeUK (talk) 09:51, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a really childish thing to fight over. They are both regular cast members, why does it matter what order they're listed in on the page? It's getting pretty annoying having to watch this pointless edit war. SeanMooney (talk) 22:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Mary Lynn Rajskub as Chloe O'Brian" getting jumpy 

message: Due to this very petty edit war, I've requested an administrator protect the article, which has been done. Please, please, resolve this dispute. I'm on hand to help out if needed. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 02:14, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This has been protected due to petty issues, and that's what concerns me. Look, I agree that this is pathetic, but I would just let the people switch them around, I don't see why it's worth protecting the page, as long as it shows that Kiefer Sutherland is the starring cast member. Besides, I think the arguement's been resolved.Green Kirby (talk) 18:14, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that full-protecting the page for a week was a bit harsh but perhaps that's what is needed for people to cool down and realize they were fighting over a stupid thing. I am thinking of rewriting the page to be similar in style to Lost (season 4) - the cast section would be prose instead of a list. This would make it easier to read and also would cut down on the edit wars I hope. What does everyone think? SeanMooney (talk) 00:05, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Hmm. It seems that "someone" has moved it again. Was this dispute ever resolved? ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 11:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

text: I have alphabetised the entire cast, including Keifer, I think this is the only way to keep the peace until the series comes out. I think, well hope, that if you say 'cast in alphabetical order' it will stop stupid edits Chocobogamer (talk) 12:17, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected 

message: I've fully protected the page for three days. Please discuss below this line. Thanks, PeterSymonds | talk 14:48, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ugh. Now personaly, I agree that Tony should be second on the cast, but it's only because of the fact that he seems more important in the trailer, not to mention being in the series longer. But it really does'nt matter. I mean c'mon, is it really worth protecting the whole article? As far as I'm concerned, as long as Kiefer Sutherland is on the top of the list, as he should be, I don't see the big issue you admins seem to be making this into.Green Kirby (talk) 16:45, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, of course it is'nt, but I don't think it's worth protecting this over.Green Kirby (talk) 00:20, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not worth it at all, especially when the first official (FOX) cast list comes out - then the argument will be moot. B.Wind (talk) 20:57, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content dispute -- protection 2 

message: Season Seven is set in Washington D.C., about two years after Season Six.
Day 7 opens with CTU dismantled and Jack Bauer (Kiefer Sutherland) on trial concerning his past extralegal activities in the course of stopping a potential attack on a bus by terrorist Ibrahim Haddad (as was the case with several other counterterrorism measures by Bauer, it involved the use of torture). Bauer’s day on trial takes an unexpected turn when former colleague and confidant Tony Almeida (Carlos Bernard) returns. 
Season Seven features the first (in the 24 universe) female President, Allison Taylor (Cherry Jones), her husband Henry Taylor (Colm Feore), and White House Chief of Staff Ethan Kanin (Bob Gunton).
A national security crisis prompts an investigation by a team of FBI agents including Agent Janis Gold (Janeane Garofalo), Agent Renee Walker (Annie Wersching), Agent Larry Moss (Jeffrey Nordling), Agent Sean Hillinger (Rhys Coiro) and security specialist Michael Latham (John Billingsley). Although CTU is no longer a part of the series, Chloe O'Brian (Mary Lynn Rajskub) and Bill Buchanan (James Morrison) return.
As the only source is the YouTube video, which can't be used as a source, I've removed the whole section. If you can incorporate this content into the article, sourcing other sites other than YouTube, go ahead, but for a TV show that hasn't even aired yet, I don't see why this section is there. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 01:28, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Season overview 

message: Have any episodes filmed prior to the strike last year been reshot, so that the "plan for the whole season" which the producers refer to could have been put into place? If not then they only planned the last 16 episodes and not the whole season. Bogger (talk) 12:23, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Reshoots of completed episodes

message: 'Season Seven, also known as Day 7, of the television series 24 was originally planned to premiere on January 13, 2008 but was delayed an entire year due to the 2007–2008 Writers Guild of America strike. FOX will air a two-hour "prequel" TV movie titled 24: Redemption‎ on November 23, 2008 that bridges the gap between seasons.' 
1. The first sentence in this Wikipedia article describes an event related to the season and not the season itself.
2. The remainder of the first paragraph is used up discussing something that's apparently "not a part of season 7".
The first sentence and the first paragraph of an article should be describing what 24 Season 7 is, and not merely "related" events.
 'Known details' 
"Known Details"??? This is utter rubbish, fuelling speculation and rumours; and is entirely un-encyclopaedic.
Production:
 'Producers were determined to reinvent the series after facing criticism over the sixth season.' 
You can't know their state of mind, just report the facts, not conjecture as to how they came to their decision.
 'Measures will be taken during filming and production of season 7 to save energy and reduce enough carbon emissions throughout the season to make the season finale "carbon neutral".' 
So what? Why does that belong in this article?
 'A number of ways that the production intends to save energy are listed on the site' 
This is, again, inappropriate for a wikipedia page. It reads like an advertisement.
 'Howard Gordon said that 24 cares about the issue of global warming and takes fighting climate change seriously. A number of ways that the production intends to save energy are listed on the site, some of which are: using a combination of petroleum diesel and biodiesel instead of regular diesel fuel, creating a series of PSAs with Kiefer Sutherland and other main cast members to educate the public on what they can do to help with the issue, and, when appropriate, applying the issue of global warming and reducing carbon emissions to the storylines.' 
There is no evidence that the production of 24 will have a direct impact ofn Global Warming. Therefore it is inappropriate to describe "carbon neutral" in this way. Furthermore, Biofuels are a debatable subject, many people feel that unless the land used to create biofuel is barren in nature (ie unable to sustain general crop) then it is taking up land otherwise used by farming for food, or forest, or wood harvest, etc.
The entire article reads as a personal opinion with no regard whatsoever as to being neutral and accurate.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.9.137.105 (talk) 09:03, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a wiki. If you feel you could improve the article, be bold and fix it. ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 09:50, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  This entire article is rubbish. 

message: In season 7, will Jack Bauer become an FBI agent?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Levis93 (talk • contribs) 15:19, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's just wait and see, shall we?  If you have some verifiable information from a reliable source (and not a 24 fan forum or someone's blog sheet), then we can look it over and see about extracting some encyclopedic facts from it.  Even if it happens to be true by sheer luck, we have no way to verify it yet.  The Wikipedia is not the place for posting fan speculation and wild guesses that are (perhaps) based on sparse television commercials, which are notoriously misleading and even deliberately edited specifically to create interest.  Thanks though.  --T-dot ( Talk/contribs ) 17:54, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

text: I know the episode airs soon in the USA, but I think you've been very unfair to this writer. In the 17 minute preview of episode one the FBI are clearly seen offering Jack a deal. So if this does happen it will happen within the first couple of episodes, and so is a good educated guess and there isn't long to wait now to confirm or deny it. --210.9.136.57 (talk) 12:30, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I would also like to point out one of my previous suspicions regarding Almeida - the article reads (and has done for a long while) that "Carlos Bernard will return as Tony Almeida in the premiere of season 7 as one of the main antagonists". This is clearly false and proves that this was never a true encyclopaedic entry for this article. And I suspected for a long time this wasn't "entirely true" because it would have lost all believability. --210.9.142.203 (talk) 07:44, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  About Jack Bauer 

message: What's the deal with Alexander Trepkos? I keep seeing hints that he's going to be back in the last episode of season 7. Anyone done research on this? — Deckiller 01:05, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Trepkos

message: Is that the actual quote from Entertainment Weekly at the end of this article? The grammar is so bad it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
"Fresh characters like this is the way that the is only that..." 
 
I have no idea what that is supposed to mean...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.114.156.28 (talk) 23:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Entertainment Weekly? 

message: they are too long compared to the rest of the articles of 24. They should just be summarized like on season 6 article.
82.131.77.12 (talk) 13:47, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Episode guides 

message: Sorry, but this is getting longer and longer. Until this can be trimmed, it's gotta go. A few sentences on each episode should suffice, not 3 paragraphs. Brevity is essential. Steve Crossin  Talk/24 00:25, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what I've been doing. — Deckiller 01:44, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  From article 

message: TVguide.com has summaries of the next two episodes. These can possibly be paraphrased for inclusion here--76.116.105.50 (talk) 01:35, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  summaries of unaired episodes 

message: This is an encyclopedia, so continuity is required, that takes precedence over the TV show. Most feel that the date is a production error, and should be removed. Thats called Consensus. Also, the date isn't that important. Saying it took place however long after the previous season would be adequate. Best, Steve Crossin  Talk/Help us mediate! 13:18, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  In-universe date 

message: I'm lazy. Lets clear out all the TBD notes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_24_episodes#Season_7
--68.48.252.180 (talk) 07:27, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Someone edit the master list 

message: The Reception section had only one post in it with a short quote that told very little about anything other than making a joke about spoilers.  This quote is useless and you cannot have an objective reception section that only has a single review.  This was deleted and should stay that way until the section is improved with more sources and more useful quotes.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.236.215 (talk) 00:44, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reception Section 

message: ma godhow can jack sufferthis much,cant he just die.eeeeeeeeeeh pliz kill the guy coz he has suffered alot.then why does tony haveto be a bad guy???????????.instead kill olivia talor off coz she is a traitor 411.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.108.254.83 (talk) 14:57, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  fairness???????????? 

message: "Jonas Hodges" redirects to the main article; can someone fix this?  I haven't the energy.  And there are other people to write articles for.  OneWeirdDude (talk) 04:22, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jonas Hodges, etc. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on 24 (season 7). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070911120151/http://www.ifmagazine.com/feature.asp?article=2257 to http://www.ifmagazine.com/feature.asp?article=2257
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.zap2it.com/tv/news/zap-24seasonsevendelays%2C0%2C2494049.story
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:29, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified