Talk:The Apprentice (American TV series) season 4

message: Hello - Although it seems to have finished in the US this season has not completed its run in many other countries (it is shown globally). I came here for a quick bit of info on the series and the first part of the article ruined many future surprises and events for me.  I'd greatly appreciate some spolier tags and some introductory information that doesn't give away important information. This is the practice for many other TV show articles (even quite old ones) and i'm sure there have been others in my boat who accidentally read a bunch of spoilers when they first visited this article.
Cheers MagicBez 13:41, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I appreciate someone inserting spolier tags but right at the start of the article before the tags it tells you when every contestant was fired. Surely it's possible to have an introduction to the teams and the show without filling it with spoilers? MagicBez 18:33, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Plea For Spolier Tags 

message: That was the episode that was aired today. Jack Cox 02:06, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Obviously the scoop that I read was correct. --Madchester 17:49, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Funny Enough 

message: Does anyone think that the names of the contestants should redirect to this page? CoolGuy 02:57, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirects 

message: I think Clay's exact words were "tight Jew," not "tight-ass Jew." Can anyone verify? Ian 04:30, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Week 7 

message: I have noted that people have not been putting reasons why People have not been exempt from getting fired on the next coming task.  From this point on, I would highly appreciate it if people put the reason why a Project Manager isn't exempt from getting fired on the next coming task.  The reason for Clay not being exempt from getting fired on the next coming task is because key reason being that Alla felt that Clay gave Alla too much work to do, Clay not functioning well as Project Manager, Clay's team didn't like him, and Clay did too little to stand up for the team, and didn't too much to keep the team together. — Vesther 03:18, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Exemptions should have a reason 

message: It's true—Season 4 sets the record for the most multiple-firings in one season of the Apprentice.  I thought that Felisha will be the only one fired for Week 11, but after the Donald told Alla to "sit down for one moment", Donald landed a heavy blow by also firing Alla before she left.  What a surprise that was—Capital Edge is probably the first team to be completely jettisoned as well. — Vesther 03:39, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Three Multiple-Firings!!!

message: I don't know whether or not Markus Garrison is actually "married" to Clay Lee, but I really can't have that in this article because it's not confirmed information.  Also, I did some rebuffs as well. — Vesther 23:07, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Purged unconfirmed Markus Garrison Information 

message: I saw instances where candidates had to use a Motorola i860 (I saw Alla, Felisha, Randal, and even Donald Trump using one) just for communication.  I think that the Motorola i860 was used ever since Season 3 (I saw Tana used a Motorola i860 on a Yahoo! archived footage).  I think the Season 2 Candidates used the Motorola i830.  I think the Season 1 candidates used the Motorola i730.  I think Season 5 the Donald might have his candidates use a Motorola i870, but sources from Sprint's iDEN Retail Stores state that it's likely either the Motorola i930 or the Motorola i860 that might be used, depending on how much i930's were in stock when the filming took place.
I would like your feedback on what iDEN phone is likely to be used by the candidates for Season 5 of The Apprentice with Donald Trump.  I think given that The Donald used an i860 during Week 6 (I'm pretty sure The Donald has plenty of Cell Phones in his sleeve).  I have not watched Season One of The Apprentice and I would like to know whether or not the candidates had to use Nextel iDEN Phones throughout the Job Interview.  If so, I would like to know or not it's an i730 (given that it's filmed before the i830 was released).
I encourage you to give me your feedback. — Vesther 14:33, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of Sprint iDEN Phones 

message: When I come to this page, I only read information for the Trumps version of the Apprentice season 4. I notice this article mentions alot of Stewarts version and it actually gets quite annoying to read through that. Not everyone that watches Trumps version watches the other, if I wanted Stewarts version I would have went to that page. I vote that we remove all mention of Stewart.
*I agree 100%. Reading through all the records of multiple firings gets confusing and boring. They're 2 completely different shows despite a similar premise. IceDrake523 04:13, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why Martha Stewart references? 

message: From the front page of his website (http://www.randalpinkett.com/ retrieved 16:38, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's being changed practically as I'm watching.  Could be hacking, but I think someone doing that would be less subtle. -- Netoholic @ 16:47, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Randal apologizes 

message: The key of this final task was to raise money for charity--Randal followed directions in spite of terrible weather, but Rebecca failed to raise money for her charity (if it wasn't for Yahoo! rejecting Rebecca's plans, then both Randal and Rebecca could've been hired) plus neither herself nor her recruits greeted the Donald right off the bat, which is extremely important in Apprentice tradition.  Rebecca didn't greet the Donald promptly so I think the two flaws (not raising money for charity, not greeting the Donald right off the bat) were grounds for the Donald to choose Randal first.  I would not hire Rebecca mainly because she didn't follow directions on the final task good enough. — Vesther 23:17, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  There were two fatal reasons why Randal was chosen first 

message: Would it make sense to put the teams of the final task in the Week by Week results? Meaning Randal, Josh, Mark and Marshawn as Excel and Rebecca, Chris, James, and Toral for Capital Edge? It could be denoted below the chart they were recruited by the two for the final task. IceDrake523 23:55, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: From my point of view, I don't think it would make any sense since once they are fired, they are fired regardless whether or not they were recruited for the Final "Monster" task. — Vesther 01:56, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Week by Week results 

message: Trump gave rather ambiguous objectives for the task, he never specified when money for the event should be tallied.  Rebecca's post-game interviews at TVGuide.com and Fishbowl.com (MP3) all suggest that funds were collected by the Elizabeth Glazer Pediatric Aids Foundation. It's rather silly to believe Trump that out of 200+ VIPs, none of them donated a cent to the charity.--Madchester 16:47, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really considering Trump speaks highly of her and gave Randal the chance to hire her. Every article has some bias too it, this one just has a positive one which will be better than negative towards Randal. IceDrake523 21:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Rebecca's Yahoo! event did earn money

message: I've gotten into a Edit War during the last 4 hours in this article.  I really hate to add this but apparently, some people say that Rebecca was "Not Hired" at the night of the Season Finale.  However, I disagree with anyone declaring this 5000%.  I am in a bad mood today, and I should say that the only valid status of each candidate is either Hired or Fired.  "Not Hired" is not a valid choice.  Because Rebecca isn't given the job, her status should be "Fired", NOT Not Hired.  I am really embarrassed that I had to state this out but frankly, disputes of Rebecca's status here in Wikipedia is making me irritated at this point, since some people rather declare Rebecca "Not Hired" while others rather declare Rebecca as Fired.  Like I said, there are only two statuses in Apprentice—Hired or Fired.  If you disagree with me, then I would like to hear your voices now. — Vesther 21:59, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're in a bad mood, I don't think coming here to continue an edit war is the best thing to do. Both Fired and Not Hired deliver the same message: she didn't get the job. However, Not Hired is more positive which I believe fits since BOTH TRUMP AND RANDAL think highly of her. Trump said on Larry King he'd offer her a job if she came asking. IceDrake523 22:24, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Rebecca said that it was unfortunate when Randal suggested Trump to reject her.  Should Randal allowed Trump to hire Rebecca, then I wouldn't have to do this today. — Vesther 22:55, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Also, IceDrake, from my point-of-view, and like I said before, "Not Hired" is not a valid status, that is why I'm trying to follow status conventions of The Apprentice franchise.  That is why I prefer to say "Fired unless Hired"—as I'm more skeptical in following conventions more closely than the majority of you who thinks that Rebecca deserved a different status than other "firees". — Vesther 22:57, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I also feel that "Not Hired" sounds too Martha-ish IceDrake523.  I really feel that the reason why I was responsible for this Edit War is because I try to follow Donald Trump boundaries when it came to this article.  Don't you think that "Not Hired" sounds a bit too Martha-ish?  Doesn't sound Trump-ish to me. :P — Dark Insanity 05:28, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Martha never used Fired and didn't even use Hired on the finale. Read what Trump has said. If Rebecca came to him looking for a job, he'd be willing to discuss it. Besides, does Trump asking a new hiree if he should hire someone else seem Trump-ish? IceDrake523 19:29, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fired or Not Hired? (Dispute Resolution) 

message: I think we should come to some general consensus and then stop all the edit wars going on about this. Please cast your vote for "Fired" or "Not Hired" below. Sue Anne 23:46, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Not Hired is my vote. Sue Anne 23:46, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Not Hired obviously IceDrake523 23:48, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Fired is what I conclude — Dark Insanity 00:06, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Not Hired as per the show's finale. --Madchester 00:22, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Not Hired is my vote but I wouldn't mind Fired. Honestly, it's not worth the effort of an edit war. --RealMontrealer 02:34, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Fired Based on the presendent set by all three previous Apprentice documents and the OFFICIAL SITES. Because the show never specified, the sites, even if you (improperly) see them as secondary, they remain the most reliable data on the subject.--Orion Minor 06:20, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Not Hired is what I vote.  When someone applies for a job and gets rejected they aren't fired.  Trump never explicitly told Rebecca "You're fired."  Therefore, that is why I think this is more fitting.  --207.200.116.14 00:57, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Fired Based on precedent. The only reason Trump didn't fire Rebecca on the spot is because he considered hiring both. Since Randal talked him out of it, Rebecca was FIRED. Acetic Acid 08:19, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Not Hired  Trump never fired Rebecca.  --172.139.255.219 15:01, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Fired If Kwame, Jen, and Tana are mentioned as 'fired' on their pages, why not Rebecca?--211.30.251.13 03:50, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Not Hired It wasn't an ordinary firing, and to classify it like that would be a mistake. --64.12.116.67 17:42, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

text: --This PatCheng comment was deleted at the request of Mark Kim (Reply/Start Talk) 04:33, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Fired If she wasn't hired then she was fired.  What's next?  Calling the winner Not Fired? Jtrost 17:15, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Undecided. You can't be fired if you weren't hired in the first place. So, technically, that means NONE OF THE CANDIDATES (except the winner, of course) was fired. But that would mean that the Donald's catchphrase was meaningless. Oh dear. Jalabi99 01:54, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Not Hired Kind of late, but I just wanted to add my two cents.  --Sakano 14:16, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Fired  Dated I know, but this isn't a regular job interview.  In every episode before this one, the final conclusion Trump declared "Contestant A you are fired, and Contestant B you are Hired".MPA 16:55, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Straw Poll 

message: :(the South African version had a multiple hiring in 2005)
While I admittedly appreciate the contribution by any circumstance, I should point out that anything you put in here should be lying only within the Donald Trump limits.  I felt that the italicized text that I have listed was off-topic IMO, and things like that should belong to the General Apprentice article rather than on a Donald Trump season article. — Dark Insanity 15:25, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually Mark Burnett's ultimately responsible for all the basic rules and premise of the show.  He's credited as the creator of the program, even in interational broadcasts.  It's up to the local bosses/hosts and producers to decide how to work those rules to their favour. --Madchester 07:57, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  About this "South Africa" Multiple-Hiring Spree 

message: I removed most links to the candidates because those that existed are now merely re-directs to this page:     . Therefore there really is no point in providing a separate article for each of them anymore. Thanks! 199.111.230.195 00:00, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  De-linking most candidates 

message: The whole section looks long and tedious. It simply does not stand out. And the information on different candidates is imbalanced, which makes it harder to read.Why don't we make it pretty like The Apprentice 2 candidates? 199.111.230.195 00:18, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spliting "Candidates" 

message: (In September, Tokyo Sexwale hired both finalists on the South African version, eliciting anger from viewers.)  
, ''
I just want to know why this is on this article.  I feel that this seems to be out of place for a Donald Trump article.  I think this is off-topic IMO and should be deleted from this season.  If you guys don't want any Martha Stewart references here in this page, why do you consider putting the Tokyo Sexwale references here?  I don't get it!!! — Mark Kim 01:58, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why the Tokyo Sexwale references? 

message: Any of these references are considered OFF-TOPIC.  I try to be as lenient as I can, but if it goes too much (like mentioning the Tokyo Sexwale decision to do a multiple-hiring), then it's likely to be purged and/or reverted.  I have seen adds, modifications, removes, and reverts before on this page, but from this point on, anything in this article has to be WITHIN DONALD TRUMP limits.  No if's, and's, or but's.  From this point on, Off-Topic edits will be dealt with due course, and any Martha Stewart and/or Tokyo Sexwale references are considered OFF-TOPIC and will be reverted.  Your cooperation is appreciated. — Mark Kim 22:13, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If this were an article only about Donald Trump, I would agree with your points. But, this is an article about the Apprentice 4 and one of the huge stories coming out of the finale was the potential of Trump hiring two candidates. I don't think it detracts from the article at all to have a mention of another Apprentice season at the same time that had a multiple hiring. Sue Anne 21:59, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I want to keep things as uniform as possible, and not to be harsh, I'd personally rather put the Tokyo Sexwale decision at the general Apprentice page rather than this one.  Since this article talks about a season in particular, I'd personally think it's really important to keep things uniform as possible.  Tokyo Sexwale's decisions fall more on the general Apprentice page than on this one, but given the fact that people were complaining about Martha references on this article, I have thus decided that I should keep the article uniform to Donald Trump ever since. — Mark Kim (Reply/Start Talk) 04:03, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  IMPORTANT: About Tokyo Sexwale, other moguls, and off-topic edits 

message: In Week 9 of the Season 5 of the Apprentice, even Donald Trump used the word "Apprenti" to introduce the remaining candidates Ivanka and Donald Jr.  Therefore, a multiple-hiring would've probably changed the show's name to "Apprenti", something that Randal felt overly opposed to. — Mark Kim (Reply/Start Talk) 03:19, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apprenti ISN'T a grammatical error after all 

message: After thinking it over and over, honestly for Season 4 of The Apprentice, I think the candidate section should be split up so that more of the candidates and how well or poor they performed can be placed on one article rather than on an entire season-related article.
Also, I have requested the Final Decision for this season to have its own separate article as well because after thinking it over and over, I think this has been something that was more of a controversy.  According to a Straw Poll result (to calm down the Edit Wars), some people were in favor of labeling Rebecca as "Not Hired on Television" while some prefer to label Rebecca as "Fired on the Season Finale".  I'm just gonna assume clean faith with the "Not Hired on Television" label for Rebecca, the only things why I'm still thinking it over and over (and the main reason why I'm considering a separate article for this season's final decision) is mainly because of the following: Rebecca had a fierce loyalty with Toral, even though Toral should've been the one brought back to the boardroom on Week 3, Rebecca felt that both Jennifers were responsible for the loss, and she believed in Toral's abilities.  I think being fiercely loyal to someone has to be a fatal flaw, but some may disagree with me because in other words, people tend to believe in others and/or people happen to be advocates of others.  Rebecca painstakingly had to let Toral be fired in Week 4 because Rebecca felt that Toral should've stepped up as Project Manager (but let Felisha do the dirty work instead).  Rebecca's PM record of 1-2 also concerns me and Rebecca would only be able to succeed if she has strong and easy-to-work contributors, while Randal was capable of managing and working with all walks of life.
Therefore, for Apprentice 4 Candidates Separate Article, Yea, for Apprentice 4 Final Decision, Yea.  That's that. — The Evil in Everyone (U * T/R * CTD) 02:08, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Candidate and Final Decision Split 

message: This entire section was pretty much verbatim copyvio from the NBC website bios, so I've nuked it. FiggyBee 01:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fired Candidates' Notes 

message: I think The_Apprentice_(UK_Series_One)#Weekly results table should be replicated here. It will easily help someone keep track of the movement between teams, project manager etc. Linnah 02:32, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Results table 

message: Please contribute to the relevant discussion here, as this discussion relates to this article. Thanks, Dalejenkins |  15:43, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The Apprentice World-wide WikiProject

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 30 external links on The Apprentice (U.S. season 4). 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://apprentice.tv.yahoo.com/trump/04/show/summary/week1_5boardroom.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://apprentice.tv.yahoo.com/trump/04/show/summary/week1_2assignment.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://apprentice.tv.yahoo.com/trump/04/show/summary/week1_4results.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://apprentice.tv.yahoo.com/trump/04/show/summary/week2_5boardroom.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nbc.com/The_Apprentice_4/recaps/week2_p18.shtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nbc.com/The_Apprentice_4/recaps/week2_p9.shtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://apprentice.tv.yahoo.com/trump/04/show/summary/week2_3task.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://apprentice.tv.yahoo.com/trump/04/show/summary/week3_2assignment.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nbc.com/The_Apprentice_4/recaps/week3_p14.shtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://apprentice.tv.yahoo.com/trump/04/show/summary/week3_5boardroom.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nbc.com/The_Apprentice_4/recaps/week3_p21.shtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nbc.com/The_Apprentice_4/recaps/week3_p2.shtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20060830225625/http%3A//www.nbc.com%3A80/The_Apprentice_4/recaps/week1_p1.shtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20060822212633/http%3A//www.nbc.com%3A80/The_Apprentice_4/recaps/week3_p1.shtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20060613191856/http%3A//www.nbc.com%3A80/The_Apprentice_4/recaps/week4_p1.shtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20060522223117/http%3A//www.nbc.com%3A80/The_Apprentice_4/recaps/week6_p1.shtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20061126120500/http%3A//www.nbc.com%3A80/The_Apprentice_4/recaps/week7_p1.shtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20060831052340/http%3A//www.nbc.com%3A80/The_Apprentice_4/recaps/week8_p1.shtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20061126120529/http%3A//www.nbc.com%3A80/The_Apprentice_4/recaps/week9_p1.shtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20060525002739/http%3A//www.nbc.com%3A80/The_Apprentice_4/recaps/week10_p1.shtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20061126060928/http%3A//www.nbc.com%3A80/The_Apprentice_4/recaps/week11_p1.shtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20060524222245/http%3A//www.nbc.com%3A80/The_Apprentice_4/recaps/week12_p1.shtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20070117031703/http%3A//www.nbc.com%3A80/The_Apprentice_4/recaps/week13_p1.shtml
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20051218032424/http%3A//www.ew.com%3A80/ew/article/commentary/0%2C6115%2C1141575_3_0_%2C00.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071007014745/http://www.collegecrier.com/interviews/int-0001.asp to http://www.collegecrier.com/interviews/int-0001.asp
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060701130959/http://www.markuswinelifestyle.com/ to http://www.markuswinelifestyle.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080116011750/http://www.adam.israelov.com/ to http://www.adam.israelov.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061128073619/http://www.felishamason.com/ to http://www.felishamason.com/
*Corrected formatting/usage for https://web.archive.org/web/20100804231013/http%3A//web.me.com%3A80/gogirlworldwide/Site_84/Home.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060820154338/http://www.randalpinkett.com/ to http://www.randalpinkett.com/
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) 10:37, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified