Talk:America's Got Talent season 2

message: A listing of every televised auditioner? It's a bit of a overload. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 18:28, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We're just following the example set for other reality competitions such as American Idol.  Thousands of people auditioned, and dozens presented their act onstage for the judges that were only shown as rapid-fire video bites.  However, in order to illustrate the variety of talents that auditioned, this article lists only those who achieved their 15 minutes of fame by having their name publicized and their act discussed by the judges on international television. GUllman 22:07, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes but American Idol's articles no longer have that. See this and this. The problem is that this generally isn't even 15 minutes of fame. Especially if everyone shown is listed. It's clutter and I don't think it's necessary. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 11:30, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The specific precedent is currently set at the season one page, where all acts appearing in the three preliminary rounds for that season are mentioned.  If we change how season two is laid out, then IMHO season one should be similarly changed.  Also note that, while season 1 had three weeks of preliminaries, it appears that season 2 will have five weeks of them, resulting in an even longer page if the season 1 formating is kept.  I don't have a very strong opinion on the actual formatting used at this point, but felt those were a couple of points that ought to be injected into the conversation. - TexasAndroid 12:38, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I organized some of the precedent in season 1, and I cannot agree that it should be maintained. A major difference between AI and AGT is: in AI, singers are compared to other singers, but in AGT, singers are compared to bands, comedians, magicians, dance troupes, and so on. There should be a way to cover the variety of acts that are presented during the audition round, but including every one of them is too much. I cannot make a determination of which of the preliminaries are notable because that would be original research. For the audition shows, perhaps only the audition round acts that were rejected should remain. (Like AI, AGT contestants must have performed in front of assistant producers—with cuts being made at that point—before moving on to the televised "audition round." But I cannot find any reliable sources to confirm that, and that is important to find out.) I will revisit the season 1 article within the next few days to see what improvements could be made to accommodate future seasons (revamping the ghastly legend is one of the tasks). Tinlinkin 19:06, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd go with Tinlinkin here. No reason to list every person. And just because it's used for season 1 doesn't mean it's a good thing to do. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 13:31, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think I said not to list every person at this point in the current season. While the series is in progress, it's still important to keep track of who's in the running as well as whoever is eliminated. I was expressing redundancies in sections when the season ends. The final product at the end of the series should be the eliminated audition acts are listed in the relevant "Auditions" section, the eliminated semifinalists are listed in the relevant "Semifinals" section, and so on. Tinlinkin 14:10, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Question. What makes the acts who auditioned notable? Just being on tv doesn't automatically make you notable. That's the problem with listing everyone. Not only that but the audition section is completely unsourced. There is just no reason to list every auditioner when none of the other talent show type reality show articles do it. It's overkill. All of the recent Idol articles don't list them. The So You Think You Can Dance article doesn't list every eliminated contestant. Ditto On the Lot. And it's for the same reason. Not every auditioner is notable. And nothing is sourced. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 20:19, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I agree that most contestants in the audtion round who don't advance are not notable. I would be fine with deleting those contestants (and those audition sections in the final product if my plan below is adopted, but the sections have to remain while the show is in progress). Those acts are interesting, and some are outrageous, but "interesting" is not the same as notable and many of these contestants do appear only to get their slice of national attention. There are not many of these contestants, however, and the article would still remain a bit bloated if we plan to cover the remaining 71 semifinalists. I don't think many of the semifinalists are notable, either, but I object to making an editorial decision to determine which ones are–meaning deleting certain semifinalists and keeping others. Tinlinkin 07:15, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I think I'll go do something else. The next person who comes by probably won't be as nice and will remove the auditioners who were eliminated as well as do major surgery on this article along with season 1's. This article does not and should not exist in its own universe. Comparing it to Survivor is faulty because on Survivor, those people are finalists. They have made it through off camera auditions and all of that. Not only that but they are on for complete episodes. That's a bit different than a person who is going to be on tv for 5 minutes (or less). --WoohookittyWoohoo! 21:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The catch-22 here is the show's format. A "finalist" in AGT (as defined from season 1) is a contestant who would appear on the final 2 shows, and for two weeks before then. A "finalist" in other programs will appear continually in multiple weeks. That distinction should be a red flag that this programm cannot be simply compared with other reality competitions. If all eliminated semifinalists are removed, then there is almost no point to have season-by-season articles–the article would be too short. There are several eliminated semifinalists that have articles, such as Leonid the Magnificent, Mark Faje, Michelle L'amour, Desperation Squad, and N'Versity. Perhaps eliminated semifinalists should be treated with brevity; that's something I would go along with. And that means I will likely make changes to the proposed article format below. Tinlinkin 07:50, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do we really need... 

message: There is, apparently, a good bit of confusion on various fan-sites and boards of exactly who made it into the 35 person "short list".  The show was far from clear on exactly who made all 35 slots.  The list currently on this page is based off of the list that someone else posted before I started, with a few I got from another list.  We've got 32 or 33 names.  I've since seen a third site with 36 names that they say may have made it.  :)  In theory, it would be possible to make 3 lists.  100% certain they made it (shown definitively in a group that made it through), 100% certain eliminated, and uncertain.  Theoretically.  OTOH, we are only a few hours from part 2 of the call-backs, and hopefully who made the 35 will be a whole lot clearer once that episode airs.  So, IMHO, I say wait for tonight's episode to clear things up a bit, and make any adjustments after that.  - TexasAndroid 17:32, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As I expected, this is pretty much moot now.  I still don't think we really know everyone who was in the 35 short list, but we do know the final 20, and from this point forward those are the important ones. - TexasAndroid 16:46, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who made it into the 35 

message: Don't have it in front of me, but I believe he was ELIMINATED from the top 20, not passed through. Can anyone replay and check this?
MrDiGeorge 04:17, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He did not make it to the top 35, being eliminated Tuesday night.  I'll work over the lists in a couple of hours, when I have more time. - TexasAndroid 11:09, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fixed.  I suspect Wynbush was being mixed up with Robert Hatcher, who we saw very little of, but who has made it to the finals. - TexasAndroid 16:42, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry about that- I was working partly on the fly and partly from a list provided by someone on the NBC message boards, who made that error.  Good catches and good clean-ups. Sorry if I was a little lax, but as I said, "on the fly." (And add me to the crowd who believes the editing on this show is way confusing.) ChrisStansfield 03:44, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe he made it in the top 35, but eliminated top 20. I again, deleted it from my DVR. Anyone to check this again? (Sorry!) 24.193.147.152 05:46, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  There's a recap of Tuesday's episode here.  About halfway down it mentions Byrain being eliminated Tuesday, which is exactly how I remember it.  He did not appear at all on Wednesday's episode. - TexasAndroid 11:21, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Byrain Wynbush 

message: *Luigi aka Boy-Shakira
*Las Vegas Callbacks (Part 2): Passed through, to Hasselhoff's apparent amazement.
I dunno, it appeared to me that Hasslehoff was...dumbfounded? Disgusted? Shocked? Amazement really doesn't seem descriptive enough to how he reacted.--293.xx.xxx.xx 06:48, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough. Is there an appropriate way to address in the main article the fact that Hasselhoff is clearly made uncomfortable by acts who cross dress or are overtly gay? Every tantrum he's thrown so far has been in response to those types of acts. Contrast that with the two British judges, who have no problem with "camp." ChrisStansfield 02:54, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Citing Sources?--293.xx.xxx.xx 05:44, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, if I were to do so, I'd cite the episodes in question themselves.  As I do not currently have access to the videos of the episodes or transcripts in which to point out the specific instances, I am reluctant to do so. However, anyone who can sit down with those and cite it is welcome to do so, IMO. ChrisStansfield 18:24, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Any attempt to explain his reaction would be conjecture or original research; you can only quote what he said himself, and I don't think he ever explicitly gave his reasons.  I wouldn't assume he's uncomfortable by flamboyant acting -- the last job Hasselhoff had just before this season started was playing a gay character on stage in Mel Brooks' The Producers. GUllman 20:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: First of all, I'm well aware that "any attempt to explain his reaction," etc would be OR...there is absolutely nothing illegitimate, however, about citing his tantrums in the first place and pointing out the nature of the acts he was reacting to- readers can then draw their own conclusions.  I also think it's perfectly relevant to the article to cite these intstances of 'walk-offs," since they were heaviuly promoted in the advertisements to the show and are obviously considered a "draw" by the creators of the show itself.  Finally, playing a heavily stereotyped Mel Brooks-style gay person is hardly an indicator that someone is comfortable with gay people; in fact, it could be interpreted as quite the opposite. (Have you ever even seen The Producers?. ChrisStansfield 15:01, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better descriptor word? 

message: VFTW, the web site that tries to keep what, in their opinion, is the worst candidate around on a number of American reality shows, has now endorsed Boy Shakira as the AGT contestant that they intend to work to keep around for a while. (This is listed on the VFTW article and on the front page of the VFTW web site.)  I'm wondering then whether this deserves any mention here on the AGT page, particularly in the Boy Shakira section.  Anyone know how the AI season pages have tended to handle the VFTW endorsements over there?  Ignore them?  List them? - TexasAndroid 15:44, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since VFTW has been referenced by news outlets who do stories about reality TV, I don't see any reason to object. That said, "AGT2" is not exactly as high-profile as Idol was, so it may be better to wait and see if anyone else picks up on it. I tend to be fairly inclusionist, I'm curious as to how others feel. ChrisStansfield 15:05, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  For now, I have it in.  I today did something I've been wanting to do for a while, which was to give each of the remaining contestants a "General" bullet point in addition to the bullet points that they already had for their individual appearences.  This created a better things for the general descriptions of the acts, and let the episode bullet points focus on just the individual appearences.  But this also created a proper place under Boy Shakira to reference the VFTW endorsement, which really had no proper place previously when all we had were the episode by episode bullet points. - TexasAndroid 15:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Vote for the Worst]] and Boy Shakira 

message: An anon has added a reference that, in the Las Vegas callbacks, Julienne Irwin performed Etta James' At Last.  Does anyone know for certain if this is true?  I remember that she was only seen breifly in a montage, and have no recollection of what song she performed, if we even heard what she performed, but this seems a little bit out of place for her (Irwin's) country style.  It's also the same song the ventriloquist Terry Fator performed in the preliminaries.  So I'm a little suspicious of this factoid, but really cannot firmly say that it is wrong. - TexasAndroid 15:22, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Julienne Irwin and At Last 

message: I've added in reference links to the performance videos for the remaining performers.  These are all links directly to the NBC web site, and so there should be no copyright problems, as they are not youtube videos or such.  There are a lot of them.  But I feel that they serve well both as official references for the performance info to which they are linked, and for letting people just go see/hear the various performances.  Does anyone see any problems with these?  If not, then I'm inclined to continue with the linking to older performances from eliminated contestants.  But I wanted to get opinions on what I have placed in so far before I continued. - TexasAndroid 13:03, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No objections in a couple of days, I'm gonna link in more performances. - TexasAndroid 13:14, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The only problem is these links will likely become dead links when the next season premieres. I'm sure I cannot reference season 1 the same way. TLK'in 11:35, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's quite possible that the season 1 videos are still there, assuming anyone had the code numbers/URLs for them.  Without those, there's no way of knowing short of testing tens of thousands of link numbers one byt one, which is to me far, far from worth the effort.  As for the current season's links, they work for now.  If they die when the season 3 page is set up, then they can be removed from the articles at that point easily enough. - TexasAndroid 14:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  So far, so good.  The direct to video links still work for season 2.  We shall see if that continues when they start putting up season 3 links but, for now, these links are still good.  If they die out when season 3 starts, then they will need to be stripped out of this article, and any of the individual contestant articles that copy/pasted the video linkes sections.  But I'm still crossing my fingers that they will remain availible. - TexasAndroid (talk) 13:10, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Video links 

message: America's_Got_Talent states that season 2 was from June 5, 2007 to  August 21, 2007. 
However, the page stages "Broadcast from May 2, 2009– July 18, 2009". Even all the show dates are in 2009. Seems the dates are about two years off. Why is this? (127.0.0.1) (talk) 21:09, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: We've had a long-term IP vandal every now and then coming through and making such changes.  I *think* he's changing things to the date of rebroadcast in one or another foreign country.  Given that this is from a few seasons back, it's not being watched as closely any more, and this time his changes stuck for a couple of months.  I've now reverted him. - TexasAndroid (talk) 21:44, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  He got seasons 2, 3, and 4, back in December. Season 2 I was able to undo automatically.  3 & 4 had too much other edits in the time since to auto undo, and I had to do so manually.  Annoying.  I'll try to keep an eye out more often for reverting his edits.  He's been doing this for years now, every now and then coming through and changing all the dates to the Singapore rebroadcast dates. - TexasAndroid (talk) 22:33, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Season 2 dates? 

message: I thought I'd add some round charts to season 2 since it's the only season that doesn't have them. When I put in the chart for the first semi finals, it doesn't stay where it's supposed to but instead, appears at the bottom of the page. I'm new to Wikipedia so I have a lot to learn! How can I fix the chart so it stays in it's section? Spencerhaber (talk) 07:50, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Round Chart