Talk:American Inventor

message: I have added a changes section to the main page. ABC sent out a release detailing the last episodes. I will provide links to articles as they become available in the next few days.
Apparently, they're cutting most of what made season one miserable (but still an overall enjoyable show). No pity party stories before the $50,000 checks (obviously), no producing commercials to garner votes from the viewing public, just vote after July 25's show that declares the three finalists! Yes, three. The judges will narrow down the six finalists to three on the July 25 episode, which will be two hours. It will feature not only the judge's important decision, but also, how the inventors spend their $50,000. Here's hoping none of them buy a $20,000 suit, develop a box and tie a rope to their invention, calling it "improved."
If you notice any other changes, add them in! I think it's pretty obvious that season one was a test show and season two is taking the best ideas from the first season and running them further... hence, more bad inventions, fewer finalists eligible for $50,000. 209.184.242.241 19:44, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: season to season changes

message: Please report what is wrong with this article on this page. If you report what is wrong then someone will have to fix this. It is good to report what, is wrong so that the article gets more understandable.
*I reverted back to a previous version from a few days ago. User  inserted a lot of illegal copyrighted content onto the page. ErikNY 19:26, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm prepared to remove the neutrality tag unless there is objection.  It appears any previous POV issues have since been resolved. Jeff Silvers 01:58, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with this... I see no non-NPOV content on this page. --Jackson 04:55, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Did some cleanup, added category, removed stub tag, removed POV tag.  It's now something of a bare-bones article, but it's NPOV. --John Nagle 05:17, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Good point.  How about checking it out and fixing the article?  Also, please sign your edits on talk pages.  Thanks. --John Nagle 20:34, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "NPOV dispute [-American Inventor] 

message: It's very annoying that every practically every noun, pronoun, and name are in ialics. Is "Simon Cowell" the name of something besides a human? No. So why is it in italics? You only need to put the title of something in italics. In case you don't know, this is italics!
71.57.4.30 02:57, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  No need for italics 

message: It would be good if somone added more pictures of the show. When the article get bigger that would be good. Thanks. FellowWikipedian talk 3:18 pm 21 April 2006 (UTC)
:I added a photo request to this page, as well as making it part of WikipediaTelevision Edu-Ward 21:56, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pictures

message: I HOPE IT BECOMES A #1 INVENTION SO I CAN BUY IT. THAT LOOKS REAL GOOD. AND WE HAVE TO HELP HIM GETTING HIS HOUSE AND GYM BACK..PLEASE
::Erik Thompson's Invention was great. Someone will get him a patent. I guess we have to wait and see...because that was better than anyone's invention on that episode! FellowWikipedian 17:44, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Erik Thompson's Receiver Training Pole is NICE 

message: What do other people think about the choice of finalists in the show?  I agreed that the final four products are great inventions, but are they really the best?  I felt that the judges put a lot of focus on the emotion of the contestents.  Especially the woman judge who always fell for those who shed tears in front of the camera, even when the product sucks.  Also the minority background of the contestents play a big part too.  Out of thousands of participants, the four finalists are two African Americans, one Latino immigrant and one Polish immigrant.  Are the white Americans really that much behind in creativity and inventiveness?  Kowloonese 00:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I noticed that too. FellowWikipedian 21:24, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, a lot of reality shows these days depends on emotion to win. It's whoever has the most tear-jerking sob story that'll win, not which invention is best. Reality shows suck!!! 205.174.22.28 04:45, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This page is for discussing changes needing to be made to the article, not for discussing the show itself. Edu-Ward 21:56, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: biased judges?

message: In the event anyone else is wondering whether the show was canned due to the lack of official updates, I dug this up. Apparently by "fall/winter of this year" they meant "early spring of next year". ~ Eidako 21:27, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second Season 

message: Because it didn't sound like a ñ 201.23.32.2 20:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Patino has a ñ? 

message: Why does this page have Jerry Wesley and his EZ-X Portable Gym listed as a finalist, and, even, as a runner-up? As far as I can recall, and what the ABC.com shows (http://abc.go.com/primetime/americaninventor/tracker.html), there were only four finalists, and Wesley was not one of them. Thus, why was my edit reported as vandalism?
Yeah, the anonymous person above has a point. They eliminated Jerry Wesley before the finals. And there were only four finalists in the first place. Did the person who wrote that even watch the finale? How can you miss the fact that there are four, not five, finalists? Slartibartfast1992 21:38, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was probably just some vandalism or his personal pov. FellowWikipedian 20:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Five Finalists? 

message: If an inventor gets 3 yes votes but isn't selected as the finalist of their city, do they get anything (other than a few extra moments of hope)? Dvandelay 03:49, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the point of 3 yes votes? 

message: I've assessed this article for WP:TV as requested here. I have rated this article as start class because the relatively short length and lack of important sections like critical response, production etc. and as low importance because there is little to distinguish it from other articles about television series. There a couple of instances of external links in the body of the text - these should be converted into citations or moved to an external links section. 
These categories are arbritrary and are subject to review by any editor who feels confident to do so. Please note that a more formal assessment by other editors is required to achieve good article or featured article status. I used criteria from the television wikiproject guidelines here, article about TV series guidelines here and the assessment guidelines here.--Opark 77 14:01, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article assessment

message: I didn't know where to put this question but here. I recently stumbled upon this article and thought about proposing it for deletion. But I doubted. I mean, maybe this guy actually has some notability because he's sort of become famous for being such a loser (no offense to Marc). On the side of deleting it, however, there's the "BulletBall was deleted and he got most of his notability from it" and the horrible state the article's in (obvious to anybody who reads it). You get 57,200 results for his name on Google, however, so I'm really in between delete and leave it alone. So I'd like another person's opinion. Anybody? Thanks, --Slartibartfast1992 17:54, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, guess we have to AfD it. I'll do it in a couple days. Besides, the Google search was all misspelt (wrote Mark instead of Marc) so it actually got much less results... --Slartibartfast1992 00:47, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Uh... I edited it but only undoing an edit that removed the prod tag, but I think you're referring to the previous ones. I'm still gonna AfD it in a couple days. --Slartibartfast1992 01:54, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Marc Griffin]] 

message: :Image:Invent.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 19:07, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Invent.jpg

message: This is not really that related to Dragons' Den, surely. It's American Idol with a different subject matter - OK a few slight change probably in order of the fact this is Simon Cowell without Simon Fuller. Absolute difference is that there is no prize as such in Dragons' Den, whereas American Inventor definitely does. In Dragons' Den you are bidding for business partners, for money and potentially for the related involvement. Part of the interest is the negotiation process.
John F. 9th Mar 2008.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.35.243.2 (talk) 22:04, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Dragon's Den Comparison

message: When I saw this supposed invention, it struck me as dangerous.  How can you spray water on electric lights?  Am I the only person that thinks this is very dangerous? Jason404 (talk) 15:08, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's for putting out fires. It only sprays the water once the tree is on fire...a fire which is usually CAUSED by the lights. 12.199.45.138 (talk) 23:08, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guardian Angel 

message: The first season of American Inventor debuted in Singapore on MediaCorp Channel 5 on August 12, 2007 on Sundays at 11:00am and ran until December 2, 2007 with the season finale. The first season was rerun on Channel 5 from November 27, 2007 on Mondays to Fridays at 1:00pm.
The second season was not aired on any channel, as MediaCorp Channel 5 did not air it. 42.60.24.230 (talk) 11:25, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  The first season was aired on [[MediaCorp Channel 5]], but the second season was not aired on any channel. 

message: The intro paragraph says "It was conceived by Simon Cowell and the producers of American Idol...", but the sidebar says "Created by Peter Jones", a claim repeated on Peter Jones' page.
Anyone know for sure?
Ministry (talk) 07:37, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who invented the show?