Talk:The X Factor (British TV series) series 4

Judges

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/a58173/i-am-a-dentist-i-am-not-rambo.html

2 new judges have not been announced yet --— Preceding unsigned comment added by Coxyappo (talk • contribs) 16:20, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

To the person who said: 'It has been announced that Danni Minouge and Brian Friedman are the two new judges', you need to cite your sources or else this will be deleted by Wikipedia. Without references to your source, then there is no evidence for this statement. Without evidence, it is not reliable and cannot be quoted in a Wikipedia article. We present facts, or rumours supported by third party reports, not just plain rumours. --— Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki edit jonny (talk • contribs) 23:47, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

NEW PHOTO OF FOUR JUDGES (that is, with Louis Walsh)

Can someone add the new photo of the four judges to the series 4 article please? Because I don't know how to add pictures on Wikipedia.

The photo can be found here: http://www.xfactor.tv/page.asp?partid=537

Thanks guys, Jonny

New categories

Article says "The bottom age group will now consist of singers between the ages of 14 and 16 (previously the lower age limit was 16)." The reference given does indeed seem to imply this, but all other sources I can find say that the bottom category will be 14 to 24, split into males and females (which is what this article previously said, and what The X Factor still says). I'm wondering if the piece cited just got it wrong? Or has this changed very recently? Matt 02:49, 6 July 2007 (UTC).

I agree entirely - I corrected it a couple of days ago but the author insisted it was correct. However it hasn't been said the bottom age-group will be 14-16s anywhere else apart from that one article. Louis saying 'I hope I don't get the kids' could just as well be referring to the 14-24s age group which will be split into males and females. We should remember news sources aren't always correct. One source saying the bottom age group will be 14-16 isn't enough to sway the accepted judgement we have gained from every other news source out there. Jonny 17.25, 6 July 2007

I can't see that they'd have a category for just 14, 15 and 16 year olds anyway. The under 25s is the biggest category so it makes more sense that it's split into male and female. As the majority of sources report 14-25 split between male and female, I think we should go with that, but we may have to wait until they get to that stage of the show to find out for sure. — AnemoneProjectors (zomg!) 22:55, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Position of commas

At the risk of appearing pedantic, here are three possible punctuation styles for a picture caption, in terms of comma placement:

1. "New judge Dannii Minogue arriving at the first auditions for series 4."
2. "New judge, Dannii Minogue, arriving at the first auditions for series 4."
3. "New judge, Dannii Minogue arriving at the first auditions for series 4."

In my opinion both 1 and 2 are correct (though 2 is to my eye slightly fussy), and 3 is incorrect. I changed 3 to 1, but it was then changed back with the comment that 3 "is actually correct English" and that I should "look it up". I find this a surprising claim. The one example of this sentence structure that I've been able to find, in The Times, uses style 2. I would be interested to see a reference to any authority that thinks 3 is correct. Matt 19:15, 15 July 2007 (UTC). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.160.111 (talk • contribs)

The reason why I wrote instance 3 is because as you said, 2 is slightly fussy. It makes the sentence a bit too 'stop-start'. The main thing is to include a comma before the name to ensure it is clear where the name begins (and in instance 2, ends). I am happy to go with instance 1 if it will close this thorough (and somewhat petty) debate. It is just a little disheartening when people like me do the leg-work and find the picture, get the copyright and upload it, when others' contribution is to remove a comma. Wiki_edit_jonny, 22.42, 15 July 2007.

My preference is number 2 but I have no problem with number 1 being used. — AnemoneProjectors (zomg!) 21:50, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you find my efforts to improve the article "disheartening". Matt 10:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Matt, can we put this fiasco behind us? You know, if you want, you can become a full wikipedia member? You seem to know a fair bit about The X Factor, you'd be a vaulable contributor. Wiki_edit_jonny 12:36, 16 July 2007

Absolutely, it's forgotten. In fact, I'm not really a great expert on The X Factor... it's just that I did a bit of tidying and reorganisation on the articles a year or two ago, and I check back on it from time to time to see how it's getting on. Matt 02:04, 17 July 2007 (UTC).

End date for series 4

I was just wondering whether we could get away with naming an end date for this series. Series 2 started on 20 Aug and ended 17 Dec 2005. Series 3 started on 19 Aug and ended on 16 Dec 2006. Series 4 will start on 18 Aug, and, seeing as there will still be 12 constestants, is likely to end 15 Dec 2007. This is also very likely because the winner needs about a week/a week and a half for a chance of their single reaching Christmas no. 1. I know there's no primary/secondary source for this information, but there is a rationale for this forecast. Wiki edit jonny 19:07, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Don't add it without a source. — AnemoneProjectors (?) 22:36, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Sure, no worries. Wiki edit jonny 10:56, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

14-16s category

It turns out that we were wrong about the 14-24s being split into male and female categories. Now, a 14-16s category will go head-to-head with the already established categories (16-24s, 25s+ & Groups). Simon says it himself at the ITV Autumn launch: "...bringing in the 14-16 year olds as a new category, it's freshened the whole thing up'. Interview can be watched here: http://www.itv.com/?vodcrid=crid://itv.com/2929 NOTE: The video will load eventually after an advert. Wiki edit jonny 19:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I wonder why he said that when it in fact has been split into male/female 14-25s (as confirmed on the programme itself). — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 12:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Reality TV star noteability guidelines

Hello, I've just created a seperate page proposing guidlines for noteability of Reality TV contestants and if they should have their own articles. I did this due to the mass number of articles being created and deleted on these subjects in recent months, and confusion among editors if they are in fact noteable or not. You can read this here. All edits and comments on the talk page are welcome. Thanks, Dalejenkins | 16:35, 24 August 2007 (UTC).

Rude Auditionee

I think something should be added to the article about the rude auditionee Rachel. Here is a link to a video on YouTube showing her. Sector X 08:33, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Er...why? Dalejenkins | 16:16, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Changes made by User 86.133.242.128 on 04/09/2007 to The X Factor (UK series 4)

I recently reverted the edits made by User 86.133.242.128, saying that the changes 'don't particularly add value to the article and "merely" is not an objective word' (see article's history page [1]). This User's edit can be seen here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_X_Factor_%28UK_series_4%29&diff=155541445&oldid=155540639.

The User then undid my reversion, giving these reasons: '(1) Move sentence to improve flow and reduce choppiness. (2) "Upped" does not need qotes. (3) "named" is not idiomatic in this sense. (4) Colon unnecessary here'. This User's edit can be seen here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_X_Factor_%28UK_series_4%29&diff=155698845&oldid=155601804.

1. My view on the matter is that moving the sentence doesn't improve the 'flow' at all. It elongates the sentence unecessarily by adding an 'and...' which just makes the sentence look as though it goes on and on, it is also quite clumsy editing.

2. 'Upped' does need inverted commas (not 'quotes') because to 'up' something is not a verb in the dictionary and therefore needs to be in inverted commas to express this.

3/4. The latter two reasons I am happy with (even if they are a little pedantic).

I would like to know what others think on this matter. Jonny - Wiki edit Jonny 14:00, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you on 1 but as for number 2, see wikt:up the ante (definition 2). — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 19:39, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay, an exception can be made in the case of 'to up the ante'. I'll buy that. Jonny - Wiki edit Jonny 20:53, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Regarding (1), the problem is that the sentence "There has also been more emphasis placed on the international standing of The X Factor" promises to impart some new information, but actually seems to just repeat what's already been said in the previous two sentences. The only way this structure works is if a distinction is made between "international standard" and "international standing", and that distinction does not come across clearly enough. Matt 01:56, 17 September 2007 (UTC). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.245.100 (talk)

I don't feel that the sentence doesn't impart anything new. It says in the next sentence that it is 'the biggest talent competition in Europe'. That is what the sentence about international standing refers to. Even further down, it talks about the increased number of international contestants on the show. Sorry for taking about a month to reply... literally! Wiki edit Jonny 15:49, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Layout

Just wondering what we're going to do with the layout once the live shows start. For series 3 we have "Bootcamp", "Finalists", "Results summary" and "Live show details". For this series we have "Stages", which includes "Bootcamp" and "Live shows", so where are the "Finalists" and "Results" sections going to go? I'd like the "Finalists", "Results summary" and "Live show details" sections to be in that order if possible as it makes sense to have them in that order. — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 14:10, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

New Studios

Simon Cowell was reported to be seeking a larger venue for the live shows, previously filmed at The Fountain Studios in Wembley. First on Cowell's list is said to be Elstree Studios in Hertfordshire.

I can see its a different studio, but is it still at The Fountain Studios? Jinxed - talk 16:49, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, The Fountain Studios Website has a video of the new stage being built. Jinxed - talk 16:54, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Ages for Series 4 finalists

Do you think we should put a little note in superscript or something that all ages given are from the time of the live finals? As I don't think anyone can be bothered to update them whenever a finalist has a birthday—there are 21 of them! Wiki edit Jonny 23:32, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I was going to do it but for some reason I didn't. We did the same last year, but after a year of it being there (and some of the ages being changed, Eton Road, I think), I removed the ages and the note. So by all means do it for now. Dates of birth were given for most of last year's so I'm sure they'll be given for this year's soon enough. — AnemoneProjectors (会話) 23:43, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not a fan of having ages in articles at all. Even if you add a note that they are "as of" (as I did last year, I think), people, as AP says, still come along and update them, and then you don't know where the heck you are. Dates of birth (or failing that even years of birth) are much more satisfactory.

Emily caught on cam happy slapping - quits show

BBC and ITV are both reporting this, the official press release is here - http://www.xfactor.tv/news/article/?scid=188 86.21.74.40 15:09, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks but it's already in the article :) ^anemone|_projectors 15:17, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Results summary order

Having been reverted again, I'm bringing this here. Should the results summary be in order of oldest first, or newest first? The other series are all newest first, it was changed during series 3, see Talk:The X Factor (UK series 3)#Elimination table. ^anemone|_projectors 13:19, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• I changed it to oldest first. I can't imagine why anyone would want it newest first; it seems desperately counterintuitive. But, if everyone else thinks it should be newest first then I will shut up! Matt 00:20, 19 November 2007 (UTC).

Mick Jackson

I think something needs to be done about the users who insist on changing Mick Jackson to The Jackson 5 (or the like). I propose we semi-protect the page as the users aren't members of Wikipedia. Any objections? Wiki edit Jonny (talk) 23:13, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

None. Head to WP:RPP and do so. Gscshoyru (talk) 23:14, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll just protect it. It'll be quicker :) ^anemoneI_projectors 23:21, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Oops, I've already posted an RPP request, shall I delete it? Wiki edit Jonny (talk) 23:27, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Damn, these guys are efficient! It's already noted as 'Already Protected' on the RPP page. Wiki edit Jonny (talk) 23:30, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Celebrity "coaches"?

"Acts are usually tutored by a celebrity coach linked to that theme".

Is this a bit strong? "Tutoring" and "coaching" to me imply that the celebrities spend a significant amount of time -- at least a couple of hours -- with each of the contestants, but from only ever watching the main show I get the impression that they just do a quick photo-call with each of them. I know that they do comment very briefly on the rehearsals, but does this amount to "tutoring"? Or is there a lot more to it that's not aired on the main show? Matt 00:02, 21 November 2007 (UTC).

---

Another point about the same sentence: "Acts are usually tutored by a celebrity coach linked to that theme, coaches were Céline Dion, Boyz II Men, Girls Aloud, Michael Jackson and Kylie Minogue." I got a bit confused here while trying to make a cosmetic edit. Just to set me straight, are we saying that there is a distinction between guests and coaches? That some of the guests didn't do any coaching, but this is (or will be) a complete list of those that did? Is that correct? Matt 04:14, 21 November 2007 (UTC).

Yeah, coaches actually go through the acts' songs with them and give them tips. Guests don't offer any one-on-one advice to the acts and just do a performance on the results show. Leona and Shayne were just guests because they don't have enough experience to be giving sessions with the acts. With the coaches, it's a difficult one with regards to tense. Michael Jackson and Kylie Minogue have yet to appear on the show, though they are confirmed. I thought I would use 'were' because it's not time-senstive and would save us having to go through it at the end, when changing all the tenses. Wiki edit Jonny (talk) 10:06, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Yep, that makes sense. I was having a muddled moment! Matt 02:05, 23 November 2007 (UTC). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Another Matt (talk • contribs)

Deadlock

Shouldn't it be mentioned that the deadlock on the 24th November show was brought about by Sharon wanting a deadlock rather than actually voting for the act she wanted to go. I feel this is show when she said: "I am doing this for a reason and when I say who I am voting for you will see this reason". or words to that affect.

This is partly for discussion and partly because I cannot make the edit not being a member and all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.7.80.172 (talk) 00:08, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes it might be worth mentioning that. ^anemoneI_projectors 01:10, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I know it's late, but yes, I agree. Wiki edit Jonny (talk) 12:11, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I added it last night. ^anemoneI_projectors 14:53, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

HOPE 1st DEC

I have reliable information from inside hope that they are singing 2 songs on saturday. 2 become 1 by the spice girls and We will rock you by queen. Yet this has been deleted. Why when other users can post uncited information and it be acceptable. You wait and see on saturday and maybe you will take me more seriously. --Willsmith342 16:58, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Information confirmed with reliable sources cited. --Midouk2002 19:57, 30 November 2007

List of songs being sung are posted on the official X Factor website every Thursday. Pegasus15 23:35, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Edit dispute: Mick Jackson

The whole situation with Mick Jackson is getting a little out of hand. One/some individual(s) have decided to take the issue to another level by editing the section to say 'Jackson Five' adding in hidden script, 'IF YOU THINK IT WAS MICK JACKSON THAT MADE THIS SONG FAMOUS, YOU MUST BE ON DRUGS'. I don't think it's fair on genuine users to just semi-protect the page again, and it obviously doesn't work as these people are still making this edit. I'd like to know what everybody else thinks. Cheers — Wiki edit Jonny (talk) 23:46, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

If the page is semi-protected, genuine users can log in, or request edits here on the talk page using {{Editprotected}}. However, reverting isn't a problem at the moment (just stay calm), as it's not being changed often. If it gets bad, then we can semi-protect. ^anemone│_projectors 00:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Michael Jackson will be appearing as a special guest, but he will not be performing a song. In fact, it will be Kylie Minogue. 172.189.71.86 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 02:28, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Which one was Michael Jackson then? ^anemone│_projectors 00:07, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Same Difference?

I think Same Difference should have their own page, Leon and Rhydian do. 81.159.61.215 (talk) 23:54, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Leon has a page because he's now released a single. I disagree that Rhydian should have a page. Same Difference are even less deserving of a page than Rhydian. If they ever release an album or single, or get a television presenting job, then they can have an article. ^anemone│_projectors 00:06, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree I also think same difference should have their own page. The girls has been on Genie in the House and you could all that in their.

It should be the final 3 deserve a page as at the moment Leon and Rhydian do!!!

Axel8 (talk) 19:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

p.s I added one last night and now it's gone was that Anemone Project. I really can't see why you don't think there should be an article they reached the final 3 and I can think of loads of citable information to put in. People less famous than them have a page.

Anemone Project: please don't let your clear dislike of Same Difference to clowd your judgement and say "they are not deserving of a page." They do deserve one. Axel8 (talk) 19:48, 18 December 2007 (UTC)