Talk:America's Next Top Model

ANTM Call-out table colors

Further information: Talk:International versions of Top Model § Call-out table colors, Talk:America's Next Top Model/Archive 4 § ANTM Call-out table colors, and Talk:America's Next Top Model/Archive 4 § Added color to table

Back on the Brittany immunity color topic, since I didn't get to answer it, I still do not think a new color is necessary. A footnote is, but it's basically a second challenge. As far as the cycle 5 pose-off goes, the winner was chosen at panel (like during the correspondant challenge in C8 or the styling one in C9), so had a girl insulted Tyra, she would not have been the winner, so Zephyr Wind's point is moot. To me it could be something like:

The colors are re-added from the talk page archive:

Color	Call-out description	Cycle(s)
LimeGreen	The contestant won the competition	All
Violet	The contestant was eliminated	All
LightSteelBlue	The contestant won the reward challenge	All
Yellow	The contestant was CoverGirl of the Week	3–10
Orange	The contestant was CoverGirl of the Week and won the reward challenge	3–10
Olive	The contestant was CoverGirl of the Week and was eliminated	3, 7, 9 & 10
Purple	The contestant won the reward challenge and was eliminated	2, 6, 10–13
Teal	The contestant did not participate in the photo shoot and was eliminated	1, 2 & 7
Crimson	The contestant quit the competition	5, 9, 10 & 13
DarkBlue	The contestant did not participate in the photo shoot	1 & 10
DarkRed	The contestant was eliminated outside of judging panel	3, 11 & 13
DarkGreen	The contestant added into the cast Scouted at a separate audition, Cycle 1 Due to a number opening, Cycle 10	See description
LightPink	The contestant was part of a non-elimination bottom two	5
MediumVioletRed	The contestant was the original eliminee but was saved, and won the reward challenge	9
RoyalBlue	The contestant won two reward challenges	11 & 12
Chocolate	The contestant was entered as a replacement into the competition and was eliminated	13
SpringGreen	The contestant won immunity from elimination	13

Colors should not be used if there's only one occurence.--Whadaheck (talk) 22:47, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Green for winner seems dark and Red for quitter is so light. Lime green and Crimson are more suitable. Hotpink is nearly like Violet. 113.22.151.150 (talk) 01:26, 24 October 2009 (UTC).

Thanks for your input. Anyways, I don't think that the chocolate color in Cycle 13 is necessary as what happened to Lisa is basically what happened to Tessa and Giselle in Cycle 1. Creating a new color for the same thing is pretty much superfluous. same goes for Brittany winning immunity in Cycle 13 or Nicole winning to have her pic used as an ad in Cycle 5, those are basically reward challenges.--Whadaheck (talk) 15:11, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I re-added the chocolate color from talk page archive # 4. Though the green color has never used in Cycle 13 and Lisa had not made it in the final cut on casting week of that said cycle. ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 16:42, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

And Tessa and Giselle didn't make the cut at Cycle 1's casting, they were brought in as replacements because Tyra and the producers couldn't agree on two more girls, yet they are listed below the rest of the girls and Tessa isn't in chocolate color, despite the fact that she's a replacement who got eliminated right away. I don't see why there should be two different policies for one show.--Whadaheck (talk) 19:45, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Read the Cycle 1 article states that Tessa and Giselle were added into the cast during the first half of its first episode. They were not as replacements than Lisa (Cycle 13). During Cycle 10, Dominique was added into the cast after Tyra announced to increase the count of the girls from regular 13 through 14. During the current cycle, Amber had made it into the final 14 list and she went missing at the start of second episode due to personal reasons (2-part episode of 09/09/2009). ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 00:01, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

The basic thing is, Lisa was entered as a replacement, Tessa & Gisele were not. They were officially, full-fletched finalists chosen by Tyra, just at a different casting. Simple. ZephyrWind (talk) 01:45, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

While Tessa and Giselle were picked "by Tyra", they were not even semi-fianlists to begin with, so they are just as much of replacements as Lisa. Adding a new color is just making things more complex for the hell of it. I say, keep it simple--Whadaheck (talk) 19:37, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't follow Whadaheck's edits, follow the call-out colors shown above. ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 01:54, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Replacements and additions are clearly different, Dark Green has only been used for additions and not replacements. LIsa was not added too the cast in the same way as Tessa and Giselle in cycle 1. she was eliminated and brought back to replace Amber who quit. I se no basis to use Dark green, or even include LIsa in the table for Episode 1. ... Misty Willows ^talk 21:41, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Well then I'd reccommend a new color for Lisa and Heather in Cycle 9, as their being featured was not technically a challenge, they were just picked by the video director at the beginning of the shoot, that's not the same as a challenge, there was no competition beforehand, we're being specific, right? Same goes for Saleisha on episode 2, for winning an extra prize at panel (and Natasha in Cycle 8 and Nicole in Cycle 5). Nikeysha needs one for randomly getting the key to the house by picking the right purse, Eva, Kahlen, Nicole, Joanie & Caridee need one for being voted as City TV's audience favourite (we have the CoverGirls of the Week, why not have those ?), a LOT of girls need one for being disqualified from a challenge. Should I go on splitting hairs or do we have enough parts already?--Whadaheck (talk) 23:24, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

All of those are trivialities, LIsa replacing amber is a pivotal point in the competition. -... Misty Willows ^talk 12:32, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Winning a feature in a videoclip, a fashion week booking or getting disqualified from a challenge are not trivialities, and to get back to your point about Lisa being eliminated and then brought back, so were Giselle and Tessa, as they weren't picked to be semi-finalists and then brought back as finalists (or Dominique by making it in after Tyra called the "last" girl). So really, Lisa's situation is no different than theirs. The point of the color scheme is to be simple and re-usable, not to note one time thingies.--Whadaheck (talk) 19:03, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

FYI, Gisele, Tessa & Dominique were never eliminated before being picked. The first two weren't even at the auditions for the first cut to be eliminated, and Tyra opened up a slot for Dominique before eliminating the rest of the semi-finalists. ZephyrWind (talk) 02:39, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

And FYI if they weren't there for the first auditions it means their audition tapes hadn't been picked up, therefore they had been eliminated, only it was before the semi-finals, so yes they were eliminated and then brought back. And I never said that Dominique had been eliminated. I just said that her being added due to a number opening is similar to beiong added due to a withdrawal (Lisa) or picky producers (Tessa & Giselle), but why not add a new color while you're at it? --Whadaheck (talk) 18:57, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, indeed whadaheck! Add one for Isis cos she is a transsexual and broke the rules that states only females 18 and above may apply, and one for Natasha & Lluvy for being non-US citizens when they applied, and Fatima cos she is a refugee. And FYI, Giselle and Tessa never sent in audition tapes for ANTM. They were scouted at a Macy's runway at NYC. And no, Dominique is NOT similar to a withdrawal, because there as none. And this will be the last you hear from me regarding this. Cheers! ZephyrWind (talk) 06:11, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Then why was there an audition tape of Giselle shown during the recap of Cycle 1? Watch it there at 2:24. And I said that Dominique qualifies as an addition (just like Lisa, Giselle or Tessa), not a withdrawal (that would be Kim, Ebony or Cassandra, who have the same color as Amber, despite not quitting in the same way). Withdrawal, one color, Addition, one color.--Whadaheck (talk) 20:26, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

There, the call-out table segment about "the contestant won immunity" was first seen in Australia's Next Top Model, Cycle 4 (see entire video and find episode 1) when one of its contestants won the challenge and also immunity for the week. ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 00:14, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

At Next Top Model (Greece) there is now a new situation: The contestant was the original eliminee but was saved. Any idea which colour should be used for it? Shameless (talk) 17:30, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

The call-out segment "The contestant was the original eliminee but was saved" and the color will be use Deep Pink as a call-out order table.

  The contestant was the original eliminee but was saved

Enjoy and use the new color. ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 02:27, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

but this colour is already in use in the same article for The contestant was the original eliminee but quit the competition

To the replied editor: I prefer Pale Violet Red as the use of the said situation above. Change it. Thanks. ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 06:23, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Cycle 13 international destination

Don't add the Hawaiian flag in Cycles section, Hawaii is not a country, it is an U.S. state. Thank you. ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 02:50, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Shall we add it beside the American flag? Just a thought. 220.255.7.157 (talk) 03:55, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Note: Hawaii is a part of the United States and it uses the American flag in many English articles. Besides, the Hawaiian flag will not added in that section. ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 04:08, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

ANTM Cycle 14

68.23.85.188 (talk) 23:06, 15 November 2009 (UTC) POSTING FROM fibron3@yahoo.com Input for placing new data on Wikipeida -- following is a good start.... PLEASE CONSIDER ADDING NEW UNIT////////////////

America's Next Top Model – Cycle 14: Following list of Judges reportedly joining the panel for the next cycle -- Kimora Lee Simmons, and Andre Leon Talley.

http://www.buddytv.com/articles/americas-next-top-model/americas-next-top-model-kimora-32632.aspx?pollid=600001563&answer=600005251#poll600001563

Go to this site and vote – let’s make sure that Miss J stays on as a judge!!!!!

Source: Meghan Carlson, BuddyTV Staff Writer

Please wait until Cycle 14 will announce on the network by January 2010. Wait it for details. Thanks. ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 04:39, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Cycle Fourteen Internal Destination Is New Zealand! Heres The source! http://www.3news.co.nz/Next-Top-Model-crew-arrive-in-New-Zealand/tabid/418/articleID/132549/Default.aspx?ArticleID=132549&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+co%2FHCaY+%283News-+Latest+News%29 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.29.90.219 (talk) 21:57, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Here is the source when the future contestants arrive in New Zealand taken from New Zealand Herald article: Top Model hunt successful. ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 10:51, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Double Elimination Order

Several times someone has reversed Erin and Jennifer in the elimination order. Lists, are supposed to be alphabetical, unless there is a logical reason to list them otherwise. Erin and Jennifer were eliminated together, so there is not a logical reason to put Erin ahead of Jennifer. "I like it better that way" or " I think Jennifer did better" are not valid reasons. ... Misty Willows ^talk 07:26, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Because on the table, the girls are only listed by their first names, so we should arrange them as such, same as Cycles 1 (Giselle then Tessa), 4 (Rebecca then Tiffany), 5 (Jayla then Nicole) & 10 (Aimee then Amis).ZephyrWind (talk) 06:30, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

I am the one who has been changing them my reason is: When watching top model the eliminated girl has her portfolio pictures shown this has been done since cycle 3. If you notice in cycle 4 Rebecca's pictures are shown first, then Tiffany's. The same is done for cycle 13, Erin's photo history is shown, followed by Jennifer's. It is clear we should be following what the show does not alphabetical order this is not fair to the best show ever created. Please keep in mind if it is changed again I will change it until you understand my reason. --KrumpMaster4 (talk) 17:25, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Have you heard of consensus? And why are you changing other people's comments on this talk page? Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:35, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

I dont want this to be an edit war, but just because Erin was shown leaving first in no way implies she came fourth, just like it didnt mean Rebecca did worse than Tiffany all those cycles ago. It could have been so many reasons on the show why Erin's footage was shown first - it could have been alphabetical, it could have been random or it could be simply editting. Had it dawned on you that they could have filmed Jen's first but then shown it second? It should be alphabetical, because your just jumping to assumptions on an edit. If Tyra had said "the first girl to leave is Erin" and then put Laura through then fair enough, but she didnt. (Kyleofark (talk) 20:33, 19 November 2009 (UTC))

If they are tied, fuse the cells. And Tessa & Giselle weren't even there that week. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.2.255.244 (talk) 10:23, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I tried they still continue to change it, does anyone know how to get a hold of the Wikipedia people because I would really like to tell them about this, how people won't let you contribute to this page.--KrumpMaster4 (talk) 20:42, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

I put in a request for full protection. Nevermind, it appears you have been blocked. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 00:44, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Dear KrumpMaster4, with all due respect to you and other eager volunteers who wish to contribute on Wikipedia to their favorite shows and programmes, please bear in mind that there's been others who have been contributing, editting, reverting vandalism, discussing for consensus, creating pages and maintaining the integrity of articles way before you did. Before you're being treated just as another come-and-go vandal, just let me remind you that it was not too long ago that ANTM Wiki pages just consisted of contestant bios and a call-out table. The format that it is now in is due to all the contributors through the years. Feel free to "get hold of the Wikipedia people", though I doubt it will be entertained anyway. In the meantime, continue to enjoy ANTM and do remember that Wikipedia is "the Free encyclopedia", not "the KrumpMaster4 encyclopedia". Have a nice day! ZephyrWind (talk) 09:48, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

And you've just proven that Wikipedia is anything but free. There's like two people who decide stuff and no matter how many people disagree, you say it's consensus. 2-3 people is hardly a consensus.--79.87.115.49 (talk) 18:11, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Well said ZephyrWind. There's so many things i'd like to do to so many pages but cant, but hey I just accept that. I think KrumpMaster should take that into consideration, or at least give a convincing argument for his/her point of view before changing the page so often. Prefering one contestant more than another (which is what I think this is really about) is not what Wikipedia is about (Kyleofark (talk) 16:53, 22 November 2009 (UTC))

That's dumb. The consensus is not someone decide and I follow, it's we all agree and then we do it, which happens not to be the case here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.194.35.225 (talk) 18:06, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Kyleofark you are the main one who has been changing the two back. I am aware others have been reversing Jennifer and Erin, I am very happy people agree with me that Erin should go before Jennifer. To everyone else who agrees with this thank you continuing to make a difference. I have been blocked from editting for 72 hours. This is simply rediculous! Who in their right mind would block someone for 72 hours for simply fusing the cells togther so they read "Erin & Jennifer" I thought by doing this we could all adree to disagree. Again I was wrong. It's still their way or no way. I say anyone should be allowed to make changes and continue to do so.--KrumpMaster4 (talk) 19:55, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Actually I'm fine with the merging of the cells. I don't know why you got blocked for that. BUT putting Jennifer above Erin is really what's causing all the problems I think... 121.6.96.156 (talk) 02:07, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Then I guess the new consensus is merging the cells.--Whadaheck (talk) 14:46, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, my bad, I just edited the Cycle 13 page without checking here. Im personally fine with merging the cells on the table, though it should still read "Erin & Jennifer". Of course, I think that means we should merge any other double eliminations, such as Rebecca and Tiffany, and any other ones in any other countries Top Model.

whadaheck you are jumping the gun again, and prematurely declaring consensus. I don't see a new concusses, I see a few people saying they are open to the Idea, There was a technical reason that merged cells were rejected in the past ( which I don't have time to go through the archives to recall) Lets slow down and do this right. I am personally not in favor of the merge cells, because they introduce potential complications, But if all the technical issues are addressed, and there is a clear consensus (which at the moment there is not) then I won't have objections. I think Plasticspork would be the best arbitrator here, and If s/he is willing, should tally and declare, what the consensus opinion is. I don't see any justification. for making the merge. until that, or a similar process happens. ... Misty Willows ^talk 08:41, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, so far we have 2 unsigned users (possibly 3 counting the one above you), Kyleofark, KrumpMaster4 and myself who seem to be for the merging, and you and Zephyrwind against it. I said the consensus seems to be a merging and nobody opposed it during a few days, then I changed it. And anyways, so far the majority is favorable to the merging. And which technical difficulties are you talking about, it's quite easy to fuse cells if you ask me.--Whadaheck (talk) 12:37, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I made a new section to discuss the proposal for merging cells, so that we can discuss it like a Wikipedia proposal. ... Misty Willows ^talk 18:54, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

The one thing I really disagree with is Erin coming first in the "In order of elimination" section though. Their surnames are used in this section, so they should be listed in order of surname. Its as simple as that. Thats how it is in "post top model careers," and you'll find I havent changed that once. (Kyleofark (talk) 18:18, 28 November 2009 (UTC))

But also Krumpmaster, you seem to be of the belief that you can just do you want and we should be happy with that? Why should we? You may want it one way, but I may want it another. Your saying you should be allowed to edit as you want.. isnt that exactly what I've been doing too? I think how the page reads know represents a fair compromise, though if someone comes along and changes it to something totally different, is that fair? The whole point in reaching a concensus is to do what the majority want - the majority here stated it should be "Erin, Jennifer" and "Jennifer An, Erin Wagner." Your opinion is of no more or no less value than anyone elses, you just need to realise that when the numbers are against you, then you shouldnt just change the page, you need to convince the majority why your opinions are the correct ones. (Kyleofark (talk) 18:27, 28 November 2009 (UTC))

Agreed. But there I think we should either list them everytime (episode summary, table, order of elim, post show careers) by first name or everytime by last name. It's just strange to have it both ways because it's different sections. On top of that, I repeat that Tessa and Giselle were not called at casting in Cycle 1 (because they weren't there) and since there is a color for replacement and one for replacement & eliminated, I think we could (and should) make the table more accurate. Anyone on board?--Whadaheck (talk) 23:21, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

if the list contains first and last name it makes sense to list by last name, and that is the standard, but if a list only has first names, then it makes no sense to list them according to the implied last name. if the table had "Jennifer An", and "Erin Wagner" in it, the proper order would be Jennifer An" followed by "Erin Wagner". but since it only has "Jennifer" and "Erin". the proper order is Erin followed by Jennifer. If you want to propose that all the tables should have first and last names in it, you might get a consensus. Then things would be the way you want them. ... Misty Willows ^talk 06:46, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I have been saying this for a while but no one will listen. They always block me this time i have been blocked for a full week. Childish and Foolishness. Blocking for me having an opinion I'm done trying to discuss this, because obviously mistywillows you don't know how to hear others ideas!--KrumpMaster4 (talk) 22:47, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

You weren't blocked for 'having an opinion'. You were blocked for engaging in an edit war, rather than waiting until consensus had been reached. If you would like to propose a controversial change, start a straw poll, as Misty Willow's did below. Thank you for help! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 23:01, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Cycle 13: Making a difference

Cycle 13 of ANTM is a unique season. The female contestants are all petite women. Why not make a section on this wiki about how this is bringing in a high rating, and how it is changing the way we think of models? Just a thought. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kkscarbro (talk • contribs) 18:56, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, from what I remember reading, this is actually one of the lower-rated Top Model cycles. Also, there would have to be legitimate reliable sources demonstrating this change.... SKS (talk) 19:17, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Adding on to SKS, actually it is the lowest rated cycle... ZephyrWind (talk) 06:31, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Cycle 13 Winner

The Runner up and winners are switched. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.130.175.104 (talk) 02:13, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

It's fixed now. Nicole confirmed as winner of this cycle. ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 02:31, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

For GOD! Don't be unconsidered!

Make a pagine for the runner up of cycle 13 Laura KiKPARTRICK! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.139.38.222 (talk) 01:24, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

And what reason would you give for that? She hasn't done anything prominent yet, so until she does, we don't really need a page for her, BUT if you really want to create one, go ahead. It's (the page) prominence will then be discussed.
Having said this, I feel that alot of ANTM alumni shouldn't have pages, like Samantha Potter, Kahlen Rondot, Bre Scullark, Lisa D'Amato to name a few, so don't even get me started. ZephyrWind (talk) 09:52, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

There is always WP:AFD. Just post a notice here if you do. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 20:49, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't her being the very first American fan favourite ever make her notable?--164.2.255.244 (talk) 09:10, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Text Table?

Just a suggestion, but maybe we should have girls that were called at the same time in bold. Then the girls that were in a double elimination in italics —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.184.255.90 (talk) 22:30, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Laura Kirkpatrick article

I brought this up because I'm nominating the article for deletion. A user created the page despite an administrator requesting its deletion. The link to this can be found on Laura's wiki discussion page. Thank you. ZephyrWind (talk) 07:54, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Alphabetical order for post top model careers.

The order of Elimination is completely irrelevant to the post top model carreers of the contestants, so there is no logical reason to have them listed in elimination order. The standard is that lists should be ordered alphabetically, unless there is a logical reason that a different order makes more sense; in this case, elimination order isn't. ... Misty Willows ^talk 09:12, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Proposal: merge cells in table for shared rank

Several times more than one contestant, shared the same rank. there have been scattered discussion in on this page and others about it, solets discuss the pro's and cons of the issue and state whether we are in favor or opposed

Pros: There isn't the appearance of preference, of one contestant over the other. It give better visual feedback, that there was a tie or group rank.

Cons: It makes it confusing if one of the group has special recognition ( like challenge winner or CGOW) that the others don't. There potentially could be some technical difficulty, for some browsers.

... Misty Willows ^talk 18:48, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

There have been 5 occurrences as far as I know:

-The first one being Tessa and Giselle being added into the cast. But that wasn't even at panel and there's already a color scheme for both replacements (darkgreen) and replacements that were eliminated on their first week (chocolate).

-The second one is Tiffany and Rebecca's double elimination. No difference between the two (no challenge win, no CGOTW).

-The third one is Jayla and Nicole's non elimination. No difference again.

-The fourth one is Rae, Brittany and Jennifer. In that case there was a difference, but we have to exit strategies. The first one is coloring the font instead of the background. The second one, better in my opinion, is that Tyra herself ranked the girls while giveing her their critique, so we can split the cell accordingly.

-The last one is Erin and Jennifer's double elimination. No difference.

And so far no browser I have used has ever had a problem with merged cells.

So at the end of the day, the cons aren't really there at this point. The only difference that could remain now is that a girl would end up winning a challenge and tying with another one, since CGOTW doesn't even exist anymore, at which point we could use the first solution I cited above, or decide that winning the challenge places you above one that didn't. But right now, there is no proof such a time would come, so I am voting strongly in favor of the merging.--Whadaheck (talk) 19:11, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Im personally cool with the merged cells, though to be honest im happy either way. The thing what concerns me is if a girl were to for example win a challenge in the future, and get double eliminated with a girl who didnt win a challenge. This happened this year with the three girls/first call out picture, but luckily Tyra said that Rae was the best etc, so it was avoided. My opinion would be merge for now, and if a problem occurs in the future, come back here and readdress the situation. :) (Kyleofark (talk) 00:48, 1 December 2009 (UTC))

I'd really like to hear what Zephyrwind, AprenticeFan and Plastikspork have to say. At the moment I would say that I am weakly opposed this proposal, but open to being persuaded otherwise. Does anyone have examples of other shows that use the merged cell strategy? How do they deal with the fringe cases? ... Misty Willows ^talk 04:27, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

PCD Presents season 1, and it deals with the fringe cases by using the magic of footnotes.--79.87.115.24 (talk) 21:36, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I am weakly opposed to merging the cells. It really wouldn't bother me either way. I just like to see some level of consistency. I know of many examples where the cells are not joined. I can't think of any cases where the cells are joined. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:31, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

To be fair, most shows don't use the call-out order for their tables, just the order of elim. I am in favor of the merging--164.2.255.244 (talk) 09:09, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

I am changing my position to strongly opposed to merging cells, because someone came up with, what I believe to be a much more elegant solution.: bold for group callouts, italic for group eliminations. See the proposal below ... Misty Willows ^talk 23:57, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I am neutral about it. With regards to the italics, bold and underline, we should implement what we decided on ages ago to help the color-blind. I've done a bit on the tables already. As for now I don't really care whether to merge cells or not, just that it should be tidy, cohesive and agreeable. (And anyway someone has already merged the cells while we were talking about it) ZephyrWind (talk) 04:47, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Proposal: bold/italic in table for shared rank

As an Alternative to merging cells. We could make group callouts and eliminations Bold or Italic, or we could make callouts bold and eliminations italic. I believe this would be preferable to merged cells since it would not cause any of the problems mentioned above, while still accomplishing the goal of demonstrating equal position. I can't see any problems with this unless we actually implement the bold/italic/underline scheme, for the colorblind, that was proposed earlier, but never implemented. ... Misty Willows ^talk 00:14, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

I am strongly opposed to it. Bold and italics are already supposed to be used for reward challenge winners and CGOTW, but nobody took the time.--Whadaheck (talk) 18:03, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

well if you think that, how about doing it youraelf. I came up with the scheme but i never got around to doing it and no one else seemed enthusuatic about the idea. It was just something to help the colorblind . ... Misty Willows ^talk 21:42, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually, it was my idea. I posted it in the last archive but forgot to log-in.--Whadaheck (talk) 22:11, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

And done half of it. I'm leaving the rest to you.--Whadaheck (talk) 22:42, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

OK. I've done the formatting for all the articles. As with regards to the merging of cells, as I've said earlier, it's fine to go ahead as long if it doesn't make the article messier or contradict an earlier decided-upon decision. ZephyrWind (talk) 05:13, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

well but I think thats excatly the case now. the table looks all over the place with the bold, italics and underlined letters now. When I first saw it i seriously thought it was vandalism. Why changing something that worked so well before when you? It really takes some time to see why every name is written in different ways when you already have a coloured background cell for each of these scenarios anyway. Is it only for the sake of a merged cell (which would still not work in a lot of ways then and looks horrible) for an event that occured TWICE in 13 Cycles of ANTM? I am strongly opposed to these recent changes that were done to the call out table as it makes it much more complicated to read and adds some difersify to it that is not really needed. And this argument that Jennifer should be listed before Erin is really ridicolous. Should we really change an entire concept only because some user is offended that one girl is listed above the other whereas both still went at the same time?! Shameless (talk) 12:43, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually, girls being called together happened 5 times already (which is more often than say: a girl getting immunity, a girl being saved from elimination after winning the challenge, a girl quitting, a girl winning two challenges, a girl skipping the photoshoot and being saved or not, all of which have their very own color). So it's quite ridiculous to use this as a reason not to fuse the cells. And fusing the cells and making the table color-blind-friendly are two separate things. If the consensus were to undo those changes (which it currently is not) I'd still be in favor of merging the cells and against bolding joint call-outs.--Whadaheck (talk) 14:50, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

I understand the reasoning behind this was to aid the color-blind, as with the same thing that happened to the Amazing Race articles. I've no opinion on the aesthetics. ZephyrWind (talk) 11:58, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

International Broadcasts

Someone should update the board about Greece. They are showing the 12th cycle right now. Thank you. 91.140.35.165 (talk) 14:29, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

This whole section is redundant with Top Model series, it should be removed,, except for the first paragraph ... Misty Willows ^talk 08:52, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Original vs broadcast call out order

While viewing Cycle 4 episode 5. I noticed that it was obvious, that the order that was broadcast, was not consistent, with number of girls standing in both the called and uncalled places. The original callout order, during the filming, was: Rebecca, Christina, Tatiana, Tiffany, Brittany, Keenya , Kahlen, Naima, Michelle, Lluvy, Noelle; but the order that was broadcast was: Rebecca, Christina, Tatiana, Tiffany, Kahlen, Naima, Brittany, Michelle, Lluvy, Noelle, with Keenya never being called. in Episode 2 and 10, there where also cases where the order was rearranged, and I'm sure with careful inspection, we will find the same thing on other Episodes. Should we show the edited broadcast order, or should we show the reconstructed original order? ( While thinking about this, it occurred to me that in both cases we need to rely on original research since we are getting the order from watching the show, not a secondary source. reconstructing the original order also has the problem or original analysis. Does anyone know a reliable source that didn't get it from Wikipedia?) ... Misty Willows ^talk 04:31, 24 December 2009 (UTC)