Talk:List of The Amazing Race (U.S. TV series) contestants
|This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to . If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
- Oppose merge. This article is in keeping with all the other episodes. --evrik (talk) 16:35, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
- Comment. My concern with the contestant pages is that they lack notability and importance to the franchise in general. For example, The Apprentice (UK) has a sub-article List of The Apprentice candidates (UK). Since the academic and working experiences of the candidates plays an important role in Sir Alan's hiring decision, the sub-article provides important and relevant background information about the series. In addition, The Apprentice contains business-oriented tasks to test the candidates' academic and working experiences; TAR's challenges aren't specific to any one discipline or ability... thus I don't see how general contestant biographies contain any relevant information relating to team performance on the Race. --Madchester (talk) 17:46, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
- Suggestion I've had this idea for a while. Instead of the prose biographies, why don't we make a single, tabular list similar to List of Survivor contestants (which is a featured list) and redirect all the current "contestants" articles there? --CrazyLegsKC 21:23, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
- Comment. I was just about to link that article in the discussion. I think that's the best way to merge all contestant info in one article, without resorting to mini-biographies of each team. While I can see mini-biographies relaying relevant academic, technical, or work experience in talent-specific reality shows (Project Runway, The Apprentice, Hell's Kitchen, etc.)... they don't really work for programs like TAR or Survivor where past experience or skills don't necessarily lead to winning or even being casted on the show. --Madchester (talk) 21:40, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
- Comment making the merge to List of The Amazing Race (U.S. TV series) contestants, following the style of the Survivor list. --Madchester (talk) 02:41, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
- Comment each of the articles was fine as they were. Lumping them together just makes the information less relevant. I'd like to point out The Amazing Race 5 contestants as an example of what I thought was the best of these pages. I'm reverting all the merges and moving the comments to here for further discussion. --evrik (talk) 16:12, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Comment. As I mentioned above, the Race doesn't test a particular contestant skill set or ability like The Apprentice (business/marketing), Hell's Kitchen (US) (cuisine) or Project Runway (fashion design). It makes sense to have an article like List of The Apprentice candidates (UK), since a candidate's education and work experience is an important factor in Sir Alan's hiring decision. Sir Alan will refer to a candidate's past experiences during the Boardroom. Likewise, on a show like HK, when Gordon Ramsay chooses a winner, it is heavily reliant on a candidate's actual kitchen experience, regardless of their success during aired challenges.
- With shows like TAR, Big Brother or Survivor, there's no skill-based prerequisites required to be on the show. It's superfluous to have contestant articles containing indiscriminate biographical information that has little bearing to the actual race outcome. The Survivor list of contestants does it right by having all the necessary contestant information in one article, without resorting to filler that is non-essential to the season results. Referring to Wikipedia:INFO, just because the biographical details are verifiable, doesn't mean that they warrant inclusion in Wikipedia. The List of Contestants is a proper compromise with regards to the show's format and Wiki-policy. --Madchester (talk) 04:41, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- Comment Despite the fact that I did much of the early grunt work on these articles I can see where Madchester is coming from, especially considering the Survivor list is featured. I'm not too fussed either way, but if we do go to having only a Survivor-style list I'd propose a "notes" column or similar to put in any particularly notable features of contestants (such as links to other relevant wiki articles). One other thing - I'm glad Evrik followed the usual process and brought this here; Madchester, I think you should have done that in the first place, since it was a major change you chose to unilaterally implement. To be honest I saw it happening and did nothing myself as I was busy with other concerns and haven't edited these articles for months, but anyway I'm glad that someone took the initiative to initiate discussion. PageantUpdater talk • contribs 13:32, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- Comment I agree with Madchester. Racers are picked purely on interview, with scouts and on personality, not on relative experience. One cohesive list of contestants is sufficient enough to describe them. It does follow the same pattern as the Survivor list, which is featured. I do think the individual contestant per season articles should go in favor of this new list Survivorfan101 (talk) 12:19, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
- Comment I think large lists are useless, and at some point they get broken up if they are too big. I like the personal details about the couples when it's done by season. --evrik (talk) 15:36, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
- Comment. Can we go through with the merge now? We haven't seen any strong arguments for keeping separate pages containing biographical details for otherwise trivial individuals. Nor is there any real opposition against the move. --Madchester (talk) 01:46, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
- I would say no, large lists (especially ones bound to grow) are useless. --evrik (talk) 18:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I've been bold and redirected the seasonal articles per the discussion that took place. Following the precedent set by List of Survivor contestants, which is a featured list. Unfortunately the season contestant articles simply contain indiscriminate information, much of which is not related to the race results. Gernally, contestant notability is limited to their placing on the Race; any notable events outside of the Race should only be included if the contestant has acheived additional notability (say as a beauty queen or actor), as indicated per WP:BIO. --Madchester (talk) 12:10, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I propose we set a ground rule that nicknames only be placed if the credits for that season billed the contestant by that name. For example, Leonard "Lenny" Hudson and Emily "Starr" Spangler should be acceptable, but not Nathan "Nate" Hagstrom or Oswald "Ozzie" Mendez.
"Notes" column or similar?
Given that many of these contestants have notability outside TAR, would a "notes" column or something similar be useful to make a quite reference to what they are notable for? PageantUpdater talk • contribs 04:26, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
What's...with the new section?
What's the point of it? Why do we have a list of living contestants when only two of them have perished? Unless the whole point is to show their current age. If so, why don't we just add a column to the existing table? Proposing deletion of second section. Shadow2 (talk) 06:37, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
The use of a "file" column is entirely too meta for a proper Wikipedia article, and as such there is such a relatively small number of individuals for which there are freely available photographs that it makes it unnecessary. The gallery format that had been introduced, over including every single photo at the top of the article, is a much better choice. The single IP editor (going over multiple IPs) made a bold move in inserting this file column, and I've reverted it for the above reasons. Therefore, per WP:BRD, we should discuss the merits on this page.—Ryulong (琉竜) 05:51, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
I have removed the paragraph concerning Mark and Mallory as the first ever "composite team". This is excessive trivia that does not belong in the lead. I'm also not sure how the original editor who added that defines "composite team", but Eric and Danielle of Season 11 were a "composite team" by my definition, as they were not teammates in their original appearances in Season 9. Mark and Mallory were AFAIK the first team that didn't have a pre-existing relationship, which might merit a small mention here or on the Season 24 article. —KuyaBriBriTalk 17:11, 29 April 2014 (UTC)