Talk:Rock of Love: Charm School

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Television (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Don't Change the Cast[edit]

Well you guys need to add to the cast cause has a video with Riki Rachtman saying he and Daniella Clarke are Head Deans on Charm School 2 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Steupz (talkcontribs) 02:13, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Please stop changing the cast. It's already been confirmed and people need to stop adding and removing names. And Hoopz is not hosting! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:56, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

will someone PLEASE post a cast list as soon as possible??? thank you!!!! i really wanna know who's gonna be on this show. if they put heather and daisy in the same house...oh snap. that's kinda like what they're doing on I Love Money, putting Chance, Real, Whiteboy, AND Mr. Boston in the same house. Three against one, baby!!! Back to subject please put the Rock of Love Girls: Charm School 2 cast list up as soon as it's released. --Adrianneramsey, 11:02 pm, 7/8/08

I found out some of the contestants that were going to be on the show, I found a photo gallery proving it. Sean9500TalkContributions 22:43, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
Brandi M. confirmed on her myspace that she would be a contestant.--Ydnar12 (talk) 21:19, 23 July 2008 (UTC)


i fixed it but i need some one to also list Destiny Heather Megan Brandi and Rodeo

all need to be listed also on i love money —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spiderman2351 (talkcontribs) 13:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Stop Adding Information[edit]

  • Note: Stop adding sections such as "Episodes" or "Call-out Order." The show hasn't even aired yet! All 14 contestants have been confirmed:
    • Kristy Joe Muller
    • Raven Williams
    • Megan Hauserman
    • Heather Chadwell
    • Lacey Conner
    • Brandi Cunningham
    • Jessica Kinni
    • Brandi Mahon
    • Inna Dimitrenko
    • Destiney Sue Moore
    • Dallas Harrison
    • Cindy Steedle (Rodeo)
    • Courtney Van Dusen
    • Angelique Morgan
  • Note: We should put the confirmed contestants in alphabetical order, this might confuse fans into a certain elimination order. Sean9500TalkContributions 20:07, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Dallas Harrison also posted some blogs on her myspace page about charm school and how she was in it so she is a confirmed contestest.--Ydnar12 (talk) 21:56, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Also on kristy Joe's myspace photos about charm school, also seen on, Rodeo is in one a the pictures so 12 of 14 are confirmed.--Ydnar12 (talk) 21:59, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Only 2 more to go... Sean9500TalkContributions 00:31, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
All of the cast is leaked from Lacey's myspace. It is not Roxy, it is Raven from season 1. Angelique is confirmed. Lastly Courtney from Season 2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ydnar12 (talkcontribs) 13:59, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Okay, that's good :) Lacey has awful spelling by the way; LOL. "Meagan..." "Kristie Joe" Sean9500TalkContributions 17:27, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Early Posting[edit]

Can we get a lock on the page I am SICK AND TIRED of people puting Dallas and Lacey as RISK and Courtney Out and Raven Quit i hate haveing to keep reverting it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spiderman2351 (talkcontribs) 05:19, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

-- Dude, chill. Maybe you shouldn't visit wikipedia so much if it makes you sick and tired. There's always going to be idiots changing things up and thinking they know everything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by D3athstardisco (talkcontribs) 12:02, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Well see i dont visit much but every time im on they keep changing it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spiderman2351 (talkcontribs) 21:28, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

HOLD IT![edit]

Why are there already call-out sections when its the first episode has only just been shown? Why is the section done up to a certain week without any given proof? Somebody amend this (as I have no clue how to) User:Jamesbuc —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:14, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Bottom Three???[edit]

Why does the chart say that Inna was one of the people at the bottom three? The episode information on the bottom of the page doesn't say anything about Inna on the first episode. Courtney was at risk, but then eliminated. Inna was never in danger. She was safe from elimination. Someone please fix this. Its is nothing compared to the details about the first episode. User:Cookie Monster (talk) 21:07, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Stop editing the elimination chart[edit]

It's only the third episode a somebody put who is going home for ep. 4 and 5. Please stop adding spoilers! (talk) 05:27, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

ive been battling those edits for god knows how long..but i spoke with an admin about it and im hoping it will all be corrected--EmperorofBlackPeopleEverywhere (talk) 05:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

These edits are getting ridiculous. Is it possible to lock this page? And can someone please undo the episode 4 results, as the episode has not even aired yet! I would do it myself, but I don't want to ruin the part of the chart that is correct. Cespence17 (talk) 02:31, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Jessica is out[edit]

i know-- (talk) 20:44, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

What (or who) is your source? Can you cite it? Is it reputable? If not, then it doesn't matter. Cespence17 (talk) 21:37, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

and that's why i keep saying..if you guys are gonna say this and that person is out..please give us a source that can confirm it other than "i know"..i know is not a source--EmperorofBlackPeopleEverywhere (talk) 21:41, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

in the episode 6 is out-- (talk) 21:09, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Well that's cool that you know it, but without a credible source to back it doesn't belong on the chart. Cespence17 (talk) 22:38, 6 November 2008 (UTC)


Should we nominate this page for semi-protection? Plastikspork (talk) 01:52, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

YES!--Ydnar12 (talk) 02:00, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes...ive been going after false edits and uncited spoilers for weeks and its getting ridiculous--EmperorofBlackPeopleEverywhere (talk) 02:50, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Can someone add it to the Requests for protection ? Plastikspork (talk) 03:33, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I think I got a request in, we will see what happens. Plastikspork (talk) 03:40, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Semi-protection will end on December 4th, so it will be interesting to see what happens. Hopefully the vandals have moved on, but unlikely. Plastikspork (talk) 23:13, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Sure enough, within 3 hours of the protection being lifted we are starting to see unreferenced spoilers. I will apply for more protection if this continues. Plastikspork (talk) 19:19, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Commandment Column in Table[edit]

who decided that the commandment that people left the show in should be included when there is absolutely no need for it at all. i had half the mind to take it out but i wanted to figure out the importance of it all....cheers--EmperorofBlackPeopleEverywhere (talk) 02:52, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree that it should be removed, but it doesn't bother me as much as the constant vandalism. Plastikspork (talk) 03:42, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

i just dont see a need for it..i mean the table was fine before and in the previous season no commandment table section was added so im trying to figure out why it was added here before i yank it down and everyone gets all upset--EmperorofBlackPeopleEverywhere (talk) 03:45, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I would say remove it, but first look through the history to see who added it (if possible). Plastikspork (talk) 03:54, 4 November 2008 (UTC)


I recently linked the names of all the contestants instead of just Megan, and here's the reason why. Per the guideline on redlinks, it's quite appropriate to have them. The contestants, while not necessarily notable at this point, may well become notable in the future. Redlinks are not harmful, rather, removing them can be harmful. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 16:29, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

i think his point is that they aren't notable now, even after all of the reality shows they may or may not have been on and that's why he has delinked them..and it really does look better without all of the redlinks and a single link...i highly doubt anyone will make decently structured or significant pages for every one of those pages because most are not going to be known for anything other than these two or three reality shows.--EmperorofBlackPeopleEverywhere (talk) 20:47, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
Take a look at WP:RED, please. One, linking to those contestants' names is quite relevant to the context. Two, it's entirely possible that one or any of these people meets or will meet notability guidelines in the future (read WP:N; the media coverage from two or three television shows on a major US cable network should be enough to pass this guideline). Three, it is entirely in line with the points in WP:REDDEAL. Whether it looks good or bad may be a concern, but if it is a problem, then the contestants' names should be linked later in the article. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 14:18, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
And yet again, more redlinks have been removed (by Ydnar12), contravening WP:REDDEAL. As this last removal doesn't even have merit in terms of the stylistic concerns voiced above, I've reverted it. I'm hoping that we can have some reasonable discussion about this. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 20:31, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Episode 2 synopsis[edit]

Alright, I admit that I haven't seen the 2nd episode, but I'm curious about a statement made in the synopsis here, and have thus tagged it with {{pov-statement}}. Specifically, I'm referring to "Sharon has never seen Megan cry". What exactly is meant here? It strikes me that the synopsis is implying that Megan is being deceptive- if it's the case that she's being deceptive, then the synopsis should indicate so. If it isn't clear, then the phrase should be removed as violating WP:NPOV. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 15:00, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I am pretty sure that Sharon said that she had never seen Megan cry before. In which case, I suppose this could be restructured as a quote from the episode. Why don't you watch the episode online and fast-forward to the part where Megan is in Sharon's office and see what exactly has been said? That would seem to be a sensible thing to do if you are disputing the statement. Plastikspork (talk) 15:43, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Hm, didn't know it was online. I suppose I'll do that. :-) —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 16:38, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Alright, having seen the scene, it sounds more like Sharon is surprised that Megan is capable of crying (i.e., she had previously assumed she was just some heartless bitch). While I can appreciate the commentary nature of including that statement, unless the whole synopsis is written like this (covering all these comments), I don't think it's really appropriate to cover this one.
However (and this is a big however), I think there's an underlying problem with how reality show synopses are written. While calling it a reality show suggests that it's unscripted, I know the writers guild maintains that these shows need the same writers as any other television show. Considering the structure of the show, using abbreviated commentaries and often only showing one viewpoint, one could see the show as having a very clear plotline. Consider the statement I earmarked earlier; the show presents it as though Megan is trying to pull a fast one on Sharon ("It was the performance of my life")- but considering it another way, it's entirely possible that Brandi M. just hit the right buttons. If this were a scripted TV show, I'd be more or less perfectly fine with the line. But because it's semi-real, and definitely presented in a POV manner, we need to watch our p's and q's. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 17:16, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
It's also worth noting that some of the online episodes have scenes cut that were in the broadcast edition. Those scenes may appear in the extras listed online though, but I don't think they always are. Makes writing synopses a bitch. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 02:20, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Kristy Joe or Kristy Jo?[edit]

Okay, this is kinda odd... now, the FamousVH1friends site shows her name as Kristy Joe, but during the show they always render it as Kristy Jo. I'm inclined to follow the show's spelling, but if that's a mistake, I think it should be at least addressed. Like, "Kristy Joe (rendered as 'Kristy Jo' on the show)". —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 15:37, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Alright, considering IMDB, I suppose it's the show's mistake. Weird. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 15:48, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Yes it is a mitake on the show. It is Kristy Joe not Kristy Jo. I think the producers just got it mixed up.--Spiderman2351 (talk) 04:12, 27 November 2008 (UTC)Spiderman2351


That is true because I saw a video on YouTube (look at external links) and saw...DONT READ IF U HATE SPOILERS!

-- You aren't supposed to post spoilers, so chill out and stop being so gung-ho. (talk) 03:30, 2 January 2009 (UTC)jjh295

I saw Daniella and Ricky (with the cameramen) if you look closely, and Lacey, Brandi C., and Heather as the final three. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nerdybrianc (talkcontribs) 20:07, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Videos on youtube cannot be used in the external links section, per consensus established with regards to WP:ELNO. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 20:39, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Multiparagraph synopses[edit]

I'm reintroducing multiple paragraphs to the episode synopses. My reasoning is that they are far too long to stand as single paragraphs at this point. If they need to be single paragraphs, they need to be massively shortened. Otherwise they're almost unreadable as-is. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 15:50, 23 November 2008 (UTC)


It's struck me that there are a number of cases where the tone of this article could stand significant improvement. While I can understand the need to hurry up and get an episode synopsis up as soon as it has aired, I really hope we could take the time to use a more professional tone when writing this article. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 22:37, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Statistics and Average Charts[edit]

What is the point of including this material? Neither is part of the show/game and the point values are arbitrary. Does any one agree? Disagree? Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 20:59, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

I've decided to be bold and removed it- blatant original research. If the original contributor who added it (Pumkinlov8) wishes to re-add it, he/she will need to provide proof that it isn't just OR. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 22:32, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Revealed bottom 3 for episode 9[edit]

From what ive see in all the previews, I can make an educated guess that Heather Lacey and Brandi M will be in the bottom 3 and Destiny will win the challenge. There have been multiple previews were I have seen Heather Lacey and Brandi M on the carpet. With Heather say "Lacey you a lair" Multiple times and Sharon finally Sharon said im going to end this now.--Spiderman2351 (talk) 12:17, 4 December 2008 (UTC)Spiderman2351

Seems likely. But per WP:RS, WP:NOR and WP:V, we can't just do that in the article. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 15:46, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Brandi M.[edit]

Brandi M. is eliminated-- (talk) 22:13, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Got any sources to back that up? —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 00:02, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
LOL what a dork. Brandi M. won the whole thing. (talk) 02:36, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Reunion fight[edit]

Well, considering VH1 is now covering the fight and has sources for their article going beyond the TMZ article, I think we can call this more than just gossip. However, I think we need to discuss how to include it before we do, because there's concerns stemming from WP:UNDUE and WP:BLP. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 18:57, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

And it's in The Guardian and the New York Daily News. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 19:00, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
And an editorial in the LA Times. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 19:01, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
How about a "controversy" or "after the show" section? I agree that it's most likely notable to include in this article.Plastikspork (talk) 05:06, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
Possibly. I think it'd especially be nice to have if it comes time to spin out the episode synopses into a list article. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 07:18, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
It is notable and there appears to be consensus for inclusion. Tgreach (talk) 19:52, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
There's consensus to include, but not how to include. We need to be careful in terms of giving undue weight to that event. It might be best to wait until the reunion episode airs, but regardless we need further discussion before we go ahead and do anything. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 21:21, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
I propose, under the reunion episode section, the following single sentence:

According to the Los Angeles Times, Osbourne is being investigated for assaulting Megan after she described Ozzy Osbourne as a "brain-dead rock star" during the taping.[1]

Opinions? Tgreach (talk) 22:14, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
More appropriate for the Sharon and Megan articles than this one. Additionally, the LA Times ref is an editorial blog. That isn't to say that the LA Times isn't a RS, just that we might want to get better sourcing. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 00:58, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Ok, you can use the VH1 source since its a VH1 show or the New York Daily News if you don't want to include the LA Times. The event is notable for the bios and also the television for which this event occurred on. Why isn't an event on a TV show relevant for an article about the TV show? People looking for information on what happened will be looking for information in the show's article.Tgreach (talk) 01:55, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
I didn't say it isn't relevant, I'm just concerned that we get it right because of WP:BLP. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 04:10, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Regarding my proposed one sentence addition, what specifically are you concerned with it regarding BLP? There are multiple sources of this event from WP:RS. BLP, reads, "Be very firm about the use of high quality references." Do you doubt the quality of the the VH1 source regarding a VH1 show-- or the NYDN, etc? I'm not understanding your rationale. We have high quality sources for a relevant event for an article that currently lacks third party sources. Tgreach (talk) 07:21, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Well, maybe I'm wrong. However, I still think it would be better to wait for the episode to air so as to make it due weight. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 19:29, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
I dont think you're wrong in this. we have no idea what really happened and so to wait to post something like this i feel is better if we have a full story...which newspapers and online folks can say they have, but pieces can always be missing. if we are holding ourselves to a standard of honesty and due weight then the best thing for us to do is to hold off until we see what really happens tomorrow morning when the episode actually airs.--EmperorofBlackPeopleEverywhere (talk) 19:32, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Order of Kristy Joe and Jessica[edit]

I noticed that Kristy Joe and Jessica's order of display on the episode progress chart has been changed, and subsequently reverted recently. The current version displays Jessica as #5 and Kristy Joe as #6. I'm of the opinion that this is the correct order, both alphabetically and because Kristy Joe was expelled first in the episode- thus she technically "ranked" higher. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 00:51, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I personally didn't care about the order of which they were eliminated, but because they were eliminated in the same episode, I went alphabetically..I have no idea why it is being contested, but almost everytime it is switched to the previous (kristy joe on top), I make every attempt to fix it.Go figure on why reverting to an incorrect format is so important right now. Cheers!--EmperorofBlackPeopleEverywhere (talk) 01:09, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't even make sense from a last-name alphabetization sense... maybe there's a popularity poll online that we haven't heard about? —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 02:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Maybe people think the end of the United States of America is coming if we don't list her first.--EmperorofBlackPeopleEverywhere (talk) 02:13, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Sharon expelled Kristy Joe first, then Jessica.-- A.G. (talk) 20:34, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Table edit war[edit]

No idea what the difference is but can this just get resolved, because it really seems to be getting neither side anywhere. By my count, the both of you are right at 3 as far as reverts lets just come to a common ground and then it stays. Seems fair eh?--EmperorofPeopleEverywhere (talk) 02:09, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. The official w3 guide on color codes state that six hexdigit codes can be compressed to three hexdigit to ensure compatibility with older displays. The WP:MOS provides little guidance on the issue, other than to say that color alone should not be used to convey information. Thanks for starting the discussion here on the talk page! Plastikspork (talk) 02:16, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
That sounds fine by me. I don't see what Ydnar12's gripe is. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 02:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)