Talk:Grease: You're the One That I Want!

	Television portal 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.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Musical Theatre

Grease: You're the One That I Want! is part of WikiProject Musical Theatre, organized to improve and complete musical theatre articles and coverage on Wikipedia. You can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Musical TheatreWikipedia:WikiProject Musical TheatreTemplate:WikiProject Musical TheatreMusical Theatre articles

Format

I'm thinking the "Development and original format" section should be less shorter. All the details about "How Do you Solve a problem like Maria", (the number/age of the girls, Scarlet Johansson, etc) is kind of tangential to understanding "You're the One that we want." Maybe a much shorter summary and a link to the "How Do you solve a problem like Maria" page would more than suffice? On the other hand, I'm a newbie, and don't want to delete anyone's labor of love. Just a thought...Tel3Fan 23:00, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to the official NBC site (and the commericials) the show is going to be "You're the One that I Want" (not "We Want") I changed the title in the text, but have no idea how to change the title of the article... Tel3Fan 23:00, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I heartily concur with Tel3Fan. The amount of irrelevant info in this article was amazing. To mention the BBC program How Do You Solve a Problem Like Maria? as its source is fine, but to then include a detailed discussion of not only that show, but a planned late-2007 BBC version of the one discussed in this article as well, makes no sense. If there's that much to say about the other versions, they should each have their own articles. Info in this article should be limited to this program, period. SFTVLGUY2 14:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But editing it down to the level you did SFTVLGUY2, removing all the references to verify the facts, and then remove the fact its being re-imported on to the oppsoing UK network was removing too much fact and too little trivia. Reinserted limited details in context. Rgds, - Trident13 11:12, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

International Version

So called "international version" - what's the source of this information? ( Just The Q ) 20:20, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

go to digital spys and you will find there is actually a version coming to the uk- under the page broadcasting Liam

Prize

What is the actual prize(s) the winner receives? --PsychoJason 08:57, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The prize is specified clearly in the opening paragraph of the article. SFTVLGUY2 14:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And nothing else? I give this show a pass... --PsychoJason 00:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki search

When I tried searching Wikipedia for "You're the One that I Want" I was taken to the John Farrar song. I linked to the reality TV show page from the Farrar song page. But I'm thinking in the near future, more people will be wiki-ing for the show than the song. Anybody know how to implement a redirect index or something for that search term?

Tel3Fan 22:20, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to this article?

Why has this article been made inferior to the way it once was? I why have references, and info box, and other marks of a article on it's way to becoming a good article been stripped away to make the article stubby? --GracieLizzie 15:30, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article was not "stubby," it was concise and accurate. You reverted it to a version that looks sloppy and is filled with irrelevant info (what does it matter that ITV might air a UK version in late 2007?). Sub-headings are necessary only if an article is extremely long; they were not designed to be used every time a different topic is introduced, which only chops up a brief article into short chunks. That the article was made "inferior" is your opinion. I believe as it stands now it includes all the necessary info and nothing more. SFTVLGUY2 17:01, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, personally, I think it is short and undescriptive. Also it lacks an infobox. The ITV series is relevant in the same way this is mentioned on the "Maria" page and World Idol, and The X Factor are mentioned on the Pop Idol as they are related programmes, of course it the ITV series shouldn't get too much attention here but it should at least be mentioned. The controversy should be mentioned too as it relates directly to programme and Andrew Lloyd Webber being upset over David Ian exporting the format before he could. --GracieLizzie 17:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an indiscriminate collection of information. Each article should contain info pertinent only to its subject. Vaguely related data really doesn't have a place here. That the article is short doesn't matter, because it contains everything one needs to know about the show. Not every Wiki article needs to be an epic, and infoboxes are not mandatory. Personally, I find them totally unnecessary since they do nothing other than reiterate info that usually is within the body of the article already. SFTVLGUY2 19:53, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HSM Comparison?

If my memory's correct, I think there was one promo where it refers to Grease as "the original High School Musical" (a reference to the highly successful DCOM from last year).

Could there be a comparison between them? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WAVY 10 (talk • contribs) 14:25, 17 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Austin Miller

Contestant Miller seems to be borderline at the moment as to whether or not he's notable enough to have his own Wikipedia article, especially because of his being a castmember on Days of Our Lives. I've added a few factoids about him here to the Grease article in the meantime. My sources have been his IMDB profile, and the show itself. If anyone wants the info for a more elaborate reference, the Hairspray and hometown information came from the episode, "The Casting Search Continues", first aired on January 14, 2007. --El on ka 05:56, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You bring up a valid point. Is an individual notable enough to merit a Wikipedia article simply because he is a contestant on a TV reality series? Since your posting, several contestants on this show have links added to their own Wikipedia articles. I do not believe that all of these contestants merit separate articles -- and my gut feeling is that their friends and relatives are behind all the new additions. Any thoughts? (JosephASpadaro 05:07, 3 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Someone who is simply a contestant on a game show, is not sufficiently notable for their own article on Wikipedia, per WP:BIO. My recommendation is that the other articles be merged into a "Contestant" section here on the Grease page, as was done with So You Think You Can Dance? (Season Two) finalists -- Having a paragraph on each contestant, or in a separate "Contestants" page, would be more appropriate. If there's considerable resistance to this right now, just wait it out. Let the show run its course for the next couple months, and then after it's finished and public attention dies down, we can do the merge then. --El on ka 15:15, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Thanks. (JosephASpadaro 18:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Name of TV Program

I am curious if there are "rules" about how TV program titles are punctuated in Wikipedia. Does anyone know for sure? It seems like the true and correct title of this program does not match the title of the article. Specifically, should there not be an exclamation point in the title? And should some of the upper case letters, in fact, be changed to lower case (specifically, the words "the" and "that")? Does anyone know for sure how to change the title of the article and all references / links to it? And does anyone know for sure the correct title of the TV show itself? I noticed that even the title card in the article presents a different title to the show than does the article itself. Thanks for any input. (JosephASpadaro 04:10, 5 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Good catch! I moved the page to correct the capitalization and punctuation, leaving a redirect at the old name. Best regards, -- Ssilvers 02:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing these errors. I was not sure how to do so myself. Thanks! (JosephASpadaro 04:47, 9 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]

The Look at Me I'm Sandra Dee number by the Sandys

The Sandys in the episode all about the Sandys didn't even TRY to mimic Stockard Channing's voice! What do you say to that?69.161.154.212 13:32, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why should they? The whole point of performing (acting, singing, dancing) is to make the character your own -- not merely a "repeat" of Channing's performance. (JosephASpadaro 20:08, 16 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I agree with Joseph. -- Ssilvers 03:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy; Description of Episodes

The article used to have a Controversy section here. It seems to be relevant information about the show, and I have streamlined it and placed it in the Trivia section. -- ALSO, there is very little description of what happened on the show. Shouldn't there be a brief description of what happened in each episode? Right now, it says that voting began, there were 14 contestants and so-and-so won. Seems too perfunctory. -- Ssilvers 03:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I don't think it's necessary to include details on every episode. I've definitely seen some other articles on Wikipedia that do that, but I think it's more a case of very energetic fans going a bit overboard, than something that's really needed to make an article more encyclopedic. Also, when this kind of thing has been debated in the past, the general consensus is that Wikipedia is not a directory. However, a bit more information on the flow of the show, hitting the high and low points, couldn't hurt. See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Television/Television programs. --El on ka 04:15, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, sounds good. -- Ssilvers 06:12, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

I recommend that the information from Allie Schulz be merged back into the main show article. Though I wish Schulz all the best and think that one day she may indeed become "encyclopedic," I don't think that there are sufficient references to make that case yet. --El on ka 07:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I support that recommendation. -- Ssilvers 12:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also support that recommendation -- and would further add that the same should be done for the other contestants who have separate articles (Chad Doreck, Austin Miller, etc.) (JosephASpadaro 01:32, 21 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Austin Miller and Chad Doreck seem to have sufficient independent notability to warrant their own pages. They've each already got a body of work, have a listing on IMDB, etc. Miller in particular has already performed as the lead in multiple productions, so would seem to meet both WP:BIO and WP:MUSIC. --El on ka 01:44, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine by me. And what about the winners, Osnes and Crumm? Do they have sufficient encyclopedic "value" due to their win in this competition? I don't know -- I am just asking. Your thoughts? (JosephASpadaro 20:22, 21 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Yes, they are independently notable, both because they won the competition, and because they are going to play the leads in a major Broadway production. --El on ka 20:46, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, got ya. Thanks. (JosephASpadaro 17:12, 22 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]

It's been almost a week, and no one has objected to the Schulz merge. I think you should go ahead. -- Ssilvers 17:46, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done, and I turned this article into a redirect. If Schulz becomes more famous in the future, it will be easy enough to restore all the information from history. --El on ka 23:34, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Change it back if you want but its the rules...

Unfortunatly it is stated in the rules of wikipedis that the dates have to fit "British standerd" i.e to be writen like this 27/03/07 rather then 03/27/07.--Wiggstar69 17:23, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL! This show, although based on a prev. Brit. show, was an American broadcast to choose stars for an upcoming American stage production. WP:DATE states: "If the topic itself concerns a specific country, editors may choose to use the date format used in that country." -- Ssilvers 18:19, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no rule in Wikipedia that says that dates have to use the British standard. Instead, the guideline (WP:ENGVAR) is that an article can use either American or British formatting, but it should be consistent within that article. In this case, where it's a show that aired in the United States, I say it should use American format. See also WP:DATE --El on ka 19:18, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, thanks, thats understandable.--Wiggstar69 16:43, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Colors

Under the Contestants section, each of the Sandys and each of the Dannys has a "color" listed in the table. What is this color supposed to represent? This should be explained somewhere in the article. Does anyone know? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 23:16, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Grease: You're the One That I Want!. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080907171134/http://www.playbill.com/news/article/119666.html to http://www.playbill.com/news/article/119666.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:59, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Grease: You're the One That I Want!. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090107153622/http://www.playbill.com/news/article/123832.html to http://www.playbill.com/news/article/123832.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:32, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]