Talk:I Love Money season 2

This article was nominated for deletion on 14 January 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This page was proposed for deletion by Cunard (talk · contribs) on 20 October 2008 with the comment:
Wwenormalfan (talk · contribs) [blanked the page] saying "Shows words mispelled,had no refrences or proof, and shoiws predictions and noy accurate information."
It was contested by Robny94 (talk · contribs) on 2008-10-21

Television: Episode coverage Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.

Alliances?

Should there be a section for the alliances.. I was watched the most recent episode today and noticed that everyone except for It are in an alliance (Don't quote me on that I could be wrong) but it would be nice just to keep up with who is on who's side. They usually break them down every episode of who's on who's side no matter what team color they are on. This would be especially beneficial now that it has been said that there will no longer be teams. Making the only thing keeping goups together the alliances. Just a thought. Great job otherwise though.. This is a very well-kept article and show tracker. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.63.209.20 (talk) 03:20, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded, it would help clear confusion.--75.107.249.52 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:17, 5 April 2009 (UTC).[reply]

I agree. i mean the alliances even have names! like the doomsquad/underdogs, and PGA, i forgot what entertainer's alliance was caled though —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.153.136.183 (talk) 23:35, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That would be an excellent thing to describe in an episode summary. Plastikspork (talk) 23:57, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Episode 5

Because Prancer announced Cali would not be going home first, shouldn't that make Myammee Bottom 2 and not Bottom 3? Please change that in the Episode 5 call-out order! ~Drew —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.141.223.196 (talk) 21:57, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed it numerous times, but it always seems to get reverted by one particular person... JaimeAnnaMoore (talk)

I Love Money ( Season 3)

Is Being Produced This Summer —Preceding unsigned comment added by DRwolves (talk • contribs) 08:03, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome. Provide a source? Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 19:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there proof to this?--Cooly123 (talk) 02:15, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Brittanya has confirmed that she will be a part of I Love Money 4, which will be filming around August 2nd, confirming both Seasons 3 and 468.227.52.118 (talk) 08:09, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Final Episode

Tailormaid's check was voided before It's, It came in second. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.60.10.106 (talk) 03:20, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It came in third, considering he was way behind Tailor Made in the final challenge, and that Tailor Made was at/near the house just as Miammi was finishing.--Cooly123 (talk) 02:16, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why does it say Sapphyri won, when Myamee was the definite winner?75.11.43.196 (talk) 03:17, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That would be vandalism. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 04:21, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Spoilers

Good job reverting them. At least the meaningless speculation is gone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.22.210.217 (talk) 17:55, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

67.34.239.22

Could this user edits be undone specifically. User changed Tailor Made into Megan Hausermann who was not on show 23:14, 15 May 2009 67.34.239.22 (talk) (67,859 bytes) (undo) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spot93 (talk • contribs)

Order of finish

Tailor Made's check was voided first, followed by It's check. Shouldn't that technically make Tailor Made 3rd place and It 2nd place? 71.177.247.178 (talk) 01:26, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neither's check was actually/officially voided.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooly123 (talk • contribs) 23:37, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on I Love Money (season 2). 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/20110928015017/http://www.pe.com/entertainment/stories/PE_Fea_Ent_D_flavor0824.23f268e.html to http://www.pe.com/entertainment/stories/PE_Fea_Ent_D_flavor0824.23f268e.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) 17:51, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]