Talk:The Challenge XXX: Dirty 30

	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 Reality television task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Draft

There is a draft for this made earlier today, see Draft: The Challenge: XXX. It is too early to make a page as there has been no official announcement of the season, nor has it finished filming. Vevmo is useful for gathering information, but wikipedia won't allow it to be used as a reliable source, as it is original research. WikiVirusC

Orphaned references in The Challenge: XXX

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of The Challenge: XXX's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Premiere":

From The Real World: Portland: "Real World Portland Coming March 27 + New Trailer". Stop Being Polite. February 16, 2013.
From The Challenge: Invasion of the Champions: Donnelly, Matthew Scott (January 11, 2017). "Underdogs Will Have Their Day When The Challenge Returns For Season 29". MTV. Retrieved January 11, 2017.
From The Real World: New Orleans (2010): This is mentioned in the first episode.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:53, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Episode progress

@J.montes25: - Why do you want to highlight Cory and Briana as green for winning the elimination round, and the rest of the people with the tan of not drawing the XX card, when none of that has aired yet. Also why change the separation between the people in redemption and the two that got DQ'ed this past week, I split it up so the people still there are shown still there, and Simone/Shane were shown red with DQ. WikiVirusC^(talk) 02:33, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The color has always been green even if it was a cliffhanger. Also those people were the people TJ said need to pack their bags. It's pretty obvious. Also the people in redemption already have their own table so we don't need extra information on the progress table. It should look like the Battle of the Exes ll table. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1008:b12f:eba8:5439:4f01:1964:22fc (talk) 17:16, July 28, 2017‎ (UTC)

In this method the page is consistently inaccurate for seven days at at time whenever there are clifhangers, a no color or a neutral color is best. At the end of the season it will all be accurate, but no reason for majority of the season it needs to be highlighted wrong. The game summary shows winners, people saved, and who is in elimination as well, just like redemption table shows it's information I'm not sure how one table is redundant but the others aren't. WikiVirusC^(talk) 17:37, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There's literally no need for the colors to be black and gray when they are going into the elimination. Your edits make no sense and are confusing. Your just making extra work for yourself when the episode actually airs. It make no sense. Also the elimination table is about the actual competition, not about what happened in the redemption house. That's why the redemption table is by itself. Your edits seriously are stupid. Sorry not sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1008:b12f:eba8:5439:4f01:1964:22fc (talk) 17:56, July 28, 2017‎ (UTC)

The coloring weren't actually "my edits", there were someone elses. Either way, leaving it all white/neutral is also fine, and then update when next episode happens. But changing from white to correct color, is no less or more work the current method being used. Also you didn't address what I asked. The contestant participated in the elimination draw, but did not draw the XX card. we can't say who or who didn't draw the card. The contestant won in the elimination round., we can't say who won the elimination round. This is inaccurate. Also the Episode progress table, is for what happens in the episode. Simone and Shane were DQ'ed. This isn't like Exes2 where they didn't show much of anything at exiles house during the show. This time they are actually incorporating the Redemption House within the episodes, hence it belongs in Episode progress WikiVirusC^(talk) 18:06, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm so done with this conversation. You just want it your way and your way sucks. The edits of how it should be have been used ever single season. It should be green and wheat. And if the edits of what happened in the redemption house are on the episode progress table then there is no point of having a redemption table if you're going to be stubborn about this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1008:b12f:eba8:5439:4f01:1964:22fc (talk) 18:08, July 28, 2017 (UTC)

We do not know who wins the eliminations yet. It will be green for the winners next week, and it will also be green when the season is over. So the all the other season blahblahblah argument won't be needed, even though WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is irrelevant. We don't try and predict the future with our edits. I agree there is zero point in having a redemption table if they don't actually have any challenges there. I didn't make the table, but it can be removed once we actually know how the season is going to proceed after an elimination happens. WikiVirusC^(talk) 18:15, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

THERE IS NO NEED TO HAVE DIFFERENT COLORS ON A TABLE THAT MAKE NO SENSE. THE GREEN IS FOR THE CONTESTANTS IN THE ELIMINATION. STOP SAYING THAT WERE ASSUMING WHO WON. THE GREEN IS FOR WHO WENT IN. MY GOD YOU ARE SO STUBBORN AND SO ANNOYING. YOURE MAKING THIS TOO COMPLICATED AND YOUR JUST DRAGGING THIS OUT MORE THAN IT NEEDS TO BE. JUST CHANGE IT TO NORMAL AJD GO ON WITH YOUR STUBBORN LIFE— Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.197.4.47 (talk) 18:20, July 28, 2017‎ (UTC)

Easy on the caps..... The contestant won in the elimination round. If the color was for who went in, then that wording for green would need to be change. But that is completely unnecessary. I'm not dragging anything out at all, if you don't want to discuss things, that is your choice, but this talk page is here to discuss things. I won't be responding to any more all-caps replies though, also could you please sign your posts. WikiVirusC^(talk) 19:00, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Episode progress 2.0

I don't know what's going on but the way WikiVirusC's formatting of the progress table is not consistent with what we've been doing for past Challenge pages. We have never done Ex-ile in the same format, so we shouldn't do Redemption House in it either. It'll just throw off the table. We already have a Redemption progress table. For the episode progress, we leave them as how they were eliminated from the MAIN game. That's how it's always been and I don't see why it's being changed now Aspiring816 (talk) 17:46, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Aspiring816: Other challenges pages aren't this one. The table isn't thrown off, since the redemption people are on the bottom and will be updated as they join. Also you can't say that is how we always do it, when the only other time there was anything similar was exes2. Exes 2 didn't show the exile house in the episodes they had that separately on mtv.com, unlike now where they are showing the redemption house during every episode. With exiles it was one team living in it, with another one trying to take their spot. This season having an episode progress with people labeled as not in each episode it when they are actually in it makes no sense. Having Shane and Simone not marked as DQ'ed for fighting when they were DQ'ed for fighting makes no sense either. Having 7 guys and 6 girls marked as "participated in the Double-Cross draw, but did not draw the XX card." is also false, since 1 of each will be selected by the winning team, and 1 of them will draw the XX. It isn't a card either, not sure why you added that back in after J.montes fixed it. Yes we already have a redemption progress table, but we also have a game summary table, why is it we want to have two redundant tables back to back and only keep the same exact information in both. If we are going to have an episode progress table, which makes sense to do so, it needs to reflect the episode accurately, not just a reformatting of the information on the table above it. WikiVirusC^(talk) 18:00, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiVirusC: How we formatted Exes II was using the same rule as Survivor Redemption Island. If they're out of the main game, they are treated as such if they were eliminated in a regular season. Survivor showed Redemption Island in the main episodes as well but that wasn't reflected on the Survivor voting tables. They were treated as if they were voted out and only put back if they returned from the game. Also the episode ended on a cliffhanger, so if you want to take out the wheat color, then that's fine. But you're just gonna have to put most of them back anyway when they participate in the draw. This just signifies that they lost the challenge and are up for elimination. Aspiring816 (talk) 18:09, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Aspiring816:, just like this isn't exes2 page, that page and this one aren't Survivor Redemption Island. Voting tables are separate from episode tables. Redemption people aren't shown in our voting table, or our game summary table either.

I did remove the wheat you put it right back in. An episode progress is there to show each episode. Tell me why we are formatting it to simply only show what is shown in the game summary above?WikiVirusC^(talk) 18:16, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@WikiVirusC: Okay but I'm formatting the table based on precedence and it's a system that has worked just fine and has been easy to read, whereas you're only doing yours based on... IDK because that's what you want? I don't understand how you think your way of doing it is better than what was already established form a previous table. I mean, even if it was only one other page, it's still one more than whatever reason you're basing your edits on.Aspiring816 (talk) 20:15, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Aspiring816: My way of doing it is because the table is constantly giving incorrect information. Like I said before, this is not the same as exiles, and that is the only similar season there has been, definitely not the same. I gave my reason in edit summaries, and here on the talk page multiple times, please don't act like I haven't given any reasoning. You say it's easy to read this way, what is not easy to read with the way I had it? At least you don't have to look in 2-3 different places to see who is in redemption in each episode, you would have zero clue Simone/Shane were DQ'ed if you don't read the efnotes located elsewhere on th epage or scroll to bottom of page for the other table. You have not given one policy based reason for or against one way. You basically have said it doesn't matter if things are incorrect with labels/colors because they will be fixed later, which is not the way Wikipedia is suppose to work. The information is suppose to be correct when it is added on to the page. WikiVirusC^(talk) 21:41, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redemption

I still don't understand why we are separating redemption from episode table. They didn't have a regular challenge and only did the redemption this episode. Why delete episode 5 from table and split the information in a separate table, this is completely unnecessary. WikiVirusC^(talk) 10:27, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]