Talk:Wipeout (season 1)

This is the talk page of a redirect that targets the page:
• Wipeout (2008 game show)
Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at:
• Talk:Wipeout (2008 game show)

This article was nominated for deletion on 27 October 2023. The result of the discussion was redirect.

Television: Episode coverage / Game shows Low‑importance

	Television portal This redirect 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.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This redirect is supported by the Episode coverage task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This redirect is supported by the Television game shows task force (assessed as Low-importance).

This list was split from Wipeout (2008 game show) on 17 July 2009. Much of the content present on Talk:Wipeout (2008 game show) on that date is about the list. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:48, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nicknames

Listen this is to out of hand. If you want to keep the nicknames do this

Keep - Enter response why you voted this

Remove - Enter Response why you voted this

I Don't Know - Enter Response why you voted this.

Okay? --98.194.251.45 (talk) 22:50, 24 July 2009 (UTC)WipeoutFan98[reply]

Remove - The nicknames are way too confusing and take up space. --Captaincharisma98 (talk) 20:17, 26 July 2009 (UTC)Captaincharisma98[reply]

Keep The nicknames are the way the participants are referred to throughout much of the show. ADifferentMind (talk) 22:25, 26 July 2009 (UTC)ADifferentMind[reply]

There has been no agreement, so please stop taking out the nicknames until some sort of decision has been reached. They were here before, so they can remain here until we've decided. Someone's obviously put a lot of effort into getting the correct nicknames, so let's not take them out (and potentially lose them and have to redo the whole thing) unless there is a clear majority or agreement. There's been one remove and one keep, that's it; that's no agreement. I will ask for this page to be semi-protected if this keeps happening. ADifferentMind (talk) 04:14, 28 July 2009 (UTC)ADifferentMind[reply]

Keep They are very helpful for isolating the episode you are looking for information on. Any episode guide for this show is absolutely useless to me without them. Honestly, I find the times on each round to be more extraneous than the nicknames. Additionally, they seem to have been removed at the discretion of one editor who states personal opinion as though it were general fact. Millahnna (talk) 15:46, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Contestants are non-notable people only publicly known for this show. The nicknames are used often by the hosts. Most viewers probably remember the nicknames much better than the real names. The nicknames are useful for readers looking for an episode they have seen or heard about. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At this point, the votes for keep outnumber the votes for remove. However, since someone continues to remove them without signing in, I've asked for semi-protection for this page. I'll continue to restore the nicknames throughout the day. ADifferentMind (talk) 15:57, 6 August 2009 (UTC)ADifferentMind[reply]

How about you put the nicknames on the part on the Episode Results, so just leave the Guide alone, to satisfy both sides, because it's not fair for others? --98.194.251.45 (talk) 16:17, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly what do you mean? Take the nicknames off here, and put them in on the other article? Although I voted keep on both, I think that leaving them on here and taking them off there (where they are not right now) is the better compromise.

* Yeah Exactly, but there is alot of errors on the page take a look at it for yourself. --98.194.251.45 (talk) 18:35, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And fairness isn't really the point. The vote was put here for a reason, and the majority says keep. The "others", as you say, number two (if you're not Captaincharisma98; if you are (and I suspect you are, although I could be wrong), then it's one).

To whoever reinstated the rest of the nicknames - thank you. ADifferentMind (talk) 17:51, 6 August 2009 (UTC)ADifferentMind[reply]

Remove - I think these nicknames should be removed, they're hardly relevant and edit wars never end well. How you just create a section on the main Wipeout page labeled "contestants" with a list of contestants in it? That way everybody wins? _{TCK| chat} 18:14, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Scratch that idea, after viewing the recent history, i requested for this page to be protected. _{TCK| chat} 18:41, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good. I had requested semi-protection this morning; full protection was given this afternoon, for a period of three days. Let's try to solve this before then. ADifferentMind (talk) 19:04, 6 August 2009 (UTC)ADifferentMind[reply]

To add on: why do you feel the nicknames are not relevant? (I'm not looking to argue; I'd just like to know your reason, if you don't mind.)

Okay. As mentoined above there confusing, i am saying that the nicknames should be moved to the part where it has the final four. Also, there is alot of errors on the Episode Guide where on the final four it has "1" "2" "2" "4" which makes it pointless and confusing. Also, Fairness is important because of my cousin's wikia "Wipeout Wikia", he protected the Episode Guide because he is afraid someone is going to ruin it like this Episode Guide because as he said it's confusing, and takes space. So I Vote Like a seperate Episode Guide with nicknames and without nicknames, is that so hard --98.194.251.45 (talk) 20:40, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With the main Wipeout page, the episode guide was only split recently because it was so long. I'm concerned that putting in another contestant table there will only lengthen the article again. There are two tables of contestants between this article and the main - one without the nicknames (the main) and one with (this one). The one on the main page only lists the top four positions, which is most likely fine for someone who's not interested in invidiual episodes. All of the contestants are all ready listed out, so why do it again? I did vote to put the nicknames in both articles, but I withdraw that vote for the other article, as it would be too cluttered.

In regards to whether the nicknames should be left in or not: I still feel that they should be here. They've been used for the entire season - even in the pilot episode, the hosts referred to them by nickname. It's a big part of how they get their laughs, and it's how the people are identified throughout the episode. As PrimeHunter pointed out, these people are non-notable except for their time on the show; most viewers won't recognize them from formal name alone.

In regards to the edit war: until last month, Wipeout was all one article, and there had been no question on the nicknames; they had been in the article for some time. Their place wasn't brought up until one user (the first remove vote here) removed them all without discussion. Until today, the only fully, 100% remove vote (both on here and the main page) was from Captaincharisma98. There were two unsure votes on the other page (one saying that there should be a split between list of wipeout episodes to make one with and one without nicknames (the same IP here now), and one saying they had pros and cons and possibly should be moved into a separate section of the table) and one saying yes to them here and no there. Since I asked for semi-protection this morning, there've been two more votes, neither of which is 100% either way.

I have no issue compromising if a reasonable solution is brought up. I do, however, feel that the nicknames should be left in the table until a decision has been reached. For one thing, the original remover has yet to participate in a discussion. There was none before he took them out, and subsequent notes have been that they're useless and should be left off. His only attempt at discussion was after the edit. Because there had been no discussion about removing them, I think they should be left until a complete discussion has taken place; at the end of that, if the result is remove, they can be taken out. Beyond that, the vote was started when they were in place and the choices reflect that (keep vs. put in). If the nicknames are removed, it could potentially be confusing to someone who simply puts Keep. Keep at that point could mean keep the nicknames in or keep the page the way it is (without nicknames).

The nicknames were taken out before, and I reverted the edit. I noticed they were gone again this morning (I don't have this page on watch but check periodically) when the vote was clearly on keep. There was no reason given, nor had any discussion taken place. I attempted to undo the whole thing before I asked for semi-protection and discovered they'd been taken out little by little. I am not familiar with undoing edits and didn't want to undo the edit before the nicknames were taken out. I added a bit (fortunately, Badjsp did the rest), then went to ask for semi-protection. I noted above that if this happened, I would ask. I asked specifically because I didn't want this to become an edit war. However, I can't discuss changes if people who don't want the nicknames in won't enter into the discussion. My hope was that blocking out anonymous edits would force reasonable, accountable discussion (as I don't know whether the IP editor is the original remover or not), not stall more changes for a few days.

If you'd like to present reasons and alternatives as a person who opposes the nicknames, great. I'd like to get this resolved. I would like everyone who has an opinion on the matter to get involved in a discussion to solve the matter.

Additionally - my fairness comment was out of line before, and I apologize.

ADifferentMind (talk) 20:04, 6 August 2009 (UTC)ADifferentMind[reply]

Keep - it helps to identify the contestants DougCube (talk) 22:51, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - can you please keep the nicknames. not only its easy to remember, but its so hard type every single details. and i do every single details. i'm doing this, not to benefit myself, but to others as well. actually, i'm kinda new here and i'm still studying the details in Wikipedia. (sorry). anyway, if you guys don't like what i did, so beat it. Badjsp (talk) 19:25, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - If you need to make it less confusing, put the nicknames into another column in the table. That'll make it less cluttered.76.14.182.135 (talk) 06:03, 7 August 2009 (UTC)seeyardee —Preceding unsigned comment added by Millahnna (talk • contribs) [reply]

Keep - These clearly serve an encyclopedic purpose, as the nicknames are what contestants are referred to as during the episode. Toa Nidhiki05 01:51, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

my favourite contestants

my 10 favourite cntestants are:

1 - "Shiny Happy" Vicky Kim 2 - "Cursy" Ali Bundrant 3 - "Crunch Time" Jacob Mann 4 - "Executive Assistant" Kim Dockery 5 - Sam "The Director" DW Griffith 6 - "Bride to Be" Kristin Egizi 7 - "Deputy Hot Stuff" Janna Kovensky 8 - Jessie "Go Go Dancer" Duran 9 - "Trash Talker" Devon Berry 10 - "Mr. Skinny" Blake Snedeker

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.191.123.187 (talk) 06:43, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My Top 15 Favorite Contestants are:

1 - "Crunch Time" Jacob Mann; 2 - "Below the Belt" John Curtis; 3 - Didi Wong "from Hong Kong" (I love saying that); 4 - "Ol' Loony" Brent Williams; 5 - "Super Stu" Stuart Yasutake; 6 - "Shiny Happy" Vicky Kim; 7 - "Cursy" Ali Bundrant; 8 - "Cheap Date" Tim Spratt; 9 - Fernando "Suave" Garcia; 10 - "Mouth of the South" Travis Mitchell; 11 - "Sexy Dork" Janica Polmanteer; 12 - "Motoring" Melia Quiray; 13 - "Ball-Loving Weirdo" Ben Kronberg; 14 - Ariel Tweto; and 15 - 'B-boy' Chris Kinyon Badjsp (talk) 03:45, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki is not a forum. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#FORUM

I also moved two misplaced votes from here to the appropriate section.Millahnna (talk) 21:35, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

S2 E10's Twins Cara & Stephanie's Surname?

Does everyone know twins Cara & Stephanie's surname by any chance? I didn't quite get it. Badjsp (talk) 03:47, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's Burlene, if I'm not mistaken. 99.8.15.119 (talk) 23:43, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suck

I'd like to see a note added about the guy that crossed the balls twice... I think it was the ball-loving weirdo, of all people... 207.179.175.87 (talk) 10:39, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bring this section back again.

Could someone please bring back this section where it belongs. "All I Want Is To Help" 18:08, 24 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Badjsp (talk • contribs)

It's too long for the article, therefore it is here, where it belongs. --S-man (talk) 23:09, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Urgent!

Sorry to burst your bubble. But the first episode in the second season of Wipeout is not the first episode to be presented in High Definition! But the Wipeout Bowl: Cheerleaders vs. Couch Potato is the first episode to be presented in High Definition. 71.138.88.223 (talk) 22:04, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AIR DATES!

I use these articles (for Mythbusters, Dirty Jobs, Penn and Teller) to see when the next episode will be out. Please add an air date next to each episode title or somewhere visible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.26.227.170 (talk) 10:19, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Episode table

Perhaps it's just me but the tables, as they stand now, are a bit of an eye sore. I appreciate that the colors are are representative of many different pieces of information but they are very hectic to look at. Thought I'd bring it up and see if anyone felt likewise or if I'm just a fluke in that regard. Millahnna (mouse)talk 21:07, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Too many colors, too strong. Some are not even needed, like the ones in 'Place'. -Koppapa (talk) 20:25, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Order is messed up big time. 1 2 3 4 5 7. Fail. Also, Place shouldn't be there (Winner) Change to 1st, 2nd Place (2nd) etc. 98.194.23.15 (talk) 22:12, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Validating contributions

I had to add back Season 2 Ep4 that was removed for some reason on 24th of Dec2010... Also had to fix a 'nowiki' tag that was never closed after Season 2 Ep3 added on 29th of Dec2010. This caused anything after it to be messed up... My changes were done on the 196.x.x.x IP, on 9 Jan 2011. Didn't have an account yet.

Don't people validate what they did before making the changes? I mean, don't you want to see what you just did? MariusAZA (talk) 20:09, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Update

Someone please update this,the summer season has already started. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.249.138 (talk) 00:24, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Suggesting this article to be split up by seasons.

I have suggested that this episode listing should be split up by seasons as the article is getting longer. Mbrstooge (talk) 00:25, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes please. I'm going through revisions right now trying to find out when the removal of the (very necessary) cleanup tag happened and many of the diffs are freezing my browser (on a spanky new gaming PC) because the page is so long. I still think the colors are an eyesore and would suggest reorganizing to address that issue in the split. Millahnna (talk) 20:14, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep

I loved these result tables. When they were removed from Wikipedia, I was heartbroken. Then when I found them again, I made it my mission to fix any error I found. I was just making the edits for myself and never meant for them to go public. But it would be nice if they can return to Wikipedia, and I can continue to improve them without seeing them being erased. 2601:CB:8280:2FA0:A0D0:7B7B:A427:4357 (talk) 20:04, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]