Talk:America's Got Talent season 1

What to include

I think it may be worth it to include more details of the results shows, namely the "weird and wacky" acts that performed and the celebrity performers (Teddy Geiger and Jurassic 5 so far). The minor acts are competing for a Dodge Caliber.

It may also be better to have a consistent format for summarizing performers and descriptions, like:

• Name of Performer description of what was performed

(see American Idol (Season 5) for an example) Tinlinkin 10:48, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Good Idea. -AMK152 13:26, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Good idea. FellowWikipedian 13:30, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Great, but I only have a tape of this past week's shows. I can't give info from the previous shows. Tinlinkin 22:17, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

What?

It says here that Bianca Ryan was the Viewer's Choice for the Semi-Final Part 3, but I watched the show and Nathan Burton was the Viewer's Choice.

Nathan and Bianca were the top two for viewers choice. However, Bianca got more votes. You may have turned off the TV, as Nathan was told he was in the final two before Bianca was told. TeckWiz^TalkContribs_{# of Edits} 18:52, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Ooooooooooh. That would explain it. GhostBoy66 16:46, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Consistency issue

I've noticed that a great deal of detail has been issued for the first three weeks (the auditions) and not the rest. I hope somebody can fill in the details of the semifinal performances as much as the audition performances. Tinlinkin 13:04, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think each judge's opinions of each performance each week are worth including in an encyclopedia. The episode articles for American Idol, for example, describe each performer once in a list of biographies, and then summarize the judges' results each week. GUllman 22:07, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you on your first point. What I meant was that each person/act who was televised during the auditions episodes has a substantial blurb. For the subsequent episdoes, there are no descriptions of the performances. Luckily, NBC.com has videos of these performances, but who knows how long they will remain? So, now, while the show is hot, would be the best time to elaborate. (Since I didn't write the audition descriptions, I would not be the best candidate to do this.) I hope this clears up any confusion with my first post.

And funny you should mention American Idol. I've been wondering how I can improve the format of this article. A table is what I'm leaning towards now, so I'll be developing it in the next few days. The new format would also include the Wild and Wacky Acts and guest performances on results shows.

I also wonder if an elmination history from semifinals onward is appropriate here. Since 8 out of 10 contestants gets eliminated in each episode, the history may be unwieldy. Tinlinkin 06:27, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

The conversion to tables is complete. I hope you like it, it's helpful, and most importantly, it's accurate. I will post the (finalists of the) Wild and Wacky Acts after the last results show, if no one steps up to post it. Tinlinkin 08:50, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Finals

Can someone please fix the order of the acts in the finals section? FellowWikipedian 14:18, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Questions need: Celtic Spring

Anyone have any questions whatsoever to ask Celtic Spring? I've arranged an interview with them for Wikinews. -- Zanimum 18:37, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Confusion over final results

I am a noob and have no idea how to go about editing (too much html) but I feel as though this point should be addressed in the article:

There has been a significant amount of confusion over how the top 5 finalists ranked. The Millers and All That finished 2nd and 3rd, but it confused a lot of people because they were announced before the 4th and 5th place finalists. They were called first because they each received a consolation prize for being runners up. It therefore made for a more dramatic effect to keep the 1st, 4th and 5th place finishers together; one act would be the winner and the other two were kept for suspense (neither Taylor nor Celtic Spring received any sort of consolation prize). It was never explained, however, that Celtic Spring and Taylor Ware placed behind The Millers and All That. That's where the confusion set in.

Most, if not all articles I have read regarding the results have erroneously reported Taylor and Celtic Spring finishing ahead of the Millers and All That. However, it was clarified post-show to the finalists as well as those in the studio audience that the Millers and All That finished 2nd and 3rd. The widespread confusion (even major news sources have published wrong information) warrants some acknowledgement in the article, I think. Especially because readers might assume that this article is wrong (if you check the history, the article originally stated correctly that Taylor and Celtic Spring placed in the top 5, but member 72.59.198.106 later edited it to say they were both top 3, which is false).

Slightly off-topic: I also heard that someone wearing an NBC ID mentioned to some studio audience members after the live taping session that the percentage of votes was very close between Bianca and The Millers, and then a big jump down to the rest. I don't think this was ever officially publicized by NBC, but someone should find out/keep an eye out for the official ranking of finalists or any related information. mallard_mania 03:30, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree; there's no question that the ending was very confusing. As I pointed out in Talk:Taylor Ware#Standing on AGT,you're right: Taylor Ware and Celtic Spring were both in 4th or 5th place. What sucks even more is that they and the bottom 5 didn't get a car or other (publicized) consolation prize, while the winner of the Wild and Wacky Talents did. And the car that that person and The Mlllers and All That won was a rather cheap Dodge Caliber, with a base price of about $14,000 according to that article.

If there is a verifiable source that says The Millers were the second place finishers, then that could be added to this article. Tinlinkin 04:55, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification; I must assume they'll be more careful in the second season. ;) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 21:27, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

YouTube links

This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright. If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed, feel free to ask me on my talk page and I'll review it personally. Thanks. ---J.S (t|c) 04:33, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I removed the link. There is a version of the clip in question, the Quick Change Artists, on NBC's website. Tinlinkin 13:01, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

NBC's website would be fine to link to since they actualy own it. :) ---J.S (t|c) 00:01, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

New article format

A proposal to change the format of this article is presented at Talk:America's Got Talent (season 2)#New article format. Tinlinkin 16:38, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Where are the L.A. Auditions?

Some one got rid of the L.A. auditions, and I can't seem to undo any edits pertaining to it. ClonedPickle (talk) 00:56, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

taylor ware and all that

yeah somone reversed it saying that all that was top 3 and taylor was only top 5 but it was the other way around and same with celtic spring and the millers--Spiderman2351 (talk) 23:45, 7 July 2008 (UTC) Spiderman2351

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on America's Got Talent (season 1). 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/20060717195813/http://www.nbc10.com/entertainment/9449871/detail.html to http://www.nbc10.com/entertainment/9449871/detail.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) 14:19, 3 July 2017 (UTC)