Talk:RuPaul's Drag Race All Stars season 2

Format Revert

I really think the format for the episodes of each season should be reverted back to the way it was prior to this new change. Opening each tab is unnecessary when the format before was completely fine. As discussed above in the "Format" section, a majority of us believe the format (at least for the episodes) should be changed back to this:

Episode Three: HERstory Of The World

Airdate: September 8, 2016

• Guest Judge: Jeremy Scott
• Mini Challenge:
• Mini Challenge Winner:
• Mini Challenge Prize:
• Main Challenge: Perform in a lip-syncing dance number inspired by legendary historical women
• Runway Theme:
• Top Two:
• Lip Sync for Your Legacy Winner:
• Lip-sync Song:
• Bottom Three:
• Eliminated:
• Farewell Message:

It is much easier than the various tabs the new format includes, and the old summaries were perfectly fine, too. Lauralimilein (talk) 01:57, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Lauralimilein; Like we have discussed before, the format needs to be changed, but to delete the recap section because it is redundant and could be explained in the summary. Chase (talk) 02:16, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Comment: Lauralimilein; I redesigned how the episode section should be for episode seven. Let me know what you think. Chase (talk) 02:47, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

CCamp2013; That's perfectly fine! But my only concern would be with episodes were the contestants are assigned roles. Where would you include those as I do think it's important to have. Lauralimilein (talk) 06:04, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Reply: Lauralimilein; We would just do what I did in episode seven and write it out instead of putting it in a table. Chase (talk) 17:10, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

I 100% agree that it needs to go back to the original format. This new format sucks. It looks awful. I think it should go back to what it was.

68.190.153.14; How can you say it is awful (WP:OPINION) when 99% of television shows have this exact format? The old way was not within Wikipedia's guidelines and frankly was redundant in the way it was presented because it had been stated a couple times almost in this exact format anyway. Chase (talk) 22:42, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Half the information that consititutes this format is not necessary in the episode summary section, not to mention it's repeated information. There's the cast progress table, list of guest appearances/judges and the lip sync table to cover most of whats in the summary. All it's doing is repeating information. Just stick to a 100-200 word episode summary and have all that information separate.Brocicle (talk) 00:11, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Reply: Brocicle; that will not bode well with the majority of people that contribute to this article. I have tried to remove some of that stuff several times and most like the information repeated in this way. Chase (talk) 14:17, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

It's not about what the majority wants in this case. It's about adhering to the guidelines in the Manual of Style for Television. There's no need to constantly repeat information that's elsewhere in the article and is very easy to see and find. Brocicle (talk) 14:30, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Reply: Brocicle; Guidelines are called that for a reason, not to strictly follow, but to follow as best we can case by case. They are not policy and must be followed and enforced. Chase (talk) 17:27, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

There has hardly been any attempt to follow at all and when trying to be enforced is met with temper tantrums and reverts. They must be followed as best as possible and I don't see any of that happening. Brocicle (talk) 05:42, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

High and Low

Why have they been removed from all the pages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.3.123 (talk) 04:48, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Because it's redundant. Both have the same outcome as SAFE. Brocicle (talk) 05:43, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

What's with all these changes? The HIGH's and LOW's give a greater indication of the contestant's performance each episode, and they're far from "subjective", it is quite obvious who is LOW (Bottom 3) and who is HIGH (Top 3). The only contestants who should be labelled as SAFE are the ones that RuPaul declares safety to (contestants who are not in the top 3 and the bottom 3). Lauralimilein (talk) 12:50, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't a review site, there's no need to indicate their performance other than safe, eliminated etc. Bottom three and the winners show who did the best and worst already so the HIGH and LOW is redundant. Brocicle (talk) 13:27, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

But how is someone going to know who was in the top and who was in the bottom? This whole new page is trash now. You guys keep on ruining everything. Everything was perfect until you guys started ruining everything. WIN, HIGH, LOW, BTM2, AND ELIM should all be on this page. Every other season that has this type of format has all of this stuff on their pages. Why all of a sudden should THIS PAGE get rid of everything but 3 things. This page looks like trash. I don't care if people report me or block me. Just know that you are making these pages look like trash without the whole table looking like it should and how it was. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.190.153.14 (talk) 21:13, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

High and low is technically against wikipedia rules. Oath2order (talk) 21:25, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

How so? If you get rid of the HIGH and LOW which you already did, how do you know what person was what in that episode. Not everyone who is safe now, was called to be safe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.190.153.14 (talk) 21:28, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

The page looks fine, you're partially stepping into WP:OWN and WP:OPINION with your comments. Changes are being made to adhere to guidelines by Wikipedia. The other pages will most likely undergo changes shortly. You know what person was what by the SAFE, BTM3 or BTM2 and the WIN, nothing else is necessary. Brocicle (talk) 21:39, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

If the contestant was in the top but did not win, that contestant is considered HIGH, if the contestant was the worst but not in the bottom two its considered LOW. And no the page does not look fine. It looked fine as it was. The person who is HIGH or LOW, is not automatically SAFE. Go ahead KEEP MAKING THESE PAGES LOOK LIKE TRASH. YOU KNOW WE ARE RIGHT SO JUST AGREE WITH US. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.190.153.14 (talk) 21:42, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

HIGH and LOW is redundant, they both have the same outcome as SAFE. I'm not sure what you're finding so difficult to understand. Oath2order gave you a more specific reason as to why they have been removed as well. Brocicle (talk) 21:45, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

BEING HIGH AND LOW IS TOTALLY NOT THE SAME THING AS BEING SAFE. ARE YOU THAT DUMB. WHY IS THIS NOT GETTING THROUGH TO YOU. BEING HIGH MEANS YOU WERE IN THE TOP. BEING LOW MEANS YOU WERE IN THE BOTTOM. BEING SAFE MEANS YOU WERE NEITHER OF THAT, THAT'S WHY THEY ARE ON HERE. DON'T SIT HERE AND ACT LIKE YOU ARE RIGHT, BECAUSE YOURE NOT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.190.153.14 (talk) 21:47, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Unless they win or are in the bottom three or two then they're regarded as safe, I never said they were the same thing I said they led to the same outcome. Please calm down. Brocicle (talk) 21:52, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

I AM NOT GOING TO CALM DOWN BECAUSE THESE PAGES LOOK LIKE ABSOLUTE TRASH. HOW IS SOMEONE GOING TO KNOW WHO WAS IN THE TOP AND WHO WAS IN THE BOTTOM. THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF THE HIGH AND LOW. SERIOUSLY. THEY WERE IN THE TOP. THAT'S NOT SAFE. THEY WERE IN THE BOTTOM, THAT'S NOT SAFE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.190.153.14 (talk) 21:54, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Many editors have given you many a reason on multiple pages regarding this issues but you persist. If you continue this behaviour you will more than likely be reported for disruptive editing. You do not own any of these pages, and the edits were made to adhere to Wikipedia policy. Brocicle (talk) 21:58, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

This edit harms the information on all of the pages for the various Drag Race seasons. It misrepresents what occurred. Regardless of opinions and who thought who did what, queens are called to be the best and worst of the week, and as such, this should be represented on the pages with the return of HIGH and LOW. Keeping them at "safe" isn't accurate. 2602:304:B1AF:EDE0:5DE0:F2CC:929F:1838 (talk) 22:30, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Reply to 2602:304:B1AF:EDE0:5DE0:F2CC:929F:1838: Respectfully, HIGH and LOW is the information that isn't accurate and is the opinion. Chase (talk) 22:32, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

RuPaul (and thus the show) states that the contestants on stage did the best or worst of the week, and makes it clear through what they say which is which. How is this not accurate? Is it not more inaccurate for someone who is specifically praised for a challenge (or "HIGH") or someone who is harshly critiqued for their performance (or "LOW") to just be grouped with everyone else who is written of as an un-noteworthy "SAFE"? 2602:304:B1AF:EDE0:5DE0:F2CC:929F:1838 (talk) 22:40, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Reply to 2602:304:B1AF:EDE0:5DE0:F2CC:929F:1838: Please read WP:No original research. The only way to come to the conclusion of who is the best and the worst is to take what the judges are saying and yourself decide if they are positive critiques or negative critiques. Without the judges saying "You were one of the bottom contestants or top contestants, then the information you came to the conclusion with is original research. Also, I have provided different coloring with a colorbox note on the table for those who were in the "best and worst" category, but was not the bottom 2/3 or top to explain in a neurtal way, what these contestant did that week without concluded if they were the top or bottom. Chase (talk) 22:45, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

This just leads to more issues; it groups the best and the worst together rather than showing the difference. One may see the chart, and while they see the slight shading of SAFE means they were the best or the worst, it doesn't truly represent what occurred; they have no way of knowing if one did poor or one did better. I believe there have been previous attempts to remove the HIGH/LOW colors from the chart before (back when Season 7 was airing), and that idea was shot down shortly after. I realize the semantics and technicalities rule in favor of this, but it still causes more confusion and misrepresentation than actual helpfulness and accuracy. 75.26.254.222 (talk) 21:59, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Reply to 75.26.254.222: I completely agree that it would be helpful and if there were any way of knowing who truly did better or worse, then we definitely should add it, but sadly we can't know 100% who is what. Chase (talk) 23:55, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Honestly HIGH and LOW is so redundant as they both have the same outcome as safe if they're not eliminated. If you really want to discuss who did better than others or received better feedback put it in the episode summary but stick within the word limit. Brocicle (talk) 03:16, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

If you say that they lead to the same result (SAFE), because they are stamped in another color by saying "best and worst category", this confuses the better to put them all in white. They contradict each other; Say that the HIGH and LOW is contradictory and this is more. (GerryCreme) —Preceding undated comment added 22:05, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Reply to GerryCreme: I have no idea what you just said. --Chase | ^talk 23:54, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

protection

I'm going to ask for the article to be semi-protected once again. (this will be the 4th protection if approved) Does anyone else think this should be an extended protection request? Looking through the edit history since the last protection ended, I see very few positive edits by IPs or newly registered accounts. APK whisper in my ear 13:34, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Reply to APK: I am going to quite agree with this. --Chase | ^talk 23:54, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Reply to APK: Even though I am a bit late to reply to this, but I think all of these pages need to be protected, as people keep changing the colors daily without consulting the talk page and seeing we have been over everything. MSMRHurricane (talk) 03:40, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

The Lip Sync table is a MESS

The lip sync table is looking a mess, everyone. It needs to be consolidated.

There does not need to be separate columns for "Up for Elimination" and "Winner". The table right above it shows who else was up for elimination, and the lip sync winner's name should be bolded in column 2. All we're doing at this point is creating a huge, poorly formatted table full of redundant information. Jacksm3 (talk) 16:42, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Agreed Brocicle (talk) 16:45, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Agreed RiceKid (talk) 21:13, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

In Reference to Discussions of Adding High and Low Placements After All Stars 3

This is just a general query posed to other editors here. It was decided previously to not identify the positivity or negativity of the judges critiques for SAFE competitors, but in light of All Stars 3 doing as much for the competitor progress table, should this be added for the sake of being consistent for every season of the show? As it stands now it's the only season that doesn't identify the quality or tone of critiques. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lavince14 (talk • contribs) 15:03, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Contestant Progress

Someone edited the contestant progress from AS4 onto AS2 table can someone undo the edits? Yankeesman312 (talk) 23:49, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Wrong winner

Some Katya fan has edited the box and progress table to show Katya as the winner, when in fact Alaska won.

RfC on table

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject RuPaul's Drag Race#RfC: Proposed progress table for all RPDR shows. Gleeanon409 (talk) 01:06, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Returning All-Stars Queens

The article introduction currently states the following:

On May 26, 2021, it was announced that Ginger Minj would return for the sixth season of All Stars, marking the first time that an All Stars contestant (that didn’t compete on All Stars 1) came back for a second chance on All Stars.

This is poorly phrased and somewhat inflates the significance of this event. Apart from Ginger, there have been 6 queens from All Stars 1 that have returned to the show, those being Latrice Royale and Manila Luzon (in All Stars 4), Alexis Mateo and Jujubee (in All Stars 5), and Pandora Boxx and Yara Sofia (in All Stars 6, competing alongside Ginger). A better way to phrase this would be:

On May 26, 2021, it was announced that Ginger Minj would return for the sixth season of All Stars. This would mark Ginger Minj as the first contestant invited back to the show from the second season of All Stars.

I would also like to note that the article introduction for All Stars season one does not follow this template. Instead, a new section has been created in the article to mark appearances of returning queens. This could be a better choice long-term choice if more queens from AS2 are invited to return in future All Stars seasons. Edictation (talk) 05:57, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Your rewrite is much more elegant, as well as being less confusing. Daundelin❁ 13:41, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 March 2023

" please change *Sonique, contestant from season two and season six of All Stars to *Sonique, contestant from season two and winner of season six of All Stars " MusicXwatch (talk) 17:46, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: The 2 links are to the same person. Lightoil (talk) 06:00, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 August 2023

Within this article in the episode run-downs, in the fifth episode "Revenge of the Queens" it states "Alaska reveals that she would have sent home Alyssa Edwards from the competition, had she won the lip-sync." but this is incorrect. Alaska was the contestant who did win and Phi Phi O'Hara was the one who revealed she would have sent Alyssa home if she had won the lip-sync.

My source: your own page saying Alaska won the lip-sync and also currently rewatching episode 4 in season 2 of all-stars GeekingGeek (talk) 05:21, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Please be more precise and clearer on what and where you want the changes to be made. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 12:26, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

False makeover challenge description

In the makeover challenge (episode 7), all queens get positive critiques aside from Alaska, who gets very poor critiques; the bottom placement for Alyssa, Roxy and Alaska is by default, so it should say all bottom queens got negative critiques, because Ru placed in the bottom because they simply did not win. 2A00:23C7:ED16:2401:1D3A:2C81:BF76:9B2E (talk) 00:43, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 December 2023

For episode 5, the text should read "Phi Phi O'Hara reveals that she would have sent home Alyssa Edwards from the competition, had she won the lip-sync", not "Alaska reveals" since she was the winner. 2601:152:4B01:78F0:DD3F:E458:A219:AC29 (talk) 01:10, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. M.Bitton (talk) 18:51, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Watch the episode then you stupid smart-arse. There are no reliable sources to support the bullsh-it lies that exist on this page to begin with. 78.40.233.12 (talk) 16:05, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 March 2024

On Episode 1, its says “eliminated” when its supposed to say “eliminating”. 2A00:23EE:2088:1928:45CE:9E5D:4073:C6CA (talk) 17:00, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

 Done - FlightTime (open channel) 17:04, 14 March 2024 (UTC)