Talk:Dianne Buswell

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did Dianne compete on the Australian So You Think You Can Dance?[edit]

I've checked all four seasons of So You Think You Can Dance Australia and cannot find Buswell's first or last names anywhere. I'm therefore dubious about the one source that lists her. I suppose she might have tried out for it but not ultimately have been selected for the top 20, but in that case she wasn't a contestant on the live shows. (She could also have appeared in a special performance as a guest artist, but again, that's not as a competitor as the article claims.) I'm pulling the information; if there's a better source that confirms that she did compete as part of the top 20, the information can be restored. I don't think we can include it in her article otherwise. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:12, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To address your concern, I changed competed to appeared. It was in her official bio, so I think we can include that she appeared on the show as one sentence. Here are other sources: [1] [2]. In general, I find sourcing Australian tv shows to be very difficult. Knope7 (talk) 01:54, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I extended that change to the lede, which still said competed. I do wish we could find something more definitive one way or another... BlueMoonset (talk) 05:59, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox[edit]

Please stop adding Joe Sugg to the infobox under "partner." The "partner" parameter is for long-term relationships, not people have been dating a few months at best. I have added a personal life section, so the relevant information has a place in the article. Knope7 (talk) 01:01, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:38, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Scores graph[edit]

I think the graph showing the progression of scores each season shows trivial information. I've long been opposed to including scoring averages because I find them to be largely meaningless. The judges are harsher some seasons and even some weeks. The judges also have changed this season and in the past some weeks have had five judges which requires doing averages anyway. I don't think the encyclopedia is enhanced by having a chart showing each and every judge's score when it's hard to compare week to week and season to season. I think it would be great if fans want to include something like that on a fan site, but it's out of place in an encyclopedia article on Buswell's life. Knope7 (talk) 03:33, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am the person responsible for adding the graph to the page. I got the idea from a user on the main Strictly Series 17 Wikipedia talk page who had suggested the idea for that page. I thought it would be a nice round off to the stats section so I added it in. Obviously the bad results of series 15 & 17 mean the graph only really shows the Series 16 progression but like with the table above it I hope it will develop and become more interesting with time. She has only been on the show for 3 years so there isn't much data to add. As I hope she will stay on the show for many more years, hopefully this graph will also become more developed.
Also you mention weeks where there were more judges than the traditional 4. As I understand there have been no weeks since Dianne joined the show in Series 15 where there have been more than 4 judges on 1 night. Alfonso has filled in for Bruno on Week 5 in Series 16 and 17 and Darcey has been replaced by Motsi this year but the total of 40 still remains promentant throughout all 3 series.
I am relatively new to Wikipedia but have thoroughly enjoyed contributing to the collaboration that is this site - the very definition of Wikis. I hope that this will explain my reasoning for adding the graph in the first place as I feel it is a nice conclusion to the sub section on Strictly.
I hope you are well
Joseph JoeLea591 (talk) 21:41, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the thoughtful response, @JoeLea591:. Let's see if others want to weigh in. Knope7 (talk) 00:41, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No other input so far. I'll say that I removed the Christmas special charts. I do appreciate the effort that goes into creating charts, but I must reiterate my opinion that we should remain focused on the fact that is an encyclopedia article. An encyclopedia article should focus on major events and use prose as much as possible. Knope7 (talk) 04:31, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]