Talk:American Idol season 5/Archive 1

Going to Hollywood section
Should it be moved to a new page, American Idol (Season 5) Contestants, with others mentioned there as well? CrazyC83 05:50, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Maybe down the line. Right now, the article's not long enough to justify splitting it. -- MisterHand 05:54, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Contestant redirects
Should contestants that do not have their own articles be redirected to their section on this page? It's already been done for Rhonetta Johnson (consensus: merge/redirect). For all articles, if there is a conflict with someone else, (American Idol contestant) should be added after the name to separate them. CrazyC83 15:50, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I would say that (singer) would be a more appropriate disambiguation indicator, one that's been used in the past. See Amy Adams, for instance. -- MisterHand 16:28, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll change all the red links that say such - if there is still a conflict, I'll make it (American Idol singer). Also for the "blooper" auditions, (comedian) should be used (i.e. Mary Roach - which already conflicts). CrazyC83 19:30, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Why do some of the contestant semi-finalists link to American Idol (Season 5) semi-finalists. Should they not just link to the contestant pages directly. It's a misleading re-direct. If they don't have their own page, they shouldn't be redirected to an alternate page, just cos it's 'kind of similar'/ Timclare 19:27, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Semifinal contestant pages
Given that these contestants have been with the show for some time, and many will continue to be with the show for several weeks, should not the decision to terminate their articles and stubs be given some discussion? It seems rather major to me, especially since a number of people worked on those articles and stubs, and I think the information actually had its uses. Instead of nixing it all completely, maybe a page with all the data on the semifinalists would be a better alternative, with short summaries and links for those contestants with longer pages. It just seems a bit counterinformative not to have more on the semifinalists, and now that we only have information for a select few, it doesn't feel very neutral. People will want to know about the semifinalists if they watch the show, and even if the information is very little and only enough for a stub, it's at least a start. Besides which -- when people who aren't familiar with Wikipedia click on the links for the semifinalists and are sometimes directed to more pages, sometimes to the top of the article, it's confusing. Emperial 14:03, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, the reasons given for some article stub removals ("not worthy" and similar) seem to lack neutrality to me. There is an interest and a reason for having information on semifinalists *during the semifinals*. Wikipedia should be informative for AI viewers and voters, even if the information we have is very limited. Emperial 15:32, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * It doesn't really matter to me one way or another, but performing on one of America's most watched television shows, in front of millions of people, seems pretty notable to me. If these contestants were to walk down the street, they'd be recognized by more people than, say, KaDee Strickland (a bit-part actor who was on the front page as a featured article back in December). One thing I am going to do is fix some of the looping links. -- MisterHand 17:40, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with you; even many contestants cut in Hollywood are notable enough for an article in my view. They're presenting and performing on a stage with over 40 million people watching, and if you search around on the Internet, fan clubs and boards exist today even for some of those early eliminated contestants! CrazyC83 20:43, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Relevant information about the semifinalists can and should be given on the appropriate season article page. There simply isn't any independently important information about them if being a semifinalist is all that they've accomplished. And yes, some people still remember them; I personally remember Lisa Leuschner, and was disappointed when she was cut, but compare google hits for her name (only less than half of which are unique hits) with those for Leah LaBelle, the first of the 12 finalists to be voted off that same season. The divide in coverage is staggering. I'm very confident that anyone who achieves no fame outside of being a semifinalist (let alone a semisemifinalist) would be deleted or redirected if put to a vote on AFD today. Why waste the time? Postdlf 00:25, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 15,300 for Leah LaBelle, 19,300 for Lisa Leuschner...that takes that argument away... CrazyC83 03:37, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I think because people seem to be willing to waste the time to have the articles for the time being and expand them with each new episode, and it doesn't hurt Wikipedia to have the articles while individuals are interested in updating and maintaining them. On the flip side, there's the question of why waste time redirecting the pages when people just keep adding them? Why not wait to make them redirects after the semifinals end and everyone stops caring? In the meantime I think we have a duty to let people know about the semifinalists as much as possible since they're current, and this is a current event article. The 2006 Olympics pages have numerous stubs and empty links for various international athletes who haven't even won any medals, just because they were at the Olympics. Given viewer coverage of AI versus individual Olympic events, it seems to make sense that AI semifinalists deserve stubs for the time being, too. --Emperial 00:41, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with the idea that semifinalists should have some other notable thing to their name besides being a semifinalist to get an article. Not all semifinalists should get articles, but I think that those finalists who make it to the final round should all get articles. --Revolución hablar ver 00:53, 26 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I finally tracked down some previous deletion discussions on Idol contestants&mdash;they are notably unfavorable to finalists, let alone those who didn't even make it that far. A.J. Gil and EJay Day had no consensus, Mario Vasquez was redirected (though later unredirected), Constantine (under a misspelling) was deleted (though later recreated), and even Carrie Underwood was merged and redirected when she was also just a wee finalist.  These were all less than a year ago, and are hardly a sign that Wikipedians in general consider Idol to automatically bestow notability on all those whom are touched by it.  The deletion discussion for Kimberly Caldwell was more favorable, but mainly based on the fact that she's had a post-Idol career.
 * Also, regarding those who were "notably" bad, or otherwise cut prior to even the semifinals, Rhonetta Johnson, David Hoover, Leroy Wells, and Mary Roach were all deleted or redirected.
 * I think even now if one of the less popular finalists were to be listed on AFD, the vote would be close; a semifinalist would be killed. Postdlf 02:10, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I still think that while the semifinals are running we should endeavor to provide as much information on the semifinalists as is useful. After the semifinals, who cares? They disappear into nothingness. But while the semifinals are on, there is an interest and arguably a need for information on the contestants. --Emperial 05:34, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

My view: by status

 * Finalist: Definitely create the article and keep it.
 * Semi-finalist: Make the article now, keep it for now (even as a stub) and then wait out and see if it becomes noteworthy.
 * Cut in Hollywood or earlier: Make the link as a redirect to the season page (to make it easier to find and to make it so that it can be placed on other pages - i.e. List of American Idol contestants) unless the contestant is noteworthy elsewhere. (Note: if the contestant has a mention on another article for some reason (i.e. hometown), it should link under his or her name, i.e. Brooke Barrettsmith - which would be a redirect) CrazyC83 03:42, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with this. --Revolución hablar ver 04:42, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I concur as well. With the added note that I see no reason semifinalists can't have a page like the list of characters from The Mighty Boosh with sections for each semifinalist detailing their AI involvement and link to longer articles with further, non-AI information when applicable, or links to their finalist articles when applicable. --Emperial 05:30, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * If we get into a dispute about keeping articles after the show, I'd play it safe and maintain them. Several semi-finalists (Kristin Holt, Judd Harris, Matthew Metzger, Ashley Hartman) have been notable enough to clearly keep them, and a few others (Lisa Leuschner, for example) are borderline...also one that had been eliminated in Hollywood (Alan Ritchson) has AI as just a small part of a long resume warranting an article. CrazyC83 06:05, 26 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I'd recommend a single article for all semifinalists together, since there's not really all that much to say about each one. That said, I don't really care that much - as they fade from the limelight, their articles will vanish or be consolidated in the end anyway. Deco 23:07, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to go ahead and start implementing something to restore the currently redirected information. It seems to be the general consensus regardless of any decisions made last year. --Emperial 00:08, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

My two cents: I don't think we need to make any new articles for those cut in Hollywood. But somebody does make those, at that time we can turn it into a redirect. -- MisterHand 00:10, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I gave the articles back to those who made it to the top 12. Va girl2468 03:09, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

American Idol (Season 5) semi-finalists
I think that the American Idol (Season 5) semi-finalists page should be merged with American Idol (Season 5) because there's no point in having the semi-finalist page anymore. They already announced the top 12, and all the contestants who made it into the top 12 received their articles back. What do you guys think? Va girl2468 03:00, 11 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Agree with the above proposal. This site has all of their names anyway, and relevent wiki-links. The American Idol (Season 5) semi-finalists page is just getting messy. All of those external links can be placed on the individual contestants places.
 * I'd prefer to just delete that semi-finalists article. It's an abomination, and contains no real info that's not already here (or in the individual contestants' articles). -- MisterHand 04:36, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
 * We should atleast still keep the information about the contestants that have been eliminated. We can put their information into the American Idol (Season 5) article and get rid of the information about the contestants that made it into the top 12 since their articles have been restored. Va girl2468 05:47, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Opposed the merge; instead give the contestants their own articles and delete that article. CrazyC83 16:53, 11 March 2006 (UTC)


 * But all of the top 12 have their own pages anyway, and some of the top 24. But agree with the deletion part.
 * Alright then. Majority rules.  I replaced the merge tag that someone else put with a deletion tag. Va girl2468 04:33, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I actually changed my mind on this one and think it should be a redirect. But if it gets deleted I certainly won't be upset. -- MisterHand 14:29, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

User:Raymarcbadz (contribs|talk} keeps trying to restore semifinalist articles Ayla Brown, Stevie Scott, Gedeon McKinney, Will Makar and David Radford. I've had to redirect these semis back to the AI5 article numerous times. Propose protection of these pages? &mdash;Chantessy 14:06, 30 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Suggestion, can we have the birthdate of the 24 beside their picture, for example if Taylor looks 40, to some, or Gedeon looks 30, to some, then a quick (born 19**) is informative. Bib 12:31, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Bottom 3/Bottom 2
I was under the impression that the producers were making no distinction between the Bottom 3 and the Bottom 2 in these early stages of the finals. In other words, they did not make it aware in Week 1 whether Ace Young or Lisa Tucker actually got the 11th-most votes. All the audience was told is that Ace was safe first, then Lisa, but that was not necessarily the actual order of finish. Therefore, in the elimination chart, no distinction should be made, except that both Ace and Lisa were in the Bottom 3. Anybody agree? --Zpb52 13:46, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree 100% and was going to make the change without discussion, but since you brought it up I'll let it go until there's consensus (or no one else responds). &rArr; BRossow T/C 14:09, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I think you're right. The way things were worded, at no time did they say that Lisa Tucker got less votes than Ace. We should keep both at "Bottom 3" and continue to do that until the show explicitly makes the distinction. -- MisterHand 14:20, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Tonight, though, they explicitly said that Lisa was "not in the bottom two"&mdash;meaning she was third from last, and Bucky was second. I'll go make that clear in the article. --zenohockey 02:51, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you, whoever did that&mdash;but are you positive that Ace was third from last a week ago? --zenohockey 03:13, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

I think bottom two should be taken out, and we need to look no farther than the results show from 4/19 for a reason why. Paris was told that she could have a seat, but it was not specified whether she had the third lowest votes or not. Same with Chris, the only thing clear is the lowest vote total unless announced by Ryan Seacrest. I guess we should probably change the wording of the table, even if the bottom two is implied. Any thoughts? Cheesehead Fan 02:38, 21 April 2006 (UTC)


 * They like to jack up the shock value of results, so yes if a favorite ends up third from last, you can be sure they will be left hanging to the last two.  Wasted Time R 04:01, 21 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I was about to bring up this issue. I think we should make the distinction between "bottom 3" and "bottom 2" (or perhaps word it some other way). The information on who was "saved" first should be kept, but a note at the bottom could clarify that it is not always known whether the last saved member of the bottom 3 necessarily received the second-lowest number of votes. Also, consistency is important here, as right now there is one case (last week's) where both bottom 3 and bottom 2 are listed as bottom 3, and I saw at least one instance in which the notes on the individual contestant bios did not match the chart. -VJ 04:42, 21 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I think that it is important that we indicate who was 'saved' first. The note at the bottom sounds like a good middle road between having this information and making sure we don't make invalid assumptions. Does anyone have an actual record of who Ryan declared as bottom 2? Uvapip 13:23, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

I think the sometimes say who's in the bottom two and sometimes don't mention it. Perhaps for ratings? 69.91.106.248 17:05, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Elimination History
The elimination history chart looks great, but I think it's gonna be really too big by the end of the season. Does anyone have any ideas to make this smaller/shorter? Otherwise, I tend to think we should go back to the way it's been before, see the season 4 article. shaile 17:23, 23 March 2006 (UTC) No to unanimous 69.91.106.248 03:07, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I think we can cross that bridge when we come to it, but a couple ideas include reducing the font size or breaking out the final group (final 4 maybe?) into a different chart. -- MisterHand 14:43, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * We should use the one from the previous American Idol shows for the finals and only keep that one for the semi-finals. Anyone agree? - unanimous

Queen theme
What the source for the statements that the contestants will sing Queen songs and that Queen will appear? -- MisterHand 14:43, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's what I first thought when I read that. I'll surf the internet to see what I can find. Cheesehead Fan 18:40, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I've removed it, as well as some other claims about future episodes. If anybody wants to add this information, do so with a citation to a reputable source. -- MisterHand 20:18, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Works for me: "Then, on Tuesday, April 11th, the Top 8 Contestants will take on the music of the legendary Rock Band, QUEEN. Will someone be able to top Constantine's performance of Bohemian Rhapsody? Tune in to find out! Then, come back on Wednesday for a special hour episode, when the Top 8 will also perform a QUEEN song or medley!" Doesn't look like Queen is scheduled to perform. -- 23:51, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Fuel lead singer?
What's the citation for this statement?
 * When Fuel heard Daughtry sing Hemorrhage (In My Hands), they offered him the role of lead singer of their group, but Daughtry declined the offer.

Thanks. -- MisterHand 14:52, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Found a citation and put it in the article. -- MisterHand 18:47, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Bottom 3?
The following note was added below the elimination chart: "Three contestants have never appeared in the Bottom 3: Chris Daughtry, Taylor Hicks, and Kellie Pickler." It was removed with the comment "this is information which can be determined by looking at the chart".

While it's true that this information can be surmised from the chart, it's a bit obtuse to do so. This small comment merely makes the information clear, and I don't think it takes away from the page in any way. Any thoughts on this? -- MisterHand 14:52, 6 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I suppose I already made my thoughts clear when I made the edit ro remove the list. :) Anyone else want to chime in? -- Skudrafan1 21:52, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Controversy
Could someone add to the controversy section the alleged anti-gay comments by Mandisa? (I don't think my english is good enough to write it myself)

Source: http://www.advocate.com/exclusive_detail_ektid29157.asp

Trivial trivia
I guess any thing can be defined as trivia. Why are the two trivia statements about the number of contestants in the semis and finals per state even interesting? Who cares? I tried reading the list but couldn't, my eyes and brain started to hurt. --Easter Monkey 06:21, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Wiki table
I don't know about you, but I liked the previous table better than the current one that is not up to date. I think we should consider reverting. Cheesehead Fan


 * I reverted it. Chantessy 02:36, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Songs
Question...Why (since last week) has it taken longer to put the songs the Idols sing up on the page? I usually put them in a newsletter I send out but havent been able to. If anyone could let me know that would be cool. Not to be mean or trying to cause trouble, just curious. Zach 01:09, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


 * User:Chantessy broke them without even mentioning it here. I am reverting, the songs are useful. Lapinmies 16:48, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

May 2nd Performances
I'm not sure why the songs for the Idols' May 2nd performances are going up already. Nothing has been confirmed officially. They should not be up.

Stock characters
Would this be appropriate for the article space? I'm guessing not.. (the hillbilly one seems pejorative, anything better, more polite?).

Archetypes, stereotypes and stock characters of AI contestants as portrayed on the show:


 * I like this idea, but it should be expanded to include the stereotypes from previous seasons as well. Evan Reyes 01:54, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't think so, looks like original research to me. Coffee 06:45, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed. -- MisterHand 00:15, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

This isn't really encyclopedic, but is a good idea though. Cheesehead Fan 22:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Unsourced speculation about results?
Is there any reference for the statement that Taylor Hicks received the highest percentage of votes in the May 16 vote (33.68%)? (Comments and calculations in the Trivia section.) Only Elliott Yamin's name was associated with one of the percentages on the results show. If there's no confirmation that Taylor Hicks was the top vote-getter, the entire subsection should be eliminated. 208.20.220.72 21:19, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

No source cited. Looks like original research, speculation, or wishful thinking. Struck references based on the speculation. -- 71.255.35.247 02:37, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Explanation to Paris Bennett Controversy
"During the East Coast transmission of the May 2 show, Paris Bennett was bleeped while singing Mary J. Blige's "Be Without You" at the exact point where the word 'shit' appears in the lyrics. However, Fox confirmed that the song was not bleeped when it was broadcast on the West Coast. Forum posters on the West Coast said Bennett sang the radio edit of the song which excludes the word 'shit', leaving viewers nationwide wondering why Bennett was precensored during the earlier live transmission."

Paris Bennett did not announce that she was singing the radio edit of Mary J. Blige's song "Be Without You". With the show running live on the East coast, the producers expected the word "shit" to appear in the performance. Because this was not pre-recorded, there was no way to foresee what was to come. Obviously, the crew reacted and prepared to censor that moment, in case she had done so. No profanity was heard during the performance, and so the producers left the censorship out of the West Coast show, three hours later.

DialIdol
Should DialIdol be forked into its own page? The section is referenced and when Season 6 roles, Wikipedians can reference that page; Yeah nay or wait? --Supercoop 20:10, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I vote Yea. It's certainly notable enough, and as you point out it will likely be around longer than this season. -- MisterHand 20:23, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yea. -- NewB 17:22, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Award for this Article
I really think we should nominate this article for a Wikipedia article of the day or some sort of article award. We have worked very hard on this article and it looks great! Any thoughts? Cheesehead Fan 20:21, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * No such award really exists. --Woohookitty(meow) 05:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

The featured article each day is what I meant Cheesehead Fan 03:44, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

The Finale
I just took out most of the "Finale Rundown" section. It was unencyclopedic and just plain ugly...and unneeded. Season 4 had a one paragraph summary of the proceedings. That's all we need for season 5 as well. Leave the song by song rundowns for fan sites. --Woohookitty(meow) 07:49, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Auditioners
I just removed a bunch of early auditioners. If something makes them notable, they should be included. Otherwise, we really shouldn't list them here. We're not a fansite nor a listing of every person who auditioned. --Woohookitty(meow) 05:02, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Question about the song "When I Fall in Love"
When I was reading this article, I saw the part about the songs Kevin sang. I noticed that it said that the song "When I Fall in Love" was by Nat King Cole. However, I remember that when that clip with Kevin telling the audience what song he would be singing, he said that it was by Doris Day and it was from 1952. I then clicked on the link th the song's article and saw that it was recorded by many people and I don't know what name should go next to the name of the song. -- Evan Robidoux 14:32, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I think it should be the one that Kevin mentioned. --Tennis Dynamite 21:10, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Former AI5ElimHist template
The talk page for the former Template:AI5ElimHist is now at Talk:American Idol (Season 5)/AI5ElimHist. Tinlinkin 16:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Season 5 Encores
Can somebody find the sales figures for the compilation album?

(222.254.192.66 06:50, 3 February 2007 (UTC))

Yamin album classification?
Are we considering Elliott Yamin's album to be a major release or a minor one? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 221.133.24.3 (talk) 08:37, 9 February 2007 (221.133.24.3 08:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC))

Fair use images
There are far too many fair use images on this page. The images of the contestants are unnecessary, particularly since there is usually only one sentence each of accompanying text. Perhaps you'd like to choose yourselves which to remove. I suggest losing half of the images. The JPS talk to me  06:51, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Elimination Chart is disfigured
Notice how some of the rows on the right side of the chart stick out like that? And the grey portions of the rows don't align correctly at the right either. Anyone know how to fix it? MarkMc1990 05:18, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:B000N60HD6.01. SS500 SCLZZZZZZZ V45789859 .jpg
Image:B000N60HD6.01. SS500 SCLZZZZZZZ V45789859 .jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 21:29, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:BUCKYFNLCVR-LOW.jpg
Image:BUCKYFNLCVR-LOW.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:38, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Davidradford.jpg
Image:Davidradford.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:46, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Daughtry home.jpg
Image:Daughtry home.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:55, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Iwonder.JPG
Image:Iwonder.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:11, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Princess p cover.jpg
Image:Princess p cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:39, 6 June 2007 (UTC)