Talk:Dancing with the Stars (American TV series) season 6

Redirect
I tweaked the redirect slightly to point to the main U.S. article, instead of just the general show article. Though it may be moot, since the participants are scheduled to be announced on Monday, February 18. --Elonka 02:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

WTF? "Footballer"??? This ain't Europe, folks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.163.0.41 (talk) 23:12, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Various charts and tables
On the season five article, there was much controversy over how they were to be formatted, most notably the colors. In order to prevent this again, I second this proposal to use the colors that have been made standard (or are currently being made) on the various season pages. Barring objections, this formatting will be the consensus-approved version. seresin | wasn't he just...? 00:00, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Good. No objections; therefore this is how it shall be done. seresin | wasn't he just...? 23:49, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Something needs to be fixed here--the green on purple is at best difficult to read, and at worst nauseating. Samer (talk) 12:55, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * To whomever changed the color--thank you. Samer (talk) 13:34, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know if its a lack of colors, but these colors don't quite go together well. They're too close together.  Leobold1 (talk) 00:13, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I can see why you would do it but I think the other way would work better because the colors, currently, are too light and confusing to tell. The other colors were very exciting and vivid, while these ones are a bit too dull. No nickname. 20:01, 06 June 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.243.210.16 (talk)

Check the history of the artlcle
And you see that the scoring chart has been "tweaked", "detailed", and "fiddled" with 33 times since the Monday show aired. Dear GOD people, one word is not going to matter all that much! If one word isn't exactly the way you want it, but gives the correct information, LET IT BE! Leobold1 (talk) 20:25, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Rankings
I'm not going to change anything, but will ask a Q.

Shouldn't the ranks for Monica and Penn be a tie for 11, instead of 12? That is the usual method for listing ties. As another example, a tie for 4th would go – 1, 2, 3, 4, 4, 6, etc.

JoeSchmuckatelli (talk) 04:19, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree. If you're going to split it like it is, you'd have to know the combination of votes that made it.  Is that score out there somewhere?  Leobold1 (talk) 04:58, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Looking back at it, I don't think the chart, as is, will allow for 2 "11"s. Leobold1 (talk) 05:00, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't see why not; JoeS has it right--both couples should be listed as 11, not 12. Samer (talk) 13:40, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I've fixed it so they're both represented as 11. PeRiDoTs13 (talk) 06:26, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Just a thought
But shouldn't there be a different way to put down the encore performances than the present footnote way? Leobold1 (talk) 05:02, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The reason they're mentioned in footnotes is twofold: (1) in both weeks the contestant that performed the encore was eliminated, and there's no non-garish way to display that fact, and (2) in the case of Steve & Jonathan, it is noteworthy enough to mention (how often does that happen in ballroom dance, period, let alone on national TV?). Samer (talk) 13:39, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree that it is noteworthy. I'm only asking (proposing?) that the encore performances are done in a way other than a footnote.  The encore performance doesn't have anything to do with whether or not they got eliminated.  I think it should be in a list or perhaps (I'm against this) yet another chart.  Leobold1 (talk) 23:54, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not suggesting that they all be done with footnotes. Again, the only reason I "reverted" to footnotes is that there isn't any easy way to indicate that they were both chosen to do the encore and eliminated in the same week. Samer (talk) 12:49, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Duplication of information
There is no logical reason to present the couples table and then just list the names individually with no other information; it's just a waste of bandwidth. Samer (talk) 13:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Music and Dance Guests
If the article lists featured music acts, it should also list featured dance acts (Alvin Ailey Theater etc.) since this is a dance show. Otherwise it shouldn't list guest performances at all.3Tigers (talk) 16:41, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I certainly think so. Actually, I went ahead and changed it before I realized you guys had a talk page.  Now the musical guests contains the performance dancers -- both to the musical guests' songs, and the "Stars of Dance" dancers. Ivytwines (talk) 03:29, 23 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Good job. I was too lazy.3Tigers (talk) 04:09, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Occupations
Shouldn't all the contestants be described as the show describes them (e.g., "Broadway Star" rather than "Broadway Actress")? Samer (talk) 14:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I think it's fine to be a little more specific than they are on the show. Vjydanz (talk) 13:48, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Ties
How many times does this need to be said? If you have a tie, everyone is assigned the highest number associated with that tie: a two-way tie for second is 1, 2, 2, 4, etc.; by that logic, a two-way tie for last here is 11, not 12. Samer (talk) 16:09, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

LOL agreed Vjydanz (talk) 18:34, 2 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I just gave up trying to fix it. I don't have the time to keep fixing it back every single time.  Leobold1 (talk) 10:28, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

100th episode question
I admit it's more for my edification than anything else, but--what is the name of that song used in the All-Pro dance at the start of the show? Samer (talk) 13:43, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

it's called "hard to handle" Vjydanz (talk) 14:00, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Colours
I hate bringing up colours again as it appears to be a bit of a sore spot, but would anyone object to my changing that hideous tomato colour and the garish green in the main contestants table to the softer colours I've used in my recent edits to the Dance Chart? If there's consensus (or conversely a lack of objection) I'll make sure I change the other articles as well. PageantUpdater talk • contribs  10:23, 15 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm a bit ambivalent about the colors in the table (it may be just me, but I like that "hideous" tomato color!), but there definitely needs to be some changes to the colors in the scoring chart; it's very hard to distinguish between, for example, the couples doing the encores and the "last couple saved"! Samer (talk) 03:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Hate to be the debbie downer but I just thought I would warn you that people are going to flip that you're even talking about this. Vjydanz (talk) 05:05, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, why don't we talk about it. Its not ideal and considering we're now between seasons this would be a good time to make any change – the contestant tables as well as the scoring tables.  I personally believe that we should go with more contrasting colours, and use pale colours rather than such vivid ones.  For the sorts of colours I'm thinking of check out some of my other articles, such as Miss USA 2007.  As explained above I think this is an idea time to discuss and improve it.  PageantUpdater  talk • contribs  05:12, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

My colour change recommendation

 * Using the medal standard for 1st/2nd/3rd and clearer colour choices for the rest. I've also cleared up a lot of bad table syntax (why did all these DWTS tables contain a mix of wiki syntax & html?  I've cleared out most of the html). PageantUpdater  talk • contribs  10:48, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Red numbers indicate the couples with the lowest score for each week.
 * Green numbers indicate the couples with the highest score for each week.
 * indicates the couple that was chosen to perform the encore performance.
 * indicates the couples eliminated that week.
 * indicates the returning couple that finished in the bottom two.
 * indicates the last couple(s) to be told they would remain in the competition (according to Bergeron, they may or may not have been in the bottom two).
 * indicates the winning couple.
 * indicates the runner-up couple.
 * indicates the third-place couple.


 * Agree, much better than what's there now at least. Swap it over. -- TIM KLOSKE 03:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, should I just be bold and go for it or do you think we should wait for a bit more input? PageantUpdater talk • contribs  03:50, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Incorrect Scores
Many contestants have incorrect scores for Weeks 1 and 2. Here are those that need to be edited:

Kristi and Mark: Week 2 Score is 27, not 26. Total is 54.

Jason and Edyta: Week 1 Score is 22, not 23. Total is 49.

Cristian and Cheryl: Week 1 Score is 21, not 20. Week 2 Score is 20, not 19. Total is 41.

Marissa and Tony: Week 1 Score is 18, not 20. Week 2 Score is 21, not 22. Total is 39.

Mario and Karina: Week 1 Score is 24, not 25. Total is 50.

Shannon and Derek: Week 1 Score is 21, not 22. Week 2 Score is 24, not 26. Total is 45.

Priscilla and Louis: Week 1 Score is 24, not 25. Week 2 Score is 21, not 22. Total is 45.

Adam and Julianne: Week 1 Score is 15, not 14. Week 2 Score is 19, not 15. Total is 34.

Steve and Anna: Week 1 Score is 18, not 20. Week 2 Score is 16, not 17. Total is 34.

Monica and Jonathan: Week 1 Score is 15, not 16. Total is 30.

Penn and Kym: Week 1 Score is 16, not 17. Week 2 Score is 17, not 18. Total is 33. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.177.110.132 (talk) 20:56, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Kristi's 2 perfect Jives
In her highest and lowest scoring dances can it be changed to Jive (twice), Cha-cha-cha Face-Off, & Freestyle (30) so if you look at the chart you can see she scored 2 perfect 30's on two different Jives? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.77.16.83 (talk) 22:48, 8 April 2013 (UTC)