Talk:The Amazing Race 36

Feedback from New Page Review process
I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Hello my friend! Good day to you. Thanks for creating the article, I have marked it as reviewed. Have a blessed day!

&maltese; SunDawn &maltese;   (contact)   03:55, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Leg 1 is not a Mega Leg?
Shouldn't the two legs in Mexico be considered separate legs, as this would be similar to the first leg of The Amazing Race 32, which is considered as separate leg from Leg 2? Additionally, this shouldn't be a Mega Leg as there aren't Pit Stops at midpoints typically in Mega Legs, such as in Leg 3 and 8 of The Amazing Race 34? Mcyossi26 (talk) 06:04, 14 March 2024 (UTC)


 * It doesn't sound like a Mega Leg to me. Bgsu98   (Talk)  11:28, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I wrote what Phil and CBS are calling it. We'll see if there is any clarification next week. Xoruz (talk) 13:05, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Leg 1 Hotel
The hotel was not mentioned during the episode at all. The SL is the beach in front. So at best both these lines should be grouped together. Thoughts? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 20:20, 14 March 2024 (UTC)


 * "Your first clue is on the car, which is parked out in the parking lot on the other side of the hotel." Xoruz (talk) 20:25, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Right, that is where the SL is located. I think listing the beach + hotel on one line would make a lot more sense here. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 20:27, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Compromise ? Xoruz (talk) 20:30, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I think that's good! Bgsu98   (Talk)  20:35, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes looks good! Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 23:55, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I am not necessarily disagreeing with you. I reverted it because it is consistent with how previous seasons are presented. I have made my feelings clear with regards to the inclusion of locations where the only "task" was getting a car, whether there's an envelope on the windshield or not. Bgsu98   (Talk)  20:25, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

In regards to the new "short" task descriptions
Is it important to have the descriptions of tasks shorter than they used to be? Maybe, maybe not, I don't know. What I DO know is that you still need to adequately describe the task so that readers who have NOT seen the show will understand what took place. For example...

"In Bicicleta, teams had to grind plastic bottles with a stationary bicycle until they filled a container in order to receive their next clue."

What is the uninformed reader going to think about this statement? How does a stationary bicycle (a device typically used for exercise) grind up plastic bottles? Do they put it in the spokes of the wheel or insert it into the bike's gears or something? No, not at all. This statement completely leaves out the fact that this is a specially designed apparatus that uses the model of a stationary bike but is also attached to a dedicated grinding device, for explicit use in the grinding up of plastic. Keeping the descriptions short is whatever, but don't truncate them so much that the actual description of the task becomes lacking. I know I could have just fixed this myself, but (A) I wanted to point this out as an example of poor form that should be avoided in the future, and (B) someone would just blindly revert me again because that's what always happens. TheNewLayoutReallySucks (talk) 21:55, 25 April 2024 (UTC)