Talk:The X Factor (British TV series) series 7/Archive 1

Don't call Cheryl "Tweedy"
I feel that both on the X Factor articles and on Cheryl's wikipedia page people are going to start saying Cheryl Tweedy instead of CHERYL COLE. Just because Simon Cowell introduced her as Cheryl Tweedy doesn't change a thing, plus he was joking when he said it. I see that people have sense to call her Cole on this article, so until she confirms that she's changed her name or not LEAVE IT AS IT IS. I'm posting this before this all starts. On the live shows if she is announced as Tweedy, her name will still be CHERYL COLE so leave it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.176.71.61 (talk) 21:03, 14 July 2010 (UTC)


 * There is no need to ask people to stop doing something that they haven't started doing, and especially no need to shout about something that hasn't happened, you seem pretty annoyed for no reason. Nobody has been changing the X Factor pages, but there is a long discussion at Talk:Cheryl Cole. Anemone  Projectors  21:56, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I just wanted to get the message across so that people wouldn't keep alternating and changing Cole to Tweedy to Cole back and forth, and glad to know nobody has changed it, I just wanted to say in advance. My sincere apologies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.176.71.61 (talk) 15:42, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Change to Format
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/tv/x_factor/3068559/Simon-Cowell-shakes-up-X-Factor-format-as-theres-so-much-talent.html

Not the most reliable source—granted. However:


 * Change to category age boundaries
 * That there's rumoured to be 16 acts that make it to the live shows (I've heard of this before – from what I understand – to avoid there being categories overly stronger than the others, there's likely to be one act from each category assigned to each judge... meaning, each judge will get a Boy, a Girl, an Over, and a Group. Thus, this avoids the age-old problem of getting lumped with the Groups, or whichever category proves to be the weakest that year.
 * That Cole and Minogue will get 8 acts to choose from at their judges' houses stage... as they weren't present for the boot camp round (and in Minogue's case, the auditions as well). Cowell and Walsh will get the standard 6 acts to choose from as they were present throughout.

Thanks – Wiki edit Jonny (talk) 08:53, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * It's been confirmed by Digital Spy as well. But all we know for sure is the age boundaries have changed and there will be 8 acts for each judge in judge's homes. Your second and third points are not mentioned in either source (even though some are rumours that have been going around for months and months). Anemone  Projectors  11:02, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Autotune?
Do you think we should add some information that X Factor is now using AutoTune? Slrkn54 (talk) 22:39, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * If there's a reliabe source for it. I imagine there will be complaints. Anemone  Projectors  22:40, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I have at least 3 sources!   Go on  the Dubs! (credits to ANEMONEPROJECTORS for the idea!)   —Preceding undated comment added 23:15, 21 August 2010 (UTC).
 * Reliable ones? The only sources I can see are internet forums, which are not considered reliable. Anemone  Projectors  23:21, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Are videos enough of a reliable source? Go on the Dubs! itv 1 lover —Preceding undated comment added 23:28, 21 August 2010 (UTC).
 * YouTube videos of someone talking about The X Factor (I saw one earlier) or videos of the performances? Or something else? Anemone  Projectors  23:41, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It was reported by the Daily Mail today so I added it in. Anemone  Projectors  13:00, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

2010 Applicants?
Anyone found anything about the number of applicants this year? It's normally central to the show that 'x-thousand people applied!', although I can't find any mentions of it this time round. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.223.135.231 (talk) 12:23, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
 * As far as I know it hasn't been mentioned. Anemone  Projectors  13:00, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Ratings
Official ratings are for ITV1, but overnights are for ITV1 and ITV1HD combined (Digital Spy combined them, but The Sun didn't). For consistency, should we not make it all ITV1 only? Anemone Projectors  11:32, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes we should use ITV-only ratings and it should be consistant. (i'm even starting to question the requirements for all these different ratings but perhaps that's a discussion for later?) --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  13:02, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it's good to include the HD ratings in the prose as it's viewers who would have watched ITV if HD didn't exist. I already changed the table so that it's ITV-only ratings. But maybe we could make the prose less detailed by removing the audience share figures. By the way, I'm planning to nominate the article for GA when the series is over. Anemone  Projectors  16:17, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree. It duplicates the information already in the table. I would oly include the opening audience share (i.e. for the first show) for the series peak and for the season finale. Also note that in terms of GA if you were going to include tables like the finalists and categories or results summary from The X Factor (UK series 6) note that the article would fail on the WP:Manual of Style for colours, wikitables and most crucially accessibility. If you want any help with the GA I will be glad to oblige. I've been learning a little bit about accessbility so I could try and help you with that though its not going to be easy to present all of that information in an appropriate way. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  16:33, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Are you saying the tables shouldn't be included? Even without the colours, I would want to keep them in. GA is down to a single reviewer, I think it would only affect the article at FA. There are two Big Brother GAs (Big Brother 2009 (UK) and Big Brother 11 (U.S.)) that have a "nominations table" very similar to the "results summary" we use here. Anemone  Projectors  18:21, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No sorry I didn't mean that. What I meant was that the tables can be kept but they need to be made accessible. Both of those articles were passed just before the changes came into play. The manual of style has been updated since and it is accepted that all new FAs and GAs must adhere to the new accessibility guidelines. Following MOS is a GA requirement. Like I said the guidelines are harsh but I can help you follow them. As this discussion demonstrates I've had a harsh tussle with those enforcing the new MOS when I nominated Kelly Rowland discography for FL. Its mainly little things like removing small formatting etc. I've created this essay based on my experience with accessibility purely as a point of reference. Either way I have the page on my watchlist so I will keep an eye out for vandalism (i know these are big targets for vandals). And either way I will help with the GA if required. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  19:30, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I would really appreciate your help, especially with the accessibility stuff. I didn't realise it was more than just the "scope=row/col" thing. The X Factor (UK series 6) was tagged for not being accessible for colourblind users, so I removed some of the colours from the results summary table. If you don't mind and if it's not too much trouble, would you be able to make edits to make the tables there accessible so I know what needs to be done? Anemone  Projectors  19:38, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Yup no problem. My main issue/the main clash with the accessibility is the Results summary table. Aside from colour, it has issues with the size of the text etc. I will look into it. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  20:26, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Here's an example I've done for the 'Finalists and categories' Table (see User:Lil-unique1/Sandbox/X Factor) though I question the need for this table with the results summary one already in existance. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  20:52, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That example looks fine but as the series is ongoing, we add the colour to show who has been eliminated. But it shouldn't be an issue as I won't be going for GA until after the series has ended and the article is completed. Normally we put the finalists' biographies in that section, below the table, and use the table to link to each section, but if a list is made then that won't happen. The table basically shows who is in what category, and I don't think the results table can do that (people have used colour to do it before but I was always against that as we already knew from the table who was in what category – plus more colour = more problems). There is some small text in the results table, I don't see the problem with making it standard sized – as long as it all fits in. The colours for the bottom two and eliminated rows in the bottom section can probably go as well, right? Is it the fact that there is too much colour or it might be hard to read certain ones? Anemone  Projectors  21:22, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

You've basically hit the nail on the head...
 * 1) Color - too much and too bright makes it hard to read. The choice of colours need to be checked against guidelines for suitable colors for the colour blind (WP:COLORS) and should try to limit the use because according to WP:ACCESS colors mean nothing when using screen reading.
 * 2) Small text - makes it difficult to read for users hard of sight.
 * 3) If you go to my example in my sandbox and click edit you'll see that the code for the table is slightly different to the existing one. One of the other main reasons for making the changes is to simplify the table so that it is easier for others to edit... along the lines of less is more.

In the example I did I was trying to highlight that the 'finalists and categories' doesn't need to have all red cells. Two colored cells (one for the winner and one for the runner-up) suffice. Its then obvious that the others failed/were eliminated. I hope that makes sense? If it doesn't please ask... it's taken me absolutely ages to understand myself. Sorry for lumbering all this on you. If its any consolation it will make achieving GA status more impressive (you can champion the article as one which is highly accessible and follows MoS to the tee) and will make FA status easier to achieve if you decide to eventually go for it. Either way you'll be following the most up-to-date MoS. But whatever you do don't ask about discographies LOL --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  22:10, 6 September 2010 (UTC)


 * So remove all unnecessary colours, and change other colours. Make all text the same size. I've just implimented your example into the series 6 article, hope you don't mind :-) Yes, it is obvious that everyone who isn't coloured was eliminated. I removed the green "safe" colour from the results table for the same reason. The only other question I have is... how do you know which colours are best to use? Anemone  Projectors  22:26, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't mind at all. Working out colors to use isn't always obvious, the existing page for series six looks something like this or in severe cases like this for those who are color blind. One way to do it is to use this website to generate a color scheme. Select a color on the color wheel (they're all user friendly) then select the type (e.g. triad, contrast etc.) and it comes up with four suitable colors etc. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  22:34, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I saw the colour scheme site before but I didn't understand it then and I don't now. But it seems to me that the biggest colour problem is the blue highlight for the "bottom two" acts in the weekly summary tables. Anemone  Projectors  23:37, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The color scheme site is simple. The big wheel on the left is an arc of colors (e.g. color wheel) yup? Well the options at the top allow you to calibrate how the colors will match e.g. they will contrast, compliment etc. Select a color you really want to use on the wheel by clicking it. Then select the scheme e.g. mono. Then notice how the four boxes become different colors? If you hover over them with your mouse it shows you the HTML colour code used to generate that color. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  23:55, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I got that but they're all really nasty looking colours that I wouldn't dream of using. Anemone  Projectors  00:06, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Haha its ok. Project assessibility has already established that 100% perfection is impossible. But above 50% is a step in the right direction. I'm going to work on the results summary table in the next couple of days. if I cant achieve a more accessible style maybe i can tweak the code to make it more user friendly at least. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  20:04, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, can you do something about that horrible black bar as well? lol Anemone  Projectors  20:08, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * HMMM that might be more difficult. Would you prefer to see it removed? or does the table need some sort of 'break'? --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  20:41, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Well I never thought the tables needed any kind of break before but all the tables have them now, even in Big Brother. But it's just ugly being so thick and black. Anemone  Projectors  20:45, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * OK I will look into its removal/replacement because it certainly isnt good in terms of the changes above that we've been discussing. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  20:55, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Ablisa
Should something be mentioned about Ablisa's audition, apparently it caused some controversy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.31.120 (talk • contribs)


 * If there were complaints I would mention that. It seems the fact that Simon Cowell said Storm was a stupid name caused more controversy. Anemone  Projectors  13:17, 7 September 2010 (UTC)


 * True but one of the girls punched the other in the face and they both had constant bad attitude, surely people must've complained —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.31.120 (talk) 22:26, 8 September 2010 (UTC)


 * The only news stories I've seen about it were saying that the event happened (along with the rest of the events of last weekend's episode). Anemone  Projectors  22:45, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Series
I think it should be added in that this series is the last series. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.151.199.124 (talk) 15:00, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * But it isn't. That's just a rumour. Simon Cowell might delay next year it but it won't be the last series. Anemone  Projectors  16:36, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Twitter and youtube.
In response to Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents, with the hope that this will reduce drama.

Unless I am mistaken the youtube video is official from ITV, I suspect that it is the same that is availiable at. But I am unable to verify this myself since this is not broadcasted to my country, so I get "this video is unavailable at your location." If it is then source the vide directly to ITV, rather than to youtube. Provided that the youtube is not a copyvio we can provide the youtube link as a convenience.

A tweet of "Airport!!!!" is clearly insufficient as a source, since it requires significant interpretation which counts as original research. Even if this was not the case self published sources, which twitter is, can not be used for statements that are self serving or refering to third parties. Since the statement we are trying to source is that Nicolo has gotten selected to the live part of the show the last is certainly a case, and most would also consider the statement to be self serving.

In addition to the above we also need to consider the issue of due weight if we are to write a detailed exposition of a single participant. See WP:UNDUE. IMHO until we can cover most participants we should not cover anyone of them. Taemyr (talk) 18:02, 19 September 2010 (UTC)


 * In 100% agreement with you there. Normally they don't let us know who the successful contestants are until Judges' Houses is broadcast, and all contestants are probably sworn to secrecy. There may even be a media embargo. We will just list the names of those who make it to that round, and expand the information for the contestants who actually make it to the live shows. Anemone  Projectors  18:43, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * This is what I was trying to explain to the user that was trying to add the information. They took one source saying Nicolo auditioned in London, added it to the source confirming he sang "A Song for You" and then added a twitter source with the mention of "Airport", taking it to mean that "Nicolo hinted on his facebook that he had made it through to the live rounds".--  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  18:48, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Chloe Heald
Just trying to head this off before it gets started, but should we mention the Chloe Heald/Victoria/Mafia thing? TheRetroGuy (talk) 20:33, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe, what sort of mention would it be? Anemone  Projectors  20:40, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I dont think we should mention it because Chloe might not even make it any further in the competition. If we start adding stories like this, how many more should we add? --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  20:57, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That's true, but I was also thinking maybe we could make mention of some of the more controversial auditions, just minor mentions but put together something like "a number of auditions were also controversial, such as...". But I don't think Chloe's audition was controversial, the controversy surrounds her personal life and isn't really anything to do with The X Factor. Anemone  Projectors  21:44, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That's kind of the point I'm trying to make. She could have done anything e.g. gone on Britain's Got Talent and her private life could have become out. But perhaps some of the reports of her boozy behaviour and lack of punctuality at bootcamp? --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  21:49, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Could include that but was she the only one? Anemone  Projectors  21:51, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No she wasn't that's why I think collectively her behaviour could be mentioned with the other bootcamp issues. However I'm not convinced what the original editor of this post was clear about what they wanted to mention of Chloe. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  21:58, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Then yes I agree it could be added as part of other bootcamp issues. But not the prostitution thing. Anemone  Projectors  22:23, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I was thinking that if she gets through to the next stage then some of the controversy surrounding her choice of career might need to be mentioned. I got the impression from something I read earlier in the week that if selected, she then could either face pressure to leave, or even be asked to drop out, because of the controversy surrounding her being a prostitute. If that happens then it would be worthy of a mention, though we would have to be careful how it was worded because we don't want the article to sound sensationalist. Of course, it's possible she won't get through Bootcamp, in which case there's no reason to mention it, unless we want to include stuff about her being late, etc. But really, as I said yesterday, I'm trying to head off a situation where people just add miscellaneous information about it by opening a discussion in which we can decide what should and shouldn't be added, as well as when, where, how and if to add it. TheRetroGuy (talk) 08:49, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Template
I think we should use a template similar to the one on I'm a celebrity...get me out of here and Big Brother to show the contestans in the live shows and which week they were eliminated in. This is just a suggestion and if people like this idea I would be happy to add and make the template.Flamingjoe (talk) 22:45, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you mean a table? We already do that. It'll be added once the final 12 are announced. Anemone  Projectors  22:13, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No the template that goes to the top right of the page and shows which week they were eliminated in and who was the winner and runner up. It's on the top right handside of I'm a Celebrity…Get Me out of Here! (UK series 9) have a look at it and tell me what you think. Flamingjoe (talk) 10:25, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No, because we use an existing infobox. That informaion isn't needed in the infobox because it will be in a table in the main article. The existing infobox gives a lot more information, such as dates, judges etc. Anemone  Projectors  13:20, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Auditions table
Is the table necessary now as it is only repeating information given in prose? It might be a neat way to arrange it but repetition is quite bad and prose is generally preferred. Anemone Projectors  23:27, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Any objections? I really want to remove it. Anemone  Projectors  16:26, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * No objections = removed. Anemone  Projectors  20:33, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Contestants' leak...
Is the mention of Simon being disappointed by the leak notable? here --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  22:14, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The leak might be, but Simon's reaction? Possibly, depends how it's mentioned. But if it's added I'd prefer to see the original Daily Mirror source used. Anemone  Projectors  22:29, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll see if the Daily Mirror have posted it online... though I'm determined NOT to look at the leaked list lol! --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  22:30, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I was just adding to my comment when I got an edit conflict... was going to say The "...Daily Mirror and The Sun sources used (but could we refrain for actually adding the final 12 until broadcast?)." Anemone  Projectors  22:43, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Yup... that makes perfect sense. It could at the end of the day be a little wrong. Like reports of Kelly Rowland appearing on the X Factor and in fact she appeared on the Australian X Factor. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  22:51, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Well I looked at the final 32 spoilers assuming it to be incorrect and actually some of it was. By the way do we know who else is guest judging yet? Anemone  Projectors  23:43, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Cheryl is with will.i.am, Simon with Sinitta, Louis with Sharon Osborne and Danii is with Natalie Imbruglia. (I've read from various online sources). I'm sure digi spy posted it... --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  16:56, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I can't find a single source that lists them all, in fact I can't find one for Imbruglia. I will update what I can now but I guess once judges' houses has aired we will get a single source for all assistants and locations. Anemone  Projectors  17:21, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

P.S.  Anemone  Projectors  21:48, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know where I read it but it turned out right in the end lol. I'm glad we were cautious bout the leak stuff now. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  22:05, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I just looked at the so-called leak (without looking at the names!) and it looks more like the magazine who published it were only including names of 12 of the contestants appearing at bootcamp rather than the actual final 12. By the way your last message is confusing - what turned out right in the end? Anemone  Projectors  12:43, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The guest judges for the judges house stage of competition. Nevermind... it aired yesterday anyway. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  16:26, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh you weren't replying to what it looked like you were replying to. I still haven't found a source that specifies all the assistant judges and locations. I guess it doesn't matter, I just wanted to make it a bit neater. Anemone  Projectors  17:27, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Over-28s: Does it include or exclude the 28 years old?
What does Over-28 exactly mean. As far as I understand, 28 should be with the Boys and Girls respectively and only 29 and over in the Over-28s. A confirmation of this is this UKPA Press Association link that clearly says 29: The news reportt says: "But the minimum age for the "overs" group this year is 29, rather than the previous 26", whereas our introduction says "Boys (male soloists aged 16 to 27), Girls (female soloists aged 16 to 27), Over-28s (soloists aged 28 and over)". This matter needs to be settled. 28 is within Over-28s? Or within Boys and Girls werldwayd (talk) 03:35, 4 October 2010 (UTC) werldwayd (talk) 05:12, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Marlon McKenzie is 28, so yes it should be changed. Anemone  Projectors  10:24, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * By the way, this wasn't assumed. Check the existing reference from The Sun: "It means singers aged 25 to 27 have been put in the solo girls or boys categories normally reserved for contestants aged 16 to 24." I will replace this source. Anemone  Projectors  11:27, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

criticism
Today on the Alan Titchmarsh Show, Sinitta and Konnie Huq confirmed that all contestants had access to a team of councillors from bootcamp right through till the final and that the media had picked up the story of cher being ill and 'exagerated' the extent of her mental health. Can we source this directly from show?

Also should we not state exactly when the two new groups were formed? And should the "Katie Vogal/Waisel/Lola Fotaine" controversy be mentioned in addition to the negative reception that Cheryl's decision not to include "Gammu" not be included too? --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  17:56, 4 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh, I just added the Cher stuff to the article. It has actual quotes from actual charities, one who has shown concern, and two who have given support. I saw some of the show but not all of it, so I didn't see that part. But if there's anything that need to be added or changed, you can cite episode. We've said when the new groups were formed in the bootcamp/judges' houses section, so anyone reading the article will see that, but if you want it mentioned in the criticism section then a brief mention is fine. The Katie Waissel stuff is also relevant if you have a source for it. Is it about the fact she already had a record deal that The X Factor helped her get out of, or the fact she keeps forgetting her words whereas Gamu Nhengu is always perfect? Or both? Anemone  Projectors  18:31, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm... I think i'll use cite episode to clarify that its a team of professions to work with the contestants.
 * The Katie Waissel stuff has attracted some attention so I think the controversy surrounding both her judges' houses performance and her already having a contract that X-Factor got her out of are both relevant... I'm going to look for relevant media sources.
 * There does appear to be some public backlash that both Cher and Katie got through despite Gamu's near perfect performances. (cheryl defended her decision to put Cher through, with the Daily Mail). --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  20:16, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow, we definitely have to add something about Gamu, apparently people are (stupidly) complaining to Ofcom! Then there are reports that Cheryl was asked not to pick Gamu because of her visa! But that's been rubbished I think. It's all gone mad. What's true and what isn't? Anemone  Projectors  10:48, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Results Summary
Can I ask why the colour coding for the mentors has been dropped? That has always been one of my favourite aspects of the results summary since it not only shows the progress of the acts, but the progress of the mentors. Plus it made the tables look great. No it's not entirely essential, but it was a nice touch I have always enjoyed. Now the table just looks so dull and boring. It's only a small aspect, which no one is going to make a fuss over it being there. Well, maybe apart from the person who took it upon themselves to remove something that is widely enjoyed by many. Just saying, I think it should remain, I see no reason why it shouldn't. Raider655 (talk) 22:35, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It was dropped last year (after one year since the tables weren't added until series 5). a) it's not necessary as it repeats information and b) it's not very.... nice to look at. Anemone  Projectors  22:46, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Does it matter if it repeats stuff? If that's the case then a lot of content that's already on wikipedia should be removed. I have to disagree with it being not nice to look at. Well, to an extent, I thought the pastel colours were perfect, not a fan of the newer, brighter colours that replaced them. I just don't see any huge issue with them being there. If you don't like them, fair enough, I respect your opinion, but there are people who do and getting rid of them is a bit disrespectful of their opinions. Isn't there any kind of compromise? Raider655 (talk) 22:53, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I should point out that a lot of changes to the layout of the tables will be made this year because I am planning to get the article to Good Article status at the end of the series, so the fewer colours used, the better. Also, if you want to know how a particular judge is doing with their acts, surely the "Finalists" table will be of more use - eliminated acts will be coloured in each week. I don't see what additional purpose colour coding the contestants has, when the information is already better presented in the table above. Anemone  Projectors  23:08, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * And as someone monitoring this page I have to say that colours are not an approved method for conveying information for wikipedia. Per WP:Access, users who have visual impairment cannot always translate information presented in colour and screen reading software certainly cannot interpret the use of colour. What looks pretty to us able-sighted users is impractical for those who have damaged/impaired sight. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  23:34, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Bootcamp
Is it worth mentioning that all the boys sang "Man in the Mirror", the girls sang "If I Were a Boy", the overs sang "Poker Face" and the groups sang "Nothing's Gonna Stop Us Now" on the first day of bootcamp? I also haven't mentioned that the first thing they did at bootcamp was vocal coaching. On Xtra Factor, Konnie Huq said there were 67 girls at bootcamp but do we know the other numbers? Anemone Projectors  13:38, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I love it when people reply before adding the info I suggested :-) Anemone  Projectors  10:58, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Should we add that the contestants spend a week at bootcamp and sing 2 songs? --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1  &#124;  talk2me  01:01, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * That refers to judges' houses, rather than bootcamp. But may be worth mentioning. We already knew that though from previous years, well, the two songs thing anyway. Anemone  Projectors  01:06, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Wildcards
Do we believe this report? Personally, I'm a bit sceptical and will wait for something more official. Anemone Projectors  01:50, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I think we should add the wildcards into the Finalists, they are Paije Richardson for the boys, Diva Fever for the groups, Treyc Cohen for the girls and Wagner for the Over 28s. Flamingjoe (talk), 18:54, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Not until a) it's confirmed by a reliable source (i.e. not rumours and speculation) and b) the full details of the twist are known. Anemone  Projectors  18:17, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

One Direction or 1 Direction
The X Factor Group formation is being referred to in media as "1 Direction" far more prominently than as "One Direction", whereas we have stayed with latter. Shouldn't we change to 1 Direction? werldwayd (talk) 05:12, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * One Direction, because that's how it was spelt on screen. Anemone  Projectors  10:22, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Though I note on the X Factor website it's 1 Direction (and FYD not F.Y.D.). I think we should leave it as it has been on screen but wait for the live shows and see how it is spelt on screen then. (It's also sometimes reported as "1Direction" without the space) Anemone  Projectors  11:22, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

We will stay with One Direction as the first live show clearly identified them as such. What the papers use is not releavnt any longer. They are One Direction for our purposes werldwayd (talk) 03:11, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Zain Malik or Zayn Malik
For One Direction Pakistani origin member, many media sources use Zayn Malik and a few others Zain Malik. Which one should we use? werldwayd (talk) 07:14, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I checked the birth register and there were no Zayn Maliks born at the time when Malik would have been born so it must be Zain. Anemone  Projectors  10:32, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

From his X Factor bootcamp audition he uses Zain Malik. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  17:13, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm on Twitter he uses Zayn (and it is really him). Anemone  Projectors  21:11, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe it's not really him on Twitter. I also note that on Xtra Factor, Za(y|i)n was handed a compact (allegedly his own) with the name 'Zain' on it. Anemone  Projectors  01:09, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Days and times
Since the show aired on mostly saturdays and now sundsys too, there should be mentioning of the times it aired(at least noted in the ratings chart for the respectable season) its starts 7:00, 7:15 even later and as the show progress the time are different two something 2 hours, 90 min. 60 min. and this week 2 hours 30 min.--Cooly123 17:53, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that's really necessary to do. Other shows don't say what time they're on. Anemone  Projectors  18:37, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Extra week
Was an extra week mentioned? I recall Dermot saying "next 10 weeks" but would have thought this week was included in that. Anemone Projectors  21:16, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Wagner
Shouldn't 'Wagner Fiuzha-Carrilho' be changed to just 'Wagner' as that is his name on X Factor. And shouldn't Nicolò Festa not have an accent on the 'o' also like on X Factor? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.23.94.173 (talk) 21:17, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Well that is the correct spelling of Nicolò's name. They might not realise they can put an accent on it, but I saw the accent somewhere during the audition process. As for Wagner... maybe. Anemone  Projectors  21:22, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks for responding. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.23.94.173 (talk) 22:00, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I notice that Wagner's name is being reported as Wagner Carrilho, without the Fiuzha- bit. Though that is his real name. Anemone  Projectors  22:21, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * His digital download is released under the name Wagner, whereas everyone else has their full name. Anemone  Projectors  23:51, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Double elimination
The double elimination doesn't necessarily mean there will be a final showdown for the bottom three - it may be as it was in series 3 when there was a double, with the person with the fewest votes being elinated, and the next two performing in the final showdown. Therefore, the "bottom three details" part of the performance table would be wrong, and even caling it "bottom two details" would be wrong. Anemone Projectors  01:34, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, I don't really want to create another section here! but it occurs to me we need a source that confirms the songs performed by the wildcards as well as the original 12. Anemone  Projectors  01:37, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Dub be good to me
Cher's first week song wasn't a version of Just be good to green. it was a version of dub be good to me by Beats International. i can't change it because its semi locked —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.141.130.46 (talk) 10:25, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

The number 1 single sung by Cher Lloyd was Dub Be Good To Me by Beats International. The Just Be Good To Green version never reached Number 1. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Harkinson (talk • contribs) 11:41, 10 October 2010 (UTC)


 * No, it was the original "Just Be Good to Me" by The SOS Band. Anemone  Projectors  11:47, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * A version of which, by Karmah, did reach #1 in Poland. So that counts. It certainly wasn't "Dub Be Good to Me" because she didn't sing the lyrics of that one. Anemone  Projectors  11:50, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * According to the official X Factor site she sung "Just Be Good To Me" by Beats International.

http://xfactor.itv.com/2010/music/viewer/read_revealed-this-weeks-songs_item_100820.htm Maybe call the artist "The SOS Band/Beats International"?
 * Well, going by last year, they often put the best known artist rather than the original, and they've put "Just Be Good to Me" instead of "Dub Be Good to Me" which was the name of Beats International's version. If Cher sang "Dub Be Good to Me" it would have sounded like this. Anemone  Projectors  13:22, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Besides, "Just Be Good to Me", "Dub Be Good to Me" and "Just Be Good to Green" are all essentially the same song. Anemone  Projectors  13:24, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Treyc 'Cojen'
In the Wildcard section Treyc Cohen is spelt Treyc 'Cojen'. Needs correcting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.23.94.173 (talk) 11:31, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The controversy was unsourced anyway so I've removed it. Anemone  Projectors  11:47, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

OK. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.23.94.173 (talk) 14:47, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

On the final showdown
Given that there are 16 acts and only 10 weeks in the finals, would it be a good idea to assume that there will both be times where there will be "bottom threes" and "bottom twos" in the show? If that is the case, I would suggest that the words "Bottom Two" aren't necessary in the cell in the results table which states that the result is based on public votes alone. After all, there will be final showdowns regardless in those situations. Just my opinion.-- Alasdair 20:27, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree and have removed it. Anemone  Projectors  20:33, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Nicolo's colour in the results table
Normally the pink colour signifies there was no final showdown, used in the later weeks, and it's kind of unclear that Nicolo was in the bottom three. Should we introduce a new colour especially? Anemone Projectors  21:48, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Why not just change the cell colour to the Bottom three? --MSalmon (talk) 21:53, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Could do, but that would indicate that he performed in the showdown. Anemone  Projectors  22:05, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I know only just realised that, mabye add Bottom three underneath 16th? --MSalmon (talk) 22:07, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * That'll only cause the same problem when we change "safe", "bottom two" and "bottom three" for the actual positions and percentages. I think the only solution is another colour. Anemone  Projectors  22:14, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok --MSalmon (talk) 22:15, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I've tried a lavendar colour. Thoughts? Anemone  Projectors  22:21, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * If you look at Series 3 when there was a double elimination in Week 3 it shows all 3 acts in blue with the first eliminee showing the postition and the other two saying Bottom 3 (there was no colour key though)--MSalmon (talk) 22:23, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah I looked there for inspiration but back then we didn't know the percentages so there was no need really for the colour key, because just saying "bottom three" was fine. Maybe what we need to do is say both "safe" or "bottom two" or "bottom three" as well as the positions and percentages... Anemone  Projectors  22:34, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Something like this? Obviously for now we would only say "Safe", "Bottom three" and "Bottom three//16th" Anemone  Projectors  22:45, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I still prefer the extra colour to say he didn't sing in the final showdown though. Anemone  Projectors  22:47, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

I think there are no need for extra colour. We can say "Eliminated without showdown" in case of Nicolo and "Eliminated after showdown" in case of F.Y.D. ... Just a thought.... werldwayd (talk) 03:30, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I prefer Nicolò having a more distinct bottom 3 color. Like Anemone said, it's essential to distinguish just by glancing at the chart that he was not a sing-off participant. Also "before/after showdown" is too much clutter for the already stretched-out chart.--Cinemaniac86Dane_Cook_Hater_Extraordinaire 10:06, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

iTunes
Tonight's performances are already available to pre-order on iTunes - is there some sort of news source mentioning this? Anemone Projectors  12:30, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * ITV's website confirms that each week you can pre-order the performance before it happens. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  22:37, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Regarding "However, the songs will not be eligible to chart to protect the integrity of the contest" - on iTunes itself it says "To protect the integrity of the X Factor competition, sales information in relation to the live performances from the current season of X Factor will not be reflected in any published sales charts." I don't know how this can be cited. Anemone  Projectors  00:56, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * This now has a news source. Anemone  Projectors  18:27, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

F,Y.D came 15th
I don't understand why this keeps being reverted. Nicolo came 16th, and F.Y.D were voted off in 15th position. Why is this being reverted? Angelic-alyssa (talk) 19:12, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Because they didn't necessarily came 15th in the pulic vote so we leave it as Bottom 2/3 until the voting percentages are revealed --MSalmon (talk) 18:14, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Exactly. They may have come 15th in the competition but we use the table to signify where people came in the public vote that week, which isn't revealed until the end of the series, or if there is deadlock or an elimination such as Nicolo's. Anemone  Projectors  18:29, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Nicolo in the first week results
I think a note of some sort is required. Currently it says FYD and Katie Waisal bottom three, Nicolo Fest eliminated. It should perhaps be explained that as the contestant with the lowest number of votes he was instantly eliminated from the show without performing. I know there is a bottom three in the sense that 3 contestants were in danger but its not explicitly clear for those who might not have watched that episode. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  11:39, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I would add this where it says "two acts were eliminated from the series' first results show". Although I did mention it under "Live shows" though I don't think I wrote it very well. Anemone  Projectors  11:48, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Spoiler
Colours? You don't need to make it so obvious who was eliminated, at least not yet. It should be possible to read the page quickly to find the encyclopedic information you need without getting the latest news, pardon me, thrown in the face. I really admire the work you all are doing but wouldn't it be fair to say that part of it would be better off at Wikinews, for the moment? You're not by any chance assuming everybody knows the result already? We're not all i the UK. I'm not saying the information doesn't belong on the page but for now, please tone it down or keep it in the news section. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.138.202.60 (talk) 09:28, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * See WP:SPOILER. The episode has been broadcast, so the information is added. This is the case with all TV shows that have been broadcast in their country of origin. It's not Wikipedia's fault you haven't seen it. Anemone  Projectors  10:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sweet. Guideline + Common sense + Exception for headings which imply the presence of spoilers = (to me) not using the encyklopedia for newsflashes or blogging. The 'common sense' part would include writing with a global perspective (policy) and taking into consideration the implications of timezones (ps it's neither our fault...). You could at least tone it down, even though it requires an extra effort to make it prettier when the finals are over. 95.209.42.34 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:26, 18 October 2010 (UTC).
 * There's no need for a global perspective because it's a UK show and it hardly affects the rest of the world. I wouldn't ask editors of American Idol, for example, to not put the results on Wikipedia because the episodes are broadcast in the UK two days later... if you don't want to know the results, I suggest you don't read the article. Same as if you hadn't seen, for example, the final season of Lost and didn't want to spoil the plot, you would avoid visiting those articles. Anemone  Projectors  14:37, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Live shows
The other thing I was going to ask was about the live shows section where the general format of the shows is explained - how can we reference this? Anemone Projectors  17:44, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure where the guideline (or what the guideline) is but I know that for films and music videos you could state what happens (a synopsis) without a reference. I believe that the same could be done with X-Factor. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  18:28, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, MOS:TV says "Plot summaries do not normally require citations; the television show itself is the source, as the accuracy of the plot description can be verified by watching the episode in question." So here, the series is the source. Anemone  Projectors  19:09, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Tonight's result
Should it be "3 of 3" or "3 of 4"? Anemone Projectors  20:04, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I follow? --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  22:06, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It should be 3 of 3 because Simon would not have voted anyway --MSalmon (talk) 22:13, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Simon didn't need to vote because the first three votes were for Diva Fever. If it had been 2-1 instead of 3-0 at that point, he would have needed to vote. But he didn't vote and didn't say who he would have voted for. Just wondered if it should be 3 of 3 or 3 of 4 to eliminate. I guess 3 of 4 doesn't make sense since Simon didn't actually vote. Anemone  Projectors  22:23, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes that makes sense. Simon said he doens't need to make the decision so didn't express his opinion. However it needs to be explained that because the other three judges had already voted for Diva Fever that is the reason why Simon didnt vote. (i dont know if that makes sense?) --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  22:31, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I already put "as Walsh, Minogue and Cole all voted for Diva Fever, Cowell was not required to vote"... sound good? Anemone  Projectors  22:48, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yup that's fine. It shows that only three votes were cast and all three were for DF... --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  22:52, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Just a little nitpick
In the elimination table, the Bottom 2 cell in Week 2 should read "Belle Amie" then "Diva Fever", so it's in alphabetical order. Please change it to satisfy my OCD? Thanks. 86.170.166.113 (talk) 18:33, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing it out, I hadn't noticed, but will make sure I double check in future. Anemone  Projectors  19:34, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Tables and accessibility
Here's where I need the expertise of Lil-unique1.

Would this be correct for the accessible layout of the weekly performance tables?

Anemone Projectors  20:58, 4 October 2010 (UTC)


 * The results summary table was added, I changed it for one I've been working on in my userspace. Does it need any tweaks for accessibility? Anemone  Projectors  23:31, 4 October 2010 (UTC)


 * By the way I've been playing about in my sandbox to see different examples of what might happen. Rebecca Ferguson and Aiden Grimshaw have very long names that don't fit on a single line... Anemone  Projectors  23:56, 4 October 2010 (UTC)


 * OK I've had a look and an experiment with this table. It should be fine. Please try and avoid using insert text here tags as this obstructs the accessibility of the table. Im also going to have to input sort so that the table sorts properly (the Song (original artists) column will throw it off). Until we have a completed table I suggest NOT using sortable... we can add this later. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  20:45, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Quick question why is the first row coloured? --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  20:45, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The first row is coloured because it's an example of the "bottom two" colour we use. Does the table need to be sortable? It hasn't been in previous years and I'm not sure I see the point of making it sortable. Anemone  Projectors  21:26, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Fair play. Stick with the table non-sortable and I'll double check with the guidance for when sortable is useful. Like you said there's a good argument that it isn't required. But its usefulness can't be overlooked thats why we new work backwards automatically assuming the use of sortable and then removing when appropriate rather than automatically using wikitable then adding sortable afters. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  21:31, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I've just made a few changes that I was working on and got rid of the sortable, made the first column "center" - that ok? :-) Anemone  Projectors  21:49, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * In the interest of WP:Deviations and editing standards it would be better to centre the entire table by typing  after wikitable and then removing all instances of   --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1  &#124;  talk2me  21:55, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I tried it - I had it there but commented out (removed in my last edit). It looks really stupid that way. Anemone  Projectors  22:31, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, having filled it out and previewed it, it's not so bad all centred. I'd prefer it not to be, but if it has to be... Anemone  Projectors  22:48, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Okies the code for wikitable has been updated. Now when you type  for rows, it automatically left-aligns the column. The most significant piece of information needs to go in the first column for that reason. Therefore the artist comes before the date, the act before the order etc. I've updated the tables already just by simplifying the code. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  12:35, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Anemone  Projectors  13:54, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * You should keep the way we used last year, its more easy, and its more organized, you dont put the ORIGINAL ARTIST and thats really important! i made it again! PLEASE CONSIDER THIS

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.16.94.71 (talk)


 * Sorry but we have to follow the new WP:ACCESS guidelines, so at some point I will be changing the past series tables to follow the format of this series. This means the first columns has to be a column header, making it bold the same as the row headers. And it has to be the name of the act, not the number. We agreed not to include the original artist as this is not that important and you can look at the article to find out - see the discussion below. We shouldn't be using small text anywhere, because of WP:ACCESS, and there's no need for using bold to highlight the word "eliminated". Also you got the colours wrong. Sorry but we won't be changing it back.  Anemone  Projectors  11:31, 22 October 2010 (UTC)


 * It's interesting how someone who thinks listing the original artist is really important gets so many of them wrong. At a quick glance, I count four on those tables that are not the original artist. Clicking on the wikilinks for each song can verify who was the original artist, which is why it is superfluous in the table. 142 and 99 (talk) 13:22, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Diva Fever's October 16th performance
On October 16th Diva Fever performed "Gotta Go Home" by Boney M. The current song called "Barbara Streisand" by Duck Sauce is a sample of a portion of that song that does not contain any sung lyrics, but adds a spoken voice saying "Barbara Streisand". Diva Fever did say "Barbara Streisand" once after singing the first verse of "Gotta Go Home", but then they continued singing "Gotta Go Home". In fact, It's not possible to sing the song "Barabara Streisand" since it contains no sung words (although the X Factor backing vocalists did provide the lyricless "Woo Hoo" part that is in "Gotta Go Home" and sampled in "Barbara Streisand).

That's all well and good, but what about sources, you say? I'm glad you asked :) (1) On the broadcast the band Duck Sauce was not named, but Louis did mention Boney M. as the "hero" after Diva Fever finished. (2) The official X Factor website calls the performance a medley of the two songs: . (3) The official X Factor YouTube clips name both songs: . Media reports of the show name "Gotta Go Home" and Boney M.:, 142 and 99 (talk) 02:06, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


 * That's fine, I already added the medley song last night. But a source is needed for the hero if it's Boney M and not Duck Sauce. Yeah it doesn't make sense for Duck Sauce to be a hero but Louis didn't say Boney M was the hero, he questioned Boney M as a hero. He guessed. The hero column is for the hero, not the original artist. The hero could even be Barbra Streisand, as Dannii Minogue suggested. Anemone  Projectors  12:36, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I've added those two sources now and removed Duck Sauce as a hero. By the way, it wasn't just backing singers singing the "oohooh" parts, Diva Fever sang those parts too. Anemone  Projectors  12:45, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Well Duck Sauce if I'm correct is the group name for DJ Armand van Burren and one other European DJ. The only thing that's clear is that the version of the song they performed closer resembles Duck Sauce's version (it even had the adlibs and direct melody conetations). Although it would have been strange to have thought a DJ was your musical hero... --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  12:48, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Firstly, Lil-unique1, as I said before, the Duck Sauce song does not have any sung lyrics, and Diva Fever sang two complete verses, so I don't see how what they did could be closer to Duck Sauce than Boney M. Secondly, AnemoneProjectors, you are right that there is a bit of an open question about who the "hero" is. I actually like the idea that it might have meant to be Barbara Streisand rather than either Duck Sauce or Boney M. In fact, in their performance, instead of just repeating saying "Barbara Streisand" as Duck Sauce does, they gave four shout outs: One for Babs, one for Judy Garland, one for themselves, and one for Louis Walsh. Perhaps the "hero" theme of their performance was to suggest that all four are musical heroes. But who knows?


 * Finally, as a small side note, nothing was said on the show to fix several of the "heroes", although one could easily guess on most of them. But I suppose it is possible that Belle Amie's hero was Van Halen rather than The Kinks, since both had hits with the song. And given that X Factor could not even get the name of the song right (they call it "You Really Got Me Going", not "You Really Got Me") the hero could even be Metallica (who just recorded the song with Ray Davies) or even Oingo Boingo! But it's probably The Kinks.... 142 and 99 (talk) 13:16, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I think "Barbra Streisand" has singable lyrics. I downloaded it last night after the performance and was singing along to it. But then again the only thing that "Barbra Streisand" adds to "Gotta Go Home" is the name "Barbra Streisand" (and in Diva Fever's case, Judy Garland, Diva Fever and Louis Walsh). The oooohs are still in the original. So I agree that Diva Fever's song was mostly Boney M than Duck Sauce. As for the actual heroes, people have questioned this! The Kinks, Kelly Clarkson, Bruno Mars? Matt Cardle likes Rage Against The Machine and Nirvana, not Bruno Mars. TBH from what I've read, people are more questioning The Kinks than Van Halen or anyone else, so I think we can stick with that. But the heroes were VERY questionable! Belle Amie probably never head that song before a week ago. Anemone  Projectors  13:37, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I certainly don't think the contestants chose the heroes. That was more the mentors. I distinctly remember TreyC saying Cheryl gave me a really hard song etc... The use of Bruno Mars as a hero is very questionable though... he's just come out as an artist... oh well we cant really argue with the sources can we? --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  13:58, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * You would think that the first thing they did would be ask the contestants "who are your musical heroes? give me a list of 10" or something like that so they could pick a song. You never know, one of Belle Amie might really like The Kinks. It's possible. But Bruno Mars... no way. Anemone  Projectors  14:17, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


 * It's probably a bit beside the point, but the theme was "musical heroes", not "the performer's musical heroes". So The Kinks qualify as a musical hero even if they are not specifically a hero of the group singing their song. The chatter from the judges strongly suggests that the mentors typically pick the songs (the judges often compliment or criticize other judges for the song choices). So The Kinks are not necessarily Belle Amie's hero or Simon's hero, just a musical hero. 142 and 99 (talk) 14:34, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * That's true, but silly! Last year it was clearly the contestants' musical heroes, hence the number of Robbie Williams songs! Anemone  Projectors  14:45, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


 * In case anyone is still interested in this, I just read an article from the Guardian that says, "last Saturday's X Factor, dedicated to songs by the judges' musical heroes" and "Simon Cowell's musical heroes apparently include Kelly Clarkson and Boney M".142 and 99 (talk) 15:30, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm wondering if Alexis Petridis is assuming that they can't be the contestants' heroes so must be the judges'. Maybe the theme was heroes in general. Maybe we'll never know. Anemone  Projectors  16:56, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Cher Lloyd controversy
I have removed this paragraph per WP:BLP, but if people think it should be included, feel free to revert and reword. I think it has turned out to be untrue and irrelevant. Anemone Projectors  12:22, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The original source for that section was an article in The Sun. I just read it, and it seems clear they went looking to manufacture a story. (What!?! The Sun!?! They would never do that!?!) Good deletion.142 and 99 (talk) 12:53, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * lol @ my typing today, I must be in automatic mode. I did add that paragraph when it seemed relevant, but now the show has been live for two weeks and as far as I know, no concerns have been raised since. I read it just now and although I used quotes from apparently real people, they made it look like she has actual mental health issues, which is completely unfounded. So gone. Anemone  Projectors  13:19, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe we could just have something like "In response to media reports of concerns for Cheryl Lloyd's mental health, Sinitta and Konnie Hug both reported that the media was exagerating the claims that Lloyd had a personal counselor and that in fact a whole team of professionals was on-hand for all constants to ensure wellbeing throughout the process."? some sort of mention is necessary considering all the who-ha about Shirlena and the mental health charity statements? --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  14:09, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes that might be a better way of dealing with it, as long as we don't say Cher is mental. Though don't put "Cheryl Lloyd" or "Konnie Hug" lol Anemone  Projectors  14:54, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * LMAO, I just noticed that. Just so you know I'm completely sober and nor am I hung over. It was a test... I was testing to see if all you eager-billed editors were paying attention and so my slightly silly but not so evil plan worked. =) --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  15:30, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Well when I started this off I put "I have remember this paragraph" lol that wasn't a test, I was tired and unwell. Anemone  Projectors  16:32, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Cher actually sampled her lyrics
If you replay Cher Lloyd's first performance on the live shows, "Just Be Good to Me" and then play Professor Green's version, "Just Be Good to Green" the version Cher sings in the original "Just Be Good to Me" with lyrical sample of Prof Green's version of the song. Also if you youtube Swizz Beats - That Oprah you'll hear that the lyrics Cher claim to write for her version of Coldplay's "Viva la Vida" were actually sample from Swizz Beatz mixtape song. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  21:03, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * We already know about the Swizz Beats thing, in fact when X Magazine did their list of songs performed at bootcamp (I think), they said Coldplay/Swizz Beats. As for "Just Be Good to Me", I don't actually know the song "Just Be Good to Green" that well but I imagine it has a rap and that's what she took from there? But the actual rest of the song was "Just Be Good to Me" as that's essentially what "Just Be Good to Green" is, plus the backing music was similar to the original song from the 1980s. Are you suggesting we put it as a medley? Anemone  Projectors  21:26, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes or that we put it contained excerpts of "Just Be Good to Green". Also is this too much speculation regarding song choices? --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  00:09, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The Wagner one is probably fine (I added it) but the other two are just rumours - probably true but I wouldn't add them until it's better confirmed. Anemone  Projectors  00:13, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Footloose
I think we should probably remove this song until we have a more official confirmation, because although Alex Fletcher said "Earlier this week, it was revealed that Belle Amie will be singing 'Footloose'" in one source, in another he says "It was rumoured earlier this week that the girl group would be singing the '80s hit 'Footloose'". And that's from the one the says Belle Amie are considering changing their song choice. Anemone  Projectors  16:48, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I suppose that's sensible. My bad... I didn't cross check his 'earlier' reports. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  18:08, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Song credits
This is going to become a contentious issue that came up with "Killing Me Softly" as performed by Paije Richardson in week 1 but may arise with other songs. Should the credit be necessarily with the one who sang it first or the one who charted with it first making it famous. Orginally when the list was done, we credited Roberta Flack who had a huge hit with it. Then a colleague changed it to Lori Lieberman because she sang it first. When I changed it back to Roberta Flack, he/she changed it back again with the put down remark "Possible vandalism". So who should be credited? Always the first artist who released it or the one who made it famous. I am sure this will come up on many more songs this week and many weeks to come. werldwayd (talk) 16:17, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 * We've always gone with the original, rather than the most famous, or the version performed, so if someone sings "Without You", we always put Badfinger. I didn't realise Flack wasn't the original performer of "Killing Me Softly with His Song", which is why I put that - I just looked at the infobox in that article and assumed. Sometimes, though, we do list the version performed as well if it is relevant, such as with last year's "Musical heroes week", we included the musical hero. Anemone  Projectors  16:59, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I know the ship has sailed on this point, but I think it's worth mentioning that it seems silly to me to ever list the name of an artist who previously performed the song - original or otherwise. With some songs (like this one) the original artist is virtually unknown, and so naming her is not of any significance. Since most songs are linked to Wikipedia pages that provide information about them there also is little need to name any artist, since the individual song pages tell that to anyone who really wants to know. If anything, it would make sense to credit the people who wrote the song rather than people who just sang it before. Becasue no matter how much credit people want to give to Roberta Flack for the success of "Killing Me Softly With His Song", the real credit belongs to by Charles Fox and Norman Gimbel.


 * But like I said, I know that that ship has sailed. So since it is "original artists" who get named, be ready for "traditional" (not The Animals) to go beside "House of the Rising Sun", i-TEN (not Heart) to go beside "Alone", Cy Grant (not Nina Simone) to go beside "Feeling Good" and Kvitka Cisyk (not Debbie Boone) to go by "You Light Up My Life".142 and 99 (talk) 19:07, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Addendum: I just changed the "original artist" credit for "Sunny" from Bobby Hebb (who wrote it) to Mieko Hirota, since she apparently recorded it first (in 1965 - the year before Hebb released his version). Also, marimbaphonist Dave Pike released a version before Hebb, making Hebb actually no better than the third to release it. There were, in fact, 8 different versions released in 1966 alone (including Hebb's) and 15 more different versions released in 1967.142 and 99 (talk) 19:29, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The article on Sunny makes no mention of it. Equally you're revision is not sourced? --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  19:33, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * (ec)Then perhaps we should just list the song and leave out the original artist. Is the original artist even that important when it comes to The X Factor? Most songs will have articles, and if there is a theme like "musical heroes" then we can list that version in a separate column. Anemone  Projectors  19:33, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Firstly, the page for the song does say this. It says, "'Sunny' was first recorded in Japan by Mieko 'Miko' Hirota". Secondly, the website for the official Bobby Hebb fan club says, "MIEKO HIROTA -- female singer who did 'Sunny' originally." Thirdly, I did not put a citation for the change because none of the original artist attributions offer citations, so there is no reason to single this one out. 142 and 99 (talk) 19:40, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, it does say that. I see three options - 1) use the original originals, 2) remove the artists, 3) use the names given in the sources (though that would mean using Boney M and The Fugees, and removing all "featured" artists). I think I favour option 1. Anemone  Projectors  20:06, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I prefer option 2, but I think I said that already :) 142 and 99 (talk) 20:27, 13 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't mind doing that either. Anemone  Projectors  20:53, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I would remove artist since this is causing conflict. Essentially it doesn't matter who the artist is. E.g. if they have Mariah Carey week its obvious who sung the songs but for example the original artist of "Without You" is not relevant. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  03:00, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. Anemone  Projectors  11:37, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's the best idea to remove the artist completely, and the previous years the original performers OR ther version that was used in the show was credited on the pages. They will not say it everytime whose version they performed on the live show, but there are times where they will perform a version of the song that would make it difficult to understand which one it is if you dont' know it, if once you hear it, you want to hear the original. For example, Cher's song "Just Be Good To Me" has been done by several artists, but whose version did they use on the show? I can recall several times on the shows where they mention whose version they covered, and so I think that the original artist should be credited, and if they do mention on the show whose version it was, write that instead of the original performer. A page like this with no reference is not good. I don't know who told you you could go ahead and delete them, maybe we should vote on it. Like I said, look at the past years, they are all there, unless they have been removed recently (for no good reason).Dollvalley (talk) 23:22, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Previous years arent really a good standard necessarily. MOS and lots of other things have changed on wikipedia in a year. I know that AnemoneProjectors wishes to take the article to GA and only the most reliable info should be included. Is the artist really required? --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  23:30, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I think that obviously previous years' worth of pages, visited by surely thousands of people trumps two or three people who in the wow long span on two days decided it wasn't good anymore. Why all of a sudden a couple of people think it's not useful and you just remove it without even putting it to a vote? Check all the previous years, where even Anemone has contributed to, so you know very well, and they are ALL there. If might be superfluous to write U2 for a song like "With Or Without You", but who's to say someone is virtually unknown? Everyone has a different knowledge. Having a REFERENCE column is better than having nothing at all, at least there's a chance someone will know what version was covered on the live shows, if not, the original artist. And sometimes they even say it on the show whose version they covered. I only clicked on the songs I didn't know, and for some it was enough to read the column, didn't click on the song, so I learned more because of the column for example.

And I really think that GA has nothing to do with something like this column existance, more the gossipy nature of the article itself and all the style of most additions. Dollvalley (talk) 23:39, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * you've completely misunderstood what I've said and you've got me all wrong. What I should have said was that for the time being we agreed to remove the info because it was causing conflict and edit wars. If people can agree on a proper methidology then no worries we'll add it back. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  23:41, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't have a problem with originals being added back if that's what people want, as long as it's original original originals. Sometimes the wrong version will be listed at first but someone who knows better or has checked more thoroughly will come along and fix it. Anemone  Projectors  23:56, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Dollvalley, first, the changes made can be simply reversed if people decide that is what they want, so there is no need to worry too much about the fact that, for now, the original artists have been removed. Secondly, you said, "For example, Cher's song 'Just Be Good To Me' has been done by several artists, but whose version did they use on the show?" Your question seems to assume that listing the original artist would settle such questions, but it won't. The performance of "Mad World" is perfect proof of that. Tears For Fears are the original artist, and so they were listed, but the arrangement Aiden Grimshaw used was not theirs. So listing the original artist cannot generally tell you what version was performed.


 * But as I said before, even if the artist listed was the person who sang the particular arrangement of the song first, it still would be getting the issue of credit wrong. Gary Jules sang the arrangement of "Mad World" that Aiden Grimshaw used, but Jules was not the arranger. So if credit for arrangement is what matters, then it is not really Gary Jules' version, it's Michael Andrews' version. So in this case Roland Orzabal wrote the song, Tears For Fears is the original artist, Michael Andrews created the arrangement Grimshaw used, and Gary Jules sang that arrangement first. The X Factor page could provide all that information or none of it or something in between. I'd say songwriters are most deserving of a mention and arrangers second most, since it is their creative work that is being performed. Singers - original, most famous, or otherwise - are less worthy of credit. But in the end, if there is a wikilink to the song's page, none need to be mentioned and anyone who wants to know more about a song can look there for information. It's how I found out that "Sunny" was actually recorded in Japan by Mieko Hirota first and then by marimbaphonist Dave Pike before Bobby Hebb's version was released. 142 and 99 (talk) 01:47, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * That, 142 and 99, is an absolutely excellent point. And then someone might do a totally new arrangement, which has happened several times before. But what if someone sings a song that has no Wikipedia article? That has also happened before. Anemone  Projectors  01:59, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, I just checked and in the last two years only one song was performed for which there is no wikilink for the song. That song was the theme song for the TV show Bewitched. In that case, a link to the show's webpage would be sufficient additional information for the curious (and a bit more informative than knowing that Steve Lawrence sang it 50 years ago). In other rare cases we could figure something out for the special case as it arises. But a general policy or naming original singers or arrangers or songwriters seems overkill to solve what might be a rare occurrence. 142 and 99 (talk) 02:16, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


 * In some cases, articles didn't exist at the time but have since been created. If it happens this series, we can cross that bridge when we come to it. Maybe link to an album or original artist or film or musical or whatever where the song is mentioned. Anemone  Projectors  12:21, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

So talking about original artists, do we need to say who did the group performance originally? Same reason... Anemone Projectors  19:23, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I'd say, if anything, it's even less important to give any information beyond the song title for songs that re not part of the competition. Otherwise, it might as well be mentioned that Joe McElderry was covering Donkeyboy when he performed "Ambitions". It's just not relevant.142 and 99 (talk) 20:04, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Removed. Anemone  Projectors  20:10, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

It's all very well removing the original artist from the table - but have you thought about songs with the same name that are totally different songs, for example... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_(disambiguation) Eddyegghead (talk) 17:51, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * We should cross that bridge when we come to it. But I suggest if there is no article, we link to an album, film, or musical. I very highly doubt there will be any songs where this isn't possible, as all songs are The X Factor are going to be known and notable. Anemone  Projectors  18:02, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * The bridge has been crossed. "Diamonds Are Forever" has no article, so I linked to the film soundtrack. Anemone  Projectors  16:52, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Why Just Bottom Two and not Bottom Three in Week 3?
Since expectations were that for 4 consecutive weeks, there would be "Bottom Three" and double eliminations (one by public vote, one by the judges), so that we go down to the usual format after 4 weeks, this didn't happen and in week 3 we had a "Bottom Two". This needs to be explained in some way in the section for Week 3 to clarify things. But i know nothing of the matter and I leave it to more knowledgeable editors who have been following this up. werldwayd (talk) 17:15, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * When Dermot announced it would be a single elinination, someone on my Twitter feed said the producers must have been annoyed that it had leaked that it would be a double elimination, so they changed it at the last minute. The actual reason is something I doubt we will ever be able to reliably source. From the way Dermot said it, it seems the contestants were expecting a double, so I reckon they had been told the first four would be. Again, can't be reliably sourced. All we can do is say it was a single elimination. Anemone  Projectors  17:35, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I understand. We cannot read the minds of the producers. But we need to mention that there was a change in elimination process in week 3 as compared to weeks 1 and 2 werldwayd (talk) 17:54, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * By the way, the format is explained under the "live shows". I was just about to add a note under week 3 but was unsure how to word it. Anemone  Projectors  19:17, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I disagree... previously we've explained that due to the wildcard contestants there were double eliminations to normalise the number of contestants. now that's almost happened its feasible to agree that the normal format has resumed. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  22:31, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually there should be four weeks of double eliminations before reverting to the old format. So it is very strange to have single elimination in week 3. I thought single eliminations would kick off with week 5. werldwayd (talk) 20:02, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

This is interesting, I just saw that according to the X Factor Updates website here that the voting terms said "Weeks 1 – 4 (inclusive)

The act with the lowest number of votes will be eliminated from the competition. The next two acts with the lowest number of votes will then face the judges.

Weeks 5 to 7 (inclusive)

The two acts with the least amount of votes will face the judges.

Weeks 8 – 10 (inclusive)

The act with the lowest number of votes will be eliminated from the competition."

but now they say "Each week, at the discretion of ITV or the producer:


 * the act(s) with the lowest number of votes will be eliminated from the competition, with the next two or more acts with the lowest number of votes to face the judges; or
 * the act(s) with the lowest number of votes will be eliminated from the competition; or
 * the two or more acts with the lowest number of votes will face the judges; or any other combination of eliminations based on the public vote and/or the judges’ decision will apply.

In each case, the elimination format, and any specific terms relating to that week’s elimination, will be announced in the applicable on-air interaction information."

Very interesting. Anemone Projectors  11:25, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Vocal coaches
Has it already been mentioned that there is now a team of four vocal mentors on the show. And as well I think it should be noted that Savan Kotecha is now the main vocal coach. His involvement on the show is significant because he has already written and produced for the show's winners. (He's was involved in Leona's Echo as well as Alexandra's Overcome. etc. etc. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  17:38, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I was coming to ask about that, because I only know that Yvie Burnett and Savan Kotecha are coaches, and that Richard Stannard is a song producer for Minogue's acts. I don't know where we should mention this but we should throw Brian Friedman in there too. I was thinking of some kind of personnel section that can also explain Dermot O'Leary and Konnie Huq, as they are only mentioned in the lead, but it would also duplicate the information about the judges given in the selection process section. Anemone  Projectors  17:42, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Although in The Sun (pardon the source) it said Yvie Burnett had been fired and instead each category had their own coach, with the team as a whole being lead by Savan Kotecha. Also from Bootcamp it was evident that Brian had a role in contestant decisions. Have we mentioned that the contestants were required to take part in a dance workshop for their own confidence and the show's creative team but it didn't necessarily affect the outcome of bootcamp? --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  18:26, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, Burnett is still working there because she was in today's F Factor videos (behind the scenes videos on the official website) which is where I discovered Kotecha was on the team, and I added a source to the main The X Factor (UK) article saying Burnett was reinstated this series but wasn't there last series, so maybe The Sun got mixed up with that. Friedman's dance workshop is mentioned, it happened on day two of bootcamp, I referenced the episode. Anemone  Projectors  19:09, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Wicked. That's ok then. I think the personnel section will add great value to the article because often interviews are given with those working back stage. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  19:14, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Was it this source from The Sun or another one? Cos if it's that one you've probably misread it, or they reported it wrong and changed it later, and you read the wrong version. I will do the personnel section but am unsure how to deal with the judges there. Should it go as the first section, or later? Anemone  Projectors  19:18, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * No I read it from a physical copy before the shows started. It was a very small snippet saying something along the lines of... "Yvie Burnet is set to be left out of the X Factor for the second year in a row. A source close to the show said Yvie was more suited to operative performances and not the 2011 pop stars Simon is trying to create. She was instead replaced by a team of four young vocal coaches led by X Factor hit-maker Savan Kotecha, who has crafted hits for X Factor winners Alexandra and Leona. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  19:28, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh right. Forgot that print versions exist! Though I do sometimes read it. Well at the time it would have been correct, but she was brought back just before the live shows. Hmm working on a personnel section in notepad but it's kind of awkward.

I would consider moving the bit about the guest judges to a new section directly below the application and selections stuff. Then we can add about the vocal coaches etc. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  19:37, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Do you mean below the whole selection process section and before the finalists? I think the guest judges belong in the auditions (and bootcamp), and the assistant judges belong in the judges' houses. We're basically talking about moving the entire second paragraph of "applications and auditions", but then essential information would be missing from that section. If there hadn't been so many changes this year it would be a lot easier. I was going to see if I could leave the judges out of the new section. Anemone  Projectors  20:23, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you could just point, other notable personnel? or you could have an opening sentance for the new personnel section saying the team of coaches and professions working with the contestants on the show includes: ... blah! (we could also include the physicians and councelling services mentioned in the chery lloyd controv. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  20:53, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I was thinking if it goes after the selection process section, the judges will have already been mentioned so we could just say something like "as well as the judges..." blah blah Anemone  Projectors  21:18, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

I've started it off, see what you think. Needs expansion. Anemone Projectors  22:48, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

I have added Peter Dickson. We still need to add Biffco who is producing Dannii's songs, and to find out who is doing the others. Also, Brian Blessed has started doing voiceovers for The Xtra Factor. Anyone else? Anemone Projectors  15:53, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added Grace Woodward, the fashion director. Sisco Gomez is a choreographer but the only source I have for that is Twitter. Anyone else? Anemone  Projectors  13:25, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Is it worth naming people who aren't notable, such as Liz Martins (make-up)? Anemone  Projectors  22:56, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * NO I dont think Liz Martins is notable. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  22:59, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Double elimination
I was all ready last night to put in a double elimination as soon as Dermot announced it but he said "one contestant will leave the competition" so I didn't, even though it was reported that it would be and has since been reported that it will be. It might still be a double but Dermot should have said. I think we have to go by what was said on the show, and if it turns out to be a double tonight, we can add it during the broadcast. Anemone Projectors  15:13, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Cole's vote to eliminate
As we just saw, Cheryl refused to vote to eliminate. It currently says "N/A" but I propose it says "Refused" to differentiate from Simon's "N/A" in week 2 (where there was no need for him to vote because the other three judges had already voted to eliminate the same act). 213.121.16.62 (talk) 21:06, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * support. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  21:08, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I have changed the vote to Refused as not to confuse it with Cowell's vote in Week 2 --MSalmon (talk) 21:22, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I think "None (refused)" is a lot clearer to readers, and I certinaly wouldn't use italics. Anemone  Projectors  21:36, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * As in "Cowell voted for Treyc, Cole voted for none (because she refused)". Anemone  Projectors  21:39, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I thought Cole said she'd "take it to deadlock" when pushed, but her vote was declared void by O'Leary? ==Jim Gamma, 7 Nov 2010, 2143 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.113.112.208 (talk)
 * Well, she refused to vote, then said if she had to vote she'd go last and take it to deadlock, but that wasn't allowed. It would have been the decision of the producer talking in Dermot's ear. Anemone  Projectors  21:58, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, but this was NEVER actually stated - O'Leary said "majority decision", but it wasn't made clear that it wasn't allowed. Also, why did Cole get asked to go second? She was clearly surprised by it, usually they make judges with two acts in the bottom 2 go last... PS, apologies for the odd signature, still not clear on how to "sign" when I don't have an account. 87.113.112.208 (talk) 22:01, 7 November 2010 (UTC)Jim Gamma, 7 Nov 2010, 2200 UTC
 * That's another thing we'll never know. The producers don't like to give away their reasons for doing anything. Konnie Huq clarified the reason for no deadlock on The Xtra Factor, i.e. Cheryl abstained so it went to a majority vote. Anemone  Projectors  22:35, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It didn't sound like she intended to abstain. Can we add a comment that Cole requested to be asked after the other judges but was not permitted to do so? This much is clear. -Jim Gamma 87.113.112.208 (talk) 06:58, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It is mentioned, but she did abstain. She said "I'm not sending anybody home" until Dermot said it was part of the role and then he allowed her to abstain even though she offered to go last after that. Anemone  Projectors  12:34, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Week 6
Dermot said they were singing Elton John songs not a boy band theme....--SaturdayMight1000 (talk) 21:19, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Fixed --MSalmon (talk) 21:26, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Did he though? Anemone  Projectors  21:37, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes at the end before he revealed the celebrity guests --MSalmon (talk) 21:39, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * ok. Anemone  Projectors  21:43, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Only Unreality TV is reporting this. I'm looking for a reliable source. (Not that I don't believe you, I do! I just want to reference it) Anemone  Projectors  01:15, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Cosmetic Change
For the week 4 shows, could the font set up be made similar to the x factor australia November 7 and 8 page where The song is listed "Stop"(performed with Melanie Brown) with the (performed with person) in a smaller font size. --Cooly123 21:50, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * No, we shouldn't use small text as it can be harder to read for some people. Anemone  Projectors  21:55, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Katie
Katie wasn't 10th in Week 4, she was in the Bottom Two. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.191.44 (talk) 20:47, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * No, she was 10th. She was in the Bottom 2 with Belle Amie, it went to deadlock. Belle Amie came last (11th) in the votes, meaning Katie must have come 10th. 213.121.16.62 (talk) 21:06, 7 November 2010 (UTC)


 * In Week 5 Treyc was booted off, so Katie should not be marked as coming 10th when she hasn't left yet. Treyc should be marked as 10th. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.108.15.231 (talk) 23:35, 11 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Katie was voted 10th in week 4 out of 11 contestants. She was in the bottom two and only Belle Amie got fewer votes. The positions refer to weekly votes, not positions in the overall contest. The table's heading makes this clear "positions in each week's public vote where known". The results for week 5 have not been officially confirmed by The X Factor. At the end of the series, all weekly voting percentages will be revealed and every placement in weekly voting will be included. Anemone  Projectors  23:52, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Cher Lloyd's performance of "Empire State of Mind"
Despite what ITV claims on their website, and in respect to the actual performance... Lloyd sang Empire State of Mind (Part II) Broken Down not Empire State of Mind and there is quite a distinct difference. The lyrics and production of Part II are quite different and its blatantly obvious when you buy the MP3 of Lloyd's performance she sang part II not the original Jay Z version. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  21:38, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm unfamiliar with the two songs, but I when I downloaded some songs off iTunes earlier today, I saw the word "Part" (the rest was hidden), so yeah. Anemone  Projectors  21:40, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * But was her rap from Empire State of Mind? Anemone  Projectors  21:42, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * No she actually rapped the lyrics from the Alicia Keys version. That's why Cowell's comments were "it sounded to copycat". Alicia Keys obviously sings her part and the arrangement is different hence Lloyd wasn't able to rap them in her usual style. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  21:47, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh ok then. I guess you're right then. Should we make the change? Anemone  Projectors  21:56, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I haven't listened to Part II much, but I do believe the line that Lloyd began with rapping, "Yeah I'm out that Brooklyn. Now I'm down in Tribeca, right next to DeNiro, but I'll be hood forever. I'm the new Sinatra, and since I made it here I can make it anywhere..." are exclusive to the Jay-Z f/Alicia Keys version only. But after that she began rapping lyrics from Keys' Part II I assume because those lyrics are not present in the original. Candy  o32  23:10, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I've just listened to Lloyd's version with the lyrics of both songs up on my screen, then listened to both originals and Lloyd definitely sings lines from "Empire State of Mind (Part II) Broken Down" and raps lines from "Empire State of Mind". Anemone  Projectors  01:13, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * So then the correct format would be "Empire State of Mind (Part II) Broken Down / "Empire State of Mind" or "Empire State of Mind (Part II) Broken Down" with a note saying that it contained a sample rap from the original? --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  01:23, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know because isn't this all.... original research? Anemone  Projectors  01:29, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Surely its just stating the contents of the performance? Since the performance is available to download its a published peice of work and so can act as the source. Either way the performance consisted more of part 2 than part 1 of the song which is significant considering that both songs have different arrangements and stylings. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  01:32, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I suppose, though we did have to analyse the lyrics to find out. Anyway, as strange as it looks, I think I'd prefer the "Empire State of Mind (Part II) Broken Down / "Empire State of Mind" format. Anemone  Projectors  01:57, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * By the way it actually says on iTunes "Empire State of Mind Parts I & II (Medley)". Anemone  Projectors  02:34, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Week 7
Apparently, Olly Murs will be performing on the show as he announced it via his Twitter site. Although no other details have been confirmed, should we add this or not? --MSalmon (talk) 18:43, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I reverted the addition originally because the only source was Twitter but it was since reported elsewhere so I added it (a few hours before you asked), though it's still only based on Twitter. Anemone  Projectors  19:48, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * That's OK then --MSalmon (talk) 20:00, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Order of live show details
I reckon each live show should be in chronological order, for example:


 * Theme


 * Group performance
 * Celebrity performers


 * Judges' votes to eliminate
 * Cowell (or whatever order they voted in)
 * Cole
 * Minogue
 * Walsh

However... I think it looks silly with the theme all on its own, especially with the gap between it and the table's heading, and although it looks quite good with the theme under the table...


 * Theme
 * Group performance
 * Celebrity performers


 * Judges' votes to eliminate
 * Cowell (or whatever order they voted in)
 * Cole
 * Minogue
 * Walsh

...it doesn't make that much sense to do that so maybe it's better to leave it as it is but just swap the group performance with the guest performers as the group usually performs first (other than in the case of the Bon Jovi appearance). Anyone have any thoughts? Anemone Projectors  18:08, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Nobody has any thoughts or do you all just enjoy ignoring me? :-) Anemone  Projectors  20:15, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Winners song?
With the show being over presumably Dec 12/13, when will be know the winner's song?--Cooly123 01:33, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * We won't know until we're told. Anemone  Projectors  01:59, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, what I mean is that there is no schedule for releasing details of the single, so best to just wait for the news the break. Anemone  Projectors  02:10, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Week 8 Songs
According the F Factor Week 8 part 2 found here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9e1hbzuj0I each contestant will not only sing two rock songs, but one is required to be down-tempo while the other is required to be up-tempo, I feel as if this could be noted somewhere in the 8th week table Edwyth (talk) 04:43, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * That's fine but reference the actual video on itv.com or a news item confirming it, not a youtube video that breaches copyright. Anemone  Projectors  12:49, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Weeks 8 Judges Vote
There has been no indication that there will not be a judges vote next week as stated in the results table - in previous year Dermot has said at the end of week 7 results something along the lines of 'Next week your votes and your votes alone will decide who continues in the competition.' I didn't hear him say that... Was there any mention on Xtra Factor? (I didn't watch) If not then this also makes me wonder will we actually run to only 10 weeks? Or will it run longer as there still has been no news of a double elimination. Next week is effectively the quarter final with 7 acts still performing. Any ideas anyone?

UPDATE: X Factor Aus this year had judges vote in week 8 but not in 9 or 10... Eddyegghead (talk) 17:10, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I have not heard anything yet, but normally there would be no judge's vote from Week 8 onwards and there is still a double elimination to come (so mabye this week would be the last time the judge's vote) --MSalmon (talk) 17:26, 22 November 2010 (UTC)


 * (edit conflict) X Factor Australia has nothing to do with this. The voting terms on The X Factor website did say it would run for 10 weeks and the last 3 would be down to a public vote. They changed it since to say "at the discretion of ITV or the producer" when they got rid of the double eliminations. Have a look in the talk archives. O'Leary wouldn't necessarily say because this year we're not being told anything about the voting until the voting opens. But it is normally down to the public vote when they start singing 2 songs each. But there are still a lot of contestants. They (The X Factor) clearly have a plan but nobody knows what it is. I did consider removing the "No final showdown or judges' vote: results are based on public votes alone" part from the table last night in case, so I may do that now. Anemone  Projectors  17:41, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * And now I have, we can revert if it transpires that there is no judges' vote. Anemone  Projectors  17:41, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * (And I know that seemed a long time to have an edit conflict but my connection dropped before I could press save!) Anemone  Projectors  17:45, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Louis was on the radio today and confirmed that there was no judges vote anymore now that we're down to the final five contestants. :) Raider655 (talk) 15:39, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Anemone  Projectors  16:18, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Two songs
Just a small query really. When they start doing two songs each, we've sometimes had two columns for "order", especially when the order of the second performances were different to the first, but I'm wondering if we should have just one column and put something like "1/8", "2/9", "3/11", "4/10". I notice that last year if the order was the same for the second songs, we just had the order of the first songs, but does that look like they performed two songs together? I think I'd rather just have one column.

Anemone Projectors  15:35, 26 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Hmm, personally I think two columns looks neater, the / make it look a little messy. Raider655 (talk) 15:38, 1 December 2010 (UTC)


 * So you'd prefer this:

? Anemone  Projectors  16:17, 1 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Actually, that looks good to me. Should we still do this if the second songs are done in the same order as the first though? Anemone  Projectors  16:24, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah that looks great :) And I would say yes to doing it even if they perform in the same order, just to keep it a little more consistent Raider655 (talk) 17:03, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah I agree, keep it for every time they do more than one song. Even if the final 3 do 4 songs each on the final night. Anemone  Projectors  17:27, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Love the way you lie
In the semi finals, Cher Lloyd sand part 2 of love the way you lie, but rapped eminems part in part 1 of the song. Kinda the same thing she done in week 5 with Empire state of mind. It is being changed whenever I make this change. I believe it should be kept as Love The Way You Lie Part II/Love The Way You Lie. —Comment added by ImanAtwal (talk • contribs)
 * I was unaware that there were two versions and I'm pretty sure at least 95% of viewers will think she just did the main version. Are they actually different songs? Or is it a bit like saying she did "Just Be Good To Green" because she did the rap from that particular cover version, when it's the same song as "Just Be Good To Me" anyway? Or saying Matt did "You've Got The Love" because it was more similar to the Florence version, when it's the same song as "You Got The Love"? Anemone  Projectors  23:03, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Well technically they are two separate songs. It's the exact same as Empire State of Mind by Jay-Z Feat. Alicia Keys and Empire State of Mind Part II (Broken Down) By Alicia Keys. They are two separate songs despite being linked. Cher Lloyd sang Love The Way You Lie Part II from Rihanna's album Loud (which features Eminem as a guest vocalist). However, the rap Cher sang was Eminem's rap in the first verse in Love The Way You Lie from Eminem's album Recovery, (featuring Rihanna as guest vocalist). In essence, she sang Rihanna's song and rapped Eminem's song, the exact same thing she done in week 5, where she sang Alicia Keys Empire State of Mind II, but rapped Jay-Z's song Empire State of Mind. I know it sounds confusing, but she did use lyrics from both songs, so both should be credited. Therefore I am suggesting using the same format as in week 5, (i.e. Love the Way You Lie Part II/Love the Way You Lie). —Comment added by ImanAtwal (talk • contribs)
 * So they have different lyrics? To be honest I wondered what the heck she was singing at the start of the song, I thought she'd completely messed up. Anemone  Projectors  00:33, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Lol. They have completely different lyrics. The only thing that is the same is the chorus. It is the exact same concept I described above with the Empire State of Mind songs. Therefore, it is two different songs. I guess the only reason that Rihanna's song is not as known is that it has not been officially released as a single, but it is still a different song, so both versions I guess should be credited. Hopefully this is being understood, not too confusing. Think of it as a Love the Way You Lie version of the Empire State of Mind songs. —Comment added by ImanAtwal (talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 00:43, 5 December 2010 (UTC).

Final episodes
Shouldn't the final section be establised by now?--Cooly123 17:36, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Not unless you have sources to back it up --MSalmon (talk) 17:43, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
 * As far as I know, no theme and no guests have been announced yet, so we have nothing to put in the section for the final. Though we do know something about it... that the third placed contestant will go on Sunday. Anemone  Projectors  19:16, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

The celebrity duets have been confirmed in an X Factor press conference as; Rebecca and Christina Aguilera, Matt and Rihanna, Cher and Will.i.am and One Direction and Robbie Williams --2.123.187.37 (talk) 19:08, 9 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Poor One Direction. Please provide a source and it can be added. Anemone  Projectors  19:30, 9 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Source here, from Digital Spy. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  19:47, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Winners' songs
The winners songs were announced on the scott mils radio show today (10th) as;

Matt - Many of horror/when we collide (biffy clyro)

Cher - Impossible - (Shontelle)

Rebecca - Distant Dreamer (duffy)

One Direction - Young forever (Mr. Hudson ft Jay-z) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TylerGaRyan (talk • contribs)


 * Not 100% confirmed. Anemone  Projectors  17:52, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

The page currently only says the winners songs for Cher, Matt and Rebecca; One Direction's is no longer there. Shouldn't Cher's be removed as she is now out of the competition, and One Direction's put back in? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.24.179.159 (talk) 12:41, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * There are conflicting reports over One Direction's song. Cher's should still be there, as will the third and second placed contestants'. If we knew Mary's song we'd list that as well. They recorded the songs and made videos for them. Anemone  Projectors  12:47, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

"3-6-9" or "The Clapping Song"?
Same as Cher's other songs, is there actually a difference between "3-6-9" and "The Clapping Song", lyrically? Anemone Projectors  22:25, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * it's the clapping song, and i have changed it. if you check the x factor's official you tube site, it states the song is the clapping song. as it's official, they get the final word. of course, there'll be someone here who'll think they know better... Geeness (talk) 23:01, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thought so. I put 3-6-9 first as that's what ITV.com says but when she performed it, it was apparent to me that it was the same song as The Clapping Song, so I changed it, but someone changed it back as if it was a different song. Syco tweeted that it was The Clapping Song, and if they say that on YouTube then we can probably go with that too. iTunes also says Clapping Song, and we've based most disputed song choices on that. Anemone  Projectors  00:05, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * i think some of the people who edit this are younger people, who don't always know how old a song is. i noticed 3-6-9 was linked to a rapper (or someone like that), but then it changed to the soundtrack listing. i remember the clapping song from the early 80's, i loved it when i was a kid, and it's the one i thought of straight away, i've never heard these 3-6-9 songs, lol!!! might have to check them out now, just to hear the difference. if there's going to be further dispute, which i don't think there will be, it can always be referenced individually. 77.97.110.57 (talk) 21:27, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Judges vote
It's a small thing, but would it be possible to change the font size of the cells that contain the names of who each judge has voted for so that 'Aiden Grimshaw' spans just 1 line? It's a little irritating that Cheryl and Simon's rows are larger than Dannii and Louis' because of this =/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raider655 (talk • contribs) 23:56, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think we should change the font size. You'll just have to be irritated I'm afraid. Anemone  Projectors  23:59, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't mean the font size of just Aiden, I mean the size of all of them. I doubt a dramatically huge drop in pt will be needed so I don't see how it would be a problem, even just to do it to see how it looks. Raider655 (talk) 00:00, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I know that's what you mean. But the font size should be the same throughout the table. Anemone  Projectors  00:03, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Then reduce it throughout? I previewed it with the font size at 83% and the difference isn't noticable, but it does fit Aiden's name across the one line. Raider655 (talk) 18:15, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * 83% makes absolutely no difference for me. Even 80% (which looks tiny) wraps Aiden Grimshaw. Anyway, Paije Richardson's name is longer. On my screen, Dannii's line is the only one with no text wrapping. Anemone  Projectors  18:29, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Here is what's confusing me. In week 1, when Katie Waissel and F.Y.D. were in the bottom two, Simon's reason for voting for Katie because he's backing his act, F.Y.D. but it says Cheryl's reason to voting for F.Y.D. was based on the final showdown performance, but, her act, Katie Waissel is in the bottom two, so, Cheryl is backing her act, and that isn't in there. Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.96.184.157 (talk) 22:02, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Because that's not the reason she specified. – Anemone Projectors – 22:34, 31 January 2011 (UTC)