Talk:Tool Academy season 1: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 05:40, 4 March 2009

Highs and Elimination Table

The contestants who received praise should be shown as it gives the viewer of the page more information on who is doing well on the show even if they did not win the challenge.

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew097 (talk • contribs) 00:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The current situation seems to be that the formatting is following previous Charm School shows, which doesn't have an elimination order. I don't care which format is used, so long as it's consistent. I saved the elimination order in a comment in the Episode 2 section. We would need the call-out order for Episode 1 to complete such a table. I also saved the top three from the Challenge in a comment (in case it is needed for an episode summary).

However, I am strongly against the use of excessive coloring. Footnotes are much better. See the WP:MOS section on colors. Plastikspork (talk) 00:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, there is now a call-out order table and footnotes for "commendations". Plastikspork (talk) 00:59, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All riiight! Chastayo (talk) 20:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The way the table is set up, it list the names in alphabetical order in the first column. The rest of the column have names and show the eliminations. The first column really is unneeded and pretty much just a confusion. I do not know how to format it without screwing up the page. Can someone please change this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.172.91.5 (talk) 23:26, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction

I think the article should quote the host's standard words he tells the tool when the tool is eliminated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.225.132.137 (talk) 19:07, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. It's not necessary. Plastikspork (talk) 22:51, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with you Plastikspork, Your a tool now GTFO! ManinTan (talk) 09:21, 5 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.253.215.21 (talk) [reply]

Change of Elimination Table?

I'm curious to know why it was changed. Chastayo (talk) 22:35, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vandals. Changes have been reverted. Plastikspork (talk) 22:51, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 : I disagree. It's not necessary. [[User:Plastikspork|Plastikspork]] ([[User talk:Plastikspork|talk]]) 22:51, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
-: I disagree with you,  Your a tool now GTFO! [[User:ManInTan|ManinTan]] ([[User talk:ManInTan|talk]]) 09:21, 5 March 2009 (UTC)  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/69.253.215.21|69.253.215.21]] ([[User talk:69.253.215.21|talk]]) </span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
+: I disagree with you Plastikspork,  Your a tool now GTFO! [[User:ManInTan|ManinTan]] ([[User talk:ManInTan|talk]]) 09:21, 5 March 2009 (UTC)  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/69.253.215.21|69.253.215.21]] ([[User talk:69.253.215.21|talk]]) </span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
 == Change of Elimination Table? ==