Talk:Rock Star: Supernova

Validation of article performed by WIKICHECK. August 16 2006 17:41pm. WikiCheck 17:41, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Redirect

Well I had set up some pages for the individual rockers so that there fans could up date them and had links to their webpages, but some of the editiors took them off. Oh well I tried.

Wikipedia is not a repository of links. Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 19:01, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Help

I was trying to start a Wikipedia page on Dana Andrews, but the actor Dana Andrews has that name. How do you go about starting a page for someone who shares a name?

Thanks

Try starting one as Dana Andrews (singer). A disambiguation link should then be added to the top of Dana Andrews. Kirjtc2 17:18, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Episode summaries

Please help! Does anyone have any ideas on how we should arrange this and other sections of this article? Thanks. --Eric Jack Nash 02:01, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I think the numbering the songs is a little bit odd and possibly misleading, for example; if Phil Ritchie were to be in the bottom 3 for 6 straight shows then voted off he would sing 12 songs. But if somebody else was not in the bottom 3 for the first 6 episodes and then was in the 7th and voted off they would sing 8 songs and I feel like that could get confusing. MBob 02:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that kinda crossed my mind. I was just copying from the American Idol (Season 5) article. My understanding is that the previous seasons of Idol used a different format in some way, somewhere in their articles, although not neccessarily concerning this listing of songs. Maybe we should look at them or maybe there's a good way to list the episode number next to each song. Or maybe instead of keeping all the songs with each performer, put the songs in a separate list for each episode. Do any of these ideas make sense or do you have a better one? Anyone? Also, so you all know, and if you think it's a good idea, I can get to work putting a similar listing for the first season of Rock Star. I recorded and have all that info. Thanks. --Eric Jack Nash 12:35, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I tossed SOMETHING up there before the list of the finalists for now as a bit of a clarification, but knowing myself it probably wasn't very clearly written :) But thats besides the point because after all anyone can edit that for clarification. I also think that there should be a section prior to this that in depth explains the voting procedures so what I wrote makes a little more sense. MBob 13:26, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

That looks good. I agree about there needing to be something a section prior to the one you added. But along those lines, have you noticed/read my two very short summaries of the first two CBS episodes? Please feel free to edit/add/rearrange (put them into sections - all that kinda stuff). One thing though: with your method of the number representing the week and then putting the "encore" and "bottom 3" performances underneath the first first week performance, that means that when I add the # sign for the next week number, it starts over at one. At least two solutions to this problem are: 1) Manually number each week, or 2) put the "encore" and "bottom 3" performances on the same line as the weekly regular performance. Is there another solution, or another way to go about it in general? Thoughts? Thanks for your effort and input. --Eric Jack Nash 13:35, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I just made some changes. I could see that the "spoiler warning" might seem silly, but I just thought about how certain parts of the world won't view these episodes until next week, so I thought I'd be cautious. Also, should the way the section headings look be different (smaller and without the line, that kind of stuff)? Thanks. --Eric Jack Nash 14:29, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I feel like the section header of "Episodes" is just the same information regurgitated over and over in the same general format in order to fit that weeks information.

Performance Episode: The rockers performed cover songs. And other assorted trivial information

Elimination Episode: These rockers were in the bottom 3, and this person was eliminated for whatever reason

Now either something needs to be done or this section is probably going to get very lengthy very quick with very little important information. Any comments? MBob 02:23, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

This is in I guess response to your comment here. I left a comment below about this, but I will also say it here. I would like to think my recaps expanded help make that section more substantive. And in saying that, just because I took the lead lately to expand on this section, please do not let it go astray. I flipped back and forth between RS and Last Comic Standing so I missed some parts and I haven't TIVO'd it since Phil was eliminated. I also haven't watched the mansion episode yet, so I can't write to that. Although I do plan on still watching it. Come on fanatics, I know we can do this :) --vi 01:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Elimination Chart

I added an elimination chart similar to American Idol's chart. The colors could use some tweaking. Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 15:05, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Cool! I was wondering if we could do something like this. Concerning the colors, is there any reason to not have them be the same as colors from the official Rock Star: Supernova logo? If that isn't wrong in some way, then let me know and I can decipher what colors look best. I noticed that you defined the colors by name - Is there a way to tell it by html/web codes? --Eric Jack Nash 15:47, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

The problem I have with the Rock Star colors is it includes black, which looks unprofessional and clashes with the Wikipedia color IMO. Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 16:08, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I just changed the chart colors to match the CBS website. There are two more colors that could be used - How do we change the heading's colors? Also, how do we change the text color? If you want I can try the MSN website's colors. Let me know. --Eric Jack Nash 16:46, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Personally I think that the colors look pretty ugly. No offense to whoever picked them but there just seems to be too much going on with the table, mainly under the "Place" and "Contestant" headings. I feel like the colors behind the place and the name should be different or even non-existent it just seems a little bit too flashy. But whatever that's just MY opinion and if I am the only dissenting opinion then keep it the way it is. MBob 00:28, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

By all means, please change them and see if you can find something that works better. Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 11:57, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Is this "Bottom 6" notation valid? I mean I understand the point of it, to show that the people were at some point in the bottom 3 during the voting period, but to call it the bottom 6 isn't that incorrect? I mean isn't it going to be different for each show the number of people who were ever in the bottom 3? I am removing the "Bottom 6" notation but if anyone objects just reply with your opinion. MBob 01:22, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree. The six people pointed out in the first elimination show is only comprised of people who were in the bottom three throughout the night. Those people don't necessarily reflect the bottom six players when voting ended. Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 02:14, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

During tonights elimination episode (7/12) 4 people were noted as being in the bottom 3 at one point. This is why there should be no "bottom 6" notation from the previous week, because each week there would be a different "bottom #" and that would just be confusing to someone looking at the page. And by the way Jtrost I like the colors that you changed the table to right now, I think that it really solves what I pointed out before, that there was seemingly too much going on, but now it looks perfectly fine. MBob 00:30, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Contestant summaries

A fellow wikipedian made some of the smaller contestants' articles redirect here. Therefore, I started creating the summaries in the Contestant/Finalist section (a la American Idol season 5) from the info from some of those articles. Please feel free to voice your opinions and definitely make changes to those summaries - one, Josh's, is way too long, but I'm not sure how best to summarize. Please help. Thanks. Also, I'm not even sure how to access some of that info from a couple of the articles as I'm not "watching" them. Is there a way that I can access them at this time? Again, thank you. --Eric Jack Nash 19:08, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

How about creating one article to highlight every contestant, because the way it is now with Josh's information is COMPLETELY ridiculous and it undermines the point of THIS article, which is to provide information on the show. If there was a section that redirected to an article, for example Rock Star: Supernova Contestants that had information on all of the contestants that would work MUCH better. MBob 19:54, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I made some of the redirects here (but not all of them, someone else did some of the others). At any rate, I believe that as time passes, at least some of these individuals will become more notable and have their redirects changed back to articles with more content. The only ones that I redirected here were those which only mentioned the singer's hometown and external website. The ones with more content, Storm, Josh, and Patrice, I left alone. In my opinion, most of these people aren't yet notable, but the more successful ones will become so over time. If you look at the articles for other shows like Big Brother (USA season 4) (yes, I know that a reality show is not exactly the same thing), you will notice that only half of the houseguests ended up having articles so far. --Brian G 20:31, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

(I have not yet read the above paragraph. This is in response to MBob's comments) I just reduced the really long summary down to what Josh's actual article has in the beginning summary of it (minus the mention of Rock Star, which goes without saying in this article). MBob, that's a possibility, sure, however, so you know, I was going off of what American Idol (season 5) article did. In that article there's a section that lists the final 12 contestants. It states the contestants' name, a summary, and then it lists each song they performed. --Eric Jack Nash 21:24, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I just read the article that you mentioned American Idol (season 5) to better understand what you are talking about, and I believe that if done right then that would be acceptable for this article also. But I have one comment to add: all of the information that is added after the contestant names should be somewhat "equal"; if one person has their age listed then all of the performers should have their ages listed (and by the way listing a date of birth is more effective than an age, because ages change and dates of birth don't, but that is another story) and also if one person has background information listed then all performers should have "equal" background information listed. But I mean I am just suggesting options for you and I would rather that you finish adding information for every performer if possible and then we can edit it as a group so that it best works. MBob 23:47, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Their are many stubs on Wikipedia and their creation is certainly acceptable. The American Idol analogy is a poor one, since that show (and its article) has dozens of contestants, and one could argue that few are "famous" enough to merit an article. Granted. But if someone wants to create a full article about the few contestants for this show, I see no problem with them doing that. I also see no problem in putting "equal" information (age, hometown, etc.) on the main Superstar page as a summary. Sure, why not? But that should never prevent someone from creating an article about a contestant, even if its a "stub" until it's fleshed out. And rather than spilling thousands of words on a Talk page about this redirect issue, I would hope we can all focus on making those stubs into good, strong articles. But knowing Wikipedians... - Nhprman ^List 17:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I would like to hear what others have to say, but to me it doesn't make sense to have an article about Magni that just lists the 3 songs that he sang and where he was born, when all that information is right on this page. Storm, Josh, and Patrice all have their own pages because somebody collected biographical information that extends beyond the show. For Magni, nothing is posted except show information. --Brian G 17:50, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Can I suggest we work together and make it a proper article? - Nhprman ^List 19:44, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I've expanded Magni's article this evening. I can't wait to see the others expanded, too. - Nhprman ^List 20:36, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I started expanding Ryan Star tonight, since it was only one sentance. I also had created Phil Ritchie's a few week's ago. Everyone is welcome to help contribute to those as they still need expanding to really become full articles. If you are looking for examples of catagories to add to them, you can use these as an example. I plan to get images and infoboxes up on them both soon. --vi 03:05, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

DAB

Songs and Musical Groups are an area where ambiguity in names is quite common. Please use care when creating links to make sure that thay are specified correctly instead of just conveniently, but wrong. --Brian G 02:26, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

BrianG, first, I'm not sure what DAB means. The closest thing that relates to this article that wikipedia says it is is "Digital Audio Broadcasting". Is that what you mean? If it is, then I still don't get why that is the name of this new section in this talk page and how it could possibly relate to what you are talking about. Please help me understand.

Second, is there somewhere in this article, or another that I'm associated with, that has links that may not be "specified correctly instead of just conveniently, but wrong"?

Please let me, and the rest of us, know more specifically to what you are referring so that we will be in compliance. Thank you. --Eric Jack Nash 11:46, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, I just went back to my watchlist and saw changes as far as what you are talking about, I think. For instance, "(song)" quite often needs to after the song, and then a pipe, so that it links correctly. Is that what you're talking about? I'm still confused about "DAB". Thanks. --Eric Jack Nash 11:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

"DAB" is just short for "disambiguation". Kirjtc2 12:08, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, sorry about the abbreviation, Eric. For more information about Disambiguation, please check out WP:DAB. The specification of (song) or (band) is frequently used in the names of these articles, but it is not consistent because #1) Each article is created by different people and there is no formal convention and #2) whoever creates an article with the name first generally gets to keep it, unless the article that comes along later is much more notable. It can also get really tricky when you have a band with a self titled album or a "title cut" where the main article usually goes to the album and the song gets the dab. In general, when creating links, it just takes that extra time to create them in preview mode and then follow the links to see that they go where you want. One tool that I really find helpful for this is popups, which you can read about at WP:POPUP. Happy Editing! --Brian G 12:36, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Instruments played by rockers

In the "Top 15 finalists" list, where we are listing the performed songs, would it be OK to add a note such as if the rocker was also playing an instrument (and what instrument)? If I don't get a response in the next 24 hours, then I'll go ahead and start noting that. Thanks. --Eric Jack Nash 12:04, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I have no objection to this. Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 13:01, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Good Idea - Go for it! --Brian G 23:15, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Why?

Why was my edit removed, I have proof to verify this information is true. -24.92.46.16 01:06, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Your information is treated as false until you post a reliable source. --Kuckzul 13:18, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Formatting and Expanding

As I have been following the show and this page, I have contributing just a little in the past to help with the growth of this into a really good article. In doing so, I took the liberty to format each week into new headings so each week is in itself editable. This will help in management of the article over time. I also expanded a little of the eliminations section for week's four and five. I would like to try to set this as an example of how we can develop this to read more article like with references, as well as more interactive within the wikipedia itself. I hope this catches on and you like my IMHO "improvements". Happy watching and editing! --vi 03:30, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

May I suggest adding some punctuation (either a dash or colon) between "Bottom 3 Performance" and the actual song title. For example, Zayra's first bottom 3 mention looks like this: Bottom 3 Performance You Really Got Me (The Kinks) which runs together and could be unclear. It's not as noticeable when the song has a wiki, such as Matt's performance, but they all should still have some separation. Mtjaws 19:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree, how about:

Bottom 3 Performance: You Really Got Me (The Kinks)

I added ':' at the end of "Bottom 3 Performance:" (nothing changed on the article yet), would that solve the issue? --Kuckzul 09:44, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's exactly what I imagined. The "Special Performance" row should also use it. But, should that song title and artist be italicized or just the intro "Bottom 3 Performance:" piece? Like this: Bottom 3 Performance: You Really Got Me (The Kinks) Mtjaws 18:47, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I like that idea, go for it? --Kuckzul 01:16, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Just also a professional editor's thoughts, numbers zero through ten should be spelled out, larger than ten should be in numeric form. Thus, I have been editing (as you might have noticed) bottom 3 to bottom three. I noticed you changed this edit on Dilana's page Kuckzul, can we agree on professional consistancy? Let's discuss! --immunity 18:54, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

The reason that I changed it is that I wanted Magnis and Dilanas performance sections (and everyone elses) to have the same format, so if you change Dilanas article, please change Magnis too. I have no opinion about whether to have the numbers spelled out or numeric. Thanks for bringing this up, I will keep this in mind when Im editing articles in the future. --Kuckzul 01:14, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

OK -- I thought about this as a compromise, so we don't have to go back and revert edits. Let's spell them out as they should be spelled within paragraphs, but on the lists (as in Week 1, Week 2, ect ... let's leave them as they are. So then bottom three IS spelled out and any other numbers as such. Sweet that we can agree. I think this communication has really built up this page much better than the first seasons! (However, when there is time, we should make them both look balanced) I also thought of a way we could possibly make the weekly performances section better. I am going to try to implement it -- see the List of Prison Break characters as my starting point, I am developing it on my sandbox page . --immunity 06:08, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree and I look forward to seeing what you are doing in your sandbox on the main article, it looks really nice. You might want to have all those pictures the same size though, but thats not a big issue. --Kuckzul 11:29, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I want to get the pictures the same size. I had to stop working on it because I needed sleep. Can I get some more of the editors of this page to chime in on what I have done? If you feel you have something to contribute to it or specific suggestions, you can discuss them over there. --immunity 18:00, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Update: I got all the rockers in now, with all their pictures. The problem is while I have them all the same width, the pictures should be taken in portrait, not in landscape, to accomodate the final column being longer. I am going to try to play with it some more to get maybe to split the performance cell over two with a rowspan this would then not effect the first two cells. Also, for individual songs that are covered and there is no article written, I am linking them to the album. I suggest we use this technique as well so there is no red within the article. So, as to say again (and saving space on here) -- please check out my sandbox page . --immunity 20:54, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Just wondering

I'm just wondering who people are rooting for. I'm rooting for Dilana, Lukas, and Toby. Please respond to this, for I wish to hear your opinions.

Special Performance

Does anyone have a suggestion about adding the "special performance" by Dilana on August 16 to the elimination chart. I'm thinking it could look something like the encore notation. --Brian G (Talk) 02:36, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I like the current notation, however with just an SP, I had to read back up in the article to realize that it was a special performance. Do we need a legend above/beneathe/on the side? --vi 05:59, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I added a small explanation beneath the chart, its easier to understand that way. --Kuckzul 13:18, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks --vi 18:35, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

My friend was visiting this article and he had trouble understanding "Btm 3", so I decided to go all the way and create a legend beneathe the chart, just like immunity suggested. Thoughts? --Kuckzul 16:50, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Blog links

Both links to Dave Navarro's blog in the "References" section are dead links. They should probably be removed. --Erich168 17:13, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I can just fix them to just point directly to his blog, rather than the exact blog dates. --vi 18:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Two possible styles, which one?

Hello wikipedia, I noticed that there are two styles used when an original song by the artist himself is written down into their "Top 15 finalists" performance overview:

Zayra style:

7. Lluvia De Mar (Zayra Alvarez) Rocker played original song and guitar

Ryan style:

8. Back of your Car (Original Song)

Which one do you think is better for the article? --Kuckzul 12:03, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I like Zayra's, except her name doesn't need to be linked twice. íslenska hurikein #12 _(samtal) 12:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree, delinked for comparison. Without a link to the name, Ryans style is not as easy to understand. We should go for Zayras style. --Kuckzul 13:49, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Links to uncreated pages

I know they are they for encouragement of creating the article, but I have some concerns about lea ving them as they are now blank, because as we all know, someone else could write a song with the same name and then it would be incorrectly linked here. Thoughts? --vi 21:56, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to be a cynic, but these songs are not notable enough to merit their own articles. Maybe if they are included on an album at some point. I think they should be unlinked. Here are the Wikipedia guidelines for notability of songs. If someone really wants to write about these songs, they should be sections in the artists' articles. Katr67 22:05, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, your right about delinking and adding the song to the artists articles instead of a small stub. We could always link the songs right to their sections of the artists article, once created. --Kuckzul 23:11, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Song Titles

Per MoS:T, song titles should be in quotation marks. In many instances, they are in italics in the text sections and are in plain text in the artist/week list. Does anyone object to a mass change to follow the guideline? I'm happy to make the change if no one objects. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 23:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

You mean we should change the style so it looks more like the one below?

7. "Starman" (David Bowie)

Bottom 3 Performance "Creep" (Radiohead)

Personally, I think it would make things look a bit clearer, I agree with you. --Kuckzul 13:39, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I believe so, yes. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 14:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I would eliminate the song title italics in Bottom Three row, and incorporate earlier suggestions. Maintain quotes around song titles. Like this:

7. "Starman" (David Bowie)

Bottom Three Performance: "Creep" (Radiohead)

--Mtjaws 15:41, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Whatever the consenses, can we say Bottom Three Performance, numbers 0-10 should be spelled out. Also, since I am on the road this week can someone update my sandbox? I give the regulars permission! ;) --immunity 16:53, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I used a good text editor (jEdit, any editor with Find/Replace works) to get this right. Also changed immunity's Sandbox --Kuckzul 20:07, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey thanks. I just checked into my hotel in OKC and I am beat. Sad I misssed the show tonight, just read a couple of blogs. I am going to miss elimination too. Feel free to keep working on my sandbox. It's still far from being complete. -- immunity 08:09, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Article Length

The article is quickly becoming quite long, and according to WP:SIZE is larger than the preferred size for an article. So something needs to be done. I am suggesting that one of two things happens, either the episode summaries are moved to another article with a link such as

See: Rock Star: Supernova episode summaries

or a short summary be left with a link like this at the beginning of the section

Main article: Rock Star: Supernova episode summaries

and of course there are other options but I am just suggesting both of these. Mike 15:54, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

• I don't think this is a problem. Further reading at WP:SIZE states that technical issues are no longer a concern and that this is now a stylistic consideration. "For stylistic purposes, only the main body of prose (excluding links, see also, reference and footnote sections, and lists/tables) should be counted toward an article's total size, since the point is to limit the size of the main body of prose." I think that removing the table and the list would put this back below the 32kb limit, so I don't think that any action needs to be taken. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 22:14, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

The House Band

Have you noticed on the bass drum that it says "The House Band"? Well, I just added The House Band (Rock Star) to the House band article. So then I realized that we should have the information about The House Band in the main Rock Star article. So I'm going to move that now. Change back or modify further if any reason to. Thanks. --luckymustard 19:28, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Week 10 performance episode end of show ranking

For whoever does the week 10 summary for the performance episode, at the end of the show they listed in order which rocker was in what place in voting at that point, 1 through 5. I don't video record it, but what I jotted down was: 1. Toby, 2. Lukas, 3. Dilana, 4. Storm, 5. Magni. Is this what anyone else got? What order is this in? Thanks. --luckymustard 02:08, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

• At the end of our version of the performance episode, we had: Toby, Lukas, Magni, Storm, Dilana in that order 1 - 5. However we don't know how that list is generated in the first place, either by votes in that country or by overall votes calculated so far. - Irisx 08:33, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Higher Ground

Should the orginal artist be Stevie Wonder or Red Hot Chili Peppers? I know that Patrice did the Chili Peppers version of the song, but Stevie Wonder was the original artist. And next to "Behind Blue Eyes" it says The Who, even though Dilana's take on it is closer to the Limp Bizkit version. 59.100.27.78 07:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Really, it's whatever the song title is when they put them up. Dilana can grab Behind Blue eyes by The Who and Do it exactly the same as Limb Bizkit version but it would still be the who... so yeah. -Andrew —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 219.88.42.251 (talk • contribs) .

In my opinion, it should be whatever the show put in the graphic at the bottom of the screen. However, if they somehow had a spelling mistake, or shortening of the title, that might as well be correct/full. Another way to go, however, is to put multiple artists and/or the actual writing credits, such as for "Back in the U.S.S.R." by The Beatles, it could also say Lennon/McCartney. That, the actual names of the songwriter, is what it says on the sheets of music when they are selecting their songs of the wall. Any more thoughts? --luckymustard 12:00, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

So is it staying as Red Hot Chili Peppers or being changed to Stevie Wonder? 59.100.27.78 12:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I just watched a video of the performance, and Brook Bruke introduces it ws "The Red Hot Chili Pepper's Higher Ground" but the caption at the bottom on the screen says "High Ground - Stevie Wonder". 59.100.27.78 12:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Since both versions are so well known, we could list it as "Higher Ground" (Stevie Wonder/Red Hot Chili Peppers) especially since the onscreen text and Brooke's intro were different. However, with "Behind Blue Eyes", Limp Bizkit should not be included since they simply covered the song, as millions of others do with songs. Clicking on the song title wiki will lead the reader to song info which includes mention of the Bizket cover. Another similar issue concerns "All the Young Dudes" by Bowie and Mott the Hoople. Both of those should probably be listed since they both could be associated with the song. --Mtjaws 13:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

When does show air?

When does the elimination episode air in other time zones around the world in relation to when I watch it at 8pm in the Eastern time zone? The reason I ask this is because an anon has indicated who are in the bottom three, what songs they performed, who was eliminated, who got the encore, and who got the special performance. I know it has a spoiler alert, but I never expected anyone to post what happened on the show before I saw it. Should I remove this info so that the rest of you don't see it? Am I being crazy here? Oh well... --luckymustard 22:48, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

well, if the show is prerecorded, maybe they were one of the actual audiences. íslenskur fellibylur #12 _(samtal) 22:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, you mean the anon could have been an audience member? I kinda thought of that too while watching the show. Again, oh well... --luckymustard 01:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• As much as it disappoints me that my favourite singer is eliminated, even if the anonymous member wasn't an audience member, the spoilers floating around on the internet forums provide sufficient information to indicate elimination song choice, encore & special performance :( -- Irisx 02:27, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I dont think lukas did headspin. He wouldnt. - Andrew —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.54.82.157 (talk • contribs) .

Some shows can be downloaded from the internet before they air anywhere, remember that several hundred if not thousands of people work on the many aspects of producing and airing a television programme. The list of people that have access to information about the outcome of a taped show before it airs is quite extensive and not at all exclusive.

Show Editing

on the final and a few other episodes, part of the show was cut because one minute it sais the they will be back with seens from the show and then all of the sudden magni is gone and there preforming there songs.

Time to copy immunity's sandbox over?

Since the show is over, shouldn't we copy the sandbox over to the main article? I know that immunity was talking about splitting the last column in two and stuff ... but we could work on that after we copy it to the main article. I don't think its too much of an issue that the first and second columns get stretched, it really isn't that noticable ... and either way it still looks better than our current Top 15 finalists --Kuckzul 02:14, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

hey thanks for keeping up on this while I was on vacation. got back to town to catch Phil Ritchie perform right before he flew back for the finale. Do with it what you want! --immunity 08:24, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem, I have decided that it was still a bit stretchy, so I played around with it a bit. Im not copying it over yet. --Kuckzul 11:38, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I like how it is now. Easy to read and utilizes the space well. Go for it. Again much thanks on the due dilligence as I travelled the country. --immunity 18:51, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

The band's new official name

Since they announced that the band will now be called "Rock Star Supernova", should all references to "Supernova" change to reflect the new official name? I already added this change info to the intro, and as much as I hate it, I think the full name should be added everywhere. Agree?
Mtjaws 03:06, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Sure, agree. --luckymustard 15:12, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Supposed Star Judges

http://rockstar.msn.com/aboutshow states: Along with becoming Supernova's frontman/woman, touring with the band beginning January 2007 and cutting an album for a November 2006 release, they'll also face the scrutiny of viewer votes (that means you) and weekly celebrity judges including Moby, Rob Zombie, Macy Gray, Slash and last year's "Rock Star" winner, INXS frontmanJ.D. Fortune. This didnt happen... Priest. 08:13, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Be Yourself and 5 Other Cliches

I'd just like to state for the record that nowhere does any official Rock Star Supernova release uses the word "common" in the song "Be Yourself and 5 Other Cliches". I don't know where everyone got the idea it does. It doesn't. Check their website (intothesupernova.com) if you need it proven. --Trogdor077 23:21, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

The special Performance of a Supernova song: "Be Yourself (And Five Other Clichés)" was made for Lucas Rossi, not for Toby Ryan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.68.137.135 (talk) 16:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Elimination Chart

Keep an eye on this chart. Someone rearranged the order and put Storm first. I changed it back. —The preceding comment was added by Dkoerber (talk • contribs) 23:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC). dkoerber

It was me, ol' Socky the blocky, STORM SHOULD OF WON, IT WAS FIXED

Trivia and Cleanup

I know this show has been long off the air, but this definitely needs to be fixed. I really don't think there's a need for a lot of the trivia near the end of the article--it's pointless and/or obvious. THE evil fluffyface (talk) 16:52, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Normally, I am one who likes reading trivia about shows and contests and such, because it is often interesting stuff that one might not notice or know about. However in this case, I can see that these items don't really add much new or relevant info. In the singers' song lists, we can see that several did multiple songs by the same artist. And who got the most encores. I'm fine with ditching that whole section since it is all very minor items. --Mtjaws (talk) 18:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)