Talk:Britain's Got Talent

The UK logo is different to the American one. I've changed the page to reflect this and will get a better quality version as soon as available. Hollaa01 16:40, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Clearer, up to date Britain's Got Talent logo added. Hurray! Hollaa01 18:07, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

The show originated with the British format

If the show originated in the British format with the Paul O'Grady fronted idea surely the show is an original British format and not based on America's got talent? Conversely America's Got Talent is based on the British format even if they aired first? --90.192.92.23 14:12, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Simon Cowell is the one who is behind these shows: he does BGT and AGT; 80.229.149.192 (talk) 16:34, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Missing acts?

There were 3 acts in here alone that were let through but don't seem to appear on the SemiFinals list http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVvp4Y4Go7c

The judges narrowed the list of all the acts they let through the auditions down to 24 and if I remember correctly George was not one of the ones that got through that elimination. However, they did drop two acts but decide to bring them back, Jake Pratt and Crew 82, making the total number 26. They still only showed 24 acts in the semi finals. Richard Bates stepped down as he was a registered sex offender but there seems to be no mention of why The Kit Kat dolls were left out. --172.141.147.20 11:50, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Someone's made changes to that...just thought I'd mention this so people reading this know not to look into adding something...I find it interesting that it was News of the World that ran the story, the newspaper PIERS MORGAN (one of the judges) worked for at one point :-) SmUX 10:57, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Music

Took me a long time to work out some songs used in the programme. One of which is something by Snow Patrol, Fix You by Coldplay, and Lux Aeterna (Two towers remix) by Clint Mansell (whoops sorry, logged in now.)

marc 11:26, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Isn't that Requiem for a Dream that's played? Neo222 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 21:13, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Tony Laf

Why does it say that Tony is in the final already?Jedi Master Bra'tac 15:01, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Tony's name is spelt wrong in the table of semi-finalists, it should be 'Laf' not 'Laff'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.177.111.164 (talk • contribs)

I have changed per this page http://talent.itv.com/page.asp?partid=316. AxG ^{@ ►talk} 11:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I was adding the Red Withdrawn Colour and I got the code wrong. I've fixed it though - Doctorwho12

Richard Bates

In the interests of WP:BLP, if you're going to mention his sex offender status, you might want to include his statement to the Sun at [[1]]. 24.148.66.96 18:29, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

The Richard Bates reference in the table

Is there anyway of making a numbered link to the controversy section for more details, so that the citation that is currently next to his name can appear there?--Jcvamp 01:15, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I've brought both links together in both areas of the article, so that they are now also together in the references section. Bungle44 09:09, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Rating references

Can we try and find viewing figures from more open sources? The sources that seem to be popping up from viewingfigures.com aren't openly available at all times by the look of it, unless you have a full account. Bungle44 09:36, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I suggest BARB. [2] Dalejenkins 10:58, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

The article cites Saturday's show as having 8.9 million viewers; however the show numerous times told the contestants they were performing in front of '10 million people watching at home'. Were they just being optimistic or are we using the wrong sources?--172.141.147.20 11:53, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

They were probably using averages/estimates from previous shows. Dalejenkins 18:55, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Seperating the pages

As we know that BGT is to return in 2008 perhaps the 'Series 1' information should be split into its own page as is done with most TV shows such as Big Brother. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Enero778 (talk • contribs)

Good idea but the articles will be small, best wait until next year. AxG ^{@ ►talk} 21:39, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Yup wait; so at least the sectiopn has some decent content. P.S. I was in this show :) Got to audtion in front of the Judges :) Didn't get past them though lol. Look out for the guy doing Smeagol impression ;) 80.229.149.192 (talk) 17:07, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

That was not a bad impression, though. If you could do a few other characters as well, you may have had a chance. 129.97.248.133 (talk) 00:58, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Section on "Controversy"

In the section entitled "Controversy", it states: "Despite being named Britain's Got Talent, somewhat controversially there were no auditions held in either Scotland, Northern Ireland or the Republic of Ireland - leaving the show technically England and Wales' Got Talent.".

RoI should be removed from there as it is a Republic and is not a part of Britain. Anyone have any thoughts? Ptancred 15:43, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the entire section as it appeared to be WP:SOAPBOXing by someone who thinks the show was too England biased. I've also removed the "Rumors" (sic) section as rumours don't belong here. If anyone has reliable sources for any of these claims, feel free to re-add them. Magiclite 17:22, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

There was a small paragraph in this section suggesting that events were fixed by the producers, which was marked as "citation needed". I have removed it. If anyone can fully source it, please re-add it. Joe dawg 9 (talk) 11:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Bgt new.jpg

Image:Bgt new.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 03:54, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Damon Scott Runner-Up

I have taken off the comment that Damon Scott was the runner-up of Britain's Got Talent Series 1. This claim is not referenced, and is not commonly known. If anyone can reference this, please re-add it. 69.114.50.36 (talk) 15:36, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Iona

I've noticed in the past few episodes (particularly More Talent episodes 7 and 8) that they don't use Iona's last name. It is for this reason that I am removing it. The rationale is similar to why Chekezie's last name was removed from the American Idol page. Joe dawg 9 (talk) 19:59, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

You're right, she was referred to as just "Iona" last night. Digifiend (talk) 08:17, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I've just had to revert the names back to Iona. This is how she referred to on the show, and this page should reflect that. Does anyone else agree/disagree? Joe dawg 9 (talk) 20:33, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

10 in the final

Two new slots need creating in the series 2 results table, there'll be 10 in the final, but there's only 8 in the semis. Digifiend (talk) 08:19, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Done -92.11.167.68 (talk)

Act Description in table

I just deleted this off the table, because it stretches the box and half of the descriptions were wrong (George Sampson was described as a comedian when he is a street dancer, for example). Should we keep them off, or not? -92.11.167.68 (talk) 11:00, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I think it is helpful additional information to see the variety (or not) of acts that have been selected. I didn't realise that this had been attempted before - my edit of this morning, subsequently enhanced by Neil, has been removed for no apparent reason. Anguswalker (talk) 13:22, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

It is not helpful to put the act descriptions into the table as the OP mentioned, it does stretch the table somewhat considerably. Can we reach a consensus as to whether to keep them in or not? TheChrisD, ^{Rant with me!} 14:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

The descriptions are now right (I was stunned to see we have an article on musical canine freestyle), so I see no reason why they can't be there. There appears to be no good reason for removing them. Short descriptions do not stretch the table too much - it fits absolutely fine on my screen, and I am only on 1024x768. Neıl 龱 14:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm on 1024 as well, and it's causing the table to stretch so that the data in some cells is forced onto two lines, rather than one. You can see that there are no descriptions for the finalists in the first series, so why should they be there for the second series? TheChrisD, ^{Rant with me!} 14:26, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I would respond with "why aren't they there for the first series"? Wikipedia's job is to be informative. I will try and find a reliable source and add the descriptions for series one. Which of the cells is causing problems for you, Chris? Just the Signature one? Neıl 龱 14:31, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Primarily, yes. It seems this issue has been sorted, since User:Anguswalker made a nice table listing the act types of all the semi-finalists. TheChrisD, ^{Rant with me!} 14:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, thanks Angus. Great work. Needs some tidying but that's much better. Neıl 龱 14:39, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Thanks for the improvements, I'm new to this! Anguswalker (talk) 15:06, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

'Buzzed off Prior to Completion'

This means that you only add the red to an act which didn't get to finish; not an act which got buzzed but still finished. I've had to clear this up a few times. -92.11.167.68 (talk) 20:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you. Being buzzed off only means getting all 3 buzzers prior to completion. I'll go and revert to the original format now. TheChrisD, ^{Rant with me!} 20:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm currently unsure as to whether or not Phil Blackmore should be red on the table. Despite getting the three red Xs, the act ended (almost exactly) at that point. Also, during the third semi-final, Ant and Dec referred to The Deans of Magic as being the first act to get all three buzzers. Thoughts anyone? Somestrangeflea (talk) 21:51, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

He shouldn't be read. If they said on the show that The Deans of Magic were the first to be buzzed out, then Phil was buzzed out after he had finished the main point of his act. So no, he shouldn't be red. TheChrisD, ^{Rant with me!} 21:59, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

• Right, stop this. We need a consensus over Phil Blackmore. Should he be red or white?

Don't add a note in until the issue has been resolved!

I'm voting for a White box since it was recognised by Ant & Dec that the Deans of Magic were the first to be buzzed off prior to completion, and that would indicate the shows official stance on the matter.

Regarding the note, I'm against any note being added since it is superfluous information. If you add that in about Phil, why not add a note about George Sampson recieving a record number of votes?

Ixistant (talk) 10:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I vote for white. And another unregistered user made it red again... TheChrisD, ^{Rant with me!} 14:56, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

It needs to be white. Blackmore wasn't buzzed off prior to completion - Ant and Dec actually said the sexy magic pair were the first to be buzzed off. Neıl 龱 15:28, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Please check for unverifiable information...

When I go to this page ("Britains Got talent", with apostrophe) there is an unverifiable claim under the table for the season two semifinals, just before the program ratings. In some versions of the page, somebody has embedded a prediction about who will win the finals, which doesn't meet the guidelines for what should be on a page. But, when I try to track down the text in the edit frame, I just can't find it! Could somebody with more Wiki experience try to track this down for me?

The problem is on the page that is not ASCII format: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/britain's_got_talent. It doesn't show up in the edit frame, but you can see it embedded in the source code for the HTML page.

Thanks! 71.203.228.179 (talk) 02:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)T. Hooper

The only thing I see between the table and the ratings is the clarification regarding Phil Blackmore being buzzed off as his act was ending. 129.97.248.133 (talk) 04:55, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Location of Vizage

Vizage come from Hull, but they went to the audition in Blackpool. Please do not revert the change I made back to Blackpool. Also, I am 92.11.167.68, but for some reason my I.P is not static and so changes every time we turn our wireless access point off.-92.8.51.167 (talk) 21:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Register and you won't have that problem any more. :) Digifiend (talk) 09:26, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

The column is where they are from, not the audition location, so I changed it back to Hull. Vizage isn't the only Hull act, Craig Harper is also from Hull, and the table says so. Digifiend (talk) 10:46, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Finalists Table

I changed the "lost judges vote" colour from green to pink. I just don't think that green was the right colour - sorta stood out too much.

As well, should we have a similar table for series 1? 129.97.248.133 (talk) 23:04, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

This seems to have been reverted, as was my attempt to reconcile the colours between the two tables. I agree that the colour choice is currently wrong and suggest four shades of the same colour, each getting darker, for 'lost judges' vote', 'won judges' vote', 'won public vote' and (eventually) 'won the competition', e.g. LightYellow, Yellow, Gold, DarkOrange (see Web colors). Anguswalker (talk) 09:43, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

The colour scheme should probably be the same for the first and second series. The "lost to the judges votes" light flesh colour from the first series is a bit better than the current pink for the second series.

Someone seems to enjoy adding a link to a non existent George Sampson article.

I swear I'll never understand why people are so adamant about unilaterally installing their own colour schemes. Ah well, all part of the wiki experience I guess. Mallocks (talk) 13:31, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Rumours

No no and no. It doesn't matter how many times you add "this is at the moment just a rumour" they are by definition unverifiable and therefore have no place in Wikipedia. Feel free to bring them back when there are reliable sources touting them. Mallocks (talk) 12:16, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

There's references for the Faryl Smith coaching stuff, so I've added a section on that. Neıl 龱 13:01, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Colours in final column of table

I don't like the alternating yellow and orange. I think that (a) the info is redundant and (b) it's just tacky. That is why I have removed it. 129.97.248.133 (talk) 02:15, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

If they were sorted alphabetically, perhaps it wouldn't look 'tacky' - making them all a new colour doesn't add any information, so they should either be coloured by where they finished or not at all. Anguswalker (talk) 10:35, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

By using the same colour for "Won the judges' vote" and "Second Place (Final)" it creates confusion. One might think that Signature came in second in the final as a result of a judges' vote, not as a result of the public vote. Similarly, there could be confusion because of using the same colour for "Lost the judges' vote" and "Third Place (Final)". The colours in the final column should be changed to an otherwise unused one for second and third in the final.

Kate and gin!

They have withdrawn from the competition becuase of the voting farce according to the sun! any more info should we add this to their current controversy article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.201.162.214 (talk) 10:39, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

By all means, please add anything that can be reliably sourced. Mallocks (talk) 11:42, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

seems they're still on there... 77.101.18.129 (talk) 19:04, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

They nearly did withdraw, but for a very different reason - Gin narrowly avoided being run over on the day of the performance. Digifiend (talk) 09:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

andrew muir controversy

andrew muir stated after his performance in the final, that he didn't choose his song. when simon cowell said to him it was abad choice of song, he said he didn't want to sing it, and simon said he shouldn't have, to which andrew replied it was out of his hands. how can the viewing public make an informed decision, when there's someone behind the scenes pulling strings. andrew didn't have a great performance, but like simon said, with a different song, could have been a lot better. how can this be a talent show, when the 'talent' are being told what to do? for me, it's like they deliberately gave him a bad song to sing, or a song he'd sing badly, whatever. can this be included in the controversy section?? 77.101.18.129 (talk) 19:07, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

If and when it can be reliably sourced. Mallocks (talk) 19:20, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Dont know how to source it, but on Britain's got More Talent on itv2 tonight, Simon explained how the contestnts submit a list of songs to sing and the producers choose from that, and muir had yesterday on his list. Presumably this is to do with clearence rights for broadcast performance. Pedgeth (talk) 20:42, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Colors for Series 2 table

I think the colors need changing; changing to something like this;

Key	Won the public vote	Won the judge's vote	Top 3 - lost the judge's vote	Buzzed off prior to completion	Winner (Final)	Runner Up (Final)	Third Place (Final)	Withdrawn from competition

Thoughts? -92.11.197.39 (talk) 21:13, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Proposal: I suggest splitting off the 'Final' column of the series 2 table, making it a new table below the current one. This will allow for a seperate colour scheme to be used, along with info such as the specific song/act performed in a second column, and the acts could be displayed in running order and so on. Thoughts?LHMike (talk) 23:13, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Signature

They should have won, but does anyone know what song they used in their performance was? The michael jackson bhangra thingy? And can you buy it off iTunes? Neo222 (talk) 21:16, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

The song is called Nachna Onda Nei by a guy called Tigerstyle. Showman16 (talk) 23:33, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

The Tigerstyle article is heavily in need of wikifying and editing, if anyone's interested. LHMike (talk) 23:36, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Order of appearance

Apparently the last act in each semi-final qualified. Order of appearance is required information to add to the table on this years acts. SunCreator (talk) 18:51, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Why? Joe dawg 9 (talk) 03:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Because the draw is like a handicap that greatly effects the amount of viewers, which in turn effects the voting. You'll notice for example that the table on Eurovision_Song_Contest_2008 has the draw, not just ESC for 2008, but ALL previous years. This article is incomplete without it. SunCreator (talk) 23:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Charlie Green

the link from Charlie Green directs me to some random scientist. Can somebody please change this?????????????? Hello963 (talk) 20:19, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Somebody removed the link. Digifiend (talk) 09:34, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

eScala

Someone should change their name to the lower case "eScala" rather than "Escala" Mista koo (talk) 14:12, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Do you have a reference for that? SunCreator (talk) 23:21, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Their official site http://www.escalamusic.com would suggest eScala to be correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moggie2002 (talk • contribs) 23:55, 2 June 2008 (UTC)