Talk:Hell's Kitchen (American TV series) season 9

This article was nominated for deletion on 24 December 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was redirect to Hell's Kitchen (U.S.).

Television

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Using dashes

Please see Wikipedia:HYPHEN and Wikipedia:NDASH to type a simple dash, single dash (–), not double dash (--). Thank you. ApprenticeFan ^work 06:47, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Contestant Progress Section

Please do not add additional colors/footnotes/identifiers to the contestant progress section. The consensus established at the series talk page (Talk:Hell's Kitchen (U.S.)#Contestant Progress Sections) was that we use a minimal amount of colors, no footnotes, and minimal amount of identifiers (Win, Loose, Out, etc.) If someone wants to find out more about a specific contestant's elimination they need to go to the episode description. As I'm wielding the consensus that has been established I consider myself immune to the edit war rules as nobody has yet to challenge (or open a talk thread about) the styling. Hasteur (talk) 11:21, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know this is waaaaay after the fact (we didn't get to see these episodes until now 2014 on TLC LA) but why is most of this article in PAST TENSE when it should be PRESENT TENSE, ie "Chef Smith gets a bloody nose when Chef Jones trips with the Beef Wellington." There are also issues with some spelling and Capitalization but I'm a little too lazy to fix it all. Davidrust (talk) 21:49, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is this why the entire page is locked? What about typos in the episode description that need to be fixed? Are you writing those? You even misspelled "lose" right above this comment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.234.185.70 (talk) 14:19, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The page is locked because multiple IP editors and newly registered users are implementing style changes in the contestant progress section against the consensus listed above that has been established. I applied for semi-protection for this reason and an administrator agreed with my reasoning and locked the page. Take a look at the history of the page to see who made the typos. If there is a problem you can use the {{Edit semi-protected}} template to propose changes. If the change is appropriate for Wikipedia and meets the policies of the community, it'll be applied. Hasteur (talk) 14:38, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We again are having IP editors add additional colors and identifiers against consensus. If this does not stop I will go to Administrator intervention against vandalism to petition for semi-protection again. Hasteur (talk) 11:54, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

why does it say bob next to elise on episode 908? 08:48, 13 August 2011 (UTC) 76.120.39.39 (talk)

It means Best of the Best.

Who named her the best and please use ~ to identify yourself 76.120.39.39 (talk) 20:08, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that Chef Ramsay did based on singling her out for extra praise during the elimination chat time. Hasteur (talk) 20:12, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since "BoB" doesn't make any sense out of context (and why I came to the talk page to ask), should that designation not be included in the legend below the table? Killermist (talk) 17:07, 29 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Finally added coloring and legend entry for BoB so nobody has any reason to come back and change it to "WIN" again. Disambiguation is a good thing. Killermist (talk) 13:42, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now that the page is out from semi-protection let's please stop making edits without the backing of consensus. I don't want to have to ask at RfPP again for protection to the end of the season, but if we get IP editors start edit warring and adding stylistic changes against consensus I will go back and ask for a RfPP until a week after the season finale.

Links to Contestant Info & Biography

I've been busy adding links to external sources of interviews and biography information for the contestants. Then it occurred to me - Does anybody care? I think an interview of a contestant by a hometown newspaper is of interest and adds depth to the person. There's an occasional hint about future episodes. Anyone care to continue? Brookfield53045 03:27, 25 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brookfield53045 (talk • contribs)

I'm sort of torn. I think the guide here should be which ones that we expect to be around for more than a year. I don't think that Fox will continue to have information available. But "adding depth" should apply to links in the "See Also" section, not where they are.Naraht (talk) 18:28, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely you should include, and you should be applauded for it. That sort of background sourcing is at the very heart of Wikipedia. And while Hell's Kitchen identifies its contestants by full name on the show's website, other shows, such as The Bachelor and The Bachelorette, do not, which has led to instances of incorrect last names being added and then getting picked up by the mainstream press, which eventually had to run corrections. (This is one reason the mainstream press rarely gives Wikipedia credibility.)

So, yes. The more we can accurately provide, the better it is for Wikipedia as a whole. The networks are known are getting things wrong — Bachelorette Ashley Hebert used to be described as a "dentist" until journalists corrected that she's only a dental student.

P.S. — given the nature of link rot, especially with small-town newspapers, when you add links, create a permanent archival backup at webcitation.org/archive. The instructions look daunting, but just fill in the blanks and hit submit, then copy-paste into this the archive URL. I usually embed it as "WebCitation archive." Good luck!--Tenebrae (talk) 00:27, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Numbering the Contestant Progress section

Recent edits have me thinking about the presumptive numbering in the Contestant Progress section. I think the anon editor may have a point (even though it looks like they don't know it). Numbering any contestant other than the ones already eliminated is too presumptive, in my opinion. I think it would serve the article better if we left the numbering off until the eliminations make it apparent. Some could almost call it Crystal Balling. Padillah (talk) 20:26, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BOLD Naraht (talk) 00:56, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All due respect, WP:BRD It had already been done and reverted. The next step was to discuss it. Padillah (talk) 12:35, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Discussion: I totally and completely agree with you and will fight to minor injury such as a hangnail to support you. Good enough? :) Naraht (talk)

Seeing as how we're the only two who seem to care... I accept? Padillah (talk) 17:28, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Number of episodes?

Is there a source for the fact that 915 is the final episode? Theoretically, there should be 17 episodes (for eliminating one per episode), but with Jason going, that would be 16. This of course assumes exactly one elimination per episode...Naraht (talk) 16:35, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is truly a legit. Last season, Antonia left the show because of migraine and was sent to hospital and did not participate a single service. In previous seasons, all of the contestants must participate in the first dinner service. If the fifteen episode format continues, there is a semi-final double elimination (like the last two seasons), only two are in the final dinner service. ApprenticeFan ^work 02:22, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What you've said is that the number of episodes makes sense. This is completely different than it being referenceable.Naraht (talk) 16:39, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edgier Content?

I don't know if anyone else has noticed, but some of the content per episode has been a bit edgier then in previous seasons. It seems more like this season is more deserving of TV-PG then TV-14 LReyome254 (talk) 00:28, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ratings/Viewers

Episode 12 &Episode 13 -96.228.120.79 (talk) 04:54, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Done. ApprenticeFan ^work 06:34, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Episode 14. -96.228.127.207 (talk) 22:01, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK and done. ApprenticeFan ^work 07:20, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Episode 11

In this episode, Elise also attempted to blamed Tommy for her wellington mistakes — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.95.30.195 (talk) 21:02, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Hell's Kitchen (U.S. season 9). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:09, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]