Talk:America's Got Talent season 16

Jane/Nightbirde

It's quite clear there's been disruptive editing/edit warring about whether her actual name or stage name should be used. From the show itself, she introduces herself as Jane (without her last name, which is why we have a source to provide the last name)... and says, "...when I sing, I go by 'Nightbirde'."

Whether we end up using her real name or stage name in the table, I'm not sure why something like this is simply reverted and we can't apparently have a solution to this issue? Whether real name in the table & stage name in a note or vice versa, we should have something that explains/clears this up (and hopefully avoids any more edit warring/disruptive edits...). Magitroopa (talk) 07:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

As I stated when I reverted some of these edits, we should stick to her real name for the time being. If in the live rounds, she opts to go for her stage name, then we can change it to that  – it can be noted when participants take part in any edition of the Got Talent franchise, that some change their names they used in the auditions, before the live rounds, if they wish to be known under a different identity (i.e. a pop group). GUtt01 (talk) 08:47, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Probably also worth mentioning that the YT video on the official AGT YT (linked above) refers to her as Nightbirde in the title and description as well as her photo on the NBC press site (see here). Also what seems to be her Twitter and Instagram accounts use her stage name, while also using '#seejanewinAGT'. But whichever name gets 'chosen' (whether by herself or producers of the show), the other name should still somehow be mentioned in the article as well- since this is moreso a 'stage vs. real' name rather than 'original vs. changed' name.

I'm sure there are plenty of other examples I could find over the past 15 seasons, but just for now- take The Singing Trump from season 12 for example. IIRC he did only go by his stage name rather than his actual name (Jeff Trachta, according to the article), so that would be fine to use just his stage name. However, here, she introduced herself as Jane, then said her singing name was Nightbirde (and proceeded to then sing...). In this case, I would think it would definitely be beneficial to somehow include both names. Magitroopa (talk) 09:08, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps. For the time being, stick to their real name - if the person is given an article on Wikipedia (which meets the criteria of WP:BIO), or they opt to use their stage name when they begin their live round performances, then the name can be changed. We should only stick to the name that is declared. Some people do offer their real name when asked, and then if they use a stage name and say "I will be entering under the name...", then the stage name would be appropriate for the table. Since this participant didn't make clear if she did, we should stick to her real name until it is certain she will perform under her stage name  – I had to check YT for clips of her audition to determine if they use a banner mark when she started that stipulated the name she performed under, but since none was given, it meant I couldn't accept the stage name as the one she would use. GUtt01 (talk) 10:23, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

I think it's Nightbirde, and I am sorry if I have been annoying people with my edits, but I think we should wait for the Live Shows to see. Tyler Michael Mannix (talk) 03:41, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

For the record - if someone declares themselves under their stagename or decides to operate under it, we use that in these articles; we stick to their real name if they do not or have not made clear which name they intend to use. GUtt01 (talk) 08:42, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

You're contradicting yourself. First, there is an article as her "Nightbirde" name. There is NO problem with changing the direct link to it as i did. Secondly, she does go by her stage-name Nightbirde. See her social media (ie. confirmed on Facebook). She uses the name Nightbirde. And she did state she goes as Nightbirde on AGT. I have no problem with her real name being used in this article since it was during auditions but it's completely acceptable to use "Nightbirde" to direct to the article for her: [ [ Nightbirde | Jane Marczewski ] ]. This is no different than any other article for a mononymous person. This is a petty issue. Fixing "(Redirected from Jane Marczewski)" has nothing to do with her legal name being used on here. Undo revert or i can. 137.27.65.235 (talk) 12:34, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

I suggest you see WP:NOTBROKEN then... Magitroopa (talk) 16:46, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

A word of advice to the IP editor above - saying this, "Undo revert or i will", constitutes a threatening attitude, which is neither civil or acceptable conduct. Consider this a warning - remain civil in discussion and resolving issues. GUtt01 (talk) 22:41, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

It wasn't a threatening attitude, yet your "warning" seemed to be. And it's "broken" when she is professionally Nightbirde so linking it as such was a comprise. I expect it will be updated/corrected in the future. Maybe instead of criticizing, in the future try to provide constructive contributions to resolve problems. Thanks! 137.27.65.235 (talk) 08:51, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

My contribution was to advise you not to act in a manner that can be construed as threatening - it's not the conduct an editor should give off in their discussions. And per WP:NOTBROKEN, fixing a redirect is a waste of time. We don't need to change the name per se in that respect. Even if she is known by her professional name, she needs to declare it in the program - so unless it changes, don't fix the link at all. GUtt01 (talk) 09:12, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

And that goes for you as well. You projecting that "undo revert or i will" is 'construed as threatening' and not calm is your opinion/interpretation not a fact. I only decided to reply since as i mentioned above she has already 'declared' she is Nightbirde! You not seeing/hearing/knowing it doesn't make you right. You can find sources/videos online showing her saying it as well as her social media she goes by which i previously mentioned. I wish editors on here would learn to pay attention and not dish out baseless warnings... Please stop. P.s. 'he says it within the first few seconds: [1] As with Sam Wills, he goes by Tape Face: America's Got Talent (season_11) 137.27.65.235 (talk) 09:19, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

I am not threatening you, and this talk page is not for going into an argument over the issue. In any case, she did not specify what name she was going under when she auditioned - that is why the link and name won't be changed until it is clarified by the program itself. Even if she operates under a professional name, we don't make the change until the program confirms that is what she will be known as in later performances. Asserting that she does is WP:OR - it's not confirmed as such, so assuming it is not a good idea. GUtt01 (talk) 09:29, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Did you not watch the show? Did you not watch the source i just added? She says she's Nightbirde! The source includes it. Why are you repeating "until she specifies" or "she did not specify" when she did? The talk page is for discussion/consensus. You're ignoring a fact and want to keep it as her legal name for some reason. That means Tape Face (from Season 11) linking to Sam Wills is wrong? Read my prior remarks again and view the MSN source. 137.27.65.235 (talk) 09:37, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

I watched the first few seconds of the clip, and that was my argument right there - she says, and I quote "My name is Jane, but I also perform as Nightbirde". She does not specify which name she is performing under: her real name or her professional name. That's the reason why I continue to say that we need to know from the program which one she will operate under when she is due to appear in her live round. GUtt01 (talk) 10:04, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Seriously? And you quote? Wow. This is a big problem on this site. People leaving messages as if it's fact and when an IP comes along they are quickly discredited. Here's what she really said which is an actual quote per AGT: My name's Jane. When i sing i go by Nightbirde. The Columbus Dispatch (Ohio): who performs as Nightbirde. She's singing. She's performing. What's the problem here? These semantic games are played out on here. Not sure why editors are doing this. Ego is my guess. 137.27.65.235 (talk) 10:14, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

I think you have the ego here in this argument. You aren't listening, you aren't seeing reason, and you're trying to overcomplicate the matter. GUtt01 (talk) 10:22, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

No ego from me. I just want it to be accurate. Unfortunately others do not. 137.27.65.235 (talk) 10:49, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Accuracy in this case is not by what others are assuming she will perform under - yes, there's no denying her stagename is "Nightbirde", but it was not clear which she would perform under in the program. She gave both names, but did not define which she will perform under - that's something she will tell production staff, and something that they will make clear in later episodes. If that name had flashed up on an on-screen title in the program, there would be no issue. People are just assuming without clear evidence, that her stagename is what she is performing under on the program. So until that is clarified clearly by the program's staff, we can't assume it here on Wikipedia. GUtt01 (talk) 10:55, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

This matter will more-or-less be clarified when AGT puts out information on the quarterfinalists, which will include Golden Buzzers, so that's when corrections will be made. GUtt01 (talk) 11:38, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

This could have been taken care of without ANI but thanks for your input/advice regarding Walter. I have to admit that put me in a bad mood which is why i was hiatus. Enjoy the AGT semi-finals and best of luck! 137.27.65.235 (talk) 15:44, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

I haven't read all of the above, but this is probably related: Talk:Nightbirde#Requested move 23 July 2021. Lennart97 (talk) 21:16, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Lennart97, thanks for including this. I left input there. To the other two editors, i hope in the future you have more understanding, tolerance, patience and consideration of others. Especially IPs. I had to deal with another difficult editor at the same time who was not blocked - even though their past history clearly shows they escaped action being taken multiple times, yet still felt the need to school me. I didn't report Magitroopa (recently blocked) for "i suggest you see not broken then" or GUtt01 (recent ANI against) for "i think you have the ego here"... These could be interpreted as having a poor or aggressive attitude. I'm not here to fight so i get my way. It just makes sense to me to link it to Nightbirde, or at least fix the "not broken" to include both since that's how the general public knows her based on "It's OK" and AGT. I revisit this only after i left my contribution on the talk page about her. We must avoid counterproductive reverts and disruptive edit wars, as well as not projecting "tone" based on innocent comments and good faith edits. 137.27.65.235 (talk) 04:10, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Not to get away from the main point of the discussion... but there is nothing actionable about suggesting you to see something. My main point was essentially that [[Nightbirde|Jane Marczewski]] is literally what WP:NOTBROKEN is about. It would be more beneficial to discuss an article name change rather than 'fixing' and unbroken link. I do apologize if you read my earlier response in a 'tone' of some sort, but that is not what I intended at all and was literally just suggesting you see the appropriate guideline regarding that. (Just an an example: if Simon Cowell suddenly decided for whatever reason he wanted to change his name to 'Simone' and that is how he is later credited in the show, the same NOTBROKEN stuff would apply- not do [[Simon Cowell|Simone Cowell]] but rather just link to the redirect as [[Simone Cowell]].) Magitroopa (talk) 04:33, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm familiar with NOTBROKEN but it's my contentions this will eventually be resolved and changed to Nightbirde. As is Tape Face from Season 11, although it links to his real name. It's what she is notable as and performs as. I guess it was a compromise to add Nightbirde for those who previously edit warred. Either way, it doesn't matter to me but to take time to revert "not broken" seems disruptive and counterproductive under the circumstances. My point about tone is that i was accused of it based on my innocent responses. So it goes both ways. 137.27.65.235 (talk) 04:58, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

FYI, I personally hadn't looked through what devolved of the discussion since this 'warning'. Not trying to start (or in this case, continue) any debates/hate here, but for my own 2 cents: While it may not have been how you intended it yourself, I can definitely see how others may view 'Undo the edit or I will' (or something similar to that effect) as a 'threat'. I myself read that as 'It will be the way I had originally put it and that's that.' (Again, likely not how you intended it). The whole 'ego' part of the discussion definitely did not have to happen, though. Last personal thing I will say is that you do not need to go around telling everyone's block/ANI history just to prove your own innocence. If the block or ANI discussion was regarding this (or a similar) matter, that's a different story, but we don't need to discuss unrelated history here. Your replies in the discussion should be enough to show you are innocent (as long as you actually are being constructive, collaborative, etc.)

From this point forward, let's hopefully stick to the main discussion... I may/may not comment on the requested move discussion on the Nightbirde talk page, but at this point, I'd just say we wait for whatever 'announcement' there is (hopefully there is one) revealing the live show acts for the season- we're currently on the Olympics-hiatus part of the season (as are many other shows currently), and the next show back will not even be an auditions, best of auditions, or judge cuts episode, but the first live show of the season. Hopefully sometime in the next week or two there is an announcement, and that will likely be able to put an end on this discussion (There's no rush to come to a final consensus/decision- we can certainly wait & see at this point in time...).

Apologies in advance for stealing your previous comment a bit, but I do hope for you (and all other viewers/editors here) to be able to enjoy the rest of the season yourselves. Magitroopa (talk) 06:17, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes, i was "reported" on ANI regarding this topic/issue while being inappropriately harassed myself. Hence the reason i mentioned the above information. My reactions/input were misconstrued/misinterpreted. It's over now so hopefully we can all move on. Thanks! 137.27.65.235 (talk) 05:10, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

This matter is now effectively over, as the subject of the discussion has recently withdrawn from this season due to their battle with cancer, thus there is no further need to prolong this discussion. GUtt01 (talk) 16:21, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't care whether we call her Nightbirde or her actual name, but we should name her one way or the other. There is not reason to be coy and mysterious about her name, just because she withdrew. It's not a privacy issue. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:49, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Name mentioning in article

It may be possible for this singer to return into the article in better context than a withdrawn contestant - I will likely write up an Incident section in the article to highlight their involvement, depending on the circumstances of her battle with cancer - whatever of the two possible outcome occurs, either one would have notable significance and justification for mentioning. For the moment, mentioning her name in the article beyond her audition appearance has little merit for the moment; although if she is covered in the article under this section, the last thing I will want to see is there to be a further argument and disagreement on the name once again.... GUtt01 (talk) 22:07, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

This message is to Ssilvers (talk) only... Please see the following vandalism by GUtt01 before i report it to ANI (amendments = reverts):

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=America%27s_Got_Talent_(season_16)&diff=1044645647&oldid=1044638960

(after this talk page discussion GUTT01 included Nightbirde then removed it)

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=America%27s_Got_Talent_(season_16)&diff=prev&oldid=1036979298

(removed Nightbirde to refuse linking)

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=America%27s_Got_Talent_(season_16)&diff=prev&oldid=1038760618

(removed her all together even though she was mentioned and appeared in future episodes)

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=America%27s_Got_Talent_(season_16)&diff=prev&oldid=1031615690

(her full name comes from alternate sources not the show itself)

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=1035809664

(ANI complaint about GUtt01)

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=1035656769

(wasn't blocked for similar behavior)

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Nightbirde

(article unchanged to legal name and inconsistent with other AGT performers)

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cabayi&diff=prev&oldid=1035816046

("i really hope i can improve and do better")

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=America%27s_Got_Talent_(season_16)&diff=prev&oldid=1036232917

(user Magitroopa changed back to my edit)

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=America%27s_Got_Talent_(season_16)&diff=prev&oldid=1036261756

(keeps writing long complicated sentences)

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:America%27s_Got_Talent_(season_16)&diff=prev&oldid=1036772089

(made a decision to end discussion even though Nightbirde appeared again)

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=America%27s_Got_Talent_(season_16)&diff=prev&oldid=1036773100

(sources/show & judges/host all called her Nightbirde)

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=America%27s_Got_Talent_(season_16)&diff=prev&oldid=1036772726

(included Nightbirde yet doesn't link it only her legal name then later deletes it)

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=America%27s_Got_Talent_(season_16)&diff=prev&oldid=1036979298

(clearly intentional/deliberate agenda not to have Nighbirde's name in article)

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:America%27s_Got_Talent_(season_16)#Jane/Nightbirde

(suppression of consensus for her notable contribution in show)

https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:America%27s_Got_Talent_(season_16)&diff=1040702074&oldid=1040701962

(did not acknowledge nor respond)

18:06, 17 September 2021 diff hist +21‎ America's Got Talent (season 16) ‎ Rving edits - Possible WP:DE current Tag: Undo

(has the nerve to say i'm disruptive?)

Thanks for your assistance! 137.27.65.235 (talk) 20:59, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Adding sources to simplify future ANI report:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/agt-star-nightbirde-delivers-a-health-update-after-sharing-cancer-diagnosis/ar-AAKUnay

https://www.today.com/popculture/nightbirde-shares-emotional-raw-message-about-faith-during-agt-finale-t231360

https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2021/09/16/nightbirde-crying-after-agt-finale-cancer-fight/8369979002/

https://www.etonline.com/simon-cowell-shares-hopeful-update-on-nightbirdes-cancer-battle-after-americas-got-talent-exit

P.s. All judges and host called her "Nightbirde" (except Simon once said Jane) when she gave an update on her health in August and during finals in September.

SEE: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Rappin'_Granny (real name not used in AGT article)

SEE: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Nathan_Barnatt (Keith Apicary is used in this article)

SEE: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/David_Stone_(magician) (Klek Entos is used in this article)

137.27.65.235 (talk) 21:37, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

@137.27.65.235: The matter is over now. This participant withdrew from the competition, and although she was a unique entry in this season's competition, it does not warrant further need to discuss the name of the performer for this article, let alone including it in the article. GUtt01 (talk) 21:39, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

@137.27.65.235: Furthermore, you are trying to monopolize this discussion to prove a point, which is the one thing on your talk page that you have telling you not to do so. Why on earth are you trying to do this? You haven't been actively involved in the article until now? And you keep trying to prove a point that is contested. Seriously, you got an attitude problem again - even if you are innocent, this is not the behaviour you should be exhibiting. What's more, you seem to be making a threat against me - you're threatening me with an ANI on the grounds that "either you change your edits back now, or I'm going to get the admins to come down on you." That sort of behaviour won't be tolerated, and I frown heavily on someone trying to do that.GUtt01 (talk) 22:19, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Very well as far as adding something later. You should have mentioned that before now. You can't just add someone withdrew without their name included in the article. By the way, "not broken" doesn't apply to common names (she's notable as Nightbirde publicly) or moved/changed pages. I think your objective is to use her full name so anyone changing it to Nightbirde will quickly be reverted per "NOTBROKEN" so just admit that. (ex: just because it "works" doesn't mean it still can't be changed when the correct name isn't in the article.)

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirect#Do_not_%22fix%22_links_to_redirects_that_are_not_broken

Please stop accusing me of that when you are the one reverting/deleting and being disruptive. I'm not proving a point. That means all the others who have included Nightbirde is? Meaning the editor you finally replied to? This is a talk page for discussion. I backed off this page only to see you continuing the same behavior i outlined above. I didn't threaten you. I was going to ANI to assist since you're ignoring the obvious. How come you don't reply to others calling you out on edit-warring (such as on your talk page)? Are you bias towards IPs?

137.27.65.235 (talk) 22:21, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

What the hell??? Why are you accusing me about the WP:NOTBROKEN issue? That was another editor!!! Seriously, you've got an ego and attitude that raises the question behind why someone said you were a good editor, when you can't calm down and check your facts carefully. I didn't even know there was a comment from the editor recently added to this discussion until today..... GUtt01 (talk) 22:32, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Per ANI report, i added her back with sources since she's notable enough to be included in this season. IF her article is deleted it won't link to it anymore but should remain as Nightbirde. There are other participants/contestants on competition shows that aren't notable enough for an article, not just her. 137.27.65.235 (talk) 01:25, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

First Ever Panel Golden Buzzer

Hello again, everyone! Not sure whether or not I'm the only one who noticeed this, but at the end of tonight's episode, a promo was shown for next week's final audition rounds. The promo featured Simon highlighting something that had not been done before on AGT. After showing scenes from a few acts, the end of the promo showed Simon telling the contestant on stage that all of them wanted to give that contestant something special. At that point, the promo concluded by showing all four judges and Terry simultaneously pressing the golden buzzer as a panel. The promo for next week's show can be found relatively easily (or so I assume), but is that something we'd want to mention here? If so, is there a good place from which sources used in AGT articles that might have coverage on this? Or would this be something that we wouldn't note on the article until next week, when it officially occurs? Thanks. --Jgstokes (talk) 03:38, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Not trying to speak on behalf of everyone (anyone else, feel free to chime in) but I'd say likely wait until it actually airs to add it in. In terms of sourcing, I had previously seen this article which talks about that at the very end ("...including one that moves the judges so much, they all elect to push the Golden Buzzer together at the same time."). That source plus another talking about it/who it was (which will be very easy once the episode airs next week) would likely cover it. (To be honest, I was thinking this might've happened on tonight's final act, and then I saw the promo for next week... lol) Magitroopa (talk) 03:48, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Agree with the above, but we should wait to find out what this is about first. If it is to be a first in the program that a Golden Buzzer is given by all judges and hosts (even when they have already done one individually for other participants), it would certainly be notable for mention in the article - provided citations are made to support this. GUtt01 (talk) 14:26, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

I understand the points raised in response to my original comments on this matter, and to a certain extent agree with the observations made therein. But in the last 2-3 days since I raised the issue, additional promos have essentially verified that it is the first-ever group golden buzzer, which will be awarded to one deserving act by all the judges and Terry at the same time. That being said, I'm well-aware that *I saw it on TV with my own eyes." is not sufficient criteria to meet the threshold of verifiabity here. So I looked again and a short while ago, I found the following article among other results on the question of the group golden buzzer:

https://www.mjsbigblog.com/americas-got-talent-2021-auditions-6-spoilers-meet-the-acts-photos.htm

I don't know if even that would be sufficient verification for our purposes here, but assuming it is not, if nothing else, the episode will air in about 18 hours or so in most time zones, so there will likely be ample sourcing on the particulars within the next 24 hours that will be able to be used here for that. It'll be interesting to see what's available on that at that time. My thanks once again to you all. Jgstokes (talk) 04:54, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I've seen at least one article on this on the internet, and what was done is certainly a very notable, significant event for the program, than just for this season. This certainly deserves being explained to readers of the article in due time. GUtt01 (talk) 08:21, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Audition Audience - details on arrangement?

I've been checking up on production of audition episodes to see what could be noted down in the Season Overview section, and came across a couple of articles on the internet that highlighted something of interest. While I am not sure of their reliability per Wikipedia's list of reliable sources, they do detail the same thing. According to the end credits, the audition episodes that have been shown did not feature large audiences during their filming in March and April, because the venue used was in California which had mask mandates in place until June 7, 2021 - the audience numbers shown on television were maskless, against such regulation. According to the details in the end credits for these episodes, the production staff used clever editing to use virtual audiences to increase the numbers that actually attended, including shots from earlier seasons.

What I would like to ask for, is if any editors can find some additional sources which can be used, because their verified by Wikipedia as reliable for use in articles. Would appreciate it. GUtt01 (talk) 11:16, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

I think these could be good?... [2] [3] [4]

My only thing is that however it is written, we cannot use original research, even if included in one of the articles. So we'd be able to use the info from the Heavy article about what is listed in the end credits, but we cannot use the paragraph after ("It sounds like the show... ...at the filming of the episode, then"), as that is how they believe they did it. Magitroopa (talk) 16:01, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

"AGT: America's Wildcard"

So how exactly will this wildcard episode be handled? Should it be added to the ratings/episode table, or just be mentioned somewhere within the season overview section? The episode is releasing on Peacock tonight at 8pm, the same time the first live show starts. I also think we should still be considering/counting this as an episode, so even if it's decided not to be added to the ratings/episode table, the episode count within the infobox should still likely increase by 2 tonight at 8pm (from 8 to 10 episodes). Thoughts? Magitroopa (talk) 20:11, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Also... Peacock link for when it releases tonight. Magitroopa (talk) 20:15, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

If it has the official title card of AGT, and all that elements to it, including the judges and/or host, then probably yes. If its being handled separately from the main program's staff, then it would be questionable. GUtt01 (talk) 16:37, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

I actually had the opportunity to watch the episode once it had aired. The audience and judges were shown in their customary spots, and Terry Crews personally introduced each performance and asked the judges for their feedback on what they just saw, in addition to which, Crews provided reminders of the details throughout the 35-40 minute specialist in terms of how those watching the program could help determine which of the 5 acts would be put through into the semifinal round. The details of what I've described here are likely available in articles covering the summaries of that episode. Although it was not aired on television, it is very much a part of this season of AGT, including allowing viewers to weigh in on the outcome of those performances through expressing their votes on Twitter. Hope this explanation, such as it is, is helpful to all who read it. --Jgstokes (talk) 03:14, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

FYI- the judges were not in the wildcard episode, just Crews + the wildcard acts. Magitroopa (talk) 03:25, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that. You are, of course, absolutely correct. I thought I remembered seeing or hearing the judges weigh in on each performance, but I was obviously mistaken on that. Thanks for keeping me honest here. --Jgstokes (talk) 04:11, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

I have updated the Ratings table to include the special, but with a note stating it was not aired by the Network's channel, but via the online streaming service. Also, in future, if you state an episode for a season, but don't include it in the ratings table, don't increase the # of episodes in the infobox, otherwise you might confuse some readers into thinking otherwise (like say, making them think another QF episode had aired when it has yet to be so) GUtt01 (talk) 11:59, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-final Wildcard

There is a distinct possibility of there being a semi-final wildcard, based on the numbers: if 7 quarter-finalists go through in each quarter-final, the total number of semi-finalists will be 21. Since there is likely to be two rounds of this, there must be a 22nd semi-finalist being planned. Thus, should that information become available, please amend the Season Overview table with this. I will be restoring the icon after originally dropping it without knowing of this before. GUtt01 (talk) 18:00, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Sethward anchor

GUtt01 (talk · contribs), in this edit, you removed an anchor for Sethward, a contestant in the show. Sethward redirects to America's Got Talent (season 16)#Sethward after RandomCanadian (talk · contribs)'s close of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sethward. I added the anchor so that readers are directed to where Sethward is discussed in the article. After you reverted my addition of the anchor, readers will not be sent directly to where Sethward is discussed. This does help readers who search for Sethward. Please self-revert your revert. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 06:37, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

GUtt01 removed this section with no edit summary, which I am assuming good faith is a mistaken deletion. I restored this section. Cunard (talk) 09:10, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

There is no need for an anchor for this redirect. If there was a paragraph of information on the person, yes; because there are just a row in two tables with his name, no. GUtt01 (talk) 09:54, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

In addition, this would have served you better putting it on my talk page, not here. GUtt01 (talk) 09:55, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

While it would improve the article to have a paragraph about Sethward, that is not needed for an anchor to be added. The Sethward row gives information about his age (32), his genre (comedy), his act (novelty act), where he is from (Los Angeles), and what quarterfinal he was in (1). It does not help readers to remove an anchor that sends readers directly to information about Sethward. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sethward closed as redirect to America's Got Talent (season 16)#Sethward, not redirect to America's Got Talent (season 16). If you disagree with the redirect target, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion would be the place to have that discussion. This is a discussion about a revert you made to this article so this talk page is the proper venue for the discussion, not your talk page. Cunard (talk) 10:09, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

I entirely agree with the above:

• I'm honestly not even sure why the venue of this conversation even needs to be discussed... it is clear that the talk page of the article the edit/revert occurred on is acceptable, otherwise are you just trying to limit it so the discussion must only occur with you?...
• Given that this is a person/act that has appeared in several (three, if I recall correctly?) seasons of the show, this is the first/only time they've gotten to the live shows, and we don't give detailed information on every single auditioning act/audition episode, this specific season article would be appropriate for any sort of anchor/redirect for him.
  • With that in mind, the table is the only information given on him, and as Cunard said above, it includes his age, genre, act, location etc. If a reader goes to Wikipedia and wants to know about this specific act, Sethward (without the anchor) just leads to this whole article, and they need to go through the whole article trying to find where he is mentioned (not every single person who goes on Wikipedia is as familiar with the locations of certain bits of information than the editors!). With the anchor, it brings you right to his location in the table, with all that information.
• Finally (and possibly most importantly?...), the deletion discussion itself was indeed closed as redirecting to America's Got Talent (season 16)#Sethward, not redirecting to America's Got Talent (season 16).

Based on the above, I've now reinstated the anchor. If you really do disagree with it that much, then at this point, WP:RfD is where you should be going now, not just deciding for yourself if the redirect/anchor is appropriate or not. Magitroopa (talk) 10:38, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, Magitroopa (talk · contribs). I agree with all of your observations and conclusions. Ideally, content about Sethward's biography and history on the show could be merged to this article to give readers more information about him. But given the current structure of the article, I don't know how more information could be added about Sethward without there being due weight issues since none of the other contestants' biographies are included. So I decided against completing a merge, instead adding an anchor to where he is already mentioned in the table. Cunard (talk) 10:52, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Question - is this is the case, why hasn't anchors been done to any other participants who have redirects to articles covering any season of AGT? Also, how long will interest in the person last for? Even if the redirect remains, its questionable if people would have difficulty finding the person in the article, because there is another way: a feature on Internet browsers for finding them, called the Find function. If I wanted to find the person that the redirect is for, couldn't people savvy enough know that where there are brief entries. I would think that an anchor would be more useful when there is a broader wealth of information in the article to go through, at which point I'd have no disagreement on an anchor. Here, it's not that difficult to scroll down and find it or use the browser's Find function. GUtt01 (talk) 11:07, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

That's a matter for WP:RFD, if you think the redirect is not necessary; although given how new the article was it's hard to judge whether this is a common search term. There are plenty of redirects which aren't quite necessary if you can use the search function (for example, you don't need BWV 1, as that's already in the title of the relevant page, but it's still very convenient), but links to anchors are still useful as the reader would otherwise be surprised by writing in the contestant's name and ending up nowhere near it. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 11:21, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

I only question this on whether interest in the subject will be respectful enough to justify the redirect, once the season has concluded. I mean, when its a case of not knowing something or understanding something, yeah a redirect works (like that example I found about "Keystone State" justifying a redirect to the article on Pennsylvania (I think)), but for a person... I have my doubts in line with notability (maybe WP:ENT even, though I don't know on that). GUtt01 (talk) 11:42, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Again, that's germane to this talk page. The policy on redirects and their uses is at WP:REDIRECT, and if you think that the redirect is useless, then what I suggest is waiting at least a few weeks (or more, there is no deadline here) so we can have useful page view statistics, and then nominating it at RfD. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 11:50, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Fair enough point. Thanks for that suggestion - I'll wait and see what happens. GUtt01 (talk) 11:54, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Peter Antoniou SF2 buzzer

Not even quite sure what happened there... don't have rewinding available at the moment, but did Cowell buzz 'at' one of the other judges, or was it directed towards Peter after he made his comment about mentalism 'not being 100% correct'? Hoping we can get more clarification once the act is posted on YouTube... but I'm very confused after what happened. I think it'd be best to leave Simon's buzzer in and add in a note to clarify what exactly happened. Thoughts?... Magitroopa (talk) 01:17, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Act is now on YouTube... excluding the buzzer... *sigh*. Either way, I think the buzzer should remain, but with some sort of note added on. Magitroopa (talk) 02:03, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

I checked a couple of clips, and its unclear whether Cowell buzzed the act for being poor, or did so to silence the other judges. I think it stays in, unless there is evidence that the buzzer was not intended for the participant - that's a no-no in terms of accuracy, since unintended buzzes should not be counted.GUtt01 (talk) 11:02, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Canine Stars - location

The Canine Stars are from Fort Collins, Colorado. Not Denver.

See article: https://www.coloradoan.com/story/life/2021/05/25/americas-got-talent-feature-fort-collins-born-dog-agility-team/7417698002/ KC4562 (talk) 21:03, 9 May 2024 (UTC)