Talk:Hell's Kitchen (American TV series) season 5

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hell's Kitchen (American TV series) season 5 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Television: Episode coverage

	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.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.

Episode 3 recap

Citytv seems to have given away the eliminated contestant a few weeks ahead of time.

http://site.citytv.com/hellskitchen/recaps.aspx

--Madchester (talk) 19:01, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And if this were a news site where we were trying to scoop someone we might care. But it's not, so we don't. Padillah (talk) 13:35, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lacey?

Is it just me or should lacey have left already, I read somewhere that she goes next, but I know that .nets aren't always reliable so I will not added. Just informing.--68.100.75.163 (talk) 03:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whether she should have or not, that's opinion and not fact. Until the show actually airs an episode where she is thrown out, nothing can really be done.Elpasi (talk) 20:56, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Elimination Table

I made it easier to read for the viewer, because before the viewer could barely understand anything about the table due to excessive over-coloring. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew097 (talk • contribs) 05:45, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And yet you made no changes to coloring, simply removing the column with Chef Ramsey's response. I do think the episode recap is a better place for the chef's response, it keeps the comment in context with the recap and space doesn't shrink as the number of episodes progresses. But, I feel, we do need to address the number of colors used in this table. I don't think the table needs to be an episode recap in and of itself. We don't need a color for each possible outcome and every possible permutation. Do we really need to have the text WIN and the color light blue? If you can't read the word "WIN" you probably aren't going to much out of the rest of the article. Do we really need the text NOM and the color yellow? I just want to bring up the irony of thinking someone is litterate enough to navigate to the page but can't read WIN. I see no need for any of the colors that can be readily expressed as text, which means all the colors except maybe the green but even that can be noted with a footnote rather than some special color. Padillah (talk) 13:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A reminder - whatever changes are made to the elimination summary table needs to be done to all previous seasons as well, for consistency.SpikeJones (talk) 14:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did fix the color scheme to match the color scheme I did in Season 4's page, but someone reverted for some reason? Sorry I couldn't do them all in one night, it took me forever (2 hours) and I couldn't stand to do another! hahaAndrew097 (talk) 05:19, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moving the Chef's Response to the individual episode recap

I don't think he accomplished anything with the "recolor" but I do think that moving the Chef's response to the episode recap is much more straight-forward and puts the comment in context better. Also it keeps the table from deforming as columns are added and horizontal space taken away from the comment. Padillah (talk) 13:05, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Progress Table

I was wondering if I could change the color scheme to the one currently posted in the season 4 page of Hell's Kitchen (if it hasn't been reverted). It is much more organized and easier to look at. Also, the table will be less distorted by the Chef Ramsey's Reason section, because I will move them under each corresponding episode summary. Andrew097 (talk) 05:37, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You already did -- and I reverted the changes. You do not make any drastic changes on this (or any other) recap page unless you have others weigh in on their opinion. -- azumanga (talk) 00:01, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I waited a whole day and there was no answer, I don't view these changes as drastic, I simply changed the color scheme so viewers don't feel like their eyes are being burnt out by the colors that are posted. And I moved Chef Ramsey's Reason under the corresponding episode summary so the table wouldn't be distorted. I didn't remove any information, but simply made it more manageable. Many users have complained about the Progress Table, and I felt I would be doing everybody a favor? May I revert the chart to my version please? I highly doubt viewers will complain if I do. Andrew097 (talk) 00:12, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Still, we should hear from others before we make changes like that. -- azumanga (talk) 02:18, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thank you. How many people need to agree until I can change it back? And if they agree for this season can I change the others as well? Andrew097 (talk) 03:10, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is, there were many people, other than you, who changed the tables according to their own vision, one way or another -- only for them to be reverted by other users, not just myself. -- azumanga (talk) 22:23, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that. but who decided this table is so great to be the default?! it sucks! haha. How can we all come together to get a consensus and make a better permanet table? I was basing mine on a combination of the existing one's info with I Love Money or Charm School 2's table's colors which are:

cornflowerblue for win, white for lose but safe, pink for risk but prevail, tomato for eliminated, lightgreen for nominated by ramsey (eliminated or not), tan for withdrawing, violet for switching teams(along with a note to describe the change), cornflowerblue for advancing in singles, and limegreen for the winner, and the same as posted for the loser. 76.20.70.23 (talk) 05:01, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the sentiment that we have to pick a cut-off. You can't just cry "consensus" to keep others from changing the article. If you are going to impose restrictions it is only appropriate you let us know what those restrictions are. The current giudeline is "consensus" well, since of the four people that have weighed in three want to change the table, that's a pretty clear consensus. I must say, I wonder about the use of colors AND text... I don't understand how darkblue conveys the meaning of "WIN" better than the word "WIN". We've at least got to move the chef's comments to the appropriate episodes. They inevitably run out of room and get scrunched until it's difficult to read. And get the blinding red out of the great swath of column after a person is eliminated. Why attract attention to people that are gone? There is so much wrong with this table I don't understand how a person could defend it but I think it would be best to separate the issues and see what people think of each thing. Padillah (talk) 13:09, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Table of issues

Do we keep Chef Ramsay's comments in the table?
No. They make more sense in the context of the episode they were made. Padillah (talk) 13:09, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do we keep the red color in row after a contestant gets eliminated?
No. Way too bright for someone that no longer on the show. Padillah (talk) 13:09, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do we need colors at all when words can suffice?
No. But this is the least of my worries. Padillah (talk) 13:09, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do we need colors this blindingly saturated?
No. A much more subdued palette would be good. Padillah (talk) 13:09, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do we need one color for every possible outcome?
No. We have episode summaries below, we don't need to overload the table with indicators of each thing that happened in the episode. Padillah (talk) 13:09, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! However, I think the correct colors help with the table just to seperate easier. The colors I chose below are a lot more suttle than the currents and have been used before in other shows' tables. I think we should only put colors for certain situations, not every little thing; just the summary. These are the colors that have been used in very similar tables that I believe should be used:

(cornflowerblue) for WIN, and IN (in individual)
(white) for LOSE
(pink) for NOM/RISK/BTM 3 and BTM 2 (whatever we choose)
(tomato) for OUT
(tan) for OUT (quit/leave)
(#CCCCCC)for the background of the graph for eliminated people

These colors should be the basis. If certain situations need to be included (Switched teams, or nominated by Chef Ramsey, BoW, and BoB) use notes such as: ^B or ^C in the contestent's column (but keep the "LOSE", "WIN", etc. do not change it!) and then under the table put
^BThis contestant was switched from the Red Team to the Blue Team
^CThis contestant nominated for elimination by Chef Ramsey
^BoWThis contestant was the Best of the Worst
^BoBThis contestant was the Best of the Best
Andrew097 (talk) 01:55, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And definetly move the "Chef Ramsey's Reason" column out of the table and into the corresponding episode summary!Andrew097 (talk) 02:01, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree on the "Reason" column moving to the episode. This is almost undebatable for me. I cannot support a shifting column for a text message as large as this one. That's the next step - move the reason to the episode. Padillah (talk) 16:43, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone else agree that the "Chef Ramsey's Reason" column should be moved? 76.20.70.23 (talk) 04:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Colors for Chart

(cornflowerblue) for WIN, and IN (in individual)
(white) for LOSE
(pink) for NOM/RISK/BTM 3 and BTM 2 (whatever we choose)
(tomato) for OUT
(tan) for OUT (quit/leave)
(#CCCCCC)for the background of the graph for eliminated people

If certain situations need to be included (Switched teams, or nominated by Chef Ramsey, BoW, and BoB) use notes such as: ^B or ^C in the contestent's column (but keep the "LOSE", "WIN", etc. do not change it!) and then under the table put
^BThis contestant was switched from the Red Team to the Blue Team
^CThis contestant nominated for elimination by Chef Ramsey
^BoWThis contestant was the Best of the Worst
^BoBThis contestant was the Best of the Best

Do you guys agree? disagree? We need to make a decision on what to do with the chart colors and notes. 76.20.70.23 (talk) 04:55, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If this is Andrew097 from above please try and remember to login when you post. I screw up sometimes and leave my browser open, then when I get in in the morning it looks like I'm logged in but I'm not. Just something to keep an eye on. Padillah (talk) 12:31, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I'll make sure to log in, thanks for the catch Andrew097 (talk) 05:10, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question: Do you think i should use for nominated by Chef Ramsey or keep the note? Andrew097 (talk) 05:11, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You want my answer? I think the color is good as opposed to the note. Hurricane Angel Saki (talk) 06:43, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Any opinion on the current color scheme or my color scheme? which is better and easier to read? Andrew097 (talk) 01:39, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Best of the Worst/Best

Should these be put as a note, or should I use for it, as seen in Season 4's Chart? Andrew097 (talk) 19:59, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

no, we can use shite brown for that —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.56.107.105 (talk) 10:24, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't support the numbering because it implies a ranking (this is a show where the contestants are ranked after all). Also, it would make it much harder to move the chefs around if/when they are sent home in an order different than the currently established one. But I think I can stand-by the current table and if it survives the week we can run-down the other tables and make them congruent. Padillah (talk) 12:56, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Taping date..

I have been informed that the season was taped in 2006, by one of the contestants. Special:Contributions/96.52.53.138|96.52.53.138]] (talk) 21:53, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to hear that this article and the season 4 articles are already correct. Thx. SpikeJones (talk) 00:45, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can anybody recall the littany of J's mistakes?

I have unfortunately deleted my TiVoed show. I remember he did almost everything wrong. As it is the article makes it look like Chef Ramsey booted him mid-show simply for burning the salmon and undercooking the scallops. There were significantly more mistakes than that. Padillah (talk) 12:05, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The synopsis is intended to be a summary, not a complete listing of every minute detail of the show. "Due to many mistakes made while working the fish station, Ramsey kicked J out in the middle of service." will suffice. WP is not intended to be a fan page or play-by-play episode guide. SpikeJones (talk) 13:42, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find anyone with the same color as J in the previous 4 seasons. Is this the first time that a contestant has been kicked out like that?Naraht (talk) 01:45, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It has happened to Josh before in Season 3, and he has the regular . There is no need to make another color just for this one early elimination. I have reverted it to the regular . Please keep it this way. Also, in the episode where Josh was eliminated, there was Early Elimination under the Episode Summary. You should put a note instead of a whole new color. Andrew097 (talk) 05:57, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if two chefs got kicked out midservice, and Ji gets her own color for leaving voulentarily, don't you think that midservice eliminates should get a color as well? Morak99 (talk) 02:08, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I personally think so, but I'd rather call for a vote. You see, the main difference is that, to date, only three chefs (S3 Josh, S5 J, and S5 Lacey) have ever been eliminated in such a fashion, whereas five chefs (S1 Jeff, S2 Larry, S3 Aaron, S4 Vanessa, and S5 Ji) have left voluntarily or by medical reasons. While it's about as common as midservice kicking (i.e. rare), the fact remains that it's still common enough to be given a color. If it were just J, then I'd oppose it, but Lacey being eliminated this episode? I think I'd support it. Hurricane Angel Saki (talk) 05:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As someone that doesn't think we need various colors in the first place I think both should go. If someone wants to find out why Ji or Lacey left they can read the synopsis lower on the page. Maybe the text can say "LEFT" vs. "OUT" to indicate one was voluntary and the other not. Padillah (talk) 12:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@SpikeJones - I didn't mean to advocate a blow-by-blow, mearley enough of a recap that the reader isn't led to the wrong conclusions. I agree, this is not a fan forum. But to insinuate that J was kicked out mid-service for a couple pieces of bad seafood is disingenuous at best. The current phrasing could be a little stronger but it's better than it was. Padillah (talk) 12:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I created a new color for mid-service elimination now that it has become more common. The reason leaving volentarily has its own color is because it has happened in every season to date. Andrew097 (talk) 00:54, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And we are now right back to where we were in the beginning. A sloppy, 12 color, seizure inducing, rainbow table that tries to recap the entire season with color-coding. It's a mess. The only difference is the colors. We don't need to recap the entire episode in a single color, we have recaps in the article itself. Users are assumed to be able to read. I feel like the cell color should be the team color, since it can (and will) change from one episode to the next. But the multitude of colors needs to go. It does not help. All it does is make people look at the bottom of the table more often. And if they can look at the bottom of the table they can look in the epi recap. Padillah (talk) 12:10, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. Absolutely right. We shouldn't have a different color for every single elimination possibility. What's next: Contestant was eliminated for this or that ? Who cares?! really! It doesn't matter where the contestant was eliminated at all! I'm changing it again. Andrew097 (talk) 23:15, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What are we trying to do with the progress table?

I think one issue this table has is different people are using it for different things. If we settle on a goal for the table we can work toward making it a bit more stable. I think the table should be a simple recap (Win, Lose, Nom, Out). It's just a table and we don't want to bog the reader down with trying to decipher different colors and footnotes and such. We have the episode recaps if the reader needs to know more. I also think the cell color needs to be the team color for that episode. Team color can and will change over the course of the season and this is the best way to indicate the progressive results of those changes. Padillah (talk) 12:15, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Contestant Progress

Each week, the best member (as determined by Ramsay) from the losing team during the latest service period is asked to nominate two of their fellow teammates for elimination; one of these two is sent home by Ramsay. On some weeks, there may be a variation in the nomination process, depending on the losing team's (or teams') performance.


Chef	501	502	503	504	505	506	507	508
Andrea	WIN	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	NOM	BoW	WIN	NOM
Ben	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	NOM	LOSE	WIN	NOM	WIN
Carol	WIN^W	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	LOSE	LOSE	WIN	NOM
Danny	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	LOSE	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	WIN
Giovanni	LOSE^W	WIN	LOSE	LOSE	BoW	WIN^R	WIN	LOSE
Paula	WIN	LOSE^W	WIN	LOSE	LOSE	LOSE	WIN	LOSE
Robert	LOSE	WIN^W	LOSE	LOSE	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	WIN
LA	WIN	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	BoW	NOM	WIN	OUT
Lacey	WIN	NOM	WIN	NOM^B	LOSE	WIN	NOM	OUT
J	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	LOSE	NOM	WIN	OUT
Coi	WIN	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	LOSE	OUT
Colleen	WIN	NOM^W	WIN	NOM	OUT
Seth	NOM	WIN	NOM	OUT
Charlie	LOSE	WIN	OUT
Ji	WIN	OUT
Wil	OUT

^WThis contestant was chosen to wait tables or serve the raw bar for the service.
^BThis contestant was switched from the Red Team to the Blue Team.
^RThis contestant was switched from the Blue Team to the Red Team.
^MThis contestant was eliminated from service by Chef Ramsay while dinner service was still in progress.

Contestant was a member of the Winning Team

Contestant was a member of the Losing Team

Contestant was chosen as the Best of the Worst (BoW), or the Best of the Best (BoB)

Contestant was nominated for elimination but prevailed

Contestant was nominated for elimination by Chef Ramsay

Contestant was eliminated

Contestant was forced to switch to the other team

Contestant was eliminated during dinner service

Contestant voluntarily withdrew from the competition

Single team - contestant advanced in individual competition (IN)

The runner-up of Hell's Kitchen

The winner of Hell's Kitchen

Seriously whoever decided to change the color for "LOSE" musnt have been thinking straight. This whole entire chart is flawed. All this color is a waste and we dont need it. Can some one please revert it.

What I'd like to see


Chef	501	502	503	504	505	506	507	508
Andrea	WIN	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	NOM	BoW	WIN	NOM
Ben	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	NOM	LOSE	WIN	NOM	WIN
Carol	WIN^W	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	LOSE	LOSE	WIN	NOM
Danny	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	LOSE	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	WIN
Giovanni	LOSE^W	WIN	LOSE	LOSE	BoW	WIN^R	WIN	LOSE
Paula	WIN	LOSE^W	WIN	LOSE	LOSE	LOSE	WIN	LOSE
Robert	LOSE	WIN^W	LOSE	LOSE	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	WIN
LA	WIN	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	BoW	NOM	WIN	OUT
Lacey	WIN	NOM	WIN	NOM^B	LOSE	WIN	NOM	OUT
J	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	LOSE	NOM	WIN	OUT
Coi	WIN	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	LOSE	OUT
Colleen	WIN	NOM^W	WIN	NOM	OUT
Seth	NOM	WIN	NOM	OUT
Charlie	LOSE	WIN	OUT
Ji	WIN	OUT
Wil	OUT

^WThis contestant was chosen to wait tables or serve the raw bar for the service.
^BThis contestant was switched from the Red Team to the Blue Team.
^RThis contestant was switched from the Blue Team to the Red Team.
^MThis contestant was eliminated from service by Chef Ramsay while dinner service was still in progress.

Contestant was a member of the Blue Team

Contestant was a member of the Red Team

Clear, concise, summary-like... This is what the summary table should hold. It does not need to recap the entire episode in detail. Nobody is going to remember all those colors anyway. They are going to look at the colors and then look at the legend to see what the colors mean. So let's just cut out the superfluous cell coloring. Padillah (talk) 14:33, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer the table looking exactly like the current season 1-4 tables are currently. While there's color, it's not obnoxiously bright nor does it detract from the text. I'll say no color it better than the horrendus purples and things on the one up right now. Morak99 (talk) 19:18, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it's pastels for Easter and after Easter we can go to something less Brain-hurty? I agree with going to the same color scheme seasons 1-4.Naraht (talk) 19:25, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There, a simple red and blue. I don't really care what the final colors are (I'm not very artistic so I'll leave that up to people with better eyes than mine) I just know it has to be simpler than 12 seperate colors and four footnotes. It's supposed to be able to be read at a glance. It's currently easier to just scroll down and read the epi summary. Padillah (talk) 20:27, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Season 4(for reference)


#	Chef	401¹	402¹	403⁶	404	405⁷	406⁷	407⁸	408	409	410	411	412	413	414
1	Christina	WIN	NOM	BoW	WIN	NOM	WIN	WIN	NOM	WIN	NOM	BoB	IN	NOM	WIN
2	Petrozza	LOSE	WIN	BoW	LOSE	WIN	WIN	NOM	WIN	BoW	IN	IN	IN	IN	2nd
3	Corey	WIN	BoW	LOSE	WIN	WIN	WIN	WIN	BoW	WIN	NOM	IN	NOM	OUT
4	Jen	WIN	NOM	LOSE	WIN	WIN	WIN	WIN	WIN	NOM	IN	NOM	OUT
5	Bobby	NOM³	WIN	LOSE	BoW	WIN	WIN	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	IN	OUT
6	Matt	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	NOM	WIN	NOM	WIN	NOM	WIN⁹	OUT
7	Louross	BoW⁵	WIN	LOSE	LOSE	NOM	WIN	NOM	WIN	OUT
8	Rosann	WIN⁴	LOSE	LOSE	WIN	WIN	NOM	WIN	OUT
9	Ben	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	NOM	WIN	WIN	OUT
10	Shayna	WIN	LOSE	LOSE	WIN	WIN	OUT
11	Vanessa	WIN²	LOSE	NOM	WIN	LEFT
12	Craig	LOSE	WIN	LOSE	OUT
13	Jason	LOSE	WIN	OUT
14	Sharon	WIN	OUT
15	Dominic	OUT

^{^1} Chef Ramsay declared that neither team won after the dinner service, but that one team was a losing team; the non-losing team is labeled as the winning team here in this table.
^2 Selected as team captain by Red team
^3 Selected as team captain by Blue team
^4 Assigned as Red team captain by Ramsay during service
^5 Assigned as Blue team captain by Ramsay during service
^6 Chef Ramsay declared that neither team won, and that there would be one nomination from the best of each team.
^7 Chef Ramsay declared both teams winners, since they both completed the service, but required that each team nominate someone.
^8 Chef Ramsay declared that each member of the Blue team had to nominate someone for elimination.
^9 Although Matt was on the winning team, he was deemed as one of the worst of the night.

Contestant was a member of the Winning Team

Contestant was a member of the Losing Team

Contestant was chosen as the Best of the Worst (BoW), or the Best of the Best (BoB)

Contestant was nominated for elimination but prevailed

Contestant was nominated for elimination by Chef Ramsay

Contestant was eliminated

Contestant voluntarily withdrew from the competition

Single team - contestant advanced in individual competition

The runner-up of Hell's Kitchen

The winner of Hell's Kitchen

Question Why do we need a color ( ) for someone that leaves the contest and then denote they left by putting "LEFT" in the cell? Can't we use ( ) and write "LEFT" in the box? Why do we need yet one more color? Padillah (talk) 20:32, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Improve table

Can we use the original table with the resining of the chef's firing at the end, it looks better then having the statement at the end of the episode recapt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooly123 (talk • contribs) 14:30, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you are asking what I think you are asking then I'd direct you to the discussion above where it was decided that to place a free-form text like that in a shrinking table cell is ugly. Also, considering that the table is a summary table and we have the episodes broken out below, it's more organized to have all the episodic content together. Padillah (talk) 17:48, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Borgata Restaurant a scam?

After having reviewed the Borgata hotel website and looked through all of their dining facilities, there is no mention of a Gordon Ramsey restaurant, was it eliminated do to the state of the economy or what? (Pavelow235 (talk) 17:24, 3 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

It was never meant to be a Ramsay "London On..." restaurant. It's simply billed as "head chef of Borgata hotel and casino". The poor guy can't just keep opening restaurants every season. Besides, they may be under non-disclosure contract until the reveal at the end of the season. Padillah (talk) 18:40, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good points Padillah, thank you for your insight. (Pavelow235 (talk) 05:08, 5 April 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Previous elimination from winning team?

Has Ramsey ever eliminated anyone from a Winning or Non-losing team before? To avoid splitting hairs, a Winning or non-losing team is any team that gets to sit down in those back tables during the firing time.Naraht (talk) 19:19, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That would call for us to do research. And if we do the research it's Original Research. So unless we can find a citation for it we're stuck. Padillah (talk) 19:21, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Having seen all the episodes myself I have never seen Gordon eliminating a person who was not on the winning team. Don't think you can find a citation for this. E1dan —Preceding undated comment added 14:05, 4 April 2009 (UTC).[reply]

If there were some recap site or some article on the show that would mention this it would be enough. Even a blog if it's kept by a serious columnist can be a r4eliable source. But I think the glitter of Hell's Kitchen is wearing off and people aren't covering it like they still do AI. Padillah (talk) 12:29, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Carol, eliminated Season 5 Episode 9. She was on the winning/not-losing red team, but went anyway. Monk3ypox (talk) 02:24, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New footnote

In light of Carol being eliminated despite being on the winning team, I took the liberty of adding a new footnote. It's "E" for being eliminated despite being on the winning team.

The President of Cool (talk) 05:35, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for making this a foot note and not YACC (yet another cell color). Also, thank you for not going so far as to suggest this might be the first time this has happened. To note that it has happened is significant enough, we'd need a citation from an RS to declare this was the first time. Padillah (talk) 12:27, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Combining the teams.

I fully understand that this is an established gimick on the show. I'm not disputing that it will happen, I'm simply saying that we shoud wait until it actually happens for a couple of reasons. One, basing a change on promos is inherently risky since they are, by their very definition, designed to be misleading and keep you guessing. Two, We don't need to scoop anybody - it's much more important to wait and get the transition correct than the need to jump the gun. Three, Given the drastic eliminations Chef Ramsay has done there's no telling what the final team will look like so we may as well wait and find out. Padillah (talk) 14:05, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Episode 12 Challenge Reward

The text in the recap says Danny and Chef flew in "separate biplanes" but it appears to me from watching the show that the numbers on the side of the plane indicate they both flew separately in the same plane. We never do see two planes in flight in the same shot. Jmac1962 (talk) 16:01, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, you're right. The camera also shows the two of them in the same biplane in one shot with Danny in front of Gordon Ramsey, so I changed it. Clem (talk) 03:24, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but that's physically impossible. If you look at the shot of the plane on the ground you will see two seats, the pilot and the "gunner". It's not used for a gunner anymore but unless Danny has learned to fly a biplane he wasn't the one in front on Chef Ramsay. Biplanes just aren't built that way. Padillah (talk) 12:17, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the pilot was in the rear seat. One shot clearly shows Gordon in the front seat when he was up.Jmac1962 (talk) 15:11, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Usually the heavier person sits in back, to balance the plane better, so maybe the pilot switched between flights for Danny and Gordon. I can't recall it at the moment. I agree that they probably took turns flying in the same plane, and we saw the edit showing both flights together. --Mtjaws (talk) 16:06, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Was Danny Wrong?

Are we sure Coi Burress was 22? Danny said in the most recent episode that he was the youngest competitor and then made it all the way to the final two. Was he simply mistaken or do we have the age wrong? I know Danny was 23.68.227.219.232 (talk) 05:43, 10 May 2009 (UTC)Jeff[reply]

Not only that, but I also thought I heard him say he was the youngest Hell's Kitchen competitor. I'm not sure of its validity, but I thought Season 2's Giacomo was 21, the youngest. I know that because I was scrolling through pages looking for it. Any ideas? Hurricane Angel Saki (talk) 07:46, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: I looked on Fox's official Hell's Kitchen page. Danny's 23, and they confirm Coi Burress is 22. Hurricane Angel Saki (talk) 07:50, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember, these shows are shot several months ago and edited heavily. We don't know at what point in time Danny said he was youngest vs. When his and Coi's birthday are. It's also not really notable how old or young he is unless it impacts the show. Padillah (talk) 12:25, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Epilogue

it's probably a little early to request, but I have noticed that the articles for season's one, two and three contain a large regarding the current status of the winning chefs and some of the other chefs. Is it possible to add such an epilogue to this article?Tlatseg (talk) 22:54, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is really simple about adding things: If you have a reliable source citing the information, you can add it. It's the "reliable source" part that I think is becoming an issue here. When these shows are over most outlets loose interest so there's usually very little reported about the contestants after the fact. If you find a source that is reliable (or better, two sources) then you are more than welcome to add the information to the epilogue. Padillah (talk) 12:01, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Danny moves to Utah

Recently in December of 2009 Danny moved to Utah to live next to his number one fan.

This sounds alarmingly creepy, is there a source for this? Old Relic (talk) 14:31, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Taste-test Record

Elsie from Season 1 was the one who set the record (which in itself is impressive given her lack of formal culinary training), not Virginia, just clarifying. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.84.22 (talk) 04:59, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Colour contrast problems

It seems that this article is using colours in the infobox which don't satisfy Wikipedia's accessibility guidelines. The contrast between the foreground colour and the background colour is low, which means that it may be difficult or impossible for people with visual impairments to read it.

To correct this problem, a group of editors have decided to remove support for invalid colours from Template:Infobox television season and other television season templates after 1 September 2015. If you would still like to use custom colours for the infobox and episode list in this article after that date, please ensure that the colours meet the WCAG AAA standard.

To test whether a colour combination is AAA-compliant you can use Snook's colour contrast tool. If your background colour is dark, then please test it against a foreground colour of "FFFFFF" (white). If it is light, please test it against a foreground colour of "000000" (black). The tool needs to say "YES" in the box for "WCAG 2 AAA Compliant" when you input the foreground and the background colour. You can generally make your colour compliant by adjusting the "Value (%)" fader in the middle box.

Please be sure to change the invalid colour in every place that it appears, including the infobox, the episode list, and the series overview table. If you have any questions about this, please ask on Template talk:Infobox television season. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:30, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]