Talk:Campus SuperStar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Campus SuperStar is part of SGpedians' Resources
An attempt to better coordinate and organise articles related to Singapore.
To participate, simply edit this page or visit our noticeboard for more info.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
This article is also under the scope of WikiProject Singaporean Arts and Entertainment.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Campus SuperStar article.
Article policies

Contents

[edit] Information Updates

Order of elimination unclear - all 24 contestants were finalists, and therefore should not be grouped in this manner. Schools of the other contestants are omitted. I propose a table format where all contestants are listed, along with gender and school information, in addition to date of elimination. Gyraforce 12:21, 25 Jan 2007 (UTC)

Hi, the table you requested have been updated. Evan_Weinstein 18:17, 29 May 2007 (UTC)



There should be more focus on the judges as I see quite little information on the judges. Grand Final section for Season 1 should contain more content too. The manner in which result shows are held has not been written very clear. Episodic details could be improved by adding in the songs which contestants sang, and judges' individual scores. Secretliker 06:07, 21 June 2007 (UTC)



Please stop editing the page to claim that the judges are being bribed. It is defamatory. 121.6.16.106 20:34, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup on Campus SuperStar (1)

Too many information thrown in on the article which are not required. Scores of every stages are unnecessary and should be taken out. Also see Wikipedia:Article_size, WP:NOT#GUIDE. Cocoma 22:26, 13 August 2007 (UTC)



(Copied whole chunks of 'unwanted' stuff and pasted them here) Cocoma 23:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)



Hi Cocoma, I see your efforts in trying to get a 'quality' standard encyclopedia article here. However, it would not help anyone by removing everything and pasting them into the talk page. Instead, I think you should identify the RELEVANT sections and include them yourself in the article, if not, include all. And when quoting Wiki special pages (by the way, they're not short either), at least point out the 'rule' you are referring to. It's hard to read long special pages too (: (Just cleaned-up this talk page) Secretliker 07:59, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

The information on the talk page was for you to put back what is relevant. Since you have mentioned that removing the whole chunk will not help, then I will cleanup the irrelevant sections specifically. The scores and public voting are now removed. Registration details are kept, though I don't think they are encyclopedic either. If you have anything that you would like to further retain, please discuss on the talk page. Do not revert what I have did once again as that will be violating Wikipedia:Three-revert rule. If anyone is still having disputes, we should bring it to the Mediation Committee and avoid reverting it persistently. Thanks. Cocoma 10:16, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
To stress on again, Wikipedia is not a fans site for keeping the progress of Campus SuperStar competition. Neither is it an indiscriminate collection of information. Scores and progressions should be taken to a fan site and not at Wikipedia. Cocoma 10:27, 16 August 2007 (UTC)



Hi Cocoma, I do not think this make Wikipedia a fansite. Firstly, if posting results of every match make this a fansite, consider soccer cups and leagues. Just look at articles like UEFA Cup and you will know what I mean. Next, I think it is appropriate for the scores to be in because this is part of the history of the competition. I think you must have some biaseness against Singapore's TV shows or even Singapore, you are not showing that you are objective by your actions. kiewzhenyi 14:50, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Please put all new text under old text to avoid any ordering confusion. I'm improving the article in accordance to WP:NOT. Your responses to my edit however, are often not assuming good faith or politeness. I have requested that the article to be cleaned up and you responded on my talk page as a "sickening move" which was later amended to "quite disturbing", and at the same time having my edit reverted. Right now, you have claimed that I am biased against Singapore's TV shows and Singapore, which is deemed hostile remark to me, and not my intention. Please provide your remarks based on NPOV or resolving this dispute through the mediation committee. Cocoma 15:22, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm trying to say, if domestic soccer leagues and cups can show scores, why showing scores for a national competition like this is not allowed (unless it's obvious biaseness against Singapore shows)? kiewzhenyi 15:28, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
In this case then, I would suggest the article to be splited up or arranged in a more tidy manner (Similar to the format on UEFA Cup). The current listing bloated Campus SuperStar into a fairly long and untidy article, hence requires a cleanup. Cocoma 15:36, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Actually, the episodic details are arranged rather neatly (cos I fixed most of the arrangements of the codes), perhaps just some presentation flaws. The tables for UEFA Cup are nicely coloured and are fairly large, whereas smaller tables were created for these episodic details. Thanks for your prompt, but I have actually been thinking of some other ways of presenting the various details. (I don't think those episodic details are indiscriminate collection of information, though.) I'm thinking of integrating whole season's episodic details - just the main things like who's singing, song title, and score - into 1 large table. But still nowhere near the point of creation. When there's a will, there's a way.

(Just my general thoughts: Somehow I don't feel quite right reading very brief account of Campus SuperStar, thus I have always been adding lots of information into this article, just to make it look more complete, giving a complete, but perhaps more unencyclopedic, feel. But yes, the rules says Wikipedia should not be... and appears, a brief, stub-looking article.) Secretliker 18:12, 16 August 2007 (UTC)



To Cocoma, I think the '1st audition' section sometimes uses the wrong tense. The song lyrics also should not appear here, this is not notable enough. The page for the Beatles doesnt have all their lyrics and this Campus Superstar is certainly not notable enough to include lyrics. But I'm not going to waste my time editing a page that people just revert back again, maybe it should be locked or... Seth J. Frantzman 19:06, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

The 1st audition section was briefly drafted by me, and has not been edited thoroughly yet. Secretliker 17:22, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup on Campus SuperStar (2)

Hi, i recommend the tables which Secretliker proposed, the song titles for each show and the song title each contestant has chosen, and the scores given Timothy 05:22, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

We'll soon be sick of reverting edits if Cocoma insists that episodic details should not be added. The cycle continues that whenever someone adds the tables back, Cocoma would remove everything, leaving the unencyclopedic registration details which I have briefly drafted. Anyway, the Productions section is also not very well done as there are lots of missing details. Are these encyclopedic? Are scores and songs which contestants sang unencyclopedic? Does it make an Wikipedia article becoming more to a fansite by adding these facts? Moreover, by not including these information, this whole article really look like a stub which has not been developed. Or, a more possible solution would be, to include these information in a less info-load manner, and by using less table codings? I think episodic details has to be included somehow. Without the episodes, there would be no Campus SuperStar article at all. These episodes are essential in the Campus SuperStar progress throughout the 2 years, and hence should be included. Secretliker 16:00, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
As stated earlier on, this is not about insisting on reverting edits. Wikipedia has a policy on how article should be written and organized. As far as I can see now, my edits are being reverted without a proper reason and bypassing the discussion here. Please take note that this violates WP:COI. The article here should be clean up and improved rather than taking off from a personal POV. Cocoma 16:22, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
I have provided the reasons above. The episodes ARE essential in the cycle of Campus SuperStar. Episodic captions were also written in a formal, and neutral tone. (Go read those in the history) As far as I can see now, there are unidentified people by the name of their IP addresses who are reverting what you have removed, and adding even more information. This just shows that there are people who are in favour of compiling episodic details into this article, substantiating my stand of including details. Disregard that I have said that the article looks like a stub now - guess you're referring to this when you probably said that I am getting personal. I also noticed that under UEFA Cup, the large tables only show the main summaries of the progress in the various years, and there are more specific articles such as UEFA Cup 2006-07 which really probed into the 'episodic' details. You suggested for the article to be splitted too. Guess we should really do that, should we? How do we name the articles? How about these? Campus SuperStar Season 1 (2006) and Campus SuperStar Season 2 (2007). Thereafter, only brief information would be on Campus SuperStar, and the details would be shifted to the respective seasons' articles. (After getting consensus, we'll start to do that.) Secretliker 17:22, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
My suggestion has been replied previously, stating that in that case, we should clean up either be splitted up into different seasons to keep the records, if not, tidy up the way these tables are organized (current score keeping just make the article lengthy (like what Sfrantzman has said) and cluttered. Perhaps, we could follow closely on how American Idol has been written since its similar to Campus SuperStar. Unregistered users going by the IP addresses seem to be very familiar with how Wikipedia works and might possibly be socketpuppet of a registered user, though that's just my guess. But putting that aside, those reverting edits are WP:COI and bypassed the discussion here, which they have already been noted. Cocoma 17:37, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Just leave all the information as they are for the moment. There's no point in continuing reverting edits, like what you have done with the unidentified IP address user. No harm leaving those episodic details intact for the moment. I have briefly read through the American Idol article and found it having too much prose, and is also difficult to read. Since we have already established a Episodic Details section with sufficient information to constitute a new sub-article, I guess we should split the article instead of compromising the amount of information with regards to the length of the article. I have also noticed the characteristic table in American Idol by the right (also the one slightly below showing dates of elimination), and I think those tables would be good to include in our article. I still think splitting the article would be a better choice than compromising the amount of information provided. Secretliker 17:59, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
It should be noted that since the scores are previously removed as part of the cleanup, it should be placed back only when improvements are done to the scores/ details of each season (such as spilitting the article up like American Idol. Similarly, persistant reverts by anonymous users ignoring the notice given should be reported or with the article requested for semi-protection.Cocoma 19:20, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
This page keeps being reverted to its former, long and unotable version. It is basicaly a fan webpage and therefore violated wikipedia guidelines.Seth J. Frantzman 19:23, 18 August 2007 (UTC)



Someone keeps deleting my contributions to Talk, I have noted again and again that this page is too long and has to much superflous information. If you continue to delete these I will be forced to report it. The point of a talk page is for discussion, not censorship. Now it appears as of this instant that the page is looking better, but it still needs work. Seth J. Frantzman 13:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think they are deleted. Your comment is under "Cleanup of Campus SuperStar (2)". Cocoma 16:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)



Alright, plain talk doesn't get us anywhere. I've decided that I would do this and I have spent 1.5 hours trying to get all the codings from the history of this page and splitted this article into 2 sub-articles. The links to those articles can be found under respective Season's sypnoses. I am following rather closely the format for American Idol. Much to be done to improve each season's sypnoses. Thinking of getting a main summary table of the progress of Campus SuperStar for both seasons like UEFA Cup to show the Top 4. Now the article looks clean. To the anonymous user whose identifyiable by IP address, please proceed to Campus SuperStar Season 2 (2007) to continue updating. Now this article looks disproportionate to those 2 supposedly sub-articles. Thus much prose has to be added here. Secretliker 21:42, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Good job! kiewzhenyi 02:12, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
THIS IS A REMINDER TO THE PERSON WHO IS ONLY IDENTIFYIABLE BY HIS IP ADDRESS: PLEASE PROCEED TO Campus SuperStar Season 2 (2007) TO CONTINUE UPDATING! STOP REVERTING EVERYTHING WE DO. Secretliker 06:29, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Article is now semi-protected. Cocoma 12:07, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pictures

Hi all. This page seems to have lack of pictures of the competition. Anyone care uploading? kiewzhenyi 02:16, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

No use, probably will get deleted by Cocoma. 220.255.48.179 16:09, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Hawhawhaw cocoma. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.255.7.239 (talk) 09:34, 12 March 2008 (UTC)