Talk:MasterChef (American TV series) season 11

Citations/synthesis and/or original research issue

I've already explained how including the citations are fine- just to add on, from the beginning of MOS:TV, "Articles should be verifiable and establish notability. Please cite your sources wherever possible." I just went back to MasterChef (American season 10), and there are at least three times an age was changed, claiming the age was incorrect in the show- there is no source giving the ages whatsoever on there, just names, locations, and occupations. Including these citations helps to avoid that from actually happening, and is helpful to verify this information, especially in the future when the information may be challenged and the episode(s) may not be readily available to check at that point in the future.

And possible synthesis or original research in regards to contestant Abe being an NYU student?... What even?? If we're going on a basis of on-air existence' citing, then don't contradict it here- as I've stated in my latest revert:

• The contestant states (and is shown in the CCs), "My name's Abe. I'm 22 years old, and I'm a student. I'm currently going to NYU."
• Is literally wearing a shirt that clearly says "NYU" [1]
• That same shirt also has a torch logo, literally the same exact design as their logo.

On top of all of that, one of the citations continuously being removed supports this information, saying, "Abe is a NYU student and one of the youngest home cooks at age 22." The information is clearly sourced, both from the episode as well as the website citation- at this point it's just seeming to be a WP:ILIKEIT/WP:IDONTLIKEIT and that the information needs to match up precisely with the on-screen information shown during contestant interviews, despite the 'contentious' information being available in the exact same source- what is shown on-screen versus what the same contestant literally says is WAY far from any sort of synthesis issue or any type of original research. Magitroopa (talk) 20:12, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Except that in just about every other previous season it states in the table "Ages and nicknames as given on air." As per MOS:TVPLOT "Plot summaries, and other aspects of a program's content, may be sourced from the works themselves, as long as only basic descriptions are given." So it doesn't matter if other nimrods change the age (here's a shocker -- people will vandalize WP no matter how many cites there are), the fact exists that the age is shown on the screen from the producers and that is more than acceptable for verifiability, so no other outside source is needed. The additional sources you cite are nothing more than recap cites (pretty much like our episode summaries), where do you think they get their information for the names, ages, occupations and locations from? Answer - from watching the episode itself, which is the PRIMARY source for verifiability. And your claim of "the episode(s) may not be readily available to check at that point" is a huge assumption, especially in this day and age when just about every TV show is archived somewhere on the web. As for your "student" issue, I'd invite you to take a look at MasterChef (American season 9) and contestant Samantha Daily. She has her occupation listed as "College Student", but on the video of the episode itself (which can be seen here), she clearly wears gear from University of Kentucky and multiple pictures of her from that school are shown (see time of video at about 30:11), but the producers (the ones who have the final say-so on the matter) listed her occupation on-screen as "College Student", so that's what got reported. It doesn't matter that Abe said he was from NYU or wears clothing from NYU, the producers chose to list his occupation as only "Student", and that's what we go by. We don't get to decide what information goes in any field of the table, be it names, occupations, age, or hometown; almost all of that information is supplied from the producers of the show who get to choose what is aired, and if the producers chose to list Abe's occupation as just "Student", then that's what we have to go by. - SanAnMan (talk) 20:36, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Yet if there is source(s) for the information, it is perfectly fine to include. It doesn't need to go precisely as what is shown on-screen during contestant interviews. If it is missing a part of it that can be verified, there should be no reason not to include it. I don't think I watched that specific season of MC (in regards to Samantha Daily), but if there is a later episode where she actually says that is what she attends, then I see no reason not to include it. In this case, Abe wearing the NYU shirt is in addition to his quote literally saying that's where he attends. No instance of synthesis or original research there- if he didn't say that's where he attends, then surely it would be original research, but he very clearly states it- no reason it can't be included whatsoever. Magitroopa (talk) 20:56, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Except for the main reason that the producers (and again, they are the ones who have the final say-so, not you or I) chose to list his occupation as "Student". So we should be doing the same. Again, we do not get to decide on our own what information goes on the table, we copy the exact information supplied by the producers of the show. So yes, it does need to go precisely what is shown on-screen. - SanAnMan (talk) 21:00, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

That is not the case at all. If the information is available and is reliably sourced (which it is), it is certainly fine to include that in addition to what is shown on-screen. There is no conflict of sources saying two different things that don't match up- this is the same source of information giving additional information. Even going by your 'the producers chose to list it this way', wouldn't that also be the case with the quote as well? I'm sure they have plenty more footage/interviews/quotes that were unused- they could've easily not used that quote, but they did in fact, so that would also classify at 'information supplied by the producers of the show'.

And no, producers do not always have a final say in what is listed on Wikipedia. Is it one of the most important 'says' from anyone? Surely. However, Wikipedia will not always follow strictly by their decisions/discretions. This is why we can have discussions here- to discuss points of contention, such as this. If the information is not original research and is reliably sourced, it's perfectly fine to include it. Magitroopa (talk) 21:37, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Once again, you are making decisions on how you feel it should be done. I'm basing my decisions on 10 seasons of previous history of articles. Standard practice has been that we don't list any information not listed in the graphics on the show, except for last names which usually need citing. Pinging other regular editors Brianis19, NintendoGeek, and will seek out third party if needed. - SanAnMan (talk) 03:33, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

For open disclosure, I have opened a third-party opinion request on this disagreement. - SanAnMan (talk) 14:55, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Annai's last name?

Here's an interesting predicament... so we first saw Annai in "Legends: Curtis Stone - Auditions Round 2", and her name was given (IIRC, she said her name) as 'Annai Gonzalez'. However, recently, MasterChef have been posting recipes of the contestants on their official social media pages, and the first two help confirm the last names of two other contestants:

• Elyce Wooten
• Joseph Manglicmot

Now today, they posted one for Annai, but instead of 'Gonzalez', she is listed as 'Annai Rodriguez'. The other interesting part is that what seems to be her Facebook account uses 'Gonzalez'.

As far as other sourcing is concerned, it's a bit hard, since I'm pretty sure most sites (such as this and this) got their information from Wikipedia (you can tell this is at least true for GoldDerby, from this previous article and how the list towards the bottom matches up exactly with this previous version).

Thanks to the post on MasterChef's social media, I have a feeling there could sometime soon be users/IPs changing it based on that. Given all the information provided here, what would be the best course of action for this? Magitroopa (talk) 19:27, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Update: Some more posts now confirm Michael Newman, Tay Westberry, and Suu Khin... Magitroopa (talk) 21:08, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

I found a source that backs up the "Gonzalez" name, and added it to the article. I'm leaning towards the IG post being a typo, as her Facebook and Instagram profiles have Gonzalez, and this article adds to that list. - SanAnMan (talk) 22:03, 1 July 2021 (UTC)

Regarding Tay Westberry's status

On the 8th episode (aired July 22nd), Tay lost due to his not using one of five required ingredients. Gordon implied that it was a violation of contest's rules. So should his status on this page be 'disqualified' rather than 'eliminated'? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dunglssllssl (talk • contribs) 13:18, July 22, 2021 (UTC)

@Dunglssllssl: No, the term "disqualified" is never said in the episode, you are assuming he was disqualified, which is a textbook example of WP:SYNTH. And even if it was a disqualified, there's no need to list it as anything other than an elimination. - SanAnMan (talk) 21:26, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, we really don't need to complicate things further- there's more than enough colors in the elimination table as it currently is. The episode summary in the episode table below already explains it- a 'disqualification' would moreso be for someone cheating, removed from competition for known (or unknown) reasoning, etc. In this case, it's basically just failing to follow the challenge's rules ("You must use all 5 ingredients...") rather than a 'violation of contest's rules'. Magitroopa (talk) 00:57, 23 July 2021 (UTC)