So I think this might be a fun thing to do for the wiki! It's totally up to you and the admins but I have experince doing them, in fact I just finished one on another wiki. What happens is that we will have a group of nominees for different category and via the polls, users can vote for thier favorites and then I would announce the winners and they would get a small trophy picture made for them. If you want to see what I do then check out this page to see kinda a more detail version of what I made:
I found these two pictures from the short promotion section of the first episode of Dance Moms. It shows Maddie performing 'Somewhere Over The Rainbow/Cry'. However, I'm not sure if these images of her are from before Dance Moms or during the show. What do you think?
Someone on Tumblr identified it as 2012. But my guess is it's 2011, before the show.
I can give you well-sourced evidence that Maddie was "Hollywood Vibe - Regional Jr Dancer of the Year" 2011; likely earlier that year than Chloe was Jr. Miss Dance of Pennsylvania (with Paige runner-up):
I need your help to change a page to make it politically correct. Since Holly has a doctorate the title of Dr. Is supposed to be used before her full name although when I try to rename it it requires some type of administration.
Academic and professional titles (such as "Doctor" or "Professor") should not be used before (or after) the name in the initial sentence or in other uses of the person's name. Verifiable facts about how the person attained such titles should be included in the article text instead. In cases where the person is widely known by a pseudonym or stage name containing such a title (whether earned or not), it may be included as described above. Post-nominal letters indicating academic degrees (including honorary degrees) should not be included following the subject's name in the first line (although they may occasionally be used in articles where the person with the degree is not the subject, to clarify their qualifications).
Isaac Asimov IPAc-en|ˈ|aɪ|z|ə|k|_|ˈ|æ|z|i-|m|ɒ|v (January 2?, 1920? – April 6, 1992; originally Исаак Озимов but now transcribed into Russian as Айзек Азимов) was an American author and professor of biochemistry, ... he went on to Columbia University, from which he graduated in 1939, later returning to earn a PhD in biochemistry in 1948 ...
If it were me, I'd try to get a link to your Bring It! site on the mainpage of the Bring It On Wiki, and hope that any active users there wouldn't object to doing that courtesy... doing something about the Kim of Queens might be more likely tricky if there are still active users on the other site.
That will give you the ratings for Kim of Queens that day.
Up to maybe around maybe June 2014, you can lookup cable ratings like that, looking at a date a few days after broadcast (using either the calendar, or changing the last couple numbers in like "http://www.thefutoncritic.com/ratings/2014/01/23/").
I know what the movie Bring It On is (and cheaper sequels)...
Instead, the idea was really just to get the google/bing search algorithms to understand that your Wiki exists and is worth a mention in results, at least in the context of very specific searches like "Bring It! Wiki" or "Bring It! Wikia". I'm not sure if getting a hyperlink there would do that, but I'd hope it might. ATM, it's definitely being blind/stupid in giving links to that other site.
(Maybe it's getting smarter or less blind - or I forgot to try "Bring It! Wikia Lifetime" when I tried before - because now I do see Google gives a useful result with that.)
You are way nasty and ugly on one of WIKI's clients page about the client!!! ??? What gives? How can an admin of the site for a client say such nasty things about That Client on a comment section of the their own client's page??? How is that good business. Is there someone I can talk about this to? I mean it looks like maybe ADMIN doesn't really mean admin? or is this a rogue admin of Dance Moms's Christi's site?? Something seems very wrong when the admin of a site is nastier than ppl who come to read and comment! Not very pleasant to visit as a fan of someone and then see the actual admins of her site talking such nasty vile things about her. What is good business about that? You are kidding me right? You can't be the admin for a client of yours and diss you client! What about good business alludes you?
I'm not being paid here, so that's the first part of good business that eludes me.
You have absolutely no understanding of Wikia's business model, with all this client-this, client-that stuff. But, just for the sake of argument, suppose that Wikia (or someone) was trying to figure out what about this show makes money, and was trying to micromanage this site according to pursuit of profit.
Just what kind of show do you think the producers have been trying to make here?
Here's something to consider: the top executive producer was making a trash reality tv show called Bridezillas before this one. You think viewers were supposed to be fans of the Bridezillas, and only talk about how wonderful their behavior was? (Wikipedia description: "The interactions are generally negative, exposing the featured bride-to-be as uncontrollable, bullying, emotional and using whatever means necessary to get what she wants.")
Maybe there are children who get the idea that this is how women are actually supposed to behave (or pretend to behave), and that they serve as wonderful role models; but the 18-49 demographic is all that advertisers care about. (Younger, and they don't have jobs, and thus don't have much money to spend. Older, and they are too difficult to convince with commercials - or at least the old theory goes.) If you want to see what most of the 18-49 demographic thinks of the women on this show, you'd be better off looking at someplace like here; or the comments sections of the tabloids.
The producers could have called this show Dance Momzillas, given their working concepts of creating controversy and conflict to produce ratings and money. Cast some stage moms who are crazy (or at least will pretend to be so), and willing to do anything to get their kids fame. Cast a crazy dance coach as well. Make sure alcohol is always available for those who will take the bait, because drunk people are great at making jackasses of themselves (very entertaining, and an old reality tv producer method.) Hand the cast lines to badmouth each other (or get them to improv their own), which is entertaining by itself, and even more entertaining when they get angry and annoyed at being unfairly attacked by one another. Get them to say incriminating things about themselves, while you're at it. Play some tricks on them, and watch when one of them blows their top. (As I recall, Stinson advertised Two Girls, One Solo as what would be the best episode ever; and called Big Trouble in the Big Apple better than Rockie III.)
If you think the love of money is the root of holding hands and singing "Kumbaya," you're confused about how this world operates.
If you're looking for a good reason to attack me on this point, you've so far done it from about 180 degrees in the wrong direction.