Talk:Big Brother 16 (U.S.)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Big Brother (Rated High-importance)
WikiProject icon The Big Brother WikiProject aims to improve articles relating to Big Brother, and Big Brother 16 (U.S.) has been identified as one of these articles. Anybody can help the WikiProject by trying to improve existing articles. Please add your name to the list of participants, if you are committed to helping out.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Television (Rated Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of television on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.


If you go through this entire Talk Page you will see that there has been numerous discussions on how the VOTING TABLE should be set up...A Census was made..The way it is currently is what MOST agreed on. Keep it the way it is! Some may think it looks 'better', but this is your opinion. Unless the census wants it back the 'new' way.--Tech-Chef (talk) 03:18, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

I give up! Some troll keeps messing with the table. I give up! The trolls win! Peace Out Beaches! --Tech-Chef (talk) 04:48, 24 August 2014 (UTC)


If the reverts that are occurring are sanctioned and normal (keeping the voting table fattened instead of tightening it up), then f*** this page. I'll read it occasionally because I watch the show, but if the table is going to be forcibly fat, then I'll make ZERO effort to make it something that America can use. Killermist (talk) 19:15, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

America can use it the way it was. There is a discussion further down the page about the tables. A Census was made that we want it the OLD way (we like it "fat").

--Tech-Chef (talk) 18:06, 4 August 2014 (UTC)


I am just posting this right away as I've seen on talk pages from seasons past about people complaining about the spoilers this page has! Those who want to complain, remember, it's NEVER updated to the episodes as it airs on TV, it updates with the 24/7 LIVE FEEDS! If you do not want spoilers, then I would suggest not visiting this page prior to the episode airing if thats how you enjoy your Big Brother! :-)

Sorry do not mean to offend or be rude to anyone, just wanted to put that out there and although it may not work as people will complain about the fact there is spoilers, at least its posted right away and people will know its not the first time and will not be the final time. It's been like this since Big Brother 1 and will continue to do so until Big Brother ends! Demers-vachon 16:26, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Two Head of Households[edit]

Included separate lines for the two HoHs since each will have their own nominations and just one line for HoH and Nominations will get confusing. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 18:01, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

I think we should wait and see how they do it before making any changes to the table. --MSalmon (talk) 18:03, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
I was just going by the press release CBS has out which says they will have their own nominations its up to you all but I just was bold and made the table adjustments so if that is the case the table isn't messed up by someone who may not understand the code ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 18:06, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Made a few changes for now but we can alter as and when we need to --MSalmon (talk) 18:10, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Here is my thoughts on how it will work: HoH's nominate two people each, four HG's up. Battle of the Blocks takes place between both HoH's and their nominees, winning team gets immunity and losing team ALL put up for eviction (including HoH). PoV competition takes place as usual, three HG's are up after PoV ceremony. --MSalmon (talk) 18:24, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Move in date in infobox[edit]

Hi, until we know that the two groups officially entered the house on separate days then leave as Day 1 until we know more. --MSalmon (talk) 21:46, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

They all moved in Day 1. The first group in the morning/afternoon and the second later that night. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:42, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Actually I would say we leave the days blank for the second eight and just put Day 1 in for the first eight until the 2nd episode airs. Unless there is a source saying group two entered on x day then leave it blank for now cause no one officially knows. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 06:41, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
I doubt it will be on different days, if last night's episode ended with the HoH comp, then tonight's episode will will be the same --MSalmon (talk) 08:21, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Why was the Day 2 removed from the 2nd group of Housemates without discussion? The 2nd premiere episode clearly was on the 2nd day of the game considering Julie had a new dress on, new studio audience, and the 1st eight had new clothes on? ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 02:01, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Your kidding me right. It could take 10 minutes for Julie to change a dress and have the audience switch out when that audience is comprised of CBS and Big Brother workers. Most of the first 8 had the same clothing on aswell, so it's clear they all moved in Day 1. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:20, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Unless the Sunday episode says "Day 1" in the recap at the beginning then it should be left as Day 2 as per the episode that aired. The evidence in the second part of the premiere indicate the episode was filmed on a different day than Day 1. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 05:14, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
I agree with Alucard. The episode will start on Sunday picking up where they left off tonight, and when they go from black and white to color, the Day number will show up on the screen. This will give us confirmation. BlueDevil54 (talk) 07:11, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
The beds in the cave room looked slept in as well. I'm guessing they moved in on Day 2.


Who marked Paola as evicted on Day 13? How do we even have that information this early on, with the feeds not even up until late tonight? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:22, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Don't know but it was removed --MSalmon (talk) 18:18, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Voting table[edit]

Hi, anybody have any ideas on how to do the table. Is it ok as it is now or does it need to be changed? --MSalmon (talk) 21:56, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

I saw you(or someone else, I really didn't pay attention to who edited it) made the BotB winners placed before the pre-veto nominees. I get why it was done and it looks nice now but it doesn't make a whole lot of sense chronologically. It makes it look like BotB took place before the nomination ceremony. Plus, when a new week starts and we have access to feeds for the whole week, how will we put the nominees in the table when they only have one row to be placed in? The point is that it doesn't accurately reflect game information. Brittany and Victoria were nominated. and then won BotB, the table makes it look like they were never nominated at all. I suggest reverting it to the way we had it with each pair of nominees being placed in their own box, then BotB winners, then PoV winners, then final noms. BlueDevil54 (talk) 23:13, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
It wasn't me who changed the layout --MSalmon (talk) 08:44, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Not sure we need the brown color there for dethroned HoH. As Julie said, once their noms win the BotB, they revert back to normal HG status. It would also cause a problem if the dethroned HoH were to be nominated, b/c then they'd have two statuses at once. T (talk) 07:44, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Removed --MSalmon (talk) 08:31, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

In the table, wouldn't it be a good idea to replace "Head of Household" status with "HOH" (to allow it to take up just one line) and the "Evicted Day ##" be made to be one line instead of two so that the table could be tightened up a bit instead of so spread out? Killermist (talk) 12:20, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Correction, HoH instead of HOH. Happy now? Killermist (talk) 13:45, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, please refer to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Big_Brother page for more information --MSalmon (talk) 12:27, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
I think the intent was clear (tighten up the table) even if the precise implementation recommendation might have been slightly off. This is why I ask these questions on the talk page instead of just diving in and making changes.Killermist (talk) 13:49, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

HoH order[edit]

I propose that we list the HoH's and their nominees in the table in the order in which their nominations occurred. Last night's Sunday show showed they did a random draw to determine who nominated first. Caleb won the draw, and made his nominations. Frankie then had to make his nominations from the HouseGusests that were left. Therefore, I have listed Caleb and his nominations first, followed by Frankie's. If anyone has an issue with this, please let me know. BlueDevil54 (talk) 05:31, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

  • Hello, BlueDevil 54. I actually like the HoH order, because of the fact that Caleb did win the draw and make his nominees first. What I would suggest, however, is to have just the "Battle of the Block" winners instead of placing them under nominees. Technically, they aren't such after their victory and it just adds superfluous space. Feel free to say otherwise. Beside that, thanks for helping sort out this wacky twist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by King1559 (talkcontribs) 14:31, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
In my opinion, its not so much superfluous space as it is accurately representing what went on in the game. It still stands that Julie will tell two people they are HoH on Thursday and both of those people go through the nominations ceremony and nominate two people each. At one point in time, they were nominated for eviction. I feel like the point of the table is to accurately depict what went on in the game. Some years, the table will look a bit cluttered or have a lot of space to it, but its necessary in my opinion. for example, look at the BB9 table. Its rather large and looks a bit cluttered with throwing 4 names into one cell multiple times but its the best way of depicting what happened accurately, so its kept that way. Thank you for being patient and wanting to improve the article, but for the reasons I have stated, I'd like to keep it the way it is. BlueDevil54 (talk) 03:21, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 July 2014[edit]

{{|Big Brother 16 (U.S.)|answered=no}} AndSimmon14 (talk) 02:18, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

What do you want done? You left it blank —LucasThoms 02:22, 4 July 2014 (UTC)


I think that the nominations should go in order, on the table, of who nominated them. So if Amber is first on the table, her nominations go first. Then Devins. --Tech-Chef (talk) 16:47, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Agree --MSalmon (talk) 21:54, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

New Layout[edit]

Hey guys, just wanted to re-do the table again just so we can cut as much space as possible. I have decided to cut out the "Battle of the Block" row and just have a background color for the winners. Feel free to object these changes and revert if you like, but I would love to know what we think about this change.

PS, how do you sign these messages? I'm not a robot, just a new user.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by King1559 (talkcontribs) 17:29, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

I actually would rather keeping the Battle of the Block winners in the table. And you sign them by typing four of these: ~
{ [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 17:32, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

I second keeping it the way it was. and when you are in message editing mode you can also click the button that says "signature and time stamp" (when you hover over it) (Or as above says just type 4 ~) --Tech-Chef (talk) 21:40, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

I am also for keeping it the way it was before. The size of the table is mostly irrelevant in my opinion as long as the necessary information is portrayed. BlueDevil54 (talk) 23:28, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Well, someone changed the layout AGAIN..I hate the new layout! I preferred the way it was before...But that is just me.-- (talk) 04:13, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
I changed it back (Above ( was me, forgot to login (oooops))--Tech-Chef (talk) 04:32, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Once Again, I had to change the table layout back to the old way...We all came to a census that the way it is, is the way it should be. Stop changing it back to the "smaller" version! --Tech-Chef (talk) 17:54, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 July 2014[edit]

I recommend this article receive semiprotected status to prevent fan-fiction edits of votes that have yet to take place. These edits have no basis in fact and therefore should not be included on the page until results are officially broadcast. {Jmanphxaz (talk) 16:08, 14 July 2014 (UTC)}

There is long-standing consensus that the BB pages are to be updated as events happen in real-time, i.e. per the live feeds. Tarc (talk) 16:18, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
I second the Semi-protected edit request. People are making edits based on discussion in the house. Not "official" even by feeds time. such as the Veto Ceremony (which someone keeps making it as if it happened already)

--Tech-Chef (talk) 17:22, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Just to clarify, "edit request" refers to an edit that you want done to a page that's already protected. To request that the page be protected, you'll have to request it at WP:RFPP. —LucasThoms 22:26, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 July 2014[edit]

Please change Day 1 to Day 2 for the following house guests; Caleb, Christine, Derrick, Hayden, Jocasta, Victoria, Zach, and Brittany. ZwooperGreen (talk) 04:40, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Symbol declined.svg Declined: All the HouseGuests entered on Day 1 in real life. Putting them as Day 2 would be too confusing and besides, we have already reached consensus. Anyone have a better explanation? ~~JHUbal27 05:47, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
This is a tired rehash of an old quibble, there is no evidence at all that it was literally a second day when the last batch was let in. Tarc (talk) 05:54, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 July 2014[edit]

Frankie IS NOT currently nominated for eviction, Jocasta is. Please correct the wrong information. [1]

Tmnt24567 (talk) 22:33, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

  1. ^
  2. ^ Wednesday Final Ratings: ‘Motive’ Adjusted Up; No Adjustment to ‘Big Brother’ - Ratings |
  3. ^ Thursday Final Ratings: ‘Rookie Blue’ Adjusted Up - Ratings |
  4. ^ Sunday Final Ratings: ‘Wipeout’ Adjusted Up; ‘Reckless’ Adjusted Down - Ratings |
  5. ^ Wednesday Final Ratings: ‘So You Think You Can Dance’ Adjusted Up; ‘Taxi Brooklyn’ Adjusted Down - Ratings |
  6. ^ Thursday Final Ratings: ‘Rookie Blue’ Adjusted Up; ‘Hell’s Kitchen’, ‘Gang Related’ & ‘Undateable’ Adjusted Down - Ratings |
  7. ^ Sunday Final Ratings: ‘Big Brother ‘ & ‘Wipeout’ Adjusted Up; ‘Reckless’ Adjusted Down - Ratings |
  8. ^ Wednesday Final Ratings: ‘Extant’ & ‘Taxi Brooklyn’ Adjusted Down - Ratings |
  9. ^ Thursday Final Ratings: ‘Big Brother’ Adjusted Up; ‘Gang Related’ Adjusted Down - Ratings |
  10. ^ Sunday Final Ratings: ‘Big Brother ‘ & ‘Wipeout’ Adjusted Up; ‘Reckless’ & ‘Rising Star’ Adjusted Down - Ratings |
  11. ^ Wednesday Final Ratings: ‘Big Brother’ & ‘Motive’ Adjusted Up; No Adjustment for ‘Extant’ - Ratings |
  12. ^ Thursday Final Ratings: ‘Big Brother’ Adjusted Up - Ratings |
  13. ^ Sunday Final Ratings: ‘Big Brother’ & ‘Wipeout’ Adjusted Up - Ratings |
  14. ^
  15. ^
  16. ^
  17. ^ h
Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: Could you please provide an explanation for why you want the change made? Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 23:26, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

August 2 vandalism[edit]

After the Big Brother After Dark and in the subsequent live feeds, it was revealed that Christine won the PoV, but User:Bsem23 seems to have added an erronious set of data with Christine using PoV on Jocasta and Nicole putting up Frankie in her place. Viewing the Live Feeds, there is no evidence the PoV ceremony occurred at that point. It's possible that these are good-faith edits as there is a lot of trolling on Big Brother live chats. Calebrw (talk) 06:48, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

This Bsem23 user has been a mostly unhelpful editor on both this and the "List of BB16 Guests" articles since the show began. There are numerous attempts to fiddle with colors & categories (long been consensus to leave as-is, the continued insistence on a "Day 2" entry for the 2nd round of houseguests (they all entered at diff't times on Day 1), and the demonstrably false (Christine did not use the PoV, Zach & Jocasta remain on the block). This user never communicates and never uses edit summaries, so I'm not sure if this is a language barrier or a competence issue, but it is clearly becoming disruptive. Tarc (talk) 13:35, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Size of text in Voting history table[edit]

Currently the size of the text of the table is set to 85% and was recently changed to 80%. I reverted that in the interest of continuity with the other BB articles. Seasons 1–5, 7, 8, 10–13 and 15 are 85%; Seasons 6 and 9 are 90%; Season 14 is 80%. I know this is nitpicking, but I'm interested in keeping things consistent. I'd fully support moving Seasons 6, 9 and 14 if there is a consensus. Calebrw (talk) 01:30, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Second--Tech-Chef (talk) 05:29, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
In my opinion, its not so much that the text size needs to be the same for every season, whereas it should be just big enough so that it does not break the page and cause the whole chart to not fit without scrolling sideways. Assuming this season will have another double like last season, it will probably end up having the same text size anyway. BlueDevil54 (talk) 07:15, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Voting table layout[edit]

Hello. Someone has recently changed the voting table and in my opinion it is a lot easier to read. What are your thoughts? What happens on double eviction if they remove the Battle of the Block competition altogether and just go back to two nominees? Then what will we do? ~~JHUbal27 08:20, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

The way the table is currently doesn't show who the two HoH's nominated pre-veto, this needs to be included --MSalmon (talk) 21:54, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
I've reverted it back to the way it was agreed upon. Seeing as the Double Eviction was the rare case for this season of only having 1 HoH and 2 nominees, the cells were merged appropriately and will now go back to this seasons norm of 2 HoHs and 4 nominees. If/When the whole twist is discontinued, the remaining cells will be merged to fit accordingly. BlueDevil54 (talk) 07:13, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Someone changed it AGAIN! I am gonna try and get it reverted. --Tech-Chef (talk) 01:07, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
It doesn't need reverting because it is fine the way it is --MSalmon (talk) 17:57, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Its fine because I changed it back. Someone changed it to the smaller, more confusing way. I reverted it to the old way..the way that everyone agreed upon in the talk (The way it is right now) --Tech-Chef (talk) 03:25, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Edit Request[edit]

Hello! Can someone please update the voting table? Julie Chen announced that the double HOH twist would end after next week's eviction. Thanks a lot! (talk) 02:24, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

AfD of note[edit]

As it involves a current houseguest, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zach Rance (Big Brother). Tarc (talk) 01:44, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Padlock-silver-open.svg Not done: The page's protection level and/or your user rights have changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 05:54, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 September 2014[edit]

Christine is not nominated anymore (check beginning table to the right), and she has won veto. Woahitsdakota (talk) 23:32, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Pictogram voting wait.svg Already done Stickee (talk) 02:43, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Summary section[edit]

For the love of God, would somebody please address the Wiki message indicating that this section "may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that may only interest a specific audience"? A summary is not meant to be a microscopic recitation of everything that happened; it should reflect key landmarks and be at most 2-3 paragraphs total.

I would edit it, but my experience with this page is that a few rabid editors would only cancel all my work because it's not what they personally want it to be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:30, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

A check of the last 6 seasons will show that the summary for this season is approximately the same length as in the past. No article for a reality show that is broadcast 3 times a week for 13-14 weeks can be encapsulated in 2-3 paragraphs. Every effort is made to reflect only key "landmarks" (competitions, vetoes, evictions, etc.) and keep conjecture and "fan-da-monium" out of play. I saw the Wiki message weeks ago, did major editing of what I felt was excessive detail and have been monitoring the summary since. I don't know what your experience has been with the summary, since you forgot to sign-in. It would be nice to know when and by who "all your work was cancelled". I agree the early weeks of summarization may still be a little fluffed-up but they are no different than summaries for seasons past. ```Buster Seven Talk 06:11, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
@Buster7:But this overlooks the fact that it's an issue on those other pages too; a summary is supposed to be a concise digest of the season's events. It's tough, especially in the early episodes, because the editors don't know which storylines/alliances/events are going to make a big impact overall so they have to put in everything, but with the benefit of hindsight, I think there should be a concerned effort to make actual summaries, and not play-by-plays of the shows. Or, if you and other editors are so attached to the play-by-plays, we can put these summaries in a separate episode guide, like we did on Survivor: Cagayan, with the rating info there too. - Katanin (talk) 04:11, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
@Katanin:First, great work here and elsewhere. Not easy! I'm not attached to the play-by-play at all. I much prefer the neatness and orderliness of a separate episode summary within the weekly guide like in Survivor. I'm a fan of both shows and only started to trim the dead wood from the summary about mid-season. Now that the show has ended and the summary has been concluded I'll leave it to other concerned editors as to what to do. As a 'johnny-come-lately' I would feel uncomfortable deciding one way or the other. ```Buster Seven Talk 07:24, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Size of voting history table[edit]

Anyone have any thoughts on the size of the table since it won't fit on the page, and reducing the font size would be too small to read the text? --MSalmon (talk) 17:15, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Agree. Even though I am the one that originally campaigned against this, I'm too am starting to thing that it's too big for many screens. Chrome now renders the table for me at 1085px wide and a 1280px wide monitor, the left sidebar is taking up too much room. I had to change it to 62.5% to get no horizontal scrollbar. Based on my testing of appx. 1600px wide screen shows that 75% is still sufficient. The only real way to solve this problem would be some type of CSS3 Media Query. Unless a global CSS change was made, that isn't practical. Calebrw (talk) 01:26, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Given the width of each week is generally limited by the words "Household" and "nominated" (on my screen anyways), could a consensus be reached to change those to "HOH" and "Nom"? This would make the table less wide overall. --Jordan 1972 (talk) 19:03, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Why not remove the "Eviction votes received" column? There's really no point to having it other than a pointless piece of trivia; it doesn't factor into the game at all, so why have it? Plus it'd definitely free up some space. - Katanin (talk) 03:19, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
"Eviction votes received" is basically a leftover because most international seasons has a "nominations received" column. I'm fine with leaving it in or taking it out. However, 75% text size does fit without a scrollbar on a 1600px resolution. I disagree with the idea of shortening "Head of Household" and "nominations" as it looks a bit unprofessional. BlueDevil54 (talk) 03:22, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Update: I just tested out removing the "evictions votes received" column and while it does allow the text size to be bumped up to 80%, the table looks very strange with the jury votes being the on the edge and I'm not a fan of it. Just my personal opinion. BlueDevil54 (talk) 03:30, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Alright, so since there's too much information on the table to have one that both fits most users' screens and has large enough text size, I devised a version of the table that removes things deemed trivial (Eviction vote total) and redundant (the awkward doubling of BoB winners, which makes it a little more confusing to figure out who was saved by the veto). It's a more pragmatic table based on all the concerns listed here. Thoughts? - Katanin (talk) 03:47, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Please don't remove the nominations (pre-veto) row because we still need to know which HOH voted for which two HGs --MSalmon (talk) 17:53, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
@Msalmon: Is it not inferred by the strikethrough on the HoH? Much like how in last season's table, we used bold text to denote who the MVP nominated, which was a pretty contentious debate that took a few weeks to solve. Why can't we denote, in the BoB footnote, that the struck-through HoH nominated the BoB winners? The issue with the table is that there's too much information, between the length of the season and all the information at the top, for the table to both fit on most computer screens and have large enough text to be legible, so trimming the table down is the best course of action. Plus the "Eviction votes received" line is trivial, nothing more than a meaningless statistic. Why include it? - Katanin (talk) 18:03, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Also, there's no denotation of the order of HoH nominees in the public display of the article, only in hidden text, and as a request. This is a more explicit division, plus explains why exactly the HoH was dethroned in the table proper. - Katanin (talk) 18:07, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
All of the information in the top section relates to how it was shown on television screens so all of the info needs to be included. --MSalmon (talk) 18:36, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
I think the only way this can be done without removing any information is to reduce the text size, so I have changed it for now. --MSalmon (talk) 17:18, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't know about others, but I'm having a hard time reading it, and have to increase the size on my browser. There is probably a more pragmatic, accessible way to do it. Also, what's the argument for keeping the "Eviction votes received" column? - Katanin (talk) 20:42, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
If we do remove the "Eviction votes received" then all the previous seasons will need to be removed so it is consistent --MSalmon (talk) 21:05, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
I would happily take that task on provided no one has any objections as to their removal. - Katanin (talk) 20:42, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
I see no problem removing that but I feel like there should be a mention somewhere in each contestant's row of the vote tally that evicted them (7-2, 3-0, etc). Gloss • talk 00:57, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Why not just have that instead of the "7 votes to evict" at the bottom? Like replacing the "Eviction votes total" with that just completely undoes the reason why we're removing the column in the first place: to save space. - Katanin (talk) 16:08, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
That's fine, I was not saying to replace the eviction votes total with that. I said that I see no problem removing the eviction votes totals but I also think the eviction tallies should be included, somewhere… anywhere. Gloss • talk 23:52, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Reverting it back to the original way. Every way suggested on here other than lowering the text size removes information that is present on every other BBUS article. Removing the eviction votes received column removes information that isn't listed anywhere else in the article, and saying someone was evicted 7-2 in their cell ignores the fact that they may have garnered other votes to evict over the season. The smaller text size is fine and isn't an issue on other articles with small text size (BB15). Why is it such an issue now? Even if the "eviction votes received" column is removed, then it would need to be removed from all 15 seasons that use it for consistencies sake, which is pointless because it fits fine on every article. BlueDevil54 (talk) 16:34, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
All other articles do not need to be changed because one season is an anomaly. I personally find that the text size is fine to read and don't see the need to remove the column at all. Who's going to be looking at this table more than a couple times anyway once this season is forgotten? Things like the text size in the voting table are minor when compared to the real issues that the article has. BlueDevil54 (talk) 16:47, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
@BlueDevil54: But what is the "Eviction votes total" if not a meaningless statistic? I'm unsure as to why that column was initially included, but while hunting for a way to trim down the table, that column was identified as functionally useless. What is the point of it? Not everything merits mention on the page; if it did, this page would be filled with lists of alliances and, more fittingly to this case, competition win statistics which are probably just as notable, yet neither enough to merit inclusion (both are too trivial). Please contribute to the discussion instead of simply coming here and saying that you're reverting, and I've received no reason from you as to why the column should stay other than because it's on the other pages, which I was in the process of removing. - Katanin (talk) 16:51, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
@Katanin: I have given you reasons, multiple times, you're just choosing to ignore them. By your definition of trivial information, everything in the article is trivial, so why have the article at all? And there are alliances listed in the season summary, but I don't see anyone calling for their exclusion at all. The information was presented to us on the broadcast, so it is to be included in the article. If we're willing to go by your definition of trivial, then all pre-veto nominees shouldn't be listed because what relevance do they hold if they're not the final nominees? Statistical information can be useful and is doing no harm at all to the article when its included, seeing as the table fits fine with an appropriate text size. I'm going to disagree with you on this simply because there is no good reason to remove it at all. Like I just said previously, why should the text size of the table matter when a significantly less amount of people will be looking at it in a short amount of time. BlueDevil54 (talk) 16:59, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
@BlueDevil54: No, by my definition of trivial material, it's compiled statistics that have no direct bearing on the game itself, such as the number of votes someone received over the span of the game. While it matters that, let's say, Donny received five votes the week he was evicted to take him out of the game, what does it matter that Nicole received 12 overall? The top of the table provides a mechanical overview of the game relating to who was eventually eliminated that week. While I agree that the section is a bit bloated right now (regarding the Battle of the Block section, by design, duplicating one of the nominee pairs), it still provides purpose, to lead the reader to the eventual set of two nominees that were put up for eviction. That pertains directly to the results of the game, the number of total votes does not. Also, your statements regarding the meaninglessness of editing due to the likely decrease in visitors apply to everyone, yourself included. - Katanin (talk) 17:10, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
What about having the table collapsible? --MSalmon (talk) 22:03, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Would the text size be increased for the collapsed table? Also, when looking for things to remove to increase the text size, I pointed out that the "Eviction vote total" column is a pointless statistic, and should be removed from all seasons. That would not only solve the text problem (as, according to User:BlueDevil54, its omission would bring the text size to 80%, which seems to be the smallest size accepted by everyone here), but it would also rid all the tables of a stat that is pretty much meaningless: it doesn't matter how many votes someone received to evict in total except to win some obscure trivia contest. All the other information on the table makes sense: what were the mechanic events that led to the eviction? Who voted for whom? But how many votes a player received overall doesn't factor into the game. There's no need for a comprehensive list of competition wins/statistics, so why the number of votes a player received overall? One of the only rebuttals to that suggestion was that someone would have to go in and manually change the tables, which I volunteered (and actually began) to do, but it was reverted with no regard to the discussion had here. So, let's have it: here's my case for nixing the "Eviction vote total" column for all BBUS articles. Then, there'd be no need to collapse this table, and decreases visual clutter on all BBUS tables. Any objections? - Katanin (talk) 05:33, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes but it is just this season the table is too big, all other seasons are fine so there is no need to remove them from previous seasons. The British version has nominations received on their tables so why can't the US have the same for eviction votes --MSalmon (talk) 21:06, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Yeah but it's not just for the size thing, it's that it's a trivial thing. The UK version of the show, aside from the name and premise (people are isolated in a house and systematically eliminated until a few are left, at which point one is awarded lots of money), is a very different show. And my reason for wanting to remove the column has nothing to do with the UK version, I'm talking about the US version and the voting tables included therein. What's a good reason for these pages, regarding the US version of the show, to have the column? No one is giving any reason for their inclusion other than 1) there's no space issue on other pages and 2) the UK version has a similar column. But neither of those reasons actually address the issue, which is that they serve no purpose on any of the pages aside from a meaningless trivial statistic. - Katanin (talk) 03:28, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 October 2014[edit]

Change the amount of Derrick's winnings from 550,000 to 575,000, to include his 20,000 for team america and his 5000 from snow man 5000 dollas and 5000 hollas raising his accumulated prize total to 575,000 before taxes</ref></ref> (talk) 18:26, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

The winner prize is 500,000. Just like the AFP prize is 25,000. Unless you are referring to elsewhere in the article? Gloss • talk 18:34, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 October 2014[edit]

There are certain facts about the summary that have been left out. I would like to fill in the appropriate information about the series. Fofanaal (talk) 20:47, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done This is not the right page to request additional user rights.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request. - Arjayay (talk) 20:53, 20 October 2014 (UTC)