Jump to content

Talk:Big Brother 13 (American season)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Citation

[edit]

I don't know how to reference properly, but if you go to bigbrothernetwork.com, it turns out Julie Chen has confirmed a July 6 launch date. Therefore, I'm going to put it in the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.215.184.140 (talk) 08:26, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blogs and discussion boards are not reliable sources. If she had confirmed the pick up date on a television show, please use cite episode or if she was interviewed for a magazine please use cite journal/magazine, etc., there's guides on these templates that can help you learn more about adding content in them to become a citation. Thank you, AJona1992 (talk) 12:45, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't know why they aren't because, unless it is a rumour (and discussion boards do clarify whether the story is a rumour or not) they usually city their source. No, I got this from bigbrothernetwork.com, it isn't a discussion board, it is a fan made news blog; it has been referenced in the past with a high degree of credibility. And again, bigbrothernetwork.com would state whether or not it is a rumour; this time, it isn't. Julie Chen confirmed on The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson in late March/early April. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.215.184.140 (talk) 23:57, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I had to remove bigbrothernetwork.com sources from Big Brother 11 (U.S.) so it can get GA status, the only fan made website that can be used is WeLoveBigBrother because CBS gives it information directly, they can interview the cast just like regular members of the press and their editors participate in the media day promotion they hold prior to the start of the season. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 05:47, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Day 1 or Day 6

[edit]

Should the returning houseguests be listed in the infobox as Day 1 or Day 6 because the 8 original houseguests entered on July 2 which was Day 1? --MSalmon (talk) 09:24, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Day 1, we have no source saying Day 6. Until there is a source for that they entered on Day 6, Day 1 should be used. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 10:19, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well it technically should be Day 6 because July 2 was Day 1 when the 8 houseguests entered the house --MSalmon (talk) 10:28, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Alucard 16, until there is a source stating that they actually came in on Day 6 I think we should put Day 1 on and assume that they had come in on July 2nd. I know it would be OR and I don't remember very well, and already deleted the episode, but were the other HGs wearing the same clothes as when they entered or new clothes when they brought the couples in? Based on watching the episode last night it seemed almost all pre-taped and nothing was really live. Jnorton7558 (talk) 11:17, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Look at last year though it was 75 days from the move in date to the finale date --MSalmon (talk) 11:19, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No one is saying that Day 1 isn't July 2nd, but when the previous contestants entered on July 2nd, day 1, or July 7th, Day 6, as i understand this at least. Jnorton7558 (talk) 12:30, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
They entered the house on July 2 (Day 1), like I have been saying --MSalmon (talk) 12:33, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It appears as if I mis-understood your last statement then. Just ignore me :) Jnorton7558 (talk) 12:38, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So we can leave it as Day 6 then --MSalmon (talk) 12:40, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Based on the premiere episode, all house guests entered DAY 1! How come the returning house guests are listed as entered Day 6? The 8 new house guests were still wearing the same clothes when the returning house guests entered. Of course, the show did not reveal immediately the returning house guests as it would "lose the element of surprise". SO PLEASE, IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO LIST DAY 6! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rushes7 (talk • contribs) 12:52, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Day 1 (July 2) refers to the day the houseguests move in not the season premiere date, see last year--MSalmon (talk) 13:19, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Everyone agrees that the season premier is not the same as the move in date, but what is being disagreed on is that the past season HGs entered on the same day as everyone else not on the day of the premier, so therefore should be Day 1 not Day 6. I believe that until there is a source or something that states the specific day the past season HGs entered on then it should be listed as Day 1. From watching the episode this also seemed to be the case. AKA All HGs entered on the same day. Jnorton7558 (talk) 13:27, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Correct, the past season houseguests did not enter the house the same day as everyone else so that means the information would be incorrect --MSalmon (talk) 13:30, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a source that states that they did not enter on the same day? From what I could tell there was nothing in the episode that aired that had that in it, in fact we've mentioned that it appeared as if they were wearing the same clothes the whole time, until the competition that is. Jnorton7558 (talk) 13:40, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This source [1] shows the original 8 entering on July 2
And this [2] screen shot from the episode shows that the new HGs are wearing the same clothes as they were in [3] where they were waiting outside the house to enter. In relation to the other picture the HGs always enter in groups not all at once, it shows only 4 people entering so should only those 4 be listed as entering on day 1?? Jnorton7558 (talk) 13:55, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea how they entered the house or what happened because I haven't seen the programme so all I know is that Day 1 is July 2 and yesterday (July 7) was Day 6 --MSalmon (talk) 13:58, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If we have no idea how they entered the house or what happened because I haven't seen the programme then why are you continually reverting those that have seen the program and find it very clear that everyone entered on Day 1, July 2nd????? Jnorton7558 (talk) 14:28, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
All of the houseguests entered on DAY 1 (July 2nd, 2010). This includes OLD and NEW houseguests. You don't have any source that says otherwise. I think the fact that they were wearing the same outfits before and after the old houseguests entered is a better source than no source at all. Also, there was no indication that the old houseguests entered on Day 6 during the broadcast. I don't think we should enter Dick's exit day yet, as there is no real source on that yet. Tylermunro (talk) 14:38, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
They may have entered in groups but it was all on the same day I believe --MSalmon (talk) 14:38, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Every single houseguest entered on the same day. Day 1. When the new houseguests were standing at the front door, Julie explained (as she has been explaining since season 2) that the houseguests would be entering in groups. The order the groups enter is randomly selected. They walked around the house and introduced themselves. Julie explained that dynamic duos from the past would be entering. Immediately after, the door bell started ringing. Brendon and Rachel entered first, followed by Jeff and Jordon, and lastly Dick and Daniele. They entered separately, but on the same day. June 1st (Day 1). Tylermunro (talk) 14:51, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The first 8 entered on July 2 and the former houseguests entered on July 7 --MSalmon (talk) 14:55, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Show me your source. Tylermunro (talk) 14:59, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any source that proves this?????? Based on everything we can tell they ALL entered on the same day. You have even stated yourself that it was all on the same day I believe and have no idea how they entered the house or what happened because I haven't seen the programme. Those of us that have seen the program have shown that from all appearances that they ALL 14 houseguests entered on the same day, July 2nd/Day 1. Jnorton7558 (talk) 15:00, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
For what? --MSalmon (talk) 15:01, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That the former houseguests entered on July 7th Jnorton7558 (talk) 15:02, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Did you not watch the live show? --MSalmon (talk) 15:05, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That was live?? Jnorton7558 (talk) 15:06, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Was it? --MSalmon (talk) 15:07, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I do not think it was. It appeared to be all pre-taped to me, although maybe the HoH comp was live but I don't remember anything saying that it was live. Jnorton7558 (talk) 15:08, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So when did the former houseguests actually enter the house? --MSalmon (talk) 15:11, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've already explained to you that the premiere wasn't live. Pictures were posted above of the houseguests entering the house on July 2nd. The premiere for Big Brother hasn't been live since Big Brother 1. You can tell that last night's show was recorded because the diary room sessions were edited in. It was obviously edited. The former houseguests entered the house on July 2nd. Tylermunro (talk) 15:12, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please watch the episode like I did before you come to conclusions. It was actually a really good episode too and I think you'll like it. Tylermunro (talk) 15:16, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I can't watch it because I am in the UK --MSalmon (talk) 15:18, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Due to the nature of BBUS here is general timeline for the US broadcasts Day 1 is the premiere night (July 7), Days 2-4 (whenever nominations, usually Day 4) is the Sunday show, Days 5-9 (Wednesday, concludes with PoV ceremony) Days 10-13 (live eviction, Thursday). The CBS broadcasts lag so much behind the live feeds major events that happened last night will fall under Wednesday's broadcast since nominations have happened but not the Veto. Hope this explains how Msalmon thought the old Housemates entered on Day 6. Also if the old Housemates entred after Day 1 they would not be eligible for the entire grand prize as stipulated in the contract they all sign. Since they are eligible then they went in on Day 1. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 18:31, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

to MSalmon: I really don't get it why you are editing this page when in fact you have not seen the programme. And I'm sure you can find ways to do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.207.107.21 (talk) 04:00, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources to help expand this article

[edit]

[4] Can help expand or create a "Viewers" section. AJona1992 (talk) 19:55, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Section 4

[edit]

In keeping with the format of previous seasons this section should be titled "Summary". I am putting my edit for that section of the page here because apparently I am not allowed to make edits to a page yet since I can't remember my old password I had to create new account harumph. During the first night the houseguests divided into teams of two. In the backard were 7 oversize bananas hanging in the air. Each duo had to hold on to their banana as long as possible. While they were hanging they were sprayed with chocolate sauce and whipped cream. The last house guest left holding on to their banana was Rachel who became the new head of household making her and her partner Brendan safe from eviction for the week. Porsche and Keith were the first duo nominated for eviction by the head of household. On day 6 Dick left the big brother house and his partner and daughter Daniell was given a golden key keeping her safe from eviction until only 10 houseguests remain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdrayesq (talk • contribs) 20:11, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Jdrayesq, 8 July 2011

[edit]

 Not done please provide specific inclusion that requires changed. Monkeymanman (talk) 21:44, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was an addittion not a change and if you read what i had written you would jhave known that. It is done now.Jdrayesq (talk) 05:31, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Golden Key Holder color

[edit]

In order to avoid confusion I changed the legend5 to legend6 for Golden Key holders, this is due to legend5 being reserved in American BB articles for the Jury Members while the season is in progress. This means that Golden Key Holders will be indicated with a teal color. The General MoS table above has the colors that are either WP:BIGBRO standards (HoH/Immune/Evicted) or colors that have been achieved through consensus from past discussions (Jury/Optional Power). Since the brown optional power is not available in the Infobox, a teal color like the one in the Infobox legend6 should be used. Now if everyone wants to use legend5 (purple) to represent Golden Key holders then Jury members need to use legend6 but this could confuse readers who are used to legend5 (purple) being used to identify Jury members. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 08:47, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not against making it teal, but if we do, we should change it to a more muted tone. I think it would be in our best interest to stick with the purple and use some other color for "Jury Members". My reasoning for this is that when a jury member gets evicted, it'll just be red/pink like everyone else that's evicted, the infobox won't need to be updated to match the chart. I'm not terribly certain why Jury Member needs to have a separate color anyways, since the box with jury votes is always changed to the standard square after the season ends anyway. Anyone have an opinion on this? T (talk) 04:11, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I went ahead and put a gold color in place. I still think the purple will work better and that abolishing the purple being used for jury members is the best bet, but I have that in place for now. T (talk) 04:23, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think we were one of the few that didn't want the Jury to have a color but everyone else did if I am not mistaken. So the compromise was while the program was in progress that the purple color would be for Jury and then it switches to America's Favorite HouseGuest after the season ends. So either way you go the purple color is in use on both templates. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 05:02, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, ok. So, do we just keep it how it looks now? T (talk) 05:17, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think we can keep it but if it is reverted back by someone else then the teal color was being used for another article. That is my only worry about changing legend6. So far it seems okay :) ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 06:19, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I'm just a guest but that Golden Key color is REALLY ugly. It needs to be changed ASAP. It doesn't fit with the Big Brother scheme (which I would also like to mention is ugly itself). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.83.206.239 (talk) 02:00, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE change the Golden Key color. It's ass ugly! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.192.83.113 (talk) 22:38, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ages

[edit]

This is a small complaint, but wouldn't Brendon and Rachel be 27 and 31 by now? 26 and 30 were the ages listed for them last time. Then Brendon was born on July 2, 1980, so it was his birthday the day they went into the house. So he'd be 31 for sure. However Rachel was listed as 26 last season, but her facebook page says that she was born on October 16, 1984, so would she be 26 now? I just feel a need for discussion about this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.62.228.49 (talk) 14:40, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Posting Spoilers

[edit]

I hearby request that all spoilers be refrained from being posted in plain sight on the official Wikipedia page. Users should be forced to click a 'Show' button in order to see spoilers. I visited this page to see the background information for each houseguest, and lo and behold, Dick's exit from the house was spoiled for me. Really unfair to someone who only watches the shows, and I believe my request is more than fair.

Moved this down, now regarding spoilers according to WP:SPOILER they are allowed and just because they may "spoil" a viewers experience well there is nothing Wikipedia can do. Each year this comes up but policies are policies. This comes up with every English BB but is most notable with the American version due to the fewer broadcasts per week. As long as the information is sourced then it can be permitted. And with the American version an editor is allowed to cite the live Internet feeds and Big Brother: After Dark to keep the information in the article. This was discussed in BB11 with the introduction of the flashback/replay feature on the American feeds. Also CBS released a press release so Evel Dick's departure really isn't that much of a spoiler unless you have missed almost every entertainment website article regarding the subject. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 08:54, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I believe you may have misunderstood my first post. I was not saying people should refrain from posting spoilers, I was saying they should refrain from posting them in plain view. Simply have the reader click a 'Show' button to see spoilers that are in sync with the live feed. And, to comment on your last line, I purposely avoided the sources you listed that had anything to do with BB to refrain from being spoiled. I did not think Wikipedia would have spoilers in plain view - and I was wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.197.253.19 (talk) 18:43, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
AFAIK there is no real way to hide the information in the manner that you suggest, as really you are asking for a button that would change things, otherwise you'd have a bunch of random show buttons on individual cells on the tables which would therefore show that that person had something different in that cell. In order to have a button to show the things from the live feeds it would change a lot of the text on the page. Its not as simple as just like hiding a paragraph, which also wouldn't be done on Wikipedia, but would require a probable modification to the MediaWiki software. Jnorton7558 (talk) 21:11, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Events Section

[edit]

Instead of the giant wall of text that make the "Events" section of BB11 & 12 such eyesores (it's like they dare you to try to read and comprehend them), why not have this year's summary a table formatted similar to the way it's done for BB10 and before, as well as many of the international BB summaries? In fact, if I had the time, I'd be tempted to change the summaries for both BB11 & 12 to the table format, which is much friendlier for skimming and understanding.

Week 1 Entrances
  • Adam, Cassi, Dominic, Kalia, Keith, Lawon, Porche, and Shelly entered the house together on Day 1
  • A bit later, Rachel & Brendon (returning from Big Brother 12), Jeff & Jordon (of Big Brother 11), and Dick & Daniele (of Big Brother 8) entered the house.
Events
  • On Day 1, Julie Chen announced the new twist to the season, as explained in the Format section.
  • Following the announcement of the twist, the eight new HouseGuests were allowed to divide themselves into four teams of two. The teams were: Adam & Dominic, Cassi & Shelly, Kalia & Lawon, and Keith & Porche. The six returning HouseGuests were paired up automatically prior to entering the house: Dick & Daniele, Jeff & Jordan, and Rachel & Brendon.
  • On Day 6, Daniele received the first Golden Key upon the departure of her partner, Dick.
Competitions
  • Have/Have-Not: Casssi & Shelly and Kalia & Lawon became Have-Nots for the week.
  • PoV: Rachel & Brendon won Power of Veto
Exits
  • On Day 6, Dick left the house due to undisclosed "personal reasons." Daniel, his partner, received a Golden key.

Jedzz (talk) 16:14, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The reason we no longer have the table is because the article won't get GA status that way. It was decided in 2009 with a consensus that Big Brother articles should not use any table for the Summary/Events section. This is why Big Brother 2009 (UK) and Big Brother 11 (U.S.) are GA articles. When Big Brother articles were submitted editors were told that Big Brother articles need more prose and less tables. Also only American Big Brother articles can use a table for the ratings section because it only airs 30 or less episodes per season unlike other versions which air 70+ episodes in a given season. That is why in Big Brother 11 (U.S.) the Reception area is a mixture of prose and has a table but in Big Brother 2009 (UK) it is all prose. Since the goal of the projects are to get articles up to GA or FA status tables will not be re-instated unless they can help the article get up to GA/FA status. Past articles that still have these tables need to be converted to prose. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 18:06, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't change them especially Big Brother 11 because it is at GA status and it took a lot of time to fix the Summary section by a lot of dedicated editors to get it to pass the GA requirement. Changing it back to a table will result in the article being delisted as a Good Article. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 18:08, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The only tables we should have is one for the HouseGuests section, Voting history and TV Ratings these were reached upon by a consensus this is to ensure the article can get GA status. If we could bring back the event table I would more than welcome it but since we can't get the article passed without the summary being in prose I rather take the time to create a summary section in prose than not have the article have a chance at GA status. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 18:13, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
For further insight as to why they were changed you can look at past discussions in both Talk:Big Brother 11 (U.S.) and Talk:Big Brother 2009 (UK) these should help explain why they were changed. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 18:22, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I find this kind of surprising, because in my opinion, a giant wall of text is the exact antithesis of a "Good Article" (and my impression from reading the archive is that despite the ultimate decision, quite a few people participating in the discussion appeared to agree with this sentiment). However, if that's how it is, I won't touch a thing. Jedzz (talk) 02:16, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean to make you mad, I rather have the table but having that section in prose is what helps the article get to GA status. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 05:53, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize for getting snippy.Jedzz (talk) 18:40, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possible spoilers

[edit]

It looks like this article has been updated beyond what has been aired on CBS; specifically, CBS has aired up to the end of the first nomination ceremony, while this article appears to be past the Power of Veto competition and one houseguest's voluntary withdrawal from the game. Hallpriest9 (Talk) 18:02, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As long as the events in question have happened the article can reflect real-time events. The broadcast episodes are delayed and are not shown in real-time. Due to the nature of the program information that will be in later episodes will be known as they happen. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 08:21, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please see my reply in Section 9: Posting Spoilers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.197.253.19 (talk) 18:45, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do we even know if the 7/14 eviction is a guarantee since Dick has left?--Cooly123 17:24, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes it is still taking place --MSalmon (talk) 17:28, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Veto competition

[edit]

Does anyone know the name of the 1st veto competition?--Cooly123 13:24, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Ratings : What are TOTAL Viewers amount

[edit]

How come the ratings section is only showing the 18-49 group? What were the TOTAL ratings for the nights? 6mill? 10 mill? 69.140.66.37 (talk) 09:53, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The chart does show the total viewers. The only 18-49 is the ratings share. Jnorton7558 (talk) 11:58, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Listing Rachel as a have not.

[edit]

Is this technically correct? I believe she doesn't have to sleep in the Have-not bedroom or use the have-not shower. She only has to eat the slop, in every other way she is a have. 12bigbrother12 (talk) 17:26, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

She is NOT a have not. Fixed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.238.54.35 (talk) 03:24, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Team Colors

[edit]

Team colors are based on the first HoH challenge Eagle2ch (talk • contribs) 16:50, 23 July 2011

Controversy

[edit]

Some explanation about the contestants throwing more competitions this season than in the past.--Cooly123 01:42, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Possibly the comments made by Adam and Porsche about hitting Rachel in the stomach with a medicine ball to save her 400$ on an abortion. Time said 5:39 PM BBT (Unknown feed). Could easily be cause for outrage from multiple groups of feminists. (Quote) Shelly: "What do you think the next competition will be?" Adam: "Maybe a medicine ball thrown at your stomach." Porsche: "That will just save Rachel $400." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.67.132.178 (talk) 09:13, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Mad24960, 11 August 2011

[edit]

Please change final air date from "September" to "September 14, 2011"

Source; www.eyeoncbs.com (password protected site) CBS Program Order: SURVIVOR: SOUTH PACIFIC (Premiere) 8:00-9:30pm cnyt/cpt BIG BROTHER 13 (Finale) 9:30-11:00pm cnyt/cpt Wednesday, September 14, 2011 OTO

Mad24960 (talk) 15:54, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently Already done Jnorton7558 (talk) 10:15, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jury

[edit]

Is Lawon the first jury member...and, if so, should a listing be started? Buster Seven Talk 16:36, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lawon is not the first jury member, due to the Battle twist there are nine Housemates left in the house again so starting this week whoever is evicted now will be in jury unless they decide to quit after their eviction and go home. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 22:15, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Eagle2ch, 12 August 2011

[edit]

I don't think the challenge or the house guest visit needs to be so heavily noted in the voting history. I think it was fine the way it was, just showing Brendon as Americas vote under Lawon being evicted 5-0. Is it really necessary seeing as how the section is called "Voting History" and it had nothing to do with a house guest vote. Plus Cassi, Dominic, and Keith did not enter the house or have interaction with the other house guests besides Brendon, so I don't believe they can be considered guests. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eagle2ch (talk • contribs) 03:40, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is due to a precedent that has been established in other Big Brother articles. When an evicted Housemate returns to the House as a guest in the same season this is typically noted in the nomination/voting table. Even if they don't enter the main House or interact with the current Housemates. One good example is in Big Brother 2006 (UK): On Day 83, Grace, Lea, Mikey and Nikki moved in into the House Next Door (a mini House beside the main House). They had no contact with the current Housemates and they chose Nikki to re-enter and Grace, Lea, Mikey were evicted for a second time. In this article it is noted they were in part of the House at the time of the vote.
In this case for Big Brother 13 USA, Keith, Cassi and Dominic and Brendon were in part of the House just to see who won the public vote. Since the public vote was for a chance to return and Keith, Cassi and Dominic lost out on the vote they are considered Guests inside the House. Since they were in part of the House along with Brendon this is why it was noted. Now since it was just Brendon and Lawon competing in the battle the current Housemates have a yellow square meaning they were exempt from this competition. Because the public did vote this is included. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 16:37, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think that precedents should be maintained also don't change Brendon's "for a chance to return" to "to return" the vote was clearly for a chance to return. If there is a vote for something other than evictions the descriptor needs to clearly depict the vote that happened. Honestly the spit Week 5 clearly indicated what happened, just because a vote didn't happen doesn't mean it should be noted in the table in that manner. If this is changed then this applies to the similar "Nominations Table" in other Big Brother articles as well. Keith, Cassi and Dominic did enter the House for a short period of time and were seen by the other Housemates. So to put them in as guests is not wrong. This needs to be discussed for a permanent result. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 06:49, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Can we do what we've done with like, the Coup d'état and and the DPoV where we created a... sub-column, if you will, for the battle between Lawon and Brendon? In all seriousness, what we have right now looks incredibly cluttered and added as a sloppy afterthought. The other thing that's bothering me is the fact that Adam, Shelly, and Porsche's rows are not the same height as the others who have won HoH or have been evicted... isn't there supposed to be a way to keep that consistent? Stjimmy61892 (talk) 21:27, 20 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Porsche Adam and Shelly rows will stay like that til they are HOH or eliminated, It is always like that during the middle of the season.Eagle2ch (talk

POV winners

[edit]

Today, Aug 21st, the week 6 POV winner says Jeff. It was Adam. Thanks! 76.186.225.185 (talk) 18:55, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it was Adamn. May not be an acceptable reference but check this out. Along with that, a lot of live feed viewers have mentioned that Jeff won the PoV (along with HoH) this week. So, unless you have a citation, it should stay the same. ♫♪Adyniz♪♫ 19:12, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Day 41 column in the voting history

[edit]

It's a giant eyesore right in the middle and it disrupts the flow of the whole chart/competition. Do we really need a whole column dedicated to the fact that Brendon and Lawon competed in a challenge to get back in the house in the VOTING history? Can't we just have a footnote describing how Brendon got back in the house? MarkMc1990 (talk) 01:50, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to change this multiple times, but apparently people like the eyesore. Eagle2ch (talk
Yes, very confusing. What's the consensus on Lawon's role that week? I saw what happened as him being evicted, and then losing the competition to return. That's not what's currently indicated. Dayewalker (talk) 04:50, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also, it is a voting history chart, not a who came back in the house and how they came back in the house chart. Even though the evicted houseguests were in the backyard of the Big Brother house, they were not back in the game. The chart is not about who is playing in a competition either. Nothing about how or why Brendon came back should be mentioned in the voting history chart, except in the notes section. Only that Brendon was gone for a week and then Lawon was voted out and Brendon came back the following week. This page, http://www.cbs.com/shows/big_brother/americas_vote/ currently shows that Brendon received 39.5%, Dominic 31%, Cassi 28.5%, and Keith 1%, which should also be noted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.39.200.85 (talk) 19:56, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Can we please get this matter resolved? It's really annoying to see three different options being in the table every time I look at the page. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.21.155.78 (talk) 00:09, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As stated above on Eagle2ch's Edit request, this will remain due to it being a precedent from other Big Brother articles. Please read ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪'s comment for more information on this. 204.106.255.39 (talk) 04:10, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Precedent does not mean we should leave it looking horrible just because it worked for another season in another country. Week Six of Big Brother 6 (U.S.) shows a great way to do a double row instead of a double column, as Kaysar was not voted back in by his Housemates like Amy in Season 3 and James in Season 9 were (hence the double columns in those seasons for voting). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.39.200.85 (talk) 18:33, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to point out that there has been no precedent set anywhere in BBUS or BBUK where a houseguest(s) has gotten his or her own column about returning, unless it was the only action in the week [BBUK, several times] or by a vote of the houseguests [BB3,9], receiving sub-columns instead. Because this was not the only action on the week, there is no need to dedicate a column to Brendon and Lawon; the note at the bottom will do or the creation of a sub-column [which I believe was already tried once here]. As a result, I'm changing it to a BB6-style with a double row at the bottom, keeping the 'chance to return'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.181.28.56 (talk) 20:56, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rachel is 26

[edit]

Apparently Rachel's birthday is October 14, 1984 so that would make her 26 so since I'm not a registered user I can't make the change. Can someone please change it? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.21.155.78 (talk) 00:14, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And Daniele was 24 when she entered the house. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.39.200.85 (talk) 05:10, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Both have now been changed. --Jnorton7558 (talk) 05:36, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Duos twist has started up again.

[edit]

How should this be done in the nomination table?12bigbrother12 (talk) 01:56, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have done it so the colors for Shelly, Porsche and Rachel match their partners but kept their old color (see BB9) --MSalmon (talk) 09:22, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly I think having the original colors then numbers representing the new duos was much more better. Also I don't know when the BB9 table was changed but Neil and Jacob was decided not to have colors because of their early departures. The way it was first done was much easier to read now with with the 2 colors in a small space is hard to tell which is which. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 10:18, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to change it then that's fine by me but try to keep the colors matching. --MSalmon (talk) 10:21, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from 76.181.37.76, 28 August 2011

[edit]

Jordan won the power of veto. (bigbrotherupdates.com)

76.181.37.76 (talk) 02:43, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From what I am finding it was Rachel that won the veto not Jordan. --Jnorton7558 (talk) 02:47, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

3rd Place Eviction in Voting History

[edit]

I have never liked the way the voting history tables handled the 3rd placer's eviction cell. It should have the blue Nominated cell, not the red Evicted cell. Visually, omitting the blue nominated cell in favor of squeezing in the red evicted cell makes it look like he/she was evicted the week before in a double eviction with the 4th placer. For those concerned that they jury vote column gets in the way of indicating the eviction, to me that red row is only necessary to show that the house guest was not present that week due to being evicted, so putting it in the F3 week's row kind of violates that purpose since they were in the house. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the fact that the contestant is in the 3rd row and cast a jury vote immediately to the right means he/she was evicted in 3rd place, not to mention the eviction result is described at the bottom of the table. Am I the only one who feels this way? MarkMc1990 (talk) 23:31, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Stjimmy61892 (talk) 04:37, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Evicted takes precedent over Nominated in that case. Plus there really is no need to change it because BB11 is a good article and has the same setup. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 12:40, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with original post. There is no "evicted takes precedent over Nominated." Without the word "Evicted" and the red box, and instead the word "Nominated", the order of names on the left, and the next column all make it perfectly clear what happened, and actually uses the correct notation according to Big Brother precedent. Just because the Season 11 article is a "good" article does not mean that there are not still things wrong with it. It means it meets Wikipedia standards. The Big Brother Wikipedia Standards, which try to make all Big Brother articles look the same, tries to make the article Good for Wikipedia. It should be changed in this and the other U.S. Season articles. IMO of course. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.39.200.85 (talk) 04:33, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rachel wins HOH. Porsche and Adam are nominated. Porsche wins POV and removes herself from the block. The renoms are Adam and Rachel or Porsche whichever one loses Round three. Then the winner of round three (Rachel or Porsche whichever one isn't renomed with Adam) casts the sole vote to evict and then we are down to the final two. 24.211.111.60 (talk) 05:01, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure why you're spinning this scenario, but there's no Power of Veto in the round of three, Head of Household chooses who they want to send out. Dayewalker (talk) 05:04, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As a compromise, I shaded the cell blue like the other nomination cells to show that Adam was indeed nominated this week, but I also kept the word "Evicted" in it, to appease those that want to make it clear that he was evicted that week. I think this is less confusing than before and doesn't make it look like a double elimination happened at the Final 4. Hopefully everyone is ok with this solution. MarkMc1990 (talk) 23:06, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now it looks stupid. The other seasons don't have it so why should we change it now? Answer: we shouldn't. So someone should change it back. It doesn't look right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.195.83.164 (talk) 00:41, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The "the other seasons aren't like that so this one shouldn't either" argument holds no weight. It's called an improvement, and it can and should be easily be applied to the voting tables of the previous seasons. It was not my intention to make the change for this season only. Anyway, the red bar only belongs to indicate that the houseguest wasn't in the house that week. Adam (and the other 3rd placers) WAS in the house that week so he should not have a red row until the Final 2. But since the Final 2 week is occupied by the jury votes, we either leave the blue Nominated cell like all the other evicted houseguests have or we can have it blue and say Evicted to show he was evicted. MarkMc1990 (talk) 05:23, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sunday TV Schedule

[edit]

I completely understand and support CBS's pre-empting BB13 with a 9/11 special. But I can't seem to find (anywhere) when and where they will broadcast the Sunday Show. Any Ideas? BB After Dark? They should be able to handle this glitch but they (CBS) dont seem to be advertising a new time and place.Buster Seven Talk 23:27, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Due to the 9/11 special, Big Brother producers decided to air the finale on Wednesday night right after the 90 minute season premiere of Survivor: South Pacific. In other words, the 9/11 special is more important than whoever wins Big Brother.--Mikeymike2001 (talk) 23:33, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Of course it is. I will try not to read some hidden sarcastic implication into your reply. As I clearly say, I understand and support the special. I was merely inquiring if anyone had more information than the network was providing.Buster Seven Talk 00:43, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Voting History

[edit]

Is the Battle to Return portion really necessary for the voting history? It just makes the table look bad and doesn't really show how it impacted the game. Mentioning it in the Summary is enough, IMO. Thoughts?

First, sign your posts; second, yes. How else would it be explained why Brendon returned to the game?64.252.128.128 (talk) 03:12, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy Section

[edit]

You should remove (entirely) the first 4 paragraphs of the controversy section. While it is half-way accurate, it is only half-way accurate, telling the side of how Jeff Schroeder is a homophobic, vile, evil person. It doesn't mention the parts about Kalia baiting him, trying to pry hateful responses out of him and keeping the conversation going to try to get him to bury himself deeper. I myself have been thusly baited by people a few times in life, who were trying to provoke reactions to affect my life negatively. This was what Kalia was doing at the time also, and unless we're gonna be fair and impartial on here, it's better to tell no sides of a story than only a very biased, 1-sided version of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.242.50.77 (talk) 15:19, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Big Brother 13 (U.S.). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:07, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Big Brother 13 (U.S.). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:09, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Celebrity Big Brother 1 (U.S.) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 05:24, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Big Brother 1 (U.S.) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 12:34, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Big_Brother_13_(American_season)&oldid=1206293997"