Talk:Big Brother 9 (American season)/Archive 1

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

New edition of Big Brother After Dark???

Does anyone know or can someone find out if the Showtime cable network will be doing the live Big Brother After Dark program again on Showtime Extreme for the BB9 season. Simon Bar Sinister (talk) 11:19, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I sure hope so, but there hasn't been any information released by CBS/Showtime as of yet. Should be found out no later than January, when they release the air schedule for Feb. (at least I think they release them a month in advance). - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:11, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually it aired on Sho2 (formally ShoToo) and we should find out something in January since Showtime releases their February schedule in January. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 21:00, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Showtime/ Sho2 is owned by CBS, which is why I expect CBS to release something, if Showtime does not. - Rjd0060 (talk) 21:31, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

CBS/Showtime should release something in January because going back to the After Dark article Variety didn't report BB8 After Dark until June 10 little less than a month before the show. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 01:16, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Just like last year, the announcement came around one month to go. But what about House Calls? Usually when CBS makes an announcement for one spin-off they include information about the other. Has anyone received legit information about House Calls returning for Big Brother 9? ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 22:09, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Differentiation between nine and ten…

There's one problem with what we have here: the series for Big Brother US are numbered as per the summer series. Seeing as this version would be half of that, then it is not technically Big Brother 9. Although I know that we'll go with whatever CBS brands it, we should consider how to label it in the Big Brother navigation box at the bottom of the page to reduce ambiguity. Geoking66_talk 07:00, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking if CBS still does a summer season (I haven't seen anything official so I am still skeptic about a summer edition) I thought we could number them like this '08 Winter · '08 Summer Or 2008 (1) · 2008 (2) ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 09:34, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Big Brother was renewed for a summer series in 2008, so I'm thinking it may be "Big Brother: Winter" or the like. Geoking66_talk 17:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Well they are officially calling the winter edition Big Brother 9. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 20:16, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't see the problem, really. Let's keep it simple. It's being called Big Brother 9 because it is the ninth edition in a series. Just because it happens to air in the winter does not change that. The number after 8 is 9, no matter when it airs. How would that affect the navigation box? The only difference is the time of year it is aired. BB10 will air in the summer. Again I don't see the problem. The article will explain why BB9 is different than the others, just as BB8 was different with "America's Player". Right? - Jeeny ^(talk) 07:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Jeeny. 3bay sam (talk) 18:34, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Ummm, are we all talking about the same navbox? The problem is that the navbox doesn't list the seasons by season # (1, 2, 3...) but it lists them by the year, (2005, 2006, 2007, 2008...), so the problem is there will be 2-"2008"'s. Maybe we should change the navbox numbers to the seasons opposed to the years. Maybe something like this?? - Rjd0060 (talk) 18:53, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Er yes, I had a feeling about the navbox being a problem, but was too lazy to look. I did start to write that, but then changed it, I was thinking of the infobox instead. That looks good what you've done there. Naming them by seasons, rather than by year. I think you've got it! Thank you. - Jeeny ^(talk) 01:35, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

But by putting season in front of each number makes the line kinda long, how about this the first example calls the ninth season "'08 Winter" the second example lists the seasons like "#1, #2, #3, etc" and the third example lists the seasons like this "One, Two, Three, etc" ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 03:04, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry. Don't like the first one because I like uniformity between them all, meaning they should all follow the same format. For the second one, I don't like the "#" symbol, makes it look kind of weird. For your third example, I guess it could work, but I don't like it because the seasons are not referred to that way (CBS calls it Big Brother 1, not Big Brother one", "2" not "two", "3" not "three", etc...). I would say my idea, while yes, that makes the lines longer, looks the best. - Rjd0060 (talk) 04:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

How about 2008 (1) · 2008 (2) to seperate the two. Or 2008 (W) · 2008 (S) to indicate the difference that the first one aired in winter and the second one aired in summer.♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 06:37, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I really wish others would comment on this. I don't like that idea either, unfortunately. I really think the names in the navbox should correspond with the actual name given by CBS, witch is "Season X", not the year. - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:52, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I like the one Rjd0060 proposed, but with a little modification. Why not use what CBS did when going to/from commercial. Something simple like:

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · All Stars · 8 · 9

I think that using that would be a lot smaller than having "Season" before each number. - zachinthebox _{(User • Talk)} 21:01, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I like that one better. It reflects the show better. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 21:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Perfect! I say go ahead and make the change, to the most recent proposal. - Rjd0060 (talk) 23:05, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and made the changes to the template. - zachinthebox _{(User • Talk)} 23:08, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Survivor/Big Brother mention

Should we mention that this is the first season since Season 1 to air along side CBS's other reality show Survivor? ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 07:32, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I think that we should because that is probably the reason it's airing on Wednesdays rather than the usual Thursdays. - zachinthebox _{(User • Talk)} 11:55, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Houseguests

If this Tony Westbrook person has indeed revealed himself as a houseguest, he will most likely be taken out and replaced with an alternate, as this is against show rules 128.151.83.52 (talk) 23:54, 16 December 2007 (UTC) (Juppiter)

Well it is sourced and the source isn't disputable. So we will wait and see. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 02:31, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

OK I'm removing this item. Finalists have JUST now been chosen [1] . There are 20 finalists. The 14 houseguests haven't even been chosen. The overwhelming evidence states that Tony Westbrook will *not* be in the Big Brother 9 house. Juppiter (talk) 18:48, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Good call. - Rjd0060 (talk) 22:28, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of Houseguests... Any idea when the top 14 will be announced? --Zach (talk) 11:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

They are usually announced a few days before the season starts. They want the House Guests in the house or sequester by the time they announce them. They're there a few days while they enter the house and get used to mic and pack and production prepares them for future shows; this is also a reason why we don't get the live feeds right away. - Atlantics88 —Preceding comment was added at 02:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

If Neil is openly gay, wouldn't his soul mate also be male? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.83.110.145 (talk) 21:39, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Casting Calls

I saw on the Big Brother 8 page, they had a little casting call information. I know for a fact that a month and a half ago, they posted information about casting in Columbus, Ohio. Should casting call information be added? -- YoungWebProgrammer^{Msg me} 05:41, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

The casting calls ended back in December and posting casting calls is not appropriate for the article. Prior to the current state of the article it was created two times I think with only casting calls which called for its deletion. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 20:49, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Posting Spoilers

Last Season I was told I missed the discussion before the season started, regarding the posting of spoilers as shown on the nightly shows. I want to create this discussion NOW regarding these spoilers. The article should be left spoiler free and information should only be added/changed when it airs on the SHOW, not when its posted on a fan site or someone watches the live feeds. CBS has COMPLETE CONTROL over the show, and in the past certain events outcomes have been CHANGED from what happened on the live feeds, therefore posting these happenings are NOT canon and therefore should only be posted after the show AIRS. It also makes the article usable for its intention; for people to find information about the show, NOT used as an article for spoilers. Furthermore the fan sites should NOT be considered a proper source, as they are for the most part run by one person and usually the opinion of one person. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RMThompson (talk • contribs) 16:45, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, first of all, spoilers will be posted whether or not it is decided to have them. When the seasons starts, the IP contributions will skyrocket, especially at the conclusion of each episode. As far as discussing whether spoilers should be included in the article or not, I would say sure, why not, based on the previous consensus for them. We will, of course, have the proper warnings and disclaimers on the page stating that spoilers are present. As for using the "fansites" as sources, many of them are reliable, as proven throughout the airing of the show. We don't add Point-of-view comments, so the fact that some "fansites" have one persons opinion is irrelevant. Saying not to use "fansites" is like saying not to use the live feeds as sources - It doesn't get more reliable than the live feeds. Also, the reason I have fansites in quotes is because it's not like we use any ones we can find. If you look at last season, only large, trusted sites which detail the happenings of the live feeds are used. Not a run-of-the-mill fansite, IMO. - Rjd0060 (talk) 17:21, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Again, the main problem here is that while some of what the fan sites report happens, CBS can CHANGE the outcome of events and other things when the show goes to air. Since the article is about the show, it should not contain speculation based on fansites and people viewing the cams. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RMThompson (talk • contribs) 19:31, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I am not aware of any times where CBS has changed things that were seen on the live feeds. The main thing that gets posted before the actual show are competition results. CBS would not lie about who won competitions after allowing the Live feed viewers to know who really won. - Rjd0060 (talk) 22:14, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I am sure you realize that Wikipedia is not limited to the knowledge that YOU know. So if you aren't aware of anything, doesn't make it true. Last season there was a punishment for something that happened in the house, so someone who had participated in an event was later unable to recieve the benefits of those (it was a food competition). The fact remains that WIKIPEDIA is built on concensus, and that if a majority of people feel that adding unconfirmed reporting from a unreliable source should not be allowed, than I AGAIN say that it should not be allowed. The TV show and the LIVE FEEDS are two seperate forms of entertainment, although tied together. I suggest that someone start a LIVE FEED page that deals solely with what happens during the live feed. Any fan of the show will admit that sometimes what is shown on the program is a very small part of the activities during the live feed and some parts on the live feed are COMPLETELY left out because of FCC regulations. Just because we did it one way last year doesn't mean we should allow it this year, ESPECIALLY since last year they included a list of who was nominated/won POV BEFORE IT AIRED ON THE SHOW... again the article is about the SHOW, so until it airs it cannot be considered canon. RMThompson (talk) 13:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't agree with you, and am stating what the previous consensus has been (and has bee for what, 8 seasons?). I realize that consensus can change, so I'd like to let some other people weigh in here. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Rjd0060, we should continue with the consensus from the past seasons and use the live feeds. What happens on the live feeds happens on the show so go ahead and use them. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 17:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I also agee with Rjd0060 and we should include the feeds but we must continue to be clear in pointing out where there is unaired information so that people who wish to wait until the CBS show doesn't have it ruined for them. - zachinthebox _{(User • Talk)} 20:13, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Well I disagree. However as zachinthebox stated, the article should point out WHAT information has already aired and what hasn't! Therefore the convienent box on the right that listed who was nominated and what not should NOT be used this year. RMThompson (talk) 21:56, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I think you have misinterpreted Zackinthebox's comment. I believe when he says "we must continue to be clear in pointing out where there is unaired information", he is referring to spoiler warnings, however, those are now avoided. See Wikipedia:Spoiler and Wikipedia:Content disclaimer. So, I think we are going with the previous consensus, as well as the current guidelines that are in place. - Rjd0060 (talk) 22:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I just have a feeling that many people will come to this article expecting information on what has aired on the show, and become disappointed by seeing the spoliers included in the article. Wikipedia:Spoiler says that "it is not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception", and I think that this is one of the reasonable exceptions. - zachinthebox _{(User • Talk)} 22:22, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:Spoiler doesn't say that; what you just quoted is just a general message that is on all guideline pages. The main thing here is "Wikipedia carries no spoiler warnings except for the Wikipedia:Content disclaimer." and we can obviously have exceptions to that, but we must remember Wikipedia isn't censored. I am fine with having some sort of note in the sections which contain unaired information. - Rjd0060 (talk) 22:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

So then we're in agreement that ANY section that contains UNAIRED information much state so and have a spoiler tag in front of it? That would be the often-used chart that shows who is nominated/evicted/POV that is normally at the top right of the ongoing BB page must be moved and tagged, since it would show spoiler information without a tag otherwise. RMThompson (talk) 21:16, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

The infobox should stay in its normal spot, however I would not object to a tag at the top of the page. - Rjd0060 (talk) 21:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

ONCE AGAIN - The tag at the TOP does not cut it. Doesn't anyone understand that Wikipedia is supposed to be an ENCYCLOPEDIA and a place for people to come to for facts. I feel like you people take this too seriously, and INTENTIONALLY post spoilers because you CAN - even the majority of users would most likely RATHER not read them when they are trying to find information about houseguests or something. yeah yeah, I know that majority rules, but NO ONE READS THE DISCUSSION so no one understands they have an option. This is the largest problem with Wikipedia - cronyism and groups of friends controlling articles with an iron fist by bending the rules of Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RMThompson (talk • contribs) 19:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

As an avid watcher of the live feeds for several seasons, at no point did CBS "air" results during a telecast that was different from what happend on the live feeds. In addition, each night Showtime Too will regularly scroll/post every 1/2 hour what houseguest won the competitions. The scroll often contained recent drama, fights, battles, etc. not related to competitions. What people see occur on the feeds and read on the scroll of Showtime is...fact. - sjasper 01-31-08 2:32pm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjasper (talk • contribs) 19:31, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

The policy on spoilers will remain the same for this season. If results of a competition or task is revealed on the live feeds or on Big Brother: After Dark via the scroll then it is acceptable in this article. Especially the scroll on Big Brother: After Dark. The page will have the necessary warnings like last year. The warnings will stay until the finale has aired on the West coast of the United States. If a seperate non-spoiler article is created like last year it will be deleted as there is no need for it. I think I covered it all. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 18:59, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you've covered everything. Now this is getting redundant. - Rjd0060 (talk) 19:16, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

NUMBER OF HOUSEGUESTS

THERE WILL BE 14 HOUSEGUEST

http://forums.jokersupdates.com/ubbthreads/showthreaded.php?Board=bbnewsandrumors&Number=7740806

(WATCH THE VIDEO) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.82.82 (talk) 20:10, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Remember Changes....

During the off season there were color changes made to the Infoboxes and the Nomination/Voting History tables. Here is the new color key:
     - Winner (Endgame Only)
     - Nominated (Housemates)/Runner-Up (Endgame)
     - Head of Household* (Housemates Only)
     - Evicted/Re-Evicted
     - Walked
     - Ejected/Expelled
     - Extra Color 1 (three)
     - Extra Color 2 (five)
If anyone has a problem please have a discussion here or at WP:BIGBRO and please visit the talk pages of WP:BIGBRO and Piony Big Brother: Celebrity Edition 2 for why the colors were changed. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 07:40, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Seems logical to me. The scheme makes perfect sense. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 03:31, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Showtime Too ---> Showtime (2)

I just wanted to clarify that Showtime 2 has re branded itself again. The correct name is Showtime 2. The logo for the channel as a 2 in a circle after the word Showtime. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 05:02, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

BB9 US airs in the UK?

I have seen some TV listings for 2/14/08 and E4 does have down that they are broadcasting BB USA on that day. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 02:09, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

U.S. television ratings

I included the table used for TV Shows that air during the official season to Big Brother 9. This will be easier to keep up with than the monster table from last year plus The Hollywood Reporter posts a chart of all the in season shows and lists their rank and viewers in millions for the total season. (2006-07 primetime wrap list from The Hollywood Reporter)

The ratings table is usually included on the main page of the shows (American Idol, Dancing with the Stars) but since Big Brother is normally a summer show I placed the table on Big Brother 9's page with a note with why past seasons aren't listed. I am not sure how Big Brother 9 will count in the official season, what I mean is I am not sure if they will count each night separately from each other like they do for American Idol and Dancing with the Stars or combine three nights together like Deal or No Deal. The table is currently set up like it would be for American Idol and Dancing with the Stars with each night separated with three spots for Ranks and Viewers In Millions. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 06:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Voting Table

How are we going to format the voting table since the couples twist is happening. We could just create seperate boxes and have two head of household markers? 75.89.237.233 (talk) 21:55, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

At this point I am assuming that we will keep the table the same as past seasons. For Head of Household we will do the same thing as we did in season seven. In season seven Janelle and Jase won a joint HoH position in Week 1. At the top where it said "Head of Household" we listed Janelle then under her name we put Jase, in the voting area both their boxes were shaded with the text "Co-Head of Household". You can visit the Week 1 of the season seven voting history as an example. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 22:05, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

General guidelines (adopted from WP:BIGBRO, BBUK, and well-written BBUS articles)

As Big Brother 2008 part 1 draws near, some guidelines need to be posted:

	Good	Bad
References	Sourcing of all information pertaining to the show. This is not to say that all sentences must be followed by a <ref> tag, but on statements of House events, it is requested that sources be applied. Facts about housemates must also be referenced or they will be deleted.	Inadequate souring in chronology and housemate sections. Not referencing housemate information can even be a source of libel.
Housemates	A well written but not very long section for each housemate, containing referenced birth dates, pre- and post-Big Brother life, entrance and eviction dates, and actions within the house. If the article goes over 55-60kB with the housemate section being the majority, it should be split.	Too long without being split or too short.
Eviction table	Look at the tables for Big Brother 2005 (UK) and Big Brother 2006 (UK). Contrary to what has been done on past BBUS articles despite its inaccuracy, the eviction (bottom) row should read '''X'''<br>5 of 6 votes<br><small>to evict</small>. This is the international standard.	Incorrect colour coding, twist syntax, or having the entire evicted [Evicted (Day 14)] row italicised. Only "Evicted" should be italicised. Commas within lists of nominated/evicted housemates.
Chronology	Short, referenced, concise. The chronology reads like a short selection of extremely major events: HoH, evicted, PoV, nominated, et alii. No minor or useless house events or strategic information.	Anything similar to Big Brother 8 (U.S.)'s chronology.
House	A picture (fair-use rational acceptable) should be used just to illustrate the house. A relatively cited description of major changes in décor or layout.	No section or one that is confusing and poorly cited.
Lexicon	Housemate (HouseGuest acceptable, but housemate preferred as per Endemol) House (capitalised) Day 25 (capitalised and cardinal, not ordinal, number) HoH, Head of Household PoV, Power of Veto 5 of 6 votes to evict	HG, houseguest, Houseguest house day 25 HOH, hoh POV, pov, veto (except when used as a verb) 5 to evict

Geoking66_talk 03:30, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree with most except the Housemates bit. I think we should continue to refer to them as HouseGuests just as CBS does. Anyone new to the show and that hasn't viewed an international Big Brother wouldn't know why Housemates is used. If a broadcaster refers to Housemates as HouseGuests then the broadcaster's term should be used. By the way lovely table. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 04:39, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I also agree, as Alucard says, with everything except for the Housemates thing. Keep calling them HouseGuests. Also, I'd like to leave that table, perhaps in a collabsable box at the top of this page. Might help throughout the season. - Rjd0060 (talk) 04:48, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree as well with the guidelines but just as Alucard 16 and Rjd0060 said, I think that we should keep it as HouseGuests. - zachinthebox _{(User • Talk)} 12:07, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Guidelines for the Voting history table

An extensively guide is needed this year and we need to agree on it. Since everyone will be in pairs and will do everything together. We need to discuss a few things. But first here are the lovely colors to use:

Head of Household	Nominated	Evicted Re-evicted	Expelled	Walked
#CCFFCC	#959FFD	#FFC0CB	#FFE08B	#FFCCFF

Now down to business, should we continue past seasons and keep all 16 HouseGuests seperate and post "Co-Head of Household" in both HG's box. Example: Matt and Chelsia are a pair and won HoH, do we put "Co-Head of Household" in each box?

Or are we going to group them together so we don't post the information twice like the nomination table? But a problem with grouping them together is what if Big Brother decides to spit them apart and let them play the game alone? Do we do the same as what the editors of PBB Celebrity Edition 2 did?

I have some examples at my sandbox. Example #1 has everyone spit up like normal. Example #2 has everyone grouped with a fake list of soulmates.

So what does everyone think we should do with the table?♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 05:36, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't think we should make it any more complicated than we have to. I like the examples you have in your sandbox, just list their names together, in the same box. Using this table format, if they get split up later on, it shouldn't really be a problem, as there will just be one name in a box, instead of two. - Rjd0060 (talk) 05:45, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I like the second example as well (with both names in the same box) for the simple reason that in the first example it looks as though there are four people nominated and that every person gets a seperate vote making it look like Jen/Ryan had 6 votes to evict when they really only had 3 against. - zachinthebox _{(User • Talk)} 12:00, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Due to an error I made, I accidentally put the wrong color for "Nominated" in the table above. The lighter blue is exclusive to the Infoboxes only and should be used in the Infoboxes. The dark blue is for the tables. Sorry for the inconvenience. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 05:13, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I also made a voting table, it's on my user page Atlantics88 It lists fake couples in the first four weeks of the show and them splitting up in week 5 if it were to happen. The whole season plays out with Neil winning. Atlantics88, 2008-02-09 07:04 (UTC)

I could see that happening. I could also see some sort of twist going along to extend the table from 10 weeks to 11 if that were to happen. In the event of a spit we can use your table. Makes much more sense. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 09:37, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Evicted together

It pretty much says on the commercial that they could be evicted together. It doesn't say that they will be evicted together. The show would only be on for seven weeks, while in past seasons the show is on for 12 weeks. It might just be a twist for a certain week in the house. Sort of like a double eviction week. I know it says that they will be evicted together on tvguide.com, but I think that they won't do it every week. I think that it should be changed and I just wanted to know what you guys thought of that. Seth71 (talk) 17:21, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I think that if the ratings aren't very good, CBS may make it seven to eight weeks. On the other hand, if the ratings are exceptional; they may break the couples up in the middle of the season or do any kind of combination to extend it to ten to eleven weeks. - Atlantics88 2008-02-09 21:55 UTC

'Til Death Do You Part

This is a bit confusing. Is "'Til Death Do You Part" a subtitle of the show, or the actual title, as in "Big Brother: 'Til Death Do You Part?" Because as far as I've seen, the show isn't being reffered to as "Big Brother 9" anymore. The CBS website doesn't do so, and neither does the guide on my TV. The title of the article doesn't need to be changed either way, does it? MadMagFreak (talk) 18:43, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

'Til Death Do You Part is a subtitle for Big Brother 9. We will have to wait and see on Tuesday. This could be a similar situation just like the All Stars season. The actual logo had Big Brother 7 with the 7 being replaced by a star. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 23:39, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Plus the CBS does still call this show "Big Brother 9" under Shows on their main site. Plus the Canadian broadcaster also refers to this season as Big Brother 9. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alucard 16 (talk • contribs) 23:41, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

It's more than likely just the seasons theme. Sort of like BB6's summer of secrets, BB4's x-factor and BB5's project DNA. Seth71 (talk) 17:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

After having watched the show, it's not being reffered to "Big Brother 9" at all. Just "Big Brother," with the occasional "'Til Death Do You Part" added at the end. No "9" at all. Just a note. MadMagFreak (talk) 04:27, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

We will leave the name of the article as Big Brother 9 since this is the ninth season. All Big Brother US articles are listed this way including the All Stars season.♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 19:30, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Also worth noting the official Big Brother site is http://www.cbs.com/primetime/big_brother_9/ . 9 it is . - Rjd0060 (talk) 19:34, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Reference Table

I've added a collapsable table to the top of this page which contains a bit of basic MoS stuff, for reference as we get started here. Feel free to add anything to it. - Rjd0060 (talk) 14:32, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Eviction table

I think that we should leave the table as each housemate individually, not as couples since it's easier to find a specific housemate. Also, it's extremely probable that the couples will eventually be broken apart, especially refenced by Julie saying that if Ryan and Jen make it to the finals, they'll win together despite being in couples with different people. Geoking66_talk 02:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I think that we're going to have two parts to this table, one that's for the couples portion, and if (and that's a big if) they do split apart, one for the singular portion of the game. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 03:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I was wandering prior to the start of the season on how we would format the voting table with the pairs. It was decided that in the beginning we group them all in to pairs. Then when (or if) the pairs spit apart and the HouseGuests can play the game individually we would split the remaining HouseGuests at that point and leave the evicted HouseGuests in pairs. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 03:34, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree with T, I think 2 tables is best if it does split 3bay sam (talk) 03:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Maybe at the point of splitting there's a thin grey line but thicker than cell dividers, that way there will be cross table singles once they split up but show all the information in one table. id est

	Week 1	Week 2	Week 3	Week 4	Week 5	Week 6	Week 7

Adam	Nominated	x	x	x	x	x	a
Shiela	Nominated	x	x	x	x	x	b
Alex & Amanda	Nominated	y	y	y	y	y	Evicted

Why the eviction colour shows up oddly (only on this page) is beyond my explanation. Geoking66_talk 04:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

HouseGuest Infobox

Should the pairs be put together on it? As a matter of fact, is that even possible? If not, the least we could do is move the pairs names' next to each other, right? MadMagFreak (talk) 04:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I think for now we should leave the infobox alone. In the event of the pairs being split then we would have to undo the pairs. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 06:41, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Another thing. Shouldn't we be reffering to Jen and Parker as "Power Couple" as said on the show, instead of HoH? MadMagFreak (talk) 06:52, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, why are we showing EVICTED houseguests before confirmation from AFTER DARK or the actual show? We decided earlier in the discussion that every SECTION that contained a spoiler should have a tag stating so, but instead there is a chart RIGHT on the page that shows the spoiler.

I just don't understand the concept of wanting to ruin the show for its viewers? I mean great you got the information early, WHO CARES. Casual readers who want to use Wikipedia like an ENCYCLOPEDIA cannot because of the spoilers. The article is about the SHOW, which airs on CBS and SHOWTIME. If it's not there than its JUST SPECULATION! RMThompson (talk) 14:05, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

RMThompson, this has been debated for years, but the outcome has always been that posting spoilers is acceptable since it is a direct contradiction of Wikipedia to withhold information from viewers. As much as you debate this point, it will be consistently rejected as per convention. I'm sorry, but we have proof via feeds and it is confirmed.Geoking66_talk 16:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

My argument is that these people are NOT VERIFIABLE SOURCES, as strictly outlined by Wikipedia's guidelines. Someone who saw it on a feed is NOT a verfiable source of information! As stated on Wikipedia's VERIFIABILITY article:

The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. "Verifiable" in this context means that readers should be able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source.

That means that while yes, the eviction may have already happened ITS NOT VERIFIABLE. It might be "TRUE" but it is NOT VERIFIABLE, and therefore not admissable. If it's verified, please show me where! RMThompson (talk) 20:16, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with the HouseGuests Infobox. This is just a debate with the Spoiler issue again. RMThompson again if something happens on the live feeds or Showtime's Big Brother After Dark it will be posted here. Both are verifiable. If you want to talk about what happens on TV only then we can restrict this to the CBS highlight episodes and Showtime's live feed show. Everything that is listed here will be cleared up tonight's highlight show on CBS. The following things are acceptable to be included in the article and reason why:

Event	Source
Soulmate twist revealed	2/12/08 Highlight/Launch Show
First Power Couple Competition & Winner	2/12/08 Highlight/Launch Show
First Evicted Couple	2/12/08 After Dark
Heads of Household (Alex & Amanda)	2/12/08 After Dark

Now everything that has happened on After Dark like the first evicted couple of Parker & Jen's choice will be shown on Wednesday's show along with the new HoH. Nominations will happen sometime in between now and Sunday so they can broadcast it during Sunday's highlights show. The Veto will happen sometime after the nominations and Tuesday so it can be included on Tuesday's highlights show and the second evictee will happen live on the live eviction show on Wednesday. Now if something is stated on the live feeds and After Dark before the CBS broadcast it will be posted here. And since you are allowed to cite episodes of a broadcast here on Wikipedia we can just spend the extra effort citing the After Dark's episodes. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 20:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

The spoiler issue is just out of hand. What happens on the live feeds and After Dark will be posted here. We have the necessary tag at the top with this warning:

It may contain non-definitive information based on advertisements, websites or interviews. The information may change as the date of broadcast approaches.

♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 20:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good except... THERE WAS NO AFTER DARK LAST NIGHT! That show doesn't start until TONIGHT, and in my opinion, is an entirely different show. Still unverifiable, but again, you get your way. RMThompson (talk) 21:07, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Big Brother After Dark premiered on Showtime 2 at 12 AM Tuesday night/Wednesday morning. I watched the whole three hours bub and it was on. It premiered three hours after the launch on CBS and the live feeds stared after the launch was aired on CBS. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 21:16, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

You know what? You don't need to call be "Bub". According to the information I have, it wasn't ON. Sorry if that was wrong, but don't make it personal. Please explain how YOU WATCHING a TV show is NOT "independant research" and how it can be considered "verfiable"? Don't tell me its the way things have always been, that's not a reason. RMThompson (talk) 21:58, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

If my last post made you mad then I am sorry for calling you "bub" but to be fair you don't need to capalize certain parts of your posts and the little message on my talk page I didn't take to well. You could have phrased it a little better. I was just pointing out that Big Brother: After Dark did in fact air at 12 AM EST. From my understanding it is live on the East Coast but delayed on the West Coast. I didn't make it personal I was just stating it did air last night. And my reason for going ahead and updating the page with information that was gathered from the live feeds and BB: After Dark is simply for one it is normally included here and two, if a new user tries to edit table (like in the past) they could end up messing up the entire section or article in their attempt to add the information. And before saying someone is making something personal you should look at your posts, some people could take the way that you capalize your posts as personal. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 22:20, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Ratings

I have added this bit to the ratings section.

Big Brother 9 airs three episodes a week, with shows airing Sundays at 8 p.m. (EST), Tuesdays 9 p.m., and Wednesdays 8 p.m. The live eviction show was moved to Wednesdays due to Survivor: Micronesia airing Thursdays 8 p.m. This is the first season of Big Brother to air during an official television season and the second to air along a season of Survivor. The first episode premiered on February 12, 2008 with 7.33 million viewers (4.6/7 viewing audience), down from last year's 4.8/9 (7.4 million viewers) launch.^[1]

Should we note that launch night was up against American Idol that night. And the following Wednesdays will be as well until March. ♪♫Al ucard 16♫♪ 21:12, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

^ [2]

[1] [2]

[1]