Talk:Big Brother (British TV series) series 8
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Big Brother (British TV series) series 8 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 |
 | Big Brother Start‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
 Archives |
|---|
Semi Protected
I had to semi-protect the article, as this afternoon there was a lot of vandalism, I had to spend 20 minutes clearing it up. Everyone happy with this? John Hayes 16:50, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
- I have reverted the addition of the template. You're not an administrator and therefore cannot protect pages. Thanks, — Xy7 16:59, 07 June 2007
- Hi John - don't worry, many users have made the same mistake :) If you need a page protecting, only an administrator can do it - to request, ask on WP:RFPP where you'll normally get a fast response. Majorly (talk | meet) 17:59, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
- Really? Wow, how come I'm able to then? well I guess I should request it then. John Hayes 23:00, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
- Ah yes, I didn't read that the first time I read the protection policy, my mistake. I have requested it now. It still surpises me that it's possible for non-admins to do that. John Hayes 23:18, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
- By adding the template, you didn't protect it - the template just informs people that it is protected - admins have to use their tools that we don't have to do it :) -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 10:24, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- Yes we do. Article semi-protected for 24 hours. It is better to request semi protection if crap is being added, rather than continually removing it (potentially risking 3RR). Neil ╦ 10:59, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- I understand now. So should the template be added now, and if so am I allowed to do it? John Hayes 11:46, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, and yes. -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 11:51, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- Done. One question how does the time bit of that template work, can't see instructions for it John Hayes 12:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, and yes. -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 11:51, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- By adding the template, you didn't protect it - the template just informs people that it is protected - admins have to use their tools that we don't have to do it :) -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 10:24, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- Ah yes, I didn't read that the first time I read the protection policy, my mistake. I have requested it now. It still surpises me that it's possible for non-admins to do that. John Hayes 23:18, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
- Really? Wow, how come I'm able to then? well I guess I should request it then. John Hayes 23:00, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
- Hi John - don't worry, many users have made the same mistake :) If you need a page protecting, only an administrator can do it - to request, ask on WP:RFPP where you'll normally get a fast response. Majorly (talk | meet) 17:59, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I've changed the template to the smaller icon that appears in the top right corner - I hope noone minds, but it reduced the amount of banners at the top of the article :) -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 12:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
- Seems sensible John Hayes 12:19, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I've had the page semi-protected again, this time for a week, as the vandalism, unsourced comments, and potential libel from IP users has continued. John Hayes 10:35, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- Well the protection has run out, so lets see how it goes. Only one, possible, incident of vandalism, though I think that was done in good faith. John Hayes 13:41, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
- I'm going to request it again, still quite a big of IP vandalism John Hayestalk 10:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Requested John Hayestalk 10:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a week again. And...... relax. John Hayestalk 14:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- And again. Did anyone request it this time? John Hayestalk 16:02, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
- And again, until the end of the series, replaced with small template. John Hayestalk 16:20, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
- And again. Did anyone request it this time? John Hayestalk 16:02, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
- Semi-protected for a week again. And...... relax. John Hayestalk 14:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Requested John Hayestalk 10:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
- Comment: Is a two-month protection really necessary? Anonymous users do provide useful information and updates in this article, even if some of them do go a bit mad sometimes. — Xy7 18:28, 03 July 2007
- Probably not, the admin seems to have taken it upon himself since he first did it. I certainly didn't request it. I don't really mind either way, though it has become a bit dead round here recently. John Hayestalk 18:31, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
- I'm going to request it again, still quite a big of IP vandalism John Hayestalk 10:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
Jonathan
Although he walked on Day 35 he still nominated on Day 34, I can't recall anyone walking the day after nomination before, but his choices (I will guess Nicky and Tracey) may still count. We will see on tonight's program, but if so the table will have to be adjusted. Darrenhusted 11:51, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah i was wondering about that. Though if he voted for Charley I hope they keep them! But I think the table should show his nominations, but with a note (and strking them through) saying that didn't count (if that becomes the case). But you're right we'll find out tonight what happens. They might mention it on BBLB too. --81.178.69.196 11:56, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
- I agree, based on how we have previously handled nominations which didn't count (see Billi and Charley), we should list them, but strike them through if they are not counted. If they are counted we should list them as normal. John Hayestalk 12:28, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
- I think that the last time this happened was with Sandy in BB3, he nominated then walked two days later, his ovtes still counted, although the announcement had been made, this time the announcment hasn't been made. All we can do is watch. Darrenhusted 12:36, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
The first two listings in this table (Notes 1+2) are nomination twists... But i don't see how the third is? If Jonathan's nominations weren't counted, and this isn't a nomination twist, why are not counting Charley's and Billi's votes a nomination twist? Maybe there could be another column listed in the table? Though it should be noted why the votes were not counted. --85.210.161.91 21:49, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
- We don't know if Jonathan's nominations count or not. On the subject of Charley and Billi's votes, there is a discussion at the Big Brother WikiProject on this subject, that nomination twist is not the best term for this. Feel free to comment on that discussion. John Hayestalk 16:00, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Subsections in House section
I would like to add some subsections to the House section, to improve it. Currently it's a bit "and this room... and this room... and this room". I think it would be improved by having subsections for various rooms. For example one for diary room, ones for the secret rooms etc. Obviously there wouldn't be any point having a subsection for each piece of info. What do you think? John Hayestalk 16:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- I have made a few changes now, seperated into Main Area (isn't enough content for bedroom by itself), Garden, Diary Room, Hidden Room and Rumoured Areas.
Jonathan Left?
On the Official Website it doesnt Say Walked it says Left, Should we change it on wikipedia or keep it like we kep Emily Ejected whereas on the official website it says Removed
- See the discussion about this on the Big Brother Wikiproject. John Hayestalk 22:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Big Twist
The Insider on Big Brother's Little Brother has said that tonight, there will be a big twist involving Australia. Fugio 18:48, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, an actress >=) FiringRange 21:34, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
The Room of Nicky
How do we know this was actually in the hidden room on the other side of the diary room and not just the lobby area again? — AnemoneProjectors (zomg!) 19:48, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
It was just the lobby room.FiringRange 20:03, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- That's what I thought. It needs to be removed from the "Hidden Room" section if that is the case. Also the lobby needs to be added and the bathroom shouldn't be in the diary room section. I'd fix it now myself but Big Brother's about to start ;) — AnemoneProjectors (zomg!) 20:59, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
There was a map showing the house and some of the secret rooms, if you want I can put it on this discussion article? EDIT: Found 'em. http://insidebigbrother.net/bb/images/stuff/housepics1.jpg http://insidebigbrother.net/bb/images/stuff/housepics2.jpg
Those pictures aren't right, the second on shows the entrance going straight in to the lounge when we all know it goes through the reception area, which is mis-labelled as a secret room. Darrenhusted 21:32, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
But there is a second secret "lobby" area which is labelled picture 4. FiringRange 21:35, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
I don't think that's a second secret lobby, it's just the lobby but draw in the wrong place. Darrenhusted 21:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- The pictures are wrong. Not only is the lobby wrong but the main bathroom is as well, it's at the wrong end of the bedroom and should have a corridor. Also there's a bathroom in top left of the picture that shouldn't be there and there seems to be another room behind it... surely that's where the garden should be! — AnemoneProjectors (zomg!) 00:18, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Ok then, thanks =) Edit : Note, I don't think the lobby area (4) looks anything like the entrance lobby area. It looks a bit small to house double doors, especially with a mirror where the double doors would be. FiringRange 10:13, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Regardless these pictures do not help. Darrenhusted 10:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Oh that's ok then =) FiringRange 21:39, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
Paulene
so how can we fit her in the article. Can't add her as a housemate yet. John Hayestalk 21:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Weekly summary, her appearance on tonight's show, then her entrance on Sunday. Darrenhusted 21:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- I've put her under "Housemates" in the paragraph - and linked to the actress's article -Thaila Zucchi. -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 21:32, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Also, when she does enter the house and gets her own section, shall we call it Thaila "Pauline" Zucchi? I think that's the best way to put it, as Pauline is a fictional character... -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 22:21, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- I think that when fake week's over though, she won't still be known as Pauline.
i Say just put her real name which is Thaila
- I don't think she should be added to any of the tables or housemates lists becuase she is not eligible for the prize, so any refernces should be resricted to the weekly summary and tasks. Darrenhusted 20:28, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- I personally disagree. In the article for Big Brother 2003, Jon Tickle's re-entry is listed in the housemate table (top right), even though he wasn't eligible to win the second time round. So I think Thaila should be included (under the name "Thaila", as this is what Big Brother refers to her as when in the Diary Room). Just my thoughts :) Thanks, — Xy7 18:45, 09 July 2007
- He started as a housemate, as did Nikki last year, this person is an actor and will not nominate, be nominated or win the prize, she is not a housemate, just an actor. Darrenhusted 19:06, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- I think she should stay in the lists for the moment, for all we know she will stay in and be able to be nominated, evicted etc. John Hayestalk 19:24, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- This is true. But also remember, Nikki was eligible to win the second time round as well. — Xy7 21:55, 09 July 2007
- Forgot about Nikki, hard to I know, but if she is an actor and part of a task how could she end up staying and win the prize? Darrenhusted 13:17, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- Because in the end Big Brother can make up the rules as they go along. If they really wanted to they could, for arguments sake, remove everyone from the house today, and fill it with new people. So we risk predicting the future if we assume that she cannot stay and/or win the prize. John Hayestalk 13:52, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- I say she should be put on there under "Temporary". Ideas? Dalejenkins 12:41, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- Now that she is gone, I am undecided. Technically she was a housemate, on the basis that she lived in the house. But as she never nominated, or was nominated she probably can be left out. John Hayestalk 12:49, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- Restrict her to the weekly summary and task list as she was a task. Darrenhusted 13:11, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah sounds good enough to me. John Hayestalk 13:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- I personally disagree. In the article for Big Brother 2003, Jon Tickle's re-entry is listed in the housemate table (top right), even though he wasn't eligible to win the second time round. So I think Thaila should be included (under the name "Thaila", as this is what Big Brother refers to her as when in the Diary Room). Just my thoughts :) Thanks, — Xy7 18:45, 09 July 2007
Credits
Should it be mentioned that Thaila's name appears in the show's closing credits? — AnemoneProjectors (zomg!) 22:05, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- I don't see why it'd be relevant, so id say no.Babygurl1853 13:10, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Jonathan in Priory
I will remove the info on Jonathan being in the Priory, as what he does after Big Brother, especially as there were no stories of him using coke or call girls in the house, is not relevant to this article. If he is notable enough for his own article (which he possibly is as a millionaire businessman) then it could go in there. John Hayestalk 14:10, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Thaila - Swindon or Isleworth?!
Thaila Zucchi and the programme says she's from Swindon, but this page has Isleworth. WHere did the latter come from? Nick Cooper 15:41, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Thalia Out?
Can anyone confirm this and provide a source. I haven't heard about this. John Hayestalk 22:11, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- It has been self-reverted. John Hayestalk 22:18, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- I found this. Tra (Talk) 00:25, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Notable Housemates
I think we can create articles for at least Jonathan, and possibly Ziggy. Jonathan is notable for 3 things, Big Brother, Guardian writer, and business man, easy to find sources on google. Ziggy also possibly as as a former member of a boyband, and a FCUK model. I'm writing this here, to attract some interest. John Hayestalk 13:46, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- Right I've started Jonathan Durden, with hopefully enough infos and sources to keep it for the near future. John Hayestalk 14:23, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting. Ziggy may become yet more notable when he leaves the house if he gets advertising deals or whatever, too. It's no coincidence that there are statistically far more potentially notable people on the non-celebrity Big Brother than there are from your average sample of 18 people from the UK chosen at random...-h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 21:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)