Jump to content

Talk:Big Brother 15 (American season)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Big Brother 15 (U.S.))

Move in date

[edit]

Aanybody know when the HG's will move into the house, since the June 26 premiere won't be live? --MSalmon (talk) 10:46, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We might be able to tell based on BB: After Dark, but otherwise it might have to come down to counting out 90 days from the last episode back. --Super Goku V (talk) 01:01, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think they moved in around June 19.

MVP legend

[edit]

I think there should be a new color for the MVP on the infobox. And an icon of some sort possibly. CloudKade11 (talk) 23:41, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not until we know more details --MSalmon (talk) 10:37, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
shouldn't there be an icon instead of a color like the pov icon? because the mvp can also be nominated by the hoh and then that person would have two colors.
Yes, but what can we use for the icon? --MSalmon (talk) 21:01, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
perhaps there is an official symbole on the cbs website? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.98.230.106 (talk) 21:22, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not one that I can see --MSalmon (talk) 21:24, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps just use the word "MVP" in the player's box with no color? Cdtew (talk) 19:12, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have changed it to just the word M.V.P. in the veto bit, by the way when does the voting for it open? --MSalmon (talk) 09:57, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

MVP Nomination

[edit]

I think the MVP Nomination section should be under the Nominations (pre-veto) section since the MVP's Nominee will be revealed right before the Veto Competition. Is that okay?--TheDevin13 (talk) 01:19, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just a thought, but I was thinking it should be placed under the main chart, similar to the coaches comp in the last season! I think it's safe to assume this twist will end after a few weeks, like all previous twists, therefore it should not be placed at the top. Thoughts? -- Sethjohnson95 21:28 ET 26 June, 2013
I agree with TheDevin13 because they are nominating a HG for eviction (even though it will probably end after a few weeks but we can use none)--MSalmon (talk) 15:05, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't the "Nominations (Post Veto)" spot have an additional place, in that there will still be three nominations after the veto? Cdtew (talk) 19:14, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes but we can do that until the PoV ceremony has taken place. I have also changed it around so it shows the HoH, HoH nominations, who the M.V.P. is, Nominations (pre-veto) including the M.V.P. nominations, Veto Winner, then Nominations (post-veto). --MSalmon (talk) 10:27, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should still have a separate spot for pre-veto MVP nominations because they're two different types of nomination. Cdtew (talk) 16:04, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is fine as it is otherwise it will make it too complicated to understand --MSalmon (talk) 16:56, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Live feeds are SPOILERS, I think.

[edit]

I think that the article should be based on episodes broadcast on TV, not live feeds, because most people watch TV. TV viewers want to escape spoilers. Is there a consensus among wikipedians that live feeds may take preference over TV? --Freebiekr (talk) 06:55, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]


This is asked or "whined" about every year, no this page should be updated like all previous seasons as they happen in real time not based on the 3 episodes a week. It's been this way for many many years now and it's not going to change now. The internet is one big SPOILER, especially when it comes to Big Brother. Type it in google and results show for who is HOH, who is nominated who won the POV and if it had been used and so and so forth. It's also plastered everywhere on twitter, facebook the LIVE feeds itself and wikipedia. If you do not want spoilers I would suggest to stay off this page and any other spoiler sites. (I do not mean to offend you in anyway, but I see this question/topic every season either on here or on facebook and twitter, it hasn't changed in forever and it's not going to change now! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.96.104.70 (talk) 09:33, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]


As someone who is not a regular wikipedia contributor I realize my points will likely be ignored however I feel I should post my 2 cents anyhow. Yes the internet is full of Big Brother spoilers, be it on Twitter, Facebook, spoiler sites, etc. however, in general these spoilers will not be found unless a person is actively looking for them. Alternately, in the case of Facebook or Twitter or other general social media outlets, there is a typical precedent to post a clearly observable **SPOILER ALERT** prior to making any statements that may have an expectation of ruining a viewing experience for others. In the case of Wikipedia, it is similar to social media in that people use it to gain information about other subjects related to Big Brother and may be unable to avoid spoilers if they are doing so. I obviously respect that there is a precendent in place to post information as it happens and do not wish to convince you to change this, but I might suggest that following other social media conventions might be in order in placing a spoiler alert of some kind to warn those who might be about to stumble upon information they don't wish to see. 137.186.233.236 (talk) 22:17, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think most people are coming to this page to see things that have not been aired on TV yet. For instance, I came here to see when the show would end, but now I have ruined the next episode. There should be some sort of warning, or at least make it less obvious (for instance in the top right I can see who won POV before it has happened). 173.33.154.27 (talk) 14:17, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I come here to find out BEFORE the tv shows it Smith03 (talk) 15:03, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just for everyone commenting, there's a current status quo in Wikipedia not to put disclaimers (such as spolier alerts) in an article. See Wikipedia:Spoiler#Why spoiler warnings are not used. In addition, I doubt there would be a consensus to add a spoiler warning. Contrary to earlier comments in this section, Wikipedia is not a social media website, a blog, etc.. It is an online encyclopedia. So while people may visit this article for non-encyclopedia purposes (and the article certainly has its other uses), that's not the goal here. Frankly, it is impossible to imagine that anyone familiar with this show (to the extent they cared about spoilers) would not know about the live feeds, and should realize that an encyclopedia article is going to note what happens on those feeds - whether or not it aired on television. Singularity42 (talk) 01:29, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Singularity has hit the nail on the head; if you want to find out the status of things in the CBS shows, your best bet is to read a review or recap of the last CBS episode. Big Brother fans know or actually should know that things move much faster on the feeds than on CBS. Cdtew (talk) 12:52, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations color and MVP color in the voting history

[edit]

I'd like to point out that there has been contention over the past few days regarding the color of Elissa's square in the first week. The reason we don't color the box for MVP any special color is because the colors are to indicate statuses that can't be simultaneously held with other statuses (ie, it's not possible for someone to be nominated and be HoH at the same time, but it is possible for someone to hold Veto and HoH). MVP and Veto can be held simultaneously. HoH and MVP can be held simultaneously. This is why there's no color for it.

T (talk) 20:17, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy section

[edit]

Since I do not want to break WP:3RR, I was wondering if there could be a discussion on the inclusion of a section that deals with the controversy that the show is currently facing. Currently, there have been a few moments in the house of comments that are derogatory in nature. I would like to know if the section could be included the article as it last stood based on information from the following possible sources:

Hopefully, this will help to make a decision over if it should be included or if there are not enough reliable sources. --Super Goku V (talk) 01:55, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The info definitely belongs on the page, the only issue was the fact that there was a full paragraph with only one source. If something is controversial, it needs numerous sources to confirm this. Thank you for providing these sources, and I will add the info into the page using these sources. -- Sethjohnson95 22:06 ET 2 July 2013.
Thank you for you help. It looks better than it did earlier. Though, I now am a bit concerned if blogs should be cited. (Granted, the source for the ratings is a blog as well, which makes things a bit more complex.) --Super Goku V (talk) 05:14, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Controversy & criticism section basically deals with Aaryn's racist and homophobic remarks. Her prejudice is proven by the fact of her choosing the Asian lady, the Black lady, the Gay guy and Rachelles sister as have-nots. In other words her actions verify her prejudice. Can this then be commented on. ? ```Buster Seven Talk 00:04, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You cannot be considered "racist" for who you choose to be as "have nots" for the week. She clearly said she was choosing the people who voted her boyfriend out of the house. Her racist comments have been added to the main page. Hitchcock5 (talk) 08:07, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Her dislike for Elissa outweighed her bias plus Howard is well-liked. Elissa was her target. 7 people voted David out, of those seven she picked "the minorities"... plus her main target. What she stated is of zero consequence...she doesn't think she is prejudiced. Her "I'm just a Southern girl......" is her reason. On the humorous side, early on she talks about how she, as a blond, is prejudged by other houseguests. Fact is...she is not a natural blonde as her hair-roots are confirming.```Buster Seven Talk 14:31, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be appropriate if someone posted a screenshot/screen capture of the disclaimer CBS now airs at the top of each episode? I realize the text itself is nothing different than the statement put out by the network which are already mentioned and quoted in the article, but it might be interesting info for the article to show (or mention) said disclaimer board/screen. If I'm not mistaken the episode of Sunday, July 14th, 2013 was the first to have said disclaimer. KRam41 (talk) 03:51, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 4 July 2013

[edit]

Blackbeltswag1 (talk) 04:32, 4 July 2013 (UTC) Edit[reply]

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. If you are requesting permission to edit this page, it is not possible for individual users to be granted permission to edit a semi-protected article. You can do one of the following:
  • You will be able to edit this article without restriction four days after account registration if you make at least 10 constructive edits to other articles.
  • You can request the article be unprotected at this page. To do this, you need to provide a valid rationale that refutes the original reason for protection.
  • You can provide a specific request to edit the article in "change X to Y" format on this talk page and an editor who is not blocked from editing the article will determine if the requested edit is appropriate. --ElHef (Meep?) 16:51, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

[edit]

Guys, it is not acceptable to vandalize this page, even if you don't like Aaryn. This is why people don't trust Wikipedia- Because people like you vandalize pages. This page needs to be locked because some people clearly are incapable of being unbiased while editing the page.

JRhorstman (talk) 17:44, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, there is alot of vandalism but no one seems to have done anything about it! --MSalmon (talk) 19:39, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Me too, it will be no problem if vandalism will still persist from this point on. Use WP:RFP if it continues. --Dude (talk) 22:04, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The vandalism has resumed and it is getting out of hand! --MSalmon (talk) 09:01, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If only 4 episodes have aired then how comes it says that Elissa has won MVP again and Helen and her are nominated? --SNTMcentral (talk) 15:51, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Must have been from the live feeds --MSalmon (talk) 17:14, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alliances

[edit]

I tried to add a table of alliances and someone removed it as 'not worthy or notable' or something. Why was this removed? This game is predicated on alliances and those that succeed and those that fail. Have not's are listed. Alliances are 100 times more important than "have nots".

Include it if you want but i'm telling you it will get removed --MSalmon (talk) 22:31, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
For what reason?
Alliances are already listed in the Season Summary. A table will be too unnecessary.--TheDevin13 (talk) 23:03, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, so could the Have/Have Nots, HOH, voting, and a whole bunch of other stuff. Who gave you the right to decide. Maybe I will just go delete stuff you add as "not notable". Obviously you know nothing about this game. The stuff listed in tables is useless. The major plays in this game is in the alliances. This directly affects noms, have nots, hoh, and evictions. How strong an alliance is (primary or sub) and those that can adapt alliances over time win this game. A simple table showing who is in what alliance goes a long way into truly understanding how each player is playing the game. And for those who are actually watching the show for the game play and not who is hooking up with who would know that having a well organized table of current alliances would be valuable information the casual viewer would like to know, not to mention being able to look back on in future seasons. I have yet to hear a reasonable answer to why it is being deleted. Just saying it appears somewhere else is not valid in that much of what is in the tables appears in other places on this page. So using that logic, all tables should go. And your statement that 'alliances are already listed in the season summary' is not accurate. Only one or two are listed. This summary is so lame, huge changes are occurring with alliances yet none are listed. Who is Helen working with? Andy? Is Howard working with multiple groups? What about Amanda/McCrea, they are in multiple alliances, yet you don't list them.
See, I told you --MSalmon (talk) 08:13, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Your argument that Amanda/McCrea are in multiple alliances just adds more to the fact that an alliance table would be too confusing. There are many major alliances and sub-alliances that make up the game of Big Brother. Keeping track of all of them is nearly impossible. Tables are used for information that is straightforward (thus Have/Have-Nots, HOH, POV, Nominations, and voting). Alliances aren't even 100% necessary to play the game, though they do help. An alliance table is not necessary. Sorry.--108.11.219.83 (talk) 16:12, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Request for Edit: Sunday's Ratings

[edit]


Current Text

Viewing figures

[edit]
# Air Date United States Source
Households
(rating/share) 		18–49
(rating/share) 		Viewers
(millions) 		Rank
(timeslot) 		Rank
(night)
1 Wednesday, June 26 3.9/7 2.2/8 6.51 1 1 [1][2][3]
2 Sunday, June 30 3.5/6 1.9/6 5.81 1 1 [4][5]
3 Tuesday, July 2 3.6/6 1.9/6 5.64 2 3 [6][7]
4 Wednesday, July 3 1.677 5.42 1 1 [8]
5 Sunday, July 7
6 Wednesday, July 10[9]
7 Thursday, July 11[9]

Replace With Following

Viewing figures

[edit]
# Air Date United States Source
Households
(rating/share) 		18–49
(rating/share) 		Viewers
(millions) 		Rank
(timeslot) 		Rank
(night)
1 Wednesday, June 26 3.9/7 2.2/8 6.51 1 1 [10][11][12]
2 Sunday, June 30 3.5/6 1.9/6 5.81 1 1 [13][14]
3 Tuesday, July 2 3.6/6 1.9/6 5.64 2 3 [15][16]
4 Wednesday, July 3 1.677 5.42 1 1 [17]
5 Sunday, July 7 2.1/6 6.25 [18]
6 Wednesday, July 10[9]
7 Thursday, July 11[9]

Mattdonders (talk) 16:37, 8 July 2013 (UTC) Mattdonders[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Wednesday Final Ratings: 'Big Brother' & 'MasterChef' Adjusted Up – Ratings | TVbytheNumbers". Tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com. Retrieved 2013-07-06.
  2. ^ "Big Brother Season 15 Ratings Down; Match Weakest Premiere Ever | E! Online UK". Eonline.com. 2013-06-27. Retrieved 2013-07-06.
  3. ^ Porter, Rick. "TV ratings: 'Big Brother' premiere down from last year, 'Masterchef' leads 18–49 demo". Zap 2 It. Retrieved June 27, 2013. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  4. ^ Kondolojy, Amanda. "Sunday Final Ratings: 'Big Brother' Adjusted Up; 'Crossing Lines' Adjusted Down". TvByTheNumbers. Retrieved July 2, 2013. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  5. ^ Porter, Rick. "TV ratings: 'Big Brother' leads a soft Sunday while 'Whodunnit?' falls". Zap 2 It. Retrieved July 1, 2013. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  6. ^ Kondolojy, Amanda. "Tuesday Final Ratings: 'Big Brother' & 'America's Got Talent' Adjusted Up". Zap 2 It. Retrieved July 8, 2013. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  7. ^ Porter, Rick. "TV ratings: 'America's Got Talent' slides some more but tops 'Big Brother' Tuesday". Zap 2 It. Retrieved July 3, 2013. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  8. ^ Kondolojy, Amanda. "Wednesday Final Ratings: 'Big Brother' & 'The Lookout' Adjusted Up; 'The American Baking Competition' Adjusted Down". Zap 2 It. Retrieved July 8, 2013. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  9. ^ a b c d "'Big Brother' Live Eviction Show Moving to Thursdays – Ratings | TVbytheNumbers". Tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com. 2013-07-02. Retrieved 2013-07-06.
  10. ^ "Wednesday Final Ratings: 'Big Brother' & 'MasterChef' Adjusted Up – Ratings | TVbytheNumbers". Tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com. Retrieved 2013-07-06.
  11. ^ "Big Brother Season 15 Ratings Down; Match Weakest Premiere Ever | E! Online UK". Eonline.com. 2013-06-27. Retrieved 2013-07-06.
  12. ^ Porter, Rick. "TV ratings: 'Big Brother' premiere down from last year, 'Masterchef' leads 18–49 demo". Zap 2 It. Retrieved June 27, 2013. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  13. ^ Kondolojy, Amanda. "Sunday Final Ratings: 'Big Brother' Adjusted Up; 'Crossing Lines' Adjusted Down". TvByTheNumbers. Retrieved July 2, 2013. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  14. ^ Porter, Rick. "TV ratings: 'Big Brother' leads a soft Sunday while 'Whodunnit?' falls". Zap 2 It. Retrieved July 1, 2013. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  15. ^ Kondolojy, Amanda. "Tuesday Final Ratings: 'Big Brother' & 'America's Got Talent' Adjusted Up". Zap 2 It. Retrieved July 8, 2013. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  16. ^ Porter, Rick. "TV ratings: 'America's Got Talent' slides some more but tops 'Big Brother' Tuesday". Zap 2 It. Retrieved July 3, 2013. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  17. ^ Kondolojy, Amanda. "Wednesday Final Ratings: 'Big Brother' & 'The Lookout' Adjusted Up; 'The American Baking Competition' Adjusted Down". Zap 2 It. Retrieved July 8, 2013. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
  18. ^ http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2013/07/08/tv-ratings-sunday-big-brother-rises-celebrity-wife-swap-hits-low-whodunnit-crossing-lines-steady/190576/

Nick Uhas & Racism???

[edit]

I do not think Nick has made any racist comment in the show.. Can someone delete his name from the list?! its really bugging me to see that..07:16, 11 July 2013 (UTC)07:16, 11 July 2013 (UTC)~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.171.7.52 (talk)

Change in the voting history chart

[edit]

The voting history chart should read
"HOH"
"HOH's Nominations"
"MVP"
"MVP Nomination"
"POV Winner"
"Nominations Post-POV"

The way it is now does not clearly specify who the MVP nominated — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.12.114.128 (talk) 03:16, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There doesn't need to be a separate row for M.V.P. nomination as it is already in the pre nominations row. --MSalmon (talk) 08:38, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just saying it doesn't make much sense to mention the HOHs nominations twice. If that's the case you might as well delete the HOHs Nominations section and just leave Nominations Pre-POV — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.12.114.128 (talk) 15:32, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it does not seem to make sense to list the hoh nominees and then list the nominees again. I would suggest the only rows needed are hoh, MVP, hoh noms, MVP nom, POV, post POV hoh noms, and post POV MVP nom. 98.122.44.136 (talk) 00:40, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image wrapping looks terrible

[edit]

At the HouseGuests heading the image breaks up the text. I fixed it. My workaround was rolled back. Having the lede text a yard from the table looks ridiculous, IMHO. Checkingfax (talk) 21:53, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Breaks up what text? --MSalmon (talk) 21:57, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"HouseGuests' occupations and residences are listed as they are on the official website."
Then, there's a yard of vertical whitespace (because of the image) and then the table of HouseGuests. Checkingfax (talk) 22:02, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see anything wrong with it --MSalmon (talk) 22:03, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 16 July 2013

[edit]

In Controversy & criticism the sentence "Heren was also referred to as "Faggoty Anny." Heren should be Helen, and it should be "referred to be". Texasboykc09 (talk) 21:44, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Was passing through so I corrected the misspelled name, but that section is very poorly sourced and still needs lots of additional cleanup.
Mooksas (talk) 00:02, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Andy's last name is Herren, why would Helen be refereed to as "Faggoty Anny" makes no sense, from what I remember it was Spencer who called Andy that not Helen.

I agree with the last individual. It was not Helen who was referred to as "Faggoty Anny". Instead, it was Andy Herren. 64.184.25.2 (talk) 19:05, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I misunderstood. I put it back the way it was. Mooksas (talk) 23:55, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 17 July 2013

[edit]

I have something for the controversy section, which of course, can be put in your own words. I have just gathered the sources.

The Big Brother 14 controversy section found here: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Big_Brother_14_(U.S.) contains production interference such as
"On Day 42, shortly after Shane made his nominations as Head of Household, he told Danielle that the production crew in the diary room explicitly told him not to put up Frank and Mike for nomination that week. However, both were nominated and were thus eligible for eviction that week."
"On Day 49, after winning the Golden Ball of Veto from the crane game, Ian alleged several times to various HouseGuests that some of the producers in the Diary Room were attempting to manipulate the game by supposedly asking him how the Ball of Veto will benefit him if he decided not to use it."
"On Day 61, Jenn was in the Diary Room for almost an hour before coming out in a heated, near panicked state, stating her game would be ruined if Frank got evicted and that she was told Danielle told Shane something she had told Danielle in secrecy. She also immediately ran to Frank, telling him he was probably getting evicted and to start campaigning. Jenn later stated, "That was too much for 50 minutes", referring to her time in the Diary Room."

This season, starting on Day 21, both Helen and Elissa told others that production told them not to put Howard on the block. This was shown on the live feeds and every time it was brought up, the feeds would cut.

There aren't any sources listed next last season's (BB14) controversies (as it was all shown on the live feeds), however, I do have sources (and video if requested) for this season's production interference in case it is needed:

http://www.onlinebigbrother.com/elissa-gets-her-orders-put-howard-up-with-the-mvp-hes-the-biggest-snake-of-them-all/
Day 21
Fri, 12 Jul 2013 ***10:38:20 cam 3-4
Helen: “the show doesn't want us to put up Howard.. ohh sorry i’m going to get yelled at”
Elissa :”I know.. “ (feeds cut)

http://www.tvgrapevine.com/index.php/bb15-live-feed-updates/1395-big-brother-15-updates-fake-mvp-covers-his-tracks-12-30-am-bbt-saturday-7-13-13
Day 22
Fri, 13 Jul 2013
Amanda says "why do you guys keep saying production doesn't want you to get rid of Howard"
(feeds cut)

http://www.tvfanforums.net/index.php?/topic/88697-was-helen-told-not-to-put-up-howard-by-bb/
"Yes, the DR would not let her nominate Howard, and made her nominate Kaitlin instead. Then, when Elissa went in there to nominate Howard, she came back and said that the DR did not want her to do that, so she nominated Spencer. When both Helen and Elissa mentioned this on the live feeds, it was immediately followed both times with [the 'We'll be right back' screen]"

http://princessglammy.com/napoleon-cry-allnight-bb15/
"[On Day 22], Helen then confided in Elissa, that production had refused to allow her to put Howard on the block so she had to put up Kaitlin with Aaryn"

http://boards.soapcentral.com/showthread.php?891110-Spoiler-Thread-Nominations-etc&p=18489306
"****ok here we go with the BB producer little funny business, Helen, Elissa, McManda, Andy in HOH talking about who to put up for MVP. Amanda is giving reasons to put Howard up. One of them says, they do not want us to put Howard on the block. LF updaters think producers (DR maybe) have nugged HG not to nominate Howard. Because LF cutout twice from hearing the rest of this convo. Sounds fishy to me."

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=9731517
"DR is putting blatant pressure on Helen not to put Howard on the block."

http://www.onlinebigbrother.com/big-brother-15-spoilers-live-eviction-and-hoh-results-jeremy-vs-aaryn-vs-spencer/comment-page-4/#comments
"It is rigged… did you miss the after dark show where Helen and Elissa decided to put Howard on the block and Elissa got called into the DR and came back and said I get the feeling Production doesn't want us to put up Howard… so they didnt.."

By the way, I posted this before and a user with the IP address of 208.96.104.70 just deleted my section from this talk page.
Here is the revision where they deleted it.
http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Big_Brother_15_(U.S.)&diff=564590375&oldid=564584127
Apparently, someone is trying to keep it a secret. But we must keep consistency between articles.

Hitchcock5 (talk) 03:46, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The information may be notable if a reliable source is found, however, tvgrapevine is the only somewhat reliable source of those that you listed, and using that is even a stretch. -- Sethjohnson95 23:55 ET 17 July 2013
The previous seasons do not contain sources. They do not need sources as this was shown on the live feeds. All I can do is post a transcript or a blog that contains feed recaps, as there is nothing else to go on. As I stated, using past seasons as a template, I didn't even need to include sources, yet I did just in case I was challenged on it. Check the Big Brother 14 controversy section to see what I am referring to. Edit: One conversation was shown on BB After Dark on the TV Guide Network. I will be more than happy to upload the video to Youtube as a source as I have a copy. Seeing it for yourself is a pretty legitimate source. Hitchcock5 (talk) 04:01, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 19 July 2013

[edit]

Why are the nominees put up when they weren't nominated yet? POV hasn't been. MVP nominee hasn't been. 82.135.153.237 (talk) 07:33, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: {{edit semi-protected}} is not required for edits to semi-protected, unprotected pages, or pending changes protected pages. Signalizing (talk) 18:50, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

[edit]

Thanks for whomever took the nominations and POV that haven't happen yet off of Wiki. I believe the nomination ceremony is tomorrow/later today. :)


Crystal Balls should not be used, nor are they accurate.

[edit]

This weeks nominations have not happened as of this time, and probably won't happen for hours yet. Someone has inserted their prediction for HoH noms. This needs to be undone and appropriate action taken to prevent more Crystal Ball usage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.199.23.225 (talk) 21:57, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Our Crystal Balls (i-e The Live Feeds) are reliable..More reliable then most crystal balls. --64.111.153.240 (talk) 02:33, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

MVP Nomination

[edit]

Could we possibly make the MVP Nomination in the table a different color? I barely notice the BOLDED name. Maybe a BLUE or RED?--Tech-Chef (talk) 18:01, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 26 July 2013

[edit]

In Controversy & criticism, someone changed Harren to Helen in this spot "Spencer Clawson and Amanda Zuckerman, who were caught referring to Helen as "Kermit the fag"[165] and "Faggoty Ann", and took out harren here "Gries was caught stating that Andy, a gay HouseGuest, could become the M.V.P". Texasboykc09 (talk) 13:20, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: {{edit semi-protected}} is not required for edits to semi-protected, unprotected pages, or pending changes protected pages. Signalizing (talk) 18:50, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 27 July 2013

[edit]

How about putting the food for the have-nots under the names each week? Lm5403 (talk) 21:16, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, if America votes for it then it should be listed, it's still a game impact.208.102.141.208 (talk) 00:06, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: {{edit semi-protected}} is not required for edits to semi-protected, unprotected pages, or pending changes protected pages. Signalizing (talk) 18:50, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Missing comp name in summary.

[edit]

"In The Balance" is missing for the comp that Jeremy won in episode 6. It's not listed there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raziellight3 (talk • contribs) 06:47, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Request Week 6 Results? August 7, 2013

[edit]

How is it possible that Week 6 results, including the 2nd eviction of the week, are posted?

I think someone is messing around. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.141.3.235 (talk) 12:29, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for fixing this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.141.3.235 (talk) 15:10, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jury Color before the end of the season

[edit]

We have precedent for using the purple color for jury members in the info box before the season ends. 216.39.200.85 (talk) 21:50, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The precedent was made last year. Before that, it was never to do that in the infobox. T (talk) 00:32, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have been trying to find more information on the precedent. On the Big Brother 13 Talk Page, I found the following (within the quotes):

"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?
— User:T 04:11, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

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.
— User:T 04:23, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

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.
— User:Alucard 16 05:02, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

So it seems that with the statement, "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," that a decision to keep the purple Jury color during the season was made well before last season. Even if the decision was only made last season (which it clearly was not), it was made. Changes are fine, but if we want to change the precedent, I think it needs to be discussed. I am reverting the color back to the previously decided on color. 216.39.200.85 (talk) 03:45, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aug 8 delayed west coast

[edit]

What football game was CBS televising only on the west coast? Is it possible the person who wrote this lives in a city in which the cbs station had a local game? I doubt it effected the whole west coast, but maybe I am wrong Smith03 (talk) 16:52, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I remember hearing about it on Twitter. I think it was a preseason game that caused it. California was affected the most from what I can remember. --Super Goku V (talk) 04:02, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lock Request

[edit]

This page needs to be locked until the end of the season. Vandalism of the Voting History started immediately after the previous lock period expired. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmanphxaz (talk • contribs) 07:50, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Where are the Controversies?

[edit]

There are some controversies missing. For example: Amanda making racist remarks during POV (calling Candice "Saniqua"), ex-members of the Production Team claiming the game being rigged for Amanda, etc. BBINDFAN (talk) 19:41, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, people are deleting the controversial stuff Amanda has said, saying that it isn't controversial since many people have made these comments in previous seasons but the reason I added the comments Amanda has said is because she got fired for making those comments. Making this issue controversial (Also, many people were calling for her expulsion).BBINDFAN (talk) 19:41, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not every controversy is encyclopedic. Period. In my opinion, the entire controversy section should be about 5 sentences long, name all the people making controversial statements, indicate that they were racist, sexist, homophobic, whatever, and move on. This isn't a repository of any individual's bad deeds, nor is it a place to air grievances or advocate for any position regarding any of the houseguests. Attempting to make this a tell-all of all the racist things each houseguest has said is a pure violation of POV. Cdtew (talk) 20:36, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Cdtew. I would probably add that the section can also include the real-life consequences for the individuals due to comments they made on the show. Beyond that, WP:NOT applies. This is an encyclopedia article, not a tell-all, a repository for all racist comments made by the contestants, a soapbox, a blog, etc. I've tried to remove in the past, but I have been reverted by IPs. I am now making a WP:BOLD change to the section. Enough is enough already. Singularity42 (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And I've made the changes. I did not cut it down quite as much as Cdtew was suggesting, but I think what's in there makes it clear what is going on, and what the various reprucussions and reactions have been. I also took out the child pornoraphy references due to WP:BLP concerns. While not quite as concise as it could be, it is now much more encyclopedic then the earlier tabloid version. Singularity42 (talk) 23:03, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And now BBINDFAN is edit-warring. I'm going to revert his change one last time, and if need be, this can go to ANI. Cdtew (talk) 01:58, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Struck the part about reverting, because I just checked and if I revert I'll violated WP:3RR. Cdtew (talk) 02:01, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted BBINDFAN. BBINDFAN, you need a consensus on this talk page before adding that content in. You have now been clearly warned about edit warring and the WP:3RR rule. This will be reported to the edit-warring notice board (not ANI for now) if you continue to blindly revert to your preferred content. Singularity42 (talk) 03:27, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Employment

[edit]

Aaryn, GM and Amanada have all been fired, and shouldn't that be of note? The part in which says contestants should it have these noted as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.235.216.51 (talk) 02:13, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The controversy section already specifically notes the ramifications of the controversial comments on the show, including the fact that these three contestants have been fired.
As for the table, it only notes occupation upon entry on the show (as many reality show contestants have to give up their job when they go on a reality show). Singularity42 (talk) 03:21, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is not needed. This is well covered in the controversial section. See Singularity42's comment above. Calebrw (talk) 21:37, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy Section

[edit]

I was wondering, shouldn't Aaryn's eviction where Julie Chen discussed with Aaryn her comments she made on the show, be included on here as it was very significant to place in there? I think it should be, if not, sorry for asking! Just think its important to note on here! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.96.104.70 (talk) 06:17, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say no more than one sentence. Calebrw (talk) 02:30, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

McCrae's age "on entry"

[edit]

I'm going to run into a 3RR problem soon on this, so can someone else fix McCrae's age "on entry"? The source is the official CBS website: [1]. I think other editors keep changing it because McCrae had a birthday in the house, but for consistency sake, the table is based on age on entry. Singularity42 (talk) 03:10, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another RPP request?

[edit]

Given the amount of IP vandalism since the page protection ended, anyone think it is worth another request? I think this time it should be until September 19, 2013 (the day after the season ends)... Singularity42 (talk) 03:06, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since there was even more vandalism from a new account as I wrote the above, I have gone ahead and made the PP request as I proposed above. Singularity42 (talk) 03:18, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User:JHUbal27's new voting table

[edit]

It looks like the voting table has been replaced by User:JHUbal27's newer version. That's great, but I see one problem. The table requires transclusion of templates from JHUbal27's user space (primary the user sandbox). User space is great for experimentation purposes, but we should not be transcluding them (or substituting them) into the main article namespace. Instead, the templates in the user sandbox should be moved to the template space, and the links in this article should be updated accordingly. 18:41, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have put back the original version of the table, and some of the info on it was wrong (it showed Candice having 7 eviction votes overall when it should have been 8) --MSalmon (talk) 21:34, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
JHUbal27 has put it back. JHUba127, can you address my concern above about moving the templates from your userspace to template space? Keeping templates for an active article in a sandbox seems like a very bad idea... Singularity42 (talk) 12:12, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry about that. User:Technical_13 will create a new parameter. I want to keep the BBHOH and BBNOM templates. I'm sorry for using mainspace to create test edits. All in all, here is what will happen in the future. ~~JHUbal27 18:50, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
{{BBEvic|Day|vote="name"|evict="number of votes"}}

@Msalmon and Singularity42: JHUbal27 simply got excited. I fully intend to move the template to template space when it is done. No worries. I would have just cleaned up the usage from his sandbox with AWB. No harm done though. Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 22:19, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good! Singularity42 (talk) 01:01, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"were required" and other passive voicing

[edit]

I've noticed that a lot of the wording in this article is using passive voicing. Most of what bothers me is the phrase "were required" or "had to" such as:

  • "HouseGuests later split into three teams to compete in the "Cooler and the Gang" ... HouseGuests were required to swim across the backyard ... teammates were required to hold the cans ... and were required to start over if their pyramid fell."
  • "HouseGuests were required to crawl through a pool of honey..."
  • "HouseGuests were required to jump on a trampoline to see an 'art gallery' ..."
  • "had to" appears 11 times as of revision 571388191. "were to" and "have to" appear twice each as well.

I have edited and rewritten some of the passive voicing out of this article, but is the fact that each task (PoV, HoH) is "required" redundant. Isn't it assumed that each HouseGuest must complete these competitions to stay in the game? Should this be different? Calebrw (talk) 16:36, 3 September 2013 (UTC) (edited: Calebrw (talk) 16:38, 3 September 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Edit request on 7 September 2013

[edit]

Please edit the "Eviction votes received" section of "Voting History" to reflect that Spencer now has a total of 4 votes received (2 from previous weeks and 2 from this past Thursday.) Thank you. 69.247.124.190 (talk) 13:24, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done --MSalmon (talk) 13:32, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected links on Big Brother 15 (U.S.) which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.change.org/petitions/cbs-television-network-to-expel-current-contestant-of-big-brother-15-aaryn-gries
    Triggered by \bchange\.org\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:17, 11 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Big Brother 15 (U.S.). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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 11:57, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Changes

[edit]

@Bgc7676: Please Discuss the changes you wish to make here. Chase (talk) 18:52, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Big Brother 15 (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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:50, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Big Brother 15 (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) 22:11, 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 "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Big_Brother_15_(American_season)&oldid=1256972007"