Jump to content

Talk:Big Brother (Australian TV series) season 7

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

Weekly Summary

[edit]

Began using UK table format for weekly summary, to keep page size down and readability ease. In the process of changing previous Aus seasons to this format also. --Theloon 03:16, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say that I hate the tablified format (eg. Big Brother 2006 (UK)). Much prefer the list format, a la Big Brother Australia 2006. But maybe it's just me. —Moondyne 06:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I thought it was just me, but I too prefer the listed format. Marquisite 07:14, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup

[edit]

This article is poorly written; It doesn't follow any continuity from the previous seasons, Rumors and "Leaks" are not encyclopedic and should also be removed. Please do not remove the Cleanup tag without discussing why here. --Theloon 09:52, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but in the future please do not add cleanup tags without an explanation. Otherwise they will just sit there and no-one will know what needs fixing. -- Barrylb 11:19, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Article has been cleaned, show has started. Removed clean tag. --Theloon 15:19, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Started adding information about current housemates - feel free to expand. Also created heading for changes to the series compared to last year. Clean-up or re-wording may be required for Adults only programme. Starting date of the series has been corrected from 25th to 22nd of April Marquisite 15:30, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cleanup tag added on a Big Brother article, days before that season starts?! Kinda redundant: clearly the page will undergo major overhaul through the run of the season! Format 19:49, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cleanup tag has gone! --Theloon 03:16, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HDTV feed

[edit]

Removed speculation from article: "Insiders have reported that this year's Big Brother will feature a live streaming feed on one of the extra Digital TV Channels running from 10am to Midnight. However this is unlikely as current broadcasting laws in Australia prohibit Commercial free-to-air stations from broadcasting alternative content on their secondary HD channels." -- Barrylb 11:17, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually this isn't true - Channel 7 Hosted alternative Australian Open footage last year on their additional channel! 124.168.26.64 14:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Surnames

[edit]

Surnames should not be used on articles related to a current season of Big Brother. Once season is finished and all names are released, they can go on this article. This is a privacy issue and also relates to the shows structure. Official Site, Press Releases and all shows; Housemates are referred to by only their assigned names, genreally their first name; or an alias, eg. TJ. --Theloon 09:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I am getting reverted for putting in names of contestants whose surnames I come across in news articles. How is that a privacy issue? They release their full names to the media. Their fault. Nobody can stalk them (until they get evicted). They are locked up in a house. I would like a Third Opinion on this. Thanks. --Lakeyboy 11:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's perfectly fine to have full names of contestants as they become available. Privacy? They're being screened on the internet and TV 24/7, they are cast on a 3 month TV show, why should they be singled out to not reveal their full names if press releases and news reports give their full name? The contestant bio summaries on the article give enough detail to provide a full name and alias when birth dates and additional info is given. Also, all other articles provide the full name, along with other reality shows and tv shows, I say go for it. Peter 13:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is there is a special WP rule that surnames are not allowed to be revealed even where there is a credible external source that gives the surname? If there is, I'd like to see a link to it posted here. If not, all the surnames should be reinstated. Format 23:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Having a quick look, there seems to be no mention of issues with privacy to filter content on current events, it seems rediculous to me - I'd be interested to see an official document, either from the network, the show producers, the distributors, the media, wikipedia, or Australian privacy law. Obviously the show tries to hide the full names, but should that be taken across the board in all media, are newspapers and media reports "breaking the rules" or "privacy laws" by publishing their full name. I see no reason for surnames not to be shown, they are in previous seasons and international versions. Full names are only necessary in the biographical descriptions, all other references should be their alias or first name (on tables etc) Peter 00:23, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Previous season contestants surnames were added after show aired. TEN Network does not release these surnames until after housemates have left the building, any mention of surnames in news or other media is purely from a 3rd party source, so I don't see any point in having surnames prior to season end. Why differ now 7 seasons on? --Theloon 01:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's not true. Previous season surnames were added into the article as soon as they became known 5 May or earlier (show ran until July 2006). —Moondyne 06:16, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The presence of a "3rd party source" is the factor which decides that information is included in WP; we don't omit information just because it only appears in a 3rd party source. If the makers of the series choose to refer to housemates by first or nick-name only within the series then that is their business and its probably done to enhance the drama and mystique of the series, but this is irrelevant to us as WP editors, and more important, it is not binding: we are not employees of Channel Ten or Big Brother and may refer to the housemates' surnames as long as a credible external source that corroborates that surname is also given in the article. Format 02:03, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't disagree with that, However my basis for the no surnames is only on the other 6 seasons, This article is about the TV show, not the housemates; so in terms of encyclopedic material I see no reason to include surnames. However If reliable references are provided along with surname placement I see no issue. --Theloon 02:16, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, according to this discussion, I am going to place references on the four five housemates surnames that I have found by third party Australian media outlets. The purpose of Wikipedia is to expand on information, not to restrict it if the information is available. --Lakeyboy 02:28, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Big Brother UK articles have the surnames put in right when they're revealed (in both the article and Big Brother housemates templates). I don't see any difference here. Geoking66 06:35, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Aust BB articles in WP in the past have added the surnames whenever they are noted in an external source, even if halfway through the series; it has never been the case that WP editors add them only after the series ends. Format 19:15, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
And it's never been the case the wikipedia goes out of it's way for Channel Ten :P JayKeaton 17:03, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All housemates should have their surname added, and yes, media outlets do use their last name, and no, it certainly is not a privacy issue. Its just like acotrs having their last names restricted from the public. Angel2001 13:49, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Housemates

[edit]

In the Housemates section of the article, should we always update each housemate with any information (about the person and/or any info that happens whilst they are in the BB house)? I think this should be looked at in terms of only putting "notable" items of interest and that can be verified by sources with ref cited. What does everyone think? --Mikecraig 03:09, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think bio information about each contestant should be kept to a bare minimum, the article isn't about the contestants, it's about the show. Information directly related to events of the show should mostly be kept in a section of it's own, a brief mention might be suitable in the individual contestant info Peter 09:14, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Friday Night Live

[edit]

No mention or summary about Friday Night Live, the winners or what was chosen? Peter 07:13, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe someone should make a section of this weeks Friday Night Live, and then as the weeks go on we can add summaries for each week. X2RADialbomber 09:23, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Added a section to weekly summary and highlights mentioning theme and winner. FNL general summary may be needed in it's own heading, and if so, could possible have it's own summary table with FNL winner, and prize one out of the three boxes, etc. Marquisite 17:22, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Added a table for FNL details. --Theloon 14:16, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nickname

[edit]

I just deleted the "Zach" nickname from Zoran's entry. In other parts of this page the Firstname "Nickname" Surname configuration is used, but in other cases the nickname listed is the nickname devised and used within the Big Brother house. These nicknames have in previous seasons been devised by the show where two housemates have the same, or similar sounding names, and they are not always their real-life nicknames. "Zach", however, is I believe a real-life nickname of Zoran's. But here it had been listed in the manner suggesting it was a Big Brother-devised nickname, made-up for use in the show. It isn't, and he is known as "Zoran" in the show. If someone thinks its really important I guess it can be added back, but it should not be formatted in the way it was but included as part of his bio description. Format 21:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Split of Page

[edit]

Does anyone else think that after Week 3, the Major events section should be moved to a sub page; It is going to get quite large very quickly. --Theloon 14:37, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm not sure...looking at BB 2006 they did it like that. --Mikecraig 22:02, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would possibly consider it, possibly being more of an article like "List of Big Brother 2007 episodes" with "episode" or weekly summaries. Peter 05:33, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have split it. Into Big Brother Australia 2007 Highlights --Theloon 02:25, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nice work --Mikecraig 02:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Photo incorrect?

[edit]

Has anyone noticed Zoran is missing from the one photo in the article, claiming to be all of the housemates from the beginning of BB 07? Shaybear♥

^Nevermind, just noticed Susannah isn't there either; they both entered on day 2. :] Shaybear♥

When the opportunity to capture a good image of all the housemates together including Susannah, Zoran, Billy and Demet, hopefully will be able to put it up as well. --Mikecraig 02:03, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Doubt that'll happen, eviction tonight. 3bay sam 23:52, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Erm, they will all be together prior to the eviction, and all seated together for the announcement of the eviction. Format 03:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Biography references

[edit]

I strongly endorse the Ten official site biography references straight after the housemate's name (e.g. Susannah), not at the end of their description (e.g. Thomas). Does anyone else agree? Extranet (Talk | Contribs) 10:51, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The reference should come right after the information that is corroborated by that reference. At the end of that information. Format 11:02, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prize Information

[edit]

I have added some info on the prize money and scooter (probably cars later in the series) awarded to housemates upon eviction. This may need moving at a later point. (Mikey01 01:48, 7 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I have removed these until someone can put them in their places, with factual references. Extranet talk 02:10, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

bit confused by factual reference wouldn't a direct statment on the show like here's a scooter and $2000 be factual enough for our purposes?Mikey01 05:10, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Goldman

[edit]

is mike goldman the voice of big brother, like, the actual person who gives the orders to the housemates? or, does 'narrator' mean that he narrates the footage of the housemates in the daily show? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.209.35.97 (talk) 12:14, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He is just the narrator, not the voice of Big Brother. Swanny92 12:28, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Remember, it is not known who Big Brother is, as that would mess up the show right? Extranet talk 12:36, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think it was revealed at one point who the "voice" was, it was on a Big Brother insider show (not Big Brother Insider, that Thursday night show they used to have) that was shown before the Series 2 premiere I think. I have no idea who it was, but I agree with you Extranet it would mess up the point of the "mysterious" Big Brother. Swanny92 13:29, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The MAIN voice is always the executive producer of the show, currently Kris Noble. Mrmoocow 23:24, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The voices are whichever Producer is doing the shift at that time. The main BB voice is that of the main Producer, as stated above, Kris Noble. In all Aust BB seasons this has always been the case, though in the first two seasons it was a different producer (Peter Abbott). After the first season Peter Abbott was interviewed on air by Four Corners about his role producing the show, so it is hardly any secret! Also, their names all appear in the credits of the shows - so again, hardly a secret. Format 11:12, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think we should mention that in the main Big Brother Australia article? We could, couldn't we, so long as we had a spoiler tag. Mrmoocow 07:03, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is it really a spoiler? It is not like someone we have been seeing in the show all along is surprisingly unmasked as Big Brother in the final episode. On all and any TV show, the top person in charge of everything is the producer. In other shows, you never (or only rarely) see the producer. So far BB is the same as all other TV programs. Only difference is that while the participants hear his/her commands, so too do the show's viewers. Format 11:14, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay then. Now we just need a good place to slot it in to the main BBA article. Mrmoocow 20:18, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It is not specific to Big Brother Australia: same routine applies for international versions too. Format 04:05, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Susannha's last name

[edit]

I remember they revealed Susannha’s last name in the paper a few weeks back – but it certainly was not “Moores”, so I removed it….could someone please find her last name and provide a citation next time they do this, and I’m confident it defiantly wasn’t “Moores”, to whoever added that. And anyway, she’s the only HM that doesn’t have a last name provided in the list. Angel2001 12:31, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried finding a source on her surname so for now there is a {{Fact}} tag next to her name. The same thing with all other housemates with surnames without a source. --Lakeyboy 09:41, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There will probably be a source in some newspaper (which can be found on Goggle News) after her eviction. I'm still not sure on whether "Moores" should stay or go. Angel2001 13:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Found it! It's Murray and have added a refernce to it from the Herald Sun. --Lakeyboy 23:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No housemates on Rove

[edit]

The article currently suggests evicted housemates wont ever appear on Rove because it is now on aired Sunday. But we need a reference to corroborate that that really is the reason why. To simply jump to the conclusion and write it here is original research. There is no reason why they can't appear via sattellite link, or appear in person the week after their eviction, or even several weeks after their eviction. When BB season ends, they might appear then. On the other hand, the Rove producers might have decided they don't want any housemates for reasons in no way connected to the Sunday night screening. We simply cannot assume their non-appearance is only because Rove is now on Sunday. Format 03:40, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I realize that, but, there was an article on behindbigbrother.com that I' m trying to find. Mrmoocow 04:36, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What about Gretel? She went on Rove, which aired after the eviction. X2RADialbomber 09:51, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, she went on Rove before the series started. Mrmoocow 10:33, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]


It was reported in the TV WEEK that as Rove and BB are filmed in two separate locations - straight after each other - it was impossible to have the guests in the studio.

Housemate Table Editing

[edit]

1. If the White Room Wildcards are given a day of exit, why shouldn't they be given Day 2 as their entry? The White Room is still a part of the house and the key and information below will let people know they were not normal housemates. If there is any issue, just change it back.

2. The idea of eviction is letting the *public* decide who will go. Because Hayley was "forced" to go by Big Brother, this should be noted, rather than having her as a normal eviction.

121.45.248.33 10:43, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article

[edit]

Article describing the Emma situation [1] I can't see anywhere for it in article at present. Accessed 27 May 2007. Format 08:11, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hayley's Last Name

[edit]

I have now got two Herald Sun articles which both state different surnames from Hayley. Hayley Zalewski[2] and Hayley Luscott[3]. Which one would be her actual surname. It's beyond me. --Lakeyboy 00:21, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was just about to raise this. I think it's a bit suss that there are two contradictory sources from the Herald Sun, but I think Zalewski could be the right pick considering this link. •97198 talk 08:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure, but the website of the education institution (www.meg.edu.au) she apparently worked for before entering the house had her down as Luscott in a newsletter: www.meg.edu.au/pdfs/alumni_news.pdf (bottom of first page). There is also the surname "Zalewski" for the Director in the contacts page - and a Luscott in the Human Resources position. It leads me to believe that both names are valid - perhaps the Luscott is the mothers maiden name. All this being orig research it literally means nothing in the entire WP sphere, but still worth mentioning. Sa87 11:01, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox colours

[edit]

There is currently discussion at Template talk:Big Brother housemates#I propose a change! regarding the changing of the orange colour in the infobox to purple. Please comment there if you agree, disagree or have other ideas. Tra (Talk) 12:30, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tonights (July 1) vandalism

[edit]

Hi guys, just letting you know that the latest round of vandalism has been generated by members of a Big Brother Fansite. Sa87 10:49, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Actually, its not generated by us, a member posted on our forums about it AFTER it had happened. Maybe you could read the first post of the thread which mentions they didnt do it but they noticed it. toiletduckBBBA

I accept that may be true toiletduckBBBA, and as I know you share the same username of a moderator of said site, I suggest you take a look at the IP's for all of the anonymous vandalism edits from the Article's history page and compare to members of the BBBA forum Sa87 12:01, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have, and I can tell you that they are not forum members. it was one of the first things I did. We are also not the only fan site out there. toiletduckBBBA

Semi Protect Article

[edit]

The latest bout of valiasim has been caused by troublemakers of a Big Brother fansite, I suggest someone protect the article from further vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.185.147.51 (talk)


You dont have proof it came from said fan site. members posted about it, but did not do it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ToiletduckBBBA (talk • contribs)

It might not have come from the website you represent ToiletduckBBBA however the number of anonymous vandalism edits, particularly in relation to Michelle has prompted me to request semi-protection on WP:RFPP Sa87 14:18, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Thats fair enough, but I would prefer you get your information correct before accusing a fan site of doing something that they didnt do. ToiletduckBBBA

Emma

[edit]

Surely she deserves her own article. she has attracted significant media attention and satisfies Wikipedia:Notability_(people) Michellecrisp 07:01, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be inclined to agree, except all the information is related to Big Brother, which makes me think it only belongs here. If you look at the past series' housemates' sections, although a number of them might satisfy the notability requirements for their own page, they all stay on the same page unless their post-BB career meets the notability requirements: eg. BB06's Danielle - see List of Big Brother Australia housemates (2006 series)#Danielle and then Danielle Foote; her own page deals with her post-BB singing career, while her BB bio section deals with her time as a housemate. Considering this, we see that while Emma's bio may meet the notability requirements for her own page, the info deals only with relevance to Big Brother and therefore would more appropriately belong here. •97198 talk 05:14, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No one deserves their own page just because their father died whilst they were on a reality show, least of all a bitch like Emma. -- 3bay sam

Merge with UK BB8

[edit]

It has been rumoured that Big Brother Series 8 of the United Kingdom shall merge with this series of BB Australia, revealed in UK's Big Brother's Little Brother.

Er, NO!. They are totally different, nothing was said about a merge anyway. --AxG @ ►talk 19:33, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No. It is fake, a trick played on the UK housemates, with the Australian evictee actually a UK actor, according to "fan" site [4]. Format 07:19, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Huh?

[edit]

If Demet entered the house on Day 11...then would Kate have been there then, having been evicted on Day 15? Kate's name is not listed when it comes to which housemate voted out of Demet and Harrison -- and if Demete entered on Day 11, Kate would've been there. I cannot remember that far back. BlueVelvet86 14:55, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure who Kate went for, but she was definitely there - I remember her seeing Demet on the screen and pronouncing her name 'Dem-it'. Good spot, just need to find someone who remembers who she chose. Seaserpent85 16:07, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll see if I can find it somewhere, I thought it was an 8-6 vote, but it couldnt've been. 3bay sam
Kate voted for Demet. Billy couldn't vote because he wasnt an official housemate. -- 3bay sam

Housemate Table

[edit]

Daniela was not evicted via public vote, which also happened to Hayley. To save making another key, I have made both these HMs being "evicted in a special eviction" and linked the text of the days they were evicted on to the corresponding special show entries.

I also added the Live eviction 12 entry but I didn't watch it so feel free to add or change.

121.45.207.241 12:00, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed 3bay sam just changed it to a normal eviction, however I just reverted that since it was far from a normal eviction. I'm pretty sure the fact that the entire nomination/eviction system was reversed makes it "special" enough? •97198 talk 13:44, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah well it's not gonna turn into an edit war, I'll leave it as a special eviction, trouble is over the last two months i've reverted Hayley's eviction back to "Special Eviction" a fair few times, so it's gonna happen with Dani's eviction too probably. --3bay sam
[edit]

Link to Behind Big Brother website Behind Big Brother has been added. I think it should be removed.

I feel this site falls into the category of Links normally to be avoided. Specifically this point: 2. Any site that misleads the reader by use of factually inaccurate material or unverifiable research. See Reliable sources for explanations of the terms "factually inaccurate material" or "unverifiable research".

Mainly Behind Big Brother is full of speculation and conjecture that would not be allowed in WP itself. Like, it claims that Andrew in 2007 season had a special deal with producers of the show... No, he only claimed he did in a discussion with other housemates... He might well have been lying to them as a trick to gain advantage in the show or some other ulterior motive. However Behind Big Brother presents Andrew's own claims as if it is a fact that Andrew did indeed have a special deal with the producers, when there is no confirmation that he really did. There are many other similar bits of conjecture/speculation through the site (Why Kyle really left), and this is often reproduced as if it is proven fact. All very misleading. Format 20:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. It is an extremely negative site that seems to be intent on getting Big Brother off the air. Seo75 22:09, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
100% what Format said. Regardless of how many times a day I visit the site :) I don't deny it is filled with bias against the show and is clearly in violation (indirectly) of WP:NPOV by its inclusion in the external links section. •97198 talk 11:50, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's trying to get the show off air but they want BB to listen and stop fucking up the show (excuse the french). But I agree that it shouldn't be added to the external links. -- 3bay sam 13:59, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They certainly have an axe to grind, but their logic is ludicrous. This week they have published complaints about Gretel going in to house in 2007 to ask the HMs questions. According to Behind Big Brother, this contravenes the 'no outside contact' rule. What the?!? Gretel has gone in the house during at least 3 previous seasons (inlcuding the first, in 2001). Big Brother and Gretel always ask the HMs questions from the outside through every season that has ever been aired, so asking viewer scripted questions is hardly different. But BBBA complains that the content of the questions "come from the outside". It is a very pedantic and wildly overcritical site, & certainly not neutral. Format 19:52, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Housemate Choice Eviction

[edit]

Maybe this is a bit pointless but i have an issue with the section that says "Daniela 12 of 21 points to evict". I understand that 7 HMs x 3 pts = 21. However, the most amount of points any one housemate can receive is 12 (6 HMs x 2 pts). I propose that this section be changed to "Daniela 12 of 12 points to evict" --Dlh1989 14:31, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree. A good observation! •97198 talk 06:54, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree because there were 21 points in total not 12, but I guess i'm outnumbered. -- 3bay sam 16:00, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I also disagree, saying 12 of 12 makes it sounds like those were the only votes. When in fact there were 21 points cast. Seaserpent85 18:14, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes but by saying 12 of 21 it makes it sound like she could have received 21 votes when one HM can only receive 12. --Dlh1989 04:15, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, while there were 21 points in total to be given out, it was only technically possible for one housemate to receive a total of 12 points. •97198 talk 13:07, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But then it sounds like no one else received votes - maybe it should be left blank and explained further in another part of the article. If you keep it this way, it should technically be 12 of 14 as they were allowed to vote for themselves too. Seaserpent85 15:05, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I like that idea - how about instead of "Daniela... 12 out of 12 points" (or whatever it may be) we have "Daniela... Evicted in a special eviction" exactly like Hayley's but linking "special eviction" to Live Eviction 11? •97198 talk 06:47, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]

I have noticed that overnight, the number of references which was 100+ has been cut down by approx. 70 to 30 something. Was this intentional? What are the reasons behind it if it was intentional? Thanks because these are the vital cites for the majority of the information in the article. Remember that most of the references were from third party Australian media outlets. --Lakeyboy 22:16, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just realised the housemate section was split from the main article. --Lakeyboy 04:49, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should we nominate this article for Good Article status?

[edit]

I believe once we get the reference issue sorted and a general cleanup after the mass edits of July 30, we should seriously consider nominating it for GA status. This article has been edited by experienced Wikipedia editors over the course of the series with most information from third party sources supported by refernces (see above talk topic). A re-write and expansion of the introduction is desperately needed though. What are your thoughts? --Lakeyboy 22:16, 30 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree - that is, with the GA nomination, and also the work needed on the intro. As far as I can tell, it meets all of the criteria, and in my personal opinion it's the best BB article (although Big Brother 2006 (UK) is pretty good, but not that I looked that hard). •97198 talk 08:50, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I see that the Big Brother 2006 (UK) was listed for GA status, but was revoked for reasons such as in-universe context such as frequent references to Day #s instead of dates, inactive links in references and a completely unreferenced lead. (Something to think about.) •97198 talk 08:03, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is interesting food for thought. I agree with proper dates with the "Day" in brackets alongside and I will double check all references when I have spare time and if any are dead, I will try to find the page by using the Wayback Machine (web site archive). I will then check it against the GA criteria for eligibility. --Lakeyboy 14:27, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know I've requested a peer review for this article to get some external views on it. There's a big backlog over there, so thought I'd get the request in now so that we can try and get this up to GA ASAP. Seaserpent85Talk 14:38, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Day 0/1

[edit]

Shouldn't the "Day 0" be changed to Day 1? The 12 originals entered on the Sunday, and then Billy, Zoran and Susannah entered on the Monday, with Cruz, Harrison, Kara and Demet going into the white room on the same day. If the beginning is day 0, then the next day should be day 1, no? godgoddingham 333 01:22, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry. I was very confused at first as well. The show did start on Day 0, and the others did enter on Day 2. Although it would appear they entered the day after, they didn't - it was two days. That's because the Daily Shows (not any other live specials) air the day after they happened - and the launch wasn't live (therefore the initial housemates entered a day before we saw them on TV). But the live specials (such as when the others entered) are live (as is implied) so if it was live and they entered a day after our time, it would have been two days after their time (i.e. Day #). Hope you understand, I didn't do a very good job at explaining that. ;) •97198 talk 11:33, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding of this matter is they don't count the day when they go into the house because it's not a full day. They only count full days. Hope it clears the matter up further. --Lakeyboy 12:09, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:BigBrotherAussieLogo.gif

[edit]

Image:BigBrotherAussieLogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Big Brother 7 (Australia). 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 18:18, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Big Brother 7 (Australia). 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) 00:00, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 25 external links on Big Brother 7 (Australia). 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) 22:21, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Big Brother 7 (Australia). 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) 11:53, 20 September 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 05:18, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Big Brother 1 (Australia) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 07:00, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Big Brother (Australia season 1) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 21:15, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Big_Brother_(Australian_TV_series)_season_7&oldid=1218713885"