Talk:Big Brother 8 (American season)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Rewrite

In desperate need of a rewrite. It's talking about what the author plans to do with the article; that's just way off. I suppose you could just get rid of that section, however, that leaves the article with nothing but an empty table. Also, this could fail WP:NOT; Wikipedia is not a Crystal Ball. Mrmoocow 05:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, I've gotten rid of the major problem, but there still is lots to go. He still mentions what he plans to do with the article. Mrmoocow 05:25, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

If needed, I can help update this article over the course of Big Brother - I've added some updates just now. --CamsWatchin 03:25, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Big Brother 8 CBS Website

When do you think they will reveal the website? Will it be like last year where they put the website up that includes recaps and HoH blogs a couple of hours after the premeire? User:ScottAHudson 7:44PM 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, since the CBS Early Show tommorow (6/28) will reveal the Houseguests, I assume that the website will be up tommorow. Last year, because it was All-Stars, they didnt release anything until after the launch, or we'd know who's in there :P --CamsWatchin 04:19, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Where is the CBS Big Brother page? I am dying to see it. Respond to this when page is posted on CBS.com!ScottAHudson 21:46, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

It's up. DemonWeb 04:46, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Even if the website has the pictures outside of that gray bar, do you think they will move them there after the show has premeired? User:ScottAHudson

Logo

Will this be the exact logo that will be shown on the opening night. ScottAHudson 03:39, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Spoiler tag to be used?

Alright, if anybody has noticed, Dick and Daniele have the same last name in the houseguest section. Should we put a spoiler tag there as to not give anything away? FireSpike 01:31, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

• • Add a spoiler tag for anything not verified [as already passed] and for anything that may happen in the future. MMAfan2007 19:25, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Dick and Daniele

Couldn't Dick be Daniele's uncle, or even cousin? There are many possibilities in which they aren't father/daughter. If they are, could someone find a source? Jordan 23:20, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, I cant find anything about a father/daughter relationship. DemonWeb 21:13, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

RealityBBQ confirmed they are father/daughter. There is also a picture on Dick's Myspace of a picture of them and Dick's son/Daniele's brother has also confirmed on a few message boards the relationship. Villacinna 18:31, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I just added two references. One from the RealityBBQ site, and the other from the OC Register (more legit) OOps, it's on now. - Jeeny ^Talk 00:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC) Plus, it was just confirmed by the show itself! - Jeeny ^Talk 00:02, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Big Brother: After Dark

Is there going to be anywork or updates for the After Dark article? User:ScottAHudson 3:19 26 June 2007

Janelle Returning

Where did you all get the info about Janelle returning? How do you all think she was given a third chance? User:ScottAHudson

Don't believe everything you read

As anyone can edit any article, it is of course possible for biased, out of date, or incorrect information to be posted to Wikipedia. However, because there are so many other people reading the articles and monitoring contributions using the Recent Changes page, incorrect information is usually corrected quickly. Thus, the overall accuracy of the encyclopedia is improving all the time as it attracts more and more contributors. You are encouraged to help by correcting articles, validating content, and providing useful references. FireSpike 04:03, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Is the news about Janelle returning true? ScottAHudson 18:26, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely not. :) FireSpike 21:28, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

OK, I'm going to be frank, the continued vandalism on this page is p****** me off. 75.46.81.83 should be blocked. Do not add names without sources! Geoking66_talk 04:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, it's been semi-protected. FireSpike 05:34, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Houseguests

Where do you get the last names? ScottAHudson 14:52, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

It's all been about web-sleuthing really. Some of them became obvious since they were on MySpace. Others required a lot more work (Zach, Jameka, etc.) but little bits of information like a school website or a personal website clued us into those names. FireSpike 19:12, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Why are all these extra people being added to the list of houseguests? User:ScottAHudson

Not eligible, NOT EXEMPT

OK, as per WP:BIGBRO convention, a greyed box with "Not eligible" should be used for Dick, Dustin, and Jessica as they are not able to vote while other housemates are. This, except a change from nominate to vote, is almost verbatim to the WP:BIGBRO guidelines. However, some people are saying that they are exempt, which they are not. When I first made HoH yellow, it was because the HoH is not exempt from voting as they nominate people. Geoking66_talk 03:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I read the guidelines, they are able to vote, they even got to nominated the HoH. They are exempt from being nominated. What are they "not eligible for? Please read the WP:BIGBRO that you keep refering to, especially this section. Also, the links of the houseguest names in the top info box link nowhere. Why is that? - Jeeny ^Talk 03:54, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

This is what is says under the "convention" "Exempt: The housemate cannot nominate or be nominated". This fits the example of the three who are EXEMPT. Cannot nominate nor be nominated. Make sense? - Jeeny ^Talk

I understand you point, but exempt is normally used for replacement and additional housemates so that they stay more than a week. From what the guildelines say, not eligible is to be used when other housemates are able to nominate/vote but the particular housemate cannot. Geoking66_talk 04:24, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Did you even read the guidelines, and I even added the use of why Exempt is appropriate from the WP:BIGBRO guidelines. This is a new twist. It hasn't happened before. Also did you read my concerns about the info box where then names are blue links but do not lead anywhere? The template is not made like in last year's, where the name links when clicked go to the list to the person's mini bio under the Houseguest heading. Can you change that? Again, I'm going to stress what it does say in the guidelines, now read what it says "Exempt: The housemate cannot nominate or be nominated". This fits perfectly, I don't understand your reasoning. Sorry. - Jeeny ^Talk 04:31, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I did read them, I've been working on WP:BIGBRO since its beginnings, and I know when each of them is used. I was part of the initial no nominations/not eligible debate and we laid down the guidelines. I'll change the Big Brother housemates infobox. Geoking66_talk 04:34, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Well then I'm even more baffled. There seems to be no sign of the "debate" on that page. Did you NOT read the bolding sentence that I took from the guidelines? I'll post it again. From the guidelines: "Exempt: The housemate cannot nominate or be nominated". So they WILL be staying another week, because they are exempt! - Jeeny ^Talk 04:38, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

For not eligible: The housemate cannot nominate for a miscellaneous reason. and This should be used when at least one other housemate can nominate that week. Geoking66_talk 04:42, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

(redent) Yes, I read that. But, it does not apply in this situation, the other guideline fits perfectly. I just don't understand why you don't get this. It's not really a "miscellaneous" reason, because this is a new twist. It's for a definate reason-- the twist!--, they are safe from nomination, EXEMPT: cannot nominate or be nominated. <sigh> - Jeeny ^Talk 04:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Miscellaneous is a twist, exempt is for intruders/additional/replacement housemates. Look at Big Brother 2007 (UK) for good use. Geoking66_talk 04:51, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

No, UK is different this is the US version. They are not considered as intruders/replacements or even additional housemates! What about the X Factor series? - Jeeny ^Talk 04:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, I'm going to weigh in on this one, and I have to say that I agree with Jeeny. "Exempt" is the better term to use here because they cannot vote or be nominated. "Exempt" indicates that safety, while "Not Eligible" does not. For instance, looking at BB8 UK's nominations table, in Week 2, Shabnam was "Not Eligible" but was still evicted. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 05:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Nominated?

Why are Carol and Amber in the color of being nominated? How can other editors edit this template when it's not clear and only to a select few? That should be changed too, as this is a collaborative where ANYone can edit. - Jeeny ^Talk 04:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Live feed watchers have figured out by discussion that they're nominated since they blantantly talk about who Kail nominated as HoH. Geoking66_talk 04:58, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, okay. Thanks. Please reconsider the Exempt though. Please? Thanks for fixing the name links. - Jeeny ^Talk 05:01, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Could somebody please remove the nomination spoliers? ScottAHudson 11:59, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I think this sort of thing should wait until the nomination episode is actually broadcast. People here reporting what they see via After Dark or the internet feed are likely running afoul of the wiki's "no original research" restrictions. Tarc 13:03, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, you ruined it for me. that is one of the most exciting thing about the show is nominations. I would rather watch it on the show than hear about it here, god thanks a lot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.181.171.10 (talk • contribs)

The UK version updates it live doesn't it? If one Big Brother uses a certain method they all should. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 18:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I want this person who is putting up the nominations to stop it. I wonder if they actually think we want to know who is nominated early or maybe that people want to wait till the show comes on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.181.171.10 (talk • contribs)

Just because another version does it, does not mean all should. Also this is about the broadcast, not the live feeds, or live updates. No information should be allowed in before it has aired. Period. See Wikipedia:Attribution and Wikipedia:Consensus. - Jeeny ^Talk 18:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

On the Original Research thing, the nominations are easily citable. Also, the article is supposed to be about the season itself. NOT just the television program. Saying that Person X and Person Y aren't nominated is incorrect information, since that is what's going on in the season right now. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 20:04, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Also, to bring up another point, if we were to update by broadcast as to not spoil anything, think about this: Say so and so is evicted at 8:50 pm EST, and we then update the arcticle. Someone getting home from work in Denver, forgetting who was nominated comes to this article to see who is on the block at 7:00 pm MST. To their surprise, they see that Housemate X was evicted. So really, no matter which way you slice it, it's always going to be spoiled for someone in some time zone unless we don't update it until AFTER it airs in the Pacific Time Zone. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 20:11, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Good point. But what do you think about adding little tidbits from the live feeds such as Nick is gay, and Joe has VD, etc.? - Jeeny ^Talk 20:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't think Joe's VD should be included since it seems kind of random and irrelevant. Nick's sexuality is fairly important, but unless it can be confirmed via a diary room segment that he is indeed homosexual, it should be left out. For all we know, he could have been joking around. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 22:44, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I see you colored the nominations in the infobox. I don't really mind, but it is not accurate because it states "Day 1" clearly next to it. They were not nominated on Day 1, correct? For that reason, I think it should be reverted. Also, how is the infobox going to work on Day 2, 3, etc.? Thanks for your insight into my questions above about the "tidbits". I agree. :) 23:09, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Uh... the "Day 1" thing means what day the entered the house. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 00:07, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

(outdent) LOL. I know that. lol. But is it going to stay at Day 1 for the whole series? If so, what's the point of having Day 1 at all, rather than a generic term? :) - Jeeny ^Talk 00:11, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I want to start a new project debate. LOL. I'm joining. This is confusing, and I'm not blonde. - Jeeny ^Talk 00:20, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

OMG! D'oh!. Now I get it! LMAO. It's the the day everyone entered the house. Not like some, who just may enter at a later time, someone like Janelle, perhaps? LOL. Okay, I was blonde just for ONE moment. But that's all. %} I still hate the "standard" colors. Yuk. It's more classy, (as if Big Brother has any class), for the more muted tones, than those garish-blinding-hard-to-read colors.- Jeeny ^Talk 01:42, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I think we need to add a spoiler tag at the top of this page. Some viewers would rather see the show to find out information, while this page will be updated with information from the live feeds. Since it would be difficult to stop editors from updating based on the live feeds, I think a spoiler tag will help prevent viewers from reading the information posted that has not beed released on the show. Z1720 04:16, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree, not everyone likes to be spoiled. I know this is an encyclopedia, but it's not a live feed, or message board. People looking up information here, rather than other places that know spoil the show, would be very upset to know before hand on this site. I think this is a common courtesy. Although, people in different time zones will have a problem too. But, should be aware, hopefully, that it is EST zone. At least, it saves the outcome for those on the East Coast, other time zones are aware, I feel, that they can be spoiled because of time zones, not live feeds, etc. - Jeeny ^Talk 04:25, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

It also fits Wikipedia guidelines on spoilers. See here. I'm going to add the tag, as it is better than the banner that was up before about the upcoming series (which I removed), as it is more obtrusive than the spoiler tag. - Jeeny ^Talk 04:36, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the spoiler tag. :) Z1720 06:26, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be good not to have the nominees, or the veto winner in the article until that respective episode airs, its common courtesy for the people who watch the show from episode to episode and don't have live feeds or who simply don't watch BB After Dark on Showtime Too. I think it is better all around, and spoiler tags are good. Alucard 16 03:30, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Removed Statement

The article said in the America's choice section that, "The first task will be to punish two other houseguests by deciding two people to be locked in the "Mad Hatter" HoH room." However, CBS's website has stated that the first poll for America's choice will be released after the Sunday show, and the viewers will decide what he will do. Therefore, this statement is unlikely to be true. If I made a mistake, please revert my edit with a source Z1720 06:13, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Joe's shirt

Did anyone notice that on the show when Julie said that it was time to reveal the 3 other houseguests, it showed a shot of Joe with a pink shirt on, then just a couple of seconds after that when Jessica started to walk down the stairs it showed another shot of the houseguests and Joe had a different shirt on and a hat. How could he have changed so fast in just 5 seconds?

It's TV. It could have been longer than that, and I think by then he knew who was coming down the stairs and knew about the shirt being Dustin's so he changed. It really doesn't take that long to change to another shirt. I can do it in a couple of seconds. Good eye though, as I didn't notice! They just didn't show it on TV. - Jeeny ^Talk 16:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, just because Julie had shown us that doesn't mean it was that quick in the house. You have to remember, they've been in the house for like 5 days now. They didn't show up yesterday just because the show premiered then...StrandedKSig 19:13, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Nick's Sexuality

Wasn't it fairly obvious that Nick was kidding about the blow job? Do we really need to include something from the feeds as canon in the article? I feel like the article should stick strictly to what the broadcast show uses - Sunday/Tuesday/Thursday episodes. Same for putting up the nominations before they've been shown to the nation. Just because we can see it in the feeds doesn't mean it should be put up on the website. If that were true, we could be writing right now about how Dick didn't really sleep last night and just got drunk, smoked a ton of cigarettes, and wrote on the kitchen table in mustard.StrandedKSig 19:16, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Exactly! This is not Joker's, etc. If every little bit is written down this article would be huge! - Jeeny ^Talk 19:23, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

The blow job remarks came out of his own mouth while on the show. 'Nuff said.

He could have been joking. Or some strategy. It shouldn't be in the bio section, unless his sexuality is known for sure. - Jeeny ^Talk 20:41, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Until he disproves himself and admits he was kidding it should stay. Your tone makes it sound like his lifestyle and/or behavior is shameful.

Sorry if you misinterpreted my tone. I don't not think his lifestyle, nor his behavior is shameful. This is an encyclopedia, and adding little gossipy tidbits, seems like this is the Enquirer, or worse. That's all. He gave someone a blowjob, so what? Why is this important, when we don't know for sure why he said it? Oh, it is shameful that you don't sign you posts. :p - Jeeny ^Talk 21:15, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Danielle 20? Why is she drinking

If Danielle is 20 as it clearly states she is why was she drinking on the opening show. She did clearly state in her frist diary room she turns 21 in 2 months. Now thats understandable. If she is in the hosue after those 2 months are up I can see it but she shouldnt be drinking until then. If so I would go on saying that we are to the point where CBS or teh producers are promoting underage drinking.

I thought the same thing. It's illegal to serve minors alcohol. Hmmmm. Enteresting. Although she said she would be 21 in a few months, it's still under-age. Interesting for sure. - Jeeny ^Talk 20:58, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

The thing is I have tried out 2 years for that show and have yet to make yet they cast a 20 yr old and in the first episode she is drinking. The rules on the application clearly state you must be 21 at time of application. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.115.108.120 (talk • contribs)

I think this was a special case because of the father. But still, you have a point. The drinking is bad as far as I'm concerned. I wonder how they are going to handle that one. - Jeeny ^Talk 23:19, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

But that still doesnt make it ok for her to drink. I dont care if Dick was casted she is still underage.

God, thats bullshit. Just that, if she were in Australia she wouldn't be under age. It's ridiculous that they aren't classified as "of age" until 21, here it's 18. -- 3bay sam 18:47, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

The legal age was 18 until a law was enacted to raise it to 21 in 1984, because of so many alcohol related accidents resulting in death. Supposedly the highway death toll of alcohol related deaths has dramatically reduced since the law was enacted. Yet, 18-year-olds can enlist and be drafted in the Armed Forces, go to war, and can kill and be killed. Eighteen is the legal age for everything else, but not for drinking -- and smoking, I think. <shrug> - Jeeny ^Talk 19:06, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

The legal age for smoking is 18. The major post-18 restrictions are drinking (21 years old) and renting a vehicle (25 years old). As for Michelle's drinking, some states (such as Texas) have laws which allow minors to consume alcohol if the parent is present, gives permission, and has proof of parental or guardian rights (like a birth certificate). I'm unsure if CA's laws are like this. If so, it's possible (but speculation) that Dick gave permission. -207.114.205.130 19:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I found this online:

"The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 required all of the states to change their legal drinking age, if the states refused to comply with the law, they would lose money under the Federal Aid Highway Act."

I do know that a parent got in trouble with the law for allowing her son to drink underage in her home, but later, he was stopped by the police driving a motor vehicle. So that may be the difference -- driving, or going outside after drinking and getting caught by police. The laws have become stricter with MADD, and other groups. Again, I don't know in this case. Also, I think certian religions can be exempt for this rule, but not the driving part. I also know that stores can be heavily fined for selling to anyone under 21, no matter if they are driving or not. Also I've heard of parents getting in major trouble for hosting parties, and allowing underaged drinking, even though it was in the home. Perhaps they'll address this in upcoming shows, or online somewhere. - Jeeny ^Talk 20:10, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Found this, which is helpful: Alcohol laws of the United States by state. The third map down shows exceptions by state for under 21 drinking. For example, alcohol laws in Texas permit a minor to drink (but not order) alcohol at a restaurant if the parent is present (and can provide proof of being the parent). Note that apparently California allows drinking for underage folks. Driving makes a difference though: Texas also has a zero tolerance law for minors behind the wheel - the BAC cannot be higher than 0% if under 21. - 207.114.205.130 21:26, 8 July 2007 (UTC) (Edited because I misread the map for CA - 207.114.205.130 21:50, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

(outdent) Thanks for that link. On further examination I clicked on some external links and found this for California:

1. Some States' provisions do not apply reciprocal exceptions to both the provider of alcohol and the minor (e.g., California permits minors to possess alcohol in private locations, but it is illegal for anyone to provide alcohol to minors in any setting).

It was from this link by clicking on the "Explanatory Notes and Limitations" next to "Underage Consumption of Alcohol". Even though under that it says "Consumption is not explicitly prohibited". So, how is it that it permits minors to possess alcohol, but illegal for anyone to provide it, if they cannot purchase it themselves? I guess it's OK, if it is just there, and no-one actually "provides" it to them? Did Daniele provide the alcohol? So how does the alcohol get there, if it's illegal to provide it in any setting? LOL, laws are so confusing. I guess being available is different from providing it, but I don't know the difference. It has to come from somewhere, right? - Jeeny ^Talk 22:06, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Color legend

On the main info box the color of nominations is a blue/greenish color, but in the voting history it is red. This is confusing, unless one or the other is changed and maybe adding a legend under the voting history table may be helpful Something like this (colors and more boxes can be added/changed):

     Head of Household, and Exempt from nomination and voting.

     Not Eligible

     Evicted HouseGuest

     Nominated HouseGuests.

     Exempt from nomination, but still allowed to vote.

- Jeeny ^Talk 20:58, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Uh, Evicted is Pink, Nominated is Blue, and HoH is Yellow in both. I really don't see what the confusion is about. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 21:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Look down at the table of the voting history, the blue is a different color from the "legend" in the infobox. - Jeeny ^Talk 21:14, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I see you removed them from the box. Good point about the PoV. We don't know yet if they will stay the nominees. But, when they are known, then the color should match the legend info box, with this color hex code #D1E8EF to match the legend of the lighter blue for nominations, and the pink #FFC0CB for evictions, rather than the red. K? :) - Jeeny ^Talk 21:20, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... although it would seem to be logical to do that, the colors used in the voting history table are pre-approved colors that are supposed to be used by directions in WP:BIGBRO. I do commend you for your dedication to this article though. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 22:38, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the compliment. :) I do realize about the pre-approved colors for the project, but why is it different in the info box? They should both match, IMO. It hurts my aesthetic sense to see the inconsistency. I'm anal like that. :/ I do like the colors in the info box better though, I wish I was in on the project debate. lol But I feel strongly that they match in color in the voting history AND the info box, even if I don't like the approved colors. :)- Jeeny ^Talk 23:26, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Just a simple question, but why are Dick, Dustin, and Jessica's boxes green in the voting history table? Is it because they were "exempt" or "not eligible" the first week (being the enemies)? I'm probably missing the explanation on the page or in the discussion, I dunno, I just found it confusing. Thanks :) - zachinthebox 03:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Unlike the HoH, who cannot vote or be nominated (Yellow), Dick, Dustin and Jessica were "Exempt" from nominations, but were still allowed to vote. This is a new thing, so I guess the color change was to reflect this difference from the HoH. - Jeeny ^Talk 03:58, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Much clearer now :) thanks a lot! - zachinthebox 19:41, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Competitions Table

Is this really necessary??? That thing is going to be HUGE by the time the series is over, and the challenges are already covered in the chronology table. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 21:04, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree, plus it's redundant. - Jeeny ^Talk 21:15, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I removed it. - Jeeny ^Talk 21:23, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

CASTING???

Does big brother even cast? Does Big Brother give false hope? I think they do for the fact of the way they are casting their shows for the past few years. It isnt reality when your cast all have ties to Hollywood. It isnt reality when people wait in line for hours just to get a 2 minute video to say why they should be on the show. Because the way Big Brother has been cast since season 3 is a joke. The cast is not diverse. The cast is a bunch of wannabe actors who all have agents getting them a spot on teh show. People who go to casting calls are give flase hope of making it because CBS only hold casting calls for show. I know you want these people for ratings but they arent "real" Also the knowing someone in the hosue gimmick has gotten old. For the past few seasons that means you arent even casting 10 people. This year you cast 11 oh wow. You want a diverse cast in tehre not 6 people and then 6 people they know. Learn to cast and starting going to towns and pick the everyday person. Dont Typecast like you have done since Season 3

This is not a discussion forum. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 23:25, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, go to Erika's MySpace page and yell at her. It's her fault. She picks them. - Jeeny ^Talk 23:39, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

yeah it is discussion why do you think the tab says discussion at teh top. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.115.108.120 (talk • contribs)

It means to discuss changes to the article, not to the show itself. :) - Jeeny ^Talk 23:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

This is discussing it. Im discussing the way BB casts its shows. Ever since season 2 casting has been terrible

You're not discussing article changes, you're discussing the way bb casts its shows. I don't see the connection to the article. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 00:24, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Veto symbol in table

Right now there is this little dot under the symbol that is driving me crazy. Is it just on my computer or what? T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 20:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I fiddled with it. I made it 3D, perhaps that's the problem. I'll revert it back to the original. :) - Jeeny ^Talk 20:19, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I changed it back. I didn't have a problem on my monitor, and didn't see any dot. But, if my change was driving you crazy, because you saw a dot, then that's more than a good enough reason to revert to the original. :) Is it better now? - Jeeny ^Talk 20:23, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. :) T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 20:47, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Stop spoiling everything on this page stop putting up the nominees and stop putting up the veto winners, I don't care to know until the show comes on. You have just ruined an entire week for me. You may get the live feed and, or watch Big Brother After Dark, but I don't get the feed, and I have Showtime Too, but I choose not to watch it. I'm going to take it down and please don't put it, back up until the show has aired. Maybe make a table for the Big Brother After Dark Page. My God you put the post nominations too. This is really pissing me off. I want to find out on my own. You know what I might just stop coming to this page if all of that stuff has been put back up. I want it to stop, like I said before you have ruined an entire week for me. People have been putting this information on the Big Brother After Dark page. Just put nominations and veto on Big Brother After Dark till the episodes air then put it on the Big Brother 8 page.Seth71 11:57, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand why this person has to keep putting this stuff up on this, I said they could put nominations and veto up on Big Brother After Dark, but NO they have to put it up on the big brother 8 page. If anyone knows who is putting this stuff up try to stop this.Seth71 17:53, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

User T is re-loading that spolier information. I know it bothers me that I already know the nominees and the veto winner. User:ScottAHudson

After Thursday I'm not coming back to this page. I already knew Danielle won POV, but if the person who put that up before the show airs then they will still do it next week and I don't want to know in advance.Seth71 18:32, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Houseguest MySpace Profiles?

Would it be acceptable to provide a link to individual houseguests' MySpace profiles or other websites, etc, as part of their listings/descriptions here? Tommy 20:19, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't. It is hard to be 100% sure that it is their MySpace profile, unless they themselves state that it is. Z1720 01:21, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Some of the Houseguests have said themselves on the live feeds and on the Showtime special what their MySpace profile names are. Last night, someone asked Mike what his was, and he said "It's the same as my name...it's just first name last name." Tommy 02:44, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Nick

There was a link to the Finnish national football team saying Nick played for it. Well for those of us in America that would actually be a soccer team, and he was a former (American) football player. I removed the link and hope no one objects since it was wrong. Just wanted to explain here. Phydend 01:00, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

CBS Version

To eliviate the debate about stuff not in the show I have created Big Brother 8 (US/CBS) that will only contain materials that were reveiled during the standard CBS broadcast so that this page can remain as is, and After Dark will be related to the After Dark show only. Thee17 01:43, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

It is going to be deleted. This IS the CBS version. You can't have two articles of the same show at the same time. - Jeeny ^Talk 02:06, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm hoping that more people will find it useful as this artical will be deal with the happinings in the Big Brother 8 House, where the new artical will deal specifically with the happings on the CBS airings of the show. If noone likes or uses it, or when the show ends then it may be deleted but just to have it deleted without trying the concept is just foolish. Thee17 02:12, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I hope this means that no one will put nominations and veto stuff up until it airs on the show. Like I said I get Showtime, but choose not to watch it because it takes the excitement out of the regular version.Seth71 13:35, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Exempt?

Do those exempts for Dick, Dustin and Jessica mean they cannot vote in the live eviction show? User:ScottAHudson 10:50PM 8 July 2007

So far we think they can't vote, but "exempt" means they are safe from nominations, therefore eviction. Hope that helps. - Jeeny ^Talk 02:56, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Julie said that they are exempt from eviction this week. I am taking a wild leap in saying that they may not be eligible in voting for someone to evict but since they did get to chose Kail for HOH, they could still be eligible. If they are allowed to vote I guess the box can stay grey for this week and have the name of the person they vote to evict if eligible. Alucard 16 03:26, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I think they will be able to vote. I just have the feeling that the will be able to vote.Seth71 13:36, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Teams from the Episode's Food Competition

I would appreciate if somebody could tell me who the teams were on the July 8 episode's food competition. Another suggestion would be to revert the change that was made to get rid of the competitions table. That would help or telling would be fine also. User:ScottAHudson

• The first food competition involved using their bodies to cover up in butter and then put it in a tub of popcorn. The team who got the most won food for the week, while the losers were put on slop. The red team (Amber, Carol, Dick, Dustin, Jen, Kail and Mike) got 77 pounds and the blue team (Daniele, Eric, Jameka, Jessica, Joe, Nick and Zach) got 37 pounds.Butter me up Here's your answer. You can also view it on the CBS website, from this link. - Jeeny ^Talk 03:07, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

America's Player Table

Is this really necessary? We could easily cover this in the chronology table. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 03:00, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to be bold and eliminate it to see what will happen. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 03:13, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Oops, sorry I added it back. It's a big part of the show, and some mention of it should be in the article, whether it's a table, or some other way to chronicle it. I think the Ratings table is unnecessary though, or at least should not be so close to the top of the article. - Jeeny ^Talk 20:41, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

The ratings table, although not completely necessary, is very useful and I think that it should be kept. I'll move it lower (and I'm thinking of merging the Global interactive and America's player as the Global interactive was born out of America's Player). Should official viewer numbers or household numbers be used (ie the launch's household number was 5.356m but the total viewer number was 7.401m)? Geoking66_talk 22:48, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I really think that the "America's Player" table is uncecessary. It's becoming extremely redundant now, as it's events are in the chronology table, the "America's Player" table, AND now in the voting history. It's going out of control and should be put in the Chronology with everything else where it can be converted to a small amount of prose. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 01:43, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Agreed Alucard 16 02:45, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

America's Player in the Voting History table

I really see no point that there is the "America's Player" part under "Nominations (Post-Veto)" Since Eric is the one and only "America's Player" this season and there is a section in the article about "America's Player" so there is no need for it in the Voting History table. Alucard 16 01:48, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

There's no point in PoV winner either. I'm sick of people deleting already consensus-agreed decisions, so I think that I'm going to request more protection. Geoking66_talk 02:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

PoV winner is quite important actually. You'd see "Post-Veto Nominations", but you'd not know who vetoed a nomination if it ocurred. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 02:32, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I meant colouring a square with "Power of Veto" is pointless since it's mentioned in the table already. Geoking66_talk 02:33, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, okay then. I agree with you there. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 02:47, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Voting Procedure

I just want to make sure that everyone is aware that there is no public vote with Big Brother 8 USA. The only vote America is controlling is Eric's vote. America decides who Eric should vote for and it is up to him to do as America wishes. After that, the rest of the house choses to evict. Not America. None of the houseguests are up against the public vote, the only American season where houseguests were up against the public vote was Season 1. Reason I am adding this is because of one edit made on 02:34, 11 July 2007 and the note that followed. Alucard 16 02:48, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

A housemate is being evict by public voting. Eric is only a medium since we are voting for the housemate that he must evict. Since he has no say in the matter, it is America's choice as to who will leave the house. Geoking66_talk 02:52, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Eric's vote is one out of a minimum of seven. America only gets to chose who Eric votes for. Then it is up to the rest of the house. For the vote to be truly "against the public vote" America must vote for who they want to leave not the houseguests. Alucard 16 02:59, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

It was never specified as to how this would work. We don't know if Eric's vote decides who is evicted or if his vote counts as a regular one. I watched it and they did not say. Geoking66_talk 03:04, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I watched the ending again and it states "Which of the two nominees do you want Eric to vote out of the house." 9 times out of 10, America is only controlling Eric's vote, and the rest of the houseguest votes count also. We will have to wait and see Thursday and see how this will go down. But until we know how the America's Player twist works there shouldn't be a mention that the nominees are against the public vote at this time. Alucard 16 03:11, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

From what I understand we only control Eric's vote. Also, on another note, if we are given the percentage of votes for eviction, I think we should include it. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 03:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

You guys are really Confused aren't you. Of course it's just Eric voting for who he would like to see ( or in this case who america would like to see out of the house) and everyone else gets to vote. It just ain't Eric's 1 vote. I can't believe you guys are actually considering that idea that Eric has the sole vote in the house.Seth71 17:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but like I said they should know it is only Eric's vote.Seth71 20:22, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I think most of them know that now, by reading the posts above. Except for maybe one. :) - Jeeny ^Talk 21:40, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Let me beat this dead horse one last time. America does not control Eric's vote; we influence it. America votes on a question. Eric learns the result of the vote. Eric chooses whether to comply with America's vote. He does not have to. Our control is that Eric gets $10K for every 5 America's tasks he completes. He can refuse any one he wants. SA Santa 13:17, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

rigged?

Do you think the shows rigged. It has been on the news before and everything. It mostly came up last season, because they said that Janelle got a little too lucky. I just want to know what you guys think.Seth71 22:59, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

This is a forum for discussion on the article, not on Big Brother. Please go to sites such as Joker's Updates to talk about that. Geoking66_talk 02:05, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Housemates' time in the house

Why is everything about the housemates duing their time in the house being deleted? That's the point of the subsections, to give information about what the housemate did while in the house, not just background information. For example, why is the topic of viewers' ambiguity over Nick's sexuality, despite being a big topic in the Big Brother viewing community, being deleted? It's important to write about these things because that's the purpose of the housemate sections. Other noteworthy topics such as Joe's accusations of gonorrhoea (please spell it that correctly, I've noticed that many people can't spell it) should be included rather than excluded. Remember, only include sourced comments and statements. Geoking66_talk 02:08, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't know why it keeps being re-written, nor deleted. But, the last contribution said that was the REASON they spilt up, which may not be true. I'm tired of all the changes, really, so I just deleted it, rather than go back to see how it was written before, and which had a source. If you can find that one, please feel free to included it, but not that it was the reason they broke up. It was one of many, or two. - Jeeny ^Talk 02:13, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

When I wrote it, I explicity said that he claimed it was because of an STD. Geoking66_talk 02:35, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah, OK. did you provide the source, if so put it back in. Thanks. - Jeeny ^Talk 02:51, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Voting History?

Why are bold lines appearing in the voting table? There is no reason because these boxes should be here. User:ScottAHudson 11:00PM 12 July 2007 (UTC)

They're thin separation lines so that it separates different parts of the table for easier reading. Geoking66_talk 03:08, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

It looks better too. For the same reason Geoking, it makes it easier to read. They're still the same boxes as before. <shrug> - Jeeny ^Talk 03:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I added them because I had trouble differentiating the parts of the table. I did it earlier on the ratings table for the same reason and it seems very practical. Geoking66_talk 03:59, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

On the long evicted row, instead of it just saying "(Day 13)" maybe it could have the date of the eviction? I dunno, it's just a suggestion :-) - zachinthebox 03:02, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

"Evicted (Day 13)" is the accepted version in nomination tables across BB articles on Wikipedia. Days in Big Brother are more important than dates. Geoking66_talk 20:15, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I have removed the bold lines and also have removed the color and bolding from the Week 1 eviction box. Why note incorporate a vote decision area into the voting table! User:ScottAHudson 10:27AM 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Competitions for Week 1

Can we put the competitions information back into the chronology table? Why were they removed? User:ScottAHudson

Yeah put them back in. I'd do it but I dont watch BB USA -- 3bay sam

SA Santa 13:29, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Does Amber Cry at the drop of a hat

Is it me or does Amber cry over anything.

She cried the first time because she left her daughter I think. Second she cried because of her nomination, and third she cried because Jen was threating her and put a lot of pressure on her, so those seem like good excuses to cry I guess.