Talk:Survivor: Fiji

Survivor Fiji

Please stop putting in Survivor Fiji. Only one source is saying it, and that source isn't confirming it. Last season Survivor Maps was right, but right now, they have no maps, no extended info, and little or no links. Once again, they aren't confirming it. Also, before the Survivor Panama Reunion Show when the official name was revealed, the page Survivor 13 got changed to Survivor Cook Islands a day or two before. This shouldn't happen again, as no one could be totally sure. Please stop. TeckWiz is 12 yrs old^TalkContribs_{# of Edits} 19:43, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Survivor Maps is getting more info. Fiji may actually be right. However, if we do put it on the page, we still shouldn't move it to Survivor: Fiji until Jeff says it officially at the reunion, so it's 100% confirmed. TeckWiz is 12 yrs old^TalkContribs_{# of Edits} 11:13, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree, hence my last couple of reverts. -- Gogo Dodo 04:22, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm not saying it shouldn't be on the page. There is so much info on it now, including Survivor Maps, which is usually reliable. I think Fiji should be included in the article, along with about 5 sources. However, there should be no page move and no putting it in the infobox. TeckWiz is 12 yrs old^TalkContribs_{# of Edits} 22:28, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Teckwiz. Reywas92^Talk 00:30, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay, but perhaps it should be a "Rumored location" section instead of the outright renaming like this revision? I don't think Template:Survivorseries should be modified until the official name is announced. While it's pretty fair to think that it will be called "Survivor: Fiji", it might be called "Survivor: South Pacific" for all we know. -- Gogo Dodo 00:59, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Like Gogo Dodo said, it may not be called Survivor Fiji, so it should just say that it may be filmed in Fiji. No info on it in the infobox, in the page title, or in template. TeckWiz is 12 yrs old^TalkContribs_{# of Edits} 11:17, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I checked around and Fiji has been confirmed by the Fijian government. [1] [2] So I inserted it into the article with references. I still believe that we should leave the article title "Survivor 14" and no changes to the name or template for the reasons I stated previously. -- Gogo Dodo 20:35, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Image

Anyone have a better logo image? I tried going to innertube on CBS.com to take a screenshot of the part where they talk about Fiji, but it stops about 5 minutes before the end. TeckWiz^TalkContribs_@ 02:34, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

A couple of contestenant Articles?

Just taking a quick look around the web I noticed that at least a couple of these contestants could use an article on them. Rita Verreos is a former Miss Venezuela contestant who has had a bit part in a movie, and models. She is also the sister of Project Runway contestant Nick Verreos. Sylvia Kwan is the head of a big architecture company in San Francisco, Kwan Henmi. A quick google search brings up multiple articles about her and her company. Just a couple of thoughts. EnsRedShirt 19:48, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, i think thats a good idea, but it may be wise to wait for the show to gain a bit of publicity first (i.e. with the showing of 3-4 episodes) so that the public can identify them. Also, if they make it far in the game, it helps the case to create articles about them. Survivorfan101 04:52, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Only make articles for the contestants who did something quite important outside of the show. Many Survivor contestant articles have been AFD'd for non-notability and must make it to the final 5 or something. Reywas92^Talk_Sigs 14:33, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree that it's a bit early to think about individual articles. I think the general view is that the castaway has to reach the final two (or three in Cook Islands' case) before they warrant an individual article just on their appearance in Survivor alone. -- Gogo Dodo 19:51, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Right, but EnsRedShirt is saying that that at least these two contestants may be notable based on non-Survivor things as well. --Maxamegalon2000 22:04, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

But just being a relative of another famous person or one simple other fact that unless such a page already existed, would not make for a good Wikipage; it can be noted on the Survivor page, but as suggested, unless they become a top contender and a lot more can be said about them (eg like Dan the Astronaut or Gary the football player), they shouldn't get their own page. --Masem 22:08, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Masem. --TeckWiz^TalkContribs_@ 22:11, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Being related to someone famous is almost definitely not sufficient grounds for notability. Being the head of a big architecure firm may be. It depends on what you mean by big. If it's for example, one of the top 10 in the US then this would probably be sufficient grounds for noteability. If it's like the top 100 then perhaps not. The fact that we didn't already have an article for her doesn't mean much IMHO. There are a lot of people who IMHO meet grounds for notability but don't yet have an article. Perhaps less so in the US given the large number of US contributors but there are still definitely so people. Of course, the fact that she has appeared in Survivor doesn't affect her notability yet as others have pointed out. But if people are interested enough in her because of Survivor to write an article about her concentrating on what makes her already noteable (assuming she is noteable) then there's nothing wrong IMHO Nil Einne 10:39, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Cast Pics for Table

Is anyone able to provide small shots of the cast for the table, similar to the cast table on the Survivor: Cook Islands page? Survivorfan101 09:29, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I tried, but I couldn't find any good images that could be used without taking screenshots. I think that if we can't find images, we should go back to the format used for the Palau and Guatemala pages. -- Scorpion 16:30, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Nice editions, but pics for Cassandra and Stacy need to be downsizes - i don't know how to do it myself, although i have tried! Survivorfan101 02:23, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I've tried as well... the images don't seem to want to shrink. I would guess that this is a bug in Wikipedia but I'm not sure. --ΨΦorg 03:56, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I fixed it, though I have no idea why what I did fixed it. I added "center" and everything resized. -- Gogo Dodo 06:12, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks guys, the table looks great! Survivorfan101 08:03, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

What happened to the images? Survivorfan101 05:39, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

auto deletion due to poor labelling? There's no sign of change on the page to disclude them. --05:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I think an IP user uploaded them and thus likely didn't tag them properly. I have no idea where the images came from and I don't think they came from the official site. -- Scorpion 05:56, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Update: They were uploaded by User:58.69.21.119. -- Scorpion 05:59, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

The images came from the CBS Early show site but were cut and resized. Survivorfan101 11:07, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

The Game table prep

My DVR showed the name of episode 1 so I started The Game section. I also prepared the Elimination Notes, Exile Notes, and Voting History table. So that the sections are not empty, I commented out the three aforementioned sections. If you're the first one who updates the article with the tribe assignments, I hope you use the table. -- Gogo Dodo 20:37, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

The table

Since there are no pictures of the castaways, perhaps we should go back to the pre-Panama table format. Thoughts? -- Scorpion 15:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Are you talking about the format that has the tribes and contestant info (ie: state, hometown) in the game table. That's too clustered. I like the idea of having the contestant's tribes seperate in it's own table. I don't like the old format. That's why the old format to the other pages have been changed to the new format that is used in the Fiji season.ScottAHudson 13:45, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Nicknames

James seems to be using Rocky for a name, so I changed the sort order accordingly. As for Gary and his "Papa Smurf" nickname, it seemed unclear to me if that was what he was going to use or just what the castaways decided to call him. There was no interview with him during episode 1 so it's still a question mark. I'm tempted to remove the "Papa Smurf" thing until it's cleared up. Thoughts? -- Gogo Dodo 05:59, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, Gary was interviewed in the first episode; he said that Sylvia was trying to dominate during the construction of the camp. The on-screen caption said "GARY SCHOOL BUS DRIVER", which I just confirmed on CBS Innertube (about 2:02 into the second section of the video). --ΨΦorg 14:56, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd agree: use only the nicknames that are in the onscreen captions. As with most seasons, as the show goes on the survivors will generate other nicknames for the other players, but these aren't "official" and by allowing the informal ones, you'll have people adding all sorts of nicknames to the contestant list (similar problem w/ Amazing Race). --Masem 15:18, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Works for me. I've removed Gary's nickname. -- Gogo Dodo 16:45, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that these sort of nicknames (i.e. Rocky and Dreamz) should be used in the voting history table. In all other season wikipedia pages, the names that appear on the offical website are used in these tables. Some extend to nicknames (for example, Cao Boi and Ozzy were used on the official site) but not always (for example, Jenn and Nate were used in the game, but Jennifer and Nathan on the official sites - hence they were used in the voting history tables). I say Dreamz be changed back to Dre and Rocky be changed back to James for the voting table only. Anyone agree? Survivorfan101 22:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Whatever is used on the official site should be used for the The game and Voting History tables. I think it should also be used for any reference to them in elimination/exile/episode summaries. -- Gogo Dodo 03:51, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Decided to be bold and made the change. -- Gogo Dodo 22:54, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Followed in your footsteps and changed the "game table" too a while back. Just in case people do not realise the names used are FROM THE OFFICIAL WEBSITE ONLY. These only have some nickname: i.e. Boo is used rather than Kenward, but others are not, i.e. Rocky for James and Dreamz for Dre - it is uniformity to use the names on the official site, as in the case of Jennifer from Palau (went by "Jenn" on the show but on the Survivor: Palau page she goes by Jennifer) and Nathan from Cook Islands (who went by "nate" on the show but on the Survivor: Cook Islands wikipedia page, Nathan as used - as it is on the official site. Although i am open for discussion should someone want to argue against this Survivorfan101 12:33, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

It begins!

Well, the show is an episode old and an article for Rita Verreos has popped up. I really don't think she's that notable. All she did was compete in some pageants and have a relationship with Peter Gabriel and relationships with a celebrity is not notable for a page. Should we nominate it for afd? -- Scorpion 05:30, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

To avoid the same thing with the JD article, I would almost suggest to be pre-emptive and create a separate, single past with brief bios on all contestants, only expanding beyond that if they are truly notable. --Masem 05:57, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Don't even remind me of the JD article. I agree that it would be nice to avoid things like that, but then people would say "contestant is not only known for Survivor" and fight for seperate pages. -- Scorpion 05:58, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't know why they can't wait till at least the season is almost over. If Rita gets voted out in the next 6-7 episodes, then she clearly is not notable. However, if she can make it until the Final 7-9 contestants, then her past experiences with fame may culminate with her Survivor performance to create a mediocre article. Till then i say that it should be eliminated. Survivorfan101 06:33, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Some people think there is a contest where one has to be the VERY FIRST to create pages for new people, which leads to pages like that. Are we in agreement that the page should at least be merged until we find out how far she makes it? -- Scorpion 17:35, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Yep, merge it. She's not notable now. If she gets further then well see Survivorfan101 21:50, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Color for exiled person on voting table

Going off previous seasons, a person that was part of a tribe but was not part of TC due to some reason (exiled, kidnapped), the voting table lists that person in a different color from the normal team color. As this looks to be happening this season through the merge (at least), we need to come to an agreement: there's been a minor edit war over the color for this exiled person in ep 2. Now, since we've already identified that 'black' bg is for "no tribe association", I do not think that we should use black again. One person used the same team color but added a footnote which works to some extent (and matches with the win/lose/exile/voted off table), but I think we should find a different color (one for each tribe possibly?) for the non-voting exiled member, with the only issue that we have no idea what the merge tribe colors will be. However, until then, I recommend we use the same color used for Cook Islands (#800080 with white text). --Masem 14:43, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I went with the usual Ravu orange because the person in exile doesn't really change tribes, but I can understand the color change. The purple is fine for me (after all the person in exile does get "bruised" by the experience =)), but I think it should be used with both tribes for when the person is not at Tribal Council for whatever reason. I think making two different colors for each tribe will be confusing. The black "no tribe" is good. I think this is another one of those things that could get hashed out if we had a standard (hello, WikiProject?). -- Gogo Dodo 15:01, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I mentioned the idea of a WP for Survivor earlier, though someone noted that other reality TV shows have it because of the large number of episodes in several countries and thus likely have a larger need, but scrolling through the WikiProject Television page, I see shows with much shorter timeframes (eg Firefly) that have their own WP. I think we should submit a proposal for a WP Survivor project over at the WikiProject Council (as suggested by WP TV) to make sure there's interest and to see if there's any major objections. --Masem 15:18, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't object. I've been trying to do stuff to keep track of individual survivor pages (because they get created and merged/deleted at a fantastic rate) and it would be much easier with a WikiProject to set some standards... As for the colours, purple would be fine. -- Scorpion 15:36, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

How do people feel about placing the voting table not in complte alphabetical order, but by alpha order by team. For example, all orange together alphabetized, all green together alphabetized. I only mention this as I think it would be easier to follow the voting history, as well as being a cosmetic fix. 208.137.139.88 04:22, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I'm new, but I was wonering is a lighter version of that person's tribe color be appropiate for exile designation? just faded orange for Ravu member exiled and faded green for Moto exiled. Antsam 04:43, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

As for the Wikiproject, I said this on the main Survivor page some time ago: :I don't really know if it's big enough. The American edition has only 14 seasons, and the other countries only have one or two each. Big Brother and American Idol have many seasons in many different country (I think BB has over 10). --TeckWiz ^ParlateContribs_@ 01:37, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Mention of semifinalists

Earlier today, I removed the unsourced statement about the 48 "semifinal" interviews for this program. I come back a few hours later and the statement has returned. I thought of removing it again, but on second thought, I won't start an "edit war" about it. To paraphrase Mike Ditka, if whoever wrote it to source it, source it; if he/she doesn't want to, he/she won't. End of story. - Desmond Hobson 00:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

the cn template is great in situations like this. --Masem 01:21, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I put it back in. It's stated in the application form. I've written the newest Survivor articles and the original information (what's currently in Survivor 15) is always taken right from the application. --TeckWiz ^ParlateContribs_@ 16:35, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

episode title quotes

While I could argue either way for ep. titles quotes as a section, since it is a relatively new thing that Survivor is doing, The Amazing Race seasons all have episode title quote sections. I think it's fair to include them, but should be near or just above the trivia section, but not as trivia itself. --Masem 18:01, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps, but where it was was too prominent. It also just stuck out without an introductory text for context. It's one of those "hey, that's cute", but is it really noteworthy? -- Gogo Dodo 18:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Technically, those would be episode titles (despite being quotes) so there is some relevance there. But I agree they shouldn't be placed arbitrarily; I think if they're put right at the end of the main section and right before the records/first section, it wouldn't be out of place. --Masem 20:26, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

A similar, though incomplete list appeared on Survivor: Cook Islands in a similar prominent location. With it being an incomplete list, I removed it from there, too. Perhaps we need to hash this out sooner rather than later. I'm still not entirely convinced that it should be included, especially since it duplicates information and just going to make the article longer. Perhaps to simplify a paragraph could be added along the lines of "The episode titles are quotes from the castways during the show. The list of sources for the quotes are, in episode order: Edgardo, Earl, ..." Just a thought. -- Gogo Dodo 04:47, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I completely understand keeping them off for now, though it may be easier to add them in as part of the episode summaries instead of a separate table without adding too much extra weight to the page. --Masem 12:42, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure if they belong in the episode summaries as the origin of the quotes don't impact the game (at least for now), which is what the episode summaries are for. I'm still leaning towards a Trivia section, even though the thought of creating a Trivia section makes me pause due to the usual excess trivia that some people like to add. -- Gogo Dodo 06:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

If I really had my way, I would reorganize this page (and every other Survivor page) to be more like other reality TV series in that you have your summary tables, and then a block with each episode detail: in the case of Survivor, you'd have your episode summary, exile reasoning, and voted out reasoning all in the same block. The title quote would lead up that block. Now, to do that with the existing S pages would take a loooot of work, so the easy way is to either do trivia (adding length to page), add to the episode summary (eg 'Episode 1 "Wow, this is Survivor" (John)": blah blah blah'), or add to where they already are (in the episode summary table). I think the latter would satisfy the gut feeling that they should be on there without affecting too much of the page. --Masem 06:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see what you're suggesting and that would solve this particular problem. Survivor: Guatemala is kind of like that where it's both styles, making the article even longer than it needs to be. I think there would need be a strong consensus to make such a huge change in the format of the article. I think it's early enough in the season that if such a consensus could be reached, that we could make the change without too much work. Changing all of the past seasons would be a huge amount of work like you said. -- Gogo Dodo 06:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I looked at The Amazing Race 11 and they have a similar section standing by itself. Though half of that article is trivia and the structure of the article is a little odd in my opinion. Not sure if looking at that article ("Hey, how did you handle this?") is all that helpful. -- Gogo Dodo 06:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Episode 6 Tribe

I assume this came from a reputable source i.e. the "STAY TUNED FOR SCENES FROM OUR NEXT EPISODE" thingy, not just someone deciding that they would make a box for an Episode 6 Tribe. Let me know, as in our country we are not quite up to episode six yet (I shouldn't be peeking, yeah, I know). The Dark Lord Trombonator (((¶))) 04:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

The preview at the end of Ep5 clearly showed that there's a tribe shuffle about to happen, thus, it's fair to say include the Ep6 column. Of course, those adding the reformed tribes are adding spoiler information and that's going to be deleted until the episode airs. --Masem 04:18, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Deleting information because it's a spoiler is most definitely against wikipedia policy. Please don't do it. If such information is not properly sourced of course, it should be deleted. Spoilers should be tagged, not deleted. But the whole article is already tagged anyway so it isn't necessary... Nil Einne 19:08, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

It's not the fact that it was a spoiler, but it was an unsourced spoiler that earned its deletion (that is, who ended up in which tribe). I follow the spoilers, I know where the names probably came from, but even those that post spoilers don't cite sources. Compare this to pictures of Amazing Racers as they are racing; that's much better than word of mouth as most Survivor spoilers are. --Masem 19:45, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

external link to survivor.com

I want to add an external link to survivor.com. It was deleted as spam, but I don't think it's spam at all. It's got a ton of articles and screen captures. I was told to suggest that here. Is that the correct way to approach this? Yes, it is my own site, but I've been doing this for years. It's also linked on the home page for the Survivor TV show. This link is for the Fiji articles only.

http://www.survivor.com/category/survivor-14-fiji/

--C331673 00:47, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Generally, by WP:EL WP is not a link farm, so not every usable link should be included. In addition, official sites, like CBS's, are preferred over fan sites unless there is reasonable criteria to keep them. In the case of the above site (which I didn't delete) I believe it does little beyond what CBS's site already has and thus is not really worthwhile to keep. --Masem 02:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree. It seems that you haven't spent much time reviewing the site if that is your conclusion. It's got a lot more depth than the CBS site and it's not a "fan site". It's got screen captures, it's got news articles, spoilers, episode recaps, and a forum. It's got everything that survivorfever has and more. I'm not suggesting that WP should be a link farm. I'm suggesting that this is a valid source of lots of information, a better source than survivorfever.net, so should be linked to.

http://www.survivor.com/survivor-13-cook-islands/episode-13-screen-captures-click-for-large-images/survivor.2006.12.07.html

http://www.survivor.com/survivor-13-cook-islands/parvati-has-her-moment-in-the-hot-tub-then-goes-home/survivor.2006.12.14.html

http://www.survivor.com/survivor-15/take-a-shot-at-survivor-at-lansing-tryouts-in-january/survivor.2006.12.27.html

http://www.survivor.com/survivor-14-fiji/cbs-announces-survivor-fiji-cast-new-season-airs-feb-8/survivor.2007.01.12.html

http://www.survivor.com/spoilers/confidentiality-agreement-violated-by-one-of-the-survivor-contestants/survivor.2007.02.15.html

http://www.survivor.com/survivor-tv-show/star-doctors-drug-confession/survivor.2007.02.03.html

http://forums.survivor.com/

-- C331673 17:32, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

If it's not an official site by the show's producers, it still qualifies as a fan site. And even though it may be better than other Survivor fansites out there in terms of content, if you add one, you'll usually be hard-pressed to refuse other Survivor fansites (of which there is a lot) into the the list, and thus is born the link-farm. But I think the more appropriate reason is that official sites should always be favored over fansites if they exist, which is definitely the case for Survivor. --Masem 00:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree that fan sites should not be linked to. I agree that WP should not be a link farm.

My point is that survivor.com is NOT a fan site. According to WP:EL, What should be linked, Number 4, it says that sites that should be linked to are "Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews."

I would point out that the link that does exist on the page now, survivorfever.net, has less "relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews" than survivor.com does. I gave multiple examples of "relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews" existing on survivor.com.

Please explain why survivor.com is considered a fan site while survivorfever.net is not considered a fan site. One more thing. Please see who Google ranks as the most authoritative site. Thanks. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=survivor&btnG=Search -- C331673 02:23, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Survivorfever is not listed as an external link, it's used as a reference. If there is something on survivor.com that can be used to support any of the information on the article, please go ahead and use it as the reference, but it's very debatable as to whether it's an external link. --Masem 02:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry. survivorfever.net is on every other season's page as an external link, but not this one yet. My mistake.

You have beaten me into submission. I give up. You have not responded to my points. You have not reasoned with me. You have only made statements. Sorry to take up your valuable time. -- C331673 04:03, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not trying to stifle the link, I was bringing up points for discussion, I'm certainly not the only person actively editing the Survivor pages, but no one else has brought in points for or against its inclusion. There is something to be said that why survivorfever (which is a fan site as well) is on the rest of the pages, but I don't know who put it there - by my same logic, it should be removed on those other pages. But I do point out, again, if there is content that survivor.com has that should be noted to support as background information in any of the seasons, please feel free to link it in.

I will note that survivor.com IS linked in as an external link (and the first non-official one) on the main Survivor page. I think a good compromise would be to have a See-also for the external links within each season that points back to the Ext. links from the main survivor page, and then remove any non-official sites from the individual seasons. This way, there's still a reasonable list of top fansites but limited to one place (the main survivor page), as opposed to linking into every single season. As long as the editors are selective to include more authoritative sites, such as both survivor.com and survivorfever.net, but after the offical ones, then I think that should make everyone happy.

(As I understand the logic behind the WP::EL ideas, the resistance against fansites is more that people personally involved with the site will post said external links, which raises conflict of interest questions (See 4.1 in WP:EL) in addition to the linkfarming that can occur. I've no idea what your relationship to that site is, so I can't say if that's the case here or not). --Masem 05:02, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

He's the webmaster of survivor.com. --Maxamegalon2000 05:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I said that in the very post I put here. It's also why I am letting you guys decide while I walk away. --C331673 06:16, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Spoilers

I'm curious, I don't go onto a lot of forums or message boards, so I'm not up-to-date on spoilers, but several different users keep adding generally the same thing - is it a coincidence or are they getting it from somewhere? -- Scorpion 03:29, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Spoiler sites generally have the winning tribes, who's going to exile, and who's voted off, but they rarely have the breakdowns that people have been posting. I don't know where that information is coming from. --Masem 03:36, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

This next episode is kinda unique in that you can find out from screen captures and stuff who's switching tribes. There's more to spoil this week. Probably some guessing, too. --Maxamegalon2000 03:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Trivia

The article says that "this was the first time first five people were voted out consecutively." Does Survivor: Vanuatu not count for some reason? (Leann was voted out 12th, followed by Ami, Julie, Eliza and Scout).

The Dark Lord Trombonator (((¶))) 05:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Good point. I decided to remove the entire entry because I didn't think that the item that the first five voted out were all of the same gender was particularly notable. However, I have this feeling that somebody will disagree with me on that. =) -- Gogo Dodo 05:41, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it kinda is but because it already happened in Vanuatu (although not first) then im not going to argue with its deletion. On a completely unrelated note the trivia section of Survivor: Panama is way too long. Does someone wanna help me in shortening it significantly? I would do it myself, but id probably keep everything :) Survivorfan101 12:11, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I'd probably delete everything. =) How about we meet in the middle? I deleted a few things. If you want to discuss, let's move to the Talk page over there. -- Gogo Dodo 17:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I've started the cleanup! Although there is still more that can potentially go, so feel free to go fishing yourselves! This message (or a version of it) will also be left on the Panama talk page; you can re-read it there. The Dark Lord Trombonator (((¶))) 10:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Elimination Notes-Lisi

Wasn't the vote 4-1? I thought Ravu only had 4 members left after the vote. --LuigiManiac 04:26, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

It was. I got confused from reverting the odd edits that you reverted. Sorry about that. -- Gogo Dodo 05:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Vanuatu

Moto came up with a great strategy to win the Reward Challenge after initially falling behind. The challenge was almost exactly the same as the one in Vanuatu.

This is incomplete on it's own. It should at least say which episode in Survivor Vanuatu the challenge was shown in Nil Einne 19:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Spoilers

I already made this comment above but after reading an unacceptable hidden comment, I think it is important to emphasise this. Removing spoilers simply because they are spoilers is completely unacceptable per wikipedia policy. Please check out Wikipedia:Spoilers. On the other hand, speculation and unsourced claims should be removed as with any article. If an episode is not aired, it is unlikely that most 'spoilers' could be properly sourced (that episode obviously can't be used as a source). However if there are any spoilers that are sourced, for whatever reason, then removing them is completely unacceptable. Please don't do it. If you want don't want to read them, either don't edit and read this article, or take great care in reading it Nil Einne 19:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Occupations regarding this and past seasons

I was wondering why is there an inconsistency with contestant occupations? I was told (not mentioning names/usernames) that in some seasons such as Guatemala, have their occupations present. In others like Panama Exile Island don't have it and some seasons like Cook Island and Fiji have kept on changing this by adding and/or removing it for no valid reason. Can that imformation just be left alone since this information is correct and isn't abusing any article(s) at all? I really would like to hear the reasoning for this and saying it's irrelevant doesn't count. I'm hoping to get this clarified as I felt that my edits are of no value at all. Willbender 08:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

It was talked about in Cook Islands (see [3]) and while no consensus was reached, the favoring view was to leave them in. But it is noted that all Survivor pages are lacking consistency, and I'm trying to see how to get a Task Force under the TV project as to set some standards for each season. Regardless , I've not been reverting changes on the contestant table if it only is adding in occupations (other spoilery or vandal info, yes). --Masem 14:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Adding HII info for the table?

I'm wondering if, particularly in this season, if it makes sense to add in the HII holder(s) as of entering tribal council (to the best we know about) in the week-by-week summary table, using one extra column (after "Immunity") and then adding a symbol, like '+', to indicate if it is used. Obviously until this season, knowing where the HIIs were was not hard to figure, but now that we're getting HII action, this might make sense to add. I would then also add them back to past seasons where relevant. --Masem 21:03, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I have mixed opinions on that because of the problem of verifiability. We can guess who has it as any one time, but we really don't know. Sure, Yau-Man probably has his, but does he really? Did he bring it with him to Tribal Council or did he leave it thinking he was completely safe? -- Gogo Dodo 21:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree, that's the only thing we're not sure about. Up to this point, the show has been truthful to us that we know, by the end of TC, where the idol is still (Gary finding it, Becky not getting it from Yul), but that's still secondary logic to say that someone still has it. It may be a better thing to add post season (or post F5 when the idols are useless), if to add them at all. --Masem 21:55, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Purple colour

Just to note, a purple colour with half the luminosity of "#FF00FF" would be "#800080", not "#880088". Hallpriest9 11:59, 11 May 2007 (UTC) 11:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

It took me a moment to figure out what you were talking about, but I see what you mean now. I forgot that we decided that a purple color would designate castaways on Exile Island during votes. I missed that somebody changed the color a long time ago. I changed it back. Except now the problem is that the purple color chosen for that is pretty close to the Bula Bula purple color. -- Gogo Dodo 16:46, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Who merits an individual article?

Apart from Earl, so do we want to start individual articles for some of the more notable contestants? I am thinking particularly of Yau-Man and Dreamz.

KConWiki 11:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Somebody keeps making a page for Rita Verreos but I think shes NN because:

1. It says she competed in a pageant, but it doesn't say anything of how she finished
2. She appeared in a film that doesn't have a wikipedia page and thus is NN
3. She had a relationship with Peter Gabriel, but Wikipedia does not give pages for having relationships with celebrities
4. She was voted out early in Survivor and did nothing of note.

I hope that I am not forced to go to afd on this because I have a bad feeling that certain inclusionists will do their best to keep the page. As for Yau-Man and Dreamz, I have no problem with that, especially with Yau-Man since he is the most popular of the season. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 17:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

For what it's worth, Marked for Death, starring Steven Seagal, has had an article since 2002. I don't think that it is appropriate to assume that because a film does not have an article, it does not merit one, but that's neither here nor there. --Maxamegalon2000 19:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

We had the same problem after CI, people making pages for some less than notable contestants (J.P. I think...). I think a conclusion we reached was that it's fine to actually make a "List of Contestants in Survivor: Fiji" so that the minimal details could be put in for non-notable people (and thus taking the need to have contestant occupations on the list in the season pages), and only for very notable people (usually the final 4, but like for someone like Jonathan from last season ) that page can then point to their actual wiki pages. However, if the only notable thing is that they got to the final X, and that's all that's known about them, there shouldn't be a new page. Otherwise, it looks like fancruft. --Masem 17:14, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

There was an attempt at making a list article for Cook Islands, but it was deleted. After going through three AfDs, J.P.'s article still exists. The consensus seems to be that the winner, obviously, gets their own article and the runners-up tend to get an individual article. But generally, others have to have some notability outside of Survivor. Though there are some exceptions, like Rafe Judkins. -- Gogo Dodo 17:20, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I think Yau-Man and Dre are good choices for articles. Yau-Man made it to the final four, and was the most popular of the season. Dre should get an article because he was the biggest backstabber in the history of the game...just kidding. Dre deserves an article because of how much he affected the final outcome of the game, and he did tie for 2nd place with Cassandra. I don't think she deserves an article because she probably won't be remembered that much down the road. --LuigiManiac 17:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Rita Verreos is up for afd here. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 21:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

If we're going to go ahead with making Yau-Man Chan's article then maybe we should get started. An anon has already changed the redirect into a one-sentence article. --LuigiManiac 01:01, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, I've done some additions to the Yau article. KConWiki 01:49, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. After seeing the article, I added him to the contestant template. --LuigiManiac 02:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Hometown or birthplace?

I noticed that the town and state under Earl Cole's name in the Contestant's table was just changed from Santa Monica, CA (his hometown) to Kansas City, KS (his birthplace). The problem is there is nothing in the table to indicate what the town and state are supposed to represent, and I hate to see people editing back and forth without clarity of purpose. Perhaps the column should be labeled 'Contestant / Hometown' or 'Contestant / Birthplace'. Personally, I think hometown makes more sense.

Eleos^Prime 18:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I reverted it to Santa Monica to follow what is on the official Survivor website. -- Gogo Dodo 07:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Second place?

Who got the $100,000 second-place prize, Dreamz or Cassandra? Latitude0116 03:16, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

CBS hasn't said anything about it yet, so right now we don't know. --LuigiManiac 03:42, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I think for purposes of uniformity on the page that Dre should be 3rd and Cassandra 2nd as this was the order shown in the reunion show. Anyone agree or disagree? I dont want to change it to be quickly reverted. Survivorfan101 06:06, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree with that. -- Gogo Dodo 06:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I consider Dre to be the 2nd place finisher ahead of Cassandra, since he won the final IC. YMMV — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.60.86.50 (talk • contribs) 16:57, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I have added a link to a newspaper article that reported that Dreamz will get $100,000 for placing in the top three. Eleos^Prime 10:30, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

This is related, so I hope it's alright mentioning this here. In the opening summary of the article, is says "For the first time in Survivor history, the winner, Earl Cole, was unanimously decided by the jury. In previous seasons, the second-highest vote-gaining contestant was awarded $100,000 but CBS has made no mention of how that will be resolved for this season since the other two castaways in the three-way vote received no votes at all." However, later, in the "Survivor records and firsts" section, it states "Survivor: Fiji is the first season with two runners-up to sole survivor. Dre “Dreamz” Herd "gets $100,000 for his top-three finish"[5]. Cassandra Franklin will also receive $100,000, as she and Dreamz received the same amount of votes for sole survivor (zero). Yau Man was consider to be the 3rd place finisher and received $60,000.[6]" These tidbits are contradictory to each other. Since we've established Dreamz and Cassandra both get the $100,000.00 reward for placing, the summary should be corrected to mention they tied and Yao-Man was awarded the showing prize, yes?(Foxpen 23:50, 15 May 2007 (UTC))

I think it makes sense to combine the information in one place and reword it. Since the #5 reference does not mention Cassandra Franklin, and the #6 reference mentions Yau-Man, Cassandra, and Dreamz it makes sense to drop #5. I fixed it. Eleos^Prime 00:06, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

List of Survivor contestants

This is kind of unrelated, but myself and user:Gogo Dodo have been working on a master list of contestants here which we intend to try to get to FL status. I think it is pretty close right now, but I was hoping to get some opinions from people familiar with the show on how it looks. So, if anybody has any suggestions, feel free to suggest them or implement them. Thanks for the time, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 00:57, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I think it looks good and you guys should be commended for it. Survivor pages are dissappearing lately as i fear the series is coming to an end. Congrats on a new Survivor page Survivorfan101 11:59, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Moto Tribe Color

Why did the Moto tribe color change on this page? ScottAHudson 19:15, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

That is a question I also seek the answer of. The other was much closer to the colour actually showed on the show. ~~ THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR (((¶))) 05:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

It was me. I reverted my color change. Actually, I had gone to the CBS site and color picked the color on the official site. The color was closer, not neon yellow-green as it was and is now. Sorry about that. But it was glaringly painful for me to look at. The colors on a computer screen differ from monitor to monitor anyway, so there is no way to be exact. Green is green, IMO - Jeeny ^Talk 05:21, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Its notable

why is there many people here offended because Jeff Probst mentioned that this season was NOT memorable? on cook islands he said it was the best and on Thailand it says:

"Thailand is considered one of the lesser Survivor seasons, being generally seen as dull, non-competitive, and lacking in interesting personalities. Jeff Probst himself stated that he was not fond of the season, going as far as calling it his least favorite. He described Thailand as a very mean-spirited season marred with hostility and ugliness, and even called Brian, Clay, Helen, and Jan the "The Least Like-able Final Four Ever." [1]"

so if you're going to remove my contribution here, you also have to remove the ones on cook islands Thailand and others. I think you are just angry because Jeff call this season forgettable. A piece of advice "GET OVER IT"

yes i am talking to you Gogo Dodo —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.33.24.13 (talk) 01:15, 24 September 2007 (UTC), not User:Gogo Dodo, as it may well appear.

Mult-Lined Names

For the names that cover two lines, can we use the nonwrap formula to wrap the names onto one line (ex of multi-lined: Yau-Man) ScottAHudson (talk) 18:15, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

sure, but please don't remove the dash, as you did with your last edits. Anastrophe (talk) 18:42, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Earl Exiled Color?

This may seem silly, but should the color that has Earl as Exiled (the purple) in the Voting History Table be changed? It looks a lot like the Bula Bula color. Just checking, so please... don't flame me! Stjimmy61892 (talk) 20:32, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

That shows that Earl was exiled when he was on Bula Bula! Shapiros10 (talk) 12:34, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

But that time he was on Ravu. They hadn't merged yet. Stjimmy61892 (talk) 22:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

No, as soon as he got to moto they exiled him...and he was also exiled on bula bula! And sign your posts! Shapiros10 (talk) 23:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Well... actually if you look at exile notes, he was exiled in ep. 2 after Moto won the Reward/Immunity Challenge, and since it was partly immunity, he was saved from tribal that night. So.... if you're saying that it would show what tribe he was on, shouldn't it be orange? Stjimmy61892 (talk) 20:36, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

This discussion has been touched on above. Sylvia and Lisi's exiles are black because they had no tribe. Earl was part of a tribe during his exile in which he abstained from tribal council, so we elected to give him a "bruised" purple colour representing the emotional trauma or something like that... It is a consistent colouring with previous seasons, and is not the same colour as Bula Bula purple, though it may indeed appear so with your browser. -- THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR 10:08, 4 February 2008 (UTC)