Talk:Big Brother 11 (American season)

Coup d'Etat in the Voting Table

Ok. In the past, if the Coup d'Etat was used, it was explained that neither the HoH or Coup d'Etat holder could vote (unless there was a tie, the Coup holder would break it). So, I'm guessing that for the table, if the Coup d'Etat is used, we'll give Jeff the Brown Square that was used for "Power Couple" in Season 9 but put "Coup d'Etat Winner" in it or something like that? Also, I think there'd need to be a new bar of "post Coup d'Etat" nominations at the top part. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 20:37, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I made a mock voting table in my sandbox. And keep in mind, I made up the rest of the week to portray the look of the table at the end of the week. I think that is a good way to go. Any suggestions? (Again, I made up those results) –túrian^patois 21:14, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I find the mock table very agreeable. I'd maybe put "Winner" or "Holder" after Coup d'Etat though. T (Formerly Known as FireSpike) 21:45, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I think "Winner" might be good, but I think it is self-explanatory without anything extra. It doesn't mean much to me though, haha. I guess we will use this style unless anyone objects by Thursday. –túrian^patois 21:48, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

IIRC, Julie said that the only ones that can't go up is the HOH, POV, and the owner of the Coup d'Etat. So, IF Jeff were to use it this week, the ones that are safe is Chima (HOH), Kevin (POV), and Jeff (Coup Owner) (& by-proxy Jordan is safe because it's unlikely Jeff would put up Jordan); that leaves Jessie, Lydia, Natalie, Michele, and Russel that can be put up by Jeff.98.163.120.145 (talk) 22:51, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, and if there were a tie (however, with 5 votes it is impossible), Jeff would tie-break. –túrian^patois 22:58, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Instead of an additional bar just for one twist (because it is unlikely the power will resurface this summer), lets try another way. In my sandbox I have Week 5 split into two rounds. The color scheme is borrowed from the UK version when Big Brother canceled an eviction or discounts nominations. What do you think of this version? I think it gives a better representation of what went on during the week. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 00:04, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I guess that is more effective/explanatory. We should use that just to document it more clearly if a completely novice person on the subject were to read it. Good work. –túrian^patois 00:12, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Shouldn't the Coup d'Etat in the hoh column match the one in Jeffs voting column? -Munch60477 11:55, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I saw a conflict in the table. The color background for the Coup d'État in the voting table (light brown) doesn't match the note section below it (light purple). Which color is the correct one? --EPMediaGeek (talk) 04:00, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Brown is, and I fixed it. Thanks! –túrian^patois 04:10, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Chima

There is some kind of circulating news going around that Chima quit. Is it true? If so, it should go up on the article. 24.88.86.28 (talk) 13:02, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

It's True,Production had a meeting and they told Chima that she had to pay for the Mic she destroyed and she went off.Here's what supposely happen (We will all find out all on Tuesday.)

http://www.yakkityyaks.com/the-chima-happenings-rumor/1356/

Forrestdfuller (talk 13:22, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

In regards to this and the way last round was setup - I apologize for tampering with the graph, I was unaware that there was a discussion form here. In my opinion to keep it as eye-friendly as possible, the best way to go about this would be to make another bar for the post-coup nominations. I think both alternatives are about equally as clear to someone who is a complete newbie. I actually think taking the other route would be more newb-friendly, as a newb I would have nearly no idea what "void nominations" means. I don't think it is really right to put Jeff in the HoH box even with a note underneath as he did not win HoH. As for the Chima situation, I think her nomination should just be crossed out in the top rather then keeping her nomination box and putting that she walked. I'm having issues with my sandbox but here's an outline of my thoughts done using excel:

http://i25.tinypic.com/o881lx.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by DoctorThrills (talk • contribs) 13:27, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I got no problem with putting Chima's name and crossing it out.But I don't think the Double Evection will happen now.Some other rumors have been said as well. Forrestdfuller (talk 13:31, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Has Chima walked or been removed because it says two different things in the article? MSalmon (talk) 13:44, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

She Quit (which is there term for walked) Forrestdfuller (talk 13:45, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, it needs to say that in the summary, and please provide a reliable source MSalmon (talk) 13:47, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I am going to revert all of the stuff about Chima until CBS or Endemol have officially confirmed it MSalmon (talk) 13:51, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Well those are from feed sites and Spoilers have been put on here. Forrestdfuller (talk 13:53, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I have reverted it all back and spoliers are not allowed on Wikipedia MSalmon (talk) 13:54, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Then why is Chima-Natalie on the Nominations list? CBS aint going to tell you until Tuesday and Spoilers are allowed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Spoiler <----- See Forrestdfuller talk13:56, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, stop bringing up the spoilers idea, WP has always allowed spoilers. And we need to keep her ask Walked until sources or the show say she was actually evicted. The sources say as of now that she has walked. –túrian^patois 17:40, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Chima

Should it really say "walked" and not "expelled"? According to the HGs, Chima quit. But according to the producers, Chima was booted by the producers, see this press release: http://www.cbspressexpress.com/div.php/cbs_entertainment/release?id=22496

Juppiter (talk) 20:27, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Yep, we were waiting for something like that. Thanks. –túrian^patois 20:30, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I believe that it should say expelled for now; according to the producers, she was kicked out for not abiding with the rules. amberdawson (talk) 21:18, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

This is in a way similar to Dawn's departure in BBUK where she received a message from her family about an emergancy and for her to come home but she was caught by Big Brother for telling housemastes it was code in the event she was being negatively viewed by the public. She said she quit (walked) but Big Brother (producers) said she was removed from the house for using code. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 05:16, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Chima wrote a letter stating she quit from the show...read it on bigbrothergossip.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris4z01 (talk • contribs) 15:22, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Michele no longer HOH

I've been watching the feeds and Michele is no longer HoH. Her reign is over and they are doing a new Head of Household competition today, Day 42 to crown a new HoH. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jphil126 (talk • contribs) 21:09, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, her rein as HOH is officially over. Everybody, except Michele, are able to compete in today's HOH Comp. If you're wondering why Michele is no longer the HOH, why Natalie is off the block, and they're playing for a new HOH, the answer is simple...after Chima got evicted/quit last night, BB decided to start the week over & the double eviction will not be taking place as originally planned. amberdawson (talk) 21:18, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Therefore, a new HOH is going to be held on the same week: WEEK 6. Someone please change the table on the Big Brother 11 page. Also, no voting will be cast upon when Michele had her reign. (therefore, no veto competition as well) amberdawson (talk) 21:24, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Michelle won HOH on day 40, on day 42 a new HOH will be announced please fix the chart accordingly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooly123 (talk • contribs) 21:26, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I changed the second one to Day 43, but the first one should still be day 41, since the week begins the day after the HoH competition (see previous seasons for details). –túrian^patois 21:41, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

"Michele was dethroned as the HoH; as a result, another HoH competition was held on Day 42.[32]" - Just to clarify, Michele's was NOT dethroned as the HOH. It is more like her reign as HoH is over. Please change that. Thanks. amberdawson (talk) 21:41, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Holy crap, what a day in the Big Brother house. Do we have it confirmed anywhere that this week is definitely NOT a double elimination? I'd agree and assume it isn't, but we still should find proof somewhere. Dayewalker (talk) 21:46, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Among the bounty of sources, yes, there won't be a double eviction. –túrian^patois 21:48, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Ejected should be Expelled

During Big Brother 2 and Big Brother 4 the correct USA term is expelled. Ejected is the UK term form Housemates that are removed by Big Brother. This should be changed to expelled to match past articles. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 22:08, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

"Expelled" sounds a lot more correct to me than "Ejected" plus as you said it'd be consistent with Justin and Scott that way. 72.224.76.224 (talk) 22:12, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Ejected is the proper term, not Expelled as Ejected is used on both UK and USA Big Brother articles MSalmon (talk) 22:15, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Big Brother 2 (US) and Big Brother 4 (US) have had "Expelled" for years, so I don't really get what you're saying here. I'm not gonna change it until there's consensus, but I think it should be changed to "Expelled." 72.224.76.224 (talk) 22:18, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

If you go back to the archives sites of Big Brother 2 & Big Brother 4, the production team does use the term "Expelled", also when Justin was removed Julie used the phrase "Expelled". Therefor "Expelled" should be used in USA articles as it is the proper term used by production. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 22:33, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't know that the term is different for UK and USA BB articles MSalmon (talk) 22:34, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

That's why before you talk about similarities between seperate articles, you have to check first to make sure you're correct before speaking.Stjimmy61892 (talk) 22:50, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Gray or White for No eviction?

Should the no eviction color be gray or white in the voting table? MSalmon (talk) 22:44, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Gray, for these reasons:

1. White bleeds out into the rest of the table so the info doesn't stand out like the other red eviction spaces.
2. The boxes in the center section are gray, so it looks better for consistency.
3. Season 2 has had it for a long time and it has worked ever since.

Also, the No voting does not need to be broken, aka br tags. Just because there are two words does not make it okay to do so. It looks sloppy in that manner (and again, Season 2 had them on one line). Keep in mind Nominated takes up more space than No voting. –túrian^patois 22:48, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't really mind what you use, I just thought I would start a disscussion about it MSalmon (talk) 22:50, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

And for those that don't believe me:

Nominated

Household

No voting

They all have the same amount of characters but the first two take up more space. There is no reason to break it. –túrian^patois 22:52, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

For formatting and standardization. The project page describes what should be placed in a cell and what color. In worldwide versions they typically don't vote they nominate so the cell typically says No<br>nominations, since the USA version votes the cell should be displayed as No<br>voting to keep in line with format standardization. Also the UK set the standard for white as No Eviction and other similar events/twists. And the USA articles set the standard for the HoH color, editors of other articles did discuss a seperate HoH color for those articles but where the USA was using a certain color those articles had to use the color established by the USA articles. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 22:59, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

But when the breaking looks awful, then it is okay to change. That is a minor aesthetic thing. But the white needs to be changed on all of the BB articles then, per my first two reasons above. If there is no gray in the central part, then it can remain white (as in the BBUK versions); but since we use the gray, it needs to be gray in the bottom section. It looks better and more encyclopedic. –túrian^patois 23:02, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

A white cell in a HouseGuest row indicates that they weren't in the House at that time and they joined the show in progress. See Big Brother 2002 (UK) and Big Brother 5 (U.S.) ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 23:06, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

/=> I am talking about the columns, my bad. It uses gray all the way down it... then BOOM! It turns to white? It looks awful and amateurish. Either make them all white or all gray (preferable gray), but not both. –túrian^patois 23:09, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

external links

what happen to the links for the twitter hoh page? why was it deleted. if someone could bring it back would be most loved. thank you 01:48, 16 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ford1206 (talk • contribs)

Links to Twitter are usually discourage per WP:ELNO. –túrian^patois 01:54, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

But they are official Twitter pages so I think those are allowed since they are run by the show. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 01:58, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I think they should be on there, but someone else removed them yesterday or so. –túrian^patois 02:02, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

More Chima

Apparently, she sent an email to Examiner.com claiming that she did in fact walk, and that the producers are lying about the expulsion. I'm not saying that it should be changed back yet, but only that it is something to continue to keep an eye on: http://www.examiner.com/x-14612-Big-Brother-Examiner~y2009m8d15-Big-Brother-11-Exclusive-chat-with-Chima-Simone 76.166.19.181 (talk) 05:53, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

For now we should go with the official CBS explanation regarding her exit which is the producers booted her out. I am sure that 75% of this will be revealed either Sunday or Tuesday. Also like I mentioned earlier this is similar to when Dawn in BB7 UK was ejected. She received a message from home about an urgent personal matter but it was really code from her family to come home she was being badly viewed by the media. She had asked BB to leave various times but Big Brother didn't remove her until BB found out she had a code set up with her family. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 10:20, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Although it is possible that both sources are diluting the events that happened, I am more inclined to believe the stance of the producers, as I saw the nonsense come out of Chima's mouth. Her story doesn't fly as of now, perhaps later though. –túrian^patois 18:08, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I have no problem with including part of Chima's statement as a counterpoint to CBS's statement, however it should clearly be marked as her interpretation of the events. We can give both sides of the story and let the readers decide what they think happened. Dayewalker (talk) 18:19, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Then add the controversy that you had deleted as well. –túrian^patois 18:20, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

What controversy are you referring to? Dayewalker (talk) 18:24, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

This one. –túrian^patois 18:27, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

(OD) What does one have to do with the other? The removed section dealt with speculation, this section deals with the verified fact of Chima's ejection, and the verified reaction and explanations from the two sides involved. Dayewalker (talk) 18:30, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

It provides information leading up the controversy. If you just mention the microphone then readers will hardly see the problem with that. She has been freaking out for days, and it is important to make note of it. –túrian^patois 18:32, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

The section I removed dealt with speculation that Chima was the sole reason for the live show being taped this week. As for your comment that we should portray the houseguests "as they are," Wikipedia isn't here to portray anyone as anything. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and presents information from reliable secondary sources. WP isn't a fansite, everything we post should be properly sourced.

I don't see what one section has to do with the other, since this section is discussing whether or not to include part of Chima's post-expulsion statement. Dayewalker (talk) 18:42, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

1. Don't presume to tell me what Wikipedia is. 2. It was properly sourced. It is controversy since it was supposed to be a live show but wasn't. And we need to assume NPOV. It was controversial, ergo a controversy. –túrian^patois 18:48, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the live show being taped was a significant event and should have been noted. However, your edit took a source that speculated the change was due to fear of Chima disrupting the event, and presented it as verifiable fact. We don't make the jump in logic from speculation to certainty. "Controversy" should be verified as controversy through reliable secondary sources, not through our own opinions or observations.

We're getting way off topic here, I'd suggest that if you still want to discuss the previous edit, we take it back to the relevant section of this talk page. Since no one else seemed to have a problem with my edit, we really shouldn't be taking up space in a section dealing with a current question. Dayewalker (talk) 18:56, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Discussion on use of sources in Big Brother articles.

This will effect all Big Brother articles, so you may want to see this discussion. DJ 21:23, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

That discussion has no bearing on the BB U.S. articles. –túrian^patois 22:08, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes it does; the outcome of this will affect all articles under WP:BIGBRO. DJ 22:11, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

No, it won't. Start a discussion on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Big_Brother or the American project page, not on the UK page. –túrian^patois 22:15, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I've directed other pages to the discussion on the UK page. Therefore, the location is irrelevant. DJ 22:19, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

No. It isn't. A simple move is all that is needed. –túrian^patois 22:24, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I started the discussion there. It really doesn't matter. You've now started the same argument on 2 talk pages. Just deal with it. DJ 22:29, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Changes needed

In the HouseGuests table, the eviction days need to be changed. Go the CBS website, and watch episode 4, the first eviction episode. Julie says "it's only day 11." So, under the evictions in the HouseGuests table, day 12 needs to be changed to 11, day 19 needs to be changed to 18, and etc. 76.127.235.42 (talk) 21:59, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

If you are talking about the Voting History table, then it is correct because apparently Julie said Day 11 when she should have said Day 12 MSalmon (talk) 22:02, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Correct, Julie was incorrect when saying "Day 11". –túrian^patois 22:09, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

That's what I thought MSalmon (talk) 22:09, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

List of Big Brother (U.S.) HouseGuests is now a Featured List!

Everyone, Another Believer has been working on List of Big Brother (U.S.) HouseGuests and has gotten the list up to FL-Class! This is a great achievement and the first FL-List for WP:BIGBRO as a whole. I honestly think that we can get more of the BB articles up to A-Class, GA-Class or even dare I say it FA-Class. I think that we should take a look at other reality based competition shows that have FA-Class articles and see what we can incorporate to make the BB USA/BB UK articles and other BB articles around the world to FA-Class. I believe this year the editors of the USA and UK articles have a great start here. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 04:42, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Posted to Big Brother 11 (U.S.), Big Brother 2009 (UK) and WP:BIGBRO. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 04:42, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Should there be a Separate Table for the Jury Members?

Should there be one? cause it could be useful on the Last Night so that way we could see how the Jury Members vote and how America Votes in place of Chima's Vote98.163.120.145 (talk) 22:40, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

No, see Big Brother 10 (U.S.) for how that is done. –túrian^patois 23:13, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

A note will be added for America's vote if that is the case, similar to how Big Brother placed a penalty vote against Jen in BB8. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 00:41, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I think that where Chima's vote was to go, we can background it blue like the Jury Member box and place America's Vote there. But that is just a suggestion. –túrian^patois 00:44, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

It may confuse new readers that don't follow the show heavily. The best way I can think of is a note in the table, or maybe a space for America's Vote somehow. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 01:39, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

But the note is the best way I can think of to preserve the accuracy of the table. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 01:41, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Is there an official confirmation that Chima's lost jury vote is being given over to an "America votes" thing? Tarc (talk) 15:29, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

CBS has officially confirmed that Chima will not be part of the jury. The America vote is just one scenario going around on how CBS will replace Chima's vote. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 15:37, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Can someone please add a space for Russell using the veto and taking Natalie off?

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.109.36.13 (talk) 23:15, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

No, because the veto competition is happening tomorrow. Nice try. –túrian^patois 23:23, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Nice catch, T. Dayewalker (talk) 00:22, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Woops. Im sooo sorry. I seriously thought thats what happened. Because I was watching the feeds and thats what Michele had said. Sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.109.36.13 (talk) 01:01, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Bold move in Voting history

I removed the usual lead in and replaced it with a Legend of the colors used. Most reality shows do this and the format of the show is either linked to the main series article or written that specific season. If the Legend works and helps improve the article standard we will implement it on other articles and even have a project wide discussion to apply it to other Big Brother articles. What do you think? ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 03:16, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I dislike it. It is a tad much since everything is clearly explained in the table already. I think we should keep the intro. And keep in mind BB is a lot different than other reality competitions. –túrian^patois 03:21, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Yea I don't like it either (looks weird), but I was thinking a lot of information is duplicated in the voting history table so trying to cut down/remove duplicate information might help. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 03:25, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I think all that happened was redundancy was added. I think the table is set up rather well as is. –túrian^patois 03:27, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I think you could have left the change up for a little longer to get other editors opinions on the change instead of reverting it after you saw it. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 04:06, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

You said you didn't like it and this. –túrian^patois 04:08, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay, my bad what I meant was that I didn't like the way it looked. If anyone would like to see what we are talking about click here. Just leave it for now and if anyone wants to discuss it further they can look at the revision history. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 04:27, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

It just repeats information because we don't abbreviate anything in the table (such as American Idol, etc.). The table is explains itself. –túrian^patois 04:37, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Controversy

It should be added what Jeff had said in the previous episode "I'll break the mirrors and light the beds on fire" Also should be noted that Chima caused the 8/13/09 thurs show to not air live and please mention some of her comments throughoput the show that they aired ffc etc. -- 17:22, 20 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooly123 (talk • contribs)

You totally misunderstood what Jeff said. Go back and watch it again. And controversy worth noting is controversy that reaches outside the house. –túrian^patois 17:44, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Also, controversy is not the same as sensationalism. Something is only controversial if there are differing opinions on what took place or who was at fault in some issue. If someone was offended by Jeff's comment, and there was some noteworthy discussion over whether it was right for him to say it, then it would be a controversy.