Talk:Celebrity Big Brother (British TV series) series 5/Archive 1

message: The infobox should not be added until the show starts. When it does start, the correct template to use is . Tra (Talk) 15:09, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox 

message: What happened to the list of HMs?? It just went poof!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.2.2.85 (talk) 21:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is coming under heavy vandalism because so many people are going to look at it. Someone just blanked the page, but I've reverted them. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we have an admin on standby to semi-protect all the HM pages as they come up, please, if one of them happens to lurk around here? I'm sending out vandalism warnings to them all as and when but...it's not exactly effective. Jammy Simpson |  Talk | 21:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Shilpa Shetty has been vandalised (and reverted) at least once already sheridan 21:16, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  HMs dissapeared 

message: Is it necessary for them to have separate sections for CBB tagged as current events? — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 21:16, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It limited the vandalism damage (to a degree - by giving them a target, if nothing else), and I imagine there will be significant expansion. These sections may no longer be relevant at the end of the series, but I believe for the moment, a large volume of readers using these articles will be looking for information specifically about their actions on CBB. Jammy Simpson |  Talk | 21:41, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Just removing the vandalism is fine. — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 00:39, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Housemates' articles 

message: Not announced, removed. Samuel 21:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A darn shame! I was looking forward to seeing him humiliating himself. Hazzamon 21:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps he is too well known to have appeared... Halsteadk 17:03, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you mean "too well known" you could say Michael Barrymore was to well known to have appeared and Mark Owen Jezabelda 00:20, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Robert Kilroy Silk 

message: Unfortunately, a lot of housemate images are likely to be fair use. From with previous Big Brother series, it is generally not acceptable to have more than a few fair-use images on one page, and if images were only included for some of the housemates then the article would be biased towards them. A compromise, therefore, would be to have the images only on the housemates' individual articles. Tra (Talk) 18:54, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Have a look at the discussion here. The main problem is that there has to be a 'limited number' of images included, and having pictures for all the housemates does not count as a limited number. Tra (Talk) 19:49, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, each of the housemates has their own article, unlike in the main series. The pictures should be adequate in individual articles. --Majorly (Talk) 19:51, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Housemate images 

message: In the summer, the BB7 article was plagued with what wikipedia calls "weasel words". Can we please be mindful with this article, that this does not happen again? Triangle e 23:39, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Weasel Words

message: According to the sidebar, Donny Tourette has walked off the show. However, he was present during the live show tonight. Canyone care to explain? Ixistant 01:07, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is DigitalSpy a valid and reliable source as per WP:RS? I'm not sure; wouldn't it be better to quote and reference the C4 BB site instead? Ekantik talk 02:11, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In a peer review for the article on the previous series, it was suggested that the article is not sourced entirely from the official website, in order to reflect the huge media coverage generated. Tra (Talk) 02:35, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the clarification. Does this mean that DigitalSpy is a reliable source, though? Ekantik talk 02:41, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think so - they have editorial oversight, the identities of the authors are published, they publish accurate information. I think they would be a secondary source, rather than C4, which are more of a primary source. Tra (Talk) 02:54, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

text: The Channel 4 website and Digital Spy both say Day 4.  J Di talk 23:42, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Day 4 was when the article was published, since the escape took place shortly before midnight. This BBC article says it happened on Friday, i.e. Day 3. Tra (Talk) 18:41, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So should the article be changed? Tra (Talk) 22:01, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it should be.  J Di talk 22:03, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Donny Tourette Walks? 

message: Since it's over (and they passed) I'm switching a few things to the past tense. Torontois 05:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Master & Servant Task 

message: Has anyone noticed that an article went up on the channel 4 website stating that Leo Sayer had escaped, but giving no details save that voting is suspended.Oli 14:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leo Sayer escapes 

message: *I notice this has now been included in his entry. A source has been cited (and it does look quite relliable), but no-one seems to be 100% sure if this happened. Should it be included or not?Anon Dude 18:16, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I couldn't find it but if it's reliable then use it. Ekantik talk 01:42, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep I just found it myself. See Shilpa Shetty where I've written up the whole thing drawing on BBC, ITN and Times of India. Ekantik talk 03:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  According the the Mirror newspaper  (16/1) and the London Lite (15/1) the producers have stated that the word was not Paki. They stated it was a four letter word which was bleeped out. The source therefore appears to be unreliable and probably should be removedGazMan7 13:42, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the Guardian, the word was "cunt", not "Paki". I have updated the Shilpa Shetty page with the reference, you can copy it from there. Ekantik talk 06:25, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The source quoted does not use that word. What has Jade said or done which is alleged to be racist or bullying? - 84.69.168.124 11:39, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What's with the asterisks? There should be no censorship on wikipedia.--Ukdan999 11:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

text: It hardly matters. According to WP:RS it only matters what reliable sources report. If they report "Paki" we do the same. If they clarify that he said "cunt" instead then we update with that information in relation to a racist row. As for Channel 4 they got what they wanted, high viewing figures. :) Ekantik talk 06:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jack Tweedy calling Shilpa Shetty a "f**king Paki" 

message: Triangle e just slapped a Copyvio Template on the 'Criticism' section but didn't list it properly at the correct page. I just did it to help move things along. Ekantik talk 02:57, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wrote the first paragraph of the criticism, someone else added the copyright infringing part. Geoking66 03:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The original criticism bit that was written was GOOD. Then somebody wholesale copied and pasted the rest! Would someone sort it out into a reasonable section and then remove the two tags? You can't accuse people of racism without it giving rise to litigation. Wikipedia could wind up in serious trouble. Triangle e 05:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the guidelines we can revert blatent copyrighted text instead of waiting for this to be processed by an administrator. As the backlog of these pages extends back to December, it would seem the most sensible action to take would be to just remove it, so I have. Otherwise by the time it'd been resolved, the series would've ended. ~~ Peteb16 08:58, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright Violation Template

message: Isn't it a bit redundant to reference a 3rd party source to verify something that happened on the show and can be verified by watching the show?
Is someone looking for links perhaps to the Big Brother transcript? Much of the accusations mentioned are available if they are necessary. --208.44.234.50 20:14, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Watching the show does not fulfil WP:RS, as Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia and citations are needed for most things, especially controversial material. I didn't know there were transcripts available, are they official? If so then we could use them. Ekantik talk 06:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You can cite the television show, but as it's a primary source, only for 'descriptive points about the topic'. Any interpretive claims need to come from secondary sources. Alexj2002 00:01, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Accusations of racism" Necessary Citations? 

message: Hi added a section in the introduction about Carphone Warehouse pulling out of their sponsorship with Big Brother at about 2pm. Can a more experienced editor decide which parts should be moved down to the article and which to be left in the introduction. The same for the Big Brother (UK) article please! Sumit Desai 14:28, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, I've done a tiny bit of editing moving the quote to the relevant section, leaving the main part (i.e. the pulling out as sponsor) in the intro. Hope this is alright with everyone.--Richj1209 16:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it should be mentioned that because so many advertisers pulled their adds, Channel 4 replaced them public service ads (e.g. Fire safety, Metal Health Awareness) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.3.120.27 (talk) 01:24, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carphone Warehouse 

message: Can i/someone add quotes (with appropriate citation) so people can judge for themselves?????
 Sumit Desai 01:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes but you must show both sides of the argument. The article must be neutral. Geoking66 03:46, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Added a few. Preetikapoor0 00:35, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alleged racist quotes 

message: Dont know about Prize Money. Article doesnot have info about this. Can anybody add this in article? Guddu 06:32, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: yeh, thats right but i thought there was a prize for the persons charity, does anyone know about this?Daniel625 23:00, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Surely Donny WOULDN'T have been paid as he walked. Triangle e 01:09, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I read on Media Guardian that he did because of something in the celebs' contracts this year... but cant find the link now! Sumit Desai 02:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Shilpa won CBB and bagged an estimated 100,000 pounds as a prize money.  linkKittu 05:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prize Money 

message: "Ken Livingstone weighed in on the controversy by stating "The racism towards Shilpa Shetty on Celebrity Big Brother is completely unacceptable (sic)." Why the "sic"? Where's the misspelling or other error? --Sam Blanning(talk) 01:07, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sic

message: The user "Preetikapoor0"'s revision of 14:05, 20 January 2007 is completely false and inaccurate!! He added "As of jan 19, 2007, a Channel 4 spokesman agreed that patrticipants were made aware of the controversy, probably explaining the recent explanations and apologies tendered by the housemates and their complete lack of surprise after learning about the latest eviction". This is actually the complete opposite of what the citations provided claim, with the BBC article explicitly stating: “But the producers insist the housemates have not been told about the storm of criticism surrounding the programme.”
Can a registered user please remove these false claims?
:Another section added by a user titled "Housemates made aware of the racism controversy" is also completely wrong and states the exact opposite of the citations provided. As stated above by the BBC: "Producers insist the housemates have not been told about the storm of criticism surrounding the programme". Someone please fix this, Wikipedia should be based on facts and not hearsay!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.105.56.191 (talk) 19:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you're probably talking about the same section, but I've removed it as you were both correct, the information is conflicting and therefore orginal research. I've removed it. ~~ Peteb16 19:46, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it possible to say there was suspicion that the the housemates were tipped off but this has been denied?Fay06 13:50, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

text: It was a problem with a malformed <ref> tag. I've fixed it. Tra (Talk) 21:01, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Actually i Believe that you misunderstood the above citation. According to the BBC - they do say that Producers insist the housemates have not been told about the storm of criticism surrounding the programme. but they also say that A Channel 4 spokeswoman admitted Big Brother had intervened in the latest row - but only to make contestants "realise that what they have said has been misconstrued in the house". The idea, she said, was to allow the housemates "to explain themselves" to their fellow inmates..  In other words contestants now at least have an idea of what is going on outside. see Are housemates aware of race row? BBC. Also Jade said inside the house before she left: "I know why there's no noise." When Shilpa asked "Why?" Jade replied: "I know, but I can't tell you." NO CROWD NO SHOCK.. NO REALITY Shame of Jade's stage-managed exit Mirror Preetikapoor0 14:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Any way if you ask any body on camera. "Were your comment against someone were racially motivated?" he will immediately understand that he has been accused of racism and possibly and start making apologies. Preetikapoor0 14:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Completely Inaccurate Comments in Article 

message: In the beginning paragraphs, specifically that of the racist comments that took place, it says 'Complainers' when referring to the people who had complaints about the racist marks. While I do know that it would be the technical term, it seems to imply that these people are whining about something insignificant, and thats what you usually call someone when they make a big deal about something by calling them complainers or whiners. Perhaps another word could be used, or just use the ambiguous word 'They'? Disinclination 08:00, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Indeed, that does seem to advocate a non-NPOV. I think its been changed now, however. --Richj1209 13:09, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Instead of Complainers? 

message: This article is already too long, and growing fast.
As per an Edit summary by another User, I think that it would be prudent to start up a sub-article on the racism row, just leaving a brief summary in this main article. Use the  template below the relevant header in order to link to the new article.
:I have done this, and the artcile is created at Big Brother Racism Row.  It might need a bit of cleanup, though.  Trixovator 22:14, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's now at Celebrity Big Brother 2007 racism controversy.  Trixovator 23:09, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  57 kilobytes, and rising fast 

message: I just privided a link for one of the quotes noted as neededing citation.  While doing so I noticed that the quote had previously been cited from the Guardian, but had been commented out because the link requires a subscription.  Many news sites on the web offer their stories for a few days for free, then archive them and require a registration / fee to retreive.  What is the policy on this ... seems to me that if we're going to revert all links such as this, then we're going to lose a lot of content that was valid, but just can't be accessed for free anymore. (Hardnfast 20:21, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The Media Guardian website is subscription-based, but its a free subscription. --Richj1209 00:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Citation Link question

message: How long is the series? The article (and Davina on the launch night) says 25 days, but the final is Sunday - making it Day 26. Squidward2602 17:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  How long? 

message: Jo nominated Dirk and Shilpa, not Dirk and Cleo for eviction.  
The link is here: http://www.channel4.com/bigbrother/news/newsstory.jsp?id=1388 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.197.150.159 (talk) 03:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mistake With Jo's Nominations on Day 21 

message: I have brought this section back to this page, having removed it to Celebrity Big Brother 2007 racism controversy, since I thought it was improtant to mention on here.  Please comment.  Trixovator 23:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Sponsor/corporate backlash' 

message: Does anybody know why letter box hasn't been used? — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm guessing either they're going to wait for the very end or with all the bullying/racism controversy, it was forgotten about. Tra (Talk) 18:36, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Perhaps they didn't plan to use it until today anyway... but I'm glad it has now been used. — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:06, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Letter box 

message: We need some Jade and Jo comments in the intro- it is unfair to single Lloyd out (even though she was the most racist). Also Jo's agent died at the weekend. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.141.215.145 (talk) 22:50, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Danielle's comments are only given as an example. The lead section might get a bit long if we start including comments from all three of them. It's probably best to leave them all to the relevent section for the controversy. As for Jo's agent, that might be more suited for the Jo O'Meara article. Since that's semi protected at the moment, you might want to suggest this at Talk:Jo O'Meara. Tra (Talk) 22:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Introduction

message: Anyone knows what the celebs were paid to participate? I heard Shilpa's salary was 350,000£ Medico80 09:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Shilpa's article says she was reportedly paid 31.5m rupees (£367,500) — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 20:33, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Salaries