Talk:Big Brother (Australian TV series) season 1

message: For edits regarding popularity, as well as a good clean up needed.ZlatkoT 11:51, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If by popularity you're referring to Sara-Marie, it's true.  It's on the BB06 website as well.  —JD[don't talk|email] 11:52, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no references for it though.ZlatkoT 11:59, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no point, because the series just ended; and the website will most likely be taken down in a week or so, or replaced with a new site for BB07 information.  —JD[don't talk|email] 12:00, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Extremely POV/Citations needed

message: This page is inconsistent with the latest style of the series Big Brother Australia series 6, and needs to be brought up to date with images, bios, diary, etc. Ste4k 10:40, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's not much information left about the earlier series, but I can try my best to expand on it later, if people don't mind.  --JDtalkemail 10:42, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

text: It would appear to be more important than editing the current version. The longer this waits, the less odds people will have of finding the information. You should also consider that you are not the only editor on Wikipedia. Ste4k 10:52, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course I'm not, but it seems unlikely that anybody else would do it, since the page is so old and no major edits have been made in a while.  If anybody else is willing to do it, then by all means I'm not going to complain or anything.  I was just saying that I will try later today, to try and do that.  --JDtalkemail 10:55, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I find it puzzeling that you believe that you can both predict the future and judge the rest of all of the editors on Wiki in such a manner. Clearly you fail to recognize that by scheduling cleanup this is the purpose of such actions. Thanks Ste4k 11:05, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If by preficting the future you're referring to my last comments on this page, I'm not making a prediction, I'm assuming.  I know I shouldn't assume, but based on the page history it seemed unlikely that anybody else would do anything major.  I'm not trying to schedule anything, I'm just saying that if nobody else does anything major to the article by the time I'm back at home, I will try to do something to help it.  Sorry if the way I'm coming across seems a bit arrogant or anything like that, it wasn't what I was trying for.  --JDtalkemail 11:30, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cleanup started with some links. Not sure what "jargon" needs a cleanup though. I'll add some more info on this first season when I think of it. Big Brother has really come under the magnifying glass on wikipedia this last couple of days. Look at the failed attempts to have Ryan Fitzgerald and Simon Deering evicted and the arguments over Tim Brunero and David Mathew. Asa01 11:25, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: Series 1 is listed as starting on April 23, which was a Monday (I just checked). Can someone confirm that the opening night was aired on the Monday? I thought they all started on Sunday, but I might be wrong. This also applies to Series 2's starting date, was that a Monday, too?
:: Series 1 actually started on a Tuesday, though the housemates went in on a Monday. Series 2 aired on a Monday, the housemates entered on the Sunday. I think in Series 3 and 4 opening night was on a Sunday and it was live, from Series 5 on housemates have entered on the Saturday (which was known as Day 0 not Day 1) and it was aired on the Sunday. -- 3bay sam 04:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date Clarification 

message: Rachel (2001), Nicole (2002), Jaime (2003), Violeta (2004) were all evicted through existing housemates voting for which intruder they wanted to stay. Each year, these specials were advertised as "Housemate's Revenge". Only Jaime from 2003 is quoted as being evicted in this way. Due to no public involvement, this is significant and thus I have added these to the respective years' HM tables. 
121.45.231.227 11:32, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intruders 

message: :Image:BB12.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 06:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:BB12.jpg

message: :Image:BB2001.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 06:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:BB2001.jpg

message: I have upgraded this article to C-Class as it meets the criteria, the article has a good amount of information but not enough yet for B-Class. More reliable sources would be good to improve the article. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 22:21, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Upgraded to C-Class 

message: The information in the table for week 11 looks wrong. The table indicates that Ben was nominated, but gives a percentage for the votes received by Blair. The nominations in the top part of the table suggests that Ben would have been nominated, not Blair. Is somebody able to clarify this? 124.168.60.121 (talk) 10:37, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Week 11 nominations? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Big Brother 1 (Australia). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101230185146/http://www.dreamworld.com.au/Schools/pdf/DW-Schools-History.pdf to http://www.dreamworld.com.au/Schools/pdf/DW-Schools-History.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:52, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Celebrity Big Brother 1 (U.S.) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 05:18, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: Does Wikipedia:Naming conventions (television) apply, and/or does it need clarification on this point?
And I suggest that it would be good to cite other articles which are or aren't similarly affected. Andrewa (talk) 02:40, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:NCTV does indeed apply, as that is the sole purpose of a naming convention guideline. Does it need clarification? Also no. While it may not be ordered correctly in my opinion, the guideline is pretty straight forward in how this should go:  with the "above" mentioned referring to: . Additionally, There is no need to bring in other articles as I'm sure there are numerous articles that aren't adhering to a guideline or policy, that doesn't mean they suddenly become a consensus. Regardless, if anyone feels the guideline should be changed, that is a different discussion which should probably be held over at the naming convention page. --Gonnym (talk) 09:40, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, I've been convinced by the ongoing discussion that it should be "(Australian season x)" (at least in this case). But I'd rather this not be done "piecemeal", and be done "all at once" with all of the mis-disambiguated Australian "season" articles moved en masse. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:29, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Is this technically possible? How would this be done? I am of course in support of that action, I do however think that this move request should not be taken "hostage" by a future mass move. --Gonnym (talk) 20:27, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, a "mass move" is certainly possible –  allows for it. Note that I have not formally !voted in this particular RM, and probably won't. But I do feel it would be better if all of these mis-disambiguated Australian "season" articles were handled in a single RM. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:46, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  I know about requesting more articles via the RM template, but that requires first finding the articles then manually adding them in. I was asking if there was a way not to do it manually, as I know that I do not have the will to do that. For this move, I did request all the seasons of BB so they are all handled together. --Gonnym (talk) 21:07, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

text: I'm not sure. I'm honestly don't think these are just quick and easy moves. As mentioned by User:Alucard 16, "WP:NCTV (as the guidance for editors) is not clear that the adjective should be applied to season articles like its parent series". As mentioned in the Denmark discussion, other examples include "X Factor (Denmark season 8) and Idols (Denmark season 1)"; in the Argentina discussion, examples include "Bailando por un Sueño (Argentina season 1)". As mentioned by User:IJBall in the Australia discussion, "there are numerous current examples of "Australia season [x]" in use – e.g. The Voice (Australia season 7), The Bachelor (Australia season 2), etc. So this probably requires a wider discussion on the question." Paintspot Infez (talk) 23:30, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion