Talk:Big Brother (American TV series)/Archive 1

message: This article did not need to be moved. It was just fine where it was. Mike H 05:38, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)
:It makes no sense to have moved this article to CBS TV series.  Someone from another country looking for information on the American Big Brother won't necessarily know that the show airs on a network called CBS.  They'll look for the Big Brother article related to USA, and the old name made it clear which BB were talking about.   I suggest we move it back. 70.48.92.135 12:36, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. 132.205.47.180 15:50, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree too. The distinction is between the countries airing it, not the network. -- Netoholic 16:31, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

text: Search engines hit upon and display the title of pages, so a Google-r typing in "big brother tv" would see this article's title and see more easily what the link was pointing to ("Big Brother (USA TV series)" as opposed to "Big Brother (USA)").  The abbreviation "TV" is used far more often than "television" on the web, mostly because its easier to type. -- Netoholic 03:43, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Moving

message: I have suggested that Sovereign Two be merged into here.   There's no point in separate articles for every alliance.  I like articles for contestants, and maybe seasons.  But not for these types of details.  --rob 01:44, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Sovereign Two

message: Does anyone else think that it might be a good idea to split the seasons out into their own articles? They are all well fleshed out, and the page is long and unwieldy as is. Philthecow 00:06, August 22, 2005 (UTC)
:Whenever someone tries to create a new article about BB USA, someone else puts a VfD tag on it so for now I don't recommend that you do that.
::I agree. It should be more like the UK version, with each season having a seperate page. It's just getting to long and hard to navigate. Also, the synopsises for each season could be longer and more detailed if there is a split.Geoking66 17:42, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. Its the way I'd like the information presented. --Jmccorm 00:58, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: How about this?Geoking66 02:03, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Egads, this article is way long. Please split it. If anyone complains on AfD, point them to the talk page where you can show consensus to split. howcheng  {chat} 22:12, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur.  I would happily support a split.  I'll look it over more closely, and see how practical it would be (I'm not sure if I'm able to do it myself).  Before doing the split, I think we should all see what kind of trivia can be taken out of completely (not relocated, but eliminated).  A a good starting point might be the section called tat's actually called "Trivia" (a good hint it's not important enough to keep).  Rather than figure out which article each trivial point goes with, it might be easier to just ditch the ones we don't need.  Hopefully, now that times past, we can recognize some of this stuff just doesn't matter.  But, I'm also not interested in a revert war if people want to keep everything. --Rob 23:40, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Split?

message: Just to let people know, the Janelle Pierzina article is up for a second vote for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Janelle Pierzina 2.  Most anti-keepers wish to do a merge, so the decision in that article, will effect this article; which is why I'm putting this here.  --rob 11:37, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Janelle Pierzina re-vote 

message: Please visit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashlea Evans for a discussion of whether her bio article should be kept, deleted, or merged into this article.  --Rob 17:17, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Ashlea Evans]] being considered for deletion 

message: Please visit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Donnellan (reality television contestant) for a discussion of whether his bio article should be kept, deleted, or merged into this article.  --Rob 19:02, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Michael Donnellan (reality television contestant)]] being considered for deletion 

message: The template  is being considered for deletion.  To participate in the discussion go to Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Big Brother USA season 6 background.  This template is included in all of the bio articles for Big Brother USA season 6.  --Rob 08:02, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Template:Big Brother USA season 6 background]] considered for deletion 

message: I haven't watched this show, so when I became curious about it I came to Wikipedia first.  Unfortunately, the article seems to have been written for someone who already has at least a passing familiarity with the show.  If someone who knows the show could do somewhat of a rewrite for the ignorant among us (me, for example), I think it could be improved considerably.  An description of how the show works, what the rules are, and so on should be the first thing, not buried near the bottom and explained poorly at that.  Abbreviations such as "HoH" should be explained the first time they appear, not in subsequent sections.  
Sorry if I sound cranky, but it's frustrating to find an article written for people who probably already know much of what's in it.  I'd do the rewrite myself, but I don't know the subject matter well enough to attempt it, and am not interested enough to do the necessary research.
Septegram 11:32, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overall Issues With This Article 

message: Are there any sites with jokes about the TV series?--Shtove 21:42, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jokes about Big Brother 

message: Does Big Brother USA have various shows with different content?  If it does, how many different shows are there?  --JD[don't talk|email] 21:59, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I was actually going somewhere with this; I didn't ask for the sake of asking.  --JD[don't talk|email] 22:31, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm not exactly sure what you're asking with this, so I hope this helps.  Big Brother USA airs three episodes a week.  On Thursday's episode, (aired live) one houseguest is evicted, and the remaining houseguests compete in the HOH competition.  On Sunday's episode, the HOH reveals who he/she has nominated for eviction.  On Tuesday's episode, the contestants compete in the Veto competition, and if the Veto winner chooses to use it, the HOH nominates a different person for eviction. Thirdreel 00:49, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, thanks.  I was just wondering whether a section for the different shows could be put in this article, similar to Big Brother (Australia)#Shows, but I don't know if there would be any point.  I guess it's not my decision to make anyway, as I haven't seen the shows and don't know how much variation there is between them.  --JD[don't talk|email] 00:51, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought you meant spin-off shows. If so, yes. House Calls, the internet talk show, which corresponds with Big Brother, airs every weekday at 1p.m. EST/10a.m. PST.Geoking66 02:55, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Any chance it could be merged into this article, and have information on other shows included as well?  Or is it better where it is?  --JD[don't talk|email] 02:58, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it should be merged.  Not sure it meets notability standards by itself. --Bill.matthews 02:18, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Big Brother shows 

message: Does anyone think that most of the individual housemate articles are useless and should be deleted? I do. They do not serve any purpose. For examples: Jennifer Dedmon, James Rhine, Erika Landin, Alison Irwin, Diane Henry, Danielle Reyes, etc. Most of the article's mass is about what Big Brother is. According to WP:BIGBRO, articles should only be made for housemates if they have done significant things outside of the house. These housemates and many more US housemates have not done anything much to deserve a separate article. Geoking66 03:11, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If they really aren't necessary, set them as redirects to the relevant season article.  —JD[don't talk|email] 11:24, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  They don't deserve their own articles --Bill.matthews 02:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most housemate articles for deletion 

message: I've removed a heck of a lot of facts from the facts section because there seemed to be a fact for pretty much anything.  I've left what I think are the important ones that I'd be interested in knowing, but if there's something that I've removed that actually is important to the US series of Big Brother, I apologise.  I thought I'd let people know here, so that there is no argument and so I don't get chased down the street by angry mobs with flaming pitchforks and whatnot.  --JD don't talk email me 17:58, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The facts section 

message: People, you can't add things to the article without explaining them.  What's the Coup d'Etat thing?  What does it mean?  Why is it worthy of inclusion twice?  --talk to JD wants e-mail 21:22, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This Coup d'Etat ting or whatever 

message: I'm removing a number of the "firsts" listed, because they refer to things that only happened once.  Thirdreel 22:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Firsts" in timeline 

message: Was there any public vote at all from series 2 onwards, and if so, was it the public who decided who became the winner.--SimonPeter 23:30, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: From season two onwards, houseguests did all the voting, including who won.  talk to JD wants e-mail 23:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Public Vote 

message: Should Power of Veto not be TLAd to PoV, rather than POV?  J Ditalk 03:43, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: I think the Nominations table should be removed as I don't see how it adds to the article.  Information should already be on tables for each season anyway.  jd || talk || 09:27, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nominations table 

message: Quick question: do you think a section on cultural references in the show itself (such as the term Big Brother itself, or the fact one season the 'confessional room' was labled 101) and the influences it's had are warrented?  As one of the first popular reality TV shows, it's been a tremendous influence on modern TV, along with the other 'first wave' RTV shows.  Research might be an issue, but I'd be willing to try. Wintermut3 02:24, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: References and influence

message: I'm thinking of shortening the article by making pages containing the content in specific sections of the artcle and only have short synopses, similar to the Power of Veto section. Geoking66 20:25, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Splitting and Re-organisation 

message: does anyone know if maybe the show is rigged. Some people I know think that it may be rigged because janelle seemed to get a little too lucky on the show. 76.181.209.219 15:45, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  rigged 

message: Someone added this to the page, but I fixed it up to have all the correct information. Do we need it here? If we add it, it makes the page look bulky. What do you guys think? ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 23:55, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Definetely the wrong picture for the infobox. I don't think it's necessary. - Spyke1077 02:09, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  TV Infobox 

message: It should be made clear in the article that Big Brother is not considered a game show by the FCC since the outcome is pre-determined. In fact, it is classified as an entertainment show just as pro-wrestling is. Wanzhen 06:17, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We have been through this unless you can provide a source from the FCC Website that this is pre-determined like pro-wrestling then it can be included. Don't provide entries from message boards, fan websites, etc. as sources. This includes the CBS Big Brother message board.  ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 07:29, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  FCC Classification 

message: Successful houseguests often use a combination of the following strategies: 
==== Alliances ====
                	The Big Team Effort
Defined         	Banding together with several houseguests in an alliance, working together for the interests of their collective group.
How It Works    	Some alliances form as a pre-emptive strategy, such as The Four Horsemen (BB5) and The Mrs. Robinson Alliance (BB8) while other teams form as a defense tactic to battle already existing teams. Alliances built for defense are The Sovereign Six (BB6) and The "Pinky Swear" Alliance (BB5). Some alliances are formed as a natural extension of who people preferred to hang out with, as was the case with The Friendship (BB6) or Chill Town (BB2).
The most successful teams in the past have been The Friendship and The Four Horsemen, whose team members successfully filled both seats of the final two in their respective seasons. Chill Town is the only alliance to be used on two different seasons (BB2 and BB7) and a member of Chill Town won each those seasons.
Who Has Used It?	
"Chilltown" (BB2, BB7) -- Mike, Will, Shannon (BB2)
"The Dream Team" (BB4) -- Robert, Justin, Jee
"The Sovereign Six" (BB6) -- Sarah, Kaysar, Howie, James , Rachel, Janelle
"The Friendship" (BB6) -- Maggie, Ivette, Jennifer, Eric, April, Beau
"Late Night Crew" (BB8) -- Amber, Dustin, Jameka, Jessica, Eric
Advantages      	
Voting majority: Controlling a large chunk of votes gives alliances the power to decide evictions
Safety: Better odds of an ally winning HOH over an enemy
Protection: Enemies will have to chip away at your alliance slowly and they target others in your group before targeting you
Disadvantages   	
A threat: Alliances are feared as powerful forces, and non-members will go after them
Out in the open: Enemies know you have other commitments with your alliance and will not trust you enough to make deals
Commitment: If you turn your back on the alliance, everyone in the house will know and find you untrustworthy.
                	The Secret Alliance
Defined         	Creating a covert alliance that the other houseguests don't know about.
How It Works    	Successful secret alliances are often formed in pairs of people who have absolute trust in one another. Since the alliance is secret and only two members are in it, there would be no public display of betrayal if one of the members turned on the other. That means the members must trust each other because there is no recourse if the alliance member were to turn on you. Jason and Danielle pioneered the secret alliance in BB3 and it worked so well, that neither of them were nominated throughout the entire course of the season until the final three when Jason was evicted by Lisa.
Who Has Used It?	
Danielle and Jason (BB3)
Jee and Jun (BB4)
Danielle, Will, Mike, James (BB7)
Will, Mike, Erika (BB7)
Will, Mike, Janelle (BB7)
Dick, Daniele, Jessica, Eric (BB8)
Kail, Zach, Nick, Mike (BB8)
Advantages      	
Under the radar: People are threatened by alliances, but if they don't know you're in one, they can't be threatened.
Working both sides: Members of the alliance can gather information from different sides of the house and secretly compare notes
Double-dipping: Since it's covert, no one would know if you had more than one secret alliance.
Disadvantages   	Hands tied: There is no recourse for betrayal because it would be a secret betrayal. If you told the house about the betrayal, they would know about your secret alliance and find you untrustworthy.
                	Flirting or "Showmancing"
Defined         	Flirting and hooking-up to create an emotionally-invested ally
How It Works    	Though the show has had many romances over the seasons, the first blatant and clearly deliberate use of sex appeal, flirtation and hooking up was used by Alison in BB4. Alison flirted with the men of the house, including her ex-boyfriend Justin and her ally Nathan. Alison's relationship with Nathan caused Nathan to win the POV and save Alison at a time when she would've likely been voted out if she had remained nominated. Eventually, Alison turned on Nathan and evicted him but he still gave Alison her only vote to win in the final two.
Who Has Used It?	Deliberate: Roddy (BB3)  Alison (BB4) Drew (BB5) Mike (BB7) Will (BB7)
Non-deliberate:  Will & Shannon (BB2)  Lisa & Eric (BB3) Janelle & Michael (BB6) Eric & Jessica(BB8) Nick & Daniele (BB8)
Advantages      	Rose-tinted view: A successful in-house romance will cause emotions to cloud your prey's logic and they will make decisions better for you than themselves
Disadvantages   	Ooops: If you start to develop genuine feelings, they will interfere with your goals within the game
Perceived pair: If other houseguests believe you are closer to that person than you are everyone else, they will target you bothGreen: Other houseguests could become jealous or find you untrustworthy if flirt with a number of people
                	Backdooring
Defined         	Nominating two pawns as an HOH with the intention using the POV to remove one nomination and nominate someone else, ensuring they have no opportunity to save themself with the POV
How It Works    	Backdooring did not debut until the number of houseguests who could play for veto was reduced to six. In BB5, when the HOH and two nominees could choose which other three players would compete, Nakomis developed a strategy called "the six finger plan" to evict Jase, a houseguest who repeatedly won the POV, saving himself from eviction. The plan stated that Nakomis, then-HOH, would nominate two pawns and they would pick players other than Jase with the intention of saving a nominee so Nakomis could nominate Jase after POV was played. This lead to Jase's eviction.
Who Has Used It?	
Nakomis to evict Jase(BB5) 
April to evict James (BB6) 
Kaysar to evict Eric (BB6)  
Daniele to evict Jen(BB8)
Advantages      	Retaliation: When you are HOH, backdooring prevents the chance that a nominee can save themself from eviction and then target you next week because you tried to get them out
Disadvantages   	Random draw: In later seasons, a random selection was implemented for choosing POV players, so if the person who wins POV is not on-board with your plan, you will be stuck evicting one of the two original nominees
==== Individual ====
                	The Competition Competitor
Defined         	Winning competitions, such as HOH and POV, to guarantee your safety.
How It Works    	Houseguests who are targeted constantly must rely on this strategy. They must study all things related to Big Brother relentlessly. They should know what has happened on what days, be observant and memorize everything. It also helps to be physically strong, agile and quick. In BB7, houseguests stated they wanted to get rid of Janelle from the first week. She went on to win four HOHs and five POVs, carrying her to third place. When other strategies fail, this one is a last resort.
Who Has Used It?	Hardy (BB2) Alison (BB4) Drew (BB5) James (BB6) Janelle (BB6, BB7) Mike (BB7) Daniele (BB8) Jen (BB8)
Advantages      	Sure thing: Holding HOH or POV is the only way to 100 percent guarantee that you will not be evicted from the house.
Disadvantages   	Spotty coverage: Once a houseguest becomes HOH, they cannot compete the following week. Furthermore, if the houseguest is not nominated at the nomination ceremony, they may not be able to compete for POV.
                  	Being A Loser
Defined           	Throwing competitions, ensuring you never even come close to winning or appearing competent.
How It Plays Works	This strategy was pioneered by Will in BB2 after he realized that people winning competitions and coming close to winning competitions were viewed as threats and promptly targeted. He intentionally lost every competition as to appear non-threatening. Will won BB2. It's important to seem like you are trying to win but are unable to. Players act upset or embarrassed to cover up their plan of throwing them.
Who Has Used It?  	
Deliberate:Will (BB2/BB7) Roddy (BB3) Zach (BB8)
Non-deliberate:Cowboy (BB5) Ivette (BB6) Jameka (BB8)
Advantages        	
No worries: Other players will believe you can easily be picked off down the road because you will never be protected by the POV or HOH powers.
Easy win: Houseguests will want to bring you to the final three under the assumption that they can easily beat you in the final HOH competition to guarantee their slot in the final two.
No blame: You won't have to make any big decisions since you will not be HOH and POV. This means you can avoid blame, avoid taking sides and avoid making enemies.
Disadvantages     	Vulnerable: If you're never protected by HOH or POV, you can be nominated and evicted at any given time.
                	Floating
Defined         	Not taking a take a stand anything and floating to whoever currently has power and agreeing to assist them in whatever way they request.
How It Works    	Floaters will be on the side of whoever has power. When power is relinquished and reassigned to someone else, the floating will then be on that person's side. The term "floating" was coined during BB4. The house was split down the middle with two sides battling each other week after week. Alison and Jun did not join either of these alliances. Instead, they agreed to vote however the current HOH requested, no matter which alliance the HOH was in. As a result, the two alliances took each other out leaving Alison and Jun as the last two houseguests remaining. Floaters don't take sides and they don't make enemies -- they let other people take the blame for what happens.
Who Has Used It?	Jun (BB4) Alison (BB4) James (BB6) Erika (BB7)Zach (BB8)Jameka (BB8)
Advantages      	
Hands clean: Floaters don't do the dirty work of nominating people and it prevents people from resenting them 
Lesser threat: Houseguests will blame and go after people who have overtly targeted them already.
Disadvantages   	
No respect: In recent seasons, floating has developed a stigma of being utilized by people who don't "play the game"
Time's up: Floating will only work as long as clear and present danger exists. If no threatening enemies are around, your lack of loyalty could send you packing next.
</blockquote>♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 02:53, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strategies 

message: The Competition Competitor
Defined         	Winning competitions, such as HOH and POV, to guarantee your safety.
How It Works    	Houseguests who are targeted constantly must rely on this strategy. They must study all things related to Big Brother relentlessly. They should know what has happened on what days, be observant and memorize everything. It also helps to be physically strong, agile and quick. In BB7, houseguests stated they wanted to get rid of Janelle from the first week. She went on to win four HOHs and five POVs, carrying her to third place. When other strategies fail, this one is a last resort.
Who Has Used It?	Hardy (BB2) Alison (BB4) Drew (BB5) James (BB6) Janelle (BB6, BB7) Mike (BB7) Daniele (BB8) Jen (BB8)
Advantages      	Sure thing: Holding HOH or POV is the only way to 100 percent guarantee that you will not be evicted from the house.
Disadvantages   	Spotty coverage: Once a houseguest becomes HOH, they cannot compete the following week. Furthermore, if the houseguest is not nominated at the nomination ceremony, they may not be able to compete for POV.
                  	Being A Loser
Defined           	Throwing competitions, ensuring you never even come close to winning or appearing competent.
How It Plays Works	This strategy was pioneered by Will in BB2 after he realized that people winning competitions and coming close to winning competitions were viewed as threats and promptly targeted. He intentionally lost every competition as to appear non-threatening. Will won BB2. It's important to seem like you are trying to win but are unable to. Players act upset or embarrassed to cover up their plan of throwing them.
Who Has Used It?  	
Deliberate:Will (BB2/BB7) Roddy (BB3) Zach (BB8)
Non-deliberate:Cowboy (BB5) Ivette (BB6) Jameka (BB8)
Advantages        	
No worries: Other players will believe you can easily be picked off down the road because you will never be protected by the POV or HOH powers.
Easy win: Houseguests will want to bring you to the final three under the assumption that they can easily beat you in the final HOH competition to guarantee their slot in the final two.
No blame: You won't have to make any big decisions since you will not be HOH and POV. This means you can avoid blame, avoid taking sides and avoid making enemies.
Disadvantages     	Vulnerable: If you're never protected by HOH or POV, you can be nominated and evicted at any given time.
                	Floating
Defined         	Not taking a take a stand anything and floating to whoever currently has power and agreeing to assist them in whatever way they request.
How It Works    	Floaters will be on the side of whoever has power. When power is relinquished and reassigned to someone else, the floating will then be on that person's side. The term "floating" was coined during BB4. The house was split down the middle with two sides battling each other week after week. Alison and Jun did not join either of these alliances. Instead, they agreed to vote however the current HOH requested, no matter which alliance the HOH was in. As a result, the two alliances took each other out leaving Alison and Jun as the last two houseguests remaining. Floaters don't take sides and they don't make enemies -- they let other people take the blame for what happens.
Who Has Used It?	Jun (BB4) Alison (BB4) James (BB6) Erika (BB7)Zach (BB8)Jameka (BB8)
Advantages      	
Hands clean: Floaters don't do the dirty work of nominating people and it prevents people from resenting them 
Lesser threat: Houseguests will blame and go after people who have overtly targeted them already.
Disadvantages   	
No respect: In recent seasons, floating has developed a stigma of being utilized by people who don't "play the game"
Time's up: Floating will only work as long as clear and present danger exists. If no threatening enemies are around, your lack of loyalty could send you packing next.
</blockquote>♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 02:53, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Individual