Talk:Big Brother (Australian TV series) season 6/Archive 1

Merge Elise Chen

Yes, please do. Anything is better than a standalone Elise article. -- Barrylb 01:44, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agree also. -- I@n ≡ talk 02:22, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed Elise Chen to a redirect as she is clearly non-notable and it appears this may be being used as an attack page only. -- I@n ≡ talk 04:46, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remove right housemate box?

I don't see the need for two lists of housemates. Anyone object to removing one? -- Barrylb 14:23, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barry, I've done it (I did it before I saw your post - I hope you hadn't started on it!) It was annoying me too. -- I@n ≡ talk 00:31, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No idea how to edit-

I have absolutely no idea how to edit, so ill just say that 'John' has a myspace www.myspace.com/micbric and if anyone could put that in for me that would be awsome

BB06 Taped?

Is BB06 taped (as in weeks into the future)? It's a rumour, but subtle suspicions have aroused my curiosity..

No. -- Barrylb 13:39, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seems live a difficult scam to pull given live evictions with large audiences and subsequent appearances of evicted HMs in nightclubs, at Dreamworld, and on TV. Why would they bother faking it like that? What makes you suspect otherwise. Asa01 21:24, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who owns copyright ownership?

Does anyone know if Ten (Fox) has exclusive rights on the housemates photos and related media? It stands to reason, but do they have the rights on images/recordings etc of housemates during the period they are in the house, or on all images in perpetuis? May be feasible to include some photos in the article... Sfacets 12:28, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless of Ten's rights, probably the only housemate photos we can put up are ones you have taken yourself. -- Barrylb 22:23, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or screenshots from the TV series. -- CHANLORD ^[T]/_[C]

03:26, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Expand

I've begun to majorly expand the housemates section. The table needs to be broken down as Notes keep getting added. I've modelled it on BBUK pages and has included they're template table at the top (and expanded that too). Essentially all the info on the table, including the Note and where the housemates are from, can be incorporated into their own section and thus elimating the need for the table. Also, I suggest that days be referred to as the number Day (eg, Day 1) instead of the actual date as this can change depending on where you live and to make it simpler. -- CHANLORD ^[T]/_[C] 06:40, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you planning to reformat all the other seasons as well? Can you point me to where there has been a discussion of the template table? -- Barrylb 08:48, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I say that's good work. New layout with housemate sections and without the homemade table will work better. -- I@n ≡ talk 02:30, 7 June 2006 (UTC) I do like our weekly highlights section though. -- I@n ≡ talk 02:45, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rename

Is there anyone who's against renaming the article "Big Brother (Australia series 6)"? This would make it in line with the other Big Brother articles. -- 9 cds^(talk) 07:53, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Me. There was no need to rename the others in the first place. Unless you have a good reason. --JD^talk_email 09:07, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would be inline with the other pages. These were renamed because "Big Brother" is the name of the show, not "Big Brother Australia series 6". -- 9 cds^(talk) 09:20, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't the name of the show Big Brother Australia? --JD^talk_email 10:06, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No. -- 9 cds^(talk) 10:10, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well that's written on the BB06 website. It also says Big Brother UK on the UK website. --JD^talk_email 10:13, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it was on the UK site... --JD^talk_email 10:15, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It does appear on the UK site, but only when you use the site's search. --JD^talk_email 10:16, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Housemates template.

I've rewritten the template almost entirely using wikisyntax rather than a mixture. This makes it futureproof, and less likely to break the page. Let me know if anyone sees any bugs. -- 9 cds^(talk) 16:10, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tables thing

The page may look better now without the tables, but what about when there's a picture of each housemate on there? --JD^talk_email 21:33, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm trying to keep the thing looking good - a little like the UK article. Tables aren't really for layout, they're for content. -- 9 cds^(talk) 21:35, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't need to be like the UK article, in case you hadn't noticed this isn't the UK article. --JD^talk_email 21:38, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Having a picture of each housemate won't be a problem, as long as there's something written about them too. There's no reason why it can't look like the UK article. The UK article has a good layout and this article should have too. Sweetie Petie 22:03, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Something's going to have to be written about Elise and Tilli then, but that would be a bit difficult for me as I felt both of them being in the house was pretty pointless. --JD^talk_email 22:06, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gaelan's photo

Gaelan pre-electrocution: Gaelan pre-electrocution, or during electrocution? I don't know which one should go on the article, if any. I prefer the last one myself... --JD^talk_email 22:11, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The last one shows more emotion - I say go for that one :) -- 9 cds^(talk) 22:14, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You call that emotion? Looks like it bloodly well hurts. --JD^talk_email 22:17, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about I just put caps of all of them getting electrocuted? --JD^talk_email 22:28, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Screen Caps

Okay, I am now all out of pics for people without pics. All I can do now, is replace the photos already there. Anybody want me to do that? --JD^talk_email 23:17, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just a thought

Just out of curiosity - the housemates aren't allowed to sing commercial songs - have they ever sung 'happy birthday'? The song is copyrighted as well... Sfacets 09:24, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How can the Housemates have entered on Day 0?

Who's the idiot who changed everything to indicate the Housemates entered on Day 0? How could they, by definition the first day in the House is the FIRST DAY IN THE HOUSE and that is obviously Day 1! Can I remind you that, for instance, Christ wasn't born in Year 0, he was born in 1 AD - and that is because there is no Year 0! Obviously! Who did this and why? Can you explain your bizarre, strange and frankly WRONG reasoning? jkm 16:34, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was me, and it is correct. Day 1 is counted as the day the Launch show was shown. Day 0 is the day they entered. It's also like that on the BB06 website. --JD^talk_email 16:41, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, my apologies. You are correct, I should be venting my spleen at the producers of the show then because their decision is completely nonsensical, not the first strange decision these guys have made. Whatever happened to the Insider role and why on Earth wasn't the house informed of Jade's role as the Insider? Anyway, sorry about tht JD.jkm 12:52, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. --JD^talk_email 19:31, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"World first"

The term "world first" was intended to mean world first in the context of the BB series, not every single TV game show out there. Sfacets 14:07, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And even in this context, it was not. -- Barrylb 14:08, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was meant to be a Big Brother World First, nobody said the word World referred only to BB AU episodes. And that's the way it's being used in the article, isn't it? --JD^talk_email 14:32, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not really: "Despite publicity using the term "World First", this is clearly a lie given international versions of the series have previously used similar concepts. The fourth Greek season had a series called Big Mother where nine houseguests participated in the game with their mothers, with whom they had to coexist during the contest. The housemates' mothers were not able to win the prize, but had to stay with their sons and daughters until their eviction. Another Big Brother series had houseguests enter the house with their mothers, but the mothers did not stay".

--> this is referring to another TV show, not BB, australian, or other. Unless 'Big Mother' is part of the BB programme... in which case it would be good to get a reference to info on this.

Sfacets 15:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's no article about Big Mother, but there's no article about Big Brother Greece either. Big Mother is a Big Brother spin-off I guess, but it is a BB programme. It's on the main Big Brother article. --JD^talk_email 15:42, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the website: [1] But unless you can read Greek, good luck. Apparently it either already has, or it will be broadcasted on a Foxtel channel. --JD^talk_email 15:45, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was just publicity hyperhole and do many viewers really take this sort of thing seriously? Really the term was used in such a vague loose way in adverts the BB producers could practically argue that it honestly was "the first time in the world a mother and daughter were secretly original housemates with a challenge to remain undetected". Asa01 20:38, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Katie's Eviction Percentage

While most believe Gretel Killeen said sixty-four percent, the number on-screen clearly said 54%.

Does anybody know which one is correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.164.109.59 (talk • contribs)

The website says 64%. --JD^talk_email 10:29, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you~ 203.164.109.59 10:45, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Summary of fines

I've removed it because it's fancrufty, and not encyclopedic. -- 9 cds^(talk) 13:32, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]