Talk:Big Brother 2006 nominations table (UK)

/Archive 1

Colours and formatting

To follow suit with previous nominations tables, the following colour codes should be used:

• Banned: #959FFD
• Ejected: #FFCCCC
• Evicted: #FA8072
• Exempt: #FBF373
• Finalists: #FBF373
• In Big Brotherhood: #DDDDDD
• Next Door: #87CEFA
• No nominations: #CCCCCC
• Not in house: #FFFFFF
• Walked: #FFCCFF

Put all existing housemates at the top

I think we should put all the current HMs at the top of the list as the table will be easier to read. Any objections? 80.41.70.35

Good idea! Dalejenkins 14:40, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

No, it'll mean the table has to be rearranged every week. Alphabetical is sufficient. — FireFox ^(talk) _{14:45, 30 July '06}

Colour changes

I've reverted the colour changes.. there was no consensus to do so, and the bright green was too bright anyway. Please discuss any further changes to colours. -- 9cds^(talk) 15:55, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

That's the colour used for the secret garden in BB6, and two users agreed that something needed to be green. Where is the consensus for it to be blue? I was "being bold" and changing it. Trampikey ^{(talk to me)(contribs)} 16:26, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

The consensus was forming in discussion which you have archived. — FireFox 16:48, 01 July '06

Well I said I liked the blue and FireFox said perhaps the next thing could be green, if there is a next thing. I was quite happy with that. But I wasn't being entirely serious anyway. -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 18:57, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Jayne's moved next door...

Right, so now Jayne is in the main house. Therefore table is inaccurate. Ideas of how to fix? — FireFox 13:30, 02 July '06

Remove the 'next door' for her, and add Jayne to who was nominated, with a blue background? -- 9cds^(talk) 13:33, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps "Next Door until Day 46"? And then continue this theme for Aisleyne's other three choices (and Aisleyne herself)? Squidward2602 15:37, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

We don't have enough space in the table. — FireFox 15:51, 02 July '06

Since this is a nominations table, I don't think it should say "Next Door" for Aisleyne, but it should list Jayne (along with others she nominates this week). Assuming there are no nominations in the main house, the other housemates should say "No nominations", but all five of the new housemate should continue to say "Next door". A note can explain exactly what happens/has happened during the week, including day numbers. Adw2000 11:09, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... good idea. -- 9cds^(talk) 11:20, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Will Aisleyne be nominating this week? -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 11:25, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh I just looked at the actually table... ignore me :) -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 11:25, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

The housemates in the main house are nominating as usual, but Jayne is exempt from nominating or being nominated. [1] Tra (Talk) 15:41, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Is it good to have Jayne's name next to Aisleyne's, since she will be nominating more people? Alex 18:49, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Why not? -- 9cds^(talk) 20:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry what I meant was is it good to have Aisleyne's nominations, even though they are "internal" evictions and not for public? Alex 18:17, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Ash didn't nominate Jayne, she moved her... Trampikey ^{(talk to me)(contribs)} 18:20, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

No, she named (i.e. nominated) her to be evicted from the House Next Door. It was Big Brother who decided that those evicted from the House Next Door would then enter the main house... Adw2000 12:34, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Eviction days

Should we incude the day of eviction (etc) in the table? (As it currently is) -- 9cds^(talk) 17:08, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't think so- all that info can be provided in the main article can't it? Trampikey ^{(talk to me)(contribs)} 17:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Why not? It's not taking up any space, and if two housemates were evicted in one week (one on wednesday and one on friday for example), without days it will be impossible to tell who went first just by looking at the table. — FireFox 12:38, 04 July '06

Spoilers

I've added the spoiler warning template to the page. I hope that's ok :) -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:02, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Is it necessary? I mean, they announce the nominees on BBLB, which is only an hour and a half before the channel 4 show, and isn't that the only thing on the table that people would want to wait for? Alex9891 11:51, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I put it up after Michael and thingy moved next door, and this week's nominations were listed here a few hours before they were shown on Channel 4. -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 12:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

See, now there's big big big spoilers! -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 17:27, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Aisleyne's nominations

Should we remove the names of the three housemates she moved and just have Jonathan as he was nominated for actual eviction, whereas all the others are now in the main house? -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I say leave it as it is, because she did nominate them for eviction. The star at the end of that nominations cell should clear up any confusion. Ixistant 22:20, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

No, get rid of the old names, because overall they don't matter! Alex 22:21, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

And I don't think the star explains Jonathan well Alex 22:24, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

And Jonathan should be added to the "evicted" bit, yes? -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:29, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

The note is much better. I think Jonathan should be added to the bottom - can the cell be split or something? Alex 22:36, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Ooh I made something better! I'm excited now! :) -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:04, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

So will Friday's evictee (hopefully Lea) go under Jonathan? Would the days of eviction be needed? Alex9891 23:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, put Lea's (or, I suppose, maybe Richard's) name under Jonathan... but I don't know about the days. -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 23:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Note 8

Shouldn't it say "Big Brother punished all the housemates apart from Jayne even though she was the one discussing the outside world, by cancelling nominations and putting all housemates up for eviction except her."?? -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 17:31, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it would be clearer --Alex9891 (talk) 17:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, they're hardly punishing her, are they? Especially as she should be the next person evicted! -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:48, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

They are in a way - by being prevented to nominate by her, the few housemates that do like her may not anymore because of it --Alex9891 (talk) 19:49, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

But they're punishing us by not letting us Get Jayne Out! -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:53, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I know, life's not fair is it? =) --Alex9891 (talk) 19:55, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Week 8 nominations

Should the name of each housemate be written, or just All but Jayne? --Alex9891 (talk) 19:47, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I think names should be used, as "All but Jayne" does not properly inform people of who is up for eviction. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 19:48, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

All but Jayne, but name them in the note for clarification. -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:49, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

All but Jayne. It's perfectly easy to understand. The note explains it for the few who for some reason don't understand. With all names listed, it makes the column too wide. — FireFox 19:50, 10 July '06

Or the row too wide. It's not about a misunderstanding, it's just trying to make the table as clear as possible, without everything having to be written in a note. For instance, what if all housemates were up except one but just through normal nominations? --Alex9891 (talk) 19:53, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Then, it would say, "all but whoever". Except where it now says "no nominations", it would give the individual nominations per housemate. — FireFox 19:54, 10 July '06

OK, that seems fine-ish - until you get all except two people, etc. I could go on but I won't - it should be fine. =) --Alex9891 (talk) 19:57, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

If we get all but two people, it will be so late in the series, the number of housemates up will not be that much anyway. — FireFox 20:01, 10 July '06

All but Jayne will do fine, without making the table look cluttered and messy... ellisjm 20:03, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, all but Jayne for the above reasons. -- 9cds^(talk) 20:12, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

New Name Move

Why the move to put the (UK series 7) at the end. It was much better in the middle... ellisjm 13:05, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

How come? The convention and precedent is to have any disambiguation at the end. The stuff in brackets is just there to make it different from anything else that could be "Big Brother nominations table". If there was only on Big Brother series ever, that's where it's be: "Big Brother nominations table. —Celestianpower ^háblame 21:50, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't forget to move all the other nominations tables. -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:31, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Week 9 Nominations

Will Week 9 be the first week without a twist in the nomination/eviction process? --Alex9891 (talk) 19:11, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

At last, it is --Alex9891 (talk) 19:25, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Amazing -- I thought a normal nomination/eviction process was never going to happen. Adw2000 09:32, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

House next door colours

IMO the blue colour for House Next Door is horrible. The green colour used for BB4 and BB6 looks much better. What do people think? ellisjm 21:49, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

BB6's secret garden colour, or a colour, should be used on all of the nominations tables for consistency, I reckon. --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 21:55, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I put green on the BB4 table because the BB7 table was changed to green. It was then changed back to blue. I then thought we could use a different colour on BB4 as well, and also BB5 for the Bedsit....... but I wanted to ask first. I like the blue. -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:09, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Well they all need to be the same colour: (BB4:Cam's noms;BB5:bedsit;BB6:secret garden;BB7:house next door). BB6 needs to be green because it was a green secret garden. Therefore, it makes sense to do it (and therefore the others) in green. The other situations have no other reason to be a specific colour... ellisjm 22:15, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't need to be any colour. It doesn't even have to be the same. Any colour would be perfectly adequate here, equally so even. The colour of the room and the colour of the box on Wikipedia are totally unrelated. I have protected until it can be discussed (not voted upon) here first. —Celestianpower ^háblame 22:21, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, maybe needed was the wrong word to use, but IMO, green makes sense because it was a secret garden, and any other colour would be perfect for everything else, but IMO all should be the same colour and so green fits the bill. ellisjm 22:24, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Green is far too bright. Yes, the blue is similar to the "banned" boxes, but that's not a bad thing – we do not want this table turning into a rainbow. — FireFox 10:10, 19 July '06

Personally, I agree with FireFox. Pages like these can easily be overpowering with many different colours, shades etc. This actually detracts from the readability of the page, which, after all, is its main purpose. —Celestianpower ^háblame 10:40, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

This wouldn't be turned into a rainbow; it would just be an attempt to keep the colours used on the nominations table consistent. Isn't that what people have wanted from the start? --JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 21:14, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

If this thing's gonna stay blocked, could one of you admins please add Jayne's name to the evicted box??? godgoddingham333 20:40, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Done. David | Talk 20:51, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks... godgoddingham333 20:58, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Note 9

I think Note 9 should say:

{{fnb|9}} As part of this week's task, housemates will nominate in pairs. The five pairs are Aisleyne and Jennie, Glyn and Mikey, Imogen and Susie, Michael and Spiral, and Pete and Richard. The housemate with the most votes on Friday will be evicted along with their 'best friend'.

because they havn't nominated yet. It can be changed back to past tense once they have nominated. Tra (Talk) 17:09, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Edit Protection

the existing text is total nonsense - it has not happened yet. Also, how was that edit applied during the edit protecton? Why are people sooooooooooo desperate to record what they expect or want to believe instead of waiting for proof though the passage of time? Utterly childish(IMO) leaky_caldron 19:51, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

An admin obviously edited it. I agree. It should be in the future tense. Just at this point, how long's this page gonna remain protected??? godgoddingham333 19:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Done. Not for too much longer. — FireFox 20:02, 23 July '06

Yes, but when?? Oh yeh, and if no-one's noticed, Jayne is still un-evicted (She needs the rest of her row coloured...) godgoddingham333 01:05, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I'll unprotect the article after consulting the protector. As for Jayne - Done. — FireFox 20:11, 24 July '06

Could someone please explain why page is protected? I was gone for a few days and its been protected. WHY?--Jboyle4eva 00:13, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

There was an edit war taking place, to do with the colours for "Next Door". — FireFox 20:11, 24 July '06

it seems that administrators only are now permitted to edit this article, there has been no explanation recorded here, and we mere mortals must apparently await their discretion. If you are concerned about this and believe that a policy has been breached, feel free to consider joining me in an Wikipedia:Requests for comment leaky_caldron 19:47, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

After consultation with Celestianpower, I've unprotected the article, and any futher edit wars will be followed by an immediate re-protection. Cheers, — FireFox 20:17, 24 July '06

Notes boxes see

Surely the word "see" repeated across the row is not required? The simple reference to "note 1", "note 2" etc., would be tidier. Don't wish to start an edit war so can some views be left here please? leaky_caldron 20:30, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

It's been like that in all previous series. To me, it makes it more clear, rather than just saying "note 1", and it's not doing any harm there. — FireFox 20:33, 24 July '06

Making an edit is not starting an edit war, having your edit reverted, then reverting it back is starting an edit war. --Lorian^T_C 22:39, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Jonathan

Is there a way in which we can put a line under Jonathan, to seperate him and Lea?? godgoddingham333 21:40, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

They are separate... -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 22:07, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

No, I mean a line between Jonathan and Lea so that someone who didn't know much about BB knew that it was only Lea who was evicted with 53 or whatever % and not Jonathan and Lea together... godgoddingham333 22:12, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

If you put this:

(previous cells) || '''Jonathan'''

----

'''Lea'''<br />53.8%

| (next cells)

You get this:

Jonathan Lea 53.8%

Tra (Talk) 23:40, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Could you do it please? It seems to mess up when I try it... Thanks... godgoddingham333 23:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Done. Tra (Talk) 00:10, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Re-arrangement

Leave all nomination tables of Big Brother and Celebrity Big Brother, in alphabetical order! —Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonPeter (talk • contribs)

Is there any chance of having the table rearranged in order of eviction? It really is terribly hard to look at as it is now. —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 15:38, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Looks fine to me. — FireFox ^(talk) _{15:45, 05 August '06}

I didn't mean to say anything was wrong with it; just that it's really really hard, for me at least, to read it the way it is now. —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 15:55, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

JD has a point, now that it's nearing the end it's just looking pretty messy. --Lorian^T_C 16:22, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I've had a look at how it's done for other countries. Out of all of the (English language) articles with full nominations tables, the UK and Australia have the housemates listed alphabetically, whilst USA has them listed in order of eviction. Whatever decision is made for this, perhaps it would be good to have all the nominations tables having the same ordering system? Tra (Talk) 19:52, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

This is how it might look if it was changed. I didn't change it in the article because it's quite a drastic change that would probably require consensus first. Tra (Talk) 15:26, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I like it. —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 15:28, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I did the BB06 Australia one earlie... it would be yesterday now... I did the BB06 Australia table yesterday, so now it's just up to the Big Brother UK ones to follow. —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 23:04, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Go on, change it! --Alex9891 ^(user) 23:09, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

in a whiny voice: But that involves wooooorrrrrk... Fine, I'll do it now if nobody opposes. ... No opposition? Okay, here goes I. —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 23:12, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

NOOOOOOOO!!! IMHO it looks horrible!! godgoddingham333 23:15, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Gah, you should have opposed like 6 minutes ago. —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 23:20, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Who's doing the others? Me? —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 23:20, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

That's one of my points. If we do this (please no!), then all of the Big Brother noms tables are gonna have to be changed! Anyway, it looks hideous. All the red is in the bottom right and it makes it look all boxy... godgoddingham333 23:23, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't mind doing the others; how many are there? Six? Five? And I think it looks worse when there's random bars of red and lighter red (pink?) going at all lengths across my monitor. —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 23:25, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

6, yeh. But then there's BBAU and BBUS and CBB and BB woteva else... Well, yeh, that's your opinion. Mine is it looks worse with all the red in the bottom right... godgoddingham333 23:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

The American ones were done like that from the get-go, and there's only one for the Big Brother Australia articles. —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 23:31, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Well anyway, IMO it looks worse and should be kept as it was. godgoddingham333 23:36, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

No it looks just as good, better in fact --Alex9891 ^(user) 23:37, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I dunno. Maybe I'll like it better when it's finished. I like the BB06 one, but I think that may be because the housemates there were able to keep their mouths shut and thus not get banned, and there were less twists that involved nominations etc... godgoddingham333 00:05, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Ha, you don't know Big Brother Australia at all... Housemates only get banned from nominations if they commit the most obscene of crimes. Otherwise, it's just $5000 AUD knocked off the prize and a visit to the Torture Punishment Room. And as for twists, my God where do I start? Insiders, Intruders, Infiltrators, Bitchfest 2006, the (one of many) World First(s)... —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 00:09, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

No I do; I used to live there. And anyway I said "involving nominations". I know it's usually 5000 AUD, but sometimes if they repeatedly discuss noms then they get banned... godgoddingham333 00:12, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

They have to discuss it a lot for that to happen, though. They normally get banned from every other thing they could possibly be banned from first. And that's not many things. Anyway, this is going off-topic again. If there's a problem with the rainbow effect, perhaps colours should be toned down a bit. —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 00:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

No it's fine. Leave it. I'm sure it'll be fine at the end of the series anyway... godgoddingham333 00:16, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay then. Any objections from the few of us that are A&A, if I or somebody else changes the others? —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 00:19, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Nope, I've already done the housemates page --Alex9891 ^(user) 00:20, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

No. Go ahead and good luck! That's me done for the night. I'm off to get some shut-eye. Nite... godgoddingham333 00:21, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I've just done series 6; I'm going to do series 5 series 2 now. Tra (Talk) 00:25, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll do 1 and 4. That should be all of them then. —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 00:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

No fair, I only got to do one :'( Meh. —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 00:33, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Ha ha. I did 3!! He he. I gotta get some sleep now. Good editing tonight! Well Done JD UK, Tra and Alex 9891!! Night all! godgoddingham333 00:40, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Yay! I did 3 as well: series 6 and the two on CBB. Tra (Talk) 00:54, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Celebrity Big Brother has the tables!?  :( Now I'm sad. —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 00:59, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

When Nikki goes back in...

When Nikki goes back into the House, does she get moved up to the date of her second eviction? Or does she get left where she is now? I'd be guessing she'll be getting bumped up the table, assuming it's staying the way it is now. But it's always good to ask, no matter how many people I piss off in the process. —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 23:24, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Hopefully it'll be back the way it was before, but if not, then she gets moved to whenever she gets evicted again. (Probs third place I reckon)... If it's back the way it was, we don't have to worry about things like this tho'!! godgoddingham333 23:27, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

You mean, "In a real Big Brother world, we don't have to worry about things like this." I mean, who put an evicted housemate back in, just to answer the public's moaning? Going a bit off-topic there... —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 23:29, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Do you mean if she does? --Alex9891 ^(user) 23:33, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, sure... If... We all know she has just as good a chance as anybody of getting back into that House... —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 23:34, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

She's blatantly going back in. I'm willing to bet my house, my bank account, my school! It's a dead-cert! godgoddingham333 23:35, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Lol, her Lisa, Grace and one other... :) --Alex9891 ^(user) 23:36, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Dunno bout Lisa. I reckon Nikki, Jayne, Grace and Lea. But the housemates will choose Nikki. godgoddingham333 23:37, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I hate to sound like, well, anybody really, but: Wikipedia is WP:NOT a discussion forum. Please stay on-topic with discussions, or piss off somewhere else with 'em! —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 23:41, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Aha but it was you who brought it up ;) --Alex9891 ^(user) 23:43, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Grumble grumble... —JD[^{don't talk}|_email] 23:44, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

How will the table be edited to show the evicted housemate back in? Will the red evicted box be merged shorter, and the Week 12 filled with "Next Door" and the Week 13 with their final position? I made a quick mock-up (using Pete and Nikki, whilst I want them in the final two, I did check on Oddschecker and thet are the two favourites to win)

	Week 1	Week 2	Week 3	Week 4	Week 5	Week 6	Week 7	Week 8	Week 9	Week 10	Week 11	Week 12	Week 13
Pete	In Big Brotherhood	Imogen, Sezer	Lisa, Nikki	No nominations	Imogen, Lisa	Susie, Aisleyne	Banned	No nominations	Spiral, Michael	Michael	Imogen, Aisleyne	HM1, HM2	Winner
Nikki	In Big Brotherhood	Lea, Grace	Richard, Sam	No nominations	Lisa	Aisleyne, Susie	Richard, Lea	No nominations	Evicted (Day 58)			Next Door	2nd place

These are the last two weeks? If they are, the last column could just be split into two, and something could be done with the penultimate cell. --
JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 11:23, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Looks ok to me. --Alex⁹⁸⁹¹ 11:26, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

There'd be nothing to show that Nikki went back in, only that she went from being most hated in Week 9 to runner up. --
JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 11:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, looking at it again, the fact that the bar doesn't go all the way across the table should be enough. Alex is right; it probably will be okay. --
JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 11:31, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Everything can be explained below in a note, if it doesn't look too clear --Alex⁹⁸⁹¹ 11:32, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Looks good to me but technically "Next Door" is wrong because the nominations were yesterday and nobody is Next Door yet. -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 11:36, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

And it should REALLY look like this:

	Week 1	Week 2	Week 3	Week 4	Week 5	Week 6	Week 7	Week 8	Week 9	Week 10	Week 11	Week 12	Week 13
Nikki	In Big Brotherhood	Lea, Grace	Richard, Sam	No nominations	Lisa	Aisleyne, Susie	Richard, Lea	No nominations	Evicted (Day 58)			Next Door	Winner
Pete	In Big Brotherhood	Imogen, Sezer	Lisa, Nikki	No nominations	Imogen, Lisa	Susie, Aisleyne	Banned	No nominations	Spiral, Michael	Michael	Imogen, Aisleyne	HM1, HM2	2nd place

-- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 11:38, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Surely, you mean whinger, not winner. Could someone that dull and annoying really win BB?

Yes, it should, but alas, the sympathy vote! Trampikey ^{(talk to me)(contribs)} 11:41, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes very nice :/ --Alex⁹⁸⁹¹ 11:41, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

What have I started... --
JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 11:42, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Will all the four evictees that go in tonight have "Next Door" for Week 12? If they do, what will happen if Mikey and/or Susie go in? Their "Week 12" box is filled with "Evicted". Squidward2602 11:55, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

As I said, Next Door is wrong because nominations took place yesterday. -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 11:57, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

No they won't. It's a nominations table, nominations happen on Monday, they weren't in the house during nominations so Week 12 will remain "evicted" (in my opinion). — FireFox ^(talk) _{11:58, 8 August '06}

Agree with FireFox, but it'll need explaining. --Alex⁹⁸⁹¹ 12:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Basically, the three housemates who don't make it back into the house won't be in the house during any nominations. So, as this is a nominations table, their presence in the house for four days does not need to be shown. — FireFox ^(talk) _{12:02, 8 August '06}

Should the ex-housemates up for the public vote be listed somewhere? The "Against Public Vote" will be filled later with this week's nominations, but the ex-housemates are "nominated" currently according to the Big Brother website. Extention of note 11, maybe? Squidward2602 12:08, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes to everything :) --Alex⁹⁸⁹¹ 12:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

The 3 people in the House Next Door that aren't picked to go into the main house would therefore be evicted 'again' in a similar way to how Jonathon was evicted. If this happened to say, Grace, it would look like this: Tra (Talk) 14:21, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

	Week 1	Week 2	Week 3	Week 4	Week 5	Week 6	Week 7	Week 8	Week 9	Week 10	Week 11	Week 12	Week 13
Grace	In Big Brotherhood	Lea, Richard	Aisleyne, Sam	No nominations	Evicted (Day 30)								Evicted (Day 86)

Could be "re-evicted"? --Alex⁹⁸⁹¹ 14:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Housmates in alphabetical order

If the housemates are put in alphabetical order, then we would know who nominated in what order, they always nominate in alphabetical order. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonPeter (talk • contribs)

Nominations in Big Brother Australia weren't always in alphabetical order, so the order of housemates is meaningless on that table. On the UK ones, does it actually matter what order the housemates nominated in? It's not about the order nominations were made in, it's about who got kicked out each week. That's what Big Brother is about. --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 16:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

The order the housemates nominate is not really that important because nothing is revealed until all housemates have nominated, therefore one person's nominations have no influence on the other housemates. The housemates are listed in order of eviction because it looks clearer. When you read down the columns, you are not interrupted by the red bars going across, because they are all at the end. Tra (Talk) 16:18, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

This is Britain, not Australia

Nominations table series 1

Why isn't there a nominations table for series 1, series 1 and 2 of celebrity big brother, and also for teen big brother. The nominations for teen big brother, are on the main teen big brother website.

See my reply on the Talk:Big Brother nominations table (UK series 2)... godgoddingham333 18:18, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

What about teen big brother? —Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonPeter (talk • contribs)

Dunno. Make it if you want. BTW, please sign your name after any comments made on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~). Thanks. godgoddingham333 18:25, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I have most of the series 1 nominations but not all of them, or I'd have done it when I did series 2 and 3... -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 18:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

How about you create a table with the ones you know, and leave the other's blank so if anyone has information for those, they can add it? godgoddingham333

I was thinking of doing that. All I'm missing is week 7 and I have half the nominations (i.e. one name from each person rather than two). I'll start work on it now. -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 09:18, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

See Big Brother nominations table (UK series 1) and talk:Big Brother nominations table (UK series 1) :) -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 10:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

If I give the nominations for teen big brother, will somebody create a table because I don't know how to ceate one. Is anyone interested. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonPeter (talk • contribs)

Teen Big Brother Nominations

If I give someone a list of who nominated who, will anyone be interested in creating the table, coz i dont know how to create a nominations table. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonPeter (talk • contribs)

I'll give it a shot. Where's the list? --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 13:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Day 3
Caroline: Paul and Jade
Hasan: Shaneen and Paul
Jade: Hasan and Tommy
James: Hasan and Shaneen
Paul: Shaneen and Hasan
Shaneen: Hasan and Tracey
Tommy: Jade and Shaneen
Tracey: Paul and Shaneen
Hasan and Shaneen were up for eviction. Hasan was eicted.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonPeter (talk • contribs)

...There was one eviction through the whole series? --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 13:49, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

  Hasan was evicted day 4, Shaneen on day 7, and the rest on day 10.

Wouldn't make much of a table would it? --Alex⁹⁸⁹¹ 13:54, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

You're saying there was one set of nominations, two evictions... I don't follow at all. It would probably be best as a small table in the article, like the one here. --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 13:57, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Day 7
Hosemates nominated one housemate to save. Caroline was imune, coz she won a task.
Jade: Paul
James: Tommy
Paul: Jade
Shaneen: James
Tommy: Tracey
Tracey: Tommy
Shaneen was evicted.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonPeter (talk • contribs)

Here's a start. I'll keep at it for a while. --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 14:06, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Day 10
Housemates nominated who they wanted to win.
Caroline: Paul
Jade: Paul
James: Unknown
Paul: Caroline
Tommy: Unknown
Tracey: Paul
As Paul was the winner, he had to choose a housemate to share his prize, he chose Caroline.

Order of eviction
Hasan
Shaneen
Jade
James
Tommy
Tracey
Caroline
Paul

—Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonPeter (talk • contribs)

It looks odd. What have I done wrong? --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 14:17, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

The table looks fine, we just need to put it on the teen big brother wikipedia site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonPeter (talk • contribs)

It doesn't have all the information on it. It won't do anything for the article as it is at the moment. --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 14:23, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Can u add an extra column saying that Paul wanted Caroline to join him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonPeter (talk • contribs)

An extra column's going to look odd if that's all that'll be in it. It's probably better off somewhere else in the article. --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 14:32, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Do u know how to move the page to the teen big brother wikipedia site —Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonPeter (talk • contribs)

Yes, and you did it already. I moved it back because firstly, I said nothing to suggest I was finished with it, and secondly, it shouldn't be moved to the article space until everybody is agreed that it is in some sort of decent condition. --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 14:43, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

And please sign your comments! --Alex⁹⁸⁹¹ 14:48, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Are you ready to move it know. I think it's allright now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonPeter (talk • contribs) How do u sign your comments —Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonPeter (talk • contribs)

We've told you three times! Use four tildes, or click the button on the toolbar with the signage on it. I'll move the table if everybody agrees, but not to its own page; it's not long enough. --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 14:54, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Do u know who I am then —Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonPeter (talk • contribs)

Huh? --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 15:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Eh? --Alex⁹⁸⁹¹ 15:00, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I've signed him again --Alex⁹⁸⁹¹ 15:01, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I think it's good enough to go in the Teen Big Brother article; it can always be improved later on, e.g. 'Unknown' nominations being filled in and details of the nominations twists. Tra (Talk) 15:06, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Do you think the table is ready to move.--SimonPeter 15:07, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

There's something wrong with Paul's box --Alex⁹⁸⁹¹ 15:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I was trying to do something. I'll get rid of that, then I'll move it to the Teen Big Brother article. --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 15:09, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps it'd look better the other way around... --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 15:10, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Who do u want to win big brother--SimonPeter 15:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry this is not a forum! --Alex⁹⁸⁹¹ 15:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

damn, beat me to it... --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 15:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Ugh, I'll start a discussion on the Teen Big Brother page. --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 15:17, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Final week - no nominations

Is there anything wrong with having this information in the boxes? Something should be there to show that there were no nominations for this week. --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 20:11, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Firefox has a point actually - there are never noms in the last week, so this can just go in the note at the bottom of the page... godgoddingham ³³³ 20:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I see nothing wrong with how it's been done with the last 5 6 series' tables, why change now? — FireFox ^(talk) _{20:15, 10 August '06}

If there's going to be a mid-week eviction, wouldn't you want to do something like this, but tidier? --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 20:21, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

There are never nominations in the final week. Just leave it as it was. BBs 1 and 2 didn't have nominations or evitions in the first week (to allow them all to settle in with no twists) and it's only mentioned in the notes section, not with a whole column of "No nominations". -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 20:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

If there was a mid-week eviction, I would want to do something like this actually. — FireFox ^(talk) _{20:37, 10 August '06}

What, all the week's evictions in one column? --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 20:40, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

You said it. We have one column per one week – makes perfect sense, don't you think? — FireFox ^(talk) _{20:46, 10 August '06}

I said that? I think tables should have one column for each day that at least one eviction is held. --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 20:51, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

One column per eviction would be stupid if the final 6 were evicted over 4 days... One per week is fine. -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 20:57, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Righto, one column it is... --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 20:58, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

As usual...

Why no as usuals?? It happens every year, so it is as usual! godgoddingham ³³³ 20:42, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

You should probably read WP:MOS if you're unsure why. — FireFox ^(talk) _{20:46, 10 August '06}

Which bit specifically? -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 20:59, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Probably all of it, any bits your unsure about. Surf's law probably means the link I gave you is nothing to do with the topic, so basically (to cut a long explanation short), it's unencyclopedic language, stuff you should try to avoid when writing an encyclopedia, in my opinion anyway. — FireFox ^(talk) _{21:09, 10 August '06}

Totals

With no more nominations should we total up. I make it to be Aisleyne Horgan-Wallace 12, Glyn Wise 6, Jennie Corner 5 (1), Pete Bennett 3, Grace Adams-Short 4, Imogen Thomas 14, Lea Walker 11, Mikey Dalton 3, Nikki Grahame 8, Richard Newman 24, Susie Verrico 12, Glen "Spiral" Coroner 4, Michael Cheshire 5 (1), Jayne Kitt 4 (1), Jonathan Leonard 0 (1), Lisa Huo 7, Sam Brodie 3, Sezer Yurtseven 3, George Askew 0, Bonnie Holt 0, Dawn Blake 0, Shahbaz Chauhdry 0. The (1) indicating a vote from Aisleyne during HND. And counting the Best Friends votes once, so Spiral only gets one vote, Michael gets two votes etc...Darrenhusted 18:46, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Personally I don't think we need totals. — FireFox ^(talk) _{18:49, 11 August '06}

They're on the previous year's tables, unless they've been removed.Darrenhusted 19:00, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think they're needed either. It doesn't really mean anything. -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 19:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Some tables still have the totals on them. Should those be removed? Tra (Talk) 19:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Not the Australia one. Nominations work with points, and the amount of points a person gets will be much higher than the number of times they have actually been nominated. --JD ^{don't talk} _{email me} 19:23, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

The totals are on BB4, BB5 and BB6, it seems silly not to total them. Admittedly there are not totals on BB1, BB2 or BB3, but either remove totals on 4-6 or add them to 1-3. Then big BB7 in to line. An element of uniformity would be appreciated, but I don't want to amend or add if there is a feeling it isn't needed. Darrenhusted 20:56, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I feel like they add nothing to the page. Obviously someone who is in the house longer is likely to have more nominations than someone evicted in the first couple of weeks, which means it doesn't necessarily show a "popularity trend" or anything like that. — FireFox ^(talk) _{21:14, 11 August '06}

Do we really need a note for Week 13?

It's a normal week – there is no nomination twist, so in my opinion there is no need for a note, as it always works like that in the final week. Additionally, please stop adding "no nominations" into Week 13's columns. We've been through this, we use it like this. — FireFox ^(talk) _{15:51, 14 August 2006}

I think there should be a note, or something, saying that the public is voting to save rather than to evict. As for the No Nominations boxes, I think something should be there, as they look odd as emptiness. My original idea was that they say No Nominations until the winner is decided, when they are then replaced with the save/evict information. --_{talk to} JD ^{wants e-mail} 15:57, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

The final is on Friday... they're not going to look empty for very long. Remember, at the beginning of the series the whole table was 'empty' as you put it. I still stand by my original comment about notes. This is a nominations table, so we don't need any information about anything other than nominations in the notes. But still, I'll go with the consensus on that one, I don't really mind. — FireFox ^(talk) _{16:01, 14 August 2006}

The rest of the table was empty because nothing had happened on those weeks. The only column that's empty right now is the week the housemates are living in. Something needs to should be there to show that this is the final week and that it is the current week. I don't know how that can be done without filling the column with Final Week - No Nominations, which in turn may lead readers to believe that the series has ended. I can't think of any other ways to do it. --_{talk to} JD ^{wants e-mail} 16:04, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

That's why I suggest we leave it until Friday night, like last years table was. — FireFox ^(talk) _{16:06, 14 August 2006}

Leaving it blank'd look a bit odd, but if there's no other way to do it, I guess it's the best option. --_{talk to} JD ^{wants e-mail} 16:12, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

It's only for 4 days anyway. — FireFox ^(talk) _{16:12, 14 August 2006}

As a nominations table, there should be details about the twist, whether it happens every year or not. --Alex^{talk here} 16:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

It's not a twist. — FireFox ^(talk) _{16:31, 14 August 2006}

Yes it is... --Alex^{talk here} 16:32, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

How is it a twist? It's normal. — FireFox ^(talk) _{16:33, 14 August 2006}

OK, I agree it might be normal for the final week, but it is not normal overall. And I have another question: will the winning places go down to 6th this time? --Alex^{talk here} 16:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes. — FireFox ^(talk) _{16:36, 14 August 2006}

(edit conflict) I don't consider something that happens every year to be a twist. I think the fact that there's no mid-week eviction, and the fact that there's more housemates than normal making up the Final Four is a bit odd, but I wouldn't consider any of it to be a twist. Despite all that, I reckon there should still be something about there not being nominations this week, as this is a table of nominations and all other times where there haven't been nominations have been documented. This encyclopaedia isn't being made for our benefit, it's being made for the benefit of those people that don't know about the subjects they're reading about. Somebody that's never seen an episode of Big Brother UK isn't going to know how the final week works, that there's not normally nominations, or that the public votes to save rather than to evict. This stuff should be put somewhere, the only problem is where. --_{talk to} JD ^{wants e-mail} 16:38, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

The last week has always listed the winners and/or any surprise evictions. It's fine as it is. Darrenhusted 16:41, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Now the ex-housemates have left...

I think the table looks odd with Grace, Lea and Mikey up near the top. I think they should be moved back to their original positions. Any comments? --Alex ^{talk here} 11:02, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I think so too, especially as they are back in the original order on the main BB7 page. -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 11:13, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I've changed the order --Alex ^{talk here} 12:02, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I think they look odd as they are now... It made more sense to me when they were in the order of their latest eviction, rather than their first. --_{talk to} JD ^{wants e-mail} 12:13, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

But the red lines go right across the table and they never did actually enter the house, so it was a different kind of eviction. --Alex ^{talk here} 12:15, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

It looks much neater now. I agree with Alex. -- AnemoneProjectors (talk) 12:29, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

This is why it would have been much simpler to keep them in alphabetical order :-P But I do agree it does look better with their original eviction date instead of their latest one. — FireFox ^(talk) _{12:32, 15 August 2006}

Consistency

I know there has been a discussion before on this, but I really do think it is better to list every housemate who is against the public vote. I am, of course, referring to "All but Jayne" of Week 8, and the final week. For the final week, instead of All Housemates, each one is written, but for Week 8, it is All but Jayne. This is not only inconsistent, it is unhelpful as it does not tell you who was up, all we know is it is everyone except Jayne. It does not make the table look cluttered, as it is essential information. --Alex ^{talk here} 12:07, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

There's a lot of housemates there, it would make the cell massive. --_{talk to} JD ^{wants e-mail} 12:14, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

There is already consensus, here, which you were involved in (Alex), and agreed that it was fine by you that it can say "All but Jayne" at the time. — FireFox ^(talk) _{12:15, 15 August 2006}

Yes (FireFox) and I have changed my mind. It is inconsistent. --Alex ^{talk here} 12:16, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not saying you can't change your mind, and I only put your name in brackets so people knew I was talking about you, and not JD. The table is going to look like a complete mess if we list all housemates there. — FireFox ^(talk) _{12:26, 15 August 2006}

It won't look a complete mess, the row will just be wider. And what about "All housemates" for the final week? --Alex ^{talk here} 12:58, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

How will the row be wider? — FireFox ^(talk) _{13:01, 15 August 2006}

Sorry I think I meant deeper... --Alex ^{talk here} 13:03, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

It's a mess. — FireFox ^(talk) _{13:05, 15 August 2006}

Well that is your opinion. I think it looks neat. --Alex ^{talk here} 13:07, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Some of those names could be moved around so that two are on a line. --_{talk to} JD ^{wants e-mail} 13:10, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

And what about the final week where it is acceptable? --Alex ^{talk here} 13:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

You can't really put two in a line – it'll make the column far too wide. In the final week there are only 6 of them (also the same as week 10), it's not the same. — FireFox ^(talk) _{13:25, 15 August 2006}

	Week 1	Week 2	Week 3	Week 4	Week 5	Week 6	Week 7	Week 8	Week 9	Week 10	Week 11	Week 12	Week 13
Against Public Vote	Bonnie, Glyn	Lea, Richard, Sezer	Nikki, Sam	Grace, Nikki	Imogen, Lisa, Mikey, Nikki	Aisleyne, Susie	Lea, Richard	Aisleyne, Glyn, Imogen, Jennie, Michael, Mikey, Nikki, Pete, Richard, Spiral, Susie	Jayne, Richard	Imogen & Susie; Michael & Spiral; Pete & Richard	Imogen, Jennie, Mikey, Susie	Imogen, Richard	Aisleyne Glyn Jennie Nikki Pete Richard

Does that really look so bad? Actually, I think it does... _{talk to} JD ^{wants e-mail} 13:30, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I can hardly read the names. — FireFox ^(talk) _{13:31, 15 August 2006}

Yes it is bad. Better with a larger font size... --Alex ^{talk here} 13:31, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

	Week 1	Week 2	Week 3	Week 4	Week 5	Week 6	Week 7	Week 8	Week 9	Week 10	Week 11	Week 12	Week 13
Against Public Vote	Bonnie, Glyn	Lea, Richard, Sezer	Nikki, Sam	Grace, Nikki	Imogen, Lisa, Mikey, Nikki	Aisleyne, Susie	Lea, Richard	Aisleyne, Glyn, Imogen, Jennie, Michael, Mikey, Nikki, Pete, Richard, Spiral, Susie	Jayne, Richard	Imogen & Susie; Michael & Spiral; Pete & Richard	Imogen, Jennie, Mikey, Susie	Imogen, Richard	Aisleyne Glyn Jennie Nikki Pete Richard

Let it handle how it shows the names on its own then. People with wider monitors see it different to those with standard size monitors. --_{talk to} JD ^{wants e-mail} 13:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

File:BB7 Table.JPG --_{talk to} JD ^{wants e-mail} 13:40, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

This is just a thought, I don't know if it would work at all - A compromise: use "All but Jayne", and link it to a footnote which lists the housemates? Might work? — FireFox ^(talk) _{13:43, 15 August 2006}

Seems fine! Just confirms them --Alex ^{talk here} 13:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Right, how do we intend on doing this? Here are our options:

1. Merge into Note 8
2. Create a separate note, name it 9 and shift notes 9-12 along one.
3. Create a separate note, name it 13.
4. Make use of a <ref> tag.

— FireFox ^(talk) _{13:50, 15 August 2006}

Merge ito Note 8, as it is part of that week. --Alex ^{talk here} 13:51, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Wasn't it there in the first place? --JD 13:52, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

It is, but no names --Alex ^{talk here} 13:56, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. Feel free to re-word. — FireFox ^(talk) _{13:57, 15 August 2006}

At last I am happy with it! :) --Alex ^{talk here} 13:57, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Total of Nominations table.

I don't understand what all the different numbers mean.--SimonPeter 17:08, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I was about to comment on that, I don't understand them either. What are they all for, what do they mean? _{talk to} JD ^{wants e-mail} 17:43, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Took me a while to understand. The numbers in brackets correspond to the key below it. The numbers above them just mean how many nominations they received. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.99.207 (talk • contribs)

What about the (+1)? There needs to be some explanation there. --Lorian^T_C 12:06, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Why not just remove the section, or add the information in an extra column on the bigger table; then merge the information with the notes? _{talk to} JD ^{wants e-mail} 12:10, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I've tidied the table up a bit to clarify the references to the notes underneath. I'm in two minds about whether this should be merged with the main table, because the main table is large anyway, and it might make it too big. Adw2000 10:28, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Good stuff

I'd just like to say that the table looks magnificent - well done to all concerned. Bentley Banana 19:11, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm glad you like it :) — FireFox ^(talk) _{19:12, 27 August 2006}

Order!

Somebody has taken the liberty to sort this table in order of when the housemates left the house. However, the housemates that returned to the house after being evicted are sorted by a mixture of when they first left the house and when they second left the house.

We should make it consistent. Either list everybody in order of first exit from the house, or list everybody in order of last exit from the house.

You could try to argue that there is consistency, namely that they are listed in order of last exit from the main Big Brother House, as opposed to the House Next Door. However, on this basis Jonathan cannot be placed, since he never entered the main house. Moreover, if we were to do this, then should we count Grace's 21-minute visit? -- Smjg 01:12, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

They are in reverse order of their original leaving, with the exception of Nikki because she re-entered the main house. Jonathan's case is an obvious exception, and Grace's 21 minute visit certainly wouldn't count. I don't understand what is inconsistent about it? --Alex (Talk) 01:19, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

It looks great as it is now. If we moved Grace, Mikey and Lea upwards then it would look extremely messy (it was done that way during the show), and we certainly can't move Nikki downwards. — AnemoneProjectors (talk) 01:20, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Week 4

At the moment they say No nominations. But that's technically incorrect as there were nominations - Susie's. Therefore shouldn't they something like Not permitted to nominate maybe?

In each of the cells in the table, 'No nominations' applies to that housemate on that week, so the table is saying Pete made no nominations in week 4, Glyn made no nominations in week 4, Aisleyne made no nominations in week 4 etc. Susie is still listed as nominating Nikki and Grace. The problem with changing it to Not permitted to nominate is that it's a bit long and might not fit in the table cell. What's often done when there are complex twists that cannot be explained in the table alone is that the twists are described in more detail in the notes at the bottom. Tra (Talk) 01:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I keep nominations tables in Microsoft Word, and have called them "Golden nominations". Squidward2602 14:57, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Dawn

Dawn's voting line was opened for 1 day in week 1, and then they shut it down after she walked out. A lot of people say that her line was never opened, but it was, her number was said on BBLB, and on the Wednesday night show. She walked on the Thursday. I think this should be mentioned on the main page of nominations.--81.145.240.6 19:07, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Was it? Do you have any proof? --Majorly 19:13, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Her phone line was advertised on Big Brother, at the end of Wednesday nights show on week one, and on BBLB. Her number was 09011 32 33 02.--81.145.240.6 19:22, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

So you say. Is there a website, or other source that is readily available that shows this? --Majorly 20:14, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know, but her line was definately opened.--81.145.241.57 15:25, 20 January 2007 (UTC)