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

from Talk:Big Brother USA contestants

I added italicized comments about September 11 and Amy's double eviction. TheCustomOfLife 19:34, 20 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I was about to add the names that had been revealed on the show, but a little web research got me a complete list that might be accurate: http://www.creditdiva.com/reality411/start.html Thirdreel 22:43, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I haven't followed up much on this season. Are the second season and third season notes okay? Mike H 22:46, Jul 14, 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, I think they're good. They give a simple explanation for the variations in timing and whatnot. I'm not sure if the 9-11 reference is completely necessary... but I suppose it was rather important to the show that they picked a very unfortunate week to plan the finish. (Man, I'm still surprised they continued the show after that. They scheduled the big finale for BB2, then happened upon the one week in which nobody really cared who won a reality show.) Thirdreel 01:18, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Don't forget, though, that 9-11 was very important to BB2's outcome because Monica, who was still a contestant at this time, had a cousin who was never found alive at the site. They broke the "no news to the houseguests" rule for her. Mike H 02:05, Jul 18, 2004 (UTC)

In retrospect, it might have been smarter for the producers to end the show after the 9-11 attacks because the outcome would be altered. But, the producers gave the option of halting to the contestants, which may not have been the most viable option considering a lot of events in that timeframe were either cancelled or rescheduled. Big Pauly 23:59, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I ask myself two questions whenever I make major revisions and additions to a Wikipedia article: "Who's going to be reading this?" and "What kind of information will they be looking for?" It helps me decide what kind of information to include. In this case, I think readers will be, for the most part, people who saw the show and already have opinions about it. They will come to the page if they've forgotten the name of a previous contestant, or if they have some reason to want a houseguest's full name. So I think some simple explanation is in order, but not too much on who voted how and why. Whether BB2 would have ended differently if not for 9-11 is definitely debatable.Thirdreel 21:32, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Oh, I don't think Monica was voted out because of her loss. I think it was because Will and Nicole were selfish and wanted moneymoneymoney. I think there should be a notice, though, somewhere (not necessarily in this article) that Amy was voted back in at BB3, and Lisa was the shocking swing vote. Mike H 21:34, Jul 18, 2004 (UTC)

Why would this page be deleted?? The information on this page is not in the Big Brother main article. 69.156.175.65 02:08, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The information is now tabulated on the Big Brother (USA) article, so it may make more sense to remove this and use the other as it has a lot of other details about the US version of the show as well as listing the contestants. -- TonyW 23:48, Jul 28, 2004 (UTC)

Update: a redirect has been set in place, rather than a delete. -- TonyW 15:57, Jul 29, 2004 (UTC)

Good idea

Good idea to create a separate page for Big Brother USA. But why is the page on the BB USA contestants about to be deleted? Maybe we should move the list of contestants here...

Spoilers, live feeds

I'm not sure if this is Wikipedia policy on spoilers, but I'm going to request it anyway: Please don't post information that has not aired on the show. If you see something on the live feeds that you wish to discuss, you may discuss it on other webpages like Hamster Time [1] or Television Without Pity: [2].

I agree with the spoiler warning. A lot of people TiVo or record the shows and watch them at later times or dates. They may "stumble" upon this page or come here looking for information. And, if someone post the contest or eviction result within 5 minutes of the show airing, the show will be spoiled for them.

Also, I think any talk about alliances is biased POV, at least until the whole thing plays out. Keep this as an encyclopedia article to report the facts about the show. Thanks. Thirdreel 22:23, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

To whom it may concern (and especially all those who commented above):

This argument is one that has been discussed many, many times among the Wikipedia editors of Big Brother articles. The consensus has been made that the Big Brother pages will be edited to accompany information concluded from the CBS Big Brother 24/7 live internet feed. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and all articles should be edited in real time. An argument made was that if a major news event broke, the article would be created/edited in real time, and would not wait for television or radio broadcasts to report it first. Spoiler warnings were recently added to the Big Brother 8 (US) article when people complained. This is especially challenging because as the United States variant has many more challenges and possible spoilers (most of which are pre-taped), the US variant has more chances for spoilers than any other, and especially as the US variant re-caps just three times a week, where most other variants have up to seven re-cap shows every week. The UK edition also has an entire channel of the Big Brother live feed.

I apologise if you are still upset, unfortunately most Big Brother fans do have the live internet feed and are interested in spoilers. The best advice I can give is watch for spolier warnings, and only check this page anytime between 9:00 eastern time on Thursday night and around noon on Friday, and from 10:00 Tuesday night to 9:00 Thursday night. These are times where there will be NO SPOILERS OF CEREMONIES OR COMPETITIONS. Though please note IN HOUSE EVENTS WILL STILL BE UPDATED IN REAL TIME.

Thank you for reading, and happy editing.

- Spyke1077 04:38, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Houseguests names

Is there a reason why their names are in italics in the description of each season?

Oh, I did that before I knew you could start profiles for them. It's the equivalent of putting quotes around the names, so to speak. If you object to them, by all means, remove them. Mike H 23:58, Aug 10, 2004 (UTC)

Pictures

If I get any more people writing articles for BB3 contestants, I will provide screencaps for the articles. Mike H 23:58, Aug 10, 2004 (UTC)

Moving

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)

I agree. 132.205.47.180 15:50, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I agree too. The distinction is between the countries airing it, not the network. -- Netoholic 16:31, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I don't think that the TV series needed to be explicitly known. The links were from an article called Big Brother television program, so everyone would know it was a television show. Mike H 16:29, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)

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)

Merge

I've removed VFD tags from the four contestant profiles I started, as they weren't even listed on the VFD page proper and as such was never resolved. I put merge tags on them instead. If someone could merge the information on Lisa Donahue, Danielle Reyes, Shannon Dragoo, and Hardy-Ames Hill to the article proper, that would be great. Mike H 02:27, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)

Having separate contestant articles has always been more appealing to me than cramming everything into one article. The main article, in my opinion, should only contain a general overview of the show. Other shows, such as Survivor, have articles on all the winners, as well as many of the "losers." The turnout of TonyW's VfD polls seems to indicate that not many people object to the articles either. There's nothing unencyclopedic about people who were on a popular television show. The more information the better, I say. 20 years from now, when all the fan sites are gone, someone might find some use for pages of information on Big Brother contestants. So, I vote to expand, instead of merge. Heck, link all of the candidate names in this article and create a page for each one of them. (Sorry, I don't really belong here; I've only seen Big Brother a few times.) ;) - MattTM 04:26, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)

I don't know why someone wants the pages on the players to be deleted. The pages are ok and have their place on wikipedia. I think they should stay in their present form and we should add links to those pages in this article. Paul99 14:26, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The VfDs were never resolved. I added merge tags to all the articles, actually, when it became evident that it wasn't going anywhere. Mike H 06:35, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)

I cannot see any reason why individual players pages should or need to be deleted. If all that data gets moved to the main BB page or to the season page it's just going to bloat the page.--66.149.92.242 21:20, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Merging is a mistake. Each contestant has their own separate story, which should clutter this article. Also, to let people know, a vote on re-directing Janelle Pierzina into here is being done now, as part of an ongoing effort to delete almost all contestants. Also, regardless of everybodies position on the subject, discussion of merge should occur here, not on each separate contestant's article (if it's a rehash of the same issue) --rob 11:56, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

Sovereign Two

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)

Split?

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)

Agree. Its the way I'd like the information presented. --Jmccorm 00:58, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

How about this?Geoking66 02:03, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Big Brother USA
Series 5 (2004) (with day of eviction)
Drew Daniel	Day 82 ($500,000 Winner)
Michael "Cowboy" Ellis	Day 82 ($50,000 Runner-up)
Diane Henry	Day 78
Jennifer Dedmon	Day 75
Karen O'Neil Ganci	Day 70
Marvin Latimer	Day 65
Adria Montgomery-Klein	Day 63 (twin)
Natalie Montgomery-Carrol	Day 56 (twin)
Will Wickle	Day 49
Jase Wirey	Day 42
Scott Long	Day 35
Holly King	Day 28
Lori Valenti	Day 21 ($10,000)
Mike Lubinski	Day 14

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)

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)

I decided to just go ahead and do it. --Rob 03:56, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Janelle Pierzina re-vote

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)

Ashlea Evans being considered for deletion

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)

Michael Donnellan (reality television contestant) being considered for deletion

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)

Template:Big Brother USA season 6 background considered for deletion

The template {{Big Brother USA season 6 background}} 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)

Overall Issues With This Article

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)

I was just reading the section about "House Calls". It kept referring to a "Reynolds", but nowhere does it mention "Reynolds'" first name, only that "Reynolds" doesn't host any more. The only Reynolds on the entire page (outside of this section) is former contestant Marcellas Reynolds. Is he the one who once co-hosted "House Calls"? I agree that this is a poorly written article, intended for people already familiar with the show.

Rename

I suggest a rename of this article to "Big Brother (USA)" in order to follow the convention of the rest of the Big Brother articles. -- 9cds^(talk) 08:14, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

It had that name, and was changed to conform with Wikipedia:Naming conventions (television)#Additional disambiguation:

Use the following when there are two or more television productions of the same name.

• Prefix the country of broadcast - (US TV series)

(write US without periods as per WP:NCA, and "US" is prefered over "USA".

So, it's best if we leave it. --Rob 14:39, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, what about "Big Brother (US)"? We don't really need to say that it's a TV series. -- 9cds^(talk) 14:53, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Why do we need to keep changing it for no reason? It's been renamed multiple times. If it was already called "Big Brother (US)", with everything linking to it, I would be happy to leave it, at that. But, other than creating double-redirects, it's not clear what changing it to that, will accomplish. Now that the name is exactly what the naming convention guidelines say it should be, it seems time to leave it. It's annoying to fix redirects (paritcularly double-redirects), and then have that undone by another rename. --Rob 16:42, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Jokes about Big Brother

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

Big Brother shows

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

I think it should be merged. Not sure it meets notability standards by itself. --Bill.matthews 02:18, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I would have merged the House Calls article just now, but I don't know where to put it as there isn't a section for Shows. Could somebody else sort it out? _{J Di}^talk 18:59, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Will Kirby

I noticed something interesting: a lot of the supposed "strategy" discussion is actually a discussion of Will Kirby's strategy. Should this be labelled as such? Or perhaps the information regarding Will Kirby's strategy should be moved to the article on Will Kirby himself? What does everyone think?

Most housemate articles for deletion

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)

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)

Agreed. They don't deserve their own articles --Bill.matthews 02:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

The facts section

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)

This Coup d'Etat ting or whatever

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)

"Firsts" in timeline

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)

I've removed this "first" from the Season 7 list :

First houseguest to win the most HOH competitions and POV competitions: Janelle Pierzina. Janelle won 6 HOHs and 6 POVs in seasons 6 and 7.

This makes no sense. Technically, the first contestant to win the most was Mike Malin, from season two, who won the first HOH competition -- at that point he has won the most of anybody -- 1 to nothing. Somebody who leads a category doesn't get a "first" because they lead it. -- ArglebargleIV 00:18, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Public Vote

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)

From season two onwards, houseguests did all the voting, including who won. _{talk to} JD ^{wants e-mail} 23:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

POV

Should Power of Veto not be TLAd to PoV, rather than POV? _{J Di}^talk 03:43, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Nominations table

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)

References and influence

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)

Splitting and Re-organisation

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)

Why is it.........

nominated for deletion? I mean Big Brother is up and running and season 8 is about to start so why is the Big Brother US Article being up for deletion when its a REAL show?

rigged

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)

Nominations table and Voting history table

I fixed all the Voting history tables (Season 2-7) to match the look of the Season 8 table. I also added a Twist/Notes section to past Voting History tables to make them easier to read.

I retitled the Season 1 table to Nominations table since Season 1 followed the international rules.

TV Infobox

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)

Definetely the wrong picture for the infobox. I don't think it's necessary. - Spyke1077 02:09, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Big Brother (US)
Created by	John de Mol
Developed by	Endemol
Starring	Julie Chen
Narrated by	Clayton Halsey
Opening theme	Big Brother US Theme
Country of origin	United States
Original language	English
No. of episodes	268 (as of 8/8/07)
Production
Executive producers	Alison Grodner Rich Meehan
Running time	60 minutes
Original release
Network	CBS Global
Release	July 5 2000 – present

FCC Classification

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)

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)

Article Rewrite

I am going to attempt to clean up the article, remove triva sections, add more sources, and format it similar to Big Brother (UK) in style. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 07:26, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

I have finished the rewrite of the article. Here is a complete list of what is different:

• No more trivia sections. All the trivia about the game in general, Head of Household, Power of Veto, Luxuray Comps.,Timeline of notable events, etc. was worthless to the article I found nothing that could be merged with the article.
• Shortened the Power of Veto section to basic information that is needed. The PoV section doesn't need more than the basic rules and uses since it has its own article. Stuff like rule changes are indicated in main PoV article.
• Increased sources from 3 to 34! :) We all know that sources are good and keep the page clean of nasty "citation needed"
• Removed TV Infobox from House Calls, the Infobox was not needed as everything is in the main BB US infobox at the top plus everthing else was in the article.
• Added short description of Big Brother: After Dark to the article. How dare Big Brother: After Dark not be mentioned here!
• Removed Season 3 DVD cover. The image did not have a fair use rationale.
• Added more detail about Virtual Me game.
• Removed "Notes" from the bottom. Stuff like Season 1 was mention in the article already plus I couldn't find anything on the unsorced statements.
• Added a "Controversy" section since WP:BIGBRO said the article needed a Controversy section. This is basically the same as what I put on the main Big Brother article. I didn't know any other way to word the section since I originally put all the information on the main Big Brother article.

Anyway that is a list of what I did. Hopefully this has improved the article and it is easier to read for people who have never watched Big Brother. Because it was in a way written in a way that people who watched the show would understand but not people who have never seen the show. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 12:51, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Looks good! - Rjd0060 14:49, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I was thinking maybe we can get this article up to GA status. What do you think? Maybe we should get a peer review or something but I don't understand how that works. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 16:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I just skimmed through the GA pages and got a general understanding about it. I definitely think that Big Brother (US) meets the criteria to become a GA. There is an explanation to add for review here. Do you want to nominate it? - Rjd0060 16:41, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't mind nominating it but would you mind helping me implement changes or clarifications requested by a reviewer? ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 16:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Of course not. I will definitely help, but didn't want to be the main person because my internet access is sometimes limited. Go for it! - Rjd0060 16:49, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Big Brother US is now nominated. Wish it luck! ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 16:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Good. I will try and keep an eye on the reviews. - Rjd0060 17:00, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. I will try also. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 17:56, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Strategies Section

I think the Strategies section can be useful to the article if it is implemented properly. The way the section reads now it is not NPOV (Neutral Point of View) I think, plus some may consider this trivia. I do believe with some work we can make this part of the article but the way it is written could jeopardize GA status.

Strategies

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 both Green: 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.

♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 02:53, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

This is written in a neutral point of view. I have zero preference or thoughts on which strategies are better than others. It is not trivia to say which houseguests used the backdoor method anymore than it is trivia to say which houseguests have won the game. It is an in-depth explanation of the strategies, how they work, and how they don't work. I was going to add other important ones to complete the list. I am a huge Big Brother fan, I've seen every single episode, I have the live feeds, I know all there is to know about the show, the game, etc. and I hate seeing its Wikipedia entry be without the most important element of it all.

If calling the strategy "being a loser" is too "non-neutral"-sounding, I can always just say "lose competitions." I can take all the conversational elements out of the article. I just thought it read better and more interestingly with conversational elements of writing.

I don't think we can consider this a "complete" article if we aren't going to talk about the cornerstone of the entire show. Strategies are the biggest element of Big Brother. The strategies are so important and so intricate, it could be an entire article of its own linked to the Big Brother page. I don't know how the admin or whoever feel about that but I think that would be a great idea if you want to keep the main article only about the rules and stuff like that.

I know there are some grammar issues and spelling issues that I was planning on cleaning up today. That should be a non-issue evaluating my article because it was going to be immediately fixed. --Teehee11 03:06, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Even if its neutral, its still original research and unverified, which makes it inelligible for inclusion in a Wikipedia article . Atropos 04:50, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I read the original research guidelines and it demands two things: 1) Neutral POV, which my strategies contribution is written with. 2) Verifiable information. I can verify the information by citing specific episodes (i.e. The episode where Ivette called James a floater in BB6, "He's the lone floater caught in the middle.") and I can verify it through articles written about the show and citing the sources. I will happily do that but not if my hard work is going to be deleted (again).

It is not original research -- I am not the only one to ever use these terms and characterize gameplay this way. I would just be compiling all the information in one spot, which hasn't been done before. I think people are putting up a fight because they don't want to see new work added to an article they feel is their article. My strategies section is extremely relevant and can easily fit under Wikipedia guidelines if experienced users would just support it. --Teehee11 03:50, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Like I said when you first did this, I don't think that this should all be on the Main BB Page. It's way to long and that page is long enough. Besides, that page doesn't really get into too many detailed specifics of individual seasons. Thats what the individual seasons pages are for. - Rjd0060 13:16, 18 September 2007 (UTC)