Talk:Big Brother 17 (American season)

Wait until show has aired.....
Can people please wait until the show has aired before making updates that contain spoilers.....I'm just kidding. I just noticed no one asked this ridiculous question yet this year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.101.9.1 (talk) 13:00, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Actually, we should wait until the show airs its 17th season because the article has been vandalized (and reverted) often enough to warrant this.--OfficerAPC (talk) 18:07, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Request for Page Protection
The latest edits to the Big Brother 17 wiki article are obviously vandalism because names of the houseguests are made up and do not have any sources to verify the information. To prevent further issues, it is best that the page would be protected.--OfficerAPC (talk) 04:27, 31 May 2015 (UTC)


 * I'll have to decline. While there is some ongoing vandalism, there's also quite a bit of good-faith editing by IP editors that would also be prevented. Huon (talk) 01:22, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

In addition to the ongoing vandalism, there appears to be an edit war between a known user (Tarc) and an anonymous user (76.168.49.73).--OfficerAPC (talk) 02:24, 17 June 2015 (UTC)


 * This is pretty straight-forward, and it'd be rather nice to see other actual editors step up and enforce the project's Manual of Style, rather than me being the only one to do so. Tarc (talk) 03:24, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

It looks like Big Brother 17 (U.S.) finally got its page protection, which was due to last night's outbreak of vandalism that began with morphing the entire article into a single URL to a porn site.--OfficerAPC (talk) 18:15, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Occupation titles and formatting
A random IP insists on all-caps...well not literally ALL-CAPS, but on capitalizing all words in the HouseGuest occupation column because it, quote, "looks nicer". This goes against all common norms of the English language and against the Wikipedia's own MOS:JOBTITLES, so I have reverted these changes, several times now. Past BB articles were a train-wreck of some over-caps, some normal, some over-wikilinked, e.g. one page had something like "sales marketing manager" linked up as "Sales Marketing Manager", and so on. Working o ncleaning those up as well. Tarc (talk) 02:28, 17 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I have restored the edits as there has been no input from this IP user in a day. Tarc (talk) 21:27, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

You need a better title than "controversy"
It makes it sound transphobic when you're referring to Audrey Middleton as a "controversy". I don't know what you want to call the situation. Maybe say the controversy is that TMZ leaked it before the premiere date, but whatever it is, you need to change it. 70.120.70.20 (talk) 16:29, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

The information that was once part of the Controversy section is now part of the Houseguests section as a note.--OfficerAPC (talk) 20:56, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Episode guide proposal
Hey, I know the "Summary" section is a big source of contention most (if not all) seasons, given that they are always these really long-winded play-by-plays that are routinely flagged for multiple issues. I am proposing that, instead of that, we make an episode guide instead, putting individual events (e.g. challenge descriptions, house drama, alliances, votes) by episode instead of making this unwieldy series of paragraphs. So, for example, turning this into something along the lines of:

Thoughts? - Katanin (talk) 14:51, 22 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Interesting, and really anything is better than how it has been done in the past, e.g. Big Brother 15 (U.S.) is just a massively dense Text-Wall. My concern with an episode-by-episode breakdown would be the  length.  It'd certainly have to be spun out to List of Big Brother 17 (U.S.) episodes, but depending on the prose per episode, it may hit 200-250k. Tarc (talk) 21:09, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

I was thinking we can make the episode tables collapsible so the content does not flood the entire article. See above for an example.--OfficerAPC (talk) 23:40, 22 June 2015 (UTC)


 * The massive walls of text was created because back in 2009 for Big Brother 11 (U.S.) and Big Brother 10 (UK) in order to get the Good Article certification the tables had to be eliminated. This is how the Weekly Summary section used to look Big Brother 16 (UK) Weekly Summary. Another reason is generally when something was applied to one Big Brother article the consensus of the Project was it had to be applicable to all versions of Big Brother articles. Unless something changed between 2009 and now for GA certification I wouldn't mind a table of some sort to reduce the multiple paragraphs.  ♪♫Al ucard   16♫♪  06:38, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * IIRC, the tables before then were divided by types of events, e.g. Entrances, Twists, Competitions, Exits, and not chronological within the weeks. I'm going to implement this proposed table for the episode that aired tonight, and then if/when it gets too long, we can give it its own page. - Katanin (talk) 01:53, 25 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I made the color a light blue to see how it looks. The solid black comes across as too harsh, but feel free to tinker as well, no strong feeling one way or the other. Tarc (talk) 19:37, 25 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Personally, I don't like the way it looks. You have a chart listing the HouseGuests, a chart listing the takeover guests, a chart type thing listing the episodes, a Have-Not chart, and a voting history chart all put together. Not to mention there is a lot more to the series then what is aired in the episodes. Keeping the chart would eliminate posting what day events occurred on (something clearly important, considering there are always competitions based on days). It is just all together a bad idea for a BB page. & unless someone is willing to sit through every episode of the first season and make one of these episode guides for it, as well as fifteen other seasons, then this shouldn't even be a discussion. --Sethjohnson95 18:33 ET.


 * With an episode guide, how are we going to incorporate what happened on the live feeds? ~ Totaldramaman  ( talk ·  contribs ) 15:32, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Whatever noteworthy things that one sees in the live feeds will likely make it to the broadcast episodes though, I'd imagine, e.g. Vanessa having a crying meltdown last night will probably be in Sunday's show. Tarc (talk) 16:10, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Given the 24-hour access that the feeds provide, there's going to be a lot of little details popping up, especially in these early weeks as the storylines have yet to solidify, so the episodes provide a litmus test of notability. Like if Vanessa's meltdown doesn't appear, for example, then clearly the show doesn't consider it important enough to devote time to. The show provides a good anchoring point of notability, at least to start off (and that's not to say that everything in the episodes deserves mention, but more that it serves as a gatekeeper as to what doesn't). - Katanin (talk)

I like the fact that there is some sort of organization to the Summary section however generally all the major events are covered in the episodes and in some versions that don't have live feeds anymore the episodes are all to go on. I think for this season we should continue on with the current format as a test. If successful then we can discuss how to apply the current format to Big Brother 1 (U.S.) and international versions such as Big Brother (UK) and Big Brother Australia. An idea we could do that would apply across all Big Brother articles like this would be to format it per week.

This is an example how we can format the table in terms of Weeks which would be better and easier to apply to all versions of Big Brother regardless of ruleset and number of episodes aired per week. We can trim the current Table/Prose sections to actually be short summaries.  ♪♫Al ucard   16♫♪  09:52, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
 * My policy has always been to treat BBUS format series and BBUK format series as different beasts (see:last year's removal of the "eviction votes received" column), because "the UK version of the show, aside from the name and premise (people are isolated in a house and systematically eliminated until a few are left, at which point one is awarded lots of money), is a very different show". I've never seen a BBUK-format season (including BBUS1), but an episode guide's purpose is to allow viewers to know which specific episodes included specific events so a viewer can go back and watch that specific episode; it may not be a feasible solution for a season with 70+ episodes, but with the way BBUS is formatted, it should work. Plus, the BBUS eviction episode will always take place over two different weeks (Week x for everything up until and including the eviction, and Week x+1 for the HoH comp), so if the episodes aren't even firmly divided by week, then why should the episode guide? - Katanin (talk) 18:44, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I can understand that but it was a consensus a few years back to make all the articles regardless of format as uniform as possible. However if we go with an episode guide then all the articles must be redone accordingly and up until this season all the events were done in chronological order based on weeks and days which worked great. The only change was the article needed more prose in order to achieve GA status (ex Big Brother 11 (U.S.) and Big Brother 2009 (UK)). I love how the Survivor articles are formatted clear and concise and how they are laid out similar from season to season. Due to the amount of information that is included in any Big Brother article due to its live nature is too much for an episode guide because there is generally a ratings table, voting/nominations history table and pre-season information. My point is an episode guide works great with other reality shows that are one episode per week and have the traditional 13-20 season because it won't be as long. It works well with a traditional TV show season with 40+ episodes because there are not as many tables as with a competitive reality show. However for a show like Big Brother due to its live nature weekly summaries usually work best. Due to the US using two different formats during its history there needs to be some sort of constancy between the seasons. Also I wasn't a fan of the "Eviction votes received" or the "Nominations received" columns as they seem like a stats column to me and not encyclopedic content. Now maybe within the Weeks the events can be separated in some form like this example in my sandbox for BB2-present/BB Canada articles  ♪♫Al  ucard   16♫♪  05:55, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Persistent Vandalism Requiring Strong Protection
The article, Big Brother 17 (U.S.) is still being vandalized by anonymous users who continue to post nonsense and/or damage formatting. A stronger page protection is needed to combat the persistent vandalism.--OfficerAPC (talk) 03:59, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Despite adding notes, Big Brother 17 (U.S.) is still being vandalized, which merits further page protection.--OfficerAPC (talk) 02:38, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Jeffrey Weldon & Jackie Ibarra Last Two Houseguests
https://twitter.com/TheBBInsider/status/614168789173714944 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pokemon315066 (talk • contribs) 20:32, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Advice for Those Who Don't Want Spoilers
Now that the Live Feeds are available, spoilers are expected to be posted on Big Brother 17 (U.S.). If you have this article on your watchlist and you do not want to see the spoilers, it is best to remove this article from your watchlist and refrain from visiting the page till after the season is over.--OfficerAPC (talk) 05:33, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Big Brother Takeover
it seems to be a recent trend that BB seasons from all over the world adopt some kind of subtitle or side title like Big Brother Secrets and Lies etc., so in this case our version has added Takeover to their title. Please discuss so we can stop edit warring. Boaxy (talk) 00:38, 28 June 2015 (UTC)


 * No source that I can find refers to it as "Big Brother: Takeover" as a proper title, they refer to it like 'Big Brother' Takeover Brings 'Amazing Race' Blind Daters Into Competition. Tarc (talk) 01:45, 28 June 2015 (UTC)


 * The CBS All Access site, the housemate info box logo, which is the official logo. I think it's an official title this season. They don't call the seaosns by number anymore, except for encyclopedic purposes. Please someone back me up. I can't let this one go, I have to be a little white girl about it. Boaxy (talk) 18:42, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not about winning an argument, so discuss it with members here and get to a consensus. Best, jona   (talk)   19:23, 28 June 2015 (UTC)


 * When you go HERE the tab at the top (The one that says where you are) Says "Big Brother 17". My vote is to keep it Big Brother 17.--Tech-Chef (talk) 02:58, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

The Twin Twist
According to this season's Twin Twist, the two Nolan twins are competing as Liz Nolan for now. Therefore, Julia Nolan is NOT an official houseguest just yet. If Liz and Julia manage to survive the first five evictions, then they both earn the right to compete as separate houseguests. Whoever keeps adding Julia Nolan to the list of BB17 houseguests needs to read the Twin Twist section BEFORE making these edits.--OfficerAPC (talk) 03:59, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree, I have removed her a few times now and nobody seems to read the note. --MSalmon (talk) 13:25, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
 * If this keeps up, Big Brother 17 (U.S.) will need further protection that requires edits made by IP addresses and new users to be held for review.--OfficerAPC (talk) 14:39, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Another one I have had to revert --MSalmon (talk) 18:23, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I have warned the IP addresses in question.--OfficerAPC (talk) 19:06, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Kathy Griffin
Kathy Griffin's "BB Takeover" twist is NOT the Diamond Power of Veto. It is whoever answers the seventh call will get the Last Laugh power to prevent THREE people from voting next week As seen here, here, and here--Tech-Chef (talk) 02:49, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The article needs further page protection against future cases of vandalism. I also saw some edits that caused interference with formatting.--OfficerAPC (talk) 02:56, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Allegations, impropriety, and BLP policy
A reminder that WP:BLP is one of the firmest policies of the project; we cannot accuse a living person of what is essentially sexual assault based on the "reporting" of it in blogs and gossip rags. If this rises to the level of past controversies and is covered by legitimate media, then by all means it should be included, but TMZ is not a reliable source, nor is perezhilton.com, Bustle, or Reddit. Tarc (talk) 11:25, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Order of 2 HOHS in weekly table
I'm confused as to why we don't keep the HOH who remains in power above the dethroned HOH whose name will stay striked out?

The way it looks now is confusing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.218.136.96 (talk) 02:52, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The 2 HoHs are listed in the order based on when they made their nominations, regardless of which one gets dethroned and which one retains power.--OfficerAPC (talk) 03:08, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Week 4 Takeover
In the first week, Julie Chen advised the HouseGuests that they'll never know "who ... or what" will be involved in the takeover. This week's 90s Theme Week seems to fall under the "what" category for the takeover. I see there have been edits on the Takeover table on this topic. Should it be / not be added? --fmmarianicolon | Talk 03:41, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The reason 90s week should not be added is simply because the "Get ready for a Takeover" theme never played, meaning a takeover has not been put in play.  { [ ( jjj     1238 ) ] }   03:45, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The "what" was referring to a twist itself, e.g. BB Fast Forward, Last Laugh. This week, there's been no music and no guest (plus no twist, but one could exist outside of the Takeover anyway), and therefore no Takeover. - Katanin (talk) 15:13, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Julia Nolan
Can we add Julia now? Since Liz won BOB, it is confirmed Julia will enter the house.


 * I would say the minute Julia enters the house as the 17th houseguest is when she should be added.  { [ ( jjj     1238 ) ] }   02:22, 25 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I think it's now appropriate to have her listed as coming in Day 43. Andrewc248 (talk) 04:08, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * You all seem to be getting ahead of yourselves adding her when she isn't even in the house yet. Plus Day 43 hasn't happened yet so she can't be added anyway. --MSalmon (talk) 17:33, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * What do we do about her row when we add her? We can't exactly say she wasn't in the house because she was. — RachelRice (talk, contribs) — 17:54, 25 July 2015 (UTC)


 * See Big Brother 5 (U.S.) for how the table handled the first Twin Twist. As for adding her, it'll have to wait until she is an official houseguest. Tarc (talk) 17:56, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Hm, that says "Not in House" as well, even though she technically was. — RachelRice (talk, contribs) — 17:57, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I know because I changed it, but we could say Not in game? --MSalmon (talk) 17:58, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Wasn't she still in the game though? I mean, they voted to evict together and both equally participated in "game talk" and had alliances. The only thing that Julia didn't do was compete in the competitions (as far as we know). Also, since Julia did vote to evict, do we include her votes to evict with a note to say that she voted with Liz? Hm. — RachelRice (talk, contribs) — 18:21, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I think "Not in game" makes the most sense. While Julia did participate in the game, she was playing as Liz, not as her own, independent player. Any votes she cast and comps she won should count for Liz, and Julia's bar should start once she officially enters the game. This is how Adria and Natalie were treated in the BB5 page. — Survivor Jay (talk) 19:54, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * What can we use then, since we can't use Not in House or Not in game? --MSalmon (talk) 20:00, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Julia and Liz both voted together. It was never stated that it was Liz's vote to evict, Julie always said that "Julia & Liz" would be voting next. That's why I think the votes to evict should be shown on Julia's row. Or we can put "Not a Housemate" / "Non-housemate" as she was in the game. — RachelRice (talk, contribs) — 21:57, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I think Non-HouseGuest would be fine, as Benazir in Big Brother 10 (UK) was in the house but was never an official housemate so it would be a similar thing. As for the votes to evict I think leave them off because they are Liz's votes not Julia's even though they were voting together. --MSalmon (talk) 22:15, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I think "Not in game" and "Non-HouseGuest" are of equal substance, but "Not in game" looks better. Julia is not considered a full player in the game until her entry. She's not in the opening credits. She's not on the Memory Wall, etc. She is currently playing the game as her sister, and Liz is the one with full status in the game right now. The BB5 page had Natalie listed as "Not in game" for quite a long time, and no one objected until this season. — Survivor Jay (talk) 00:58, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Not eligible is what they used for season 5. Which seems best to me as it is the voting table, and she wasn't eligible to vote as herself. Andrewc248 (talk) 04:07, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Should it be noted that it was actually Julia who cast the vote week 4? Even though it's likely Liz would have voted the same way, Julia was the one in control of that vote. Eagle2ch (talk) 10:01, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

We have to consider the potentially surprising external circumstances; Liz can still walk the game or get expelled before the 5th eviction, thus voiding the Twin Twist's deal.
 * We don't choose things on the basis that it looks better. Julia has been playing in the game; her not being on the memory wall or the opening credits means that she wasn't a full housemate. — RachelRice (talk, contribs) — 01:28, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Julia Nolan wasn't in the game. She was playing as Liz Nolan, not Julia. Her name isn't on the memory wall or in the opening credits because she wasn't in the game and wasn't a houseguest. Once she enters the game this Thursday then she'll be in the game. "Not in game" makes the most sense to me.  { [ ( jjj     1238 ) ] }   03:16, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Just re-thinking the "non-houseguest" label for Julia until she was able to enter the house. I think it should be edited to note that she was playing as Liz, even though it is explained elsewhere in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.169.26.194 (talk) 12:11, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

The weeks in the nominations table
Shouldn't the weeks start on Week 2? I understand why we've done it in previous seasons, but the first eviction this season took place in Week 3 (Day 15), and the first nominations took place in Week 2 (Day 9), so why does it say Week 1 when the only thing that happened that week was the HoH competition? Is the first week not a real week? — RachelRice (talk, contribs) — 01:34, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

It's like that in all previous seasons. It doesn't matter what day the eviction took place, it's when the game starts. So no, the weeks shouldn't start in "week 2". That wouldn't make sense. IMO. 24.138.180.66 (talk) 01:44, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Besides, the week numbers are referring to the episode air dates.--OfficerAPC (talk) 02:51, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 July 2015
Change voting history table, week 4. The votes Audrey received was 9 out of 10, NOT 10 out of 11. Thanks.

BadrWaterloo (talk) 01:31, 27 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Audrey received a penalty vote for violating the Have-Not rules, so 10 out of 11 is correct. Tarc (talk) 01:59, 27 July 2015 (UTC)


 * As a matter of fact, this has happened before; in 2007, Jen Johnson received a penalty eviction vote in Big Brother 8 (U.S.), making the vote count 6 out of 6 instead of 5 out of 5.--OfficerAPC (talk) 02:38, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * If you watched the show, you'd know this. — RachelRice (talk, contribs) — 06:01, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Julia in the Voting history
There's been some debate over what we should put for Julia's inevitable row in the voting history; I hereby propose Non-HouseGuest. "Not eligible" is reserved for HouseGuests who, for some reason other than being HoH or Nominated, cannot vote, e.g. Last Laugh or being a non-Coach (as in BB14), whereas "Not in game" or "Not in house" aren't exactly true, given that Julia is very much in the game and in the house, but she's not a HouseGuest: there is no Julia on the memory wall; you can't nominate Julia for eviction. Thoughts? This would also apply to Big Brother 5 (U.S.). - Katanin (talk) 20:01, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree with this entirely. Non-HouseGuest (or Not a HouseGuest, doesn't really matter) is the only suitable option. She was in the house, in the game and was eligible to vote. The fact that she was playing under a different name doesn't change anything. — RachelRice (talk, contribs) — 20:07, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Indeed. "Not eligible" implies that there is a condition where the person could be eligible at some point, and for weeks 1-5 that was never the case for Julia. Tarc (talk) 20:24, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * imo, Liz and Julia's votes should be combined for the weeks they were Liz. There were some evictions were Julia voted, not Liz. Most obviously was Jeff's eviction, Julia voted to evict James and was shown in a later episode telling Liz at a swap that she didn't vote as they had discussed. - Wattlebird (talk) 02:10, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I get that, but how would we do that if/when their rows are nonconsecutive? I think there should be a footnote for those first five weeks that explains it (as there was in BB5), but keep it as Liz, given that there was no Julia voting. - Katanin (talk) 02:17, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * YOu could argue there were weeks where Liz didn't vote because after the first week, Julie would address the twin by their name (Liz or Julia) and not "Liz" thereby making Julia the one to vote some weeks. Even though at that stage she was still playing as "Liz" because, like in my example above, she didn't always vote as the real Liz wanted making crediting the vote purely as Liz incorrect/misleading. - Wattlebird (talk) 02:22, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Given the circumstance of Liz during those five weeks being a singular HouseGuest portrayed (so to speak) by two different people, "Liz" voted every week for five weeks. There technically was no Julia in the house for the first five weeks; she didn't enter the house as a HouseGuest until Day 43, and any decisions she made was under the banner of Liz. Though it's confusing, it's merely a reflection of the peculiarities of having two people play as one. Though the person named Julia cast the vote against Jeff, she was doing so as Liz. - Katanin (talk) 02:37, 31 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I prefer Not Eligible because that is what they used on BB5 the last twin twist, if Non-Houseguest is preferred both should match. 69.124.227.80 (talk) 02:14, 31 July 2015 (UTC)


 * The way it was handled in the past was the second twin was treated as any latecomer/intruder and listed as "Not in House" with a white background but this has been changed various times without discussion. This was to avoid confusion that the second twin was a legit HouseGuest during the task. The grey "Not Eligible" is reserved if there is a reason/twist that a HouseGuest can't nominate or cast eviction votes as per the regular format. Even though Julia didn't vote as planned in some cases as per the rules of the twist they are treated as "Liz" for the first five weeks and are listed as such. These instances can be listed in the episode guide. I think that it should say "Not in house" as Julia was technically not in the house and Liz was in the House as per the twist rules. The other wording that would be suitable is "Not a HouseGuest" with a white background. I don't think "Non-HouseGuest" would be good in the event either BBUSA or BB Canada chooses to adapt the Week 1 twist from Big Brother 10 (UK) which would cause another discussion on the topic.  ♪♫Al ucard   16♫♪  05:02, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Shouldn't be a grey background. It makes it look she was a houseguest all along. Nothing was wrong how the BB5 article ORIGINALLY had it. CloudKade11 (talk) 05:44, 31 July 2015 (UTC)


 * It should be white as per the consensus of the Big Brother WikiProject because "Julia" was not in the House for the first five weeks. Same goes for Natalie in BB5 and when the tables were originally put into the articles there was a long discussion on how they should be formatted and this is the original season five voting table after the discussion and the consensus that were reached at the time. The only thing that has changed is how Natalie/Julia's status should be worded which should be "Non-HouseGuest" on one line until a consensus is reached.  ♪♫Al ucard   16♫♪  05:56, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * She was in the house, she swapped with Liz multiple times. Just because she was known under a different name doesn't excuse the fact that Julia was in the house and playing the game. — RachelRice (talk, contribs) — 12:44, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, but pretending to be Liz; everything done up until last night's walk-in was under Liz's name. We need to separate Julia the person from Julia the Houseguest when thinking about this. Tarc (talk) 13:55, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Having it as white looks real confusing just saying. 2602:306:32DA:6710:C538:1A80:16AA:1BE9 (talk) 14:38, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
 * That's how it is on all Big Brother articles, we must follow WikiProject Big Brother so that there are no inconsistencies. — RachelRice (talk, contribs) — 17:37, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

I wish people would STOP changing it to complete nonsense. I'm tired of reverting it all the time. — RachelRice (talk, contribs) — 09:48, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

@johnalberttv: I lpthink we should put "Participating in Twin Twist" because it shows she was in the house a and will encourge the reader to learn more about it.

The Case of the Disappearing Takeover
The vanishing of the "there will be a Takeover every week" announcement is being mentioned now out there. The only solid source so far is Bustle, but if a few more pick up on it it may be worth a mention. Also depending on tonight of course, they may come back with a new one. Tarc (talk) 20:30, 30 July 2015 (UTC) Here is another source regarding the disappearance of the BBTakeover:. I hope that the editor of this page finds this information useful. Bamfordtim (talk) 15:08, 11 August 2015 (UTC)Tim Bamford Aug 11, 2015

Semi-protected edit request on 20 August 2015
This is something that needs to be changed, I'll first copy and paste the text from the "HouseGuests" section from the page, and then I'll explain why:

"The cast of the seventeenth season of Big Brother.
 * Top: Meg, Clay, Shelli and James
 * Second row: Jason, Liz, Jackie, John and Audrey
 * Third row: Steve, Da'Vonne, Vanessa, Jace and Austin Bottom: Jeff and Becky
 * Not pictured: Julia."

Since there's been a "Twin Twist" during this season of Big Brother, the text is confusing Liz and Julia. Julia is the one next to Jason and Jackie, Liz is not pictured since she was in sequester.

Fred7GL (talk) 23:11, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting comment.svg Note: This article is no longer Semi-Protected, so you can now edit the article yourself. - Arjayay (talk) 08:32, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Voting History is wrong certain weeks
Week 7 and 11 are messed up, underneath them it should say "Double Eviction" to indicate that those weeks were double evictions. For week 7, instead it says Day 50 and Day 57, so the chart is very misleading because it appears that an eviction happened on day 50, then on day 57, when in reality both evictions on week 7 happened on day 57. The same thing with week 11. On week 12 the evictions happened on days 89 and 91, yet the chart says that they happened on days 85 and 89. I can't edit pages because I'm a guest, but I'm just letting everyone know some of the days on the chart are wrong. 74.215.212.33 (talk) 03:17, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Days on the chart are listed to show the days in which nominations are made. During the week 7 double eviction, Becky made her nominations on Day 50 while Steve made his nominations on Day 57. The same goes for the other double eviction weeks. The correct eviction days are listed per HouseGuest's Voting History.--TheDevin13 (talk) 06:20, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

So it's not when the eviction is, but when the "round" starts? I guess that makes sense but why do you guys have it like that? Wouldn't it make more sense to have the days displayed as the actual eviction day? 74.215.212.33 (talk) 15:44, 17 September 2015 (UTC)


 * It has traditionally been done that way, the precedence is generally followed. Checkout the other seasons for examples. Andrewc248 (talk) 15:11, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 September 2015
Thanksforbands (talk) 02:14, 24 September 2015 (UTC) More importantly, you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 07:49, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: as you have not requested a specific change in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".

Good season guys!
Another great season! thanks to all the people that contributed this year! we'll see you next summer!! (: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elijah.wilhelm (talk • contribs) 03:18, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Big Brother 17 (U.S.). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150905053943/http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2015/09/03/wednesday-final-ratings-big-brother-last-comic-standing-the-carmichael-show-extant-adjusted-down/457432/ to http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2015/09/03/wednesday-final-ratings-big-brother-last-comic-standing-the-carmichael-show-extant-adjusted-down/457432/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:13, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Celebrity Big Brother 1 (U.S.) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 05:24, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Big Brother 1 (U.S.) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 12:34, 22 December 2018 (UTC)