Talk:Big Brother 20 (American season)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Hannahwritinguwo. Peer reviewers: Hannahwritinguwo.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:59, 17 January 2022 (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 was closed due to No Consensus. P37307 (talk) 07:19, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Source Anonymous
You can't add houseguest infromation at this stage based on a June 2018 Anonymous Twitter Account — Preceding unsigned comment added by P37307 (talk • contribs) 00:04, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Houseguests
CBS Big Brother's official site has posted this regarding the Houseguests: ''On Monday, June 18 at 11 AM ET / 8 AM PT, CBS All Access subscribers will be able to meet the new HGs before anyone else, thanks to the Big Brother Live Feeds! That's right, more than a week before BB20's season premiere, you'll get to meet the cast that will soon be cohabiting and competing for the $500,000 grand prize throughout the summer.''

As the note in the body of the page says, any release prior will be speculative.

Question: Are we going to release the names and bio on Wikipedia based on the live feed release or CBS's public release date? Personally, I think we should watch and see what other reliable sources, like news and entertainment magazines, do. If reliable sources releases the names, we should add. If not, should we be the spoilers of the houseguest, overriding CBS's commercial business interest of using the Live Feed release as means to increase their subscribers? Only a fraction of viewers are live feeders and CBS All Access subscribers. Thoughts? P37307 (talk) 00:11, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Per previous seasons we have added information that was collected from seasons. So I say it's alright to use the live feed release. A notable example of this is with Celebrity Big Brother when the season didn't start until February 7th and the live feeds didn't start until later that same night. However CBS had a sneak peak of the live feeds where they turned them on for 15 minutes once or twice a day in the day's leading up to the premiere. However we DID add information based on those sneak peaks which can be seen in the reversion history here. We continued to do the same thing throughout the season. The Doctor Who  (talk) 00:55, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. How would those be referenced or would referencing be ignored and added at a later date with verifiable referencing? I'm sure, maybe even you (hee hee), will beat me to an edit though. I also assume media news articles will be abundant on that day too. I bet the big news organizations that report on BB already have the info/bio's and it is embargoed until the live feed preview. P37307 (talk) 01:14, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Depending on how it's released through the live feeds the link to that could be referenced. It would be likely that enough people editing this article have All Access subscriptions that it could be verified that way (I plan on renewing my All Access subscription this weekend; I cancelled it after CBB). Also websites such as Big Brother Network which we've used as reliable in the past will be releasing an article. Also there's some pretty quick editors on here so good luck. The edit history on this article will probably blow up on Monday. The Doctor Who  (talk) 01:30, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Just a quick reminder to all editors now that we're less than 24 hours out from the release: Anything that is added BEFORE the official release at 11 AM ET / 8 AM PT on June 18 will be quickly reverted. Thanks! The Doctor Who (talk) 20:34, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
 * EvelDick and some of the other pro's are releasing this information regarding incoming houseguests so I assume it is going to be a long night reverting until the official release by CBS. As of right now nothing is official until the official release by CBS. People need to understand that Wikipedia goes by fact and not fandom. Wikipedia is not a spoiler website or service, regardless of the editors intention. P37307 (talk) 05:53, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
 * You're probably right about the reverting. We just need to watch it and stick with our previous decision not to add anything until the official release (which is approaching very fast!). The Doctor Who  (talk) 07:03, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Heads up. If the "leaked" cast ends up being real, there are a lot of gossip about some of the houseguests. People seemed ired up already. Also, I saw the Future WikiProject sticky. Can we talk about that in our personal talk or here. Not sure what exactly that entails to get started but I am interested in participating if it does. P37307 (talk) 07:16, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
 * For the gossip we should make it clear that none of that can be included unless backed up by sources in which case it wouldn't be gossip. As for your question about the WikiProject sticky it's not quite clear can you clarify? The Doctor Who  (talk) 07:25, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I see it is marked as a future project. I've joined one project in the past but I was invited and it was already a long time established. I don't see an opportunity to join or contribute. I guess I need to study up on Wikiprojects and their development processes. Maybe I am jumping the gun. P37307 (talk) 07:41, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
 * To join any of the WikiProjects above see WikiProject Big Brother, WikiProject Television, and WikiProject United States/Members. Anyone is allowed to join any WikiProject, an invite is not required. It being marked as "Future" only means that the article may not be well developed yet because it is about a future event. Once the season begins it can be re-classified (most likely as a C-class). The Doctor Who  (talk) 07:54, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
 * In general, spoilers are allowed to be included as long as there are independent reliable sources to confirm them; otherwise they will be considered speculative. Also, the note I added regarding the names of houseguests has been added to the WikiProject Big Brother page because it appears to be a recurring issue every time a new season is just a few weeks away from premiering. OfficerAPC (talk) 13:59, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
 * In general, spoilers are allowed to be included as long as there are independent reliable sources to confirm them; otherwise they will be considered speculative. Also, the note I added regarding the names of houseguests has been added to the WikiProject Big Brother page because it appears to be a recurring issue every time a new season is just a few weeks away from premiering. OfficerAPC (talk) 13:59, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Nicknames
I am starting this section for confirmed slang names/nicknames, for the houseguests.
 * Chris has been revealed as "Swaggy C" on the official Big Brother Twitter feed with a link to the live feeds. Around Timestamp Second 45 in the Youtube interview/CBS interview, he says from Day one he is going to be called Swaggy C if nothing else he does it is that. Twitter: Fun Fact: #BBSwaggyC has a photographic memory. Meet "Swaggy C" on the #BBLF now to learn more about his #BB20 strategy: (UTC) P37307 (talk) 02:41, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Discuss Chris v. Swaggy C.
A recent revert (the revert) to changing his name from Chris to "Swaggy C", the edit reason said: ''Let me be clear. You can NOT change something like this without discussion first''. Let's discuss. He is adamant he goes by "Swaggy C" and from day 1 he will be known as "Swaggy C". Therefore, he should be known here as Swaggy C, even before the game has started. He made it clear that that is his identity and wikipedia editors should not and must not appropriate someones identity to some kind of culture acceptance as a legal name or birth certificate. He clearly identifies himself as Swaggy C. P37307 (talk) 03:17, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Well let's see, first of all when something has been reverted by multiple editors multiple times:, , and you cannot simply re-add it until those issues are addressed OR until a consensus is formed. User:Jjj1238's edit summary stated: Cornbread was called that in the game, we do not know if they'll be called by these names in the game, wait for that confirmation., now just because you have a source stating that he wishes to be called that does not mean that he WILL be called that. As of this morning the HouseGuests were not in the house yet and we do not know when they're moving in it is possible that he could've changed his mind. It's also possible that other HouseGuests could call him Chris because he can not force them to call him Swaggy C. Therefore the issues raised cannot be addressed until the season premiers.  The Doctor Who  (talk) 03:45, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Regarding my edits, I thought I added enough confirmation and reason to overcome the editors that reverted and such felt a discussion was not warranted, esp since other editors did not propose discussions as they made their revert opinions and reasons. I also added to the talk during my edit to state my position. Editors could have began discussing there if they so chose. None did nor did anyone start an independant discussion. As far as my edit, he's widely known, as short of time as it is publically, as Swaggy C. This is evidenced by CBS pushing it on social media, and it trending at times on 3 different social media platforms. (I will add the trending status links as soon as they roll over by reliable trackers later in the morning.) Because he is overwhelmingly known, in real life, for what he is associated with, in this case Big Brother, a name change is appropriate under Using nicknames. The fact that the public knows him as Swaggy C meets the criteria for him to be known as Swaggy C. As far as speculation as to what the houseguests refer to him as, who knows, it may be full of racists that despise African American monikers, that is irrelevant as the genre's public, some begrudgingly, know him as Swaggy C. We could fix this issue if we do a formal, support/oppose consensus discussion. I'm confident we'll get this sorted out without passive aggressive comments and attitudes that reality shows tend to bring out among editors, including myself from time to time. P37307 (talk) 04:34, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Precedent is to use the name that CBS puts in the chyron when they're in the diary room, whether it is Chris or Swaggy C, the name in chyron will be used.VietPride10 (talk) 04:48, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Per WP:BRD you made a bold edit, it was reverted multiple times, it is on you to start the discussion not the reverting editor. And as of now I am also agreeing with the above comment. The Doctor Who  (talk) 04:57, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I considered myself as starting the discussion outside the "Edit summary" box during reverts during my edit when I added the section and comments to this talk page before your revert. It was reverted without discussion by you. I'll further review WP:BRD and apply it to my edits in the future, if necessary. Although I don't agree with deciding this with the "chyron when they're in the diary room", as suggested, and allow others to subordinate someone's choice of adultful identity, I'll accept that for the time being but may come back to this discussion in the future. P37307 (talk) 05:21, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The thing is in this case it would be best to review MOS guidelines from WP:TV and the reality TV task force to see if there is guidance on this topic. It would also be worth looking at WP:COMMONNAME as well in this case. WP:BIGBRO is very outdated and honestly the project as a whole needs to be re-evaluate and updated to conform with updated Wiki policy & guidelines. However the most recent president established by WP:BIGBRO, which is based on the British version, is to use the common name of the contestant while they were in the House. An example is the seventh series of the UK version. One contestant proper first name is Glen but goes by his nickname "Spiral". The consensus at the time was reached to use the name that the show uses. So in all the tables like the Nominations table uses "Spiral" instead of Glen. This has continued throughout all British articles. So if the show uses "Swaggy C" on screen instead of "Chris" and if the Housemates go "I vote to evict Swaggy C" or "I've nominated Swaggy C" then the current president of the project is to use "Swaggy C". I strongly suggest is to review MOS guidelines from WP:TV, guidance from the Reality TV task force and WP:COMMONNAME first before starting any kind of !votes to resolve the issue.  ♪♫Al ucard   16♫♪  01:09, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Also worth noting the American series also follows this guideline see the eighth season where in the tables it uses the nickname for Evel Dick instead of his proper name Richard.  ♪♫Al ucard   16♫♪  01:11, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Julie overwhelming used Swaggy C when she referred to him as did the houseguests. Can we now reach consensus that Chris is indeed Swaggy C? As did the diary room Chyron. P37307 (talk) 02:09, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * At this point after seeing episode one I officially support using Swaggy C. The Doctor Who  (talk) 02:12, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I believe we have a consensus then based on the number of participants in the debate and previous chyron added part of the debate. P37307 (talk) 02:18, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The CBS chatbot, which is run by officially by CBS, dresses Chris and Angie as there real names.CBS refers to them as there real names and we should too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ugla'a (talk • contribs) 19:17, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * We had a discussion that started almost 2 weeks ago in the edit summaries and on this talk page for 9 days already and came to a consensus based on precedent. I agreed with the majority and waited until we saw what was going one. P37307 (talk) 19:31, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Discuss Samantha v. Sam
From what I can tell she is primarily called Sam in the house not only by fellow HouseGuests but by the announcer and Julie. Should we keep Samantha or go along with what we've done so far and change to Sam? The Doctor Who (talk) 03:46, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I say keep Samantha, as we're going with the name in the chyron on the showVietPride10 (talk) 05:38, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I say it may be time for an exception? If you go deeper on this there are 4 common people/things that say the HouseGuests names.
 * The Chyron
 * Fellow HouseGuests
 * The Announcer
 * and Julie Chen.
 * Numbers 2 and 3 refer to her as Sam while 1 refers to her as Samantha. This currently puts the tally at 2-1 Sam. We should hopefully find out what Julie refers to her as tonight. If Julie refers to her as Samantha I'll agree with keeping it but if Julie refers to her as Sam that would put the tally at 3-1 and I think it may need discussed further. The Doctor Who  (talk) 00:49, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Julie referred to her as Sam tonight which makes it 3-1. Thoughts? The Doctor Who  (talk) 01:06, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
 * In past seasons, the precedent of the name of the chyron was always used, for instance in BBCAN6, Alejandra was referred by houseguests as "Ali" while Arisa did switch between Ali and Alejandra, but Alejandra was used because it was in her chyron, the same case is also with Pilar from BBCAN 3. However, I do see very strong points in your argument, I just think we shouldn't break precedent. Also thank you for bringing this issue up. :) VietPride10 (talk) 02:36, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
 * While I agree with precedent, I think that a weirder aspect of this that shouldn't be ignored is that she was originally announced as Sam by CBS during the cast announcement, and continues to be credited as "Sam" on their website profile of her. It wasn't until the premiere that she was called Samantha. { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 02:56, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I just wonder where we eventually draw the line with precedent. Hypothetical example that will never happen: If there was a HouseGuest whose name was Jim and everyone referred to him as Jim except the chyron which put "jhjiodsokoskl" which would we put on the page? The Doctor Who  (talk) 03:34, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The argument that Jjj1238 makes sense, and I think that could override the precedent. So we come to the consensus to change Samantha to Sam? VietPride10 (talk) 03:56, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Although the precedent is good and we haven't had many major issues up until now I believe this time we should override the precedent. Just to be clear this is NOT setting a new precedent and if similar issues arise in the future they can be discussed on a case-by-case basis just as it was here. But as no one has objected I believe we have consensus to change Samantha to Sam. The Doctor Who  (talk) 04:43, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ All mentions of Samantha have been changed to Sam with the exception of the HouseGuests section which will continue to read 'Samantha "Sam" Bledsoe' to align with other HouseGuests who use nicknames. The Doctor Who  (talk) 05:23, 7 July 2018 (UTC)

Episode Table or Prose?
I'm gonna ask this now before the season starts: Do we want to present the summary in prose format or use an episode table as we've done in other seasons such as CBB, BBOTT, and BB17? After seeing both formats used I personally prefer the episode table. The Doctor Who (talk) 17:03, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Pinging who took part in the CBBUS discussion over the same matter. TheDoctorWho Public (talk) 06:17, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
 * We should use an episode table as it's more organized that way. OfficerAPC (talk) 13:34, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
 * My thoughts exactly just wanted to get other editor(s) opinions. TheDoctorWho Public (talk) 19:05, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Alright I've added the table however I made two bold edits from it that differ from the CBB version. 1) I labeled the section "Episodes" instead of "Summary" because I saw it as a better fit since we're using an episode table, 2) I changed "Timeline" to "Day(s)" since we're including the days covered in the house it seems like a better fit. TheDoctorWho Public (talk) 19:31, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry I have been extremely busy this week and haven't been on Wikipedia lately. The episode table should be used and the changes look great. The only thing change I would suggest is the weeks. Week 1 in the House can last up to anywhere from 9-16 days depending on how long they were in there prior to the actual premier. So having "Week 2" after the first two episodes is premature right now.  ♪♫Al ucard   16♫♪  00:50, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * That's a good point, I'll change it when I get a chance if no one else does before then. I just want to make sure I get the episode description down without missing anything. Per a source I found earlier they moved in on June 20. The Doctor Who  (talk) 00:53, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I noticed you moved the Week 2 header (sorry I forgot to get around to it so thank you). I'm still questioning the position of it, if we want to align it with the nomination table however, if we're trying to align it with the current week in the house then this upcoming Wednesday would be the start of Week 3. They moved in on June 20 so Week 1 would be through the 27. And then Week 2 would be through the fourth (Wednesday). Thoughts? The Doctor Who  (talk) 03:43, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Ever since the format of the show was rebooted in BB2 the first week never corresponds with the first week in the House (real time) instead it corresponds to the first full week of televised episodes. This includes the season premier plus the first week of regular scheduled episodes. The first week always starts with the launch and ends with the first person evicted that was nominated by the first Head of Household. It can last as short as 8 to 9 days (OTT and BB10 respectively) or as long as 16 days (BB18 & BB19).
 * BB1 is excluded from this because in the original format Week 1 was 7 days and the actual nomination/eviction process didn't start until Week 2. (Good examples are the first editions of BBUK and Aus that followed this as well at the time.) When CBS used to create individual websites for each season Week 1 always had the first HoH through the first evictee with Week 2 starting with the 2nd HoH of the season. (Example of BB8's official voting history via Wayback Machine showing 11 weeks just like it's en Wiki article.)
 * When CBS used to do the "Love 'Em or Leave 'Em" polls this was the same thing. (BB7's official Love 'Em or Leave 'Em poll via Wayback Machine showing 10 weeks just like it's en Wiki article.)
 * So "Week 1" will never align with just 7 days in the House (except BB1) or the first partial week of episodes from any season. To avoid confusion a hatnote maybe needed or we may need to just remove the "Weeks" from the episode tables to avoid confusion.  ♪♫Al ucard   16♫♪  05:41, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. The Doctor Who  (talk) 06:05, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Quick reminder
This is just a quick reminder for ALL editors that you cannot add something unless it can be confirmed 1 of 4 ways:
 * 1) It airs on Big Brother through CBS
 * 2) It can be confirmed through the Live Feeds (which don't start until later tonight)
 * 3) It can be confirmed through Big Brother: After Dark (which doesn't start tonight)
 * 4) Or can be confirmed through MULTIPLE reliable sources
 * Reliable sources DO NOT include: Social media, fan sites, rumors, blogs, or Reddit.

This seems to be an issue every season and has been so far this season so I think it's good to address now. Thank you! The Doctor Who (talk) 01:34, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Live feed Citations References
Is there a set way or preference to cite a reference of a live feed source? For example, time and camera number? If not I think this would be a great policy in case readers want to go view the source itself. P37307 (talk) 04:59, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * As far as I know we've never really discussed it before but if we want to this would be the place and time to do it. Also per BBAD apparently we have some have-nots in the house we should figure out who and add that into the article. The Doctor Who  (talk) 05:20, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I'll add the Have Nots, I think Winston/Brett/Kaitlyn are confirmed have nots so far. VietPride10 (talk) 05:52, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I support live feed citations including the date, time and camera number. This is standard info for all live feeds and would show the editor had actually knowledge to backup the editor not hearsay. It would be easy for someone to cite something and it be based on rumor from Twitter or a fan site with no way to verify. P37307 (talk) 05:30, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not opposed to this but the issue there is there isn't a template designed for that it would all have to be manual plus the live feed citation would be replaced with its televised episode or recap from a reliable third party in a matter of days.  ♪♫Al ucard   16♫♪  05:50, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Current day in house.
Per this source the HouseGuests moved in on Wednesday, June 20. This means that for tonight's live eviction the exit day would be Day 16. Sometimes days aren't always agreed upon so I figure it's better to address any objections prior to the episode. The Doctor Who (talk) 00:04, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Please don't make changes that don't affect the rendered text
I would like to ask you to refrain from edits that do not affect the rendered text. There have already been numerous discussions such as this one that condemn this action. There are no good reasons to remove them and plenty to keep them. Computer40 «»  (talk)  22:16, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
 * You are also making changes that do not affect rendered text by adding them. Please do not tell me not to do something when you did it yourself. Thank you! The Doctor Who  (talk) 22:18, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
 * How am I making changes that don't affect rendered text?... I'm reverting the ones that you're making. Computer40  «»  (talk)  22:31, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
 * to above response. Also for reference the discussion you linked to above refers to the end of paragraphs not section headers so all points made in that discussion are almost invalid here. The Doctor Who  (talk) 22:20, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
 * In this edit you added a space before and after the word HouseGuest in the section header. This change DID not affect the rendered page. Also to my next point you made a WP:BOLD edit by adding them and I reverted it so by saying you're reverting my changes you're also reverting to your preferred version. You might wish to review WP:BRD The Doctor Who  (talk) 22:36, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 July 2018
"Reception" viewing figures should be updated to Wednesday's numbers. Source: https://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/daily-ratings/tv-ratings-wednesday-july-11-2018/ Neth110 (talk) 18:46, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: We generally wait for the final ratings to come out because the numbers would have to be updated then anyways. It's not uncommon for someone who adds preliminary ratings to be reverted with a summary of "wait for final ratings". The Doctor Who  (talk) 19:05, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting wait.svg Already done Or not appears someone just added them.  The Doctor Who  (talk) 19:07, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

Week 3 App Store corrections
On the section for the BB App Store, Scottie is listed as most trending and JC as least trending. But as of right now, the week 3 apps haven't even been given out. Scottie and JC should be removed until the recipients of the apps are known. Kingswagas (talk) 16:02, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Controversy and criticism section including Rockstar
1) I don't believe it's necessary to list every in-game incident in the controversy section. We don't do it for the Survivor articles, we shouldn't do it here either. 2) The paragraph talking about Rockstar is very weak in terms of sources. Recaps are not reliable sources. I read and went over the Global sources and they do not say anything about a controversy or public opinion. All it is is summarizing the episode, which is pointless seeing that's what the "Episode" section is for. 3) Something as tame as Rockstar saying "On my daughters birthday" is nowhere near the levels of controversy regarding the comments Angela, Rachel, JC and Kaitlyn have made. If you ask me it looks ridiculous being listed next to something as serious as the JC-Bayleigh debacle. Brett was not a victim like Bayleigh was and we should stop treating it as such. It's actually insulting to actual victims of racism to think someone calling a white man "rich, snobby, white-privileged ass dude" is anywhere near the severity of being called the n word or other derogatory slurs.

You won't see CNN, ABC News, Fox News covering what Rockstar did to Brett because it's not controversial. Those would be reliable sources. Recaps are not. I propose someone finding actual sources that are not recaps of the episode or removing the paragraph entirely if you are unable to. Listing the Brett-Rockstar fight as controversial with the public is a mere matter of opinion with a few users on here and does not reflect the majority of the public's opinion. Miss HollyJ (talk) 23:22, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I could make a whole paragraph of Wikipedia rules that your comment above breaks, but I don't have time to put the effort into it. Computer40  «»  (talk)  03:17, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

,,  The Rockstar "controversy" section needs to be reevaluated and revised, if not deleted entirely. The whole section on Rockstar is entirely biased, and one-sided. It is not neutral, but rather bias against Rockstar, pointing out everything she did to Brett, without the provocation from Robinson throughly explained. For example, Robinson has stated he wanted to spit on Rockstar, and has ridiculed her appearance/weight numerous times. Also to say Rockstar "jumped on Brett" is egregiously incorrect, as she sat near him, while never making physical contact. VietPride10 (talk) 04:12, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Completely agree and that was my point from the beginning. However, I was accused of having a "personal grudge" against the paragraph but I will let that slide seeing as that issue has been "resolved". Getting back on topic, I also feel that proper sourcing is lacking in the entire section. There are sources like CNN, Fox News, ABC News etc. that have reported on the statement CBS released a few weeks ago. I think those would be perfect additions. As for the wording of the Rockstar paragraph, I agree that it comes off as bias. Personally, I don't believe there is a way to reevaluate that paragraph without making it seem bias but I would love to be proven wrong if anyone has any suggestions? Miss HollyJ (talk) 06:43, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * If it's biased, then things that Brett has done to Rockstar should be added instead of things that Rockstar has done to Brett be removed. All the things that Rockstar has done is verifiable and notable. I see no news coverage of Brett calling Rockstar names or making comments about her. Controversy is not generally two-sided. Computer40  «»  (talk)  07:14, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * You just proved my point. There is no news coverage of Rockstar bringing out pots and pans and saying Brett has a micropenis either. The only sources included are the Global recaps, which are not considered news coverage. Miss HollyJ (talk) 08:14, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * It was literally shown in the episode??? You don't need sources for that. Computer40  «»  (talk)  08:48, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * That doesn't mean every single confrontation/argument shown in an episode needs to be in the controversy section. Miss HollyJ (talk) 09:21, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Optional alternative version
Let me try to fix this: I've rewritten the paragraph with additional sources but wish for you guys to review it before I implement it to address any issues. The new paragraph would read as follows:

On Day 30, during a live eviction episode HouseGuest Brett Robinson called out Angie "Rockstar" Lantry in his eviction speech for "strategic purposes". Lantry responded by screaming in Robinson's face claiming that it was her daughter's birthday. Lantry later called Robinson a "rich, snobby, white-privileged ass dude". Days later Lantry confronted Robinson with pots and pans during which she exclaimed that Robinson has a "micropenis". Upon confrontation Lantry sat between Robinson's legs whom repeatedly asked her to get off of him.

Thoughts? I've attempted to reword it to read more neutrally and added more sources to verify what happened. The Doctor Who (talk) 08:40, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I do like that, however; maybe change the beginning so it's not "On Day 30" because the rest of the C&C's don't start with that (for consistency). Computer40  «»  (talk)  08:46, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Agreed and will remove upon instating the paragraph to the article pending agreement from the other editors. The Doctor Who  (talk) 08:51, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * In my opinion it's still one-sided and bias against Rockstar. First off, I'd change "screaming" to "confronting". Also, I don't see how her saying it was her daughter's birthday is controversial. Miss HollyJ (talk) 09:21, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Controversies are not always two-sided. Find a source that has Brett doing something controversial and it will be added. It's not the fact that it was her daughter's birthday that was controversial, it's the fact that they got into an argument. Computer40  «»  (talk)  09:29, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * You still haven't provided a source of Rockstar doing something controversial. A recap is not a reliable source. Miss HollyJ (talk) 21:24, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * If recaps were not allowed as sources then almost the entire section would be empty. I'm trying to make a compromise here. I've provided a second re-write below taken your previous concerns into account. The Doctor Who  (talk) 21:41, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Recaps are allowed. Go read Verifiability. Computer40  «»  (talk)  23:18, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Never said they weren't. Recaps are obviously allowed but using them as a source for EVERYTHING is not okay. The recap is nothing more than a summary of the episode. No where in that source does it mention any criticism or controversy from a non-recap perspective. Your personal opinion does not reflect the majority of the public's views. In fact, you're most likely in the minority that views what Rockstar did on the same level as Angela, Rachel, Kaitlyn and JC's comments. Miss HollyJ (talk) 23:00, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Second Re-write
Rewording it based off of the above to comments would make the new paragraph read as follows: During a live eviction episode HouseGuest Brett Robinson called out Angie "Rockstar" Lantry in his eviction speech for "strategic purposes". Lantry responded by confronting Robinson in his face claiming that it was her daughter's birthday. Lantry later called Robinson a "rich, snobby, white-privileged ass dude". Days later Lantry confronted Robinson with pots and pans during which she exclaimed that Robinson has a "micropenis". Upon confrontation Lantry sat between Robinson's legs whom repeatedly asked her to get off of him. The reason the birthday is included is because in her reasoning: How dare [insert anyone's name here] do [insert anything she doesn't like here] on [insert any date that's important to her here]. The point is exactly that: What did her daughter's birthday have to do with it? It can still be removed before moving to the article if consensus is found to think it is best to do? (I'm not shutting you down on removing it, just trying to discuss it further to get all sides on this). Thoughts on the second version? The Doctor Who (talk) 09:39, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I think it's good. Is the "upon confrontation" right though? Wouldn't that be used for if Brett retaliated or something. It probably is right. If that is grammatically right then it's good. It passes the core content policies. Computer40  «»  (talk)  10:03, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I think upon confrontation works. The Doctor Who  (talk) 21:16, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

After no further objections I've moved the new paragraph with references to the article. The Doctor Who (talk) 23:54, 25 July 2018 (UTC)


 * The YouTube link needs replaced as the video was removed due to copyright claims. Also arguments and confrontations are not necessarily controversial like they used to be in the early days of reality TV in general. Has the confrontation between Brett & Rockstar caused third party websites to speak out against it or caused people to complain like the earlier controversy that prompted CBS to release a statement? Is it notable like where Kaitlyn Herman's boyfriend is distancing himself from the show? Or is the sources available at the moment just recapping the big confrontation? After looking at the sources this particular instance doesn't seem like a controversy but more like a typical big argument that the show is known for. It might be better suited being interrogated in the Episodes section but with a brief recap. If I'm wrong or missing something please let me know.  ♪♫Al ucard   16♫♪  05:55, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Personally I'm about fed up with this. After an ANEW report, an ANI report, and the above discussion all stemming from this one issue, I really really realllyyyyy don't care anymore. I did the best finding the sources I could, I agree it's not our typical controversy but again our typical day in the house doesn't end with someone calling someone else a "white-privileged ass dude" and talking about said someone else's "micropenis". So keep it, remove it, vandalize it, whatever makes the other editor's happy.  The Doctor Who  (talk) 06:16, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Awe don't give up there your doing an awesome job here If the current consensus is to keep it then it can stay as long as it is properly sourced. I was just looking at it from an outsider perspective in the event the article is nominated for GA status. But the YouTube link does need changed at least since the video was removed.  ♪♫Al  ucard   16♫♪  16:06, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi,, I agree with your stance on this. There are two users so far me and who agree including the Rockstar/Brett fight doesn't fit in the controversy section. Personally, I don't think the re-write was good enough. It's still very one sided and bias. I also believe that keeping a brief summary of this altercation is better suited for the "Episodes" section. Using the Global recap as a source there would be perfectly fine. Miss HollyJ (talk) 23:04, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Brett's Veto Punishment
In the "Mamma Mia! Madness" Veto competition, the houseguests had a second chance at stacking the cups but they had to be a have-not for a full week. Brett was the only one who took the second chance, so when does his full week of being a have-not begin? Jayab314 (talk) 23:44, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Does anyone know? Is it this week since it apparently wasn't last week? Jayab314 (talk) 14:24, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Veto competitions are played on Saturday, the have-not cycle starts on Sunday, so Brett's have-not punishment started Week 3.VietPride10 (talk) 16:17, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

H@cker Competitions
Multiple questions: 1. Do we know how many weeks the h@cker comp is? 2. I started calling it the "H@cker Comp", and so did some other people, but others call it the "Hacker Comp". We should agree on a name either with or without an "@" and stick to it, so which one should it be? 3. How should we go about formatting the H@cker Comp? Should it be somewhat identical to the BB App Store section with a table? Thanks! Jayab314 (talk) 19:39, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
 * answers below. The Doctor Who  (talk) 20:11, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Length of H@cker Comps
Julie Chen said it was "summer's next big twist", so will it last as long as the BB App Store? Jayab314 (talk) 19:43, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I may be wrong but from what I've gathered on the live feeds I believe it is two weeks long. The Doctor Who  (talk) 20:11, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Can Haleigh become the h@cker next week, too? Jayab314 (talk) 23:42, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
 * As far as I know no official announcement as been made at this time. Whether or not the HouseGuests have mentioned it on the live feeds I'm not entirely sure of. The Doctor Who  (talk) 00:13, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Official Vegas leak saying "Haleigh is eligible to be hacker again. All HGs compete, it is not a one shot/time thing." Jayab314 (talk) 21:22, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Hacker or H@cker?
I personally prefer h@cker as the logo has the "@" and was shown with the "@" on the episode. Jayab314 (talk) 19:43, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
 * We should use the official name that it is referred to by on the show. The Doctor Who  (talk) 20:11, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
 * So are you suggesting we use H@cker? Unless you're talking about when it actually happens and maybe a name pops on the screen like sometimes what they do with the comp titles? Jayab314 (talk) 20:14, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
 * In the subtitles said by Brett, it was shown as a Hacker not H@cker. Jayab314 (talk) 00:34, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * In every official mention of it by the show, shown on the screen in the living room or during the broadcast of the competition it was used as H@cker so I think it should be written as H@cker in the article. The Doctor Who  (talk) 02:09, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Per Official names, we should use H@cker. OfficerAPC (talk) 02:44, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * While it's sometimes stylized as "H@cker" (e.g. in the living room screen), it's often seen officially as "Hacker" (on the screen in the room when Haleigh won the competition, and underneath Haleigh's name in the Diary Room shots)... It's WP:STYLISM that's only used some of the time on screen. Paintspot Infez (talk) 02:20, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Format
I would like a format for us to stick to and use. Jayab314 (talk) 19:43, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The comp will probably be mentioned in two places. There will be a row for it that exists in the voting history table, and its own more expanded table in a subsection below the App Store section. The Doctor Who  (talk) 20:11, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Is the current subsection for it okay, because I'm not very good at making tables. If someone could maybe word it better, but it was just a base to build off of. Jayab314 (talk) 20:16, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
 * It looked pretty good! I did split off the second portion of the ability column into a action column to clear it up just a bit. The Doctor Who  (talk) 20:42, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Technology Loser in Voting History
I saw that someone added a row in the Voting History table called "Technology Loser" and I don't think it should be there. My reasoning is that the BB App Store losers got punishments that didn't directly affect the game (The winners got powers while the punishments were costumes, Ham eating, etc. which aren't seen in the voting chart) so there isn't any importance in highlighting the losers in the voting history. Of course if you guys think it is important we can leave it there. HelpfulHondaPerson (talk) 01:52, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I originally added the names of the winners of the crap apps in italics under the winners of the power apps because technically the won a crap app. Someone else added it in a separate row. I don't agree or see the need for an entire row for it (at least not at this time; possibly later if something else happens). However, I do think it is still worth mentioning in the way I originally added it. The Doctor Who  (talk) 02:06, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Remember the Den of Temptation in last year's Big Brother 19? If a houseguest accepted a temptation, a consequence would affect another houseguest.  We did not have a row for consequence recipients in the Voting History table, so why have the technology loser row in this table? OfficerAPC (talk) 02:48, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Still agree with not having a separate row but again, I still think it's worth mentioning how I originally had it. Reasoning is, it's slightly different then the Den of Temptation. The Den of Temptation punishment resulted on the actions of another HouseGuest however, the BB App Store was a result of outside actions. The Doctor Who  (talk) 02:52, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I also think the extra row in the voting table is unnecessary. It's repetitive with there already being a table about it above. VietPride10 (talk) 03:15, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

I think we can all agree that there is a clear consensus not to have the extra row in the voting history table. So that can now be removed. Anyone else have opinions on still listing them in the same column underneath the winner of the power app? The Doctor Who (talk) 03:18, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree with having both people named with the crap app winner in italics. I think with that we should add a note explaining that Crap App winner is indicated in italics. HelpfulHondaPerson (talk) 03:59, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Similar to how it appeared in this edit? The Doctor Who  (talk) 04:09, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I think that looks great! HelpfulHondaPerson (talk) 04:48, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Agreed. VietPride10 (talk) 04:49, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
 * There is already a separate table that shows the BB App Store information, including Power App and Crap App winners. OfficerAPC (talk) 12:31, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Hacker symbol needs to be transparent
If someone can make the symbol transparent then that would be great. Computer40 «»  (talk)  20:40, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Controversy and criticism section
Earlier today this was removed from the Controversy and Criticism section. "During a conversation between Bayleigh Dayton and Angela "Rockstar" Lantry, Dayton claimed that Lantry was the only white person who she knew that didn't like white people. Dayton then said that Lantry dislikes "normal white people" more than she does.[49] Days later, in a conversation with Haleigh Broucher, Dayton referred to her housemates as "crazy-ass white people."[50] Many viewers saw Dayton's statements as racist.[51]"  I did not see any conversation about this removal on the Talk page. In parentheses it was written "Does not qualify as a controversy". Should this edit of been discussed before it happened on this page, it seemed to of been properly cited? It may not be viewed as a controversy but wouldn't it be considered a criticism? Sadiex2 (talk) 23:49, 11 August 2018 (UTC)Sadiex2


 * I've added it back in for now. The Doctor Who  (talk) 00:24, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 August 2018
In the Episodes section, specifically Episode 17, change the Head of Household competition name from "Gif That Keeps on Giving" to "GIF That Keeps on Giving". Sebonack1 (talk) 14:28, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done by another user. The Doctor Who  (talk) 08:02, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Controversies and Criticisms
You guys really need to not include everything slightly problematic someone does or says. Like seriously, the section for this season is longer than that of Big Brother 15's, and that's saying a lot since that season was the worst in terms of controversies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.200.102.182 (talk) 12:49, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The controversies involving sexual misconduct should remain in light of the sexual allegations against Julie Chen's husband. As for the rest, they need to be discussed whether they are serious enough to be on there. OfficerAPC (talk) 13:17, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I can agree with that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.200.102.182 (talk) 14:29, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 September 2018
Change 'Ross Matthews' to 'Ross Mathews' in the Uncertain Future section to fix spelling of his last name. 65.74.61.174 (talk) 22:07, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting wait.svg Already done Sak ura Cart elet Talk 00:50, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 October 2018
Needs sourcing and referencing. Fieryflames (talk) 14:56, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.  ♪♫Al ucard   16♫♪  15:03, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 November 2018
Change: "After Tyler asks if Bayleigh would put Angela up if he uses the veto, Bayleigh tells Rachel that Tyler's targetting Angela." To: "After Tyler asks if Bayleigh would put Angela up if someone used a power, Bayleigh tells Rachel that Tyler's targetting Angela." He did not mention using the veto, this was shown on the episode. 47.220.166.1 (talk) 23:53, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Izno (talk) 20:25, 22 November 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)