Talk:Survivor: Micronesia/Archive 1

Fact

 * IT HAS BEEN DECIDED: SURVIVOR MICRONESIA: FANS VS. FAVORITES! IT will face the biggest survivor fans vs. the favorites from the previous seasons.::  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.129.144.15 (talk) 05:17, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

This going to be an all-star season --SuperHotWiki 16:35, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * There's something ironic about adding a header warning that "This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject" and starting a topic about an unconfirmed rumor in the same edit. --Maxamegalon2000 16:44, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah well to prevent anyone from changing it to All Stars 2 i've redirected "Survivor All Stars 2" to here. 3bay sam 05:34, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * But that would be speculation since it may not be Survivor All Stars 2. --R Parlate Contribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 11:16, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Am I alone in thinking that if this was an All-Star season, then CBS would not be doing a round of applications for this season already? JeffyP 21:49, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
 * CBS had applications for TAR 11, which was all-stars. --R Parlate Contribs@ (Let's Go Yankees!) 00:04, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I was thinking the same thing, but it is possible these applications are really for Survivor 17 -- 3bay sam 11:50, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

There are some sources stating Survivor16 is the next All-Star season--SuperHotWiki 12:38, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Please point them out to us. --Maxamegalon2000 15:26, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

This article is self conflicting. How can there be 800 finalists if this is an all star season of people playing the game since the first all star season, considering there were only 127 castaways since then? --Captain Proton 10:33, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * CBS holds the applications for its shows regardless of whether its an all-stars or not - perhaps to generate interest. They may be used for Survivor 17, if we get one. THE  DARK LORD  TROMBONATOR 23:48, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * And for those interested, there will have been 237 castaways that have played the game by the end of Survivor: China, 22 of which have played twice. THE  DARK LORD  TROMBONATOR 23:50, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

I heard it will not be another all-star season but a regular season. In fact, I saw on survivor.com that it would be called Survivor: Arabia and be filmed in Saudi Arabia, but I doubt this is true. Why can&#39;t i find a good username 22:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * At the moment, it is just known as Survivor 16. We cannot change it to All-Stars or Saudi Arabia or even South Carolina until it is announced by CBS. Wait until December, people, it should all be revealed on the Survivor China reunion. THE  DARK LORD  TROMBONATOR 02:17, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Survivor 16 in Palau!
Why would they have it in Palau? They've already had a season on that location. There are plenty of other locations to chose from, and I'm sure they would chose something new. Unless it's officially anounced, I wouldn't count on it being in Palau. Why they filmed in Panama again, is beyond me. I think the should've filmed somewhere else. That also isn't good proof at all that it will be in Palau again. once again, I wouldn't count on Palau.--24.63.18.184 01:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Going on SurvivorFever.net on the Survivor: China section, the latest news headline is that Palau has officially been announced as the location for season 16, unlike the spec previously on this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.179.29.158 (talk • contribs)
 * I'm pretty sure Sam's Tours Palau, Blog isn't an official source. --Maxamegalon2000 12:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * They already taped Palau in Fall 2004. VoL†ro/\/Force 00:07, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

They're going to film in Palau again. They've filmed in the same location more than once before...see Panama. Here's proof. http://www.pacificmagazine.net/news/2007/09/21/survivor-palau-prepares-for-new-tv-seasonagain  Agrippina Minor
 * It should only be added if and when an official source is found. A few weeks ago, people seemed absolutely convinced that it would be in China again, and apparantly that's false. So, that is exactly why we wait for official sources. -- Scorpion0422 21:46, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I haven't said anything untrue or debatably untrue. I said local media is reporting.  Pacific Magazine is a reputable source.  It should stay unless you can present a feasible argument.  Agrippina Minor
 * Wikipedia policy says no rumours, and even if there is a source, it is not an official one, nor does the article cite any official sources, so it really doesn't count. Wikipedia is not a rumour site, it is for confirmed facts. -- Scorpion0422 21:51, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello!?! Did you read the article?  It cites the following:  "Big Fish Ink location manager Blake Archer said, 'We’ll bring in about 250 international crew to complete the film and also hire about 200 locals for guides, building sets, drive boats, preparing food, labor and other needs.'  Clear Water Ink, the name of Survivor 10’s production company and employees spent about $4.5 million in 2004 in Palau, according to Archer."  Next argument?  Agrippina Minor
 * I think you need to look up the definition of "official source" is "Big Fish Ink location manager Blake Archer" affiliated in any way with CBS? Until a) A press release is issued by CBS or b) Jeff Probst or Mark Burnett confirm it, it is unconfirmed and can be counted as rumours. -- Scorpion0422 22:01, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Here's another source. Actually read it.  http://www.mvariety.com/calendar/september/25/localpage/lnews26.htm  This is another local newspaper.  Big Fish, Inc. is the production company for Survivor.  Agrippina Minor
 * Again, not an official source as Big Fish Inc does not speak for CBS or the producers. Please read the early discussions on the Fiji and China talk pages, and you will learn more. -- Scorpion0422 22:06, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I never said "official source" I said "local media is reporting." There is a difference, and I included the preface in the entry.  You said it was unsourced.  There is a difference.  I never said "CBS has confirmed."  Just because CBS has not confirmed doesn't mean that the entry is invalid, as long as it is sourced and prefaced approporiately. The Survivor China page cited China as the location for filming when it was announced they were filming in China in a magazine.  The consensus was not to change the actual name of the page until the announcement was made by CBS.  I have provided a prominent Pacific Islander magazine and a local newspaper article.  I have not changed the name of the page.  I have likewise not indicated that anything is official.  I have followed the precedent of last season's wiki discussion.  Frankly, I don't see what all of the fuss is about.  Agrippina Minor BTW - http://www.survivor.com/survivor-13-cook-islands/survivor-show-finished-200m-viewers-to-come/survivor.2006.08.10.html  There's a link showing "Blake Archer" as Location Manager speaking on behalf of CBS.  Agrippina Minor 22:29, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia policy is not to include rumours and stuff unless it is confirmed by an official source. The only reason I haven't removed it is because of the three revert rule, but I can guarantee that someone else will. -- Scorpion0422 22:54, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * So if the New York Times publishes an article on the front page tomorrow that "Survivor 16 is in Palau" based on seeing the teams in Palau and comments from the Survivor Location Manager, this would have to be removed? I don't think so.  Not all sourced material has to be "official" so long as the article doesn't indicate that it's official when it isn't.  It must be reliable.  Almost every article on wikipedia isn't based on "official" sources.  That would be impracticable.  Please feel free to review the rules regarding "Reliable Sources."  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_sources  Under the rules, both Pacific Magazine and the local newspaper (which purports to be Mircronesia's Leading Newspaper since 1972) clearly qualify.  Agrippina Minor 23:17, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * There is a difference between a reliable source for something that has occured and something that hasn't yet occured. Nothing is official yet, so it shouldn't be mentioned. -- Scorpion0422 00:05, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I never said in my edit that anything has occurred, only that local media in Palau has reported that Palau has been chosen. I'm not calling it official.  Again, refer to the rules.  "Official" is not the standard.  Agrippina Minor 03:59, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm as much a stickler for proper sourcing as the next person, but I think these sources are perfectly reasonable to use for this, especially if we frame the information as being according to these sources. --Maxamegalon2000 00:29, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

FOR SURE Survivor 16 will take place in Palau. I'm from Palau and left there September 15, 2007 to the Nevada. Back home you could see the Survivor support crew frequenting the local restaurants and shopping centers. Also nearly all rental vehicles and bicycles have all been rented out. If you call any of the car rental agencies for availability they will tell you the Survivor crews have either rented all or if any available they are prioritized.
 * Any personal anecdotes would, of course, be original research, which is not allowed. --Maxamegalon2000 06:34, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Canada/winter "facts" removed.
Masem removed some information an IP put on this page. It probably isn't relevant, but he asked for it to be cited. Here's the site: -- THE  DARK LORD  TROMBONATOR 05:25, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Officially confirmed
All Stars are confirmed. Feel free to discuss.
 * Anything with the title "things Terry jerks it to" really can't be counted as a reliable source (I looked through and I couldn't find any mention of an all star season anyway). Using Survivorsucks as a source has been previously discussed and the verdict is always to wait for an official source. And, by the way, a forum isn't an official source. -- Scorpion0422 23:20, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

What about the magazine? it's from tv guide channel, i just can't find a source that has that image thats why i poste it on "sucks"
 * THat can't be counted as a reliable source. -- Scorpion0422 12:34, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

WHY??????????????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.250.190.119 (talk) 16:47, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Because no one can actually show that it's from TV Guide, probably because it's not. --Maxamegalon2000 16:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

What about this one? GreekHouse 00:53, 4 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't see how that article can be considered reputable. The author even reported the fake TV Guide clipping as fact. --Maxamegalon2000 02:55, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

The title is Micronesia- Fans vs. Favorites, it comes from a very reputable spoiler board. If you won't allow that then you shouldn't allow talk of all-stars 2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.192.18.169 (talk) 15:25, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Unsourced sentence
I have to delete this sentence in red as it is an unsourced sentence. If there is a reliable source for it, please source this sentence (and sorry for all of the trouble if there is any reliable source to this sentence). Aranho 13:02, 9 November 2007 (UTC) (edited)

Please do not edit this page....
...yet. We will know (based on past reveals) exactly what the name of this season will be called and if it's truly all-stars 2 or a variation thereof, this Sunday night. Possibly sooner if CBS decides to put out a press release before then. However, without that press release prior to Sunday night, do not move this article nor do not assume it will be All-Stars 2 or the equivalent. --M ASEM 23:15, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Palau or Micronesia
Please stop changing all mentions of Palau to Micronesia. Take a second to look it up, and you will quickly learn that Palau is a part of Micronesia. The Survivor: Africa page gives the specific nation of filming, it doesn't just say it was filmed in Africa. -- Scorpion0422 04:06, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * For all we know it could be anywhere in Micronesia. If it was just in Palau it would of said Survivor Palau. So I think it should say Survior Micronesia was filmed in Palau, which is one of the 18 territores of Micronesia.--Yankeesrj12 (talk) 04:15, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * They probably didn't want a second season titled "Survivor: Palau". Several of the sources in the article say it was filmed in Palau, and you shouldn't remove sources. -- Scorpion0422 04:16, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The evidence that they are filming in Palau has already been cited. Local news in Palau has reported the filming.  The Palau references should remain.  Agrippina Minor (talk) 01:03, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Tribe Names: Confirmed
Fan's Tribe Angaur

Image: S16.jpg

Fan Favorite's Tribe Orulok —Preceding unsigned comment added by Polarbear12345 (talk • contribs) 23 December 2007


 * Source? A picture is not enough, plus name of the tribes is not mentioned on the picture. Aranho (talk) 15:00, 23 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I watched the reunion show of Survivor: China last night, the preview of Survivor: Micronesia will be have 4 or 6 new castaways along with dozens of old castaways from previous seasons. -- December 27, 2007 14:43 UTC —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.97.103.199 (talk) 14:44, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

20 castaways confirmed
I saw Survivor Sucks internet forum on Survivor 16+ forums. The first half of 10 castaways will be the new castaways and the other 10 will be the former contestants from previous seasons.

Old castaways confirmed will return as favorite Survivor contestants:
 * Amanda Kimmel
 * Ami Cusack
 * Cirie Fields
 * Eliza Orlins
 * James Clement
 * Jon "Johnny Fairplay" Dalton
 * Jonathan Penner
 * Ozzy Lusth
 * Parvati Shallow
 * Yau-Man Chan

Source: Non All-Stars in the cast - Survivor Sucks -- December 28, 2007, 04:44 UTC —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.97.212.4 (talk) 04:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Since when is Survivor Sucks an official source? -- Scorpion0422 04:50, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Page 22, reply number 440 in Non All-Stars, in the cast in Survivor 16+ forums. -- December 28, 2007, 04:58 UTC —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.97.212.4 (talk) 04:58, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * That's still not official confirmation, so it can't be added. -- Scorpion0422 05:03, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Please wait them until January 3, 2008 when they will reveal on CBS.com. -- 05:07, 28 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.97.212.4 (talk)

Official Cast Revealed!
The official Micronesia cast was revealed this morning on the Entertainment Weekly website! I doubt that it will now be announced on TES...--71.166.35.115 (talk) 12:47, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * For the table, I think we want to add one extra column right after the name to list out Fan or Favorite (with under Favorite, the series they were in), such that the name column is still Name, Age, Hometown. It looks funny with the mix of season and city there right now. --M ASEM  17:31, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed. There should be a new column to note previous season. --  Bull  Wiki  Winkle  19:14, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree about adding a Fan/Favorite column. 75.89.234.140 (talk) 01:07, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Tribe Colors and Names Revealed!!!
INFORMAL SOURCE:

http://www.survivorfever.net/images16/challenge2oy1.jpg

FORMAL SOURCE: http://www.filmpalau.com/BehindScenes/challenge2.jpg

Fan's Tribe Airai

Fan Favorite's Tribe Malakal —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.85.240 (talk • contribs)

The Game Table/Voting History
Let's continue using these two tables with this season. An edit summary says reverting to the new format. Does that mean we are going to do something different? 75.89.234.140 (talk) 01:57, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes. See Survivor: China and the discussion on the Talk page. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 09:15, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I am in favor of the new format shown on the Survivor: China page, but it also includes the game table and voting history, so either way those tables aren't going anywhere, its just the episode summaries and extra information put together to make it more accessible and less convoluted Survivorfan101 (talk) 23:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Question about the tribe colors
You might have notice that the color of the tribe on the CBS site is LIGHTER, and also the buffs they are wearing.

ORIGINAL VERSION:

UPDATED VERSION:

WHICH SHOULD WE USE? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.85.240 (talk) 02:50, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Use the original. These are the colors to go by: http://www.filmpalau.com/BehindScenes/challenge2.jpg MadMagFreak (talk) 03:05, 5 January 2008 (UTC) And is it just me, or according to that picture, isn't Airai actually red?


 * I tore the website's CSS apart and the colors used for the castaways names that appear when you hover over their pictures is B95817 Airai and 8B4B7A Malakal . However that's pretty dark.  The orange and purple horizontal bars in the background are integrated into the entire background image and it was a transparent layer when it was designed, so picking the color out of that isn't going to work.  Funny that you say "red" because there is reference to a red, yellow, and black tribes in the CSS, but I wouldn't read too much into that because I suspect that Survivor: China's CSS was used as a basis for Micronesia, hence the colors from the last season. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 03:15, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The old one is a much better representation of the colors Survivorfan101 (talk) 04:23, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The new version is a much better representation of the colors. In a picture, I saw Jon wearing the updated favorite tribe color, while I saw Mary wearing the updated fan tribe color. 98.17.118.77 (talk) 15:11, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Personally, I don't think either is that great. Looking at the cast photo, the color is more of a pale purple, like a lilac.--71.166.35.115 (talk) 17:55, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Does this look like a pale purple to you:

75.89.236.193 (talk) 19:45, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * That's better...but I seem to like the Amethyst color (#9966CC from the List of Colors page)--71.166.35.115 (talk) 22:53, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Try using this as a guide, as well: http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e130/whataprob/Survivor/favesbuffsgroup2.jpg. Definetly a light purple, and if you look at the girl next to Ozzy, you'll see the Airai Orange. MadMagFreak (talk) 23:09, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * It's been changed again, and I have to say whoever did so did a good job. I found a pretty clear cast picture: http://www.comingsoon.net/nextraimages/survivornewpic.jpg, and it works with those colors. MadMagFreak (talk) 23:55, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I am the one responsible for changing the color. It is a lavendar colored purple and and it looks exactly like the buff. Let's hope the color changing madness is over. One more thing: Does the Airai color need to be changed? ScottAHudson (talk) 01:08, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Nope, I think the Airai color is perfect. As you can see in the cast picture, Airai is just like that orange. MadMagFreak (talk) 05:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * How can we show the past seasons for the Favorites without making a third line in the contestant box. 75.89.236.193 (talk) 02:46, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I think the same should be done as was done with Survivor: All-Stars. They added two more columns, one for previous season, one for previous finish. The only problem would be with the new contestants. Maybe a simple "New Contestant" would be enough? MadMagFreak (talk) 05:16, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, the new colors are perfect, right on the money. Not sure about the two extra columns, i think it wouldn't suit for the new contestants. I say leave it, i mean the extra columns weren't added for Steph and BJ in Guatemala, and they were old contestants with new ones Survivorfan101 (talk) 14:51, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * BJ and Steph were from the same season, not to mention there was only 2 of them. This season features 10 people from 6 different shows. I think we should find a way to mention when they previously competed. Maybe not necessarily what place they finished in, but a previous season is pretty important, yeah? After all, the name of the show is "Fans vs. Favorites." MadMagFreak (talk) 23:25, 9 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, you are right. I guess because this season is based on the fact that there are 10 returning contestants, there needs some kind of recognition. I suppose we just have to figure out how to do that without having the column awkward and out of place Survivorfan101 (talk) 11:20, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Tribe names from reliable source?
Upon some further checking prompted by MadMagFreak's comment above, do we even have a reliable source for assigning the name Airai? The photo does look like a red box to me instead of orange. For all we know, Airai could be a third tribe (note that I did not say merged tribe). Deducing Malakal as the purple tribe name is fair enough, though that borders on original research. I'm tempted to remove all of the tribe names since there doesn't appear to be a reliable source. However, I'm sure that I will probably immediately get reverted. So before I delete it, I'd like to get some feedback from others. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 03:36, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * http://www.filmpalau.com/survivor.htm Please read the article, before making any Changes


 * you can also check the Official site on Cbs. You might notice that There is only TWO tribes. one is orange and the other one is purple. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.85.240 (talk) 03:55, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * You didn't read what I said. I read the article and yes I know that there are two tribes.  What I am questioning is that the two starting tribes are Airai and Malakal and that the names are assigned to the respective tribes.  All the article says is: The 2 tribes eventually named Malakal and Airai would be located quite far from each other.  That doesn't say that it starts that way nor does it assign names to the respective tribes. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:09, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

The Official Survivor 16 website is finally over!
Survivor Sucks found the official website of Survivor 16 and its, http://www.cbs.com/primetime/survivor16/. - 14:20, January 7, 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.96.255.47 (talk • contribs)


 * Um, you mean the one that's been in the article for almost three days? And what do you mean it's "over"? --Maxamegalon2000 16:51, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * This article is been for 6-8 months old, website added on January 6. - 07:46, January 8, 2008 (UTC)

What If?
What if Survivor Palau Had a Merged tribe, What would be the color and Name?


 * It did not and this is not the place to discuss survivor palau. This is the talk page for survivor: micronesia Survivorfan101 (talk) 02:34, 8 January 2008 (UTC)


 * They said it was supposed to be green. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.89.237.88 (talk) 21:41, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Cirie Fields link
The link on the page from Cirie's name only links to the Survivor: Panama page. I got rid of it, and was reverted twice. Since i do not wish to break the 3 revert rule, i have taken the issue to the talk page. In my opinion, it is irrelevant to link to the Survivor: Panama page, the link is already found at the bottom of the article. Also, if this link were to be kept, wouldn't it make sense that all the other "favorites" must be linked to their previous page as well. Only problem - 6 of them already have pages. I would like to hear other editor's opinions, as the one user that reverted me twice attacked my character because i choose to only edit survivor related material on wikipedia Survivorfan101 (talk) 03:04, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * They should all link to their pages or their own articles which will in turn link to their season. Be bold and do that.  Because this is a favorites show if a contestant doesn't have a page, link it to their season.  If a contestant has a page, link to that.  Be bold!!  KellyAna (talk) 03:08, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It is strongly recommended to avoid "surprise links", links that take you to a topic that you don't expect. Because Cirie and James lack pages, linking to their season is inappropriate.  We should have a column to provide previous season for the past players.  --M ASEM  03:14, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirects to a survivor's series page is not a surprise link. Also, there should be consensus, not just a go ahead with one person making changes based on one person that agrees with them.  It seems there is ownership issues with this article and it may need administrative intervention if ownership behaviour continues. Edits made without consensus but using "per talk page" is a violation of common courtesy and consensus theories.KellyAna (talk) 03:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It is a surprise if all the other links go to pages on the people themselves.  It would almost be better to redlink those instead of linking to the seasons. --M ASEM  03:46, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with redlinks. As I was told redlinks indicate one of two things. One, that a person is notable and needs an article created (seen in sports templates quite often) with the redlinks prompting article creation; or two, that the person isn't noteworthy and the brackets should be removed.  Being on twice denotes notability as very few out of the many have appeared on more than one season. I prefer the former to the latter.  Let's redlink and create some articles. KellyAna (talk) 03:58, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I do not believe there are any ownership issues for this page. You yourself have agreed that there is a different and more effective way to illustrate your purpose. I only reverted you on the basis that you told me to "be bold" and make the change, i did based on the opinion of myself and another user. I sense a lot of hostility towards me and am left wondering where it has come from. Survivorfan101 (talk) 04:04, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I see you have found an article on Cirie. This resolves our issue. I thank you for finding the article and hope we can move past this misunderstanding Survivorfan101 (talk) 04:11, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Found and expanded and cleaned. I still feel you have some ownership issues as you immediately reverted changes by someone you didn't know rather than discussing them.  A random IP I can understand but not a logged in editor with a long edit history and an explanation to their edits.  You then reverted without consensus and purposefully took be bold out of context.  Consensus means a few people other than just you and one person.  That's not consensus, that's jumping the gun. Now.... Rather than beat an almost dead horse, let's move on, make some articles, and make this one great with some great wikilinks! KellyAna (talk) 04:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I see an extreme case of assuming bad faith. Normally, we try to avoid linking to redirected and nonexistant pages, and a lot of editors do that, so Survivorfan101 was hardly doing anything bad (in fact, I'd do the same thing) and I see no ownership issues. -- Scorpion0422 04:41, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Merge tribe confirmed!!!
Got it from a reliable source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.85.240 (talk • contribs)


 * That's great, but we'll need the source first. --Maxamegalon2000 02:09, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Added a third "Fan or Favorite" column
Tell me your opinions. Quite honestly, I think this is the best we may be able to get it. MadMagFreak (talk) 02:33, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * WELL, seeing as it's been deleted, I guess I'll just put a preview here MadMagFreak (talk) 02:48, 16 January 2008 (UTC):


 * I thought it looked great. Not everyone is going to know who is who.  I don't understand why, as this is a special Survivor, it was summarily deleted without discussion.  I actually had reverted the removal before coming here and think it should be discussed.  It looks great and helps people see what is going on, where people are from. It's informative and that's what an encyclopedia is about, information.  I believe it should be discussed before being removed.  Why do some feel it should be removed verses just removing it.  KellyAna (talk) 02:57, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I see some feel their opinion supersedes talking, I'm sorry. I thought it looked really good.  KellyAna (talk) 03:12, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It was removed because it is an unnecessary extra column, and I thought that the seasons of the previous competitors were noted already, but that was removed for some reason and I couldn't find any reasons why in the history. -- Scorpion0422 03:14, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Unnecessary is your opinion. What are the numbers underneath the column? You seem to have created an article only you understand, not visitors to wikipedia that aren't editors.  I'm an editor and even I don't understand what you've done.  It was so much better, looked nicer, and was more readable.  Again, sorry to MadMagFreak, it looked really, really good. KellyAna (talk) 03:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * "What are the numbers underneath the column?" It's their age, and you do realize that the previous version and every other season has that too, right? As for "what I've done" all I've done is reverted to a previous version that was removed for some reason. I didn't create it or the article. -- Scorpion0422 03:21, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * So everyone who comes here is supposed to know what those numbers are without a legend or anything? I have to wonder if that's a little "in universe" in a way as it doesn't mean anything to an outsider looking for information.  I maintain, MadMagFreak did a great thing.  You took it upon yourself to remove his/her column. A column that looked good and was easy for anyone who comes here to understand.  I just don't see why articles need to be so no one from the outside can understand them. KellyAna (talk) 03:25, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No, I reverted to an earlier version that was removed for some reason by a random IP . As for the age column, I had nothing to do with that, so why are you criticixing me for it? -- Scorpion0422 03:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

You aren't even addressing the issue or responding. Leave it as it is. It's not user friendly at all. But that's fine, enjoy. Again, I reiterate, MadMagFreak ~ I am sorry. It looked great!!!! KellyAna (talk) 03:36, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I like the current edition, as it does not include a column that is only useful for 10 of the 20 contestants. The way it is now, which is Scopion's current revision, the one with the three lines for the favorites, states the contestants previous season without the need for cluttering the article with an extra column. The problem with this issue is that it does not apply to all contestants, so it is hard to reach a decision that pleases everyone. I cannot come up with a solution, and i believe that the current edition is the best seen so far Survivorfan101 (talk) 04:32, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I too, like the new version. However, after reading some of the things said on this page, I assumed we didn't want a third line, and another column was our next option. I was just guessing after Scorpion edited it, we weren't giving any mention AT ALL to the Favorites. MadMagFreak (talk) 04:39, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, deep breath everybody. =) I'm very confused upon which version everybody seems to like.  I don't like the extra column. I prefer this revision, but then I have to admit that I'm rather minimalist when it comes to these tables (those of you have been around for past seasons remember me and the whole age/location thing).  Just a suggestion, if you are going to point to a specific version, add a link if it's in the history of the article. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:19, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry Gogo Dodo, the one i was referring to is the one you like and have linked too. Now looking back, i wasnt very clear :) Survivorfan101 (talk) 07:32, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I meant I liked the one that's here as an example. I thought that was clear but obviously not.  KellyAna (talk) 00:51, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Obviously, people will be able to tell whether they were a "fan" or "favorite" by looking at their original tribes! Airai for fans, malakal for favorites! Shapiros10 (talk) 22:46, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Official source for city names
What is the official source for city names? I keep seeing them changed. My opinion is the cities listed on the official CBS site should be used. -- Bull  Wiki  Winkle  17:07, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree, it should definately be those used on the official site Survivorfan101 (talk) 00:31, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

In the current revision, all cities are correct per the official CBS site except Ami (Denver, Colorado --> Golden, Colorado) and Kathleen (Wheaton, Illinois --> Glen Ellyn, Illinois). I'm going to make the change since the EW article has the same info for Ami (there are no locations for favorites) and the cities link to actual WP articles. If there are any dissents, please discuss here before changing. -- Bull  Wiki  Winkle  01:32, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Survivor Micronesia Official Logo.PNG
Image:Survivor Micronesia Official Logo.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 13:06, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

can you pLease add episode numbers?
can you pLease add episode numbers? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.60.243.20 (talk) 05:07, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That's not necessary. It's basically irrelevant information that's just another column that means nothing. KellyAna (talk) 05:11, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree, it would just add a pointless column Survivorfan101 (talk) 07:19, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Me too - too many columns. -- Bull  Wiki  Winkle  19:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Then there's the question of determination of number. When I recorded the finale of the last Survivor, it recorded all three hours including the reunion. So apparently the reunion is now part of the finale.  So do we count them separate or together and when do you change it..... You get my thought process.  I don't understand the thought process of episode numbers but I do believe they have no place on this article or any other Survivor season. KellyAna (talk) 20:41, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree that an episode numbers column is unnecessary. Just more clutter. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 21:00, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

FYI: Template:Survivor change discussion
There is a lack of consensus for changing the template from it's current format to the Navbox format. Since very few editors are participating in the discussion, I thought I would leave a note here about the discussion I've tried to start there. Your opinions are welcome. =) See Template Talk:Survivor. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:03, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Articles on Survivor
MSNBC.com (considered a reliable source) has a couple good articles about this season I believe could be good reference sources. Here they are and. I wouldn't know where to incorporate it but maybe someone else could. KellyAna (talk) 02:39, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Only the first one had something interesting with the two castaways sent to Exile Island, so I added to the lead. Since we are only hours away from the start of the season, the reference can probably be removed at a later time, but we'll leave it in for now.  As for the second article, it was an interesting bit of a trivia, but there wasn't anything to add to this season. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 18:17, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, I just thought both articles were interesting and referenced articles are far better than "seen on TV" since there seems to be differing opinions on what's seen sometimes.
 * In an unrelated (sort of) question regarding the show starting, literally in mere hours, do you care about "spoilers" or will someone be on the east coast spilling the beans for the rest of the country. KellyAna (talk) 23:34, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
 * There are no such things as spoilers here. If an editor on the east coast feels like writing things up, they're welcome to.  If past seasons were any indication of how things go, the east coast editors will fill in all of the info on the tables and I will come along and write the episode summary sometime later. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 00:22, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I just know on the soap articles things must have happened before they are put in articles, not based on spoilers or the Canadian episodes.KellyAna (talk) 00:23, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * To clarify: you may certainly write up show details after the show's aired on the east coast - there's no need to wait for the west coast to get it.
 * However, like I did above, long term (unaired episode details) cannot be confirmed, in addition, not discussing unaired information being a courtsey to other editors that want to edit this article without being spoiled. --M ASEM  06:04, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Message board??
Since everyone is fans here and I know talking about the show here is inappropriate (for the challenged that means discussing what happens not asking other things), does anyone know a message board to talk about the show? I'd like to speak my mind about tonight's ep. Please email me the link. And I've returned this question because it is NOT against the rules to ask this question it's only against the rules to list one on the article and the editor reverting me has some sort of (apparent) grudge since he keeps reverting rather than just replying with his opinion.KellyAna (talk) 01:54, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * From WP:TALK, "Keep on topic: Talk pages are for discussing the article, not for general conversation about the article's subject (much less other subjects). Keep discussions on the topic of how to improve the associated article. Irrelevant discussions are subject to removal." --Onorem♠Dil 04:17, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * How is this irrelevant? It's a simple question aDrnd the whankers keep sandbagging it. KellyAna (talk) 04:21, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * How is your question relevant to the improvement of this article? WP:NPA. --Onorem♠Dil 04:22, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Where the frack did I personally attack you? Although you do seem to be steppin in questionably. KellyAna (talk) 04:25, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I never said that you personally attacked me. Calling editors that are simply trying to follow guidelines "challenged" and "whankers" would seem to qualify however. --Onorem♠Dil 04:27, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Then why you be bringin up NPV? You have to watch the implications. KellyAna (talk) 04:30, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't forget to keep cool, guys. KellyAna, Onorem is correct here in saying that Wikipedia talk pages are not the right place to discuss where we can find survivor forums. Google search can do that for us :D -- THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR  04:33, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

KellyAna, please read the very top box on THIS PAGE. Talk pages are for discussion of the article, NOT for discussion of the show. Your question is inappropriate for this page, and its removal is justified. Also inappropriate is threatening me on my talk page and insulting other editors. You are assuming bad faith where none exists, and you are most definitely in the wrong in regards this issue. Captain Infinity (talk) 04:53, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Fairplay voted for himself
For whoever keeps changing it from 10 to 9 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 26skidooo (talk • contribs) 02:07, 8 February 2008 (UTC)


 * No he did not, he voted for Ozzy. His vote at the end credits of the show reads "I (heart) Ozzy" Survivorfan101 (talk) 09:39, 8 February 2008 (UTC)


 * He did vote of Ozzy. 69.181.190.57 (talk) 18:06, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Question
Shouldn't we add a tag for the names that might hit two lines after a while, such as Jonny Fairplay and Yau-Man? We could worry about it when episodes 9, 10 or 11 hit. 75.89.233.41 (talk) 02:21, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Do you mean in the voting history? We needn't worry with Jon - we don't use nicknames - but more importantly the tribe has spoken and he has been eliminated. -- THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR  04:36, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

The age-old debate
Once again we have anonymous editors changing castaways names to nicknames they have been called on the show. I remember the name used by us is the one used by CBS in the confessional things (i.e. it says "The Dark Lord Trombonator, Wikipedian" and then my tribe underneath), but as I am yet to see the premiere episode, is Jon actually called Jon, or is he known as Jonny Fairplay, and am I in the clear to revert these edits? -- THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR  03:58, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, here we are again. As of the cook islands talk page, the consensus was to use the names used on the official site. So for this season "Mikey B" instead of Michael and to use Kathleen instead of Kathy. Problem with this season - Jonny Fairplay is used on the official site. Now the reason why i think Fairplay should be an exception to the rule is that he is a previous contestant of the show and on his previous season "Jon" was used in all tables and episode summaries. Therefore, to be able to establish some connection between Micronesia and Pearl Islands, i believe he should also be "Jon" here as well. I know that goes against the official site names, but it does help others unfamiliar with Survivor to identify the two as the same person on different seasons. However, as always, i am up for discussion as why it should be otherwise, but i think "Jon" should be used instead of "Jonny Fairplay" in this season Survivorfan101 (talk) 04:56, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Urgh, I hate this debate. Okay, I've thought it over and my opinion is to remain consistent with how we did things in past seasons: use the official name on the website.  The table makes it clear that he name is Jon Dalton and the link to the past season is below his name. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:56, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

If it hasn't been brought up before
The last few seasons CBS/Survivor has taken on the habit of picking their survivors from the ranks normal people. That is if you count aspiring models, actresses, and the like as normal people. They then list their occupations as something totally unrelated to what they really are. Hiking guide, waitress, take your pick. This season where they just say "fan", are any of these fans really models/actors/acresses/etc? I'm only bringing it up because it's been a pretty reliable trend these last few seasons, and when I saw their selection of female "fans"... all I could think was "someone called central casting again". Previously wikipedia has always been a source of accuracy on what the castaways REALLY do, and I'd like to see that trend continue. Mind you I don't even have an issue with them doing it. After all, I'd rather see young buxom women on a tropical island too. I just wish they'd stop insulting our collective fan intelligence by convincing us they seek out normal people at this point if that is not what they're doing. - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.132.177.217 (talk • contribs)

How about this shade of purple for Malakal, called "Medium Purple" (#9370DB)?
I think it most closely matches the buff color, slightly more than the one currently being used. MarkMc1990 (talk) 23:12, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I just went ahead and changed it. I really think it matches the buff color almost perfectly. Sorry for not waiting for discussion/consensus first. You can just change it back if you don't like it. MarkMc1990 (talk) 05:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)'
 * Your right, it is a better color and closer to the buff color in my opinion Survivorfan101 (talk) 06:50, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

how about adding another coLumn for HII finder?
and adding a strike through effect if the idoL has been used? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.60.243.20 (talk • contribs)


 * I don't think that's really necessary, since an Idol is not going to be found every episode. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:42, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Mary's Vote
Another source says Mary voted for Chet. What did the closing credits show? 75.89.239.193 (talk) 05:50, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm having a hard time figuring out which woman is which on the Fans tribe, but no woman voted for Chet. It was only Mikey B and Jason.  See the Tribal Council Voting video on the CBS website. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:56, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Immunity Idol line added to episode summaries
Since my removal got reverted, I'm bringing this to the talk page for discussion. I don't think that the two Immunity Idols lines should be added to the first two episodes by themselves as it sets a precedent that will be potentially unmanageable in future episodes. An Idol will not always be available so the line will either be: Instead, I think that any mention of the idol where it has an impact on the voting, should instead be mentioned in the episode sumary. By impact, I mean a Hidden Immunity Idol played or amazingly not played like James with last season. Any keeping of out of the open idols such as the ones in episodes one and two or future Individual Immunity Idols is kind of a given. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * describing something over and over ("so-and-so" kept it to themselves)
 * not be relevant ("so-and-so" continued to keep the Idol secret)
 * empty (nobody had an idol) or just not there
 * I agree. Unless it is directly relevant to the vote, it is just a pointless line filler. Perhaps a small mention in the episode summary but certainly not a line dictating the immunity idol's place in EVERY episode Survivorfan101 (talk) 07:56, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree with Survivorfan101. -- THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR  07:58, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, I removed it. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 19:20, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Are reward and immunity challenges always going to be combined this season?
Its been that way for the past 2 episodes. Do we need the two 1/4 cells that say "Reward" and "Immunity" if both are always going to be won in the same challenge? If they are combined in one challenge everytime, then the game table should look like how I have it below.

Combined Reward and Immunity Challenge.

Exile Island was not yet known to the castaways.

You'll also notice it makes the challenge column smaller and makes more room in the episode title column, which in turn makes the entire table not so unnecssarily huge if you're viewing the page on a large font setting like I am. MarkMc1990 (talk) 07:27, 18 February 2008 (UTC)


 * It's not likely that the Reward and Immunity Challenges will be combined throughout the season, especially when Individual Immunity arrives with the merger. I think you are mistaken with last season being combined challenges.  There was only one combined Reward and Immunity Challenge during the first episode.  The table looks like it was combined because the challenges were mostly won by the same tribe, but they were separate challenges (see the episode descriptions).  Changing the table now would only save space for however many more episodes have combined challenges, but will eventually need to split the table back to the way it is now.  So I think it's too big of a change for such a short time. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The only other season to begin with 20 playing contestants, Survivor: Cook Islands, also began with two combined challenges, but returned to the standard format in Ep. 3. Most other seasons also began with just an immunity challenge. Perhaps the producers are pulling the same thing from Season 13, but I doubt it'll stay around for the whole season. -- THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR  10:00, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Very true trombonator. It was also the case in Survivor: Fiji, where the first two episodes were just one combined challenge. It is very very doubtful that this will continue past next episode let alone the whole season, so i also don't believe there is any need for a different table Survivorfan101 (talk) 12:53, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * "I think you are mistaken with last season being combined challenges. There was only one combined Reward and Immunity Challenge during the first episode. The table looks like it was combined because the challenges were mostly won by the same tribe, but they were separate challenges" I never said anything about last season, I said last 2 episodes (of this season). Just wanted to clear that up =) And yeah, I think you guys are probably right about it not continuing past episode 2. MarkMc1990 (talk) 17:56, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * wince* My mistake. I totally read what you said wrong.  Sorry about that. =\ -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:05, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Once again, contact one of the contestants and ask them. They have MySpace accounts. Its so easy to just ask one that doesnt take their contract seriously. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.252.4.81 (talk) 20:43, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * That would be original research, a major "no-no" in the Wikirules. The information must come from a reliable source, whether primary or secondary. 147.70.242.40 (talk) 22:42, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
 * As we can see now, the challenges are not all combined this season. -- THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR  04:31, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

EPISODE 5 CONFUSION
In wikipedia's article, it's says "He's a Ball of Goo". BUT, on TvGuide, It's says "He's a Ball of God!"

So, i Changed it from what TvGuide said.

WEBSITE: http://www.tvguide.com/detail/tv-show.aspx?tvobjectid=292131&more=ucepisodelist&episodeid=7612190 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.82.82 (talk • contribs)


 * yahoo and tv.com has "Goo" per here and here, respectively. And well "Ball of God" makes no sense. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:19, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Elimination notes
Is there going to be an elimination notes thing on the page, as all all over survivor pages have one (bar China). 218.101.65.70 (talk) 12:41, 23 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Probably not. This season follows the same format as the China page, and not that of Borneo-Fiji Survivorfan101 (talk) 13:52, 23 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Elimination Notes are incorporated into the Episode Summaries under the new format proposed at the end of last year. It saves space, and doesn't spread out bits of info about the same thing in multiple places. -- THE DARK LORD TROMBONATOR  23:25, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Kathy instead of Kathleen?
Only one question: why Mikey B. is called with this sort of "nickname" instead of is real name "Michael", and Kathleen is called with the first name and not with "kathy", used even by the producers? (sorry for the form, I'm not english) --Alessandro223 (talk) 14:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * It's the names used on the official site. It has been discussed already here on this talk page, and on other talk pages Survivorfan101 (talk) 14:06, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * ok thanks :) --Alessandro223 (talk) 14:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Notability
I really don't think this is notable enough for Wikipedia. It's some TV show that I've never heard of. it's amazing that something this minor has over 20 pages on wikipedia. I wanted to check before adding prod. The Change is Coming... (talk) 21:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


 * You are welcome to PROD the article, but I suspect that it will be de-prodded almost immediately. I also predict that any AfD listing for any of the Survivor season articles will result in a speedy Keep.  Just because you have not heard about the show does not mean that it is not notable.  I don't think that the notability of Survivor is in any doubt. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 21:56, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Are you serious? This loew-market game-show is...I knew the established user would win. Nobody bothered to show me the ropes...I thought every user was given a fair chance! The Change is Coming... (talk) 22:00, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I suggest you go read Survivor (U.S. TV series) before claiming that Survivor is "low-market". I didn't say that you couldn't PROD or AfD the article, I just said that a PROD is likely to be reversed and an AfD result would be speedy Keep.  You're welcome to do either. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 22:04, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


 * There are many articles on Wikipedia i have never heard about. Does this make them not notable? No way. Survivor is one of the oldest reality TV shows and has one of the highest budgets for a reality TV show. It has sustained reasonable ratings for 16 season, enough to win the night in which it is shown in ratings. To say that Survivor is a "low-market game-show" is clearly an incorrect statement. PROD all you like, you will have many many users voting for a speedy keep Survivorfan101 (talk) 02:23, 27 February 2008 (UTC)