![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
To follow suit with previous nominations tables, the following colour codes should be used:
Any major changes to the colours used on the table without discussion will be reverted on sight. — Fire Fox 21:31, 12 June '06
Just a thought, would Evicted be better if it was #FECOFF
I don't like the colour for the walked, it is too bright and i would expect it to be over powering. i realise that this is following previous series tables, but in previous cases there has not been such a section. I feel that it should be changed, what do people think to #ffccff (shown below)
× | Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 13 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bonnie | |||||||||||||
Dawn | |||||||||||||
George | |||||||||||||
Glyn | |||||||||||||
Grace | In Big Brotherhood |
||||||||||||
Imogen | |||||||||||||
Lea | In Big Brotherhood |
||||||||||||
Lisa | In Big Brotherhood |
||||||||||||
Mikey | |||||||||||||
Nikki | |||||||||||||
Pete | In Big Brotherhood |
||||||||||||
Richard | In Big Brotherhood |
||||||||||||
Sezer | In Big Brotherhood |
||||||||||||
Shahbaz | Walked | ||||||||||||
Nomination twist | See note 1 | ||||||||||||
Against Public Vote | |||||||||||||
Evicted |
I will put Shahbaz as a “walked/big brotherhood member” just for future reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.111.6.104 ( talk • contribs)
I think it's a good idea. dalejenkins.
Could this be merged with the main article when the series has finished and the information on the talk page is no longer needed? JD 20:51, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm gonna go for no, keep it separate. -- 9cds (talk) 00:33, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Since there are no nominations in the first week, I suggest we make the column for week 1 grey or something along those lines, so it is clear. Maybe #999999. Thoughts? — FireFox ( U T C) 10:20, 25 May '06
Just to let people know, I wasn't thinking properly when I made this edit summary - I meant simple, not accurate :) — FireFox ( U T C) 15:13, 27 May '06
Where do you find the information about who nominated who> Ellisjm 19:02 UTC 31 May 06
Should we put Dawn as up for nomination in week 1 as she was up for nomination for 6 hours and people could vote for her in that time? Ellisjm 20:54 UTC 31 May 06
Should there be a colour for "Not in House"?? Ellisjm 20:56 UTC 31 May 06
Is there a list of colour codes - then I'll show you what I mean Ellisjm 21:07 UTC 31 May 06
Oh wow, it's turning into an episode of The Tweenies. Wouldn't more neutral colours be better? Just a suggestion. JD 21:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Oh, for gawds sake - all I'm trying to say is that there should be a colour light(not bright) colour for Not In House Ellisjm 21:21 UTC 31 May 06
Can't we just leave it? How much does it really matter how many colours of the rainbow you manage to get in the table at the end of the series? It's all about what's written in them more than anything. JD 21:40, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
There are clear differences between 'nomination boxes' and 'not in house boxes'. For a start, they're a different colour, and if you can't see that, the 'not in house boxes' are italicised as well so what's the problem? We're turning this table into a rainbow, which is unneccessary. The more colour that we have which stand out, the more confusing the table gets, and less people will stay and look at the table. Think about it for a second - people don't come to this page to look at the pretty colours, they come for the information contained in the table. So if they were actually interested in reading the table, they'd read every box individually, so colours are really not a necessity. The only reason we use colours is to make the table slightly easier to read, and slightly more pleasable to the eye, but there is a line regarding the amount of [bright] colour we use in this table, and we're crossing it. — FireFox user talk 10:14, 01 June '06
Is there any point in having a tag at the top of the page? We can just have a note at the top saying the table is incomplete if necessary, but in my opinion, neither {{In-progress tvshow}} or {{current}} seem appropriate. Comments? — FireFox user talk 21:08, 31 May '06
Anyway....
"As Aisleyne and Sam were new to the house, they were exempt from both nominating, and being nominated."
Firstly, nothing that I can find states that a general rule of BB is that new housemates are banned from nominating. True, they sometimes do twists to the nominations when a new housemate has arrived, but that's an aside. Secondly, I'm not sure if "exempt" is the right word. Is nominating a burden or a privilege? I was about to change it to
"New housemates Aisleyne and Sam were not allowed to nominate or be nominated."
but now I'm not sure if "not allowed" is much better. Can anyone think of a better way to put it? -- Smjg 13:56, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
You know perfectly well that I mean changes regarding colours to the table or spoiler/current tags. — FireFox user talk 14:49, 01 June '06
Anyone have a source for Imogen being banned next week? -- cds (talk) 20:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
It was brought up that it's hard to tell what the current nominations are - making them bold just makes the table look even more cluttered. Anyone any ideas how to solve this? -- cds (talk) 11:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I was thinking of templating this table. I think it would save a lot of time if anyone wanted to keep up to date as they could put the template on their userpage and then not have to check the article. Then again on the other hand it may be a complete waste of time. What does everyone else think? -- JAB [T] [C] 21:51, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Read the piece about %'s - sorry. 81.111.218.26 18:35, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
1. Individual
× | Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 13 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Imogen | In Big Brotherhood |
Banned | Banned |
2. 'Merged'
× | Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 13 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Imogen | In Big Brotherhood |
Banned |
× | Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 13 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Imogen | In Big Brotherhood |
Banned in both weeks |
I have added an extra feild for times nominated which contains how many times the housemate has been nominated by others. This is what is looks like:
× | Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 13 | Times Nominated |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Housemate | -Number goes here- |
It may make more sense if viewed from the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.81.172.231 ( talk • contribs)
I would just like to point out that I made a minor change, just to make it clear for future reference. In the last note (note 4 I believe ), I made a small change. I hope this is ok with everyone, I know it is a bit picky.
Perhaps we could fill the box #D1E8EF instead of giving it a border? What do people think? — Fire Fox 18:50, 20 June '06
Are those who are up against the public vote listed in alphabetical order?? Ellisjm 10:30 UTC 21 June 06
Why do you think having <br> between "See note" and "x"? It seems completely unnecessary to me, and looks worse... -- Lorian T C 18:33, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
See these:
WITHOUT <br>: Image:Prtscrnbb1.JPG
WITH <br>: Image:Prtscrnbb2.JPG
Trampikey 19:20, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi I did put this earlier but I think it got a bit lost. Basically I don't think the 'Exempt' boxes should be gold because looking the BB6 Nominations Table, the gold colour is used for the finalists' boxes. Therefore we should use gold for this year's finalists' boxes as well, and 'Exempt' should really be different?
The column width on the Nomination twist row of the table needs correcting, "see note 3", "see note 4" and "see note 5" all go too far to the right. Digifiend 08:59, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
I don't like the word 'exempt'.
Exempt implies that they couldn't be nominated. And although that is the case, the box is for who they nominated. I would be much happier with "Unable to nominate" or something along those lines.
What do people think? Ellisjm 16:21 UTC 22 June 06
So are we having a border around the current weeks nominations or not? It keeps getting reverted without any discussion. Personally I think we should have no border, it looks ugly and isn't necessary. -- Lorian T C 19:14, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
There is discussion here. :) -- 9 cds (talk) 19:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Does it really matter that much? It's certainly not worth the reverts. — Cel es tianpower háblame 19:19, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Somehow highlight the whole column then, so the single box doesn't stick out like one of those things that stick out in those places where they normally wouldn't if they were like the other things... -- JD talk| email] 20:43, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Right, well, I think it's about time we got some discussion and ideas going for how we're going to structure the table for the secret new housemates before everyone starts their frantic editing later tonight? Nobody knows as of yet if nominations with the 5 new housemates (and Aisleyne/Susie) will take place in the new house but we have to accomodate this if it happens. I was thinking a light sky blue colour or something, to distinguish the new housemates (plus Aisleyne/Susie) whilst staying in the house next door... comments? — Fire Fox 17:11, 30 June '06
Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 13 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
New housemate | Not in house |
In secret house |
|||||||||||
Aisleyne/Susie | Not in house |
Exempt | Nikki, Sam |
No nominations |
Lisa, Mikey |
Lea, Nikki |
In secret house |
Something in the table needs to be green. Please make something green. AnemoneProjectors ( talk) 20:46, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. -- 9 cds (talk) 22:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
I think this looks better:
Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 13 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Aisleyne | Not in house |
Exempt | Nikki, Sam |
No nominations |
Lisa, Mikey |
Lea, Nikki |
In secret house |
Trampik e y ( talk to me)( contribs) 15:41, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
If there were to be a Big Brother series 7 in another country that was to have an article of the nominations table, then this one would be over-generalised. Mark272 22:02, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
To follow suit with previous nominations tables, the following colour codes should be used:
Any major changes to the colours used on the table without discussion will be reverted on sight. — Fire Fox 21:31, 12 June '06
Just a thought, would Evicted be better if it was #FECOFF
I don't like the colour for the walked, it is too bright and i would expect it to be over powering. i realise that this is following previous series tables, but in previous cases there has not been such a section. I feel that it should be changed, what do people think to #ffccff (shown below)
× | Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 13 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bonnie | |||||||||||||
Dawn | |||||||||||||
George | |||||||||||||
Glyn | |||||||||||||
Grace | In Big Brotherhood |
||||||||||||
Imogen | |||||||||||||
Lea | In Big Brotherhood |
||||||||||||
Lisa | In Big Brotherhood |
||||||||||||
Mikey | |||||||||||||
Nikki | |||||||||||||
Pete | In Big Brotherhood |
||||||||||||
Richard | In Big Brotherhood |
||||||||||||
Sezer | In Big Brotherhood |
||||||||||||
Shahbaz | Walked | ||||||||||||
Nomination twist | See note 1 | ||||||||||||
Against Public Vote | |||||||||||||
Evicted |
I will put Shahbaz as a “walked/big brotherhood member” just for future reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.111.6.104 ( talk • contribs)
I think it's a good idea. dalejenkins.
Could this be merged with the main article when the series has finished and the information on the talk page is no longer needed? JD 20:51, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm gonna go for no, keep it separate. -- 9cds (talk) 00:33, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Since there are no nominations in the first week, I suggest we make the column for week 1 grey or something along those lines, so it is clear. Maybe #999999. Thoughts? — FireFox ( U T C) 10:20, 25 May '06
Just to let people know, I wasn't thinking properly when I made this edit summary - I meant simple, not accurate :) — FireFox ( U T C) 15:13, 27 May '06
Where do you find the information about who nominated who> Ellisjm 19:02 UTC 31 May 06
Should we put Dawn as up for nomination in week 1 as she was up for nomination for 6 hours and people could vote for her in that time? Ellisjm 20:54 UTC 31 May 06
Should there be a colour for "Not in House"?? Ellisjm 20:56 UTC 31 May 06
Is there a list of colour codes - then I'll show you what I mean Ellisjm 21:07 UTC 31 May 06
Oh wow, it's turning into an episode of The Tweenies. Wouldn't more neutral colours be better? Just a suggestion. JD 21:17, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Oh, for gawds sake - all I'm trying to say is that there should be a colour light(not bright) colour for Not In House Ellisjm 21:21 UTC 31 May 06
Can't we just leave it? How much does it really matter how many colours of the rainbow you manage to get in the table at the end of the series? It's all about what's written in them more than anything. JD 21:40, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
There are clear differences between 'nomination boxes' and 'not in house boxes'. For a start, they're a different colour, and if you can't see that, the 'not in house boxes' are italicised as well so what's the problem? We're turning this table into a rainbow, which is unneccessary. The more colour that we have which stand out, the more confusing the table gets, and less people will stay and look at the table. Think about it for a second - people don't come to this page to look at the pretty colours, they come for the information contained in the table. So if they were actually interested in reading the table, they'd read every box individually, so colours are really not a necessity. The only reason we use colours is to make the table slightly easier to read, and slightly more pleasable to the eye, but there is a line regarding the amount of [bright] colour we use in this table, and we're crossing it. — FireFox user talk 10:14, 01 June '06
Is there any point in having a tag at the top of the page? We can just have a note at the top saying the table is incomplete if necessary, but in my opinion, neither {{In-progress tvshow}} or {{current}} seem appropriate. Comments? — FireFox user talk 21:08, 31 May '06
Anyway....
"As Aisleyne and Sam were new to the house, they were exempt from both nominating, and being nominated."
Firstly, nothing that I can find states that a general rule of BB is that new housemates are banned from nominating. True, they sometimes do twists to the nominations when a new housemate has arrived, but that's an aside. Secondly, I'm not sure if "exempt" is the right word. Is nominating a burden or a privilege? I was about to change it to
"New housemates Aisleyne and Sam were not allowed to nominate or be nominated."
but now I'm not sure if "not allowed" is much better. Can anyone think of a better way to put it? -- Smjg 13:56, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
You know perfectly well that I mean changes regarding colours to the table or spoiler/current tags. — FireFox user talk 14:49, 01 June '06
Anyone have a source for Imogen being banned next week? -- cds (talk) 20:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
It was brought up that it's hard to tell what the current nominations are - making them bold just makes the table look even more cluttered. Anyone any ideas how to solve this? -- cds (talk) 11:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I was thinking of templating this table. I think it would save a lot of time if anyone wanted to keep up to date as they could put the template on their userpage and then not have to check the article. Then again on the other hand it may be a complete waste of time. What does everyone else think? -- JAB [T] [C] 21:51, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Read the piece about %'s - sorry. 81.111.218.26 18:35, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
1. Individual
× | Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 13 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Imogen | In Big Brotherhood |
Banned | Banned |
2. 'Merged'
× | Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 13 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Imogen | In Big Brotherhood |
Banned |
× | Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 13 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Imogen | In Big Brotherhood |
Banned in both weeks |
I have added an extra feild for times nominated which contains how many times the housemate has been nominated by others. This is what is looks like:
× | Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 13 | Times Nominated |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Housemate | -Number goes here- |
It may make more sense if viewed from the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.81.172.231 ( talk • contribs)
I would just like to point out that I made a minor change, just to make it clear for future reference. In the last note (note 4 I believe ), I made a small change. I hope this is ok with everyone, I know it is a bit picky.
Perhaps we could fill the box #D1E8EF instead of giving it a border? What do people think? — Fire Fox 18:50, 20 June '06
Are those who are up against the public vote listed in alphabetical order?? Ellisjm 10:30 UTC 21 June 06
Why do you think having <br> between "See note" and "x"? It seems completely unnecessary to me, and looks worse... -- Lorian T C 18:33, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
See these:
WITHOUT <br>: Image:Prtscrnbb1.JPG
WITH <br>: Image:Prtscrnbb2.JPG
Trampikey 19:20, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi I did put this earlier but I think it got a bit lost. Basically I don't think the 'Exempt' boxes should be gold because looking the BB6 Nominations Table, the gold colour is used for the finalists' boxes. Therefore we should use gold for this year's finalists' boxes as well, and 'Exempt' should really be different?
The column width on the Nomination twist row of the table needs correcting, "see note 3", "see note 4" and "see note 5" all go too far to the right. Digifiend 08:59, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
I don't like the word 'exempt'.
Exempt implies that they couldn't be nominated. And although that is the case, the box is for who they nominated. I would be much happier with "Unable to nominate" or something along those lines.
What do people think? Ellisjm 16:21 UTC 22 June 06
So are we having a border around the current weeks nominations or not? It keeps getting reverted without any discussion. Personally I think we should have no border, it looks ugly and isn't necessary. -- Lorian T C 19:14, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
There is discussion here. :) -- 9 cds (talk) 19:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Does it really matter that much? It's certainly not worth the reverts. — Cel es tianpower háblame 19:19, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Somehow highlight the whole column then, so the single box doesn't stick out like one of those things that stick out in those places where they normally wouldn't if they were like the other things... -- JD talk| email] 20:43, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Right, well, I think it's about time we got some discussion and ideas going for how we're going to structure the table for the secret new housemates before everyone starts their frantic editing later tonight? Nobody knows as of yet if nominations with the 5 new housemates (and Aisleyne/Susie) will take place in the new house but we have to accomodate this if it happens. I was thinking a light sky blue colour or something, to distinguish the new housemates (plus Aisleyne/Susie) whilst staying in the house next door... comments? — Fire Fox 17:11, 30 June '06
Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 13 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
New housemate | Not in house |
In secret house |
|||||||||||
Aisleyne/Susie | Not in house |
Exempt | Nikki, Sam |
No nominations |
Lisa, Mikey |
Lea, Nikki |
In secret house |
Something in the table needs to be green. Please make something green. AnemoneProjectors ( talk) 20:46, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. -- 9 cds (talk) 22:36, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
I think this looks better:
Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 13 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Aisleyne | Not in house |
Exempt | Nikki, Sam |
No nominations |
Lisa, Mikey |
Lea, Nikki |
In secret house |
Trampik e y ( talk to me)( contribs) 15:41, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
If there were to be a Big Brother series 7 in another country that was to have an article of the nominations table, then this one would be over-generalised. Mark272 22:02, 30 June 2006 (UTC)