Talk:List of Big Brother 2007 housemates (UK)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Big Brother WikiProject aims to improve articles relating to Big Brother, and List of Big Brother 2007 housemates (UK) has been identified as one of these articles. Anybody can help the WikiProject by trying to improve existing articles. Please add your name to the list of participants, if you are committed to helping out.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Article merged: See old talk-page here

Contents

[edit] Notable Housemates

Why is Charley not mentioned on the psge?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.137.143.115 (talk) 18:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)


I think we can create articles for at least Jonathan, and possibly Ziggy. Jonathan is notable for 3 things, Big Brother, Guardian writer, and business man, easy to find sources on google. Ziggy also possibly as as a former member of a boyband, and a FCUK model. I'm writing this here, to attract some interest. John Hayestalk 13:46, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Right I've started Jonathan Durden, with hopefully enough infos and sources to keep it for the near future. John Hayestalk 14:23, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Interesting. Ziggy may become yet more notable when he leaves the house if he gets advertising deals or whatever, too. It's no coincidence that there are statistically far more potentially notable people on the non-celebrity Big Brother than there are from your average sample of 18 people from the UK chosen at random...-h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 21:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree, even Charley and Carole have a chance of being notable for other things, but not enough to currently warrent an article; Ziggy has a much better chance for his own article. John Hayestalk 23:36, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to start looking for sources for Ziggy, between FCUK, Lynx, music producer, Northern Line & 5 Go Dating, there should be enough. John Hayestalk 11:37, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Here he is, with no mention of Big Brother (as it was written in 2005), if I can find the original Mirror article that would be better. [1]. John Hayestalk 11:43, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Started at Zachary Lichman, continue discussion at Talk:Zachary Lichman. I'll work on this, this afternoon. John Hayestalk 11:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
I strongly object to these articles, and have nominated Jonathan Durden for deletion. I may do the same for Ziggy, but he has noteablility. Dalejenkins 16:35, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Would you not agree that they are notable outside of Big Brother? John Hayestalk 00:44, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thaila knew Ziggy allegation

Reading the actual report on the Star website, it all seems desperately circumstantial. Nick Cooper 00:20, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd take it out, as there was no evidence in the house, anything else is conjecture at this point. Darrenhusted 00:59, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. John Hayestalk 11:26, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Brian's Mum

The Article says that Brians mum has said that he is playing dumb, when she has recently been on essex radio stating that she never said this, hence that the part saying so should be removed !

[edit] New Housemates Article

Last year I believe we split the section when there were about 18 HMs. There's 19 here, so shall we do the same again? Dalejenkins 13:32, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, lets do it, this article is getting too big. John Hayestalk 14:41, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I agree Fugio 17:00, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
According to the technique on WP:SIZE, the article contains 23kB of prose (excluding references, tables, footnotes etc) which on its own is not long enough to justify splitting. However, a large proportion of this article is made up of tables etc (increasing the size) so it may still be useful to split off the section. Tra (Talk) 18:23, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
We should as we did with List of Big Brother 2006 housemates (UK). Geoking66talk 19:43, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
I would agree to this.Babygurl1853 01:10, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
I have made the split, based on this consensus. Tra (Talk) 01:36, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Charley's Surname

Mentioned in Archive 4 but dismissed there out of hand is the fact that when asked in the house what her surname was, Charley replied "Owen". The papers all say "Uchea" but maybe they got that from here. Here's a link to a C4 forum post dating from the day before BB8 started, when The Sun had printed a picture of Charley calling her "Charlie Richardson", in which the forum poster Candie notes that she's someone she went to school with called "Charlie Owen". So I think it's clear that both a few years ago in school and in the present day, she actually uses the surname Owen, not Uchea. Perhaps this is a divorced parents thing? Also, the article doesn't list Billi's real first name which is Nabeel, which he did mention in the house but an example source would be here. The protection on the article prevents me from adding these changes. RorschachUK 17:34, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that information. I've added Billi's name but I think with Charley, the newspaper may not have got their facts completely right, which is evidenced by the variety of surnames and the misspelt first name. Perhaps they were guessing based on the names of parents etc. Also, a forum post cannot be used as a source on its own; it would be necessary to find the particular issue of the newspaper or a web page on their site to confirm this. Tra (Talk) 18:05, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Charley's listed on the England and Wales birth register as Charley Kazim Uchea. -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 20:05, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Since you can only look up records in the register of births, deaths and marriages by name, that's surely a circular reference? Someone had to have obtained a name to look up before they were able to find it in the register. Since the register is listed as a reference for the names of Charley and Brian, where is the reference to say what their name was before it was looked up in the register? @Tra - the article from the day before the show started, which called her "Charlie Richardson" (since all they knew was that she was called Charlie/ey and her cousin was Kieran Richardson) is here - the forum post from the same day corrects it to say she's actually Charlie Owen, and much later when Liam was playing quiz games with the twins he asked them as a quiz question what Charley's surname was - Charley said it was Owen. So whilst forum posts may not be acceptable references, it's nonetheless certainly correct. How is a generic link to the front page of the register of births, deaths and marriages an acceptable reference? RorschachUK 20:25, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
I think I'll take a B,D&M register over a forum post. If the name on her birth certificate says Charley Kazim Uchea, then that is her name, and posts in forums from before the program started guessing at names in not WP:RS. Darrenhusted 20:32, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
You miss the point, perhaps - how was the B,D&M record LOOKED UP? You need the name FIRST, then you use it to look up the record. And the name someone uses in life is still significant even if it's not on their birth certificate, if not then let's rename Elton John's page to Reginald Dwight, etc. RorschachUK 20:36, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
I wouldn't bother he changed his name by deed poll years ago. And Charley is no Elton John. If you want to change it the burden is on you to prove the B,D&M register wrong, not for us to prove that her name is what it says on her birth certificate. Darrenhusted 20:47, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
This page uses 'Uchea' as her surname. Tra (Talk) 20:49, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
It does, however it's dated three days LATER than the change appearing unsourced on Wikipedia so could still have been sourced from here. Got one from earlier? But that's not the point, I expect that probably is her birth name (though Kazim's a boy's name), I was only pointing out that the name she actually chooses to use is Owen, which I would expect to be noteworthy irrespective of whether it's reflected on her birth certificate or not - just as it is with Billi, Brian and Ziggy, none of whom are appearing under their birth names, according to the information on this page. I didn't expect that to be so contentious, but if people strongly object as they clearly appear to, then we'll leave it another week till she gets kicked out and wonders why her name's been widely reported wrongly. RorschachUK 21:56, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Is the BBC a good enough source for you [2], the upshot is that other then speculation on forums by posters who heard someone who knows her say she calls herself Owen there is no source which contradicts the established sources. Darrenhusted 22:01, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
No - because that's dated 13th July. Are you following my logic? And she said herself on the highlights show that her surname was Owen - are you disputing that? I imagine I might be able to find it on YouTube given a little detective work, though I imagine there would be objections to citing that as a source too, despite it being her own words on camera. RorschachUK 22:04, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Well the BBC would have got the name from Channel4 who would have got the name from Charley's application form. I have the eviction show on tape, I'll watch it because you cannot add youtube links. Darrenhusted 22:06, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
I'd be weary of sourcing a fact just from what the housemates say on the show. They might lie or bend the truth. Your idea of waiting until she's evicted is a good one. I've found from previously that housemates that become famous after Big Brother (such as Nikki Grahame) tend to be referred more often by their surname, which will provide plenty of sources for the name. At the moment, the name 'Uchea' tends to be used most often in the media so I think that's the one that should be used in Wikipedia for the moment. Tra (Talk) 22:12, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Of course, it's not just what she said in the show (as reported here, here, here, here etc.), and which I saw for myself, it's that IN ADDITION TO the link I originally posted of someone saying THE DAY BEFORE the show started (when Charley would have been sequestered away in France) that she'd been to school with the girl from the Sun article and that she wasn't Charlie Richardson she was Charlie Owen. The two things together make it extremely persuasive for me. But you're right, it's clearly not going in, I'm resigned to that fact, I guess I'm only carrying on banging this drum because I'm right. RorschachUK 22:20, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
I think wait and see is the maxim here. Darrenhusted 22:28, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Chanelle just called her Charley Owen in the diary room. Technohead1980 20:14, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Favouritism?

Should we mention the controversy surround the alleged favouritism towards Charley. Many people (inlcuding myself believe she is recieving preferential treatment and is deliberately being kept in by Channel 4.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.153.147.99 (talk • contribs) 14:50, 15 July 2007

No. Darrenhusted 15:14, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
It would be perfectly acceptable to include it, if it's been covered by the media. Nick Cooper 18:14, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
It is nothing more than rumours, accusing Channel 4 of fixing the show to keep Charley in, unlike the Emily controversy there is not going to be anything (like an ejection) to substantiate the rumours. When the press report the events that actually happen then it is fine to add them, when they write an opinion piece that guesses that Channel 4 are trying to keep Charley in then it cannot be added. Darrenhusted 19:37, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
If, on the other hand, a newspaper quotes "insiders" on the issue, who are we to decide whether what they say is genuine or not? Similarly, it would be perfectly legitimate to mention that newspapers are reporting that viewers think it is being fixed. Nick Cooper 10:35, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
I would steer clear of "insider" remarks. The article is about the events that happen on the TV show, not the speculation in the press about the TV show. There is no evidence Charley is "deliberately being kept in", and by the time the series ends all the housemates will be out anyway. Speculation has no place on Wikipedia. Darrenhusted 11:08, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Speculation by editors certainly has no place. The media, however, speculates all the time, on everything from politics to fashion. Sometimes that speculation - or "inside knowledge" - transpires to be true. I don't know where you get the idea that media coverage is off-limits - there are plenty of things covered on Wikipedia, in the articles for which media reaction is often documented. While I personally don't think there is a concerted effort to keep Charley in (with the possible exception of disallowing her's and Billi's nominations a few weeks back, which directly worked in her favour), clearly plenty of people do. Nick Cooper 11:45, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
My view is simply that while some things turn out to be true (such as adding house mates) this is a piece of speculation which Channel 4 will never confirm, and so it will always just be speculation. It has its place on a BB forum, not on the article which is supposed to be covering what has happened on the program. In your first response you said "if it has been covered by the media" which is acceptable if we are using the media to confirm the nominations or who was evicted. So far this article has remained free of speculation and it would be best kept that way. Darrenhusted 12:03, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Darren on this one, we have to use reliable sources, which not only means sticking to sources which are generally reliable, but also judging how reliable a source's source is. So this means looking at the article and deciding how reliable their source is. In this case I would say not very, and therefore shouldn't be used. Just because it's good enough for a newspaper (who only care about number of readers and not being sued), doesn't mean it is good enough for an encylopedia John Hayestalk 13:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Well, clearly everything should be taken on its individual merits, but in essence reported viewer/reviewer reactions are legitimate, and indeed are part-and-parcel of most film/TV programme pages on WIkipedia. Nick Cooper 15:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

To unindent this and clarify, the nominations discounted thing. Billi and Charley's nominations were discounted which resulted in Charley and Nicky not facing the public vote is just a report on the maths of the situation, saying the nominations were discounted so that Charley wouldn't face the public vote is spinning the events with speculation. As the producers rarely confirm specualtion it is almost impossible to add it to the article, after all this article is about the program and the events of the program are controlled by the producers. We can say they had a fake eviction, but not that they had it so that Charley would stay in the house, unless a producer tells Dermot on tonight's BBLB that they want to keep Charley in then I don't see how there could be a source which confirms that the intent is to keep Charley in, they can only speculate, and we do not need speculation on this article. Darrenhusted 16:50, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Quite true, although the fact that that different punishments are being applied selectively does breed an atmosphere of distrust, e.g. Ziggy and Chanelle only getting one nomination for discussing the process being shown virtually parallel with Charley and Brian doing the same thing in the garden, with no apparent sanction. Nick Cooper 07:42, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
See that right there is speculation, you don't know what the producers aren't showing you, and BB can apply what ever punishments it wants, but as they do not give reasons for the differences in the punishments then you can only speculate as you will never recieve confirmation for the reasons for different punishments. Darrenhusted 12:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Er... no, that's observed fact. Various HMs have discussed nominations, provoking diffrent punishments, or none at all, and this has led viewers to speculate why this is so. In the current climate of the public distrusting what TV broadcasters may or may not be doing behind the scenes (cf. latest Gordon Ramsay "scandal"), it's hardly surprising that this is happening. This this. OK, it's The Sun, but we can't pretend it doesn't exist. Nick Cooper 16:25, 17 July 2007 (UTC
Rantings of bitter ex-housemates do not form credible, reliable sources. He offers only speculation, and does not know the intentions of the producers. Having seen housemates deny what has gone on in the house, forgetting it is all filmed (re:Grace's I do not bitch comments last year), I would not put much weight behind it. One last time, speculation does not belong on an article about Big Brother. Darrenhusted 16:36, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Nonsense, it's a legitimately-reported reaction to the programme, no matter what you or I may think of some or all of what he said. Wikipedia's TV and film pages are filled with quotes from reviwers/commentators/columnists/whatever saying, "this means X, Y, or Z" or "the director's intention is A, B, or C." What's the difference? Nick Cooper 17:01, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Nick. If it has been covered by the press as a controversial issue then it doesn't matter if it ACTUALLY happened. There is evidence to suggest she is being kept in just as there is evidence suggesting Emily shouldn't have been evicted and it should be added. 82.36.177.31 21:48, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Charley's surname (continued)

Chanelle just called Charley, Charley Owen. Maybe she was born Charley Uchea, but is known as Charley Owen? godgoddingham 333 20:16, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

We have already gone through this on the talk page to the main article, the answer is no one knows and we won't know properly until she gets out of the house, which will be in roughly 72 hours. Darrenhusted 20:20, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Haha OK. But has anyone ever thought that maybe the BBC and DS:BB etc. get the housemates' surnames that they use from Wikipedia? godgoddingham 333 20:27, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
It has occurred to me. Channel 4 give out the names, everyone else picks them up, and then they stop caring. No doubt her £50,000 interview with the NOTW will spell her surname correctly. Darrenhusted 20:30, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
In her "exclusive interview", she's Uchea. [3] Dalejenkins | The Apprentice (UK)'s FA plea-please have your say! 17:55, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Also on Radio 1 this morning she referred to herself as Charley Uchea. — AnemoneProjectors (?) 19:47, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 5 HMs instead of 6

In all of the BBLB episodes before tonight and on the website, it was mentioned that 6 HMs would be entering, but only five did. Does anyone know why, and is this worth mentioning? godgoddingham 333 22:24, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

One man dropped out after the "talk of doom" Fugio 22:51, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

If we can get a source then it's worth mentioning, it may be the first time a housemate has dropped out this late in the game. Darrenhusted 22:53, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Davina talked about it on BBLB. Is that a good source? Fugio 23:49, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Can you remember which episode? Tra (Talk) 23:54, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Today's episode Fugio 23:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Is there a web ref? Darrenhusted 00:05, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Todays epidode could be cited as <ref>{{cite episode|title=Big Brother's Little Brother| series = Big Brother| network = [[Channel 4]]| city = [[Hertfordshire]], [[England]]| airdate = 2007-07-27}}</ref> Tra (Talk) 00:12, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I can't seem to find a web ref Fugio 00:14, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I found this. Tra (Talk) 02:23, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Or [4] godgoddingham 333 10:35, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
That is a 404. Darrenhusted 11:59, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Here's the corrected link. Tra (Talk) 12:09, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

It'll do. Darrenhusted 02:46, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pauline

Can we add a bio of Pauline (the character) in Thaila's section?

I've added a few details. Tra (Talk) 01:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] David's surname

The link on the page says his name is David Parnaby, but this link says his name is David Hamilton-Parnaby. Does anyone know what it actually is? Fugio 15:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

There is more evidence for David Parnaby Fugio 01:26, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] References

Refs 7 and 8 have disappeared (probably when Amanda and Sam were merged). Could someone fix this? — AnemoneProjectors (?) 15:55, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gerry

Is it worth adding that since he left the house, Gerry's famly have disonwed him? I read it in an interview in Star Magazine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yumikuga2 (talk • contribs) 13:30, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

If you can provide a source, maybe. It would have some relevance to Big Brother. John Hayestalk 13:57, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
It was in an interview in Star Magazine Issue 192. You were worried about how your family would react. Have they been in touch? "I phoned home on Friday and was told they have disowned me. The coverage of me hasn't been good and my mother is very upset." (talk • contribs) 13:30, August 27, 2007 (UTC)
If it seems like a reliable source (only you can judge that, as it is a magazine), then by all means go for it. Add the text to the article, and use the following cite template: Template:Cite_news John Hayestalk 15:18, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barely any information!

Sorry to moan, but compare this to last year's list of housemates, there's barely nothing! If they're going to stay this short, maybe they could go back on the main page?81.152.87.25 22:28, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Er...no. The main article is too big. If you want infomation, go ahead and add it (if sources can be found). Dalejenkins | 13:29, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
We also need to be careful about adding details which aren't relevant to Big Brother, some of the previous years suffer from far too much information, whether someone likes collecting cuddly toys really has no relevance to Big Brother, the housemates sections should only list a basic background, basic details such as DOB, and anything that is directly related to Big Brother. John Hayestalk 14:00, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
For example Carole ... once went to a Scissor Sisters concert dressed as a mobile phone. This should be removed. John Hayestalk 14:08, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

This article relies far too heavily on dodgy sources, particularly The Sun. There may be a significant amount of content that needs removing. violet/riga (t) 22:06, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree that many of the sources need to be replaced (all the Channel 4 ones), but in the case of Big Brother, The Sun is actually quite a reliable source. John Hayestalk 15:19, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unneeded statement

Found under Brian's section

"He is the first black winner of Big Brother UK.

Why is this noted, so what? I'm taking this off. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooky-cy (talk • contribs) 22:03, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

If you're wondering how it got in, it was inserted in this edit. I would agree that it probably doesn't need to go in the article. Tra (Talk) 23:39, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
If he is notable for being the first black winner then it can be mentioned, otherwise no. As that notablity has not been established it shouldn't be in there. John Hayestalk 12:09, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gerry's book

Proper citation for the work he did, as it's actually a (published) conference paper:

Naoum D.C., Muskett G.M., and Georgiadis M. (eds.). Cult and Death- Proceedings of the Third Annual Meeting of Postgraduate Researchers, The University of Liverpool, May 2002, Liverpool Interdisciplinary Symposium on Archaeology, [BAR International Series 1282], Oxford.

Stergiopoulos, G.V. (2002) "The Greek Neolithic Figurines",Cult and Death- Proceedings of the Third Annual Meeting of Postgraduate Researchers. The University of Liverpool, May 2002. Oxford: BAR.

Peripolis (talk) 13:59, 11 May 2008 (UTC)