Just wondering whether people on this forum ever look at the Big Brother Wikipedia pages.

I thought I'd ask because basically, a few times I have tried to edit the pages constructively and there seems to be 1 poster that tries to rule the article and is always reverting things that they perceive to be slightly incorrect.

For example, in the nominations table, this week he has put 'No nominations' for the week's nominations, and actually is saying to me that the 3 newbies' votes do not count as nominations.
Really discourages anyone to edit the pages.

Well there are no nominations....BB producers put everyone up except Helen so there are no nominations as we know it! I guess it depends how it is worded on the wiki. No housemate has nominated nor will they!

There are no regular nominations...but Biannca, Pav and Zoe's choice to evict has to be shown clearly in the table, with the name of who they choose to evict, so in a way, that is a nomination, just not to face the public vote. A nomination to evict. A bit confusing!

Choosing to evict isn't nominating though, the hm's have already been nominated by BB. They won't actually sit in the diary room and each pick a housemate, they will discuss & have to agree on one hm to evict.

Just stick to irrefutable facts and their won't be any problems

Having looked at it, I'm with you. It's consistent with the way the table shows Aisleyne nominating/evicting Jonathan. Probably the logical way to think of it is them nominating someone for a one-person-only eviction where the public isn't voting because there's nothing left to decide.
Don't know why I'm getting involved here as I'm not even watching the show any more...

As for general behaviour on the pages I did notice there was an unnecessarily arsey argument in the talk pages of BB14 last year.

I never attempted to edit. My BB memory isn't very good. I have usually forgotten half the HM's names two days after finale night. I only ever go there when someone writes BB 11 or CBB3 etc on here. I don't seem able to recall the shows like that so I have to check which series it is by seeing who was in it. If it is unreliable I would have accepted it as gospel.

That's a common issue with Wikipedia, unfortunately.

In broad strokes, it takes a certain type of person to become a prolific editor over there. Sometimes they view topics of interest as gardens. How dare you plant zucchini in their garden how very dare you. Although your input is allowed, it's not really welcome sometimes.

Do you mean the 'Michael - noms table' bit? Because CHRIST.... I'm on my phone and the thing goes on getting thinner and longer, it gets to one letter a time like:
N
o
m
i
n
a
t
e
d
.
How sad can some people get. Wiki needs to reformat an rework how talk pages work on mobiles. It looks ridiculous

That's the one. I thought this bit was particularly eye-popping (and ironic) as a first reply to someone's argument: