Talk:I'm a Celebrity...Get Me Out of Here! (British TV series) series 9

This article was nominated for deletion on 25 November 2019. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the British television task force.

Image copyright problem with File:IACGMOOH logo.png

The image File:IACGMOOH logo.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

Erm... Any chance on including Katie Price on the list of contestants as she has been confirmed by deveral national newspapers to be returning to the show. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.70.182.167 (talk) 12:54, 15 November 2009 (UTC) This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:29, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bottom 2

IIRC, the bottom two needs only to contain the bottom contestant and any one other. The other is not necessarily the second bottom. The results are announced "in no particular order" therefore only the producers know who the actual bottom 2 in the public vote are. This is not like SCD or X-factor where the bottom two have to dance-off or sing-off. Being the last 2 named is no guarantee that they were both literally bottom. Leaky Caldron 01:12, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Legend Key

Why isn't nominated showing up in the legend key? MSalmon (talk) 10:06, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nominated is incorrect here. They were the 3 remaining after the bush battles - nominated impies a selection process by the group or public vote. I suggest "faced elimination" or "elimination vote". Leaky Caldron 12:22, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could it be fixed somehow? MSalmon (talk) 12:59, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a suggestion, but shouldnt all of the celebrities who won immunity be the same colour, and not those who just won the individual immunity bush battles? The first team won immunity when Sabrina held the water the longer, so isnt that in effect the same as the others winning immunity individually? (Kyleofark (talk) 21:01, 23 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]

So what is the point of the Week 1 Bush Battle legend orange colour then? Leaky Caldron 21:07, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed it so nominated shows on the legend key for Series 10 but it sais Facing Elimination instead of Nominated. (Flamingjoe (talk) 09:20, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bushtucker Colours

Not sure if Trials 10 and 11 are decided by the contestants or by the public, I am sure its the contestants choice for trial 10 and trial 11 is put forward to the public to decide. pday2387 (talk) 22:10, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Scrub my post above looks like it has been sorted pday2387 (talk) 22:11, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Camps

I have made a table showing details on the camps and a copy of it can be seen here I'm a Celebrity Get Me out of Here (Series 9) Camps, if u like it I'll add it to the article, till then I'll keep it in my userspace so people can comment on it. Thanks Paul2387 (talk) 19:16, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have decided to add my table to the article but if anyone objects, feel free to remove it and leave me a comment on my talk page. Paul2387 (talk) 20:45, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good work but I think it's a bit imposing for a single issue that only lasted a few days. Unless new camp splits occur there is not much point showing the whole series. Leaky Caldron 21:09, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Made some changes so it shows what status the celebrities where in when so it doesn't just reflect on camp splits. Paul2387 (talk) 22:35, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Camilla being shown as being withdrawn from day 5 onwards when she withdrew on day 4, therefore it should be from day 4 onwards not day 5, also katie is being shown as being withdraw from day 10 not day 9, could u tell me why u changed this Panel Guy. Thanks Paul2387 (talk) 11:37, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The table is correct MSalmon (talk) 11:39, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it to correspond with the Results and Elimination table where the red & purple bars start the day after the celebrity is eliminated. Panel Guy (talk) 13:46, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I fail to see the point of this table being maintained to the end of the series. It is pure duplication of the Results and Elimination table. What value does it add? Leaky Caldron 13:51, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Camp table shows how many celebs were in camp on any one day where as the Results and elimination table shows which celeb is safe and which will face elimination, so there not duplicates or each other. Paul2387 (talk) 14:15, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The location of celebs is simply not volatile enough to warrant a table coveing the whole series (unless further camp splits take place). It is also clearly duplicating elimination details aleady recorded in 2 other places. It needs to change otherwise I will delete per your offer above. Leaky Caldron 15:43, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Updated the table so it is different to the Results and Elimination table, so it now shows whether a celeb was in camp or not

and rephrased the bits refering to elimination, I also changed the colours so it doesn't look the same and also added a mention of the Jungle Jail. Paul2387 (talk) 17:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I have to say i'm with Leaky Cauldron on this one, as much as I appreciate your work (I mean that too) The table does seem a bit much when all is needed is a comment along the lines of "celebrities on the losing team of the initial bush battle were sent to Exile camp, where they remained until they won immunity from the first public vote. The winning team of the challenge got to stay at Base Camp. On Day 11, Gino, Lucy and Samantha returned to Base Camp before the first elimination, and all celebrities remained there until they were voted out of the jungle"

Oh and also, if the table does stay, I think the Jungle Jail should be deffinatly removed. It gives the impression that Joe and Stuart were there all day, when in reality it was just another Bushtucker Trial with an added survival twist. They didnt actually spend that long there. (Kyleofark (talk) 22:00, 2 December 2009 (UTC))[reply]

I have reworded the part about Jungle Jail to say it was a Bushtucker Trial MSalmon (talk) 22:04, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The table gives a graphical look at who was where when and is used similar to the Results and Elimination Table, going to add notes though to make it more understandable and to avoid confusion. Paul2387 (talk) 22:43, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the camp table because it is duplicating what has already been said in the Camps introduction, if anyone wants to re add it they can do but I don't think it will be there much longer MSalmon (talk) 22:54, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kerry Katona/McFadden

I know this isnt really the place for this, but I figured I was more likely to get a response here. But i've been doing some work on the I'm A Celebrity pages, and was wondering if Kerry Katona should be listed as Kerry McFadden on I'm A Celeb articles, as that's what she was known as when she appeared on the show? I know its not the place, but any opinions would be appreciated :) (Kyleofark (talk) 18:00, 28 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]

No becuase she is no longer a McFadden any more MSalmon (talk) 18:46, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

why is the article locked?

Why is this article locked from editing? There is absolutely no justification for protection of this article, particularly as it has a number of errors. 78.32.143.113 (talk) 10:07, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is semi-protected because of unsourced additions, fancruft and vandalism MSalmon (talk) 10:09, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

None of those reasons given are justifiable reasons why the article should be semi-protected. There are clear policies to deal with vandalism and unsourced additions - and those do NOT include locking a page from being edited. Kindly unlock the page, so that it is free to edit as per Wikipedias open editing policies, thanks. 78.32.143.113 (talk) 21:47, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry can't help you there, you will just have to wait until it is unprotected MSalmon (talk) 21:49, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I requested page protection on the 24th November 2009 and the request can be seen here

I'm a Celebrity…Get Me out of Here! (UK series 9) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Temporary full protection dispute, Protection is needed to at least the final as things are being changed that are not appropriate to what's being shown on the Programme. pday2387 (talk) 22:18, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected I think you meant semi-protection. If not, please explain the reason for full-protection and give diffs to show it. Otherwise, it's semi-protected until the show is over. tedder (talk) 22:31, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

and the protection log entry here [1]

It ends 48 hours after the shows finishes so until then Anonymous users will have to wait as those were the one's who kept vandalising the page with nonsense edits. Hope you understand why I requested this page to be protected, this will apply to any other ongoing TV Broadcast in the future as I do my Protection Patrol and request any which require it.Paul2387 (talk) 15:50, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but you have still failed to fully justify why this article needs protection. All wikipedia articles can sometimes suffer from 'nonsence edits' - but that categorically does NOT constitute a requirement nor a need to protect the page! 78.32.143.113 (talk) 18:07, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What I meant to say is that the page kept being edited with things not related or announced on screen and things which were deemed as spoilers so that's why it's only editable by registered users. Paul2387 (talk) 20:35, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Winner and Vote% columns

These are entirely redundant - and look terrible in black. There is no purpose in keeping them for consistency with previous years or any other reason that I can see. I have removed them and they have been replaced - why? Unless there is a good reason I propose their removal and this will be confirmed by whatever noticeboard it is disputed at. The entire thing contravenes WP:Synth as does the rest of the article so be very careful about maintaining unnecessary content otherwise other tracts of the article may find themselves being disputed. This article documents the 2009 series - nothing else. Leaky Caldron 16:11, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the Winner column as Stuart was the only winner for this year as said in the note, but I would leave the % Votes column MSalmon (talk)

Why? It's redundant - no BT trials involved votes. Leaky Caldron 16:21, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the public votes ones in light blue MSalmon (talk) 17:57, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The column heading "Vote%" is without meaning, context or content. Please explain why it is needed. Leaky Caldron 18:01, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The public voted for that trial if you look at the key, so the outcome of the public votes will be put here when they are announced MSalmon (talk) 18:04, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have reworded it so it makes more sense to people who don't understand what the show is about MSalmon (talk) 18:07, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't see and I don't understand. It makes no more sense with the word public added. What is the source for the data that will be entered now that the series is completed? Leaky Caldron 18:10, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The ITV wesbite, obviously MSalmon (talk) 18:11, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously? Really? - so why haven't you completed it then? If it's an unsourced, uncompleted column it will need to be removed until it is sourced and completed. Leaky Caldron 18:15, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't completed it yet because the votes haven't been announced yet MSalmon (talk) 18:16, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nor is it likely that any will be. The first BT trial was 3 weeks ago. If results were going to be published they would have been by now surely? Leaky Caldron 18:18, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you not watch the show? They announce all the results together MSalmon (talk) 18:19, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When? The final show was last night. Only the after show prog. on Monday and I've never known results published for anything then. Leaky Caldron 18:21, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Last year the votes were revealed a week after the final, so I am guessing this year will be the same MSalmon (talk) 18:23, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the rat.....

Court case and widespread coverage. This is more than just the usual post-series gossip. I think it could be considered for inclusion - in time. Leaky Caldron 10:39, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Daily Summary

I thought a table could be made giving a summary of each day like on the Big Brother articles where it gives summary's of each week, it could look like this:

Day 1	Bushtucker Trials
	Celebrity Chest
	Bush Battle
	Twists
	Entrances
	Exits

It would then make the article style follow across as the two reality shows are similar. Paul2387 (talk) 22:36, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Day 20 eviction vote

On the official ITV source with phone vote results for Day 20 it shows Justin & Kim having the lowest number of votes but Ant & Dec said that Jimmy & Justin were in the bottom 2 and not Justin & Kim, why is that?

Because as I said above (Bottom 2) being named in the bottom 2 does not always indicate the actual percentage vote. It's a technique used by the producers and is consistent with the statement "not in any particular order" often quoted. Obviously the looser is named in the bottom 2 but the other can be any of the others. THis is why I added "(or named in)" to the table but someone removed it. Leaky Caldron 21:18, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Statistics Article

I have added references on the Statistics Article so that it's not original research, I used the official site for the stats as shown in the reference. Paul2387 (talk) 16:56, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

new stats section - contravenes policy

This information contravenes this clear policy WP:ISNOT#Wikipedia_is_not_an_indiscriminate_collection_of_information in that it is an excessive collection of statistics. Discuss..... Leaky Caldron 17:24, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The phone voting results should not be in the article as it is already in the official ITV source and it is a duplication of the tables for Bushtucker trials and Results & Eliminations MSalmon (talk) 18:08, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Third Place

I think we should use "walk" on the legend key as Third Place as it is the same colour as on the Results and Elimination as he technically was not Eliminated as it says at the moment. Flamingjoe (talk), 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Results Table

The Results Table needs to match the colour key for Winner and Runner-up as in the infobox, also Safe doesn't need a colour andit should be lightblue for Bottom 2 --MSalmon (talk) 17:38, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]