Talk:Ugly Betty/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This 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.

Contents

Not NPOV, not verifiable, not encyclopedic

From the 'in other countries' section downwards, the article is most certainly not NPOV, particularly in its use of language. It reads as though it were written by the show's PR company, or marketing department.

Wikipedia is not an advertising platform.

Why is a ratings fall described as "dissapointingly"? Not NPOV.

The second sentence here is unverified (because it is unverifiable), and not NPOV: The season one finale aired 5 August 2007 and received the lowest rating of the year - 1.051 million, and only in the 13th slot of the night. This was predominantly because it was up against the season premiere of the popular program, Australian Idol.

The "In popular culture" section is a neutratility disaster throughout, just one example: Australia also became smitten with "Bettymania." Oh yeah? Cite, verify please.

And New Zealand have also hyped-up Ugly Betty by promoting Tuesday nights as "True Beauty Tuesday" and also launching competitions for a replica of Betty's Guadalajara poncho. So that's the entire country of NZ doing that, eh? Cite, verify please.

--Dagenham dave 11:03, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

So what is this show actually about?

All this article says is "The series follows the daily work and personal lives of Betty Suarez (Ferrera) and her boss Daniel Meade (Mabius)." Great, doesn't tell me much though does it.

WP:SOFIXIT —Moondyne 16:41, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, it isn't really about anything more than that. What you've described is pretty much it, except for the moral at the end of every episode, which is usually either "being gay is fabulous; people who don't like it are terrible" or "being transsexual is fabulous; people don't like it are terrible". Sometimes it's "being a vulgar slut is fabulous; people who don't like it are terrible", or something along those lines. If there's a notable source that points that out, it should be mentioned, but otherwise the article is fine as it is. — Chameleon 11:01, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

The title

I liked "Betty the Ugly" better, but alas, the networks don't listen to my advice. SnappingTurtle 17:08, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

It will be interesting if the ABC show can hold a candle to the riotous 'Betty la fea'. The actress in the latter added to the humor of the show. Dogru144 22:13, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

What exactly is a "videotape production" as opposed to a "traditional network drama"? This part is a bit vague. 212.204.134.138 16:26, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

"Videotape productions" use videotape as opposed to motion picture film. The Colombian original used the former, while this version uses the latter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brittany Ka (talk • contribs)

English Wikipedia readers may be interested to know that we have the same show in the Russian-speaking world. It's called "Ne Rodis Krasivoy", which translates to "Not Born Beautiful" (which itself comes from the Russian proverb, "be not born beautiful but be born happy"). I'm really surprised that they've made a US version given how much American TV usually relies on attractive actors and never puts an ugly woman in the star role ("Roseanne" being one of the few exceptions). I hope the show does well and I'm really pleased to see that ABC is planning to make the episodes available for download after they air. Good move guys! -- Hux 06:49, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Present tense

Since the program has now debuted, I'm going to change all the material to present tense. Never Mystic (tc) 01:09, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Merge character articles to this article

The following articles on characters need to be merged to this article per this AfD:

--Deathphoenix ʕ 04:55, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

    • I heartily agree! Too many television series have superfluous separate listings for all the characters they include. TOM 12:21, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
      • Concur. This series is what, two episodes old? SmartGuy 16:37, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Since I voted for the merge, I went through and merged all those articles and redirected them back to this article. I basically just copy and pasted the info, so now someone who has seen the show can come in and make those entries better. - Lex 00:11, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I have a feeling that we'll get to know a lot more about the characters now that ABC has given the show a full 23-espisode order.[1] If this article does expand during the duration then we can give the characters their own articles now that the series has proven to be a hit. Robert Moore 01:36, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Look i really think that you shouldnt of merged the whole thing, the episodes list should of been left alone. the hole thing looks really stupid now it was way better before. couldnt you go find somehting better to do than play around with the article. Its really dissapointing that you had to merge everything. im not even going to use this now its all too stupid for my liking. your like a little child who ment well but you just stuffed it all up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.245.163.175 (talk) 05:32, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Gay characters

I concur with Bearbear that the paragraph regarding gay characters in this series is extraneous and gives no indication of any particular notability. And as worded it violates WP:NPOV. If it can be verified that UB is the only series on air with gay characters, or that the fact a show involving a fashion magazine has gay characters is somehow unusual, the by all means include it in an NPOV fashion. But to make an editorial statement about gay characters disappearing with Will and Grace and qualifiers like "surprisingly" is way over the NPOV line. 23skidoo 21:18, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Wait... did I make any comment on that? I don't remember. --Bearbear 17:19, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
In the Televisa version just recently concluded in Mexico, the Director of Fashion was gay but it was not a negative reflection upon him. Kinda funny because the guy is buffed out and straight. Ronbo76

Sarah Jones

The guest star of Episode 2 The Box And The Bunny is credited to Sarah Jones. However, it is linked to the wrong Sarah Jones, because obviously the character in this episode was not black. After doing some research on the actress, I have found that this actress to be the right one and have removed all links to the African-American Sarah Jones from the Ugly Betty articles. The question is, how do you differentiate in Wikipedia between two people who have the same name? Going by race seems a little harsh. Do these actresses have middle names? Shall we leave it unlinked? Cumbiagermen 21:47, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

NEW: Sarah Jones (disambiguation) -- Zanimum 16:36, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Is Justin the first ever gay child depicted on television?

Although there have been debates as to whether Justin is gay or not, there has been no disagreement as to his fashion savyness and self image/body awareness. Some said that Justin role plays or acts like a model at times, but upon careful examination viewers should be able to tell that the jestures Justin exhibited were fashioned after female models instead of male models. For argumenet's sake, let's say that Justin is gay, which is perfectly OK, I just wonder if this is the first time a child has been asked to portray as a gay person on the television. Any input?

He's not the first gay child depicted on television. There are many. I just can't remember which ones... UnDeRsCoRe 00:50, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
Um, Lance Loud on reality show predessor An American Family was 20, but I can't think of any. Unless they definitely say he is gay, he's simply effeminate. -- Zanimum 16:24, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
See List of television shows with LGBT characters Otto4711 19:37, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
There was definitely a gay kid on Will and Grace in one episode where Jack visits an elementary school. --Sbrools (talk . contribs) 04:38, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, they never explicitly said he was gay, either. He'd be in the same boat as Justin. --AMK1211 03:30, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

The question comes up in an article in a US edition of the "TV Guide" (May 7-13, 2007), titled "Burning Questions a la Mode." Executive producer Silvio Horta is given this question, "We love tap-dancing, fashion-obsessed Justin. Will the topic of his sexuality ever be addressed?" Silvio responds, "Because Justin is 12 and is portrayed by an actor of the same age, the issue won't be dealt with directly for a while."

MODE or Mode?

The article is very inconsistent, sometimes switching back and forth in the space of two sentences. Is it MODE (all caps) or Mode? Otto4711 19:37, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

ELLE's article is all caps, while TIME switches back-and-forth. -- Zanimum 17:19, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Comedy or Drama

Many people have asked which one is this show and have classified it as a Dramedy, which it is. But like Desperate Housewives isn't Ugly Betty technically a Drama?

Actually, ABC is billing "Ugly Betty" as a comedy. The producers have said that come award time it will be entered in the comedy category if its nominated. Robert Moore 20:32, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

All-encompassing characters article

OK, so instead of before, when there were separate articles for each character, why don't we have a "Characters of Ugly Betty" article like some TV series have? That way, this article won't be so bloated; and we don't have to deal with having, like, 20 articles, most of which would be for minor characters anyway. 66.41.213.24 18:02, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I just solved that problem. Now there is one. I've also opened up the template now that the characters are starting to expand to the point that we're going to start giving them their own articles, just like they're doing with Heroes and Jericho. Robert Moore 20:23, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
BTW, I've split off Whilhemina and Fey, into their own articles. If someone could chop down their "Characters..." bio to the essentials, that would be great. -- Zanimum 19:00, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Who is?

Who's between and behind Betty and Daniel in this pic? He's got a moustache and fairly dark skin. Was he kicked off before the pilot? -- Zanimum 19:03, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

He was in the pilot, trying to get Betty fired. He sounded kinda French. In the previews of the show, he says "To Revenge". --Bearbear 16:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Viewer numbers

I'm glad to see the viewer numbers per episode. A graph of the data would be good, too. But it would be better to also have at least the broadcast date for each episode viewership. 69.87.193.238 21:03, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Ireland

Although the U.K will get Ugly Betty soon, Ireland actually got it today on RTE 2 (1st January 2007)82.18.180.58 20:45, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Two comments and a correction

I watched the Colombian version in Costa Rica and it was always called "Betty la fea", not "Yo soy...fea."

I think it would be interesting to add that a Mexican version was made as well: La Fea más bella. (At least that's what it was called in Costa Rica!)

Lastly, I believe "mode" is a word from French and ultimately from Latin, not from German as the article states. --DBlomgren 03:29, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

The word "mode" is definitely from French and ultimately from Latin. --AMK1211 17:59, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Devil Wears Prada

How is this related to The Devil Wears Prada? There is nothing mentioning it, but the story lines are clearly very similar and the end credit music of the pilot was Suddenly I See, the same as the opening music on Devil Wears Prada. Has there been a controversy? 217.43.184.59 19:02, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

There are some people who are fans of TDWP who think that Betty is a copycat of the book and movie, while others think its the other way around since the original Betty came before TWDP. Robert Moore 19:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Is there any citable sources of the controversy? It seems notable if there are. The music (which I presume was not in the original Columbian version) seems to be too much of a coincidence. A small nod by the Betty team to the assertion their idea was stolen? 217.43.184.59 19:29, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Here's a article from USA Today that might give you a insight on this topic. Robert Moore 20:05, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
If you look at the info box at the Ugly Betty bottom's info box, you will see that Betty la fea inspired the spin-off of this show long before The Devil Wears Prada came out as a novel (2003) or movie (2006). In fact, La fea, as the novella is also known brought two other series to America via Televisa, TV Azteca and Univision. La fea más bella was going strong in 2006 before Prada hit the screen and brought acclaim. The main difference, which is huge and striking, is Betty la fea and its versions center on the ugly duckling's transition as the protagonist. Salma Hayek acquired the American rights to Betty and brought it to ABC after NBC failed with its project. To assert Prada was copycatted would be a narrow POV that has no basis in fact. You don't see Hayek, Betty or ABC squawking "copycat". Maybe they should. . . Ronbo76 16:38, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
In one episode, I don't remember which one, the character Justin references the Prada movie. Also, Prada concentrates on the protagonist's struggle with her boss, where as in Betty, this conflict is almost absent. Prada concentrates on the transformation, while Betty does not. There is also an underlying mystery aspect to Betty with the death of Fey and such that is absent from Prada. --Sbrools (talk . contribs) 04:44, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Fan sites and blogs

It has come to my attention that Wikipedia may have guidelines concerning unofficial websites and blogs, so unless its official refrain from posting any websites/blogs about this program. Thank you. Robert Moore 02:32, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm looking at the sites listed in the fan sites section most of them aren't official, or am I misunderstanding. Thanks. --DotzieJoy 05:37, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

PLAGARISM

i havent seen Ugly Betty yet but the plot strongly resembles an India television series called Jassi jaise koi nahi (Nobody like Jassi). i dont know which one has been inspired but Jassi is chronologically ahead. 128.243.220.22 15:51, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Jassi came first but it was a spin-off of the novella Betty la fea. This is easily determined by looking at the info box at the bottom of the article and by the link in this paragraph. And, it is not plagarism - it is a spin-off. Please do not use caps as it indicates yelling. Ronbo76 15:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

No this is plagerism of La Fea mas bella. It currently airs in cyprus dubed into greek from spanish. I looked on its wiki entry and it was made 8 months before ugly betty


"No this is plagerism of La Fea mas bella" NO You're Wrong, Betty la Fea was made about 7 or 8 years ago, then here in mexico they made this "Remake" called La fea màs Bella. The original Soap Opera is Betty la Fea, all the other versions (as far as I know there are more around the world) are remakes from Betty la Fea.

The series is based on the life and times of Derek Shields (and is as gay as him)

THANK YOU FOR WHOEVER EDITED THIS PHRASE OUT. I WAS ON MY WAY TO DO THAT AND SOMEONE GOT TO IT BEFORE ME. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.15.132.108 (talk) 20:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC).

That would be me. Good thing I was still in the page at the time. If this kind of vandalism keeps up I will place a semi-protection template on this article. Robert Moore 20:36, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Semi-Protection

In a effort to keep this article from being vandalized I added a semi-protection template to the page for the time being. Robert Moore 21:42, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Reviews

I had to remove the comments, since it was made by someone else other than me. Robert Moore (talk • contribs) 07:59, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

February 14, 2007 edits

User:H. Elpenguino is cutting out info and building new articles. Would like to have other editors' comments. Please keep it friendly. Ronbo76 04:15, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm working at trying to split up the article into new sections. I agree with you that we should let the editors decide, but until then lets leave the article as it is. Robert Moore 05:43, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Super long article

This article is way too long. We need to move all the tables: Ratings, Broadcasts, awards etc. to different articles. We also need to slim down the Summmary. This article needs alot of work and i think it should just be started up again by scratch. Sorry about my major changes without consulting. I'm new to Wikipedia. I'm going to lay of the article for a while. It seems like alot of people have it under control. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by H. Elpenguino (talk • contribs) 04:17, 15 February 2007 (UTC).

I'm working at trying to split up the article into new sections. I agree with Ronbo76 that we should let the editors decide, but until then lets leave the article as it is. Robert Moore 05:43, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

The article is indeed long. Honors and Cast should be their own articles but I believe we should wait till the end of the season in May. There is a lot that needs to be done to improve the overall quality of the article but I think we should do just that versus deleting everything and waiting for it to be rewritten.Light Bulb 08:06, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Picture

Wouldn't the promo picture that is located under the 'Cast' subheading be more appropriate as the main picture then the one of Suarez (Ferrara) herself? Or maybe someone should take a screenshot of the title screen? Dunno. Ka5hmir 04:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree. An image of the title in the opening of the show would be best.Light Bulb 00:18, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Know about vandalizations but why is this article still on a Protected Status

Every article on Wikipedia should be available for WP:BOLD edits. This article has enough editors to protect it. It should be unprotected. Ronbo76 01:31, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree, but we still have vandals who want to come over and mess it up. Until then the template stays. Robert Moore 04:20, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I will inquire about this in the proper place. Ronbo76 04:23, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
WP:OWN might be a good review. Ronbo76 05:15, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

We'll leave it unprotected for now

But if there are more vandals and trolls who spoil it action will be taken. Robert Moore 08:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Fight it as a Recent Changes/vandal editor. Special protection should be the last measure. Plenty of articles get vandalized. This one article does not require/need special attention. Ronbo76 14:22, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Please see WP:OWN. Ronbo76
In the event, consensus thinks protection is needed, the action requested should be taken to the proper admin board and not be the unilateral action of one editor. Ronbo76 14:30, 22 February 2007 (UTC)


Sorting of "International broadcasts"

I was looking at the list of "International broadcasts" and was wondering how the list was sorted. It's not sorted alphabetically by country name, nor is it sorted by first broadcast date. Which way of sorting the list should we use? Sorting alphabetically has the advantage of easily being able to find a certain country, however sorting by broadcast date also has an advantage of shwoing which were first (i.e. United States followed by Canada, etc.). What does everybody think?

While we're on the subject, shouldn't the heading be "International Broadcasters" rather than "International Broadcasts"? Does Wikipedia:WikiProject_Television have a convention on either of these issues? Liyster 07:36, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

It seems to be organized by the order of which country the show aired in, and then in that divided by different stations or channels it aired on within that country, it is rather confusing though.--DotzieJoy 05:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

NAACP Image Awards

Ugly betty won Outstanding Comedy Series at the 2007 NAACP Image Awards. Ferreira and Williams didn't win in their categories. I would have corrected the information in the article, but daunted by the formatting of the chart I'll leave it to one better able.--House of Scandal 02:09, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Translation of Yo soy Betty la fea translates directly to I am Betty the ugly

A user has reverted the direct translation of the Columbian title of its Ugly Betty original show. This title appears in English exactly as per what it was when I reverted yesterday in articles such as its title on IMDb. To break it down for those who do not speak Spanish:

Yo - I
soy - am
Betty - Betty
la - the
fea - ugly

Yes, as with all languages, many interpretations are possible. However, being very familar with all incarnations of this show, the original show has always been translated as per its direct translation. Ronbo76 12:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)


Yes, I am the one who keeps changing the translation and it's simply because "I am Betty, the ugly" is a bad translation of it. All that is just a literal word for word translation that is obviously done without a proper understanding of the language. I speak Spanish, and the Columbian show is almost universally known in Latin America as, "Betty la fea" which is how in Spanish you would say "Ugly Betty". Translating it as "Betty, the ugly" does not make any sense and is wrong. 9th Gate 9:05, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

That is your interpretation. It is referenced which means it applies. In addition, it no different than saying the exact same words in English. I too speak Spanish and have a proper understanding of the language to include Castillan influences and the nuances of the American/Mexican versions. The proper title of the is the longer version. It is shortened sometimes in print to Betty la fea. Shortening does not diminish what has been properly cited. Ronbo76 14:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

This isn't an interpretation because "I am Betty, the ugly" makes NO sense in English. That is a bad translation. "Yo soy Betty la fea" translates to "I am ugly Betty" just like how "Roberto el gordo" is how you say "Fat Roberto" in English. This is the way it is and it is why I made that correction. 9th Gate 14:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

It still is original research. Substitute "eighth" for "ugly" and see how it sounds. You are making WP:Beans. Ronbo76 19:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
The assertion that "I am Betty, the ugly" makes no sense in English is incorrect. It is a proper English construction. Both phrases, "I am ugly Betty" and "I am Betty, the ugly" are both correct English, and the two phrases have slightly different connotations. Just another data point, Google Translator suggests that "Yo soy Betty la fea" might better translate to "I am Betty the ugly one". --Ben James Ben 00:43, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


I don't understand what you were trying to say in that last reply. I am going to guess that you are not as fluent in one language, Spanish or English, as you are in the other. That is why you seem to be so strong on "I am Betty, the ugly" which is simply a poor choice for translation. A stiff and unnatural sounding title that makes no sense. No one says that in English. No one says, "Hey, there goes Bob, the tall" or "There goes Pete, the short"

I am willing however, to make a compromise. The construction as it is specifically done in the title (with a comma) can allude to it being translated as, "I am Betty, the ugly girl". I will make this change myself, with the sole condition that an added note be given to the text and that is that it is popularly known as "Betty la fea" (without the comma) which DOES without a shadow of a doubt translate to "Ugly Betty". I will implant these notes into the texts of both entries for the US and Columbian programs. Hope this brings a peace to the argument. 9th Gate 11:53pm, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

It is true that I am not fluent in Spanish. However, I re-iterate that the phrase, "I am Betty, the ugly", is a legitimate English construction, one that has subtle differences in meaning compared to "I am ugly Betty." I think that the difference is that the second means "I am Betty and I happen to be ugly", while the first means, "I am Betty. My identity and role in life is that I am an ugly person." My assumption is that the Spanish language has the same ability and complexity to make this distinction. (Please correct me if this is not true.) Yes, the construction "I am Betty, the ugly" is stiff and not commonly used. I suspect that because it is so powerful people only use it in special circumstances. --Ben James Ben 06:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
I would agree with this. In Spanish to say Yo soy is very formal and rarely used. It is an emphatic statement made either as a boast or declaration that I am what is being referred to. In today's parlance, "la fea" would be a nickname given to someone that stuck. My own grade school nickname was sapo which translate to "frog" or "lucky". More than likely back then, I probably even said: Yo soy Reynaldo, el sapo.
Other examples of similar statements involving famous people would be Henry VIII, Merlin the magician and Doménicos Theotokópoulos known as El Greco. Combine the "I am" with their name followed by the suffixed name and you get a perfectly sounded statement. Ronbo76 13:05, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

It would be preferable if the three or so of you involved in this reversion war could reach consensus and *then* make the change. Perhaps the translation should be removed entirely until consensus is achieved. --71.70.218.41 05:12, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Being as it is cited in sources; thus real consensus is present but there are two users who agree. Also, since I created the header for this section, it should not be changed or refactored. The explanation and cite appear within the article's external links and the start of this paragraph which you may have missed. Ronbo76 05:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
The title appears as directly translated and cited in the main article here - "Yo soy Betty, la fea" (1999). Morenooso 00:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
First, I'd like to apologize about last time and the changing back and forth of the main article. I was not aware of the rules of the website. No harm intended.

Anyway, Ben James Ben, I'd advise you to read the reply I made where I tried to make "peace" with Ronbo76 on this. To reiterate to others, and explain in more detail here, in Spanish when you use an adjective to point out a person, even though it might not be there, it is understood that a noun is present since in Spanish grammar there is the concept of everything being masculine and feminine. Ronbo's example of being called "sapo" is not the same because that is a noun (and can be translated as "So and so, the frog") whereas "fea" is an adjective but it is already understood in the sentence of "Yo soy Betty, la fea" that it means "la fea chica" or "la fea muchacha". That is why the translation that I am suggesting (which also reads smoothly in English) of "I am Betty, the ugly girl".

I used the previous examples to help illustrate the point in one of my past replies and I will use similar ones here as well. "Bob, el flaco." The equivalent in English is to say "Bob, the skinny guy" not "Bob, the skinny". Also saying something like "Jenna, la bonita" would be the same as saying in English "Jenna, the pretty girl" since you are not going to hear "Jenna, the pretty".

By the way Ronbo76, is the IMDB your only cited source for the title you used? And did you reword my addition to the text itself (the part about "Betty La Fea")?

And can someone be so kind as to direct me on how to find out how to properly sign out these posts here? All I keep doing is copying and pasting the sign out text and just putting my screen name twice. 9th Gate 9:32pm, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I posted the link and have seen it in other sources. Unfortunately like many south of the border articles I follow, references do not last long. Trust me that if Ronbo76 does anything wrong, I will set it right. Unfortunately for you, I concur with his edits. Morenooso 01:37, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
BTW, you sign your post with four tildes like this ~~~~. Morenooso 01:41, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Are you an administrator here Morenooso? And thanks for the sign out tip.9th Gate 02:22, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Nope, just another user. But, if you look at the history of this article and the other, you will see that I have contributed to it or defended it against dubious edits. Morenooso 02:31, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Ignacio's plot summary

This seems unwieldy, especially the last sentence:

Another recurring storyline involves Betty's father, Ignacio Suarez, who admitted to coming to the United States as an illegal immigrant which could put his family in a legal bind. He revealed his reason for immigrating was to avoid being arrested in Mexico for murdering a banker in self-defense after falling in love with the banker's abused wife, who happens to be Betty and her sister Hilda Suarez's now deceased mother.

I know it's a convoluted and soapy plot, but isn't there a better way to word this? (I admit I'm kind of stumped myself.) Maybe the subplot involving Constance and his green-card woes could be added at the same time.--Thessaly 01:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


How about ...

Another recurring storyline involves the legal problems of Betty's father, Ignacio Suarez, who came to the United States illegally. Ignacio fled Mexico with Rosa (Betty's mother, now deceased), to avoid arrest for killing Rosa's abusive husband in self-defense. Lkredhat 08:29, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

OR

Another recurring storyline involves the legal problems of Betty's father, Ignacio Suarez, who illegally immigrated to the United States years ago with Rosa (Betty's mother, now deceased). He fled Mexico to avoid arrest for killing Rosa's abusive husband in self-defense. Ignacio's illegal status has left him vulnerable to insurance problems; an obsessed immigration counselor; and a forced return to Mexico where he may face consequences for the long-ago homicide. Ignacio fills many psychological roles for his family in the series: a cheering section; a role model of grace, kindness and traditional wisdom; and a "damsel in distress" figure who must be helped. Lkredhat 08:29, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Main Picture

I don't think the main picture really describes the series. Betty may be the titular character, but a cast picture, like the one lower down in the article would work better. ɱўɭĩєWhat did I dowrong 23:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

May I suggest that we use a screenshot of the titles "Ugly Betty" from the cold open of each episode. It seems to work with other show pages on the site. Sfufan2005 17:19, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
That might be good, but I really like the current/new picture with the cast watching the models on the runway. Describes the show as a whole much better than the pic of Betty. --AMK1211 04:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Proposed splits

Having looked at the articles for Desperate Housewives, its best that we use the same formats that they are using when this article is split up. Robert Moore 09:54, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I think that it would be better if the article was split like Grey's Anatomy. Its easier to navigate and read.

Semi-protection reinstated

I have put the article back in semi-protection status. Sometime ago the the show's opening title card was added as the main image of the article, very appropriate since most articles on television shows include this. Unregistered users for no stated reason have been reverting to a promo image. This is leading to redundancy since said promo image is already in Cast.Light Bulb 07:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Of course since I am not an administrator I cannot personally place any article under any protection but placing the template may have discouraged others from making unnecessary changes. Now the article has a much better main image that I think most no one will tamper with.Light Bulb 00:50, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Latest Episode Section

I thought it would be a good idea to put a latest episode section in the International broadcasts bit. Please Please Please update it as more episodes are broadcasts across the world.
Olz06 13:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Season 2

Are there any other good, reliable sources that confirm there will be a second series of Ugly Betty??
Olz06 17:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

It was confirmed in an offical press release from ABC. You can probably still find it at abcmedianet.com--DotzieJoy 05:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Creation of MODE Magazine and Speedy Deletion

I created a seperate article for MODE Magazine that was speedily deleted. Ronbo76 was kind enough to let me know of this but when I came across this information the article had already been deleted.

I didn't have an opportunity to make an argument against the deletion of the MODE Magazine article. It being tagged for speedy deletion gives me the impression that a discussion on the topic should be avoided and I feel that this was wrong judgement in practice. What further cements this assumption for me is the reason given for speedy deletion. It was a valid reason for the article to be deleted but I do not feel that it warrants deletion to be speedy. If it had been tagged as a "vanity page" I would have understood but the manner by which this was dealt currently frustrates me personally.

I want to appeal this decision but would first like to know if anyone even saw a discussion over the validity of the article or if anyone even knew of the article's existance. I have read Wikipedia articles similar to the one I created, for example the model I followed, Central Perk. I believe that a fictitious magazine that serves as the office setting of a hit television series is a subject as notable as Central Perk if not more so.

If your opinion is the same please express it here.Light Bulb 08:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Your concern is noted and appreciated. Permit me to explain the Speedy Delete process and my role in in it. In the process, this is a good faith attempt meant not to offend.
  1. The Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion (CSD) exist to nominate an article for Speedy Delete based upon Wikipedia:Notability.
  2. The process involves the nominator and a reviewing admin to make the decision to keep or delete.
  3. My process was as a Wikipedia:New pages patrol editor who nominated the article for CSD.
  4. I have also contributed to this article and as also serve as a Wikipedia:Recent changes patrol editor (to alleviate any concern about a bias).
  5. Contrary to public belief, I nominate solely based upon my role as a New pages patrol editor and not because "it feels good" or "I get a kick from it". In reviewing articles I use the CSD criteria based upon WP:N as my guide.
  6. I cannot remember where I saw this article created. Since I spend a lot of time on the Special:Recentchanges or Special:Contributions/newbies pages, it was probably one of those places.
  7. Vanity is not a preferred criteria choice as it implies a hurtful feeling towards contributors.
  8. CSD is a contentious process. Because two {{hangon}} tags were placed on this article after the CSD nomination, it was most likely reviewed by several admins.
  9. "Speedy Delete" contrary to belief is not all that instaneous. Admins have to balance the Wikipedian standards against their track record. Because article deletion is contentious, no admin in his/her right mind would make a hasty decision because it would leave them subject to review. Most articles, with obvious exceptions, are not deleted post haste.
  10. Additionally because of the hangon tags, this CSD went most likely into an admin review log where it drew review before the admin who took action made a decision.
  11. Before this becomes a debate upon me, permit me to say that as New pages editor I have over 1,000 articles on my Watchlist. About 100 of those articles are personal. The next 300 or so come from the various projects I belong to. The other 1,453 (I just peeked at my total) are articles I have picked up to watch as a Recent changes patrol editor. Of that 1,453 articles there are an unknown number that I have chosen to save or contributed to because they were stubs or on edge of deletion.
  12. The decision to nominate this article for CSD was not driven against you. It was basely solely upon what I saw upon reviewing the list of articles and then upon the above criteria.
Again, I take no joy in nominating an article for deletion. If I did, I would sooner take myself out of the Wikipedia process because I have to face myself in the mirror. Please accept my explanation as one not meant to offend. Ronbo76 14:45, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for replying. I appreciate you giving me a detailed account of your role in the article's speedy deletion. Nonetheless I continue to not understand why the article was deleted, whether it be speedy or not. I still do not know what all arguments were raised for or against deletion in the open discussion.
Furthermore, the article was as "notable" as Dunder Mifflin. In fact, both read very much the same and it confuses me how one was deleted and the other not. I want to create a page on MODE Magazine with very much the same content but more expansive in order to avoid deletion. Am I correct in understanding that this is where the article lacked "notability"? I do not want this to repeat itself so I would like for you to give me any advice you have on what would merit the article from deletion. Once again thank you.Light Bulb 08:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Delete "Comparisons" Section?

This section seems unneccessary; I think it should go. Anyone disagree? 24.124.29.130 10:13, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

I am going to integrate "Comparisons" into the Intro. If anyone disagrees with it being there then they can revert the edit. I'm simply trying to minimize the space on the article.Light Bulb 19:50, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Streamlining the article

It appears that this article might have gotten too large, so I might have to delete some items or split it up. If you have no objections post it here. Robert Moore 11:09, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

It should be slipt up I agree.The summary section is way too long and some of that could be deleted since the same information is already listed under each episode recap. The International Broadcast section should probably have its own page too. --DotzieJoy 05:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I finished condensing the Plot. Along with eliminating redundancies and content leading to sentences reading as run ons.Light Bulb 06:23, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Special Episode of Ugly Betty

Is their some reason why the special episode of Ugly Betty "The Beautiful World of Ugly Betty" isn't mentioned in episode lists? I know its only a clip show but even just putting special instead of the episode number would clear up any confusion. I know as a fan I was expecting to see it mentioned. Thanks--DotzieJoy 05:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Christopher Gorham and Judith Light

Do these two actually appear in the main cast as the moment? If not, I think they need to be moved to the recurring character list, so we don't confuse readers.

To answer your question, they will be starting with the second season. The reason they were moved up is because they are essential to the storylines, plus they been appearing in more episodes, so there is a reason for this. Robert Moore 08:31, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Ugly Betty cast list

In the wake of the Ugly Betty cast members category being deleted, i've decided to split the cast list from the main article and give it a article of its own‎. However, I left the main and recurring cast members list on the main article. Robert Moore 08:39, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

New noticeboard

A new noticeboard, Wikipedia:Fiction noticeboard, has been created. - Peregrine Fisher 18:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

This noticeboard has been deleted per Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Fiction noticeboard. Please disregard the above post. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 11:27, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Tanner/Tanen

Amanda's last name is spelled "Tanen," not "Tanner". See tonight's episode. --AMK1211 00:26, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Vanessa Williams

Vanessa Williams as the evil Wilhelmina Slater is wonderful. The emmy nominators need to recognize her. In the ensemble cast of Ugly Betty, she's probably one of, if not the strongest actor. She needs to be recognized. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.127.43.203 (talk) 15:47, 11 May 2007 (UTC).

Agreed, but the point is completely irrelevant to a Wikipedia article. Smurfmeister (talk) 16:37, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

UK popularity?

This seems to be amongst the most popular shows in the UK, I mean it's been referenced in virtually every British show I've seen and the ratings given in this article seem impressive. If this is the case, shouldn't it be mentioned in the article? -MichiganCharms 02:25, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I have added a comment about the so-called 'disappointing' UK ratings for the Season 1 finale. What the article had failed to point out was that Ugly Betty was moved from its usual 9pm slot to 9.30pm to accommodate Big Brother - many viewers, me included, missed half of the show because of this. Smurfmeister (talk) 16:39, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Number of Episodes

I think it's best if people don't update the part of the infobox which says 'Number of Episodes' untill after the episode has aired. It's probably best.

I know. This is quite annoying sometimes. Mrx9898 21:36, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Farthest from the original?

Regarding this sentence:

Of all the adaptations of Betty La Fea, the original Colombian telenovela, Ugly Betty is probably the farthest from the original.

I don't think that's true. The Indian version, for example, is apparently (I haven't seen it) only marginally concerned with the original's theme of the importance of looks and so on. I will remove the sentence shortly unless there's a better explanation for this statement. Juanmejgom 19:08, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the removal of the sentence regardless of whether or not it is true. Any sentence like this is opinion, which does not belong in an encyclopedia. In addition, it breaks WP:NPOV. A general rule is stick to fact, and when writing necessary opinions down (ie, critical reception), cite and voice properly. (By voice, I mean say something like "According to many critics (ref1) (ref2) (ref3), blah blah blah," instead of just "blah blah blah." Dylan 19:10, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

International Broadcasters

I have recently noticed that many articles are now cutting down or reducing their International Broadcaster boxes. I think this should also be done here. Thankyou Mrx9898 21:38, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Fey/Fay and Summers/Sommers

I think the consensus is that the proper spelling is "Fey." That seems confirmed on IMDB and abroud.

My stronger question is about the spelling of the last name. I've noticed on IMDB that the character listing (which I think is provided by someone who is professionally associated with the making of Ugly Betty, but I could be wrong) for the actress playing Fey (Christine Jones) has the last name spelled as "Sommers." But in all of the episode summaries (which I believe are submitted by users of IMDB), the spelling is "Summers."

It seems like we might want to go with the "industry" spelling as opposed to the more popular spelling. I'm not making any changes right now, but I'm curious what anyone thinks, and if anyone knows for sure as to what the studio-intended spelling might be.Bitterfly77 06:54, 8 October 2007

The newspaper article in Betty's Wait Problem spelled it Fey Sommers, so I guess that's the canon one. Squidward2602 13:04, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Online Episodes

I missed the first two episodes of Ugly Betty (season 2). I'm in Canada so I can't watch them on abc.com (only US viewers can access the site). Does anyone know how I can get the episodes I missed?



             I watch them all on sidereel.com  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.102.23.115 (talk) 13:27, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Some corrections

In the section "Criticism in Colombia" it says that Sony Entertainment Television broadcasts Ugly Betty as "Betty Feia". The name of the tv show is kept in English, and the word "Feia" is in portuguese, it means that Betty Feia is the name of the show in Brazil. If the name is translated to spanish it would be "Betty la Fea" as the original telenovela. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chaos spear (talk • contribs) 01:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)