Talk:Belle (Disney character)/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

question

this thats written below: Belle is the only Disney princess to marry someone who wasn't human for most of his life. She is also one of the three Disney princesses who were not born princesses (the other two being Cinderella and Mulan). Mulan didn't become a princess in the movie but shes a heroine and great fighter good powerful image for girls thats why they put her as an offical disney princess so belle and cindrella are the only other ones thats not princess buy birth AT THE MOMENT Tiana from the new princess and the frog isn't a princess buy birth nor is Rapunzel but both aren't yet offically disney princesses as there films not out yet tiana also marrys someone whos a frog at first and not human like belle.

What's the question? :) Cactusjump (talk) 23:02, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Belle in "Hunchback of Notre Dame"?

OK. In the article for "The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996 film)", it states that Belle appeared in the film in a cameo. In a book I have, "Reel Gags", an animator, or someone associated with the film says it wasn't Belle, though it may have been her grandmother. Does someone have a definitive answer on this? 72.147.60.53 02:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

During Quesy's song about being with the people and not above them, when the screen moves from him singing to a bird's eye view of the town, there is a girl distinctively in a blue dress moving through the street. This obviously looks like Belle. The character is relatively small and you may want to pause the movie at that very exact momment.BeastyPrince 18:00, 10 September 2006 (UTC)


How is Belle not a princess?

Granted it's been a while since I've seen the movie, but doesn't she end up marrying the Beast/Prince, becoming a princess-by-association in the process? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.110.71.164 (talk • contribs) .

Implied, but not confirmed. Powers T 15:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

The final stained glass window image at the end of the film depicts Belle wearing a crown, implying that she does indeed marry the prince and become a princess. Also in fairy tales, particularly with Disney, the phrase "happily ever after" usually leads to a wedding. 70.127.55.118 05:43, 1 December 2006 (UTC)Angela

Fair enough. Though it might be a figurative crown. =) Powers T 15:26, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


The Beast is a Prince? Where's the King? Mikelieman (talk) 05:32, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Disneyprincess belle.jpg

Image:Disneyprincess belle.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 01:57, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Belle gold dress.jpg

Image:Belle gold dress.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:29, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Not human for MOST of his life?

"Belle is the only Disney princess to marry someone who wasn't human for most of his life."

I, for one, contest that the movie says the curse lasted for 10 years. But even if it did, the curse lasted until his 21st birthday, which means he was 11 when he was cursed, making him HUMAN for most of his life and not beast. Ofcourse one can say that maybe the curse lasted for 10 years and 7 months, making him 10 years and 5 months old when he was cursed, but we don't know the details on that.(213.10.46.8 (talk) 13:28, 8 July 2009 (UTC))

I just find these types of superlatives completely pointless in these articles. I vote to remove it. It's totally irrelevant. Cactusjump (talk) 19:12, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Alias: Beauty

As for one of her aliases being "Beauty," an alias is another identity or name, not a descriptive term. In the song "Belle" when the woman is trying on wigs, she says "It's no wonder that her name means 'Beauty'," not that it is Beauty. And in the song "Beauty and the Beast" Mrs. Potts doesn't call her Beauty, she is singing a song about the beauty and the beast in the "tale as old as time." No one in the movie calls her Beauty as an alias, although they may call her that as a descriptive term. Cactusjump (talk) 00:09, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Request For Unlock

If not then please give concrete reasons. Thank you. --99.192.64.57 (talk) 18:59, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 66.26.229.65, 12 January 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Please change "waste" in the purple dress section of Wardrobe to "waist". This describes a woman's midsection rather than refuse.

66.26.229.65 (talk) 06:51, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Done Thanks! Qwyrxian (talk) 08:27, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 89.215.134.121, 15 September 2011

Please remove "Diana Santos (official Spanish dub voice) Sofia Källgren (official Swedish dub voice) Bénédicte Lecroart (official French dub voice)" because only Belle's English voices are important and the others are just natter/filler and not important.

Replace change "Belle is a young woman living in a small French town." to "Belle is a young woman, possibly in her late teens or early twenties, with brown hair and hazel eyes living in a small French town." because it's important for people to know that Belle has hazel eyes, because Belle sometimes gets confused for brown-eyed. Belle's eyes appear hazel in all 3 "Beauty and the Beast" movies, the "House of Mouse" cartoon and the official Disney Princess site. On the Disney Princess site, brown-eyed princesses' eyes like Snow White's, Jasmine's and Tiana's appear orange, indicating they're brown-eyed. Belle however has hazel eyes as her eyes appear to be a mix of brown and green and don't look orange. And there are also various sites who also say that Belle is hazel-eyed, but those are not very often visited.


89.215.134.121 (talk) 12:52, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Not done: We'll not replace factual information with trivia. — Bility (talk) 16:31, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Addition request re: Once Upon a Time

Not sure why this article is locked, but could the powers that be please add that Belle has made a second appearance on Once Upon a Time in the episode "Dreamy"? Thanks 68.146.70.177 (talk) 19:38, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Sequels?

Would Belle's Tales of Friendship count as a sequel similar to The Enchanted Christmas and "Belle's Magical World", or is it simply a spin-off? --Changedforbetter (talk) 19:58, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 12 June 2012

On the Beauty and the Beast-Belle page, I would like to request that Belle's eye color, rather than being listed as hazel-brown, the term would be replaced with something to this effect:

"There are disagreements on her eye color, which have been noted as both hazel and brown, depending on the version of the film being viewed. Either is acceptable."

I've been seeing trolls, flamewars and a lot of other baloney being tossed around because of people fighting over whether or not her eyes are hazel or brown, and it's getting old. Personally, I'm of the school of belief that they are brown, since on the concept art model sheets and such by Disney they are always shown/noted as brown, in the sequels they were brown, in an interview with her voice actress Paige O'Hara, Paige stated explicitly that they were brown, and many other such sources-but as long as there's that coloration in the new Diamond Edition of the film, I know that there's going to be someone screaming that they're hazel, so maybe stating that it is acceptable to have them as both, rather than taking one side, will put a stop to it.

Minotaurgirl (talk) 22:57, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Not done: Neither the current content nor your proposed change is sourced. On the assumption that the matter is somehow verifiable, and since it seems like a really trivial question, I'll leave the unsourced status quo in place for now. Rivertorch (talk) 06:38, 13 June 2012 (UTC)


The aforementioned interview with Paige O'Hara can be seen here: http://www.cinesnob.net/archives/paige-ohara-beauty-and-the-beast-dvd/ in which she states that she received a lot of letters from children who were thrilled to have a brown-eyed princess.

Audio Version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_OEuy9yw40

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Minotaurgirl (talk • contribs) 21:32, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Please be careful not to remove other editors' replies to your edit request. (I restored my reply above.) I've reset the template so that another editor can find and assess your modified request. Rivertorch (talk) 05:23, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Done ... But the section is probably condemned... Mdann52 (talk) 16:07, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 26 June 2012

Belle's eyes are hazel, not brown. Belle's official eye color is hazel. In the merchandise, franchise and in all of the movies, her eyes are depicted as hazel.

94.190.193.163 (talk) 17:14, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.  TOW  talk  06:34, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 19 July 2012

Belle's eyes are HAZEL. Please replace brown eyes with hazel eyes as hazel is considered to be the general consensus about Belle's eyes. You can't go wrong with saying Belle's eyes are hazel.

PICS: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] This is Belle from the official Disney Princess site. She has hazel eyes there too [21]

CLIPS: [copyvio removed] [22] [copyvio removed] [copyvio removed] [copyvio removed] [23] [copyvio removed] [copyvio removed]

There you have it. Artwork from the Disney Princess franchise and pics and clps from all 3 movies showing Belle's eyes color to be hazel. If Belle's eyes were really brown, they never would have been refered to as hazel at all. Snow White is a Caucasian princess with brown eyes, but no one has called her eyes hazel.

Maybe Belle started out with brown eyes, but the people at Walt Disney wanted to change her eye color and that's why in the prequels her eyes were depicted as hazel, and for the 2002 Special Edition of the first BatB movie, among the changes they made, they also changed Belle eyes from brown to hazel. Or maybe Belle's eyes were hazel all along, but the poor 1991 video quality kept making her eyes appear as brown.

Brown is brown and Hazel is mixture of brown and green. Like most eye colors hazel eyes vary in shades from being almost green to being almost brown. If you're wondering whether someone has brown eyes or hazel eyes, chances are he has hazel eyes.

130.204.213.29 (talk) 06:39, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

 Not done I've reformatted your wall of links; not a single Reliable Source (RS) presented. Videos are sources for nothing, and I'd recommend removing those which violate copyright before you're blocked for adding them. Dru of Id (talk) 08:35, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 19 July 2012

What reliable source are you looking for? What could be more reliable than visuals? Paige O'Hara also said that the princesses before Belle had blue eyes, which is a lie because Snow White has brown eyes and Aurora has violet eyes, so something tells me she doesn't know Belle's eye color either. At the Disney Wiki, a user called Clover Hartland got blocked for inserting false information, that being changing Belle's hazel eyes to brown. So what reliable sources are you looking for?

[Copyvio video removed].

130.204.213.29 (talk) 11:50, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

 Not done As stated at the link provided previously, print media or an online site known for fact checking. News programs, newspapers, magazines, books. Random people agreeing with a video are not reliable sources. Dru of Id (talk) 12:21, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Good Article Progress...

There are several great Disney character articles on Wikipedia, but very few of them are classified GA. I am really trying to transform Belle into a good article, like Ariel from The Little Mermaid...how am I doing so far? Thoughts? Suggestions? I know the article is no where near nomination status...I would just like a few guidelines.

Just a thought but other minor films that she appeared in could be merged down in one section with a few mentions about the films without going into huge detail about them. Something like she's appeared in spin-off films regarding the character, something like that you know? Doesn't need a subsection for each movie it makes the article clunky. All of her appearances don't have to be put into such great detail; like the Kingdom Hearts info goes too far into the it, just a short summary would suffice. And I'm sure that you're aware that the article needs more info on the character's cultural impact, stuff like that. The information on the development seems, okay same amount in the Ariel article so there's that. I'd suggest getting rid of the list of Broadway Actresses it's kind of an eye sore, just a thought. Or put it to prose GroovySandwichYum. 03:01, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Another thing I noticed while I was editing the page, there are a lot of references to IMDB (the whole production cast and stuff like that, you used IMDB) when there are a lot of other options. The film usually has documentaries on production where you can get that info; that's where I got a lot of info when writing the Ariel article, and the commentaries are useful too. What I'm saying is that there's a tone of info on this character out there (the Blu-Ray has a tone of extras and documentaries that could be of use). And if you don't own the dvds or whatever I'd assume YouTube could be of service. And when you're citing your sources remember to put the original date that the information was published and all the access date stuff too. But it's going to take a while GroovySandwichYum. 08:44, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Believe it or not, I have actually been trying to use sources other than IMDb. The majority of my character development information came from other online sources. As for film and production documentaries, I am still new on learning how to source those, but I will look into it. And I always thought the "date" section in the source template was meant for the date that you found the information. Thanks for letting me know! --Changedforbetter (talk) 01:17, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

In response to the above...

Ahem. You have been going around on many sites constantly spewing your nonsense, and it's getting old. Please, kid, find a hobby. Also, you have no evidence besides 'it looks that way in the one release' to support your claim of hazel eyes, which as aforementioned could easily be a formatting error from the remastering-it happens, you'd be surprised at how often. The evidence for brown eyes is as follows:

Quote from the Actress: [1]

Cover art from all the movies, since you're so intent on visual cues only: "Belle's Magical World"[2] "The Enchanted Christmas" [3] And last but certainly not least, the original version: [4]

All of them clearly show her eyes as the exact same shade as her hair...brown.

There is also the website art itself, which, while it doesn't have them orange as it does for Snow White, neither does it show Tiana, Jasmine or Mulan with orange eyes-Snow White is the only one with that coloration. Belle's eyes match her hair again, as you can see for yourself on the official Disney Website: [5] and if you go specifically to Belle's page, her eyes are once again the exact same shade as her hair:[6] and the DVD homepage with official information: [7]

There is also the fact that actresses playing Belle in the parks are preferred to have brown eyes, or to wear colored contacts to make them brown. I applied for the position myself once. Also, the vast majority of Disney merchandise has her with brown eyes.

It's only natural that Paige wouldn't remember the previous princess Snow White also had brown eyes-she didn't work on that project, and most of the time Snow White's eyes just look black, so it's hard to tell anyway. It's normal to know less about a project you aren't part of than one you are. Calling her a liar, or those who know Belle has brown eyes losers, is uncalled for, childish, and just goes to show that you can't validate your arguments at all.

All you've been asked to do is provide one single verifiable source, which you have thus far failed to do, and anyone saying Belle has brown eyes can easily prove it. Until you can prove your argument, please stop annoying everyone and wasting webspace with your inane persistence of something you can't prove in any way. Also, I have noticed that once again, someone has changed the article line to include hazel eyes: "Belle's combination of brown hair and hazel eyes makes her easily identifiable from the rest of the Princesses." which is an outright falsehood. Until it can be proven, which it can't because it's not true, then this should not be included in the article and to submit to an angry child's unverified ranting is absolutely apalling. Until Wiki has stopped submitting to the angriest tantrum-throwing child, I will no longer be considering it a verified source of information for anything. ~~Minotaurgirl

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.124.143 (talk) 02:28, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Protected

I have protected the page for a week (at the WP:WRONGVERSION). The alternative was blocking User:Wolfcho and User:Minotaurgirl. If the edit warring continues after the protection has expired, you will be blocked. Please stop all Wikipedia procedures against one another (at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case, or anywhere else) and discuss this here. If you can't find an agreement, as for a third opinion at WP:3O or start a Request for Comments (WP:RfC), but don't start edit warring over the article again. Fram (talk) 08:16, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Dead Link

The last link in the line "Animator James Baxter wanted Belle, a beautiful French native, to have a distinctly European appearance, so he drew inspiration from the face of British film actress Audrey Hepburn to design her" is dead. I would like to request that the dead link is removed, and if possible replaced with a live link to the same information. Minotaurgirl (talk) 09:41, 14 August 2012 (UTC)Minotaurgirl

Come on...

My goal here is to turn this page into a Good Article. If all we can focus on is Belle's eye colour, we're not going to get anywhere. There are still several sections that need work, specifically the Appearances and Reception sections. I say we stop fussing over Belle's eye colour, and start focusing on improving other sections. --Changedforbetter (talk) 00:27, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

I can see where you are coming from. There are a lot of things that still need to be taken care of, and yet it seems as if every one else is worried about trivial matters. Still looking around for reviews of the character and the other media section is a bit messy, I mean who really needs to know all that stuff about Kingdom Hearts? I hope that when the protection is lifted there will be more helpful editions then just the character's eye and hair color. GroovySandwichYum. 06:23, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Right back at you.

Biased nothing. I base my opinion on facts, including all the evidence I've provided before-Paige's statement, the cover art for all the movies, the website, merchandise, the Kingdom Hearts games, ect. However, since you are obviously going to be incredibly obnoxious about it, going so far as to hunt down my livejournal and post snide, rude comments there (don't bother trying to deny it, by the way-you still haven't mastered changing your IP, have you?), I am content with leaving out her eye color entirely since it's clearly so touchy a subject to you. Why you are so determined to believe her eyes are a color they are not, without any evidence besides 'they look that way in the reformatted release', without listening to anyone else or paying attention to any evidence to the contrary, I don't know. I suggest finding a hobby-have you ever tried making jam? I made fourteen jars of Apple Butter today, and have thirteen of apricot from the trees in the back. Or Macrame`, which can be easy but still have some really nifty stuff like the hula-hoop rag rug, or really anything else entertaining. Try watching the 1930's Disney shorts or something-some of them have some things in them that went totally over one's head as a child, and if you watch them now, the only thing you can think is "HOW DID THAT GET PAST THE CENSORS?!" For a good example of this, I suggest the 1936 short "The Three Little Wolves". Or hang out with your friends more. Do something else with your time, rather than stalking any website that mentions Disney movies at all and throwing a hissy fit at anyone who's opinion is different than yours, particularly over something so trivial-her eye color is not integral to her character, it could be green, blue, purple, pink or any other color and she'd still be the same character. The only reason I've kept up with what you've done here at all is because I don't like to see children who throw tantrums get their way, it doesn't teach them proper behavior or how to function politely in society-just how to scream- particularly when they've been incredibly rude to friends of mine and myself in destructive ways-easily fixed ways, of course, but still destructive and an irritation. I hope that the behavior you've shown here is only the way you act behind the anonymity offered by the internet, and not how you behave in real life, because if you do act that way to someone face to face, eventually you'll irritate the wrong person and get hurt. Even if someone has been quite irritating, I don't like to see anyone get hurt, so please take that as a friendly warning. Try to learn to solve a disagreement with polite debate, not throwing around insulting names and harping on one unverifiable argument. Minotaurgirl (talk) 09:29, 16 August 2012 (UTC)Minotaurgirl

Indented line Really, all you had to say here was, "Hey, let's stop harping over Belle's eye color try focusing our energy on something else." You saying "find a hobby", calling us "toddlers throwing tantrums", threatening Wikipedia's reliability and all that info you gave us about how many bottle of jams you make per day is info no one really wants to know. I actually found it kind of rude and unnecessary...like you were saying you're better than everyone else because you bottle jam and watch old Disney shorts. Talk pages are supposed to be used to make beneficial changes to articles, not tot to tell people to make changes to their lives. --Changedforbetter (talk) 19:07, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Us? When did I imply I was speaking to anyone but Wolfcho? I certainly wasn't referring to anyone else, merely replying to their statement. As for Wikipedia's reliability, any website that allows anyone with a keyboard and a pulse to post information is questionable unless they've got some truly spectacular mods monitoring everything at all times, which is impossible to do for a site this size. I wasn't aware trying to offer someone-again, directed at one person, not everyone-advice on possible activity options was implying I was better than anyone. Politeness and attempts at friendly conversation or advice seem to be really despised nowadays.In any case, I will try to keep such future advice on the talk pages, though I may not bother even there since it seems to be falling on selectively deaf ears, and keep the conversation here on topic. Minotaurgirl (talk) 12:39, 17 August 2012 (UTC)Minotaurgirl

Minotaurgirl's edit

"Also based on Paige O'Hara's own looks, Belle's eyes were matched to her hair, always being colored in the same shade for a consistent, natural look."

Well, that was the biggest load of **** she's ever written. Nowhere in any version of any of the movies do Belle's hair and eye color match. Also is she saying that if you have brown hair and you don't have matching eyes, you look unnatural? In what universe? And doesn't this girl know that hair and eye colors vary in shades. Look at Flynn Rider. He has dark brown hair and light brown eyes - two totally different shades of brown, and Minotaurgirl calls that unnatural?

Did you people see the links she provided for that statement?! Not a single movie footage or a screenshot. It's ridiculous. --Wolfcho (talk) 16:33, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

--They match in the original version and...well, all versions I've seen except those youtube clips of the diamond edition. The one time I watched the Diamond Edition DVD, I didn't see any oddness to her eyes, so I can't help but think it may have been in the youtube videos alone. As for the 'natural and consistent' comment-brown is a dominant gene, which most people have. The number of people who have brown eyes in comparison to any other eye color is truly massive. Browns are considered more natural colors-I'm not saying that it's unnatural to have anyone with other eye or hair colors, but it's more common to see shades of brown simply because there are significantly more people with that coloration. It's what you will see more often, just because that's genetics.

As for your statement of the ridiculousness of my not providing screenshots...well, I would like to point out that screenshots of a single film are all you have provided so far, which is contradicted by the cover art [24][25], the official site[26] (None of the princesses with brown eyes have orange coloration save for Snow White, Belle's eyes appearing to be the same shade as her hair), official artwork [27][28] (her reference art from Kingdom Hearts) [29], a great deal of merchandise [30][31] (Matches her hair color again) [32] (The artwork on the box, not the items themselves as they're too small to make out)[33], and the lead actress herself. I would be fine with the suggestion that her eyes are hazel, if not for the fact that it is contradicted by so much, the most powerful contradiction being the statement of her voice actress who outright states it! Hazel and brown are close enough together that mere screenshots from one version aren't enough when so much contradicts it, including outright statements. If her eyes were green or blue or violet, painfully obviously different than the statement, then I might think it was a mistake. However, when the cover art and actress statements match, along with most merchandise and official artwork, I have to agree with them, particularly since it's too close to call on visual alone in that version.

However, if it's screenshots alone that will appease you, allow me to provide: [34] [35] (a bit light in that one, but with no shades of green, which are necessary for hazel) [36](Once again fairly light, but lacking any shades of green) [37](Matches the shade of her hair pretty closely, once again lacking any green)[38] (Again, lacking green, and from the strand hanging down in her face you can see they are pretty dang close in shade) [39] (Lacking any green, and again close to her hair in shade) [40] (Pretty pixelated but still clear enough) [41]

Is that enough, or do I need to provide more? As aforementioned, I have nothing against the idea of a princess with hazel eyes-I think it'd round out the cast nicely, particularly with so many having brown eyes due to race, the rest having distinct sky-blues or, in the rare case, green or violet-but when there is so much very powerful evidence contradicting that, I can't make myself believe that it's fact in this case. True, there is a lot of contradiction in this case-at least as far as the DE version of the main film and some select merchandise goes-but I'm going to have to go with the one that has more solid, verified evidence, and that's brown. Until hazel can be undisputedly proven, that will always be my opinion. Minotaurgirl (talk) 12:39, 17 August 2012 (UTC)Minotaurgirl

YOU'RE CONTRADICTING YOURSELF! Basically your opinion of based on blindness and bullshit as far the "evidence" you send me are considered.

Really? Puny pictures in which you can almost not see what her eye color is. You need a magnifying glass to see her eyes. Don't show such pictures cuz ((because)) it just looks really sloppy and desperate, which in your case makes sense. 1(By magnifying this image up to 400%, you can clearly see her eye color looks sort of olive green, not anywhere close to brown). 2(What the f*** is this? It look horrendous. Oh and her eyes are lighter than her hair and you keep saying they're the same shade, when clearly they're not. Lets take a look at a better quality image. No brown eyes here.) ((Actually, they look about the same shade as her hair, maybe just a smidge lighter-it lacks green coloration, which is what hazel is. Hazel isn't light brown, it's brownish-green.))

3(These eyes can still be called hazel.) ((Barely)) 4(Hazel eyes due to their nature have the tendency to look goldish brown in certain lights, and look at Belle's hair it looks red)((Well having red lights in her eyes would hardly make her look princessy, wouldn't it? Also, brown eyes can look gold in certain lights too, sometimes being called 'cat eyes' when that happens.)). 5(I can clearly see her eyes are not the same as her hair, in fact take a close look when a lock of hair falls in front of her right eyes and clashes with her eyes color. The difference looks brown and hazel, instead of brown and light brown.) ((Again, lacks green tinting, which is necessary for hazel. Hazel is not light brown with gold lights, it's brown with green.)) 6(That's not a screenshot, and by magnifying the image, her eyes look dark hazel and so not the same color as her hair)((Dark hazel? Once again-no green.)) 7(400% zoom in, hazel eyes) 8(What a desperate image, you can barely see anything, 1000% zoom in and her eyes appear not to be brown again). 9(400% zoom in, hazel eyes... again)((Light brown is not hazel. It needs green.))

Oh yes, the Belle merchandise that has her with brown eyes is so big, only one of the pictures you send can sort of qualify. 10 (By magnifying the image up to 400%, you can clearly see her eyes look green-like). 11(400% zoom in, hazel eyes AGAIN)

JESUS F***ING CHRIST. You preseted ((presented)) me with like 18 images and almost all of them have Belle with hazel eyes instead of brown. ARE YOU COLORBLIND? Don't you know how to differentiate colors. An you call this SOLID? If Belle's eyes are hazel, than those are indeed solid, verified evidence. And the screenshots aren't even from the Diamond Edition, they're from the Special Edition. ((So the special edition movie no longer counts to you?))

Take a look at these pics, please. Think anyone will believe you that her eyes are brown? I don't think so. These are just a couple of additions to the pictures you presented, further cementing that Belle has hazel eyes instead of brown. Since hazel is a mix of brown and green and that hazel eyes vary between almost green to almost brown, on what bases are people suppose to believe Belle's eyes are brown?

Look at this page

The way I see it, you only pretend to believe Belle's eyes are brown just cuz ((because)) her voice actress sais (says)so, which is really idiotic. If she never said what Belle's eyes are, what would your evidence be? Probably nonsensicle ((nonsensical))stuff like the images you send me that have Belle with hazel eyes and not brown thus contradicting both yourself and the words of Belle's voice actress

There's already a hazel-eyed princess and that's Belle. SO except this obvious fact like the rest of the world did, ya bias.

Minotaurgirl, what the fuck is your problem? What the fuck is your problem? You must think your readers are a bunch of idiots os something, when the only one making herself seem like an idiot is you. Here you are twisting my words and talking bullshit that doesn't make sense. The lack of links speaks for itself. You also pretend you never made a single contradict to yourself. If Belle's eyes were green they would have been the same as Rapunzel's eyers, you idiot. See this picture with all 10 Princesses It's plainly obvious Belle's eyes are hazel since they look like a mixture of brown and green and has this kind of goldish color. And none of the other Princesses share her eye color. Just compare her eyes to Jasmine and Snow White and Rapunzel for example.

I seriously worry about you. You're such a lousy Beauty and the Beast fan, you don't even know about the EDITION. That's where most screenshots of the movie come from, and that's where these screenshots come from. WHAT FUCKING BROWN EYES ARE THESE? Anyone with functioning eyeballs can see that's not brown or green. When people think brown or green, that's not what comes to their minds.

Brown eyes can never win against hazel eyes due to how similar some of the shades between the two eyes colors can be, and hazel is the only safe bet since it contains brown, while brown is just brown with no hint of green in sight...ever. I'm 100% sure if Belle's eyes were brown we wouldn't be having her eyes colored like this 1 2 3 4. And since hazel can sometimes look goldish brown which brown eyes never tend to look, hazel is once again the safest bet.

I dare to find me a footage in which Belle's eyes and hair are the same exact color. There is no such a footage. This is brown and hazel, not brown and blue or green, you can't show puny pictures of Belle's eyes and claim them as brown just cuz here eye color cannot be seen clearly, that's so freaken stupid. Have close-ups or something.

I can see how desperate you are. Since all of the movies provide evidence that Belle's eyes are hazel and not brown, you tell to JUST IGNORE THE MOVIES. ARE YOU A COMPLETE IDIOT? The movies are the ultimate evidence of everything. You say to judge the movie covers. What the hell do you kno about the covers? Is there any evidence the artist knew what color Belle's eyes are suppose to be? Is there any evidence the artist didn't just got lazy and decided to use Belle's hair color for her eye color too, cuz none of the movies have Belle's hair and eyes with the same color. Why does this cover have Belle with red eyes and this cover with hazel eyes? VERY CONTRADICTIONAL. And this cover - I don't remember Belle's dress being this shade of blue, nor do any of these exact same shade of colors appear in the movie itself.

As for Paige's statement, that's stupid. Do you have evidence Paige knows what hazel eyes are, do you have evidence she payed attention to Belle's eyes, does Paige says where she got the info about Belle's eyes being brown? No, no and no. It's just words that the world have proven to not take seriously. Check this out.

Minotaurgirl, you seriosuly need help. Who else on the internet acts the same way as you. Who? Who? WHO? Who else goes on internet pages and chages Belle's eye color who originally was written as hazel? Nobody, cuz the rest know better. YOU'RE A MINORITY! You're a sick, demented girl that forces her own dumb personal believes down people's throats. It's amazing the depts you're willing to sink to? It's like a Christian and an Atheist having an argument about the existance of God and what he stands for. Keep your stupid personal believes to yourself, it's clear the world doesn't share them.--Wolfcho (talk) 17:59, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay, people. This is getting beyond ridiculous. Why don't we try this another way: here's a picture of American singer-songwriter Kelly Clarkson. She's said herself that her eyes are hazel (not that I need confirmation; it's really quite obvious). Now let's compare that image of a real life person with hazel eyes to a genuine, good quality shot of Belle. See what I'm getting at? Now, I refuse to share much of my opinion in this heated (and quite vulgar) argument, but here's a pretty generous hint: honey, her eyes ain't brown.--Changedforbetter (talk) 22:53, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Exactly, Kelly knew what color her eyes were when she made the song "Behind These Hazel Eyes". Comparing the pictures of Kelly and Belle, they do seem to share the same eye color just slightly different shades of it - Belle's eyes are little lighter. Someone made a video called "Behind Belle's Hazel Eyes", the person who made this video knew what color Belle's eyes were and decided to include Belle's name in the title. And if you read the comments, the people fully agree her eyes are hazel with comments like "green or hazel? they look more hazel than brown or green . yup belles eyes are deffinetely hazel problem solved". I like the "problem solved" part. With Minotaurgirl's bias against the idea of Belle having hazel eyes, I think there will always be a problem with people like her involved.

TV Tropes has already suffered an edit war because of her, so much so they forbade users from writting what Belle's eye color is. Notice how Belle's name is missing from the Eye Color tropes colony, while the rest of Disney Princesses have their eye color mentioned. Belle's name was there under the category of Hazel Eyes until Minotaurgirl came along and ruined it all. Same thing almost happened to Disney Wiki. This is Minotaurgirl's account, as you can see she got blocked with an expiry time of infinite, the reason; inserting false information, the false information being writting down Belle's eyes as brown.] And now here's Minotaurgirl on the Wikipedia. Is there any repsite from her?

I noticed she has a Live Journal account. See what she has written. The lack of links speaks for itself. She thinks she actually proved Belle's eyes are brown, depsite the fact what she has presented as evidence is either a minority or a plain old lie, like the screenshots she send me. By magnifying the images, you can see her eyes are hazel-colored and not the same color as her hair at all. Notice how she's afriad to use close-ups of Belle's eye cuz she knows they'll appear hazel if she did so, thus disproving her. On her blog, she didn't mention that she was blocked on Disney Wiki, and said the only reason Disney Wiki kept Belle's eyes color as hazel was to shut up people who keep writting her eyes as hazel, when in reality the one who got shut up was Minotaurgirl as she got blocked while the others didn't. She wrote "Bleh. Kids these days. This one needs a hobby. I'm tired of wasting time trying to undo this snot's damage, and I'm fairly sure the mods of these sites are too. Would it be possible to just...block this person off the internet entirely until they learn some manners?" Yup, she calls people who use logic and legitimate evidence to prove their point snots and hobby-less kids if the evidence goes against what Minotaurgirl said/believes.

If anyone deserves to be blocked, it's Minotaurgirl. If it wasn't for her bias, sites like like TV Tropes, Disney Wiki and the Wikipedia wouldn't have suffered an edit war about Belle's eye color. The fact that there was never an edit about Belle's eye color until Minotaurgirl came along, says a lot. Ever since she got blocked from Disney Wiki almost an year ago, no edit war about Belle's eye color happened there either. It's like Minotaurgirl is the only person on the entire internet who refuses to accept Belle's eyes as hazel and is willing to go to every page and change her eye color to brown, just cuz she likes to think so, not because the world thinks so or any legit evidence are presented. It's like someone going around changing Ariel's eyes from blue to green, just cuz he likes the idea of Ariel being green-eyed. Thinks don't work like that.

My overall opinion on Minotaurgurl. I think it's safe to say the interent is better off without her. She's toxic, she's a nuisance, she's talks trash to people just cuz they disagree with her, she lies, she mangles, twists and misrepresents other people's words, and she causes edit wars. Action needs to be taken against people like this.--Wolfcho (talk) 05:42, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Heh. So, anyone who disagrees with you, basing their opinion on something more solid than visuals (I.E, the opinion of a cast member who actually worked on it, and the cover art for all films) means that they are a toxic liar? Not to mention the fact that you have constantly said that there is no evidence to support brown eyes, even though I have sent you quite a bit in the past-every time you have ignored it and claimed that there is no evidence whatsoever. Also, you told me yourself that one of the mods of the Disney Wiki is a friend of yours-which could mean that they're humoring you out of friendship, not to mention you got blocked on there yourself by one of the mods for a short time (a week, I believe?) as a warning after you started trouble there yourself, including making multiple accounts, which you also did on TV tropes, where you trolled, blanked pages and got to a point where the mods banned you multiple times, one outright calling you 'rabid' and saying you sounded like you were constantly foaming at the mouth, which you generally do. I have tried to keep civil throughout this whole thing-I've presented my side, given my evidence and tried to wait for general consensus. You immediately start throwing around names, calling anyone who disagrees with you an ignorant, stupid loser or liar, and insulting them in any way you possibly can, not to mention making a matter as trivial as the eye color of a cartoon character so personal that you'd hunt down anyone who disagrees with you on other accounts in order to flame them there, which is just rude. I'm quite sure if I bothered with facebook or any of those sites, you'd have tried to show up there too.

Overall, I've been civil and polite. The worst I've said is that you act like a child, which you do-My overall impression of your age is twelve to maybe fifteen at the most. I'm not trying to change her eye color-I'm simply pointing out that the most solid evidence, the cast statements and cover art, disagrees with what you say. If there wasn't such a strong contradiction, I wouldn't have a problem with it. Right now, as there is so much contradicting evidence on both sides, I think the safest thing to do is leave out her eye color entirely until something truly solid and undeniable comes out, like a physical description page from Disney itself, or if someone finds the official character design sheet from them or something - particularly since her eye color is rather unimportant to the character anyway. It's not an integral part of her. I don't think we should put hazel OR brown on the page right now, as both are heavily contradicted by different forms of evidence. Visually, the Diamond Edition ones look green or hazel, while the other editions, cover art and cast statement indicate brown. Until we can verify one or the other completely, it's not something important enough to have such huge flame wars and arguments over.

Simply put, my opinion- Leave it off until completely solid, watertight proof is provided for one or the other, I don't particularly care which. Minotaurgirl (talk) 11:38, 19 August 2012 (UTC)Minotaurgirl

Page Evaluation

Okay, let's begin our thorough evaluation of the page, shall we?

  • The character introduction (first three paragraphs) are well-done. They generally summarize the entire article, and are well-written. However, the punctuation can be improved upon a little, and I suggest replacing the word "stubborn" in the third paragraph with the word "strong-willed"; it simply has less of a negative connotation attached to it. Also, slightly alter the sentence "Belle is noted for being the only Disney Princess to have brown hair, the majority having blonde or black." and make it "Belle is noted for being the first Disney Princess to have brown hair." since Rapunzel is a natural brunette--Changedforbetter (talk) 14:01, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

If you're looking for an unbiased commentary, you should take the article to the peer review page, they have good suggestions on how to improve the article. Quick comment, in the lead, where it says it Belle is notable for having brown hair or whatever, it's really unnecessary and trivial yet so many are drawn to keep it. Her hair (or eyes) doesn't define her, her actions do, and that's why she's popular. I've not seen reviews praise her for having brown her and whatever the hell color eyes, because that is nonsense; it just doesn't matter. But if people are so fond of keeping that tidbit just write something regarding her brown hair, and whatever the consensus is for the eye color (ridiculous) GroovySandwichYum. 05:58, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 20 August 2012

The brackets in the image caption are incorrect. Please change it to "Belle (from the movie) in her signature golden ball gown, in which she dances with the Beast." or remove the movie note completely because it is fairly obvious. Thank-you! 91.125.227.178 (talk) 13:22, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Done Removed; it could also have been intended to mean that the image was taken from the movie, and not self drawn: but such attribution fails WP:CREDITS since you can click the image to see its description page, which should have all necessary attribution. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:25, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Belle's eye color

First off, there are no evidence that Belle's eyes are brown, just like there are no evidence that Aurora's eyes are blue. The movies, the Disney Princess website, the franchise and merchandise, and official artwork all depict Belle with hazel eyes and Aurora with violet eyes. And saying that there's only one person in the entire world who believes Belle's eyes are hazel is ridiculous. Search the internet, the people who believe her eyes are hazel are way more than the people who believe her eyes are brown.

People who claim her eyes are brown have no evidence to back that up. An article with an interview with the voice actress is not a good evidence, it's just a bunch of words. What evidence does the voice actress herself have to back up what she's saying?! It can't be any of the movies, they tell a different story.

A quote from the actress - "She was also the first brown-eyed princess, the rest had blue eyes. She had a quirkiness and an oddness about her so many girls identified with Belle because they feel there is a part of her that is like them."

There are THREE lies buried in that first sentence; 1) Snow White was the first brown-eyed princess, not someone else. 2) Not all of the previous Princesses have blue eyes; Snow White has brown eyes and Aurora has violet eyes - that's half (2 out of 4) of the Princesses that do not have blue eyes. And 3) Belle's eyes are not brown as the movies themselves and other stuff will show you.

There's nothing wrong with articles as long as they don't condradict anything, but Paige O'Hara's words contradicted not one, but THREE things about the Disney Princesses. And because a DP voice actress said it, people tend to swallow word after word and lie after lie because they tend to not doubt the words of a celebrity. That is just sad. It's like going your whole life believing that 2+2=5 because of someone's words.--Wolfcho (talk) 12:56, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

As unreliable as you may find O'Hara's statement to be, she is, unfortunately, still the best source listed on the article's reflist. I'm going to remove any eye color statements from the article, and if you manage to find a RS for the character having hazel eyes, feel free to add it and restore the content. Jonathanfu (talk) 02:46, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

A message to Minotaurgirl

Minotaurgirl, you're the only person on the entire internet who would change Belle's eye color from hazel to brown. There's a reason why the Disney Wiki permanently blocked you. The fact that there have been no edit wars before you joined in and after you got blocked really says something. Thanks to you, Belle's eye color cannot be shown on TV Tropes or on Wikipedia. You're an edit war magnet. It's like Belle's eye color cannot be written unless if favours your own personal opinion, which in and of itself was based on a poor source.

You writting Belle's eyes are brown is based on a bias instead of actual facts or evidence. An article or a video that has Belle's voice actress saying Belle's eyes are brown, is just evidence that Paige O'Hara said Belle's eyes are brown, it's not evidence of what Belle's eye color is.

If Belle's eyes were brown than there should be no stuff depicting Belle with hazel eyes or any other color, yet there's stuff galore depicting Belle with hazel eyes, including the movies themselves, the official Disney Princess site, merchandise and franchise and ever artwork. What is there left? Snow White, Jasmine and Tiana never get depicted with hazel eyes.

This page is better off without Belle's eye color being mentioned. Don't you dare mention or imply Belle's eye color. If an edit wars begins because you did so, it'll be all on you.--Wolfcho (talk) 12:56, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

What???

"Described by her fellow villagers as the most beautiful girl in town - "strange, but special" because of her non-conformity and love of reading -[3] Belle appears in the subsequent direct-to-video sequels, expanding upon her role in the first film and exploring her relationship with the the Beast and other inhabitants of the castle." What does Belle appearing in the sequels have to do with her personality? We already mentioned that Belle appears in the sequels. The only thing that isn't mentioned in the opener is her personality, which used to be, but got moved to her development section.--Changedforbetter (talk) 02:26, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Development

In the development section, what should come first: Characteristics or Design? In a Disney animated film, aren't the characters personalities usually developed before they're drawn?--Changedforbetter (talk) 16:55, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Savoy!

There is no proof that Belle is Savoy! The original fairy tale Belle might be, but that doesn't mean than the Disney Belle, the Belle that this article is written bout, is!--Changedforbetter (talk) 23:14, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Review

So far, the best parts of the article are the opening paragraph (mostly the second and third sections; the first one reads a little strangely), the development section (more content needs to be added to the design and personality section, and, if possible, the opening section where it talks about her story), and the reception section (which could do with some reaction from the general public, such as polls).--Changedforbetter (talk) 19:59, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

There could be more on development, design and animation, but reassessed to B-Class as it's just as good as Ariel (The Little Mermaid). igordebraga ≠ 00:05, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I think I've just about completed the development section, unless the story section can be expanded some how. I'm currently working on polishing up the appearances and in other media sections.--Changedforbetter (talk) 16:50, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Dress and Clothing Editors...

Something needs to be done about these anonymous Wikipedia editors who keep adding dress, wardrobe, and costume information to Disney Princess pages. It is really beginning to reach the point of vandalism.--Changedforbetter (talk) 10:39, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Belle (Disney)/GA1

Interesting sidenote

http://www.paigeohara.net/artwork.htm

Paige O'Hara does artwork of Belle, to sell on her website. Different thing to stumble on. -- Zanimum (talk) 17:28, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Belle_(Disney)&curid=4483446&diff=534506835&oldid=534505755

Disney's 'Sofia the First' meets Princess Belle

Source: http://family-room.ew.com/2013/09/09/sofia-the-first-beauty-and-the-beast/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.188.24.247 (talk) 21:56, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Disney's Belle vs. fairytale Belle

This article treats Belle like a completely new creation, rather than an adaption of an already established character in the Beauty and the Beast fairytale. This confused me.--Coin945 (talk) 10:18, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

The article states: "Beauty and the Beast was conceived as a Broadway-style musical with a strong heroine. Loosely based on the heroine of the fairy tale by Jeanne-Marie Leprince de Beaumont, Belle underwent a series of significant modifications by Woolverton, who developed the character into a stronger, braver and more intelligent heroine for the Disney adaptation." Obviously, the article can not be about the original character because Belle IS NOT the original character. It would be like writing about the Beauty and the Beast fairy tale as opposed to the Disney film adaptation.--Changedforbetter (talk) 19:15, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Ahh apologies. My mistake. I guess I expected to read something about this in the introduction, and when i read the rest of the article I must have merely glanced over that particular line. ou are entirely correct.--Coin945 (talk) 19:25, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Aha it's no problem. Thanks for your concern!--Changedforbetter (talk) 17:13, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Move article?

I think Belle (Disney character) (which currently redirects here) is a better title (a la our article on Mulan (Disney character)). Belle is a disney character, not a...Disney? I'd move it myself but I'd like to see if there was a reason for the move. Also pinging Changedforbetter. Thanks. Protonk (talk) 14:46, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi there Protonk! Here's what I believe the general consensus is when it comes to naming Disney Princess articles: if the character's name is the exact same as the title of the movie in which she appears, the suffix "(Disney character)" is added to distinguish the character from her film. For example, Cinderella (Disney character) from the movie Cinderella and Mulan (Disney character) from the movie Mulan, which also help distinguish the articles from their original fairy/folk tales and characters or other characters who possibly share the same name. If the character is the only known/reputable occurrence of the name, the article does not require the suffix "Disney character" but is given something more specific – Ariel (The Little Mermaid) or Princess Jasmine. In the case of characters such as our girl Belle, whose name does not appear in the title of her film but is not nearly the only character or source with such a name, the suffix "Disney" is added simply to indicate that the character belongs to the Disney realm as opposed to resorting to using the film title (imagine "Belle (Beauty and the Beast)", which could look kind of clunky. Similar goes for Elsa (Disney), Rapunzel (Disney)) and Anna (Disney). I hope this helps :)--Changedforbetter (talk) 16:01, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Transformation...

Dear editors, Over the next few weeks I will be putting this article through a dramatic overhaul in an attempt to salvage it and return it to a somewhat more neat and legible state like Mother Gothel. Expect changes to the article: things will be deleted, edits removed and undone, and paragraphs expanded and/or shorted. Please bear with me!--Changedforbetter (talk) 02:33, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Outline

Development

  • Oodles of good facts here. However, not as well-written as it could be.--Changedforbetter (talk) 19:32, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Lead and infobox

  • This article is devoted to the animated character. Therefore, including a list of actresses who have portrayed subsequent alternate versions of Belle in the infobox looks almost trivial. The only actress who possibly deserves a "portrayed by" credit in the infobox is Susan Egan; she at least portrayed a version of the character faithful to the film and earned a Tony Award nomination for her performance. Although similar, Lindsay McLeod is simply not well-known enough to warrant a "portrayed by" credit. However, all in all, I believe this credit is unnecessary for an infobox devoted to an animated character. --Changedforbetter (talk) 05:48, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
  • "Spouse" there is no reliable source stating that Belle indeed married the Beast (or Adam if you prefer to refer to him as such.)--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:00, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
    • I was about to say that on Sofia the First, Belle was referred to as "Princess Belle" by Sofia in this official video from Disney Junior. [42] However, calling the Beast/Adam her significant other works. And1987 (talk) 01:21, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
  • There is also no reliable source stating that Belle's mother is in fact "deceased". What if she abandoned Belle and her father? What if she is still alive but simply long-divorced from Maurice? Sure, the natural thing is to assume that Belle's mother is dead because, after all, this is a Disney film, but again that would only be an assumption. Removed!--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:00, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
  • "Created by" difference between Linda Woolverton and Beaumont. As the film's screenwriter, Woolverton is credited with creating this version of the character; Beaumont simply wrote the original story upon whom this character is based, and therefore did not create Disney's Belle, only inspired it. Beaumont does not belong in this section!--Changedforbetter (talk) 06:00, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Appearances

  • Remove as many individual sub-headings as possible, a blemish and eyesore found in several Disney character-related articles. Character-specific articles do not require 200 word-long plot summaries and a sub-heading for every single film, television show, and stage production they've appeared in; a few sentences will do just as well, amounting to at most a three or four small paragraphs, naturally divided into film, television, etc. without the use of fifteen different headings and sub-headings. If readers are interested in a plot synopsis of some sort, they are welcome to go the main article of the film, etc.--Changedforbetter (talk) 02:41, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

why are you not including actreses who portrayed the live action version of belle?173.65.21.238 (talk) 20:31, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Already explained in my "Lead and infobox" section above: "This article is devoted to the animated character. Therefore, including a list of actresses who have portrayed subsequent alternate versions of Belle in the infobox looks almost trivial."--Changedforbetter (talk) 22:00, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Belle (Disney). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:43, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 47 external links on Belle (Disney). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:29, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Portrayers in infobox

This is a Disney film character and non-Disney portrayals should not be listed here, specifically Once Upon a Time which is not a Disney series, but an ABC television series. Disney corporation owns ABC, but ABC is not Disney for its creative output. The musical theatre portrayals are many and varied and unnecessary for the infobox. § Broadway musical talks to this and is sufficient for this article. The focus of the article is on the animated film character. Other Disney film projects using the character are in scope. non-film and non-Disney are not. Geraldo Perez (talk) 19:38, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

EXACTLY! Omg I'm sooo tired of reverting these edits.--Changedforbetter (talk) 02:39, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
@Changedforbetter: I think the live-action film is in scope for this article both for the lead and infobox as that is essentially a remake using the same character. Descendants and other projects are much more marginal as that is an extension to the character that is only loosely related to the film portrayals. Geraldo Perez (talk) 02:55, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

I think the musical is Disney, because I looked at the article itself and it say's Disney on it. But I did removed the "Once Upon a Time" portrayer. 174.192.12.68 (talk) 02:33, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

As the article states "A total of seventeen actresses have portrayed Belle in the Broadway musical". Picking one seems arbitrary even if it is the first is it not necessarily the most notable. Best to leave it out of the infobox and let the section on the musical talk to the portrayers. Also Jodi Benson is not supported by IMDb. Keegan Connor Tracy's role in Descendents is really a totally different character but I am conflicted about this one. Geraldo Perez (talk) 03:00, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

I did manage to removed the Musical portrayer for right now. But I did keep Emma Watson in there. 174.192.26.119 (talk) 20:42, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

But I also started a discussion about the Jodi Benson issue on why she keeps getting removed. Because I'm just a little confused over it. 174.192.26.119 (talk) 20:43, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Jodi Benson

There's this issue I've seen that keeps on happening in the infobox ever time some random user edit's it. Actress Jodi benson keeps getting removed from the voice actor/actress section in the infobox for unknown reasons, I'm not complaining about the issue, I just wanted to understand why she keeps getting removed. Because she actually "DID" voice here in a few episodes in Disney's House of Mouse in the early 2000s, several sites confirm it and BTVA too. 174.192.26.119 (talk) 20:54, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Links: http://voicechasers.com/database/showprod.php?prodid=59 174.192.26.119 (talk) 20:54, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

It is covered in the article proper but the role seems too minor relative to the other starring portrayals to be highlighted in the infobox or lead. Geraldo Perez (talk) 21:01, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Well, I guess that makes sense. But ok. 174.192.26.119 (talk) 20:54, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Belle (Disney). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:22, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Belle (Disney). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:38, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Belle (Disney). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:10, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZqrP8eW0Mk
  2. ^ http://www.disneydreaming.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Beauty-And-The-Beast-Belles-Magical-World.jpg and http://ak1.ostkcdn.com/images/products/P2855759.jpg
  3. ^ http://imageshack.us/f/203/allcdcoversbeautyandthe.jpg/
  4. ^ http://images4.fanpop.com/image/photos/19200000/Beauty-and-the-Beast-Two-Disc-Platinum-Edition-Disney-DVD-Cover-walt-disney-characters-19286154-1523-2178.jpg
  5. ^ http://disney.go.com/princess/#/home/
  6. ^ http://disney.go.com/princess/#/belle/
  7. ^ http://disney.go.com/beauty-and-the-beast/characters/
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Belle_(Disney_character)/Archive_1&oldid=1195772499"