Talk:Ugly Americans (TV series)

Page name

If one types simply "ugly americans" into the Wikipedia search engine, it redirects here... so why is the "(TV series)" in this page's title necessary? The Mach Turtle (talk) 11:42, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

• Ugly Americans redirects here because the TV show is the most prominent use of the name right now. Should a band release an album called 'Ugly Americans' at some point down the line their page will be called 'Ugly Americans (album)' or something similar, and we would put a "If you are looking for the album by X then go here" on top of this page. If enough things with the same name come about we create a disambiguation page and either direct 'Ugly Americans' to that or have a fight over which single usage is the most prominent and link to the disambiguation page from there. That is at least how I understand the process of managing wiki pages. Ccs4ever (talk) 18:21, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

• That's ridiculous. Pages don't get named based on what may or may not come along somewhere down the line. If that were the case, we'd have to go back and rename the three quarters of the encyclopedia and add what sort of medium/context any particular page is in the title. Should we rename such pages as Bad Romance, The Hurt Locker, Bayonetta, She & Him, Family Guy, etc. in case of these "what ifs?" (I could go on; go ahead, dare me.) This page should be moved, with the "(TV series)" part of the title deleted. The Mach Turtle (talk) 12:37, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

{{movereq}} Ugly Americans (TV series) → Ugly Americans — No other "Ugly Americans" article exists, no further disambiguation is needed. Just add the hatnote {{About|the television series|the book|Ugly Americans: The True Story of the Ivy League Cowboys Who Raided the Asian Markets for Millions|other uses|Ugly American}} at the top of the page, which results in the following:

This article is about the television series. For the book, see Ugly Americans: The True Story of the Ivy League Cowboys Who Raided the Asian Markets for Millions. For other uses, see Ugly American.

Always use the simplest article name, with the least disambiguation attached to its page name. If another article wants the same name, then there is a need for disambiguation, depending on the notability, just a hatnote to the article which would have a disambiguated title, a disambiguation page with or without a disambiguated page name, etc. _Xeworlebi ^(t•c) 13:22, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

• Oppose. Do you really think that anyone actually calls the book Ugly Americans: The True Story of the Ivy League Cowboys Who Raided the Asian Markets for Millions rather then Ugly Americana? While review sites are split on this, WP:NC-BK says the you don't use the subtitle unless it is needed for disambiguation. That is the case here. Please don't argue that if other articles are disambiguated, that the main name space is not not being used. Vegaswikian (talk) 22:03, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment: No I don't think that. The problem was that the page Ugly Americans redirected here, which was just an unnecessary redirect, either have it directly on that page or link towards a DAB page, which is the case now. I have no further problem with the way it is setup now. Next time please don't push your opinion trough and then discuss, that is not how a regular discussion works. Also, your last sentence makes no sense to me. _Xeworlebi ^(t•c) 22:30, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
• Move. Or keep and move Ugly Americans: The True Story of the Ivy League Cowboys Who Raided the Asian Markets for Millions → Ugly Americans (book) just because that subtitle is so cumbersome. There are only two articles with the title "Ugly Americans," and this is the one most people are likely to be looking for.
  --Gyrobo (talk) 23:22, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
• I'm confused, it seemed like everything was fine for a move, and now "Ugly Americans" simply redirects to a disambiguation page. Seems kind of silly since only two of the articles listed there are actually called "Ugly Americans." Not sure if it matters now, but this page should be Moved to eliminate the "(TV series)" part of the title, as I said before. The Mach Turtle (talk) 00:07, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

From the lack of replies, I think that's your answer. The way it is is the way it is, unless you want to carry it out. 216.117.192.91 (talk) 16:28, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Prototype Ugly Americans

How is it that no one's talked about the web show that started Ugly Americans? It's called 5-on and I've added a link here. It's even got prototypes of at least two of the main characters, Randall and Callie. Ztyran (talk) 21:12, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Probably because it's a short-order animated sitcom. Don't take it as an insult, I am a fan, but honestly in the scope of importance it's not Comedy Central's bread and butter. If they produce full-order seasons (closer to 20 or more episodes) or if it lasts longer than 3 or so years, then notability would increase much more and things like this would be welcome. Besides, something tells me those are coming on the DVD after their first season ends this year anyway... it's not like they wouldn't have room to include them. 216.117.192.91 (talk) 16:26, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Fat, Ugly, and Stupid

What a winning combination! When I tried to add The Ugly American and Ugly American in a See Also § it was whisked away by some citoyen. They are the actual origin of the term. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 02:54, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, you could mention that in the body of the article if you can source it. "They are the actual origin of the term". Well, cite that. The fact that you know or think that isn't sufficient. Reading the articles added doesn't provide any context for the show. Mjpresson (talk) 03:40, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

True, it's possible that these individuals independently use the term outside of and with no consciousness of its provenance in the general culture, and though that would be skank space normal I would be (slightly) surprised if it was the case. That they have/had a vague apprehension of the term as said culture item is a high probability scenario but that they independently originated it isn't. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 11:48, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

To be clear, the ugly in this case doesn't refer to like the beauty of a Jason Alexander, but more like "things could get ugly at the next multi trillion dollar bailout of big capital". 72.228.177.92 (talk) 17:37, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Whatever, 72.228.177.92. Mjpresson (talk) 16:36, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

There's already a disambiguation page pointing to these areas when Ugly Americans is entered in search. Adding a "See Also" is redundant. Being a low-brow comedy show, I don't think anyone cares where the term came from. Calling an editor a citoyen is not really an insult if your from an anonymous IP yourself. 216.117.192.91 (talk) 16:16, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Having a See also to Ugly American is perfectly reasonable for those too young to recognize the term, or for non-English speakers who use English WP as a general resource without having a native speaker's grasp of the language.

You do not need to provide a quotation from the director stating, "Yes, our title is a reference to the commonly used English language expression, Ugly American. What are you, a little simple-minded? That's obvious."

Varlaam (talk) 23:31, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

"a two-bedroom he found on Craigslist"

Hey, where is the quotation from the screenwriter saying that the Craigslist mentioned here is the online site that everyone has heard of, and not some obscure one with the same name in Bulgaria?

That sentence should be deleted. It's uncited. It's unreliable.

There are 100 different things that this "Craigslist" might be referring to. It might be a nickname for the want ads in the New York Times. It might be the guy who lives down the street named Craig.

Unreliable. Delete immediately.

Varlaam (talk) 23:47, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

3rd season?

This link at tv.com says the show is "on the bubble" http://www.tv.com/news/whats-renewed-whats-canceled-and-whats-still-in-between-2012-edition-28304/?page=5 Anyone else got better information?