Talk:The Bachelor (American TV series)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Too little info!

Hi, fellow wikipedia fans:

I'd like to encourage people to update "The Bachelor" show because there seems to be little info about each season. Already omitting the first 7 seasons, it's not helping wikipedia. It would help a great deal if anybody can update the first 7 seasons and seperate them to one article per season; THX!!

I know there's a lot of work with research and updates, but it is contributing to wikipedia.

Sli723

Each season should get its own page or have a separate page with all of the seasons and a description for each there, but it shouldn't all be lumped into this one page. This page is about the show, not about the seasons and the lengthy descriptions put too much weight on the individual seasons (and only half of them to boot), as opposed to the show. I've cleared the season descriptions and would create separate articles (like has already been done with the more recent seasons), but I've only watched season one and the last couple of seasons and I'm afraid I would be useless in creating all the articles in between (though I will try if no attempt is made by someone else). --13² 15:19, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Spoiler Warnings

Should their be spoiler warnings? Rome for example was just shown for the first time in Norway this past month and it was ruined by seeing the results. Icefox 21:42, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

It was decided that spoiler warnings would no longer be used on Wikipedia because plot summaries automatically mean there will be spoilers. We shouldn't have to babysit users who are too curious to stop themselves from reading something they know they shouldn't. --13² 15:20, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

A prince?

"In past seasons, bachelors have included a doctor, a prince, an NFL player, a millionaire, and other types of frequently sought after men." Which one was the prince? 'Prince' isn't listed for any of the previous bachelors. MMagdalene722^{talk to me} 15:40, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

My guess is Prince Lorenzo Borghese. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 19:22, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Info

On a recent season Michael Bubble had appeared it should be worth mentioning. Robin Thicke appeared on a seperate episode as well.--Cooly123 14:48, 30 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooly123 (talk • contribs)

More spinoffs and specials

A wedding special will air with Jason and Molly of season 13, and a competition series of past contestants of Bacholer and Bacholerette in the summer of 2010. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cooly123 (talk • contribs) 15:27, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Prize Money

There should be a section about the prize money won by the bachelor. Does he win money? How much? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.205.234.219 (talk) 05:21, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Does the winner also receive money?

Is there any fiscal remuneration for the contestants? Robert K S (talk) 03:08, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Not that I'm aware of. Anyways, it can't be included in the article unless there is a reliable source to back it up. Considering this would make big news if it were ever released or leaked because it would essentially defeat the purpose of the show and it hasn't, I absolutely cannot imagine it to be true. --13² 03:19, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

I really dont know why after ever season they break it off everything seems so real. But what really happens when the camera are not rolling. the only people who took love for real was trista and ryan. And wiith the last season if i was molly i dont think that i would of taken him back i mean came on he left her and asked melissa to marry him. His prouble gonna do the same to her. but hopefuul it will all work out in the end —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.102.106.160 (talk) 18:38, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

The major contestants (bachelor/bachelorette) are paid, although the sums are not disclosed for obvious reasons. There is speculation that it is somewhere between $50,000-$150,000, but it's not our job as encyclopedists to report such findings unless used in a press release by ABC or reported by a respectable 3rd party source. Guiltlessgecko (talk) 02:11, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Ratings

Any information in regards to ratings would be appreciated, especially season premiers and season finales in a chart much like other shows. Also the season 13 finale was one of the most watched finales in the shows history, this should be mentioned as well. --Cooly123 (talk) 16:30, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Some articles have entire charts for ratings. However, I agree with your general point -- we should have some general mention of ratings. You are correct; the ratings are insanely high, so this would provide some context for the reader. Guiltlessgecko (talk) 20:30, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Needs Criticism Section

As something part of 'reality television', this show desperately needs a "Criticism Section"! Not saying that I hate or that I like it, but for the good of Wikipedia, I strongly believe there needs to be one for this. Many other reality tv shows have it if you take a look. This one should too. But people that hate the show probably aren't going to bother spending time writing one. People who love the show usually won't be objective enough to be able to or want to write one either.

I want to know what media sources have said about reasons why this show could be socially or morally or whatever bad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DougCube (talk • contribs) 06:33, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree, it does need a criticism section. I may try to work on one later, but I don't have time right now to write it and find all the relevant reliable sources required for it. --13² 15:21, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

For clarification, the appropriate section is "Critical Reception". It sounds as if you might be trying to promote a POV without knowing it, so be careful. Remember that this is an encyclopedia, not a message board for people to post their opinions of this show (however, valid their opinions may be). Guiltlessgecko (talk) 02:09, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

The correct word is criticism, and it's not about promoting a POV... Sorry, I know those are harsh words but there really isn't anything wrong with having a criticism section. For example, there's one in the Reality Television article. And this might seem pretty non-NPOV of me, but reality television has taken very serious criticism from the academic community since its inception. I'll give a few examples of some criticisms to maybe wet the palette of anyone interested in taking this on. In particular with the Bachelor, one thing that would be awesome to see is re: how only 1/15 of the seasons have produced a married couple that is still around today (and something like half have broken up before even getting married). And the 1 couple that is still around is a recent one, and history tells us that they haven't gotten over the 'hump' yet, so the speak - they might still break up. This gets into the unrealistic expectations of the contestants. Another criticism is how it affects the perceptions of those who watch the show; are their expectations in turn becoming more unrealistic? Another: corporate influences (in terms of catering to ratings, increasing drama). Another: the role of editing as a tool to deceive the audience, and the extent to which this deception is justified. Another: the extent to which the show associates love with what are traditionally considered more "shallow" characteristics in a partner. The contestants actually do take into consideration the depth of their relationships, and the psychological compatibility they have with their potential partner, but they also seem to like some of those more "shallow" characteristics as well. Finally, you could go into actual criticisms of love itself, but that's probably out of the scope of this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.92.86.181 (talk) 03:43, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

I think that one criticism that seems appropriate for inclusion here is about the racial makeup of the cast, which is overwhelmingly white. This isn't my POV but rather a frequent criticism with social significance, see this Newsweek article and this one on the Latimes. It would be easy to write a short description of the situation in a NPOV style appropriate to wikipedia. The question is simply, where to put it in the article exactly? Metal.lunchbox (talk) 17:44, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

I've added the above controversy to a section entitled "Controversy". I have seen other similar sections in other articles with that same title. Metal.lunchbox (talk) 18:18, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

success rate

I wrote a sentence about the success rate of the couples in this show and it was reverted by User:Plastikspork who cited the "no original research rule." I understand your point but the only research I did consisted of counting the couples from the list lower down on this page. Research means making a conclusion after analyzing information. All I did was summarize the same information that's elsewhere on the same page by presenting it in a different way. I made no conclusions. Do you know what I mean? Kansaikiwi (talk) 23:53, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I still think it qualifies as WP:OR. These things have a tendency to balloon as well. At one point in time there was a heavily edited "statistics" section in each article (for ANTM and here as well if I recall), which analyzed each contestants call-out order position average ranking, age, etc. I agree that one "success rate" may not seem like that big of a deal, but it's a slippery slope and best to err on the side of WP:NOR. Now if you can find an article from a reliable source that compares the "success rate" with the "success rate" in the general population to add some critical commentary on the utility of dating shows, that would be great, and something that should be definitely included. Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 01:16, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

That is far from original research. From the article: This policy does not forbid routine calculations, such as adding numbers, converting units, or calculating a person's age, provided editors agree that the arithmetic and its application correctly reflect the information published by the sources from which it is derived. The community even supplies some templates to help perform such calculations. Saros136 (talk) 16:20, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

How do you define "success"? Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 03:11, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Plastikspork is correct that you can't include the words "success rate", which is a subjective term. Of course, I think that it's reasonable to think of marriage "success" as the operative definition given the style of marketing ABC does for the show. On the other hand, it doesn't count as original research to count the number of "relationships" that resulted in marriage from this show. In fact, that seems like a necessary fact that an encyclopedia article on a dating show would have.Guiltlessgecko (talk) 20:33, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Of course it's not "original research" and should be allowed. With all due respect, Plastikspork, it's a slippery slope using slippery slopes as a justification to delete other people's additions. We now have a clear consensus that this is not original research, so I encourage Kansaikiwi to reinstate his or her sentence.Historydude58 (talk) 00:48, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

I concur with Guiltlessgecko that monitoring the number of marriages (or at least continuing relationships) is a valid topic and a valid indicator of the show's success. I would go further and say there's nothing wrong with using the term "success rate." This is a show about finding true love, as repeated constantly on every episode. Whether people stay together after the show is the obvious and sole indicator of whether they have found true love, so I don't see how it's subjective at all. True love is subjective--how many people find lasting relationships from this show isn't.Historydude58 (talk) 00:52, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

More citations than there are footnotes

Unless I'm missing something, this article has 36 citations but only 31 footnotes to match them. Anyone want to try to sort that one out? Because I know I don't!Historydude58 (talk) 08:21, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

The numbering is slightly confusing because its counting references and footnotes both. Each is in its own section. There are 5 notes and 31 references making 36 total. Metal.lunchbox (talk) 19:21, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Bachelor Pad TV Show Season 2 Episode 3

I think it is obvious that Kasey and Jake tied in this weeks episode 3 of Bachelor Pad Season 2. Obviously, Kirk did not want to be the swing vote, he probably said something when he pick out a picture and that is why they did not air him making his vote.

If you go frame by frame when the name is said at the end it was cut to the frame ending in "y" when he said Kasey's name. If he was saying Kasey your safe there would have been a pause to cut into between Kasey and your. If it was a twist ending then there would have still been a pause between Kasey and your as in Kasey your going home or Kasey your safe.

I think they frame cut on the "y" because there would not be a frame pause in between when saying Kasey and Jake. No one pauses when saying and in a situation like that. Also notice that the announcer emphasizes the clarification "if you don't hear your name your leaving immediately."

Hope this gives some help to those of you left wondering in the cliffhanger black screen event tonight. Looking forward to what a tie breaker looks like on Bachelor Pad!!

Mike FL. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.102.64.220 (talk) 03:46, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

This is not a general discussion forum about the Bachelor Pad TV show. - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 06:03, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Is cinematographer in a reality television show notable if the art form is bad, in particular for The Bachelor?

There is discussion here, PPdd (talk) 02:41, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Statistics

http://tv.yahoo.com/photos/how-long-do-bachelor-and-bachelorette-relationships-actually-last-slideshow/

After 10 years of matchmaking, 16 completed seasons of "The Bachelor," and seven seasons of "The Bachelorette," a full four out of 23 "official" couples are still together. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoeyRR (talk • contribs) 21:37, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Bachelor in paradise

I added the third spinoff to the lead section. But for some reason I can't figure out how to link to the existing Wikipedia article on bachelor in paradise. Maybe someone can help fix the red link? AgnosticAphid talk 15:49, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

That article is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachelor_in_Paradise_(TV_series) AgnosticAphid talk 15:50, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Aaron Buerge. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131015210642/http://askville.amazon.com/33-year-Angye-McIntosh-news/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=56817909 to http://askville.amazon.com/33-year-Angye-McIntosh-news/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=56817909

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 03:12, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Reference List

Number 16 does not have a retrieved date. --Panarej2 (talk) 17:52, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Added information about Bachelor Winter Games

I added this under the spin off section:

Bachelor Winter Games premiered on February 13th, 2018. The show follows a similar premise to that of Bachelor in Paradise with a few twists. One stand out twist is that the cast is made up of international contestants from The Bachelor Franchise. All contestants participate in various winter sports in order to win a date card. Ashley Iaconetti (American) and Kevin Wendt (Canadian) were the winning couple of the first season, after competing in an ice skating dance routine against three other couples. Aswetland (talk) 00:39, 21 February 2018 (UTC)