Talk:Supervillain/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
POV
- The section The supervillain stereotype applied to real life is extremely POV. --Ezeu 03:52, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
- I'd prefer to remove it entirely. Doesn't seem to go with the rest of the article anyway. Turnstep 01:39, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
- I've removed that section and the POV tag. --Ezeu 20:36, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
Glenn Talbot
Someone (anonymous IP) keeps re-adding Glenn Talbot, who appears to be a villain (and not even a supervillain) from the Hulk comic book. In addition to not being a supervillain, he is not "well-known". Not only would the average person on the street not know who he is (as opposed to say, the Hulk himself), M. Talbot does not even have his own page on Wikipedia. Therefore, he does not belong on this list. Dissenting opinions welcome below. Turnstep 17:56, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
Personality Types
First of all, good job on this subtopic. Now my questions: #1. Who came up with all this, and how? Are there sources to cite, or is all original? #2. Isn't "beast" a subset of "fallen", and therefore redundant? --Lionelster 23:41, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Arachnos
May I ask why Arachnos is listed under the "parodies of supervillains" section? I don't see him as a parody at all. There's nothing funny, ironic, or even humorous about him. He's just a regular old supervillain. I'm going to move his entry up to the ordinary supervillains section for now, but before anyone moves it back, I would like an explanation as to why he belongs there. Shralla 10:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Horror
I am removing (again) the stars of horror movies, such as Jason, Freddy Kruger, etc. These clearly do not fit the definition of a supervillain, so please do not re-add them without discussion here as to why you think they do. Typically, supervillains are cartoonish characters who want to take over the world and are pitted against one or more superheroes. I cannot see how "Jason" from Friday the 13th qualifies for that at all. As a more general request, please be stingy in what gets added to this list - it is probably too long for the page already. Turnstep 13:18, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
- While Jason, Chucky et al are more "monsters" than supervillains, I do think some horror figures qualify. Freddy Kruger is more than just a lumbering killer, his mastery of the dream world gives him the status of an overlord He's not as refined as Doctor Doom or Dracula, but he is reasonably powerful, and strategically creates "death traps". Would Hannibal Lecter warrant a spot on the list? His scope isn't that vast, but let me put it this way; He'd fit right as a Batman adversary, in some respect. Skyblade
Jason is most certainly a supervillain. He has various "superpowers" and he uses them to do harm to the protagonists. 68.166.68.84 22:48, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
How well known?
I just removed what I considered to be a fairly obscure villain (Naraku) from this list - while they may be well known in certain anime circles, they don't seem to be at the level of the rest of the list. Some others seem questionable too, but I was wondering if others had input on where to draw the line. To me, "well-known" means that a typical [wo]man-on-the-street may have heard of them, or at least has heard of their hero nemesis. So Lex Luthor, Dr. Octopus, and Darth Vader clearly qualify, but what about Revolver Ocelet, Valentina, and Queen Beryl? Those are just examples: I'd like to clarify some guidelines and not get bogged down in any specific names. I also am trying to avoid this turning into a giant list of every super-villain ever created: the current list is almost getting large enough to create a separate "list of supervillains" page, but I don't know if that is worthy of its own page considering we already have a list of villains. Turnstep 00:58, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
As far as modern (last 10 years) villains go, Naraku and Revolver Ocelot are pretty well known as Inuyasha is currently a very popular feature on the very popular Adult Swim program series, and the MGS series is a premeir title. Ocelot is somewhat of a mascot for Sony.
That's not to say that I don't understand what you're saying. All these Warcraft and manga characters are pretty obscure but Naraku and Ocelot are as well known as just about any anime or VG villain around today. In 20 years when the kids are all grown up, I'm sure Ocelot will be as well-known as Doctor Octopus. Naraku is really only notable as an anime villain though. They have some contemporary iconic value. They're just a generation or two ahead of you.68.166.68.84 22:32, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
I removed Krang from the list of evil geniuses since the Shredder is already there, more recognizable and from the same mythos. I replaced some guy with Revolver Ocelot in the "Minion" list as he's an older more recognizable video game villain. Once I find replacements I'm going to remove most of the Warcraft characters. WoW may be very popular but unless you own the game or play it regularly none of the characters are familiar or recognizable at all. I repaced two obscure Warcraft characters as examples of "fallen". I included Archagel. Can someone link it to got to the comic character? I'm not sure how to type the vertical line.
I removed Mister Sinister and Carnage from the list of notable SV's as Apocalypse, Magneto, and Thanos are more recognizable villains in the Marvel universe and already on the list. I removed Lord Recluse and Bishop as they're too obscure a reference. I'm going to put Naraku and M. Bison on the list because they're probably the most reognizable examples of Anime and VG villains respectively. Edit: I'm going to replace M. Bison with King Koopa. Are there any anime villains who deserve the spot more than Naraku? I think it's important to list notable villains from different forms of media so I think there has to be at least one anime villain on the list. 68.166.68.84 23:42, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
White Witch
Could whoever keeps removing the White Witch from the Dark Lord section please give a reason as to why?
Hi there.I think an explanation is needed indeed.You see,the White Witch already appears in two categories:'Dark Lord' and Born-and-Bred'.But it is impossible to be in two categories at once.I am not familiar with the works of Mr.Lewis but judging from the 'White Witch' article it seems that she's more like the Born-and-Bred.If you think that she should be in the 'Dark Lord' section then please give a reason too.Yours thruly,Dimts 17:50, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Well I was just thinking, why not be in two categories. I mean the White Witch was brought up to be evil on the planet she came from (Charn) and she is also a Dark Lord as she is a fantasy villain of near-omnipotence who plots domination of the world with the help of her army of devoted servants and followers. That's my humble opinion anyway.
You seem to be familiar with the Narnia universe.So,check the 'Dark Lord' and the 'Born-and-Bred' categories.The section which is more close to the description of this disputed character...will get her.Dimts 16:45, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
"Well known" POV tags
Well known is inherently POV - until there's a popularity contest, there's no definitive say of measuring such a claim. CovenantD 02:18, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Totally disputed
This article has turned into a dumping ground of Original Research, uncited claims and POV. The discussion above about the White Witch shows that characters are being added to descriptions based on the reasoning of editors. I suggest a complete rewrite of the entire article, with close attention to documenting every claim that is made. CovenantD 19:22, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Dark Lord redirects here
Why? -Black Omnimon 21:09, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Because those fools deleted the Dark Lord article (as well as the Dark Lord category) so as the Dark Lord character trope could vaguely be described as a supervillain personality type the bosses decided to have it redirect here whenever somebody typed it in. -Anon
But a "Dark Lord" isn't the same as a supervillian, a Dark Lord is often a main antagonist in many medievel themed fictional works, and coudl be considered The supervillian instead of just some random supervillian. Black Omnimon 22:28, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Yeah. And 'vaguely' isn't good enough for a redirect. Perhaps 'blatantly', but 'vaguely' isn't. A Dark Lord is massively more powerful than a supervillain. Three-Tail 02:01, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Personally I couldn't agree more.
OR
This whole article wreaks of original research and a lot of it. I propose to completely erase the Personality Types section because that seems to be the most arbitrary. The Foils and Common Traits sections respectably still need to be debated on further.Stupidhumanzz 08:50, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
May I ask what the "SuperVillain Studios" link at the bottom has to do with the subject?
- Nothing that I can see: I've removed it Turnstep 13:04, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)
Vader: Villain or henchman?
Vader is what i would call a super-hunchman. In many moderns tales of good vs evil, the main villain has an army of henchmen and one very special "superhenchman" who is similar to the henchmen but has special abilities and the ability to think.
- by this standard, Sauron is the super-henchman of Melkor Demong 01:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Elaboration of the Dark Lord
The concept of a "Dark Lord" I think merits its own disambiguation page, if not an article. Not only is it an autonomous concept, but many people have also been dubbed"dark lords," e.g., George Lucas, the guy who designed the electronics systems for early Jaguars... I think there is more to be said Mr Anthem 13:37, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
I quite agree. I think the Dark Lord character trope deserves its own article and perhaps its own category. I'd do them myself only I'm not registered so I don't have the power.
And a supervillain pertains almost exclusively to the comic book industry. A supervillain can be any type of villain. I mean look at Kingpin. He's a crime lord. He's got no special powers. And could very well be a real person. But he's still considered a supervillain because he's in comics. A dark lord and supervillain are not the same thing. So I think Dark Lord should go back to having its own article. Three-Tail 22:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Absolutely. Would you care to do the honours, good sir?
Heh, uh, not particularly. I guess I'll try. I'll just copy the old info from somewhere. Trust me, there's alot of sites with hold articles that have been merged recently. Mergings I disagree with completely. I mean, I thought the goal was to offer as much information as possible, not to merge and cut it all to half.Three-Tail 01:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Oh you wimp.
I know XP.Three-Tail 01:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Um, Orochimaru of Naruto technically is more like a Dark Lord or Fallen than criminally insane. Could someone move it? 24.61.48.7 00:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
You're absolutely right. I'll do that right away.
Oh by the way you'll notice I've created a category for Dark Lords.
Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut, it's been deleted. Perfect.
Speaking of Dark Lords, some of the characters have really got to be relocated. for instance, although King Bowser did have a role similar to a dark lord in the original super mario bros (which even then it is more comparable to King Zant anyways), due to some quirks in present day Bowser (i.e. his more comical villain role) he really shouldn't be listed as a dark lord under there, otherwise, pretty much every supervillain should be considered a dark lord due to their thirst for world conquest. Megatron, see above, though he did try to manipulate a sacred object for his own uses in the 2007 movie. so my point is that a villain in that article who is tied to the creators of said villain who have comic relief villain roles (by that, i mean that the creators of said villain made the villain that way, meaning that games like the CDi Zelda games don't count) should not be listed as dark lords. Did Palpatine, Voldemort, White Witch, Sauron, Darth Vader, Sauron, Ganondorf, Dimentio, Black Doom or Maleficent even have comical villain roles from their creators. No, so any villain that was a comical villain to begin with or even a villain who was originally a dark lord but was downgraded to comical villainry should be relocated. Also, they really should keep the Category of Dark Lords as well as the category of female dark lords in there.
I don't think whether or not a character is a dark lord should be defined by whether ot not they are comical. After all many dark lords do have a sense of humour and can be amusing. For instance Voldemort, Scar, The Master, the Sheriff of Nottingham (as portrayed in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves. But yes, I see what you're getting at.
Speaking of Dark Lords, would Chernabog be considered a demon or a dark lord? He is a demon, but he rules his own realm. Actually, come to think of it, so does Neron and Mephisto...BWANASIMBA 03:51, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
I think the Demon and Dark Lord categories are pretty much the same thing.
Third party needed
Another anonymous IP has just re-added a bunch of entries. I'll refrain from reverting it right away, and assume that this is the same person who keeps re-adding entries such as "Chucky" to ths list. Would anyone else care to comment on this (in regards to the "horror" section above, and to a lesser extent to the "well-known" qualification)? I don't want to turn this into an edit war by reverting again, but on the other hand, the latest revert is by an anonymous IP whose sole two edits have been on this page in the last few hours, with nary a edit summary in site. Turnstep 06:26, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
This book maybe a good sources of info if anyone can get their hands on it [1] Dwanyewest (talk) 02:14, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
External links
It seems to me that this article could use some external links. Is there a reason there are none? RoyRedersn17 20:04, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
This link is from a reputable website discussing a book about the history of supervillians i wish it would stop being removed. [2]
Dwanyewest (talk) 00:35, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- Part of the problem is that the link is more about the book rather than about the subject of the article. You might wish to consider incorporating the book itself as a "Further reading" entry. (Feel free to ask if you have questions about this.) --Ckatzchatspy 00:51, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
The Most Dastardly... Q?
Star Trek's Q as a supervillain does not quite work for me. Mainly because he did not really have any desire to rule the Federation. Typically he would harass the Enterprise-D and Voyager crews, usually to get some type of point across. True, in All Good Things... he put Picard through that test, but that wasn't his doing, it was the Q Continium, in fact, he even helped Jean-Luc out. But, I'm not quite willing to take him off. What do the rest of you guys think?
- Agreed- he does not exhibit enough of the supervillain characteristics to qualify, IMO. He's more mischevous than evil, certainly has no cartoonish desire to "rule the world", never fights a "superhero", and doesn't have an outlandish supervillain costume. Turnstep 13:24, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
- Ok, I'm taking Q out.
Not every supervillain has to be "cartoonish" or desire to "rule the world".
He has "superpowers" and he uses them to antagonize the heroes. I'm not going to go out of my way to put him back in but he's certainly a villain.
I don't think Q is a supervillian at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.53.17.234 (talk) 06:16, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
Wtf?
Happened to the article? Like, all of it except for the origins section has been erased! This is an outrage!
- It's not "an outrage" - it is just cleaning up an uncited, unverified, mess. --Ckatzchatspy 17:49, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
- What citations and verifications do you hope to get for an article on supervillains? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.175.37 (talk • contribs)
- Simply put, if there are no available references, the material cannot be included. However, I would be very surprised if such references do not exist for a reasoned examination of the concept of a supervillain. --Ckatzchatspy 17:44, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
- If you mean academic references, then I seriously doubt it. The best references on something like comic book mythology come from obscure fan-produced publications and the fans own analyses. Most of us would trust the fans original research over the "official" research of an academic.206.192.18.13 17:52, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
- What you say you trust, however, isn't what qualifies under Wikipedia's guidelines for verifiability. The old version of the article demonstrated why, as well, since it was nothing more than a collection of whatever villains editors wanted to add to the list. No citations, no verifiability, nothing. --Ckatzchatspy 07:16, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
- If you mean academic references, then I seriously doubt it. The best references on something like comic book mythology come from obscure fan-produced publications and the fans own analyses. Most of us would trust the fans original research over the "official" research of an academic.206.192.18.13 17:52, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
- Simply put, if there are no available references, the material cannot be included. However, I would be very surprised if such references do not exist for a reasoned examination of the concept of a supervillain. --Ckatzchatspy 17:44, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
I think this is just bad sportsmanship. It was a fun list. Restore it. The unverifiability rules are broken so often anyhow. This was a quirky aspect to the wiki. Besides which, it is actually not hard to verify -- as supervillianesses need only to exist in comics and TV/Film in order to qualify. Just because one user doesn't like it, it goes? (129.96.112.105 (talk) 07:15, 2 June 2009 (UTC))
The Master
Which category do you think the Master from Doctor Who should go into? Because he could fit into "The Dark Lord", "The Evil Genius", "The Sociopath" or "The Demon."
Well there won't be any need to worry about it now as all the categories have been erased along with all my hard work.
Unfair! (129.96.112.105 (talk) 07:17, 2 June 2009 (UTC))
UBL
Osama is the first real one. Underground bases. Sleeper cells. Technology. World domination objective etc. like a proper Bond villain. The article should say so.--81.105.243.17 (talk) 22:31, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Provide reliable evidence and citations to justify notability then by all means do it. Dwanyewest (talk) 22:41, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Try to prove you're unbiased why you're at it. (129.96.112.105 (talk) 07:17, 2 June 2009 (UTC))
Where's the article?
Apparently this page is supposed to be the list of female supervillains but there's nothing here. Where's the list? 203.211.74.185 (talk) 04:02, 13 May 2009 (UTC) It appears to have been deleted. Vote to restore!(129.96.130.207 (talk) 06:13, 4 August 2009 (UTC))
How well known? (reprise)
I just did a major pruning of the list - it was growing out of control. I still think it is a bit large, but I gave some items the benefit of the doubt. This page is not meant as a canonical list of supervillains : it is meant to list some well-known supervillains that the average person may have heard of. A good rule of thumb - has the character ever been in a major motion picture? They also need to be a true super-villain: cartoonish, powerful, desire to take over the world, etc. That latter characteristic is the reason I removed some (e.g. T-X) which may be well known, but are not focused on world domination, and do not have a huge ego. All of this is very subjective, but I think the options we have are:
- Keep the list small and contained
- Make a separate list of all supervillains
The problem with the separate list is the large amount of overlap with the existing list of villains page, and differentiating between the two. Turnstep 01:49, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
Paring Down the List
Okay, so keeping the list at its tightest...
Dracula, Dracula, Darth Vader, Lex Luthor and the Joker could be recognized by anyone. Moriarty is recognizeable. Blofeld is known by the average man on the streets, (though more by looks then name--I bet two out of three would think he was called "Dr No". Khan is very well known. Voldemort, Magneto, Doctor Doom, Skeletor, and Shredder are not quite as famous, but have appeared in enough media to be recognized by at least a reasonable number of people.
Characters that I think are too obscure to belong on the list are Kang and John Sunlight. Davros might be pushing it, but I figure he might be more recognizeable in England. Bullseye and Sandman are pretty expendable. They're really more thugs/hired killers than criminal masterminds. Syndrome could be included on the parody list, but on the main list? His media appearance is downright scarce. Personally, I'm wondering if there should be medium crossover requirements. Finally, Batman has four archenemies on the list, which I think is pushing it. Many hardcore fans prefer Two-Face, but he's the least recognizeable of the four villains mentioned. I'm a little ambivalant about Braniac, but he does play a part on Smallville, though some may argue Zod has played a larger role in Superman media. But whittling down the comic book superivllain list. (Not counting Loki, who has served as a public domain villain)
Brainiac Doctor Doom, Doctor Octopus Green Goblin The Joker The Kingpin Lex Luthor Magneto The Penguin Red Skull Riddler
We have three villains for Batman, two and a half for Spider-Man (sharing one arch-foe with Daredevil) and two for Superman, pretty much giving more than one arch-foes for the three most well-known superheroes. We have Marvel Comics's two big bad guys. I'm not married to the Red Skull being on the list, but I'm not going to argue for or against him being on it.
Finally, I was surprised to see Fu Manchu and Saruman removed. Saruman I could sort of understand, considering the prestige nature of Lord of the Rings, but Fu Manchu should definately be put back on. I wonder if Hannibal Lecter should be included? I'm not going to add him, but he does have the cadence and quirkiness of many supervillains...what stops him is his scope. In fact, Mason Verger probably acts more like a quintessential supervillain, but including him is against the point, since he's not as well known.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.250.0.202 (talk) 08:39, 05 February 2006 (UTC)
Not Cool...
You know, I have a question. Why do a few of you people think you should control the entire Supervillain page? The whole point of Wikipedia is to look at different points of view, which is what makes it so different from an Encyclopedia.com. When everyone can put in their input, new thoughts, ideas and info can be shared.
I think a lot of you need to quit editing away other people's input. I understand if it's something stupid, like "Supervillains Suck" or something, but come on... erasing everything a person says because you don't agree with it, or you don't think anyone else will understand it!
In any case, back off a little bit. Yeesh.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.139.224.1 (talk) 20:00, 06 September 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, come on, for some this is the only way they can feel important. Let them pretend they are needed.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.198.242.7 (talk) 05:22, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
I think we can dispense with the bitchiness, Mr Unsigned Comment. The people who work on this page are only debating their points of view to come to fair solutions on how to run it. Anyway someone suggested adding Hannibal Lector to the list. Well I think this is fair despite this fact that he doesn't have superpowers. After all look at the Joker and Moriarty.
Anon— Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.145.241.38 (talk) 17:02, 03 February 2007 (UTC)
John Devil
Why would he be the first supervillain? How about the evil queen from snow white? or the big bad wolf (the freaking animal was able to speak)? Faust. Then there are Ares, Set, Loki. The Cyclops from the Odyssey. Medusa. Ramses II, Herod.--20-dude (talk) 00:47, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The definition of supervillain excludes IMHO, Darth Vader, as other villains in SF and literature. The Super-villain as the word says, is the nemesis of the Super-Hero. As we don't talk about Luke Skywalker, Han Solo and Princess Leia as superheroes, we shouln't consider Dart Vader or Palpatine as supervillains, but just as villains or archenemies. In other words this article should be related only to comic supervillains, like Doctor Doom, Magneto, Lex Luthor and many more. They have more in common, in terms of features and personalities, than all movie or literature related evil characters.--Doctor Dodge (talk) 17:11, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker count as "super" already since they have telekinesis. Think you can get that by lifting weights, learning Asian martial arts, running laps, doing situps, reading Soldier of Fortune, etc.? Darth Vader already closely resembles Doctor Doom anyway, exclusive of his telekinesis. Also, George Lucas made Star Wars based on his affection for Flash Gordon, a newspaper comic strip.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Enda80 (talk • contribs) 00:26, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Joker and Lex Luthor
Joker and Lex Luthor are the two most recognizable characters in pop culture? Maybe in DC comics but what about Doctor Doom and possibly even Green Goblin Venom and Magneto etc.Jhenderson777 (talk) 21:46, 30 October 2009 (UTC)