Talk:List of female supervillains

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

No consensus, 17 June 2023, see discussion.
Keep, 14 September 2021, see discussion.
keep, August 14, 2014, see discussion.
keep, April 20, 2012, see discussion.
keep, July 29, 2007, see discussion.
no consensus, January 3, 2007, see discussion.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women

The Borg Queen

The Borg Queen certainly qualifies as a "supervillainess" — but not, as far as I know, in "Live action TV". She only appears in the film First Contact. ChrisWinter 17:59, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, she's in several later-seasons episodes of Star Trek Voyager too. Wpell (talk) 11:08, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Definitions

I have trouble with the phrase "[supervillainess characters] are a counterpart to the superheroine, just as the villain is the counterpart to the hero." Surely female villains can be a counterpart to male heroes and vice-versa? The phrase seems to imply that heroes and heroines only ever have villain counterparts of their own gender. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.17.53.21 (talk) 23:57, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Granted, that is how it usually tends to be done in the industries, but I would say Wikipedia ought not to unnecessarily reinforce the stereotype. Wpell (talk) 11:10, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Supervillains

Okay, there's a "List of female supervillains"; why isn't there a "List of male supervillains" or simply a non-gendered "List of supervillains"? The closest I can find is the "List of supervillain debuts". Wpell (talk) 11:12, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The comic book supervillain list also includes females.

As this list is entirely uncited, and redundant to the supervillainess category, and sticks out due to the lack of male lists, i directed it to the supervillain article, as was done a long time ago to the male list. The list i put into a subpage of the comic book supervillain list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yobmod (talk • contribs) 18:00, 9 March 2009

Sourcing

my response in regards to the recent reverting of Edward321. In hindsight, my understanding of that article was that since all the other names were not "sourced," then why should we source all the remainder? The article shouldn't even be kept if all new additions need sourcing and the previous ones on the article don't have any sources of their own. Additionally, I had no objection of sourcing the material, but I assure anyone who looks into it that it's all factual information. Edward321, if it is not too much hassle, may I ask how to go about sourcing the few insertions exactly? Seems to me like most of the article is currently unsourced. - Zarbon (talk) 05:55, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest u hav a read of this sockpuppetry case ur involved in. Never resort to using alternate accounts, Zarbond. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.205.49.97 (talk) 11:18, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The IP is not being helpful. The article is entirely unsourced, but at least for the Marvel and DC characters, they are appear in media that clearly involves super-powered beings. The anime characters come from different genres Dragon Ball is about high powered martial arts. Sailor Moon is about magic. Classifying the villains of either as supervillains should only be done if there is a reliable source identifying them as supervillains. Edward321 (talk) 15:03, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. It will be difficult for me to pull up actual confirmation of such criteria of "supervillain" for each character but if I am able to find official sources, I will link them in the future. On another note, I would ask for the ridiculous attempts of vandalism from the aforementioned sockpuppeteer who has been attempting to impersonate me to please be brought to the attention of the proper administrative functions. I am really tired of this behavior and it has been going on long enough. This same user has been attempting to impersonate me on not only wikipedia, but all its sister projects as well. I grow weary of such childish behavior of this caliber. - Zarbon (talk) 01:32, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

but i looked and looked, and there are no refs calling the Dragon Ball and Sailor Moon ppl super-anything. Duh! ActionFigureLover (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:53, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am inclined to agree. The whole thing should be deleted, per being WP:Original. I used to hav an account here a decade ago, but forgot password. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Appule (talk • contribs) 17:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am unhappy with the current setup. but lets just move on, policies are important (i read them). hey, thanks for calling me over from Frieza-Force, Mr. Zarbon. o yea, Zarbonzo Beans Salad bak on our forum will be cleaning Wikipedia also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jon Garth Murray (talk • contribs) 15:32, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]