Talk:List of fictional antiheroes: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Implementing WP:PIQA (Task 26)
 
(236 intermediate revisions by 92 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{Film|class=List|importance=na}}
{{Old AfD multi |date=December 31, 2006 |result='''keep''' |votepage=List of fictional anti-heroes |date2=3 June 2022 |result2='''No consensus''' |page2=List of fictional antiheroes}}
{{oldafdfull
{{not a forum|disagreements on a cited anti-hero's placement (see [[WP:NPOV]], [[WP:NOR]], and [[WP:V]] for relevant policy regarding why we don't decide which characters are anti-heroes)}}
| date = December 31, 2006
{{FAQ}}
| result = '''keep'''
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=List|
| votepage = List of fictional anti-heroes
{{WikiProject Film}}
{{WikiProject Fictional characters}}
}}
{{Broken anchors|links=
* <nowiki>[[List of Darker than Black characters#Hei|Hei]]</nowiki> The anchor (#Hei) has been [[Special:Diff/1032534854|deleted by other users]] before. <!-- {"title":"Hei","appear":{"revid":485498034,"parentid":485497415,"timestamp":"2012-04-04T11:55:18Z","removed_section_titles":[],"added_section_titles":["Hei","黒（ヘイ）","Yin","銀（イン）","In","Huang","黄（ホァン）","Hwan","Mao","猫（マオ）"]},"disappear":{"revid":1032534854,"parentid":1016988070,"timestamp":"2021-07-08T01:35:38Z","removed_section_titles":["Hei"],"added_section_titles":[]}} -->
}}
}}
{{not a forum|disagreements on a cited anti-hero's placement (see [[WP:NPOV]], [[WP:NOR]], and [[WP:V]] for relevant policy regarding why we don't decide which characters are anti-heroes)}}
==Severus Snape?==
Considering the events in <I>Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows</I> i believe that he should be included. [[User:66.41.117.220|66.41.117.220]] 21:10, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree and have added him to the list. <span>[[Image:Backpack.png|16 px|test]]</span> [[User:STHayden|<span style="color:#7C4B26;">'''STHayden'''</span>]] <sup>[ [[User Talk:STHayden|<span style="color:#7C4B26">'''Talk'''</span>]] ]</sup> 17:58, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

==awkward title==
This page has kind of an awkward title; I think it should be changed to 'list of fictional anti-heroes'. [[User:CameoAppearance|CameoAppearance]] 15:35, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
*I agree. I have also added some video game characters, as they belong just as much as the others. There is no Category:Video Game Characters that I could find, so i added one to computer and video game protagonists, as it's mostly the same. --[[User:Ifrit|Ifrit]] 12:02, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
::Why do we need the addition of "fictional" or "in fiction" at all? Where else would anti-heroes appear?--[[User:CWL]] 13:36, 15 July 2006 (CET)
:::Sometimes (it's quite rare) actual living people are referred to as anti-heroes in articles, newspapers, etc. It's pretty rare so you're question is completely valid (the old list was simply titled "list of anti-heroes"), but usually it's best to be as clear as possible. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 16:50, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
::::Not to be a grumpy old skeptic, but I am not entirely convinced of this. Could you maybe provide an example?[[User:CWL]] 04:08, 17 July 2006 (CET)
:::::Usually it's also incorrect usage: [http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/archive/p/pawlik/2004/pawlik021104.htm John Kerry as anti-hero], [http://www.alternet.org/election04/20345/ Eminem as anti-hero], [http://www.jkampfner.net/articles/ns200904_2.html Colin Powell, the anti-hero]. As I said, it's rare, and usually used incorrectly, but occasionally actual people (in politics and entertainment mostly) are dubbed anti-heroes, usually based on public persona. I'm not surprised that someone was unconvinced, but it happens, and adding "fictional" to the title doesn't really have any drawbacks in my opinion. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 08:35, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
::::::Ah, I see what you mean. Another problem would of course be caused by characters in fictional biographies who are based on real characters. Two such rather good examples of anti-heroes I can think of spontaneously are [[John Wilmot, 2nd Earl of Rochester]] in ''[[The Libertine (2005 film)|The Libertine]]'' and [[Mozart]] in ''[[Amadeus]]''. --[[User:c-w-l|CWL]] 18:20, 1 August 2006 (CET)

Your definition of anti-hero is off. Anti-heroes are not villains or bad characters who lead to good ends. The real definition of an anti-hero is often one who walks away from a battle. Frodo Baggins in the Lord of the Rings is an example of a true literary anti-hero.
:Sorry but if there is a "real definition" of an anti-hero it isn't "walking away from a battle". I suggest reading a bit of [[anti-hero]]. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 18:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

::Right. Frodo is the classic "reluctant hero". [[User:Doczilla|Doczilla]] 22:21, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

== Lucifer ==
This subject is highly interesting, but also very subjective, and therefore the list here is very incomplete. I've got an interesting addition, an "ultimate anti-hero" of sorts, which I would like to throw out here in the Talk page first. My ultimate anti-hero is, of course, Lucifer as depicted in Paradise Lost. I'm not sure if Milton intended to make him an anti-hero, but it sure seemed that way to me when I first read the thing in college. I didn't want to edit this choice into the main page because as an atheist living in the USA, a major source of wikipedia readers, I know only too well how easily this religious stuff sets off flame wars on the internet. People might have problems with me labeling Satan as a "hero," or that I've put him into a list of ''fictional'' anti-heroes, etc. But I do believe this character is a perfect embodiment of an "anti-hero" and I feel he should be at the head of the list. What do you guys think? [[User:Tren001|Tren001]] 14:41, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
:Honestly the most important thing is that it's sourced, as long as there's a reliable source saying Lucifer from ''Paradise Lost'' is/can be seen as an anti-hero there shouldn't be any problem in adding him to the list. And don't worry, flame wars here aren't very widespread since Wikipedia isn't a discussion forum and there are policies against it. Also, as a sidenote, I rarely see religion strongly influencing articles, the [[Talk:Evolution]] page shows how the editors have kept religious objections/manipulations off the article civilly and efficiently. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 17:23, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
::Fair enough. I've put good ol' Lucifer into the list, along with a website listing some Romantic-era criticism of Paradise Lost expounding on Satan's role as a hero from such literary luminaries like William Blake, Sam Coledrige, and Mary Shelley's husband! [[User:Tren001|Tren001]] 02:10, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
::An antihero has to have some redeeming qualities Lucifer being the imbodiment of pure evil has none therfore he is not an antihero. He also fails to meet the cirteria stated at the top of the page. [[User:Eno-Etile|Eno-Etile]] 01:56, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
:::You're wrong. The devil has been portrayed sympathetically many times in literature. I'd even go further to say Satan is more deserving of a spot than Patrick Bateman who has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 02:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
::::Furthermore, don't remove Lucifer's section until a consensus was reached. But since sources are cited referring to him as an antihero, thats enough, so deleting him would be a case of [[WP:NPOV]].[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 02:09, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
:::::Most refrences to Satan in Literature especially the earlier ones make him a villian and the progentor of evil even more sympathetic refrences don't usually deny that he is the imbodiment of evil. As for Patrick Baetmen I am not familiar with that character so I cannot make any comparison. [[User:Eno-Etile|Eno-Etile]] 02:12, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
:::::::PLease don't remove my discussion comments, unless that was just a mistake. Furthermore, his mention on the page specifically refers to his role in Paradise Lost, in which he is a sympathetic character. We're not referring to his roles in general.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 02:21, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
:::::::: Ya the removal was a mistake if it was me I was having a problem getting my edit to go through might have removed yours when I finally got mine saved. Still the author never intended Lucifer to be a "good guy" or have good guy qualities. I will admit that I never read the book but I did study the keypoints of it, a brife summary, and John Milton in English class. Anyway part of the wikipedia article on the poem does explain and argue against any supposedly noble attributes Lucifer may seem to have.Check under the 3rd paragraph under satan on the Paradise Lost article.[[User:Eno-Etile|Eno-Etile]] 06:06, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
:::::::::Those are some theories by people who have read the book based on what what was written. Milton didn't come out and say what the story meant, it was for the reader to decide. You don't think he's an antihero, fine, but others do and a source has been cited so he's going to stay.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 11:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

== Sources ==


== Donnie Darko ==
This list still hasn't managed to incorporate a single source or external reference, leaving it completely POV and OR, against Wikipedia policies. These are the reasons similar lists have been deleted in the past, such as [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of anti-heroes]]. In addition, video games are generally not included in literary/fictional canon, as they are very subjective and not critically reviewed in the same context as literature, film, or even television. At this rate the list will probably continue to grow without any sources being added and eventually be nominated for deletion. Try to provide references or sources for existing examples, or remove them, before adding even more if you want the list to last. Just some advice, and my own opinions. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 12:44, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
:First of all, I disagree completely with your comment on video games. In case you haven't played any recent ones (say, from the past ten to twelve years), most video games tell a story, with often complex characters. Even if it is an interactive story of which your degree of success might depend on your skill or perseverance, most video games have only one ending, or a few endings with very small variations. Should the characters of these stories not be counted because of the way games are ''reviewed''? I think, comparing video games to literature, that playability is equal to readability, and the games story is a moot point. Many books have been made into games, and even vice versa. I feel they belong as much as any other fictional characters. Second, demanding citations for everything is just silly. How would you citate something like this? Is there an official bureau for the listing anti-heroes? Which "source" would "people" find "credible"? Think about it... it is like demanding a source on the statement that most people like candy. Okay, exaggarated example, but you get my drift. As for new additions to the list running the risk of coming out of control... well, it is always modifiable and we can discuss the inclusions to a great degree on this very page. --[[User:81.191.14.79|81.191.14.79]] 01:19, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
::I'm guessing you're actually [[User:Ifrit]] who added the section. Please read the official Wikipedia policies on [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiability]] and [[WP:NOR|original research]] and you'll see that the notion of asking for credible sources isn't silly, and if you think it is you can take your arguments there. You'll also see on the discussion of the old list's deletion that most people there didn't think it was too silly either. I'm not going to debate for or against the merits of video games; the simple fact is there are critical reviews for most literature and a substantial amount on film and television, but unfortunately not a lot on video games, which hinders verifiability.
::As for your question on where to find sources, references can include books, magazines and web sites to name a few. For example, many editions of books will have an introduction, and they may address the nature of the hero, as is the case with ''A Clockwork Orange'' for example, where Alex' qualities as an anti-hero are discussed.
::If you want a guideline for "which" "sources" "people" "would" "find" "credible", "you" "can" "check" "[[Wikipedia:Reliable sources]]". With popular culture the standards for sources are much more lenient, but verifiability with something as inherently subjective as this is still important. It doesn't need to be a government, United Nations, or Harvard document to qualify as a reliable source, but we still need an external source and simply discussing every objectionable addition here would still amount to original research.
::I had edited the old list of anti-heroes and thought it was relatively useful and interesting, but it still failed to meet the encyclopedic standards Wikipedia is aiming for. And I think that in its current state, this list suffers from the same problems. Finding sources and avoiding examples where verifiability is difficult/impossible would fix these problems. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 16:52, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
:::I've just added a few sources/examples. Sources are particularly difficult for video games and television. I think that for video games sources can include articles in (online) magazines, but forums and blogs are unusable (which applies to all categories). --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 17:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
The artical said that an Anti-Hero had to have eventual redeption via love, sacrifece, ect.[[User:24.186.66.167|24.186.66.167]] 04:14, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


Donnie Darko, the main character of [[Donnie Darko|a film by the same name]], is a prime example of an anti-hero in my opinion. To put it simply, he commits all sorts of crimes at first, but then ends up saving the universe. -[[User:Hazethebassist|Hazethebassist]] ([[User talk:Hazethebassist|talk]]) 23:00, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
== Images ==


:Wikipedia needs reliable sources, not personal opinions. If you don't have a reliable source that says that Darko is an anti-hero, then that is original research on your part and it should be deleted. [[User:Edward321|Edward321]] ([[User talk:Edward321|talk]]) 00:05, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
I added some images since I though the article was looking a little dull. I tried to use the most iconic examples instead of more obscure or contemporary ones, as well as those which have articles discussing their anti-heroic attributes. Any thoughts on replacing them, getting rid of them etc. can go here. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 19:49, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
::I'll find a source, just give me a little time. Are there guidelines on the sources? [[Special:Contributions/174.31.145.37|174.31.145.37]] ([[User talk:174.31.145.37|talk]]) 16:15, 25 July 2010 (UTC) (Hazethebassist)
:::I found one, but somebody may want to clean up my work, since I'm not the most professional Wikipedian. Also, if you need more sources, someone else can find one, because I don't know what to look for in a source. -[[User:Hazethebassist|Hazethebassist]] ([[User talk:Hazethebassist|talk]]) 16:26, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
::::It's not a blog or a wiki, which seems to be what 90% of the people who bother to list a source use. (Obviously, those are not reliable sources.) I think the one that you found should be good enough for inclusion in a list. [[User:Edward321|Edward321]] ([[User talk:Edward321|talk]]) 23:15, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm not part of Wikipedia but I do believe that someone who is should add Damon Salvatore to the list. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/74.15.36.108|74.15.36.108]] ([[User talk:74.15.36.108|talk]]) 01:35, 15 August 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


== Hannibal ==
== Gollum revisited ==


: Any objection to moving Gollum to the film section? The article cited (which is now a 404 error and should be relinked through the Internet Archive) was Serkis talking about the movie version of Gollum, and not the book version. Gollum certainly was not a hero (or antihero) in Tolkien's work. --[[User:Stevehim|Stevehim]] ([[User talk:Stevehim|talk]]) 03:19, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm not familiar with the books, so I'm just going to ask what qualifies Hannibal as an anti-hero. In the movies he doesn't usually do anything heroic and isn't actually the protagonist. Most heroic actions he takes throught the movies that I can think of were diversions so he could accomplish his own objectives (such as escape from police custody).
:Read ''Hannibal''. That's all I say. The movie is much different. In the book ''Hannibal'' he is the protagonist, his tragic past is explored and he does one or two heroic things.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 02:19, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
::The [[Hannibal Lecter]] article here outlines the character's biography and the second source I just added to the list discusses his classification as an anti-hero extensively. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 02:41, 16 August 2006 (UTC)


::{{Done}} [[User:Adrian J. Hunter|Adrian&nbsp;'''J.'''&nbsp;Hunter]]<sup>([[User talk:Adrian J. Hunter|talk]]•[[Special:contributions/Adrian J. Hunter|contribs]])</sup> 05:58, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
::: This is not right. First he was created as a villain (voted one of the best two villains of the 20th century!). He does not deserve classification as an anti-hero anymore than Darth Vader deserves it for attacking the Emperor in the end. The fact Dr. Doom saved the whole world a number of times doesn't make him an anti-hero. --[[User:Leocomix|Leocomix]] 14:43, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


I think that the list is entirely debatable and dependent on personal opinion - for example, Stephen Dedalus of Portrait of an Artist as a Young Man, it could be argued, is a hero to secular society <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.195.197.192|71.195.197.192]] ([[User talk:71.195.197.192|talk]]) 21:35, 31 October 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::: Too bad for you. You can't remove cited examples because you disagree with them. What if I disagreed with your classification of Namor as an antihero? Would that give me a right to remove it? That, and I'm not sure if you have even read ''[[Hannibal (novel)|Hannibal]]'' and ''[[Hannibal Rising]]'', both which have Hannibal in the protagonist's role and is displayed more of an antihero than a villain.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 17:02, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
:That's why people are supposed to cite a reliable source that says a specific character is an antihero. Bowser being a playable character does not make him an anti-hero. Some guys blog or another Wiki won't work, either. If you've got a reliable source and include it in your edit, feel free to add Stephen Daedalus to this article. [[User:Edward321|Edward321]] ([[User talk:Edward321|talk]]) 03:53, 1 November 2010 (UTC)


== The Crow ==
::::: That's the point I am trying to make. Namor as a anti-hero is not my opinion. It is an opinion stated so many times by so many different persons that its omission was a glaring mistake. Also I doubt you could find many people that disagree. In other words there is a consensus. Second, there is always an opinion expressed in any Encyclopedia article, if only editorial policy such as what to include, the form that articles must have, etc. From the aricle history you seem to act as de facto editor (in the publishing sense not just WP sense) for that article. Well, when you look down that list, you don't get a sense of what a anti-hero is. You seem to subscribe to the idea that it is not definable. That's proper not for an encyclopedia neither for an editor. It's not too bad for me but too bad for the article and ultimately too bad for the readers. That's who the article should be written for. Being a protagonist is not enough to take on heroic qualities. You cannot gloss over the fact that the public in general doesn't see Lecter as a anti-hero and that this is enough to make the categorisation wrong. This categorisation is clearly your opinion and you chose the excuse that another said it to impose it. I don't intend to bother with an article that is someone's private ground.--[[User:Leocomix|Leocomix]] 11:40, 29 July 2007 (UTC)


Might I suggest that "The Crow" also belongs on this list? James O'Barr's graphic novel version could be listed under comics.
::::::And there's a large consensus that considers Hannibal to be an antihero. You just happen to disagree. You personally don't see him as an antihero, and frankly, I don't care. If we were to remove every single anti-hero thats contested there'd be nothing left. And for the record, I'm not the one who added Hannibal to the list. Furthermore, Hannibal ''was'' an antihero in the last two books. And he's far more of an antihero than Patrick Batman or Alex DeLarge, but I don't see you complaining about them.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 16:43, 29 July 2007 (UTC)


[[User:Nytebreid|Nytebreid]] ([[User talk:Nytebreid|talk]]) 08:13, 3 November 2010 (UTC)Nytebreid 11/3/10
== The Devil's Rejects ==
:While I think he does, too, Wikipedia is not about personal opinions, its about finding reliable sources that support the claim. [[User:Edward321|Edward321]] ([[User talk:Edward321|talk]]) 12:15, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
Regardless of what a review says, how are they anti-heroes? They brutally rape and murder hundreds of innocent people for fun. Despite caring for their own, they display no heroic qualities. --[[User:DrBat|DrBat]] 00:08, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
:They are no worse than Patrick Bateman or Alex DeLarge. The former in question has no human qualities whatsoever. As long as there is a source citing them as antiheroes then they stay on the article. I'm really getting tired of people trying to remove characters from this category and violating [[NPOV]]. And "''despite'' caring for their own"? Their selfless love for each other was one of the major parts of the films and seperates them for two dimensional slashers.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 00:14, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
::Then remove Bateman and DeLarge as well. Two wrongs don't make a right.
::The Rejects have little to none of the qualities mentioned at the top of the page. They're remorseless mass-murderers who kill for fun. They aren't redeemed, they don't have noble motives, ect. Plenty of villains care for their loved ones; that alone isn't enough. --[[User:DrBat|DrBat]] 00:27, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
:::I'm sorry to be harsh but your opinion, CyberGhostface's and mine have no bearing on whether or not they should be included since there are sources to back it up; leaving it to WP editors to decide and debate in this case would constitute [[WP:NOR|original research]]. Although I haven't seen the films in question, I'm guessing the characters qualify as anti-heroes not because of redemptive qualities but simply because they are the focus of the films, the same justification is used for others like Shakespeare's Richard III, and the two mentioned above. The term "anti-hero" is a complex term and can be applied to a vast array of characters, regardless of their relative moral reprehensibility. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 00:55, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
::::That should be clarified in the beginning when it talks about characteristics.--[[User:DrBat|DrBat]] 01:41, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
:::::They don't have to display any heroic qualities to be an anti-hero - otherwise they would just be "heros with some downfalls". It has more to do with their role in the context of the plot and less to do with whether they do any "good" deeds at all. The characteristics on the main page are example, not the criterion. - Xvall
::::::We don't have to justify the listed examples. External sources called them anti-heroes. The external sources can be wrong. Conversely, we don't have to alter the definition to make it fit every example that the external sources have named. [[User:Doczilla|Doczilla]] 20:20, 25 May 2007 (UTC)


==Dante from Devil May Cry==
== Sourcing Problem ==
I remaber seeing Dante on the Anti hero list . So why was it remove from the list ? There was sorce from a review .--[[User:Ratchetcomand|Ratchetcomand]] 00:55, 9/14/2006 (UTC)
*The source was a player review, although it superficially looked like an official review (my mistake). Player reviews, like customer reviews, are not valid sources. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 19:49, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


I have just added Eric Draven (The Crow), William Munny (The Unforgiven), Jackson Teller (Sons of Anarchy), and The MacManus Brothers (Boondock Saints) to this list. Unfortunately, I cannot seem to get the format down for my references to stay. Any suggestions?[[User:JTBA75|JTBA75]] ([[User talk:JTBA75|talk]]) 11:04, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
==V==
:Short term, I have removed them as unsourced. What are your sources? Have you looked at how existing sources are listed? [[User:Edward321|Edward321]] ([[User talk:Edward321|talk]]) 15:14, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Somebody needs to add V from V for Vendetta. He is an archetypal antihero.[[User:69.9.30.57|69.9.30.57]] 03:48, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
:He's already there under comic books. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 08:00, 25 September 2006 (UTC)


== Forgotten antihero? ==
==Batman==
I don't think Batman is actually an anti-hero. True he works with a mask and at night and he can be a bit dark, but in the comics he's in league with the GCPD. Furthermore he disapproves of some other masked vigilantes and their more agressive means of handling things - like Huntress and Azrael. He's got this code and he's all noble, and he even risks his life to save villains from being murdered, something an anti-hero would never do. [[User:86.17.163.37|86.17.163.37]] 11:45, 27 October 2006 (UTC) (Harley)
:Sorry to be curt but your own opinion (and mine) doesn't have any merit in terms of what to include in this article: we have a reliable source claiming he's an anti-hero and that's all that's needed. Second, you don't seem completely clear on what an anti-hero is based on your objections. Third, this has already been argued to death at [[Talk:Anti-hero]] when there was a list on the page and Batman was included under the vigilante section, so if you want to see a debate over Batman you might enjoy that. He's staying since we have a source, but if you find a source arguing against a classification of him as anti-hero we can add that it's disputed. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 14:33, 27 October 2006 (UTC)


Could Edmond Dantès from ''The Count of Monte Cristo'' technically be an antihero? --[[Special:Contributions/24.229.63.177|24.229.63.177]] ([[User talk:24.229.63.177|talk]]) 17:43, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
==Concerning the disagreements above==
The people above discussing who is and isn't an anti-hero seem to disagree on what an anti-hero is. I suggest you figure out exactly what that is. I think it's far-fetched to justify that by what other sources have said so. Anyone can refer to any character as an anti-hero.
:[[Anti-hero]] is already defined. Although you may think it's far-fetched, verifiability is an important feature which Wikipedia actively seeks out, hence the importance of using reliable sources. You're absolutely right that anyone can refer to any character as an anti-hero, but that doesn't make the assessment correct or suitable for inclusion in this list; using reliable sources is helpful since the classifications are made by (usually) people with knowledge on the subject, and/or reflect established public opinion. Hope that helps. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 04:23, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


Bryan Mills from Taken, Jesse Pinkman from Breaking Bad and Darth Vader are all antiheroes too. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Futuremoviewriter|Futuremoviewriter]] ([[User talk:Futuremoviewriter|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Futuremoviewriter|contribs]]) 07:37, 2 November 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
==Duke Nukem==
If you don't mind me asking, wouldn't [[Duke Nukem (character)|Duke Nukem]], a well known video game character, be an anti-hero? I mean he's willing to save the world from destruction but has a lot of flaws such as his love for constant drinking, cigar smoking, gun firing, alien killing and destruction, and womanization of strippers and prostitutes as well as generally arrogant, cocky, and seemingly carefree attitude about things. What do you think?


== Patrick Bateman? ==
:All you have to do is find a reliable source that describes him as an anti-hero. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 15:20, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
What about Patrick Bateman from [[American Psycho]]? His own [[Patrick_Bateman|Wikipedia page]] mentions him as an 'Antihero' and gives two sources, one of which is broken. This is the working link, where the article states Patrick Bateman as being an antihero.


EDIT: Sorry, I never looked under the "Literature" section, he is already there. Unable to delete this as I do not have an account. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/79.97.38.21|79.97.38.21]] ([[User talk:79.97.38.21|talk]]) 14:53, 16 December 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Here you go:<br>
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2008/jun/12/breteastonellis <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/79.97.38.21|79.97.38.21]] ([[User talk:79.97.38.21|talk]]) 14:50, 16 December 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
http://www.gamingworldx.com/news/DukeNukemArrivesonZodiac.shtml<br>
http://www.mediafamily.org/kidscore/chart.asp?ID=3243<br>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Fictional_anti-heroes<br>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_Nukem:_Manhattan_Project<br>


== Mad Max ==
Also, 3D Realms website itself calls him an anti-hero as well.


Max Rockatansky from the Mad Max series is also an embodiment of the antihero due to his appearance as well as his reluctance to help out others and ultimately sacrifice himself for the greater good. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/166.205.8.154|166.205.8.154]] ([[User talk:166.205.8.154|talk]]) 07:18, 7 January 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Good enough?


== Adding context of each character? ==
[[User:Vgamer101|Vgamer101]] 22:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
:I wouldn't qualify any as particularly reliable. Wikipedia obviously doesn't cite itself as a source, and the others aren't too substantial/reliable. In future you'll want articles/reviews like [http://pc.ign.com/articles/361/361107p1.html this], or including where 3D Realms calls him an anti-hero. I included it in the list with the review already linked. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 23:11, 18 November 2006 (UTC)


I don't know why they are called anti-heroes. This list looks [[WP:NPOV|plainly opinionated]] and [[WP:OR|originally researched]] to me. How do sources verify characters as [[anti-hero]]es? --[[User:George Ho|George Ho]] ([[User talk:George Ho|talk]]) 07:52, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
You're right. The ones I gave sucked, but that was because I was too lazy. Just to see if I did any better at finding reliable info, I got two hopefully better ones:<br>


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0280617/keywords<br>
http://www.3drealms.com/news/1998/02/duke_nukem_movi.html<br>


The first one is a bit vague but does show that when Duke Nukem is searched for, Anti Hero is one of the keywords that comes up. And that is IMDB talking there.


3/17/13 I agree, many of these should be considered Byronic heroes, which are ancestors to antiheroes but not the same thing. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.209.17.182|71.209.17.182]] ([[User talk:71.209.17.182|talk]]) 17:14, 17 March 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
The second one is an archived news piece from the 3DR website that quotes another now defunct link or website which itself is, as you would put it, may not be reliable. But the fact that 3DR put it there with the "anti-hero" word indicates to me that they agree with the term because they could have easily quoted it and then omitted the term if it wasn't true.


== Lord Byron ==
Any better?


Lord Byron's works defined the modern antihero. At the very least Conrad (''The Corsair'', 1814), Don Juan (''Don Juan'', c. 1818-1824) and Byron himself (from his semiautobiographical epic ''Childe Harold's Pilgrimage'' (1812–1818)) should be in any list of this sort. [[Special:Contributions/184.56.230.216|184.56.230.216]] ([[User talk:184.56.230.216|talk]]) 22:32, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
[[User:Vgamer101|Vgamer101]] 02:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


== The Girls of How to Rock ==
:Since IMDb has a lot of user-editting with categories, keywords, etc. (I believe, could be wrong though) like Wikipedia it's not considered reliable in this context. And I'm not sure about the second one either, since it's quoted from something called "Metaverse's Sleaze site", which as you pointed out, seems dubious and 3DRealms even disparages it. The main thing is just pulling a quote from reputable, large scale sites like gamespot or ipc (I'm not too sure about video games but those seem the most reputable). Getting sources is just a formality (and with video games it's slightly more lenient) but it helps maintain higher standards, and with obvious cases you can usually find a source pretty quickly. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 17:07, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


I consider Kacey Simon, Molly Garfunkel, and Grace King to each be antiheroes. David Israel told me on Twitter that he agrees, a little. I propose that they each be added to the list of TV antiheroes then. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Futuremoviewriter|Futuremoviewriter]] ([[User talk:Futuremoviewriter|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Futuremoviewriter|contribs]]) 02:29, 1 November 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
==Blake's 7==
:Your opinion, my opinion, and some guy on Twitter;s opinion are all irrelevant. Wikipedia requires reliable sources. [[User:Edward321|Edward321]] ([[User talk:Edward321|talk]]) 14:19, 1 November 2012 (UTC)


David Israel is the writer of the show, hence, his opinion is not irrelevent and he is reliable. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Futuremoviewriter|Futuremoviewriter]] ([[User talk:Futuremoviewriter|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Futuremoviewriter|contribs]]) 23:38, 4 November 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Most of [[Blake's 7]] characters are bitchy outlaws and certainly antiheroes, but I've been modest and only inserted Kerr Avon as the most obvious one. I was surprised not to see any B7 characters on the TV list, considering how much the "bunch of criminals bickering in space" concept influenced later tv sci-fi, notably [[Farscape]] and [[Firefly]]. I'll give more links for reference if needed, shouldn't be difficult if Google comes up with 27,500 pages with the search string "Avon+antihero".{{unsigned|Snowgrouse}}
:: Someone on Twitter claiming to be the writer for the show does not meet Wikipedia guidelines for reliable sources. [[User:Edward321|Edward321]] ([[User talk:Edward321|talk]]) 00:18, 5 November 2012 (UTC)


The Twitter is David Israel's and therefore, a reliable source. ([[User talk:Futuremoviewriter|talk]] <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|undated]] comment added 06:31, 18 November 2012 (UTC)</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
== Images ==
::Twitter is still not a reliable source. Please read [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources]. [[User:Edward321|Edward321]] ([[User talk:Edward321|talk]]) 15:52, 18 November 2012 (UTC)


==red hood==
I know people like to have the images in the article; they make the article more attractive to read, but they're really not necessary. I don't need to see [[Travis Bickle]] here when I can go straight to the character's own article page or to [[You talkin' to me?]] for this specific image. The images themselves are not discussed in the text and thus by definition they are decorative. If you want a second opinion on this, try [[Wikipedia:Fair use review]] and I guarantee you other admins will tell you the same. <span style="font-family:Verdana; ">'''[[User:Howcheng|<span style="color:#33C;">howcheng</span>]]''' <small>{[[User talk:Howcheng|chat]]}</small></span> 21:17, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
I added Jason Todd the red hood I was going to try to put a link but i didn't do it correctly so I don't can't. the Wikipedia article on Jason Todd also says he's antihero and uses IGN as a link for that in that wiki article. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/97.91.184.128|97.91.184.128]] ([[User talk:97.91.184.128|talk]]) 20:37, 26 January 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Your first objection to inclusion of the images hinges on the argument that they are unnecessary, but necessity is completely POV: one could argue all images or even this entire encyclopedia is unnecessary. Your second objection that images are only to be included when the images ''themselves'' are discussed rather than simply the subject of the image (if I understand your argument correctly) seems quite inaccurate, since if that were the case only articles concerning notable photographs, portraits, etc would contain images.
:This list includes images of some of the more notable and iconic fictonal anti-heroes of each given media, which are the subjects of this article. As such their inclusion falls under [[WP:FUC]] #8, specifically the identification of the subject of an article or illustrating relevant points (in this case the "points" are the examples). --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 22:29, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


==Red Hood and link==
::Yes, you are correct in your interpretation of my comments, and this is entirely in line with the Foundation's stance on non-free images (see [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2007-February/027547.html] for a recent email and [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Kat Walsh's statement]] for discussion). In reality, this has ''always'' been part of the [[Wikipedia:Five pillars|Five pillars]] but has until recently only be laxly enforced. <span style="font-family:Verdana; ">'''[[User:Howcheng|<span style="color:#33C;">howcheng</span>]]''' <small>{[[User talk:Howcheng|chat]]}</small></span> 00:21, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I finally managed to figure out how to link it. I used the IGN article that was used on Jason Todd's wiki page. Since its good enough for that wiki, its good enough of a source here as well. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/97.91.184.128|97.91.184.128]] ([[User talk:97.91.184.128|talk]]) 04:35, 27 January 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
==Are This Character Anti Heroes?==
-Lev Peskov from The Century Trilogy
-Impmon from digimon tamers (3rd series)
-Kick Ass (Dave Lizweski)
-The 3 protagonists of GTA V <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/79.41.148.76|79.41.148.76]] ([[User talk:79.41.148.76|talk]]) 08:30, 6 October 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


== Elric of Melniboné ==


Really, the opening of this wiki page alone should convince anyone to add him to the literature list, but just keep on reading and there should be no doubt. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elric_of_Melnibon%C3%A9
== Why was the PREDATORS remove ?==


But he is the arch typical antihero, pretty much all he characteristics listed earlier is found with this character. <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/85.167.14.32|85.167.14.32]] ([[User talk:85.167.14.32|talk]]) 06:57, 27 November 2014 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Why where the Predators remove on the List. It even have a link to prove that the Alien race are Anti Heros .
: It does not matter whether you or I think a character is an antihero. Wikipedia requires reliable sources. [[User:Edward321|Edward321]] ([[User talk:Edward321|talk]]) 16:04, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
.--[[User:Jackbalck23|Jackbalck23]] 00:55, 9/14/2006 (UTC)


Did you even see the link? There should be sources there...
:"showing them as a kind of noble, anti-hero, alien culture" does not specifically call them anti-heroes. "kind of" is weak. [[User:Doczilla|Doczilla]] 23:51, 5 March 2007 (UTC)


Maybe the entirety of the Predator race should not be included but, instead, specific Predators such as Broken Tusk from the original Aliens vs. Predator comic, or the Predators from the AvP film. - CawH <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/138.88.55.248|138.88.55.248]] ([[User talk:138.88.55.248|talk]]) 01:31, August 28, 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
In any case, he's pretty much the original antihero in the fantasy genre... Just do a simple google search for Elric and antihero, and you will find a lot of sources... <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/85.167.14.32|85.167.14.32]] ([[User talk:85.167.14.32|talk]]) 12:20, 28 November 2014 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:If you can find a source referring to them as such, then go ahead and add it.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 03:14, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


He's also mentioned on this article a couple of times as being an anti-hero.
==Elric of Melnibone==
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Moorcock
I can't see any reason why Elric shouldn't be on this list, he is called an anti-hero on his own page as well. While he should be placed here, the source for that statement is not cited, so if anybody can find an official reference for Elric, it would be very helpful.{{unsigned|76.203.14.200 }}
Here's someone analyzing the character:
http://www.stainlesssteeldroppings.com/elric-of-melnibone-michael-moorcock <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/85.167.14.32|85.167.14.32]] ([[User talk:85.167.14.32|talk]]) 20:36, 1 December 2014 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:The website does not meet Wikipedia guidelines on reliable sources. The Wikipedia page [[Micheal Moorcock]] provides no sources for the opinion that Elric is an anti-hero. [[User:Edward321|Edward321]] ([[User talk:Edward321|talk]]) 21:58, 1 December 2014 (UTC)


== Star Wolf ==
==James Bond==
SchroCat reverted my edits for James Bond. But per this page they had no reason to do so: "Each of these examples has been identified by a critic as an antihero, although the classification is somewhat subjective. Some of the entries may be disputed by other sources and some may contradict all established definitions of antihero."
I provided a legitimate source for literary bond, and now I have several others for literary Bond. Regardless of whether Bond is cited by more sources as simply being a hero or action hero and not an anti hero, this page says that as long as "a critic" (even if 999 other critics disagree) from a reliable source considers a character an anti hero, they can be on the list. I have three books and several other web based sources from newspapers and magazines. So I have the right to put it back up, which I will. [[User:Kinfoll1993|Kinfoll1993]] ([[User talk:Kinfoll1993|talk]]) 22:32, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
: Your sourcing looks good, especially considering this page has been a magnet for unsourced or poorly sourced opinions. [[User:Edward321|Edward321]] ([[User talk:Edward321|talk]]) 16:23, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
::Thanks, Edward321. [[User:Kinfoll1993|Kinfoll1993]] ([[User talk:Kinfoll1993|talk]]) 16:43, 19 April 2015 (UTC)


To be fair, James Bond is not an anti-hero, especially not at the time he was written. He may have traits that in 2021 would be undesirable, but at the time, a womanizing assassin was a perfect hero. [[User:Wubbox|Wubbox]] ([[User talk:Wubbox|talk]]) 14:11, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Please add Star Wolf in the list. While they are "just goons" in the Star Fox 64, they slowly become anti-heroes (and even allies) in the next games. This is more highlighted in Star Fox Assault, where Wolf advices Fox which later helped in the hero's struggles. In Star Fox Command, Star Wolf team is seeking for redemption, and the default path shows that they did receive redemption. <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/122.2.127.32|122.2.127.32]] ([[User talk:122.2.127.32|talk]]) 14:51, 3 May 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
:If you can find a source that refers to them as such, go ahead.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 20:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
::My reference would be the game itself, but I don't know how to cite it. The articles about [[Star Wolf (Star Fox)|Star Wolf]] and [[List of characters in the Star Fox series|character list]] contain references itself, though they don't provide the link (the references are the manuals and, as I said before, the game).


== Does a Review calling some fictional character an anti-hero qualify? ==
::The thing is, they won't show their anti-heroic attitude until the third game in the series which is [[Star Fox Assault]]. They will continue to do so up to the recent game, [[Star Fox Command]]. In the [[Star Fox 64|second game]], they lack characterization, but as I stated, this was resolved in later series, where the core Star Wolf is made up of [[List_of_characters_in_the_Star_Fox_series#Wolf_O'Donnell|Wolf O'Donnell]], [[List_of_characters_in_the_Star_Fox_series#Panther|Panther Caluroso (Caruso/Caroso in US)]], and [[List_of_characters_in_the_Star_Fox_series#Leon_Powalski|Leon Powalski]]. <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/122.2.127.32|122.2.127.32]] ([[User talk:122.2.127.32|talk]]) 14:18, 4 May 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
:::You need a secondary source describing them as antiheroes for them to be included in the list, otherwise it's original research. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 17:47, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


I've authored two books, featuring my character Charlotte Aiken. I was going over the reviews for them tonight on Amazon and the most recent reviewer stated "Charlotte is the perfect anti-hero." I have no idea who this reviewer is, as s/he made the review under the name "CMT."
:::How can I site if my sources are simply the manual and the game? Nintendo sites never cared about the characters outside the main team in the game. =/ <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/122.2.127.32|122.2.127.32]] ([[User talk:122.2.127.32|talk]]) 08:16, 5 May 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
::::Just search "Star Wolf" and "antihero" on google and if you find a reputable source (I.e. not a geocities website) then you can add it.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 15:35, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


I've had people tell me Charlotte was an anti-hero, but here it is in print now for the first time.
:::::ArwingLanding.Net is a reputable source - a big conundrum for Star Fox information. The following links state the Star Wolf team's profiles about their "position".
:::::http://www.arwinglanding.net/sfds/index.php?page=characters
:::::http://www.arwinglanding.net/sf2/index.php?page=enemies
:::::In addition, the official manga for Star Fox 64 explicitly shows how Wolf feels towards Star Fox.
:::::http://arwinglanding.net/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=2 <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/122.2.112.253|122.2.112.253]] ([[User talk:122.2.112.253|talk]]) 09:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
::::::Seriously... somtimes you people on Wikipedia takes this with "original reasearch" and sources too far. If it's in the games themselves, there's no reason a source other than the games would be needed. <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[Special:Contributions/81.216.251.71|81.216.251.71]] ([[User talk:81.216.251.71|talk]]) 12:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
:::::::It's Wikipedia policy. This isn't the place to debate the policy. Take it up at the talk page for the policy article. [[User:Doczilla|Doczilla]] 14:45, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
::::::::I've provided links. How come Wolf O'Donnell is not yet listed?


Joseph Steffen
: An Amazon review is not a reliable source. You would need a review by an actual critic. [[User:Edward321|Edward321]] ([[User talk:Edward321|talk]]) 03:55, 26 July 2015 (UTC)


== Classification of anti-hero ==
Honestly, it is ridiculous to require a source other than the game itself. The video game is a primary source openly displaying anti-heroic qualities for Wolf O'Donnell (The rest of his team is iffy, as they generally abide by his orders). There has to be a point where one source is enough, otherwise stating 2+2=4 and referencing your Ti-83 calculator counts as original research. I say Wolf O'Donnell qualifies, as he picks a fight with Fox McCloud on the basis of a rivalry yet helped Fox save the universe from the Aparoid invasion, nearly killing himself and his whole team in the process. [[User:Commander Regulus|Commander Regulus]] 01:53, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
:<s>Hey, if I can find someone calling Leatherface an antihero, surely you can find someone calling Wolf o'Donnell one, huh? *wink wink*--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 01:55, 1 November 2007 (UTC)</s>
::Sorry about that earlier post. But, as the rules go, you need at least one reliable source. If not, anyone can add anyone just because they think they fit the criteria. I've never played Star Fox, but Wolf does seem to fit the criteria, so finding a source should be easy. But adding a character based on his qualities in the story itself is not a reliable source in this case. I'd like to add [[Ben Linus]] to this article, for example, but since I have yet to find a review calling him such I have not.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 03:45, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


I think the classification of anti-hero needs to be highlighted in this topic. To my mind, there are two types of anti-hero - one being the sort that are previously amoral types who throughout the course of the narrative become heroes (e.g. Snake Pliskin, 'Escape from New York')or the types who do not, and are not going to reform, e.g Hannibal Lecter.
== Vegeta ==
The first kind - are they really anti-heroes, or heroes by 'stealth'?
The second kind are more realistic and appear in literature or media that doesn't compromise with the viewer to create a means of redemption, to give us that warm fuzzy feeling at the end that means there's hope for us all. A true anti-hero just is, from the one-dimensional cowboy bad guy, to those damaged or psychopathic like Alex in 'A Clockwork Orange'[[User:Cheshire Writer|Cheshire Writer]] ([[User talk:Cheshire Writer|talk]]) 10:47, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
:It looks like the article already has this but I am going to still comment about anti-hero should include:
:* previously amoral types that become heroes (this also includes former villains that were victims of the [[arch]]enemy.)
:*Heroes with sociopathic behaviours such as Alexandra Cabot from Josie, Thirty Thirty from BraveStarr, and McCoy & Worf from Star Trek.
:*And finally, wanted criminals such as Robin Hood. [[User:In Correct|In Correct]] ([[User talk:In Correct|talk]]) 05:04, 15 January 2017 (UTC)


== The Walter White Question ==
Is Vegeta from Dragon Ball Z an anti-hero too? He changes from a bad person to a good person and tries to save the world but still is selfish and arrogant. What do you guys think? <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:Darth Mandalorian|Darth Mandalorian]] ([[User talk:Darth Mandalorian|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Darth Mandalorian|contribs]]) 13:53, 10 May 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto-Unsigned -->
:Sorry but this isn't a forum for editors to discuss their opinions of which characters are anti-heroes. If you want a character included in the list you just need to provide a reliable source describing a character as an anti-hero. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 14:16, 10 May 2007 (UTC)


Can [[Walter White]] from ''[[Breaking Bad]]'' be classified as an antihero? [[User:Mr. Brain|Mr. Brain]] ([[User talk:Mr. Brain|talk]]) 19:54, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
As long as he is NOT a traditional type of hero, he qualifies. More specifically he qualifies under the following definition mentioned in the Anti hero article, some come across, and one I added. "An Unconvetional hero" "A character with, few if any, traditional values or characteristics" "a protagonist or notable figure who is conspicuously lacking in heroic qualities"
As he matches ALL those definitions, he can be clasified as an antihero. The only main characteristic he has is his pride. His honor itself is merely an aspect of his pride.
Before you start wondering WHY all those definitions, I have wondered the same, and I must admit, they can be confusing. It seems to me that the only type of character who can't be classified as an antihero is a traditional hero. [[User:Corrupt one|Corrupt one]] 02:18, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


== External links modified ==


Hello fellow Wikipedians,
== Jack Carver ==


I have just modified {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on [[List of fictional antiheroes]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=757387622 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
Could I add Jack Carver, from the Farcry games to this list as I believe he is a good case of an anti-hero... [[User:Smiley200|Smiley200]] 17:29, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120213122128/http://www.escmag.com/v5/features/feature.cfm?fv=5 to http://www.escmag.com/v5/features/feature.cfm?fv=5
:Your belief is not an encyclopedic source. We only add those for whom an appropriate source can be cited that specifically calls the character an anti-hero. Thanks for asking, though. We get so tired of people constantly making unsourced additions. Unsourced additions will get this article deleted for violating [[WP:NOR]] and [[WP:NPOV]]. [[User:Doczilla|Doczilla]] 17:40, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
:If you search for "Jack Carver" and "antihero" on Google and find a legit source that defines him as such (I.e. not a fan review on amazon) feel free to add it.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 17:45, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
: How about these:


When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Taking on the role of anti-hero Jack Carver, you’re thrown right into a tropical paradise... TeamXbox(spring 2006) and the official amazon review: Hapless antihero Jack Carver..., now i need a bit of help. How do you add references to this kind of thing? I'm not sure :( Thanks again [[User:Smiley200|Smiley200]] 19:09, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
:Just add the name and the source. (Sorry if you already did this, but no one responded yet)--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 04:14, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


{{sourcecheck|needhelp=}}
== The root of the problem with this page ==


Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 11:15, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
The root of the problem wit thispage is that there is NO CLEAR DIFINITION OF AN ANTIHERO! You could have Jack the Ripper as one, as he was a character with few if any traditional heroic qualities! This discusion page will not help much until we can find a way to deal with this matter. The only constant I have come across with definitions is that a person who is of a type recognized as a traditional hero type is not able to be counted as an antihero. That is the only constant.
[[User:Corrupt one|Corrupt one]] 02:36, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


==Multiple Adaptations?==
== Captain Jack Sparrow? ==


The character Fritz The Cat appeared in comic book (as this article has listed him) but he also has appeared in film. Also, Alexandra Cabot (From Josie and The Pussycats, not Law & Order ... is in an Archie Comics but also appeared in Television and Film.) Currently Alexandra is not in this article but this is still a problem when the characters appeared in multiple adaptations. Batman and Catwoman are other examples. Can I move these into a new table? [[User:In Correct|In Correct]] ([[User talk:In Correct|talk]]) 03:35, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
In the Pirates of the Carribean trilogy, Will Turner plays the archetypical hero, and Jack fulfills the role as anti-hero.
:If you can find a source labeling him as such (and I'd be very, very suprised if there isn't) then add him.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 15:24, 8 June 2007 (UTC)


== Why are villains being listed as anti-heroes? ==
Just as long as he is NOT considered a traditional type of hero, I think he may qualify. The root of that matter is that the definitions of Antihero are so broard, general and different, only traditional heroes types are excempted from being listed as some.


Why are characters like Beetlejuice being listed as an anti-heros? As I recall, he was the villain of the piece, with the couple having to save the daughter from his attentions?
Anyway, why is he mentioned in the part under Jack Sparrow, and jack is not? [[User:Corrupt one|Corrupt one]] 02:09, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


Your own definition of an anti-hero lists the character in question as the protagonist of the piece. One could make a case for either the Maitlands or Lydia Deetz as the protagonists, NOT Beetlejuice himself.


[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094721/plotsummary?ref_=tt_stry_pl imdb link]
== Discworld ==
[[Special:Contributions/68.207.135.148|68.207.135.148]] ([[User talk:68.207.135.148|talk]]) 14:47, 22 January 2017 (UTC)Wynni


:The short answer is [[WP:V]].


:The long version: We cannot have a "List of X's" with a series of long arguments over whether or not each item is or is not and "X". Wikipedia does not present "[[WP:NOR|original research]]" which is what each entry would be. Instead, we need to have [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] that directly state that each item fits the list.
=== Rincewind ===
The cowardly wizard [[Rincewind]] accidentally saves the world and does other heroic deeds in multiple [[Discworld]] novels.<br>
http://booksiloved.com/20/Color_of_Magic-Light_Fantastic.html: "Rincewind, on the other hand is the ultimate anti-hero. Not the dark side of heroism as portrayed by Clint Eastwood etc., but what you get if you distil all the heroism out, leaving only a streetwise but inept example of thaumaturgical detritus."<br>
http://www.sfsite.com/05a/last56.htm: "Rincewind is Pratchett's anti-hero"


:In this case, the [http://www.starpulse.com/turning-twenty-a-look-back-at-1988s-beetlejuice-1847846247.html source] cited says "Beetlejuice is the titular anti-hero..." - <span style="color:#D70270;background-color:white;">Sum</span><span style="color:#734F96;background-color:white;">mer</span><span style="color:#0038A8;background-color:white;">PhD</span><sup>[[User talk:SummerPhDv2.0|v2.0]]</sup> 18:48, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
=== Samuel Vimes ===
The (former) alcoholic policeman [[Samuel Vimes]], protagonist in multiple [[Discworld]] novels, is anti-authoritarian and cynical, equally dislikes all species, but has a strong sense of justice.<br>


== External links modified ==
http://www.lspace.org/books/analysis/andreas-kristiansen.html#Toc58643935: "Commander Sam Vimes is the most easily recognizable anti-hero"


Hello fellow Wikipedians,
:I don't see any problems with these references, so I added them. [[User:Terraxos|Terraxos]] ([[User talk:Terraxos|talk]]) 01:53, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


I have just modified one external link on [[List of fictional antiheroes]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=781469735 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
== Changed the top of the list page ==
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150402145718/http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/movies/movie-news/judge-dredd-john-wagner--1308794 to http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/movies/movie-news/judge-dredd-john-wagner--1308794


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


{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}
I removed this example of what an antihero may exhibit as a characteristic of being an antihero


Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 12:32, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
"*Eventual [[wikt:redeem|redemption]] through love, friendship, duty, etc."


== External links modified ==
Redemption heroes have become recognized as traditional, and are thus exempt from from being antiheroes solely on those grounds.[[User:Corrupt one|Corrupt one]] 02:13, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


Hello fellow Wikipedians,
== I am surprised no one mentioned Severus Snape ==


I have just modified 19 external links on [[List of fictional antiheroes]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=783808476 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
He's playing both sides - he could be siding with the enemy, with an ally, or even his own.
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131014171406/http://www.close-upfilm.com/features/Featuresarchive/fearandloathing.htm to http://www.close-upfilm.com/features/Featuresarchive/fearandloathing.htm
:Do you have a source?--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 22:50, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120217030430/http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/entertainment/ci_4423615 to http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/entertainment/ci_4423615
::Can I post book pages on the last two books?
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120418083550/http://optimusfilms.20m.com/directors/ks/ to http://optimusfilms.20m.com/directors/ks/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131014171406/http://www.close-upfilm.com/features/Featuresarchive/fearandloathing.htm to http://www.close-upfilm.com/features/Featuresarchive/fearandloathing.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080923021938/http://www.newsaskew.com/includes/feature.shtml?id=EEuApFEpEleOgHOogB&style=single to http://www.newsaskew.com/includes/feature.shtml?id=EEuApFEpEleOgHOogB&style=single
*Added {{tlx|dead link}} tag to http://www.free-times.com/index.php?cat=121304064644348&z_Issue_ID=11012912091306551&ShowArchiveArticle_ID=11003112092998631
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120218201412/http://www.eppc.org/publications/pubID.453/pub_detail.asp to http://www.eppc.org/publications/pubID.453/pub_detail.asp
*Added {{tlx|dead link}} tag to http://www.darkhorizons.com/news06/060807h.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140728223805/http://voices.yahoo.com/surviving-borat-where-sick-humor-satirizes-american-145575.html to http://voices.yahoo.com/surviving-borat-where-sick-humor-satirizes-american-145575.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090430181859/http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/thearts/2008101154_steig10.html to http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/thearts/2008101154_steig10.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120811130204/http://benedictcumberbatch.co.uk/shifting-sherlock-holmes-in.html to http://www.benedictcumberbatch.co.uk/shifting-sherlock-holmes-in.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070910235426/http://soapnet.go.com/behindthescenes/mimi/columns/2006/mimi_10252006.html to http://soapnet.go.com/behindthescenes/mimi/columns/2006/mimi_10252006.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110918091647/http://dir.salon.com/story/ent/feature/2003/05/13/spike_buffy/index1.html to http://dir.salon.com/story/ent/feature/2003/05/13/spike_buffy/index1.html
*Added {{tlx|dead link}} tag to http://metro.co.uk/2013/02/23/jack-taylor-got-a-credibility-it-scarcely-deserved--iain-glen-3508463/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121124010956/http://www.hollywoodjesus.com/comments/maurice/htdocs/2005_02_01_archive.html to http://www.hollywoodjesus.com/comments/maurice/htdocs/2005_02_01_archive.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120220054340/http://totallyjewish.com/entertainment/features_and_reviews/?content_id=3555 to http://totallyjewish.com/entertainment/features_and_reviews/?content_id=3555
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120111155208/http://ps2.ign.com/articles/710/710660p1.html to http://ps2.ign.com/articles/710/710660p1.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090223213837/http://the-chosen.com/records/ to http://www.the-chosen.com/records/
*Added {{tlx|dead link}} tag to http://videogames.yahoo.com/gamereview?cid=1951016479&tab=reviews&page=0&eid=-1.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110717032241/http://www.blisteredthumbs.net/2011/05/cwc-garrus-vakarian/ to http://www.blisteredthumbs.net/2011/05/cwc-garrus-vakarian/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120315193342/http://features.teamxbox.com/xbox/1521/The-Games-of-Spring-2006/p1/ to http://features.teamxbox.com/xbox/1521/The-Games-of-Spring-2006/p1/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070220020118/http://videogames.yahoo.com/newsarticle?eid=360855&page=0 to http://videogames.yahoo.com/newsarticle?eid=360855&page=0
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120630001223/http://pc.ign.com/articles/832/832454p1.html to http://pc.ign.com/articles/832/832454p1.html


When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
== I killed Iago ==
I removed Othello's Iago from the literary anti-heroes list. I'm not sure Iago is ever considered an anti-hero, he's one of Shakespeare's most memorable villains. The article on Iago makes it clear he is a villain, not an anti-hero. Of the two sources for this Iago anti-hero assertion, one link is dead, and the other's only reference to Iago at all is the line, "'Othello' is focused on jealousy and is all about the destruction of the Moor by his servant, Iago." Which is a paragraph discussing characters like MacBeth or Othello as anti-heroes. So, unless there's some new school of thought reimagining Iago as an anti-hero instead of Othello (and can be cited), I think he's a misleading and bad example.[[User:AstrolobeJones|AstrolobeJones]] 02:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
:Its not for you to decide. As long as a source refers to him as such, and is properly cited, it stays. I've added am extra source. If we were to act like this and remove any character who we thought didn't fit the qualifications the article would be dead.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 14:14, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
::Heh, I didn't remove him because ''I'' felt like he didn't belong, that's just how I noticed it. I removed it because of the two sources, one was dead and the other said nothing about Iago being an anti-hero. I don't think I did anything wrong by "acting this way" and removing unsourced references. Anyway, as for the sources you've added, I'm removing ones that are not, in fact, sources. The Independent source says, "Iago- He's the worst villain of all," and nothing about being an anti-hero. Ditto for the writersstore.com, which is about Othello being an anti-hero. The random geocities page (questionable as a source to begin with...) also says nothing about Iago as an anti-hero, and talks at length about what a great villain he is. That being said, the thestage.co.uk, dailyinfo.co.uk and filmeducation.org sources all, bafflingly enough, ''do'' discuss him as an anti-hero, so I guess he belongs after all. Well, at least it's much better referenced now![[User:AstrolobeJones|AstrolobeJones]] 00:59, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
:::Also, it might be worth adding to the actual Iago article that he can be read as an anti-hero instead of a villain, since the entire article only discusses him as a villain with no mentions to his possible anti-hero status. [[User:AstrolobeJones|AstrolobeJones]] 01:05, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
::::Sorry for misinterpreting you then...there have been numerous cases where people try to remove cited additions from this list because people don't like them, so I just jumped to the wrong conclusion. As for editing the Iago article, I did add a quote from Andy Serkis that somewhat shows him more than just a villain.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 01:49, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
:::::Heh, no problem. Anyway, looks good now, and the citations are much more robust if a reader should happen to look into them in the future.[[User:AstrolobeJones|AstrolobeJones]] 08:05, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}
== This whole article is flawed ==


Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 20:05, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
It mixes totally different characters. The criteria seems to be 'if we have any source that says so that's enough' well, no, that's not enough, there must be a definition and consistency within the article. --[[User:Leocomix|Leocomix]] 14:47, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
:If we went by your guidelines then the list would be subject to personal opinion. So a source is enough, as long as said source is legit. If we were to go "B-but that character is a villain!" and remove cited examples then there'd be nothing left.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 17:05, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


== External links modified ==
A source cannot be enough. What if a single source is contradicted by many others? Like I say in my answer for Hannibal, the list is in its present state heavily subject to personal opinion including the personal opinion that a single source is enough. Saying that there'd be nothing left if we removed villains is such bad faith and so false that you have already managed to thoroughly disabuse me there is any chance of having you relent your ways. --[[User:Leocomix|Leocomix]] 11:47, 29 July 2007 (UTC)


Hello fellow Wikipedians,
:From the main article: ''Each of these examples has been identified by a critic as an anti-hero, although the classification is somewhat subjective matter. Some of the entries may be disputed by other sources, and some may contradict all established definitions of anti-hero.''. And I'm not saying simply removing villains...I'm stating that if someone were to disagree with the classification of a character and then removed it there'd be nothing left. I don't think Homer Simpson is an antihero. But I'm not going to remove him and say "He's not an antihero!"--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 16:46, 29 July 2007 (UTC)


I have just modified 11 external links on [[List of fictional antiheroes]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=801359592 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
::Your arguments bring into question whether or not this article is encyclopedic in the first place. How is a critic's review of a movie not a personal opinion? Does being published in the Entertainment section of a local newspaper make it a fact? [[User:ButteredToast|ButteredToast]] 03:52, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120418083550/http://optimusfilms.20m.com/directors/ks/ to http://optimusfilms.20m.com/directors/ks/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131014171406/http://www.close-upfilm.com/features/Featuresarchive/fearandloathing.htm to http://www.close-upfilm.com/features/Featuresarchive/fearandloathing.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080923021938/http://www.newsaskew.com/includes/feature.shtml?id=EEuApFEpEleOgHOogB&style=single to http://www.newsaskew.com/includes/feature.shtml?id=EEuApFEpEleOgHOogB&style=single
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130410201009/http://www.free-times.com/index.php?cat=121304064644348&z_Issue_ID=11012912091306551&ShowArchiveArticle_ID=11003112092998631 to http://www.free-times.com/index.php?cat=121304064644348&z_Issue_ID=11012912091306551&ShowArchiveArticle_ID=11003112092998631
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120218201412/http://www.eppc.org/publications/pubID.453/pub_detail.asp to http://www.eppc.org/publications/pubID.453/pub_detail.asp
*Added {{tlx|dead link}} tag to http://www.darkhorizons.com/news06/060807h.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140728223805/http://voices.yahoo.com/surviving-borat-where-sick-humor-satirizes-american-145575.html to http://voices.yahoo.com/surviving-borat-where-sick-humor-satirizes-american-145575.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160116090236/http://press.optimumreleasing.net/dvd.php?id=145 to http://press.optimumreleasing.net/dvd.php?id=145
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120811130204/http://benedictcumberbatch.co.uk/shifting-sherlock-holmes-in.html to http://www.benedictcumberbatch.co.uk/shifting-sherlock-holmes-in.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121007025353/http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/tv/comic-con-2010-showtimes-antiheroes-hank-moody-dexter-morgan-get-new-season-teasers.php to http://www.filmschoolrejects.com/tv/comic-con-2010-showtimes-antiheroes-hank-moody-dexter-morgan-get-new-season-teasers.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070910235426/http://soapnet.go.com/behindthescenes/mimi/columns/2006/mimi_10252006.html to http://soapnet.go.com/behindthescenes/mimi/columns/2006/mimi_10252006.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110918091647/http://dir.salon.com/story/ent/feature/2003/05/13/spike_buffy/index1.html to http://dir.salon.com/story/ent/feature/2003/05/13/spike_buffy/index1.html
*Added {{tlx|dead link}} tag to http://metro.co.uk/2013/02/23/jack-taylor-got-a-credibility-it-scarcely-deserved--iain-glen-3508463/


When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
:::No, it doesn't and the article doesn't claim to be undisputed fact. This is stated as much in the opening paragraph. And reviews aren't 'fact' either, but a cited source is better than just some schmoe posting his favorite character.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 04:07, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}
::::Also, concerning your argument about critic's review; think of it this way. You can't go in an article about a movie and go "This movie is horrible." What you ''can'' do is find a cited review and properly quote the critic as in "Roger Ebert wrote 'This movie is horrible'" and so forth. The same goes with this. The page itself says its disputed, but as long as it has a cited source, it can stay. But you can't remove or add characters from this list based on your own personal opinion. There are a lot of characters here who I don't like. Am I going to remove them? No, because they have sources. And there are a lot characters I'd like to add, but am I? No, because I can't find any sources. Which is why it bothers me when people try to remove cited entries on the basis of their own personal opinion. Whether or not you think Leatherface or Tony Soprano or Hannibal or ''whoever'' is an antihero is beside the point, because as long as they have cited sources referring to them as such, then they get to stay.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 21:20, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 06:02, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
:::::The opening paragraph basically says that this is NOT a list of ficitonal anti-heroes:
:::::<blockquote>"Each of these examples has been identified by a critic as an anti-hero, although the classification is somewhat subjective matter. Some of the entries may be disputed by other sources, and some may contradict all established definitions of anti-hero.")</blockquote>
:::::That's a pretty good indicator that this whole article is indeed flawed and not encyclopedic. [[User:ButteredToast|ButteredToast]] 01:09, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
::::::That actually seems more like a disclaimer. I think it's fair to add a character if there is an established source saying that so-and-so is an anti-hero. It's either that, or as Leocomix pointed out, we let it be based on personal opinion. [[User:Fuzzform|Fuzzform]] ([[User talk:Fuzzform|talk]]) 21:15, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


== Really? Leatherface ==
== Additions to Movies ==


Maybe this has been asked before, maybe it hasn't. But if you have John Constantine and The Punisher listed in Movies, TV, & comics, why not also add Batman & Deadpool? Those 2 are listed in comics, but not either in movies or TV. [[User:Aidensdaddy2k9|Aidensdaddy2k9]] ([[User talk:Aidensdaddy2k9|talk]]) 22:49, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
How in the world is Leatherface from the Texas Chainsaw Massacre an anti-hero. To be an anti-hero the character still needs to be a hero, which he is specifically not. He viciously and cruelly kills random people mainly for the sadistic experience of their suffering with eating them as a distant second purpose. It would be very hard to even argue that he is the protagonist, much less the hero of the films. I will admit that I have only seen the original film and the new prequel, but, unless the old sequels or new version pose some drastic overhaul of his character, he needs to be stricken from this list. -CawH <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/138.88.55.248|138.88.55.248]] ([[User talk:138.88.55.248|talk]]) 01:28, August 28, 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:First off, your personal opinion (or anyone's for that matter) doesn't matter. Removing or adding characters to this list based on personal opinion counts as [[WP:NPOV|POV]] and [[WP:OR|original research]].
:Second of all, Leatherface is hardly sadistic/cruel and doesn't enjoy people suffering. He is mentally retarded, childlike and is bullied/manipulated by his family. That's irrevelant to this discussion, of course, but I just wanted to make that point.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 21:11, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
::It's not a "personal opinion" that Leatherface is the villain of Texas Chainsaw Massacre. A sympathetic antagonist is not an anti-hero. In fact, that's pretty much the opposite of an anti-hero. [[User:ButteredToast|ButteredToast]] 03:20, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
:::One of the qualities listed is "Qualities normally belonging to villains (amorality, greed, violent tendencies, etc.) that may be tempered with more human, identifiable traits (confusion, self-hatred, etc.)". Leatherface has violent tendencies and villainous behaviors (i.e. cannibalism) that are tampered with 'more human, identifiable traits' such as loneliness, confusion, etc and so forth.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 04:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
::::I cannot identify Leatherface as an anti-hero. The article for anti-hero states:


== External links modified ==
::::"In fiction, the anti-hero is the protagonist who is lacking the traditional heroic attributes and qualities — courage, idealism, fortitude — and possessed of character traits — ineptness, stupidity, dishonesty — that are antithetical to heroism. Typically, the anti-hero acts heroically, in scale and daring, but by methods, manners, and intentions both fair and foul, even underhanded and deceitful."


Hello fellow Wikipedians,
::::He does not commit "heroic acts" despite possessing traditionally unheroic qualities; rather he possesses A FEW sympathetic qualities in spite of his villainy. He still is a villain in that his action is "evil" in both purpose and effect; certainly, he cannot be considered a protagonist or even allied with the protagonists (as a typical antihero would be). Perhaps (but probably not), he could be considered an anti-villain, but certainly he does not fulfill the qualifications of an anti-hero. All in all, I think it should be edited. --[[User:DarkStar0|DarkStar0]] 21:34, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


I have just modified one external link on [[List of fictional antiheroes]]. Please take a moment to review [[special:diff/817737031|my edit]]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
:::::I have no idea why this is still being discussed.
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140413131240/http://entertainment.msn.com/photos/gallery2.aspx?gallery=16015&photo=82dec84c-5c21-4aa0-9cee-866d798d982d to http://entertainment.msn.com/photos/gallery2.aspx?gallery=16015&photo=82dec84c-5c21-4aa0-9cee-866d798d982d
:::::First off, whether or not you consider Leatherface to be an antihero is '''irrevelant'''. This goes for ANYONE. If a character is cited by a legit source, it stays. If not it, its removed. End of subject. There are ''plenty'' of entries I disagree with but I'm not complaining because them's the rules. Removing entries based on ''your'' opinions counts as [[WP:OR|original research]] and [[WP:NPOV|point of view]].
:::::Also, keep in mind, this article states that "Some of the entries may be disputed by other sources, and some may contradict all established definitions of anti-hero". BUT..."Qualities normally belonging to villains (amorality, greed, violent tendencies, etc.) that may be tempered with more human, identifiable traits (confusion, self-hatred, etc.)" is listed as criteria. And as I've pointed out, Leatherface's villainous acts are tampered with human traits.
:::::Also, would you care to explain how Alex DeLarge and Patrick Bateman (the former's picture was used in this article before the fair use inquisitors removed it) act as heroic? Or how the natural born killers "act heroically, in scale and daring"?--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 21:48, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
::::::I am nothing if not reasonable. I would not care to answer your question, as I absolutely believe many of the other characters listed are NOT anti-heroes. I am not going to argue further on the definition and how it does or does not apply to Leatherface. The legitimacy of the citations is in question for the following reasons:


When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
::::::[66] Fangoria.com - This is the only half-way justifiable article, but not a credible source. This seems to be more of a release marketing article trying to indicate TCM attempts elevate the depth of the film genre. Only uses the word anti-hero once.
::::::[67]Nighttimes.com - Does not make a case for Leatherface as an anti-hero at any point (the reference may even be sarcastic given the rest of the article). Seems highly uncredible, referring to the film as a “cinematic turd” shows it is not really a scholarly article about anti-heroic attributes.
::::::[68]Dvdjournal.com – this short review makes no justification of its claim or even indicates the author understands the definition of anti-hero (as given on wikipedia).
::::::[69]Aintitcool.com – See [68]. Also, the author’s use of quite a bit of profanity takes away from it as a credible article.


{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}
::::::Simply, using the word anti-hero is not enough; some justification should be present in a good citation. Even if I don’t agree personally, I would be more than happy to completely drop this if one credible article that explains how and why Leatherface is an anti-hero is cited. Beyond this, the point as you accurately stated is moot. I did not edit the list, nor would I edit the list without consensus (as some may strongly feel he is an antihero). Even simply removing [67], [68] and [69] would be preferable, as those citations, in my opinion, are so illegitimate as to detract from the argument for Leatherface’s inclusion.--[[User:DarkStar0|DarkStar0]] 22:44, 11 September 2007 (UTC)


Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 07:49, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
:::::::Who are you to decide how credible a source is? Since when does using profanity mean its no longer credible? In fact, your critique that the articles aren't 'scholarly' enough or don't discuss the subject of being antihero is rather baseless: I suggest you take a look at some of the other sources. Alex DeLarge's source states "Clint Eastwood's Harry Callahan from the Dirty Harry movies is fourth [in a poll on antiheroes in a magazine], ahead of Alex DeLarge, played by Malcolm McDowell, from controversial film A Clockwork Orange". He's not even the focus of the article, and its mentioned briefly. Holden Caulfield's? "...was intercut with a series of short films that featured an actor playing Salinger's adolescent antihero, Holden Caulfield." Yet again, only a 'passing reference'. For Snape: "It may be that we have finally seen which way the wind is blowing with the brooding anti-hero Professor Snape." Yet again, another passing reference. I could go on and find some more, but you get the picture.
:::::::So if you're going to argue that simply using the term antihero in describing Leatherface is not enough, then I suggest you take a look at numerous other entries on the list instead of singling out one character--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 23:13, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
:::::::: To maintain Wikipedia as a credible source it must be based on credible sources. And if you read my previous entry you would see I have a problem with 90% of the entries here. I think the whole list is flawed, people can't see the difference between an anti-hero and an anti-villain apparently (the anti-hero article tries to explain this). So perhaps you're right in that I shouldn't focus on Leatherface, but rather on getting this flawed list removed. I withdraw my individual complaint against Leatherface. The list needs a complete rewrite with more stringent restrictions.--[[User:DarkStar0|DarkStar0]] 21:28, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
::::::::: Alrighty then. Nominate the article for deletion, if you feel so strongly about it. I should point out, however, that this was nominated before and the consensus was to keep it, so keep that in mind. The discussion was in favor 10-2, with one of the two dissenters being the original nominator.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 21:33, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::: I just want the list to reflect the true definition of anti-hero, which as defined on the list itself is unclear. I really would like input as to what you think, as you seem to disagree with a lot of the so-called 'anti-heroes' placement as well. Do you know if there is an anti-villain list (as many of these characters would be more accurately defined as this)? If one does exist a merger might be a good idea and then sorting or something. I really don't know, what do you think?--[[User:DarkStar0|DarkStar0]] 21:28, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
::::::::::: First off, I'm sorry if I came off as rude before. There is an anti-villain page, but there is no list. There used to be one, but it was just people adding characters with no source. Anti-villain isn't as common as anti-hero so it would be harder to make a lengthy list using cited sources.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 03:25, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::::: An idea... This might be plain crazy or against wikipedia rules, so tell me if I am completely off-base here. Maybe make an archetypical antihero subsection within the list for characters who are "consummate" anti-heroes. They would have to fulfill all the terms that would end up listed for example:
::::::::::::1) they must be the protagonist (not the antagonist),
::::::::::::(2) they lack several traditional heroic archetypical traits (ex: courage, ideals, fortitude),
::::::::::::(3) use methods and have intentions both ideal and underhanded,
::::::::::::(4) have their own values which may or may not be in unison with societies,
::::::::::::(5) and, in the end, act heroically, in both heroic scale and daring.
::::::::::::These are just examples (taken from the antihero article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antihero), but I think you see where I'm going. Can you require literary sources (which would assume credibility) for this kind of thing; is that against wikipedia rules? Anyways, this is just one idea on how to cleanup. Like I said, my intention is just to reflect anti-hero accurately. I guess I really don't care if some quasi-antiheroes are on there, but some clear 'good' examples would really elevate the list in my opinion. Any other ideas to achieve the goal?--[[User:DarkStar0|DarkStar0]] 00:47, 18 September 2007 (CST)
:::::::::::::I could have sworn I already replied...weird. Anyway, I would take it up with themidnighters, as he is the main editor on the article. I wouldn't have a problem with making subsections, though although I don't know how it'd fit in with the other sections.
:::::::::::::As for literary sources, do you mean judging if a character is one based on events in the book, or if a character is referred to such in the book?--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 01:37, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Ideally, a source for the subsection would come out of an academic journal article (e.g. "The Anti-Hero In Eigteenth-Century Fiction". By: Adams, Percy G.. ''Studies in the Literary Imagination'', Spring76, Vol. 9 Issue 1, p29, 23p; AN: 6889189).--[[User:DarkStar0|DarkStar0]] 12:47, 23 September 2007 (CST)
:First off I agree that Leatherface is not an anti-hero, but as has been repeated to death on this talk page, the opinions of editors do not factor into the inclusion of characters. Only including examples backed up by a reliable source is the strength (and sometimes, as in this case, the weakness) of the list. The reason the list is imperfect and includes some objectionable examples is due to the problems inherent in the usage of the term "anti-hero" in popular discourse which is beyond our control. This list never has been and never will be perfect, but maintaining the Wikipedia standard of verifiability is what has and will (hopefully) keep it alive.
:Second, while I like your suggestion of a subsection for "consummate" anti-heroes I'm pretty certain it would simply become another battleground for POV. For example, I already disagree with your conditions for inclusion, namely the fifth, which does not apply to some of (what I consider) the more iconic, clearcut and universally recognized anti-heroes of modern literature (like Alex from ''A Clockwork Orange'', Patrick Bateman from ''American Psycho'' or Humbert Humbert from ''Lolita''). Your definition is more within the scope of the vigilante type of anti-hero (a questionable but ultimately heroic character), and while this might encapsulate the definition of anti-hero for you, it won't for everyone. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 23:53, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


== The anime/manga section ==
==[[Prince (Prince of Persia)|The Prince of Persia]] and [[Solid Snake]]==
[[Prince of Persia: Warrior Within#Criticism|This page]] says that "(The Prince) has become a generic tough guy or anti-hero." Also [[Solid Snake]] from the [[Metal Gear Solid|Metal Gear Series]] has aspects that could qualify him as an anti-hero. For a start he claims not to be a hero as he only fights for himself. I don't have specific references for either of these two things outside of wikipedia or from what can be perceived from playing the games. [[User:Jagged Fel|Jagged Fel]] 14:41, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
:You need a cited source to get a character mention in this list. Do a google search for "Prince of Persia" and "antihero" and see if any professional game reviews count as such.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 21:12, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
:Thats what I thought: I found this one:<br> *http://uk.pc.gamespy.com/pc/prince-of-persia-2-2005/570797p2.html<br>
Which I think is official, it says near the bottom "The Prince in Warrior Within is a bitter, deeply angry man who's only out to save his own ass and he really doesn't care who he has to run over in the process. The result is that, rather than being a "dark" and "gritty" anti-hero, the Prince merely comes across as a self-pitying jackass who refuses to take responsibility for his own actions." It occured to me that although it suggests he isn't an anti hero, the fact is he is described as having the same characteristics as one. I found some other official reviews, but they don't specifically mention the phrase "anti hero" and are therefore no more or less help than that review. Also seeing as Solid Snake claiming to fight for himself and no one else is a quote from the game, does that need a website as a reference? Or will just stating that its referencing a quote in the game do? [[User:Jagged Fel|Jagged Fel]] 13:28, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
:Here are some published reviews for Prince of Persia that use the term antihero.[http://www.gamecritics.com/review/popwarrior/main.php][http://www.game-over.net/reviews/pc/Prince_of_Persia:_Warrior_Within.html] And here is one for Solid Snake.[http://www.metalgearsolid.org/show_features.php?id=389] You should be able to add them now.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 13:40, 4 September 2007 (UTC)


The anime/manga section could include any character from tokyo ghoul or tokyo ghoul: re, with the exception of furuta, and various other members of V <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/66.220.239.186|66.220.239.186]] ([[User talk:66.220.239.186#top|talk]]) 05:20, 22 January 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
== Crypto ==


== [[Rorschach (comics)|Rorschach]] ==
If you don't mind doing so I believe that Cryptosporidium-137/8 should be added to the list of anti-heros in video games <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/69.248.111.206|69.248.111.206]] ([[User talk:69.248.111.206|talk]]) 23:08, 18 September 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


needs adding. [[User:Spicemix|Spicemix]] ([[User talk:Spicemix|talk]]) 21:40, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
== Anti-Heroines ==


== Removal of poorly sourced entries ==
I know that these are less common than male anti-heros, but I feel that there need to be some on the list. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Shakesomeaction|Shakesomeaction]] ([[User talk:Shakesomeaction|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Shakesomeaction|contribs]]) 02:55, 30 September 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:As long as you have a cited source, you can add them.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 03:50, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
::Oh, my! You're so gracious for giving Shakesomeaction permission to edit this open source encyclopedia. [[User:ButteredToast|ButteredToast]] 00:37, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
:::CyberGhostface is merely stating the requirements for inclusion so that Shakesomeaction's additions do not get removed. Please refrain from personal attacks. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 01:41, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
:::Thanks, I ''am'' pretty gracious.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 11:39, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
::::I am now an official mod on the fictional anti-heros page. Citations are only allowed from in-print sources and those I do not agree with will be arbitrarily deleted without discussion. [[User:Shakesomeaction|Shakesomeaction]] 01:45, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
:::::Um, there's no such thing as being an "official mod" for an article, and noone gets to single-handedly decide what entries remain or not. I hope this is some kind of joke. --[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 04:47, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
::::::Actually, two people on here seem to have enough time to decide what gets posted. Notice there is a lot of "you can post if..." This is Wikipedia, anyone can post in spite of someone's presumption that the poster is incorrect. A lot of people have had their entries deleted just because it isn't "sourced." Do you even know what a credible source is? I will agree one source I gave was not credible, but neither are movie reviews, which are purely biased and opinion-oriented. Just because a single person once somewhere incorrectly gave the label of anti-hero to a fictional character ''does not'' mean that the character is an anti-hero. It would make more sense if you used un-biased sources (if the sources is your basis on choosing who to delete off the page, since both of you have taken the roles of unofficial mods) and at least two of these un-biased sources were cited. Movie reviews are not unbiased. Period. Neither are booklists or movielists (even in a newspaper), personal webpages, or descriptions of movies or books by a retailer. I don't know what you learned in fifth grade about research papers, but that doesn't cut it. That's the worst thing about an open-source encyclopedia. Anyone can edit it or take over a page and constantly edit it to their liking, and they don't know shit about research and un-biased journalism. And for christ-shakes! The US education system needs to put more effort into their teaching of correct grammar, spelling, and punctation! (And don't either of you try to give me "we have the disclaimer" crap. That disclaimer invalidates the whole source idea. You don't want ''opinionated sources'', yet you disclaim that some of these sources are personal opinion. Make up your mind what you see as fit and stick to it. Don't arbitrarily decide when it should be used.)''Delete this if you wish. You'll have read it anyway, and that is my intention.'' /end rant [[User:Shakesomeaction|Shakesomeaction]] 09:19, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
:::::::I'll try to form a response point by point. "You can post if..." is in regards to [[WP:V]] which states that claims need sourcing, otherwise it's [[WP:OR|original research]]. I didn't come up with that rule, the community did. In regards to the claim that movie reviews are biased, that's arguable and depends on your definition of bias but of course they are opinion-oriented, most (or arguably all) articles/academic papers/reviews inherently are since they represent the views of the author. You're correct that a single person cannot single handedly ''definitively'' label an anti-hero, since, as has been repeated, this is a slippery and subjective term and means different things to different people. The decision as to what is biased and un-biased is a very grey area; one person's biased piece is another's unbiased piece. Attempting to weed out "biased" articles would open up POV battles about which articles are biased and which aren't. Your last point is pretty much a straw man argument since at no point do we say we "don't want ''opinionated sources''" (all sources concerning the labelling of anti-heroes is opinionated). And finally, obviously your comment will not be deleted.
:::::::So, what would you like to see done? Would you like us all to review the citations and only stick to highly regarded sources (The Guardian, The New York Times)? You suggested only citing in-print sources which, as an academic elitist, I might support since it would likely do away a lot of examples I don't like, but there is little justification to exclude sources based on whether they are in print or online. And besides, with print media you still end up with what you would consider biased and opinion-based articles.
:::::::The problem is, as I've stated so many times, that the application of the term (in most or perhaps all cases) is a subjective and debatable issue and as long as we state that fact in the article we remain ''objective'' about the subjectivity of the list. We are not saying that these are ''definitively'' anti-heroes, merely that they are characters that have been ''described'' as anti-heroes by a critic.--[[User:TheMidnighters|TM]] 11:22, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
::::::::That post about in-print citations was just as you named it--a joke. But in all seriousness, let's not get into the complexity of the fact that there cannot be a paper written without any sort of bias. Clear bias is a movie review. An informative article is not. Let's excuse the fact that making a list of fictional anti-heros is almost ridiculous in itself, but clearly ill-informed people don't understand what an anti-hero really is and movie reviews(which, I might add, don't really take any kind of journalist training to write and does not make a person a professional critic) and other examples I gave previously fall into this category. All I am saying, and I know that plenty of other people agree, is that if you and your friend want to take the role of "main editors," use some common sense. I would actually have no problem with non-cited examples because of the nature of Wikipedia, but because this is important to the two of you, maybe you should make it a little more professional. I have no qualms with the fact that you insist there should be sources. (And by the way, not all academic papers are biased. English, Philosophy, and other subjective arts might be, but scientific papers make it a point to avoid bias.) [[User:Shakesomeaction|Shakesomeaction]] 14:19, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
::::::::There's little to say that TM hasn't without coming off redundant, so I'll just state this in response to the complaint that I "police" this page and how I'm always asking for sources on the talk page.
:::::::::So many times someone comes on here and goes, "Can I add this character? He's cool. I think he's an antihero." I just point out that for it to be a valid site it needs a published source. In one case, I actually helped someone find a source. And sometimes someone might add an unsourced entry, which gets removed. I don't "control" the page. There are ''several'' characters I don't like who I haven't touched on account of there being valid sources. The only personal bias I see are people trying to remove cited entries based on their personal preferences. As for having enough time to moderate this page...it literally takes all of five seconds to check the most recent changes and see if there's a source or not.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 11:59, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::That's interesting that you automatically assumed I was speaking of you. Obviously you do think that you have some authority over the page, when it is a open-source encyclopedia of which no one should consider themselves the main editor. I'm not putting words into your mouth, I am simply explaining through your actions and even the very fact that you felt you must justify yourself telling a person they couldn't add something to a domain that is not your own. Other than that, I have no problem with sources, it's the type of stuff that you consider sources. (And your well-endowed user page shows your presence on Wikipedia is not merely passing.)[[User:Shakesomeaction|Shakesomeaction]] 14:19, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
::::::::::And Wikipedia, by nature, is not a valid site. It is edited by any hoo-ha who can type and has access to the internet.[[User:Shakesomeaction|Shakesomeaction]] 14:21, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::::Of course I assumed that you were speaking to me. You write "two people on here seem to have enough time to decide what gets posted". Me and TM are the two main contributors to this article. I think Doczilla pops up to regulate it but not as much. Unless you wouldn't mind telling me who else "the two main people" was referring to??? If not, then why is it a problem that I 'assume' that you are talking about me?
:::::::::::That doesn't mean I believe I have an authority over others. I don't remove legit entries, and I don't add unsourced ones. There are no rules on this page that I consider myself to be exempt from. You're the one who's trying to narrow down the list and exact your standards on it.
:::::::::::Wikipedia is an open-source encyclopedia, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have its rules. If someone's going to be doing something that's against article criteria, then its going to be removed. That doesn't mean that the removing editor is exacting his authority over others, it just simply means that he's following said rules.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 15:43, 1 October 2007 (UTC)\
::::::::::I go back and forth on watching this page. I'll take it off my watchlist for stretches of time just so it doesn't feel like I'm camping the page and so I can come back with a fresh perspective. Plus, those of us who regularly check this page have generally been in such consistent agreement on what we'll delete that it's pointless for us all to check the same article every day. I do think we need to come up some stricter standards on what we'll count as sources. It's a tough call. Printed sources, however, are clearly not the only sources allowed on Wikipedia. [[User:Doczilla|Doczilla]] 16:44, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
This page is basically based on a biased view. It's just everyone's "opinion" [[User:Zzz sleeping|Zzz sleeping]] 04:41, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
:*shrugs* I guess you could say that, although it would probably apply to 90% of any articles dealing with the critical response of a work of fiction. Buf if we don't have sources then we just get random people adding in their favorite characters with no rhyme or reason.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 17:05, 30 October 2007 (UTC)


Going with the clean-up tag, I'll be removing numerous entries on here that are unreliably sourced, not labeling the character as 'anti-hero' in the source, not sourced at all, or having a dead source. I’ll also be removing sequels/related works for certain entries that only have the source for a particular entry (Crank 2, for ex.). [[User:Barely made one|Barely made one]] ([[User talk:Barely made one|talk]]) 00:06, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
=="Official mod"==


== I believe Thomas Covenant deserves a place in this list. ==
Wait a minute. Let's back up to Shakesomeaction's claim to be an official mod on this page who gets to decide validity of the page's sources singlehandedly. What does that mean? That sounds like a hoax, and <u>if</u> so, this person should be blocked from editing this page for attempting to perpetrate said hoax. [[User:Doczilla|Doczilla]] 16:39, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
:I have a feeling that he/she was trying to be sarcastic more than anything else.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 16:41, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
::Let's find out. After all, a feeling is not a valid source. [[User:Doczilla|Doczilla]] 16:45, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
:::''a feeling is not a valid source'' Good Show!
:::''it is a open-source encyclopedia of which no one should consider themselves the main editor''
:::If you weren't making a well-placed joke, I am very embarrassed for the psychological community, of which I am a member. Ban me if you wish. It ain't no thang. [[User:Shakesomeaction|Shakesomeaction]] 04:12, 2 October 2007 (UTC)


Thomas covenant, anti hero archetype known from "The chronicles of Thomas Covenant" is all too human and flawed to be anything near a hero, yet despita all his flaws .. you have to read the books.. Take it from me and anyone who has read the books, a truer anti-hero is hard to find. [[Special:Contributions/83.101.80.204|83.101.80.204]] ([[User talk:83.101.80.204|talk]]) 03:40, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
==How do I add someone?==


== List of Fictional Antiheroes Page Issue ==
Can someone PLEASE tell me how I do this, I wanna add Master Shake, he's a worthy anti-hero. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/76.122.145.130|76.122.145.130]] ([[User talk:76.122.145.130|talk]]) 03:59, 30 October 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Just find a review or some source making reference to him as such and add him to the proper section.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 01:47, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


Hey I was on the List of Fictional Antiheroes page and some presumably 13 year old girl added Ash Morgenstern (from one of the hundreds of vapid Cassandra Clare books) with the comment "U go Ash (insert a dozen exclamation points)"
==Alastor==
If I recall, wasn't Alastor casted as the Anti-Hero for Viewtiful Joe? I think the game might have even stated so, as it has a tendency to mock itself for being cliche in regards to silver-screen archetypes. I know that if Leatherface through some twisted mockery of the definition of Anti-hero can be labeled as such, Alastor could easily meet those terms. [[User:Commander Regulus|Commander Regulus]] 01:41, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
:Gasp. Someone disagrees with Leatherface's classification on this list? Oh no, that's horrible. I'm so upset. Just take a number and wait in line with the rest of the people. Thanks!--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 01:52, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


Not sure about the procedure for reporting issues but here you go..... <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/173.14.178.149|173.14.178.149]] ([[User talk:173.14.178.149#top|talk]]) 20:29, 15 December 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
I never said remove him. I looked at the argument and it was clear that debating such a classification is a lost cause. I'm saying that if a few quality match-ups can place a character on the anti-hero list, I believe Alastor meets at least one or two of those qualities. There's really no call for such blatantly scathing sarcasm. [[User:Commander Regulus|Commander Regulus]] 02:03, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
:I was being sarcastic because it seems that tons of people are complaining about Leatherface or attempting to remove him because they don't agree with his addition. It wasn't so much as targeted at you specifically but just in general. There are ''tons'' of characters I don't like but are sourced. I wasn't attempting to be deliberately hostile to you specifically, I'm just in a pissy mood today for various reasons, so I apologize for that. As for Alastor, maybe you can search for some reviews that refer to him as such.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] 03:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC)


== Some potential candidates ==
==Randall Flagg==
Randall Flagg, by all definitions, is a bad guy, not a anti-hero. [[Special:Contributions/98.200.242.98|98.200.242.98]] ([[User talk:98.200.242.98|talk]]) 01:04, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
:He's sourced. That's all we need.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] ([[User talk:CyberGhostface|talk]]) 01:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


Jacket (Hotline Miami)
==Ben Linus==
ben Linus is an anti-villain, not anti-hero. He is certainly the main antagonist of Lost and doesn't do gestures by non-heroic deeds. He is noble and does what he thinks is right for the wrong reasons. He's certainly not an anti-hero, although he does have potential to become one. He is by definition a villain and does nothing to help the survivors (minus trying to prevent the freighters from arriving, but he's saving his own hide over theirs).{{unsigned|75.66.134.228}}
:That's not for us to decide. See [[WP:NPOV]], [[WP:NOR]], and [[WP:V]] for relevant policy [[User:Doczilla|Doczilla]] ([[User talk:Doczilla|talk]]) 09:06, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


Biker (Hotline Miami)
== [[Woland]] ==


The Fans (Hotline Miami 2)
From [[Mikhail Bulgakov]]'s [[The Master and Margarita]]. I don't have a source yet, but from reading the novel, it's clear that he isn't a villain. More evidence to come. [[User:Fuzzform|Fuzzform]] ([[User talk:Fuzzform|talk]]) 21:16, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
:It can't be included unless you have an reliable external source calling him such. Anything else is [[WP:OR|original research]].--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] ([[User talk:CyberGhostface|talk]]) 22:01, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
::I did a quick google search and nothing came up.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] ([[User talk:CyberGhostface|talk]]) 22:03, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


Ichi (Ichi the Killer)
== Some links explaining Wolf O'Donnell's position ==


Kakihara (Ichi the Killer)
I looked at the discussion and it seems that no one posted links on proof that Star Wolf, or at least Wolf, is an antihero. Here are some links.


Ash Williams (Evil Dead series)
http://www.arwinglanding.net/sfds/index.php?page=characters
http://guides.ign.com/guides/748545/page_68.html
http://super-smash-bros.wikia.com/wiki/Wolf_O'Donnell
http://super-smash-bros.wikia.com/wiki/Star_Wolf


Herbert West (Re-Animator series)
Here are even vids to provide stuff about them!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=J91fAOBsaW0
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ysW-z47Bm6Y
http://youtube.com/watch?v=-VA2s4bY1-U
http://youtube.com/watch?v=AM6QWn0iNPQ
http://youtube.com/watch?v=rOQXs-B8bfs


Marceline (Adventure Time)
There's still one vid I am looking for where Star Wolf comes and assists Star Fox in the Aparoid Homeworld invasion. but yeah, those are proof. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Wuffiekun123|Wuffiekun123]] ([[User talk:Wuffiekun123|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Wuffiekun123|contribs]]) 14:50, 28 April 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:The link needs to call him an antihero specifically. Including a character because you believe he fits the criteria is [[WP:OR|original research]]. I don't know if any of those links are valid. The first two don't call him such, wiki pages aren't used for sources, and I don't think the youtube videos (which I haven't viewed yet) would be good either unless its of a creator/reviewer calling him one. I did a quick google search for you but nothing valid came up.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] ([[User talk:CyberGhostface|talk]]) 14:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
::For example, if you were to find a review that said something like "Antihero Star Wolf is the most interesting character" then we could add him.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] ([[User talk:CyberGhostface|talk]]) 14:58, 28 April 2008 (UTC)


Mr. Krabs (Spongebob)
== Definition of Anti-Hero and opinion of Wikipedia's stance on neutrality ==


Squidward (Spongebob)
The main issue I see with the list is that many have forgotten that “hero” is the major aspect of the definition of “anti-hero.” An anti-hero is, essentially, a hero who acts in a non-traditional manner towards heroic ends. I was going to comment on what qualities some of those on the list possess that qualifies them, but many are a complete mystery how they ended up listed. If the primary criterion for being included is that someone printed an article stating a specific character was an anti-hero, then it is completely subjective to that one individual’s point of view.


Postal Dude (Postal series)
Wikipedia has a definition of what an anti-hero is, as does Wiktionary. But both definitions are very limited and I would argue not accurate enough. An ant-hero is one who is a hero with a looser moral code. Usually they operate with an “ends justifies the means” attitude with a positive or heroic ends and questionable means. This is also why I disagree with Wikipedia’s stance on neutrality relating to this article. If people are referencing this article for an understanding of what an anti-hero is and using Gollum from Lord of the Rings as an example compared with Severus Snape from Harry Potter they might become confused.


Divine (Pink Flamingos)


Filthy Frank (The Filthy Frank Show)


Guts (Berserk)


Wilbur Soot ?? (Dream SMP) [[User:Meepingmorp|Meepingmorp]] ([[User talk:Meepingmorp|talk]]) 16:26, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
********* SPOLIER WARNING *********


== Wilbur Soot DSMP ==


Could Wilbur Soot be considered an anti-hero within the Dream SMP ? Since its a minecraft role-play there wouldn't be any 'reliable' sources in terms of media reviews and official opinion but the DSMP wiki does offer a lot. [[User:Meepingmorp|Meepingmorp]] ([[User talk:Meepingmorp|talk]]) 16:25, 15 March 2021 (UTC)


Wikipedia doesn't allow fandom wikis to be used as sources. [[User:Wubbox|Wubbox]] ([[User talk:Wubbox|talk]]) 14:07, 30 March 2021 (UTC)


== Splitting ==
Gollum’s motivation was to reacquire the One Ring at any cost for his own personal gratification. That is not heroic. Snape utilized questionable tactics and actions that were perceived as villainous until we learn that it was his “end” to see that Harry Potter survives to defeat Lord Voldemort. Snape is whom I could view as the arch-typical anti-hero. I would also cite The Punisher over Batman due to the latter’s qualms about killing. Batman’s reluctance to kill is a traditional hero standard that The Punisher eschews in order to bring about his sense of justice. By setting a standard for what characters should be included as anti-heroes and adding only characters that fit the definition will we properly demonstrate our definition, which is the purpose of this list/article. [[User:SeanMike77|SeanMike77]] ([[User talk:SeanMike77|talk]]) 08:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
{{discussion top|1=There is '''no consensus''' currently whether to split the list. It seems prudent to await the outcome of the current discussion on scope before discussing a potential split of the content. [[User:Felix QW|Felix QW]] ([[User talk:Felix QW|talk]]) 19:44, 21 June 2022 (UTC)}}
:There's nothing really to say on this that hasn't been discussed already. Yes, the list (and what antihero means) is subjective. But removing entries based on our own personal views counts as [[WP:OR|original research]]. Yes, the links make it subjective to that reviewer's point of view, but its still a cited review and not just the editor's opinion.
This large, convoluted list must be split into multiple ones, and I have made a request [[Wikipedia:Proposed article splits#NEW REQUESTS|here]]. --<span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family: Papyrus">[[User:Kailash29792|<b style="color: black;">Kailash29792</b>]] [[User talk:Kailash29792|<span style="color: black;">(talk)</span>]] </span> 06:40, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
:If someone's really confused, they just can click on the link for the proper context and make up their mind. But I don't see anyone becoming confused.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] ([[User talk:CyberGhostface|talk]]) 11:38, 8 May 2008 (UTC)


: I would strongly prefer cutting down the list first, per [[WP:TRIVIA]]. A list of this nature always has contentious content, and I do think the list is worthwhile, but Wikipedia is not TVTropes, and a list of this nature shouldn't seek to document every single fictional anti-hero with a wikipedia article (and almost certainly shouldn't list characters without standalone articles). I think if we looked at the article's sources, identified sources like [https://theculturetrip.com/europe/united-kingdom/articles/top-10-greatest-literary-anti-heroes/ "Top 10 Greatest Literary Anti-heroes"] and limited the article to listing characters discussed as ''notable'' or ''paradigmatic'' anti-heroes, that would be much more appropriate. As it is, this article is a trivia-magnet. - - '''[[User:mathmitch7|mathmitch7]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Mathmitch7|talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Mathmitch7|contribs]])</sup> 14:45, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
{{discussion bottom}}


== Removal of sourced entries ==
==spiderman!==
In the anti hero article it states numerous times that spiderman is an a primary example of the "young brooding anti-hero" yet he is notably absent from this list. [[Special:Contributions/201.238.124.206|201.238.124.206]] ([[User talk:201.238.124.206|talk]]) 22:46, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
:Probably because no one bothered to find a reliable source calling him such. If you can find one, go ahead and add him.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] ([[User talk:CyberGhostface|talk]]) 23:14, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


Lately, I've noticed users removing sourced entries because ''they'' disagree with those entries, such as [[Special:Diff/1019204610]]. Thoughts? –[[User:LaundryPizza03|<b style="color:#77b">Laundry</b><b style="color:#fb0">Pizza</b><b style="color:#b00">03</b>]] ([[User talk:LaundryPizza03|<span style="color:#0d0">d</span>]][[Special:Contribs/LaundryPizza03|<span style="color:#0bf">c̄</span>]]) 16:57, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
== Arthur Dent? ==


:batman isnt an antihero. As well as sources from screen rant arent reliable because screen rant isnt official reliable source. As well as hulk and iron man. No where in their biography over thr net it say they are antiheroes [[Special:Contributions/46.71.151.137|46.71.151.137]] ([[User talk:46.71.151.137|talk]]) 22:24, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
Really. . . Does someone have a verfied source for that? <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Jessnotdean|Jessnotdean]] ([[User talk:Jessnotdean|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jessnotdean|contribs]]) 15:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


== Adding Rocky Balboa ==
== So.. how do you find a reliable source? ==


Hello everyone! Is Rocky Balboa a typical antihero? Because at the beginning of the first movie, he was a lone fighter in the ring who worked for low wages, just like Wolverine did at the first movie of X-Men. If yes, I would recommend to add him to this list. Please reply! Thanks! <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/186.109.170.177|186.109.170.177]] ([[User talk:186.109.170.177#top|talk]]) 00:20, 4 April 2022 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
I know for a fact that Winslow Leach from 'Phantom of the Paradise' is an anti-hero. He's the protagonist of the film; he is falsely imprisoned, has his teeth removed, and after a horrible accident he is disfigured and forced to hide in a costume in the attic of a discoteck. Further bad things happen as his musical work and hippy girlfriend are stolen, so he goes nuts and starts killing people.
* Are there sources that describe Rocky as an antihero? [[User:BD2412|<span style="background:gold">'''''BD2412'''''</span>]] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 17:29, 13 June 2022 (UTC)


== List criteria ==
How do I find a reliable source to confirm this?


This list has no clear [[WP:LISTCRITERIA]]. That is at least a major part of why it is such a mess. The [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional antiheroes|recent AfD]] closed as no consensus because (per the close) editors were more-or-less split between improving the list and getting rid of it altogether. So let's try to improve it as much as possible. It may be the case that even the best possible version of this list is still not satisfactory and we would be better off getting rid of it (perhaps instead writing about the most important examples in prose form in the main [[Antihero]] article as was suggested in the AfD), but at least then we'll know whether we can bring it up to an acceptable standard for Wikipedia or not and can let that inform further discussion about how best to handle the situation.
(Also, I think Swan could probably be on this list too. He's the cause of all the things mentioned above, all in the pursuit of greed and immortality.) <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/192.197.54.136|192.197.54.136]] ([[User talk:192.197.54.136|talk]]) 19:09, 10 June 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:The easiest way for me is just to do a google search. It doesn't have to be a major thing, just a reference in a professional interview, review or article. (For example, a review by the Boston Globe could say "As the antihero Sweeney Todd, Johnny Depp steals the show" and that would be enough) But I just did a google seach for Leach and nothing came up.
:But including a character on the list because you feel that he fits the criteria based on his actions counts as original research.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] ([[User talk:CyberGhostface|talk]]) 19:21, 10 June 2008 (UTC)


As I said during the AfD, I would suggest adopting criteria akin to those used at [[List of military disasters]]: only include entries where multiple (i.e. at least two) reliable sources ''specifically dealing with the subject of fictional antiheroes'' refer to the character in question as an antihero. That way, we should only end up with ''bona fide'' examples that are generally (or at least fairly commonly) considered antiheroes rather than unduly presenting [[WP:Minority viewpoints]] where perhaps only a single person thinks the character is an antihero whereas everyone else thinks they're a regular hero or an outright villain. The subjectivity of the term (and some sources applying it rather loosely) was of course an issue that was brought up repeatedly during the AfD. I would be in favour of having a fairly high threshold for what to consider a [[WP:Reliable source]] in this context, one that would exclude e.g. [https://screenrant.com/best-movie-antiheroes-in-history/ a listicle] by ''[[Screen Rant]]''. I am unsure about whether or not to restrict entries to characters with stand-alone articles, since I can see pros and cons with both (though it may very well be a moot point since one would expect characters who have featured heavily in literature on fictional antiheroes to also meet the relevant notability requirements).
== Chucky ==


Ping all the editors from the AfD: {{ping| LaundryPizza03 | Dream Focus | Clarityfiend | Zxcvbnm | Reywas92 | Rorshacma | Piotrus | Daranios | Jontesta | Shooterwalker | Jclemens | Bookworm857158367 | BD2412 | Ritchie333 }} Thoughts? [[User:TompaDompa|TompaDompa]] ([[User talk:TompaDompa|talk]]) 17:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
I believe that the information about Chucky as an anti-hero should be edited.
: There is no encyclopedic justification for committing intellectual suicide. If multiple reliable sources describe a fictional character as an antihero, that suffices. By comparison, if a new Senator is elected from Rhode Island, we don't exclude them from a list of Senators from Rhode Island merely because all the sources that predate their election omit their name. If a fact can be established by reference to reliable sources, then the context of that establishment is irrelevant. [[User:BD2412|<span style="background:gold">'''''BD2412'''''</span>]] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 17:27, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
::Whether someone is a Senator from Rhode Island is an objective fact, whereas whether a character is an antihero is a subjective assessment. [[User:TompaDompa|TompaDompa]] ([[User talk:TompaDompa|talk]]) 17:37, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
:As I told you in the AFD ''Information in any article only needs one reference to prove it if its in doubt. No reason to require more.''. Just wasting everyone's time. And the "listicle" as you call it is fine, a reliable source mentions different antiheroes, then it counts. [[User:Dream Focus | '''<span style="color:blue">D</span><span style="color:green">r</span><span style="color:red">e</span><span style="color:orange">a</span><span style="color:purple">m</span> <span style="color:blue">Focus</span>''']] 17:38, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
::And as I told you in response, you are categorically incorrect in that absolutist assertion since our policy on [[WP:Exceptional claims]] explicitly says {{tq|Any exceptional claim requires ''multiple'' high-quality sources}}. And for something like this list, where it's not a matter of facts but rather subjective assessments, requiring multiple sources may simply be a reasonable application of [[WP:WEIGHT]] so as not to unduly include the views of tiny minorities. [[User:TompaDompa|TompaDompa]] ([[User talk:TompaDompa|talk]]) 17:42, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
:::That's for Fringe theories and to prevent scam artist from tricking people. [[User:Dream Focus | '''<span style="color:blue">D</span><span style="color:green">r</span><span style="color:red">e</span><span style="color:orange">a</span><span style="color:purple">m</span> <span style="color:blue">Focus</span>''']] 17:46, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
::::The point is that we do actually sometimes require multiple sources, which you should already know because {{u|Eddie891}} gave you the different example of [[WP:BLPPUBLIC]] in the discussion at [[Talk:List of military disasters#Proposal for list criteria]] a year ago and furthermore made the point that {{tq|something not being done doesn't mean that it can't be or shouldn't be}}. [[User:TompaDompa|TompaDompa]] ([[User talk:TompaDompa|talk]]) 17:54, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
:::Since when is describing a fictional character as an antihero an exceptional claim? [[User:Jclemens|Jclemens]] ([[User talk:Jclemens|talk]]) 17:56, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
:I'd be fine leaving it be if the inclusion criteria are limited to notable entities only (i.e. ones that have a stand-alone article), and of course the entry is referenced - with a quote, preferably. As for listicles on ScreenRant, meh, I'd let it go, I don't like them in the context of establishing notability, but they seem fine for such lists. I mean, using a crappy list to reference a crappy list is somewhat fitting :P Anyway, I'd like to remove non-blue linked entries on this list, as well as all unreferenced ones. Any objections to the former (the latter, per [[WP:V]], should really not be objectionable...)? <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">[[User:Piotrus|Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus]]&#124;[[User talk:Piotrus|<span style="color:#7CFC00;background:#006400;"> reply here</span>]]</sub> 08:25, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
::I agree with {{u|Jclemens}} that classification of a character as an antihero is not an exceptional claim. I see a certain subjectivity of the term, in which case [[WP:LISTCRITERIA]] suggests requiring a reliable source as the solution. So I personally am fine with keeping with having one source. I do see "some sources applying it rather loosely", and that there may in some cases be an issue with [[WP:Minority viewpoints]]. I don't think that's a ''big'' issue, as we surely have many non-controversial examples to balance others. I would have not problem with asking for multiple sources to deal with that in the spirit of "something not being done doesn't mean that it can't be or shouldn't be", though it would be quite a big amount of work to fix a small problem. ''If'' we should agree to such a requirement, we should not throw the baby out with the bath water, however: Most entries here have only one source, because earlier contributors would not have expected that more are needed. So entries with one source should then ''only'' be removed, if there is good reason to believe that no other sources will substantiate it, i.e. after a search for such sources has been done. I would have a problem with requiring sources "''specifically dealing with the subject of fictional antiheroes''". I don't know exactly what that means (I guess the discussed "listicles" would qualify here after all), but I think such a requirement could promote a new kind of bias: On Wikipedia we want to include all the world's knowledge. Summary works concentrating the concept of antihero will invariably be limited (presumably mostly to [[Western world]] fiction) and prevent us from including information from (reliable) works analyzing individual works of fiction, areas of popular culture or regional fiction more in-depth. [[User:Daranios|Daranios]] ([[User talk:Daranios|talk]]) 15:07, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
::If they have a reference, leave them be. Some characters might not have their own separate Wikipedia article, but the series they are in does. [[User:Dream Focus | '''<span style="color:blue">D</span><span style="color:green">r</span><span style="color:red">e</span><span style="color:orange">a</span><span style="color:purple">m</span> <span style="color:blue">Focus</span>''']] 15:18, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
: The claims are controversial because it's likely to be disputed. Screen Rant isn't rigorous about what makes a hero an anti-hero, and the list is too [[WP:INDISCRIMINATE]] to create an article that meets Wikipedia standards. The article should have been deleted. But at least it needs a clean-up with higher quality sources. If we can't find a consensus around improving this article, that would be strong evidence that the article cannot be improved, and it should end up back at AFD. The suggestions from Piotrus should be an uncontroversial place to start and I would urge this towards better sources as Screen Rant is considered less than reliable at [[WP:RSP]]. [[User:Jontesta|Jontesta]] ([[User talk:Jontesta|talk]]) 23:21, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
::[[Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources]] reads: ''There is consensus that Screen Rant is a marginally reliable source. '''It is considered reliable for entertainment-related topics''', but should not be used for controversial statements related to living persons.'
::So that source is fine. There is no real dispute. A reliable source, clearly listed on the list of reliable sources, calls someone an anti-hero, then they belong on the list. [[User:Dream Focus | '''<span style="color:blue">D</span><span style="color:green">r</span><span style="color:red">e</span><span style="color:orange">a</span><span style="color:purple">m</span> <span style="color:blue">Focus</span>''']] 23:27, 14 June 2022 (UTC)


== Benson Dunwoody and Chick Hicks could be anti-heroes? ==
The following is an excerpt from the source citing Chucky as an anti-hero:


Hi friends i saw some pages and videos from these characters who are/were anti-heroes:
"The first one is great because it’s actually a scary movie. It’s really original. Bride is genius because it rewrites the whole series and Chucky becomes the anti-hero instead of the villain. There’s something great about how [Don Mancini] chose to rewrite the series."


* Chick Hicks from the Cars franchise: He in ''[[Cars 3]]'' appears as the minor antagonist (because Storm is the main antagonistic jerk) and ''[[Cars 3: Driven to Win]]'' appears as the anti-heroical central main antagonist (because he congratulated Lightning and Ramírez because they defeated a jerk and they saw Miss Fritter chasing Storm at the end of the videogame)
The current wording seems to imply that Chucky is anti-hero in all theatrical appearances. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Brendonnn|Brendonnn]] ([[User talk:Brendonnn|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Brendonnn|contribs]]) 01:54, 6 July 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
* Benson Dunwoody from ''[[Regular Show]]'': Benson sometimes will be a hero and an antagonist but in some episodes from Regular Show describing as him is the anti-heroic deuteragonist
:He's still the same character in all the films, though. I really don't agree with saying "Chucky from ''Bride of Chucky''" (if that's what you're trying to suggest) instead of "Chucky from the ''Child's Play'' series", but maybe one the regulars like Doczilla or Midnighters could clarify this for me. But if push comes to shove, and the current one is not acceptable, then we can just use [http://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/reviews.php?id=3684 this review] which states "''Seed Of Chucky'' is the fifth installment in the popular ''Child's Play'' series that introduced audiences to a pop culture antihero and a horror icon." which does make a clearer indication of him being an antihero in all his appearences.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] ([[User talk:CyberGhostface|talk]]) 02:19, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
[[User:NRR EL 95|NRR EL 95]] ([[User talk:NRR EL 95|talk]]) 13:13, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
:{{re|NRR EL 95}} As you can see from the [[#List criteria|discussion above]], there are some concerns of this list becoming an [[WP:INDISCRIMINATE|indiscriminate]] collection of examples. So probably only characters should be included where [[WP:Reliable sources|reliable sources]] ''say'' they are an antihero, but not those where there is only ''circumstantial'' evidence. [[User:Daranios|Daranios]] ([[User talk:Daranios|talk]]) 16:02, 11 March 2023 (UTC)


== Suoerheroes being anroheroes ==
That is good enough for me and everyone else I suppose. I was just uncertain with the original source's statement. I just have trouble with the ambiguity the anti-hero definition. thanks
<small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Brendonnn|Brendonnn]] ([[User talk:Brendonnn|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Brendonnn|contribs]]) 06:16, 6 July 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


Aravela 13 screen rant isnt an official reliable source as well as cbr.com. in nowhere does it say batman is an antihero [[Special:Contributions/46.71.151.137|46.71.151.137]] ([[User talk:46.71.151.137|talk]]) 22:29, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
== Lelouch Lamperouge and Light Yagami ==


== It's Always Sunny ==
Shouldn't Lelouch Lamperouge and Light Yagami added to the list since both of their articles on Wikipedia clearly state that they are anti-heroes. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Camcamfee|Camcamfee]] ([[User talk:Camcamfee|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Camcamfee|contribs]]) 02:17, 7 July 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:You need a reliable external source (outside of Wikipedia) that refers to them as being antiheroes before adding them to the list. I'd be extremely surprised if no article ever called Light an antihero, although I have no idea who Lamperouge is.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] ([[User talk:CyberGhostface|talk]]) 16:39, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Are these links okay? http://www.amazon.com/review/product/B001AZ5ITM?filterBy=addFourStar
http://bestuff.com/stuff/light-yagami <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.105.255.37|71.105.255.37]] ([[User talk:71.105.255.37|talk]]) 18:07, 9 July 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Here's another link for Lelouch Lamperouge if the first one doesn't work. Although it doesn't explicitly say the word "anti-hero" it states his actions and morals. http://stars.ign.com/objects/142/14236948_biography.html <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.105.255.37|71.105.255.37]] ([[User talk:71.105.255.37|talk]]) 18:17, 9 July 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:Unfortunately, none of those are acceptable. Be-stuff looks like a fan wiki and Amazon reviews aren't reliable sources. IGN would be a reliable source, but only if it called him an antihero. I'll do a google search and see if anything comes up.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] ([[User talk:CyberGhostface|talk]]) 19:33, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
::I found [http://anime.ign.com/articles/869/869513p2.html this link] at IGN for Lelouch, which should be good enough to list him here. It reads "With this power and his impressive intellect, he becomes the quintessential anti-hero with a cold willingness to use any means necessary to achieve his noble goal of destroying the Empire." I haven't found anything reliable for Light, though.--[[User:CyberGhostface|CyberGhostface]] ([[User talk:CyberGhostface|talk]]) 19:39, 9 July 2008 (UTC)


No mention of It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia?! For shame that Charlie Kelly, Dennis Reynolds, Deandra "Dee" Reynolds, Ronald "Mac" McDonald and Frank Reynolds have not been entered into this list as anti-heroes. [[User:L2J1086|L2J1086]] ([[User talk:L2J1086|talk]]) 01:44, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
how's this? http://stars.ign.com/objects/102/10207290_biography.html It doesn't use the word anti-hero but it does say he is mad.

Latest revision as of 13:11, 31 January 2024

Donnie Darko[edit]

Donnie Darko, the main character of a film by the same name, is a prime example of an anti-hero in my opinion. To put it simply, he commits all sorts of crimes at first, but then ends up saving the universe. -Hazethebassist (talk) 23:00, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia needs reliable sources, not personal opinions. If you don't have a reliable source that says that Darko is an anti-hero, then that is original research on your part and it should be deleted. Edward321 (talk) 00:05, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'll find a source, just give me a little time. Are there guidelines on the sources? 174.31.145.37 (talk) 16:15, 25 July 2010 (UTC) (Hazethebassist)[reply]
I found one, but somebody may want to clean up my work, since I'm not the most professional Wikipedian. Also, if you need more sources, someone else can find one, because I don't know what to look for in a source. -Hazethebassist (talk) 16:26, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a blog or a wiki, which seems to be what 90% of the people who bother to list a source use. (Obviously, those are not reliable sources.) I think the one that you found should be good enough for inclusion in a list. Edward321 (talk) 23:15, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not part of Wikipedia but I do believe that someone who is should add Damon Salvatore to the list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.15.36.108 (talk) 01:35, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gollum revisited[edit]

Any objection to moving Gollum to the film section? The article cited (which is now a 404 error and should be relinked through the Internet Archive) was Serkis talking about the movie version of Gollum, and not the book version. Gollum certainly was not a hero (or antihero) in Tolkien's work. --Stevehim (talk) 03:19, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 05:58, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the list is entirely debatable and dependent on personal opinion - for example, Stephen Dedalus of Portrait of an Artist as a Young Man, it could be argued, is a hero to secular society —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.195.197.192 (talk) 21:35, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's why people are supposed to cite a reliable source that says a specific character is an antihero. Bowser being a playable character does not make him an anti-hero. Some guys blog or another Wiki won't work, either. If you've got a reliable source and include it in your edit, feel free to add Stephen Daedalus to this article. Edward321 (talk) 03:53, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Crow[edit]

Might I suggest that "The Crow" also belongs on this list? James O'Barr's graphic novel version could be listed under comics.

Nytebreid (talk) 08:13, 3 November 2010 (UTC)Nytebreid 11/3/10[reply]

While I think he does, too, Wikipedia is not about personal opinions, its about finding reliable sources that support the claim. Edward321 (talk) 12:15, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing Problem[edit]

I have just added Eric Draven (The Crow), William Munny (The Unforgiven), Jackson Teller (Sons of Anarchy), and The MacManus Brothers (Boondock Saints) to this list. Unfortunately, I cannot seem to get the format down for my references to stay. Any suggestions?JTBA75 (talk) 11:04, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Short term, I have removed them as unsourced. What are your sources? Have you looked at how existing sources are listed? Edward321 (talk) 15:14, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Forgotten antihero?[edit]

Could Edmond Dantès from The Count of Monte Cristo technically be an antihero? --24.229.63.177 (talk) 17:43, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bryan Mills from Taken, Jesse Pinkman from Breaking Bad and Darth Vader are all antiheroes too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Futuremoviewriter (talk • contribs) 07:37, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Bateman?[edit]

What about Patrick Bateman from American Psycho? His own Wikipedia page mentions him as an 'Antihero' and gives two sources, one of which is broken. This is the working link, where the article states Patrick Bateman as being an antihero.

EDIT: Sorry, I never looked under the "Literature" section, he is already there. Unable to delete this as I do not have an account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.38.21 (talk) 14:53, 16 December 2011 (UTC) http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2008/jun/12/breteastonellis — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.97.38.21 (talk) 14:50, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mad Max[edit]

Max Rockatansky from the Mad Max series is also an embodiment of the antihero due to his appearance as well as his reluctance to help out others and ultimately sacrifice himself for the greater good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.205.8.154 (talk) 07:18, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Adding context of each character?[edit]

I don't know why they are called anti-heroes. This list looks plainly opinionated and originally researched to me. How do sources verify characters as anti-heroes? --George Ho (talk) 07:52, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]


3/17/13 I agree, many of these should be considered Byronic heroes, which are ancestors to antiheroes but not the same thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.209.17.182 (talk) 17:14, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lord Byron[edit]

Lord Byron's works defined the modern antihero. At the very least Conrad (The Corsair, 1814), Don Juan (Don Juan, c. 1818-1824) and Byron himself (from his semiautobiographical epic Childe Harold's Pilgrimage (1812–1818)) should be in any list of this sort. 184.56.230.216 (talk) 22:32, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Girls of How to Rock[edit]

I consider Kacey Simon, Molly Garfunkel, and Grace King to each be antiheroes. David Israel told me on Twitter that he agrees, a little. I propose that they each be added to the list of TV antiheroes then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Futuremoviewriter (talk • contribs) 02:29, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion, my opinion, and some guy on Twitter;s opinion are all irrelevant. Wikipedia requires reliable sources. Edward321 (talk) 14:19, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

David Israel is the writer of the show, hence, his opinion is not irrelevent and he is reliable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Futuremoviewriter (talk • contribs) 23:38, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Someone on Twitter claiming to be the writer for the show does not meet Wikipedia guidelines for reliable sources. Edward321 (talk) 00:18, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Twitter is David Israel's and therefore, a reliable source. (talk —Preceding undated comment added 06:31, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Twitter is still not a reliable source. Please read [1]. Edward321 (talk) 15:52, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

red hood[edit]

I added Jason Todd the red hood I was going to try to put a link but i didn't do it correctly so I don't can't. the Wikipedia article on Jason Todd also says he's antihero and uses IGN as a link for that in that wiki article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.91.184.128 (talk) 20:37, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Red Hood and link[edit]

Okay, I finally managed to figure out how to link it. I used the IGN article that was used on Jason Todd's wiki page. Since its good enough for that wiki, its good enough of a source here as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.91.184.128 (talk) 04:35, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are This Character Anti Heroes?[edit]

-Lev Peskov from The Century Trilogy -Impmon from digimon tamers (3rd series) -Kick Ass (Dave Lizweski) -The 3 protagonists of GTA V — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.41.148.76 (talk) 08:30, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Elric of Melniboné[edit]

Really, the opening of this wiki page alone should convince anyone to add him to the literature list, but just keep on reading and there should be no doubt. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elric_of_Melnibon%C3%A9

But he is the arch typical antihero, pretty much all he characteristics listed earlier is found with this character. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.167.14.32 (talk) 06:57, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It does not matter whether you or I think a character is an antihero. Wikipedia requires reliable sources. Edward321 (talk) 16:04, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did you even see the link? There should be sources there...

In any case, he's pretty much the original antihero in the fantasy genre... Just do a simple google search for Elric and antihero, and you will find a lot of sources... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.167.14.32 (talk) 12:20, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

He's also mentioned on this article a couple of times as being an anti-hero. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Moorcock Here's someone analyzing the character: http://www.stainlesssteeldroppings.com/elric-of-melnibone-michael-moorcock — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.167.14.32 (talk) 20:36, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The website does not meet Wikipedia guidelines on reliable sources. The Wikipedia page Micheal Moorcock provides no sources for the opinion that Elric is an anti-hero. Edward321 (talk) 21:58, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

James Bond[edit]

SchroCat reverted my edits for James Bond. But per this page they had no reason to do so: "Each of these examples has been identified by a critic as an antihero, although the classification is somewhat subjective. Some of the entries may be disputed by other sources and some may contradict all established definitions of antihero." I provided a legitimate source for literary bond, and now I have several others for literary Bond. Regardless of whether Bond is cited by more sources as simply being a hero or action hero and not an anti hero, this page says that as long as "a critic" (even if 999 other critics disagree) from a reliable source considers a character an anti hero, they can be on the list. I have three books and several other web based sources from newspapers and magazines. So I have the right to put it back up, which I will. Kinfoll1993 (talk) 22:32, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your sourcing looks good, especially considering this page has been a magnet for unsourced or poorly sourced opinions. Edward321 (talk) 16:23, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Edward321. Kinfoll1993 (talk) 16:43, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, James Bond is not an anti-hero, especially not at the time he was written. He may have traits that in 2021 would be undesirable, but at the time, a womanizing assassin was a perfect hero. Wubbox (talk) 14:11, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Does a Review calling some fictional character an anti-hero qualify?[edit]

I've authored two books, featuring my character Charlotte Aiken. I was going over the reviews for them tonight on Amazon and the most recent reviewer stated "Charlotte is the perfect anti-hero." I have no idea who this reviewer is, as s/he made the review under the name "CMT."

I've had people tell me Charlotte was an anti-hero, but here it is in print now for the first time.

Joseph Steffen

An Amazon review is not a reliable source. You would need a review by an actual critic. Edward321 (talk) 03:55, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Classification of anti-hero[edit]

I think the classification of anti-hero needs to be highlighted in this topic. To my mind, there are two types of anti-hero - one being the sort that are previously amoral types who throughout the course of the narrative become heroes (e.g. Snake Pliskin, 'Escape from New York')or the types who do not, and are not going to reform, e.g Hannibal Lecter. The first kind - are they really anti-heroes, or heroes by 'stealth'? The second kind are more realistic and appear in literature or media that doesn't compromise with the viewer to create a means of redemption, to give us that warm fuzzy feeling at the end that means there's hope for us all. A true anti-hero just is, from the one-dimensional cowboy bad guy, to those damaged or psychopathic like Alex in 'A Clockwork Orange'Cheshire Writer (talk) 10:47, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the article already has this but I am going to still comment about anti-hero should include:
  • previously amoral types that become heroes (this also includes former villains that were victims of the archenemy.)
  • Heroes with sociopathic behaviours such as Alexandra Cabot from Josie, Thirty Thirty from BraveStarr, and McCoy & Worf from Star Trek.
  • And finally, wanted criminals such as Robin Hood. In Correct (talk) 05:04, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Walter White Question[edit]

Can Walter White from Breaking Bad be classified as an antihero? Mr. Brain (talk) 19:54, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of fictional antiheroes. 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) 11:15, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple Adaptations?[edit]

The character Fritz The Cat appeared in comic book (as this article has listed him) but he also has appeared in film. Also, Alexandra Cabot (From Josie and The Pussycats, not Law & Order ... is in an Archie Comics but also appeared in Television and Film.) Currently Alexandra is not in this article but this is still a problem when the characters appeared in multiple adaptations. Batman and Catwoman are other examples. Can I move these into a new table? In Correct (talk) 03:35, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why are villains being listed as anti-heroes?[edit]

Why are characters like Beetlejuice being listed as an anti-heros? As I recall, he was the villain of the piece, with the couple having to save the daughter from his attentions?

Your own definition of an anti-hero lists the character in question as the protagonist of the piece. One could make a case for either the Maitlands or Lydia Deetz as the protagonists, NOT Beetlejuice himself.

imdb link 68.207.135.148 (talk) 14:47, 22 January 2017 (UTC)Wynni[reply]

The short answer is WP:V.
The long version: We cannot have a "List of X's" with a series of long arguments over whether or not each item is or is not and "X". Wikipedia does not present "original research" which is what each entry would be. Instead, we need to have reliable sources that directly state that each item fits the list.
In this case, the source cited says "Beetlejuice is the titular anti-hero..." - SummerPhDv2.0 18:48, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of fictional antiheroes. 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) 12:32, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 19 external links on List of fictional antiheroes. 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) 20:05, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on List of fictional antiheroes. 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) 06:02, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Additions to Movies[edit]

Maybe this has been asked before, maybe it hasn't. But if you have John Constantine and The Punisher listed in Movies, TV, & comics, why not also add Batman & Deadpool? Those 2 are listed in comics, but not either in movies or TV. Aidensdaddy2k9 (talk) 22:49, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of fictional antiheroes. 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) 07:49, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The anime/manga section[edit]

The anime/manga section could include any character from tokyo ghoul or tokyo ghoul: re, with the exception of furuta, and various other members of V — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.220.239.186 (talk) 05:20, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Rorschach[edit]

needs adding. Spicemix (talk) 21:40, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of poorly sourced entries[edit]

Going with the clean-up tag, I'll be removing numerous entries on here that are unreliably sourced, not labeling the character as 'anti-hero' in the source, not sourced at all, or having a dead source. I’ll also be removing sequels/related works for certain entries that only have the source for a particular entry (Crank 2, for ex.). Barely made one (talk) 00:06, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Thomas Covenant deserves a place in this list.[edit]

Thomas covenant, anti hero archetype known from "The chronicles of Thomas Covenant" is all too human and flawed to be anything near a hero, yet despita all his flaws .. you have to read the books.. Take it from me and anyone who has read the books, a truer anti-hero is hard to find. 83.101.80.204 (talk) 03:40, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of Fictional Antiheroes Page Issue[edit]

Hey I was on the List of Fictional Antiheroes page and some presumably 13 year old girl added Ash Morgenstern (from one of the hundreds of vapid Cassandra Clare books) with the comment "U go Ash (insert a dozen exclamation points)"

Not sure about the procedure for reporting issues but here you go..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.14.178.149 (talk) 20:29, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some potential candidates[edit]

Jacket (Hotline Miami)

Biker (Hotline Miami)

The Fans (Hotline Miami 2)

Ichi (Ichi the Killer)

Kakihara (Ichi the Killer)

Ash Williams (Evil Dead series)

Herbert West (Re-Animator series)

Marceline (Adventure Time)

Mr. Krabs (Spongebob)

Squidward (Spongebob)

Postal Dude (Postal series)

Divine (Pink Flamingos)

Filthy Frank (The Filthy Frank Show)

Guts (Berserk)

Wilbur Soot ?? (Dream SMP) Meepingmorp (talk) 16:26, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wilbur Soot DSMP[edit]

Could Wilbur Soot be considered an anti-hero within the Dream SMP ? Since its a minecraft role-play there wouldn't be any 'reliable' sources in terms of media reviews and official opinion but the DSMP wiki does offer a lot. Meepingmorp (talk) 16:25, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia doesn't allow fandom wikis to be used as sources. Wubbox (talk) 14:07, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
There is no consensus currently whether to split the list. It seems prudent to await the outcome of the current discussion on scope before discussing a potential split of the content. Felix QW (talk) 19:44, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This large, convoluted list must be split into multiple ones, and I have made a request here. --Kailash29792 (talk) 06:40, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would strongly prefer cutting down the list first, per WP:TRIVIA. A list of this nature always has contentious content, and I do think the list is worthwhile, but Wikipedia is not TVTropes, and a list of this nature shouldn't seek to document every single fictional anti-hero with a wikipedia article (and almost certainly shouldn't list characters without standalone articles). I think if we looked at the article's sources, identified sources like "Top 10 Greatest Literary Anti-heroes" and limited the article to listing characters discussed as notable or paradigmatic anti-heroes, that would be much more appropriate. As it is, this article is a trivia-magnet. - - mathmitch7 (talk/contribs) 14:45, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Removal of sourced entries[edit]

Lately, I've noticed users removing sourced entries because they disagree with those entries, such as Special:Diff/1019204610. Thoughts? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:57, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

batman isnt an antihero. As well as sources from screen rant arent reliable because screen rant isnt official reliable source. As well as hulk and iron man. No where in their biography over thr net it say they are antiheroes 46.71.151.137 (talk) 22:24, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Rocky Balboa[edit]

Hello everyone! Is Rocky Balboa a typical antihero? Because at the beginning of the first movie, he was a lone fighter in the ring who worked for low wages, just like Wolverine did at the first movie of X-Men. If yes, I would recommend to add him to this list. Please reply! Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.109.170.177 (talk) 00:20, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Are there sources that describe Rocky as an antihero? BD2412 T 17:29, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List criteria[edit]

This list has no clear WP:LISTCRITERIA. That is at least a major part of why it is such a mess. The recent AfD closed as no consensus because (per the close) editors were more-or-less split between improving the list and getting rid of it altogether. So let's try to improve it as much as possible. It may be the case that even the best possible version of this list is still not satisfactory and we would be better off getting rid of it (perhaps instead writing about the most important examples in prose form in the main Antihero article as was suggested in the AfD), but at least then we'll know whether we can bring it up to an acceptable standard for Wikipedia or not and can let that inform further discussion about how best to handle the situation.

As I said during the AfD, I would suggest adopting criteria akin to those used at List of military disasters: only include entries where multiple (i.e. at least two) reliable sources specifically dealing with the subject of fictional antiheroes refer to the character in question as an antihero. That way, we should only end up with bona fide examples that are generally (or at least fairly commonly) considered antiheroes rather than unduly presenting WP:Minority viewpoints where perhaps only a single person thinks the character is an antihero whereas everyone else thinks they're a regular hero or an outright villain. The subjectivity of the term (and some sources applying it rather loosely) was of course an issue that was brought up repeatedly during the AfD. I would be in favour of having a fairly high threshold for what to consider a WP:Reliable source in this context, one that would exclude e.g. a listicle by Screen Rant. I am unsure about whether or not to restrict entries to characters with stand-alone articles, since I can see pros and cons with both (though it may very well be a moot point since one would expect characters who have featured heavily in literature on fictional antiheroes to also meet the relevant notability requirements).

Ping all the editors from the AfD: @LaundryPizza03, Dream Focus, Clarityfiend, Zxcvbnm, Reywas92, Rorshacma, Piotrus, Daranios, Jontesta, Shooterwalker, Jclemens, Bookworm857158367, BD2412, and Ritchie333: Thoughts? TompaDompa (talk) 17:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no encyclopedic justification for committing intellectual suicide. If multiple reliable sources describe a fictional character as an antihero, that suffices. By comparison, if a new Senator is elected from Rhode Island, we don't exclude them from a list of Senators from Rhode Island merely because all the sources that predate their election omit their name. If a fact can be established by reference to reliable sources, then the context of that establishment is irrelevant. BD2412 T 17:27, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Whether someone is a Senator from Rhode Island is an objective fact, whereas whether a character is an antihero is a subjective assessment. TompaDompa (talk) 17:37, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As I told you in the AFD Information in any article only needs one reference to prove it if its in doubt. No reason to require more.. Just wasting everyone's time. And the "listicle" as you call it is fine, a reliable source mentions different antiheroes, then it counts. Dream Focus 17:38, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And as I told you in response, you are categorically incorrect in that absolutist assertion since our policy on WP:Exceptional claims explicitly says Any exceptional claim requires multiple high-quality sources. And for something like this list, where it's not a matter of facts but rather subjective assessments, requiring multiple sources may simply be a reasonable application of WP:WEIGHT so as not to unduly include the views of tiny minorities. TompaDompa (talk) 17:42, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's for Fringe theories and to prevent scam artist from tricking people. Dream Focus 17:46, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The point is that we do actually sometimes require multiple sources, which you should already know because Eddie891 gave you the different example of WP:BLPPUBLIC in the discussion at Talk:List of military disasters#Proposal for list criteria a year ago and furthermore made the point that something not being done doesn't mean that it can't be or shouldn't be. TompaDompa (talk) 17:54, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Since when is describing a fictional character as an antihero an exceptional claim? Jclemens (talk) 17:56, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be fine leaving it be if the inclusion criteria are limited to notable entities only (i.e. ones that have a stand-alone article), and of course the entry is referenced - with a quote, preferably. As for listicles on ScreenRant, meh, I'd let it go, I don't like them in the context of establishing notability, but they seem fine for such lists. I mean, using a crappy list to reference a crappy list is somewhat fitting :P Anyway, I'd like to remove non-blue linked entries on this list, as well as all unreferenced ones. Any objections to the former (the latter, per WP:V, should really not be objectionable...)? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:25, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Jclemens that classification of a character as an antihero is not an exceptional claim. I see a certain subjectivity of the term, in which case WP:LISTCRITERIA suggests requiring a reliable source as the solution. So I personally am fine with keeping with having one source. I do see "some sources applying it rather loosely", and that there may in some cases be an issue with WP:Minority viewpoints. I don't think that's a big issue, as we surely have many non-controversial examples to balance others. I would have not problem with asking for multiple sources to deal with that in the spirit of "something not being done doesn't mean that it can't be or shouldn't be", though it would be quite a big amount of work to fix a small problem. If we should agree to such a requirement, we should not throw the baby out with the bath water, however: Most entries here have only one source, because earlier contributors would not have expected that more are needed. So entries with one source should then only be removed, if there is good reason to believe that no other sources will substantiate it, i.e. after a search for such sources has been done. I would have a problem with requiring sources "specifically dealing with the subject of fictional antiheroes". I don't know exactly what that means (I guess the discussed "listicles" would qualify here after all), but I think such a requirement could promote a new kind of bias: On Wikipedia we want to include all the world's knowledge. Summary works concentrating the concept of antihero will invariably be limited (presumably mostly to Western world fiction) and prevent us from including information from (reliable) works analyzing individual works of fiction, areas of popular culture or regional fiction more in-depth. Daranios (talk) 15:07, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If they have a reference, leave them be. Some characters might not have their own separate Wikipedia article, but the series they are in does. Dream Focus 15:18, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The claims are controversial because it's likely to be disputed. Screen Rant isn't rigorous about what makes a hero an anti-hero, and the list is too WP:INDISCRIMINATE to create an article that meets Wikipedia standards. The article should have been deleted. But at least it needs a clean-up with higher quality sources. If we can't find a consensus around improving this article, that would be strong evidence that the article cannot be improved, and it should end up back at AFD. The suggestions from Piotrus should be an uncontroversial place to start and I would urge this towards better sources as Screen Rant is considered less than reliable at WP:RSP. Jontesta (talk) 23:21, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources reads: There is consensus that Screen Rant is a marginally reliable source. It is considered reliable for entertainment-related topics, but should not be used for controversial statements related to living persons.'
So that source is fine. There is no real dispute. A reliable source, clearly listed on the list of reliable sources, calls someone an anti-hero, then they belong on the list. Dream Focus 23:27, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Benson Dunwoody and Chick Hicks could be anti-heroes?[edit]

Hi friends i saw some pages and videos from these characters who are/were anti-heroes:

  • Chick Hicks from the Cars franchise: He in Cars 3 appears as the minor antagonist (because Storm is the main antagonistic jerk) and Cars 3: Driven to Win appears as the anti-heroical central main antagonist (because he congratulated Lightning and Ramírez because they defeated a jerk and they saw Miss Fritter chasing Storm at the end of the videogame)
  • Benson Dunwoody from Regular Show: Benson sometimes will be a hero and an antagonist but in some episodes from Regular Show describing as him is the anti-heroic deuteragonist

NRR EL 95 (talk) 13:13, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@NRR EL 95: As you can see from the discussion above, there are some concerns of this list becoming an indiscriminate collection of examples. So probably only characters should be included where reliable sources say they are an antihero, but not those where there is only circumstantial evidence. Daranios (talk) 16:02, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Suoerheroes being anroheroes[edit]

Aravela 13 screen rant isnt an official reliable source as well as cbr.com. in nowhere does it say batman is an antihero 46.71.151.137 (talk) 22:29, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's Always Sunny[edit]

No mention of It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia?! For shame that Charlie Kelly, Dennis Reynolds, Deandra "Dee" Reynolds, Ronald "Mac" McDonald and Frank Reynolds have not been entered into this list as anti-heroes. L2J1086 (talk) 01:44, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_fictional_antiheroes&oldid=1201365616"