Talk:Supercouple

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Television (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of television on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Soap Operas (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soap Operas, an effort to build consistent guidelines for and improve articles about soap operas and telenovelas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit WikiProject Soap Operas, where you can join the project and/or the discussion.
 B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 

Archives

Archive 1


Archives

Archive 2

Contents

[edit] Romeo and Juliet, Antony & Cleopatra, other historical / fictional couples?

It seems to me that before the rise of TwenCen media there was great public interest in other couplings, whether historical or fictional. Mark Antony and Cleopatra's tragic love, and the story of Romeo and Juliet spring immediately to mind. These two couples (and others) have also been enshrined in contemporary culture on numerous occasions, as well as forming paradigms for intense love relationships. For example West Side Story, cited within this article, is widely seen as a retelling of Romeo and Juliet. Even earlier, the Bible's Samson and Delilah and David and Bathsheba entranced centuries of the public. Does their enduring fascination for the public qualify these earlier couples as "supercouples" also? If so, shouldn't a section of this article discuss them, more than a brief aside in #Literature, toys, comic book, and other? And if not, then perhaps a section could explain why earlier famous couples, considered the paradigms of such concepts as fated lovers, do not qualify as supercouples. -- 192.115.133.116 (talk) 22:41, 5 April 2009 (UTC) -- corrected 22:51, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Good points. It is not a matter of whether they "qualify" as supercouples, though. It is a matter of whether there are valid sources calling these couples supercouples. Romeo and Juliet and the characters of "West Side Story"'s main romance, mentioned in this article, are often considered supercouples. If we can find valid sources stating those other couples you mentioned as supercouples, the Literature section can be broken apart from "toys, comic book, and other" and expanded upon. Flyer22 (talk) 22:18, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Gay Power Couples

Degenes and Heche, Surely Elton John and David Furnish were the first Gay Power Couple. 94.195.78.217 (talk) 13:18, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

If you can find a reliable source stating them as the first gay power couple, then we can add that in. Perhaps, Ellen DeGeneres and Anne Heche were the first lesbian supercouple, but Elton John and David Furnish were the first gay male supercouple or power couple. I don't remember the Elton John and David Furnish couple being as popular as the Ellen DeGeneres and Anne Heche couple, though (at least not in America). Flyer22 (talk) 03:51, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

[edit] Video game section

Regarding this edit, I am aware that some of the video game couples are not called supercouples in the sources. But also evident in that section is that none of those couples in particular are attributed as supercouples. Thus, there is no misrepresentation going on. The Final Fantasy couples are specifically mentioned as "notable couples," for example. Mentioning popular couples in addition to "supercouples" is perfectly acceptable. It is even needed to explain some of the text...such as how video game couples have evolved. The soap opera and film sections mention popular couples in addition to "supercouples" as well. If there is no valid reason for why we should not mention "simple popular couples" alongside "supercouples," I will be removing the tag. Flyer22 (talk) 17:01, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

You're right. I mistakenly thought they were considered supercouples by the article. I removed the tag. Jonathan Hardin' (talk) 20:00, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
No problem. But that section does need more video game couples who are specifically mentioned as supercouples, as well as more online sources (to back up or replace the sources that are not available online). One of the problems is that video game couples are not generally called supercouples. From what I've seen, it's rarer that they are referred to as such. They are usually simply referred to as "greatest couples," "best couples, "favorite couples, or "popular/notable couples." I've also been thinking of removing the Criticism section for the longest now, since it is only based on one source, and that source is no longer online; maybe I can find it at Internet Archive. But, yeah, since that subsection is only based on one source, it could be downsized significantly and just blended into the general Video game section. Flyer22 (talk) 20:34, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

[edit] YouTube Section

I Justine and Toby Turner may have been YouTube's first super couple. They appeared together in numerous videos, frequently eating at nice restaurants. As far as I know they did not say they were dating or a couple, but it was widely assumed they were. It has been noted that they are not appearing together more recently, so it maybe over.

I Justine frequently claimed to be attracted to Steve Jobs, Justin Bieber, and Shane Dawson. These relationships appear to have been for the sake of humor. Many female YouTube personalities claim they have a crush on Justin Bieber or Shane Dawson. With I Justine it maybe that relationships that are mentioned are for laughs, those that are simply shown are real. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davisrich1 (talkcontribs) 03:13, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

There's no YouTube section in the article (nor do I feel there should be), Davisrich1, so I take it you are only referring to this discussion as the "YouTube Section"? Or the Internet and media trends section which briefly mentions YouTube? Either way, we'd need WP:Reliable sources to back up your statements and add them to this article. Flyer22 (talk) 19:53, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Interaction
Toolbox
Print/export