Talk:List of tomboys in fiction

Sailor Jupiter or Sailor Venus

I've been told that Makoto was a girly-girl in the manga, where as Minako was the tomboy.

Appearance and behaviour

Makoto is tomboy in appearance: she is very tall, have a lot of strength and can be very rude. But her hobbies are those of a housewife. Minako has a very feminine appearance, but her hobbies and her behaviour are those of a boy. I think you are right and she is the real tomboy. (please note that I don't believe that hobbies, or even the behaviour, are either male or female, I tell how it is shown in the manga). --83.57.207.57 (talk) 09:24, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Dragonball

I am not agree that all those girls are tomboys only because they fight. The only real tomboy would be Videl, and maybe "evil" Lunch.

• Chichi: when she is young, her only aspiration is to marry with Goku. After, she is a protective mother.
• A18: she fights because she is built to do so, but she likes fashion above all (the androids lose a lot of time just because she wanted to "buy" new clothes).
• Zangya: do we know enough of her?
• Seripa: could be, but Seripa is the only female saiyan model we have so we must think that she follow the tradtional female role in the saiyan race.
• Pan: she is too young to have gender differences (in the GT, she could be identified as tomboy).

--83.57.207.57 (talk) 09:24, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Naruto

Sakura, Ino, and Temari aren't tomboys.They all wear feminine clothing. Sakura and Ino are both highly concerned with their appearance and boys; stereotypical 'girlish' behaviour. Temari is also quite feminine.
The only thing that could be considered boyish about them is the fact that they're ninja, and Sakura has been shown to be rather aggressive at moments (However, even then Sakura usually gets aggressive over pretty 'girlish' things, like being told she's ugly and being interrupted while flirting with the object of her affections).
I'm removing them from the list again, and if someone doesn't agree, please explain why you think they're tomboys (Specifically you, Georgiacatcrimson, since you keep reverting my edits without an explanation). JadziaLover (talk) 22:24, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

sorry,but those naruto characters aren't in list of notable tomboys in fiction .but they are in the arkticle otenba .and otenba actually means a girl that could be less or more mannish than a tomboy .sakura ,temari and ino are less mannish than an "american tomboy".that's why the person who had added them only adds them in otenba and not in list of notable tomboys in fiction .but somebody (everybody,actually) had miistaked otenba as tomboy,and put them in the list

The same goes for Lyra Silvertongue, elsewhere the character is described as especially not-tomboyish (like "finally a real girl in fantasy!"), she too only wears female clothing; but she is the leader of a gang of children (mostly boys), hmm.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.179.54.231 (talk) 22:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC) 

Trim the Anime/Manga section

Yanno, the above comments only point up the fact that the section of all those should be replaced with a cross-reference to Otenba, because the Japanese concept of a tomboy is different enough from the Western one that it should be discussed separately. —Quasirandom (talk) 20:18, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

yeah otenba is really different from tomboy because of the concept(the guy that added naruto characters to otenba might understand the difference--Revim (talk) 08:46, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Trimming not necessary

The Otenba article dosen't have squat on it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgiacatcrimson (talk • contribs) 17:10, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

(Note: refactored the above to not start a new section). That just means Otenba needs to be expanded (with sources). —Quasirandom (talk) 22:18, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

It's going to be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgiacatcrimson (talk • contribs) 11:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Will you stop vandalizing the list by removing legitimate cleanup tags? --Farix (Talk) 11:48, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Now that wasn't very nice of you. --Farix (Talk) 02:05, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Jean Louise "Scout" Finch

Shouldn't Scout from Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird be included in this list? She didn't wear dresses or traditionally female clothing and she often beat up boys at her school. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.45.206.128 (talk) 02:00, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Reverts

I reverted to the last decent version. There has been alot of screwing around with the article that isnt helpful. Work from here with regards to finding citations. Some of which were deleted by vandalism some time ago. There is no need to remove content minutes after it has been tagged. As this can be considered a navigational list, entries with articles that cover the topic do not really need sourcing. --neonwhite user page talk 14:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Reintroducing unsourced original-research material that was previously deleted under general concensus strikes me as being a retrograde step. I strongly disagree with the statement that "entries with articles that cover the topic do not really need sourcing". My view is that entries without verifiable references explicitly describing the characters as "tomboys" can only be described as original research, and thus do not belong here. --DAJF (talk) 22:57, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Note also that your (User:Neon white) reverts actually removed valid references, and also undid the work of other editors to put entries in alphabetical order. --DAJF (talk) 23:07, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Citated entires have been removed with no valid reason. Navigational lists don't need complete sourcing if the article the entry links to clearly defines it then that is usually ok. Obviously they need to be checked but i've added the ones i've found so far. Many may turn out to be incorrect but the wholesale removal of content without any attempt to find sources or check them is not helpful and damages the article. Common sense is applicable here. If characters fit the stated criteria then they should be acceptable. Fact tags are added to give editors chance to provide sources, they arent there to indicate immediate deletion. There is no consensus to remove anything here. The article currectly is an absolute mess and was far more useful previously. I remind editors to avoid Wikipedia:Wikilawyering and remember that writing a good article is the goal here. --neonwhite user page talk 17:50, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Merge this article into Tomboy

To discuss whether you support or oppose a merger of this article into Tomboy please discuss it on that articles talk page Talk:Tomboy. --Magnetawan (talk) 16:22, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Personally, I'd put it up for deletion. The number of tomboys (and does anyone know the equivalent word for a male who acts like a girl?) in fiction must run to the millions. The tomboy has been a standard character in fiction for a couple thousand years at least. Fifty years ago that paragon of maleness (Boy's Life) was rife with tomboys in its fiction and Men's Life always had exuberant women running around with machine guns and whips.71.197.83.129 (talk) 03:07, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

This should be discussed on the Tomboy talk page. This article has been listed for deletion 3 times (by me most recently), and the consensus is very much against deletion. -- Mark Chovain 06:42, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Winona Ryders character in Roxy Carmichael

Does anyone remember that movie? I distinctly remember her character being a tomboy to the max —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.134.73.128 (talk) 07:38, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Toph

We should add Toph, she is also a tomboy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.12.156.120 (talk) 01:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

you're right,we should add toph but Mr.Huggles keeps reverting my edits.--Revim (talk) 09:36, 7 November 2008 (UTC)