Jump to content

Talk:Supercouple

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

There is an ambiguity in the lede: paragraph one suggests an article on an historical phenomenon, while paragraph two indicates an article on a term (more like a dictionary entry). The above comments correspond respectively to readers/writers who would like to see a focus on the phenomenon as opposed to those (apparently dominant in editing here) who prefer to identify referents of a particular word. There can be no doubt that media long before the 1980s identified certain celebrated couples as possessing power or influence as a couple far greater than the sum of the power/influence they could wield as individuals. In Hollywood, the Pickford/Fairbanks coupling (who made their home at 'Pickfair' -- perhaps the original model, never forgotten by publicists, for today's portmanteau couple-names?) is notable. Among royalty, William & Mary and Victoria & Albert come to mind -- especially the latter. Outside the English-speaking world there was (were?) Ferdinand & Isabella. There are large literatures on these four pairs of people, drawing attention to their influence and popularity as couplings above and beyond their celebration and impact as individuals. Harry & Leona Helmsley were once notorious for wielding superpower within the New York real estate sector. Did John Lennon and Yoko Ono -- both unquestionably famous as individuals -- constitute a supercouple prior to 1980, or were they at least moving in that direction? What of Jeffrey & Ina Garten -- a counterexample (like Charles & Diana?) of a married couple who are/were better known individually than they are/were as a couple, despite their frequent linkage in media? Googling such phrases as "power couples in the art world" (Gilbert & George might be an example, or at least an example that parodies the supercouple trope) and "power couples in politics" (George & Martha Washington, arguably; Jefferson & Varina Davis, possibly; Franklin & Eleanor Roosevelt, probably; now Bill & Hillary, surely; Anthony Weiner & Huma Abedin, until recently) is instructive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.99.67.208 (talk) 12:49, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gay Power Couples

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Video game section

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

YouTube Section

[edit]

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 (talk • contribs) 03:13, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Heche/DeGeneres

[edit]

Heche and DeGeneres were not a "supercouple." That is just common sense. I've removed it twice and an IP editor keeps re-inserting it. The source being used is a gay magazine that Heche gave an interview to in 2001 after she and DeGeneres split and Heche married a man. The interview uses the word "supercouple" once. This is not a credible source in this circumstance. The definition of "supercouple" on this Wiki page is "a popular or financially wealthy pairing that intrigues and fascinates the public in an intense or even obsessive fashion." Heche and DeGeneres were neither of those things. At the time of their pairing, DeGeneres was a comedienne with her own TV sitcom and Heche was a completely unknown actress doing small parts in movies like I Know What You Did Last Summer. DeGeneres was wealthy; Heche was not (she even stated in court documents in 2008 "I have no money" to pay child support for her son during her divorce battle with ex-husband Coley Laffoon). DeGeneres and Heche did not "fascinate the public" but rather make the public dislike them, as Heche has stated on multiple occasions that she lost career opportunities due to this relationship. The IP editor has no reasonable merit for putting this back in. If he does it again I will have no choice but to take this to the Noticeboard, as mention of the Heche/DeGeneres pairing has no reason to be mentioned on this page. Sancap (talk) 00:37, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Malformed DR/N

[edit]

A recent attempt to file a dispute at DR/N has been removed as malformed. No discussion can take place without a properly filed case. This can be easily achieved by using the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/request form. Thank you and happy editing.--Amadscientist (talk) 11:04, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I should note that the IP user 76.248.149.47, made a similar malformed DR/N filing on Octobe 6. If this was you and simply forgot to sign in, I suggest disclosing that now.--Amadscientist (talk) 04:28, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Supercouple. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:09, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Primetime: House of Cards

[edit]

For primetime, the U.S. House of Cards is the definitive series depicting a power couple. This should be added. -Mardus /talk 17:31, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mardus, is there a WP:Reliable source calling them a supercouple or power couple? If so, examples are usually placed on List of supercouples. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 02:00, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Flyer22 Reborn, I only suggested this as an idea. Being out of time, I could not expand much about this in-article. -Mardus /talk 19:00, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Supercouple. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 23:51, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Supercouple. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 17:50, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Javanka redirect

[edit]

Following the examples of Bennifer and Brangelina, I redirected Javanka to Supercouple earlier today. There's no mention of "Javanka" in the article currently, though. Perhaps a "Politics" section might make sense? --MZMcBride (talk) 00:47, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MZMcBride, a section simply for that couple would be WP:Due weight. They can fit in the Celebrity section if there are reliable sources naming them a supercouple or power couple. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:21, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Flyer22 Reborn. Do you mean undue weight to have a section for only Javanka? I tend to agree. I'm not sure the "Celebrity" category would be quite appropriate for this particular couple, though. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:13, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
MZMcBride, yeah, that's what I meant. As for the Celebrity section, well, politicians are sometimes considered celebrities. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 04:31, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Supercouple. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 16:29, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Supercouple. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 03:38, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

America-centric perspective

[edit]

This article seems to have a very strong America-centric perspective, which is probably true for a lot of the internet and Wikipedia in general. I'm attempting to add more non-American supercouple examples for which I can find WP:RS, but help from others on this is very much appreciated! Quantumavik (talk) 22:39, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quantumavik, regarding this edit you made, your sources need to actually use the term supercouple or power couple for those pairings. Otherwise, your text is WP:Synthesis and should be reverted. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 22:54, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Flyer22 Reborn, thanks for pointing this out. The first source I have cited in that edit para starts with "Supercouple Virat Kohli and Anushka Sharma who got hitched...," so I believe that counts as a correct source. I am looking for sources that explicitly use supercouple/power couple, and will add them. Quantumavik (talk) 23:08, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Supercouple. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 22:36, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Supercouple&oldid=1209293126"