Villains who are more likely to accidentally foil their own plots than the heroes they're fighting against (unless if said heroes are the same) due to stupidity, cowardly behavior, weakness, incompetent henchmen, and/or overconfidence. Thus, they can be easily defeated and often hit the Scapegoat category because of this.

Incompetent villains mostly appear in comedies, where it is expected from the audience to see the main evil-doers or their henchmen fail miserably (such as Bebop & Rocksteady and Dr. Robotnik) - and most cartoons (e.g. many Looney Tunes villains), but can appear as well in serious or even mature stories. If this is the case, they are often comic reliefs due to their incompetence contrasting the work's overall tone. An example is Phil Cassidy. Evil organizations and corporations can also be labeled as incompetent if most or all of their agents/superiors are themselves incompetent. Team Rocket, the Koopalings, and the Casino Bosses are good examples of this.

Incompetent villains can also be characters who have schemes that are ultimately stupid, pointless or do little to cause chaos. Sometimes their attempts at evil blow up in their faces by either causing them great harm or even aiding the heroes; thus, these villains are not really much of a threat but they can occasionally be dangerous or even intimidating. Additionally, characters who are stated or made out to be smart in the media they appear in, or even masterminds, such as Dr. Neo Cortex, Wile E. Coyote, Eric Cartman and Krang can still be classified as incompetent if they meet any of the previous qualifications, especially if their intelligence varies. However, some incompetent villains can actually be dangerous at times if they really put their minds to it. A good example of this is Zim. Also, as mentioned, just because they are incompetent does not mean that they aren't smart. It is possible for villains to be good in a certain field, but still are too cowardly, lacking in common sense, or arrogant to get the job done.

For obvious reasons, such villains are likely not successful, but in certain cases, they CAN still succeed in their goals, notably either if they have the help of much more frightening and competent villains, just with luck, or by learning from their own mistakes to become better.

Keep in mind that this category only refers to incompetence in terms of villainy and antagonism, not professionalism or occupational skills.

Pure Evil villains will NEVER qualify as they are capable of committing horrific acts and causing serious problems in a story which actually makes them competent and very formidable.

Even if, in very rare cases, some Pure Evils are somewhat incompetent (e.g. Shou Tucker, Chaka, Colonel Henry Favours, Joffrey Baratheon, Diodora Astaroth and Bob Ewell) they're still capable of doing horrific acts and thus, they should go under the Arrogant, Dimwits, Cowards, Weaklings, Non-Action and/or Pawns categories instead.

Even if they are not Pure Evil, please DO NOT add villains who simply have a lack of competence but at the same time are still capable of commiting horrific acts, as this DOES NOT automatically mean that they are Incompetent (e.g. Dawn Bellwether, Rumpelstiltskin, Aku, Lord Shen, The Healthy Band, and Tiger General).