Of course he has corrupted a lot of people via temptation, but there were also those that he couldn't corrupt. He couldn't corrupt Job. He tempted Jesus Christ but failed. Revelations says that every knee will bow to the Godhead three in one, and the devil will be in the lake of fire for all eternity. As for the neutral part also looking from a biblical standpoint (whether you have a head knowledge of the Bible), corrupting a certain number of people does not make him "successful", as he had his failures as well.
news for you DragonDude, if we're neutral we respect all views - some believe Satan has already won and God as you know it IS Satan.. by that definition he is successful and he won't be going anywhere, we will just suffer as demons or become Satanic servants etc.. the concept of Theological Satanism is not just fantasy, it is a belief system too: not widely practiced but it is there.. thus to some Satan is successful, if we go by Revelations we may as well say we are pro-Christian as that is only one doomsday scenario (and most people don't believe in a doomsday anymore, even Christians).
That is the most ridiculous statement I've ever heard. "God being Satan." If this Wiki is neutral, then I suggest that "Successful Villains" be removed from that article, as Christians think he will ultimately fail in the end. If you respect all views, you wouldn't ostracize believing Christians like that. Personally, I find Satan being successful offensive.
no more ridiculous or offensive than your whining about your precious religion - neutrality isn't us doing what you want us to do: get over yourself and stop finding offense with facts that don't comply with your so-called "faith". Many see God as evil, you can't prove either way so until God comes (or doesn't) you can't say anything other than propaganda.
He is kind of right. Just take a look at the Maltheism God page. Now granted there are counterarguments, but the point is is that God as a villain is a view many people have. And frankly if you do take the holy scriptures literally it's hard to see him as anything but pure evil. And if not, well, there's no evidence that God even exists one way or the other, never mind whether or not he's good, evil, or neutral.
Don't go pushing your atheistic beliefs on me moron. If this was neutral, you would actually respect my religion. Some see God as evil, which is why there's a God (Maltheism) page on there. Fine. Being neutral is respecting all religions, which you don't seem to do with Christianity. I suggest you shut up and YOU get over yourself just because I want this Wiki to be truly neutral. Saying that Satan is successful is not doing it.
I put "Status dependent on version" - it is the most "PC" answer, at the same time Dragon - try not to take things personally, if you have true faith things on this wiki (of all places) should not get you this wound up.
Also Blueberry, calm yourself a little, often people "whine" because religion is important to them : this is why real life villains were banned, the controversy factor.
2. Not actually an atheist. Just pointing something out.
3. I do respect religions other than my own. I am saying that there are alternate interpretations that are no more or less valid. What has been said above is valid. To say you are right would be to assume that your stance is the most valid when it simply is not.
4. Telling me to shut up? Oh that stings. Also overly and needlessly hostile. Gonna have to reccomend you get banned for a while. My apologies.
no matter who you were talking to, you earned yourself a ban - this is not the place to insult people like that, also he was clearly trolling you and will be dealt with as well : you however showed a very negative side to yourself with the language you chose to use and the way you voiced your opinions.
Anyway, this is Overseer's wall so I'll leave it at that.
This time I think you may be wrong. I agree concerning the "Hero's Lover" category, if the villain wasn't actually "in love" with the hero, however on the category "Evil VS Evil" it is clearly said that to qualify, a villain has to be portrayed in at least some sort of "heroic" way for fighting other villains. A Complete Monster is never ever portrayed in any positive way. Percy Whetmore might be an exception, but I'm not really sure about Catalina.
Hmm...going by my understanding of it, Evil Vs. Evil can pertain to any scenario where two evil parties are in conflict. At least that's how it's viewed on TV Tropes and they're where the term comes from so I prefer to go with their definition. To give another example Pre Vizsla and Darth Maul fit Evil Vs. Evil with each other, but Pre Vizsla is definitely a Complete Monster. So I'm not sure. For now we'll just leave it as is I guess.
Can't wait. Although Zombie Spider-Man did turn good, when he came to Earth-Z, he ate some more flesh, which is not a good thing. He could be considered a True Neutral character compared to the usual Neutral Good character.
Take it up with him. I've said my piece about a dozen times and he refuses to listen to me. No matter what I say he is 110% convinced that he is right and nobody else is. Honestly I find his insistence on policing Star Wars pages to be supremely exasperating, especially given how he never even tries to give an argument in his favor. If he thinks he's right, that's just grand, but the onus is on him to prove that he's right. He cannot just assume that I know what he's thinking. I am trying to provide corrections to a page in desperate need of them and he is so consumed with narciccism that he refuses to believe himself to be in the wrong. So perhaps you or an admin can talk some sense to our mutual "friend". I've already requested he be banned for blatantly disrespecting me repeatedly with his actions.
But you're right. It is getting old. But he refuses to communicate with me, so my hand is forced.
The thing is, our standards and guidelines are not as high as TV Tropes. Villains they do not consider to be CMs we do. Now the opposite is never true. If a villain is a CM by their standards, they are for us to. But some villains we disagree with TV Tropes on and Syndrome is one of them. This is because he really isn't sympathetic. Becoming a mass murderer because you had your widdle feelings hurt is not even remotely sympathetic, especially when one remembers that Mr. Incredible snapped at Syndrome AFTER his stupidity caused a dangerous supervillain to get away and before that was interfering in Mr. Incredible's attempted arresting of a dangerous supervillain. And for being snapped at by a guy who's patience he'd tried to it's limits...he became a mass murdering psycho. Why people find him sympathetic is a mystery I will never solve. Being yelled at because you were an idiot is not a sufficiently sympathetic backstory. And in any event, the Villains Wiki does not consider Tragic Villain and Complete Monster to be incompatible.
So that's my stance anyway. I appreciate your willingness to hear me out. I await your reply.
I agree that TV Tropes CM standards are way to high. I completetly agree with that. Syndrome however, was always one of those cases in which I agreed with them. I am not saying that his backstory excuses mass murder, but still he murdered the superheroes to make everyone else super. He had a well-intentioned extremist goal. He wanted to make everyone super. And when he launched missiles on Mr. Incredible family ship, he did not know children were there.
Anyway, this is my opinion and I will be happy to await you response to that.
Actually his motives were not of the Well-Intentioned Extremist variety. He outright says that once everyone becomes super, no one will be because that will be the standard. So actually it is an insidious symbolical destruction of the very concept of superhumans. Nothing well-intentioned about it.
And in fact he DID know there were children on board. Elasti-Girl says in no uncertain terms there are children onboard, which shocks Mirage. Syndrome however doesn't care and goes through with the plane's destruction.
So in the end he is not a Well-Intentioned Extremist and knowingly targeted missiles at children.
Actually, you almost got me. The first point, you got me convinced.
But the second one, I am still on-the-fence. Maybe Syndrome thought Elasti-Girl was lying about children being on board? But I will accept that I have been outvoted. I guess he can stay in this category.
Thank you for being respectful UNLIKE TV Tropes users. :)