Reconsidering the Wiki's Approach to Theory/Fanon...

[Seele00TextOnly]

Awkwardly split from here, where the issue of the Wiki started coming up... -Reichu

It is likely that this part of her soul was then salvaged and reunited with the maternal portion within Eva-02, as her voice begging Asuka to “die with me” is heard alongside her otherwise encouraging words telling Asuka she is still alive.

of course also adding "it is, however, also possible that the 'die with me' line is an audio flashback that Asuka is experiencing." would just be far too much to ask of a supposedly intellectual and open minded wiki. Yes, the dogmatic approach truly is for the best. It is, after all, all about your narrow interpretation of the evidence that has to be presented and is the only one worthy of notation, consideration, or study.

[Bagheera]

of course also adding "it is, however, also possible that the 'die with me' line is an audio flashback that Asuka is experiencing." would just be far too much to ask of a supposedly intellectual and open minded wiki. Yes, the dogmatic approach truly is for the best. It is, after all, all about your narrow interpretation of the evidence that has to be presented and is the only one worthy of notation, consideration, or study.

I'll fix it this weekend.

Edit: Regarding the wiki page in question: I went the easy route and changed "likely" to "possible". Aspiring editors take note: be as conservative in your choice of language as possble. The wiki is supposed to be a neutral source of information, not a dumping ground for your pet theories. You shouldn't claim something is likely (let alone fact) unless you have solid evidence to back it up.

I didn't put in anything about other theories for Kyoko's other voices since the page is specifically about soul division; noting it's a possibility for that scene is sufficient. Additional discussion can be saved for more appropriate pages (Air, Asuka, Kyoko, etc).

[Reichu]

of course also adding "it is, however, also possible that the 'die with me' line is an audio flashback that Asuka is experiencing." would just be far too much to ask of a supposedly intellectual and open minded wiki. Yes, the dogmatic approach truly is for the best. It is, after all, all about your narrow interpretation of the evidence that has to be presented and is the only one worthy of notation, consideration, or study.

The sarcasm isn't necessary.

I can speak only for myself on these matters... Writing for a wiki is hard. It's exhausting. It's one reason why I barely ever work on it. I know I'm biased and that this will color everything that I write. It takes a lot of diligence and thinking outside one's box to be able to put one's biases in their place and cover the material in whole. Whenever I commit anything to a page, there's almost certainly going to be some problem or mistake that I'll get to hear about later. Because, more often than not, the problems sit there. The Wiki format enables anyone with an account to change those pages, but almost nobody here touches the thing. Why are people complaining about these problems when they could personally fix them? Why not, you know, balance things out? Those lonely times when I'm hammering away at the Wiki, I'm always thinking, "Why aren't all those other people pouring their own insights and perspectives into the Wiki? How can the few contributors possibly know and see all?"

It's all quite frustrating. Ultimately, we get down to the "don't slam it if you can't be bothered to contribute" problem. The Wiki is the way it is because only a small handful of people have worked on it, and the Wiki process that tends to polish away rough edges has never had a chance to happen.

[Bagheera]

The sarcasm isn't necessary.

I can speak only for myself on these matters... Writing for a wiki is hard. It's exhausting. It's one reason why I barely ever work on it. I know I'm biased and that this will color everything that I write. It takes a lot of diligence and thinking outside one's box to be able to put one's biases in their place and cover the material in whole. Knowing that most of the people here don't contribute to the Wiki but are more than willing to complain about it doesn't help matters. All I can think when I'm hammering away at the thing is, "Why aren't all those other people pouring their own insights and perspectives into the Wiki? How can the few contributors possibly know and see all?"

It's all quite frustrating. Ultimately, we get down to the "don't slam it if you can't be bothered to contribute" problem. The Wiki is the way it is because only a small handful of people have worked on it, and the Wiki process that tends to polish away rough edges has never had a chance to happen.

It's happening now. I'm only doing minor edits, and I'm only one guy, but I am addressing some of these issues as I encounter them.

Is there a list of known issues somewhere? I know we have the Editorium, but is there anything beyond that?

To everyone else: Seriously, it's not that hard to do edits. Just volunteer and put some effort into it and you get to contribute and shit.

[Legendary]

The Wiki is the way it is because only a small handful of people have worked on it, and the Wiki process that tends to polish away rough edges has never had a chance to happen.

It might be wise to make it official policy to move ALL fanon/theorizing to their own sections on pages and only pass judgment on things that are revealed in one of the continuities. This would require an extensive overhaul, yes, but it would help people separate what is in the NGE2 files and what is simply fanon (in this very thread people have mentioned the Rei = Eva-00's soul theory as fact, even though it is just a very reasonable theory).

[Bagheera]

@Legendary: That's a great idea. You should get right on that.

(I'm serious; it's a good idea. Make it happen.)

[Reichu]

It might be wise to make it official policy to move ALL fanon/theorizing to their own sections on pages and only pass judgment on things that are revealed in one of the continuities.

For various reasons, I'm inclined to agree with this.

Perhaps further Wiki discussion should go to the Editorium?

[Bagheera]

For various reasons, I'm inclined to agree with this.

Perhaps further Wiki discussion should go to the Editorium?

Yes. A split/merge is in order.

[Legendary]

I'll get started on that if and only if I can have the guarantee that it is going to be official wiki policy because I hate getting involved in things that might be undone later.

[Reichu]

Well, it might get undone by accident (but that's what reversions are for). I'm fine with adding a policy change note wherever those things go. But it's probably better to get some more feedback before making an official change, just so that I can't later claim to have changed a wiki policy without a bigger samplings of opinions and while half-asleep.

[Bagheera]

I think it is very reasonable to separate out fanwank from official, confirmed material, and to explicitly note the former whenever possible (not necessarily with a "fanwank" tag or whatever, so much as "speculation suggests that..." or the like.

However! If such a change is to be made I would suggest we formulate and agree upon a standard format so that everyone's on the same page when making edits.

[Legendary]

Really, "speculation suggests that" creates the same problem. "Speculation suggests that a part of Rei's soul is in Eva-00." "Speculation suggests that Kyoko's soul pieces were merged." "Speculation suggests that Misato killed Kaji."

See the problem? If the point of this is to separate fanwanking and fan theories, then we should probably have it be a clean break and not allow any speculation in the main sections. Otherwise ideas that are preferred here at the wiki will just get placed in there as "the best possible choice" even when we've shown with the whole Eva-02 thing that the very best possible statement to be made about these two conflicting theories is "they're equal," and then we've just wasted a whole bunch of time talking about things that didn't need to be mentioned in one section when there's a perfectly good second one for them.

[Bagheera]

Really, "speculation suggests that" creates the same problem. "Speculation suggests that a part of Rei's soul is in Eva-00." "Speculation suggests that Kyoko's soul pieces were merged." "Speculation suggests that Misato killed Kaji."

See the problem? If the point of this is to separate fanwanking and fan theories, then we should probably have it be a clean break and not allow any speculation in the main sections. Otherwise ideas that are preferred here at the wiki will just get placed in there as "the best possible choice" even when we've shown with the whole Eva-02 thing that the very best possible statement to be made about these two conflicting theories is "they're equal," and then we've just wasted a whole bunch of time talking about things that didn't need to be mentioned in one section when there's a perfectly good second one for them.

Sure. I wholeheartedly advocate a clean break, but I'm talking about how to deal with overly ambitious statements in the meantime. Identifying them as speculation at least ameliorates the problem; ideally they should be separated out, but until then...

[Seele00TextOnly]

...

[thewayneiac]

It might be wise to make it official policy to move ALL fanon/theorizing to their own sections on pages and only pass judgment on things that are revealed in one of the continuities. This would require an extensive overhaul, yes, but it would help people separate what is in the NGE2 files and what is simply fanon (in this very thread people have mentioned the Rei = Eva-00's soul theory as fact, even though it is just a very reasonable theory).

I'm not quite sure this idea makes as much sense as you say. Many of these articles are already labeled as "Theory and Analysis" articles, including the Soul Divisibility article. Are you really suggesting that each Theory and Analysis article neads a Theory and Analysis section, or will you only apply this policy to the more general articles?

Also, the evdience for Rei 1 = Unit-00 is overwhelming to the exclusion of all other theories. Yes, it's still a theory, but it's the only viable theory. There needs to be some point where we can say, "O.K., there is sufficient evidence to treat this as a near fact".

My point is that not all theories are created equal. Excluding justified theories due to some preference is biased and bad of course, but giving equal time to unlikely theories that are not supported by evidence is even worse. It would be a major distortion to treat everything equally. Preference must be given to theories that are justified by the evidence presented in the series and to some extent in the supplimental materials. You are not suggesting, giving equal preference to "Misato shot Kaji", or "Rei doesn't have Lilith's soul", are you?

There's such a thing as being too unbiased.

See the problem? If the point of this is to separate fanwanking and fan theories, then we should probably have it be a clean break and not allow any speculation in the main sections. Otherwise ideas that are preferred here at the wiki will just get placed in there as "the best possible choice" even when we've shown with the whole Eva-02 thing that the very best possible statement to be made about these two conflicting theories is "they're equal," and then we've just wasted a whole bunch of time talking about things that didn't need to be mentioned in one section when there's a perfectly good second one for them.

But I don't agree that they are equal. The soul reunion theory is supported by the evidence of the conflicting voices. The Asuka's memory theory is is a further streach in that it requires us to assume that some of Kyoko's lines are real while others are not. It is possible but much less likely. If mentioned on the Wiki it shoul be a second tier theory with the soul reunion theory the primary theory. (Though ultimately it is a concensus opinion of the Wiki editors that decides whether theories are equal or if one takes precedence. Lets agree now: no revert wars on the Wiki.

@Seele00TextOnly: Don't worry about it. I probably should have reserved that stuff about dismissing the evidence. In this case you and the others theorize that the lines in question are from Asuka's memories. You did not arbitrarily declare them from her memories in order to support some other theory, as was happening in the other examples I cited.

[Bagheera]

But I don't agree that they are equal. The soul reunion theory is supported by the evidence of the conflicting voices.

The problem is that that's it's only support, and there are other ways to explain those conflicting voices.

The Asuka's memory theory is is a further streach in that it requires us to assume that some of Kyoko's lines are real while others are not.

Yes, but it nevertheless has support -- the memory in question was a key plot point in recent episodes, and the images at the end of the sequence suggest that something was going on in Asuka's head at the time.

It is possible but much less likely. If mentioned on the Wiki it shoul be a second tier theory with the soul reunion theory the primary theory. (Though ultimately it is a concensus opinion of the Wiki editors that decides whether theories are equal or if one takes precedence. Lets agree now: no revert wars on the Wiki.

That's fine. But I would argue that we have no business assigning theories to particular tiers based solely on a single piece of evidence, particularly when that evidence can be interpreted in multiple ways. It's not like the memory theory is the only alternative in this case, don't forget -- we also have the breakdown theory brought up by NemZ, which frankly seems more likely than both.

Rei I = Lilith is a solid, top tier theory. The evidence supporting the notion is overwhelming, even if the show never comes right out and says it. Rei I = Unit 00 is a solid b-tier theory, since there's some solid evidence for it and no established alternatives (though note it's not a given like you seem to assume; so long as some fragment of Lilith is in Unit 00 pretty much all of the evidence is satisfied). What we're talking about here is idle speculation based on minimal evidence -- it should be labeled as such to avoid confusion.

[Reichu]

@"Tiers" for theories/fanon: I have the feeling that this is going to get messy fast... Probably in general, we need to keep in mind that the wiki's purpose is to be informative, and not for satisfying our fragile little egos by putting our "favorites" on an altar. It can be a difficult obstacle to overcome, but I guess what it comes down to is: it doesn't really matter which theories we like more. What matters is being helpful. As a general rule, carefully select some theories that have gotten a decent amount of mileage (for better or for worse) and provide the pros and cons. Try not to verbally press the reader toward one or the other; let the ideas speak for themselves.

@Revert wars: Yes, we can definitely avoid such things by discussing matters and reaching an agreement out in the open. If it seems like something needs to be changed expediently and nobody can be reached at the moment, it's possible to make alterations that aren't overly aggressive, and leave the matter open for further discussion in future. (Specifying what you did and why in the history is a good thing.)

[Bagheera]

@Revert wars: Yes, we can definitely avoid such things by discussing matters and reaching an agreement out in the open. If it seems like something needs to be changed expediently and nobody can be reached at the moment, it's possible to make alterations that aren't overly aggressive, and leave the matter open for further discussion in future. (Specifying what you did and why in the history is a good thing.)

Oh. I'd completely missed that. I figured out how to do edits, but I didn't know the History section was also editable. I'll be mindful of that in the future.

[Reichu]

The history section isn't "editable", but, whenever you make edits, you can put in a summary/reason that shows up in the page's history. Everyone should make use of the thing.

[Legendary]

The history section isn't "editable"

It damn well should be, lest people realize we weren't always at war with Eurasia!

But seriously, Reichu basically summed up what I'm going for with the "it doesn't matter which theories we like more" post. I personally believe the "Rei 1 = Eva-00" theory; I'm not detracting it in any sense; but I am saying "We can't use theories, even 'near-fact' theories, as a way to justify more theories." This doesn't work and it almost inevitably leads to things that aren't there.

And yeah, I meant the general pages. Theory & Analysis pages obviously shouldn't have these sections within themselves, but I do think that these pages should allow people to comment back and forth on them and that it wouldn't hurt to include notes that anything on these pages is stepping out into the here there be dragon lands of theories, even if there aren't any other viable alternatives for them.