Lilith is female, I'm also convinced on the "Adam is female" argument (did you really have to drag ovipositors into this?..)

The Angels.....could either be male or female depending on the one, but really, they strike me more as "it", as "its". The Commentary might focus on actually assigning them gender, but at the moment, I think we should use the gender-neutral "it".

Evas....should Evangelions be "it" or "she"?

They do call Eva 01 "she" but are the Adam-based Evas (00, 02, etc.) "he" perhaps? Dunno.

But really, they strike me more as an "it" than a gender. I mean they're....artificial.

Nothing on this has been settled really. I'm in favor of just choosing something and sticking to it, since it'll get confusing when multiple editors start getting their hands on an article and an angel or Eva is referred to as "she" in one sentence then "he" in the next. I'm indifferent to whatever pronoun is to be used, be it he, she, ve or it. However, there may be some ways of talking about sentient things that interact on a high level being referred to as "it", so that one is my least favorite.

I would even be in favor of using the gender list that was made a while ago on ANF for the Angels and having a disclaimer somewhere on the EvaWiki main page that states the genders used for the Angels in this wiki come from fandom and <insert relevant digest version of the discussion>, and that such pronouns are used to facilitate the writing.

I'm going to use "it" for the prototype then add in the other pronouns later...

Lilith and Adam as "she"s is pretty much settled, as much by Reichu's insistance as anything else. In this regard, the Evas as "she"s also seems a foregone conclusion, as Reichu's thoughts on this matter have been well documented.

The other Angel's will present a slight difficulty. Essentially, we must be consistent across Angels, as there is nothing to distinguish them sex-wise, from each other. They must all be "its", "shes", or "hes". Essentially, I imagine it will probably be down to "its" and "shes". All things considered, in the interests of open mindedness, I think we would be better off with its.

Ornette wrote:I would even be in favor of using the gender list that was made a while ago on ANF for the Angels and having a disclaimer somewhere on the EvaWiki main page that states the genders used for the Angels in this wiki come from fandom and <insert relevant digest version of the discussion>, and that such pronouns are used to facilitate the writing.

This wouldn't fit well with the overall ethos of the Wiki. Our information, were possible, is supposed to be very solid. We honestly can't point to anything concrete in the show that marks any of the Angels out as one sex or the other.

(Another matter comes to mind on all of this, spurred on by reading the linked thread. I think it goes without saying that Evangelion Unit-01 and Yui Ikari will have to have separate pages on the wiki. We really cannot combine those two pages without seriously breaking the internal logic of the site.)

well yeah....Yui and Eva 01 are different articles on the wiki. You know I was never quite sure if Eva 01 had a mind a bit separate from Yui's soul (IN THE MANGA it appears it does...)

But I digress....

Okay, Seeds are "she" (no arguement there)

Angels are "it" (at least for the time being) (not arguement there).

Evas are "she"......as Reichu commands....

okay I'll get started...

ObsessiveMathsFreak wrote:This wouldn't fit well with the overall ethos of the Wiki. Our information, were possible, is supposed to be very solid. We honestly can't point to anything concrete in the show that marks any of the Angels out as one sex or the other.

True. We can use that made-up gender list in the Commentary (though I'm not saying we necessarily should) because it is more our personal playground, but in the Wiki we need to restrict our playful whims. "It" is the way to go.

I'd have preferred pulling out good ol' "ve" for the Angels -- nonstandard and niche as far as pronouns go, but it's rather nice when dealing with entities of unresolved sex/gender... (Considering how nonspecific "it" is, "ve" is also much easier to write with. Once you figure out how to use the forms, at least.)

The other pronouns will probably require a disclaimer somewhere. I.e., that, while the technical issue of biological sex is unresolved, "she" is deemed an appropriate convention due to the whole "mother-being" thing. That's my take on it, anyway.

I'd have preferred pulling out good ol' "ve" for the Angels -- nonstandard and niche as far as pronouns go, but it's rather nice when dealing with entities of unresolved sex/gender... (Considering how nonspecific "it" is, "ve" is also much easier to write with. Once you figure out how to use the forms, at least.)

You know, I thought that was so cool I wanted to do it too. But as the thing must be "accesible" I don't think it should be universally used. Should add it to the notes on Adam that "fans do this" (self fullfilling prophesy...)

V wrote:You know, I thought that was so cool I wanted to do it too. But as the thing must be "accesible" I don't think it should be universally used.

Its usage as a pronoun is clear from context. The only thing people wouldn't know is WHY we do it, but they could plug it into "Search" and find an explanatory write-up within seconds if they cared.

Should add it to the notes on Adam that "fans do this" (self fullfilling prophesy...)

?

that is, we don't know if "hundreds" of fans *currently* use the "ve" system

in the same way that hundreds of LOTR fans have an opinion on the Balrog issue


At present, perhaps several dozen people are aware that "EvaCommentary" started doing that.

However, universally use "ve" system on EvaWiki, and leave a not explaining it saying that "this is commonplace among the fandom"

Everyone who reads EvaWiki assumes this to be true, and in turn starts using "ve". Thus, a self-fulfilling prophesy.

I have no strong feeling on its use one way or the other: would you like it to be done using the "ve" designation?

Mostly I want to use "ve" for Angels #3 ~ #16 because (A) it's there, (B) many/most of the people who are going to be editors already know about "ve", (C) "ve" is better than "it", and (D) we can.

A brief explanation behind the logistics for using it would be provided in the same place where we explain why we standardize various other things to what they are.

....well I thought you meant just for Adam and Lilith.

(shrug)

we might do that eventually. Right now I'm just worried about physically throwing some content up there, and I'll get back to it.

V wrote:....well I thought you meant just for Adam and Lilith.

Oh, no. "Ve" for Adam's kids; "she" for Seeds and Evas. What gave the impression otherwise?

I really, really think that we should stick with "it" for the Angels. I don't think Ve is even the only contender for a neutral third person singular.

I am strongly disinclined to use ‘it’ for the Angels, though that's just a personal preference (lol human). I'm tempted to suggest using she across the board, although I can't really justify it.

Is Ve the most common Gender Neutral Pronoun (aside from it, they etc) or just the most common in the NGE fandom? I'm not suggesting using an entirely different pronoun of course, we have enough of those already.

Katayoku no Tenshi wrote:I am strongly disinclined to use ‘it’ for the Angels, though that's just a personal preference (lol human). I'm tempted to suggest using she across the board, although I can't really justify it.

The Angels are entirely open-ended; they're not "mother-beings" like the Seeds and the Evas, just members of an ill-fated race.

Is Ve the most common Gender Neutral Pronoun (aside from it, they etc) or just the most common in the NGE fandom?

Mr. Tines introduced it into usage at ANF years back. No other GNPs have been used in any NGE fandoms I know about, so I'd have no reason to consider them.

Ve/ver/vis is a deliberate choice of the singularitarians at sl4.org/singinst.org for use with transhuman or potentially transhuman entities, and in more recent SF (especially Greg Egan's) it seems to have eclipsed older fannish usages like se/hir or hesh/hiser.

By coming into NGE fandom by what seems to be a surprisingly atypical route, I brought this (and a cluster of related memes) into this particular affinity group, simply by carrying on as before.

Ve is a very bad idea. It won't read well on the pages, it will be confusing to casual browsers, and it assumes a gender ambiguity in beings which we are not even sure have such a concept. I think this is something we would later regret.

We could always use "the Angel" as an ad hoc third person singular, though I would still be in favour of it.

upon further review....yeah I think it would really confuse newcomers

Allocating genders to the Angels seems rather arbitrary based more on personal preference than any kind of conclusive facts. But I agree that neither "it" nor "Ve" works. However, 've' is far worse (barring prior explanation) as a good many people would have no clue what we're talking about. "How did they misspell 'he'" they'll wonder. I don't like "it", so I guess "the angel" could suffice simply enough - though it would get kinda repetitive.

My opinion: Either "the angel", it, or "ve" with an explanation regarding the term attached.

On the Evas, "She" seems obvious when we consider whose souls are in them.

On Adam / Lilith: I can relent to the "she" concept, but it's not my favorite. "She" and "He" are used to distinguish between sexual creatures. Obviously, "she" must combine with "he" for sexual creatures to reproduce, but there's no evidence that Adam / Lilith reproduce any other way but asexually (ignoring the "Spear as giant penis" theory). The FAR seem to send them out fully equipped with the means to produce species on their own. The idea that they're "mothers" is relevant only to the fact that in sexual beings only mothers can give birth. But in asexual beings this isn't the case, but this would've been nearly impossible to express within the series.

To sum up: I don't mind referring to them as "shes" but I think this gender ambiguousness needs to be addressed somewhere within the Wiki article...