Wikia

Narutopedia

Talk:Haku/Haku in relation to the Article

5,668pages on
this wiki

Back to page | < Talk:Haku

Revision as of 03:11, December 10, 2007 by Dantman (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Icon-Archive
This page is an archive. Please do not edit this archive, instead try editing the page this archive originated from.

Protection

Protection has been removed. The article is free to edit. However, references to Haku's gender should not be made until after consensus is reached. --Believe it! 10:47, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

As of now, this page is Protected from anyone under "Jonin" level, that is anyone Sysop, Bureaucrat, or Rollback abilities. This was done because of the needless edit war.--TheUltimate3 01:43, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

As long as the page is neutral then that is fine with me. Now, about this issue. Do you plan on discussing it here? If so then it is your turn to post evidence. --Believe it! 02:00, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Haku in relation to the Article

The previous discussions have been archived because of how heated and off topic they have gotten. We're restarting a proper discussion, focusing on the real issue that we have at hand. Which I will remind you, is not trying to prove what Haku's factual gender is. But before that, I need to write up some guidelines so that the discussion does not spiral out of control like the last one did. So, in the meantime... I suggest a heaping helping of WP:COOL (namely, #8) for everyone involved while things are being organized. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Dec 7, 2007 @ 04:03 (UTC)

Before detailing things I should explain something. The Job as administrator is to neutrally oversee things and help out the community. Adding a final decision on the last discussion was a bit preemptive. I'm actually working on becoming more newbie friendly. After trying something or at various points, I normally ask User:Sannse to look over it and provide me tips on making what I do more friendly for the new users and being generally more administrative instead of moderative. She did say that stating a final decision was a bit hard, and I consider one or two of my points to be a little to policidic, but she did note that my points and reasoning was valid. But in summary, this time around I am going to be doing more administrative stuff than being involved in the discussion. I'm here to keep the discussion on-topic, keep it civil, and help point out when any side is using to much speculation.

Also, despite whatever... I'm just going to use he to refer to Haku in my explanation since it is common belief and Wikipedia does as such.

Ok, on with the explanation and organization of the discussion.

Here is the most important thing. We are not trying to decide what Haku's gender is. No matter what is said, there is no way to convince another side that Haku's gender is the opposite of what they think. That's the biggest issue with the last discussion, everyone focused on that, and it turned into a endless loop of heated arguments.

So I'm clearing this up right now before any discussion starts. Our objective is not creating a fact on what Haku's gender is. Our objective is deciding how Haku's gender should be treated inside the article, and what stuff on it should be put in there.

And this is the next important point. The last discussion focused far to much on speculation. Speculation is not fact, and tossing it around here isn't going to solve anything because speculation is O.R. and can't be considered fact. Things that are being considered are direct character statements, indirect ones, and references to external sources. Not speculation.

To explain and define these. A direct character statement would be a character directly stating what Haku's gender is. So Haku calling himself a man means that he directly states himself to be male, only speculation to deny it. To clear this up, this creates the fact that he "states himself to be male", not the fact that he "is male". But even if it is a fact of statement, it still has effect on how the article should be written. A indirect statement is a character (who is not confused about Haku's gender and knows the fact of what it is) referring to Haku using gender specific terms ie: he/she. And a reference can be various data books, fact sheets, web resources, and other places which detail these kind of things. Speculation is something that is mostly assumed. So a fact is that Haku states his gender as male. But speculation is saying that he could be lying, because there is no direct reference or fact that can back up the statement that he is lying about his gender. And no, facts backing up that he is lying about something else does not constitute a fact backing up him lying about gender, because it is completely possible and probable for someone to lie about one thing, and not about another.

Now onto reaffirming our focus. We are trying to compile and discuss reasons to refer to Haku in a certain way, and add certain information to the article. "Haku is a boy/girl because <insert speculation or nondeterministic fact>!" is not a reason to refer to Haku in a way. Remember that because of the ambiguity of Haku's gender decisions made on a debate on gender have no bearing because those are not official decisions. And because of that us using the gender in a certain way does not make it a fact, it makes it a way of referring to Haku. Just like how we refer to Character names in one way and others may do it in another. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Dec 7, 2007 @ 06:28 (UTC)


Ok, here is the first fact to note. The ambiguity on the page has been complained about. The fact that we sidestep gender instead of at least following common belief or just following what other reference sites go by confuses many readers. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Dec 7, 2007 @ 06:31 (UTC)

For the record, I never tried to prove that Haku was a girl here. I have only talked about article neutrality this whole time. To reach that goal of neutrality I had to prove that a debate existed on the issue, which I did and will do when the discussion starts again.

I also thank you Daniel for respecting the rules of Wikipedia and using your privilages correctly. For a minute there I thought I was going to have to deal with a power-mad moderator (as Wiki has plenty of those). It appears you are a fair person though so thanks for allowing this discussion to take place.

However, there are a few problems I have with some guidelines you proposed.

  • First: "A indirect statement is a character (who is not confused about Haku's gender and knows the fact of what it is) referring to Haku using gender specific terms ie: he/she."

This is unacceptable because it is an effort to tip the scales in your side's favor. We all know that Naruto called Haku a "lady" or "sis" in the anime. Saying that only statements from those who are "not confused" seems like a direct attack on that source. Furthermore, how do we know who is confused and who is not? In reality the only ones who we know for a fact would know for sure are Haku's parents, and neither of them referred to Haku as being male or female. This only opens up the possibility for more speculation.

  • This leads to the next problem: "But speculation is saying that he could be lying, because there is no direct reference or fact that can back up the statement that he is lying about his gender. And no, facts backing up that he is lying about something else does not constitute a fact backing up him lying about gender, because it is completely possible and probable for someone to lie about one thing, and not about another."

First of all, how can you say there are no direct references or facts backing that up? You are excluding evidence simply because you think it doesn't exist. A neutral guideline would state that claims about a certain reference need to be supported by facts in order to be valid. With all due respect, you don't know which facts exist and which ones don't. The second problem is that while it is indeed completely possible that someone can lie about some things but not others, it is not necessarily probable that they would. For example, if someone wants to hide their true identity from their enemy, the person is probably NOT going to lie about most things but then tell the truth about one thing. The person is probably going to lie about everything. Now, this may seem unimportant, since what one would probably do is in the realm of speculation, but this is important because certain facts may prove that there is a stronger probability that the character was lying rather than telling the truth. If that strong probablity exists then the debate on Haku's gender becomes that much more complex and involved, and thus much harder to determine the correct answer for. If it is difficult to determine the correct answer, then the only option is to leave the article neutral, post the facts that exist, and let the readers decide for themselves.

You see what I'm saying? So, these guidelines are a good start, but those problems need to be changed or omitted. Personally, I understand the goal of the discussion, which is to decide on what the article will state, not what gender Haku factually was in the series. My objective is to keep the article as neutral as possible, since it is my belief that this issue is under too much deabte to be telling people to think one way or the other on it. Moreover, the issue is not clearly resolved in the anime itself. Therefore Wikipedia should not weigh in on the issue until a clear fact has been determined by the series creator. --Believe it! 08:43, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

The example I gave was just that. An example within a limited scope. A overview of the previous discussion didn't show any counter facts so I used that just as a limited example to explain. It's hardly worth a paragraph rebuttal. As for the note about who is not confused I see no way that that could be considered a tip in favor of one side. It's merely a statement that discredits statements from those who don't know Haku's gender. For example, Naruto had no previous knowledge on Haku's gender, therefore because he does not know the facts, his statements on Haku's gender cannot be relied on. This has nothing to do with tipping scales, this has to do with eliminating unreliable sources. Which is the entire point of this, finding valid sources on how to treat the article. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Dec 7, 2007 @ 10:06 (UTC)
But before things even continue, I'd like to remind everyone what Wikipedia policies actually are. Wikipedia's policies are not rules, going against what is literally written on a policy does not mean you're breaching that policy. What matters is the spirit of the policy, someone going against the policies spirit, even if they follow it literally are still violating the spirit. Which is why I'd like to note something about WP:IGNORE, the policy is not a loop to allow someone to discredit a policy, it's one that tells you to ignore the policies literal meaning and go along with it's spirit if it's beneficial to the wiki. Another thing to remember, is that Wikipedia's policies are not our policies. We only reference them because they follow the wiki spirit, which is something we normally follow to. But do remember that Wikipedia policies are just guidelines, when a policy or it's spirit hinders the wiki, we may completely reject the policy. This is something which it seams has been misunderstood in the past here. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Dec 7, 2007 @ 10:20 (UTC)

Ok, now on with the sources. I finally found what I was looking for, for a good deal of time. Talk:Haku I make the strong suggestion that everyone read over the entire talkpage. The biggest thing I have to note about there, is that Haku's gender is not debated. What is debated? His sexuality. Paraphrasing from the talkpage (Which was actively discussed on by many editors, so it's quite a valid resource) "The two sides to this dispute agree on many basic points about the fictional character Haku. They fundamentally agree [...] that Haku is presented as an androgynous or feminine boy. For example, one of the lead characters, Naruto, mistakes Haku for female." Please remember that as with the past spirit of the Narutopedia, as in our past Name discussion we rely heavily on the reasonings made in discussions on Wikipedia. And they normally are one of the major deciding factors in how we treat things, which is why we refer to Might Guy, as Might Guy instead of Maito Gai. And why we use Naruto Uzumaki, instead of Uzumaki Naruto. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Dec 7, 2007 @ 11:17 (UTC)

Possibly my ownly part in this discussion for the weekend. And as Dant said, WPs are mostly used in spirit here so as such, I will use them in my discussion. I would like to point out WP:V that Haku is a boy, with Common Sense telling us that as long as a form of literature doesn't deny or make actual textual hint of something is hidden, then it is true.If not, nothing in the manga/show could be hold to any truth. With that said, if Haku really was a woman and hid her gender for no apparent reason, then it would have been revealed in texts, not subtle manerisms that anyone could interpert differently. Now as I have said previously, in Chapter 21 page 12, Haku clearly said I'm a boy. As everyone before Naruto thought Haku was male (and Naruto as sources show is not all that intellgent at this point) common sense would dictate that he is indeed a he. However Believe It, seems to have a knack for Ignoring these facts, citing that (as he said above) I am ignoring facts that weren't in the the text, instead using Probables to insist that they could be there, which supports [[Wikipedia:WP:OR|original research], which even here we can't use.

Lastly, I would like to bring up Dantmans words of the real question is Haku's sexuality. This is an obvious as most would sterotype a mans love for another man to be gay. As facts were given to Haku's gender being male, a section on his Female traits and possibly preference could/should be added to the article to discuss the matter.--TheUltimate3 12:05, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Think I follow, but to clear it up... When it comes to sexuality, I think we should just state the facts, as was suggested at one point on the Wikipedia discussion. State his officially recognized gender, state his femininity, and state what happens through his entire life, and how he interacts with Zabuza. Let the reader make their own assumptions on what Haku's sexuality is.
But to recap.
  • Haku states that he "is a Man" in the series.
  • No fact has been presented yet that discredits this statement.
  • Common belief also matches this statement.
Therefore the official assumption would half to be that Haku is a male. Believe it!, you're free to bring up any facts that discredit the statement if you have any.
Now onto the notability of a debate on Haku's gender. Believe it!, do you have any sources or references that show that Haku's gender can be considered a highly debatable subject? We can't state that it's a debatable thing unless we have a source on that, because only one editor on both Wikipedia and the Narutopedia finds the topic to be debatable. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Dec 7, 2007 @ 17:17 (UTC)
Hang on, first of all, I know what the policies of Wikipedia are. What I don't know is what the "spirit of Wikipedia" is. Where does it say in Wiki policy that this spirit exists? And who is defining it, you? To me, this whole "spirit" thing is just seems like a way to get around the rules. So unless you post a Wikipedia source describing this spirit, I must reject it outright and follow the rules literally.

Next, saying: "The two sides to this dispute agree on many basic points about the fictional character Haku. They fundamentally agree [...] that Haku is presented as an androgynous or feminine boy." I never agreed to that. So what do you mean both sides agree on that? In my opinion she was presented as a feminine girl who was pretending to be a boy in order to keep her true identity safe. So saying I agreed with the other side about that is false.

Now, on to the discussion. Verifiability and common sense are cited, yet no proof that Haku was a male is posted. How can those Wikipedia policies be mentioned if no evidence accompanies them?

Next: "With that said, if Haku really was a woman and hid her gender for no apparent reason", this is a strawman or a misrepresentation of the girl Haku side for the purpose of easily refuting the point to make it appear as if the side has been defeated. We do not think she hid her gender for no apparent reason. The reason was apparent both to us and within the canon of the series.

  • Fact: Zabuza and Haku were being hunted by tracker ninja.
  • Fact: Haku would need to keep her identity a secret in order to minimize the risk of being tracked down and caught by the trackers.

That is a valid reason to keep her indentity a secret and it is official.

Next: "then it would have been revealed in texts, not subtle manerisms that anyone could interpert differently." How would it be revealed in the texts if there was supposedly "no apparent reason" for it? Anyway, her reason for hiding her gender was stated in the texts and the hints to her being a girl are in place all throughout the Wave Arc. Moreover I must point out the fact that Haku never referred to herself as a boy in front of Zabuza, nor did Zabuza ever refer to her as a boy except in the presence of enemies. In each case that he was alone with Haku he called her a kid, child, or brat. This indicates that the act of being a boy was meant only for enemies.

Next, the claim that Haku was a boy is made and as evidence Chapter 21 page 12 is cited. It is alleged that Haku clearly said "I'm a boy". This is false. It was established in the previous discussion that Haku said "I'm a man". This would achieve the same goal if it were true, however, there is proof that this was a lie. First of all, Haku was 15 years old. That is not old enough to be considered a man in the Japanese culture which lists that age as a "shounen" for boys. In addition, Haku did not believe herself to be an adult. This is proved in her conversation with Zabuza where she states "I'm still just a kid so...". This is proof that she considers herself to be a kid since Zabuza is one who she would be open and honest with. Therefore, if she had been honest with Naruto AND she had been a male then she would have called herself a "shounen", not an "otoko".

Furthermore, even if she had said boy, as is how it was mistranslated into English by Viz, it still does not prove that Haku was a boy. The claim that she was a boy is only proof that she claimed to be a boy, not that she was one. The possibility and probability that Haku lied to Naruto still exists because of official facts. Haku stated during the bridge battle that deception of the enemy, catching them off guard, that is the way of the shinobi. It was Haku's desire to be a great shinobi for Zabuza. Therefore Haku would not go against this shinobi principal by revealing a true fact about herself to her enemy. She would however decieve that enemy if the enemy had thought something true about her, such as the truth that she was a girl. This also goes back to what I said earlier about protecting one's true identity. With trackers after her and Zabuza, Haku would not risk their safty by telling the enemy the truth about something that could get Haku caught and lead to Zabuza's capture. So to recap:

  • Fact: Trackers were after Zabuza and Haku.
  • Fact: Haku would keep her identity a secret in order to protect herself and Zabuza.
  • Fact: Haku was not old enough to be a man.
  • Fact: Haku thought of herself as a kid.
  • Fact: Haku knew that deception was the way of the shinobi.
  • Fact: Haku wanted to be a great shinobi in order to be Zabuza's weapon.

Therefore Haku would lie to her enemies about herself, and this includes Naruto especially if Naruto was correct in thinking that Haku was a girl.

This evidence proves many things, but in relation to the Wikipedia article, this proves that Haku's gender is a highly debated issue and that there is no clear or easy answer as to what Haku's gender was. It also proves that there is reason to believe Haku was a girl since there were many hints that she was all throughout the Wave Arc.

It is this level of ambiguity that dictates we must keep the article neutral. This is my conclusion based on the FACTS presented so far. This should not be taken as my only evidence on this issue. I have even more proof that Haku was a girl to add to the goal of keeping the article neutral. However, I think I can end here an allow rebuttal. --Believe it! 00:25, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

What do you know, I do have some more time. Goody. Anywho here is another fact you can't seem to grasp.

Fact: Haku wore a friggin mask when he first showed up. Nobody NOBODY but Zabuza knew it was him.

Therefore, common sense (and Naruto's reaction when meeting him) would suggest that Naruto had no clue who he was, making Naruto believe he's just met Haku.

With that in mind again Common Sense would tell you that he has no reason to hide his gender, as it would hold little to nothing in the long run. Its like lying to that guy on the street corner you know you'll never see again (assuming you do everything right in the ninja world) you'd waste your own time lying.

You also can't be to literal with the whole "I'm a boy" "I'm a man" comment. People say stuff differently. At the age 10 I considered myself a man when culture would clearly say I'm a child. Its all a matter of preference on there part. One should use this, especially in a comic/manga, as a valid defense in anything.

Now for the fun part. You continually ignore facts given to you because it doesn't agree with you (or in my opinion isn't a neatly made collection or random blend between speculation and facts). As such, you ignore the facts given (the very fact that everyone when not referring him to name or "kid" has used "him" or "he" to describe Haku, the very fact that Haku said "I'm a boy" or "Ah, soreto, bokua Otoko-desuo" which says he is a male.") and insist on the accuracy on your point without acknowledging the point I have given. Believe me, I have read and considered your point, I really have. The problem is, it is all based around Original Research (The argument that because they were being followed by tracker-nin, which is common for missing-nin, Haku had to disguise his gender, when that was mentioned nowhere in the text). This is where my point is valid where yours is not. I base mine on facts given, not some supposedly hidden our obscured meaning which probably doesn't exist.--TheUltimate3 04:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Believe it!'s second response

Your accusation that I refuse to get the point is inflamatory. Just because you don't make a good point does not mean I refuse to understand it.

Now on to the points you make. Yes Haku wore a mask and Naruto did not know that the girl he met in the woods was Haku, but Haku did not know this. Moreover, Naruto was not some stanger on the street that Haku would never meet again.

  • Fact: Haku even stated that she and Naruto would meet again.

Because of this, Haku could not have known if Naruto would be able to figure it out or later discover her true affiliation. Thus, deception was a necessary action to ensure that her true identity was protected. All that was required was the possibility that Naruto could leak that information. That possibility existed and so it was necessary to misinform him.

Next, your claim that Haku's gender would hold little to nothing in the long run is speculation. All pieces of information are important to a shinobi. Moreover, any true info about a rogue ninja is vital to a tracker ninja and aids in capturing that ninja. Conversely, any true information about one's self getting out to a tracker would be a dire risk. Since Haku's goal was to protect Zabuza she would not have given true information about herself to an enemy because doing so would increase the risk of their capture. You also calim that she'd waste her own time in lying. Well what point is there in telling the truth? Please answer this. If Haku was a boy, then what purpose was there in telling the enemy the truth?

In addition to this, please answer the following. The appearance of a female, namely the pink kimono, choaker, and platform shoes along with the long hair is something Haku must have put time into. A logical reason for this would be to use it as a disguise. Why then would Haku "correct" Naruto when this disguise obviously worked on him and why would Haku go against the effort put into said disguise by contradicting it with the claim of being a man?

Next, I most certainly can be literal with the quote "I'm a man" because that is what Haku said. In the Japanese version this can obviously be considered a joke just to throw Naruto for a loop. This is because the claim is just too absurd to be true, and as I proved above it is not true. More humor is added to this since "knucklehead" Naruto falls for it despite the claim's blatent absurdity. However, it appears that you did not read my above evidence. Proof of this is seen in your reply. You stated: "People say stuff differently. At the age 10 I considered myself a man when culture would clearly say I'm a child." I explained this already. It is a fact that Haku did not think of herself as an adult. Please go back and read my proof if you wish to continue.

You accuse me of ignoring facts when you ignored the above fact that Haku admitted to still being a kid? For shame. It seems as though you have no interest in discussing this issue. Rather you only wish to insult me and slander my side's beliefs. I have no ignored anything. Refuting a point you make is not the same thing as ignoring. Ignoring a point is what you did with the fact that Haku claimed to be a kid to Zabuza.

To address your next point, that "everyone when not referring [to him by] name or "kid" has used "him" or "he" to [refer to] Haku...", I must point out that this is false. Naruto referred to Haku as lady or sis. Moreover, Haku's parents did not refer to Haku as male or female. This leads me to my next piece of evidence.

  • Fact: Haku's parents did not refer to Haku as male or female.

This indicates that there is intentional androgany in the series to leave the audience without clear resolve regarding Haku's gender. Perhaps Kishimoto left it this way so that debate on the issue could occur. Since the only credible sources of Haku's gender remain silent on the issue, and that includes Kishimoto himself, it can only be concluded that the Wikipedia article must remain neutral in regard to Haku's gender.

Next, there are no such words as "soreto", "bokua", or "desuo". You must have the spelling wrong. "Bokua" for example was likely said as "boku wa" in the anime. Regardless of correct spelling, your claim is false. This is not translated as "male" or "dansei" it is translated as "man" or "otoko". Moreover, the Japanese manga uses the word "man" in written form "男".

Your following claim that my facts are based on Original Research is nothing but a rant. It is a fact that Haku was lying about her gender, even if you think Haku was a male. This is because of her appearance, the pink kimono, and other female clothing she wore. If she had been a boy, then the appearance was the lie. If she had been a girl, then her claim was the lie. Either way, she was lying about her gender. That is a fact. The most logical and factual reason for this is because she was being hunted by trackers. However, only her being a girl fits common sense. This is because if Haku had been a boy then claiming to be one would be contradictory to the disguise and to shinobi principals. --Believe it! 10:14, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


Edit conflicted: Post started around 02:36, 8 December 2008 UTC
Additional comment after edit conflict: We're starting to spin off point again. Civility is also slowly degrading again.
Original post:
  • The fact that the spirit of a policy is to be followed, not the literal text is explicitly explained in some of Wikipedia's pages:
    • Wikipedia:Wikilawyering - direct quote "As another example, the Three-Revert Rule is a measure of protection against edit warring. An editor who intentionally reverts the same article three times every day is not breaching the letter of this rule, but violates the spirit of the rule - and can thus be sanctioned for revert warring." read more into the essay because it nicely explains the point of Wikipedia policies.
    • WP:NOT#BUREAUCRACY, and WP:COMMON support it to.
    • Principle is linked to by WP:CIVIL and used, but unlinked by many other Wikipedia pages. Wikipedia is based of Principles, not rules.
    • And lastly for the notes, WP:IGNORE#Meaning states things about what I have referenced in nearly every note.
    • But on the Wikia side. As you'll see on w:Common mistakes#Applying too many policies Wikipedia policies are not automatically our policies. Generally around the Narutopedia from the history on it, we go by Common sense, we only reference Wikipedia policies when there is a serious conflict, and then, we use them just because both us and them try to follow the WikiWay and the spirit of most of Wikipedia's policies go along with that, or have goals similar to ours.
  • I didn't say that you agreed to Haku being male. That was a direct quote from Wikipedia:Talk:Haku (Naruto) where one of the users stated, and was supported that both sides of the discussion there agreed that Haku was male. This is a source of what common belief is elsewhere, not a statement about the current discussion.
  • Wiki deal with citeable facts, and fall back to common belief.
    • In the content that I see, rather than citing sources that counter another cited statement, I see facts cited, then mixed in with assumptions and built up in a way similar to the examples on WP:LEGS to state something as fact when there are to many assumptions made for it to be fact.
    • The hard citation here is that in Episode 12 Haku stated that he is a male in the series. Whether he used the word for Man or Boy has no bearing, because while it can be said that someone used incorrect terms for reference, it can't twist the statement and say that it was an outright lie. It needs a citable fact to be countered like that.
  • I would please ask you to remember to assume good faith. I am personally uncomfortable with the fact that it feels like words are being put in my mouth.
    • I stated that Wikipedia's policies were meant to be followed in spirit, not by the letter. And in response to that I was accused of trying to bypass rules and was "outright reject[ed]".
    • I quoted a section of Wikipedia:Talk:Haku (Naruto), and was accused of altering the other side's viewpoint.

Now... Back to the whole point of discussion. The WikiWay uses consensus to decide things. Consensus means that everyone agrees to abide by a solution, and so I'm going to state my stance as an editor.

As an editor I will not abide by a solution which...

Unless...
Details
  • ...treats Haku as an ambiguous character.
    • ...the citeable facts on Haku's gender can all be discredited or countered with assumed citable facts.
      • Reasoning: It doesn't matter if we have a bunch of speculation and original research... If we can't cite it with sources without altering the meaning that those convey, then it lacks Verifiability. Which is something important when editors have conflicting opinions and views.
    • ...it accounts for the fact that the common belief is that Haku's gender is male.
      • Reasoning: It doesn't matter if we have a bunch of speculation and original research... If common belief can't be countered with citable facts, then the common belief stands.
  • ...considers the debate an important part of Haku's background.
    • ...citations show that the debate is carried on by more than a non-fanon minority.
      • Explanation: A non-fanon minority would be a group which believes something, but this belief does not expand past a select group. For an example of what is fanon, the fourth Hokage was considered to be Naruto's father by many fans, and few objected to this view (outside of places where you need Citations to add things to, ie: wiki).
  • ...adds an entire section on the debate.
    • ...the above point is also resolved.
    • ...it is done in a way which will not distract the readers from the more important parts of the article.
      • Namely: Jutsu, Haku's history as a person, Haku's involvement in the story, etc...

This is my stance as an editor of the wiki. I'm not going to dissect long posts to point out every time an assumption is made or someone's words are twisted. I want to see citations and solutions to change my stance as an editor.

My personal solution at the moment while waiting for things to alter my stance is:

  • We follow common belief and talk about Haku in the article as if he were male to avoid confusing readers as we are.
  • We add information on, as explained on Wikipedia:Talk:Haku (Naruto), 'The name "Haku" (白) (which is written in jōyō kanji) means "white", but is also inadvertence to his immaculate personality.'
  • We add a section on Haku's appearance.
    • Noting Haku's androgynous or intermittent feminine appearance.
      • And perhaps Naruto's reaction to Haku stating he is a man; A image from one of the fansubs might liven up the article and also show to readers who haven't seen the series how feminine he can appear in the show.
    • Noting Haku dressing in clothing which appears as if it were for girls. And same for the clothing that appears as if it were for boys. I say appears because some of the feminine clothing he wears may also be worn by males, but it does have the appearance of a girl targeted clothing.
  • We add a section on Haku's history with Zabuza.
    • Noting Haku's relation with Zabuza and detailing scenes involving their history.
      • Relation: Hero-worship, teacher/student, etc...
      • Making consideration to Haku's reason for living being to be helpful to Zabuza.
  • We add a trivia section to point out...
    • There are some small fangroups which believe that Haku was actually a girl.
    • Haku remains a very popular character among fans, despite his short appearance in the series. (Do a Find on "favorite character lists" on Wikipedia:Talk:Haku (Naruto) to see where I got this idea)
    • There was a Malaysian dub in which Haku was actually a girl. But the majority of fans ignore this one for a similar reason we ignore the rename of Whiskers The Wondercat in the Harmony Gold dub of Dragon Ball. (If we can find some supporting facts to the note made on Wikipedia:Talk:Haku (Naruto) [Find: "Oinin" and look to the second half of the paragraph])
~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Dec 8, 2007 @ 07:42 (UTC)

Starting from “In the content that I see”. When Haku's claim of being a man was cited, I countered with facts showing that this claim was a lie and therefore unreliable. Cited:

  • Fact: Haku was not old enough to be considered a man.
  • Fact: Haku thought of herself as a kid.

You cannot dismiss these facts as assumptions. You must refute these facts with facts that support you.

Next point. Haku used the word man. Can we at least agree on that fact? Next, this word has bearing because it decides whether what Haku said was a blatant lie or a claim that could have either been a lie or the truth (albeit illogical and contradictory to other facts had it been true). Addressing the same point:

First of all, you are applying a double standard. You say that your side can say that someone can use incorrect terms for reference but prove that the person is male and that this is not considered an assumption, yet you say that that my side cannot claim that someone can state an incorrect term for the purpose of lying because that is an assumption that must be backed up with fact whereas your claim does not have to be.
Second, even though you admit that this reference was incorrect, you still claim that it produces the outcome you want, which is that Haku was male. How does an incorrect claim still produce a reliable statement that can be cited?
Third, I did counter the assumption that Haku's incorrect self reference to being a man still indicated that she was telling the truth about being male, and I did so by citing official canon fact. This can be reviewed above.

Now, skipping ahead to your statement: “As an editor I will not abide by a solution which...”

Treats Haku as an ambiguous character? What does this mean? Does this mean that you will not accept this? That you want Haku to be referred to as a gender on the article page? Or do you mean that you will accept a neutral stance as long as the page also refers to the common belief? If you mean that the page would reflect common belief and just refer to Haku as male then I find that unacceptable. Common belief may dictate that Global Warming is caused by man, but that does not make it the truth because common belief may be misinformed or uninformed. I might be willing to accept a compromise, where the article remains neutral but refers to the debate in a section of the article page where each side is equally represented, thus complying with Wikipedia's NPOV policy.

About the debate being an important fact of Haku's background, I don't think that is relevant to this discussion right now. I think we should focus on resolving this issue first.

Also, I think you might be jumping the gun by stating what you will or will not abide by. This is in violation of the spirit of Wikipedia, which is to have a discussion, not limit options down to only those you will accept. Instead, you should be reading through my posts and questioning my facts or challenging my points. You efforts may change my stance on what the article should say. However, you won't do that by simply stating what will satisfy you as an editor.

About Haku's “immaculate personality”, this is only a possibility. It should be mentioned that others though Haku was as pure as the snow, but to say that her name reflected her personality is just an assumption. For all we know it was to reflect the fact that she was from a snowy village. I am fine with an article on her appearance, but it should be neutral for now and it should show each on of her appearances. Kid appearances and teenage appearances. In other words, all outfits she wore. What clothing is what gender is debatable and best left to a different discussion. Her relationship with Zabuza is also good. However, we will also have to cover the fact that she was physically attracted to him. We may have to discuss how that is presented as well. The trivial section is unnecessary, and I don't like Haku fans who believe she was a girl being classified as a small fangroup. This is an assumption and it sounds disparaging. --Believe it! 11:52, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


Believe it!, I think it is time to step off of the Soapbox. You've been using speculation as if it was fact and personally attacking other users. We asked for citations, we asked for you to remain calm, we've asked for you to assume good faith. We've given you every good opportunity to make this a valid discussion on improving the article and they have not been taken.

Now, quite simply, if you have nothing else to contribute but stale speculation which you have used a quarter of a dozen times already I as an editor have no discussion to continue with you.

Ok, the info is in. I had Wikia's Japanese staff member translate Haku's data page into English. Yukichi speaks Japanese fluently and reliably, and is a neutral third party, if he couldn't then he wouldn't be asked to translate Wikia's system messages into Japanese.

From w:User talk:Yukichi#Need a quick translation.

Translation of: [1]

A white and ephemeral sword for efleet.

I want to convoy the important person for me, to work for him, to fight for him, to make his dream true.... It's my dream

This is a genuis boy who has a blood that has a tragic ability. He has a given talent as a Ninja and very clever as he understood the system of Kakashi's "Sharingan" at first time. He tags along with Momochisabusa at Kirigakure truly and made the result as a Momochisabusa's weapon. Although involved in many troubles because of his blood, he recognizes himself for fighting for Momochisabusa, stands the way of Kakashi's team that convoys Tazuna in the Land of Wave.

Ninja registration code
-
date of birth
9th, Jun.
height
155.9 cm
weight
43.2 kg
blood type
O
charactor
good-natured, compliant, eager

The Naruto Official Data Book 1 is an official source. It doesn't matter what speculation you bring forth. The fact that will stand is that the Official Data Book states Haku as a male.

Now, Believe it!, do you have any sources to show that outside of the groups which abide by official sources, Haku's gender is highly debated? If you can objectively show us some citations instead of continuing on with the speculation, then we might actually be able to get something from you we can put in the article. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Dec 8, 2007 @ 10:50 (UTC)

First of all, you have lost your cool and now you are directly insulting me and accusing me of things I have not done. Stop slandering me by saying that I post speculation and ignore facts or else I will report you. I am willing to let it slide this time but I will not say this again. Your recent discovery of evidence that you think wins this discussion for you has probably encouraged you to go off on your rant, but you need to calm down and realize something. I have researched this issue in depth and I can assure you that this debate is still open for discussion. I too have this databook information. However, what you posted is ONE of TWO pages on Haku. The second page features the word "female" or "woman" to describe Haku. Therefore we must get both pages translated first. I will try to upload the second page tomorrow. Next, you need to get the digital Japanese text from your translator so that we may peer review it and check it for accuracy. Otherwise you source stands as Original Research. So please get the digital text for the Japanese texts in the databook and I will try to get the second page uploaded tomorrow. And again, watch that temper. --Believe it! 11:52, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

In addition, I must add the following information.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sh%C5%8Dnen_%28disambiguation%29

Shonen does not literally mean "boy". It means "few years" or "young". It can mean boy if used in a certain way, however to determine that we must have the digital Japanese texts so that we can check them ourselves. Furthermore, this can refer to other things such as girls or those who are pure of heart. So in reality, the databook could be saying that Haku was a genius who was pure of heart. Again, we need to peer review this to make sure we are using the accurate intention behind the texts. --Believe it! 12:09, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

No. In this case, "Shonen" means "boy" clearly. Examples that Shonen means boy and girl are used only in laws. Because Japanese laws don't distinguish boy and girl. Other examples in above Wikipedia page are related to laws also. So Haku is just a boy. --Yukichi / Shun (Talk) @Wikia 12:33, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
By the God of Christians, Jews, and Islam. Given a direct source and calling it Original Research. Seriously though, as stated, we have a direct source, you have speculations. As a admin (or technical admin in my case) we have the right to block you Believe It! under Wikipedia:WP:Point (reasons why this is in our favor is above. Look for it.). That that said, I agree to the suggestions for the article given by Dantman in regards to additions to the article, if edited in right would make wonderful additions to the article.--TheUltimate3 13:01, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Well, didn't half to say block outright. But Belive it!, if you can show that fans like to debate the subject of Haku's gender, then I'm fine with adding a trivia note on that. But from what I've seen, Haku's sexuality is debated by people more than his gender. Can we stop this useless debate and instead find nice ways to improve the article and others? In one edit from me the article has been improved a good deal. Though we still need more information on Haku's Appearance, Personality, and his life with Zabuza. Could someone also find a source to cite on the Malaysian dub making Haku a girl? Also, once Believe it! can calm down and be more civil I think the majority of this discussion should be archived again. Having this thing here is going to scare any new users away from discussing ways to improve the article. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Dec 8, 2007 @ 22:42 (UTC)

[[2]]

This is the rest of the information. As I said, this discussion is not over until all the information is translated into digital text that we can peer review.

Now, I would like to point out something very important here. In the top right hand corner of the image I posted, the paragraph there features the word "female" or "women". Therefore, this might be an instance of where Haku is referred to as female in the databook. We must get this all translated and made into digital text so everyone can research this and make sure everything is accurate.

The databook is not original research, but your translation is original research. We don't know if your translator is correct in that translation. So again, please have him translate it into digital Japanese text. I will do the same by contacting a translator in the forum I am from.

One last thing. The page should not be edited in regards to Haku's gender until consensus is reached on that issue. It is fine to edit the page to add more info about Haku regarding other things. --Believe it! 05:32, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

By the Gods of the Three Major Monothestic Religions and the Greek and Roman gods. Are you honestly saying that someone from the JAPANESE Wikia can't speak/read Japanese.--TheUltimate3 06:14, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
No. I am saying that relying on one translator is called Original Research. Also, while this person can translate, it does not mean he can't make mistakes, and there are some that I have seen already. Of course, this is because he put his own interpretation behind it, which is common when translating Japanese. However, I think what we should do is get the LITERAL translation first. This means to get the Japanese texts or the English translations of them as they are literally structured. Right now, this translation is not structured in the same way it appears in the databook, which can throw the meaning off completely.
Also, I have been translating this for a while and I have run across another very important thing. Shonen does mean "few years" or "young", as I said. While this can sometimes mean "boy" depending on how it is used, it does not literally mean that. Instead the word danji or "男の子" is used for "boy". Not shonen or "少年". --Believe it! 06:43, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm ditching the use of Wikipedia policies as guidelines now, and returning to the original way I decided how to handle things. Basing things purely on how it helps the wiki. Acting nice to new users is nice, but not when they don't return that favor on a very small wiki with only a few active contributors.

Believe it!, feel free to have the rest of the databook pages translated as it will likely give some nice bit of info to have added to the article. However, until that point, the article is going to be free for editing. It's been held back from editing for long enough and it's starting to fall behind other articles that are being improved. Till then, the article will follow the consensus that Wikipedia and the Narutopedia had previously reached, which is that Haku is a male.

I will now say this just once. The Narutopedia is a very small wiki, there are only a total of around 3 or 4 active contributors to it. And the way you are treating one is not appreciated. It is likely that other contributors are afraid to contribute to the Haku article because of your actions. You are free to edit and find sources, however please be more civil to the other editors. I don't want to see a case where one new contributor acts in a way that will scare away other active contributors, that is a case where I will hand out a block even though good faith is assumed. It's nice that you are also trying to contribute to the wiki, but the method is not helping it progress, it is holding it back. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Dec 9, 2007 @ 09:58 (UTC)

Unacceptable. I have followed Wikipedia policies all throughout this discussion. I have posted proof that a debate on Haku's gender exists. I have posted proof that Haku was lying about being a man. None of this proof was replied to let alone refuted. Therefore it is clear that the other side of the discussion has purposely ignored the facts that I have presented. Dantman's open statement of disregarding Wikipedia policies is proof of his bias in this matter. In addition, he has openly attacked me personally by accusing me of being insulting and ignoring facts. I have edited the page to keep the recent information that has been added except in the case of gender, which remains neutral. This is because discussion is still being had on this subject. New edits may add information to the article, but should not make any gender reference until consensus on that issue is reached.
In regards to this discussion, I have uncovered even more evidence that supports a neutral article.
Search for the word "Shonen". The results show the definition being as "early years (of a reign or era) - (n-adv,n)" and "first year - (n-adv,n-t)"
Now search for the word "child". As you can see, one of the pronunciations is "sho_nin". This is the same meaning as the word "shounen". Therefore, evidence indicates that the word "shounen" can refer to a child without identifying gender. The reference to the databook's use of the word "shounen" is not adequet proof that Haku was a boy. We must continue to post translated evidence from the book to find more information.
In addition to my link to Wikipedia on the word shounen, I submit this source as well.

:I have obtained the digital Japanese texts through my source. I will post these texts late Sunday or Monday afternoon so that others can copy the texts and research their meaning themselves. I must repeat, the article should not be changed in regards to Haku's gender until consensus is reached. --Believe it! 10:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Believe it!, please discuss these matters with Sannse. She should be coming in here at some point. The community isn't going to discuss this with you any more as it isn't helping the wiki at all. I will state it again, as explained on w:Common mistakes#Applying too many policies Wikipedia policies do not apply here. While you're discussing that with sannse the article is going to be free for users to edit, please try to avoid reverting good faith edits. I would like to be able to leave you unblocked if at all possible. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Dec 9, 2007 @ 10:51 (UTC)

This discussion is not helping Narutopedia because you refuse to cooperate and discuss this issue to reach consensus. Please do not edit the article to reflect POV on Haku's gender again. If you do then I will have to report you for vandalism. --Believe it! 11:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Sorry Believe it! there is no one to report to. Vandalism is a complete different subject than edit waring. There are only 2 levels here you can report to. The admins of the wiki (me and TheUltimate3), and Wikia Staff. In other words, Sannse and Yukichi. Who have both been here, or are already coming here. I've asked the staff member you wish to talk with to come here, so wait till she comes and let the users contribute to the article in the meantime. There is no reason to stop good edits from being added to an article because one user thinks that the character's gender is debatable. It's a single attribute of the character, low significance to the article, and less to the series, and even less to the entire wiki. I think Wikipedia has a few similar cases in their list of Lamest edit wars. While new consensus has not been decided, previous consensus still stands. Previous consensus on both Narutopedia and Wikipedia was that Haku was male. So while discussion is still going on we shouldn't be taking a stance that will confuse readers. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Dec 9, 2007 @ 11:54 (UTC)
I'll report you to everyone from here to Jimbo Wales if you vandalize the page again. I am fine with edits that add information but do not push POV on Haku's gender. Leave the gender issue alone until this discussion reaches consensus. And what do you mean one user? The only ones who think Haku was a boy are you and Ultimate3. You don't have any right to push your POV anymore than I do pushing that Haku was a girl on the article page. Why don't you answer the points that I brought up in the discussion? How about contributing to the discussion? That is what I will do later by posting my findings on the databook info. --Believe it! 21:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
You continued to revert the page to your view which is not agreed by any other editor on the Narutopedia, and as I told him TheUltimate3 reverted back and gave you a temp block to stop you from reverting for awhile. If you will look at it, it is a mere 4 hour temp block, please do not overreact it will expire quite soon. Temp blocks are quite in the spirit of 3RR. Edit wars don't have articles reverted to neutral state, they are reverted to previous state, and previous state was consideration that Haku was male. I've told you to wait for sannse to come in and leave the page free for users to edit, but you didn't do that and so TheUltimate3 blocked you.
But I would again remind you, the Narutopedia is not Wikipedia. Wikipedia's policies are not our policies, and Jimbo Whales does not have a superior authority like he does on Wikipedia. Wiki are run by the communities that run them, and you are creating friction between you and the members of the Narutopedia community.

Please do not E-Mail me again, Narutopedia issues should stay on the Narutopedia and you still have access to your talkpage when blocked.

~Daniel Friesen(Dantman) of:
-The Gaiapedia (http://gaia.wikia.com)
-Wikia ACG on Wikia.com (http://wikia.com/wiki/Wikia_ACG)
-and Wiki-Tools.com (http://wiki-tools.com)

Dai Grepher wrote:
> This is Believe it! from Narutopedia,
>    
>   "The block was made by TheUltimate3. The reason given is For continuous Disturbing the Wikia to prove a point.. 
>   You can contact TheUltimate3 or another administrator to discuss the block. You cannot use the 'email this user' feature unless a valid email address is specified in your account preferences. Your current IP address is 68.43.240.55, and the block ID is #55. Please include either or both of these in any queries."
>    
>   This is against the rules of Wikipedia. I have not tried to push any POV on the Haku page. My personal belief is that Haku was a girl, yet I have not even once edited the article to reflect that POV. I have kept the article neutral in each edit. Moreover I have been stating time and time again that we must find consensus first through discussion. TU3 has now abused his privilages by blocking me from editing any and all pages on Narutopedia. I can't even post the databook information that I have obtained! Please restore my access to the website and revoke TU3's privilages, as it is clear that he is not responsible enough to have them.
>    
>   - Believe it!
>
>        
> ---------------------------------
> Never miss a thing.   Make Yahoo your homepage.
Just archiving a related e-mail on the talkpage. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Dec 10, 2007 @ 01:26 (UTC)

I did not violate the 3 revert rule and I did not revert the page to my POV. I reverted it to a neutral POV until after consensus could be reached. I also left the page open to new information. I only edit the gender references because they push your biased POV. TU3 abused his privilages and I demand they be taken away from him because he is not responsible enough to have them. --Believe it! 02:51, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki