View source for EvaWiki talk:Standards and Conventions (Eva-Specific)

==Too much Spiffiness?==

Including quotations on top of the page isn't the only problem. Directly quoting characters too often is a definite turnoff, and so are rhetorical questions coming in the middle of analysis or notes sections, amid non-question, NPOV points. 

To make this clear-I can't claim to be anywhere near Reichu or many, many others in level of participation, but I do believe that we should try to moderate the geekiness and make this encyclopedia plainer and more friendly for causal visitors, who are bound to be a-plenty. Quality of information and presentation count, since most people hate to go through overlong, messy, or quote-laden articles, or something that simply has too much of a geek factor to it. I'm sorry if I'm pushing my bounds by saying this, but I think it's relevant.

For rhetorical questions or quotes, I'm willing to shift them into additional FAQ or "Quotes on the Subject" sections if it is agreed that these are absolutely necessary. We might have, for instance, a large FAQ/ Rhetorical questions page with sections for each episode, so that a visitor who wanted an answer to such a question could simply go to the Q and A section of whichever episode he wanted to. Would these do?
--[[User:UrsusArctos|UrsusArctos]] 01:38, 29 December 2007 (PST)

:No.  Reichu told me to drop the quotes opening an article so we'll do that, but if you're talking about when we quote characters as evidence to support statements, we need that evidence to back up what we're saying; i.e. when in "[[Particle-wave matter]]" we quote exactly what Ritsuko said.  I too want to avoid excessive geekiness but I don't think this is excessive geekiness.  Phrasing something using a rhetorical device is often the best way of introducing the point we're trying to make.  Yes, within an Analysis section itself there will be some "unanswered questions", some "it's a question and we attempt to field an answer for it" and "it was a common enough question that we felt we should put it up there with the answer" alongside "this is just an observation".  If you think we should shift some of that from "Notes" to "Analysis" alright, but sometimes its a simple thing like "why did this event happen in this episode?" "they explain that later in episode XX"...this isn't trying to be spiffy its just a stylistic choice for conveying info.  The spiffyness of unecessary quotes was removed on Reichu's wishes.  --[[User:V|V]] 07:37, 29 December 2007 (PST)

::Ursus, you're "piling on the levels". 

::Quotes should be used in practical terms, for citational purposes. Citations need to be worked out rather badly -- the templates, the format, everything. Although templates would be a nice start. This isn't an Eva-specific issue, though. (Neither are the rhetorical questions, which I respond to elsewhere on this XBOX HUEG page.) --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 11:06, 30 December 2007 (PST)

==Protection==

Why is this protected now? I gave UrsusArctos the go to edit it. --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 10:59, 24 December 2007 (PST)
:oh you did?  Generally only admins should be able to edit policy pages so I just protected them as SOP.  I'll remove the protected status...--[[User:V|V]] 11:05, 24 December 2007 (PST)
::Well, hmm, I never really thought about that specifically. I suppose that gives me an idea about Ursus (which I traveled back in time to mention on your page). --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 11:28, 24 December 2007 (PST)

==Eva-03, Harpy genders and policy violations==
I've made an exception for Eva-03, as an "it" when infected and a "she" when not. But what of the presumably unsouled Eva-04 or those wretched Harpies? Mothers or not, they don't really strike a feminine chord, do they? 

And regarding the recent talk about the policy pages...the pages for individual Evangelion Units blatantly violated them. Violations like "Eva 03" or "Eva Unit 02" or "Unit 02" were all over the place. I included that Eva designations must have a hyphen, and so "Eva-00" and not "Eva 00". Of course, the most widespread violation, calling Evas an "it" is pretty widespread, we have to see about that...
--[[User:UrsusArctos|UrsusArctos]] 19:36, 24 December 2007 (PST)

:Nuts, there's even more of these nitpicky violations than I thought! Missing Hyphens in particular. --[[User:UrsusArctos|UrsusArctos]] 02:39, 25 December 2007 (PST)

::Regarding the "it" violation, this is largely V's doing, I suspect. Ve "officially" did a provisional nod to the rule, but never agreed with it, and never, to my knowledge, abided by it. 

::As I mentioned in [http://evageeks.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3729 various posts over here], I actually find myself leaning towards the "neutering" of Evas and Seeds in the more "formal" sections of the website -- for the reasons drawn up in my posts if nothing else... If this issue requires a new topic here, make it so. --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 07:23, 25 December 2007 (PST)

:::Actually, we're all responsible for the "it" designation, and it's mostly instinctive. When we think of "The Eva", the first thing that comes to mind is "it". If we think of "Yui-sama" or plain old "Yui", it's an obvious "she". Perhaps the designation rule should be relaxed in case of Eva-00, 01 and 02, which would serve to be referred to as female along with the Seeds of Life. Biased and Judgemental, yes, but it fits the "mother representation" indeed. The infected Eva-03, unseen Eva-04 and those horrid Harpies all default to "it", I guess.--[[User:UrsusArctos|UrsusArctos]] 07:43, 25 December 2007 (PST)

:::I agree.  Actually I do fully support Reichu's thoughts on the Eva gender subject but then she said she was rethinking it, so I wasn't religious about implementing it just yet; I was just focusing on writing the article content, and my intention was to do a really thorough check-through of each article at some point to bring them up to standards.   One of the many things on my "To Do" list; if you're concerned I'll pay closer attention to it.  --[[User:V|V]] 22:09, 28 December 2007 (PST)

::::Since the gender thing is doomed for a "review" later once we're... more organized, it's not a major concern to go around fixing like mad, though if you want to fix anyway just keep the Evas "she" for now. --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 11:08, 30 December 2007 (PST)

==Rhetorical Questions==
Should these stay? In my opinion, this questions-answer pattern ( Rough example- "Question- How would Adam survive if Sahaquiel went Kamikaze?" "Answer- He had an A.T. Field!) looks very amateurish. --[[User:UrsusArctos|UrsusArctos]] 02:39, 25 December 2007 (PST)
:They're essential and will stay.  They're not amateurish that's just a style of formatting.  Otherwise we'd have to awkwardly re-phrase things.  The idea is that they're an answer to a common question, or, people can raise a question in an Analysis section (not "a question they personally have" but "a question the episode raises to which the answer is not readily apparent, though one may actually exist".  I consider this a keystone of the framework of  the episode articles; the episode articles aren't so much encyclopedia articles as hybrid "encyclopedia/episode guide pages".  This is what makes them the best frakking sources of Eva info in existence.  My decision on this is final.  --[[User:V|V]] 22:05, 28 December 2007 (PST)
::Final or not, this is the sort of thing that should go into a FAQ section. Putting this in the main article itself throws off the feel. I mean it. --[[User:UrsusArctos|UrsusArctos]] 00:31, 29 December 2007 (PST)
:::Sometimes they're not even a "Frequent" question but a valid one.  It's just a rhetorical device.  It's staying.  --[[User:V|V]] 07:28, 29 December 2007 (PST)
::::This is a valid point. I was feeling... "uncomfortable" with the rhetorical questions myself, and starting to edit them out of things I'd written. --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 11:00, 30 December 2007 (PST)

==The Big List==

We seriously need to get a whole bunch of unresolved stuff out of the way, so here's a list of what I've been able to come up with so far. Please share your thoughts. "i.n." means "Reichu thinks this should be considered an improper noun" (though in some cases I'm actually ambivalent and we just need to agree on something).

*'''A<sup>10</sup> nerve''': Always remember to put the "10" in superscript. Neuroscience treats this as an improper noun, and so shall we.
*'''Acronyms''': Since we're not including periods in the acronym LCL, I take it we won't do the same for ones such as "UN", "HQ", "JSSDF", etc. 
*'''Bakelite''': Apparently this is treated as a proper noun.
*'''blood type pattern''': i.n.
*'''Cage''': Proper noun, because it’s a place. 
*'''Chamber of Guf''': Just like so.
*'''Contact Experiment''': I always wrote it as a proper noun. I'm not sure why. Probably because the CEs are so "special". 
*'''core''': i.n.
*'''divesuit''': This refers to the proto-plugsuit that Yui (and presumably Kyoko, as well) wore for her Contact Experiment. Similarly to "plugsuit", I suggest that this be a compound word, i.n.
*'''Doors of Guf''': Just like so. Remember “Doors” is plural.
*'''dummy plug''': i.n.
*'''Dummy Plug Plant''': Because it’s a place.
*'''dummy system''': i.n.
*'''entry plug''': i.n.
*'''escape capsule''': …is what the script calls the little thingy that saved Misato at 2I. Just to keep people from making up their own names for it. 
*'''Eva weapons''': I'm not sure about "proper vs. improper" treatment here. Some of them have snazzy names (Pallet Rifle, Progressive Knife, Smash Hawk, Sonic Glaive, Dual Saw, Mastema) that look better as proper nouns, and some of them have kinda generic names (hand gun, bazooka, sniper rifle) that would look kind of stupid written that way. I'll take suggestions here. 
*'''Geo-Front''': The form utilizing a dash (as opposed to "Geofront") is is the most common rendition in the show, to my knowledge. (I can attempt a more complete survey if people care enough.) Though considering it's always capitalized, we would have our choice between Geo-front and Geo-Front.
*'''Giant of Light''': I say proper noun, because it's referring to something specific. "The Giant of Light", not "a giant of light", that sort of thing. It looks cooler.
*'''GNR''': Is this in or not? A final decision was never made. [http://evacommentary.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=16303#16303 Here's the forum discussion.]
*'''harmonics''': i.n., I guess. I was never quite sure WTF this was.
*'''interface headset''': i.n.
*'''LCL Sea''': Or should it be “Sea of LCL”? Not sure. There should also be a policy in place to keep people from using this term to refer to the physical, LCL-saturated ocean, since it’s not the “LCL Sea” Rei was describing to Shinji.
*'''metaphysical biology''': i.n.
*'''MP Evas' weapon''': This was never resolved. See the subtopic on this page for options.
*'''Nerv Headquarters''': I figure the policy should be to have "Headquarters" (the full word) as the default. However, after the first mention in an article, it can be abbreviated to "HQ".
*'''N² weapons''': The part after "N²" (depends on the weapon in question) is never capitalized. We don't write "Nuclear Bomb", right?
*'''plugsuit''': I can't find anything official on this (just wait, it'll probably be on a computer screen somewhere…), so my proposal is one word, improper noun. 
*'''Project E''': Not “Evangelion Project” or whatever.
*'''simulation body''': You tell me.
*'''simulation plug''': i.n.
*'''synchro rate''': The variation “synch rate” is often seen, but the characters actually say “synchro”. 
*'''test plug''': i.n.
*'''umbilical bridge''': i.n.
*'''umbilical cable''': i.n.
*'''United Nations''': Similar to Nerv HQ, write it in full upon the first mention, then feel free to abbreviate. 
*'''Wings of Light''': The actual term for… well, guess. These things are special enough I think they deserve to be a proper noun.

Also, a reminder to any naughty individuals about the pronoun policy... Changing those things = easily avoided work, you know. --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 21:44, 3 September 2007 (EDT)

:  
*GNR does seem to fan-name-ish and seems unprofessional in a way. Either call her Lilith (first choice) or Giant Rei (second choice).  Maybe even both in the same article just to make things not so bland? *shrugs* 
*This ''LCL Sea: <SNIP> policy in place to keep people from using this term to refer to the physical, LCL-saturated ocean, since it’s not the “LCL Sea” Rei was describing to Shinji.'' makes my head asplode with it not being the same place Rei was describing to Shinji, but regardless of that, I think "LCL Sea" sounds better than "Sea of LCL". 
*And LCL ''won't'' be refereed to as L.C.L? Hmm. I thought it was going to be, but whatever, I guess. --[[User:Sailor Star Dust|Sailor Star Dust]] 22:54, 12 September 2007 (EDT)

::I agree on all points of the "Big List" except for one:  I prefer the usage "GeoFront".  "Geo" + "Front" capital G capital F.  Unless the more orthodox are pushing for "Geofront".  I don't think we need to complicate things with a dash.  Of course, whatever we decide is superceded if we ever see it in English in print in the show or later movies.  Implementing these standards will be a major, major future project; we're focusing on simply getting content and info now. --[[User:V|V]] 21:06, 21 December 2007 (PST)

:::Geo-Front sadly lands in the same category as L.C.L. It's annoying to have the dash and the caps in the middle of the word. GeoFront is also a touch wierd...would plain "Geofront" do? In any case, it isn't a term exclusive to NGE, so maybe using the more common spelling of the word might be the solution to this problem.--[[User:UrsusArctos|UrsusArctos]] 08:03, 25 December 2007 (PST)

::::Well yeah I thought that too, and "GeoFront" IS a real word apparently....the problem is, Evangelion is so popular on the Internets that if you Google-search "GeoFront" all you get is info on the NGE GeoFront! :)  Thus, while in theory it should just be a matter of finding out how the "real life word "GeoFront"" is spelled....I cannot find it.  I agree we should use whatever the "real life" word is but where to find it?  --[[User:V|V]] 22:11, 28 December 2007 (PST)

:::::Jeez! What are you, a noob?http://www.uee.kyoto-u.ac.jp/english/laboratory/geofront/geofront.htm All you have to do is search for it with the word "Evangelion" excluded from search results. There are other different spellings floating about, but this (Coming from Kyoto university) should do.--[[User:UrsusArctos|UrsusArctos]] 00:50, 29 December 2007 (PST)

::::::Well based on that, I think it should officially be '''"Geofront"'''--[[User:V|V]] 07:29, 29 December 2007 (PST)

==Director's Cut Episodes==

In my view this is backwards.  The director's cuts should treated as the default (see the tiers of canonicity) and the subsection should explain how the original episode was different. --[[User:The wayneiac|thewayneiac]] Aug.02, 2007  15:53 EDT.
:While the new information in the Director's Cuts do supercede the original episodes, the point was just that episodes 21 onwards will explain what was added into the director's cuts in a special subsection.  --[[User:V|V]] 17:44, 2 August 2007 (EDT)

::If I'm reading that correctly then there is no problem.  The episode summary will describe the Director's cut, and then the subsection will explain what portions of the above were additions.  I thought you meant the summary would describe the on air version, and then the subsection would say, "These things were added to the above."  --[[User:The wayneiac|thewayneiac]] Aug. 02, 2007  22:16 EDT.

:::On a related sort of note, V wrote in the S&C doc, ''an original episode would be "Episode 21" but the Director's Cut would be "Episode 21'" (Note:  apostrophes screw up wiki code and I actually think this would cause problems with the wiki-code Reichu, though not insurmountable ones; get back to me on this).'' A way around this would be to use the special symbol ’ instead -- another reason why we need to somehow implement the "big list of things you can insert really quickly and easily" box that Wikipedia has... --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 10:47, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

::::Oh...you mean the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_%28symbol%29 Prime symbol]; that would work.  Hey, where is the key for that on a qwerty keyboard? What big list? --[[User:V|V]] 11:36, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

:::::Oh, so ''that's'' the "prime symbol"? Nifty. There's no key for it on a QWERTY keyboard; you need to go to extra lengths to insert it. Well, unless we get that big insert box... Since you don't seem to know what I'm talking about, go "Edit" some random Wikipedia page, and you'll see that there's a huge box full of special characters below the edit window. --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 12:19, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

==Episode Notation==

The articles have come as a bit of a "shock" to me, since I've been in this longtime habit of putting a # in front of the episode number, and only capitalizing "episode" when it is at the beginning of a sentence. This isn't based on anything particularly concrete, just personal habit. 
:[We can't do this in HTML as a # symbol in a url denotes a link within a page. Hash is right out for the article title. Notch this one up as a technical issue.[[User:ObsessiveMathsFreak|ObsessiveMathsFreak]] 19:29, 7 August 2007 (EDT)]

The second titles for the episodes use the format EPISODE:##, but this is sort of weird.

I'm guessing people will want to use "Episode ##"? A rule should be established for this, in any case. And for referencing episodes in shorthand, as well. (Having the # in front of the episode number came in handy for shorthand referencing. "In #04...") --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 17:16, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

:We shouldn't refer to them as "#04" because the "#" symbol is a hotkey on Mediawiki-code which [[The NGE Fan-Geeks Project:Boot Camp for Newbies#How to make a numbered list|automatically generates a numbered list]].  You could use "Episode #04" if you really wanted, but it seems kind of redundant with "Episode 04".  As long as the word "Episode" is in front that doesn't really matter, (though I think it redundant), but "#04" would screw up the wiki-code.  --[[User:V|V]] 18:56, 7 August 2007 (EDT)
:: The '#' symbol is fine within regular text and code, as you can see on this page. We just can't use it in article names or headings. See above.[[User:ObsessiveMathsFreak|ObsessiveMathsFreak]] 19:29, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

::Goddamn MediaWiki, always ruining my fun. Well, I can give up my pound signs, via vigorous retraining, but how would shorthand work? Writing out "Episode ##" all the time is a pain in the ass. I remember people liking "e##"; I think I used it once upon a time. --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 19:24, 7 August 2007 (EDT)
:::I think we can still do that. What exactly do you need?[[User:ObsessiveMathsFreak|ObsessiveMathsFreak]] 19:29, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

::::What do you mean, "what do I need"? --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 20:06, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

:::::Well I don't really have a problem with writing "Episode 12" as opposed to "She Said, "Don't Make Others Suffer for Your Personal Hatred."" a million times ^_^ --[[User:V|V]] 11:31, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

==Harpies' Weapon (Mode 1)==

Here's another one for everybody: The script refers to the initial incarnation of the harpies' weapons as ''Omoi Yari'' (Heavy Spear/Lance/Whatever), but this is used practically nowhere else. Everywhere else, I see ''ooken'', which is Japanese for "huge-ass sword". To reinforce the point, Japanese 'web usage as per Google:

*EVANGELION + "omoi yari" = 25 [81 with just "EVA"]
*EVANGELION + "ooken" = 10,700

--[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 19:27, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

:"Heavy Spear" gets used alot more in other material and translations than "huge-ass sword".  --[[User:V|V]] 11:30, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

::I don't think I've seen "Heavy Spear" used by anyone other than me. On the other hand, fans refer to the weapon as "sword" quite a lot, simply on account of its appearance. ("Huge-ass" was a colorful way of saying "big".) 

::Incidentally, ''real'' "heavy spears" (at least, those that come up on English language searches) look absolutely nothing like what the harpies lug around. --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 12:19, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

:::Update: "great sword" is the minimally-lame-sounding translation for ''ooken'' (came across it today while doing some translation-thing or another), and I suggest we use this. Seriously NOTHING aside from the script uses ''omoi yari'', and since the weapons look slightly more like swords than spears, we ought to just hop onto the bandwagon, with a note on the names in the appropriate place(s). --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 11:15, 30 December 2007 (PST)

==Kyoko==

I think this got switched Reichu: is it officially "Kyoko Zeppelin Soryu" or "Kyoko Soryu Zeppelin" on here?--[[User:V|V]] 19:06, 7 August 2007 (EDT)
:"'' Asuka and Kyoko's Japanese surnames are placed after their European ones due to the "name swap" custom'' -- I'm going to take this as "use Kyoko Zeppelin Soryu"--[[User:V|V]] 19:08, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

::Yup. --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 19:27, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

==LCL==

===Acronym===

:> and the explanation that it is an acronym standing for "Link Connect Liquid" might not be entirely canon.

:If my memory serves me correctly, that acronym is an entirely unofficial creation coined by ADV in the liner notes of their old VHS versions. But don't take my word for it. --[[User:Dr. Nick|Dr. Nick]] 20:26, 3 August 2007 (EDT)

::Incidentally, ''Chronicle'' parrots Scott's suggestion that one of the Ls stands for "Lilith". ;;p --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 20:06, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

===LCL vs L.C.L.===

:I finally remembered that this term is shown in the show when Kaji and Kaworu enter the "''L.C.L.'' Plant". ''Uh''-oh... --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 17:16, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

::I have seen it as both "LCL" and "L.C.L."....but it would indeed appear to be an acronym.  Um, you should figure that out so we can finalize it.--[[User:V|V]] 18:53, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

::I mentioned in some thread or another, ''Oddly, the script uses "LCL", but other sources, like the theatrical programs and Chronicle (the first two I checked), use "L.C.L.". But any in-show computer display would provide the "final say", in my opinion.'' So "L.C.L. Plant" ought to be the final say, while making typing much more annoying. --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 19:24, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

::EDIT: For anyone reading this who hasn't also been keeping tabs on forum-talk, "L.C.L." is far too annoying for its own good, as it turns out. --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 00:04, 16 August 2007 (EDT)

==Lilim = 18th Angel==

"There are some who ardently consider humans to be the "18th Angel". <snip>"

I had always taken Misato's words at face value; if we are to question the "18th Angel" bit, we might as well question everything else in that rather important expository monologue. "If someone doesn't 'get' how hominids can be an 'Angel', that's their problem". 

Reichu's vote: Simply go with what Misato says, as there is nothing that contradicts it. Other pages can explore the intricacies of the matter. (BTW, remember those cards EvaOtaku loves so much? There's one for "18th Angel: Man".) --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 16:16, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

:I thought that monologue was in error, but reading up on it I believe the "error" was in referring to Lilith as progeny of Adam, which she ain't.  Um, I would put this to vote.  I took a "hands off" approach and was just putting all of the information out there, that is, explaining the whole situation on the "Lilim" page and just saying "to be on the safe side, just say "there's 17 Angels" under normal circumstances.  You could change this around if you want I have no strong feelings one way or the other, please discuss.  --[[User:V|V]] 18:52, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

::"''I believe the "error" was in referring to Lilith as progeny of Adam''" = Translation Blooper. There is nothing contradicting any of what Misato says. Ergo, take it all at "face value" (as Shin-seiki said in the Good Old Days): Misato reveals that there is an "18th Angel", and that Angel is us. 

::Dealing with the significant Angel/human semantic problem is a whole 'nother thing. --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 19:24, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

==Pen-Squared==

V wrote: ''Write the name of Misato's pet penguin as "Pen Pen" (without a dash), not "Pen²", as "Pen²" is more difficult to use.''

...Any more difficult than S² or N²? But, more to the point, if Pen² is rejected on the basis of "user-unfriendliness", how ''do'' we decide which variation of the Romanization (katakana --> PENPEN) to use? Pen Pen? PenPen? Pen-Pen? Penpen? I did a very crude Google Test (no way to get quick and easy results, since all of the variations are the same in Google's eyes) and counted up the occurences on the first five pages of results. Allow some room for error.

*Pen Pen: 19
*PenPen: 15
*Pen-Pen: 7
*Penpen: 6

Guess V's choice wins after all? --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 10:47, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

:Well it wasn't my choice and I actually don't care one way or the other; you see the Pen Pen article was created before I got here, and in that version http://evacommentary.org/evawiki/index.php?title=Pen_Pen&oldid=4076 was already spelled "Pen Pen", as well as in the already created character template, so I just assumed that was what you decided already.  Btw....Pen Pen is God?--[[User:V|V]]

==Pylon==

The thought occurs to me that I ought to make sure Yamashita is actually referring to the whole "shoulder part" before I make an ass of myself again. --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 14:37, 20 August 2007 (EDT)

==Rei, Rei, and Rei==

The usage I commonly see for referencing Rei's three main incarnations is "Rei" followed by a Roman numeral. However, I only recall I, II, III being used in episode titles. When referred to specific Rei, Arabic numerals are used in the script (#25), and see also the listing for the Reiquarium (04, 05, 06...). --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]]
:Oh okay, I'll switch it to "Rei 1", "Rei 2", and "Rei 3".  --[[User:V|V]] 11:27, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

==Scope of S&C==

Exactly what is the scope of this page supposed to be? 

I say this because some of the included guidelines are fine in some instances and needlessly restrictive in others. For example, in the pages where we have actual fan-geeks "talking", people were always allowed to go into "Weeaboo Mode", within reason. And by "W.M.", I mean casually using things like honorifics, random Japanese terminology (Eva designations, etc.), and perhaps worse here and there. It's been so long, I honestly can't remember what I "let in". 

I'll be revising this bit, unless there are objections. --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 16:16, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

:"''fan-geeks "talking", people were always allowed to go into "Weeaboo Mode", within reason. And by "W.M.", I mean casually using things like honorifics, random Japanese terminology (Eva designations, etc.), and perhaps worse here and there. It's been so long, I honestly can't remember what I "let in".'' -- "Using a lot of Japanese terminology, i.e. calling him "Shinji-kun" in passing, will deeply confuse new people.  As this is meant to be an English-language Eva Wiki...quest...thing, then we shouldn't punish people for not knowing what the Japanese honorifics are.  As I said, if it is of some plot significance (i.e. "notice that Shinji called Misato "Katsuragi-sama"...) it should be pointed out.  However, using Japanese words alot will make the site insular and cliquey, when its meant to be accessible to all people.  Remember:  we already know most of this stuff. Half of the point of this thing is to educate newbies and turn them into non-newbies.  The other half, though, ''is'' finding out stuff on our own through further analysis, pushing the boundares of knowledge, etc.  We should also refrain from using internet slang terms that people might not understand at first glance.  The whole thing is supposed to be "Accessible" and I stand by this decision.  As for the Eva designations....we might let that once pass by, but as that would be inconsistent, I'm personally not in favor of it.  --[[User:V|V]] 18:48, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

::The scope of Standards and Conventions is just to tell people conventions regarding things like spelling and capitalization, etc. of specific *terms particular to the Evangelion source material*.  Things like rules for behavior of editors, and instructions on how to edit stuff, go in the other policy articles.  --[[User:V|V]] 18:50, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

:::I'm all for letting people go Weeaboo and memerific in the sections permitted the Fangeek Touch, applicable in people's FGC comments and elsewhere. That's always been part of the site's unique character. As for being "insular and cliquey" -- whatever we were doing Way Back When, it didn't seem to bother the various random people who have contacted me over the years, so I'm not going to fix what wasn't broken. 

:::It's all about "there's a time and a place", know what I mean? --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 19:05, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

===Weeaboo stuff===

#I don't know what Weeaboo means
#Oh yeah, Japanese stuff like "poor Sachi-chan" can be used in the other parts of the greater FGP stuff, I just meant that like in an episode guide part on here, you can't just assume people know the honorifics.  Looks good.  --[[User:V|V]] 11:47, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

:Oh, right, I was going to provide a link to the definition of "weeaboo"... Very useful term, that. --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 12:19, 8 August 2007 (EDT)

==Source of Life vs. Seed of Life==

I wonder if the fact that "Seed of Life" is ''only'' used in the CI (AFAIK) should feature into a decision about which of these to use? Though I did a Google Test here, just for lulz: 

*EVA(NGELION) + ''seimei no tane'' [Seed of Life] = 1,790
*EVA(NGELION) + ''seimeitai no minamoto'' [Source of Life] = 399

Hmmm... Maybe I shouldn't question the "Seed of Life" decision, after all. --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 19:27, 7 August 2007 (EDT)

==Evangelion Designations==
I thought we'd agreed on "Eva-XX", not "EVA-XX", the same as Nerv and Seele not being in all caps. 
--[[User:UrsusArctos|UrsusArctos]] 23:47, 15 August 2007 (EDT)

:Yes, we did. But I am not Rei, I cannot be everywhere at once. 

:Okay, okay, I'll go fix it... --[[User:Reichu|Reichu]] 00:02, 16 August 2007 (EDT)