Talk:Haku

Protection
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The previous discussions have been archived because of how heated and off topic they have gotten.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 !" 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)

=Believe it!'s response=

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)