Fan talk:Couplings

From DigimonWiki

There is a proposed guideline for the couplings article at DigimonWiki:Coupling guidelines. Input from all users is welcome at Talk:Couplings#Proposed guideline

Contents 1 Bias 2 Validity 3 Slash? 4 Favorite couplings of the user 5 Proposed guideline 6 Suggestions 6.1 Retool? 7 Kazu & Kenta 8 Anti-Canon Validity 9 Michi? 10 Broader Category? 11 Format 12 Evidence 13 The love triangle 14 Colourbars? 15 Qualification 16 Digimon Couples 17 Debatable Evidence 18 Locking 19 Tomizu

[edit] Bias

I think I have something against this idea, for the simple fact that it's far to easy to get too hot-headed over couplings. I think there should be a general guideline: don't remove an entire page. Place your arguments on the discussion page and talk there, rather than simply removing it or placing stuff in the code, because it leads to editing wars and the downfall of this page. Lanate 03:54, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Another possible idea could be a "counter argument" page for each coupling, so everyone would be able to have their say, without to go back and forth on the same page. -- Ned Scott 06:22, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Validity

I think there should be guidelines like this (these aren't official; they're my opinions)

1. There should be enough evidence to fill an entire page (i.e. Sorato/Takari pages as an example)

2. Couple is valid ONLY IF there is enough evidence of a two-way couple

3. It should be treated in a formal manner with canon examples of affection and not just the "they have similar evolutions" argument

Counter-argument is good. But the thing is that this is a wiki. Wikis are meant to be informative and consistent. Neither of which seems to be happening here.

(For your information I did NOT set up the Takari/Sorato articles.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.4.66.248 (talk • contribs)

Hmm, I disagree on all points but 3. I think we just need to see what is real evidence (note that there is no such thing as "an entire page" on the internet, and what isn't, rather than laying down judgements on particular couples (which would be against the point of it). I agree that the "same crests" or "their digimon are similar" arguments are complete nonsense however.

Who decides what is 'enough evidence' anyhow? --Blazing Chaos 20:46, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I should think that, "actually happened" would be enough evidence - thus Tai and Sora (at least dating), Sora and Matt (permanent, but damnit, I hate that one), Mimi and Michael, Ken and Yolei. I've heard something that the original Japanese ending also had T.K. and Kari, but that seems like an awful big mistranslation for the American version.

Seeing as we know what actually happened for most of these, I think the pages should be rewritten to be about the fangroups who espoused these pairings - that "this is why they believed it", and perhaps even trivia if the group did something else, like petitions, etc. As it is now, it's like the wiki is trying to convince readers of things blatantly false.

That's just for Adventure though. The other seasons were smart enough to not pull crap like that on us.KrytenKoro 18:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, since apparently the "explain why the fans came up with it" idea didn't fly, can I start trimming the articles that only present one-way crushes (like Daikari), and deleting the ones that are completely empty? I really don't think some of these should just be thrown up there as templates, with little to no effort to actually explain them (like Henry & Jeri - what the hell?). And I know it will probably never be listened to, but can we ask that the "evidence" actually show romantic inclinations, and not merely be friendship or philos?KrytenKoro 05:46, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I think you're going to start a lot of problems if you start trimming pages and cutting couples to your whims. In my opinion, so long as there is evidence (beyond "OMG aren't they kawaii together?!"), there can be a page. Becoming judgemental over couplings is a bad move. --Blazing Chaos 19:06, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Except that I'm specifically asking if I can remove the ones that present no actual evidence for a mutual relationship. Empty pages are actually expressly denied by the earlier consensus, and again, the point of these pages is to be an "&", not "one character gets the other against their will".KrytenKoro 04:46, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Slash?

I write and read band-fiction, specificly band-slash (however, not anime fan-fiction or yuri/yaoi,) and therefore have a rather biased eye for homosexual pairings. I am also rather shy and awkward about editing wikis (aside from on encylopedia dramatica, but that is a different story) so I probably will never contribute to this, but I sill have to ask: Would it be alright to add plausible homosexual pairings, with evidence/why the fans of the 'ship believe it exists? Rock.n.Roll.Vietnam 01:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I would say that stuff like Taichi & Yamato, or Kazu & Kenta could make a valid argument - while in the first case it is eventually proven false, there does seem to be a fair few connections with some of them. I don't know what the other editors think, but it should be okay as long as it's not something out there like "Yamato & Takeru". Honestly, I'd wish some of these pages would acknowledge (for both hetero- and homo- pairings) that not all affection or love is erotic, though these are slash-fan articles we're talking about.KrytenKoro 05:44, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Favorite couplings of the user

I have question: can users write their favorite couplings in their pages, even if they are fan-made or crossover? Leader Vladimir

Being the one who started the pages, I would not recommend it, as there is no evidence of such couplings. Fan-made and crossover kinds are only allowed in Fanfiction. Unless you can find evidence other than 'they look good/cute together', please do not. - Digi9346 22:58, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, well, at least can users write in their pages canon couplings they like/don't like and the reason(s) they like/don't like them? Leader Vladimir

You mean like, have users say if they personally like the couplings or not, in the article? I'm not so sure about that. It would be ok on the talk page, or if you wanted to write up a little rant about it on your user page or a user sub-page. We will probably explore some way to let editors write reviews of games and episodes, so that could be another option as well. -- Ned Scott 01:20, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Ooh, I like the reviews for episodes and games idea. This could definitely expand the wiki in a good way, particularly if there were to be several different people doing various reviews and not just one. Perhaps something for a separate debate? --Blazing Chaos 19:06, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

No I don't mean a rant. But if they put their reasons, it's possible it would lead to a rant. After all, it's just a matter of opinion whether they like the coupling or not. How about they put their favorite couplings (reasons as optional), along with other stuff? You know, characters, episodes, seasons, etc. Leader Vladimir

The answer is no, unless you're limiting it to YOUR OWN USER PAGE and not the actual page. Only dead fish go with the flow. 19:22, October 4, 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed guideline

Starting a thread for discussion on the proposed guideline at DigimonWiki:Coupling guidelines. Feel free to give any thoughts you have on the matter, such as what other things to note, if you agree or disagree with anything listed, etc. -- Ned Scott 07:55, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestions

From Dakari talk page:

Notes that one character says one name first also seem to be a bit superfluous - relationships are built on much more than who you view as the leader of the group. I would also include sitting together as mere coincidence, though I know it does sometimes mean something. Not much, but something.

Most moments like [the team cheering Davis during the soccer game], where the whole team is actually cheering on one member, should not be misrepresented as evidence of a relationship unless something special, like a hug or something like "You were cute!", "You're my hero!" etc. is said.

Comments on differences between versions should not be condescending - it should be limited to "In the English dub", "In the manga adaptation", etc. That there is a difference between the two in this instance only is all that needs to be said - anything more, along the lines of "it should be noted..." is only asking for argument, and should be avoided.

"The commentary (specifically "The first name she said was Davis' name." and "Ken is a wonderchild!") are specifically the kind of "hmmm" arguments we don't need." - "Evidence" should be posted as non-commentary descriptions of the events, and not in the argumentative or condescending tone many of them are written on.

I would also like to suggest the deletion of the completely empty coupling pages, and a greater effort to suggest something on the talk page before adding it. I don't want to be too hard on these pages, but we have to agree that these pages do need some kind of cleanup or copyediting, as they're in pretty sorry shape for right now.

I would actually advise editors who want to add things to look for some of the "professional" essays found on some fansites - these are much more concise, much more persuasive, and much more....good, than what we have now. I've actually seen a good one arguing against Taiora and for Sorato which convinced me, even though I'd always thought that Sora and Tai were indicated to be dating.KrytenKoro 22:04, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Retool?

I think we could actually retool these pages a bit. Instead of trying to argue specifically for romantic relationships, we could have them cover whatever form of relationship the two characters have.

Besides that, I have two suggestions for the current state of the articles:

1. Articles should only mention the two characters in question, unless another character is entwined in the matter. So, Any page including Yolei should leave out mention of characters besides the other char., except to mention that Ken and Yolei get married.
2. The Speculation section should be retooled to be more of the "essay" section - those fan-written, synthesis essays examining two character's relationships should be here, while the bare facts should be listed above. So, the "Speculation" section puts together the "evidence" section into a cohesive argument.
3. Any type of "implication" evidence should stand up if the same method is applied to other characters in the scene or in similar scenes. So, if it claims that T.K. and Kari sitting together in Digitamamon's diner is evidence, it should consider that the same scene has Yolei and Cody sitting together as well. It would either need to admit this as part of the claim, or use it to remove the claim completely.

KrytenKoro 04:20, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kazu & Kenta

Uhm.. I think this really strange because Kazu and Kenta are both boys, and in Digimon they have no homosexual, right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by BramBenthem

They only have implied heterosex at the end of 02, so it's as logical as the rest of the coupling articles. They are actually told that they act like a married couple in one episode, as well.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 08:32, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

You'd probably think Tai & Matt is strange, too, but you wouldn't believe its popularity among a certain kind of fangirl. It had as big a rivalry with both Tai & Sora and Matt & Sora as those two did with each other. It was a perfect-storm triangle of shipping wars. --Doomdoom 00:09, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Anti-Canon Validity

It seems there is a good amount of argument around the subject of couplings (particularly in Seasons 1 and 2) involving characters who ended up canon-paired. In response, I'd just like to give one opinion on the matter: why not? Last I checked, Ken and Yolei didn't get married while they were still kids. Pairings and fanfiction can take place any time, even before the series (if the characters knew each other before its start) or after the epilogue if an author so chooses. So who's to say Yolei didn't date Davis or T.K. or whoever some time in High School before realizing she still had feelings for Ken? Even without extreme canon evidence, any coupling could be possible if timed right; people change, after all. (Not to say I don't want evidence, just stating a good author could make it work.) Just look at the differences in Tai and Sora between 1 and 2. Heck, on that note, why do people seem to believe that Sorato proves Taiora never happened? The way I recall it, Tai and Sora were implied in 1, and said in 2 to have dated in the past (when Matt is asking Tai if he's okay with it (Basing on Dub here)), be that during 1 or sometime between the two seasons. So yes, Ken and Yolei may be canon. But we as fans absolutely cannot prove that neither of them ever dated any other character between the final battle and the epilogue. Therefore, it is my opinion that all possible couplings with enough evidence to make an article should be covered, whether the characters involved have a canon pairing or not. Heart-of-Thorns 16:50, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Technically, and it's much more clear in the original version, Tai and Sora were best friends, and most of the stuff spun as romance in the dub was friendship in the original. Kari's really the only one they made have multiple love interests - it's just not an important theme of the series, so it's not covered in depth.

There's also the cultural context that suggests that, unlike America, and at the sunny-side of reality, none of these marriages were things they came to overnight. They may not have been planned marriages, but they had a crapload of time invested into them.

But that's just my feelings - it is possible to provide evidence for any which pairing. However, I'd much rather the article evolve into true "relationships" articles, like you see on the Inuyasha pages on wiki - covering how the two characters interact, and letting the reader judge for themselves if there's romance or not.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 20:03, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

What Inuyasha wiki? inuyasha.wikia.com only has 108 pages, and none of the titles look like they're about relationships. And while they have no equivalent pages there, I'd rather we took on the aloof humor-based style of the Transformers wiki. --Doomdoom 00:35, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

No, the Inuyasha articles on wikipedia, which have a "relationships" section on each article covering how the character interacts with other characters. That would be a much more neutral way of covering the info.

While I love the humor of the TF wiki, it is based on a series that strongly incorporates humor, recognizes the silliness of its concept, has much more familiarity with readers, so that the jokes actually "take", and has a huge editor-base, so that jokes can be made but there's enough people to recognize whether information is still factual. Digimon is confusing enough as it is without sarcasm, and if we tried to have a similar humor-based style, we'd have to rewrite everything. I know I'm not up for that anytime soon, but if the other main editors are...Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 21:59, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Lol! Isn't that the truth? Even issues such as gender become massly disfigured. For example, Renamon says Digimon are genderless. Yet they've used gender-based pronouns. Plus the wonderful episode in 02 (The Good, The Bad, and The Digi) where they let only the girls (including Digimon) out of their cells for cards. And this included Hawkmon, who is otherwise obviously male. On that note, assuming they do have even implied if not literal genders, and Yolei's Hawkmon's is male, wtf is the 02 Silphymon? xD

Anyway, back on topic.. '^^ Serious question: Why is there no article for Riley and Yamaki from Tamers? While not Digidestined or children, they were pretty major characters who had a largely implied though (at least in the dub) never canonly stated relationship. I dunno.. Maybe their fanbase isn't as big as I'd like to believe.. But I know I was a Yamaki fangirl.. '^^; (To the point that this many years after Tamers ended I finally got a Zippo for the sole purpose of flicking it open and shut like Yamaki does when he's anxious, nervous, or bored. '^^ Hehe..) So yeah, thoughts? Heart-of-Thorns 23:14, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Geez, these tabs are getting so far in that all the words are crammed...xD

Digimon are genderless...in a technical sense, meaning that they can still act like male/female if they feel. However, since it's not actually a gender, they cannot reproduce. According to Kokana's notes, that's what he meant. As for Slyphimon, I have no idea. xP

As for Yamaki, while he's a major character, the problem is that he isn't a Chosen/Tamer. If we let him slide, we might as well let slide people like Takeru and Yamato's parents...which would be kinda pointless. So it's probably best at leaving it as such. Only dead fish go with the flow. 13:45, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Michi?

Michi seems to be popular in the ff.net community. Why doesn't it have a page?

Because it's the duty of its supporters to add a page about it and provide the evidence they can.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 04:54, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

You will notice now however that a page has been put up now. Feel free to add any other evidence that comes to mind. User:Coolbloo12 (03:24, 1 February 2009)

[edit] Broader Category?

I'm not at all a 'regular' here, but after viewing some of these articles, I really do not see a "Coupling" title being the best way to list relationships between two people. A title such as "Relationships" (also previously brought up by KrytenKoro) would be much more encompassing and provoke less debate concerning speculation and canon. For example, canon would never see people who rarely interact or same-sex couples (except for maybe Mimi and Miyako...) exist. The way the "Coupling" articles work now, there is therefore no organized method to document the relationships or rivalries between two people even if they've met - ex. Yamato & Takeru obviously have a very strong relationship, though they are definitely not a couple. Under a more encompassing category, it would be a lot easier to organize and record interactions between everyone, as well as interactions between human and Digimon. Each article would have a section for factual evidence, as most coupling articles have now, as well as a section for speculation, where others could pretty much speculate on couples.

Also, not really related to the above paragraph, some of the "evidence" on aforementioned coupling pages is based solely on two characters standing beside each other *in or along with their friends/allies*. I personally do not see that as evidence at all - friends will often cluster together but still not be a couple. I can see this when there is affection being shown between the two (Yamato and Sora in the S2 Finale Poster for example) - however when it comes to the S2 Koumi image (where they are clearly in a cluster with their friends and not displaying affection via hand-holding or whatnot) or the Rukato Movie Poster (where Ruki is also reaching for Henry's hand as well as Takato's), that honestly is a bit of a stretch for me.

Just trying to voice my personal opinions as a very infrequent visitor on this site. Discussion is encouraged of course. Thanks, and Merry Christmas :) 99.246.156.184 07:45, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

This is a very good evaluation, I of course don't really approve a people doing this but people mearely will have to delete these types of evidence but I know it won't be this easy.User:Coolbloo12

I'm currently working on cleaning up what I can. I can't get everything at once (I'm still a working student) but there used to be some truly ridiculous things on the Takari article that have now been knocked off...Ironically, I think the ridiculous stuff was my fault to begin with...xD Well, I'm not a fangirl anymore. Only dead fish go with the flow. 13:42, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Format

All right, I am in a bad mood, but I have a reason.

I worked very, very hard to keep the general information at the top of each page consistent (i.e. "This page is dedicated to the <insert full name> and <insert full name> coupling..."), and instead someone came and changed the ones on certain ones (i.e. making "Davis Motomiya" and "Kari Kamiya" in bold in the Daikari article, and taking away Zoe's last name in the Junzumi article). Is there a way we can enforce a real standard on things like this? Only dead fish go with the flow. 01:18, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, with the episode articles, we've got one dedicated editor, and a plan (yet to be an MoS draft yet, though). With the card articles, there's OCD me. And with the main articles, we've got an MoS draft.

What I've found to work well is to spend some obsessive time on one article, making it perfect and shiny, and then go on to the other articles. That way, if anyone gives you grief, you can just say "Look at x", and keep on working.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 03:49, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Evidence

If you have noticed some coupling pages are "bigger" than others. Quite frankly I'm getting annoyed by the fact that some people actually write stuff like "Her son looks a bit like him" Ever since I started my own account here I've been cleaning up the couplings page and I am freaking annoyed. Not to mention the fact that couples that shouldn't even be able to happen show up on the coupling page. I erased some of them because I felt that the couples didn't have enough evidence to support it, but they keep showing up. I'm open to ideas of couples but stuff like Henry&Alice aren't right. I just like to say that evidence is evidence, if you don't have more then 2 then you shouldn't start the page. I feel we need some standards of this, seriously...User:Coolbloo12 (03:32, 1 February 2009)

I know evidence is evidence, but Ned said something along the lines of "these are just for fun".

And besides, I've been on the fanfiction community for over a year now and you'd be shocked at how many people stick them together...Only dead fish go with the flow. 04:27, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

If you want, I can probably dig up fanfiction pairing most main characters together. My personal favorite of the bunch is Kenta x Ruki, but I have a soft spot for Taichi x Takeru. My point is... Fandom is strange. You don't have half the pairings people have ever written about here.

...and I will admit to having written some weird pairings myself. Including Takeru x Jenrya x Tomoki. Because this is fandom, we can tolerate it.

Maybe for expansion, you can include some fandom history? Lanate (talk) 07:04, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps. I'll think about it.

Henry x Alice, however, is not considered a "weird" pairing (although it is to me) on the fanfiction community; it's most commonly found in triple-date fanfiction with Jurato, Ryuki, and the above former...I think it's because they want to stick some girl with Jian. And I'm personally sick of seeing it, but it continually appears on the FF feeds...

I'll think about the fandom history section; there'll be a lot to write about that. Only dead fish go with the flow. 13:36, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] The love triangle

Sorato or Taiora? There's a battle going on about which one should have happened and users are erasing evidence and adding useless stuff. What can be done? User:Coolbloo12 (03:35, 1 February 2009)

Currently I'm taking care of it. I have every coupling page on my watchlist and any minor tiny thing that gets changed has to go through me. Although I'm onesided myself, I firmly believe in fairness for both sides and thus whenever something happens I'll make sure it doesn't go bad. xD Only dead fish go with the flow. 04:30, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Colourbars?

Stumbled upon these coupling colourbars for Digimon Adventure/02 (see here, about 1/2 way down). What about adding these to their respective articles (at the bottom of the article, or maybe the top). Opinions? If anyone does want to do this, someone is going to have to help me make the html work in the wiki (as wikicode or something else). ---- Rad140 Grrr.... I'm Wargreymon! Arrrgh! Grrraaww! 23:36, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Qualification

This particular rule:

• Anything exclusively from the English dub and prominently not in the Japanese version must be marked.

Rather than making it one way, it should probably state:

• Anything exclusively in one version and not in another must be marked.

That way, we can cover manga differences, as well as stuff that was in the Japanese version but not in the English version. Or if anyone who's watched other dubs have anything different to say. Lanate (talk) 06:11, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Digimon Couples

I was wondering perhaps if we could have couples with digimon in them ex: Agumon/Biyomon. I think digimon also can have the right to be in the coupling section. It's just an idea but I think it could be fun. Coolbloo12

No, we need to limit the amount of couplings possible. It's bad enough Adventure's Chosen Children alone could potentially have 132 pages; if we add the Digimon then it'll be a hectic mess. Only dead fish go with the flow. 19:11, October 4, 2009 (UTC)

A follow-up: Digimon are genderless...in a technical sense, meaning that they can still act like male/female if they feel. However, since it's not actually a gender, they cannot reproduce. Yes, I know that means they can still have a romance, but considering the whole idea that Digitamas actually come out of nowhere...I don't think Digimon were ever meant to have romances like that. Only dead fish go with the flow. 19:18, October 4, 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Debatable Evidence

After reviewing the evidence on some coupling pages, I feel that some might not be considered as romantic evidence but evidence of bonds. For example on the Takari page it states that In "Piedmon's last jet" that T.K. wanted to be brave in front of Kari and not cry, I thinks thats a little bit of a strech. Of course it can be debatable but would any little boy want to show his fear in front of a girl in any situation? Also on the the Sorato page there is evidence from the episode "Birdramon gets firepower" that Matt screamed out "Sora come back!" I have to wonder if any other person might have screamed that out. This could be evidence of worry or a bond but not a real romantic link. There is also some debateble evidence on the Michi page in which Mimi held tightly on Tai when they were riding on Greymon, I feel this only happened so that she wouldn't fall off and can't really be considered evidence also when Tai helped Mimi off the boat, any person could do that and since only Tai and Joe was there I have to say it could be debatable the same could be said on the Daikari page in which Davis and Kari were in a dance position, it could have been in the spur of the moment. Two bits of evidence from the Kouzimi page could also be debatable, she helps him talk to Koji, that's not exactly romantic, futher more fighting together with Emperorgreymon isn't a romantic link either. I have to review a little more to spot some debatable evidence from the pages but I guess it's just some things to think about. Coolbloo12

Well, technically, the coupling pages are about romantic couplings, so romantic evidence. There is no concrete evidence, so anything put on those pages is up to debate, but common sense seems like a good way to go. If something doesn't seem like one person cares about another, or is just coincidence (like holding onto someone for safety, or helping them off a boat) that is debatable. There's been talk about setting up a general friendship/relationship section (like how one character reacts to/with another), or just making notes in the article that it's not romantic. Regardless, any evidence that you don't think is applicable should be put on the couple's discussion page, so others can review/debate.---- Rad140 Dear vandal, I'm not afraid to rollback your ass. 17:44, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

Agreed with Rad140 - sometime in the future when I have a lot of time open I'm deleting all of the couple pages and replacing them with the relationship articles. Honestly, all of the articles have issues like the one you said (Taiora included), so it's not really in a good state at this point. Only dead fish go with the flow. 23:19, October 8, 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Aster Selene, writing relationship articles would be the best route I think for these pages. The problem with these coupling pages is that they are so many opinions and there are so many theories that opposite forces often clash. Writing evidence allows you to see the blatant truth that one couple is better then another and allows vandals and fangirls to delete evidence they don't want seen or add irrelevant evidence. So making articles of romantic relationships would be good. But then a new problem could come up, if you write it based on your opinion or theory you may sound biased. Others may want to voice their opinion, if one of your theories goes against another, they won't take it well. We have to make sure that the articles are fair with most couples and the content is crucial, we should write based on evidence and other things you see in the show, not evidence alone. If we aren't careful another "war" could come up. I think maybe on those articles we should write a section that says other theories, thus other can voice their theory without any flaming that you see here currently. ---coobloo12 It's a life October 12, 2009

We tried that on the Coupling articles but it got very messy. Daikari evidence and Takari-bashing on the Takari page - not fun. I'm thinking a relationships more along the lines of http://www.haruhi.wikia.com/wiki/Kyon (look at the bottom). It's more equal and more passive, even though Kyon has been paired up with all five of those characters. Only dead fish go with the flow. 14:02, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

So are you thinking of giving each character their own page, and then summarizing their relationships/interactions with other characters, much like the Kyon page? If so, we should probably still keep the original coupling pages somewhere, but state that they are no longer looked after/maintained (lock them?) and link the the relationship/interaction pages. Hopefully that would make everyone happy.---- Rad140 Dear vandal, I'm not afraid to rollback your ass. 15:15, October 12, 2009 (UTC)

That works. I can work on that. However, I would like the R-S articles to be more detailed than that of the Kyon article of course (it's short in the Haruhi wiki because the Haruhi series isn't done, but DA, DA02, DT, DF, and DS are over and done with). Only dead fish go with the flow. 21:36, October 25, 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Locking

I am now locking the Couplings pages so I can start work on the Relationships pages. New evidence added now at this time will make the job messy.

It may take me over a month to write, so please be patient. Pages will be deleted and redirected to the new pages when all of them are complete. Only dead fish go with the flow. 21:36, October 25, 2009 (UTC)

Alright. Let me know if you need any help. I'm assuming each relationship article is going to discuss that character with every other character (Chosen only?) that they could have interacted with in their respective series?---- Rad140 Dear vandal, I'm not afraid to rollback your ass. 16:22, October 26, 2009 (UTC)

Yep :D Only dead fish go with the flow. 19:16, October 26, 2009 (UTC)

This will be a great change! Let me know if you need any help ---coobloo12 It's a life

[edit] Tomizu

A bit ilogic,but Tomizu is the couple Tommy and Zoe

Sign your posts. Not as illogical as one might think, but locked is locked and I won't add it. Only dead fish go with the flow. 19:43, December 1, 2009 (UTC)