Talk:Eliza

Clarifying Cwejen status

Might I suggest that the article lead emphasize the original source that says Christine is a Cwej? It's none of the four stories cited in the lead, and it's confusing. As written, it suggests that BotW or Dead Romance are saying that she's a Cwej, and they absolutely do not. An earlier edit suggested this was The Five Christinas, but this claim was removed from the page and replaced with a more in depth discussion of the story. Having not read the story, I can't comment, but if it's the case that this is the first place her being a Cwej is mentioned, I'd suggest that we highlight this fact. Najawin ☎ 08:19, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it originates in The Five Christinas, which de facto presents her as a Cwej by having her be present in a situation where five female Cwejen have been pulled together from across time and space due to… something-or-other; I forget the details. That being said, it's building on the mention in Dead Romance that Christin was grown from a "standard human template" in the Great Houses' databanks, which I think it is fair to argue was a literary antecedent to the proper introduction of the Cwejen, even if I am doubtful that it was the intent upon introducing the Cwejen to retcon Christine as having been one (since BotW says nothing of the idea of female Cwejen, a much later confabulation). Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 08:24, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

That's what I gathered from the prior edit. The current configuration is super confusing to me as a reader who hasn't read the Cwej series stuff. Again, the people who are actually up to date will know best on how to present the material, but I think that if you mention her being a Cwejen in the lead it should (also) be sourced to the first story in which she's stated to be one (imo). And the standard human template/Cwej nuances strike me as useful to discuss. As a reader who's not up to date on the issue. I fully admit my own limitations here. Najawin ☎ 08:30, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

I have now added the correct citation after the statement, it must have been missed in the expansion where I changed some things around in the article. DrWHOCorrieFan ☎ 08:33, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

Rename

Tardis:Character names says "the titles of articles about individual characters should be the name by which the character was most commonly known in the Doctor Who universe." This character is exclusively called "Eliza" in the majority of her appearances, but I've hesitated to use that name for the page, since she's not called Eliza in her first appearance – Eliza (Dead Romance) just wouldn't make any sense! However, it now occurs to me that due to her status as a main character of a spinoff range, she may merit primary topic status, similar to Abby or Ruth. Thoughts? – n8 (☎) 14:19, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

I'd say she qualifies for primary topic status. No other Eliza in the DWU even has two appearances, as far as I can tell, let alone being a recurring character.

EPSILON^🔎 |📯|📂|📦|📝

14:33, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

I support this rename, as long as a redirect exists from Christine Summerfield Cousin Ettolrhc ☎ 16:18, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

This seems reasonable enough and a correct application of Tardis:Character names. Additionally, I can't see any other recurring Elizas in Elizabeth. Therefore, I will perform this rename to Eliza, keeping Christine Summerfield as a redirect. Bongo50 ☎ 20:02, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

Pronouns, Gender identity and Sexuality

Now whilst at first this may seem simple but it is quite complicated. The simplest of these I would argue is sexuality as D’eon implies that Eliza may be interested in Justine (their are a few other hints but like that they are vague) yes Eliza does marry a woman. However this is an arranged marriage by the Ossirian Court, yet eventually Horus apparently has at the very least slept with his wife. Eliza also does suggest that she and Justine could go back in time and become “Adam and Eve, Eve and Eve” implying that she is at the least interested in both gender. Thus warranting their inclusion to the non-heterosexual category. This and like the other two topic is pose above is made all the hard by the fact that it quite quickly become impossible to tell where Osiris starts and Eliza end, may I propose that because they are give the title Horus they should be considered as having aspects of both people thus suggest at least some level of non cisgender identity or perhaps Intersex? (They do however still have Eliza’s physical form at any rate and thus I assume the same physical arrangement, of course whilst the dna may be the same the Biodata is most definitely not which makes this all the harder to figure out). Now come the final part pronouns may is simple suggest that whilst as Horus we use He/him pronouns but whilst Eliza we use She/Her as these are the way pronouns are used and when referring to both parts at the same time was use they/them much akin to what we do with Doctors page. I have made my views clear on two points I know what I would like however I am still not sure on gender identity and so will hope for a suggestion. Anastasia Cousins ☎ 21:05, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

It's fairly clear that Eliza is bi, yeah. All the Horus stuff is more complicated, but the fact of the matter is, Horus has his own page. It strikes me we should just apply such categories to his page. The Horus section of this page correctly {{main}}-s to that page anyway. Scrooge MacDuck ⊕ 21:12, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

so would you suggest giving Horus the category of non-Cisgender individuals? Anastasia Cousins ☎ 08:56, 26 April 2023 (UTC)