From Apex Legends Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

My edit was flagged as harmful[edit source]

I'm certain this will gain me no friends. At best it will spark a discussion, at worst I will be told I'm wrong and life will go on. But I feel the integrity of this wiki is something important. The edit I attempted to make was to Bloodhound's gender. I'm not here to get into a debate about the definition of gender, I'm here to bring to attention an assertion I believe to be factually incorrect barring further evidence. So, to my edit then.

I was scrolling through Bloodhound's page when I notice this statement: "Technological Tracker" Bloodhound, whose real name, age, and homeworld are unknown, is either "non-binary, or at least non-specified, in terms of gender."

I also notice that that statement links to a source, so I visit the source. The source is an article on IGN linking to both the official bio for Bloodhound and to a Rock, Paper, Shotgun article. On the IGN article the quote is "'Technological Tracker' Bloodhound, whose real name, age, and homeworld are unknown, is either 'non-binary, or at least non-specified, in terms of gender.'"

Personal information blacked out

I followed their links in an attempt to find where the statement was originally made. My intent was to find the primary source of this information and replace the link to the IGN article with the original source. I checked Bloodhound's Bio on the EA page to find no mention of gender.

Personal Information blacked out

Naturally I follow the last link to Rock, Paper, Shotgun and their article. This is what I find: "I mention Bloodhound, a tracker character sporting futuristic plague doctor garb, and Frechette confirms that yes, Bloodhound is non-binary, or at least non-specified, in terms of gender." There is no quote from Frechette here, no link to the raw interview, no confirmation of the information. It is a claim made by the interviewer without evidence. The fact that the statement is "Bloodhound is non-binary, or at least non-specified," furthering my suspicions that this information is inferred rather than implied given how uncertain the language used is.

Personal Information blacked out

Given the results of my search I returned to Bloodhound's page in order to edit the Gender section of their template to non-specified (though after some thought 'Unknown' would likely be more accurate). When I attempted to save my change I was met with a message saying that my edit had been flagged as harmful because it met the criteria of changing Bloodhound's gender from non-binary. This is an approximation of the message I received as it seems after signing in and tagging the edit as a minor edit I was, in fact, able to change it to non-specified while trying to find the exact message I had received before about harmful edits. In the interest of keeping things running properly I immediately changed it back to non-binary in order to keep its links working.

All this brings me to my conclusion: Bloodhound's gender should be changed to unknown until further credible evidence can be found to ascertain that they are indeed non-binary.

Sources of the edited images:

IGN Article:

Bloodhound Bio:

Rock, Paper, Shotgun Article:

Also, if this is in the wrong place I apologize. I went to the community portal and looked for a place to discuss things but the section I found that seemed right was also empty. Perhaps I am the first to start a discussion or perhaps there are simply no open topics on which to discuss at the moment.

Anvillior (talk) 19:28, 19 February 2019 (UTC)Anvillior

Actually, yes, you're the first person who has tried to start a discussion about it. Most people just change the gender to Unknown or Male without so much as an edit summary, get stopped, and leave (or try to commit some vandalism out of spite).
As for your point, I can understand that you aren't satisfied by the lack of quote, although I would find it weird that the term "non-binary" even came up in the interview at all if it wasn't used and I don't think it warrants throwing the interview out just because we don't have a transcript. But if you want some additional confirmation, here's also Bloodhound's voice actress confirming the character is non-binary:
--Mr Pie 5 (talk) 01:35, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
I see. Thank you, I do believe that is sufficient evidence to put my mind at ease. I would argue that that link should perhaps replace the IGN article (or that the IGN link be at least replaced with the RPS link) but that is a decision that requires consesus. Anvillior (talk) 05:50, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
I added the tweet link in addition to the existing one. I wouldn't be too opposed to replacing the IGN link with the RPS link, but they convey the same information and while the IGN is taken from the RPS one, it's more focused on the matter at hand so I thought it more apropriate.
--Mr Pie 5 (talk) 06:15, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Hmmm.... I did the same thing, but I leaved a review I hate Apex Legends. Okay, I knew Gib was gay, but Bloodhound is so cool, and HE absolutely looses it when you realize HE apparently is non binary ( which is same as saying your gender is not having one🤨) And all for what? So some dumb minority doesn’t feel left out? Awwww... do they want the blood taken out to? If you have a good game, their incredibly stoopid complaints won’t matter. Apex is a good game. See where I’m going? Azzazin (talk) 00:17, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Non-binary/Non-specified[edit source]

I edited this to fit better into what we know. We got two truths on this one and I saw that another editor got their edits on the gender flagged. I don’t see how it is harmful at all to just edit this to what the developers told us.

And yes, I know that Allegra is saying what she thinks is true on this. But until Respawn says something, I think we should be careful with the assumptions. Alsiloute Gaming (talk) 12:44, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

So other readers have continuity, here is a link to your post on my talk page after I reverted the edit:
This is controversial because Bloodhound's gender comes up daily, typically only as entries in the abuse log we had to install due to the sheer volume of back-and-forth we get over it though - you're only the third person to try and actually discuss it. The reason I don't want to use "non-specified" is for the same reason I don't want to use "unknown", which was a conversation elsewhere so I'll re-iterate: it's not the same thing. Non-binary means neither male or female, and unknown/non-specified means simply that it isn't known, and given that we are culturally still biased towards binary, would imply either male or female but not sure which. In addition to being inaccurate, that would invite a lot of "helpful" people trying to let us know that Bloodhound is male.
I get what you're saying about wanting to add the slash because the interview says "non-binary, or at least non-specified", but I think to call non-binary "contradictory" and "spreading misinformation" is quite a reach, perhaps you could elaborate on that. As for Allegra, I'm not giving her more weight, I'm giving her the same weight, but she gave a more direct answer.
If you do want to discuss further, the conversation is open (here, because this is about the Bloodhound article and not about me), but do try to keep it civil and not level accusations.
--Mr Pie 5 (talk) 21:11, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
As I don’t want to lean towards any direction on this, of course I will keep it civil.
What I mean by spreading misinformation is that many take it as granted that bloodhound is non-binary because of the fact that a source that is supposed to be non-biased leans more towards one side of the coin even though information is not fully clear.
So I didn’t call the gender identity non-binary “contradictory” or “spreading of misinformation”. I simply called the fact that an independent fact source takes a side on an unsure matter a little misinformative. And as there is a hot discussion on media about this because of the uncertainty. Therefore I just wanted to change it to a state were both ideas are represented and the information is still as true as it was prior to the change.
I do understand that these “helpful” people is an annoying hassle. But they would stop once they understand that the gender is what it is and it is not going anywhere.
Also, as of it being inaccurate, how would it be inaccurate to say that “the character could be non-binary, or maybe they are something else” when we really don’t know anything? We don’t know their name, we don’t even know where they are from but we know that they identify as non-binary? I think Respawn intends for this character to be a mystery, to be something or someone that is whatever the player playing them may think they are. Respawn will probably never go out and say what is true. They did this once before you know. There was a character called MRVN in titanfall 2 who was a robot with an owner gone missing. They gave hints but never told us who in the end. Therefore it says owner unknown on the page and the bio still to this day. The fans just got to believe whatever they wanted to. That, that is unbiased.
Alsiloute Gaming (talk) 10:44, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
Saying "non-binary or something else" would be inaccurate because is equivalent to "unknown". If they could be one thing, or they could be anything else including things that contradict the first thing, then why even mention the first thing? Additionally, non-binary is a very broad term for people who don't identify their gender as male or female - it doesn't inherently suggest anything more than that. It is equivalent to non-specified, except that it excludes male and female. Whereas saying only non-specified would include male and female in the list of possibilities.
--Mr Pie 5 (talk) 23:10, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
Who decides what the first thing is though? Who decides that the one is somehow more valid than the other?
This is what I mean by this. If the site is to be unbiased, then it should either present both points or none at all.
Who are we to assume that they are something based on what one person says, but not what the other person says?
Maybe unknown is what should be stated then, until further notice.
Just like you said yourself, Saying “non-binary or something else” is the equivalent to unknown and that is hands down what Jay Frechette has told us. Maybe it is inaccurate, but that is what the owners of the franchise has said, and we should respect that and not assume anything more or less. Alsiloute Gaming (talk) 08:54, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
From my point of view, I don't see any significant value in changing it from just "Non-Binary" to "Non-Binary/Not Specified". It is a pointless inclusion even for the sake of being a more faithful answer according to the community manager. That quote itself is a shaky answer to even use as a source because he adds on that bit at the end. Like stated before, it's contradictory. I believe that it is best to just leave it as Non-Binary because it is the one "side" confirmed between two sources, the voice actress and the CM. MrPeachie (talk) 19:42, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
Who are we to assume that they are something based on what one person says, but not what the other person says? No one assumed anything Alsiloute Gaming and MrPeachie is correct. Both sources state that Bloodhound is "Non-Binary." Also, "Non-Binary" and "Non-specified" are the same thing, both don't identity as a specific gender. Sorry, but this topic is like hitting a dead horse and expecting something to happen when sources say differ to what your saying. -- Azgoodaz (talk) 19:55, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot about this thread. I do not consider the term ”non-binary” anything close to “non-specified”. Non specified means that nobody knows or that they keep it hidden. That it is closer to unknown than anything else. Non-binary means that they themself consider them to not be part of any biological gender. One is about identifying, as if they told someone, while the other is as if they didn’t. There is a grand difference. And if you want to consider yourself a dead horse, no big deal on my end. Alsiloute Gaming (talk) 13:28, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Okay. I see the background, I’ve read it 800 times. The reason it refers to Bloodhound as “they” is because, again, if you had read it, is because nobody really knows anything about Bloodhound, so, since nobody knows his gender, and this is written in the perspective of a person in that time, the author refers to Bloodhound using non specific pronouns. Come on. The site isn’t calling Bloodhound what he or she wants to be called, it is just trying to be nonspecific (because it is unknown) Non binary is NOT the same as unknown. Unknown or non specific is unknown. Non binary is the person does not want to have a specific gender. Look it up. It’s not. Do you see what I’m saying? Do you see my point? If not your an idiot. Also, non binary offends people. It’s putting barriers to anyone who comes. And we don’t want people to be offended Azzazin (talk) 16:45, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

If you take a look at the trivia section, there are 3 separate source confirming them non-binary (in your defense though, I just realized we were missing the third one). If people are offended that a character is non-binary, that's not our problem.
Mr Pie 5 (talk) 18:56, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Basically Non binary is not the same as non specific or unknown, yielding your point obsolete. We should keep it unknown and let people use their imaginations Azzazin (talk) 16:48, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Fine. Bloodhound is so stupid as to say is gender is not having one. It’s stupid, but you win. Happy? Azzazin (talk) 00:18, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Hey, new here. I popped in and added it to the trivia since I noticed the sources where missing to try to avoid further confusion. I won't get into the logisitcs of it here but I'm glad you guys were able to settle this. I wonder if its possible to lock it to keep from having to check back in on it since it seems to be a daily issue? Novicerobes 5:45, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

The page is already locked for unregistered users. Metafysika (talk) 06:30, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
The sources used to be in the trivia but got moved to the bio. I modified it to be in both and fixed some formatting. As for locking, the page is already locked to anonymous users, and there are abuse filters in place. The filters however, have not been doing much work lately. The issue isn't quite as big as it used to be; whether that's because people are running out of ways to deny and discredit the sources, got bored and moved on, or finally accepted it, I do not know.
Mr Pie 5 (talk) 21:48, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Eye of the Allfather - Cone[edit source]

Wiki as of now:

> In a 125° cone in front of you ...

Latest patchnotes as of now:

> Increased the angle of the scan to 110 from 90. 15:07, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

This was changed in the Iron Crown patch to 125°. I've added the patch notes to the changes section. Jockshocker (talk) 18:18, 6 October 2019 (UTC)