| abstract
| - __NOWYSIWYG__ __TOC__ I suppose I figure that as of the ending, this topic may come up sooner or later. Even if it would be later, I'm pushing it to sooner. I think that as a wiki we should discuss whether we can consider Korrasami as canon for the time being, [ie: adding this information to their articles and relationship pages, etc]. I am well aware of the wiki's policy on speculation and speculative thinking, so I intend to bring this up in the most conclusive manner I can. I am fully convinced that Korrasami is intended to be canon, or as canon as Bryke physically can under nickelodeon's nose. I believe so first for all of the beliefs here. In addition, the piece played during this scene was "The Avatar's Love," a piece that as far as I can recall has only ever been played during Kataang scenes. On top of all of this, we have hand holding and eye-gazing, which quite simply can't be interpreted as platonic. Girls never stare into each others eyes and hold hands like that. There was no need for them to in that scene besides to solidify a romantic relationship. As stated in the linked post, if the message was friendship they wouldn't be looking into each others' eyes like that. We have Sokka listed in Toph's relationships as a love interest. After carefully reading through it, you can notice that a big portion of the proof comes from the way that Toph blushes at the "I didn't care," upon Sokka's absence. However, one can also recall Korra blushing while complimenting Asami. That can be interpreted as heterosexual either, in fact if I can recall correctly Korra has quite literally only ever blushed in romantic instances. If this is enough to constitute Toph's romantic interest in Sokka, why not the other way around? I can tell that some sort of "if they were supposed to be canon they would have kissed," comment is likely to be a counterargument to the idea of changing our articles. However, one must keep in mind the network they're working for. I can recall (I'd have to dig up the video later) that in an "Adventure Time" panel a person affiliated with the writing for the series confirmed that Bubbline (a lesbian ship) would have been canon, had it not been for the network. They stated that because in some places that air Cartoon Network shows, gay marriage is illegal, they can't air it. This means nickelodeon would likely have similar logic. YET, this doesn't disprove the canon of the ship either. Just because they couldn't kiss doesn't mean the heavily romantic undertones didn't exist. It doesn't mean that wasn't Bryke's intention. Anyways, all I am stating is that we at least consider Korrasami canon for the time being. Due to the heavy amounts of proof, writing, and more, I can safely say I am certain that was how the scene was intended to be read, and that our articles should reflect such. Thank you for your time. 03:11, December 20, 2014 (UTC) I completely support and uphold the above. The Wiki should explicitly note Korra and Asami's status as love interests. Even if not rendered as "canon" as kataang or makorra due to a lack of kiss, the finale frames korrasami in an extremely romantic light, and while one could theoretically interpret this as platonic rather than romantic, one could "just as theoretically" interpret the ending of Avatar: The Last Airbender as platonic. Since Bryke will likely say nothing due to the censorship on the part of Nick, we aren't going to receive "confirmation" one way or the other, but since Korra did not end romantically involved with any of her other love interests and instead received an extremely touching and tender ending with Asami, we can do a bit of interference. 03:22, December 20, 2014 (UTC) The piece played during the final scene was not "The Avatar's Love", it was a different arrangement. Regardless, I'm not going to argue anything. I ship Korra x Asami, I ship Katara x Aang, but what I don't ship is Wiki x Speculation. Interpretation is interpretation. I do not see what the problem is, since we can easily add what occurred in the final episodes to all appropriate pages and report it as it happened. "After they attended Varrick and Zhu Li's wedding, Korra and Asami decided to take a vacation and journeyed to the Spirit World." No controversy, no speculation, just facts. There is no doubt that this will be controversial, and the creators will most definitely address the issue in the upcoming days, or in the final book's commentary at the very least. I don't see a reason to diverge from wiki convention on this matter. We report what happened as it happened with avoidance of personal interpretation. File:Waterbending emblem.png Water Spout 03:36, December 20, 2014 (UTC) Bubbline video in question, just for posterity. Like they say above, we've got Sokka in Toph's section just because of basically one instance in what amounts to a filler episode. This is literally the ending of the show, with this character taking precedent over all her friends, the fate of the Earth Kingdom, her former love interest, and her mentor. Like I keep telling people, if this was Mako instead of Asami, this would have no debate at all. --BobLogical (wall • contribs) 03:54, December 20, 2014 (UTC) There would probably be some debate, but there would be far less of it because Mako and Korra have an established romantic history together. Korra and Asami do not. In any case, I agree with Water Spout on all points. In fact, they're all points I've made in earlier comments. State whatever we can say with absolute certainty happened, and avoid interpretation. - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 03:59, December 20, 2014 (UTC) @Waterspout: Calling very similar sounding sounds different things doesn't make them any different... they sound extremely similar. Here from the episode, here from Avatar. They use different instruments but the song is still eerily similar, no? I still am missing what about at the bare minimum adding Korra and Asami as love interests is any more speculative than saying Toph had a crush on Sokka. She never said it, it seems like the largest proofs are the blush and the joke Toph/Suki cheek kiss. I'd say that's honestly about equivalent to what we have on Korrasami being, well, a blush and Asami comparing Korra to the only person left she loved... and the hand holding... How are these scenarios different? At the bare minimum, they should be considered "love interests" on the relationships page. 04:01, December 20, 2014 (UTC) Firstly, thank you very much for bringing this up FireFerret. I agree with everything that FireFerret has stated. If Sokka is listed on Toph's relationships page as a love interest, then it would be hypocritical of us to not list Asami and Korra as love interests on each others' pages. Toph merely kissed Suki on the cheek mistaking her for Sokka and then blushed once at Sokka. Korra and Asami have had much more than that. Asami constantly going out of her way for Korra during Book 3 was just the building up for their true feelings. Asami took care of Korra when she was wheelchair bound for two weeks and then she tightly grasped Korra's hand while saying the she would be there for her if Korra ever wanted to talk or, anything. Asami was also the ONLY person that Korra wrote to during her recovery at the Southern Water Tribe. As previously stated, Korra blushed when Asami complemented her new hairstyle. There was also something that came full circle. When Korra was headed back home, Asami said that she'd be happy to go with her, but Korra said she'd only be gone a few weeks. During The Last Stand, Korra apologized for being gone for so long to Asami. Lastly, of course, Asami and Korra held hands and stared romantically into each others eyes as they were enveloped in the light from the spirit portal on their way to a vacation between just the two of them. Obviously, they weren't going to kiss as kisses between same-sex couples is not allowed on shows geared towards younger viewers, which is stupid. As stated above, Adventure Time was going for a same-sex relationship but were not allowed. If any of you are familiar with Sailor Moon you might remember that Sailor Uranus and Sailor Neptune, both of whom are females, were in a romantic relationship in the original Japanese version. When Sailor Moon was dubbed in the USA, they changed their relationship to that of cousins. Unfortunately, Nickelodeon wouldn't have allowed a Korrasami kiss because conservative parents would flip the crap out. So, I support moving the relations between Korra and Asami to the Love Interests section on their respective relationship pages. ShadowZaHedge Korrasami is endgameFile: Korra Sprite-01.gifFile: Asami-chao4.gif 04:48, December 20, 2014 (UTC) NEW PIECE OF INFO: To further sway any doubts of speculation, Mike actually just posted a link to an article on his facebook. This article clearly talks about Korra and Asami being gay and the gay undertones in their relationship, he does nothing to deny it or change it, hell, you can read the article and unless you're trying to tell me that he just conveniently skipped over the parts about Korra and Asami being gay then, I'm pretty sure we just got our extra confirmation. 05:19, December 20, 2014 (UTC) As someone who often analyzes music, they sound similar because they have similar tempo and the same dreamy mood. I don't know what you mean by "different instruments" as the instruments which stand out most in both pieces are the strings. Moreover, they share the same composer and the key of D major. But that doesn't mean anything. Korra's main theme is in D minor, everything revolves around D. Imagine you have to fill an end scene with music. It's a happy ending, so you try to compose something calm and dreamy. It doesn't necessarily have to do with the plot itself focusing on a relationship as you assume. The soundtrack begins with strings as an introduction. It's rhythmically and melodically based on Korra's end credits you hear after every episode and then the end credits theme really begins even before the episode ends. That means it's just the end credits theme with an introduction, so you are basically saying that the end credits theme and "The Avatar's Love" carry the same meaning. I'm not against homosexuals, but this has led to an edit war. Several people add the plain phrase "Korrasami is canon" to articles, sometimes so excited that they don't even check the spelling. They just want to establish it as a fact rather than contribute. --Darjeeling- (wall • contribs) 04:37, December 20, 2014 (UTC) Why are we using Sokka's place in Toph's love interest section as proof that Korrasami is irrefutably canon? I have never said that the two were romantically involved and do not particularly agree with that addition; it was not my edit and I would advocate to have it removed, but it has not been a concern of mine since I don't typically visit relationship pages. That is hardly justification. And using any other franchises as proof is irrelevant; we base our canon based on our canon, not any others. As I said, convention should be upheld and all information should be reported based on explicit canon, unless statements by the cast or the creators dictate otherwise. The article Mike shared is certainly a small indication that a romantic relationship between the two was the intended outcome, but I would hold off for a couple of days to see if anything else surfaces (i.e. another lengthy post from Bryan), and to at least gather enough sources to back up moving sections and adding information that people who disagree with the interpretation will inevitably edit out. File:Waterbending emblem.png Water Spout 05:47, December 20, 2014 (UTC) We're using it because it's been on this wiki for quite a while and has next to no basis in canon? If you don't agree, then you can edit it out. You talk about consistency, but this is a clear instance of not being consistent. If speculation with the slightest hint of relevance in canon is enough to warrant this for Toph, why is enough subtext to fill a book and deliberate parallels to the original series' ending not enough to do the same for Korra and Asami? People mention Adventure Time and Sailor Moon not as some kind of proof, but as an example why this would never be confirmed directly in the actual show itself, forcing them to be less obvious. And I'd say a creator deliberately posting an article talking about the queer implications of the ending is a pretty huge amount of proof. --BobLogical (wall • contribs) 06:13, December 20, 2014 (UTC) On one hand, let's face it, the finale is as close to a confirmation of a heavily foreshadowed development as we'd be able to get on a Nickelodeon show. As BobLogical noted, it was shot to parallel ATLA's final scene with Aang and Katara, and then there's Mike's repost. On the other hand, since it's never definitely confirmed with the L-word (or the other L-word, but it's even less likely), I can understand the reluctance to act on information that's implied but not outright stated. A wiki, after all, serves to document, not to judge. Still, I feel like completely ignoring this development would be a disservice to the show and author intent. Maybe label them as "possible love interests"? - Sikon (wall • contribs) 07:39, December 20, 2014 (UTC) It would be a far greater disservice to them to act on unconfirmed information. On the chance that that's not what they intended with the scene, we've added false information to the wiki. It's not 'completely ignoring' the development, it's simply holding off on making assumptions until they confirm or deny it's the case. Is it really that hard to be patient for them to speak up about it for probably at most a week? - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 08:01, December 20, 2014 (UTC) @Sikon The idea isn't a bad one, but calling something "Possible Love Interest" sounds extremely speculative, which is exactly what we want to avoid. The entire term possible implies lots of speculation, and if we wanted a truly in-between stance we would have to word something as "maybe" or "possibly" which is not the desired effect at all. It is more respectful to simply acknowledge the work of the creators. If they do nothing to debunk a claim that they continue to perpetuate via sharing articles, then it can be assumed that's the message they wish to spread. @Lavisdragoon What sort of confirmation do you think we will receive? If they couldn't put in a kiss they aren't going to be able to flat up state 'oh yeah that was gay'. You could argue that maybe since they're done with nick now, but then why would they schedule an interview to talk about the show if they have no more need of publicity? I don't know people seem to expect an immediate statement from the creators about this. The facebook post from Mike clearly says "gay" in the URL, he couldn't have unknowingly spread that. He knew they were talking about his characters being gay, and he didn't deny it. How "officially" confirmed do we need things? We decided that Amon was dead without official confirmation simply because it wasn't debunked and it just seemed flat out unrealistic for him to be alive. Here, we have the own creators of the show spreading that the show is gay for their audience to read. That's proof. We aren't misinterpreting what they have literally given to us. 08:12, December 20, 2014 (UTC) @Lavisdragoon: As of now, the evidence is highly in favor of it being intentional. Out of all the many articles written about the series finale, Mike chose to repost that one, without any comment. I'm not saying we have to mark them as definite love interests, just possible ones. (I'd say "very likely", but I'm not in charge here. Though FireFerret brings up a good point on why we can go beyond that.) On the slim chance they say it wasn't their intention - it's a wiki. It can always be edited. - Sikon (wall • contribs) 08:15, December 20, 2014 (UTC) It's extremely unlikely for them to not comment on it within the next few days, so I think that it's just being unnecessarily hasty to go ahead and state it as fact. As I said before, it's not hard to cool down and be patient for a few days. The issue is that people are very anxious to confirm its canonicity, and we need a measure to take for the time span during that wait. I ran into an extremely similar situation on the Borderlands wiki not three months ago, and my stance on these situations hasn't changed since. If they're not confirmed to be romantically involved, don't assume them to be. I understand that policies differ greatly from wiki to wiki, but if we just keep a hawklike watch on new information and add confirmed information as we receive it, there won't be any issue. - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 08:26, December 20, 2014 (UTC) What makes you think they'll talk about it later if they aren't talking about it now? - Sikon (wall • contribs) 08:32, December 20, 2014 (UTC) I'll counter that by asking, what makes you think they're going to comment on every development immediately? It's been a day and a bloody half. - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 08:49, December 20, 2014 (UTC) File:Neutral.png Neutral — Let's just wait until Bryke either say something on their social media sites or in interviews directly not just sharing reviews without saying anything about it . KevinTriforce Talk 11:06, December 20, 2014 (UTC) I personally think that we should not add anything to the articles yet. Though it may not really be my place to speak (I'm a very new member, despite having watched and loved this wiki for years) I think Bryke deliberately left it open to interpretation. Besides that, it was ultimately the biggest chunk of fanservice they have ever given us. The fans have been raving about it since season three, and they've been teasing it since then. They might simply just be messing with us. Let's face it, if they were going to give us Korra and Asami as a couple they would give us more build up. It was very subtle and Avatar relationships are anything but subtle. They just don't do subtle couples. About the links to Aang and Katara in the Avatar finale. They were, essentially, pressured into doing it by the fans. It was such a last-minute thing that the rest of the Korra team did not know about them turning to face each other, it was originally just going to be them stepping hand-in-hand into the portal. About the original 'holding hands' part. Sure, girls can hold hands with their friends. I've seen my friends do it on occasion, and most of the time we link arms or put them around each other's shoulders, which is, if anything, a closer action (and I can tell you here and know I am not gay). I mean, sure, if Asami was a guy and that context there would be no doubting that she and Korra would be together, but guys don't interact so physically with girls they aren't in a relationship with, when girls do. So essentially, it was ambiguous, and mostly taken to be romantic because our brains are so that way inclined when it comes to Korra and Asami together. It was also fanservice, and intended to be interpreted. I doubt that Bryke would have considered such a thing otherwise. So, anyway, that's my opinion. (If it's not meant to be here read it before you delete it, at least.) EosOfTheDawn (wall • contribs) 11:58, December 20, 2014 (UTC) Use four tildes in a row to add your signature, Eos. - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 12:21, December 20, 2014 (UTC) Like this? ~~~~ hang on,thank you classic editor! You work with my iPad!--EosOfTheDawn (wall • contribs) 12:52, December 20, 2014 (UTC) Just as a general point to start with; any user, new or old, admin or otherwise, can give their opinion on this. Everyone's point of view has the same weight in discussion such as these. I wouldn't want anyone to refrain from giving their view because they believed otherwise. I think with this we need to separate the inferences and interpretations from the objective facts. It is no secret that Korrasami is a popular ship and the creators have acknowledged that in interviews. It is clear that in Books Three and Four, Korra and Asami grew closer together, and its entirely possible that this was done in reference to the popularity of said ship. In the last scene, they held hands and looked at one another; this is an objective fact. But to say that this therefore confirms they are in a romantic relation ship, I'm sorry but that is an entirely subjective interpretation. Two people holding hands and looking at each another does not mean they have to be romantically linked. It is not for us as a wiki to infer what this means; our job is to report objectively on the facts, not the theories. A lot of the reasoning that has been given in support of listing them as romantically linked has been that the relationship has not been confirmed but has been heavily foreshadowed and suggested, and that it is implied. Well, again, this is not objective. We do not make statements and conclusions on the wiki based on inferences and suggestions. Whether something is strongly inferred or otherwise, it is not confirmed, and thus is speculation. FireFerret linked in the original proposal a tumblr page where someone had analysed the finals scenes and come to the conclusion that this is what was intended. But that is one person's interpretation. They are looking at these scenes and coming to a conclusion based on their interpretation of what the looks mean. Interpretation =/= fact. I want to end this response by saying that I would love to see the writers place Korra and Asami into a romantic relationship. My arguing against listing them as such is not because I disagree with the ship, but because this wiki is based on facts, not inferences or hopes. As much as I would wish otherwise, there is no current objective basis on which to make a claim that Korrasami is canon. 13:01, December 20, 2014 (UTC) Yes, I agree. We should act on the facts because this is what the wiki is about. It is undeniable that Bryke put that scene there to at least acknowledge Korrasami, but also that there is no place in solid fact that it has been confirmed.--EosOfTheDawn (wall • contribs) 13:33, December 20, 2014 (UTC) I'm going to keep this (relatively) short, since HammerOfThor already stated everything I would have said, save for his last two sentences. When dealing with relationships, a lot of what we list on the relationship pages is based on interpretation, that's just how it is. I am completely on board with dismissing the initial links to that Tumblr post since that's just a person's interpretation. However, the fact that the show ended on a "is it or isn't it Korrasami"-note and that DiMartino then linked an article that clearly talks about the characters being gay is a statement from the creators without actually making the statement -and thus avoids breaching any contract he may have entered in that regard to not have a gay couple on a nick show- that Korrasami was indeed endgame. DiMartino spreading word of that article without saying that it's completely wrong -because what creator would not want to debunk an article about one of his characters if the analysis given was completely wrong- tips the scale to "Korrasami is endgame" and thus warrants Korra and Asami to be listed as each other's love interests. As a random note: Sokka is listed as Toph's love interest also based on this War Room consensus I believe. 15:06, December 20, 2014 (UTC) The problem is it's not quite so clear-cut because the article he links to is not about the Korrasami ending, but the entire finale, so it could have simply been a nod to the reaction to and notice that has been taken to the finale itsself, and him posting the image of them looking at each other was a testament to the finale part, seeing as it is the end (this may not be the case but it can be interpreted as such).--EosOfTheDawn (wall • contribs) 15:19, December 20, 2014 (UTC) @LL - I do not see that Mike's facebook post provides official confirmation of it being canon. Whose to say he didn't just find it to be an interesting analysis of the last episode that he wanted to share. Too much is being inferred as to what his intentions or motivations are to make such an objective claim. 15:59, December 20, 2014 (UTC) "because what creator would not want to debunk an article about one of his characters if the analysis given was completely wrong" 16:02, December 20, 2014 (UTC) Completely wrong? Since when does having one section of an article go off-base make the entire article wrong? - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 16:13, December 20, 2014 (UTC) It's the analysis of the Korrasami relationship. If it was not correct, a creator would have said something about it. When you create a character, that character basically becomes your baby. They're a part of you. So when someone then makes false statements about them, you correct them, because they're hurting your baby. That's basic creator instinct. So if the statement of Korra and Asami having a lesbian interest in each other would have been false, a note would've accompanied the link, because "because what creator would not want to debunk an article about one of his characters if the analysis given was completely wrong". 16:19, December 20, 2014 (UTC) What Lady Lostris has said is true. I cannot find the link now, but does anyone remember when someone said that Kya was a light-skinned character and that Bryke doesn't represent racial diversity? The creators immediately responded by posting the color selection of the characters showing that Kya has the same skin tone as her mother and that Korra is a dark-skinned character. Therefore, I believe that if Korrasami wasn't meant to be romantic then the creators would not hesitate to debunk it, rather than sharing an article that states the two are in a relationship. ShadowZaHedge Korrasami is endgameFile: Korra Sprite-01.gifFile: Asami-chao4.gif 16:31, December 20, 2014 (UTC) No, the point is that Bryke want people to come to a Korrasami conclusion. If they didn't want that, they wouldn't have edited the original plan to have the camera scroll up as they entered the portal with their backs to us. Bryke are teasing the shippers. It's pretty obvious that they want to make known that they pay attention to the fanbase, and I suppose this is essentially massive fanservice. I suppose they must have spent these last two days privately laughing their heads off.--EosOfTheDawn (wall • contribs) 16:41, December 20, 2014 (UTC) @ EosOfTheDawn, do you have any links to this "original plan"? Also, if you agree that Bryke wants Korrasami to be canon, then I don't see why you're against moving their relations with one another to the "Love Interests" section of their respective relationship pages. ShadowZaHedge Korrasami is endgameFile: Korra Sprite-01.gifFile: Asami-chao4.gif 16:51, December 20, 2014 (UTC) [edit conflict] @LL - and again, that is an assumption and not a fact. You cannot take his silence on the matter as official confirmation. If the creators' intentionally made it ambiguous and want people to interpret it as they wish, then of course they wouldn't say anything. We shouldn't be kidding ourselves that we know exactly what their intentions are. 16:58, December 20, 2014 (UTC)~ Per ShadowZaHedge comment about the color correction. 17:01, December 20, 2014 (UTC) Which I made note of in that they may intentionally have made it ambiguous to allow people to interpret it as they want. If they did, of course they would not comment. 17:06, December 20, 2014 (UTC) Which in turn brings us back to my first post. 17:10, December 20, 2014 (UTC) Because one interpretation beats another? That is clearly not objective. 17:11, December 20, 2014 (UTC) It's not an interpretation based on what was previously said. However, as clear from the short replies and referrals to previous posts, I just don't care to constantly repeat what has already been said to debunk the same statements. 17:14, December 20, 2014 (UTC) Here's a screenshot on someone's Tumblr of one of the storyboard artist's reactions to the finale. Apparently they knew nothing of the full ending, so either Bryke hid it from the team or changed it at the last minute. You misunderstand me. I'm not saying that Bryke want Korrasami, I'm saying that they added the ending as fanservice, and thus to be interpreted by the fans whichever way they want. The majority have chosen to interpret it as Korra and Asami being in love. The key word here being 'interpret' meaning that there are very little by the way of facts telling us that it's canon, bit that is more than made up for in most people's heads by fan theories, shipping, romantic interpretations of platonic intercations and shipping-inclined viewpoints. --EosOfTheDawn (wall • contribs) 17:24, December 20, 2014 (UTC) You do realize that Jet was confirmed to be dead, that the creators afterward stated that it was clear he died. So if "this is about as close to confirmation of Korrasami as Jet's death was" then that post is more an argument pro listing them as love interests than it is against it. Also, please note that no one is calling Korrasami is confirmed solely based on the events in the finale. That shot was indeed vague and up for interpretation. It's the statement of DiMartino afterward that's most notable in that regard -and now, I guess, also the post that you linked. 17:30, December 20, 2014 (UTC) Sure, they confirmed afterwards, but, as Sokka highlighted, at the time it was 'really unclear'. This means that the ending is 'really unclear', and that correlates with the tone of the post itself, which is denial. Which statement? I haven't seen myself any statement that confirms Korrasami, but I could have easily missed something.--EosOfTheDawn (wall • contribs) 17:46, December 20, 2014 (UTC) One last link to add, here is Mike reblogging a post from Avatar-Mom that is solely about what the finale means to her as a mom with a gay son. He clearly read the entire piece (I doubt he would skim it and reblog it,) and thanks her for her time in the fandom, again, without disputing any claims of romance. Like Lostris said, if these weren't true, why would he post it? He clearly reads thinks, has the power to debunk them, why wouldn't he? You can say "yes it was fanservice" (to which I would disagree but that's not relevant to the issue at hand) but that doesn't make it any less canon. If you wanted an ambiguous ending, why post anything about the romance aspect of the finale? Why have them look into each others eyes when them holding hands at the portal makes way more sense and is way less ambiguous? What's the point? Simple— we were supposed to draw a Korrasami conclusion. 18:20, December 20, 2014 (UTC) You have a point, but he doesn't mention the romance side of her post. He says that it was touching and he thanks her for sharing her story and her devotion to Avatar for all these years. He neither confirms nor denies the statements she makes and again leads us back to square one. Sure, we can speculate about how the lack of denial means it is true, but again, that is speculation. And we're trying to avoid speculation here. --EosOfTheDawn (wall • contribs) 18:30, December 20, 2014 (UTC) I'm not speculating on anything. If it wasn't true, he would deny it. It's a fact. He literally reblogs a post about this. He could have made his own post "thanks to avatar-mom for doing all this stuff for us over the years" or reblogged literally any other post from her. But no, he reblogs something specifically about the korrasami interactions. It's not speculation at this point. If you want to argue that it's ambiguous, like I said, why reblog any posts? There is a certain level of things one inevitably will have to make an educated jugement about in the absence of proof. We've done this with Amon's death, Tokka, and I'm sure if I tried hard enough I could dig up some other ones. We don't know if there's an official confirmation coming, if so it could take weeks, months etc. We have enough proof to make a fair claim that it was supposed to be romantic. An "official" confirmation can't be used for everything when we have a ton of proof already supporting a particular claim. We have the crew member saying its canon, Mike blatanty posting not just one but two different stories talking about it being gay. We have zero proof in the opposite direction other than interpretation, which IIRC, is what we wanted to avoid. All evidence points in this direction, its safest to assume it was intended to be romantic. 18:40, December 20, 2014 (UTC) Basically our entire timeline is made of speculation and guessing based on the few ages we have for certain. In fact, our entire dating system (BG and AG) is fan-created. If we're really going to talk about how we don't want "speculation" in our articles, then scrap that entire monstrosity of best guesses. --BobLogical (wall • contribs) 19:39, December 20, 2014 (UTC) Support. When I first came across this section I was very sceptical about listing Korrasami as canon due to missing sources, even though I support the ship. After reading the discussion and the articles Bryke reblogged, however, I agree that Korrasami is indeed canon. Just like Lady Lostris said, it is extremely unlikely that Nick will ever allow Bryke to offically call Korra and Asami's relationship gay, so I find the evidences presented sufficient to confirm it as canon. DyingFlameTsui (wall • contribs) 23:41, December 20, 2014 (UTC) Given what we've seen now, it seems there's sufficient evidence to state it as canon. Sure, it wasn't quite as clear as the Kataang ending in the show, but one could also say that Mako breaking up with Asami in season 1 was open to interpretation. That was even poked fun at in Remembrances when they revisited the line where he said he was sorry how things became messed up between them, but wanted her to know he cared about her. "Yes, that was a breakup." No, we haven't gotten a Word of God confirmation from Bryke saying "yes, that's Korra and Asami as a homosexual couple," but at this point we have everything but that, with the scene in the show plus further hints from Bryke. Whether or not it was "fanservice" (personally I don't think it was, I think they did it on their own terms) is not really the question here. There's no guarantee that we'll get more direct confirmation in a few days, or a week. It could be months, if ever at all. So we should not wait around for it, it's best to take a stand on this with what we know now. -- 01:53, December 21, 2014 (UTC) Confirmed canon by Bryke's own word. Also, he announced new Korra comics. - Gilgamesh (wall • contribs) 02:45, December 21, 2014 (UTC) Wait, perhaps it should be confirmed that that post is genuine first. How easily does Bryan Konietzko misspell names like "Asami"? - Gilgamesh (wall • contribs) 02:49, December 21, 2014 (UTC) (EC) I indeed question the legitimacy of that link as it seems to be just to a random comment on some website with no identify verification. That being said however, I can't imagine that the two holding hands and gazing deeply at each other is meant to imply anything but romance. It'd seem strange to leave that labeled as just friendship, so, I support the notion per the reasoning others have given in this discussion. 02:51, December 21, 2014 (UTC) Agreed, it was tasteful but not all that subtle. I'm surprised they actually did that. But that said, it seems very important to some other users here to have concrete confirmation. - Gilgamesh (wall • contribs) 02:56, December 21, 2014 (UTC) I think most users have the wrong idea about Korra and Asami's current relationship. In my opinion, it's not heterosexual or anything, it's just mutual trust that turned into an everlasting friendship. I compare their current relationship to that of Saki Miyanaga and Nodoka Haramura from the manga/anime "Saki". SkyGuy-Let's chat! 03:28, December 21, 2014 (UTC) I just personally love how Farret keeps saying he/she is not speculating, when they clearly are. I'm simply in full agreement with Eos and Thor, it's simply left too open to interpretation to add it. † CR90 (talk) 03:33, December 21, 2014 (UTC) Regardless of any of our personal feelings about the pairing nor how well it may or may not have developed, I would deem Korrasami canon just given Bryke's past handling of false rumors. They're generally quick and clear-cut to shoot down any inaccurate popular rumors, sometimes going as far as to write personal blogs dissecting all the wrongs about it; their handling of Zutara opinions is a clear enough example. If it were all false, I don't see any reason why they would not only sit quietly while a major, if not majority, of their fanbase believes religiously in Korrasami, but even go as far as to share an article of a major magazine company that very loudly acknowledges this pair - introducing the section with "but the /real/ thing came in the final moments [...]" and with no shortage of praise. The chances of this article-share being an unrelated and misleading 'accident' of sorts is virtually the same as the likelihood that Bryke would ever share an article with a cover of Katara and Zuko hugging with a huge conclusive paragraph talking about the obvious signs that the two had clearly been falling in love all along. This is as objective an argument as I can make at this point, and I do hope that Bryke can give us a more direct confirmation before long, but imo the factors above all do make it a pretty big stretch to still try calling Korrasami non-canonical. --MinnichiFile:Dai Li Sprite.gif 04:15, December 21, 2014 (UTC) ... So let me get this straight. We DON'T need concrete evidence to add information based on interpretation of a scene to the wiki, but we DO need concrete evidence to withhold from adding it? I absolutely can't see how that makes the slightest bit of sense. Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 04:39, December 21, 2014 (UTC) @Christianrocker90. I'm not speculating. The dictionary defines speculation as "the forming of a theory or conjecture without firm evidence." What about a co-creator reblogging a post talking about how much the Korrasami scene meant to them as a mom with a gay child is "not firm evidence". What part of Mike posting a link to an article that has the word "gay" in it is "not firm evidence". What part of a storyboard artist saying that's as canon as it gets is "not firm evidence." What part of the holding of two hands, and staring into each others eyes as a direct parallel to the balcony scene can be interpreted as platonic? How is any of this "not firm evidence". These are all, arguably, very firm evidence. As opposed to the interpretation of a platonic ending? Which has been backed up by... nobody exactly? As far as I can tell? Thinking the creators left it "open to interpretation" is fine and whatever, but our articles would still reflect a platonic ending if we don't list them as love interests which is backed up by zero sources. As opposed to the numerous people who have stated otherwise. Also, I'm not a he or a she, using "they" for me is by far preferred. @Whom it may concern. Why are all of you so insistent on discounting literally all of the evidence that points in the direction of it being canon? We have again, literally three accounts from the crew (two mike posts + one storyboard artist) talking about Korrasami being canon, when historically the crew is FAST to debunk claims. They never talked about Zutara aside from being asked about it. Here, they're broadly sharing information on Korrasami stuff. I'm not speculating. I am 100% sure that this is canon, I have evidence to back it up. What evidence do you have of it not being canon? Stating that they are merely friends is just as much of a statement as saying they are more than friends. If freaking Sokka can count as a love interest for Ty Lee because of literally two lines where she says "it looks like we're dancing" and "he's kind of cute" why is this any different? Why is handholding, complimenting, blushing, any different from Sokka being on Ty Lee and Toph's love interests, because of blushing and "cute" lines. There is absolutely zero difference. This is not speculation any more than Toph and Ty Lee having crushes on Sokka was. Absolutely not. This is even more because we have a storyboard artist saying they interpret it as canon, and the co-creator reblogging posts explicitly addressing the impact of a gay couple on a family. There is no lack of evidence. There is nothing in which to speculate. We have multiple accounts backing up the claims of Korrasami. We have zero anything from the creators saying the hand holding was "friendly" or "platonic". 05:53, December 21, 2014 (UTC) I'll state once more that I don't condone the Sokka/Toph love interest bit. In fact, most people debating this had NOTHING to do with that decision. And why is it so complicated to understand that for something to be canon, it has to be stated in the original source material, or by the creators directly that this is the way it is? I don't understand why you're so adamant about going right ahead and adding it. Platonic relationships are always officially assumed until a romantic relationship has been inarguably entered. And, quite clearly, we're arguing about it. - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 06:25, December 21, 2014 (UTC) It doesn't matter whether you, or anyone else currently arguing about this, supports Sokka/Toph. Ferret pointed out that there exists a precedent on the Wiki to support implied love interests as canonical love interests. Toph never stated: "I love Sokka." But the small aspects of her relationship with him, such as the constant blushes and deep trust, implied a romantic interest, and the Wiki agreed, so the Wiki added it to Toph's article. It's a matter of precedent; it's what the Wiki has done previously and therefore paves the road for what the Wiki will do in the future. If the precedent needs to be broken, then the new rule retroactively applies to the older material. Bryke could not explicitly state it in canon due to network censorship, just as Bryke could not explicitly state that Jet had died until afterwards. It was entirely clear from the scene, however, that Jet had died, but the Wiki accepted it. Similarly, Legend of Korra did not explicitly say that Amon and Tarrlok had died, yet the Wiki accepted it. Had Mako and Korra been in that exact same situation, we would not be having this debate. Please learn how to make interferences in fiction, which the Wiki has been doing its the original A:TLA. 07:13, December 21, 2014 (UTC) Just to nip this in the bud, you're mistaken if you think this is just because it's two girls being portrayed. The reason the debate wouldn't be held if Mako were in Asami's place at the end is because Mako and Korra have romantic precedent in the series. Their relationship has been openly expressed, where Asami and Korra is left entirely to speculation. If Mako and Korra had never expressed romantic attraction towards one another, odds are we would be in this same position. And I think you miss the point of my comment on the Sokka and Toph articles. What I was saying was that my stance does not differ by bringing up the fact that Sokka and Toph are listed as love interests on the wiki, and I in fact disagree with it. As such, continuously stating it as though blaming the arguing parties for the past decision is not helpful. - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 07:29, December 21, 2014 (UTC) First of all, since you guys seem to be begging for more proof, this is all of Mike's liked posts on tumblr. The second down is clearly Korrasami fan art, lol. There's absoltuely nothing platonic about that. Second, you actually keep missing our points. I know you say you think it should be removed, but what we're arguing is that it doesn't matter that you don't like Tokka or disagree with it being put up. We're saying that as a community the wiki decided on this being what we consider a love interest, and that as a result by that definition Korrasami is too. Your personal opinion on Tokka or Ty Lokka is irrelevant to whether or not they have matching definitions. If you don't like Tokka and Ty Lokka or disagree with that definition of shipping, create a forum to change the definition. Until then, they do have equal definitions. 07:47, December 21, 2014 (UTC) I haven't even read your entire paragraph and I'm gonna have to stop you. Don't put words in my mouth by saying I don't like Tokka. Tokka is literally my favorite TLA pairing. I never ONCE said that I disliked it, and I'm not arguing any kind of point about them other than I think they shouldn't be used as evidence that we should take the same action in a different instance. - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 07:57, December 21, 2014 (UTC) Again, your opinion on Tokka is literally not relevant. I said "don't like Tokka or disagree with it being put up" please read my writing before responding emotionally. My point still stands. This has nothing to do with "evidence" but about the standard the wiki has used to judge relationships in the past. If you don't like it? Change it. Your opinion on the matter is irrelevant, it's about the standard the wiki uses to define relationships. 08:16, December 21, 2014 (UTC) Asami constantly going out of her way for Korra during Book 3 was just the building up for their true feelings. Asami took care of Korra when she was wheelchair bound for two weeks and then she tightly grasped Korra's hand while saying the she would be there for her if Korra ever wanted to talk or, anything. Asami was also the ONLY person that Korra wrote to during her recovery at the Southern Water Tribe. . When Korra was headed back home, Asami said that she'd be happy to go with her, but Korra said she'd only be gone a few weeks. During The Last Stand, Korra apologized for being gone for so long to Asami. Lastly, of course, Asami and Korra held hands and stared romantically into each others eyes as they were enveloped in the light from the spirit portal on their way to a vacation between just the two of them. Obviously, they weren't going to kiss as kisses between same-sex couples is not allowed on shows geared towards younger viewers, which is stupid. As stated above, Adventure Time was going for a same-sex relationship but were not allowed. Okay first of all. Asami wheeled around korra when she was in a wheel chair because korra is asami's only true friend. telling someone you will be there for than doesn't make them a love interest. It makes them loyal trustworthy friends. Which is one of the reasons korra only wrote to asami When she was away. The another reason was that she was scared and she didnt what to tell mako that she's weak and she doesnt know if she will ever return to normal. Korra is a girl who is big and tough. Not weak. She didnt what people to know what she really felt. Also if my friend was almost kid. My best friend, i would so try to be with him or her as much as i can so Asami wanting to go with korra doesntt prove anything. Another thing is that holding hands means nothing. Girls hold hands all the time. Tenzien and korra hand hands at the end too. In fact all the stuff you guys are saying about korra and Asami. You can say for korra and Tenzien. Lastly going on vacation with your only girl best friend doesn't mean love interest. It mean girl to girl bonding. Korra has had a horrible 3 years and she came back to war. After all this i too would need some r and r with my best friend. does this mean imm gay no. Oh one more thing. Nickelodeon has no plociess about having charaters being gay. So you saying that they dontt allow that stuff is not a fact at all. Itss a lie. Think of this as you will. All of which i stated was facts and yes they may have a love interest but there are no facts to support this. They are just very good friends. korra has no other girl friends and so does Asami. All they have is eachotherr to talk about girly things and do girly thing With. P.S. if anything bolin should be listed as a love interest since bolin dated korra and had a huge crush on her. -Redgoatdog (wall • contribs) 08:22, December 21, 2014 (UTC) I agree, my opinion on it is irrelevant, so stop bringing it up. We're not talking about who ships what, we're talking about whether to change their relationship status or not. And the point is, I'm opposed to taking action without solid evidence that they're canonically in a relationship, and so far I see no convincing direct evidence that their romantic relationship is irrefutably canon. I see a large number of indirect possible hints and nothing more. I strongly disagree with taking action based on speculation, and just because Nick may not want them to be displayed as being in a homosexual relationship doesn't mean that we should lower our standard of what counts as proof that they are meant to be in one. No amount of desire for the scene to be a shining, canon LGBT symbol is going to make it one. The beauty of storytelling is that you can leave things open to whatever people want to think, and stating them as love interests pushes the perception of them being in a romantic relationship. - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 08:27, December 21, 2014 (UTC) Neither Ferret nor I ever mentioned your opinion. You, and your opinions, are not relevant here. The reason we brought up Tokka is to demonstrate that we are not "lower[ing] our standard of what counts as proof that they are meant to be in one". If you disagree with Tokka, then make a separate forum to discuss Tokka being removed from the pages, but Tokka and Korrasami have had the same in-canon level of relationship, and moreover Korrasami's had been reciprocated (unlike Tokka's one-sidedness). And as it stands, Tokka is accepted by the Wiki. Therefore, given that precedent on the Wiki, Korrasami should also be accepted. We are not lowering but going by the same standards. Even though we have given you so much evidence, you "see no convincing direct evidence". Please examine your internalised homophobia, because it's very obvious to me that that is causing you to quite literally discount evidence and be unable to make inferences whatsoever. Take a good long look at yourself before you continue to argue. I don't mean this as an ad hominem argument; I'm genuinely curious as to how you could look at what has been presented so far, especially in the light that studio censorship kept them from making it "explicit", and claim that there is not enough evidence. Quite literally, we had one of the executive producers - a member of Bryke - share a link that explicitly, even in the url, referred to the Asami and Korra scene as gay. There are so many articles about the finale that make no reference to their queerness, yet he specifically shared that one, and did not comment, "Oh, but they're not gay." While they might not be able to publicly say that Korra and Asami are gay/bi/etc. because of their affiliation with Nick, this is explicit proof that they have no issue whatsoever with the relationship being read as romantic. And please, if you're not queer, do not refer to it as a "homosexual relationship". That is quite offensive. 09:05, December 21, 2014 (UTC) I'm pansexual, thanks. It'd be who of you to think before you explode on someone for criticizing someone as a homophobe for criticizing a relationship between two characters of the same sex, and I'd appreciate it if you'd stop assuming things about me when you know literally nothing about me. I'm simply pointing out that we need to check ourselves for bias and treat them as we would treat any 'straight' couple. -Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 09:13, December 21, 2014 (UTC) I apologise for my last comment, in that case, but I never called you a homophobe. I asked you to examine your internalised homophobia. And reply to the rest of my argument instead of picking out a single detail. 09:18, December 21, 2014 (UTC) I say let us until Bryke possibly gives confirmation in the next few days. I just don't like everyonr bickering like children about it. KevinTriforce Talk 09:31, December 21, 2014 (UTC) I'm still kind of miffed about that comment, but I'll move it along. I need to clarify something. My problem is not necessarily with the Korrasami issue. My problem is with the suggestion that we should continue to edit on perception, rather than editing with facts as we receive them. I also feel like because they're a same-sex couple, people who never even knew Korrasami was a thing want to advocate for their canonicity. I simply think that we should treat each case equally, and separate our facts and hopes. And I'll maintain this position until someone actually bothers to reflect on whether their desire to see Korrasami as canon is affecting their judgment. In any case, I still believe that reading so much into their actions is taking it out of context. We can debate about what they think and feel all we want, but the fact of the matter is we don't know. They've acknowledged Korrasami on multiple occasions, so what on Earth is wrong with them not crushing it? By their choice to leave the ending open like that, you're free to believe whatever you want to believe. If they did speak out against it, they'd be usurping that. But once again, this is all my own interpretation of events. I really agree with Kevin; we should wait until Bryke comments about it before we go and change things. I fail to see why it's too much to ask to be patient.- Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 09:44, December 21, 2014 (UTC) I agree with you completely. I think they left it open ended intentionally. KevinTriforce Talk 09:52, December 21, 2014 (UTC) For those who are desiring to wait, this forum consensus will not take affect three days after the last comment is made, so we are all forced to wait anyway, whether someone may like that or not. I just want to make a final minor comment in regards to Lavisdragoon's "And I'll maintain this position until someone actually bothers to reflect on whether their desire to see Korrasami as canon is affecting their judgment." You do realize that nearly everyone in favor of acknowledging them as canonical have done so based on the silent acknowledgment and support given by DiMartino after the finale and not based on the scene itself, right? People here are not pushing their Korrasami view into the show where it may or may not belong, they're just not turning a blind eye to the circumstances it occurred in. 11:34, December 21, 2014 (UTC) I purposely refrained from mentioning who I was talking to with that comment. I wasn't referring to you or even to most of those in favor, but rather someone specific. - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 11:39, December 21, 2014 (UTC) Just adding something here. The post I linked from the storyboard artist should not be used as evidence for it being canon. Sure, you can twist the meaning of the Jet comparison but it is pretty obvious that the artist themselves disagree with korrasami. You can see it in the mood of the post and I don't think the comparison should be manipulated to mean that it is confirmed. Again about the 'confirmation post from Bryke' thing. The one where they spell Asami as Assami. I've seen that in person and if I wanted I could have posted a reply calling myself 'Bryke' too. It should be disregarded as there is no proof that it is legitimate. In my personal belief the ending was Bryke's way of messing with the Korrasami shippers, but I suppose I have little proof besides the way they have handled fan ships in the past. They've teased them. Such as with the Zutara ship in instances like June calling them boyfriend and girlfriend, and the Ember Island Players. Also I believe that the ending was purely fanservice, but these are just my veiwpoint on an ending which they intended to make open, thus can be disregarded. I think in essence our problem is the open-endedness of the finale. There is no real way of coming to a conclusion about it because it was intended to be open to interpretation. Perhaps we should put that as an alternative to and solid conclusion as to their relationship status? It's evident that our discussion isn't going to get us anywhere in that respect.--EosOfTheDawn (wall • contribs) 11:47, December 21, 2014 (UTC) "I don't think the comparison should be manipulated to mean that it is confirmed." Nothing is twisted or manipulated. The facts are the storyboard artist compared the canonity of Korrasami to Jet's death and Jet is canonically dead. Nothing more, nothing less. "Again about the 'confirmation post from Bryke' thing. [...] It should be disregarded as there is no proof that it is legitimate." Everyone is disregarding it, since it's just laughably obviously fake :-) "There is no real way of coming to a conclusion about it because it was intended to be open to interpretation." I'm just going to copy/paste my previous response to a similar statement from earlier: "You do realize that nearly everyone in favor of acknowledging them as canonical have done so based on the silent acknowledgment and support given by DiMartino after the finale and not based on the scene itself, right? People here are not pushing their Korrasami view into the show where it may or may not belong, they're just not turning a blind eye to the circumstances it occurred in." 11:55, December 21, 2014 (UTC) And you do realize that at this point in the debate we're basically just repeating the same argument back and forth? We're getting absolutely nowhere. The fact of the matter is that those opposed don't see their silent acknowledgement and support as concrete evidence, and those for do. At this point, this entire discussion is just changing the angle slightly and saying, "Do you see it now?" "No, I don't." "How about this angle?" - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 12:07, December 21, 2014 (UTC) Totally aware, which is why I restricted myself to just correcting some factual errors of a statement made and then did away with it by just copy/pasting a former answer. At this point, unless there is a direct declaration from the creators confirming or debunking Korrasami, it's a majority rule on this forum consensus. 12:09, December 21, 2014 (UTC) Okay, you win! I was just giving my opinion, and I'm okay with what the Wiki says, because it's not going to change how I think about the matter. :) --EosOfTheDawn (wall • contribs) 13:20, December 21, 2014 (UTC) I have to ask, why is it so important to some people that Korrasami isn't a thing? I don't see how there can be much debate that it is. That final pose of Korra and Asami holding hands and looking into each other's eyes has been exclusively reserved for romantic relationships in TLOK. See this image. Also this unnoticed shot. Plus the storytelling analsys of the ending. Why are people arguing so hard against this? --SG-17 It's not about arguing against Korrasami per se, it's about it being confirmed or not beyond personal interpretation. 14:23, December 21, 2014 (UTC) The argument isn't necessarily that Korrasami is impossible. The argument is whether or not it's unconfirmed and refutable. It's complete inference to say that it's exclusively a romantic pose, and we have no concrete hints in-series stating that they are romantically interested in one another. Another argument is whether or not it is in the wiki's place to entertain such theories. Note that I'm not going to argue with you one way or another since I've been having the same argument about this for the past three days. I'm just bringing you up to speed. ...Or basically what LL beat me to saying. - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 14:29, December 21, 2014 (UTC) I just want to quickly clarify why I brought up the Toph and Ty Lee thing earlier. It wasn't to persuade anybody about if you agreed with x you should agree with y. I brought it up to show an already pre-established wiki standard that we should conform to. It doesn't matter if one doesn't like the existing standard, the standard as established by Ty Lee and Toph and Sokka exists. My point in bringing it up was to show how Korrasami matches this existing standard, therefore should be included. Personal feelings about any of the pairings or how warranted they are shouldn't matter. If one doesn't like the standard, they should change it. I can see now arguing about any other sort of evidence is a "yes it is" "no it isn't" matter so I'll drop it for the time being, unless more evidence pops up. I just wanted to clarify why I brought up Toph and Ty Lee's pages in the first place. I also think I saw a post about why Bolin is considered more of a love interest for Korra above? First of all, I wanted to say that their claims of "each scene counts as friendship therefore the ending is friendship" is entirely interpretation. Also, Bolin isn't a love interest for Korra because she was never shown to reciprocate those feelings. Whereas with Asami, it's more unclear. 19:29, December 21, 2014 (UTC) Hey guys, lil more info, Jeremy Zuckerman retweeted a fan "Korrasami" cover of "Lost my heart in Republic City" that uses Korra and Asami kissing as fan art. He also retweeted a Korrasami analysis of the ending, as well as the article Mike linked to on his facebook. I doubt this counts as the official proof others asked for, but I figured I would put it up for discussion anyways. 21:13, December 21, 2014 (UTC) Support. It seemed pretty clear to me that the authors intended it as canon, and went as far as they could to show this. I suggest that Asami is added to Korra's love interests (even though I don't ship them) for this reason. I understand that there is a lot of speculation involved with this, but perhaps a good compromise would be to include, in the love interests section, that the information is speculative, or to state that it is up for individual interpretation, but many interpreted it as romance. Katherine Rebekah (wall • contribs) 22:01, December 21, 2014 (UTC) I'm not sure why this is even a discussion anymore. If you really want to stick your head in the sand and ignore evidence or the wiki's precedent on these matters, go right ahead, but we've got a growing number of actual votes in support every day so far and 0 against it (and only a couple neutral). Community consensus, if nothing else, puts this through. Also, support. --BobLogical (wall • contribs) 22:36, December 21, 2014 (UTC) Support. DiMartino openly promoted an article about how Korrasami was endgame on his Facebook. Not only is this DiMartino we're talking about to begin with, but he actually wrote the episode. I'm really not sure why this is still considered a debate. --Deist Zealot (wall • contribs) 23:23, December 21, 2014 (UTC) You're all still speculating the intent behind retweets, reblogs, and link sharing. Yes, they've all been in support on Korrasami, however, there's hardly been any coverage that doesn't talk about Korrasami. There's is simply no solid evidence to say one way or another whether Korrasami is canon. Just speculation based on a few tidbits around social media. I'm staunchly opposed to speculation of any sort in any articles. Precedent be damned. Call it putting my head in the sand or whatever you please. But I'm still one of roughly 4 voices here opposed to adding speculation based on ambiguous social media posts. † CR90 (talk) 01:16, December 22, 2014 (UTC) You say it's still too speculative, yet, as it has been stated earlier on this thread, Sokka is listed in Toph's love interests and the only "romance" between them is a blush from Toph and an accidental kiss on Suki's cheek. There is far more evidence for Korrasami then for Tokka, yet Tokka has a canonical place on the wiki. We not only have a blush from Korra to Asami, but we have them holding hands and gazing into each others eyes. There are also more subtle hints starting in book 3, were Asami comforts Korra. Katherine Rebekah (wall • contribs) You obviously didn't read my whole post, so I'll reiterate: I'm staunchly opposed to speculation of any sort in any articles. Precedent be damned. † CR90 (talk) 02:31, December 22, 2014 (UTC) Well tough tuberculosis-laden old ladies. This whole wiki is filled with speculation, and people have explained why a direct confirmation if nigh-impossible several times. Not to mention, you're four voices against, what, twenty? So, majority still rules. Thanks for playing. --BobLogical (wall • contribs) 02:41, December 22, 2014 (UTC) It bothers me greatly that the logic so many are rallying behind is "we've done it before, we should do it again". That doesn't justify it in the least, yet you speak of it like it's all the justification that's needed. That's stagnant thinking and shows close-mindedness towards wiki reforms. I'm not arguing the specific example of Tokka, but I don't think it's a good habit for a wiki community to have. - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 02:54, December 22, 2014 (UTC) @Christianrocker90. That makes no sense. Yes, they've all been in support on Korrasami, however, there's hardly been any coverage that doesn't talk about Korrasami. Okay, so you do agree that all of these pieces of evidence have been in support of Korrasami. So if the images support a Korrasami ending over a platonic ending, shouldn't we include it in our article? When we have based on other small pieces of evidence? Further, why would we need coverage that doesn't talk about Korrasami to prove that Korrasami is canon. In fact, the fact that there has been nothing that doesn't talk about Korrasami proves even more that what we got is what's really happening. There's is simply no solid evidence to say one way or another whether Korrasami is canon. I'm staunchly opposed to speculation of any sort in any articles. Okay.... so there's stuff that supports Korrasami... Which is apparently not "solid evidence" enough for you? Yet the complete and utter lack of support for platonic claims (which you admitted to). Couldn't I, then argue, that since we all agreed evidence points in favor of Korrasami and there's none pointing in favor of a platonic ending, it's biased they intended it to be platonic? You can agree we don't want speculation on our articles, when all of our evidence points to a canon Korrasami ending why are you insisting we need to keep the platonic ending up? Why, when we have defined other relationships by partial speculation, as Katherine pointed out, is it so necessary that Korrasami not be defined by heavily implied romance and evidence form the creators? @Lavisdragoon It's not a matter of "we did it once let's do it again." It's a matter of a wiki-established definition of a love interest. Please, read the forum. The forum discusses the issue of how we are going to define a love interest. By the definition established here and shown in Ty Lee and Sokka we should include Korrasami. Like I've said, if you don't like the wiki-established standards, create a forum to change them, because right now Korrasami fits them. 03:03, December 22, 2014 (UTC) Bob, what you're also failing to realize is that a LGBT relationship in an American children's cartoon is groundbreaking. So, it's my personal opinion that you need a little more solid evidence that yes, that's what the creators meant by that scene. For all we know at this point, they prefer Korrasami, but in canon its left open ended for the viewer to decide what happens after. † CR90 (talk) 03:06, December 22, 2014 (UTC) Hey, look at you, dismembering your argument for me. You just explained why they can never and will never be able to confirm this for us. Thanks. --BobLogical (wall • contribs) 03:15, December 22, 2014 (UTC) I would say the exact opposite. Precisely because the relationship depicted is queer/MOGAI, we know that it was impossible for the crew to openly have them kiss or declare their love. In light of the overt support by many members of the crew (liking, sharing, or retweeting posts that explicitly reference Korra and Asami as romantically involved, etc.) coupled with the strong romantic undertones of the scenes (the stage bows, the similarity to the wedding and to the Katara/Aang original ending, etc.) and the precedent already in place on the Wiki, denying its canonicity on the basis of it being queer/MOGAI is an act of queerphobia, and you know it. Perhaps we should make a vote. 03:22, December 22, 2014 (UTC) TAD, being on point. I like this voting idea. Seconded. --BobLogical (wall • contribs) 03:28, December 22, 2014 (UTC) @FireFerret, I read it and reread it, and I do see your point, but I also see that even this point loops back to the counterargument of what defines a "canonical interest in starting a romantic relationship existing by the character". As it's been stated several times, Korrasami was taken out of context in prior cases and the argument would not be held if not for the final episode. Regarding the argument of Korra's blush, I fail to see it as a strong hint that she has any kind of feelings for Asami, since it's far from abnormal to blush when one receives a compliment on their appearance, especially from one who is beautiful herself. Hell, I personally blush if someone says my shirt looks nice on me. I'm not blind in that those opposed are outvoted and I respect your opinions, but my mind hasn't been changed. And TAD, stop bringing up the subject of queerphobia unless you want to trudge through a minefield of political incorrectness. That's not what this is about. - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 03:32, December 22, 2014 (UTC) To clarify: I never said that those who dislike Korrasami are queerphobic, but if your denial is centred around them being queer, then it is queerphobia. To quote the person to whom I was speaking: "a LGBT relationship in an American children's cartoon is groundbreaking [therefore] you need a little more solid evidence". 03:39, December 22, 2014 (UTC) If I viewed that statement that way, I might agree. But I read the focal point of his sentence as the fact that it is groundbreaking, not the fact that it's a queer pairing. - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 03:42, December 22, 2014 (UTC) But the fact that it is queer is why they say it's groundbreaking and deserves extra scrutiny. Like I said earlier, this discussion wouldn't even be happening if one of them was a guy. I know why. You know why. We'd have our answer overtly in the show and confirmed in writing on Twitter. By all accounts, this argument is pretty much over. Every relevant piece of evidence has been presented, debated, and now we're at the stage for community consensus. Eyeballing it, I'd say we've got approval. If this needs a formal vote, someone set it up and we'll put an end to it until, twenty years from now when queerness is no longer a crime around the world, Mike and Bryan can finally say, "Yep, that's what we intended," or "No, you're a bunch of losers." --BobLogical (wall • contribs) 03:51, December 22, 2014 (UTC) Firsts are always different, regardless of the subject, and I think ignoring the delicacy of the matter altogether is something we need to avoid. The fact of the matter is that alternate sexuality is a complex social issue, and there is a difference in the dynamics of their depiction. I simply don't think we already have all the evidence we need to label this event as canon. We should accept the same level of evidence as we would need to accept a straight pairing as canon, but not less. - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 04:03, December 22, 2014 (UTC) Then I'll, once again, direct you towards Toph and Sokka. We keep telling you, this is 100% compliant with wiki's standards. That argument doesn't work anymore. If you don't personally like it, that's cool and all, but there's not a lot you can do about it unless you want to bring that topic back up and get everything else changed retroactively, too. --BobLogical (wall • contribs) 04:13, December 22, 2014 (UTC) Tokka was commented on by Bryke by the time a decision was made on it, and was romantically oriented on Toph's end. There is no 100% concrete argument that Korra and Asami had an interest in beginning a romantic relationship. They're. Different. Cases. Honestly the instance is far more comparable to Borra than Korrasami. - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 04:21, December 22, 2014 (UTC) Well, no, they're pretty much exactly the same circumstances. I don't know what comments you're speaking about, but either way, if you don't like that, let's do Ty Lee and Sokka. They're good enough for the wiki despite having about 4 scenes together the entire series. --BobLogical (wall • contribs) 04:25, December 22, 2014 (UTC) Ugh, it's like talking to a brick, and I'm sure you feel the same way. This is a debate, and telling someone else that their standpoint is completely moot over and over again is about as helpful as edit warring. All we're doing is going around saying "Your point doesn't matter", "I disagree", "No, nothing you say matters". I'm done arguing with you on this. My vote is in opposition, and I've yet to find someone to change my mind. That's the last I have to say about this. - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 04:33, December 22, 2014 (UTC) Could just do that whole "formal vote" thing I suggested earlier. I'm pretty sure my original comment would solve everyone's problems here. So anyone want to actually do that? Like, I don't know what would make this thing formal, I've never done this before. Anyone? --BobLogical (wall • contribs) 04:37, December 22, 2014 (UTC) Yeah, I agree with BobLogical. I've been following the debate and it's going nowhere. As for the Tokka thing, it was confirmed in The Ultimate Pocket Guide's Who Likes Who? map that Toph and Ty Lee had a crush on Sokka. I don't even know if the book was proofread by Bryke, I know it's written by Tom Mason and Dan Danko, but it's some sort of proof, not purely speculation like some users are considering and thus, cannot be compared to the ambiguity of Korrasami. Correct me if I'm wrong. Also, if we voted, I'd support the just keep everything based on fact. If they are/weren't love interests, then the wikia can just correct it later. What's wrong with just reporting the facts and waiting for an official confirmation? If we never get one, oh well, then. All Hail the Ruler of the Bison! (Fanon) File:Appa Sprite.gif 05:05, December 22, 2014 (UTC)RuleroftheBisons97 If "love interest" is strictly for romantic love on this wiki then I would vote oppose. Per my comment here and here, the deep love that Korra and Asami have shown for each other can still be interpreted as platonic love. Having no sexual attraction won't invalidate their love or make it less beautiful. IMNSHO, I think the ending is intentionally left open for personal interpretation, either "Korrasami BFF" or "Korrasami OTP". If your personal experience tells you that "girls never stare into each others eyes and hold hands like that", understandably you would lean on OTP. xP My 2 cents. — Hasdi Bravo • 07:12, December 22, 2014 (UTC) To be perfectly honest, i haven't read most of the arguments on here... there's simply too much back and forth bickering. Water Spout's first post on here sums up my opinion quite nicely. regardless of "shipping", we can only state what was actually shown/confirmed, and as a result, we can't present "korrasami" as canon. until bryke says otherwise, we can't state that they're in any sort of romantic relationship.Intelligence4 (wall • contribs) 07:31, December 22, 2014 (UTC) If you'd actually read the arguments, you'd have seen that Mike has liked Korrasami art on tumblr, reblogged a post talking about what the gay representation in Korra meant to a mother and linked to an article on his facebook talking about Korrasami. If you don't count that as "confirmation" for whatever reason, fine. But don't comment by just saying "I agree wiht x side even though I didn't read everything." 09:18, December 22, 2014 (UTC) I'm just going to point out that writers can enjoy a ship without writing it into the story. JK Rowling loves Harry x Hermione and prefers it to the canon pairings, but that doesn't mean it's canon. - Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 12:39, December 22, 2014 (UTC) Aye, and she states that explicitly. Just how Bryke has explicitly stated that Zutara is not canon and that Katara and Jet kissed. They have not said Korrasami is not canon and, actually, there was a rather brilliant tumblr post that summed it up. If I can find it again, I'll link it. What they have done is as FireFerret stated; DiMartino has 'liked' Korrasami fanart on tumblr, shared a link that actually has the words 'Korra', 'Asami' and 'gay' in the URL and basically been completely opposite how they have shown to react to such 'fan ships'. A lie by omission is still a lie, and by not following their usual MO—which is to shoot down possible canon-ships that are popular but still completely fanmade, like Zutara—they are technically validating the claim. 13:17, December 22, 2014 (UTC) Aaand I bring myself back into this discussion again. The post and articles they've linked do, undoubtably, contain Korrasami content. But then, are there any posts or articles discribing the finale which don't contain an opinion (pretty much unviersally korrasami is canon) on the romantic side of the episode? As far as I'm aware, no. I also agree with what Intelligence said about Water Spout's post. That highlights what this is all about. We've kind of gone on a tangent more into shipping-war territory, eg. Back and forth 'you're wrong, I'm right and my evidence is sound and yours is not'. We have to analyse the facts not shoot down others' evidence because you disagree. Everyone has made their points by now and as far as I can tell all we are doing is repeating them again and again. We need to remove the bias and think about them properly. On a side note a completely agree with the idea of a vote. --EosOfTheDawn (wall • contribs) 14:18, December 22, 2014 (UTC) I would like to say that Hasdi Bravo my very well be right, that they may have a strong platonic love for one another. But even if people would like to think that it is platonic, I still believe that it deserves a place under love interests, because of how strong of a love is implied. Honestly, they used the ending, arguably the most important part of a series, with these two characters holding hands. Like I said before, it may be a good compromise to add Asami under love interests, but state that it may have been strong platonic love, but many interpreted it as romantic love. Also, I agree this is just to much back and forth banter. We should take a vote if that is possible. Katherine Rebekah (wall • contribs) @EosOfTheDawn: I completely agree with your statement of "We have to analyse the facts", though that on itself does not deter from the fact that DiMartino -or anyone else on staff- is yet to correct all the allegedly false claims about Korrasami, something they have not hesitated to do in the past whenever someone made a false claim about a certain ship. That in itself is also a fact that needs to be considered. And yes, I am completely aware that me saying this is just repeating what has been said thus far, but it's an important point worthy of repetition since it's consistently ignored and brushed off as if it means nothing, when it actually holds a lot of importance. As a more general note, per War Room practice: a vote is only necessary when discussion leads to nowhere and there is no clear majority in favor of a specific solution, which is not the case in this situation. 14:32, December 22, 2014 (UTC) Not the case? LL, by my headcount (which I just spent about fifteen minutes reading through for), we have 12 for adding, 12 for waiting. 12 for adding, 11 for waiting if I misinterpreted one, and 12 for adding, 13 for waiting if I interpret Fruipit's statement as an opinion. Even if I'm slightly off, the number of commentors here for each side are even enough to say that it's not a great majority. The only reason it looks like there are more for adding is because those for adding have made far more comments.- Lavisdragoon (wall • contribs) 14:47, December 22, 2014 (UTC) Yes, unneeded, since the consensus at this point is in favor of acknowledging them as love interest. And please, give me some more objective credit. As if I'd fall for those who commented the most. I count purely based on a "one user, one vote" system. As such, I counted 27 participants, of which 13 are clearly in favor of acknowledgment and 11 are against it (I even added the neutral ones to that to come to that number). Then there are 3 users that I don't know what they're voting for. Gilgamesh and Sikon seem to lean to the "yes, acknowledge them"-vote, but it wasn't entirely clear, so I didn't count them and I just didn't understand Darjeerling's opinion with his music analysis, so I didn't count that vote either. So there currently is a majority to acknowledge -even with 2 votes for that majority not counted (it would be great if those three users could clarify their vote). 16:45, December 22, 2014 (UTC) Honestly, I think all this Korrasami debate would end a lot sooner if everyone can accept that love and sex are not mutually inclusive. The "proofs" of Korrasami-OTP is at best clues but not conclusive. You could argue that Mike wanted to suggest OTP with plausible deniability from Viacom, but deniability also means we can't accept it as fact. So Mike shared the Vanity Fair article on his facebook. I retweeted that same article on my twitter a few days back, but I don't agree with some things the author wrote. Mike liked the Korrasami fanart on tumblr (which I also did). There's a number reasons anyone would like anything on tumblr, from approval to disaproval to "hmm... this interesting". Why didn't he just reblog it with a note so everyone can see where he stands? Ah, but he did reblog avatar-mom's letter, to agree on the gay representation for her son? Or is it her punchline: "korra is about love… the avatar universe is about love. bolin and mako’s love for one another, kuvira’s love for her people…" There are other love stories in the finale, including Hiroshi x Asami relationship (father-daughter love) and Varrick x Zhu Li relationship (romantic love). Why does Korrasami relationship put our panties in a twist? Can we just accept Korra and Asami love each other very much, BFF or OTP? Now excuse me while I google more Korrasami fanarts. Oooh myyy.... — Hasdi Bravo • 17:08, December 22, 2014 (UTC) As a new-to-this-wikia contributor, I don't know if my opinion/vote has any weight, and if not just ignore my vote with my apologies, but I'd like to ask… of the Tl;dr above, did *anyone* mention the scene where K&A looked at the city with the portal-beam ("sounds perfect") and how the mountains were painted in the colors of the Bisexual Flag? That is a statement in and of itself. (I prefer lesbian, but purely gay/lesbian-pink mountains might have been harder to pass the network's muster. Although for most of the Finale Korra was dodging a PINK Spirit energy beam which awashed much of the scenes in pink, until she stepped in to take it head-on) Love Robin (wall • contribs) 18:13, December 22, 2014 (UTC) Regardless of how long you've been here, if it's your first or 10,000th contribution, your opinion counts all the same, so don't worry about your vote being ignored. 18:15, December 22, 2014 (UTC)
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)