Talk:Shi

summary: 数多の不幸を背負い続けている魔法少女。 生まれてすぐに孤児となり、以来、過酷な人生を歩むことに。 図らずとも他人の悩みを知る能力を持ってしまったが故に、その悩みを自分の苦しみとして夢の中で体験してしまうという苦難に苛まれている。

Etymology

What's the source for the etymology? I can't find anything on Wiktionary to support it; the Japanese for "beach" appears to be "buna", and it's hard to imagine that "beach tree" wasn't a typo. ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 14:24, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

I researched for it on the day she was announced very quickly, and didn't use any actual viable sources (searching for it now, I can't even find the source I used back then). I meant for it to be temporary until someone with more viable sources found the proper meaning. Since it wasnt changed, I kind of assumed that it was accepted. Amaterasu (talk) 16:14, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Nvm I found it. It's not a fantastic source but its what I used. Here is the source I used. Amaterasu (talk) 16:15, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

and yeah I did misread it as "beach" instead of "beech". Oops! Amaterasu (talk) 16:17, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Looks like that source was poorly worded – Castanopsis is not a beech tree, though it is in the beech family. ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 18:50, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Patricia

Considering her long school skirt, long hair reminiscent of one of the familiar magical girls Walpurgisnacht uses (which were originally meant to represent the magical girls of the original witches in the series), and the second set of arms, could she be the magical version of Patricia?Sondenise (talk) 01:01, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

I would say that visual similarities aren't really enough to draw the connection (other than the silhouette, but that doesn't connect her to Patricia specifically). It's rare for a witch to resemble her magical girl form, right? ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 03:30, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Well, Witches almost always have some way of relating to their Magical Girl. Oktavia has a knight motif, Charlotte is obsessed with sweets, etc.. Its also worth pointing out that she grows a second pair of arms, and Patricia does have multiple arms. While I don't agree with the theory, they are interesting connections.

Should we include the theory?

The to me dumb theory about the Pale Horse and Rider has always been speculation in a trivia area (don't we have specific templates for those things?) and is obviously debunked. I'm of the opinion we should remove it or at least move it into such a template.--NepetaLeijon27 (talk) 06:55, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

How has it been debunked? Amaterasu (talk) 11:51, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Oh. I see. While it has been debunked, I think saying so right in the Trivia section is good enough reason to keep it. Amaterasu (talk) 11:59, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

I'd say, we're a wiki and keeping speculation in the trivia is bad for our reputation. Speculation shouldn't be in trivia, and debunked theories shouldn't. Even articles like Magia Exedra have their speculation in an appropriate tab and template, so everyone can see it is. Trivia is for extra bits of factual info about the subject, not for speculation. --NepetaLeijon27 (talk) 12:58, 11 May 2024 (UTC)