OMGz, Library Girl with a Pigtail. (BTW, I agree to an extent, depends how it looks)  ILHI ^{20:41, 23 February 2009 (UTC)} Something similar. Like our fanmade template: I think about that size and style: just saying "This character has no name; the current placeholder is fan-dubbed name" or whatever. (Doesn't need an image; nor a quote related to the matter)  ILHI ^{21:23, 23 February 2009 (UTC)}

The names that this is an Invisible Woman is not that recent at all... It's kind of outdated info. I think the title should change to get with the times. 67.214.28.75 00:43, March 6, 2010 (UTC)

Article Name Change Edit

Given the fact that the article acknowledges that the invisible NPC is in fact female (though this isn't exactly a recent revelation), it only seems appropriate to rename the article to "Invisible Woman" - I cannot see any merit in retaining the title "Invisible Man."Undine 05:56, April 9, 2010 (UTC)

Thinking further on it, why not simply rename the article to "Invisible Woman"? This is less of a term of art and more of a simple descriptor than "Invisible (Wo)man of Cornelia". I think this would let us ditch the "this is not an official term used by Square Enix and the title is merely a placeholder" disclaimer at the top of the article. Given the recent move, I'm inclined to do so now just to avoid another jarring transition later. --Undine 21:16, April 9, 2010 (UTC)

Nope, she is never called "Invisible Woman" so we would have to keep the "Nameless" template regardless. Furthermore, names of articles that have no official name use the name (NAME!) given to them by the fanbase. Or the most common name by the fanbase. This is not easy to scale. However, this guy (or girl) has been known as "The invisible man in Cornelia" or the "The invisible man of Cornelia". "Invisible woman" gives no insight into where, although that's what the article for. Nowadays, she's known as people in the know as "The invisible man (who's not actually a man)".

Actually, I made all that up, I have no idea what the fanbase knew this person as--but if there is someone trying to find out about this person, they'd search for "man", simply because "man" has referred to both genders, when "woman" has only ever referred to one. Though I wouldn't search any of the titles, and I'd just go to Cornelia and find information there.

But anyway: The "Nameless" template will always be there unless Square want to make a joke, and she appears in a remake, with a name. Secondly, the title is "of Cornelia" because she has no official name. I am personally not bothered either way. Just making a point. 79.64.34.11 22:05, April 9, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I meant the term "Invisible Woman" to refer to the nature of the bug, not as any sort of proper name (my thinking was that "Invisible Woman of Cornelia" implies a sort of proper name, whereas "Invisible Woman" is just mentioning the fact that one of the women in Cornelia Castle is invisible). Based on my understanding, such a simple description (not meant as a proper name) would not necessitate the Nameless Template, correct? Perhaps "Invisible Woman Bug" or "Invisible NPC" would more clearly indicate that the article title is not meant to convey a proper name?

As to the Man/Woman... I'm thinking from an NPOV perspective. I realize there's a sort of tendency to assume male until proven female, but that's hardly NPOV when writing an article (this is more likely the reason people would search for "Invisible Man"... realistically, if someone is thinking or searching on a gender-neutral basis, "Person" is a substantially more plausible and accurate term than "Man," which may be gender neutral when referring to humanity as a whole, but is rarely if ever gender neutral when referring to an individual based on modern usage). In this case, we know the character is actually female, and there is no evidence that the fanbase perceived her to be male in any sort of pervasive fashion (apart from the person who originated the article). Using Occam's Razor, the simplest (and most NPOV) solution is to just stick to the facts as objectively as possible. --Undine 23:46, April 9, 2010 (UTC)

Aah, yes, can't disagree with you there. I understand that "Invisible Woman Bug" wouldn't require a Nameless template, but "Invisible Woman" would. I suppose it's more because adding that one word changes the entire type of page it is. This is currently a bugged character page, but adding "Bug" on the end changes it to a bug page. Also, without bug, the article name is the name we assigned to her, she is the "invisible woman", but with bug on the end, she is an invisible woman.

So to call it "Invisible Woman" without a Nameless template? I don't know. 79.72.7.71 12:05, April 10, 2010 (UTC)

On a related note, I brought this up on the Final Fantasy Template discussion page, but I'd might as well mention it here too: should the Invisible Woman really be mentioned as an NPC on the template? From an in-game perspective, she's just another nameless NPC; the only reason she has any distinction at all is because of a bug that makes her invisible. I'm thinking she should be removed from the template. --Undine 23:46, April 9, 2010 (UTC)