Talk:Sidhe

Was this term ever used in the series? -- Matt 17:50, 5 January 2009 (CST)

Yes. Goliath uses it in "The Hound of Ulster". "Are we in Ireland, then? The Sidhe were of Ireland in ancient times." or something like that. --GregX 18:03, 5 January 2009 (CST)

Ah, yes, that's right. Thanks! -- Matt 18:25, 5 January 2009 (CST)

So it's pronounced "shee" then? -- Demonskrye 06:54, 6 January 2009 (CST)

I always thought he said "The 'shee were of Ireland in ancient times." DTaina 08:00, 6 January 2009 (CST)

Yeah, that sounds correct to me as well. -- Matt 08:19, 6 January 2009 (CST)

The conversation went like this:

"I am called The Banshee."

"Are we in Ireland, then? The 'Shee were of Ireland in ancient times."

"This is Ireland, indeed."

So, I think he was referring to the Banshee, plural, hence the 'shee, not the Children of Oberon themselves. DTaina 09:07, 6 January 2009 (CST)

Sidhe is pronounced 'shee'. --GregX 11:00, 6 January 2009 (CST)

Oh, and the more traditional spelling for Banshee is 'bean sidhe.' Pay no attention to the English rules of pronunciation when dealing with Gaelic. --GregX 11:02, 6 January 2009 (CST)

Okay... got this e-mail from Greg. "Sidhe is pronounced She. But that doesn't mean that Sidhe is a synonym for Oberon's Children, anymore than Asgardian is." --GregX 13:16, 6 January 2009 (CST)

If Sidhe is a subset of the Third Race, rather than a synonym, then we should consider creating a group article for them, along the lines of Kachina or Aesir. We also need to edit the article on Oberon's Children to reflect this, and perhaps include a list of the subsets we know about, as well as the individuals? (After a quick check, I notice we haven't mentioned Kachina anywhere at all in that article.) -- Supermorff 14:37, 6 January 2009 (CST)

Oops, guess I was wrong about the spelling. Thanks for clearing that up, Greg! DTaina 17:00, 6 January 2009 (CST)

I think it's fair to add an article for the Sidhe as a subgroup of Oberon's Children, since Goliath mentions them and in such a way that it's clear that there's more than one of them (or there was at one time, at least), even if we've only ever met the Banshee. If we're assuming that all Aesir and all Kachina are Oberon's Children, I don't see any problem with assuming that all Sidhe are as well. -- Demonskrye 18:20, 6 January 2009 (CST)

Since we now know that not all Aesir were Oberon's Children (see Talk:Aesir), should we reword this article slightly? -- Supermorff 15:53, 8 January 2009 (CST)

I think so, but if the Sidhe are not (necessarily) a branch of Oberon's Children, then what do we call them? -- Demonskrye 16:50, 8 January 2009 (CST)

Don't know. They're a group of mythological beings from ancient Ireland. Do we need more than that? -- Supermorff 14:56, 9 January 2009 (CST)

Just to be clear, the Aesir, the Titans, the original Olympians, the Egyptian pantheon (is there a name for this?), the "Fay" (or whatever), the Sidhe, the Kachina/Cloud Fathers, etc. are largely subsets of the Children of Oberon (or Mab, depending on the timeframe we're discussing) mixed with some hybrids (ala the New Olympians). Does that mean that EVERY individual member of each subset is DEFINITIVELY one of the Children? No, it does not. Each "character" will be dealt with on a case by case basis. But if you're asking me about generalities... --Gweisman 15:35, 9 January 2009 (CST)

Thanks, Greg. That does make it clearer, although we still need to decide how to classify and document all these groups. As for the Egyptian pantheon, I've heard them called the Netjer (or the Neter, or Necer, or similar), but I think that's less a name for the group than it is the ancient Egyptian word for "gods". The Ennead and Ogdoad might be groups within the Egyptian pantheon, although I'm not sure how well defined they are and there might be some overlap. -- Supermorff 16:51, 9 January 2009 (CST)

I say that since they're generally Children of Oberon, we classify them as such. When and should individuals within these groups appear that are now Children, we'll reflect that in their own entries. But for now, let's keep them classified as Children. --GregX 16:54, 9 January 2009 (CST)

I tend to agree, except in the case of the Aesir in which we have an Ask Greg comment saying that not all Aesir are Children. -- Supermorff 17:15, 9 January 2009 (CST)

Yes, but he also said right here, a couple of posts up, that they are largely Children of Oberon. --GregX 17:27, 9 January 2009 (CST)

Okay, so on the one hand we've got "in general these groups are subsets of the Children" and on the other we have "the Aesir specifically are not all Children of Oberon". That is the only definitive information we've got about the makeup of any of these groups, so I don't like to pass it up in favour of the generality. But that's just my opinion. -- Supermorff 17:33, 9 January 2009 (CST)

I've though of a compromise: we create a new category called "Cat:Branches of Oberon's Children" or similar, in which we put all of these different articles. This category is a subcat of Cat:Groups, but not of Cat:Oberon's Children. Instead, we include an intro paragraph explaining that these groups are "largely subsets of the Children of Oberon" (or Mab), but that not every member is necessarily one of the Children (and probably that most Children nowadays don't run in packs). We include a link to the Children category, and say that there will likely be some overlap between the members of these groups and the Children.

If this works, we can do something similar with "Cat:Gargoyle Clans". What do people think? Worth running with? -- Supermorff 04:13, 10 January 2009 (CST)

I'm going to give this a try now, rather than wait for a response, because I'm probably going to be incommunicado for a week or so. If it doesn't work out, feel free to revert it while I'm gone (although I'd love an explanation for why it didn't work out). -- Supermorff 03:56, 11 January 2009 (CST)

Done. See how you like it. -- Supermorff 04:23, 11 January 2009 (CST)