Android vs. Artificial Human

File:Androids Daizenshuu 4.jpg|190px|thumb|Androids? So, flipping through the Daizenshuu, I discovered this (see image; sorry for the bluriness). The kanji and the furigana reads jinzōningen, but the English translation that the Japanese themselves give us is "Android". So, which do we go with? You'll notice that they list the Androids as being named "Android 17, 18", etc. Also of note, they consider "Cyborgs" to be a classification of Androids: not Androids in their totality. It calls the group, as a whole, Androids on all three pages they are covered on. ~ Lord Guru One Star 02:40, June 18, 2015 (UTC)

Bump (because you guys are here and this is important). ~ Lord Guru One Star 03:28, June 18, 2015 (UTC)
Apologies for not noticing. Hmm... this is rather difficult. For consistency purposes, we use literal translations from the manga and databooks, correct? If so, then Artificial Human would be a better fit. (Still fence-sitting here, though) WindStar7125 Five Star 03:33, June 18, 2015 (UTC)
Consistency would dictate literal translations, but my thought is that, what if this is simply how Japanese speakers see the term? "Android". After all, Artificial Human is literally what the Kanji means when broken up, but that doesn't mean that is what it means to a Japanese speaker. They did the same thing with Developed Form. That's what they call it, even though the Kanji is literally "Perfect Body". So, I want to trust their translations (since they do know their language best), but I want to stay consistent at the same time. ~ Lord Guru One Star 03:43, June 18, 2015 (UTC)
Well, if we want to trust their translations and be consistent at the same time, then Android would be the way to go. Android not only showcases trust in their translations, but is consistent with Developed Form: Not the literal translation, but what they refer to it as in English. I'll wait to see other's opinions on this though. WindStar7125 Five Star 04:07, June 18, 2015 (UTC)
The Good Lord knows I'm not partial to the term 'Android'. However, if the term is from the databooks, and is used as the official English term in said Databook (alongside 'Developed Form' for Cell), then I don't see any choice but to roll with the flow and stomach the use of the name. If it's official, we use it, that's simply how we work. Otherwise, we'd have taken to Alpha's suggestion of shortening Super Saiyan God Super Saiyan merely because it sounds hilarious.--— Mina Țepeș Two Star 06:25, June 18, 2015 (UTC)

Any other thoughts on this topic? ~ Lord Guru One Star 01:17, June 19, 2015 (UTC)


Chozenshu 1 classifies the Androids into two different categories: the first category is Biotechnological and it includes, Android No. 8, Android No. 17, and Android No. 18. The second category is Mechanical and it includes, Android No. 16, Android No. 19, and Android No. 20. I do not know what they classify Cell as but it does give those two categories or classifications. I hope this is useful to your wiki. Godccolo (talk) 20:35, August 15, 2016 (UTC)

That actually is good information, thanks! But do you have either the pages where you got the information, since that'd make for a fantastic reference point and give us the translations we need?—Mina Țepeș Two Star 20:48, August 15, 2016 (UTC)
Yes. The information for the Mechanical Androids are on page 335 and the Biotechnological on page 336 Godccolo (talk) 20:52, August 15, 2016 (UTC)
Excellent, and thanks! And I should have been a little more specific, do you have scans or images of the page if at all possible? I don't know if anyone on this wiki yet possesses the Chōzenshū (Lord knows I don't).—Mina Țepeș Two Star 20:55, August 15, 2016 (UTC)
The Chozenshu are reprints of the Daizenshū. We already have this information I just haven't documented it. --—NWG RedVariant 01:19, August 16, 2016 (UTC)

Literal Names

I just had an engaging conversation with Lin, although I was pretty bothered on wasting the time of the Bcrat to place input I decided to make a discussion revisting an old topic, on what we could do alternatively to this revisited topic, as you know I don't like mistranslations as I feel we're supposed to attempt to be accurate, as I mentioned on the topic of Teleportation and the King the entire term means something and has a myriad of meanings, Android, Cyborg and Robot, each of which are concrete definitions. So in the literal name, given that we have a large amount of information on each model, why don't we apply the most accurate translation in the "literal english" section to each "Android". So No. 18 and No. 17 would be Cyborg because it fit's more with the actual term. --— New World God 8th Universe Symbol (talk) 13:20, April 11, 2017 (UTC)

I've got nothing against this; No. 17, 18 (and also 20, as he has the flesh brain of Gero, and thus is not 100% mechanical) are Cyborgs, rather than simply Androids. Even the Abridged had the common sense to classify someone like No. 16 differently from No. 17 and 18 ("Affirmative. I am Android 16.") And "cyborg" is a viable translation, as well as "robot" or "artificial human" (at least from what I can see), so using it in the literal english sections of 17, 18, and 20 is not a bad idea.—Mina Țepeș Two Star 18:06, April 11, 2017 (UTC)
That literal meaning parameter originated from Ten's idea when "Android" from daatabook is treated as official, and "artificial human" translated word by word being its literal one. Now you suggest that, "Cyborg" is more reasonable. The literal meaning will stay contact but it must be corrected.--L.I.N (Saiyan Beauty) 03:54, April 12, 2017 (UTC)
@LIN: Absolutely not. I have explained this to you three times. Your appeal to novelty is not an argument. The name is official until we get an official name that matches that, if you have a problem with the name then offer a source or a letter from Toriyama like you always request someone who disagrees with you. You're being really bull-headed for no reason. Grow up. The literal name is "Cyborg" because that what the androids are. Given the information on the characters that we do know. All you have done in the last three days is complain about not getting your way, when you're wrong. And you unable to coherently argue your point that you're trying to appeal to more fallacies. Artificial Humans is not returning.. because it's wrong. Because Jinzoningen is one word, therefore it Literally means Cyborg, Android and Robot. What don't you get about that? --— New World God 8th Universe Symbol (talk) 04:44, April 12, 2017 (UTC)
I'm not an expert on Japanese by far, but "Artificial Human" is just as viable a reading of (人造人間) as anything else; in fact, more so, as it is made up of the characters 人造 (Jinzō, artificial or synthetic), and 人間 (ningen, i.e. human, man, or person). Japanese (or any foreign language really) isn't exactly so cut and dry as being able to say "this is 100% the translation of this", especially when it comes to words like these. "Jinzōningen" is a word most likely used to refer to creatures like robots (i.e. fully mechanical), or cyborgs (i.e. partially mechanical), but what are these beings? They can talk and think for themselves, perform actions without being orders, and as we've seen from No. 8, develop a will of their own; 16's character itself was built from his experiences. They are humans that were created by artificial means, and therefore, "Artificial Human" is a viable translation, the same as "robot". I support "Cyborg" for 17, 18, and 20, as I have said, but I see no reason to discard "Artificial Human" for Androids like No. 16 and No. 8, in favour of something so simplistic as robot, especially when it is indeed a viable translation.—Mina Țepeș Two Star 05:41, April 12, 2017 (UTC)
Because Jinzoningen is one word...
The literal name is "Cyborg" because that what the androids are.
Now you finally let me know your PoV after asking you three days ago. I keep in mind it's a good point. You think I appealed fallacies, but you're the one who bring Kanzenshuu bible and Toriyama letter in our argument, though they have nothing to do with us and I directly ignored them problems more than one time. Wrong this, wrong that. There's nothing most accurate in the translation, especially from Japanese, one of the most complicated language. Is it totally right when translate word by word? No, of course, but plz look at what the androids are, they're not articifial? We're not choosing the most accurate translation, we're choosing the most suitable fitting in the context. Artificial Humans is replaced by Cyborg, Fine by me 'cause it's not inaccurateand 'cause you suggest that but I dislike your opinion of the previous is totally being negated. Just straightforward.--L.I.N (Saiyan Beauty) 06:01, April 12, 2017 (UTC)
@LIN: Please stick the current conversation. I don't care if you dislike my opinion. I didn't ask you. Again, I have noted this already. The “Androids” (the subject we’re talking about) should be named by a “case-by-case” basis, in the literal section because we in english do not have a ‘one-size fits all term’. You agree, I agree, and Aha agrees with this notion. So can you stop bringing this meandering point over and over again, now onto the next portion of my position my point is further evidenced by the sub-type of Androids that are documented in the series’ books. In which, by the way nice “quote-mine” please make it seem as if that isn’t out of context. nonetheless the term Cyborg is specifically in context to whom? No. 17, No. 18, No. 20 should each have Cyborg because that’s what they are. As Aha and myself agree, I speak english, he speaks english. I assume we all agree there. However, No. 16, 19 and 8 would have different literal names, in that literal english section opposed to the others because in their model they are different. They are Androids, hence why they should have a different name in the lit meaning section. This is in the source material I don’t even know why i’m bothering to explain this to you. You should know this yourself. So now that we have settled, I would argue there is no reason to use Artificial Humans, because it is completely transparent on what these characters are, given the source material. Aha, get’s the point with 20, 18, and 17 being called “Cyborg” and agreed, sure i'll take it. While the mechanical ones, should be called Androids as Aha explained above because that is the accurate depiction of the character. So you want to tell me to look at the characters, how about you look at the characters and read the source material, specifically the fourth Daizenshuu and it will convey that for you. Yes the term Jinzoningen term is one word but it can give more accurate translations given that we know what model these characters are. It's literally not that hard you're just having a hard time accepting that because you dislike my opinion. So if you want to find a suitable term for each of them, myself and Aha did, at this point you're against what? By the way let's remember this is a 'debate' about removing a term that is inaccurate, and btw I am not conceding the characters are not artificial, don't straw-man me or take me out of context. I'm more concerned with empiricism and accuracy not laziness and confirmation bias. You've conceded your central point. At this point you're grasping at straws. You just agreed to that yourself. So in short my solution; 17, 18, 20 - Cyborgs, where as 16, 8 and 19 are clearly Androids. Aha and myself agree, So now that we've settled this issue, can you drop it? — New World God 8th Universe Symbol (talk) 07:14, April 12, 2017 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.