The Last of Us Wiki
Advertisement
The Last of Us Wiki

Archived discussions

Please see the following for officially archive discussions: Archive one

Ellie and Cat?

Cat

Do we add Cat as one of Ellie's romantic interests? Also is there any info on her? I tried searching for any info on her but I can't find anything beyond "she kissed ellie one time and everyone except Joel thought they were dating" from Ellie's journal. Was she mentioned anywhere else? (I'm probably missing something really obvious)

EmBELLEm (talk) 04:02, June 24, 2020 (UTC)

Ellie's height

This is long overdue so I've asked Soa Lee, the modeller of Ellie in part 2 about her height at different stages in the game.

Ellie's height in TLOU part 2 is 5'5"(166cm) at 19 years old and 5'3"(160cm) at 14/15 years old (museum flashback). At 17 years old she is in the middle of the two, so that would be 5'4"(163cm).

Could you please add these numbers to Ellie's page?

Thanks in advance

Source: Soa Lee (https://www.artstation.com/soalee)

SnooPies5502 (talk) 21:29, September 12, 2020 (UTC)

The link you provided simply takes us to her profile. Where is the actual confirmation on these heights? Snivy The coolest Pokemon ever 22:15, September 12, 2020 (UTC)
I have the convo screencapped but its from private messaging so I'm not sure if I can just post it here in the open (maybe I can send it to you per PM?). Alternatively the 3d TLOU2 models that have been uploaded online recently reconfirm most of these exact heights as the model units are scaled to meters.
https://www.deviantart.com/crazy31139/art/TLOU2-Ellie-Seattle-853552008


SnooPies5502 (talk) 10:33, September 13, 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Snivystorm. We really need a source for this. --M67PattonZippo (talk) 13:47, September 13, 2020 (UTC)

Adoptive Family Relationship

Has it ever been confirmed that the Millers adopted Ellie and that Ellie adopted J.J or is this just what people have inferred? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MICKEYMOUSEUSERNAME (talkcontribs)

I don't know of any ND source has said that Ellie was adopted by Joel or JJ by Ellie in so many words, but y'know. On the JJ side, Dina's "We've got a family" line seems like a reasonable indication that she sees Ellie as a parent to JJ. The time we see with them makes it clear that Ellie is caring and involved in raising him. For all functional purposes I think she adopted JJ. RinasaurusRex (talk) 15:16, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
I figured as much. I can understand where people are coming from, but at the same time, shouldn't it be confirmed whether or not someone is adoptive family before being added into the "relatives" section? For example, I added Dina in as Joel's "daughter-in-law" and as Ellie's "wife," but it was removed by an admin because it was never confirmed if Dina and Ellie were actually married. We know that Ellie SEES Joel as a father figure/friend and J.J as her son, but it's never confirmed whether or not he adopted her as his daughter or if Ellie actually went through the process of adopting J.J as her son. Plus, it also complicates who's really related to who. If Ellie is Joel's adoptive daughter, wouldn't Sarah technically be her adoptive sister and J.J's aunt? And Maria Ellie's "adoptive aunt-in law"? idk —Preceding unsigned comment added by MICKEYMOUSEUSERNAME (talkcontribs)
The thing is, what even would be the "process" of "officially" adopting someone in such a society? It's not like there's a government office that they could file paperwork with.
Marriage is obviously a concept that's survived the outbreak, even if it can't be made official, either. Tommy asks Maria to marry him, and boom: they're married. It's such a common thing from our world that it's survived into theirs. But it's far less common that one person would ask another "would you adopt me?" (or "can I adopt you?"). So I believe that's something (a requested adoption) that would be very unlikely to carry over into their society. For that reason, just my opinion, I think it's fine to require proof of a marriage between 2 characters before considering them married, but okay to consider a relationship adoptive/adopted just based on what's inferred, and how the characters interact with each other. Swedgin (talk) 23:54, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
I still think that someone's status as an adoptive family member should be objective. We don't know the ins and outs of people getting married in the apocalypse, but there's still likely ceremony around it to finalize people's marital status. Even if it's outside of the "legal" (U.S government) realm, there's likely a process that a person undergoes within their respective community. There is likely a similar process for adoption.
Moreover, Dina and Ellie essentially function as a married couple; They live in the same house, take care of the same child, are bound together by their commitment and love for one another, but that doesn't mean that they're married. Just like how someone can FUNCTION as a parental "figure" while not having adopted another person as their child. Joel is LIKE a father to Ellie (as a matter of fact, he probably sees Ellie as his daughter more than she sees him as her father), but that doesn't mean that she's been adopted into the Miller family. Plus, it opens up room for convoluted ties to extended family, but I guess that's just a personal thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MICKEYMOUSEUSERNAME (talkcontribs)
I guess my point was, whereas a wedding ceremony is recognized as a pretty standard part of a marriage and also a staple of our society, an adoption ceremony/celebration is a much less common thing, and so if such a thing exists (I'm sure it must) it seems less likely to carry over to a post-apocalyptic society. A newfound parent/child relationship like Joel and Ellie would just become something that simply IS, that exists, and is understood by everyone without having to verbalize or formalize it.
But, with that being said... I agree with you. Joel and Ellie's relationship being classified as adoptive father/daughter made sense when there was only one game and they were the only ones that such a designation applied to, but now there's also Ellie and JJ, as well as Abby and Lev. Are they big sister/little brother? Mother/son? It adds a whole extra, complex layer of subjectiveness and opinion, which is kinda out-of-place in a wiki. Maybe others could chime in on whether to keep it or not? Swedgin (talk) 08:41, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
I think a terminology change from "adopted/adoptive" might be in order, but different wikis seem to have their own standards for what qualifies as "relatives". Like, the Red Dead wiki includes relationships like "significant other" and "ex-fiancée" in "Family" even though those would not be blood or legal relatives since they weren't married. On the other hand, the Buffyverse wiki seems to pretty strictly limit "Relatives" to blood and legal relations, and doesn't include romantic partners in the infobox unless they were married.
And y'know, there's always the option of adding a field to the infobox for very significant but non-blood/legal relative relationships, which could include things like ex-girlfriends and father-figures. 'Cause yeah, Joel is clearly a significant relationship to Ellie, but I would be pretty hard pressed to consider him her "adoptive father" even though he's her father figure. Like, once they had a roof, they never even seem to have lived under the same one. The earliest bit in Jackson we see in Part II, Ellie's already opted to make that detached garage an apartment instead of living in that two bedroom house with Joel. RinasaurusRex (talk) 14:08, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
I think the reason why some wikis include "significant other" in the "relatives" section is that romantic relationships (whether or not you're someone's boyfriend/girlfriend or husband/wife) tend to be more objective. Platonic relationships, on the other hand, are a lot more complicated and, like Swedgin said, hinge upon OUR subjective interpretation of it. Abby essentially takes care of Lev like a parent, but their relationship is a lot more brother/sister-like because of their proximity in age. Marlene was *like* a surrogate mom to Ellie and took care of her from a distance, but did Ellie really have enough of a personal relationship with her to be in the "Relatives" section? It's all very convoluted, and then going as far as to add the rest of the adoptive guardian's family muddy's things up even more (Ex: Is Jerry Lev's adoptive grandfather?).
I think the subjectivity of all of this is the problem. If we remove Joel's title as "adoptive" parent but still wish to place him in the "Relatives" section, what would he put him down as? Close friend? Father-FIGURE? What do we put her down as in his section? Ward? These are all very dependent on our individual interpretations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MICKEYMOUSEUSERNAME (talkcontribs)
I mean, yeah, "father-figure" seems like an appropriate label. We have observable canon events that show Joel acting in a fatherly capacity to Ellie. I don't think giving him that label reaches the point of speculation. And for JJ, we have the "We've got a family" line that makes it clear that Dina considers herself, Ellie, and JJ to be a family unit, so calling Ellie a parent to JJ seems appropriate. (Also, unrelated to the discussion, but please remember to sign your comments with ~~~~ so we don't have to keep putting the "unsigned" note in! 😅) RinasaurusRex (talk) 17:38, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
I agree with RinasaurusRex, "father figure" is a very good descriptor for Ellie and Joel's relationship. However, given Dina's comments later in the game, I think it would be safe to say that she considered Ellie to be a parent to JJ, even without the blood relationship. M67PattonZippo (talk) 21:14, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
But what about Abby and Lev? Sister/brother? Mom/son? And tho I agree about it making sense to describe Ellie as a parent to JJ, how far beyond her does that go? Are Tommy and Maria his great-uncle and -aunt? Does Joel continue to be listed as his adoptive grandfather? Should Sarah be listed as his aunt? Even if it's limited to just the "close" (parent/child) relationships, people are going to be coming in and constantly editing in the other connections ("Well, if JJ is Ellie's son, then someone obviously forgot to list Joel as his grandfather; I'll just fix that up"), and then maybe not really understanding why their edits are being reverted, even if a brief explanation is offered.
A couple of ideas for possible changes: 1) limit the "relatives" section to actual blood relatives, and put the "found family" members in the "affiliations" field; or 2) include Joel & Ellie, Ellie & JJ, and Abby & Lev in each other's "relatives" list, but just don't put a label on them or try to define the nature of those relationships.Swedgin (talk) 21:53, 8 April 2021 (UTC)


This was actually meant to be a direct reply to Rino, but I see that other people have commented.
"My bad, lmao. Anyways, a lot of what you said goes back to my previous comments about how somebody can FUNCTION as a parent/adoptive parent while not actually having adopted them. In my opinion, there's still a bit of a grey area concerning what Joel and Ellie are to each other. Obviously, we know that Joel wanted to be like a father to Ellie and saw her as somewhat of a surrogate for Sarah, but it's not clear how exactly she sees him. When someone isn't blood-related, there's just too much of a grey area. Abby and Lev are a perfect example of that. She's his guardian and looks after him, but that doesn't make her his adoptive parent/sibling.
I understand that you're proposing adding other close relationships under different labels than "adoptive (insert relationship here)," but I still think that there'd just too much subjectivity involved regardless. If we were to do this, we'd have to apply the same standards to every other relationship with familial undertones, adding a whole nother layer of complications. One editor can add someone as a "relative" to whomever under the pretense of "Well, *I* interpreted their relationship this way. Therefore, they are X." And can we all agree that we don't need the extended family labels as well? ("Adoptive uncle," "Adoptive Aunt-in law," "Adoptive Grandparent," "Adoptive sister," etc.)"
I agree with most of what Swegdin is saying. I think that we should be objective with this, and restrict the "relatives" section to blood-relatives and those with a formally recognized relationship. We can just specify more about other "close" relationships in the "relationships" section of the character's article. Also, I hope I signed this correctly.~~~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by MICKEYMOUSEUSERNAME (talkcontribs)
We still have not reached a conclusion about this topic yet. Let's keep this discussion active. Are we in favor of removing characters who aren't related via blood or legal process from the "relatives" section or no? If not, do we plan on just keeping things as is? MICKEYMOUSEUSERNAME (talk) 03:02, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
I would vote to get rid of ALL the adopted/adoptive listings, and just leave the "relatives" category for those characters who are blood-relations, or related by marriage. It removes all the problems of opinions and subjectiveness, and just sticks to the known facts.
If, however, the decision is to keep them, can we at least limit it to the "main" relationships of Joel/Ellie, Abby/Lev, and Ellie/JJ, and get rid of all the uncle/aunt/niece/nephew/grandparent/grandchild stuff? Those connections are really tenuous, and just clutter things up. Swedgin (talk) 05:22, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
I 100% agree with what Swedgin is proposing, ESPECIALLY getting rid of the extended adoptive family stuff. Anybody else have any other input? MICKEYMOUSEUSERNAME (talk) 05:54, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
(indent reset) Hey guys, here to throw in my two cents. For one, we plan on changing the Relatives parameter to Relationships to help accurately include blood related and non-blood related relationships such as adoptive and romantic relationships (girlfriends/boyfriends).
Now, this goes without saying—this is the apocalypse, it is very unlikely, if not impossible, to be officially married or adopted. However, we should still use the respective terms for specific relationships that are explicitly evident in game, i.e. Tommy and Maria are considered married, regardless of official documentation, ceremony, whatever. Of course we want to avoid speculation as much as possible, and considering that it was never confirmed or has any concrete evidence, Joel and Ellie's relationship should not be considered adoptive. We know Ellie sees Joel as a father figure and Joel sees her has his own child, but we don't have enough evidence to warrant them as an adoptive family. As for Ellie/Dina/JJ, Ellie and Dina are in a clear romantic relationship, but not confirmed to be considered married, with Ellie helping raise JJ as her own child—this clears enough speculation for JJ to be considered Ellie's adopted son, even though it isn't explicitly mentioned. Joel and Ellie weren't ever mentioned as a family, so it shouldn't be the same case for them—this is also true for Abby and Lev's relationship. Marlene and Ellie should have a surrogate relationship, considering we've been told that Ellie was put in Marlene's care after her mother died—essentially the definition of a surrogate relationship.
In my opinion, Joel and Ellie's relationships should be removed completely and be only kept in the Affiliations section, as their relationship is never evident without including subjective feelings. Joel/Ellie, Abby/Lev = no evidence for any familial ties, Ellie/JJ = adoptive family, Marlene/Ellie = surrogate relationship and Tommy/Maria = married sounds about right to me. With all that being said, it's okay to list all blood relations (grandchildren, great aunts/uncles, etc.) and significant relationships (including adoptive) in the infobox as long as they're based on objective evidence.
Edit: If we were to give Joel and Ellie a specific relationship, I honestly believe that the closest would be a surrogate relationship. After all, a surrogate father and a father figure can be pretty synonymous without the possibility of adoption. If we had to narrow it down to one option, I'd say this is the best. NinjaFatGuy (talk) 07:03, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
This makes sense. But, if we were to replace the "relatives" section with the "relationship" section, wouldn't that also wind up leading to an endless stream of speculation? I feel like if we were to go down that route, having someone come in and add other characters based on their interpretation of the relationship seems inevitable. We'd probably be right back to where we started in terms of this discussion.
If we would have to put Joel down as anything, I can understand "surrogate father," but would we still be listing every resulting relationship like we're doing now? (Ex: Maria being "surrogate aunt-in-law" or Sarah being "surrogate sister" to Ellie.) Also, while I can see why people would want to put Marlene in as Ellie's "surrogate mother," they didn't seem to have had a personal relationship. Marlene briefly took care of Ellie before putting her into an orphanage when she was likely no older than an infant. They never even met until Ellie was 13, and when asked about her connection to Marlene, Ellie describes her as " just a friend." Like I said before, I think it's the subjectivity of all of this that's the root of the issue. MICKEYMOUSEUSERNAME (talk) 00:43, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Not necessarily. We just need to set a standard for future reference, which is the point of the discussion. As long as the relationship is based on objective reasoning, we can keep it based off the standards we're attempting to set. Anything considered subjective or speculation will get removed.
As for extending the surrogate relationship to other relatives, I find it unnecessary. Sometimes, if not in most cases, surrogate relationships can just be between the surrogate parent and child, and considering Joel and Ellie's relationship isn't concrete, it might just be best to consider those two as the surrogate relationship as anything beyond that could be crossing the line into speculation. As for Marlene and Ellie, it could honestly go either way. The situation of Marlene putting her in an orphanage for most of her life definitely diminishes the idea of a surrogate relationship. If others agree, we could just completely remove their relationship. NinjaFatGuy (talk) 01:11, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Most of the ideas for changes (and the logic behind them) sounds spot-on. I do worry about the "surrogate" thing, tho. To me, that sounds like it could be opening the door for "same problem, different words". Yes, Joel and Ellie fit the description for that relationship perfectly. They're fine. But what about Abby and Lev? Their relationship is a mirror for Joel's and Ellie's in Pt1, and by end of Pt2 they're as close as Joel and Ellie were. Maybe closer. If Joel and Ellie get a label, then Abby and Lev should, too. And that's where I think it could be opening a can of worms.
At the very least, I'd suggest that preemptive decisions be made on Abby/Lev, Ellie/JJ, Abby/Yara, and Marlene/Ellie. Those seems like the ones that are undefined that would be the most likely to be up for interpretation.Swedgin (talk) 02:01, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Here's what I'm thinking:
1.) We restrict the "relatives" section to blood relatives and those who have a legally recognized relationship only, while keeping all other relationships in the "affiliations" section.
2.) We go through with the idea of having a "relationships" section, but we keep the "relatives" section as well. Only those who are related via blood or legal process go into the "relatives" section, and we can put everybody else (including those who are boyfriend/girlfriend or surrogate ____) into the "relationship" section. I think this is a better solution, because it's more likely to remove any confusion for all future editors who might conflate the two otherwise.
Personally, I would just categorize Ellie/JJ as surrogate mother/son and put them in the "relatives" section. Everybody else can just be put into Affiliations. MICKEYMOUSEUSERNAME (talk) 03:16, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Have we come to a conclusion? Based on the recent edits, I think we have, but it'd still be good to set everything in stone here.MICKEYMOUSEUSERNAME (talk) 14:59, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Admin note: it is good courtesy to allow talk page discussions to remain ongoing until at least a) two full weeks have past and the discussion is still in a deadlock over the decision or b) a consensus was reached and remained as such for at least 3 days after said consensus was reached. Do keep in mind this discussion hasn't even been going on for even a week yet so its fair to allow it time in case editors wish to chime in their opinions, alternate suggestions, or provide further evidence or strength to their arguments. Therefore, this discussion will remain open for at least 2 more days before a staff member comes in to wrap up the verdict and formally close the discussion. Thank you. Snivy The coolest Pokemon ever 19:20, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Before this discussion closes, let's try to come to a definitive conclusion so that all future editors have a reference. Joel is now considered to be Ellie's "surrogate father." Is there any disagreement with this current listing? Is there a need to label any other relationships, such as Abby and Lev, in a similar manner? MICKEYMOUSEUSERNAME (talk) 06:17, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Seems like the consensus is to have Joel and Ellie as a surrogate relationship (no other extended familial ties beyond that), but I believe Abby/Lev should remain without any relationship -- despite being close, we don't really get enough solid evidence of Abby acting as a mother to Lev like we do with Joel acting as a father with Ellie; after all, we pretty much have a good idea of their relationship after 6 years of being together. Based on Marlene putting Ellie in an orphanage and Ellie's words as "just a friend", I think it can be agreed upon to remove their relationship. Abby/Yara definitely shouldn't have a relationship, even if Abby was a surrogate mother to Lev. Ellie/Dina/JJ is considered an adoptive family. If there are no significant objections to this, then we will close this discussion at the end of Friday. As a result, I will add this information as a reference in the wiki's manual of style when I revamp it. NinjaFatGuy (talk) 08:18, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
I still strongly disagree with giving Joel and Ellie a defined relationship, but not doing the same for Abby and Lev. Their story in the second game is such a direct parallel for Joel and Ellie in the original that it seems wrong to acknowledge one, but not the other. I get the argument that Abby and Lev's relationship is harder to define (are surrogate sister and brother even a thing?), but that's the exact reason I argued that Joel/Ellie shouldn't be defined, either: because while theirs is obvious, it leads to a situation like Abby and Lev, who are harder to label but every bit as deserving of one.
Seems like maybe I'm the only one who feels this way, but my vote would've been to keep the category as "Relatives" and limit it to blood-relations, spouses, and Ellie/JJ (based on the "family" comment); everyone else goes into the "Affiliates" list (with girlfriends and boyfriends being called out). Otherwise, then the proposed changes sound like the best alternative. But maybe the Abby/Lev thing could be shelved for now, and discussed again at some point in the future?Swedgin (talk) 10:27, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
As long as it receives opposition, the issue very well may be shelved. After all, we're attempting to clarify many issues here, it would be very hard to come to a single consensus that everyone agrees with. NinjaFatGuy (talk) 19:47, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Ellie's age?

Just thinking about Ellie's age, and I realized that some of the numbers and dates might not add up.

Based on the museum flashback scene, we know that her birthday is sometime in the summer, or perhaps late spring. And she tells us in the first game that she's 14 in the summer of 2033, meaning that she was very likely born in 2019. It's possible that she was actually born in 2018, and her 15th birthday is coming up soon after she meets Joel, but this seems unlikely for a couple of reasons. 1) As a writer, if you go out of your way to tell your audience that a character's age is "x", you're creating the expectation that they're going to be that age for awhile going forward, not that they're secretly going to turn "y" a couple of weeks later. And 2) No teenager that's about to turn 15 very soon would still be all like "Oh, yeah, I'm 14". :p So I think all the evidence strongly points to her being born roughly sometime between April and September, 2019.

However, that means she'd actually be 18 during the March, 2038 Jackson scenes, and her age for the Seattle scenes would also be open to question. Which is a problem, considering that all the interviews and promo material and everything specifically describe her as 19.

All things considered, tho, I think she should still be listed here as 19 in Pt2. That's the age that all the out-of-game official sources give for her. And we don't know for sure when the 3 days in Seattle take place (some evidence points to late April), but its possible she turned 19 right around the time they arrived, or would soon afterward, making it okay to round up by a few days or weeks.

Just throwing all this out there just to see if anyone else had any thoughts on it.Swedgin (talk) 06:31, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Put simply, if she is 14 in 2033, then she is 19 in 2038 because that's a five year time lapse and math shows: 2038-2033= 5 and 19-14= 5, so it logically fits. Plus, like you said, official media places her at 19 years old during Part II, so that's the age we go with as that is her canon age.
Further, it is important to clarify that fans presumed Ellie's age at the end of the first game (Spring, 2034) remained 14 on the basis her turning 15 because her birthday occurred was not mentioned. Therefore, it remains speculation as to when exactly she was born. What we know for sure is this: she is 14 in the Summer of 2033 and she is 19 in the Spring of 2038. That's what we go with because that is the canon the games and Naughty Dog established. Hope this helps! Snivy The coolest Pokemon ever 16:41, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
That makes sense. Like I said, I wasn't suggesting it be changed, but there was an edit yesterday that changed it from "19" to "19-20", and when I changed it back I was planning to include an explanation that "we know she can't be 20, and here's the math that proves it"... and that's when I realized that the math doesn't quite add up if you dig too deep. Felt like it was worth pointing out, at least.
The editor yesterday may have meant the "20" to refer to the farm/Santa Barbara sections, but I assume the age given in the infobox for Pt2 is just meant to refer to the Jackson/Seattle scenes, since that's when the majority of the game takes place? Otherwise, Dina, Abby, and Lev would need expanded age listings, too... plus others for Joel, Tommy, and Ellie in the opening scene, and that seems like it'd make things messy and cluttered real quick.Swedgin (talk) 21:37, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Elliot Page

Out of respect to Elliot Page and transgender people in general, can we please remove his dead name from the trivia section? His current name is the only one that needs to be there. VengefulTheDemon 18:16, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Makes sense. Like you said, the old name doesn't need to be there; I think most people know who Elliot is. Supported.Swedgin (talk) 20:41, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
The issue has been fixed, thank you for pointing that out! NinjaFatGuy (talk) 21:32, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
Advertisement