Talk:Uwu

UwU is a German abbreviation, Unsere Welt Untergang (the day of our doom), a battle cry of an SS soldier. It was shortened to UwU and written on helmets and bayonets. REAL HISTORY furries ruined everything on Wikipedia, I will restore the very first remaining files on all sites MrCrekerYT (talk) 18:20, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

There is no evidence of this. ❧ LunaEatsTuna (talk), proudly editing since 2018 (and just editing since 2017) – posted at 21:12, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

I believe this has no place on the article, it's simply irrelevant. Amsiism (talk) 16:19, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

I agree, as I'm pretty sure it was only added because it's a recent event, but honestly stumbling upon this was really funny... 🫀 Crash // Organhaver (talk to me, maybe?) 16:53, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

I did recently make an edit to this content as it existed, but don't let that in any way stop you from removing it entirely if you think that's appropriate. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 21:37, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

Following up on the discussion above — I find that the mention of the event doesn't add to the article.

From my understanding of WP:UNDUE and WP:NOTNEWS, a single, recent incident involving “OwO” being written on a bullet casing does not meaningfully relate to the history, usage, or cultural context of the emoticon. It gives disproportionate weight to a one-off event and doesn’t improve the article.

Unless there is a strong reason to keep it, I propose removing the sentence and citation entirely. MattConnors365 (talk) 20:58, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Definitely remove that. Honestly, I'm surprised it's been kept for so long. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver (talk to me, maybe?) 22:47, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

I neutral to remove this mention: The OwO variant was found inscribed on the used bullet in the investigation of the assassination of Charlie Kirk on September 10, 2025 VitorFriboquen :] (Talk) 23:37, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Are we going to note under every online meme/emoticon when it is used by the perpetrator/suspect of a violent crime? It reads more like trivia than actual encyclopedic information. I've opted to remove it now as editors involved in the discussion are so far either pro-removal or neutral. Raskuly (talk) 12:55, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

I just noticed that my edit was removed, apparently due to "original research"? Why? I provided plenty of references of people using the word "uwu" in connection to anime, despite, as I said, the word not originating from anime. Why isn't this good enough evidence of the mistaken use of the word I was referencing? Multiple business at that, I would think that someone starting an anime-connected business, but using a word that does not originate from anime, is a pretty clear example of the mistaken use I was talking about. Do you need me to also link to a ton of YouTube videos where people are talking about anime and drop "uwu"?

Granted, I don't edit Wikipedia much, so is the problem with how I worded it or something? I would have assumed that a common use of the word, based on an assumption that's not possible (i.e that "uwu" is something used in anime, so you can use it to reference anime, when not only is is not from anime, but it can't even be properly pronounced in Japanese) would be rather relevant in this article. Fireaza (talk) 00:19, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

I'm pretty certain that "original research" in this context is basically making conclusions yourself without a source saying it. looking at your edits I could see why this would be an WP:OR violation. Examples of anime and uwu being correlated don't work as great sources for that claim. At least, that's what I think. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver (talk to me, maybe?) 01:50, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

So, what would you recommend? I'd say that the frequent use of using "uwu" to reference anime (as shown by the references from my edit), despite not originating from anime, and Japanese in fact lacking the ability to even say the word, is something remarkable that's worth including in this entry. Fireaza (talk) 09:43, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Of course it's worth including. If you can find reliable sources that say that, then go for it. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver (talk to me, maybe?) 21:43, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

What's wrong with the sources I originally included? They clearly show examples of the assumed connection between "uwu" and anime in the mind of Westerners, yet, as I said, not only is it not from anime, but it can't even be pronounced properly in Japanese. What exactly would count as a better source than that? Are you holding out for a reputable source that literally says "uwu is often erroneously used to refer to anime culture"? Fireaza (talk) 13:48, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

For that last sentence, yes, you are correct. A source you need is one talking about Westerners correlating uwu and anime. Not examples. Sorry for not explaining well. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver (talk to me, maybe?) 20:48, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Well, in that case, one of the sources I linked to was about being an "otaku" which used "uwu" in the headline. Surely that's a good enough? Especially since it was written by a university department, which is a pretty good indication of how wide-spread this is. Fireaza (talk) 11:54, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

No, it isn't, at least for making claims on Wikipedia. You can't use examples for supporting a claim; you need a source that actually says that. I don't know how to keep telling you this. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver (talk to me, maybe?) 15:14, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Why do I need a source for something that should be "factual"? It's a fact that "uwu" is not from anime nor is it used in it. The only point of contention should be if the misconception is truly as "widespread" as I'm claiming it to be. To that point, wouldn't multiple anime-related businesses using "uwu" be good evidence of this? Fireaza (talk) 07:57, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

It doesn't matter if it's factual. You need a source that says what you are claiming if you want to add it into the article. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver (talk to me, maybe?) 15:34, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

OK, I’ve located some sources that supports the claim:

KnowYourMeme:

Describes uwu as “frequently used in anime” and associated with anime/furry communities.

https://knowyourmeme.com/editorials/guides/what-does-uwu-mean

Cambridge Dictionary:

Defines uwu as a “manga-derived emoticon.”

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/uwu

Dictionary.com:

Notes its early use on an English-language anime/manga fan fiction site (2005).

https://www.dictionary.com/e/slang/uwu/

Observatory of Youth Language and Culture:

Calls uwu “reminiscent of anime films or manga comics.”

https://obserwatorium-mlodziezy.ujk.edu.pl/en/units/uwu-uwu/

Japanese phonology studies confirm that modern Japanese lacks a native wu syllable:

https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/gengo1939/1989/95/1989_95_144/_article

Together, these show that while uwu is popularly tied to anime by Western fans, it did not originate in Japan and does not correspond to a pronounceable Japanese syllable. Fireaza (talk) 04:39, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Do you understand what I'm saying? You can't use examples. For an example of this (no pun intended), you can't say that frogs aren't blue with sources talking about green frogs and other colors. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver (talk to me, maybe?) 06:04, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

I understand the concern, we can’t use inference or examples. That’s why I’m pointing to sources that explicitly make a connection between "uwu" and anime culture:

Cambridge Dictionary: defines uwu as a “manga-derived emoticon.”

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/uwu

Observatory of Youth Language and Culture: says uwu is “reminiscent of anime films or manga comics.”

https://obserwatorium-mlodziezy.ujk.edu.pl/en/units/uwu-uwu/

KnowYourMeme: describes uwu as “frequently used in anime” and connected to anime/furry communities.

https://knowyourmeme.com/editorials/guides/what-does-uwu-mean

These aren't just examples, they directly state that uwu is tied to anime/manga culture in the eyes of Western fans. Separately, linguistic sources (e.g. Wu (kana), Tabata 1989: https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/gengo1939/1989/95/1989_95_144/_article) confirm that Japanese lacks a wu syllable, supporting the point about pronunciation.

While none of them *literally* say "many people use 'uwu' to refer to anime culture, however this is incorrect, as it does not originate from anime and cannot be properly pronounced in Japanese", any reasonable person would be able to see that they show Westerners associate "uwu" with anime culture. Combine that with the aforementioned information about Japanese lacking a wu syllable, and I'm not sure what other evidence I can provide for this connection. Fireaza (talk) 09:22, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Forgive my bad wording in all of this. When you say while none of them *literally* say "many people use 'uwu' to refer to anime culture, however this is incorrect, as it does not originate from anime and cannot be properly pronounced in Japanese", any reasonable person would be able to see that they show Westerners associate "uwu" with anime culture you're wrong. If this is any help see WP:OR. Specifically, this sentence: [Original research] includes any analysis or synthesis of published material that reaches or implies a conclusion not stated by the sources. Even if it's "obvious", you can't make those conclusions yourself. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver (talk to me, maybe?) 16:26, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Following up to clarify sources and wording based on WP:OR concerns:

Thanks for clarifying, and I understand the concern about WP:OR. I believe, however, that the sources I’ve cited do meet Wikipedia’s sourcing standard for verifiability (WP:V), as they don’t require any synthesis beyond what they already state.

For example:

Cambridge Dictionary defines uwu as a “manga-derived emoticon,” directly linking it to Japanese media.

KnowYourMeme describes it as “frequently used in anime” and within anime/furry communities.

Dictionary.com notes its early use on an English-language anime/manga fanfiction site.

The Observatory of Youth Language and Culture says uwu is “reminiscent of anime films or manga comics.”

Each of these explicitly connects uwu to anime or manga — not as mere examples, but as part of their definitional or analytical descriptions.

At the same time, linguistic sources (like Tabata 1989 and the Wu (kana) article) confirm that Japanese lacks a “wu” syllable, showing that the term could not have originated in Japanese.

The proposed sentence simply summarizes these two verifiable points without interpretation:

“In English-language fandoms, uwu is often associated with anime and manga culture, despite not originating in Japanese media or language.”

I believe this is neutral, verifiable, and well-sourced under WP:V and WP:RS, while avoiding WP:OR. I’ve also requested a Third Opinion to get a neutral view on whether this meets inclusion standards. Fireaza (talk) 04:53, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Did you seriously have to ask a LLM to generate a response because you couldn’t yourself? I’ve literally talked with you this entire discussion. You do not write like that. And– I’m happy about the third opinion, but please, maybe actually listen to what I’m saying when I reply. I would appreciate it. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver (talk to me, maybe?) 05:06, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

@Fireaza Replying to your message.

It sounds like you're driving at this being a case of mistaken Japonisme. An analogy that comes to mind is "Fortune cookies are often served as a dessert in Chinese restaurants in the United States, Canada, Australia, and other countries, but they are not Chinese in origin."

I'd look for sources that directly say things like "while uwu is now associated with anime culture, it originates in the furry community" or "the cultural affiliation of uwu has changed with time" or "while uwu is strongly associated with Western anime culture, the term is not used by Japanese otaku". That last one would be pretty interesting if true. Maybe Japanese sources exist that address this head-on. Is there a Japanese transliteration of uwu that could be used as a search keyword? Uhoj (talk) 23:58, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks again for your detailed feedback — your “fortune cookie” analogy is actually very close to what I was trying to express.

I’ve revisited the sources I mentioned earlier, along with some additional Japanese-language references, and found that while uwu is often associated with anime or kawaii culture in English-speaking fandoms, Japanese speakers themselves generally describe it as a foreign (海外) expression rather than a native Japanese one. For example:

Dictionary.com defines uwu as a fandom emoticon linked to anime and kawaii contexts.

Cambridge Dictionary calls it a “manga-derived emoticon.”

KnowYourMeme notes it is “frequently used in anime” and tied to anime/furry communities.

Japanese explainers, such as the YouTube video 「可愛すぎる海外の顔文字『uwu』とは？」 (“What is the overly cute overseas emoticon ‘uwu’?”), describe it explicitly as an overseas meme.

Searching for “uwu” on Yahoo! Japan mostly returns results identifying it as part of English or overseas internet culture rather than something used in Japan.

Linguistic sources (e.g., Tabata 1989, Studies in the Japanese Language) confirm modern Japanese lacks a native “wu” mora, reinforcing that it’s not naturally pronounceable in Japanese.

So while there may not be a source literally saying “it is erroneous to connect uwu with anime culture,” the evidence suggests it’s a Western association based on Japanese aesthetics rather than something that emerged within Japan.

Would a more neutral phrasing like this meet Wikipedia’s sourcing and NPOV standards?

“In English-language fandoms, uwu is frequently associated with anime and kawaii culture; however, the emoticon did not originate in Japanese media or language, and modern Japanese phonology does not include a native ‘wu’ mora.” Fireaza (talk) 04:59, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

My two cents, which you're free to disagree with:

You can say whatever a single source says. If it's disputable then it needs to be presented as an opinion attributed to the source. For example, "X said that uwu is not a Japanese word." Where X needs to be someone with expertise / gravitas; not a random YouTuber.

Combining sources is prohibited by the synthesis policy.

"modern Japanese phonology does not include a native ‘wu’ mora” feels like original research unless you have a source connecting that fact with uwu. Uhoj (talk) 19:05, 25 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Uhoj — thanks again for the clarification.

Two points of clarification plus a proposed, policy-safe wording:

1. Japanese phonology is well-documented as lacking a native wu mora (e.g. Tabata 1989, Gengo Kenkyu). A mora is a timing unit in Japanese (roughly like a syllable in English). Modern Japanese has kana for wa (わ), wo (を), and u (う), but no native wu mora. I mentioned this only as background context to explain why uwu is not a naturally occurring Japanese lexical item, not to make an analytical claim about usage. This isn’t specific to uwu, but rather a basic phonological constraint of the language — the same reason loanwords containing “wu” are typically adapted as u or fu. In this context, it supports the point that uwu cannot be a naturalized Japanese expression.
2. Proposed neutral wording (no synthesis):

“In English-language fandoms, uwu is frequently associated with anime and kawaii culture. Japanese-language sources, however, generally describe it as an overseas or foreign emoticon rather than a native Japanese expression.”

Supporting references (formal):

• Cambridge Dictionary – uwu
• Dictionary.com – uwu
• Observatory of Youth Language and Culture

Additional context (non-citable, for Talk page discussion):

Japanese Q&A sites like Yahoo!知恵袋 feature questions “uwuって何？” with top answers explaining it as “海外の顔文字” (“an overseas emoticon”). While not suitable for article citation, this shows native Japanese speakers perceive uwu as foreign rather than originating from Japanese anime culture.

If that phrasing looks acceptable under [[WP:V]]/[[WP:NPOV]] and avoids WP:SYNTH, I can prepare the proper {{cite web}} templates and post it as a suggested edit for review.

Thanks again for your guidance and the “fortune cookie” analogy — it was very helpful.

—Fireaza (talk) 05:59, 29 October 2025 (UTC) Fireaza (talk) 05:59, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

There are a couple problems with the second sentence.

1. None of the three sources supports it.
2. Two of the sources appear to contradict it:

On English-language manga sites, it appeared as early as the beginning of the 21st century, and in digital communication in East Asia even earlier

Uwu is likely a simplified form of such kaomoji as (o･ω･o).

Uhoj (talk) 14:03, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying, I see your point about the kaomoji connection, and I agree that uwu’s appearance is likely inspired by Japanese emoticons such as (o･ω･o).

My original intent wasn’t to argue against that lineage, but rather to highlight the Western cultural misunderstanding that treats the word “uwu” itself as Japanese or anime-related. That’s a bit different from saying it’s “inspired by” kaomoji, it’s about how English-speaking fandoms perceive and use it.

Part of this confusion may come from how some anime characters have distinctive speaking quirks. For example, characters who add sounds or syllables at the end of their sentences (like “desu~”, “nyan”, or “nano da~”). To people unfamiliar with Japanese, “uwu” might sound like one of these “cute” verbal tics.

Linguistically, though, modern Japanese phonology lacks a “wu” mora, meaning the exact sequence uwu couldn’t occur naturally in Japanese speech or writing (see Tabata 1989, Gengo Kenkyu). So when English speakers use uwu as a shorthand for “Japanese-style cuteness,” it’s a Western construct, not something that exists in Japanese itself.

I completely understand that this distinction would still need explicit sourcing before being added to the article, but I think it’s relevant background for understanding the nature of the misconception I was referring to.

Perhaps a more precise, source-aligned phrasing for the article would be something like:

“The emoticon uwu is influenced by Japanese kaomoji such as (o･ω･o), but originated in English-speaking online communities rather than in Japan.”

That wording directly reflects the sources (especially the Dictionary.com and KnowYourMeme entries) without implying anything unsourced or evaluative about “erroneous” use.

Would that be closer to policy compliance? Fireaza (talk) 01:52, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Response to third opinion request:

There is a conflict over whether to include "It is often erroneously used to reference anime culture" in the article. @Fireaza provided sources that they say support this addition. @Organhaver says that the statement is original research not directly supported by the sources. The question is not whether uwu is now associated with anime, but whether or not it originates from anime, and if it does not originate from anime, whether this makes anime-associated usage erroneous. Etymological fallacy tells us that it is incorrect to argue that customary usage is incorrect merely because it varies from original usage. Therefor, reliable sources must agree that uwu in reference to anime culture is incorrect today. The sources linked by User:Fireaza were reviewed. One reference to anime is "If you've ever found yourself browsing anime or furry communities online, you may have run across the term UWU before" indicating that usage is prevalent in today's anime culture. No source addresses whether or not it is erroneous to use uwu to reference anime culture. Consequently, a source directly addressing this point is needed to allow insertion of "It is often erroneously used to reference anime culture". No such source is known, so we must omit the statement. Uhoj (talk) 23:06, 7 October 2025 (UTC)