Talk:Rei Ayanami

The inclusion of reiayanami(tentative name) in this article

I recently noticed an edit which removed a portion of a section on Rei's appearance in the third Rebuild flick, which made sense to me since I don't remember Rei appearing in that film, but another character titled reiayanami(tentative name) did. However, it was recently undone, and with a reason I could understand:

Sorry but all "iterations" of Rei are considered the same character, the article already treats Rei 1, Rei 2 and Rei 3 from the series as the same so there's no reason to be different with Rei Q, which is in fact present in the movie and has a significant, if still reduced role.)

— FelipeFritsch

Assuming Rei Q means ayanamirei(tentative name), there is a significant difference between not accounted for: Rei 1, 2 and 3 are fan names for the same character, as in the original series Rei is simply credited as Rei Ayanami. With the third Rebuild flick, this differs as a new character titled ayanamirei(tentative name) is introduced. Both the Japanese wiki and official material does not list Rei as present in the third movie. Furthermore, the most important difference is perhaps that in the original, Rei Ayanami remains a linear, singular character as it is the same individual from start to end. This differs with the new movies as Rei from the first two movies is locked away and is off screen, whilst a similar (in fact, a clone) character makes a new appearance. Considering that these are two characters, both with distinct development arcs and personalities and indeed individualities, conflating the two would only cause confusion and misrepresent both characters.

FrittyFelix (talk) 08:42, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps simply clarify that a "new" Rei is there. For comparison, the Asuka article lists Asuka Shikinami and makes her differences in regards to the original Sohryu character quite clear.

FelipeFritschF (talk) 01:45, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

The problem with comparing Rei - Rei Q and Soryu - Shikinami is that Shikinami was the direct Rebuild adaptation of Soryu in NGE, while Rei Q is a completely new character introduced in the Rebuild series. The rebuild series still contains their own direct adaptation of Rei in NGE as seen in 1.0 and 2.0. This is why the characters need to be distinct when documenting them.

Pelle Lad. (talk) 16:38, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

I agree with Felipe that clarifying that a "new Rei" being there insofar it means a new character is the way to go. However I also agree with Pelle because in Asuka's article it's still only one character being represented, whereas with Rei's article there's now two characters being described. I think we should excise the new character in the third flick and perhaps even create a new article for that character.

FrittyFelix (talk) 22:41, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

On Rei's reception section

Hello, I was reading through the "Reception" section and found it rather disorganized. Rei is first and foremost, a japanese character insofar she was made in japan for a japanese tv series and for a japanese audience. Therefore it would make sense to consider the Japanese reaction first, and going into detail about that. As it stands, it's simply a series of anecdotes from both western and eastern audiences.

I think it would make sense to restructure this a little bit, perhaps even dividing it into subsections for nations and whatnot.

FrittyFelix (talk) 17:35, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Unencyclopedic

Unfortunately, this article is written in large parts like a fan page, with frequent insider language. For someone trying to inform myself about the lemma, this is very frustrating. Maikel (talk) 10:25, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Rewriting

I'm currently rewriting this whole article. Basically all sections are written in non-encyclopedic style, with no sources or with fansite-like prose. --TeenAngels1234 (talk) 22:19, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

I think the works that's been done is phenomenal! I came here to look for some citations, and found a great revamp. Though, I'd say that the reception section only makes me more confused. It's great showing how Rei's ranking in certain polls are, but if she ranks 5th or 2nd doesn't tell you much unless you have the context of that poll, who's #1 of that year, and so on. I think I'll look into providing some more sources and maybe picture references to help with this.FrittyFelix (talk) 21:34, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Felix. Of course this is only a small incentive. You are free to edit as you wish, as the it.wiki and en.wiki guidelines change a lot. Anyway, I would honestly suggest to use an early Sadamoto design for "Conception", as for Asuka's article. Maybe the one on Yui Ichijo. You can find it on ru.wiki.--TeenAngels1234 (talk) 20:04, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

I'll do that. I thought that design was copyright protected. Oh well... FelipeFritschF (talk) 20:12, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, Felipe. Design is still copyright protected. It should be trasferred here on en.wiki with fair use licence, not Commons for copyviol.--TeenAngels1234 (talk) 23:07, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Yeah that's a good idea. Because of Eva's particular case of being perennially popular but not *the franchise of the season* things can fluctuate a lot. FelipeFritschF (talk) 22:02, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Rei Ayanami Proposal Design.jpg
• Yui Ichijo.jpg

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:37, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Rei Ayanami/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tintor2 (talk · contribs) 14:28, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I'll be reviewing this article. Like we did with Shinji Ikari, we'll revise Rei's sections little by little. Starting from the infobox:

• Are Yui and Lilith worth mentioning in the infobox as "relatives"?

 Done I deleted them.

• "Brina Palencia (Rebuild of Evangelion)" The title should be written in italics. Done
• Infobox image needs alt Done

Lead

• The lead should focus first on her primary media like "fictional character from the anime Neon Genesis Evangelion" Done
• "She is revealed to be a key factor in the events that conclude the storyline." The lead is supposed to be an introduction of the character so there is no need to focus on that unless we mention her role in The End and Rebuild

 Done I deleted the passage.

Creation

• add alt to the image. Maybe you could combine the two sketches by Sadamoto like the ones from this article using the "multiple image" template Done
• "trying to put aside my presuppositions, trying to bring out the most primitive, the most core, the purest parts within me" Since the source is Japanese, I would suggest rephrasing that in your own words as it was quoted from a fantranslation

 Done Kinda superfluous.

• "Original script from Evangelion Original III" I would suggest a better format for this reference Done
• In voices link Megumi Hayashibara since it's her first mention in the body Done
• Even if there are no interviews, mention the other actresses in the article's body with any simple reference like Behind the Voice actors, the official website, a news article, etc.

@Tintor2: I tried my best with the other advices, but what do you mean? Just the English dub, or the dubs in various languages, like for Elsa (Frozen)?--TeenAngels1234 (talk) 23:20, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

That's all for today. Good work so far. For some reason this is faster than Shinji's review. Remember to ping me once you are finished with visiting this issues. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 14:28, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

@TeenAngels1234: Just a mention in prose in the voice actors from the English dub is enough. By the way, remember how you handled Shinji's actress? Unless there are exceptions, there is no need to state Hayashibara's works. Good work so far. I'll continue tomorrow.Tintor2 (talk) 23:31, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done--TeenAngels1234 (talk) 12:46, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Neon Genesis Evangelion

• Although Shinji Ikari's backstory is told early, Rei Ayanami's is not revealed until the final episodes before Kaworu appears. As a result, I would suggest moving " She was born in Laboratory for Artificial Evolution's third branch, a place located under the lake Ashino and Hakone city.[28] Her body with albino-like traits is created in absolute secrecy from the salvaged remains of Yui Ikari,[29] a brilliant researcher who loses her life in a testing experiment by Evangelion Unit 01. In the deepest level of the headquarters of a special agency named Nerv, many Rei clones are kept, so that when one Rei dies, she can be replaced. When a clone is activated from a level named Terminal Dogma, although she remains characteristically distinct from all former incarnations, she is endowed with the soul of a being called Lilith, the second Angel." to the bottom of this section. and start this section with what the viewer of the series knows who she is in her first episodes.
• While I'm not sure about this, should Rei 3 be mentioned in this section? I mean, I remember in the manga that Rei delivered a sense of individualism and thus the regular Rei, Rei 2, appears to Shinji in the finale during Instrumentality with Shinji remembering how they met through the contact of their hands. The mention that Rei 2 is a clone is important though.

I completely edited the section, fixing this informations and still trying my best.--TeenAngels1234 (talk) 12:46, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Rebuild of Evangelion

• No issues here. I understood everything and the explanation of clones is better presented.

In other media

• Reference 52 (From the interview to Sadamoto from the CUT magazine, December 2014.) needs better formatting Done

Characterization and themes

• Unlink Sadamoto or relink the one from the manga paragraph. Done
• "In the twelfth episode, she states she does not deem it necessary to write a will and reveals she is a vegetarian.[89] During the series it is suggested that she does not have a menstrual cycle.[90]" This sure sounds awkward like those comments from Harry Potter's author. It might come across as WP:Fancruft so I suggest removing it unless Anno or somebody else makes a deal in regards to these statements. Done
• "Ōizumi Mitsunari, in a long interview with Hideaki Anno, compared the figure of Rei to the many girls committed to the Japanese sect Aum Shinrikyō, particularly popular during the years of the first broadcast of Evangelion, as "completely dependent on their guru" Shōkō Asahara.[15]" This one kinda intrigued me but it is lacking certain stuff: Who is Mitsunari and what's exactly the sec about.

@Tintor2: Well, he's a Japanese writer and academic. There's not so much to say about him, but I added a specific mention, at least. You can find my original scans on Italian EvangelionWikia. The statement is brief, and I basically reported it with a brief context: "When I look at Rei Ayanami, I’m reminded of the girls in Aum. In short, they’re all dependent upon their Guru, Asahara.". (From an EvaGeeks fan translation). --TeenAngels1234 (talk) 12:46, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

• "According to her voice actress, Amanda Winn-Lee, despite the cold and detached appearance, there is still "a small spark of humanity" in Rei, "clouded by this huge sense of negative self-worth and the realization that she is expendable".[98] She also stated: "She knows she's expendable, but the thing is, she's still human." This would be more fitting for the section Voice since we are seen the character from an English actress' point of view similar to Hayashibara. Done

@TeenAngels1234: That's all for these sections. Keep up the good work. Once this is solved, we move to Cultural impact.Tintor2 (talk) 01:35, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Popularity and critical reception

• "For Oricon News, Rei's character has become Evangelion's emblem." seems to be more suitable in the first paragraph as they deal with the popularity she has. Done
• When dealing with the first and second paragraph provide an introduction statement like "Critical reception to Rei's character has been" similar to a formal letter. Done
• "IGN ranked Rei 10th on its list of Top 25 Anime Characters of All Time. Writer Chris Mackenzie noted Rei was one of the most influential characters in the anime series, adding she was different from similar characters since, "She's a mystery we never really solve, when you think about it."[152]" This might fit better in the popularity paragraph. Done

Merchandise

• "Neon Genesis Evangelion: Ayanami Raising Project" Shouldn't this fit better in the other media sections kinda like Shinji's games? Done
• In 2020, Honda used Rei and other characters from the series for a number of commercials, which aired on the occasion of a collaboration between Evangelion and Honda Civic.[168]" Evangelion is lacking italics (unless we are talking about the mecha?). Done
• "Evangelion Photograph - Rei" Sounds like an artbook but it lacks a description

@Tintor2: It seems it's just a collection of pictures, but at least I specified.--TeenAngels1234 (talk) 15:11, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

• " This moe element, which gained wide popularity only after Rei's success, can be found in numerous subsequent female characters, including Eva in Black Cat, Ai Enma in Hell Girl and Yuki Nagato in Haruhi Suzumiya." Is this backed up by the next reference? I mean the sentence ends and it goes on with Gasaraki among other influences Done
• "According to De'Angelo Epps (CBR), the character contributed to popularizing the kuudere stereotype, a term for male or female characters who hide their true feelings behind a melancholy and cold facade.[190" is similar to how Rei had an influence in the mukuchi. Since this material is not that big maybe it could be moved to the previous paragraph alongside to mukuchi saying "Similarly...." Done
• @TeenAngels1234: And that's all. Finish this and I'll pass it. Good work.Tintor2 (talk) 14:24, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Passing the review. This was quite faster than Shinji's review. Keep up the good work. Congratulations.Tintor2 (talk) 15:23, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Sources

Have we all forgotten what site we're on? This is an English article on the English Wikipedia. Cited sources need to (a) meet Wikipedia's reliability standards, (b) be written in English, and (c) be something that we can actually confirm the existence of. This means that you need to name a book, magazine issue, etc. that a person can buy or a website that a person can browse. If I type "ISBN 4-8074-9718-9" into a search engine and I only get two results, both of which are Wikipedia pages about Evangelion, then your source might as well not exist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.70.13.107 (talk) 09:41, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

What are you on about? Sources used in English Wikipedia doesn't need to be in the English language. It was never a requirement. Neocorelight (Talk) 05:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

The user who made this ga has access to such sources. Unless it's controversial information or a Fa nomination I don't see the reason to get nervous Tintor2 (talk) 16:35, 20 April 2022 (UTC)