Talk:Neon Genesis Evangelion (franchise)

Photos?

The two photos seem oddly context-less. Can somebody please improve their captions and include material in the article to establish how they are notable (I assume they are some reaction of hardcore fans). They look weird and could be considered to also give WP:Undue weight here. Ingolfson 08:53, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I know that the second photo was used in The End of Evangelion...I think the first was also in the movie, but I can't remember for sure. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 18:17, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Third reference

Was the third reference copied from another article? It's not showing up as containing any information. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 04:46, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

I had an off-by-one reversion in trying to reinsert {{peacock-inline}}. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 17:00, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem; easily fixed. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 17:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

the endings meaning

the ending of neon genesis evangelion was confusing for many including me looking at many discussions on this very topic i got many diffrent interpertations including ones such as when he got out of the pod he had learned to care for people other than himself so they were all there the people he cared about to congradulate him so they think that its in his head. another one is that hes dead and somewhere else. whatever the meaning the end is confusing overly so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thekamakazi (talk • contribs) 22:23, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Merchandise

under the Other media the merchandise section doesn't seem to be very formal at all. It seems whoever authored it added side notes to try and be more humorous - just some random IP stoping in to try to bring some attention to a section in need of a quick review :P —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.162.138.200 (talk • contribs)

You refer to the quote? I quoted it at length so that way I could sneak in the humor - Eva merchandising is fundamentally absurd - but avoid issues with the reference nazis. --Gwern (contribs) 22:11 7 August 2008 (GMT)

I agree that the first part of the merchandise section is informal and needs to be edited/removed. The comments are humorous, but do not significantly add to the article. Removing from "Asides from the many releases and forms of ...." to the end of the large quote looks like it helps the section. Rantir (talk) 00:50, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I disagree; that guts the section and drops all the merchandise down to just a few things released recently. There's a book just on Eva merchandise! We would be derelict to not mention this and quote an expert's summary. --Gwern (contribs) 23:50 19 May 2010 (GMT)

Well i would have to agree with Rantir, but i'm not going to go too far into this. i'm just going to say quotes like these look like undue weight, they could be put in prose format. Many quotes are better suited to be in prose in the NGE article, but it's up to whoever. I'm not forcing my opinion too much, but i do believe the quote can be removed and be put in prose format.Bread Ninja (talk) 01:08, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

The suggestion by Bread Ninja to move the quote into prose format is a good compromise. It keeps the content intact, while increasing readability. I am new to Wikipedia editing, so I will let someone else make the actual edit. --Rantir (talk) 02:16, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

yeah i think the quote was just there simply because Carl Horn was the one describing it.Bread Ninja (talk) 02:35, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:QUOTE#Formatting says large quotes 'may need to be set apart'. I think the Horn quote qualifies for that. --Gwern (contribs) 20:54 2 June 2010 (GMT)

I agree that the quote is long, but this discussion is concerned with whether the quote should even be in there. As Bread Ninja suggested, I believe we can move the quote into prose format. If this isn't a consensus we can just leave it for now. --Rantir (talk) 22:50, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

To be honest, i don't really believe 100% prose format is the best choice. The quote doesn't even seem to be a huge importance, all carl horn is saying is a list of merchandise, but does not really get into specific detail of which specific merchandise. for a quote about merchandise i would have to say it would have to be reception at best. i suggest completely removing it and leave no mention of it with no prose but i have sense learned my lesson in NGE articles, and just keeping it safe by getting the best of two sides, even if i still feel the same about the subject.Bread Ninja (talk) 03:41, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree that removing the quote would be the ideal choice, but in the meantime moving the quote to prose format is probably the best compromise. --Rantir (talk) 20:19, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

What does 'prose format' even mean? It's not like Horn was writing in Homeric hexameters. --Gwern (contribs) 18:44 8 June 2010 (GMT)

It jsut means removing it in quote or list format, and describing it rather than putting it in some other format.Bread Ninja (talk) 21:04, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Lilith (hypothetical moon)

Is Lilith (hypothetical moon) mentioned in NGE? 70.51.8.158 (talk) 06:02, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

A connection could certainly be drawn, at least to the Secret Files's version of the White Moon; but I know of no particular evidence linking them beyond their general similarity. --Gwern (contribs) 19:25 19 September 2008 (GMT)

Plot summary needed

As someone who has never seen anything from this series, I think this article needs to have a short, concise summary of what exactly the series is about.

The current assumption seems to be that everyone knows what it is already, so this very obvious thing is currently not in the article. Esn (talk) 00:21, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, there was a "Plotline of Neon Genesis Evangelion" article, but it was deleted. I didn't feel any necessity for a plot section for this article, because it doesn't make sense. What plot would it be summarizing? The manga is roughly the same as the TV series, but it diverges and goes on further. The two movies are either abbreviated and extended versions of the TV series, or they are entirely new endings. (Opinions differ on how new End of Evangelion is.) Each game has a radically different plot. The new movies aren't carbon-copies of the TV either. And so on.

Perhaps you meant something more akin to a 'setting' section, which describes the general setup of a secret military organization fighting alien monsters, with a neurotic cast of adults and kids? I don't know what else you could. But I am unsure what to put in such a section - I am in too deep to write a quick sketch of the NGE universe suitable for someone who has not the first clue about it. --Gwern (contribs) 02:58 11 November 2008 (GMT)

It should briefly outline the common plot elements and maybe mention the differences between versions. I literally mean that I want to know what the heck this thing is about. Yes, perhaps the setting section of the Star Wars article is a good example. Esn (talk) 05:39, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I ran with it. Comments? Willbyr (talk | contribs) 17:53, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. That does help a lot. Esn (talk) 22:24, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Looks good to me as well, as much as I'm tempted to add on additional bits like the religious symbolism, the fan-service, the psychological drama, etc. Although that lengthy comment about being apocalyptic vs post-apocalyptic might be a bit excessive. --Gwern (contribs) 23:01 12 November 2008 (GMT)

Possibly...I won't miss it if it's removed, but since it's a hidden comment, and was put there to put a halt to revert warring about apocalyptic vs. post-apocalyptic, leaving it wouldn't hurt anything. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 04:53, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

The very limited information in the introduction of EVA confused me often. It is necessary to add the plot so that more people can get a clear idea about Evangelion.Square.fang (talk) 11:45, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

While the franchise page should give some general information about the plot of the series, it isn't very necessary for such a general article that covers different works with such different uses and interpretations of a basic plotline or general terms (Evangelion, Angel, ect.). Think of how general Gundam can be. Better for the pages of each individual work to explain all the relevant plot. Ode2joy (talk) 12:53, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Multi-billion???!!! Are you sure about that?

I know it was successful, but did it really make billions of dollars? Dream Focus (talk) 01:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes. The references are in NGE TV. That level of profitability is plausible when you consider the number of video games, TV series, manga volumes, movies, and the infinite amount of Eva merchandise. --Gwern (contribs) 02:25 24 January 2009 (GMT)

I am also Highly skeptical about the "Multi Billion" figure. Multi Billion Yen maybe; but Dollars. Gundam makes about 50billion Yen a year. I highly doubt that Evangelion is a more successful franchise than Gundam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.136.104.21 (talk) 14:23, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Assume 15 years (easy math) and 2 billion (minimum for multi-billion) -> $133,333,333.33/year ... if Gundam = 50Gyen-> 500,000,000$/year , then NGE would need to be 1/4 as profitable... isn't that possible? 76.66.192.35 (talk) 12:31, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

The source quoted says "total sales of more than 150 billion yen". A yen has been around 1cent US for a long time (plus/minus ten percent or so), certainly for the last ten or fifteen years. That would make it TOTAL sales of US$1.5B. Which is noting to sneer at, but doesn't entirely warrant "multi-billion" verbiage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.78.180.35 (talk) 17:01, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it's excessive. That figure is from 2007, and probably based on earlier numbers yet; and it merely gives a lower bound. (Who knows how much more than 150 billion yen?) So it's an underestimate, doesn't take into account 3 or 4 years of sales, and much more importantly ignores Rebuild 1.0 and 2.0, which have been selling in the millions of copies on their own. (And Google tells me that 150b yen is more like 1.62 billion dollars, not 1.5.)

It seems sensible to me to say multi-billion when we're discussion more than 1. If you have 1 billion, you have a billion; if you have 2, you have billions. 2 is a multiple; 1 is not. --Gwern (contribs) 23:48 19 May 2010 (GMT)

(blank stare)....this has been the number 1 TV series in Japan for 10 years, produced *multiple* films that topped the Japanese box office...YES its a multi-billion dollar franchise! (the entire franchise, not just the original TV series, including merchandising etc.)....seriously, that's like saying "wow, are you really sure that all of Miyazaki's films taken together ever made over a million dollars?. As for bickering about "150 bilion yen"...that may just be about the series itself; the Eva merchandising empire is huge. Yikes. --Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici (talk) 19:19, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I was reading Eva ML archives the other day, and saw a thread where people listed what they had and how much they spent; the first person had spent >400$, and the second person had spent >1600$ and was planning to spend another 1 or 2k. --Gwern (contribs) 21:10 18 June 2010 (GMT)

Multibillion seems like an exceptionally high figure for a Japanese series. Given that the most financially sucesfull media franchises world wide never really get past a few billion in profits. The entire Starwars films franchise - one of the most commercially successful long running move franchises with a true global presence - for instance has a box office gross of about 5 billion dollars. To put this series in that league of success - especially given the fact that its mainstream popularity only lies in one country (Japan) and the rest of its worldwide popularity lies with very select subcultures in other nations that ammount of monet seems less than plausible. Even if each person being a fan of the franchise spent a large ammount of money on it you would need a huge number of fans for this to happen. For instance if we said the franchise was worth 2 billion USD (the bare minimum definition of multibillion) and each fan spent lets say 300$ on the franchise (most likely not the case, but we can understand this as a large sum) you would still need about 7 million people spending that large of a sum - to put it in perspective that would be about 1 in every 20 people in Japan spending such a large ammount of their money. I know when numbers are brought up in the abstract its mentally easy to forget how large the sum is - to neglect a zero and so forth. But a billion dollars is a massive sum of money. To say this series earned 2 billion dollars means it earned more than the entire GDP of nations like Siere Leone, Belize, San Marino, or Greenland. I dont know just mark me as very skeptical as to the techniques used to generate those numbers 70.112.184.148 (talk) 10:29, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

NGE is an exceptionally popular franchise. No one is talking about profits - the article specifically says 'gross'. Billions in profits would be very impressive indeed. And yes, Star Wars may have grossed 5b, but the multi-billion figure for NGE is for every single thing rolled together, not just the 6 NGE movies and TV series. And if you don't find the numbers plausible, consider that otaku are a large fraction of Japan's population, NGE has had a lot of time to extract money from them and also anime fans worldwide (don't discount the US market), NGE appealed to non-otaku Japanese as well (see Tsurumaki's interview in the Red Cross Book), and so on. Your country comparison is worthless; Greenland and Sierra Leone are pretty worthless places, so it's not surprising that consumers in the 2 wealthiest countries in the history of the world could spend more than their GDP on entertainment. Might as well say Bill Gates couldn't exist because his net worth was more than >100 countries put together! --Gwern (contribs) 10:43 9 August 2010 (GMT)

Hey Gwern - Your totally right, I had misunderstood the discussion to be about profits but that sort of number is totally plausible for a total gross (which doesn't justify certain the flawed logic of some of my arguments anyhow). Anyways this reference is from February 07, and given that 2 additional feature films have come out since then I imagine the number is even higher and I think a more contemporary reference would be appropriate - il keep my eyes peeled for one. Thanks. 70.112.184.148 (talk) 04:59, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Evas

can someone please put in articles about the evas like put in like links so u can read about unit 1 the rest of the evas lol ok well if some could maybe put it into the link thing down the bottom with characters, ok well it would make things so much easier cause iv been looking for like 1hr for a link so i can read about the evas well love and peace to all love Miko 121.210.246.36 (talk) 12:56, 14 February 2009 (UTC) Miko 121.210.246.36 (talk) 12:56, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

As best as I can tell, you're asking for a link to an article on the Evangelion mechas themselves. That link is in the lead paragraph. --Gwern (contribs) 16:36 14 February 2009 (GMT)

The Films

I think there´s a common mistake about the films and the way, there are mentioned. The article states, that there are 2 films, Death & Rebirth and The End of Evangelion, while it is in fact one film, that was sort of split due to time constraints. The original Death & Rebirth is a double feature, where Rebirth was intentended to be what is End of Evangelion today, but couldn´t be finifhed. The finished verion was later released as "End of Evangelion". "Revival" is the final edit of the movie(s). Even the Japanese DVD (look on amazon.co.jp) calls itself "Neon Genesis Evangelion The Feature Film" - singular. And does not contain Rebirth. I see it may be clutter, but I think it is worth mentioning it and maybe raorganize the template.87.174.221.27 (talk) 14:47, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

No, there ARE two films. That Death is a recap and Rebirth is the first 30mins of End of Evangelion (but with a cliffhanger ending that varies ever so slightly from the same scene in End of) changes nothing - There were two theatrical movies. Rebirth is essentially a long preview of End of Eva, designed to raise money to fund the full film. There are multiple versions of Death and rebirth too, and during the Revival of Evangelion project, both movies were restored and released Dandy Sephy (talk) 15:44, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Alright you can say, that Death is one film and End another. But , I think you should take a look on how was dealt with the films ultimately. Although, granted, both films have been released sepperately several times on Video and DVD, the japanese final release packaged them into one DVD-set. Called The Feature Film, singular. However, I believe they do not have plural and singular as we do and this coul be just a glich. I inserted a few notes about it (such as Rebirth (originnaly intended to be blabla), but didn´t chage the overall article. I hope you agree.87.174.192.118 (talk) 12:54, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

No, "Death & Rebirth" is as much "a film" as ReVival of Evangelion was, and I'd seriously argue for simply merging it as a subsection of "End of Evangelion"--Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici (talk) 18:12, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

NGE article names

i noticed that there is not one Neon Genesis Evangelion Article that has no side title. like (anime) or (manga) or stuff like that. for any article to have NGE (insert here) title there needs to be an article with the Title "neon Genesis Evangelion" by itself. I suggest we make the anime article "Neon Genesis Evangelion" by itself and making this article "Neon Genesis Evangelion (franchise)".Bread Ninja (talk) 17:43, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm fine with this article's title as it is, but I don't have an issue with making the title "NGE (franchise)" if the majority goes with that. I disagree with taking the "(anime)" out of that article's title, partly because I don't agree with the logic of the argument, and partly because the current titles make an explicit distinction between the two media covering the main NGE storyline. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 18:57, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

it's not really difficult. in order fora title to be called "title (franchise)" instead of just "Title" there needs to be the original title. the only reason why we use (insert here) is to differentiate two different titles, but that doesn't mean both titles get it. not to long ago there was a debate about changing kingdom hearts to kingdom hearts (video Game) and change the Kingdom hearts series into simply "Kingdom hearts", the proposal won and you can see the discussion there at Kingdom Hearts . maybe similar idea can come here?

well if you all deny then we'll just simply settle for NGE (franchise) insteadBread Ninja (talk) 15:55, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't care particularly much either way. However, if you make the move, like my mother always said, 'you will darn well clean up after yourself!' --Gwern (contribs) 21:21 27 December 2009 (GMT)

i'll play it safe and simply change it to (franchise). but if someone else supports then the change can still be made.Bread Ninja (talk) 22:57, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Live Action Film Rights?

It says that the live action film is being distributed by Universal...Where's the source for this? rzrscm (talk) 01:18, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Alright...I'm just going to go right ahead and remove it. rzrscm (talk) 15:44, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Leaving Gainax

Potential developments; I've started a section at Talk:Gainax#Hideaki Anno.2FStudio Khara.2FNeon Genesis Evangelion leaving Gainax.3B predictions of doom to keep discussion and link collection centralized. --Gwern (contribs) 08:07 6 July 2010 (GMT)

Live action film notable for it's own article?

i understand it hasn't been released yet and may have been canceled. but it does have a lot of references to have it's own article. so does anyone think the live action film can sustain it's own article?Bread Ninja (talk) 21:53, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

I'd worry that the article would be short and not really be much superior to a section, although if you were willing to fight for it, it might pass WP:CRYSTAL... --Gwern (contribs) 04:07 18 August 2010 (GMT)

well seeing as how the film has yet to be officially i guess it's not worthy of an article. what happens if the project cancels though? do we remove all the news it got and just mention it was canceled??Bread Ninja (talk) 06:22, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Canceled projects can be N (by the usual criteria of multiple substantial mainstream media articles/coverage), but obviously it's harder than if they were released. There's no need to remove it from this article if it is canceled - sections are not articles, and diff'rnt strokes for diff'rnt folks. --Gwern (contribs) 07:57 18 August 2010 (GMT)

Timeline merge?

Could the Neon Genesis Evangelion timeline be merged into this article? --Malkinann (talk) 04:11, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

There is no point and it makes the article that much more in-univers. Also, how are is the merge going to look like? i've tried it before, and failed without disrupting the structure. It just can't be done without affecting the article negativelyBread Ninja (talk) 05:01, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

If you can find a way to merge the timeline into the main article,let me know. -R.G. (talk) 18:27, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Is there any reason why this information should be kept. There just eisn't enough coverage on the timelineBread Ninja (talk) 21:29, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Hmm...this information is described in a very in-universe style. It has barely any references/sources. I think I can see that there is a little bit of original research (which is not a good thing). Can someone please justify the creation of this article? Is this type of information even significant enough to have its own page? -WANINOKOZ ^(TALK) 00:57, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

A big problem with this time line is that it has little to no reliable sources available...which means that it does not meet general notability requirements. -WANINOKOZ ^(TALK) 01:05, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

I have asked Gwern, who originally suggested such a merge take place when Bread Ninja first brought the subject up last September, to comment here. --Malkinann (talk) 02:20, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Waninoko, sourcing this is easy. Looking it over, everything listed before 2015 could be sourced to Evangelion Chronicle or the dates given in-game in the Ayanami Raising Project, and 2015 events are just sourced from plot summaries or are from dates displayed inside the show or basic deduction therefrom (eg. footnote 2). --Gwern (contribs) 00:29 30 October 2010 (GMT)

I agree with Bread Ninja and WaninokoZ. I don't think that Neon Genesis Evangelion timeline is covered enough by third party sources. The timeline doesn't seem to be mentioned by non-Evangelion related sources. It's mostly in-universe. There are a whole lot more sources on Macross' timeline by third party sources, it also has more series and yet it doesn't have it's own timeline article. It does ok with a "Series chronology" section in the franchise article and mentions of the timeline in each article of the individual series, so I don't think that Evangelion invariably needs a specific article for it. I'd even question the need of having it at all. Jfgslo (talk) 03:05, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

She isn't commenting, either she's on a small break, or she's just satisfied that the article isn't being AfD.Bread Ninja (talk) 09:52, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

It's more likely to be a busy time of year for Gwern. --Malkinann (talk) 19:26, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

I think, that it should be changed to "assume good intentions". Theres a point how much good you can assume from someone who has been in conflict for so long without giving proper reasoning.Bread Ninja (talk) 02:11, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Now, to continue the suggestion I made last year. It isn't particularly important where this goes. Clearly it would be a bad idea to try to stuff this into characters' pages, since then it's just 1 individual birthdate. We could merge it into this franchise page, since the timeline is generally respected: TV obviously follows it, D&R and EoE does, Ayanami Raising Project was already mentioned, and Rebuild seems to be mostly the same (although some things don't fit and suggest a 2017 setting rather than 2015). But we could also merge it into List of Neon Genesis Evangelion episodes (currently shorter than NGE TV, so better) because there nevertheless are those discrepancies.

One might think that this would bulge said article, but the chronology could be cut in half or more just by shifting to tables and not wasting so much whitespace in the current list format, and reduced even more by consolidating or cutting a few entries (eg. there are 2 lines for the MAGI, but it could just be one - 'planning finished & construct begun').

Or we could just not merge the article anywhere. Category:Fictional timelines is far from empty, after all. Call this OTHERSTUFFEXISTS if you life, but I think Eva is at least as worthwhile a chronology as Goodkind's terrifically terrible Tolkien-plagiarizing Shannara novels or the somewhat obscure Shadowrun games (in their extremely obscure pencil-and-paper RPG genre) or World of Greyhawk timeline (which I hadn't even heard of, which I could at least say for Shadowrun, Dr. Who, Dragonlance), and while Eva may not be as successful a Japanese franchise as Gundam is, it is, I think, more successful than Kerberos. --Gwern (contribs) 00:29 30 October 2010 (GMT)

For one, it's not exactly fair to compare it to other series to another such as World of Greyhawk timeline unless the right ammount of refs were there, and how iconic it is in the series compared to that of the Dungeons and Dragons series. Which the ones you mentioned could very well be in question such as Kerberos. So the argument of "other series have a timeline, so NGE should have one too" doesn't exactly fly. Two, some of these have far more coverage and have more refs compared to the NGE timeline and aren't directly from the plot. So even then, this makes this timeline even less meaningful compared to the others timelines.

I can't see this article affecting the other articles positively. Plus basically everything, Jfgslo Mentioned above. But again, please justify why the article should be kept or merged.Bread Ninja (talk) 05:31, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

For Christ's sake. I already said the entire article is sourced from 1 of 2 places. Sourcing is not an issue, so we absolutely should compare it to the other timelines like Greyhawk! And as for iconic, I daresay Eva & Gundam are far more iconic in Japan than D&D is in America; when was the last time you saw D&D merchandise or a D&D movie? (Our D&D article proudly boasts D&D has over its lifetime sold over $1 billion; our NGE article snickers and says to come back when it's sold a few billion more.)

And maybe you'd like to be more specific about the refs in other timelines not directly from the plot? The Shadowrun timeline? The Greyhawk timeline? Fat chance. --Gwern (contribs) 02:29 21 November 2010 (GMT)

I don't see a good reason to merge the timeline here. I think that the timeline article should be deleted because it is not notable according to WP:FICT (it hasn't received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject). It's been already some days since the last comment so I believe that it's time to close the proposed merger unless someone else has anything to add. Jfgslo (talk) 15:01, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Quotes

AS you may see, there is a large mamount of quotes, and some (if not most) would say has an excessive ammount of them in NGE articles to a point where it's not very encclopedic. Although i believe almost all the quotes need to be removed and only summaries to save time reading and more on the point, and in a more presentable structure. I only took out the obvious ones, and if more are willing to listen, i will probably add more until almsot all of them.

heres a few:

• Neon Genesis Evangelion#Merchandising

^^clearly, not necessary to be in quote format. Just a list of media. it's rather useless as a quote.

As said before, it's better than repeating it except as a list with a bazillion reference links, conveys expert commentary blah blah blah said all this before. --Gwern (contribs) 03:50 21 November 2010 (GMT)

• The End of Evangelion#Reception]

^^the first one really needs to be cut into the main idea. it strays away from the main idea with the first sentence. the rest just need to be summarized, remove the block quotes, and cut the quotes to pieces. But still, needs to be summarize and more presentable.

The first one's first sentence could be cut, yes, at some lost in clarity. But what is the summary of the rest that does not inject POV or drop things that a expert who is notable in his own right said? --Gwern (contribs) 03:50 21 November 2010 (GMT)

• Neon Genesis Evangelion (anime)#Origin and production

^^the first quote is by anno himself, and very difficult to understand, so again, i request summarization to just get the idea. second one is off his biography, which really weakens the reason why it's in quote format.

The first quote is by Takeda, not Anno... And the second one is an autobiography - note the 'copyright Hideaki Anno'. --Gwern (contribs) 03:50 21 November 2010 (GMT)

I also request this one summarized. in the airing section a huge quote that i really dont see much justifying it from how the first sentence introduced it. Plus it doesn't really seem that much related to the airing, other than this one bit. So if the idea was to just get that one bit, i think cutting off the rest and just mention that one piece mainly relation t othe airing setion.

Not that much related? It's Tsurumaki's explanation of what was going on both in and around the ending; Tsurumaki, recall, was assistant director on NGE TV, big honcho on EoE, and full director on Rebuild. --Gwern (contribs) 03:50 21 November 2010 (GMT)

feel free to disagree, give a good reason why they shouldn't (related to wikipedia).Bread Ninja (talk) 08:24, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Make it easier for people to reply. i number my comments in the order of your replies 1)Who said we need to make it a list? It's practically undue weight, just to have a long list of media just because someone notable pointed it out. i'm saying we can trim it down and mention it had wide variety of media 2)No clarity will be lost. we need to stick to the main idea, not try to go into intricate detail. 3)either way, like i've said before, it's very difficult to understand the first one and the autobiography, well it's still in third person, and we should really just describe it, instead of quoting everything. 4)but that's not much related to airing, more to production.Bread Ninja (talk) 21:21, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

1. Then be clearer what you are arguing for. Removing it is even worse than listifying or summarizing it.
2. Yes, clarity will be lost. What is the context of him saying it? Is that mangaka discussing just the movie or the entire franchise+EoE? This is not a huge hit, as most people will make the assumption that he must have said it as part of a review, but still one must think about it - a loss of clarity.
3. I don't see what is difficult to understand.
4. So suggest a different section for it; I don't see any better sections since airing and production overlap considerably. (Also, moving all that material into the List article makes no sense. It is completely deprived of context, rips out part of the narrative from this article, and is simply not what List articles are for. I figure I'll revert that once the AfDs are done.) --Gwern (contribs) 22:15 23 November 2010 (GMT)

1)I'm not saying removing it completely, just summarizing saying it has a wide variety of merchandise and mention only the most notable. Why is this difficult? because every single detail has to be in there, and without it it would damage the article? i don't know why you have such a warped view on NGE articles. when it comes to NGE, you tend to look at it completely different from other articles. quote or not, it's still just a list of merchandise. Why would we need to list every single bit that it covers just because napier mentions it.

2)What clarity would be lost exactly? What would happen if we summarized it? what parts would be difficult to understand? if we just mention his view on EoE that should be enough.

3)It has a term not many will understand. also the subsection seems to be dedicated to the development of that series and already mentioned in Royal Space Force: The Wings of Honnêamise article, so it's unnecessary to have the exact same information on there too.

4)Not all material, just information relating to the airing of NGE. And many list articles have different styles. The airing section, was mainly reception related to the episodes and other miscellaneous reception. So moving it to the List of NGE Episodes was ideal and Jfsglo agreed to it on the WT:ANIME so that a bit of a consensus (unless Dream Focus disagrees and then we'll have to discuss this even bigger)

The idea is to stick to the point, not to give intricate detail of every little aspect. that's the only real reason i could come up with for sticking so strongly to the quotes.22:41, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

"The original ending"

It seems to me there should be some discussion about the following under the "After the Series" section:

and the first half of the new ending (Rebirth, which was originally intended to be the full ending, but couldn´t be finished due to budget and time constraints). The project to complete the final episodes was completed later in the year,

I don't feel this is entirely accurate. While no one could argue that Anno et al wouldn't have made something different, certainly more lavish, if they had the budget to do so when creating the original episodes 25 & 26, and that it is clear that several plot elements in The End of Evangelion were foreshadowed or hinted at in the series ending and that were intended to be more obvious originally, like they were in The End of Evangelion, the truth is that The End of Evangelion can't rightly be considered "what they originally intended."

Why not? BTW the primary sources generally point to time being the limiting factor (aggravated by things like Anno waffling on scripting the ending by himself, early plans scrapped by censorship, and general snafus like the animation out-sourcer losing a bunch of cels), not budget. The previews show events more consistent with an EoE-style ending than the one that aired. --Gwern (contribs) 02:35 21 November 2010 (GMT)

It's obvious from watching The End of Evangelion that newer events, such as the reaction to the original ending, had a profound impact on Hideaki Anno, and that his anti-Otaku sentiments had been greatly inflamed. Aside from that, there's just no way to really know how different it could be from what they would have originally done.

No, it's not obvious. Most of the 'death threats' shown in EoE are thank-you notes or personal letters like that. Anno did make anti-otaku statements after NGE TV, but nothing that is unusual for a man who worked on Otaku no Video or directed NGE TV. (Episode 16: "We cannot weave our lives only out of things we like...") --Gwern (contribs) 02:35 21 November 2010 (GMT)

So in truth we have "Ending 0", the ending Gainax would have made in the first place if they'd had a greater budget, "Ending 1", the original episodes 25 & 26, and "Ending 2," The End of Evangelion.

Whether you prefer one ending or the other or view them as complementary is between you and your god. I'm just saying it's inaccurate to portray The End of Evangelion as "what the creators originally intended," and I also think it does a disservice to "Do you love me? / A World That's Ending" and "Take care of yourself. / The Beast that Shouted "I" at the Heart of the World". I thought I'd confer with all concerned before just going and editing the article, though. Maybe we can brainstorm alternatives. DragonGuyver (talk) 09:19, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

That section barely holds anything, it should be moved to End of Evangelion rather than having a "After the series" section. It really doesn't need one.Bread Ninja (talk) 09:53, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

All that part is not referenced so feel free to edit it to remove that point of view. The lack of real references in that text in particular makes this article fail at WP:NPV, WP:OR, WP:V and particularly WP:NOT#FANSITE. And it's an unnecessary course of action given that the series has several serious reviews in third party sources. Jfgslo (talk) 14:31, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

There may be edits to be made to that part, DragonGuyver, but your case is not made. --Gwern (contribs) 02:35 21 November 2010 (GMT)

Merge List of Media?

I have noticed alot of overlap in covering "media" with this article and "List of Neon Genesis Evangelion media." I feel that there should be one article for this, rather than two separate ones, like you see with almost every other media franchise page (Star Wars, Ghost in the Shell, ect). With some rewriting and editing, I think we can keep such a long list of merchandise readable even to series novices. Questions or complaints? Ode2joy (talk) 12:46, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

When there is enough information to fill a side article, then you split out into it. When suggesting a merge remember to tag the other article with a merge notice also. Dream Focus 00:18, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Regarding Evangelion: Re-Take

I was wondering if anyone has read "Evangelion: Re-Take?" It is absolutely breathtaking, and is just as good as every bit as good as the series and the movies. While unofficial, it does serve as a fantastic follow-up to End of Evangelion. Asuka's original voice actress Yuko Miyamura is known to have read "Re-Take." I hope that someday it gets an official release and/or gets animated. zictor23 (talk) 20:, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

We had an article but it got deleted. Since then I've added useful material like Hiroki Azuma's praise to http://wiki.evageeks.org/Re-Take --Gwern (contribs) 20:53 27 February 2012 (GMT)

Hi Gwerne,

I didn’t realise that you knew about “Retake” until I looked at your response to one of my posts. I’ve been on that page you gave me a link to: its a great summary of the doujnishi. Like me, do you think that it would be great to see this get an official manga release and/or get animated? I’ve read that “Retake” is very popular amongst fans, so it would be a shame if this didn’t happen at some point. I liked the happy endings that the author gave for both Shinji and Asuka in both of those different Earths, with Shinji and Asuka marrying each other and having a daughter in one reality, and post-Third impact Shinji and Asuka in the other now aware of their feelings for each other and staying together. I also liked the message of hope that was given towards the end of post-Third Impact Shinji and Asuka's story, with that little girl rising out of the sea, as it suggested that more humans would eventually return.

Also Gwerne, do you know if anyone else who worked on the original series and currently works on “Rebuild” (including Hideaki Anno) has read “Retake?” It would be interesting to know what they think of it, including Yuko Miyamura. zictor23 (talk) 22:32, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

It would be nice if something were done with Re-take but it's unlikely.

I don't know if anyone in Khara has read it. You would think so, but aside from Azuma I don't know. I also don't remember hearing anything about Miyamura reading it. --Gwern (contribs) 23:02 27 February 2012 (GMT)

Hi Gwern,

I learnt that Yuko Miyamura had read “Re-Take” on this forum: http://myanimelist.net/clubs.php?cid=19580

Unfortunately, the person who posted this information didn’t say where he/she got this information from, nor what Yuko Miyamura thought of it. I like to think that she enjoyed it, seeing as though things ended up happily for Asuka on both Earths. While unofficial, it does stand out as a superb sequel to End of Evangelion. I think that the writer did a fantastic job. It’s sad to think that it may never get an official release and/or get animated, but perhaps if enough fans demand it, it might actually happen. I think that it provided a very happy ending for Shinji and Asuka, together with a number of the other characters in the alternate Earth (things ended up happily for Shinji and Asuka on the two Earths).

zictor23 (talk) 18:15, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

• I made a Wikipedia article for it back in 2008 but it got deleted. I later had them restore it long enough for me to export it and then import it to the manga wiki. http://manga.wikia.com/wiki/Neon_Genesis_Evangelion_RE-TAKE Great series. Remember to read them in order(1, 2, 3, 0, 4). Dream Focus 00:14, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I will. How I would LOVE to see Re-Take get an official release and/or get animated, as it serves as a fantastic follow-up to the End of Evangelion. zictor23 (talk) 17:59, 01 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Gwerne,

I saw recently that you put on the EvaGeeks website that information I added on Wikipedia regarding Yuko Miyamura having apparently read Re-Take. I felt that that was a really nice compliment. It will good to find out someday whether or not Yuko miyamura actually read Re-Take.

Also, Dream Focus, thank you for tahat link you sent me to your article on Re-Take. I wouldn't actually mind creating a new article about it on Wikipedia someday, if I find the time. Even though it is an unofficial sequel to EoE, I think it would be good to have more people find out about it.zictor23 (talk) 11:32, 06 March 2012 (UTC)

Regarding Tiffany Grant's thoughts on Shinji and Asuka

Following on from my last post, and after watching Evangelion and reading Evangelion: Re-Take, I was interested to find out exactly what Yuko Miyamura and Tiffany Grant (Asuka’s Japanese and American voice actresses, respectively) thought about Shinji and Asuka’s feelings. I think I got my answer the other day when looking at a Yahoo fan site for Tiffany Grant (which she also visits, posting comments and responding to questions from fans). Based on her various comments, it seems that she strongly dislikes the idea of Shinji and Asuka being together, and didn’t think that Asuka had any romantic feelings for Shinji at all.

I found all this surprising, because I thought that as the character’s voice actress she would have realized that Asuka liked Shinji (but couldn’t openly admit it) and wanted to be with him. I was just wondering what other fans thought about all this? These are some comments I published yesterday about this on the Tiffany Grant talk page:

“I could have misread this, but she seemed to imply in one post that Yuko Miyamura feels the same way as her about Shinji and Asuka, when she jokingly tells this guy that she told Ms. Miyamura about these "sick" things he said about Shinji and Asuka being meant for each other, and she apparently agreed with her. It makes me wonder if Tiffany Grant's opinions on this have changed now, together with Yuko Miyamura's thoughts, if she actually does feel the same way. “ “I found a link to one of Tiffany Grant's comments that confirms what I said earlier. I'm not sure why, but she seems to think that Asuka never had any romantic feelings for Shinji, and simply loathed him:”

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tiffanygrantfanclub/message/1290

“The way I understood it, Asuka hid her feelings from Shinji. I think that the final scene from EoE, with Asuka gently stroking Shinji's face, is probably one of the closest indications of her feelings for him.” In one of other posts, however, she does seem to suggest that Shinji and Asuka make a good pairing (found on this link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tiffanygrantfanclub/message/5730):

“My take on it is that Asuka and Shinji kind of have a 'brother/sister' kind of thing going on. They share some deep bonds, having fought together and saved each other's lives, each has deep emotional wounds, but are not (by the end of the series) romantic. Though I do think that when Asuka is ready to move to a romantic relationship (not the childish fascination she has with Kaji) she might go to Shinji first, since they share so much in common.”

Interestingly, during an anime convention in Australia last year, it turned out that both Yuko Miyamura and Tiffany Grant thought that Shinji should end up together with Mari in Rebuild of Evangelion. You can read about it on this link:

http://forum.evageeks.org/post/472110/Asuka-is-coming-to-Australia/

Personally, I'd prefer a Shinji/Asuka ending. It'll be interesting to see how things turn out in Rebuild, seeing as though it takes palace in an alternate universe and taking into account the fact that it is apparently going to have a completely different ending to EoE. zictor23 (talk) 23:40, 06 March 2012 (UTC)

If you find the post on Miyamura, I'd be interested to know. But keep in mind that seiyuu are not always the most insightful commentators - for example, Miyamura apparently only realized a year or two ago that Anno's little story to her about someone breaking into her room and masturbating to her (the 'kimochi warui' story) was a reference to Shinji masturbating at the start of EoE! --Gwern (contribs) 02:58 7 March 2012 (GMT)

Hi Gwern,

Sorry it took a while to get back to you. Did you mean that post where Tiffany Grant said that Yuko Miyamura agreed with her in regards to her thoughts on Shinji/Asuka? If so, here is the link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tiffanygrantfanclub/message/5699

The “sick things” that I think that Tiffany Grant were referring to these comments made by this one fan about Shinji and Asuka being meant for each other. Maybe I’m reading it incorrectly, but she seemed to be implying that Yuko Miyamura also disliked the thought of Shinji and Asuka ending up together, despite the fact that that is what I think the scriptwriters were working towards. Some may disagree with me, but I felt that the ending of EoE implied that Shinji and Asuka would have a life together, however difficult that they may be on the post-Third Impact Earth. As least there is a chance that other humans would return, perhaps even Misato, considering the fact that Asuka had returned to life.

Despite this, in a later post (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tiffanygrantfanclub/message/5730) she did seem sympathetic to Shinji and Asuka becoming a couple.

I remember reading the 'kimochi warui' story Gwern. However, I didn’t know that it was only a year or two ago that she realized that Hideaki Anno was referring to THAT scene from EoE!

You probably know this already Gwern, but there are actually references to the 'kimochi warui' scene in “Re-Take.” Asuka actually says “I feel sick” at one point, and in another scene, she recalls to God (actually her future daughter) how Shinji “defiled” her, thinking that he only pretends to worship her.

Lord, how I would love to see that get an official release someday. I think that, if enough fans demand it, then there is always a chance of that happening. It would also be great to find out if Hidaeki Anno or anyone else who worked on the original series (and currently on “Rebuild”) have read it. If I ever do, I’ll post that information on this talk page. zictor23 (talk) 22:40, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Link to Evangelion: Re-Take

The other day, I added a link to an English translation of the all-ages version of Evangelion: Re-Take. I hope that other Evangelion fans who possibly haven't read it yet will enjoy it as much as I did. Its nice that Azuma Takeshi (of Studio Kimigabuchi) continued the story from "The End of Evangelion." zictor23 (talk) 12:35, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Interesting link regarding Re-Take, Spike Spencer, Yuko Miyamura, and Tiffany Grant

Hi everyone,

I came across this link today:

http://forum.evageeks.org/thread/4918/Have-you-met-any-of-the-voice-actors-or-actresses/

Zeak (an Eva fan who attempted to make a fan animated adaptation of Re-Take) met Spike Spencer a few years ago, and apparently he has read Re-Take. I wonder if that is true, and what his thoughts were on it?

Also, Yuko Miyamura and Tiffany Grant both said "No!" when asked if either of them felt for Shinji. Personally, I felt for Shinji. In my opinion, he was a tragic character, and one should feel sympathy for him, not detest him.zictor23 (talk) 12:02, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

This isn't a forum. The discussion page is merely for discussing ways of improving the article or possibly to handle a dispute about the page itself.Lucia Black (talk) 23:23, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I understand what you mean, Lucia Black, from looking at the other posts which relate to article content. But I don't think that other people who responded to my questions or comments (such as Gwern and Dream Focus) minded. I just felt that the discussion page was a good place to bring the things up that I have done, and I have got feedback, which is nice. zictor23 (talk) 12:39, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Robin Williams toy story.

Is there any evidence to support the last part of this story about Robin Williams being a fan and intentionally putting the mistaken line in the movie One Hour Photo? Like a reference to a DVD commentary? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.126.25.46 (talk) 23:15, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Axed it because it seems speculative and traced to IMDB and Animenation forums. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:44, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

It still happens in the film. The intent of the actor not withstanding, it should be mentioned somewhere.—Ryulong (琉竜) 04:57, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Neon Genesis Evangelion (anime) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 06:28, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

"Evangelion (franchise)"

Can someone redirect Evangelion (franchise) to here? -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 05:58, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Neon Genesis Evangelion (franchise). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://features.cgsociety.org/story.php?story_id=1901
• Added archive https://archive.is/20120804050851/http://www.ex.org/2.3/28-newtype100.html to http://www.ex.org/2.3/28-newtype100.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20001003100535/http://www.ex.org/news/1999_05.html to http://www.ex.org/news/1999_05.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120226195246/http://www.fields.biz/catalog/cr_eva_r/ to http://www.fields.biz/catalog/cr_eva_r/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120206052646/http://www.fields.biz/catalog/cr_eva_second/index.html to http://www.fields.biz/catalog/cr_eva_second/index.html
• Added archive https://archive.is/20120801145357/http://www.ex.org/3.6/14-event_comike.html to http://www.ex.org/3.6/14-event_comike.html
• Added archive https://archive.is/20120731194632/http://www.ex.org/1.4/07-comike.html to http://www.ex.org/1.4/07-comike.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://afufu.net/freewill/2010/07/life-size-evangelion-final-video-and-images/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:46, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Additional Citations

This article has now far more citation than it had when that notice was put into place. Is it acceptable to remove by this point? ~User:Roi.Frvr 16:22, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

Definitively.--TeenAngels1234 (talk) 15:24, 18 February 2023 (UTC)