Anime and manga: Evangelion Project‑class | ||||||||||
|
We've been edit-warring back and forth, and I'm starting to get tired of him, but since I don't understand why he objects so much, I'm loathe to just call in an admin strike.
The relevant content: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/?title=List_of_Neon_Genesis_Evangelion_characters&action=historysubmit&diff=339957411&oldid=339954503
The URL in question is http://theplanetsthatmatter.com/features/yoshiyuki_sadamoto_young_ace_interview/yoshiyuki_sadamoto_young_ace_interview.html . I view it as reliable, as it gives its source quite clearly, consiles with everything else I've learned, and sounds like Sadamoto (I have a few of his other interviews), and otherwise seems legit.
But the anon is objecting at Talk:List of Neon Genesis Evangelion characters#Translation of the amateur who mixed false information that apparently the translator's choice to translate Mari Makinami as Mary utterly discredits the entire thing and the statements that Mari was designed to look English/British. At least, I think that's what he means.
Thoughts on this - just ask for a block? Keep arguing with him? - welcomed. -- Gwern (contribs) 17:34 25 January 2010 (GMT)
This source seems to be falsified aiming at spectators in Europe and America. Name mari of the katakana never becomes mary. I do not complain if it is official information on an English version or a Japanese version. 60.40.8.165 ( talk) 17:50, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Does no-one have any opinions on this? Should I take everyone's silence as complete implicit agreement with my reversions of the removal? -- Gwern (contribs) 21:07 30 January 2010 (GMT)
I think the interview is accurate, but we should hold off on changing "Mari" to "Mari" until we have additional information to confirm. -- Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici ( talk) 16:17, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
The person who made this false information cannot do even a basic translation of the word of Japan. Or, to make people in the West pleased, mary and the name are falsified. I am telling it not to use such amateur's information as a source. 61.119.136.56 ( talk) 23:22, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
However, it is insisted that it not change it with mary. Gwern admit the imitation to mix with this source? 60.40.11.48 ( talk) 01:10, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
How are you confirming the truth of information? Change it into an official source if there is a complaint. Do not reflect it if an official source is not found. I stay on for a long time if you do not correspond in sincerity. I only say the just argument. 60.40.11.48 ( talk) 01:43, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
mysterious IP, please define "official" first. We go by "reliable" sources, not just "official". if the source is reliable, than it can be used. And if it's a primary source, then use secondary sources to support the primary. Bread Ninja ( talk) 17:44, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Japanese IP, you should be more constructive in your edits. Obviously, you have access to many more sources than us, because we can only rely on secondary translations, and unfortunately, there are not enough mainstream anime media interested in Evangelion. I have to admit that planetsthatmatter.com, the site having posted this translation, was created quite recently, and we currently have no way to know exactly who is writing it (and names are not enough), so it's not really the best source. Having someone fluent in japanese is always helpful, so please, could you actually help instead of just deleting the reference ?
The Sadamoto interview was originally published in Young Ace #3 (september 2009), more precisely in a booklet included in the magazine, and named "Osada-bon 2009". Could you please check the booklet (since you have easy acces to it) and tell us if the informations about the creation of Mari are true ? More precisely, could you tell us if Sadamoto, in japanese, said he designed Mari to look British and that her glasses are used to "set her appart from other characters" ?
If you can confirm this information to be true, then the article will directly use the magazine Young Ace as a reference, and the translation will be provided so that non-japanese readers can still, well, read it.
This is the only way we're going to add any "official" source. But just claiming the source is "false" is not helping us in anyway. If the "mistake" is only about Mari/Mary, then it is irrelevant and the translated interview is still considered reliable. Folken de Fanel ( talk) 18:04, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Http://yui-spirits.kboyu.net/2009/08/newtype.html
this is an impression site of the magazine of the Newtype September edition. It differs from the source of the amateur who is telling it that I must remove. It is said that middle-aged father in Japan joined there though an initial image is British. Mari put on a result glasses different from the design grammar of "Eva". (The reason to give glasses is the same. )
I do not think that it is correct to treat the source of this Japan by Wikipedia because it is an individual impression 60.40.11.48 ( talk) 04:09, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
What makes a source "amateur"? Bread Ninja ( talk) 15:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Please explain how this source is an amateur site, and not a reliable one Bread Ninja ( talk) 15:52, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
it's here, WP:RS. still, like Folken said, instead, why not search for information? we cant simply judge everything so quickly, like folken has said, the site relatively new. still, we have to try to find where they got there information and see if we can find another site with the translation. Bread Ninja ( talk) 16:47, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
it was all speculation though. it wasn't much of saying how it is. you even corrected yourself once too. Bread Ninja ( talk) 18:07, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
It is not possible to come here for several days because business turned up. Because progress doesn't seem to advance, I will leave. It has something to say to Gwern at the end. Please do not forget the pure mind. You may believe mary. There is a possibility of becoming mary in an English version. Good bye. 220.104.44.235 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:54, 11 February 2010 (UTC).
Mysterious IP, you need to understand that it was just a translation, also no official translation has come up, that doesn't mean the article is "amateur". if you read list of soul reapers in bleach you see Mayuri Kurohsugi's zanpaktou called Ashisogi Jizō (疋殺地蔵?, roughly "leg-cutting Jizō") when the more exact translation is "head-cutting Jizō" . Despite it being a mistranslation it still being used due to it being the one that's verifiable. if you can verify that Mary is actually "Mari" then please find a source. Bread Ninja ( talk) 16:10, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
and i agree, b ut it's just some insight to show this IP how wiki works. Bread Ninja ( talk) 17:50, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
From http://web.archive.org/web/20071224093211/www.geocities.com/Tokyo/3948/evanews.html a selection of news events and also merchandising; it's not really a RS, but knowing what to look for is half the battle:
...
...
...
(2) offers original Evangelion art while (1) and (3) has scenes from the show and graphic art by Sadamoto and New Type Magazine Staff. I recommend the (2) and the (3) type of trading cards. Now the news is, The Death and Rebirth Part of the Movie has been released as a trading card last August. It will be a CARDDASS MASTERS type of card and PART 3 of the series. One pack of 7 cards will cost 314 yen excluding tax. Watch for it in your nearest trading cards store or Toy Store.
...
...
-- Gwern (contribs) 22:27 28 February 2010 (GMT)
497 articles mentioning Eva. Good grief. I hope I don't wind up going through all those by myself... -- Gwern (contribs) 22:27 28 February 2010 (GMT)
I'll read and see what there is. it appears that there's enough info to make another NGE article about this trading card game. or we start making tables for the list of media. Bread Ninja ( talk) 16:56, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I whant ask you the help. Can you finish this article in simple english? In advance thanks. 82.193.155.236 ( talk) 16:08, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
you can just look for it on your own. it's just adding info right? just look in the rei ayanami article in this wikipedia. Bread Ninja ( talk) 16:15, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Sorry if this has been brought up before, but I've been wondering about the relevance of relationship sections when it comes to articles about an individual character, i believe they take up so much information and only talks about how the main character interacts with certain characters, wouldn't it be easier to merge some of the main points of relationship with personality or something similar to that. Bread Ninja ( talk) 18:25, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
FYI, WPBANNERMETA now supports adding portals to each Workgroup/taskforce line. You may want to add the Eva portal to the line in the WPANIME banner that lists the Eva TF. 70.29.210.155 ( talk) 11:01, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Portal:Evangelion Dream Focus 22:50, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
FYI, Neon Genesis Evangelion timeline has been nominated for deletion. 76.66.200.95 ( talk) 06:23, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
FYI, the usage of Sephiroth (Tree of Life) is under discussion, see Talk:Sephiroth (Final Fantasy). 76.66.203.138 ( talk) 05:52, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Neon Genesis Evangelion timeline is up for deletion again. 76.66.203.138 ( talk) 09:01, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Neon Genesis Evangelion glossary for deletion. Please join the discussion here and share your comments. Jfgslo ( talk) 21:25, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
I changed the manga of "Gakuen Datenroku" to Campus Apocalypse. It would be a great help if you changed the links to "Gakuen Datenroku" to "Campus Apocalypse" in other related articles so no further confusion be made. Bread Ninja ( talk) 20:50, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 January 18#Evangelion. -- Gwern (contribs) 15:40 18 January 2011 (GMT)
See Talk:Evangelion where it is being discussed whether NGE is ever appropriate to be refered to as Evangelion, and whether the religious term should be primary over the disambiguation page. 65.93.13.210 ( talk) 03:23, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Found out today that this attraction is coming to Fuji-Q Highland, providing yet another reason to go to Japan when things are sorted out.
BrokenSphere Msg me 22:56, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
There's a notice about Hiroyuki Tsuchida at WT:JAPAN -- 65.92.180.137 ( talk) 03:11, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Dear editors of Eva project,
I need some help from you guys here. Evangelion 3.0: You can (not) redo's plot section is bloating because of an anonymous user. I've reverted his edits twice already, along with informing him of the word count limit, but he doesn't listen. This guy is showing signs of edit warring by always reverting my edits back, and I don't want to start an edit war. Now the article is full of fancruft and terms only Eva fans would understand, plus speculation besides. Can any active editors help me convince this guy and undo the bloat? I would appreciate some help here. Greatly. Thank you. Anthonydraco ( talk) 15:13, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
User User:TeenAngels1234 has recently been editing several of the Eva character articles, mostly replacing them with translated version of the Italian Wikipedia. While those articles are significantly larger and more detailed, I have noticed they have some peculiarities which are rather questionable. The Analysis sections on them are significantly longer *however* they contain several sources making rather... large assumptions and I have to wonder how much of it is acceptable. For instance, Asuka's article has added a section in that claims she has narcissistic personality disorder. I understand several fans consider this a valid analysis ( histrionic personality disorder being another popular alternative), but I really question the wisdom of adding what is essentially fan interpretation as fact, as I think that gets dangerously close to original research territory. Even if there are instances of critics interpreting her as such, that should still be clarified. I also wonder if quoting random and apparently unknown sources as commentators, like Chilean radio shows (?) fits into the wiki's notability rules.
Now, Asuka's page has only been minimally edited (though the additions are somewhat redundant, you even have a quote by her voice actress that is repeated from the earlier Conception section) but the Shinji Ikari and Rei Ayanami pages have been mostly remade into whole copies of the Italian pages. Again, the additions aren't entirely bad, but there has mostly been a transition from the previous pages (which I honestly feel were already quite good enough) into saying mostly the same thing, but using more Italian sources, plus the expanded Analysis sections. Looking at the Italian wikipedia, I am afraid it contains several problems that might not be apparent at first glance unless you're quite familiar with Evangelion sources. It is an unfortunate fact that anime sources in Japan vary wildly in reliability, relevance, proximity to the creators and consistency. Several sources are not even trying to be legitimate, there are tons of independent guides, video game guides, fan writing and such that sometimes gets passed off as official. Or some "official" sources that are just not canon or made by the actual writes, like those only pertaining to "for fun" video game scenarios, or spin-off manga with no involvement from the creators. This gets even worse when you add in the language barrier, which can be exploited by fans with particular interests, and these sources get passed off as official, canon, or, worse, written by Anno himself - I should mention that claiming anything is by Anno himself if a telltale sign of this, as these fans seem to be largely disconsidering of the involvement of anyone else in making Evangelion. This happens markedly in the Kaworu page, which reproduces some myths spread by the Evangelion tumblrs in the 2011-2015 period, 4chan, and other questionable sources, falsely attributing tons of sources as far more primary than they really are, quoting them out of important context, or omitting certain facts. The Kaworu page, as can be expected from the influence of those tumblrs, has several of those problems, with independent video game guides cited as official Gainax sources stating facts about the series themselves, despite Gainax's many, many statements about the complete non-canonicity of those video games, or interviews attributing questions made by the interviewer to the interviewee, and other cases of bad faith - though I am sure the original Italian editors were not aware of those manipulations.
Which is ironic, because those sources are *also* made known to the Western fandoms by way of fan sources like Tumblr and 4chan (as the cases of officially translated Evangelion material is rare in the West), usually first into English and later into other languages, but when they are inserted into Wikipedia they are simply cited by themselves, even though the editor might have been misled. Of course, unless you are in a fan site that is able and willing to investigate that sort of stuff, it can be hard to be made aware of those problems. Another example is the Schizo/Parano books. This is a legitimate source, but Anno is actually present in only half of the book. The other half consists of interview with other staff and essays by other people. This might not be apparent because, in the Japanese "taidan" book format, the "main" subject of that book has his name credited in the cover, even though he didn't write the whole book or even most of it. In that case, one of the articles uses a character guide written independently by an editor as an official Gainax source. The Italian articles even use a factually incorrect source, which is in turn originated an English speaking article that never made a correction made 2 days later in the Japanese original article after its own publication, regarding that book, when Anno talked about in an event. Because the Japanese understand that the taidan books couldn't be attributed to Anno himself, let alone Gainax as a whole, when his statements had been misreported as him talking about having written the whole book, this provoked a large outrage and confusion, since that meant Anno had to have falsely written entire essays and fake interviews with other people, using the name of a real editor, and all of those interviews simply happened to match what those people said in other places over the years. Except, that this was corrected two days later in the original Japanese source, when the original editor tweeted about it to the Japanese newspaper and that was immediately corrected, after Anno himself emailed the editor to apologize. As it turns out, Anno was simply talking about having edited what he said in his own answers in his own interviews, and this was misreported by newspaper. However, English speaking sources had by then translated the original Japanese article and simply never made that correction. That was then spread among Western fans as fact, even though anyone with even a minimal knowledge of those books (and they had also been fan translated for years at that point, in 2014). It also happens to contradict many other sources by Anno himself on not spelling out what each character means or explaining much in the series per se, not to mention the actual contents of that very same book. This is because that statement was used as, you can imagine, evidence for shipping, and was originally spread by these fans as a single image saying "this is what Anno says my ship is canon", without providing any additional info. There are other examples, but this speaks to the danger of using these sources when there is a problem in accessing them and verifying their validity, and they are in turn presented by English speaking fans, sometimes in bad faith, sometimes as an honest mistake.
With that said, I would like to ask the user their intentions in adapting future if any articles, if he is aware of those problems, as well as the opinions of the other uses involved here, like and in the Eva articles, like User:Sjones23. Personally, I am inclined to really just leave the articles as they are. FelipeFritschF ( talk) 18:42, 28 April 2020 (UTC) FelipeFritschF ( talk) 18:42, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
(
←) As for the part on Kaworu, in fact, the point is another. We have to position things differently. For Asuka translation, for example, I arranged "Psychoanalysis" differently from the original Italian version. It.wiki used themed sections. On en.wiki we may should think how to organize the various sentences and declarations in a harmonious way, without colliding with each other and clearly establishing the canonity and what that sentence refers to. We did it on It.wiki, again, but following It.Wiki style. Again, it is an editorial work, rather than of substance.
I am also aware of that questionable ADV "Mythology of Evangelion". Again, I don't think I've ever used a source that is only 'authorized' (that is, licensed by Gainax, but completely independent and wild) to make non-canonical statement. I have even used Evangelion Chronicle sparingly in very sentence, because it's 2nd or 3rd-thier canon, not first. Always taken Anno's comments as Anno comments, Tsurumaki comments as Tsurumaki veiwpoint, always taken the editorial comments from Animage in context, and so on.
TeenAngels1234 (
talk) 21:32, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
Petit Eva: Evangelion@School needs work to avoid deletion. It's entirely plot. The one source isn't sufficient and I could only find a passing mention elsewhere. The Japanese article isn't much better, unfortunately. Unless someone can find better sources, probably in Japanese, this needs deleting or merging. Fences& Windows 11:07, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Greetings to the group. My name is Fico, and I need your help with this draft. I barely have knowledge about Godzilla, but nothing more. Therefore, I require help from your group in order to expand it during the following years. Thank you so much. Fico Puricelli ( talk) 16:59, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
Anime and manga: Evangelion Project‑class | ||||||||||
|
We've been edit-warring back and forth, and I'm starting to get tired of him, but since I don't understand why he objects so much, I'm loathe to just call in an admin strike.
The relevant content: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/?title=List_of_Neon_Genesis_Evangelion_characters&action=historysubmit&diff=339957411&oldid=339954503
The URL in question is http://theplanetsthatmatter.com/features/yoshiyuki_sadamoto_young_ace_interview/yoshiyuki_sadamoto_young_ace_interview.html . I view it as reliable, as it gives its source quite clearly, consiles with everything else I've learned, and sounds like Sadamoto (I have a few of his other interviews), and otherwise seems legit.
But the anon is objecting at Talk:List of Neon Genesis Evangelion characters#Translation of the amateur who mixed false information that apparently the translator's choice to translate Mari Makinami as Mary utterly discredits the entire thing and the statements that Mari was designed to look English/British. At least, I think that's what he means.
Thoughts on this - just ask for a block? Keep arguing with him? - welcomed. -- Gwern (contribs) 17:34 25 January 2010 (GMT)
This source seems to be falsified aiming at spectators in Europe and America. Name mari of the katakana never becomes mary. I do not complain if it is official information on an English version or a Japanese version. 60.40.8.165 ( talk) 17:50, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Does no-one have any opinions on this? Should I take everyone's silence as complete implicit agreement with my reversions of the removal? -- Gwern (contribs) 21:07 30 January 2010 (GMT)
I think the interview is accurate, but we should hold off on changing "Mari" to "Mari" until we have additional information to confirm. -- Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici ( talk) 16:17, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
The person who made this false information cannot do even a basic translation of the word of Japan. Or, to make people in the West pleased, mary and the name are falsified. I am telling it not to use such amateur's information as a source. 61.119.136.56 ( talk) 23:22, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
However, it is insisted that it not change it with mary. Gwern admit the imitation to mix with this source? 60.40.11.48 ( talk) 01:10, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
How are you confirming the truth of information? Change it into an official source if there is a complaint. Do not reflect it if an official source is not found. I stay on for a long time if you do not correspond in sincerity. I only say the just argument. 60.40.11.48 ( talk) 01:43, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
mysterious IP, please define "official" first. We go by "reliable" sources, not just "official". if the source is reliable, than it can be used. And if it's a primary source, then use secondary sources to support the primary. Bread Ninja ( talk) 17:44, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Japanese IP, you should be more constructive in your edits. Obviously, you have access to many more sources than us, because we can only rely on secondary translations, and unfortunately, there are not enough mainstream anime media interested in Evangelion. I have to admit that planetsthatmatter.com, the site having posted this translation, was created quite recently, and we currently have no way to know exactly who is writing it (and names are not enough), so it's not really the best source. Having someone fluent in japanese is always helpful, so please, could you actually help instead of just deleting the reference ?
The Sadamoto interview was originally published in Young Ace #3 (september 2009), more precisely in a booklet included in the magazine, and named "Osada-bon 2009". Could you please check the booklet (since you have easy acces to it) and tell us if the informations about the creation of Mari are true ? More precisely, could you tell us if Sadamoto, in japanese, said he designed Mari to look British and that her glasses are used to "set her appart from other characters" ?
If you can confirm this information to be true, then the article will directly use the magazine Young Ace as a reference, and the translation will be provided so that non-japanese readers can still, well, read it.
This is the only way we're going to add any "official" source. But just claiming the source is "false" is not helping us in anyway. If the "mistake" is only about Mari/Mary, then it is irrelevant and the translated interview is still considered reliable. Folken de Fanel ( talk) 18:04, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Http://yui-spirits.kboyu.net/2009/08/newtype.html
this is an impression site of the magazine of the Newtype September edition. It differs from the source of the amateur who is telling it that I must remove. It is said that middle-aged father in Japan joined there though an initial image is British. Mari put on a result glasses different from the design grammar of "Eva". (The reason to give glasses is the same. )
I do not think that it is correct to treat the source of this Japan by Wikipedia because it is an individual impression 60.40.11.48 ( talk) 04:09, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
What makes a source "amateur"? Bread Ninja ( talk) 15:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Please explain how this source is an amateur site, and not a reliable one Bread Ninja ( talk) 15:52, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
it's here, WP:RS. still, like Folken said, instead, why not search for information? we cant simply judge everything so quickly, like folken has said, the site relatively new. still, we have to try to find where they got there information and see if we can find another site with the translation. Bread Ninja ( talk) 16:47, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
it was all speculation though. it wasn't much of saying how it is. you even corrected yourself once too. Bread Ninja ( talk) 18:07, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
It is not possible to come here for several days because business turned up. Because progress doesn't seem to advance, I will leave. It has something to say to Gwern at the end. Please do not forget the pure mind. You may believe mary. There is a possibility of becoming mary in an English version. Good bye. 220.104.44.235 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:54, 11 February 2010 (UTC).
Mysterious IP, you need to understand that it was just a translation, also no official translation has come up, that doesn't mean the article is "amateur". if you read list of soul reapers in bleach you see Mayuri Kurohsugi's zanpaktou called Ashisogi Jizō (疋殺地蔵?, roughly "leg-cutting Jizō") when the more exact translation is "head-cutting Jizō" . Despite it being a mistranslation it still being used due to it being the one that's verifiable. if you can verify that Mary is actually "Mari" then please find a source. Bread Ninja ( talk) 16:10, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
and i agree, b ut it's just some insight to show this IP how wiki works. Bread Ninja ( talk) 17:50, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
From http://web.archive.org/web/20071224093211/www.geocities.com/Tokyo/3948/evanews.html a selection of news events and also merchandising; it's not really a RS, but knowing what to look for is half the battle:
...
...
...
(2) offers original Evangelion art while (1) and (3) has scenes from the show and graphic art by Sadamoto and New Type Magazine Staff. I recommend the (2) and the (3) type of trading cards. Now the news is, The Death and Rebirth Part of the Movie has been released as a trading card last August. It will be a CARDDASS MASTERS type of card and PART 3 of the series. One pack of 7 cards will cost 314 yen excluding tax. Watch for it in your nearest trading cards store or Toy Store.
...
...
-- Gwern (contribs) 22:27 28 February 2010 (GMT)
497 articles mentioning Eva. Good grief. I hope I don't wind up going through all those by myself... -- Gwern (contribs) 22:27 28 February 2010 (GMT)
I'll read and see what there is. it appears that there's enough info to make another NGE article about this trading card game. or we start making tables for the list of media. Bread Ninja ( talk) 16:56, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I whant ask you the help. Can you finish this article in simple english? In advance thanks. 82.193.155.236 ( talk) 16:08, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
you can just look for it on your own. it's just adding info right? just look in the rei ayanami article in this wikipedia. Bread Ninja ( talk) 16:15, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
Sorry if this has been brought up before, but I've been wondering about the relevance of relationship sections when it comes to articles about an individual character, i believe they take up so much information and only talks about how the main character interacts with certain characters, wouldn't it be easier to merge some of the main points of relationship with personality or something similar to that. Bread Ninja ( talk) 18:25, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
FYI, WPBANNERMETA now supports adding portals to each Workgroup/taskforce line. You may want to add the Eva portal to the line in the WPANIME banner that lists the Eva TF. 70.29.210.155 ( talk) 11:01, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Portal:Evangelion Dream Focus 22:50, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
FYI, Neon Genesis Evangelion timeline has been nominated for deletion. 76.66.200.95 ( talk) 06:23, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
FYI, the usage of Sephiroth (Tree of Life) is under discussion, see Talk:Sephiroth (Final Fantasy). 76.66.203.138 ( talk) 05:52, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Neon Genesis Evangelion timeline is up for deletion again. 76.66.203.138 ( talk) 09:01, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated Neon Genesis Evangelion glossary for deletion. Please join the discussion here and share your comments. Jfgslo ( talk) 21:25, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
I changed the manga of "Gakuen Datenroku" to Campus Apocalypse. It would be a great help if you changed the links to "Gakuen Datenroku" to "Campus Apocalypse" in other related articles so no further confusion be made. Bread Ninja ( talk) 20:50, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 January 18#Evangelion. -- Gwern (contribs) 15:40 18 January 2011 (GMT)
See Talk:Evangelion where it is being discussed whether NGE is ever appropriate to be refered to as Evangelion, and whether the religious term should be primary over the disambiguation page. 65.93.13.210 ( talk) 03:23, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Found out today that this attraction is coming to Fuji-Q Highland, providing yet another reason to go to Japan when things are sorted out.
BrokenSphere Msg me 22:56, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
There's a notice about Hiroyuki Tsuchida at WT:JAPAN -- 65.92.180.137 ( talk) 03:11, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Dear editors of Eva project,
I need some help from you guys here. Evangelion 3.0: You can (not) redo's plot section is bloating because of an anonymous user. I've reverted his edits twice already, along with informing him of the word count limit, but he doesn't listen. This guy is showing signs of edit warring by always reverting my edits back, and I don't want to start an edit war. Now the article is full of fancruft and terms only Eva fans would understand, plus speculation besides. Can any active editors help me convince this guy and undo the bloat? I would appreciate some help here. Greatly. Thank you. Anthonydraco ( talk) 15:13, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
User User:TeenAngels1234 has recently been editing several of the Eva character articles, mostly replacing them with translated version of the Italian Wikipedia. While those articles are significantly larger and more detailed, I have noticed they have some peculiarities which are rather questionable. The Analysis sections on them are significantly longer *however* they contain several sources making rather... large assumptions and I have to wonder how much of it is acceptable. For instance, Asuka's article has added a section in that claims she has narcissistic personality disorder. I understand several fans consider this a valid analysis ( histrionic personality disorder being another popular alternative), but I really question the wisdom of adding what is essentially fan interpretation as fact, as I think that gets dangerously close to original research territory. Even if there are instances of critics interpreting her as such, that should still be clarified. I also wonder if quoting random and apparently unknown sources as commentators, like Chilean radio shows (?) fits into the wiki's notability rules.
Now, Asuka's page has only been minimally edited (though the additions are somewhat redundant, you even have a quote by her voice actress that is repeated from the earlier Conception section) but the Shinji Ikari and Rei Ayanami pages have been mostly remade into whole copies of the Italian pages. Again, the additions aren't entirely bad, but there has mostly been a transition from the previous pages (which I honestly feel were already quite good enough) into saying mostly the same thing, but using more Italian sources, plus the expanded Analysis sections. Looking at the Italian wikipedia, I am afraid it contains several problems that might not be apparent at first glance unless you're quite familiar with Evangelion sources. It is an unfortunate fact that anime sources in Japan vary wildly in reliability, relevance, proximity to the creators and consistency. Several sources are not even trying to be legitimate, there are tons of independent guides, video game guides, fan writing and such that sometimes gets passed off as official. Or some "official" sources that are just not canon or made by the actual writes, like those only pertaining to "for fun" video game scenarios, or spin-off manga with no involvement from the creators. This gets even worse when you add in the language barrier, which can be exploited by fans with particular interests, and these sources get passed off as official, canon, or, worse, written by Anno himself - I should mention that claiming anything is by Anno himself if a telltale sign of this, as these fans seem to be largely disconsidering of the involvement of anyone else in making Evangelion. This happens markedly in the Kaworu page, which reproduces some myths spread by the Evangelion tumblrs in the 2011-2015 period, 4chan, and other questionable sources, falsely attributing tons of sources as far more primary than they really are, quoting them out of important context, or omitting certain facts. The Kaworu page, as can be expected from the influence of those tumblrs, has several of those problems, with independent video game guides cited as official Gainax sources stating facts about the series themselves, despite Gainax's many, many statements about the complete non-canonicity of those video games, or interviews attributing questions made by the interviewer to the interviewee, and other cases of bad faith - though I am sure the original Italian editors were not aware of those manipulations.
Which is ironic, because those sources are *also* made known to the Western fandoms by way of fan sources like Tumblr and 4chan (as the cases of officially translated Evangelion material is rare in the West), usually first into English and later into other languages, but when they are inserted into Wikipedia they are simply cited by themselves, even though the editor might have been misled. Of course, unless you are in a fan site that is able and willing to investigate that sort of stuff, it can be hard to be made aware of those problems. Another example is the Schizo/Parano books. This is a legitimate source, but Anno is actually present in only half of the book. The other half consists of interview with other staff and essays by other people. This might not be apparent because, in the Japanese "taidan" book format, the "main" subject of that book has his name credited in the cover, even though he didn't write the whole book or even most of it. In that case, one of the articles uses a character guide written independently by an editor as an official Gainax source. The Italian articles even use a factually incorrect source, which is in turn originated an English speaking article that never made a correction made 2 days later in the Japanese original article after its own publication, regarding that book, when Anno talked about in an event. Because the Japanese understand that the taidan books couldn't be attributed to Anno himself, let alone Gainax as a whole, when his statements had been misreported as him talking about having written the whole book, this provoked a large outrage and confusion, since that meant Anno had to have falsely written entire essays and fake interviews with other people, using the name of a real editor, and all of those interviews simply happened to match what those people said in other places over the years. Except, that this was corrected two days later in the original Japanese source, when the original editor tweeted about it to the Japanese newspaper and that was immediately corrected, after Anno himself emailed the editor to apologize. As it turns out, Anno was simply talking about having edited what he said in his own answers in his own interviews, and this was misreported by newspaper. However, English speaking sources had by then translated the original Japanese article and simply never made that correction. That was then spread among Western fans as fact, even though anyone with even a minimal knowledge of those books (and they had also been fan translated for years at that point, in 2014). It also happens to contradict many other sources by Anno himself on not spelling out what each character means or explaining much in the series per se, not to mention the actual contents of that very same book. This is because that statement was used as, you can imagine, evidence for shipping, and was originally spread by these fans as a single image saying "this is what Anno says my ship is canon", without providing any additional info. There are other examples, but this speaks to the danger of using these sources when there is a problem in accessing them and verifying their validity, and they are in turn presented by English speaking fans, sometimes in bad faith, sometimes as an honest mistake.
With that said, I would like to ask the user their intentions in adapting future if any articles, if he is aware of those problems, as well as the opinions of the other uses involved here, like and in the Eva articles, like User:Sjones23. Personally, I am inclined to really just leave the articles as they are. FelipeFritschF ( talk) 18:42, 28 April 2020 (UTC) FelipeFritschF ( talk) 18:42, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
(
←) As for the part on Kaworu, in fact, the point is another. We have to position things differently. For Asuka translation, for example, I arranged "Psychoanalysis" differently from the original Italian version. It.wiki used themed sections. On en.wiki we may should think how to organize the various sentences and declarations in a harmonious way, without colliding with each other and clearly establishing the canonity and what that sentence refers to. We did it on It.wiki, again, but following It.Wiki style. Again, it is an editorial work, rather than of substance.
I am also aware of that questionable ADV "Mythology of Evangelion". Again, I don't think I've ever used a source that is only 'authorized' (that is, licensed by Gainax, but completely independent and wild) to make non-canonical statement. I have even used Evangelion Chronicle sparingly in very sentence, because it's 2nd or 3rd-thier canon, not first. Always taken Anno's comments as Anno comments, Tsurumaki comments as Tsurumaki veiwpoint, always taken the editorial comments from Animage in context, and so on.
TeenAngels1234 (
talk) 21:32, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
Petit Eva: Evangelion@School needs work to avoid deletion. It's entirely plot. The one source isn't sufficient and I could only find a passing mention elsewhere. The Japanese article isn't much better, unfortunately. Unless someone can find better sources, probably in Japanese, this needs deleting or merging. Fences& Windows 11:07, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Greetings to the group. My name is Fico, and I need your help with this draft. I barely have knowledge about Godzilla, but nothing more. Therefore, I require help from your group in order to expand it during the following years. Thank you so much. Fico Puricelli ( talk) 16:59, 22 February 2022 (UTC)