Talk:Elfen Lied/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions about Elfen Lied. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Silpelit: Reproduction/Infection

In the article it is stated that the Silpelit are incapable of reproducing yet are able to infect humans. Just to be clear, does this mean that a full-fledged Diclonius like Lucy can give physical birth to a non-silpelit Diclonius child, while a silpelit is unable to actually give birth at all, their role being limited to simply infecting humans?

Yes that is correct. -- Psi edit 16:48, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I'd managed to get myself confused on the issue for a while there.

More Sadistic?

Lucy is depicted even more sadistic and murderous. She actually enjoys inflicting both physical and emotional pain on her victims and aggressors.

Im not sure I agree with this change in the manga. How exactly is she more sadistic. -- Psi edit 12:31, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

She's certainly humanised a lot more in the anime. It's probably fair to say that she's more sadistic, in that the manga version of Lucy is not as sympathetic a character. It's essentially the difference between murdering the classroom bullies for killing her beloved dog and doing it simply to get back at them. One is clearly more sadistic, although both are malicious and brutal. GrubLord 14:52, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I dont know. You make a good point. However I dont understand how did anime Lucy differ from manga Lucy in killing the bullies (I thought the bothy killed for the same reasons). But also what is this "physical and emotional pain" difference from the anime? -- Psi edit 22:08, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I believe it is interesting to notice that, unlike in the manga, Lucy is not shown smiling ONCE in the anime when killing people, nor when inflicting pain and suffering. There are only two instances when she's shown with a grin while in a fight: first in her first fight with Nana, she smiles when the opening to turn the tides of the battle arises, although I believe it's not a sadistic smile. I can't remember the second time now, it was somewhere near the end of the series, but it is a very faint thing, nothing like a sadistic smile. Moreover, neither situations happen in the middle of a slaughter/torture session. On the other hand, she is shown with a sadistic kind of grin almost all the time in the manga, at least until when she finishes Nana off for the first time. I believe this makes a crucial change between the manga and the anime and shouldn't be put aside, in which it gives Lucy a much more human personality, resented with the world for having been rejected (in the anime her expression is almost always of grief and resentment or hatred when with humans), and therefore makes the sad ending, together with the addition of music box very plausible and appropriate (and much better than the sci-fi, mecha, evangelion, reincarnation, spiritual kind of ending described in the manga spoilers above). In the subject of Lucy's personality and feelings at least, the manga and the anime differ greatly. -- FiReCaT 06:39, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Your right, the smile gives a slightly different character. And that of course the aniem is very different from the manga. -- Psi edit 19:36, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

The note about Lucy laughing while her dog is killed in the manga seems a bit erroneous/subjective. I just read the scene and saw it as the boys laughing; Lucy's face isn't really that of laughter. Any thoughts? 72.90.235.14 01:13, 31 July 2006 (UTC) Emi

I thought the same of that scene. -- Psi edit 01:31, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Lucy's nonviolence towards Kurama

Both when she passes him down the hall in the beginning, and when she is smacked by him after hurting Nana, she does not attack or retaliate, despite the fact that he has taken part in experimentations on Diclonius children. Why? (the article doesn't say)--Dch111 02:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC) (reposted here because the discussion in list of characters is empty)

Most likely, she does not kill him because he has been infected and reproduces Silpelits. Thus, Lucy's "biological programming" favors leaving him alive for the purposes of reproduction of the species. --Kuronekoyama 15:12, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Its explained in the Elfen Lied OVA (however it isnt spoiled at the article). However the reason she got slapped in for hurting Nana is because of Nana's perceptive ability to disable Vectors of other Diclonius, however its unknown what Lucy would have done otherwise (had her Vectors been active. The OVA will be released soon (I saw it Japanese while subtitled). -- Psi edit 02:37, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Both the manga and the anime imply that Lucy does not care for the reproduction of the species. How could she have knowledge of Kurama's infection. -- Psi edit 16:32, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

She enjoys torturing his mind. Thats why she killed the secratary after he told her to run. also note how he always tells her "i will never forgive you." there was an exact reason but i cant remeber what. Give me a couple of days to rember -TDML

She stated that she would hurt everyone that he cared about, but wouldn't kill him. She did this because she wasn't killed, but had to witness her friend die.

Yeah thats it-TDML

Where is the cameo?

Lynn Okamoto himself has a brief cameo appearance as a special guest in episode 12.

Where does he appear? (Ive watched all of the anime). -- Psi edit 02:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Mariko

Where does she say 'Myu'? I don't find anything about it in the TV and 1-6 volumes? And Saito had not said about that too. But it's written in the article. 83.178.203.88 16:15, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry. I'd noticed that she said Myu in the 7-th volume.

GA Nom

I have no experience with the official review process used for Good Article nominations, but after a read-through of the article, I'd like to make a suggestion that would greatly improve the readability:

Split the gigantic section on what a Diclonius is out of the story section into Diclonius (Elfen Lied) or something similar. Right now, we have an article's worth of definition and description in the middle of what is supposed to be a description of the series intro, with no transition between them. I found the following part especially abrupt:

"Silpelits are merely expendable soldiers tasked with the complete annihilation of the homo sapiens population so that the fertile Diclonius can breed progeny to populate the planet and, therefore, becoming the dominant species.

The next day, a boy named Kouta arrives at Kamakura to meet his cousin Yuka."

Come to think of it, didn't Diclonius used to be a seperate article? What happened to that? Did it fall victim to a mergist admin? --tjstrf 07:00, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Good Article nomination has failed

The Good article nomination for Elfen Lied/Archive 2 has failed, for the following reason:

Good work on this article - it is very thorough. However, I think it has a few problems that prevent it from becoming a Good Article at this time.

As Tjstrf mentioned above, the lengthy description of the Diclonius is awkwardly inserted into the Story section, and it really disrupts the article. It needs to be reorganized, or split into a new article titled Diclonius (Elfen Lied).
The Story section needs to be copyedited for proper grammar. It is full of non-standard phrasing and clauses that make it hard to read.

I encourage re-nominating when these are addressed. Aguerriero (talk) 16:01, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

A bit of balance

See this diff. He immediately removed it (probably because this issue is also dealth with in the "Humanity" section), but when I first read it, I thought that there was a need for some balance there as well. Shinobu 22:47, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

It wasn't removed, just moved down 1 paragraph; it's still there in the Diclonius section...And what do you mean by balance? -- (十八|talk) 23:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh sorry, I must have misread the diff somehow. As for balance, I thought the diclonii were made out to be a lot more "evil" in the article than in the series. Shinobu 13:47, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

ˈɛlfən liːt

How do u prenounce exactly "ˈɛlfən liːt"? 84.228.211.118 06:38, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Lingvo have informed that it sounds like ['elfin li:d] 83.178.206.174 09:16, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

That's not really true though. The ə is a schwa, not an i, and final consonants in Dutch and German are devoiced, so it ends in a t. Besides non-IPA pronunciation guides can easily give someone a wrong impression, since the interpretation of such guides will be very dialect dependent. It's better to have a look at International Phonetic Alphabet and the relevant articles linked from there. Shinobu 16:38, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Guessing from my limited knowledge of foreign words I'd say "lied" is pronounced "lee-dh" 207.114.232.98 23:15, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I've heard the name pronounced in the Trailer. Its pronounced "Elf-In Lead" Elf-in being one sound of course...208.248.33.30 16:37, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

The sound "Lead" as in the english word Lead meaning to guide in a direction. Heheh208.248.33.30 16:39, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Take note that the last d is sounded as a t, not d. --130.232.131.47 01:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

According to www.dictionary.com, "lied" can be pronounced as either "leed" or "leet." Both are correct. (I personally say "leed" since "leet" reminds me too much of "1337.") -Crimsonseiko 14:11, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Nope. [lid] is the English pronounciation, meant for the word "lied", meaning a certain type of song. However, the title is obviously wholly German, and hence you're stuck with [lit]. That's why it's written as エルフェンリート/-rīto in Japanese, not リード/-rīdo. --130.232.106.17 14:31, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Elfen Lied body count

Talk:Elfen Lied body count. Since no-one's responded yet there, I'll make the offer here:

Is there any reason whatsoever that we need that article, since it seems to be a collection of indiscriminant information? I'm going to nominate it for AfD in all likelihood, but would like to give the editors of this category some input first. Is there some vital need for it that I'm not aware of? --tjstrf 04:39, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Fancruft. Shinobu 02:16, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Kouta / Kohta / Kōta

What is Kouta's name supposed to be in the entry? "Kouta" is seen often, but Wikipedia uses the Hepburn style of romanization, or "Kōta". But ADV, the official licencee of Elfenlied uses "Kohta". I'm leaning torward replacing Kouta and Kohta with Kōta, unless other people have a good reason not to. --Wirbelwind 23:24, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Though I tend to go with "Kouta" myself, I think I read it somewhere that Wikipedia prefers to use the official English translation if one is available. Could someone please confirm this? ChibiKareshi 13:30, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Yea, it is, in the Manual of Style.

Names should be romanized according to common usage (see below), which includes unconventional romanizations by licensees (e.g., Devil Hunter Yohko and Tenjho Tenge).

--Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 23:00, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Manga

After director Kakuzawa is killed late in the manga by Lucy's own hand, Lucy tells his corpse that Diclonius are not a different species, but humans like everyone else - just born with horns and a unique power.

If I remember correctly, what Lucy said after she killed Kakuzawa, is that Kakuzawa is just a human with horns, thus not a diclonius. In vol.10, page 106, She said "That's why I can't sense our atmosphere from you", implying diclonius and humans are indeed different species. Kzaral 14:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I haven't read the manga up to this part yet, but isn't it possible this confusion was brought on by a translation error? In that case, a look at the Japanese text should clarify things. The first account of Lucy's words sounds a bit fishy to me, though. I'll check back here once I've read the other volumes (I'm reading the original Japanese version). ChibiKareshi 11:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Kzaral is correct, the statement that Lucy tells Kakuzawa that "the Diclonius are not a different species" is false. What Lucy does say is that old man Kakuzawa himself is just a human with horns and not a real Diclonius. This sentence should be removed from the article as it is invalid. ChibiKareshi 10:38, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

If they were a different species then tell me how can they be born from normal humans like Lucy and procreate with them it quite impossible that they are a different species a proper example of a different species is blood+ chiropterans which mating with humans produces nothing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.45.39.88 (talk)

Why couldn't they be born from another species? Chicken and egg problem; and different species can produce offspring. Mules, ligers, tigons, etc. Some are even fertile. --Gwern (contribs) 23:51 12 December 2006 (GMT)

Yes there was theory in the manga some guy theorized that diclonius might have been an alien life form but that was shot down. As for different species bit humans are a bit more complex than tigers and the like for example the monkey/ape darwins theory says we evolved from it hell we may have come from it if darwins right but we cannot produce anything with it since we are so far apart in genetics. Diclonius are not like this at all there basic structure is basically the same as our own with minor changes like horns and the bigger pineal gland. in truth they are basically humans with horns and a super power. If they were born from a different species than humans they probably would not have human form they would be perhaps more beast like. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.45.39.88 (talk)

Elfen Leid 2?

I've been hearing rumours of the making of elfen leid 2, this article could mention this with more detail, if any wikipedist know if this are only rumors or if it's true, elfen leid fans want, could or should know, please mention this in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.169.14.38 (talk)

I, atleast, have heard no such rumors, and anyway Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, so predicting future events that aren't confirmed aren't allowed. If it becomes confirmed, site your reputable source and add it to the article.--(十八|talk) 20:50, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Cousin?

I was positive before it said on this page that Kouta and Yuka being cousins was a mistranslation when the Anime was made, otherwise their relationship would have been incestious and that wasn't quite right... Can someone confirm this for me? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.30.15.7 (talk) 19:05, 12 December 2006 (UTC).

There was a discussion about this earlier. Read the source here. -- Psi edit 21:12, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Incestuous relationships are nearly par for the course in harem series. Nothing to be surprised about there. --tjstrf talk 08:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah Yuka is Koutas cousin alright but i heard in japan marrying cousins is not taboo there are other countries where that isn't taboo either--Vipa Human 17:41, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, when they see each other in the series, Yuka says "yuka desu. itoko no," meaning "It's me, Yuka. Your cousin." Chibi Gohan 16:56, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Furthermore, Yuka refers to Kohta's father as "Uncle" in the flashback of the festival. -Crimsonseiko 14:13, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Diclonius Information

This is the Diclonius information taken out of the page, as it was too cluttered. The reason I put it on here is because I am a bit of a new, inexperienced member, and would prefer that someone else with more skill would create the Diclonius page everyone has been suggesting. -- LuceOmbra 13:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I have reinserted the Diclonius information for now as there is no reason to take it out currently. Also, I am against creating a seperate Diclonius article since it's just fine where it is in the main article. Also you say "everyone's been suggesting" but just who are you talking about?--(十八|talk) 14:00, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I meant "some", not everyone. It could still use some cleaning up, though.69.245.238.206 21:22, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I've jazzed up the Diclonius (Elfen Lied) article. --Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici 06:08, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

GAC

I have taken on copyediting the article. Please feel free to discuss here or on my talk page.

I've never seen the series, but it seems to me that the cousin of the hero should figure in the characters section, since she is in every single other section.--SidiLemine 13:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Since Elfen Lied was first a manga, I think the article should focus first on the manga and later on the anime adaptation. I understand most people, myself included, learned of Elfen Lied through the anime rather than the manga, but with some "minor twicking" it could at least give the appearance of focusing on the manga. Like:

Change the character portraits to art from the manga.
Turn the "Anime" section into the "Anime adaptation" section and move the "Cultural references" section inside it.
Also inside this section, move the list of things where the anime differs from the manga.
If possible, change the anime screenshots to manga panels (unless the section it's about the anime)

Like SidiLemine mentioned, there are missing characters: the cousin, Mayu, the other diclonus (can't remember the names right now) And the trivia could be worked into the main body.--Nohansen 14:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Mmmh. I'm not so sure about the focus on the Manga. I already rephrased the lead to reflect this, and I don't think more accent is needed, specially if the anime is more notable than the manga. I don't think there is any guideline regarding choice of pictures: the article is about both the manga and the anime, and should be balanced. And the cultural references contain stuff about the manga, too, so can't be included into the anime sections.

Now I'll go with suggestions of my own:

Create a "List of Elfen Lied media" to move the episode list, the manga volumes, songs, etc. there.
The first point of the Trivia is unclear: i sit in the anime or the manga? Anyway, it should move to that section.
The second point of the trivia could move to the new article proposed above.
The third point of the trivia should move to the to-be-created "reception" section, which should include sells, critics, prizes, etc. This is a pretty important section, and it's hard to do without.

I'll keep copyediting and will post further remarks as they come.--SidiLemine 15:26, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

As a suggestion I think you should add some more references. 7 references for an article this long doesn't look too good. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 20:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm putting this article on hold until the above concerns by a few editors are resolved. The trivia section needs to go, I don't know why someone added it back. --Squilibob 03:25, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

What's wrong with the trivia section? There's three entries, and I think a cameo by the author is certainly worth mentioning... --Gwern (contribs) 04:40 12 January 2007 (GMT) 04:40, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Why have a trivia section when you could include those points in writing? Trivia sections have to provide their own context, why they are notable and each be referenced. Trivia is small sentences in point form on different topics towards the end of the article. There is a Manual of style page that asks editors to avoid creating them. If you want to read more about the disadvantages of a trivia section then read Wikipedia:Trivia and Wikipedia:Avoid trivia sections in articles. --Squilibob 06:18, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I restored the trivia section because I, as a raw manga newbie, found the information interesting and useful. I don't think a trivia point should be removed UNTIL you've incorporated it into the article (or created a related article from it). I think you can interpret Wikipedia:Avoid trivia sections in articles to mean that Trivia sections should be avoided to present all the content, but they can be useful as a sort of content incubator -- not that Trivia sections should be eschewed entirely. --Renice 14:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

In the long run, I think we could probably move the Clone-manga thing into a webcomic. If it's been popular enough to inspire 6 translations, my guess is that it probably meets webcomic guidelines. The Gaia Online thing might be better off in the Gaia article, if it has a trivia section. --Gwern (contribs) 16:34 12 January 2007 (GMT)

I added the Clone-manga thing there because it shows that Elfen Lied was notable enough to inspire such a thing, not to talk about the comic itself. I did try to make that clearer and justify the "4x helm" thing by re-naming the section to "Influence", it could just as well be "Cultural references". Yes? No? Maybe? - Phorque 00:44, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

The only way the anime is more notable than the manga is that it got subbed into English before the manga. --tjstrf talk 08:58, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

On that last point, what I meant is that one way or the other, the article is about both the anime and the manga, and shouldn't give undue weight to either. About the trivia, Gwern, I quite agree a cameo appearence by the author is worthy; as I said above, it should go to the anime production section. It has its place there, and that's where someone looking for this kind of info will go. I am not at all for deleting all that's under "Trivia" in any given article; but if there's no other possible section to fit something into, then maybe it is trivial, and thus not notable.--SidiLemine 09:07, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and distributed the "Trivia" info in the article. I'll look for sources to populate the "Reception" section.--SidiLemine 16:05, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I have just read the Wikipedia:What is a good article? guideline and there are still problems with the article.

1(c) fails Words to avoid

2(a) the first inline citation is in the fourth section.

2(d) may have to reference the manga chapters or anime episodes

3(b) does not stay focused on the main topic in the Influence section

6 Images are cluttered around the Plot and Main character sections. I'd recommend changing the Lucy .jpg into a .png so the transparency is preserved from the original picture from which it was cropped. --Squilibob 00:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

With regard to the character images, I spent a lot of time taking screenshots from the official VAP Elfen Lied site, and made nice pngs of most of the characters, and seeing as they lacked a decent "Evil Lucy" image, I just left that out. However, someone got lazy and cropped a low quality JPG from the ADV site with the gray background (eugh). So as a temporary (but probably permanent) fix I cleaned up the jpg, gave it a white background and saved as png. I'm not totally into having it this way as the quality is noticeably lower than almost all of the other character images. Oh well. Personally I think that this article is nowhere near GA... but it's nice to see it improved so much because of the nomination. - Phorque 12:49, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you, it has improved a lot. The references are much better. I think the Music and poetry reference needs to be changed so it tells us more about the composer Hugo. The article still fails 1(c) as per above so I'm listing it as a failed GA nomination. Images are better but I'd recommend fixing the text wrapping around the portraits. Influence section is still trivia. --Squilibob 05:51, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Good points. I'd like to see the Clone Manga point stay somewhere in the article, as it does seem to legitimize Elfen Lied as an influential series. I'll find somewhere else to move it. The Gaia Online thing seems a little non-notable, as well as possibly original research, I don't think there will be a reference that states explicitly that the show inspired it. So unless someone can reference it, I'm probably going to do a bold/harsh edit of the article taking out any trivial or original research info. (mainly in the manga and societal sections). - Phorque 11:42, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Kouta vs Kōta

(my adapted statement/question from another user's talk page)

The characters of his name do not contain a "ー" (aka "vowel extender mark") which, to me, would be the indicator of a long "ō". Kouta's name is broken up like this: コ(ko)ウ(u)タ(ta). Wouldn't only コーウタ be Kōta?

The fact that the official romanisation is "Kohta" seems to strengthen this. Would this not indicate a rare case in which the name contains "ou" rather than "ō"? Please somebody agree with me, or correct my feeble attempt at understanding katakana. - Phorque 09:29, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

You're right on all but one count. Your only error: コーウタ would be literally Kōuta, コータ would be Kōta. ^^; I think people call him Kōta because of the literal romanization of the ō being "ou" in Hepburn romanization, even though it's incorrect in this case because there is a distinction between the "o" and the "u", but when people read "ou" they think 'long o'.

Aside from all this, Wikipedia should use the official English translation or romanization for names, so all instances should be Kohta if that's what the official is. I'm assuming that when you say 'official', you mean that that's the name that appears on English DVD cases and in the subtitles for the series on those official DVDs? If so, then the name should be changed to Kohta in the article. Nique1287 00:56, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

"Kohta" looks so silly to me, but that is what is on the official english website. I suppose it would make sense to use that. I'm still not certain what the author meant by breaking it up in the katakana... or whether it is equivalent to コータ as well as the kanji reading. Blah. - Phorque 16:00, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Crossposting from user talk:

Actually, the alternate Romanization as Kohta is the clincher that it is indeed a long O sound. (Oh is the same sound as Ou and Ō) If it were not a long O, but rather a vocalized u, then it wouldn't be written that way. There are apparently a very few cases where an ou is not one syllable, I know of exactly 1. (Yoruichi Shihouin)

For an absolute proof, look at the Characters of Elfen Lied page, where it gives his Kanji name. The first character is 耕. Looking at wikt:耕, it's pronounced Kō.

And Wiki policy is to use Hepburn Romanization. Actually, Wiki policy sucks in this regard and self-contradicts, but if we're using Nyū we should use Kōta. --tjstrf talk 05:20, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

One final bit of confirmation: wikt:太, the second character of his name, is read Ta (and some other alternate readings inapplicable here), not Uta. So it's definitely Kō-ta, not Ko-u-ta. --tjstrf talk 07:12, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

If all this is so, then why is his name listed with the literal kana for Kouta on this page? Nique1287 13:02, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Because o-u or o-o kana are how you write Ō. (There are many different ways of depicting the sound in English.) Look at Ko (kana). コウ is romanized as Kō, Ko, Koo, Kou, Kô and Koh in various systems, but it's all the same sound and Kō is the proper Hepburn romanization, which is what Wikipedia uses. --tjstrf talk 23:36, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

But that doesn't explain why it's written as Ko-u-ta (コウタ) with a distinct U on this page, which is what I was asking. Sorry for being unclear. Nique1287 23:49, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

That's like asking why Lye is written with ye rather than ie for its vowel sound: it doesn't matter as it would make no difference. コウタ (Ko-u-ta), コオタ (Ko-o-ta), and コータ (Ko-ta) are all identical sounds and Romanized the same way. (Kōta in Hepburn.) --tjstrf talk 00:05, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

(Random unindent) Actually, since every symbol is pronounced, it makes a GREAT difference (Ko-o-ta versus Ko-u-ta). Just because they're romanized the same way, doesn't mean they're pronounced the same way. Oh, and コウタ there, is not romanized Kōta, by any means, because the "o" is not elongated in sound. Nique1287 00:34, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Look at the page I cited above, Ko (kana). They are all Romanized Kō. Also look at the kanji. The argument over whether to use Kohta is another one entirely, but there is no argument whether Kōta is the proper Hepburn for his name. --tjstrf talk 00:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Relevant table:

Form	Rōmaji	Hiragana	Katakana
Normal k- (か行 ka-gyō)	ko	こ	コ
Normal k- (か行 ka-gyō)	kou koo kō, koh	こう, こぅこお, こぉこー	コウ, コゥコオ, コォコー

Revised Hepburn Romanization uses ō for long vowels oo and ou. As you can clearly see, Kō is the Romanized form of コウ. --tjstrf talk 00:57, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I see nothing on that page, or that table, that says that コウ becomes kō. All I see with regards to Kou (being the separate "o" and "u" sounds) is that it is listed separately from kō in the table (note that the kana for Kou are on one line with Kou, the kana for Koo are on one line with Koo, and the kana for Kō are on one line with Kō). They're in the same square, but I'm rather sure that doesn't just mean they all can be written as kō. The kanji in his name become Ko-u-ta, with three distinct sounds. Kōta cannot be correct in this case, according to Revised Hepburn, because again, the "o" sound is not extended, the second vowel is clearly an "u" sound, and macrons are only used when the first vowel is extended. Nique1287 01:03, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

O-u is, with rare exceptions, the long vowel O. For additional evidence on top of the kanji pronunciations, katakana conversions, hiragana conversions, etc. that I have already provided, see wikt:王 (The Japanese word Ō, kana spelling O-u), wikt:こう (the kana Ko-u, romanized Kō) and wikt:おう (the kana O-u, Romanized Ō). --tjstrf talk 01:33, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

And some more, from wikt:tō: wikt:とお (too), wikt:とう (tou). Both Romanized tō. --tjstrf talk 01:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

In fact, let's just list all of the hiragana combinations that end Ō:

wikt:ō: wikt:おう (O-u)/wikt:おお (O-o)

wikt:hō: wikt:ほう (Ho-u)/wikt:ほお (Ho-o)

wikt:kō: wikt:こう (Ko-u)/wikt:こお (Ko-o)

wikt:mō: wikt:もう (Mo-u)/wikt:もお (Mo-o)

wikt:nō: wikt:のう (No-u)/wikt:のお (No-o)

wikt:rō: wikt:ろう (Ro-u)/wikt:ろお (Ro-o)

wikt:sō: wikt:そう (So-u)/wikt:そお (So-o)

wikt:tō: wikt:とお (To-o)/wikt:とう (To-u)

wikt:yō: wikt:よう (Yo-u)/wikt:よお (Yo-o)

Note: Wiktionary doesn't have articles for all of the Romanized forms.

While they may not be interchangeable spellings in Japanese, o-u, o-o, and o- are all romanized ō in revised Hepburn. --tjstrf talk 02:02, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

One must ask whether this really matters, though. I was under the impression that Wikipedia uses the official translation (i.e. the one used by the dub) if one is available. ADV settled for "Kohta", I believe. Shouldn't that be what Wikipedia uses, regardless of whether it is right or not? ChibiKareshi 08:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

You are correct, and in one of my crazy editing sprees on this article that is exactly what I did. I saw somebody try to revert it back to "Kouta". I'd recommend we just leave it at "Kohta"... - Phorque 12:18, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Mamoru Kanbe interview (in Elfen Lied DVD cover)

I hear there is an interview with the Mamoru Kanbe (the director) on the inside cover of one of the english DVDs. I can't find a scan anywhere (except for a site that requires registration and seems to have blocked have of South Africa from registering) so if anybody owns the DVDs and could post a transcript for me, I think it could provide a welcome reference to the article. - Phorque 15:17, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

The english DVDs? I own all of them, but I have no interview on any inside cover… Suspicious… ChibiKareshi 08:30, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, that's weird. I read that in a DVD review... and on some forum. I'll find what I read sometime and show you. - Phorque 08:56, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I found an interview on youtube...

Elfen Lied cast interview

Anyone good with translating japanese? ^^; - Phorque 21:06, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Wow, Nyū sounds unnatural as hell when you see it spoken by a real person. Anyways, I really only know enough to Japanese to understand everything but what's important, but I don't think it'll contain too much work citing. It's mostly a bunch of stuff like "I was suprised at how well the series was recieved", "it was a lot of hard work". I think.--SeizureDog 11:43, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Elegance

I just got the message of Elfen Lied: see User:Renice/The_Asperger_Riddle -- they are signalers/synchronizers, but they don't know it yet. The story is a message that comes from a human signaler, who doesn't know it yet. Discrimination leads to negative thoughts. They need to clear their negative thoughts to transcend, to transcend they need to do their job of synchronizing the species. I didn't know what was drawing me to this story.... The universe is elegantly recursive. --Renice 19:45, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

So, um... is that page anything but OR? --Gwern (contribs) 22:54 6 February 2007 (GMT)

Added

added this portion: "with a fictional spin on human evolution..."

-intranetusa

And I changed it to say "the philosophy of", since it is more relevant to what that paragraph discusses. --tjstrf talk 09:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

GA on hold

I think this article comes pretty close to meeting the Good Article criteria. However, there are a few things I'd like to see addressed:

~~The "Societal Topics" section is very light on references, with only one citation. What are the other sources discussing its treatment of these topics?~~

For now I've simply merged the referenced section of "Societal topics" into "Style" under the anime section. I don't think it detracts much from the articles overall quality, and if other editors would like to include more on style and themes, there is probably sufficient information in the reviews I have cited thus far. - Phorque 12:10, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Some images are missing fair use rationales; please double-check them and fill in the ones that need it.
Just an aesthetic point that wouldn't stand in the way of GA status, but I think "Cultural references" might better be placed further into the article. The manga and anime sections seem more important to the topic.

Done. Thanks for the tip, didn't think of that! ^^; - Phorque 09:29, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

The "manga" section mainly deals with its differences from the anime. However, the anime has not yet been dealt with. On one hand, it seems to make sense for the manga section to come first, since the manga was published before the anime was produced; on the other hand, as it stands now, the section would make more sense to a casual reader if it were to follow the anime section.

I have moved and adapted this section under the Anime heading. - Phorque 12:37, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations on your work so far. Let me know either here or at my talk page when you feel these points have been addressed, and I'll give the article another look. Shimeru 03:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Shimeru, I'll probably do quite a harsh edit of the "Societal topics" section and trim it down to referencable essentials, perhaps even merge it down into another section, maybe right after the plot summary. I'll try think of some solution to the manga-before-anime dilemma as well. - Phorque 09:29, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

"Societal topics" could perhaps be renamed to "Themes"? That seems to be the standard...-Malkinann 02:02, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I was just wondering about the anime page part, would we need to do a recap on the story, or should we just talk about what is actually different in the anime from the manga, and risk being repetitive? Q E11even 03:36, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think there's a need to repeat the plot summary, unless the anime plot is significantly different from the manga plot. The section on "plot deviations" should be enough to handle the differences, otherwise. Shimeru 19:21, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Many of the images are missing fair use rationales as Phorque stated. Many are also high resolution and need to be scaled down. I've tagged some with {{fairusereduce}}; make sure to reduce their size so that the largest dimension is no more than 400px, and replace {{fairusereduce}} with {{fair use reduced|~~~~~}}.

GA

It seems all of my points above were addressed, and I see fair use rationales are in place on the images as well (could've sworn they were before, too; I must have missed one or two). The article's well-written and referenced, too, with a good amount of out-of-universe material. At this point, I'm passing it and listing it as a GA.

If you're planning on taking this to FA candidacy, here are my suggestions:

The "Manga" section is a little bit "listy"; try to convert some of that into prose. For instance, instead of simply listing the side stories, maybe each could have its own paragraph featuring a brief plot summary?
Ask for a peer review, or a review from the Anime/Manga Wikiproject, or both.
See whether there are any sources that might be used to expand the "Reception", "Style and themes", or "Cultural references" sections. Is there anything special to report about the production of the anime (or manga)? Can more be said about its influences? Has it been cited as an influence to any more recent series? (It may be too recent for that to be clear, though.) In general, the out-of-universe portion is already excellent, but more detail in this area would serve you better at FA.
After everything else, but before the FA nomination, do a copyediting pass or two. Tighten up the prose as much as possible. Make sure everything's in line with the Manual of Style, and doublecheck grammar, punctuation, and the other technical details. It might be beneficial to ask someone who's not involved with writing the article to do this. (I know I sometimes overlook errors in my own prose because I know what I meant to write.) I'm willing to do this, if you'd like; just drop me a note on my talk page.

Congratulations, and thanks for your work on the article. Shimeru 18:34, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

K[ō/ou/oh]ta again

Firstly, congratulations on the GA pass. Manga series are far underrepresented in the FA/GA listings when compared to their video game compatriots, nice to see another one pass muster.

But, we still have this irritating standardization issue to deal with. Right now the main page uses Kohta throughout, which while not my preference is in accordance with at least one of the 4 policies on the issue so doesn't bother me. But List of characters in Elfen Lied is still at Kouta. Could we please pick one thing and stick with it? --tjstrf talk 08:32, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I believe the official romanization is Kohta, as much as I dislike it as well. I went ahead and changed them to Kohta. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 08:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

So then what about Ny[ū/u/uu]? Shall we use the official romanization for her name? (Even though Wikipedia leans heavily towards macronization rather than doubling up on the u in most of the articles I have read.) What is the official romanization of her name anyway? --tjstrf talk 19:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Manga Ending

I'm glad to have found out the ending to the manga which was somewhat different from the anime. I think someone should post a summary of it...I would but I have trouble reading Japanese. --~~charizardpal~~

The ending was different because the anime only covered the first half of the manga (give or take a few chapters). And plot summaries can get lengthy, especially with a series as philosophical as Elfen Lied. Nique talk 14:26, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Lucy's Name

Isnt it possible that Lucy was named after Lucy the austrolopithicus? I mean it fits. Lucy(amcestor) was the begining of our species as far as we know and Lucy(Elfen) is the true begining of the Diclonius since she is the first with the ability to reproduce. Just wondering if it coould be added in a genreal trivia section. Luciferian56 01:15, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Unless there's a reliable source stating it definitively, it couldn't be added anyway, as it's just speculation on the part of a/a number of fans. Nique talk 01:21, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Nique is right, not to mention that Trivia in unencyclopedic, and should definately not be in a Good Article.--十八 02:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Title

The article gives the translation of Elfen Lied (the title of the production) to be "Elf Song". However, the number 11 in German translates to "elf", so I believe it to be "Eleventh Song". To further prove my point, in single words (or incomplete phrases) – such as in titles and names – it is common for Germans to attach the adjective to the verb or noun it is describing (hence some very long words in reading).

Therefore, if Elf Song were to be translated into correct German, it would read something like "Elfenlied" or "Das Elfenlied" (assuming it even translates back to English in the pointy-eared "Elf").

So, what does "Eleventh Song" mean? Heck if I know. Has there ever been an official translation?

Well, we're guessing Lynn Okamoto just butchered the German in his title... but I'm fairly certain he *is* trying to get "Elf Song" across because the actual lied "Elfenlied" appears in the manga. - Phorque 15:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

An alternate translation could be 'eleventh song'. However, Elfenlied is the Elf Song, quite literally, not the Eleventh Song. Since the series was based on Elfenlied, the correct translation is Elf Song. Nique talk 15:14, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

While I'll be the first one to admit that my German is a tad rusty, wouldn't "Eleventh Song" be "Das elfte Lied"? --Bakuryuu 18:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Split Personality

I don't recall them saying that the head injury caused the split personalities. Is this just speculation or do we have a reference for that? --Kraftlos 09:10, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I believe if it wasn't said directly then it was mostly implied since we see her as a child with no such split personality and the first apperance of Nyu is after she got hit with the bullet.--十八 09:58, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I can't remember it being explicitely stated, either. However, seeing as how Lucy was chained in the research lab for several years before this, Nyû would have had little chance to make an appearance. Still, Nyû does learn new things as the story progresses, eventually learning to speak and act normally, so Nyû's state in the beginning would seem to suggest her a rather new arrival. Lucy's third personality, "DNA's voice", first appears in Lucy's childhood, before the events of the story proper, so that, at least, wasn't caused by the bullet. Also, dicloni seem to have a knack for developing alternate personalities when injured, since Mariko goes into a "Myû" state, caused by an explosion, just before her eventual demise. Make of that what you will. --Bakuryuu 13:03, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

That's not a diclonii trait that's just something anyone would do under extreme stress. I don't think "DNA's Voice" can properly be described as an alternate personality exactly; it's the aspect of Lucy's wounded pscyhe encouraging her to do bad things. --Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici 17:25, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't say just anyone would become a "myû"-saying child from getting hit by a bomb... Anyway, DNA's voice is as much a different personality as Nyû - near the end of the manga, it takes over, causing Lucy to vanish from the diclonius-radar, much like Nyû. Nana identifies it as someone "neither Lucy nor Nyû". --Bakuryuu 18:28, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but the anime and manga are separate continuities. (I really like the more upbeat anime version, and don't consider them equivalent really). --Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici 19:11, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I didn't realize we we're talking about the anime specifically. Few things are exclusive to the anime, though, and I can't think of anything that would give reason to believe that Nyû would have developed in a different manner in the anime than in the manga. --Bakuryuu 19:25, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

In the manga nyu was lucys ideal self as she confessed to kouta what she would have been without the horns and what she always wanted to be but never had the chance to become. In the anime its just something the gunshot wound caused.--Vipa Human 20:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Those two are not mutually exclusive, you know... Both versions are nearly identical in the beginning, and the anime simply doesn't get to that point, as the story terminates earlier. I don't think that a fundamental difference exists between the two versions in this matter. --Bakuryuu 22:41, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

For all all intents and purposes, the anime and manga versions are considered 2 separate universes. --Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici 00:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Even so, as the appearance of Nyû is portrayed nigh-identically in both, how are different conclusions supposed to be derived from them? --Bakuryuu 05:37, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Mostly because of the anime's divergent ending episodes, but generally, it's just clearly not a direct translation of the manga (i.e. even in volumes that are adapted, Lucy isn't nearly as sadistic in the anime). --Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici 06:09, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree, the plot of most manga differ from their anime counterparts. There is no cause to make an assumption that something revealed in the manga has any bearing on the plot of the anime. Thus, the plot section should only contain the plot which is established by the anime. --Kraftlos 06:32, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

What what? This article is about both the manga and anime. Why should the plot chapter only cover the anime? --Bakuryuu 14:18, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Well yeah you can mention it, but while also saying that the manga and anime are different (i.e. don't refer to both interchangeably). --Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici 20:28, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

You really get away with less trouble by first giving the plot for the manga, and then giving an account on how the anime differs. Not many things in the anime which aren't in the manga, but a great deal the other way around. Besides, manga's the original work. --User:130.232.106.17 22:36, 25 April 2007 (UTC)