Jump to content

Talk:Ergo Proxy

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

HD

[edit]

As far as I know Ergo Proxy is one of the first anime series that was transmitted in HD. Any details about it? --T0rek 09:18, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question: If you buy the DVD's, is a HD DVD-player required? 88.197.162.241 (talk) 22:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, a DVD is a DVD and will play in any DVD player (region coding and disc defects notwithstanding). If there was a HD-DVD version, then you would require a HD-DVD player, but there isn't, so you don't. Like an increasing amount of recent anime it was broadcast in HD in Japan, but there is precious little anime released on HD disc formats. Shiroi Hane (talk) 05:35, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Further trivia

[edit]

Would it be considered trivia that the letters that bubble up in Vincent's alphabet cereal after he pours too much milk in (beginning of the series, possibly episode one) spell out "MISFIT"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.30.163.247 (talk) 04:33, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - it's a rather minor detail. --Eruhildo (talk) 00:45, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It also bubbles up to say "AWAKENING". In fact, I believe in episode 1 it says "AWAKENING" and episode 3 it says "MISFIT"--Sarielpg (talk) 08:16, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Still, it's just minor fancruft. --Eruhildo (talk) 10:10, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Auto-Rave

[edit]

If you look at the Japanese page on the matter, it is explained why the robots are called "オートレイヴ" (ooto-reivu). "Auto + Slavery" which makes them "auto(matic-s)laves. Therefore, the spelling Auto-Rave (not Auto-reiv) would be better (and explaining the origin on the page could help, too). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Niemand8et (talk • contribs) 07:02, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What sources are provided in the Jp article? Also, what is the official translation? --Eruhildo (talk) 08:12, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The official translation is "Reiv", per the English subtitle track on the R1 DVDs (for example, at approximately 5:30 into the first episode). —TangentCube, Dialogues 09:09, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Then it should be kept as it currently is. --Eruhildo (talk) 03:19, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sic

[edit]

why is there a sic next to husserl ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.87.251.109 (talk) 12:29, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not certain. The file that has the interview is no longer online. Maybe whoever put it into the article knows. --Eruhildo (talk) 16:23, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The second [sic] has nothing to do there. I deleted it. The first one is there only to note that the virus'name is not the good one. I added a phrase to take full notice of that below. Solsticedhiver (talk) 12:50, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thriller

[edit]

is thriller actually a genre?Linder1990 (talk) 15:52, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. TomDæmon (talk) 22:10, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Image

[edit]

since DVD came out, i suggest you place the DVD image.Linder1990 (talk) 18:20, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Agreed, the picture representing Ergo proxy is very unprofessional.Haseo445 (talk) 16:32, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Genre

[edit]

Why is it Postcyberpunk and not just Cyberpunk? I do not really see the positive utopian aspect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.193.99.73 (talk) 00:03, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, adding genre is considered original research. we should just go by the genre the series has been officially listed as.Bread Ninja (talk) 19:10, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Referencing System

[edit]

I overhauled the referencing system for all inline citations for this article. Instead of directly placing the citation with links and all inside the text, please name tag the reference and use that as the in-text cite then under the References section place the full citation with links and all.

Example: When adding a cite to the text, use the name tag of -ref name="whatever you want"/- then under the references section write it all out - ref name="whatever you want" - the proper citation format - /ref- also note to use proper format symbols as well.

Refer to WP:CITESHORT under List-defined References for the format. This should greatly reduce the clutter in the text since a lot of the citations are very long and make it hard to edit content. Fox816 (talk) 19:13, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is that way really better than the old way? It seems like it would be harder to work with the references directly when you're editing section-by-section. I honestly think its better to have all the reference text up in the body with the text. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 19:20, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It creates far less clutter inside the text which helps in the long run when copy editing. True enough section editing takes another step since you'll need to add the references at the end but it will help in the broader run by streamlining the process overall. What you can do is just add the citation when section editing then do another full page edit to just move it. So include the full citation with name tag then when section editing then a full page edit to move the reference. Fox816 (talk) 19:24, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ahhh...well it got reverted...there goes an hour of work...ah, well. Fox816 (talk) 19:29, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't want the idea to go to waste. By comparing the previous system (before my change) and the one I'm introducing, I feel that the list-defined system is far less messier and while true enough it makes section editing one step longer in count, the ease of copy editing will certainly make up for it. Fox816 (talk) 19:37, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
While I'm adding references to the article, it seems better to have them right next to the text I'm ref'ing. It's never really seemed cluttered to me; you see a lot of stuff in edit mode that isn't visible to readers. Plus like I said, when you are writing, you're adding references in the fly. If I'm editing a section, I shouldn't have to put down a broken ref, then edit the reference section again to un-break the reference. And I really don't like editing the whole article at once, it just complicates things. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 19:44, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In regards to referencing by section, you could put the full citation so that it's not broken so that if you don't do a full page to move it then the proper reference is still there. I may have been too excited about fixing things that I went ahead and made some short term improvements without taking into account the overall health improvement of the article. For that I apologize. Would you support the list-defined reference system after everything is done, or at least when the article is overhauled to a better standing? Section editing without concern of reference format won't be a problem during the improvement phase and I can take up moving all the refs at the end when placing the list-defined system if it's supported by consensus. Fox816 (talk) 19:51, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

300 Proxys

[edit]

In the Article it says there are actually about 300 proxys? Is there a overview over all those proxys, the coming from or any other information about them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.47.254.33 (talk) 15:27, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Proxies are effectively supporting characters, since they play such a vital role in the series. Although upwards of 300 Proxies exist, only a few have been named: Monad, Senex, Kazkis, and Ergo Proxies; Proxy One; MCQ; and Will B. Good. A sixth Proxy, which Re-l sends back to Romdeau with Iggy, is never named. Ergo Proxy (Vicent Law)is not one of the original 300, but is instead the missing half of Proxy One's personality and memories that has taken physical form, i.e Proxy One is the first of the original 300 Proxies.

We would only mention them if they were essential to the understanding of the work as a whole. I'm not sure where they got the number 300, first sentence makes it sound like an ambiguous number, then later sounds like there were exactly 300. On further reflection though, this sentence is more of a listing than an explanation of proxies. It would be good to try and explain what they are; and references. I'm going to try to track down whoever added this paragraph and see if they can give some answers. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 08:14, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like that number was inserted by one or more anonymous users without using any reliable references. I'm changing it back to the longstanding version of that paragraph which seems to be more true to the plot and in general makes more sense. Thanks for pointing that out, and I'm sorry if I jabbered on too long. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 08:27, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The number 300 comes from episode 15 "Nightmare Quiz Show/who wants to be in jeopardy!" where it's stated that there's exactly 300 proxies. --122.108.180.218 (talk) 10:36, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Romdo or Romdeau

[edit]

It has been translated as "Romdo" but inspection of citizen I.D. cards show it to be Romdeau... 98.112.230.67 (talk) 06:27, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Than we go with Romdeau.Bread Ninja (talk) 07:44, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MCQ

[edit]

Where exactly is it ever said that MCQ is a proxy? I certainly never picked that up when I watched it and I even reviewed the episode again after I saw him labeled a proxy here. Is this a line that's cut out of the English dub or something or is there something else I'm missing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brovyle (talk • contribs) 13:24, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

recent reverts

[edit]

Regarding popular culture edit:

'Several influences can be seen from the Highlander series, and Jet Li's 'The One'. In The One, the character's name 'Gabriel YuLaw' bears a close resemblance to Vincent Law. In all three cases, the character attempts to become a supreme being by eliminating copies of oneself or of a unifying force.'

I seriously no longer care about your policies, anyways youre no admin anyways, just a fanboy it seems. The Original Research dilemma has already come up with 3 of my edits, and it is simply ridiculous, since these analyses are not available elsewhere and they are CLEARLY visible in the text/themes of the Ergo Proxy series.

Is it reallt necessary for me to get a degree as a 'writer' and write a book about it before i can include it? Is that really what the policy states? because if it is, then i will write an article, publish it in an obscure paper and have it included. unless you then will use the argument that only 'credible' sources will be used, in which case, 50% of the sources currently on wiki are NOT credible. 64.250.81.218 (talk) 14:19, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If the allege "influences" have not been noted in a published reliable sources, then it is not verifiable and should not be included in the article. Also, trying to self-publish your "research" in order to get it included into Wikipedia will not work either. —Farix (t | c) 14:59, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Those rules can easily be circumvented since A. you cant tell who the poster is by IP alone, B. you can always have someone else add the wiki after you publish, C. have someone else publish and add the wiki. Just my points of view. 64.250.81.218 (talk) 15:41, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
After announcing your intentions, any edits to add the material back in will be suspect. —Farix (t | c) 19:38, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Too bad you can't convict anyone on a statement of intent and furthermore could not even prove that I had made the edit myself. Just wouldn't hold up under any jurisdiction. I appreciate your strict adherence to wiki guidelines, but there are times when someone can cross the line in their 'presumptions'. 64.250.81.218 (talk) 20:28, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Title?

[edit]

Why is 'literally, "The Agent of Death" ' included? Neither the Latin (at least, I think it's Latin) meaning, nor the Japanese characters (which is merely a transliteration) has anything to do with it. Silvermael (talk) 03:44, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's been challenged long enough (almost a full month) that it can be removed. Every attempt by the original contributer to source is has been unreliable. Apparently, the translation is based on a comment of one of the character that is very similar to Robert Oppenheimer's quote, "Now, I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds." That doesn't mean that "Death" translates into "Destroyer of Worlds". —Farix (t | c) 10:10, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ergo Proxy the character is the "Agent of Death". The various Proxies are sometimes referred to as "The Agent of X". Shiroi Hane (talk) 00:35, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But should it be in the title? And if it should, the 'literally' should be taken out, because 'The Agent of Death' is most definitely not the literal meaning of Ergo Proxy. Silvermael (talk) 03:12, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, it doesn't belong in the title because it is not part of the title of the television series. —Farix (t | c) 14:19, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like its original research.Lucia Black (talk) 03:21, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

[edit]

Isn't the comment of Zac Bertschy a bit out of context? I felt it was so when going through the review referenced in the link because it only reviews DVD1. The criticism of characters stems from the first few episodes of the series where the reviewer identifies only Re-l and Raul as main characters and assumes that the plot revolves around the city of Romdeau. But as the series progresses it is obvious that it is not so and there is significant character development for all characters. My point is that the first few episodes do not reveal the plot very much and that this review is based on only a very small part of the series.

Lasantha Fernando (talk) 22:02, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The first impression is relevant. We can look for later reviews to see if his opinion changed. But they are still relevant. But this shouldnt be because you dont like what the reviewer stated.Lucia Black (talk) 22:18, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pino

[edit]

just saying, i doubt pino is a reference to any artists... also, why is OR being allowed as a reference, with no citation? lmao...

Pino is simply 'Piano' without an 'a', just like 'Cogito' is "Cognito" without an 'n'. in fact, there are several references to pianos in the series.

there's obviously an 'a' missing from re-l compared to her citizen card.

it might be interesting to find if any other references are missing letters, and if that amounts to anything.

also, it can be said that the town of 'karos' is missing an 'i' like "Ikaros", from ikaros & daedalus...

which, incidentally, is used as a motif... asura (the sun), the final scenes, daedalus obviously, etc...

coincidentally, 'karos' without an 's' is 'karo', which is the suit of diamonds in playing cards - hence the playing card soldiers.

174.91.115.234 (talk) 16:32, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's more likely that "cogito" is a reference to "cogito ergo sum" or "I think, therefore I am." 207.114.135.131 (talk) 14:02, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
yes, it's prob a dual reference you're right. there is some aspect to the autoreivs gaining cognition or self-awareness however. which is in fact, similar in scope.70.54.39.164 (talk) 07:08, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Original research, shouldn't be added. for the moment, the only name that means anything is Re-L/Real. Lucia Black (talk) 14:36, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, i found your reference, randomly, just like that: pino is not only 'piano' in the tradition of many name/places which have such missing letters, it is a reference to pinoko from 'black jack' (same character traits and design), and also osamu tezuka 'the walt disney of anime', who wrote that anime. problem solved. 64.231.24.143 (talk) 00:16, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's not a source. That is pure original research. A source is production notes from the series' creators. —Farix (t | c) 22:01, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm well aware of that. neither do i care, about that fact, or your opinion. that's why i referenced it on the talk page. 64.231.24.143 (talk) 10:43, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Ergo Proxy. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 09:58, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ergo_Proxy&oldid=1201792751"