Talk:Neon Genesis Evangelion (manga)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Merging

we should merge the anime and manga series together. It would be much easier to look at seeing as how the manga has hardly anything while the anime has a lot more information.Bread Ninja (talk) 15:56, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. See User talk:Gwern#Manga and anime of nge. --Gwern (contribs) 14:59 14 September 2009 (GMT)

Logo

we should also remove the Neon genesis evangelion logo and place in the first Manga volumeBread Ninja (talk) 15:59, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

http://www.sasugabooks.com/images/sasuga/4047131156.jpg

here is the japanese cover if anyone wishes to use it. i suggest this one considering it has the official logo all the other ones have. plus the new redesigned covers also show the logo. i also think that needs some mention in the article.Bread Ninja (talk) 19:20, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Which new "redesigned covers" are you talking about? All the volumes of the manga that I own simply have the English title without the actual show logo. We can probably include the image of the Japanese cover for comparison/contrast, but since this is the English Wikipedia, I think it'd be a little more appropriate to stick with the English cover...and actually, that cover is out of date, the regular-size volume uses a different image:

http://www.coverbrowser.com/image/bestselling-comics-2006/2155-1.jpg Willbyr (talk | contribs) 13:59, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

FWIW, and I realize this is a silly reason, I like that sasugabooks.com cover better - it shows off Sadamoto's coloring style much more effectively than Willbyr's link. --Gwern (contribs) 16:35 23 January 2010 (GMT)

WIlbyr, keeping the English cover simply because it's an English wiki was never reason enough. i recently saw the Naruto article and saw a discussion about changing it back to the japanese cover, and it won. i thought it was a good idea to do so here and on another article, but that one is different. Anyways, i merely wanted to change it because it had the actual logo that most of NGE media including the english, so i thought it would be more promotional to put it on.Bread Ninja (talk) 01:56, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

What's wrong with File:NeonGenesisEvangelionManga1.jpg? --Malkinann (talk) 04:21, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

i said so. i'm not enforcing it, i'm just recommending it.Bread Ninja (talk) 20:19, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

There's nothing "wrong" with that image per se, but from what I understand that version is out of print, and the more standard sized volumes with the title and info fonts in the image I linked to is the current print run. My vote would be to use one of the currently printed English cover images in the infobox and do a gallery with a compare/contrast between the current English covers, the old cover like what's being used in the current page image, and the Japanese cover that Bread Ninja linked. That is, unless doing a gallery like that stretches fair use guidelines too far. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 12:22, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Willbyr, it's not like if there's a new version, we would have to replace it, look at some of the other articles, they still have there theatrical release poster even though the DVD is released. Just because the cover is currently out of print doesn't mean we would have to remove it. this isn't some sort of news, it's not like the image is to suit simply English readers. I tihnk the image is to show some history behind it, so i always think the original cover is the best. we dont update the image due to english, that sounds more like if we were selling the article. I personally think we should stick with the Japanese cover anyways, since it's the real original cover and of course pertains the logo which would be much more promotional than the one without it.Bread Ninja (talk) 15:45, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Bibliography?

I'm a little confused by the name of this section - is the "Bibliography" section a further reading section? Wikipedia:Citing sources says that sometimes, the section title "Bibliography" is reserved for complete lists of published works by an author (somewhat like the chapter list, I think)? The section here has more than one author, so it's not a bibliography in that sense (by one author). This suggests to me that it might be a further reading section - works which could be mined for information for the article but have not yet been. To avoid the confusion, can we change the section name to further reading? --Malkinann (talk) 20:02, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I see only one author, Sadamoto. --Gwern (contribs) 12:27 29 October 2009 (GMT)

Sorry, must have gotten confused by seeing Carl Horn listed as a coauthor on some of these (he was the translator). Having a bibliography in the sense of a complete list of published NGE manga kind of overlaps with the chapter list, so should this section be refactored as a further reading section? --Malkinann (talk) 19:56, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

There is some overlap, but the chapter article doesn't cover all the information the biblio section does. Merge in the missing citation information, and there's no need for the biblio section.

As for Horn, I don't know if you've read the manga, but there's more to him than just translating the little kanji and kana Sadamoto wrote. He handles the letters to the editors, writes the 'Ask Misato' column (I think), and inserts a number of articles about Eva in general (such as the article on books about Evangelion you may've noticed used as a reference in several of our articles), such as, to pick one randomly from my JPGs, an article on Anno's... Love and Pop. I'm not quite sure what it has to do with Eva, but it's in those volumes. So 'translator' doesn't do him justice. --Gwern (contribs) 21:06 29 October 2009 (GMT)

Wow, neat. :) Sounds like these books have a lot of extra material that could be used as sources in the article. I've been bold and done what I proposed - feel free to revert if you feel it's inappropriate. --Malkinann (talk) 21:15, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Character section

I've just completed a copy edit as requested via maintenance tag, and the article flows much better now. However, I didn't change much (if anything) in the Character section, because I don't really know anything about this particular manga.

It does seem that the character section is entirely focused on how the characters differ from the anime, which presumes knowledge of those characters to start with. I've renamed the section to better describe its contents. It would really be better to rework the section to actually describe the characters, and only then get into their differences from the anime. I'd do this, but as I said, I don't know anything about these characters. —Darkwind (talk) 16:03, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

The section was written back when there was coverage of characters in other articles, and it would have been pure redundancy to describe anything but the differences in detail (since there aren't very many differences in the first place). --Gwern (contribs) 18:55 5 September 2011 (GMT)

Doing a fresh copyedit on this page, and in the process I've found more character information from related pages and added it here. Please feel free to edit and adjust as necessary. – 2macia22 (talk) 02:15, 2 May 2015 (UTC)