Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Evangelion

NGE: Sadamoto's out of universe quotes are being challenged by anon. Japanese IP

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/w/index.php?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)

Reason why I do not admit the source. 1 Not official. 2 There is obviously an erroneous information.

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 am 60.40.8.165. When this source is admitted, the name of mari can be changed into mary. Such a wild decision won't be able to be done. 124.86.246.23 (talk) 08:34, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

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)

Mari to Mari?

If you mean 'Mari' to 'Mary', well, I wasn't doing that to begin with, so it seems kind of irrelevant to me. --Gwern (contribs) 18:47 1 February 2010 (GMT)

You are strange. It should be insisted that it change it into mary if this amateur's source is blindly believed. You should notice that this source is actually useless.61.119.136.56 (talk) 22:17, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

How is it useless? What is wrong besides one romanization which I have already pointed out that reasonable men may differ on? --Gwern (contribs) 22:25 1 February 2010 (GMT)

I wanted to say it was useless as the source that was able to be trusted. You are a victim who has believed a part of false information. 61.119.136.56 (talk) 22:52, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

And I'll say again: if it is so false and useless, what else is wrong? --Gwern (contribs) 23:07 1 February 2010 (GMT)

It is possible to guess by seeing the false information named mary.

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)

I have asked you countless times to talk about something other than Mari/Mary. Since you can't, I'm done with you and will simply revert your removals. --Gwern (contribs) 17:51 2 February 2010 (GMT)

Please do not cling to the source of the amateur with whom the false information is mixed. If you have official information, it is certain that this discussion ends. Please remove amateur's source and change it for an official source. 61.119.136.56 (talk) 22:51, 2 February 2010 (UTC))

yet another mysterious IP user. the article does appear reliable, but of course we cannot see where they got there info, so if we find another reliable site, than the source can be used. If the site is official or not, is not for us to question, it's the information that matters. Bread Ninja (talk) 19:28, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

IP users are all the same person. I was surprised because there was a person who believed mary besides Gwern. decide whether this amateur's source is suitable for Wikipedia. It is a quick means to end the discussion. It becomes possible to change mari into mary when admitted. 220.106.177.190 (talk) 23:05, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I personally dont think we should change the name until we find another source, but the other info in the article can be used.Bread Ninja (talk) 16:00, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

No one is saying change the name! The only one who has ever even mentioned the name is this crazy anon. --Gwern (contribs) 16:24 9 February 2010 (GMT)

Tell that to 220.106.177.190. you really need to calm down. I'm the one in agreement with you.Bread Ninja (talk) 18:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Gwern blindly believed this source. ('Mary' is a perfectly respectable Romanization, since Mari=Maria=Mary. by Gwern)

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)

Isn't there the reliable source of information's definition in this place? How has the truth of information been ascertained up to now? The definition will be what people who exist in "WikiProject Anime and manga/Evangelion" should decide. 60.40.11.48 (talk) 04:53, 11 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)

The date of issue is not written in the amateur's source though you tell me to look at the magazine. Even if when it was issued is understood, I do not have the means to obtain a past magazine.

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)

Your link seems to confirm the interview, as best as I can understand it using Google Translate. I don't see what the contradiction is. --Gwern (contribs) 16:47 11 February 2010 (GMT)

Mari is an image of middle-aged father in Japan, and a mixture design of the Britain style. It is insisted on the individual site. 60.40.11.48 (talk) 17:13, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Correction. The effective date existed in amateur's source. 60.40.11.48 (talk) 04:20, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

What makes a source "amateur"?Bread Ninja (talk) 15:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

The meaning is not understood. say more concretely. 60.40.11.48 (talk) 15:39, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Please explain how this source is an amateur site, and not a reliable oneBread Ninja (talk) 15:52, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

It might be a problem that the reliable source of information's definition is not here. The member of "WikiProject Anime and manga/Evangelion" that doesn't decide the reliable source of information's definition might be responsible up to now. If the definition is clear, such a discussion will be settled soon. 60.40.11.48 (talk) 16:05, 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)

Thank you for a comprehensible explanation. see my comment on old times about the reason of amateur site. 60.40.11.48 (talk) 17:16, 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)

Mari is not mary. It is not a guess. It is an amateur that causes such a basic mistake. Or, mary and information are falsified. It is painful to repeat this dialog. 60.40.11.48 (talk) 18:39, 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)

BN, it's not hard to find RSs like ANN using 'Mari' - http://www.google.com/cse?cx=009114923999563836576%3A1eorkzz2gp4&q=mari+evangelion

The point is, it doesn't matter. --Gwern (contribs) 17:45 12 February 2010 (GMT)

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)

News & articles

Chrono

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:

• "Neon Genesis Evangelion was nominated (but lost to Princess Mononoke) the 39th Japanese Grammy Awards for animation music.
• Neon Genesis Evangelion won the 1997 multi-media cultural award for animation. The award night is scheduled for February 2, 1998 at the New Tokyo National Theater. There will be an Evangelion Exhibition. Entrance is free.

...

• Trading cards of The End of Evangelion is now on sale. Its 314 yen excluding tax per pack which contains 7 cards.
• The anime Neon Genesis Evangelion has received three awards in the 1997 Animation Festival in Kobe for Interactive Software Category (Neon Genesis Evangelion Game: Girl of Steel), Popularity Category (Neon Genesis Death & Rebirth/ The End of Evangelion) and the Soundtrack Category

...

• The Evangelion Digital Card Library by SEGA saturn has gone on sale last September 25 at the price of 4320 yen. Unless you have money to burn you might be a bit disappointed since it contains only the illustrations used in trading cards and some simple games.
• The Neon Genesis Evangelion Screen Saver Volume 2 has gone on sale last September 12 in all computer software stores and anime stations. It is a Windows and Macintosh CD-Rom containing 20 different screen savers and 50 icons to supplement the Volume 1 which was previously released. The price is 6800 yen plus tax.

...

• For those who are following the illustrated card series or Trading Cards of Evangelion. There is currently 3 kinds of trading cards on sale. They are the following:
• 1. CARDDASS MASTERS PART 1 and PART 2 - 119mm by 63 mm cards. Both of which are 172 cards to complete the series (a total of 344 cards if you combine part 1 and part2). One pack of 10 cards cost 291 yen excluding tax.
• 2. CARDDASS CARDS - 86 mm by 59 mm cards. A total of 109 cards to complete the series. One set of 5 cards cost 100 yen including tax.
• 3. SEGA CARD COLLECTION PART 1 and PART 2 - 86 mm by 59 mm cards. Part 1 has a total of 44 cards while part 2 has 55 cards to complete the series. One card cost 20 yen including tax or one set of 34 cards cost 600 yen excluding tax.

(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.

• There are currently 2 binders available for the Evangelion Trading Cards. The CARDDASS MASTERS and CARDDASS/SEGA card collection. Each offers a special number 00 card when you purchase them. Now the news is a special binder for the Evangelion movie has been released last August.

...

• The exact copy of the R-55 Bag of Shinji which he used when he ran away in Episode 4 of the TV series is now on sale. It cost 9800 yen excluding tax. Visit your nearest Anime Stores for more information.
• In case you dont know, Director Anno is a lover of UCC COFFEE, and has allowed that company to produce 6 special cans of UCC COFFEE bearing the pictures of six of the characters from Evangelion. The special edition coffee cans was released last July 1. Visit your nearest Seven-Eleven. Now the problem is how to drink the coffee inside the can without opening it ? Any suggestions ?

...

• The EVANGELION COLLECTOR's DISC (CD_ROM) Vol 5 which started selling June 6 (6800 yen plus tax), this contains 200 pictures and illustrations from the TV series and the DEATH part of the movie, also includes voice, clock and calender.
• EVANGELION PHOTO BOOK- 2015/The Last Year of Kaji (collector's edition) started selling this June. Thirty photographs (computer generated, you cant distinguish it from the real pictures) and 16 original Kaji reports are included. It is 4800 yen plus tax, again if you have money to burn then buy it else just let your friends buy it and look to judge it for yourself."

--Gwern (contribs) 22:27 28 February 2010 (GMT)

ANN

• http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/encyclopedia/anime.php?id=49&page=-5

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)

Work

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)

Relationship sections

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)

Portals and WikiProject Banners

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)

Portal:Evangelion up for deletion

Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/Portal:Evangelion Dream Focus 22:50, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Redirected to Portal:Anime and manga. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 23:55, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Neon Genesis Evangelion timeline

FYI, Neon Genesis Evangelion timeline has been nominated for deletion. 76.66.200.95 (talk) 06:23, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Sephiroth

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

Neon Genesis Evangelion timeline is up for deletion again. 76.66.203.138 (talk) 09:01, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Any idea where the first AFD is at? It seems to be missing. Dream Focus 20:36, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Neon Genesis Evangelion glossary nominated for articles for deletion

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)

Neon genesis evangelion manga name change

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)

Evangelion disambig page deletion discussion

See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 January 18#Evangelion. --Gwern (contribs) 15:40 18 January 2011 (GMT)

Evangelion

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)

Evangelion World @ Fuji-Q Highland

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.

• http://www.fujiq.jp/en/attraction/eva.html (in English)
• http://www.fujiq.jp/eva/ (in Japanese)

BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 22:56, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

This is the same thing as Neon Genesis Evangelion#Amusement park, no? --Gwern (contribs) 01:21 12 April 2011 (GMT)

Hiroyuki Tsuchida

There's a notice about Hiroyuki Tsuchida at WT:JAPAN -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 03:11, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Plot summary bloating in Evangelion 3.0

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)

probably get an admin and see if its possible to get the article semi blocked from Annon IP users.Lucia Black (talk) 20:50, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Translations from Italian Wikipedia articles and problems with sources

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)

(edit conflict)Well, Felipe — I don't think it's necessary to ping you — I answer in short to this WoT. I am not interested for the accuse of manipulation of the sources, frankly: I think the claim is apodictically questionable. First, I'm perfectly aware of language barriers. Everyone can see that original Italian articles and translations are different. So the assumption that I would take Kaworu's article as it is is annoying and arrogant.

1. Yūko Miyamura and, generally speaking, Asuka's notes obviously needs to be fixed in future. By me or other people, of course. It is just as obvious that I have not finished with the article. So, buh.
2. Regarding Narcissistic personality disorder. The source is Kathy Richmond. Original Wikipedia article says: "can be attributable to a". It doesn't even touch WP:NOR. And, as far as the quality of the source or assertion is concerned: is this statement counterintuitive or controversial? If we really have to argue about the source (but, seriously, why?), at least let's honestly argue. At the most we can add: "According to the Richmond".
3. Sorry, but what Tumblr and 4chan myths are you talking about?
4. I personally own almost all the sources mentioned, from Essential Evangelion Chronicle to Filmbooks. I have translated them personally and there is only my work. I am familiar with the sources, all primary sources have been cited sparingly. I have not translated from any corner of the web (4chan? really?), except perhaps in the case of Parano (p. 107).
5. The current en.wiki Kaworu article instead shamelessly cites things almost autoreferentially. Try to fix the disastrous and partisan use of the sources of the en.wiki article, instead of assuming things about my work and sources.
6. Have you seriously read the article on Kaworu? The parts about video games talk about video games. They don't talk about the series. The relationship with Shinji and Kaworu's personality in the context of video games is mentioned, respecting well-know canonicity and balance. Be silent, instead of accusing me of not respecting canocity, which I know as my pockets.
7. For Schizo/Parano. What are you talking about? The statements about Oedipus complex, which do not come from a publisher, but from a very clear quote from Hideaki Anno in person in an interview? Or the one about Kaworu, coming from the description of the character? And if so, what are you arguing? Are you arguing abuout an official and reliable description, personally translated by me and cited perfectly in the context? Are you sure you are not in bad faith? Or maybe yours are just guesses? Do I have to dismantle some other assumption or can we go on?--TeenAngels1234 (talk) 19:23, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello. Please don't misunderstand me, I don't think you're editing in bad faith. I thought you weren't gonna add more stuff to the Asuka page, lol, sorry. I don't know how much it is necessary to add some of this stuff in, but most importantly I think there are some problems we have to be aware of and in several cases some myths do get perpetrated by those fan sources in certain places and I have seen cases of them being replicated elsewhere, unknowingly. The Schizo/Parano source is only one example of a source that, in that case, is only partly Anno's but tends to get misquoted - like the "same sex interest" part coming from the editor's own guide presented as Anno's statements, when then you have Anno denying "carnal attraction" in the June interview, or other sources like the filmbooks going into detail to call him only a friend (also applies to statements about Rei), or putting him in the same place as Rei on Chronicle. Then you have some other sources like the storyboard collections which as far as I know were never officially translated. Or sources that we only really use because they are convenient despite being quite questionable, like the Classified Information from the NGE2 game. Those are mostly fine in fan sites and fan wikis, but I don't think are solid enough for Wikipedia. Much like the video game guides, which are sometimes claimed to be canon, sometimes you have what are essentially personal opinions treated as official sources, though this is sometimes down unknowingly. I am aware that Chronicle and some other sources have French and Spanish licenced translations, at least, though not English ones. In that case the "first person who loved him" - the whole paragraph was remade from scratch in the Spanish/French versions (I have only verified those). I could provide the link to the original Japanese but the site it's linked in, e-hentai, might break the rules here. Additionally, the licenced sources being written by a multitude of people with little to no oversight from Gainax/Khara add further problems (yes this is a fan article but I do think it's worth considering for the sake of argument). There are more than one Japanese fanbooks that get presented as official sources. Japanese supplementary material has this problem not only in Eva but in multiple anime and other works, it can contradict itself, it can get retconned, it can be simply outdated, sometimes you have stuff that is literally just made to make money off specific fans - Anno himself has commented on that. Might I ask, did you translate from those already translated sources or the original Japanese? I ask that because I know more than one person who own the Japanese sources, are fluent in Japanese and have translated them directly (including two professional translators, and, indirectly, Khara's own in-house translator) and are very much aware of those problems. In the English side of things this is a problem even in licenced sources, as per the many mistakes present in the old ADV localizations of the show, or even in Funimation's localizations of the movies, which contain tons of mistakes.

It was only recently that Khara took more of an interest in Western releases of their IP, and there is a ton of problems and plain mistakes that got through along these 25 years because they quite simply didn't really look at them, and that makes even licenced translations questionable when there are already recorded instances of them getting lots of stuff wrong and getting published anyway. To this very day tons of people believe in the myth regarding the "death threats" sent to Anno for the series' ending... which are mostly messages of encouragement, made in response to Evangelion Death. The vast majority of material was never official translated, though there is a wealth of fan translated material including the "death threats". And who was most responsible for spreading those myths, along with several other ones? The people who officially translated Evangelion to the English languages, plus some other weird myths like Asuka being pregnant in EoE and/or being fused with Misato and Rei. And even so, Khara's oversight now mostly extends to their own re-made localizations of the re-releases of 3.0 and NGE for Netflix, but that only really applies to English. Those issues might never be readily apparent to Western readers without background info, and it does get exploited sometimes. You can see examples of this happening in the past in this very same Talk page as well as that of other Eva articles.

Again, I am not at all trying to accuse you of bad faith. You can see I barely made any changes to the Shinji and Rei pages. I should mention I did change that part to to "it can be attributed".* in the Asuka page. I just think there are some problems we should take into consideration. If you're okay with me just mildly altering the articles taking that into consideration I think we don't really have a problem here. By and large they are great additions. FelipeFritschF (talk) 20:10, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)For now I simply stopped. I want to put the usual TP message, but I'd wait at lease some other user to talk here before proceeding with the insertion of other sources.

1. As for the famous "For Shinji, Kaworu is" paragraph. Kaworu is a friend of Shinji. This is evident, apodictic and no one questioned this. To say that he is Shinji's friend does not necessarily mean going against the "same-sex attraction" statement. Since the editorial source is authoritative, I don't see why remove it. It doesn't say "Anno stated". Or "They're not friends". I simply put the source as it is. Nothing more, nothing less. It is just written in those authoritative books. Parano says that "Shinji has a homosexual romantic interest." Not that Shinji is engaged to Kaworu. This is not said on any page of the article. Simple Aristotelian logic. I will not say more on the matter. Twenty years and people says the same things arguing about apodictically evident statements (with context) and it is time for the fandom to move on.
2. Again. Video game sources are used to talk about video games. Never in the main continuity. The sources are authoritative (eg. Gainax official site), and used respecting the well-know canon thiers, without ever speaking of the original series.
3. I personally translated Evangelion Chronicle from Japanese. You can find some nice scans on the Web Archive. Filmbooks have a good official Italian translation (by Panini). For Essential Evangelion Chronicle I used the French version by Glénat, as mentioned by CiteBook notes. The English version contains many translation errors. I read, reread and excerpt all the interviews collected by Gwern, translated the various Oguro commentaries and each paragraph of movie program books (you can find even the original texts, on it.wiki), so I all used with the maximum respect possible. And I checked all the various translations to make sure there were no mistakes, yes. Of course it is one person's job. If you find any errors, report it. An help with the language would also be welcome, as I am not a native speaker.--TeenAngels1234 (talk) 20:46, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Felipe, please: write a comment one by one, or we constantly conflict each other. I never finished, tho.--TeenAngels1234 (talk) 20:47, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Felipe: I understand your doubts, really. But believe me if I tell you if I have studied Eva for years, and I say all the possible sources. And not from Tumblr, not from 4chan. It took me years to translate Eva Tomo no kai, Oguro commentary, Newtype. I personally purchased Evangelion Stye, the Official Manga Guide you see mentioned in Shinji (2011), Evangelion Entry Files from Amazon or Ebay. Really. I am transcribing all the hundreds of Schizo/Parano pages from my book from Ebay, since I don't have the Ebook.
By the way: I am even aware of the unfamous "death threats" myth (still mentioned in en.wiki as a fact, but not on it.wiki!). If you read the article of it.wiki on EoE you will see written: "In reality the letters are not real, but they were created ad hoc by the movie staff basing on some emails actually received by Gainax, almost all of appreciation. With fake e-mails Eva staff tried to simulate the hypothetical reactions of the fans, to reflect on the relationships established "between a work and its fans". And as a source, the Eoe DTs booklet (in Italian we have a splendid translation by Dynit). And Oguro. I am aware of all the myths, all the rumors, all the stupid things said by academics and many comments from interviews still untranslated in English fandom (see, for example, it.wiki articles on Asuka or Misato). You can have a clear vision of my work on every single source and note here. No myth has been spread here by me. I would like to see these articles one day all with the GA symbol. I just want to contribute after years of study. These articles on en.wiki have been stuck for years. Even ru.wiki is moving on, with beautiful articles on Rebuilds. And the Chinese Wikipedia is already translating my articles. En.wiki must gon. It is not forward: it is behind other wikis.TeenAngels1234 (talk) 20:58, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I don't see much of a problem then. I might make some small adjustments, but most of these are just because people make *way* too many assumptions in the English side of things, which are then mostly based on some other fan sources, so I feel an additional need to make it clearer in the English articles. Same thing applies to the video games, I understand you are not trying to imply this, but several fans do not understand those games allows all sorts of wild scenarios, or are even told to the contrary. I am somewhat involved in a translation project for the NGE2 game and that game allows Kaworu to be seduced by Ritsuko, with an entire subplot dedicated to that. By the logic employed in the past by several fans, that should be taken as "official" just because it has Gainax's stamp on it. It's the sort of thing that gets disfigured all the time. The editorial source for Schizo/Parano is worth considering, sure, but I don't think it's exactly authoritative because it's not a Gainax statement at that point just like the essays contained there are not and Anno had even specifically denied any part of those books that weren't his, and this is often not understood with by many fans. In keeping with that, you have the Kaworu fan books, which are licenced by Khara, but mostly consist of reprinted doujins and fan letters, claiming Kaworu wanted to marry Shinji or somesuch saying he loved him (romantically) so much and would even if he were a flower, while then also having a "quizz for kaworuists" contradicting itself with how pure and non-sexual and non-romantic it is, because it is, at the end of the day, merch made for yaoi fans, just like the merch for Rei fans, and Asuka fans, and so on. It's weird, but there are tons of examples of Eva merch being very ship-friendly to all ships. It's licenced and it's "official" but it's not very solid because Gainax would essentially rubber stamp most of these. It's clear example of merch being aimed at just making money, much like the collected anthologies of pornographic doujinshin. Then you have sources like Newtype making wild shipping speculations about Shinji and Asuka (and Rei) and those have also been taken as official sources in the past just because those same sources also contained some sort of staff interview in the middle of the magazines, but they get mixed in with original editorial sources, which aren't verified by Gainax. The equally official and licenced English releases have *tons* of official research and bonus features made by the localizers that are treated as fact. See "Mythology of Evangelion" as an example. I don't know how much of that applies to the Italian side of things but it's very much a thing here and I think it warrants additional clarification. It's the sort of stuff I see on Western fandoms (not just the English speaking one) often but is virtually nonexistent in the Japanese one. Again, save for some specific issues you have been making good additions and I don't see a problem. FelipeFritschF (talk) 21:06, 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)

Sure. Like I said I'm not planning on making huge changes. By and large that stuff is also available on the English speaking fan sites but not on English Wikipedia. I'm glad you seem to understand why I'm concerned, again I apologize if I came off as criticizing you, it's just that this sort of stuff has happened in the past before and most editors simply don't realize it..FelipeFritschF (talk) 21:37, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Placing good faith above anything else, his edits have been mostly positive based on the changes. Of course a nonnative English speaker would have issues with writing English. That's why we have Guild of Copyeditors. Evangelion is a series that explores multiple themes, so I finding that critics have developed different ideas makes a lot of sense. If it's word coming from Hideaki Anno, we can't do too much. I once tried editing Evangelion articles too but I had most of my edits reverted multiple times for reasons not properly explained. I think this discussion might fit better in the main project of anime and manga since they are more active.Tintor2 (talk) 21:39, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't think the edits themselves were bad at all, I was just worried about some potential problems - notably things being missatributed or rumors taken to be truth, a problem I've seen elsewhere in the fanbase and in Wikipedia in other franchises and subjects. It happens but this wasn't really the case here. You can see I barely even changed anything and these edits have remained in place for months now. FelipeFritschF (talk) 22:15, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Petit Eva: Evangelion@School

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)

@Fences and windows: I'm currently busy on other NGE-related articles. I have almost every Evangelion Chronicle issue. The EXTRA Binder has interesting comments from PetitEva main staff and other useful informations, so I can help. But, be patient, I'm gonna start to work on it in the future.--User:TeenAngels1234 (talk) 22:01, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Shin Japan Heroes Universe

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)