Talk:Godzilla (franchise)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Most frequent monster co-star appearences[edit]

Updated the numbers of appearances (namely, added Minilla to the list), will do the rest later.FreakyFrogThing 05:35, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


The "alternate Japanese titles" listing is a complete waste of space. As we all know, the Japanese titles can be translated in many different ways, are there is no true standard. Thusly, even mentioning the translations of the Japanese titles should be left to the pages which describe the actual films. ~ Teh Xilian 00:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

The Start[edit]

The intentions of this page is to be a hub for all the film articles and to cut down on the content in the Godzilla article. The original Godzilla article will now focus on Godzilla the character and this article with then pick up the slack in regards of cultural content and the like.

This page still needs heavy editing but this is a start. --DyslexicDan 00:29, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Making this part of WikiProject Films[edit]

I believe this should be part of WikiProject Films instead of the Godzilla page but I’m not sure how to go about this --DyslexicDan 00:29, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

They are both a part WP:FILMS. Cbrown1023 16:13, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Other Monsters' Solo Movies[edit]

Under the heading "Shōwa Godzilla Series (昭和ゴジラシリーズ) 1954–1975":

"The Showa period saw the addition of many monsters into the Godzilla continuity, many of which (Mothra, Rodan, Ghidorah had their own solo movies. "

I think this sentence implies that Ghidorah starred in a movie as the sole Kaiju, which is not true. If the following sentence is meant to clarify the above statement, I think it's a little murky. I'll just edit the first sentence, since I'm unclear of the 2nd's intent. The Shrike 16:58, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I gave up and deleted both sentences. As I tried to reword them I realized I was unclear of either sentences intent, as the information seemed slightly irrelevant. The Shrike 17:16, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Godzilla Final Box[edit]

In the 20th issueof gmr on page 28, there is a small artical about a relise of 27 Godzilla movies (Godzilla - Tokyo S.O.S) and that it includes a slot for Final Wars. It says it was released in Japan on April 22, 2005 for 99, 750 yen ($922). Should any of this be mentioned in the artilce?--LRO 20:00, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Liraoq 05:57, 22 July 2006

Name Origin[edit]

Tried to clean up the origin on the name Gojira, and at least make it mesh with the Godzilla Character page!

2008 Godzilla Film[edit]

That's a load of hooey. I'll delete it later because no such project exists. -- 00:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Godzilla 3-d to the MAX? yeah it does idiot —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:20, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that section has been deleted, which means the project is now dead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:49, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms[edit]

There needs to be a mention of The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms. This movie predated godzilla by two years and was a prehistoric dinosaur that wakes up after nuclear testing and goes on to attack a city. (talk) 00:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

the best from 20,000 fathoms is the thing that inspired godzilla it should be meanchoned but not like that —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:38, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Unmade godzilla movies[edit]

should we meanchon unmade movies such as

  • 1972-Godzilla vs. hitodah
  • 1972-Godzilla vs. redmoon
  • 1972(How many movies did they drop in one year)-Godzilla vs. hedorah 2
  • 1978-Godzilla vs. satan
  • 1978-Spacegodzilla
  • 1978-(Again?)-king of the monsters, return of godzilla
  • 1989-Godzilla 2
  • 1992-The return of king ghidirah
  • 1992-Godzilla vs. king kong
  • 1992-Godzilla vs. mechini-kong

if you want proof or more info check (talk) 21:40, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Learn how to spell, dumbs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cabbage-Sama (talkcontribs) 18:13, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Forgot about 1988 Godzilla sequels — 18:07, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Godzilla film chart[edit]

Why don't have this in a separate article...? (Though it does look good)? — (talk) 19:59, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Big Five[edit]

Since so many of the various Godzilla character articles are so small, I propose that we keep the character articles for the big five: Godzilla, Rodan, Mothra, King Ghidorah and Mechagodzilla, and that we merge all the remaining articles into List of Godzilla Series Monsters.


K00bine (talk) 00:42, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Thoughts, yeah I have thoughts, first A B S O L U T E L Y N O T! Second, the characters deserve their own pages! Third, Angirus is a bigger Monster Superstar than Mechagodzilla!

Technically no, only the popular pages should be down there while the other are put into the Godzilla Series Monsters73.47.37.131 18:10, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Godzilla 3-D to the MAX[edit]

Okay listen people! Unless you can show me and the whole world proof that 3-D is gone, you guys are going to haft to wait until fall, because the movie was scheduled and probably still is scheduled to Summer 2009! Now please, either put the section back or show me that IMAX is done for. (talk) 23:03, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

So, is it canceled?[edit]

With Godzilla-3-D-Imax pretty much done in dirt (so far i can tell), and Godzilla Final Wars being titled...Godzilla...Final Wars, and that movie being the 50th Anniversary is Godzilla canceled? Or are Godzilla 3-D and the 2014 movies real? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:11, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

They're all a lie. Although there have been rumors of a Godzilla Broadway musical coming in Fall 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Are you sure? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:59, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

What happened to biollante and megalon's pages? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:00, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

film titles[edit]

so it seems this article does a really good job at breaking out the eras in Godzilla films however, for some reason this article doesnt list what films belong in each era. If someone has this information, could you please add it? (talk) 15:26, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress which affects this page. Please participate at Talk:Godzilla - Requested move and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 14:20, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Comic-Con 2012[edit]

Not sure what can be added with this but here: There is a lot of talk about them showing stuff at Comic-Con this year. - (talk) 14:20, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

A poster and someone thinks they saw a giant centipede. Seems pretty trivial and not worth mentioning here. Please only add reliably sourced facts. Barsoomian (talk) 03:11, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Someone already added it, with a source. - (talk) 17:20, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Separate article for Godzilla 2014[edit]

We have plenty of information, including director, writers, teaser poster, two confirmed monsters, release date and 3D. I know it would be small, but I feel like this probably would benefit from a separate article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:59, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

When there is confirmation they've started shooting the film. See WP:NFF: "Films that have not been confirmed by reliable sources to have commenced principal photography should not have their own articles." Since they don't even seem to have any actual actors yet, that doesn't seem to have happened. Barsoomian (talk) 19:06, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
I concur with Barsoomian. This project was announced in 2009. We had a discussion last year about a stand-alone article, and the consensus was against one because filming had not started. The release date was purported at the time to be 2012. Filming still has not begun, and we cannot assume it will anytime soon. It is kind of like Jurassic Park IV in that regard; promises but never reality. If filming gets underway, a stand-alone article can be had. Erik (talk | contribs) 21:57, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

It may be yet be too soon, but considering they've already showed film, it's not far off. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 04:03, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

I looked up what you were referring to, and it looks like a teaser trailer before filming has even begun. It's an improvement from the concept art that they showed a while ago, but it's still not a lock. Projects like this are too easily scrapped before the camera starts rolling. Erik (talk | contribs) 13:16, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

As for the title, I think it's pretty unlikely it will be just "Godzilla". It'll be something like the last Spider-Man remake, add some adjective to differentiate it. So I have reverted the changes of heading to "Godzilla (2014)" pending confirmation that that is the real title, and 2014 is the real release year. Neither of these are more than guesses or estimates at this stage. Barsoomian (talk) 16:35, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

The poster for the film uses only 'Godzilla'. here It is also what it is listed as on IMDB [1]. Also, you could apply the same logic to 'reboot'. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 16:46, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
A couple of years ago fans (including you, I think) were saying we should have the article "Godzilla (2012)" because that's what IMDB said then. IMDB is full of wishful thinking, we have to be more cautious. And the poster is just a teaser poster, they have to put a title on it but it's not binding. They're still writing the script. The film is at least two years away. Next year it may still be two years away. "Reboot" is not a title, it's a description. Barsoomian (talk) 02:31, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
As I said, "Reboot" is speculative too. It might not be a reboot, following your logic, as it's not been filmed and released yet. It's been publicized by Legendary as "Godzilla", so using their title should not be objectionable. Whether it changes title or release date, is a matter of process and editing. Myself and others are quite happy to keep it up to date. As to my thoughts on a separate article, which you seem to have an issue with, I've agreed to follow wp:film's guidelines, (because basically the history of the production have been allowed to be completely covered in this article, otherwise it would be quite objectionable) but the topic of the film/production has had enough coverage on its own to be considered notable according to wikipedia policy. It's been covered thoroughly in the media. You should keep that in mind. Also, I am certain that even an article on a failed film production can be of value to and within Wikipedia. As to myself, I may be a fan of Godzilla, but it is only a small fraction of my editing on Wikipedia. I've been editing here for six years and have thousands of edits. So, lay off. I am not just a "fan", I do know the rules and I try to keep an encyclopedic POV, but I try to keep an open mind. Project guidelines can lead to silliness. The ultimate might be the never-ending debate on the capitalization of bird article titles at wp:redirect. Guidelines vs. policy. I find this 'separate article' debate to be silly too. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 14:37, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
If it makes you happy, change the subhead back. It's bound to be wrong, but there isn't a policy against being gullible, then you can occupy yourself changing it and all the crossreferences every time they push the date back or when they announce the real title. But if you try to start an article before filming commences, that contradicts WP:NFF. No matter how many T-shirts they sold at Comic-Con. Barsoomian (talk) 15:41, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
I won't create a new article. Even though NFF is a guideline and WP:GNG is policy, it's not worth the debate for consensus. We went through that before. I do understand why NFF is in place. And that's reasonable. I'm not going to upset the apple cart. In the long-term scheme of things, waiting for filming to start is not too long to wait. As I said, this article is fine for the time being. There are redirects in place that all go to this one place, (Godzilla (franchise)#American reboot) so we're good. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 18:23, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
"GNG" = "General Notability Guideline". It's not a "policy". Anyway, on the Wikipedia:Notability page it directs you to WP:NF for films, and that includes the Future films section. It's not like I invented any of this, but it's very unambiguous. Barsoomian (talk) 18:44, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
Sorry. I was thinking of the birds debate in my wording. GNG always applies and does not need NF, whereas NF is weaker. I believe NF was written to allow film articles, but it gets used also to exclude, which is unlike other notability guidelines. The section "Future films, incomplete films, and undistributed films" really should be some sort of project guideline, not a notability guideline. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 22:53, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
"whereas NF is weaker" [citation needed] NF is just the film-specific part of GNG, it's no less significant for actually mentioning "films". Barsoomian (talk) 02:55, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Under general principles of WP:NF - "The general notability guideline states, "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article or stand-alone list." The link to the main article explains each criterion. For topics related to film, some may not readily meet all the criteria."

So if you can pass NF, then you can have an article and not have to demonstrate GNG. I guess you didn't know this? ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 14:25, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Under Other evidence of notability of WP:NF - "A topic related to film may not meet the criteria of the general notability guideline, but significant coverage is not always possible to find on the Internet, especially for older films."

I guess you did not know this either? ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 14:27, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
I read it all, years ago. I fail to see what this has to do with proving your assertion that "NF is weaker". I see why you'd like that to be true, as the loopholes you are trying to squeeze through were closed quite unambiguously by WP:NFF, no doubt due to others raising similar arguments in times of yore. Barsoomian (talk) 15:59, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
It's no 'loophole' to have GNG. That's just weird. ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 18:08, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
GNG isn't a loophole, that's an absurd statement and I never said that. You are trying to create a loophole from selected parts of it, while ignoring the specifics in NF and NFF, which is part of GNG. Basically, you want to rewrite NF. You need to argue it there, not here. Barsoomian (talk) 19:19, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
WP:NFF and WP:GNG should be read in tandem, one does not trump the other, but WP:NFF was written with future films in mind. The project still may never happen and for this reason, as has been argued in many places, many times before, WP:NFF is a sensible guideline. There's no common sense reason to make an exception, so we should follow WP:NFF here. --Rob Sinden (talk) 08:17, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

American productions[edit]

It seems arbitrary to include Godzilla, the King of Monsters in the list of American productions, considering there were other movies edited for American release. Thoughts? -Joltman (talk) 16:20, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

On the face of it, it seems reasonable to include it, as there were additional scenes shot, etc., but if you think it could be expanded with other films, why not go for it! --Rob Sinden (talk) 16:30, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
KOTM was made in California. Were the others similar? ʘ alaney2k ʘ (talk) 21:55, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Like GKOTM, the American sequences for King Kong vs Godzilla and Varan (which like GKOTM, featured American actors in newly shot scenes not in the original Japanese versions of those films) were also shot in California. And I believe that was the case for the American version of the first Gamera film as well. (I know its not Toho but still). Giantdevilfish (talk) 01:51, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok, there needs to be something that makes it clear that King of the Monsters etc. were not made in America. The table for American productions is very misleading at the moment. (talk) 10:37, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

These were made in America. Where is that not clear? This does not take away from the fact that they used the original Toho materials. They were not simply 'dubs' or subtitled versions. They used a lot of new material. It's important to show that the Toho and US productions are distinct. There are separate articles on the productions. Alaney2k (talk) 14:48, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
They're edited Japanese films, not original productions. There should at least be a footnote to highlight which ones are Japanese films with added footage. (talk) 16:07, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
I have added that note to the table. Alaney2k (talk) 15:07, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Furthermore, additional scenes were added for other films such as Godzilla Raids Again (Gigantis the Fire Monster), so it's not even consistent at the moment. It's very misleading to someone who doesn't know the history of the films, so I will remove the American products which are edits aside from King of the Monsters due to its significance for the franchise. (talk) 10:56, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
I think then, we can add Gigantis, if it is on the level of the other movies. Alaney2k (talk) 18:55, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
I don't think we should add Gigantis to the list of American productions. It's a dubbed, edited version of the original Japanese version, no different from the US version to Mothra vs. Godzilla. It is not an American production because it does not include any exclusive footage shot for the US release, it only features stock footage borrowed from previous American films. The discussion so far has been centered on distinguishing the Toho & US productions within these films. The US version of Godzilla Raids Again did not have an American production like GKOTM, King Kong vs. Godzilla or Varan did so I don't believe Gigantis meets the criteria of having an American production like GKOTM or King Kong vs. Godzilla did. Armegon (talk) 21:39, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining your edit. Please remember to put stuff like that in your edit summaries. I just want to get it right and editing without summaries can look like edit warring. An anon editor has been reverting without explanation also. To the point though, why would you not think that the level of changes that were made is not enough to call it a 'production'? I haven't done a comparison lately but if the plot is changed, is that not enough? It wasn't simply dubbing the film and having to redo the sound, they went much further than that. I mean, really, they didn't want people to think it was Godzilla. Alaney2k (talk) 23:16, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
You are right, the US version did go through some significant changes but it still doesn't justify it as an "American production". Godzilla 2000 went through similar, not the same, but similar changes for its US release in terms of editing but it has not been considered or even been called an American production by Sony. Other Kaiju films too have gone through similar re-edits that differed significantly from their original Japanese counterparts like Gamera vs. Barugon, Mothra vs. Godzilla, Frankenstein Conquers The World, Yongary '67, and the most heavily edited of them all, Terror of Mechagodzilla. We should reconsider how Gigantis meets the same criteria as GKOTM & King Kong vs. Godzilla that allowed them to be included into the American productions section. Armegon (talk) 23:41, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Official titles[edit]

I was wondering where we could look up "official" titles for the films, so we could cite them. Alaney2k (talk) 15:05, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

This might be a good one. This is an official publication from Toho and even features the title Gigantis for the English title. Armegon (talk) 21:42, 1 August 2014 (UTC)


While Toho is planning a new Godzilla movie, I've not seen anything that indicates it will be a new origin story, or anything specifically I would associate with a reboot (new main character, new style of monster, etc). Toho has had hiatuses before of Godzilla productions. I think that secondary sources have termed it a reboot, but not Toho itself. Toho said it is new, that's as close as I've seen. I don't read Japanese, so I've only read Google translations. Alaney2k (talk) 14:13, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

‘G-Fan’ Should Not Redirect Here[edit]

I want information about G-Fan magazine. There is nothing in this article about it, yet “G-Fan” redirects here. Separate articles please. Felicity4711 (talk) 22:03, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Writing Style of Article[edit]

I'm new here so I don't feel up to tackling it myself, but this entire article comes off like fanzine. Subjective descriptions like "classic" and "ignited a genre" are all over it. The actual content may be accurate but the presentation is embarrassing. Can somebody with more experience editing or rewriting take a look? It needs more than a quick polish or a few replaced words. Captain Accuracy (talk) 04:05, 29 April 2015 (UTC)Captain Accuracy

Don't be shy to edit. I replaced the 'igniting' with 'starting' for a start. If your edits don't work out, then others will touch them up. After all, someone inserted 'igniting' which you noticed. The articles about a genre or topic are written by people interested in the field, not some disinterested neutral party, so the articles are going to reflect that. Alaney2k (talk) 15:16, 29 April 2015 (UTC)


Should we protect the Godzilla (franchise) with a

? — (talk) 17:05, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Padlock-dash2.svg Not done: requests for increases to the page protection level should be made at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 17:51, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Also, the {{edit semi-protected}} template protects nothing - it is used to request an edit to a page that is already protected. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:52, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Well than can you help me with this protection issue if you please (on this subject)? — (talk) 00:14, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Also this page is NOT even semi-protected so how does THAT work? — 2601:183:4000:D5BD:8945:B1F0:B4A5:D0AB (talk) 00:19, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Please don't alter |answered=yes to |answered=no unless you have a valid edit request and there already is protection on the page Godzilla (franchise). Whether the template is {{edit semi-protected}} or {{edit fully-protected}} is immaterial: there is presently no protection on the page Godzilla (franchise), and using either of those templates is not the way to request protection, which as ElHef noted four days ago, is to visit WP:RFPP and make your request there. --Redrose64 (talk) 07:17, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Really than how come I don't SEE One at all in top right crier eh? IF you say it is protected show me Redrose64 eh? — (talk) 18:57, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
I didn't say it was protected. I said, and I quote, "there is presently no protection on the page Godzilla (franchise)"; this situation has not changed. You can tell that it is not protected because when you go to that page, the tab at the top, fourth from left, is "Edit" - if it was protected, that tab would be "View source". Another way is to click on the "View history" tab; at the top of the history page is a link "View logs for this page"; if you click that, it says "No matching items in log", so the page has never been protected, at any level. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:14, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
All I want is to have it protected to avoid vandalism or changes like Godzilla's all, I could use a hand could you (Redrose64) or someone be willing top help with that — 13:43, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
I (and ElHef) have already told you how to request protection. The page is WP:RFPP and the instructions for making a request are at the top of that page. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:21, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

A request for protect was made at WP:RFPP and was declined by me. There's simply no justification for it. --NeilN talk to me 17:24, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

@NeilN: Didn't think there would be. My point (above) was that {{edit fully-protected}} was the wrong way of requesting that a page be protected. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:01, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Template:Relpyto,@Redrose64: Than will you two help or something since apparently this article will NEVER be Protected?! — (talk) 16:16, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
There are almost five million articles in the English Wikipedia and about 99.8% of them are unprotected. I don't see why this article needs special attention. --NeilN talk to me 16:29, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Template:Relpyto Fine, than how about we make are the articles un protected and have them all be vandalized instead huh FINE. –– (talk) 23:06, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Protection Request on 6 September 2015[edit]

To avoid unnecessary changes or what not and avoid vandalism (FYI: I won't be DOING ANY VANDALIZING). — (talk) 16:10, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Not done Nothing's changed. --NeilN talk to me 01:03, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
I meant just in CASE, okay?!!! — (talk) 22:26, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
We've been over this. Pages are not protected preemptively. --NeilN talk to me 17:11, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
So? — (talk) 00:24, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Okay, your frivolous requests, here and at WP:RFPP, are becoming disruptive. The next time you make one, you may be blocked from editing. --NeilN talk to me 03:56, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Article for Godzilla 2016???[edit]

According to this source, filming has started on Godzilla 2016 and per the guidelines of WP:NF, it warrants for the film to have its own article since there is enough significant coverage from reliable sources. If we do start the article, I elect it should be tentatively titled, Godzilla (2016 film) until Toho reveals the final title of the film. Thoughts? Armegon (talk) 01:07, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

I think so. If the film has begun production and there is ample citations then why not? Its going to get a page eventually.Giantdevilfish (talk) 15:07, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

What about the two preceding TriStar Godzilla films?[edit]

Well according to WikiZilla there were two films that scrapped and others too, so why isn't there an article for those? — (talk) 19:04, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Scrapped films[edit]

What about all the scrapped Godzilla films being featured on the Template box too? — (talk) 22:25, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

  • Why not provide a link to some source material? And then we can figure out if it is notable? Alaney2k (talk) 22:55, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
    • Well I did mention Wikizilla — (talk) 02:11, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

External Links?[edit]

Why can't we have Wikizilla on the front page or (possibly) Godzilla's Page? — (talk) 18:45, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

First up, are you sure about that link's address? When I click on it I can get some kind of spam thingie. Once that's fixed we're onto Wikipedia guidelines, specifically WP:ELNO which deals with sites we shouldn't create external links to. One link we should not do is:
12. Open wikis, except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors.
If it can be demonstrated that this Godzilla wiki is a reliable source of information and has been for a long time, then we can create a link to it. Until that occurs we shouldn't link to it. Assuming you meant this Godzill wiki, nothing jumps out about it as being a particularly reliable source. SQGibbon (talk) 01:23, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Pending changes request on 23 January 2016[edit]

PLEASE SOMEONE place a Pending changes on this article... — (talk) 22:57, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Protection request on 8 February 2016[edit]

To prevent vandalism and messing the documents up (anyMORE)... — 2601:183:4000:D5BD:49:8EB:C5A6:9A3B (talk) 16:58, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Padlock-dash2.svg Not done: requests for increases to the page protection level should be made at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Cannolis (talk) 17:09, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Godzilla (franchise). Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:29, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Who Regularly Runs this article? – (no insult intended)[edit]

(In order) To prevent vandalism...? — 2601:183:4000:D5BD:D9F1:3661:72E0:7860 (talk) 21:59, 28 July 2016 (UTC)

If you are not requesting a specific change, you need not use the request edit template. This article is monitored by at least 96 editors, 10 of whom have recently visited this page. So rest assured that any vandalism will not stay for long. Altamel (talk) 23:09, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
No one person runs it. But lots of editors, myself included, watch it so they're informed of each new edit. Friginator (talk) 00:53, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Where should this go?! — God's Godzilla 18:35, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Box Office Performance[edit]

Below is a chart listing the number of tickets sold for each Godzilla film in Japan including the imported Hollywood films. The films are listed from the most attended to the least attended. Almost all of the 1960s film were reissued, so the lifetime number of tickets sold is listed in small print underneath the initial release ticket numbers.

Extended content


Year Tickets sold

King Kong vs. Godzilla

1962 11.2 million
  • Film has lifetime gross of 12.55 million


1954 9.61 million

Godzilla Raids Again

1955 8.34 million

Ghidorah, the Three-Headed Monster

1964 4.32 million
  • Film has lifetime gross of 5.41 million

Godzilla vs. Mothra

1992 4.2 million

Shin Godzilla

2016 4.12 million

Godzilla vs. Destoroyah

1995 4 million


1998 3.9 million

Godzilla vs. Mechagodzilla II

1993 3.8 million

Invasion of Astro-Monster

1965 3.78 million
  • Film has lifetime gross of 5.13 million

Mothra vs. Godzilla

1964 3.51 million
  • Film has lifetime gross of 7.2 million

Ebirah, Horror of the Deep

1966 3.45 million
  • Film has lifetime gross of 4.21 million

Godzilla vs. SpaceGodzilla

1994 3.4 million

The Return of Godzilla

1984 3.2 million

Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah

1991 2.7 million

Destroy All Monsters

1968 2.58 million

Son of Godzilla

1967 2.48 million
  • Film has lifetime gross of 3.09 million

Godzilla, Mothra and King Ghidorah: Giant Monsters All-Out Attack

2001 2.4 million


2014 2.18 million

Godzilla vs. Biollante

1989 2.01 million

Godzilla 2000: Millennium

1999 2 million

Godzilla vs. Gigan

1972 1.78 million

Godzilla vs. Hedorah

1971 1.74 million

Godzilla Against Mechagodzilla

2002 1.7 million

All Monsters Attack

1969 1.48 million

Godzilla vs. Megaguirus

2000 1.35 million

Godzilla vs. Mechagodzilla

1974 1.33 million

Godzilla: Tokyo S.O.S.

2003 1.1 million

Godzilla: Final Wars

2004 1 million

Godzilla vs. Megalon

1973 0.98 million

Terror of Mechagodzilla

1975 0.97 million
Not done You need to request actual changes to the article if you want to use the edit request template. I've also collapsed the content in question to make the page more navigable. --st170etalk 14:20, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Current revision has no owner?[edit]

Why has it been revised when its current permanent link says it's an other version and who changed it back — God's Godzilla 19:58, 10 October 2016 (UTC)