Talk:List of Neon Genesis Evangelion characters

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Anime and manga (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
Wikipe-tan head.png This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime and manga related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-class on the assessment scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
EVA This article is supported by the Evangelion work group.
WikiProject Fictional characters (Rated List-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.


"This has led fans to debate whether or not Maya's feelings for Ritsuko have romantic or sexual undertones, in the same manner as the debate over the relationship between Shinji and Kaworu."

--That was a very good way of summarizing the "situation"; we should leave it as this. Good. --Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici 22:44, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Danke. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 23:35, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Two questions:

  • In regards to the scene where Rei/Lilith takes Maya in EOE, on the page at where the scenes are being discussed frame-by-frame, it's pointed out (and rather obvious) that "Ritsuko" has her knee against Maya's crotch when "she" hugs her, and that Maya sees this. Should this be included in the section?
  • Also, I've heard it said that the script/storyboard for that scene says that Maya's cries are of "ecstacy" there an actual source for this?

Willbyr (talk | contribs) 19:12, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

My own "translation team" more or less varifies the scripts ( I do have all the Renewal scripts but translation is another matter). As for the knee in crotch theory....its not like she's grinding away at her with her knee or something, its kind of just how she's sitting. That said, I'm a total Mata fan, simply because she's an ordinary "girl next door" seemingly *normal* person on a show filled with basket cases! and for a relatively minor character was fairly memorable (I think it was just the voice was really good, but that VA never did anything after that). --Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici (talk) 14:51, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Knee:'s not all that explicit, and if you're not paying attention you're likely to miss it (like I did) but given the context of the scene, it's rather's definitely not something I would do to a woman unless I was very intimate with her or wanted to become so. Script: There's not an official translation of the script anywhere? Nuts...Willbyr (talk | contribs) 16:52, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Toji's sister[edit]

Relations: Sister: Mari

Uh...what? She's unnamed. -- (talk) 01:28, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Good point. --Gwern (contribs) 03:03 4 March 2008 (GMT)

Some more Googlingresearch indicates that it's a fanon name - for some reason or another, it's become the most common name given to her in fan fiction. Similarly, Mrs. Tendo appears to have somehow acquired the name "Kimiko." Don't ask me how. As for "Mari," it's been used in Shinji and Warhammer40k, Neon Genesis Evanjellydonut, and Higher Learning, just to name a few, but I can find no official source. -- (talk) 10:30, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Use of term Seiyu[edit]

The word seiyu has different spellings in this article; seiyuu and seiyu. Can someone with better knowledge of its correct usage confirm this inconsistency is necessary or appropriate? Also, I feel we should link the first use of the word to its own article since I don't believe it's even an English word and as such direct reference to its meaning is important. Ninestories (talk) 03:00, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Good point; the link has been made. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 03:51, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Actually, it should be replaced with Japanese voice actor/actress per WP:USEENGLISH and WP:JARGON. Seiyū simply means "voice actor", but anime fans outside Japan have taken the term to mean only Japanese voice actors. And since Wikipedia is not a fan website, we should use the more neutral term. --Farix (Talk) 12:29, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Isn't seiyu a more precise term? 'Japanese voice actor' parses at least 2 ways - a voice actor in any market who is of Japanese descent, and a voice actor for the Japanese market (regardless of nationality or ethnicity). The article uses seiyu to disambiguate and make clear the second meaning is meant. (I'd note that not all cases can be inferred due to an English VA being listed - many of the minor characters have listed seiyu but no English VA.) --Gwern (contribs) 16:20 18 February 2009 (GMT)
I agree with Gwern. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 17:27, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Translation of the amateur who mixed false information[edit]

Sadamoto designed her to look British, and added glasses as a 'simple yet effective way to set her apart from the other characters'

It points out only clothes. Her character makes middle-aged father in Japan a base. (talk) 02:07, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

The source is a pamphlet distributed in the movie theater. The origin of her character surely has the explanation , saying that "Father at the Showa era(昭和の親父)". (talk) 02:26, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

What exactly are you saying? That the translation is incorrect?
No one is saying that Mari is of Caucasian ethnicity or of British nationality (although the latter is plausible); just that Sadamoto designed her to look British. Given the multiple times he says that in the interview and the multiple ways he says it, I find it hard to believe the translator could've gotten it all wrong.
And you know what? She does look British. Checkered skirt, socks, the bow - very British. --Gwern (contribs) 14:47 24 January 2010 (GMT) and are me. The base of the speech and behavior of mari is middle-aged father in Japan. This strange idea was decided by Hideaki Anno. Do you say that you cannot understand this? (talk) 00:09, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

When the source is seen, her name is falsified by mary and the name of the Britain style. It is dangerous to make the amateur's translation a source. (talk) 18:16, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I think I see the problem. Are you familiar with the ideas of 'in-universe' and 'out of universe' material? Inside the Eva universe, the explanation of the clothing and appearance of Mari may be as you say, although you must be omitting something because a 'middle-aged father in Japan' has nothing to do with Britain. Outside the Eva universe, the appearance & clothing of Mari are due to design choices by Sadamoto working under orders from Anno or whomever, seeking specific effects & meaning. The interview states that out of universe, Sadamoto wanted to make her look British and added the glasses for the stated reason. You seem to be confusing the in-universe and out of universe reasons.
What is the problem with the translation? 'Mary' is a perfectly respectable Romanization, since Mari=Maria=Mary. That's not an error anyone cares about, much less sufficient do discredit the translation as a source.
If you have no other objections, I will restore the material. --Gwern (contribs) 01:15 25 January 2010 (GMT)
Please do not say the fake information. Neither mari nor mary are the same marks in Japanese.The katakana named mari doesn't become mary. Mary and the translator who falsifies do not understand even the abc or are falsifying on purpose. (talk) 02:04, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Gwern returned the article without objecting to the name of the imitation of the Britain style. What you believed was an imitation. An informal source where such a false information is explained is not admitted. (talk) 16:25, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Explain what is false about it! Mari to Mary is well within translator license. I'd probably make that change myself, especially in an Evangelion context - a series which loves meaningless religious name like 'Adam' or 'Lilith' or 'Longinus' (or Caspar etc.).
If the translation is so bad, and your English good enough to argue with me, then you can surely provide a better translation of a snippet. Or something. Nothing stops you from looking at the original Sadamoto interview and showing that the translation is making up the British style. Or from showing that there is no Sadamoto interview.
There are many things you could say. Talking again and again about 'informal source' or 'false information' is not enough.
As the expression goes: put up or shut up. --Gwern (contribs) 17:08 25 January 2010 (GMT)
Mari(マリ)Maria(マリア) Mary(マリー or メアリー). I know the name of the project stage of mari is mariko. I am not selling it near myself though you tell it to make an original magazine look. An informal source is dangerous though saying many times is tired. (talk) 17:21, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I've asked the rest of the taskforce for advice here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Evangelion#NGE: Sadamoto's out of universe quotes are being challenged by anon. Japanese IP --Gwern (contribs) 17:35 25 January 2010 (GMT)

What are you doing?I only say the just argument. My IP changes automatically whenever PC is cut(Even I do not understand the reason either.). (talk) 17:41, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Gwern stopped waiting for advice and took arbitrary actions. Your behavior is thoughtless. (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:44, 2 February 2010 (UTC).

School Uniform[edit]

Is an image of the school uniform really so necessary? In fact, it looks fan-made and we already have a picture of the characters who already wear the uniform.Bread Ninja (talk) 18:04, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

And for how long shall we have that screenshot?
I don't know that it is 'fan-made' (there is so much Eva merchandise), but you seem to be the only one bothered by it. --Gwern (contribs) 23:18 12 May 2010 (GMT)
And what's the point of the image? Show a school uniform already repeated
above? The number of users against something does not matter in wikipedia as it is not a democracy.Tintor2 (talk) 00:57, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Well yes i am bothered by it, but I'm not using it as my main point. i just don't think the image is necessary. is there any reason why we should have an image of the school uniform? i see i still have some tension with the old EVA group, hopefully it doesn't strive to something bad.Bread Ninja (talk) 16:24, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
I just realized that there's a rule, if you be bold, and someone reverts, than it will have to be discussed. So I'll just remove it. if anyone disagrees, well you can talk about it.Bread Ninja (talk) 15:46, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Comment: It's a rule, but its meant to be for clearly have a disagreement and is not intended to make a point.Jinnai 02:43, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
So I've restored it. The content is not illegal, Free content, not unethical, and germane to the article, so I think the presumption ought to be against removal.
Why to keep it? The blue uniform is, like the plugsuit, iconic. While I don't offhand know of any Sadamoto commentary on the uniform akin to his hilarious comments on the plugsuit (see ), although I have been asking on the Eva ML about a rumor that the school uniform was designed by Anno based on schoolgirl fetish videos, it is nevertheless a signature Eva uniform, and one that is not clearly depicted in the group shot. (It has only, what, 2? At an angle? As a small part of a tiny thumbnail?) It's not like we're short on paper/space, either.
Tintor: Wikipedia is not a democracy, but that doesn't mean everyone gets a Real Ultimate Minority Power of vetoing any content that strikes them as 'fan-made'. --Gwern (contribs) 21:19 16 May 2010 (GMT)
And when did I say anything about fanmade or powers? If the school uniform is really important to the article (if it has mentions of it), then the top image could just be reuploaded in a bigger resolution as it has both male and female uniforms.Tintor2 (talk) 21:28, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
My bad. I assumed that since you were not agreeing with me nor presenting any reason to remove it, you agreed with Bread Ninja's argument.
And no, we can't just re-upload it in higher resolution. Our fair use guidelines are hard enough to meet as it is. --Gwern (contribs) 21:42 16 May 2010 (GMT)
I don't see the current problem with the current resolution unless somebody has vision problems so there's still no point to have an image of a school uniform already shown above.Tintor2 (talk) 21:46, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Jinnai, it wasn't to make a point. it wasn't so i don't get ignored after giving me a responce but no answer. Usually, i ask for consensus first before making bold edits unless i know for sure no one will disapprove, many EVA members know this, and since they will not reply back, that would mean i wouldn't make big edits. well that was until i discovered that rule. So if i didn't get a straight answer i would remove it and if they reverted and i left a discussion, then they would have to respond and discuss it. Gwern, i didn't say to remove it at first did i? my first comment was a question, so i should at least gotten a straight answer instead of making it sound so trivial. Anyways i read more on that site, and says nothing specifically on the school uniform whatsoever. Saying the blue uniform is like the plugsuit is Original research.Bread Ninja (talk) 03:27, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
BN, I gave you 2 different reasons to keep it and pointed out a likely erroneous assumption you were making. Please don't complain that I didn't give an answer. If you don't understand what I am saying, ask me to clarify; for example, I don't understand your question to me at all. (There, that wasn't so hard.) --Gwern (contribs) 00:34 20 May 2010 (GMT)
I was referring to your first responce. i meant to say give answers the first time rather than argue whether i'm bothered by it. And i already discussed about the two reasons. 1) was that the blue uniform was iconic even though you would need a ref for that. The ref you gave wasn't really explaining much or giving any special attention to the uniform itself, and really it's talkinga bout how their appearances is subdue rather than stand out. Actually i can only find 1 reason, what was the second one? either way...Even if the uniform was important, why add it in the list of characters article? it doesn't make much sense.Bread Ninja (talk) 00:58, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Is that the actual uniform? The sleeves in the picture of the characters [1] go to their elbows, while the picture featured of an actual school uniform seems much shorter. The skirt doesn't look as long as it does in the Anime. Anyway, if you are going to show the uniform, it should be from the anime itself, or a picture from the manga perhaps. Show off one of the girls wearing it, that making more sense. Dream Focus 16:53, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Must... resist... urge... to accuse you of OR.
And it could be from the anime or manga, but A) we don't currently have one, and we do have this. B) Same fair use issues as before. --Gwern (contribs) 20:46 2 June 2010 (GMT)
Although it could be OR, s/he's right that the school uniform does not match of the anime and we have yet to see any live action NGE series to prove this or any proof that this is an official NGE merchandise. This appears to more otaku cosplay merchandise and on top of that, we have nothing to prove that the school uniform is iconic as the plugsuits to the characters of NGE. So i still don't see the reason why it should even be kept or even search for an image of the characters in there school uniform. The image of the characters is enough. Adding a picture specifically for the uniform itself is trivial.Bread Ninja (talk) 03:30, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
The sleeve thing proves nothing; there are summer and winter uniforms, after all. And they surely come in varying sizes, and there may've been manufacturing compromises, and... (It's not even implausible that they would be sold; Gainax seems to have merchandized every other possible thing.) --Gwern (contribs) 21:36 6 June 2010 (GMT)

1)the image is a poor representation of the school uniform and we have not seen any winter or summer uniform yet, so thats OR. ALso assuming that this is official merchandise from gainax is OR as well unless you can prove it.

2)You have not supported why it should stay other than for the sake of it staying there. Sorry, but i'm going to say your faliing under WP:ILIKEIT.Bread Ninja (talk) 21:52, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Poor representation - alright, I'll call a spade a spade. That accusation is pure OR. Show proof that it is not a good representation.
Nor do I need to justify it. It is the garment that Rei and Asuka wear when they are not wearing plugsuits. It is half their wardrobe. It is not clearly visible in the tilted tiny screenshot. It is germane to this page. You are engaging in WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT. You keep making vague claims like 'I don't understand', but nothing about guidelines or policy. --Gwern (contribs) 19:09 8 June 2010 (GMT)
a spade by a spade? the reason why i keep repeating myself is because you haven't given a reason why the image itself should be kept and yes you do need to justify it. Just because they wear the same outfit for almost entire series, does not mean we need an image of it, if the image of all the characters in there usual outfit is already in here. and i'm pretty sure my comments are straight forward, if you have a problem about a specific sentence i said, then mention it. As tintor2 already said, i don't see the point of having this image.Bread Ninja (talk) 20:58, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
I've given the reason tons of time! It's a relevant picture, under a Free license, and a backup for our crappy tiny fair use picture which will probably be deleted in a few years anyway. --Gwern (contribs) 17:52 22 June 2010 (GMT)

ALso you cannot accuse someone for WP:IDONTLIKEIT if you have been accused of WP:ILIKEIT and haven't defended why it should be kept. The accusation si not pure OR, it's specualtion. You haven't defended the image, and i'm not the on ly one here, so don't focus the argument solely on me. there is also tintor2 and dreamfocus.Bread Ninja (talk) 23:40, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh, so once someone has invoked it, they automatically win? I'll remember that in the future.
And don't try to count Dream Focus as against it; he's only wondered whether it's accurate and suggested that better pictures could be found. This is true. It would also be nice if we all had ponies. Which defecate rainbows and ice cream. We are concerned with what we actually have. --Gwern (contribs) 17:52 22 June 2010 (GMT)
Not necessarily, you simply have not defended yourself when i accused you of WP:ILIKEIT. instead you try to counterattack by saying i'm going by WP:IDONTLIKEIT. I'm also confirmed on what we have and what is necessary, the image of school uniform is unecessary and there is no real reason to keepit.Bread Ninja (talk) 21:40, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Character section format[edit]

I think we should change this to Main Character, Supporting Character, and other. There isn't much reason to keep it in this format.Bread Ninja (talk) 02:07, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I like it as it is; main character and supporting character is a pretty subjective assessment and one that can easily change. (Mari is a supporting character right now, but in the next 2 movies, could easily become a main character.)
Also: I hereby accuse you of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. --Gwern (contribs) 17:52 22 June 2010 (GMT)
Its fine like it is now. Very hard to determine who was a main character and who was a supporting one. Would you count their lines, the number of episodes they appeared in, or their actions? This was is much better, since you have the children who were the pilots, then the NERV staff, etc. Much easier to find who you are looking for. Dream Focus 20:09, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
No, it's not fine the way it is because it's written in primarily in-universe style, that includes the format. Also, it's quite easy to tell which one is a supporting character, and which one is a main character. For example, all the children are main characters of course but some members of gehirn and Nerv are main characters, such as ritsuko, katsuragi, haji, Gendo, and i forget his name but the man that is also with gendo most of the time. and if a character becomes a main character, then we just change it. That's my reason for changing the format, so it's not because i don't like it, it's just too in-universe. But you simply said "I like it as it is", so whats your reason to keeping it in this format? i will not accept main character/supporting characters being subjective assessment as a problem (because it's not).Bread Ninja (talk) 21:34, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Japanese Names of Characters[edit]

Is there any reason why katakana is used for the personal names of ALL the characters? The reason I ask is because many, if not all, (i.e. Rei, Yui, etc.) have real Japanese names as personal names, so wouldn't it have the associated kanji instead?Bwing55543 (talk) 04:31, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea. Maybe they were there but were removed for lacking source? --Gwern (contribs) 16:37 21 January 2011 (GMT)
I just checked the japanese wiki, it appears to be kanji...are you sure you're not mistaking kanji for katakana?Bread Ninja (talk) 19:14, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Actually, ALL of the characters in Evangelion have their given names written intentionally in kataka (e.g. 碇シンジ, 綾波レイ). It's unknown whether they have the kanji but not stated, or simply don't have any in the first place (Asuka had her name written as "明日香" at the final ep of the TV series, but this may be an exception). I heard (i.e. I don't know the source) it was done to make the hidden information in the names be ambiguous, and to leave space for people to guess what they mean: For instance Shinji can be written as "神児" ("god child"), Rei as "霊" ("soul") or "零" ("zero"), Ryouji as "療治" ("remedy") and so on. Btw, just for further reference, even in real Japan, we (the Japanese) can have hiragana/katakana names if the parents want it (it's just not that common to be seen).--Doncot (talk) 20:29, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Proposed merge with List of Angels in Neon Genesis Evangelion[edit]

The Angels really don't need 50kb to describe them. One introductory paragraph and a brief, bulleted list limited to a few sentences per Angel on the character list would be plenty. TTN (talk) 19:48, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Kind of hard when Apocalypse Academy adaptation gave them significant changes. but i'll vote for support.Lucia Black (talk) 05:53, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Neon Genesis Evangelion characters are not characters from Rebuild of Evangelion[edit]

There is no place here for spare characters from Rebuild of Evangelion on this page. We need another page for them.

If i did't need ouno changes of one username, who just now learn to speak with others, i could change they to ZimaPasocom (talk) 08:27, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Don't you dare trying to hide talk-page, coward ZimaPasocom (talk) 07:47, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Do what ever you want, i don't care anymore. Marlin Setia1 (talk) 10:31, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

First, this is the list of characters for the entire franchise, not just the television series. So characters from Rebuild of Evagelion can be placed on this list. Second, I have cleaned up and reorganized the list to present it more in a real-life context. Since the Angles are monsters of the week through the series, they have been removed. I am also tempted to remove some other unimportant background characters, mainly those listed under other characters as they are not in the main plot. —Farix (t | c) 11:46, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
The Angels are a critical element of the series (both the Anime and the Manga) - they are not simply MoTD - their origins and motivations are central to the plot. Removing them entirely is hardly appropriate. Please avoid mass deletions such as this in the future.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 23:51, 5 August 2015 (UTC))