Talk:Mobile Suit Gundam SEED/Archive 1

GUNDAM : Word connotation

Hi, you may have not heard this before but the fruit that caused the exodus of Adam and eve from heaven for western nations is Apple or rather APPLESEED and for Middle Eastern nations it is called GUNDUMSEED. I am not too sure that the creators were aware of this connection but interesting to know. Danraz 13:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

English voice actors for the druggies

There's no mistaking Richard Ian Cox as Shani Andras, even though the end credits on the dvds only credited him for playing Tolle Koenig. But even though the dvd and the website CrystalAcids.com credited Andrew Toth as Clotho Buer, I very pig-headedly refused to believe it because the AnimeNewsNetwork credited Andrew played Orga Sabnak and Ted Cole played Clotho and then that is what I impulsively submitted to the Internet Movie Database. Well, it turns out that that was wrong. Andrew Toth did indeed play Clotho as was said in the end credits of the DVDs. As for Orga, he was voiced by Matt Smith, who also played Jackie Tonomura, but only received credit for that role in the end credits just as Richard Ian Cox only received credit for playing Tolle. Bandai did not make it clear that Matt played Orga until they showed the end credits of Phase-20 Volume 5 of Gundam Seed Destiny. Ted Cole played two other roles in Gundam Seed, Yuri Amalfi (Nicol's father) and Ray Yuki, the guy who kills Patrick Zala; he did not play any of the druggies. That being said, I've already made the changes to this page and that of Orga/Matt and Clotho/Andrew and I currently in the process of correcting my mistake on the Internet Movie Database as well. Shaneymike 14:24, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Mission accomplished! Now I just gotta link the quotes to their rightful actors. Shaneymike 15:35, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

It seems user 199.212.53.54 has recently reverted your edits on the articles of the "druggies" and those of the voice actors that voice them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/199.212.53.54 - Silver Edge 09:41, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Cagalli

Is Cagalli Natural or Coordinator? The official website says Natural, but in one episode she had the Seed-berserker eyes.

hey i saw that episode, it was awesome she just when crazy it was good. I actually thought that she wsa just a natural until that episode, but when it comes to japenese or any forneign shows being dubbed there are always mistranslations so you never really know for sure unless your question gets directed to the big guys Hope. 17:24, 18 July 2006 (UTC)hope.

Cagalli is a natural. It's explained somewhere either in the talk pages, or on the article itself that Cagalli is a natural. The ability to go SEED is not unique to coordinators, rather it is a trait all humans possess. --198.161.173.180 18:54, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

It is true the ability to go in SEED mode it is not only for coordinators naturals can also go into the SEED mode it is just that it is harder for them...beside for those who have the manga correct me if I am wrong but in volume 5 phase 22 when Kira Mwu and Rau are in the L4 colonies Creuset tell Kira that his real mother pregnant with twins and that one of the embroys was transfered into an artificial womb so they could carry out an experiment on it. to create the perfect coordinator and beside their true parents are naturals the only coordinator in the Hikibi family (Cagalli and Kira's original family) is Kira because he was modified so that is enought proff to say that Cagalli is a natural no matter what others say.

isn't cagalli kira's sister? and by the photo which izume gave cagalli, it would seemed that both kira and cagalli are coordinators... 129.78.64.104 06:00, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Certain Changes/Emphasis

First of all, SEED refers to "Superior Evolutionary Element Destined-factor(SEED factor)", effectively stating that SEED is a way of theorising that someone has a destiny. It, in the show, can only be applied to people that can do a large amount of change (Such as Councilmen Atha, insteading of bowing to EAF's demands, decides to fight with his country's minimalist resources [and strong allies] against over half the world in Alliance), and can be specifically tracked through Kira Yamato, who is the Ultimate (Supreme) Coordinator.

Kira Yamato has a very prominent role in all political movements throughout the show, initially leading the Archangel to the safety net of the EAF, to his role in disabling the two task force fleets of ZAFT and EAF during the Battle of Yakin Due. His philosophies and opinions expand with the plot (at first he is defending his friends and maintaining their safety [due to Archangel's plight], but eventually grow to a certain enchanting anti-war tone, with his disenchantment of the established sides and hate for needlessly exterminating lives). I believe that the philosophy of Kira and Lux would be a very good addition.

Berserker refers to what many think of as SEED. Berserker is the state of concentration that, at first, manifests itself in the inexplicable occurrences of Kira's near mental/physical breakdowns that lead him to victory against ZAFT's illegal acquisitions. Athrun is the next to replicate this, during his frustration after Kira kills Nichol, followed by many others (Lacus, Cagalli). Eventually, the process of engaging oneself into a frenzied state becomes artificial, such as Kira demonstrated in Gundam SEED: Destiny during the assault on Lacus.

I believe the racial tensions should be more catered to, as the irrationality of the Natural/Coordinator hatred reflects many opinions in reality, and they are as irrational if not more. The portrayal of nuclear weapons as the end-all solution toward, and the massive reprisal by ZAFT and Plant would be a great addition. Explanations of Bloody Valentine, the significance of Junius 7, and certain political intrigues and groups (Blue Cosmos).

The beauty of SEED is that it is a very complex, well rounded story. From Flay's manipulation of Kira, to the mutuality of his and Lacus's relationship. There is much to expand upon in this article, though it is very good for a superficial outview.

I agree about it being a complex story, but I think the article should avoid going too in-depth in regards to character relations for certain reasons, one being that some of the ones you've mentioned have more layers than what's on the surface. There was more to Kira and Flay's relationship than manipulation and it's rather questionable to classify his relationship with Lacus as being overall "mutual"—since her feelings for him weren't reciprocated at the end. This kind of complexity sometimes makes it hard for some people to describe the relationships from a neutral stance, so I think that just informing the reader of the general idea works best in this case. --James26 05:41, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Criticism of SEED: On-topic?

Do you guys think putting in a section on the loads of criticism regarding Gundam SEED is on-topic for this article? There is a large vocal faction (mostly made up of UC fans) that criticise SEED for being too much a copy of older Gundam series, especially of Mobile Suit Gundam, as well as criticism of series director Fukuda's changing the script to boost sales of the Buster Gundam model kits. - chibikit

It should be included as part of the article, but it must presented in a neutral, non-partisan manner.

67.172.242.116 02:41, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

It's funny how people have ignored this so far and the one section discussing reactions just seems to be gushing praise for the series. There are a number of vocal critics of Gundam SEED who see it as somewhat of a joke compared to the older UC series, and I think that we need to discuss that rather than make this out to be something that everyone enjoys.

Mister Mister 20:26, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I somewhat agree with Mister Mister about the reactions section. However, some of what is said in the paragraph is fact, and I don't think it should be removed (things such as the merchandise selling, and it being a vision of a 21st century UC). However, I don't agree with sticking criticisms on a page just become "everybody doesn't like it." At that point, I may as well go around and post criticism on Zeta and the original Gundam series pages, since I've heard plenty of vocal critics complain about them as well. I s'pose we just need to tone down the reactions section, and perhaps add equal length sections for both positive and negative fan reactions?--208.104.224.37 06:17, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Well SEED is widely criticised, and with good reason, so I'd keep it.--68.84.45.45 17:11, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

A google search for gundam seed criticism gives 21,400 results, compare this to a search for gundam wing criticism which gave 91,600 results, gundam v criticism which gave 28,500 results, gundam x criticism which gave 42,300 results. None of the series I mention have criticisms included in the articles about them, despite the amount of criticism surrounding them, so why should seed have such a section? --86.133.150.105 14:19, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Google is not the Holy Grail of Wikipedia potential

And a majority of the GX criticism would no doubt be misinformed bandwagoners.

The problem is most of the SEED criticism is nonsensical, ranging from "It's too Emo", to "It's a rip off of UC", to "They changed it to sell Buster!". The first one doesn't even need dealing with, I don't care for the internet's bizarre hatred for anything that passes a certain emotional threshold. The second one is baseless as SEED is CLEARLY stated to be a re-imagining of the original series, yet no matter how many times you say this it doesn't get through their heads. The third is just... bad. This whole thing reminds me a lot of Transformers, and the different series. Most TF series were made to sell toys to begin with, if not all. In fact, one of the least "toyish" ones was also the most criticised - Beast Machines. Beast Wars was still an excellently written cartoon. The motivating factor for selling figures actually drove them to come up with some interesting plots; the transmetals, for instance, the Fuzors, and Optimal Optimus(very cool). I would consider the Buster controversy supremely irrelevant. Though I must admit I wouldn't have wanted a Buster if it wasn't for that extra exposure while I also cared somewhat about the pilot. I don't mind wanting another model kit; I was new to Gundam at the time so it was nice to have a few more showcased, they focused way too much on the Strike for most of the series. It's also actually an excellent model kit.

In TFs, you also have the G1 Purists kind of like the UC purists. The difference is, however, it's the "Let's embrace something new!!!" people that are actually the dicks in TF Fandom, because they shove the movie down people's throats.

SEED is actually well written. From what we've seen of the TF Movie script, it really isn't, and the series recently have been godsawful.

- Kittie Rose

i really dont think anyone should really be criticizing anything really i mean afterall everyone has different opinions, like all those naruto critics out there and all those naruto fans ((<-- i know a little irrelevant... sorry)) and true gundam seed was a remake of Mobile Suit Gundam they just modernized right? I agree Kittie Rose there are just so many people who complain about that but it just doesnt get through their heads!!

sometimes when i go to forums to talk bout it theres always a bunch of people who go into the forums just to talk bad about to me an my friends its just so annoying!! Grrrrr!!

Xxem0kittyxx (talk) 00:08, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Canadian Airtime

• Don't get me wrong, I'm a Canadian too, but is it really necessary to include the YTV air time? I mean either list out all the air time of this show for all the stations in Japan/Canada/USA, or just leave it out. 142.104.250.115 06:32, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I think adding the show bloc GUNDAM SEED was aired is fine ex. Adult Swim. Wikipedia is not a TV Guide.. mouselmm 01:36, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Cleaned

Added a section on themes and opinions, which was notably absent, and removed information on the Filipino broadcast which seems to be irrelevent in an English-language encyclopaedia. Hope you enjoy.

yay, that definitely needed to be removed Dudeman74 23:08, 25 April 2006 (UTC) i think the cast of hero tv is the same with all cast of dub anime i watch it but only for that its english dub for cartoon network i live here gabcerv 10:50, 29 june 2006 (UTC)

Broken sentences

The aftermath scenes of the Battles of Porta Panama and Victoria cites vengefully frequent summary executions purged against surrendering and incapacitated enemy soldiers in the Pacific and also the life of Dearka Elsman in captivity aboard the Archangel could be compared to the degenerating and reckless mis-treatment of Prisoners of War by the Japanese Army.

What is trying to be said here? Hackwrench 22:10, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Um... maybe they're trying to say this?

The after of the Battles of Panama and Victoria illustrated summary executions against incapacitated soldiers, and soldiers who chose to surrender. Furthermore, Dearka's captivity aboard the Archangel could be compared to the treatment of prisoners of war by the Japanese Army.

This is just what I interpreted it as. If this is the case, it probably doesn't belong in the article as it seems WP:POV. --Miss Ethereal 15:55, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Not only is this unclear ranting, but these are some wild comparisons. Is this saying Dearka's captivity on Archangel is equivalent to the Bataan Death March or the executions on Wake Island? Sure he was attacked with silverware and forced to eat cafeteria food, but he was hardly mistreated or abused overall. --68.90.16.203 16:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Marketing copy

The article as it now stands reads too much like marketing copy. Hackwrench 03:34, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Three Ship Alliance/Clyne Faction

Is the term "Three Ship Alliance" used in any official documents? I don't believe I've seen it listed anywhere, which would make it appear as a fan-term. If that is the case, it would seem more appropiate to use "Clyne Faction" for the Three Ship Alliances, since I've seen this associated with the three ships and their units more than other designations. --208.104.224.37 06:12, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Cast/Crew

In the cast/crew section, is it really necessary to mention the die-hard Gundam SEED fans? Should that part about the die-hard fans be in this article?

"One striking fact of the series is that the voices of characters, both major and minor, were done by many veteran seiyu. The cast list reads like a Who's Who of Japanese voice actors and actresses. This is also carried over to the sequel, Gundam SEED Destiny. While there has always been scrutiny over the dubbing of many anime series, the mispronunciation of several character names in the english dubbing has angered many die-hard Gundam SEED fans."

Vera26 06:12, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

IMO, it's not needed. To say the least, it needs a citation as it sort of is POV if it is to be kept. --Miss Ethereal 14:24, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Canadian opening?

The opening for the Canadian dub was changed... it was shortened... however, it matched well with the video.

Is this the same for other dubs? 69.192.62.63 19:39, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm Canadian too, but on the DVDs and in the states, I think there were several openning themes. Sango4ever 4:25 pm, 9 October 2007 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 20:27, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Video game

Despite the fact that it's been cancelled (I hate that fact!) shouldn't there be an article on the DS video game? —↑_{Darklinkskywalker}|^{Talk_|i did this stuff_}↓ 19:44, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Canadian dub?

Is the dub that used to be on YTV's Bionix the same as the Cartoon Network/Adult Swim (not sure) one?

Do they at least have the same voices? Or themes? Any info at all?

Thanks in advance.

74.116.142.240 22:14, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

ok i want to know!

ok i want to know who in their right mind suggested to delete some mobile suit pages ive seen one for the Aegis and the raider gundam i suggest right here keep them!--Spartan117009 00:24, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you're talking about me, but I nominated all of the Cosmic Era mobile suits, and my mind was quite right. Most were deleted. Even though you want the articles (and obviously a lot of others do), most of them violate policies in Wikipedia. Regardless of whether they should be deleted or not, you need to base your reasons for keeping (or deletion) on the rules, not your opinion. --TheEmulatorGuy 03:38, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I was quite frustrated that most (over 90%) of gundam infos are removed. I saw the header and next day the article is gone. So why is it removed? Care to explain a little bit more instead of just referencing to look at the rules? OhanaUnited 03:17, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

hi, wikipedia is not a playground for gunhappy dim sighted fellons or is it? [[User:]]

Discussions can be found here. And all the information deleted are transwikied at http://gundam.wikia.com/wiki/Cosmic_Era_Mobile_Units Ric 07:18, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Is there a ninja character?

I remember hearing that there was was, but I'm not familiar. Please answer on my talk page, thanks (for Ninja in popular culture) --HanzoHattori 13:51, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Kira didn't destroy Genesis

In the episode 50. Kira didn't directly destroy Genesis. Correction, Kira didn't even TOUCH Genesis.

-Here is what happened, Athrun was the one that really destroyed the Genesis, so it is true Kira did not destroy it for those that thought that it was him the one that had done so.-

lol, i noe yea. athrun busted his ass off going into Genesis and making Justice self destruct to destroy it and u giv kira the credit. seriously watch the series and understand it b4 u write an article about it. TranscendantX (talk) 09:05, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Interviews

Does anyone know if the two interviews with Fukuda (kyoto university and gundam files book) and the one with Kunio Okawara regarding gundam seed is available on a website that's not a blog. I wish I could use Gunota Headlines as a source, but wikipedia doesn't allow blogs as sources. I believe a Japanese source would be fine as well. Rezumop (talk) 02:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Cast Lists

I'm planning on deleting the cast lists information on this page. The characters and voice actors are already listed accordingly on the character list as well as on individual character articles. Restating each and every one - mainly citing credits - is excessive. This seems to be a recurring problem for majority of the Gundam articles. I'll replace the lists with short descriptions of the central characters to the series (Kira, Athrun, Lacus, Cagalli, etc...) and keep the link to the Character list where anyone who wants to know what should go to. Fox816 (talk) 03:26, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I always wanted to delete those + the references that go up to ca is ridiculous. Rezumop (talk) 01:06, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Reupload picture

Apparently the old picture was delete for some reason. Dragonsblast (talk) 07:53, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Misquote within controversy

I couldn't come up with a good way to rewrite the section, so here's my beef for others to fix:

MAHQ is cited, within the Controversy section (dealing w/ the "implied sex" in ep.16), as calling the inclusion of such a scene as "Daring and Creative". This is incorrect: the person who reviewed that episode stated that others may have called it daring/creative, but he doesn't agree.

Simply put, MAHQ doesn't think that it was daring and creative, which means that the incorrect citation should probably be removed.

thnx.

98.233.161.129 (talk) 00:16, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Copyedit

Thanks.Tintor2 (talk) 16:59, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I've completed the copy edit has been. Requests, reviews and comments are always welcome on my talk page --Blackmane (talk) 08:45, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

erroneous redirect

Is there some reason that Ptolomaeus Crater redirects to this site? It shouldn't - Ptolomaeus crater is a real location on the moon of geological interest. Jstuby (talk) 19:21, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Manga section

The year of release on one of the manga series was incorrect, so has been corrected; the correct year was taken from the reference that had already been provided. T3021 (talk) 20:08, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks.Tintor2 (talk) 20:33, 28 July 2014 (UTC)