Talk:Neon Genesis Evangelion (manga)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Themes section[edit]

At some point I suppose we need a theme section on how the manga diverges. Here's some quotes (from the cite for the 17 million sales figure) for when we write it:

The story goes on, mercilessly depicting how Shinji and his fellow Evangelion pilots, all 14-year-old boys and girls, come to be physically and mentally torn to tatters through fierce combat with Angels. Clues to the unraveling of various mysteries, such as why the Second Impact happened, what Evangelions and Angels really are, and what the Instrumentality Project is, are scattered through the plot.

The world of Evangelion is filled with pessimism and lacks any trace of hope, apparently reflecting the public mood in Japan shortly after the Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake on Jan. 17 and the sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway on March 20, both in 1995.

There is a common misconception that the anime series was based on the manga, but Sadamoto has applied his personal interpretation to the anime script and the characters to make the manga series easier for even teenage readers to understand.

You may not be a teenager any longer, but you may still want to understand the extremely complicated plot of the most-talked-about and--many critics say--the best anime and manga series Japan has ever produced, a series that has strongly affected the nation's otaku culture since the late 1990s.

--Gwern (contribs) 01:34 27 March 2008 (GMT)

Conclusion? Stage 90 and volume 13[edit]

The forum links contain multiple conflicting translations and official statements; the situation is very confusing. We may well need to amend it - it seems impossible for the manga to end with stage 90, at this point in the plot, there was like almost an hour left to go in End of Evangelion! --Gwern (contribs) 00:01 23 February 2012 (GMT)

http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2012-05-01/evangelion-manga-volume-13-slated-for-november-2 points out that the situation is still unclear. --Gwern (contribs) 01:28 7 May 2012 (GMT)

Having just read this article for the first time, I found it needlessly confusing. I don’t see the relevance of including the contradictory blow-by-blow accounts of the publisher and author regarding which volume was going to be the final volume. Some of the links to the sources are 301’d to the soft-paywall front page of another site. And for these, the main internet archives do have snapshots, but the authors don’t actually link to an official source, so the sources for this back and forth were bad sources a decade ago.

I think the majority of the publication history section needs to be rewritten with updates citation sources where possible.

I would happily do this myself right now, but I’m honestly tired of spending hours poring over an article just to have someone’s auto-revert bot come through and undo everything. So I’m bringing this back up for discussion with the sincere hope that anyone who disagrees with me will put their arguments here and save me hours of wasted work. ChiXiStigma (talk) 10:28, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated Information tag: Details[edit]

I've finished a copyedit and removed the corresponding tag, but added the "Outdated" tag in the hopes of getting more up-to-date information up in the article. The information currently presented only includes up to 2012, when the series was still running; it should be updated to include the details of the final volume, including the volume's reception and the original publication dates. – 2macia22 (talk) 02:32, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]