# Talk:Neon Genesis Evangelion

{{refideas
|1=https://archive.org/details/fanroad-1997-05/Fanroad%20-%201997-05/page/n19/mode/2up
}

Is there any reason for this section and the long table? I don't know if it would be of interest to casual readers of the article. If anything, only hardcore fans would be interested in something like that and this is not the place for that, not to mention that it looks like pure WP:ORIGINAL. - Xexerss (talk) 22:47, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
I've moved it to a more appropriate spot in the "List of Neon Genesis Evangelion episodes" page now since, as you say, it's beyond summary-level info and that's a page with e.g. more in-depth info on translation of titles. Since e.g. there was not even any mention of the parity between 21'-24' and 25'-26' before this suggests something needed improving at least and this is the most diplomatic solution I could find; a pictorial solution like a table is better than body text when talking about lots of different versions with very similar titles in succession.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmbroseCadwell (talk • contribs) 23:44, 29 December 2021 (UTC) 

Have we all forgotten what site we're on? This is an English article on the English Wikipedia. Cited sources need to (a) meet Wikipedia's reliability standards, (b) be written in English, and (c) be something that we can actually confirm the existence of. This means that you need to name a book, magazine issue, etc. that a person can buy or a website that a person can browse. If I type "ISBN 4-8074-9718-9" into a search engine and I only get three results, two of which are Wikipedia pages about Evangelion and the third of which is written in Spanish, then "ISBN 4-8074-9718-9" is not a valid source. 73.70.13.107 (talk) 10:33, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

I think you have forgotten. lol 130.0.28.21 (talk) 15:12, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

What exactly is this supposed to mean and what is the source for that statement? The anime industry in Japan was doing just fine before NGE was released. 185.68.78.153 (talk) 00:30, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

They're mentioned and it's all in the article.--TeenAngels1234 (talk) 08:37, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

The 53rd Source, "Interview with Hideaki Anno" is missing a link for its Source.
I searched through this scientific paper and found it has a full and accessible source for the 53rd source of this Wikipedia article.
The link for the interview is here: https://gwern.net/doc/anime/eva/1996-newtype-anno-interview
Can someone put the link in there for me? I don't remember how to format quotations in Wikipedia and I think it hinders the article and the research from here to lack the link to that. NuloSois (talk) 16:05, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

What do you think @Gwern:? -- Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:33, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
Well, obviously I think the French translated interview & our English translation is legit, otherwise I would'n't've made it. And it has held up all this time and remains consistent with all discussion of the original Japanese interview that I know of, and I haven't seen any criticisms of it, and as you can see, it has been cited/used by other people. So I am comfortable with my own uses of it as a source. (I trust it more than a number of sources in the article...)
Whether that should count as a WP:RS or as WP:OR, I would have to leave it to other people, as I am obviously biased. --Gwern  (contribs) 22:01 31 December 2024 (GMT)

Dani Cavallaro's publications have been designated as generally unreliable sources in this discussion at the reliable sources noticeboard. Citations to her work can be replaced with more high-quality ones or removed, and the tag can be taken off once complete. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 20:03, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Neon Genesis Evangelion: Death & Rebirth § How should we organise Death & Rebirth?.  I thought you were an articles who's editors might be interested in this discussion. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:31, 31 December 2024 (UTC)