Talk:Evangelion (mecha)

message: Much of the content on this page came from the (now-removed) merged article "List of Eva-Units in Neon Genesis Evangelion", which is now available at Talk:Evangelion (giant robot)/List of Eva-Units in Neon Genesis Evangelion. Do not delete that page - we need it (and its history) for Wikipedia copyright reasons! Noel (talk) 19:12, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: from

message: The countries listed for the G7 countries are one more than the actual count of G7 countries (Russia wasn't part of the G7). Does it mean G8, which includes Russia? Did G8 form before or after End of Eva was made? -℘yrop (talk) 19:19, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)
*The G8 was formed after the series was created. The information should be G7 + Russia + China 67.71.170.108 15:08, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  G7 

message: I had a discussion with User:Toiletduck regarding the consistency of the way the Evangelions should be addressed, and we agreed to the rules he outlined. However the information here says that the official way of addressing the Evas should be Unit n, and I believe that, given the source of the information, that this should be made the standard way of addressing the Evas across all the Neon Genesis Evangelion article. So, should the naming convention outlined here be made the standard one for all the articles? --cheese-cube 09:50, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consistency of Evangelion namings 

message: The image being used for Eva-04 is actually a fan illustration created by Maher Al-Samkari, author of the Evangelion based fanfiction "Eva:R" (www.eva-r.com).  While the drawing of "MARI" (Mobile Armored Reconnassance and Infantry) is based on an offical Eva-04 illustration by Gainax, I think it goes without saying that it's not appropriate to be using this particular image.  That image should be redirected to an Eva:R wikipedia entry, and the official Gainax image (there is only one official one, to my knowledge) should be used in its place.
:Fixed.  I'm quite amused that that image was used.  It was actually one of my old forum avatars, why anyone would use it is laughable to me. --The Eva Monkey
::So, is the official GAINAX EVA-04 picture going to be posted?  There is an official Revoltech figure for EVA-04 (), so it stands to reason there must be an official design photograph of some sort to replace it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.53.17.70 (talk) 21:59, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Silver is harder to depict than white. An image that differs slightly from the description in the text is better than no image at all, in my opinion. Hellbus 02:54, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: By that logic I could post a picture of a green-colored Eva and say its "better than nothing". Silver is harder to depict than white? Can't anyone find a silver picture of this thing?--Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici 12:53, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Just keep watching mecha anime, you will find several mech that suppose to be silver yet look like white in show (Cybuster for example). L-Zwei 14:13, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Would a picture of an action figure of that Eva work for the article? Willbyr (talk | contribs) 17:27, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was embarrased to suggest that (although the thought had occured to me some time ago), but yes, I think using a (good quality) picture of the Eva 04 action figure would be a great idea.  (I mean it's really  just the physical twin of Eva 03, but silver instead of black.)....show a pic of an action figure, but also, here's an official Gainax image showing it as silver here, unfortunately its only a headshot.--Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici 19:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I could try to locate the box that my Unit 04 figure was in. The picture on the box might work better than a picture of the figure itself. Hellbus 22:17, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I did manage to find the box, but the pictures on it are not very good. I'd rather not use a picture of the figure itself unless that was done for the other Evas as well. I do have the whole set, if it comes to that. Regarding the existing image, I don't see it as being as much of a problem as you do. It's already noted in the section that Unit 04 is silver. Adding gray shading to parts of the existing image might make it look more silvery, but the resulting image, if used, might be a copyright violation. Hellbus 22:28, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A trimmed version of this wallpaper might be useful. It's only a shade lighter than the official one.--Amitakartok (talk) 22:57, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

text: honestly, we don't need an image of Eva unit 04. We need images of the most common Eva units, such as Eva unit 00, 01, and 02.Bread Ninja (talk) 23:08, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I'll try to upload them but no promises; they'll most likely get deleted very quickly. I uploaded the new Evas from Rebuild 2.0 and I immediately got a notice from YOU that I should take them down "due to levels of importance and relevance" (they're from a spinoff so they shouldn't belong here or something like that). Last week, I added a fair use rationale to keep them from getting deleted so they remain for the time being. Also, which versions should I upload? I'm not talking about a bazillion pictures (you said we can't have too many), just one of each: Unit 00 (orange, blue, Rebuild), Unit 01 (already have one up), Unit 02 (original, Rebuild version's head), Unit 03 (either will do fine), Eva Series (one group pic since we can't tell which is which). Is this arrangement OK?--Amitakartok (talk) 03:42, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eva-04 image 

message: In this article there seems to be an explicit relationship between the S² engine and an angels ability to regenerate, with the eva series being treated as an anomaly, however I wonder if this is the case. Firstly, regeneration is taken to be an ability posessed by all angels even though it is only demonstrated by two of them (the 3rd and the 7th).  I can't complain about this because in the first episode this ability seems to have been be already known and documented by NERV. However it is unclear whether it is supposed to be different or more profound than the natural regenerative capabilities of any living creature.  There is certainly no instance of the almost instant regeneration displayed by unit 01, with Israfel requiring six days to restore itself completely.  Secondly, I can't find any other reference to the phenomenon of regeneration being related to the S² organ, either in the series or in the fan community.  That's not to say it's not there, which is why I haven't removed the connections made in the article.  I was just wondering if anyone knew why that link was made in the first place.  As a final note, Unit 01's regeneration in episode 14 is definitely not brought about by the S² organ, as it regrows its arm before assimilating the S² from Zeruel.  -User:McFaust 03:32, 24 December 2005
*That's a good point. In addition, even if it does allow regeneration (rapid or slow), it seems like the Production Models do regenerate. When Asuka is attacking them in EoE, she chops one in half with a Heavy Lance, and another's leg off. Yet those wounds can't be seen later on, when they form the Sephiroth or the Tree. Is there any official documentation on either S^2 engine or Production Eva regeneration? Spencer F. 00:54, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That was an animation error, mentioned in the article. After that shot you can see that the units are, in fact, damaged. Hellbus 22:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  S² Engine related to regeneration? 

message: each Eva should have an image in their sections... (00 should have two, one blue, one orange)
:should pictures actually be uploaded, Two images would be required. One for the original appearance (ass seen in the series). Two for their Rebuild counterparts. (three for Unit 00)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheEncounter (talk • contribs) 06:35, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  reqimage 

message: I just re-watched the first 24 episodes of the anime, and found no inconsistencies with the heights of the Evangelion.  They were always, always, always roughly 40 meters tall.  (That translates to roughly 10 stories of a building.)  Any appearances of greater height seem to be just that -- "camera" tricks, combined with the fact that 40 meters is truly, awesomely, nearly inconceivably tall.  Even the scene with the destroyers - those are about 15 meters breadth, IRL.  For the Evangelions, that would be a little more than shoulder width!  Anyhow, I'm definitely going to adjust the main article to reflect this.  Too many people (in fanfiction) are arbitrarily setting the 200m mark as though it has as much support as the 40m mark.  (As of yet, I've seen nothing to support it.  Then, I haven't gone and re-watched the various end-of-evangelions.)  --Obsidian-fox 10:16, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just watched the rebuild of eva movie and found that the height is kind of variable. For instance, when eva 01 was fighting Shamshel, it got knocked down and almost crushed 2 or shinji's classmates, assuming the they are 1.5 meters tall, we can deduce that the each finger of the eva is between 3-5 meters in length. Now if the evas are really 40 meters tall, that means that it's body is approximately the size of 8-13 fingers lined up. This is obviously not true since measuring from my body (approximating the eva) 8 fingers only goes up to my thigh. So based on this measurement, an eva is atleast 80 meters tall. Ofcourse there are other inconsistencies, such as when a eva was fighting on an aircraft carrier. Typical aircraft carriers are usually 300-400 meters in length, and i seem to remember that eva 02 jumped onto one in the episode, the proportion does not suggest that the eva was 40 meters in height. thus based on my 2 rudimentary analysis, i think it is better to say that evas are between 40-200 meters in height and I shall reflect that change. 129.2.206.65 (talk) 19:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I agree; Evangelions clearly change size based on the situation, mainly for cinematic effect.  Sometimes they're taller than buildings, and sometimes they're climbing buildings.  I support listing a range rather than a definite height, and giving the reasoning behind it. Gamer 2k4 (talk) 07:46, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evangelion Heights 

message: Is there an explanation for why the MP Evas are able to reactivate after being killed? (since it is said that their S2 organs do not regenerate)--Dch111 23:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good observation...that may indeed be the key. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 12:12, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do question how the one she cut the legs off of and sent flying could still move around, but I guess because it had wings its okay (they should still have shown it missing legs).  Of course, the first one, which she busted its skull with a flying leap then wrang the blood out of like a rag....how could that thing have lived?  Yeah, well, it's just "they've got S2 Engines" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.64.137.195 (talk) 23:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe it has something to do with Kaworu, since his name was on the dummy plugs and he was an angel.The Twilight Goddess 04:01, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MP Eva's reactivation? 

message: Just a thought. It is the only true mecha of the series.
:No it has its own page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.64.137.195 (talk) 23:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Include JetAlone in this article? 

message: While I can't argue with the logic, I think it's a little excessive to note it in the article, as I don't think their Unit #s are ever discussed in canon. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 17:24, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You can see some onscreen graphics in EoE that identify them as Units 05 to 13, but it is never said which is which. The names are never spoken by any characters (except when Misato mentions that some parts delivered to NERV were intended for 05 and 06), so I can agree that the name translations are not really necessary. Hellbus 22:59, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Very well, I fixed it.  P.S. I"m totally psyched about the Rebuild of Evangelion teaser trailer due out tomorrow. --Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici 14:28, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding the naming of the MP Evas 

message: In the article the Evas are call cybernetic but (to my knowledge) that word has never been used. Ritsuko used the term “synthetic being” and the manga used biomechanical, so wouldn’t these be better terms?The Twilight Goddess 00:34, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Those terms (especially Ritsuko's description) might be good to add to the article, but I think "cybernetic" is the best (and simplest) way to describe the Evas since they are cyborgs in the purest sense of the word - beings comprised of both organic and mechanical components.  Willbyr (talk | contribs) 04:36, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

text: They're mostly Angel-clones which then got grafted with all sorts of circuitry and stuff to control them, etc.  --Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici 05:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cybernetic? 

message: 'Somewhat decent' is a pretty ambiguous way of describing an armour's effectiveness. I feel justified in describing the limits of its effectiveness. I am, of course, open to constructive criticism. Also, regardless of their classification as mechas, i think it's also important to note the fact that this classification is, indeed, debated. 
Minor compared to other eva 'issues' you say, willbyr? So are you fine with classifying whales as fish? Or maybe we should just call them 'obese dolphins'. May i suggest you ask for feedback from other users before making changes based purely on personal bias? 203.54.235.69 06:45, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My main concern is keeping the amount of material that is "debatable" as low as possible.  With NGE, it's impossible to avoid mentioning things that are controversial and spark debate among fans, but in comparison to some of the really major topics, whether or not the Evas are true mecha seems very minor and ticky-tacky.  It's not a huge concern to me, and if others are fine with having a note about it, then that's cool.  I do like your last edit about the Evas' armor, that is much better in terms of tone and descriptiveness than the previous edits. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 12:48, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. Point noted. Melody from discord 02:36, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Armor changes 

message: Can someone that can read kanji go here and verify that the two new Eva units featured in this game are named "The First Type" and "The Second Type", as is suggested in the game's article?  The other link in the article is to a gaming blog that doesn't seem to give any really useful information. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 20:33, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They are more or less called The First and Second. There's no mentioning of a "type" Anyhow, these two new EVA units are named after the Celestial stem. So i don't know if my romanization is completely correct. --Refuteku (talk) 15:37, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evas in NGE: Battle Orchestra 

message: Why was the image of Unit 01 deleted?  I thought I had the fair use covered on all the images, especially the screenshots from the series... Willbyr (talk | contribs) 22:19, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it was an admin mistake.  I am in the process of correcting it.  With a little luck it should be back soon. --Pekaje 22:27, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. The images for Evangelion: Death and Rebirth and The End of Evangelion were also removed; will these be fixed as well? Willbyr (talk | contribs) 12:35, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes they will, but it will unfortunately take some time, as references to the deleted images have often been removed from the articles, so now I have to go through a batch of some 30 images accidentally deleted by an admin (not all of which have been undeleted yet) to see if I can find where they originally belonged.  If you find any other that have been deleted in this way, by all means let me know where they belonged. --Pekaje 12:46, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Finally got through them all.  Certainly one of those things you don't want happening too often ... :-) --Pekaje 22:31, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks!  Willbyr (talk | contribs) 12:25, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image removal 

message: Assuming you all have desires to see this article advance, I'd recommend significant copy editing, particularly in light of WP:LEAD. jddphd (talk · contribs) 03:21, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see your point...as I get time, I'll see what I can do about working on the lead section. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 02:51, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  In need of copyediting... 

message: For the discussion about culling excessive non-free images from the Evangelion articles, see here. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 12:25, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion about non-free image removal 

message: I'm not quite sure how to word it and I'm uncertain whether it's worth pointing out, but Unit 00 is the only Eva that never opens its mouth. I thought that was a bit odd. Hellbus (talk) 23:55, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd never thought about that, but you're right...I don't think it's enough to warrant a mention in the article unless a sourced discussion is somewhere out there, but it's an interesting point. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 12:46, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I tinkered a bit with what V5 added, and I think it works pretty well. Hellbus (talk) 02:31, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Some have just waved their hand and said "that doesn't mean it doesn't have teeth"...but really, if you look at the "failed Eva prototypes" in End of Eva...some of them clearly have teeth and some don't appear to have conventional "mouths"...leaving us to speculate at the exotic appearance of Eva-00.  --Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici (talk) 22:25, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  What lovely teeth you have 

message: There are some fan speculation about the sudden appearance of this Eva. More specifically, it has been noted that Unit 08's head armor is somewhat similar to Unit 01's godlike form at the Rebuild of Evangelion 2.0 finale. There are rumors that it might actually be Unit 01 in a different armor to restrain it, like what the tons of bandages were used for in episode 20. Can anyone confirm or refute that? If it turns out to be untrue then it will most likely be piloted by either Mari or Rei since they both lost their respective Evas (Unit 05 is gone completely while Unit 00 only has a pair of legs left - WAY beyond the Hayflick limit).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.147.118.135 (talk) 09:12, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The only real way to confirm or refute any of it is to wait for the third film to be released. Hellbus (talk) 11:07, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

text: True. Maybe the film will also confirm whether the similarity of the Mark.06 to the old Lilith is accidental or the Eva was derived from it, similarly to Unit 01.--89.147.118.135 (talk) 01:45, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: If the subtitles in 2.22 are to be believed, then the 'quickening' of Unit 08 is its 'birth' making it a different Eva than Unit 01. How much different is to be determined. However it may be Unit 01 being 'reborn' so to speak, and i think that is what people are guessing, if perhaps falsely. I personally believe its is merely when it is going to make its debut appearance and people are reading too much into it but Evangelion has thrown me through a loop on more than one occasion. TheEncounter  —Preceding undated comment added 06:53, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, there is no room for speculation here in wikipedia. That's why i have removed almost half of the information in some of these articles.Bread Ninja (talk) 23:32, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speculation regarding Unit 08 

message: Added all the Evas that appear in 3.0 and gave them their own section; as the film just came out, there aren't many (if any) options for citing sources yet. Still, make sure any information you might add is actually in the film because there's lots of misleading speculation among non-Japanese sources; that will most likely remain so until the official English release which is not announced yet.--Amitakartok (talk) 17:46, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Rebuild information 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Evangelion (mecha). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070630193917/http://www.advfilms.com/titles/evangelion/ to http://www.advfilms.com/titles/evangelion/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:11, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Evangelion (mecha). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071202123427/http://www.evacommentary.org/images_production/ryousanki_design.gif to http://www.evacommentary.org/images_production/ryousanki_design.gif
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:13, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:25, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: Most of the changes make sense to me, but this still isn't clear:
Is this the legitimate title of the document? It sounds like the general name used. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:06, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: That is how Evangelion Chronicle (vol. 1, p. 26) calls it. Its title is just that: 新世紀エヴァンゲリオン (仮) 企画書, or 'New Century Evangelion (Tentative name) Proposal'. Shortened in the sources as simply 'Proposal' (e.g. Newtype 100% Collection, p. 85).TeenAngels1234 (talk) 09:25, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

text: . I changed it to the full name. Interesting source. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:32, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  GOCE copyedit request