This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Anime and manga: Evangelion This template is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime, manga, and related topics 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.Anime and mangaWikipedia:WikiProject Anime and mangaTemplate:WikiProject Anime and mangaanime and manga This template is supported by the Evangelion work group.

Angels and Evas are all on one page, er, two pages. Why are all listed in the template box? - HKMARKS 23:31, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed revision: (deleted - no longer relevant -HKMARKS) HKMARKS 00:26, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Two questions:

• Is the article for Neon Genesis Evangelions 2 going to be created anytime soon?
• Until it is, should a link to a nonexistent article be on the template?
  

Willbyr (talk | contribs) 13:49, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Who knows?
• Yes. Motivates someone to make it, and that way we don't have to edit the template to update it. --Gwern (contribs) 23:38 14 April 2007 (GMT)

I've created it. --Gwern (contribs) 20:04 20 April 2007 (GMT)

There are at least three NGE manga (see Category:Neon Genesis Evangelion). Since it's already listing by medium, there should be a manga line. --Gwern (contribs) 20:32 15 April 2007 (GMT)

Done. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 13:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should the template include links for the WikiProject and the Portal? Willbyr (talk | contribs) 05:21, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone? Willbyr (talk | contribs) 18:18, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now that the first new Eva movie has come out, should Rebuild of Evangelion be moved to the Misc. section, or left in with with the rest of the movie links? Willbyr (talk | contribs) 18:16, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I say leave it until the first Rebuild movie has its own article. --Gwern (contribs) 18:18 4 September 2007 (GMT)

It already does, that's why I was wondering...I shoulda been more specific. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 18:20, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I came across the Chamber of Gauf article - if noteable in the eyes of the EVA project, you may want to include it here. Ninja neko 15:39, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The vast majority of that information is already covered in Rei's article; that article serves no purpose and should be speedy deleted. Also, I think the term used in the series is "Chamber of Gaff," not "Chamber of Gauf." It's been a while, I could be wrong. Willbyr (talk | contribs) 16:23, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That article now redirects to Guf, about Jewish mysticism (the Chamber of Guf).--Cybermandrake (talk) 20:23, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is it worth providing a clearer distinction? Like 2 music sections or split the existing one? BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 22:56, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For the sake of removing unnecessary redundancy, what do you think about taking "Neon Genesis Evangelion" out of the title links so that the main parts of the titles are all that shows? Willbyr (talk | contribs) 19:35, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think for most of those, you won't be able to remove the phrase, but for the ones you can - sure, go for it. --Gwern (contribs) 01:38 19 March 2008 (GMT)

I've created an article called "Magi supercomputer system" with the sole purpose of making it appear in the "fictional computers" category. The article redirects to the glossary. I don't know if it is convenient to add a link to that article from the glossary line. I think it's not necessary, and may pollute the template, but the community can decide.

--Cybermandrake (talk) 20:26, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why not add the category to the glossary itself? eg. [[Category:Fictional supercomputers|Magi]]? --Gwern (contribs) 19:28 19 September 2008 (GMT)

What do you think? Willbyr (talk | contribs) 23:38, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dunno; calling them characters seems somehow wrong. They're really more monsters or plot devices than 'characters'. --Gwern (contribs) 05:35 15 January 2009 (GMT)

I agree with gwern, they arent really much characters, more like tools often used in the series.Bread Ninja (talk) 15:42, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's true that the band Fightstar did do a concept album based on the series, but I can't find a good reason for why they would be on this template, so they've been removed. ChaosAkita (talk) 17:02, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. They have nothing to do with the series at all, and don't belong there. Dream Focus 06:59, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]