Talk:FLCL

Pearls before swine
From FUNime 2002's interview with Tsurumaki:

"Why was FLCL produced?

Gainax needed to work on something new after Evangelion, but Hideaki Anno needed a little rest, so I came up with the idea for FLCL.

Where does the title for FLCL come from?

There is a japanese rock group which has an album called "Fool Cool". I thought that title would be suited for an anime. (That later became "Furi Kuri" > FLCL) That was also kept in the last OVA episode where Mamimi wins the photo competetion.

Is the scooter in front of the Gainax shop really the vehicle from the FLCL ending?

Yes, it's the Vespa from the ending, and it's mine. Alas, it cannot fly."

Original: http://www.tomodachi.de/html/archiv/funime/f27_kurz_1.html Translation: http://forum.evageeks.org/viewtopic.php?p=454429#454429 --Gwern (contribs) 23:46 15 May 2011 (GMT)

Yamaga
AQ 	What does FLCL mean? Mr. Yamaga 	FLCL was originally designed by Mr. Enokido and the director, Mr. Tsurumaki. They came up with it themselves. Even within the series, the question of what exactly is FLCL is thrown out there.. Mr. Akai 	In fact, I asked the director, "What exactly does FLCL mean?" and the director said, "I don't really know." Mr. Yamaga 	When you abbreviate longer words in Japanese, you take the first couple of syllables of each word and connect them up.. It seems like the younger generation has been doing that with absolutely everything. He wanted to give the aesthetic of a longer title that had been shortened but in reality there is no longer title. Audience 	So feel free to make one up. Mr. Yamaga 	Since the title doesn't really describe anything. It was very hard for the advertisers and distributors to say, "No, we don't want to do that." because they weren't exactly sure what it meant. {Laugther} It is really hard to argue with something when you don't know what is going on. Mr. Akai 	In fact, when the studio was younger, since they were biting everything that moved, it seemed that they stranger they were, the less likely that they were going to be opposed. They [the sponsors] just saw it as, "Oh, good old Gainax, saying those weird things again." They didn't really want to deal with it so they just let Gainax say whatever they wanted. AQ 	How did the creators present FLCL for approval? Mr. Yamaga 	Since King Records made a lot of money on Evangelion, the connection between King Records and Gainax was pretty much, "Oh, it's Gainax, we'll probably make some money on it", and they let just let it through [the approval process]. Since it was a direct to video release, there was less controversy over content because it was direct to video. AQ 	How did Mr. Tsurumaki present it to Gainax? Mr. Yamaga 	Since Mr. Anno didn't really want to do animation after Evangelion, his 'kohai' (understudy) was supposed to make an animation series, but seemed to take a while to come up with a concept. So when he did finally come up with one, it was like, "Okay, that sounds good."

http://web.archive.org/web/20040101025405/http://www.anime-tourist.com/article.php?sid=299 --Gwern (contribs) 22:40 13 August 2011 (GMT)

Elliottsmith001's deletion
I am going to revert the edit because it seems to me that the information that was deleted is germane to that section. Maybe I'm wrong; but let's at least have a discussion about it first before we decide to delete, shall we? (especially when the information is cited)--NBahn (talk) 05:23, 17 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for catching that; I agree that this is valid (and quite interesting!) information for an article of this nature. I'm gonna change the section to "Reception and influence" to make the information more appropriate to the section.  As far as discussing before removing content, I generally think it's a lovely thing to do, particularly with sourced content.  However, it slightly goes against Wikipedia's policy to Be Bold.  But thanks to the same policy, for such actions, you can often just do a revert and leave it up anyone disagreeing with you to justify themselves on the talkpage.  Admittedly, this involves some level of idealism or a silent edit war ensues, so reverting and justifying at the talkpage as you did is often the safest best. -Verdatum (talk) 22:19, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Theme music
The section on the music seems a bit misleading. None of the episodes really have opening themes; the ones mentioned as such essentially function as insert songs (and some, like "Carnival" and "Runner's High," are used multiple times at different points in other episodes). It certainly does have an ending theme in "Ride on Shooting Star," but I don't even know that I'd call "Advice" a "battle theme" -- it usually does signify an action sequence (you could call it the "uh-oh" theme), but...


 * 1) Ends at the beginning of the fight, which is set to "Sleepy Head"
 * 2) Used through the first half of the fight
 * 3) Only used at the beginning of the fight, the rest of which is set to "Yorii Gallop"
 * 4) Not used
 * 5) Only used in the segment where the robot emerges; the actual fight scenes throughout the episode are set to other songs
 * 6) Again, not used

So that designation is iffy. And "Little Busters" is even more tenuous; the main thing is that it's always the last song to be played before the ending credits. Twice it starts when Canti eats Naota, four times it only starts after the action's all over.

Definitely looks to me like some cleanup is in order. --Shay Guy (talk) 01:19, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
 * There's a definitive soundtrack out for FLCL. Just look it up and make the references to the scenes if necessary, but the guessing isn't. Sorry for the unsigned. I'm not active on Wiki, just a FLCL fan. 141.165.170.32 (talk) 18:15, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Bass?
I was reading the article, and it says currently that Haruko has a "Rickenbacker 4001 right-handed reverse strung electric bass guitar" in the series. While it IS indeed a 4001, it is clearly a left-handed model, rather than a right handed one strung in reverse; this is evidenced by the fact that the longer horn is on the left hand side of the body (from a front view). is a good example picture from the anime; Comparing this to a right handed 4001 will prove once again that it is in fact a left handed 4001. 

Didn't want to edit the article out of the blue, will either leave that to someone else or wait for someone else's approval first.

--Pogs (talk) 03:14, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Sales rankings in May 2000
Y'all may find this reference useful: http://web.archive.org/web/20010706135824/http://j-pop.com/anime/news/top10.html

It gives top-10 sales rankings of anime in the US & Japan. This is included in the list. --Gwern (contribs) 01:30 26 January 2010 (GMT)

The Vespa's name
Shouldn't it be mention that Haruko's Vespa is referred to as the "Cosmic Scooter"? Sarujo (talk) 00:38, 3 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I see this phrase in reference to figurines, but I don't personally recall hearing it in the japanese vocal track or the English comentary. Where might one go to verify this fact? -Verdatum (talk) 16:24, 3 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I seem to recall it was in the manga, but now I'm not sure. Yet I have not read the novelisation. The only thing I know for certain that the name is feature on blister pack for Kaiyodo figure which is romanized as "Haruhala Haruko & Cosmic Scooter". I'm getting a vibe that marketing doesn't apply here. Sarujo (talk) 21:12, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

curious
what is the literal translation of the title, "furi kuri"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.188.155.226 (talk) 08:01, 5 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Acording to the director Kazuya Tsurumaki it just a made up name. As he stated: "I got the idea from a CD in a music magazine with the title Fooly-Cooly. I like the idea of titles that are shortened long English words. Pokémon for “Pocket-Monsters” for instance, and an old J-pop band called Brilliant Green that was known as “Brilly-Grilly.". Hope that sheds some light. Sarujo (talk) 21:20, 5 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I wonder if anoyne noticed that they mistransliterated fooly cooly in the englsih one. Episode 6 spells it "Fooly Coolly"Bread Ninja (talk) 18:15, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

My Reasoning For Reversing this edit.

 * OK, so grammatical theory has always been an extraordinarily weak point for me, but please hear me out: This definition states that for the definitions 1-5 & 9 in the noun listing, that the plural is staffs.  It seems to me, therefore, that that portion of the sentence should read "the staff [singular] was [singular past tense] ordered to buy FLCL."  Does this seem reasonable, or am I — once again — demonstrating my grammatical incompetence?—NBahn (talk) 18:32, 19 May 2010 (UTC)


 * See Collective noun British English bit. --Gwern (contribs) 02:04 29 May 2010 (GMT)
 * Well, that went straight over my head; not surprising, I guess, when I have enough trouble with standard (American) grammar — never knew that British English has its own unique grammar. No wonder English is listed as the third-most-difficult language in the world to learn.....—NBahn (talk) 02:30, 29 May 2010 (UTC)


 * It is also worth remembering that 'sic' is only intended for flagrant errors, where a reader would suspect the transcriber of the error and not the original author, and this is especially true because of its pejorative/insulting usage.
 * With my point about BE in mind, does this seem like a case that calls for multiple 'sic's, or even just one? --Gwern (contribs) 02:33 29 May 2010 (GMT)
 * As I am completely out of my depth, I shall — out of necessity — defer to your judgment in this matter.—NBahn (talk) 02:42, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Single DVD
A friend has all six episodes on a single DVD. It's a replicated disc, dual layer, not a DVD-R. Bootleg? Bizzybody (talk) 03:13, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the no sign, but yes, it is obviously a bootleg version. The only way to have all 6 episodes is to buy them one at a time, or get the collection.. which has all 6 cases, not all combined into one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.97.206.59 (talk) 21:50, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Not really, FLCL has been officially re-released all on one disc72.89.142.185 (talk) 17:27, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Review(s)
--KrebMarkt (talk) 15:39, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * ANN: Brain Diving column Shelf Life BR
 * Mania.com: complete series DVD complete series BR

References to Italian culture
Apart from the Vespa Piaggio motorbike, which should pretty much make everyone get an hint of Italy, FLCL is pronounced furikuri furikurà and sounds like a blatant reference to an italian popular song, Funiculì, Funiculà.

That's a song that's supposed to talk about the opening of a funicular cable car in Naples, but actually goes on and on repeating:


 * funiculì funiculà (which means nothing, it's just a fancy humorous way of saying funicolare) and
 * n'coppa jamme ja (meaning let's go to the top, lets'go in strict local dialect)

This song in most of Italy is seen as an anthem for Naples and its verses are used in all of it to refer to the humorous, gaggy, theatrical, and slapstick way of conducting business and going trough life of neapolitan people.

It's also a very good metaphore for that anime as a whole.

Zingus J. Rinkle (talk) 02:02, 19 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Please do not use original research. we only add in information we can verify through reliable 2nd-3rd party sources.Bread Ninja (talk) 12:30, 13 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Zingus, your suggestions are unreferenced as BN says, and they are not even correct (aside from the Vespa). We know why FLCL was named what it was. It has nothing to do with Italian slang; see the very first section on this page where I provide 2 separate references quoting Tsurumaki on the name. (Not that any so-called editors have made use of them.) --Gwern (contribs) 22:01 7 July 2011 (GMT)

References to other anime
In addition to it's rather obvious nod to NGE, there is a set piece based on Lupin references, eyebrow references that made me think immediately of Cobra, etc. Somebody needs to start a 'sources' section and explore this angle a bit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.215.115.31 (talk) 21:20, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

That's original research. We can only add what we can verify through reliable sources.Bread Ninja (talk) 22:31, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

HELP! Internet Book Mills lifting entire entries from Wikipedia and selling them on Ebay...
Greetings! Recently I ran a search for FLCL on ebay and found the following book "Flcl: List of Flcl Characters, List of Flcl Episodes, D" by Books LLC. I was very excited because anything FLCL by Gainax or the Pillows has my undivided attention, but as I got ready to bid I realised this was not a new book or a doujinshi, but rather a copy-paste job from the FLCL entry in wikipedia. I mean, they did not even bother to give it a title! Its the table of contents from the article! It even says "Souce: Wikipedia" and the excerpi in the description is the entire music section from the same entry. Naturaly, I reported it to ebay as infringing on copyrighted material and as a listing violation as compilation media.

I am not sure if the ad expired or Ebay took down the listing, but it was gone for a while and everything was good in the world, until the seller relisted the item again. I report it anew, it goes away then comes back a few days later.

My question is, should I do this? Although I do not own the copyright to the original work and my contributions to this article are little I feel it is not right for a book mill/content farm to rip on two things that I hold dear, FLCL and wikipedia. Can Books LLC print entire enciclopedic articles from wikipedia and sell them online? Is this a widespread problem?

Here's the particulars: Ebay Item number 180786879511 (to change soon if my report goes through)

Title "Flcl: List of Flcl Characters, List of Flcl Episodes, Discography of FLCL"

Author Books LLC

Language: English

Format: Paperback

ISBN-10: 1156344808

ISBN-13: 9781156344804

Length: 28 pages

Thickness: 0.2 in

Weight: 2.4 oz

Please let me know if Books LLC is within its right or how you would have handled a similar problem. Mighty Ozymandias (talk) 18:28, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The key point is, "It even says 'sou[r]ce: Wikipedia'". Attribution is pretty much the only thing that Wikipedia requires from those who reuse its content. That's one of the points of it being a free encyclopedia (even for commercial use).--Remurmur (talk) 22:31, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Reusing content in another project is one thing; lifting it verbatim and selling it for profit is quite another. I think Mighty Ozymandias makes a valid point and I'd like to see a Wikipedia admin weigh in on this.  Is attribution sufficient?  If the republisher is repackaging the info and including quotations as examples or as support for argument, that is covered by attribution.  When the republisher is simply selling for personal profit that which Wikipedia provides for free, you're talking a completely different ballgame.  Wikipedia already offers the functionality to convert articles to PDF or to print them out to whomever needs them, without requiring remuneration. Why should some eBay user rightfully expect to make money off this when Wikipedia (which is dependent on user donations to survive) doesn't see a cent?  12.233.146.130 (talk) 01:16, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

sugestion to add 2th name
theres alot of confusion about the name FLCL. ive seen decades ago a couple of these, but always asumed it whas 'vespa girl' and manny like me, took me decades to actualy trackdown this serries (by catching writer's name on titles on a mange fan stream), i sugest adding this 'keyword'- 'vespa girl' if techical posible, not an od sugestion if you consider this whas orginaly in a difrent language and FLCL makes lil sense and hard to remeber. it would make this article/serries more accesable for all. im a wiki inliterate so ill leave this all upto peeple more understanding of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.85.94.241 (talk • contribs) 05:59, February 6, 2012‎
 * You seem to be confused on multiple levels.--Remurmur (talk) 22:22, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Merge proposal
I think List of FLCL episodes should be merged here. With only six episodes, there's no valid reason to create a spin off article and this article would benefit enormously from the decent content that the list covers. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:44, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
 * oppose. The article is featured. It still disturbs the nature of the article if merged. The main article could use expansion though.Lucia Black (talk) 22:53, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * No, the list is featured, not the article. And a merger should not be opposed simply because part of the content to be merged is currently featured. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:12, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The list is what I meant. Regardless all the more reason not to merge. If merged, there will no longerr be a featured article related to the topic. I never seen a perfectly good featured list/article being merged (which inevitably means losing featured status)Lucia Black (talk) 03:50, 8 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Support - Common sense overcomes the list's status as Featured List. If consensus agrees to merge it, then it must be demoted from Featured honor. To be honest, the anime consists of just six episodes; more trimming is needed if people are interested in the anime for the sake of casual readers. --George Ho (talk) 00:11, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No need to nix quality for quantity here. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:41, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment that doesnt make sense. Why demote an article? The list may be short but still a very acceptable list. Seems like this starting to become a matter of preference.Lucia Black (talk) 00:36, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Support although i agree that the list will be demoted that is not a valid reason not to merge, the list is far to small a article and this article as well is pretty small there no reason the list should be serperate. this article wouldn't take loads of work to get it up to GA so the arguments about losing a featured list is petty. Question to the ones who oppose due t losing a featured list, if a articles lets says article xyz i know it doesn't exist, was about 5kb half the size of this article for content but was featured because it passes FAC criteria even though being small and someone proposed to merge it to a article that was appropriate to the subject but was lacking in content on that subject and merging would improve that article from C to B would you still oppose and we assume that the subject is fish????? Andrewcrawford ( talk ][[User:Lucia Black|Lucia Black (talk) 19:27, 28 December 2012 (UTC)] -  contrib ) 07:05, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I personally dont believe merging would improve the article that much.Lucia Black (talk) 07:21, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * so this article isnt far off B class and adding content from FL wont help bring it up, even if it doesnt ther eis no reason to have a article tha tis so small losing FL isnt a good reason not to merge unless you can provide me a policy that states we mustnt merge is a article is featured??? Andrewcrawford ( talk  -  contrib ) 14:03, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * When it comes to Anime and Manga, featured articles are incredibly difficult, thats why our articles are filled with featured lists but only 4 featured articles. Adding FL content wont help it. What makes a B-class article is having enough sourced content and organized properly and of course well written. B-class is just an organized and well sourced, C-class.Lucia Black (talk) 19:27, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * what policy states because it s a featured list it should not be merged back to the main article when it should never have been split out in the first place. yes it good to have featured list an articles but unless i am missing a policies that states that as a criteria i dnt see why there is opposition to the merge, if i am direct to policy that shows this i will change my response on it but just now the only reason i can see why people are opposing it is losing a featured list Andrewcrawford ( talk  -  contrib ) 21:07, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Its already an established notable list. Why merge it if its not what keeping it from being improved. Your question is far too specific but generalize it and you already got your answer.Lucia Black (talk) 21:25, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Support. Inappropriate spin-out by today's standards. For the same reason, the list wouldn't survive an FLRC either. While we're at it, the discography and character list should be merged as well.  Good raise  21:53, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose The list warrents it's own article as it is notable in it's own right. I agree with Lucia, its not worth losing a featured list as it is not going to make this article any better. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:33, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * List of Firefly episodes was merged into Firefly (TV series) because the series lasted for 14 episodes in one season. Same goes for FLCL, but less episodes. --George Ho (talk) 07:46, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * How exactly does the list meet WP:LISTN, Knowledgekid87? I don't see it.  Good raise  07:40, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * and that looks like a worst decision considering the length of the article. It can easily be split regardles of number of episodes. Plus WP:OTHERSTUFFEXIST.Lucia Black (talk) 07:54, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * wp:size says when a article should be split wp:otherstuffexist doesnt apply here Andrewcrawford ( talk  -  contrib ) 18:23, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * It applies perfectly. You brought up an articls situation and tried to use it as a valid reason. It applies wether you agree or not. Re-read it. And as what the anonymous IP editor said.Lucia Black (talk) 20:31, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Do you have any evidence that WP:SIZE mentions articles because it specifically was meant to exclude lists. I personally have never heard that before and personally don't see any evidence of a prohibition of splitting content into lists.--174.95.109.77 (talk) 19:58, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose - The FLCL article is terrible. Let's not merge an FA article to a C class just because we could. If this article is filled out and made to at least GA, then rediscuss it, but there are way to many issues left on this page to deal with first. Priorities need to be improving this page. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 06:28, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Completely beside the point. The question is whether the list should exist. It's too small and if it's not merged, it will be demoted. Not to mention the fact that merging the list in here will improve this article.  Good raise  07:37, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It wont improve this article at all....the difference is minimal because most of the information is already covered here. The only thing the list has is the actual list. Regardless, i believe the list should exist, even if its small, usually lists such as episodes and chapters arent just based on chapters and episodes bt to show its air/release history.Lucia Black (talk) 17:31, 7 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment well I believe that the featured list no longer meets the requirements as a standalone list and can still be merged into this article, creating the potential for a good article. I'll shortly instigate an WP:FLRC in order to determine whether the community agree that the featured list should be delisted.  The Rambling Man (talk) 17:37, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Support Being a featured list is no reason not to merge the information if that is what is best for the encyclopaedia. The information would easily fit in here and I see no reason for it to be presented as a standalone list. AIR corn (talk) 11:31, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Infobox image
Normally, we would use the cover of the first manga volume or anime DVD in the infobox. But in this case given the monochrome covers of the original DVDs, I can understand why an exception would be made. However, there is one problem and that has to do with the identification of the image. Right now, we don't know where the image originated from, which weakens its fair-use case. Is it production art, did it come from a DVD insert, promotional image, or etc? If it cannot be identified, I would suggest replacing it with one that is part of the insert for the North American Blu-ray release. (Sixth image over) It features the same characters, but we can identify what the image is. —Farix (t &#124; c) 01:58, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The image looks to be a piece of promo art used on the DVD cover of certain releases (for example, the Spanish language release ). I've updated the FU rationale to reflect this. Axem Titanium (talk) 20:33, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Maybe its a promotional poster from the Japanese. For the most part we can just state its a piece of artwork from FLCL without worrying if it came from a DVD cover or poster (until we find out where it came from).Lucia Black (talk) 17:34, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Amazon a reliable source for a Good Article?
Are there any Good articles using Amazon? --George Ho (talk) 23:34, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
 * It has been determined that for the sake of referencing of otherwise uncontentious information surrounding release dates that it is typically allowed. Most parts of the industry do not do press releases for release dates and they cannot be sourced to anything else - and this data is, in particular, is deemed reliable. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:51, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Comedy-drama classification?
The only episode that did not have serious moments was episode five. Should adding this be considered? You may also want to consider Slice of life as a genre. --Toonipedia (talk) 16:17, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * This is not a slice of life genre, but it is comedy, drama, science fiction according to ANN. Though FLCL is not a serious show, it is more of a parody show than anything else. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:22, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

I agree, but it does at least TRY to be seroious (it doesn't pull it off well, in my opinion). If it says comedy-drama on a reliable source, it should say comedy-drama. --Toonipedia (talk) 12:22, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

It's redundant to have two tags relating to humour/comedy. If you want to add drama alone that makes sense, but comedy-drama itself is a useless addition. The genres as "Science fiction, Surreal humour" alone are more than adequate for description and account for the broad view of critical review. 2607:8400:2802:10:250:56FF:FEAB:339C (talk) 22:28, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on FLCL. 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/20071216112407/http://www.gainax.co.jp/anime/flcl/goods.html to http://www.gainax.co.jp/anime/flcl/goods.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131220020620/http://bookclub.kodansha.co.jp/bc2_bc/search_view.jsp?b=3490343 to http://www.bookclub.kodansha.co.jp/bc2_bc/search_view.jsp?b=3490343
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131220080719/http://bookclub.kodansha.co.jp/bc2_bc/search_view.jsp?b=3490629 to http://www.bookclub.kodansha.co.jp/bc2_bc/search_view.jsp?b=3490629
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130122221556/http://www.mania.com/flcl-complete-series_article_126452.html to http://www.mania.com/flcl-complete-series_article_126452.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130913004255/http://www.filmthreat.com/festivals/1239/ to http://www.filmthreat.com/festivals/1239/

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) 19:29, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Novel table
Is it really necessary to list the novel releases in the form of a table? In my humble opinion, it makes the article hard to look at with that large gap of space. Wouldn't it be better to just summarize it in text?

SIDENOTE: Once reviews start pouring in, would it be a good idea to split FLCL Alternative and FLCL Progressive onto a single article? Although they are confirmed to being second/third seasons, they seem detached from the original. i dont know how to phrase it. But basically i'm considering it a "reboot" (sort of, not really). If someone could help me out with the words.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 11:55, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Alternative is a “Loose Prequel” to the original and Progressive
https://ask.fm/Clarknova/answers/150639396841?utm_source=tw_share_own_ar&shareBy=Clarknova&utm_campaign=ui_v3#_=_ Knowing this, I think the article needs to be reworked a bit to establish that Alternative is a “loose prequel” and not a sequel.24.228.215.81 (talk) 08:41, 22 October 2018 (UTC)