Talk:Rebuild of Evangelion

3.0 article
Now that we have a relatively firm release time-table for 3.0, maybe we ought to go and create a stub (WP:CRYSTAL no longer applies). --Gwern (contribs) 22:18 28 September 2009 (GMT)
 * There has not been any official announcement.Folken de Fanel (talk) 17:28, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Nor were either of the sources used in the summer 2010 claim accurate. Legendary (talk) 17:33, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Concurrent Release of 3.0 and 4.0
I have noticed some back and forth regarding 3.0 and 4.0 being release alongside each other. Currently the article reads that the two movies will be released together. However, I have not come across any information to back up that claim. There is no cite listed for this info. I suggest it be removed until such information is officially released, or can be sourced accurately. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.31.161 (talk) 05:59, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Assessment Rating
Rebuild is currently categorized under the "low" importance rating under the manga and anime project. I think that while a "top" rating might not be proper, this anime is clearly one of "high" importance in the community, and certainly ranks above the likes of 3X3 Eyes or Boogiepop Phantom in terms of economic, cultural and industry impact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.216.185.126 (talk) 05:46, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

"New Theatrical Edition" > "Rebuild of Evangelion"
You may or may not be aware, but "Rebuild of Evangelion" is actually not the title of this film series. It was initially proposed as a tentative title, but was soon replaced with "Evangelion Shingekijouban" (New Theatrical/Movie Edition). "Rebuild" continues to be used by fans, but Wikipedia's article should reflect the official title, correct? Funimation's official overseas release uses the translation "Evangelion New Theatrical Edition". --Reichu (talk) 02:46, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

It is called Rebuild over here though, on the Blu-ray. 84.135.180.88 (talk) 20:17, 27 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Quite right. I believe I've pointed out, with many links and statistics, either on EML or EGF, that NME has next to zero uptake in the Anglophone world. It's Rebuild. --Gwern (contribs) 21:23 27 August 2011 (GMT)


 * I own both the Japanese and US Blu-rays of both films -- and am capable of reading Japanese to some extent -- and neither refer to the film series itself as "Rebuild". (The making-of features are called "Rebuild of Evangelion #.#, however.) "Uptake" is irrelevant here. The article should be entitled what the film series is actually called, not whatever nickname Anglo fans bat around amongst themselves. As an example of official>fan-name precedent on Wikipedia, see this article. (Notice how it's not entitled "The White Album".) --Reichu (talk) 05:23, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * You are right. "Rebuild" is not used anywhere other than by the fandom. I have moved the article.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 05:45, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * That is simply false. Please move the article back, 'Evangelion' is an overloaded term as it is. No one refers to the series just as "Evangelion" - look at the CSE hits for "Rebuild of Evangelion" and you will find an awful lot of non-fandom hits. --Gwern (contribs) 14:22 22 November 2011 (GMT)
 * "Rebuild of Evangelion" is not an official term and is only the most common term in fan-oriented media. As far as I can see, most of the English language sites use "Rebuild" moniker because of its false original implications. None of the official websites use "Rebuild", none of the English language DVD/BD releases use "Rebuild", and this title is the most accurate based on the original Japanese title.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 18:34, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Neither "Evangelion (film series)" nor "Evangelion" are official names of the tetralogy anywhere either! I tried to find out what Funimation calls it, but it was just too swamped with those darn fans; the official page seems to almost deliberately avoid ever naming the tetralogy anything. (I thought Anime News Network might help, but darn it, they seem to just call it Rebuild too.)
 * 'New Theatrical Edition' is pretty stupid because no one uses it in English, but it at least has the merit of being (a translation of) an official title. The current title you so boldly moved the page to has no merits at all. Maybe you should read Official names - this reminds me of the attempts to move Emperor Norton (because he's not a real Emperor, you see). --Gwern (contribs) 22:41 22 November 2011 (GMT)
 * "Evangelion" by itself is the most accurate name we can give to the tetralogy considering that it is "ヱヴァンゲリヲン" and that adding "New Theatrical Edition" is just a literal translation of the Japanese, whereas it they are only referred to as "Evangelion X.0" in English, and "Rebuild" unofficially. By leaving it as just "Evangelion" we avoid making up names that have not appeared elsewhere in reliable sources.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 23:19, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
 * "have not appeared elsewhere in reliable sources"? Are you screwing with me? I already linked to the CSE with RSs using the name, and was 100% clear about it too. Here, have some freaking links from the hits: http://www.animetion.co.uk/Reviews/anime/evarebuild1%28ric%29.htm http://www.1up.com/news/grasshopper-producing-evangelion-video-game http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/reviews/anime/6843-Anime-Review-Evangelion-1-0-You-Are-Not-Alone http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2007-06-28/hikaru-utada-to-sing-first-evangelion-film-remake-song http://www.japanator.com/evangelion-3-0-q-quickening-coming-in-fall-2012-20218.phtml --Gwern (contribs) 00:35 23 November 2011 (GMT)
 * What-fucking-ever. I've reverted it myself. "Rebuild" is still not the proper title. And only two or three of those are actually reliable sources, anyway.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 00:47, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I discuss this in a policy post on ReVA: (http://revolutionofevangelion.org/forum/index.php?topic=355.0 link); various publications refer to it as Rebuild of Evangelion, if not in print, FUNimation staff functionally refer to it as Rebuild of Evangelion, as does ANN.com and Otaku USA magazine. This is anal-retentive fan-posturing.  "Official" sources functionally use it as the "localization name".  --Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici (talk) 04:51, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Call it what you wish: it's a falsehood that Wikipedia has helped propagate, and the least it can do is correct this article to reflect fact. Again, the "White Album" provides a useful correlate: people commonly call it that, even people working in the industry, but that isn't the album's name and never will be. Wikipedia can't play by argumentum ad populum on this one either.
 * Ryulong is probably correct in that "Evangelion (some description)" is the most accurate description for the article that can be provided. For what it's worth, Funimation did translate it to "Evangelion: New Theatrical Edition" on their website at least once (as mentioned in the message from Anno that was included in that movie poster, etc.), and in Japan itself "New Movie Edition" has been used on action figure boxes. Whatever the case, "Rebuild of Evangelion" has to go. Maybe if Wikipedia finally takes a stand on this, the rest of the Internet will slowly start to catch on. --Reichu (talk) 07:02, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * According to Wikipedia's naming policies as already linked, argumentum ad populum is exactly how Wikipedia should be playing. --Gwern (contribs) 14:50 1 December 2011 (GMT)
 * The article doesn't seem to get into the possibility that Wikipedia itself might have played a role in perpetrating a misconception in the first place. (In this case, letting the movie series' production title become its "official name" overseas via a neglect to ever update that aspect of the article, even though there was opportunity years ago right after the official designation WAS released; and, of course, it's no secret that many people treat Wikipedia as their go-to source for information.) There is a certain element of self-fulfilling prophecy here, if you will. I'm reminded of Colbert's concept of Wikiality too.
 * I wouldn't mind getting an opinion from some Wiki-people who aren't involved with the Eva scene at all. --76.6.42.32 (talk) 15:20, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It would be ironic if Wikipedia caused Rebuild to become the most common English name, but it would be as wrong to deliberately cease to use Rebuild (because of the irony) as it would have been wrong to deliberately use Rebuild to try to make it the most common English name. Once it has happened, it has happened. Wikipedia editors work in a world with Wikipedia, we don't try to document some counterfactual world where Wikipedia did not exist and so we hypothesize the name would be something other than Rebuild. --Gwern (contribs) 22:26 5 January 2012 (GMT)
 * The notion that inaccuracy is somehow okay if it's popular is troubling. "Rebuild of Evangelion" is not the proper title of the series. It is not used in the Japanese releases, and it is not used in the U.S./international releases. It should not be the default title for Wikipedia's purposes. By contrast, "Evangelion: New Theatrical Edition" (or "Evangelion: New Movie Edition", as you like) has seen official use both in Japan and abroad. It might not be popular, but it is accurate. I feel the page should be retitled accordingly and that "Rebuild of Evangelion" inquiries should be likewise redirected. Let's please get away from "Wikiality" and focus instead on making the page as accurate and helpful as possible. --Sankarah00 (talk) 21:05, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * "New Theatrical Edition" is such a clunky word. "Gekijōban" means "movie version" or "The Movie". "Shin Gekijōban" should be "New Movie Version" or "The New Movies" (as I have since retranslated it as).— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 22:17, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * True. I've edited my previous comment accordingly. --Sankarah00 (talk) 10:41, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * We don't even need to use the same phrasing as the Japanese either. We could go with "The New Evangelion Movie".— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 11:23, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * If you aren't going to use the 'same phrasing as the Japanese', then why are we bothering with this whole discussion? I thought it was about making the title of the tetralogy more faithful to the Japanese... --Gwern (contribs) 17:30 6 January 2012 (GMT)
 * What I meant was we do not need to keep the same word order as the Japanese name ("New Evangelion Movies" over "Evangelion New Movies"), but I see I am wrong as earlier in the discussion a translation for "Shingekijouban" as "New Movie Edition". So my latest suggestion can be ignored.— Ryulong ( 竜龙 ) 21:11, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Funny, on the German Blu-ray, they do say "in the next Rebuild of Evangelion" during the preview after the credits...at least over here they seem to have adapted it as the official title for the movie series.84.135.150.18 (talk) 13:58, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Guess that means the German Wikipedia doesn't have the problem that we do. Can we change this page's name, already? --19:40, 20 May 2012 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.6.32.70 (talk)

On a related note, shouldn't we change the mention of the official title by substituting "known in Japan as" with "officially known as"? I'm not sure myself if it'd be better to change the title or not, there are pros and cons, but at least that portion should be changed since the current phrasing is quite misleading, one could easily think "so Rebuild of Evangelion is the official title in the west, cool". Hyper Shinchan (talk) 21:51, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Release date announcement for final movies (or at least Q)
I'm afraid I can't provide any sort of official documentation link for this, but the TV broadcast in Japan that ended literally minutes ago (which I'd been watching) announced a release date of fall 2012 for Q following the "next time" preview part. I imagine it'll be verified soon enough by the creators.180.9.101.85 (talk) 13:54, 26 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Looks like the official site has done so. --Gwern (contribs) 15:22 26 August 2011 (GMT)

Title of the final movie
As of November 23, 2012 the title on the official website is "ヱヴァンゲリヲン新劇場版：?". This title should be used unless there is a reliable source to show that another title should be used instead. I should also note that the ":||" should not be used as a substute for ":𝄂" or "𝄇". – Allen4names (IPv6 contributions) 18:01, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The WebCite archived version shows the title as "次回 シン・エヴァンゲリオン劇場版𝄇" as opposed to the live version title above. Likely the server is showing a different page depending on which IP address is being used. – Allen4names (IPv6 contributions) 18:25, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The two different images I have found used on that page so far are img_final.gif and img_final_02.jpg. How should this be noted in the reference? – Allen4names (IPv6 contributions) 22:39, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Go with ANN's article, which gives the title as "シン・エヴァンゲリオン劇場版𝄇". It appears that they modified the title and WebCite had cashed the old version. Not sure if the change in title is worth noting in the article though. Google is translating "次回" as "Next time", so it is not part of the title. —Farix (t &#124; c) 01:17, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I have done a preliminary edit but I will not try to fix everything tonight. BTW the Wayback Machine is caching the same file as WebCite. – Allen4names (IPv6 contributions) 07:20, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
 * You should avoid using the unicode character because it is not supported by all browsers (this is an issue with WP:Accessibility). Or at least I don't have the right fonts installed to see it properly. If anything, we should request the addition of the character to music or do whatever they're doing on Wiktionary to get it to work properly here.— Ryulong ( 琉竜 ) 11:31, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
 * "" renders as "". Are there any changes that need to be made? – Allen4names (IPv6 contributions) 19:28, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Over a week and no reply? I am considering using to produce "&#x1D107;" where ":||" is now being used. I will leave a Please see on Ryulong's talk page first but not today. – Allen4names (IPv6 contributions) 07:33, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, this got lost in my watchlist or something. I think the music encoding will do for now (maybe you can add the final bar to it as well just in case it's "colon final bar" and not "repeat"). I'm not on a decent computer to see if the unicode figure will work but I'll double check in a couple of hours because this machine I'm on right now is ancient, but what we definitely should not be using is a unicode character that cannot be properly displayed.— Ryulong ( 琉竜 ) 07:27, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Unicode is not working on my main either.— Ryulong ( 琉竜 ) 10:28, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I would prefer to use the template but if it doen't work the  template will have to be used instead. I will replace the ! templates with ampersands to avoid table problems for now as the music template needs more adjustment. I was unable to find an image that could be used for "&#x1D102;" (&amp;#x1D102;) so that will have to wait. – Allen4names (IPv6 contributions) 18:37, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

minor cleanup
This line at the end of the production part: "(with the final film's last announced for a later release date)" It needs to be reworded for clarity, but I can't think of a good way to do so. 74.132.252.16 (talk) 14:07, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Release Date of the Final Film
This film has had quite a few announced release dates that never came to fruition and there are frequently rumours about new release dates. I've not seen anything that says August 27, 2017 and there are other editors on related articles with the same situation. I guess this date comes from this Godzilla event which doesn't appear to mention an explicit date. Has anybody else managed to find a WP:RS? — dasime (talk) 11:16, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Anime News Network posted the release date https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/encyclopedia/anime.php?id=8423&page=28 70.186.209.205 (talk) 23:06, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Their encyclopedia section is based entirely on user generated content and is therefore not a reliable source. Also, the listed "source" on the ANN encyclopedia is "I saw the trailer". A trailer, I may add, that is not listed on the official website nor reported by ANN's news staff. —Farix (t &#124; c) 02:10, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Storyline section, Evangelion 3.0 paragraph, final sentence. Run time estimations for related manga. Can’t be correct, can they?
“Evangelion: 3.0 You Can (Not) Redo is the first film to completely break from the original continuity and tell a completely new story. Taking place fourteen years after the previous events and heavily featuring Kaworu, a new organization called WILLE is introduced and described as a NERV rival. New types of Evas are introduced, as well as new characters such as Sakura Suzuhara, Toji's sister. 3.0 is also complemented by the short manga Evangelion: 3.0 (-120min.), and an upcoming short video, Evangelion: 3.0 (-46h). Rixonium (talk) 10:39, 7 December 2022 (UTC)