Talk:Akira (manga)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, which aims to improve and expand anime and manga related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.

	comics Portal This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Help with current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project talk page.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. Please explain the rating here.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
More information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related task forces (publisher): Marvel Comics work group

Contents 1 AKIRA (2009 film) 2 Plot Summary 3 Year of the first destruction of Tokyo 3.1 user.lain's edits 4 akira as a startpoint for animanga 5 collected editions v. individual books 6 AKIRA hardcovers by Graphitti Designs 7 Themes? 8 Yikes, overgrown plot section 9 External Links

[edit] AKIRA (2009 film)

why does that link to this page when in the AKIRA film section it mentions this film and says AKIRA (2009 film) main section. if you click on it it takes you to the manga section, that makes no sense! how do I get to the article on the 2009 film! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.19.224.124 (talk) 04:53, 30 April 2008 (UTC) theres 2 endings for akira the 1 for japan story .an the other 1 for marvel in u.s. the marvel stip ed early in the early 1990s cuz otomo felt the he wanted a different ending.. sumtime in the the mid-1990s,otomo tools years to rewrite the u.s. ending ,marvel printed the bookk around 1996 ..i havent hread bout this since the 1990s... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.113.8.205 (talk) 18:39, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Plot Summary

Ok, the current plot summary has been copied from the film article. I haven't read the comics in a while, so maybe someone who has could write a proper summary. Thanks. fataltourist 23:36, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

1. Groovemaster D. 10:29, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I've recently read them and this manga is the primary reason I signed in as a registered user. I'm glad to see someone else also thought this manga needed a page different from the movie. I'm busy writing a summary and I'm also thinking about analyzing the metaphores more elaborately. Maybe a good source for more information is http://www.ceri-sciencespo.com/archive/avril00/artjmb.pdf. It's a great article (eventhough it has several grammar errors) and that's the one I'm currently trying to incorporate in the Akira (Manga) article. I'll probably make a lot of errors with this because I'm not familiar with editing Wikipedia, or other, pages whatsoever.

It needs to be an objective outline of the plot. Metaphors are too open to interpretation. Just try to write a clear, concise outline of events. I can help edit and wikify the text. fataltourist 14:03, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll take into mind. But it would be alright if a part of the page will be made where interpretations/meanings or something can be put, right? BTW, I'm Dutch and although I think I can speak and write pretty good English, don't be too surprised when a grammarmistake slips into my stuff. As of the moment, I'm still summarizing the story a bit more elaborately (as well as working for the my study). Groovemaster D.

1. OK, So I've added my synopsis. Just adjust what you do not think is appropriate, what is bad English, add links or anything else you think should be adjusted. I'll probably now move on to adding some character paragraphes. Groovemaster D. 15:32, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

I've read all the comics and am willing to help out where I can, I was planning on separating the Manga info myself and began a synopsis but I've been busy with exams, so this took a back seat. I personally recommened breaking up the synopsis into the six books, just to make it that little bit easier on the eyes and to make it more clear. I think V for Vendetta is a good example of a well organised comic book wikipage. What are your views on a more detailed list of characters? Ajplmr 09:45, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

1. We can always seperate the synopsis into the six books. I do not think it would be my preferation but just try and see what happens, maybe I'll end up liking it and even if I don't, that does not really matter. I think the thing I really wish to do is, at least, give an outline of Tetsuo's physical changes, what they (could) stand for and what Tetsuo's behaviour is at that time. Maybe we could also add more information about Kaneda, Kei, the Children and others? --Groovemaster D. 09:34, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I have all the books at home, I'll add to the undone summaries once I can find them all again.

Shamanic Enzan 14:47, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Year of the first destruction of Tokyo

The article says the first explosion, mentioned in the prologue happened in december 1992. My japanese version of the book says december 1982 (which would be right about the time Otomo started drawing OR the time the first pages were published). I'm not sure about the translations, the date could have been altered for them. Can someone elaborate on this? If not, I'll change the date to december 1982. 213.172.254.96 12:07, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

My English version (Dark Horse) says 1992, and it also has the line "38 years after World War III (2030 AD)," and 2030-1992 = 38. Rapidflash 04:18, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] user.lain's edits

Just for the record, all I did was edit the volume summaries for grammar and clarification in some places. --User.lain 06:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks for your help! Book 4 needs to be condensed. I will try to work on turning it into a concise summary if I have time. --fataltourist 12:57, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

On top of that, Book 1, at least, could use some expansion as far as I can tell. I've only just started reading the series today but I'm 2/3rds through and unless I'm mistaken, the summary for Book 1 ended quite a ways back from where I am. Looks like it needs to both cover more of the volume but also be condensed given how little ground the paragraph that's already there covers. (Kind of like this comment I just made!) --User.lain 09:53, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] akira as a startpoint for animanga

Well, I don't think that needs a citation, I mean... Sure, NOR is very important but anyone that has dabbled on a few animanga communities can tell that this statement is true. That said, I think Akira popularity as a central animanga has declined over time, maybe replaced with newer centerpieces. Then again, that's original research and doesn't belong to Wikipedia, but...

No "buts". You've said it yourself: it's original research, so it doesn't belong here. And you're most probably wrong, like all those people on "animanga communities". 207.164.158.194 (talk) 01:13, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] collected editions v. individual books

I've never looked at any of the six volumes, can anyone tell me when a new volume begins and ends in the series of 38 books? --Onesecond 21:28, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AKIRA hardcovers by Graphitti Designs

Is there any word if Graphitti Designs ever plans to release the sixth and final volume of their limited edition hardcover collection? 74.244.63.126 00:48, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Themes?

"Akira, like Otomo's other work (such as Domu), revolves around the basic idea of individuals with superhuman powers, in particular psychokinetic abilities, but much of the story does not focus on these abilities themselves, but rather the people involved, social issues and the political ramifications of their existence. The social commentary is not particularly deep or philosophical, but rather a wry look at youth alienation, government corruption and inefficiency, and a military grounded in old-fashioned Japanese honor, displeased with the compromises of modern society."

Alright, the problem with this section, and a problem that pisses of people who understand their english classes, is that these are not themes, but are motifs. A theme can be written as a complete statement, esentially as one of the messages contained in the book. For instance, "the idea of the cosmic stream presented in Akira is used to assert that entropy and chaos is inevitable, and that order and society are destined to crumble." Now, the problem with a theme section is that themes are provable, but they are not encyclopedic fact.

"revolves around the basic idea of individuals with superhuman powers, in particular psychokinetic abilities" is definitely a motif, as are "youth alienation, government corruption and inefficiency, and a military grounded in old-fashioned Japanese honor".

Also, the statement "The social commentary is not particularly deep or philosophical" is a statement of opinion and is a violation of NPOV.

So I'm going to edit the section.

[edit] Yikes, overgrown plot section

This really needs to be trimmed down guys. A lot. I'd help, but my computer access is limited.--SeizureDog 19:10, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Seriously cut down. Like to a two or three paragraphs per volume, at most -- see WP:NOT#PLOT. I'd help, but no way I can pick out which of the profusion of details are the significant ones. —Quasirandom 01:29, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Cut way down. And I'm not going to do it either. Timothy Perper (talk) 14:25, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Ultra supermegasaiyan cut down. I'd be willing to help out if I can find the time. Eyeball kid (talk) 17:04, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. I'll help turn these into synopsis-length paragraphs.207.164.158.194 (talk) 01:16, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I've trimmed a bit of the Book 1 plot, but Jesus Christ, this is going to take forever. I still think it's too long. There should be a better way to go about this, like re-writing the whole thing.207.164.158.194 (talk) 02:00, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

It's worth the effort, dont' worry. --Eaglestorm (talk) 16:40, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] External Links

This external links need to be cleaned up per the policy guidelines at External Links to Be Avoided. Anyone up for the task?ask123 (talk) 14:12, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I am just trying to figure out how BlueBladeAkira is a relevant link and Akira2019.com isn't? It seems like some of the "new" editors of this page are taking an over zealous approach to what links can and can't be included based on their personal opinion. I've read the guidelines and still see akira2019.com as the most relevant link there is to any article about Akira. Seems like nothing more than a grudge against the site.