![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Someone added the following to the movie-blurb: "The film will be set in New Manhattan - a decision which has drawn severe criticism from die-hard Akira fans.[4][5][6]" The links that the references led to had no mention of any fan responses, neither positive or negative. TorbenFrost ( talk) 07:42, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
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)
On a similar note, why is the anime mentioned so often in the intro to this article? The two are very distinct pieces of work and I think it would be much cleaner if the manga article simply linked to the anime article instead of trying to make comparisons in every single sentence. I haven't read or seen them recently enough to make these edits myself, but I think this article is doing a HUGE disservice to the manga by constantly referencing the inferior anime instead of simply stating: For more info about the anime title of the same name, see
Akira (film).
76.24.24.170 (
talk) 05:35, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
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)
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.
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)
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)
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)
Can we state that there is a distinction between the Japanese and English version's date of the explosion? ObedMuta ( talk) 04:18, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)
"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.
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)
He, i too agree that the plot needs to be shortened, but please take into consideration two things: 1.- Akira's plot is extremely complicated, particularly the section between akira's awakening and the destruction of neo-tokio (the whole chase-in-the-streets sequence between Nezu, the army, the protagonists and miyako's girls), given that there are many characters with unrelated story lines that affect each other, and a shortened exposition could very well be very very confusing to someone that has not read the manga. 2.- As an encyclopedia article, the plot summary should server a reference purpose, by containing mention and context of all things that could be of interest to readers, particularly things that are part of the story setting, being as this is a soft science fiction plot and its full of things that only make sense in the context of the story.
I have an example for this, and it's the reason i came in the first place to the talk page, but found your discussion about the plot: i wanted to find the name of the american counterpart to SOL seen in the manga, that Tetsuo crashes into the aircraft carrier, and i noticed that there's a gaping hole in the plot, in the end of book five: "Back at the aircraft carrier, the Admiral goes to the ship's infirmary to check on the condition of the scientists of Project "Juvenile A" after Tetsuo's destructive onslaught", but no mention is made of this event, neither of Kay's fight with tetsuo in the aircraft as a medium for Miyako, nor the scene previous to that one that is critical to understanding the relationship between her and kaneda.
The above examples shows that a briefer plot exposition should be built with extreme care, as leaving this details out make the article useless as a reference source, and this is, after all, an encyclopedia and it should be the kind of place where one would be able to find answers to questions like "what is the name of the american satellite...". In the context of this article, this questions can only be answered in the plot exposition, unless one created reference sections for all the elements mentioned in the story that could motivate interest and searching form readers, which is much more difficult.
I haven't got access to all the books right now, and haven't read it in a long time, so i'm affraid that i, too, would be unable to assist with this daunting task. sorry. Gorgonzola ( talk) 14:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
ps: the funny thing is that while i was writing this comment, i had a sudden flash of memory and remembered the name: it's called Floyd.
People, fret not: the entire section has been CUT DOWN like you've wished. -- Eaglestorm ( talk) 06:42, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
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.
This article needs the B-Class checklist filled in to remain a B-Class article. If the checklist is not filled in by 7th August this article will be re-assessed as C-Class. The checklist should be filled out referencing the guidance given at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment/B-Class criteria. For further details please contact the Comics WikiProject. Comics-awb ( talk) 11:26, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Just bookmarking refs for later work:
Click Tetsuo Shima. This article redirects to itself.
Idiots. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.219.219.155 ( talk) 06:36, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
-- KrebMarkt ( talk) 18:33, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
-- Gabriel Yuji ( talk) 05:54, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Akira (manga). 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:16, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
Specifically, it's a widely known fact (among Japanese circles) that Kaneda's name was taken directly from the protagonist of Tetsujin 28-go, who shares the same name down to the kanji. However, I can't find any English-language sources that state this. (As a side note, Tetsuo's name (鉄雄, literally "iron male"), as well as Akira's designation as "project 28", are also references to that series.) Can Japanese-language sources be used on English wiki pages? - Wohdin ( talk) 08:45, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Akira (manga). 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:54, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: withdrawn by nominator. The film being an equivalently primary topic slipped my mind. ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 20:09, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
– The manga appears to be the primary topic here, pageview wise it gets an average of 1300 a day, far surpassing any other article called Akira. It's safe to say that if someone types Akira they usually want to look at the page for the manga. ZXCVBNM ( TALK) 14:04, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
The sections "Plot" and "Characters" seem to be unnecessarily detailed for this article. I suggest that they be rewritten in a condensed form and a their bulk content be moved to another article, say "List of Akira chapters". Tetrahedron17 ( talk) 13:04, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
So I just got the Akira Club book and I noticed that the release dates given in it for the six volumes differ from the ones currently listed in this article as sourced by Kodansha's website. The book also includes several original advertisements for the volumes from back in the day which show the same release dates and these dates also match the ones listed on the Japanese wiki article. The book also gives the magazine dates for each chapter and the first and last dates differ from the start and end dates currently listed in this article, but this is probably due to that cover date versus street date nonsense and this article currently doesn't have a source for the ones it uses. What are other people's opinions on which set of release dates to use? Xfansd ( talk) 01:28, 23 September 2021 (UTC)