Talk:Ryoko

Trivia Section to be deleted
Mentioning Ryoko Hakubi from Tenchi in a trivia section for Ryoko in Guild Wars is a bit far fetched to be even noted. Ryoko Hakubi from Tenchi does not look even similar nor does she even have any stats in common with Ryoko of Guild Wars.

Seeing Ryoko in GW is only called Ryoko one has to assume she could have been named after anything but even more likely just have been called Ryoko cause it is a name fitting the game's genre, era and setting.

Why not also assume Ryoko in GW was named after any of the following fictional Ryokos:
 * Ryoko of Saint Tail
 * Ryoko Anno of Battle Royale
 * Ryoko Balta of Tenchi Muyo! GXP
 * Ryoko Hata of Battle Royale II: Requiem
 * Kano Ryoko of Fighter's History
 * Ryoko Izumo of World Heroes
 * Ryoko Leingod of Star Ocean: Till the End of Time
 * Ryoko Mendou of Urusei Yatsura
 * Ryoko Mitsurugi of Samurai Girl: Real Bout High School
 * Ryoko Subaru of Martian Successor Nadesico

Thus I seriously believe the trivia section should be removed on this article.

Also,..isn't a trivia not suppose to be a question and answer of unimportant facts rather than assumtpions in the first place !!!

Definition of Trivia !!!!

That's quite an arguement... you do know that you can delete it yourself? &mdash; Rogue  08:32, 13 June 2007 (CDT)

Well,..I just didn't want to be rude and be respectfull to the guild wiki community as not just anyone (even though they can) should delete information without getting an oppinion of the community ;) Gontronix


 * Heh I guess Fyren is the community then! (He just removed the trivia.) Anyway welcome to the GWiki, you probably don't need to do that much research for all your edits though ;) Oh and:  ~  will sign your comments :) --Xasxas256 08:48, 13 June 2007 (CDT)


 * Everyone is part of the GuildWiki community. I've just gone on a mini-anti-anime trivia spree.  --Fyren 08:52, 13 June 2007 (CDT)

I disagree with deleting it entirely. Gontronix is correct in that if there is an intended reference in the Ryoko name, it could be from a number of sources. However, given the nature of the intended audience (gamers), one could reasonably assume and indeed argue that the reference is to the character in Tenchi Muyo. Because so many people are familiar with that character, it is inevitable that people will attempt to make a Trivia Note for this article; deleting the trivia entirely invites people to do so. So, I think the trivia section should stay (because people are going to create it anyway), and that it should include a possible reference to the Anime series as well as other sources - because all are valid possibilities.--Ninjatek 08:57, 13 June 2007 (CDT)
 * No, that doesn't make sense. There is nothing but the name and there is nothing remarkable about that name; it's just a normal Japanese name.  The only connection there is your own guesswork.  --Fyren 09:05, 13 June 2007 (CDT)

Added Trivia back in
I have added the trivia section back in but this time as an actual trivia not an assumption, as an assumption is not a trivia by any means of defining it. Hope this is acceptable now :) Gontronix 09:02, 13 June 2007 (CDT)
 * The existence of a character with that name doesn't mean there's a relation. As I said above, there's nothing remarkable about the name itself.  There is no other visible connection to the Tenchi character.  I'm sure you can find plenty of other NPCs that share a name with a character from a TV show or from another game.  --Fyren 09:07, 13 June 2007 (CDT)
 * Who says there has to be a "visible connection?" As Gontronix showed, there are several possible sources for the name, so you're right about that.  But remember who the intended audience is here.  The idea of sneaking popular Anime characters' names into a video game isn't very far fetched.  And as I already stated, wiping the Trivia section entirely will only invite people to try to add it in again.  So before you break GW:1RV yet again, how about we get a community consensus on this?--Ninjatek 09:13, 13 June 2007 (CDT)
 * Side Note - I was under the impression that Gontronix posted the list of other possible Ryokos, but now I cannot tell who posted it.--Ninjatek 09:20, 13 June 2007 (CDT)
 * If there's no visible connection, then it obviously should not be in the article as... there's no connection. It's also plausible someone at ANet knows a Japanese woman named Ryoko.  Even more plausible is they got someone to research Asian names and draw up a list from which they pulled out NPC names.  --Fyren 09:24, 13 June 2007 (CDT)


 * I'm sorry i started all this, I should have just changed the statement in the trivia section into a factual statement. :(.


 * A Trivia by its definition is an unimportant fact to the subject. This means that a trivia section can mention what ever it wants to as long as it has at least the slightest relation to the article at hand and always is a fact.


 * Thus it is correct to add all anime or even real life characters that exist in the world named ryoko as long as the statement in the trivia section in itself is a factual one and not an assumption.
 * Although I would agree with Fyren that purely based on the name ryoko it is pointless to start a trivia on that bases for this article.


 * Also, the audience the trivia appeals to is irrelevant as an audience can not change the definition of the word Trivia.


 * Anyway I will part from this article now as I can see it was a mistake on my behalf to try and be respectfull in adding a discussion instead of just changing it.


 * Regards Gontronix 09:25, 13 June 2007 (CDT)


 * I've got a couple points to make. First, the audience the trivia appeals to is certainly not irrelevant.  The way ANET makes money, and the way this game sells, is ALL about appealing to the intended audience.  So, the claim that appealing to the audience is irrelevant is clearly fallacious because that's what games DO - they appeal to the intended audience.


 * Secondly, if there's going to be this much debate over what constitutes valid Trivia (or unimportant facts), then we may need a policy that dictates the rules of such. You have your idea, Fyren has his, I have mine, and others have theirs.  So who's right?--Ninjatek 09:36, 13 June 2007 (CDT)