From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


I could be wrong, and I have no references (great way to start a section), but I could've sworn Monty Oum specifically said the characters were not based on anything. MGray98 (talk) 16:24, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

He has said that they are not based off fairy tale characters in the sense that they are not reinterpretations of those characters, but he did say that they drew inspiration from said characters. On several occasions he has specifically stated that Ruby was modeled after Red Riding Hood.--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 23:58, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
I added 3 things that were stated as "speculations". 1) that Blake Belladonna was inspired by Beauty from Beauty and the Beast because "belladonna" was Italian for "beautiful woman", 2) that Adam was her counterpart because of his Mask and his obvious tie to Blake, and 3) that Torchwick was inspired by Candlewick from Pinoccio (or Lampwick from the Disney version). I would agree, that other than the translation of "belladonna"[1] (sufficient to create a tie for Weiss based on previous interview comments), the other items were personal connection/conjecture. Obviously, not every character will have to have inspirations like that, but for those that do have it, why withhold them? Even Oum himself mentioned at 9:15 in the source #7 interview [2] that other characters "yet to be released" also have their inspirations in the fairy tale world. If there is no direct tie mentioned for those characters, will they unable to be connected as well? I believe Ruby's inspiration is the only direct mention thus far. Sysxrusher (talk) 08:58, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

It makes more sense to see Pyrrha as being based off of Achilles, at this point. The only thing tying her to Pyrrha is the name. But her Greek warrior outfit definitely seems more Achilles to me, who also matches with her name. Of course, it's difficult to say anything definitive until some more parallels are drawn. MatrixM (talk) 16:10, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Monty is dead. He left you that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:288:12A7:1:96E:82A9:3CC:FF27 (talk) 02:08, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

RWBY is declared as anime[edit]

"If there’s one thing Monty Oum wants his audience to know, it’s that RWBY is anime." KyuuA4 (Talk:キュウ) 03:47, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, that sort of thing comes down to what critics say about it, rather than what Oum says. The current phrasing seems sufficient.--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 04:18, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
Fair enough. I'll be awaiting review articles then. KyuuA4 (Talk:キュウ) 06:34, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
RWBY is not listed as an anime on ANN, anidb, myanimelist or anime-planet. Verdict: the Western audience that care about anime don't see it as an anime. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:23, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
At the very least, it is referenced as "anime-styled" - in direct quote mind you. KyuuA4 (Talk:キュウ) 12:34, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
Looking at the comments thread in this article - -- apparently, ANN is rather inconsistent with its own listing. KyuuA4 (Talk:キュウ) 12:37, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
I have first hand "debated" within MyAnimeList and have concluded that the decision to exclude RWBY from anime is merely "political". KyuuA4 (Talk:キュウ) 20:58, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

I think we should include both Anime-Influenced-animation and American-made anime and leave in parenthesis (Depending on how one defines it) even if there is a majority that believes Anime can only be from Japan, there are probably just as much or just barely lesser anime fans who believe it to be style, as for anime-database users are actually a minority of anime-fans. Plus by basing our title of anime for RWBY on the anime-databases would mean we are leaving those anime-databases as authority figures of what is anime and what isn't. Not to mention Myanimelist can be very corrupt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sakechi89 (talkcontribs) 06:40, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

American-made Anime[edit]

American-Made Anime From Rooster Teeth Gets Licensed In Japan

Anyways, good news for this series to be ported into Japan. It's status as an "anime" rather than the watered down "anime-influenced" category becomes more solidified. KyuuA4 (Talk:キュウ) 01:05, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

How so? RWBY is hardly the first american animated series with anime influences to get a Japanese port. This doesn't solidify it's "status" any more does it do that for MLP: Friendship is Magic.
Well you may think from what people tell you that Japan uses the word anime for all forms of animation, however that is a misconception. the Japanese do in fact have a distinction from we would call anime and not-anime, they identify RWBY more with the anime we know of: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sakechi89 (talkcontribs) 06:27, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
He has a source and with our guidelines that makes it fact. You would need another, reliable website that would say RWBY is or is not anime. Supergodzilla2090 (talk) 18:10, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
We're not going by the Japanese's broad definition of manga or anime, which would include comics and cartoons respectively in general. Please see WP:ANIME#WikiProject_Anime_and_manga#What_topics_we_do_not_cover "Animated or printed works produced for consumption outside of Japan that nevertheless draw on or are similar to Japanese media in terms of content or form (such as Chinese animation, Korean animation, manhwa, manhua and Western manga-styled comics such as Gothic Sports and Peach Fuzz) do not fall under our scope." AngusWOOF (barksniff) 19:16, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

First of all, as I mentioned earlier Japan's definition is not as broad as you make it out to be, they make distinctions between manga and general comics, as well as Anime - and general cartoons, RWBY in Japan's eyes falls under anime, that much I at least want to correct you on. However based on everything you suggested even if Japan does follow the stylistic definition of anime it won't affect the American definition? Alright I can somewhat tolerate that, but the subjectivity of what is anime and what isn't is still very subjective, and the fact that you absolutely title RWBY as "Not-Anime" without at least leaving the readers taking it in with a grain of salt heavily ignores a lot of aspects of RWBY, and what anime is or can be. This is what happens when things are to subjective, while I can agree that people with the style definition of anime is a minority it isn't however so significantly small that it can be swept under the carpet. If you keep insisting on something subjective to be this one absolute thing that's the equivalent of trying to divide something by 0 and expecting a clear-cut answer out of a calculator, no matter how many times you type it in the calculator it will always say error. You may as well get rid of the entire Anime title and Wikipedia page for Anime all together. This isn't a website where we choose things to be the way we want them to, If you want a clear cut answer leave it to websites that specialize on RWBY like The RWBY wiki who dubs RWBY as anime or anime database sites like MAL or Hummingbird, forums keep piling up on whether "A" is an anime or "B" is an anime. The rules of those sites' definition however should not apply to this Wikipedia page absolutely. Otherwise the people that essentially own the mere "concept of anime" are just a tiny bunch of Website-Masters, and there about 5 popular anime databases that equals around 5 people in control of the definition of anime vs the millions of other people's definition. This is Wikipedia we give people an insight of how this show is viewed from "what genre to how many awards it received" so clearly how many view this show should also be added to the page as long as there is a fair amount, and there are a fair amount who dub it as anime. Also the fact that there's even a page discussion for classifying what is and is not anime is absurd, it's completely opinion-based and should be looked down upon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sakechi89 (talkcontribs) 05:27, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

I'd also like to bring up that some animator in Japan Stay away from the term anime when distributing their works to outside nations they're aware of how we use the word anime, and so they try to keep the styles separate Here's an article about it that evens says that Japan has a similar issue with anime as well so why should the opposite (foreign-made anime) not be included? Also RWBY is marketed as anime as well, it should be noted on how RWBY is marketed on the Wikipedia page as well, because that contributes more fact! I found a copy of RWBY volume 3 in the anime section of retailer stores, and RWBY merch with other anime products for Hot Topic's AniMay (Anime + May) deals, so even if RWBY isn't an anime (which I don't believe) adding to the page that it is marketed as such In the States as well as Japan is that of Anime — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sakechi89 (talkcontribs) 21:23, 28 May 2016 (UTC)


I'm curious. What software is used to render RWBY? Many have made comparisons of RWBY's animation to that of MMD. However, I am willing to place some doubt on that assertion. KyuuA4 (Talk:キュウ) 00:59, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

They mention it at the end of the episode. Poser Software is used for the animation.--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 03:08, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
Hmm, I doubt that we can use the episode itself as a source. KyuuA4 (Talk:キュウ) 02:52, 26 July 2013 (UTC)


Is RWBY "ruby" or "ruuby"? (W=UU (double-U)) -- (talk) 08:42, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Same as you would pronounce the gem: ruby. KyuuA4 (Talk:キュウ) 05:42, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Argument on Yang Xiao Long's name[edit]

Yang means sunshine, and Xiao Long means little dragon.

Okay, family names In Chinese name usually have one syllable. So her name would be rendered as either YANG Xiaolong (Xiao Long of Yang) or Yangxiao LONG (Yang Xiao of Long). But the latter is definitely wrong considering the meaning of her name.

Of course, there are some exceptions where some families have two-syllable family name. In that case, her name would be rendered as either YANGXIAO Long (Long of Yang Xiao) or Yang XIAOLONG (Yang of Xiao Long). JSH-alive/talk/cont/mail 03:59, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

It takes place on a fictional world where there is no China and thus traditional Chinese name ordering need not apply.--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 04:33, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
It takes place on a fictional world which we know very little about, and which could very well have Asian-like cultures. Also: How does Ruby Rose have a sister named Yang Xiao Long? ~~----
It's generally been inferred that either Ruby or Yang are adopted. In addition, there has been discussion about the gravestone in the opening scene which says Summer Rose. There is a possibility that it is the grave of a relative of Ruby and that she was taken in by Yang's family because of that death. Or it could of course vice-versa in that whoever she is with now took in Yang. Regardless, it is fairly clear that they are not directly blood related (excluding the possibility of them being cousins taken in by the same parent (ex. if Summer Rose was Ruby's mom, her father may have moved in with her sister, perhaps the mother of Yang, etc.)). There are quite a few possibilities, but none of them have been proven in-episode yet.
Actually, I have to correct myself on the above ^. Monty has repeatedly said on his Twitter that Ruby and Yang are not step sisters and are directly related as sisters. I think he's pressuring it a bit too hard, however, and it's a little silly to have sisters whose names are from completely different languages without any explanation beyond the assumed "it sounds cool" and "it's fiction so it doesn't matter." I guess we have to accept that, regardless, Yang and Ruby are full sisters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:44, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
As far as discussion about Yang's name goes, I agree that that the names should have been ordered/pieced properly. Even if it is a fantasy world, unless the names are in a fantasy language, they should match up to their original lingual patterns when they're based on real world etymology. Regardless, I believe Yang Xiaolong (little dragon of sunshine) makes the most sense as far as the original ordering goes and the most likely meaning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:31, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
So far in the series (2nd season) - Ruby and Yang share the same father. Yang has inherited her father's name (probably as her mother Raven Branwen left her shortly after she was born) however Ruby Rose is named after her mother (Summer Rose, maybe she was kinda bossy? :-) ). Summer Rose died while on a mission and Raven is still sort of a mysterious figure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:13, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Pyrrha's Polarity[edit]

One of the characters mentions "magnetic polarity"; but the series has yet to directly explain Pyrrha's power. The only vague explanation up to Episode 15 occurs when Pyrrrha assists against a Grimm by affecting the polarity of an object, at which point she explains she can control "polarity" and someone else conjectures "magnetic polarity". In the series, Grimm are able to destroy man because man exists as a being born of "light" and Grimm of "darkness"; one could assert that "polarity" refers to this, as the mentioned affected object shows a dark aura, aligning it with the Grimm to familiar effect. I'm not sure if weak evidence violates WP:OR rules or otherwise makes definitive statements undesirable; at this point I feel that Pyrrha's power of "polarity" doesn't have a concrete canon explanation. --John Moser (talk) 00:44, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

It was not a matter of conjecture. Weiss explicitly says Pyrrha's polarity semblance allows her to have control over magnetism.--The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 00:51, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Read what John wrote again. MatrixM (talk) 16:07, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Chapters vs Episodes[edit]

RWBY Volume 1 is divided into 10 Chapters. Most of these chapters were split into 2 episodes. I was wondering if this had enough significance to be mentioned, as this is the way the episodes are ordered on the DVD and Blue Ray release. The RWBY developers have also said that the story was written as Chapters, and later split into Episodes. Ragef33 (talk) 11:57, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

available on Netflix Streaming[edit]

As of February 6, 2015 the full series is available on Netflix Streaming in two "episodes": "Volume 1" (season 1) and "Volume 2" (season 2). — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:43, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

RWBY's Future[edit]

In a NY Times article, Matt Hullum said that Rooster Teeth planned to continue and expand RWBY, as volume 3 is set for this year, said in another article of the NY Times as well (talk) 03:46, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Here it is (talk) 03:02, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Provide a source for this. Perhaps the actual article? -- Joseph Prasad (talk) 03:50, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Remove Japanese VAs[edit]

As this is not an anime show, and the English VAs were broadcast first, I would recommend removing the Japanese VAs from the English article. The VAs would be retained in the Japanese Wikipedia of course. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 03:57, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

  • I disagree. While the show is not anime, it is anime inspired. Along with it's popularity in Japan and a manga adaptation, i say Japanese VAs stay in the english article.--FonFon Alseif (talk) 14:29, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
A manga adaptation isn't enough to make the original material anime. This would be like equating The Powerpuff Girls or Lilo and Stitch to anime and adding the Japanese VAs to the original version. You can only put Powerpuff Girls Z or Stitch! in the anime category. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 14:57, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
  • I also disagree, Anime is pretty clearly defined as "Japanese-disseminated animation style often characterized by colorful graphics, vibrant characters and fantastical themes." in Wikipedia's own page, RWBY quite clearly falls under this definition. And furthermore, why would that be cause for their removal? Wikipedia is about providing information, not subjectively deciding what information people should see. The Evil Dice (talk) 22:09, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
While it's anime-influenced and anime-styled and promoted to the anime audience, it is not produced or co-produced in Japan (as with Miraculous Ladybug) and thus listing the VAs would be like listing any of the VAs in other countries where the product is disseminated. It is not relevant for this article. See WP:ANIME "Animated or printed works produced for consumption outside of Japan that nevertheless draw on or are similar to Japanese media in terms of content or form (such as Chinese animation, Korean animation, manhwa, manhua and Western manga-styled comics such as Gothic Sports and Peach Fuzz) do not fall under our scope." AngusWOOF (barksniff) 14:57, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
Not anime, I find it similar to the two animated Avatar series (Aang and Korra) but they are not anime.Tintor2 (talk) 22:33, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
  • I know nothing of this show, nor do I watch anime, but since this is an American webseries, there is no need to list the Japanese voice actors. Otherwise, it's just fancrufty.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 22:50, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Since the show was originally an American show, I don't see how this falls under this project. The manga would, but it doesn't have voice actors. So, no voice actors from Japan should be listed. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:29, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Remove - I am aware that RWBY has a manga adaptation, but this discussion is talking about the cartoon, and since the cartoon is originally American (albeit heavily inspired by anime), only the English voice actors should be listed on the main article. If this was the Japanese Wikipedia, then maybe this would have been fine, but it isn't. It's like putting the French cast of The Simpsons on characters pages of The Simpsons characters, or mentioning the Japanese voice actors of SpongeBob SquarePants on all related articles. It doesn't work, and even if it did: why single out Japanese voice actors? If you include Japanese voice actors, you might as well include all foreign-language dubs for the work, since there's no particular reason why the Japanese dub is suddenly more important than other dubs (though this is only recommended for articles on characters, and not for articles on works themselves). RWBY's animation was primarily made in America, by Americans, for an American audience, so it isn't anime, so there's no particular reason why the Japanese voice actors are suddenly so important that they should be mentioned here. We don't have a list of Japanese voice actors on our article on Minions, so why here? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:34, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
  • Remove per Narutolovehinata5's reasonings. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 05:51, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Proposed merge with List of RWBY characters[edit]

The characters, as a set, aren't the subject of commentary separate from the media itself, so the characters should be mentioned as necessary in the plot sections of the parent article, perhaps in an overview of the main characters. The rest is outside the scope of a generalist encyclopedia. czar 04:13, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

I disagree with merging the list of characters with the main article, unless there is a compelling rationale to otherwise do so; especially if compared to other articles of similar anime/animated series.Swilliamrex (talk) 01:26, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

I think it would be okay to merge since RWBY has a wikia. Supergodzilla2090 (talk) 00:10, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm worried about the main article becoming too long if we merge the character list into it. Plus the list looks well written enough (and sourced) that it can stay independent for now. Feinoha Talk 01:57, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

It's barely sourced. The groundwork is there for referencing but I'm probably one of the only folks adding them. There are still a ton of OR statements like where the names are coming from for all the secondary characters, and way too many rehashes of the plot where it should be more about character design. Outside of RWBY and JNPR, each team can be shortened to a single paragraph listing its four members. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 03:19, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Really? The overall presentation didn't look that bad, and it had a few sources (which I didn't check; sorry I can't attest to the OR since I barely know anything about the show). I guess I'll have to give it another look over. Feinoha Talk 03:29, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Oppose It's too long to merge in this page.DigiPen92 (talk) 03:03, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Oppose It would encourage oversaturating the main article; which led to the initial split. --Atvica (talk) 19:42, 28 June 2016 (UTC)