Talk:Chun-Li

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The official Capcom SF storyline can be a real mess. Is what described here in the story section actually the official storyline now? I've seen so many contradictions, it's hard to tell. --Paul Soth 15:08, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Contents 1 Special and Super Moves 2 Every? 3 Yes well 4 Chun-Li's surname 5 Animated GIF 6 Clothing 7 Lynn Harris = hoax? 8 Fighting Style 9 Dispute about Ryu relationship 10 Ryu/Chun-Li dispute vote 10.1 Discussion 11 Proof of materials' canon...ness. 12 Thong song 13 Fighting Pose 14 Techniques 15 Chun-Li CvS2 sprite 16 Birthplace 17 Shichisei Senkuu Kyaku 18 Special moves? 19 Upskirt for article is bad taste? 20 Name Translation 21 Nationality 22 Chinese Material Arts 23 Trivia Removal 24 Media Appearances

[edit] Special and Super Moves

I like how people listed her moves like that. It's organized and easy to read. Can someone do that for other characters too?

[edit] Every?

Futhermore, almost every female character in a fighting game is based somewhat off of Chun-Li. I doubt this is true. I could understand some characters being based off of Chun-Li, but not "almost every". --Bubbachuck 00:49, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

I would say that almost every female fighting character owes their existence to Chun-Li, whether or not they are based on her. Chun-Li was the first, and inspired fighter fans to recognize that a woman could be tough enough to stand up with the mightiest of men; unfortunately it also spawned the concept of women going around in exposing outfits, or using moves that give a gratuitous number of panty shots. -- VederJuda 01:00, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes, but its far-fetched to say that most female characters are based off of her because she was the first strong female lead. -- Bubbachuck 01:45, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

I'd have to agree; I don't think the majority are based on her in some way. Maybe back when fighting games were first becoming popular, but I doubt it's the case with many of the characters who've come along since. -- James26 02:50, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Yes well

Personally, I think that Chun Li has attacks that are used but re named in other characters. Such as Ling from Tekken. But thats my view. I still think girls with that sort of Power under them have the respect. Despite being a Cartoon fighter. =====))))) Hadoken!

[edit] Chun-Li's surname

What happened to the Xiang in Chun-Li Xiang? did you people miss it by purpose or what?

That was a surname given in the movie and the US cartoon. It has not been confirmed as canon.--Mitsukai 22:40, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Animated GIF

Do we really need that Animated GIF? It slows the loading down a bit, as well as not providing any useful info; ie not telling you what move it is Anouymous 22:29, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

It looks pretty spectacular, a description of the move would be suitable. Can a Street Fighter Fan put a caption on? Jesus On Wheels 09:45, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Well, that's all we had to say that we didn't need the Animated GIF in the article. --Zachkudrna18@yahoo.com

[edit] Clothing

It was first corrected to the blue one in Street Fighter II: Champion Edition? I'm pretty sure it was not first corrected to that one, I know officially it was first corrected to the blue one in Street Fighter II: The World Warrior (SNES version) [1], and then seen again in Street Fighter II:Champion Edition. --Zachkudrna18@yahoo.com

[edit] Lynn Harris = hoax?

I don't think Lynn Harris actually voiced Chun Li in the original Street Fighter II because 1. I'm 80% certain that CPS1 voices were done through speech synthesis, and 2. this "Lynn Harris" person turned up on IMDB claiming to have voiced many characters that were definitely not played by her (such as Karin Kanzuki in SF Alpha 3) and also claims to have voiced "Chan Li" in Street Fighter 1. I won't edit it out, but I think people should look into this because it seems like a very well perpetrated hoax. Danny Lilithborne 18:38, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

I took the liberty of deleting the info. Looking at her so-called resume at the IMDB, she's an obvious hoax! The fact that she has an anime-ish drawing as her mug shot leads me to doubt her credibility. Also, "Diane in Metal Gear"? That game didn't have voice acting! Jonny2x4 21:52, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

You're just jealous though.

Um, yeah. Lynn Harris is an actual voice actress who's in the end credits of "Soul Calibur", among other things; but it's still clear she never voiced Chun-Li, particularly not in Super Street Fighter II Turbo. It seems that her inflated resume on IMDb is because of an overzealous fan. Danny Lilithborne 03:06, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fighting Style

Her fighting style was described in the Tokuma comics as Southern Cross Kempo, it was also called Kempo in one of the cartoons I think with Fei-Long (no good explanation why she'd be kempo training with a jeet kyun do expert.) As a side note, it seems kind of silly to shoehorn continuity into a story where there clearly is none.

Many sources, including the Street Fighter Canon Plot Guide (which gets a great deal of its information from mooks), state that her style is Tai Chi. Although her stance isn't exactly the most common Tai Chi stance, and her style seems to focus on hard force kicks, there is some Tai Chi-like movement in her fighting. In addition, it is best to take anything in a comic/cartoon/et cetera based on a video game with a grain of salt, unless the creator(s) are directly involved (as is the case with the official Mortal Kombat comics by Ed Boon and John Tobias). The S

[edit] Dispute about Ryu relationship

I removed it a while ago, and I'll remove it again - it's pretty common knowledge on Wikipedia that fancruft just isn't encyclopaedic. That paragraph is more circumstantial than speculative, but it still doesn't belong here, no matter how much the 'shippers or fanfiction authors want it. Sorry, but "some fans" isn't enough to merit inclusion. The "trivia" section isn't a blank slate to put down whatever pops into your head about the character. I don't want to start an edit war over this. --Marcg106 05:37, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree. The relationship with Ryu is only dim falsity at best, and not a stated fact. I vote it stays off the page. - MegamanZero

I'll just reiterate that the mere mention of this qualifies as trivia, not fancruft. The fact that there are official stories and an in-game happening to support it lifts it above the realm of dim falsity as well. Sorry that you don't seem to like it, Marcg106, but that isn't a good enough reason for a bit of trivia that is both factual (referring to the fact that there are fans who do hold this feeling) and long-standing to not be included. --James26 18:12, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

It should definitely be kept off. --Locke Cole 05:21, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

And FYI to anyone coming up on this conversation down the road, check out Ryu's article (and the talk page there). --Locke Cole 05:23, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, check it out, and the Wikipedia fancruft and original research policies to see if anything there qualifies this as something that should be kept out. Nothing I can find yet that applies to the edit as it stands now. Trivia should not be kept out simply because certain users don't like what's being discussed. If that's not the case, kindly prove it. --James26 23:59, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

It's original research and fancruft. I'm sorry you disagree with that assessment, but the consensus doesn't want that passage in the article for the reasons already stated. That you disagree with the conclusions reached just means you disagree, it doesn't mean you get to override consensus and put in your own version. --Locke Cole 06:46, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't simply "disagree" with that assessment, I've proven it wrong (fancruft is detailed; original research is something that's not cited). You're no one to talk about overriding anything, as you should learn that you don't get to override policy and remove trivia from the Ryu page or this one when you can't validate your reasons for doing it. Simply repeating "it's fancruft" or "it's original research" again and again doesn't make it true. Hopefully your punishment for disregarding all this will be coming soon. --James26 12:23, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

In your opinion you've proven it wrong. You haven't proven it wrong to me, which is the crux of the matter here. And obviously you haven't convinced anyone else contributing because nobody else has responded to your obvious fanboy attitude. It was my mistake to respond in the first place, as consensus was reached that this should not be included in the article. And again with the threats-- nothing is going to happen to me over this, except maybe the advice that in the future I ignore obvious fanboy fancruft pushing. God help me, that's not advice I need, in the future I'll steer clear of conversing with the likes of you. --Locke Cole 05:35, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Okay, time to weigh my two cents in on this one. The fact that it is likely non-canonical part does not diminish its importance as trivia. Why? Simple - obviously, if there were two (considered non-canonical) stories published that considered Ryu and Chun-Li a couple, then that should be listed as examples of the Ryu-Chun Li "controversy". Has CAPCOM made an official statement to confirm or deny this? No, because getting just about anything out of CAPCOM regarding SF canon is about as difficult as pulling off a shoryuken with a broken joystick. If they have (and I haven't seen one if so, I admit), then we should use that as a counter-reference within the text. Regardless of this, denying the existence of the Seishua and Malibu Comics versions of the story is needlessly removing information.--Mitsukai 13:55, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

So I'd missed this. Hoo boy...

In your opinion you've proven it wrong.

No, in fact it was proven wrong based on the descriptions stated at the fancruft page that I outlined. Seems you didn't know the differences between opinion and fact, or that you just placed more importance on the former than the latter (as long as the opinion was your own, of course). As for the humorous "fanboy" claims, I guess it's easy to resort to pathetic namecalling and sling mud in place of reason.

You haven't proven it wrong to me, which is the crux of the matter here.

No, it was not, because the encyclopedia revolves around the policies in place during debates, not your whim, which was obviously too stubborn to change anyway. The policy at the time for fancruft stated that this wasn't it because this wasn't detailed. (Now the whole "fancruft" thing itself is under debate).

consensus was reached that this should not be included in the article

"Consensus" was just an excuse for vandalism in this case (removing content without valid reason), given that it's a consensus that wasn't supported by any cited policy (and this is not "my opinion," but something that a little reading can prove).

in the future I'll steer clear of conversing with the likes of you.

It seems that others also believe that you are of questionable maturity and credibility, so according to the official encyclopedia consensus, you're the one of lacking character overall, and getting into a debate with you was/is the mistaken undertaking. The VfA archives this.

At any rate, the pages as they exist now are just fine, since truthful policies are cited for actions taken. James26 01:07, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ryu/Chun-Li dispute vote

[edit] Proof of materials' canon...ness.

I would like to see a laundry list of reasoning why the materials are canon. For instance, does Capcom approve of any such material containing the relationship? - A Link to the Past (talk) 15:52, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

FWIW, with regard to the manga, there's no way it can be canon: if what I'm reading is correct, Ken dies in it. As the manga is from like 1992, how does Ken return to fight in the SF sequels? :P I'm not going to respond beyond this because I desperately do not want a multipage rant like on the Ryu talk page, but from brief research into the manga, it sounds non-canonical. --Locke Cole ^{(talk) (e-mail)} 16:05, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

An alternate universe can be canon. - A Link to the Past (talk) 15:02, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Anyway, I think I have this stupid edit war over. Wikipedia does not necessarily demand that a source be canon. For instance, when discussing Dracula of the Castlevania series, should we just keep any mention of Castlevania Legends or Castlevania: Circle of the Moon out of the article, since they are retconned? No. What matters is that the comic that portrays their relationship is not fan fiction, but is perfectly legal and authorized by Capcom. In the event that someone uses it to argue on a universal scale of their relationship, no. But the fact that they are romantically connected in this official source deserves mention as much as Princess Peach being romantically contected with Mario does. - A Link to the Past (talk) 16:16, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

I never said they were canon. I said they were officially created (meaning that Capcom licensed the comic publishing rights to the two companies). In any case, it's a moot point.--Mitsukai 15:12, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thong song

The trivia states that Chun Li's "thong" is edited in the international versions of the SNES game. Can anyone confirm or deny this? I've been playing the Japanese version of SSF2X and I can't see the difference.

Moreover, the clothing item in question isn't a thong. It's the lower half of the bodysuit that protrudes below her dress.

And, if someone would like to add, this bodysuit is not painted onto the SOTA Street Fighter action figure of Chun Li.-—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.0.164.47 (talk • contribs) .

NV

Fancruft. Blatent fancruft. Chun Li's true appeaarence is accurately covered in the article. -MegamanZero|Talk 05:16, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

So... does that mean that the innacurate information about her apperance in the "trivia" section should be removed?-—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.0.164.47 (talk • contribs) .

If you haven't noticed, a wiki entry about Chun Li is entirely fancruft, blatent fancruft. If that's not enough, a trivia section in a Chun Li wiki is even more fancruft, blatent fancruft.-—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.0.164.47 (talk • contribs) .

Ethier way, it doesn't belong in the article. -MegamanZero|Talk 05:01, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fighting Pose

Which game in the series did that come from? I'm not sure where it was. Street Fighter III: 3rd Strike?--ZachKudrna18@yahoo.com

• Actually, it's Capcom vs. SNK 2. Danny Lilithborne 06:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Techniques

I believe that the techniques section is important to all fighting game characters. It of course differs in the sense that the wikipedia techniques section describes the technique: a game FAQ would describe the move's execution and application. Since fighting game characters are simply a series of techniques to be used by a video game player, the techniques section is vital to the article. Does anyone disagree? Nawara Ven 22:27, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

• I do. Techniques can be found at GameFAQs; to put them here would require putting them not just on Chun-Li's, but on every fighting game character article on the site. This is a waste of effort, as the interested user can easily find a movelist there. As for physical descriptions, they're patently unnecessary since their particular execution often varies from game to game (from SF2 to SF3, and that's not even considering the non-canon games such as SNK vs. Capcom). I also vehemently disagree with the idea that VG characters are nothing more than their techniques. I'm removing the techniques section. [[User:Danny Lilithborne|Dan

• I was sent a message from Danny. I'm not trying to engage in a revert war. Someone said the technique section needed to be trimmed if it was going to be there. The Chun Li article was fine, but it seems kinda ridiculous to me to mention a Street Fighter or any fighting game character without mentioning their signature techniques. It's like mentioning Bill Clinton without mentioning what he did while he was president. Or Monica. It's not logical. My original post had translations from outside sources and from inside the game. All I added today was techniques from games that weren't already there Street Fighter Alpha, MVC 1, and Street Fighter III Third Strike very simple and clean. I agree that the characters are not the sum totality of their techniques and fighting abilities, but they are a very strong part. It's not like Capcom is talking about Chun Li's music career.

• If you want to do this, then you can't do it for just Chun-Li. You have to do it for ALL the Street Fighter characters, and if all of them, why not the King of Fighters characters? The Tekken characters? This is one case where there is a real slippery slope, and the best way to avoid this problem is by just leaving the techniques to the specialists. Danny Lilithborne 00:48, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

• Who are the specialists? I'd be happy to do it, but I don't have access to materials for all the fighting games in the world. I do have it for Chun Li so why not share the information. get to it as it comes, don't remove it because you can't do it for every character in every fighting game (or anime) there is. The information is here to be compiled from various sources, and modified for accuracy as the information becomes available. I'm not gonna burn energy replacing or trying to retype it. So if you feel the argument has merit then I would have no objections to you restoring. Or not restoring it. There is listing of the moves list for Ryu, Ken, Akuma, Terry Bogard, The Sakazakis of Art of Fighting, and more. It isn't just Chun Li (don't take that to mean go delete all of that info)I'm just providing example. It's not just this article. A technique section is viable and reasonable.

I see both viewpoints on the matter, and I paticulary like the introduction of describing the move information, but I'll have to agree with Dannny on this matter - Wikipedia is not a place of indiscriminate information. However, the information is useful out of saturation of the article. I recently created List of Mega Man skills and attacks, an article listing and describing the various aspects and names of all of the gained techiques over the course of the series. I think that an List of Street Fighter Skills and techniques in this vein would be an great idea. What do two think..? -Zero^Talk 14:33, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm pretty surprised that there's even debate regarding if a videogame character's techniques are important or not. Okay, I'll concede that Chun-Li is more than a set of techniques, but they are what define her. Are humans not defined by their actions? The above poster is correct: Clinton was a president, not just a guy with a big nose. Chun-Li does the spinning bird kick and kikouken, she's not just the Chinese girl with the ox-horns. Much like Scorpion, Sub-Zero, Reptile, Smoke and Ermac are considered different characters, beyond having different names. To have a brief discussion of gameplay and techniques for each character is patently necessary. That's what they do. That's what they're for. If one wants to find out how to execute these moves or understand how they work in gameplay situations, that's what gamefaqs is for. For a brief overview necessary to understanding who that character is, a brief gameplay and techniques section. Obviously, the writer can mention that moves differ slightly from game to game. And this should be done for all characters. Nawara Ven 15:19, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Not to knock the List of Street Fighter Skills and techniques, but I feel that this information is not as useful when it's not attached to a page about the character in question. If the purpose is to imagine how the moves might look when executed, an image and description of the character is nice. Nawara Ven 15:19, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

• "If you want to do this, then you can't do it for just Chun-Li. You have to do it for ALL the Street Fighter characters... ...and the best way to avoid this problem is by just leaving the techniques to the specialists." ~ Why? Show me the law that says this. The information on WP is added by us people. If people wanted to add the other character's techniques, then they would. Since it hasn't happened, people obviously don't want to. And there is no rule that says it has to be done for all the char. Or did you create that rule yourself and now you think everyone has to follow it? That statement you made- yes, that's your opinion, and you're free to you're opinion, but that's all it is. And just because it's 'your' opinion, it doesn't make it true.

And since were talking about it, like another user has already said, there are techniques listed for other fighters (go look them up, and then come back to say what you have to say). Considering this, and the other very good reasons as to why this should stay (scroll up and read), compared to your reasoning, I think its safe to say that you've been proven wrong. So your/this argument is completely useless. You fail. Unreasonable

Well, I was simply putting forth the thesis of a comprimise. If you wish to list information for characters, why not gather them collectively in an table...? We avoid saturation, and we have exemplative techniques article from readers to draw from. Concerning the statement of performing the task for all characters, I see no problem with that; people may fill in the tables for other characters at their leasure. -Zero^Talk 18:18, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

And making an link to each character article to each respective sub-section should clear up the problem of visualization qualms for the reader. -Zero^Talk 18:20, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

• Do the work, then. I'm only telling you the logical consequences of your actions. I'm "miffed" because Chun-Li is the only Street Fighter character with a techniques list, which obviously shows favoritism on the part of whoever keeps putting the techniques back. It's impulse without forethought. Now, if you guys who have such a huge problem with my "attitude" want to make techniques, then do it. But at least TRY to look like you're being objective when you do it. I'll leave the techniques under notice. Danny Lilithborne 06:01, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

• Thank you. We'll be more than happy to do the work. But Chun Li isn't the only character to have a moves list. Mozey on over to Ansatsuken and you'll see that someone was dedicated enough to describe the entire Uppercut brothers fighting style after the Capcom retcon. And their special techniques are all mentioned in their sections. As is Gill's. But I don't have a problem with your attitude, you had an argument that you wanted to pursue. That's what the talk forum is for.

[edit] Chun-Li CvS2 sprite

I'm sure everyone agrees that revert wars are not good for this article or for Wikipedia. Vic Vipr prefers that the image of Chun-Li's sprite not be there, but T-1000 thinks it's important for the article. I've always been rather neutral on the issue, but would putting it to a vote help resolve this dispute? Danny Lilithborne 00:45, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

It's the same as a screenshot, shows how she looks in game. It is different from Artwork. T-1000 01:28, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

There is simply no commentary within the text that warrants the inclusion of said sprite, and it must be put in an appropriate context. The fair use policy is quite clear on this. Vic Vipr ^T_C 18:20, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to remove them all immediately. The Fair Use policy is clear on this. We posess artwork to depict the appearence to the reader. That is enough.-Zero^Talk 18:34, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

But artwork appearence is not the same as the in game sprite appearence, given that the SF game is the original media, the sprite should remain. T-1000 20:38, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Nonsense. Concept art and official art is created before the implementation of sprite models in video games. You know that.

A character is a character. We require only this to show the reader who it is. If they feel the need to see the sprite, they can play the game themselves. Its not terribly much of a difference. -Zero^Talk 21:34, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Of course they can. Wikipedia is not supposed to replace the game. However, having the sprite on the page will not stop people from buying the game, and also in shows how she looks in her most current form, so it falls under fair use. It is not a decorative image because there is no other image which shows her in her most current form. Also, a character has differnt forms though, Comic Wolverine is different from Movie Wolverine, for example. Similarly, game Chun Li is different from Artwork Chun Li. The artwork did come before the sprite, but as the two are completely different mediums, they cannot be compared. None of your reasoning for removing the pic stands. T-1000 01:12, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Fair use images should be kept to a minimum (read WP:FUC) and the artwork is an adequate illustration of what the character looks like, in her most current form I might add - the sprite and artwork are derived from the same product. Furthermore, there isn't any critical commentary for the sprite so it doesn't fall under fair use. The article doesn't discuss the appearance of her sprite in Capcom vs. SNK 2, does it? Vic Vipr ^T_C 09:30, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Chun Li is a SF game character, the sprite depicts her in the proper medium, the artwork does not. The Sprite is meant to represent her aprrearence in SF fighting games in general. The Capcom vs. SNK 2 just happens to be her most current form. Since there is critical commentary on Chun Li in street Fighter games, the image falls under fair use and hence should remain. T-1000 17:28, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

"There is no other image which shows her in her current form..?" The lass hasn't changed a bit since her debut. Don't play games. Chun Li is Chun Li. -Zero^Talk 11:08, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Her appearence in each game is different, due to the graphic engines. Her most current form is her SFIII/CvS2 form. T-1000 17:19, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Birthplace

Where in China was Chun-Li born? A very few people say she's from Beijing, China. --PJ Pete

• Very few characters have an official birthcity or town, and Chun-Li is not one of them. Danny Lilithborne 06:58, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Shichisei Senkuu Kyaku

This move is possibly a citation of Fist of the North Star, although I don't feel like adding it up, but someone can take that in consideration and add this note th either the move description or some trivia. --2dMadness 08:40, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Special moves?

Are the "Special moves" and "Super arts" sections really necessary. I won't RM them if people think they should stay in, but it seems like they're really unnecessary for an encyclopedia. -- Digital Watches! 01:46, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

• I'm for removing them, but there was a big hubbub awhile back from someone who thought characters in video games were just "avatars" and the articles were meaningless without a movelist. He kicked up a big hubbub about it. Danny Lilithborne 03:20, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • I was one of the people who was for having it included, and as I recall I wasn't alone. People identify characters as much by their moves as by their personalities and backstories. Few people mention Ryu without mentioning Hadou-Ken and few people mention Chun Li without thinking about the Lightning Legs (Hyakuretsu Kyaku) or teh Spinning Bird Kick. Please return them if you don't mind.Rayfire 03:11, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Upskirt for article is bad taste?

OK, is it just me but isn't the current picture at the top of this article a bit chessy and shows bad taste?

SS376231AB 14:16, 5 October 2006 (UTC)Unfortunately, that was her offical artwork in Street Fighter III 3rd Strike and therefore her latest appearance storyline-wise. There are other pictures we could use though that's also official artwork from that game...

[edit] Name Translation

In Japanese, you CANNOT hear the "L" in any word. Instead, Chun-Li's name is translated into Japanese as "Chun-Ri". --PJ Pete

• Respectfully, though that is a valid point, Capcom Japan as well as Chun-Li's creator Akiman have always romanized her name as Chun-Li. DvnInspiration 07:25, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually, that's quite untrue. Japanese phonetics are unrelated to English ones, and contain neither a phonetic "L" nor an "R" sound, but one that's somewhere in-between, and used for both when pronouncing foreign words. To all-inclusively write it as "R" is just as inaccurate as all-inclusively writing it as "L". Even this is a horribly simplistic representation of what I mean, but it applies to the point of this discussion. -- Digital Watches! 17:34, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

To tell the truth, that would mean that Akiman would RATHER romanize it and pronounce it in Chinese INSTEAD of Japanese, because the Japanese language lacked the sound of "L", so, you would replace it with an "R". --PJ Pete

[edit] Nationality

Chun-Li is either Chinese or Cantonese. --PJ Pete

• I think it'll be safer to just assume that she is Chinese rather than infer she is Cantonese, since she speaks the Mandarin dialect in Street Fighter III ["Zhu Ni Hao Yun (good luck)" and "Xie Xie (thank you)"].

[edit] Chinese Material Arts

If her fighting style is Chinese Material Arts, what stands for Chinese Material Arts? --PJ Pete

[edit] Trivia Removal

As part of the wikiproject to reduce the amount of trivia, I went through the trivia section and removed the more 'trivial trivia' and some trivia without references. If some of what I removed is deemed by the editors of this article to be necessary information, please find a way to incorporate it into the article proper, rather than re-adding it to the trivia section. Wikipedia does not outright ban trivia, but it strongly recommends that it not be included in articles. The guidelines state that trivia sections are particularly okay in new articles because they can add information before the article is formatted. However, once an article is as developed as this one is, the trivia needs to be removed from the trivia section and incorporated into the article proper. I strongly recommend that editors here try and do this if they want the trivia information to stay as there is a growing movement to remove trivia. More trivia may be removed if not incorporated. And, think about it this way: you'll never see a Featured Article with trivia. --The Way 02:10, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

• No objections here; I honestly think we can do without a lot of those musical references, though. Danny Lilithborne 02:11, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Feel free to remove more. Frankly, I'd like to see it all removed. Trivia, by its very nature, is unencyclopedic. Any well-developed article should have NO trivia section; anything that's important should be incorporated into the article, everything else should be removed. You'd never see a featured article with trivia. --The Way 02:19, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

And you're head of the council that chooses them, I assume? While I agree that it's a good idea to try to incorporate these facts into the article, having a trivia section does not automatically make the article a failure.--Agent Aquamarine 23:39, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Media Appearances

Added this section to lend the piece some more structure. Also trimmed some trivia and integrated into the article. Please expand on this, and restrain from reverting like last time. This information is entirely relevant to Chun-Li.