Talk: Arroyo

This talk page is only for discussing improvements to the page "Arroyo." For general discussion or to share stories about the topic of this article, please visit our discussion boards. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~) after each of your entries. Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. Do not edit other people's entries. For general conversation on this topic, please visit our discussion boards.

Untitled[]

One of the Followers in New Vegas says she comes from Arroyo. I haven't caught any other references to it yet, nor is it clear if Arroyo became part of the NCR.--OvaltinePatrol 22:36, October 26, 2010 (UTC)

Yes it's Emily Ortal, she needs your help to spy on Mr. House, we know it became a big city but there not mention Arroyo became part of the NCR. Itachou ^[~talk~] 23:03, October 26, 2010 (UTC)

Game over if attacking anyone?[]

I've heard that if player kills/attacks someone or in any other way makes the people of Arroyo being hostile towards him, and then we will wait to the midnight, then we will receive a game over with Hakunin's skull saying that the village has died, and we died too. Is that true? - ZuTheSkunk 02:11, November 12, 2010 (UTC)

Hello, anybody home? - ZuTheSkunk 17:51, December 16, 2010 (UTC)

New vegas era[]

it's stated that is now a big city so...maybe some DLC will show it to us :D, aslo what happened to the vault dweller? 120 years have happened so he must be a skeleton... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.167.57.33 (talk • contribs). Please sign your posts with ~~~~!

Itachou edit[]

There is an edit which is...problematic, specifically this one. I don't want to get into a revert war, so I'll discuss here before making any changes.

1. Firstly, the dates. The dash is not useless, "Chosen One (2242—?)" tells us that the Chosen One was elder from 2242 to an unknown future date, whereas "Chosen One (2242)" simply tells us that the Chosen One was elder in 2242. Similarly, "Arroyan villagers (2167—)" tells us that the Arroyan villagers were a faction in Arroyo from 2167 onwards, whereas "Arroyan villagers (2167)" just tells us that the Arroyan villagers were a faction in Arroyo in 2167. Worst of all is changing "New California Republic (?—present)" to "New California Republic (2281)", as the former tells us that the NCR has been a faction of Arroyo from an unknown date to the present, and that 2281 was considered the present at the time of writing, whereas the latter tells us only that the NCR was a faction in Arroyo in 2281.
2. Secondly, the opening section is more loquacious than suggested in FW:LAYL, as well as inaccurate (Oregon ceased to be a state in the Fallout universe).
3. Finally, the image. I am not sure how I can put this in simpler terms: this is a map, so it should go in the map field of the infobox. This is the most "recent" image of Arroyo, and incidentally the best image we have. Therefore it should go in the image field of the infobox. You opposed this by saying that the map should go in the image field because that is consistent with other FO1 and FO2 pages. However, this is a precedent which has never been discussed, and does not actually apply to all other pages; one long-standing example I can think of is Shady Sands (which I am sure you will go and change now you are aware of it). If we were supposed to use the map as the main infobox image, there wouldn't be a point in having the map field in the infobox at all. I see no advantage to using a long-outdated (in-universe) map image rather than a more recent image of the settlement, as the most prominent image on the page.

In short, there is not a single aspect of this edit that I do not have a problem with, but I hope we can discuss it and come to an agreement. --Lugiatm (talk · contribs) 19:11, June 13, 2011 (UTC)

"Present" is ambiguous, especially if e.g. a future game is released where the NCR is no more. There should be no "present", just "2281" (the last known date).

As for the image, it should be one of Arroyo as a tribal village, since that is how it appears in game, and Arroyo as of Fallout 2 is what readers will expect first and foremost. The most recent picture is not necessarily what should always be the main picture, but in this case it is a more notable depiction of Arroyo. Ausir^(talk) 19:26, June 13, 2011 (UTC)

Agree, present is variable and if we do it in this way, we should change countless pages each times. Nothing to say more for the image.

The guideline for the opening section didn't have a precise size, and I find this of Arroyo relatively short and well written. Also, in the Fallout universe, all people talk by old pre-war states (California, Utah etc.) and I also think it's nice for a reader to know "what state the city is" (otherwise without that, I don't even know that New Reno was already in Nevada - same as New Vegas, the kind of detail that some people appreciate). Itachou ^[~talk~] 19:44, June 13, 2011 (UTC)

Well, exactly. If a future game is released, then the reader will know that 2281 was considered the present at the last known mention of Arroyo, so that the town of Arroyo was part of NCR until at least that point. Just leaving it as "2281" doesn't tell us much at all...was Arroyo made part of NCR in 2281? Was 2281 the last known point when Arroyo was part of NCR? Readability should be our number one priority. Itachou: the point is that the present is variable, and we will have to change every page whenever its story is "updated" by a future game regardless. If Arroyo is not mentioned in a future game, then "present" can be left as 2281; I know of no better ways of indicating that "Arroyo was part of NCR until at least 2281, possibly further but it is unknown" in such a concise manner.

As for the image, I would still argue that as the page is generally written from the point of view of someone in 2281 (background is all in past tense, etc.) that the image used should be the most "recent" one. Regardless, the current image is inappropriate because it isn't even of the village - it's a map. This is acceptable by the standards you have outlined above, but a map? There is a map field in the infobox for precisely this use, so why is it not being utilized as it is on the Shady Sands or Vault 15 page? --Lugiatm (talk · contribs) 00:27, June 17, 2011 (UTC)

FO3: W. Brandice of Grayditch says he came from Arroyo[]

W. Brandice, an NPC found dead in Fallout 3 in the tunnels under Grayditch, mentions on his computer terminal that he moved to Grayditch from Arroyo. FO3 is set on the opposite side of the U.S. from Arroyo's location in FO2, but it may very well be the same town. We might want to mention this in the Appearances section. 129.82.96.37 08:00, August 7, 2011 (UTC)

I just checked the terminal through the GECK and found no mention of Arroyo. The closest thing I found was him mentioning him leaving Navarro. Paladin117^{>>iff bored;} 23:25, April 5, 2013 (UTC)

New location after FO2 ending?[]

I don't know if I understood right, but in the endgame video it says the Vault 13 dwellers and Arroyo villagers reached the shore in a different place, I didn't understand it very well, was everyone in a different place and Arroyo was refounded (A.K.A New Arroyo) or just the Vault Dweller didn't knew where they where and settle with the others in the village? Just a little question here.--AntonioBarbarian (talk) 23:12, April 5, 2013 (UTC)

Arroyo Location?[]

The article states that Arroyo is located in what was once Oregon, but it doesn't seem to list a source. I mention this only because I believe I have found out today that Arroyo is actually located in far northern California. Granted, according to my findings, Reno is set in eastern California and not western Nevada. So, the questions are: what's the source for Arroyo being in Oregon, and should the in-game maps not be relied upon for referencing the location of in-game locales?--74.250.176.121 00:22, October 20, 2015 (UTC)

Change for pronoun[]

I did an undo on the last edit on this article, in order to change the pronouns back to neutral for the player characters mentioned here. The articles read that for the purposes of the wiki, all player characters are referred to in a neutral way. -bowndarrow 00:59, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Emily Ortal statement[]

Nice, got published in the middle of my edit summary.

To pick up the topic: Emily's statement is not clear evidence of the NCR having annexed Arroyo.
She replies to the Courier's explicit question about how long she has been with the followers, telling them about her background, then points out how the good work is being done where she is right now.
In her next sentence, she generally talks about the hardships for folks living in the NCR while the republic is at war, and how scientific endeavors suffer from it, due to all funds being redirected to the war effort.
It is at best ambiguous, but it definitely does not prove Arroyo's annexation as a "fact."

–Findabair^{The benefit of the doubt is often doubtful.} 09:21, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Arroyo Is Part of the NCR[]

To follow up on Findabair's claims that Emily Ortal's statement "doesn't prove" that the NCR annexed Arroyo at some point, how would she know about the effects that NCR taxation and Republic inflation are having on Republic citizens living in the Republic Core Regions? And why would she randomly and out of nowhere talk about NCR taxes/inflation while also referring to Arroyo unless she was also speaking about NCR taxes/inflation in Arroyo (which would only be the case if Arroyo was a part of the NCR)?

If she had said "Back West", "Back in the Republic" or "Back in California" then Findabair would be right about ambiguity but the simple fact of the matter is that she's obviously speaking about Arroyo being a part of the NCR. That's literally the only possible logical reason for Emily Ortal to bring up Arroyo followed by also bringing up NCR taxation and Republic inflation out of nowhere without explicitly stating that she's talking about the Republic Core Regions.

- TheChonChon|link=User talk:TheChonChon 3:56 9 November, 2021 (UTC).

It is not our place to infer what is meant when something is not clear. A source should be irrefutable evidence, where common sense is subjective and can be wrong. It certainly could be the case that she's saying the Arroyo is part of the NCR, but there is room for doubt. If we were purely debating the intent behind what she had said, not the quotes merits as an in article citation, I would agree with you that she is most likely saying the Arroyo is part of the NCR. But this point has been argued over several times before now, so it is a moot point. That it is so strongly contested means there is significant enough doubt, that a better, clearer citation is needed. The Dyre Wolf (talk) 10:57, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Fair enough, I suppose. - TheChonChon|link=User talk:TheChonChon 5:08 9 November, 2021 (UTC).

To give you some background info, the claim that her statement proves the annexation of Arroyo by the NCR is not exactly a new one, it was on this article before and has been brought up in the past. In fact, there was a discussion about this very topic happening on Discord two months ago. General consensus among users involved was that her dialogue alone is not 100% clear evidence. In turn, the statement was removed from the article two days later.

“how would she know about the effects that NCR taxation and Republic inflation are having on Republic citizens living in the Republic Core Regions?”

She could have spoken with other folks while travelling from Arroyo to the Strip. Many (drunk) NCR personnel is present on the Strip, which may speak with her about things. To mention just two possibilites.

“And why would she randomly and out of nowhere talk about NCR taxes/inflation while also referring to Arroyo unless she was also speaking about NCR taxes/inflation in Arroyo”

Because she does not refer to Arroyo imho. If she was, she would have stated "NCR taxes and inflation haven been hard for my people..." or something similar - whereas she use the general term "...been hard for a lot of people..." And while I agree that it is only logical to assume, she does not even refer to NCR citizen specifically. Taxes and inflation of a nation can have an impact on people not part of it just as well, as NCR currency is used by many, including merchants in the Mojave.

“If she had said "Back West", "Back in the Republic" or "Back in California" then Findabair would be right about ambiguity but the simple fact of the matter is that she's obviously speaking about Arroyo being a part of the NCR.”

If it was obvious, we would not have this discussion right now, and other users would not have talked about it back in September.

“That's literally the only possible logical reason for Emily Ortal to bring up Arroyo followed by also bringing up NCR taxation and Republic inflation out of nowhere without explicitly stating that she's talking about the Republic Core Regions.”

Unless it is a general statement of hers. Just because we cannot think of other possible reasons, it does not mean that there are none.

In my opinion, and like I already wrote earlier, it is entirely possible that she includes Arroyo in her second and third sentences. But then her dialogue is way too unspecific in that regard, she does not connect the dots for us. This is why I think that claiming Arroyo to be part of the Republic on this source alone is not valid. I hope this makes sense in some way.
–Findabair^{The benefit of the doubt is often doubtful.} 11:43, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

I think it is unwise to assume that annexation is the only way a government's taxes could impact a region or city. For example, if the United States increases taxes on a specific good or service, it could/will impact trade worldwide, including implications on logistics, cost, demand, currency value. The United States does not have to annex the world for it to have those impacts, similarly to how the NCR would not have to annex Arroyo in order for its legislation to have a financial impact on nearby regions. -kdarrow ^{take her for a spin!} 18:55, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

This has already been discussed on the wiki's discord server a few times in the past so I'll go ahead and transpose my thoughts from one of those past discussions:

The dialogue in question is this:

The Courier: "How long have you been with the Followers?"

Emily Ortal: "About five years now. I have family back in Arroyo, but this is where all of the good work is being done, so to speak. NCR taxes and inflation have been hard for a lot of people to deal with, and most of the money is going to the war effort. There's not much funding for medical research with OSI or any other group - not unless it has a military application, anyway."

(Emily Ortal's dialogue)

With the provided reasoning being this:

"Emily Ortal is referring to NCR taxation and inflation in Arroyo, which is only possible, if Arroyo is a part of the NCR. The Mojave is not integrated into the NCR and neither taxes nor inflation apply in the territory."

Except... nothing about that dialogue seems to specifically say NCR taxes and inflation have been hard for ARROYO to deal with? She's a Follower of the Apocalypse and to my mind she could very much be referring to a general "everyone in the NCR is having trouble" thing. Like, she left Arroyo to "come to the NCR" and is talking about the NCR's troubles, not the troubles of Arroyo.

Hopefully this helps clear things up on what I'm thinking. To further elaborate on how I've interpreted this:

All we can take from this specific comment is that she is from Arroyo ("family back in Arroyo") and that she came to the Mojave because it's "where all of the good work is being done" - judging from her other comments it's safe to assume, IMO, she's referring to charity work being important and needed in the Mojave.

Here she's following up on her comment that she came to the Mojave because "all the good work is being done" there - likely, IMO, referring to people there being in need of charity and the Followers being the only group in the area willing to do medical research. You could interpret this as her saying that she couldn't get any medical research done in Arroyo due to the OSI and NCR's influence, but I feel like it's equally likely - perhaps more likely - that she's saying that Arroyo is boring and well-off and that she came here because the Followers need medical researchers to help people in the Mojave.

Essentially, my argument is that you can interpret this comment as meaning "Arroyo is doing fine, but people out here need help and NCR won't provide it, which is why I joined the followers and came here, to do some good work" just as easily as you can interpret it as meaning "Arroyo is chafing under NCR taxes and inflation and I can't get anything done there, which is why I ran off to the Mojave".

Personally I feel like the former is a more likely explanation, but that's beside the point - both are valid interpretations without any further evidence from other sources to clarify the matter, so picking one would be speculation. And Kdarrow also brings up a solid point about how Arroyo doesn't necessarily have to be a part of the NCR for its tax policies and economic decline to have a negative effect on them - the decline of a major economic superpower could be harming trade all across the west coast.

Better to just leave it at the bare facts, IMO. "A follower of the Apocalypse named Emily Ortal was from Arroyo, and in 2281 she commented that she left the settlement to do charity work and medical research in the Mojave." --DirtyBlue929 (talk) 19:06, 9 November 2021 (UTC)