Talk:Link (The Legend of Zelda)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Link (The Legend of Zelda) article.
Article policies
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
Featured article star Link (The Legend of Zelda) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 19, 2005.
Peer review This Everydaylife article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. It has been rated FA-Class on the assessment scale (comments).
To-do list for Link (The Legend of Zelda): edit · history · watch · refresh
  • expand reception section
  • copyedit, weed out any hidden unreferenced statements
Archive
Archives


Contents

[edit] Archived

I archived this page. It was 141 kilobytes long...--Smashbrosboy (talk) 05:05, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] link and toon link

shouldn't they have there own page being 2 seperate people? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki443556 (talk • contribs) 10:23, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

"Toon Link" is merely Link from The Wind Waker. This page covers the 7+ incarnations of Link, including both Twilight Princess and The Wind Waker.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 23:15, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding the dates

Why aren't any of them wiki-linked in the paragraphs? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 04:27, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pic

Um for the main pic, should we use the ocarina of time pic? Only because it was nominated the best game or somethinThe Legend of G (talk) 23:29, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

This is explained in the archives - just because more of the series' fans like a certain representation doesn't mean it will be the most accessible image to the wider populace. Think about it - is some parent trying to figure out what their kid is babbling about really going to recognize a picture from a game about a decade old?Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 01:24, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

No we swhould use the Twilight Princess Picture, its now links modern accepted appearence. As evident in SSBB! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.44.101.184 (talk) 11:25, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

if you think we should use modren era then toon link would be the newest link because of phantom hourglass. Edaldren (talk) 23:55, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Modernity isn't all that matters; we should use the image most people have of Link, that is, something like TP or OOT. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zeck (talk • contribs) 14:23, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

..then prove that. Prove that most people (and by that, NOT just people introduced to the series by OoT) know Link by his OoT/TP image. In fact, I would actually bet that most people that weren't introduced by OoT know him by his original design, the little chibi guy. PH is the one most recently in advertising, and thus most visible and likely to be in a general reader's memory.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 05:37, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Seven Links

Ok, i was just playing Super Smash Bros. Brawl, and on Snake's stage fighting Toon Link, his codec info tells him that there are seven diff. Links from diff. eras and homes. It also states that the essence of the triforce always stays the same. Check it out for yourselves, and see if you should put it in. User: Kazaan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.20.78.16 (talk) 02:16, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

She says "several" not "seven". Video is on IGN. Axem Titanium (talk) 15:14, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Important reference to beef up the article

http://stars.ign.com/articles/860/860908p1.html Lets reference this as much as its worth.Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:02, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Query

  1. "in other media" - because it is wrong, and proved so in that very sentence. "Other media" would include the TV series, and there's no good reason to over-generalize it.
  2. Majora's mask image: because we have too many images on the page already, and it was new. It didn't seem necessary enough to keep it, and looked like it was mainly there for ornamentation, which is against the fair-use guidelines.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 15:46, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
  1. "in other media" applies to the comics also, not just manga.
  2. Each image has a purpose thus far; they illustrate the different Link encarnations. Any more pics would be too much, yes. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 15:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
  1. The American "comics" is still considered a manga, but you agree that we shouldn't just use "other media", correct?
  2. Fine, but it seemed like it had been arbitrarily added, since it was a recent addition according to the edit history.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 14:45, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
  1. Yes. I saw your point afterward (manga is also known as "comics" in Japan so figured using that term)
  2. What exactly are you saying? I linked the "as of 2007" per WP:ASOF. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 14:53, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
According to this diff, which is the one I checked, the image was new. I may have missed the diff where it was removed by accident.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 13:31, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rinku → Rinkū

I have changed the nihongo to demonstrate "Rinkū" because not only does Rinku Town do this, Rinku Gate Tower Building does the same. Was this a bold move? I made a similar edit to List of YuYu Hakusho characters#Rinku. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 16:18, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

It was incorrect, if that's what you're asking. The "ū" is for when the kana form has a double "u" (like if it has been ri-n-ku-u).Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 15:22, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
What was that for? If you're going to revert a good faith edit with undo, please leave a reason why per the undo message: If you are undoing an edit that is not vandalism, explain the reason in the edit summary rather than using only the default message. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 16:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
You're honestly throwing a fit because I gave the reason on the talk page only, and not in both places? Do you realize how ridiculously bureaucratic that is? And then you reverted it for that reason alone?Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 18:52, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
And then you revert both the article edit (which is false information, by the way - I could give you a corresponding little "vandalism warning" if I was as bureaucratic as you're trying to be) and remove my comment here? Very mature. Someone disagrees with you, so you try to censure them.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 22:10, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
But here, I'll lay it out even clearer than I did the first time.
Link's name is spelled リンク. Ri-n-ku.
The town is spelled りんくう. Ri-n-ku-u.
Now, those in our viewing audience with rudimentary counting skills will notice that there are three letters in Link's name, and four in the town's. The even smaller number of us who have actually been through even the most basic Japanese classes, and have the authority to know what the hell we are talking about, will also notice that the character's name only has one u-base letter, while the town has an elongated one.
I know you were only trying to help originally, but when you deliberately and repeatedly insert false information into an article for mere bureaucratic, time-wasting, and wiki-lawyering reasons, you are in fact being just as much a vandal as those who continuously replace articles with "LINK IS TEH F*XORZ", and I have no patience for you.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 22:25, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
This is called a personal attack. I suggest you should also read up on WP:CIV and WP:ASSUME. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 00:38, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Deliberately inserting false information for bureaucratic reasons is a violation of WP:POINT. And no, it's not a personal attack, as I did not unfairly insult your capabilities or accuse you of bad faith edits until after you made it clear you were wiki-lawyering. Yes, I was probably overly aggressive, but again, I have no patience for people who obstruct the project by being obsessed with bureaucratic rules.
Let's review:
  1. After I explained on the talk page why your edit was unfortunately false, and reverted it as such, you deliberately re-inserted false information for the sake of proving a point, violating WP:POINT.
  2. You then accused me of a bad faith edit, when I simply didn't see the need to be redundant, violating WP:ASSUME.
  3. You have also violated 3RR long before I did (well, maybe my first edit counted as well, so possibly we tied for it), with no justification for it besides wanting to make a point, violating WP:3RR.
I think if anyone needs block warnings, it would be you. You are deliberately obstructing the insertion of correct information for your own personal whims - a much bigger "no-no" then violating the 3RR rule to remove vandalism. If you really want to keep this fight going, I really don't think you'll come out the winner. I'm not going to report your obstructionist and vandalizing behavior if you agree to just let it go, but neither will I roll over and let you get away with blocking me if you want to drag this out. Yes, I realize how incredibly stupid it is to fight over a silly little line over a u, but you're the one who turned this into an attack. So, truce?Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 01:04, 14 May 2008 (UTC)