Talk:The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess/Archive 2

message: I really really shouldn't get involved, but someone (who shall remain nameless) felt as if I should say something. THE COVER IS REALLY DIFFERENT! If no one will back him up, I should. The Gamecube cover is a lot more colorful  and the WII is a lot more tannish (bronze works too:) Well if you feel as if I don't have any right to do this, tell me but THEY ARE SOO DIFFERENT! Momoroxmysoxoff September 26, 15:33
:In most sources I found the boxart to be the same on GC and Wii, they are almost the same game you know. But if you have any proof, show me. -EEVEE103
::It's a bit of an old discussion, but if you can see all the boxarts here.JackSparrow Ninja 15:16, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cover 

message: Long talk page.  Can we set up a set of sub-pages for older talk subjects, so that the newer (usually more pertinent) issues are easier to locate?
--Stratadrake 04:15, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, after some quick wikiresearch on subpages, I've cut/pasted the older discussion sections (i.e. no comments since January 2006) onto the /Archive1 subpage ... doing so was frighteningly easy. 
Though next time, a page move followed by copy/paste back into the talk page might be better.--Stratadrake 09:37, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Archive This?

message: I investigated the poster's claim, and 3rd April is the what it says. However, since this site has other, obviously spurious release dates on it (Legend of Zelda: Revolution out on 3/1/2006, anyone?) there is reasonable reason to discount this site for such matters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Setokaiba (talk • contribs) 
:I work at Circuit City and they just put up preorder cards for a release date of 11/01/05. So I am still confused as to when its coming out. (Note I also check CircuitCity.com and they claim, 11/08/06.Chotchki 15:37, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That date seems extremely unlikely. Has Circuit City not been informed of the delay? --Optichan 21:16, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

text: April 3rd is the first Monday in the month; since it's unlikely that Nintendo would ship the game out on Saturday or Sunday, it made the most sense to list that day as a possible release day. Unfortunately, by not going with the common "first of the month", it makes it look more like a real release date as opposed to a placeholder. It would be so much better if these places could tweak their databases and websites to allow the entering of a month/year value as opposed to requiring the exact day. -- VederJuda 21:57, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: IGN has it listed as coming out April 15 which is a Saturday. http://cube.ign.com/objects/572/572738.html (right side under the box art) IceDrake523 01:43, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I checked Yahoo and they too have the game coming out in April 2006. I added the month since there have been a number of websites that also state this information. http://videogames.yahoo.com/ongoingfeature?eid=431017&page=0 -IceDrake523 17:56, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Gamestop's Release Date

message: This game logo looks a lot like the Ragnarok online 2, also in development, logo. isn't it weird?Raquel Sama 17:48, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: not really, the Ragnarok online 2 logo is a dragon type thing comming up from the upper left, the zelda one has the wolf from the left. they are simiiler but not enough so to warent being mentionedShinigami Josh 04:37, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: game logo

message: I haven't seen any news regarding this.  If this is true, it's absolutely huge news, seeing as though it would be coming from a first party source to Nintendo.  However, I've heard nothing about this announcement from Nintendo Power.  Does anyone know if this is true?
--buckeyes1186 03:02, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure myself. I don't believe the newest Nintendo Power is out yet and Nintendo.com still has the release date listed as 2006. IceDrake523 02:54, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My latest NP doesn't say... reverting it until volume and page are cited. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 03:26, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: March 2006 According to Nintendo Power?

message: Do we really need to have the paragraph comparing the flame/whip/chain boss to the Balrog? It's one thing saying it resembles it, but to have all this analysis about speculation... it's a little fanboyish. Surely just a description of the boss will suffice. - Tredanse 13:41, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I certainly see no reason to keep it, although this user clearly wants to "get it right" Setokaiba✌≝ 14:03, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well the user did a sucky job of it, not even knowing how to link to other wiki articles. Anyway, I reduced it to half a sentence. Since this was at least the second user to make the comparison, I didn't delete it, but it definitely doesn't deserve any more mention that that in a Zelda article. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 15:01, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

text: It looks like a balrog, and most people are calling it that until we get a name. JONJONAUG 01:09, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That doesn't make it in any way accurate. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 01:08, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bosses 

message: Is there not a way to have this user 69.34.162.232 blocked? He keeps on spamming about the Revolution, time after time. Hyrule 04:27, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: he is getting irritating. Could someone do something about it ? SmegEd 13:18, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are still users like him that constantly change the date and rating of the game.  The game is TBA and Rating is T right? XxLeekxX 05:16, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The rating of the game is RP. The releasedate is indeed still TBA Hyrule 05:25, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  User block Revolution spam 

message: Could people PLEASE stop adding releasedates?
It's nice and all that the local news stand on the corner in some backwater town tells you they know the releasedate of Twilight Princess, but if anything, with TP retailers have proven to be extremely unreliable. 
The press will catch up when there's a real releasedate, please stop changing this article to fit some random retailer releasedate. Hyrule 06:30, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Releasedate mania 

message: I've recently heard from G4 that their sources indicate that Twilight Princess will be delayed again Lord Falcon 15:56, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you be a little more specific?  G4's live coverage of E3 doesn't start until 6pm EST.  I thought all of their video game shows would be repeats up until then, unless maybe I've missed something? --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 16:49, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Twilight Princess will be released in two versions on the same day: one each for GameCube and Wii.  See the Nintendo Press Conference: Nintendo E3. --LuminousSpecter 17:28, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I noticed that they're releasing it on the same day as Wii's launch, but there's no indication that it's been delayed again.  Everything I've read seems to indicate the console coming out November of this year which falls right in line with Twilight Princess's speculated release date. --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 17:50, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delayed Again? 

message: What good are the "preceded by" and "followed by" fields?  If we list them in order of game development, Twilight Princess is clearly preceded by Wind Waker.  On the other hand, if we use the game's own chronology, TP follows Ocarina of Time but precedes Wind Waker (which is complicated by the fact that TP is not a direct sequel to OoT, as Majora's Mask was).
Furthermore, the entire Legend of Zelda series has its own box template at the bottom of the article, and the "preceded/followed by" parameters are under some debate even on the infobox's own Talk page.
So... uh... any consensus on what (if anything) we do about it?  --Stratadrake 01:03, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't really see the point in them, as you can find the order in the series box below, as well in the series article. Besides, The Minish Cap preceeded Twilight Princess ;-) Hyrule 05:00, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Infobox 

message: Who removed the links to the first couple of trailers for the game at the bottom of the page. I think it's relevent to the article.--Wikiphilia 23:41, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Links to trailers & pics 

message: Quote from Shigeru Miyamoto when speaking of the differences between the Wii and the GameCube version.</br>
"But there's also the 16:9 widescreen, which is obviously another difference. Then again, if you take the Wii version and go back to play it on a 4:3 television, then it's actually just shrinking down, it will cut off the edges, so that kind of offers a different experience as well." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hyrule (talk • contribs) 14:08, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Source on that quote? -- WikidSmaht (talk) 20:16, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd been cleaning up the citations, and I'm sure it was in there.  I guess this means it's time to go back through the article. *sigh* Dancter 20:27, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, you’re right. I hadn’t reviewed your changes yet when I made that comment, only Hyrule’s, which, as usual, cited his own fan site. Nice work, by the way. You deserve a barnstar, but not sure which one is appropriate. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 21:29, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just checked the history. Didn't know about the redirect. They're the same thing? That could've saved me some keystrokes. It seems that there are quite a few articles on future games right now that share the same problem with original research. I feel a little guilty marking this article up like that, especially after cleaning up the references that were there. I must say, while not appropriate for a Wikipedia article, some of the original theories in this article are quite impressive. Dancter 22:38, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I think more articles should look like this, and I’m glad that  is so ugly, it prompts people to act on it. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 23:04, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was tempted to put up some  tags, but then I thought that would be too much. Maybe I should have. I'm thinking those could have helped explain what I'm trying to get at. Dancter 23:36, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 16:9 widescreen vs 4:3

message: The section discussing a rumor that Zelda might be a playable character in this one has been in the article for quite some time, but despite having witnessed a fair deal of the Zelda fan base online, I haven't actually seen people seriously pushing this theory.  There doesn't actually seem to be any official refutation of it, with regards to the "Citation needed" tag, but I think that's more because the rumor simply doesn't exist far beyond this article itself.  As such, I would reccommend removing the mention of it completely.  Support? Fieari 22:51, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *supports* Hyrule 23:44, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now we just need a more appropriate location for the Zelda concept art.  I'm loathe to remove it entirely, just because it is so pretty, but we don't really seem to actually talk about Zelda anywhere. Fieari 18:34, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I added that a while back because every time it was removed, a new anon would come by and put it in again. As for the official refutation, I read it in some article. It might have been IGN, an interviewer commented on how Midna was the first new playable character in Zelda( guess they forgot about Kafei), and the interviewee said that it wasn’t really Midna, you control wolf-Link and she’s just along for the ride, and that Link was still the only playable character and there were no plans to change that. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 23:01, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zelda Playable 

message: So far every store I've asked said it comes out Sept. 8. I'm keeping my fingers crossed! Bly1993 13:04, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd advice you to use your fingers to play a game rather then keep them crossed for something not happening. As for reliable releasedate information, gamestores are at the bottom of the ocean. Besides, Q4 starts in october. Hyrule 14:08, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Release date

message: Regarding this excerpt:
:It has also been confirmed that some weapons can now be combined, as with the bomb-arrows seen in one trailer. This combo actually originated in the classic Game Boy adventure Link’s Awakening, and fans have been clamoring for the feature’s return ever since.)
I watched the trailer referenced, and I don't believe it supports this claim.  Bomb arrows are indeed shown, but combining items is not.  For all we know, bomb arrows could be a special pickup.  The oil combining thing does smack of original research too.  I'm going to remove them unless there's better arguments for this. Fieari 04:36, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: please do. 69.199.121.37 05:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Combining Items 

message: From what I've been able to find, it seems that claims that Twilight Princess will have more dungeons than any other Zelda game are based on the premise that Ocarina of Time had the most dungeons of the other Zelda games. Is this verifiable? Dancter 17:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: LttP had more dungeons than OoT, IIRC. Fieari 19:01, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll look up the interview/quote. It's been said "more dungeons then any other Zelda game", which means at least 13 (ALttP had 12) Hyrule 03:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Nevermind, I see it's already been found. Hyrule 03:46, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "more dungeons" 

message: According to the Manual of Style:
:There are two options when considering the look of the quotation marks themselves:
:* Typographic “text”, ‘text’
:* Typewriter "text", 'text'
:As there is currently no consensus on which should be preferred, either is acceptable. However, it appears that historically the majority of Wikipedia articles, and those on the Internet as a whole, follow the latter style.  If curved quotation marks or apostrophes appear in article titles, ensure that there is a redirect with straight glyphs.
:Never use grave and acute accents or backticks (`text´) as quotation marks or apostrophes.
While there is no preferred style officially, consistancy is a good thing when working on articles.  My computer does not automatically create the typographic quote marks, instead always using the typewriter ones.  Furthermore, the text editor I use to edit wikipedia can't even display them, instead rendering them as blank square black boxes.  As such, it would be very diffult for me to use the curly quotes instead of the straight ones.
Can we have some consensus?  Out of neccessity, I've been replacing all the curly quotes with straight ones in sections I work on, so as not to break the article. \ But when I return later, I see someone seems to have changed them back to curly.  Should this system be maintained, or can we just switch fully to straight marks? Fieari 05:30, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone's been actively changing them? I hadn't noticed that. For what it's worth, I think the straight quotes are easier to manage and more consistent.  Dancter 06:14, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I've argued on MoS for straight quotes, for the sake of editability. In my opinion the ideal is that the wikitext would always contain straight quotes, but would be rendered curly on the fly by the parser. Deco 06:29, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consistancy with quote marks 

message: The Good article nomination for  has failed
:Major lack of stability, owing perhaps to the fact that this game hasn't been released yet.
 cholmes75 (chit chat) 15:58, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Good articles|Good Article]] [[Wikipedia:Good articles/Nominations|nomination]] has failed 

message: Just in case you guys think it's worth mentioning. http://wii.ign.com/articles/726/726748p1.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.234.206.177 (talk • contribs) .
:Added already, but thank you. JackSparrow Ninja 16:34, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New stuff

message: have they given another release date yet?
:nope. 14 (US and Jap) and 15 (Europe) september they have a big Wii party thing though, at which all is expected to be revealed. JackSparrow Ninja 05:30, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: nintendo have also done stuff like this recently with the release of the DSlite 10 days before NA Shinigami Josh 03:39, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The current release date

message: I noticed that in the boss section that big, ghostly, dog-like creature is not mentioned. Shouldn't we mention it. I mean, it is boss-sized. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.194.217.222 (talk • contribs) .
it is one of the good guys. JackSparrow Ninja 16:04, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What about that big, ghostly, dog-like creature?

message: Link in the Wii version of the game is right-handed now. Probably something to do with the new Wii controls. 143.88.67.112 18:25, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What new screenshots???  -SaturnYoshi 02:03, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: this one JackSparrow Ninja 02:43, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think he's actually holding that sword with two hands, because the way his sheath is pointing, it shows that he would draw his sword using his left hand.  -SaturnYoshi 02:47, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: all new screens in higher res. JackSparrow Ninja 03:48, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Look here for some videos. Link is clearly right-handed. It seems that they changed it because most people are right-handed and it would be ackward for Link to be left-handed and the person not to be. However, if it weren't really important, they wouldn't have changed it, so there's probably an option that can be changed for the lefties. It would be relatively simple, I'd imagine. Either way, it's gonna be awesome! -Platypus Man | Talk 06:23, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's an option or something.  This video has him left-handed.  Or...  Maybe the "Twilight Realm" mirrors everything.  -SaturnYoshi THE VOICES 01:30, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, your video is from E3, before they changed the hand, back when it was all left. You'll only find righty Link in videos from September 14 or after. -Platypus Man | Talk 17:08, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We don't know if it's an option or not. Don't start speculating ;) JackSparrow Ninja 19:44, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I never said it wasn't an option. I think you misread my statement -- I mean that you won't find a right-handed Link in videos before the 14th, not that there won't be left-handed Link after the 14th. In fact, I'd think that they would logically have to make it an option. -Platypus Man | Talk 23:38, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Considering Link is officially left-handed, more research is needed.  I doubt it will make any real difference for the player though, as it's already mentioned that Link's spin attack relies on the nunchuk attachment while the bow/arrow and boomerang use the Wii Remote in its point-and-click mode.  --Stratadrake 21:39, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Stratadake, you do realize that there is more than 1 Link in the Zelda timeline? Link is USUALLY left handed, not always since there have been several Links. TJ Spyke 22:22, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, the Multiple Links theory.  I haven't read up on that in ages, but I did notice how the NES and SNES games used sprite-flipping for Link's actions when he was facing right or left, making him appear ambidextrous.  I don't know more than that though... need to go refresh my knowledge on that subject. --Stratadrake 23:43, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link is right-handed in Wii version. 

message: New screenshots of the game show several characters seemingly having reversed designs and the demo level being mirrored also from previous version. Anybody know why this happened? 12.207.127.76 05:41, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, no explanation has been given on the subject. However, unlike some websites, we need not go into speculation about this and just leave the subject untill, if at all, Nintendo comments on it. JackSparrow Ninja 05:43, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It should be noted in the article along with the information about a right-handed Link. Link's article should be updated with that too alongside with his right-handedness. 12.207.127.76 05:44, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We don't know the reason of the reverse design. It might just be a redesign for some parts, or in all. The speculation that would make it worth noting, that GC is left around and Wii right around, is too speculative and on top of that, too far sought. JackSparrow Ninja 06:37, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It should be noted anyway. 12.207.127.76 06:52, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wii version is mirrored?

message: May i add that in this new trailer that it is shown that link can fly? --70.130.41.157 08:34, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We see 2 seconds of Link hanging under a flying creature. That's not flying and might just as well be a mini-game. Besides, Aonuma said at E3 2005 there will be no flying transportation (mini-games excluded of course). JackSparrow Ninja 21:35, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What are you talking about? Did you see the same trailer? Link becomes a bird and flies around. True, it may be a mini-game, but Link definately flies at some point in the game. -Platypus Man | Talk 17:06, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

text: OK. I looked at it again and admit defeat. However, the player still is clearly controlling the bird, even if it's not Link himself. Maybe it's Midna? -Platypus Man | Talk 23:40, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It could be but claiming that would be pure speculation. That would need to be verified before adding. --65.95.19.142 20:43, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

text: "The flying dragon-like creature we have seen in one of the recent trailers, that was carrying Wolf Link, is an enemy that you control. You first encounter such a sequence while following the story, but at a later point you will see these sort of sequences again in mini-game and sidequest form. To put rumours to rest, this -and Cucco's- is the only sort of flying in the game." JackSparrow Ninja 02:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flying in TP 

message: I've just removed the reference to Ladyhawke, basically because it is completely irrelevant.  Paraphrased, what I removed says "it was thought that the wolf-dynamic was inspired by a manga, but it isn't".  I think there's absolutely no reason for it being, but does anyone object? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wapatista (talk • contribs) .
:Actually I'm glad you did. JackSparrow Ninja 06:38, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ladyhawke Reference 

message: Twilight Princess is the first Zelda game to be relased in the Americas before in Japan.
What about Four Swords? Wikipedia doesn't have the release details there for some reason, but I'm pretty sure that came out in Japan in 2003, and the US version certainly came out in 2002. --Impossible 14:55, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The infobox on the game's Wikipedia page also has that infomation listed. I believe that the statement should be removed if it has not already been done. --65.95.19.159 21:03, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Miscellaneous 

message: http://wii.ign.com/articles/733/733762p1.html 12.207.127.76 21:26, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There you have it.  And it still states that Link is traditionally left-handed.  -SaturnYoshi THE VOICES 01:45, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I think you ahve missed the point. There is no 'mirror mode' the Wii version is a mirror of the Gamecube version.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.144.251.120 (talk • contribs) 
owing to the fact that it cant have been the same link in every game, and the fact that the link directs you to a 404 error, it still hasnt been confirmed as definiteShinigami Josh 03:39, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mirror Mode Confirmed!!! 

message: The article mentions that there is a recently released video where link is in his normal form and retrieves the master sword, could someone please provide a link for this video? 124.186.180.238 05:52, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Added under links as 'latest trailer'. JackSparrow Ninja 13:09, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Master Sword video 

message: I think we have enough information on characters and setting to move all of that into its own articleJudgesurreal777 17:56, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Moving information

message: Two things; if the game hasn't been released yet, why is there spoilers (I've obviously not read them)? Secondly, pretty much the whole article is under a spoiler section, I can only read about... two paragraphs in it! Could some spoilers be removed or something? Shamess 09:29, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am against having spoiler warnings at all since they are not encyclopedic. You wouldn't see something like there in any normal encyclopedia. TJ Spyke 19:45, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But you wouldn't see articles about video games in a normal encyclopedia. This isn't a normal encyclopedia. 70.26.91.139 20:33, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's the same thing with movies though, spoiler warnings are not encyclopedic. If people don't want to read about a game (which included the plot), then they shouldn't go to an encyclopedia entry on it. TJ Spyke 21:43, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoilers 

message: Is it not obvious that the reason that Link is right-handed here is because most players will be right-handed (as most people are), and the increased interactivity of the Wii controller means that if Link remained left-handed, players would be playing off-handed, seriously effecting the game experience? I'm not sure there's any big mystery here; just pragmatism. Kelvingreen 09:19, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's already confirmed that Link is right-handed in the Wii version. Also, are you thinking of Shigeru Miyamoto? TJ Spyke 19:27, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm just pissed off the game is on the Wii at all. Because now I'm going to have the buy the friggin thing twice because I won't feel like i've completed it until I've done it with both sets of controls. I'm pretty appalled that they've changed Link to a righty too... what a load of balls. How hard is it to say that when you swing the controller, Link swings it the same way but from the opposite side. Oh wait, it's not hard at all. Duh. Bullshit. TP should have been GC only, then they should have started work on a Wii based Zelda game from the ground up, none of this conversion rubbish. (195.92.168.168 21:03, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Keep in mind here that Wikipedia is not a forum. The talk pages are for discussing changes to the article, not posting personal opinions. --Sasuke-kun27 21:22, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Right-handedness 

message: Does anyone know what kind of stuff will be included in the collector's edition of the Gamecube version?  Am I right that there is no collector's edition for the Wii?  Please, anyone with info should add it to the article.  66.41.25.143 05:12, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If it was known, it was added. Just have some patience young padawan. They will most likely not unveil that information, if it's still coming that is, untill after the Wii launch. They don't want to cut down on Wii sales. JackSparrow Ninja 05:14, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What collector's edition? I haven't seen any news about a CE. TJ Spyke 05:18, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Reggie's mentioned it last winter. JackSparrow Ninja 07:03, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I only remember him saying that GC owners might get a pre-order bonus. Since there has been no mention of a CE since then, I think it's safe to assume their won't be one or else Nintendo would have said something. TJ Spyke 07:15, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gamecube Collector's Edition 

message: In the introduction of this article it states that the GameCube release date is set to the 13th of December, while later in the article under the 5th and 6th paragraphs of the "Development" section it states the GameCube release will be the 12th of December. Do we have absolute confirmation on which of the two dates it is? --Nicklegends 17:51, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are conflicts even among official sources. I've seen official sources (i.e. Nintendo) say both the 12th and 13th. The 12th is a Monday, so it will probably ship on that day and arrive in stores the 13th. TJ Spyke 20:18, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Nintendo press site says it's the 13th. I can't seem the find the 12th on the Zelda site anymore, so I guess that solves it. JackSparrow Ninja 02:40, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: On the zelda.com page (http://zelda.com/universe/game/twilightprincess/) the text at the bottom still shows the 12th. It is rather tough to find, but nonetheless it is also official, as are the reports of the 13th. I see what Spyke means now. --Nicklegends 15:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release Date Conflict 

message: with the recent increased occurances of it should we move to have the page edit protected, at least by non-users?? Shinigami Josh 11:16, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: vandalism

message: The GCN to Wii comparison image is extremely misleading. Though they are indeed shots from the game running each platform, the Cube ones are extremely outdated, and the Wii ones are about two days old. The image is therefore misleading and not proper representations of the game on each system. I am going to remove the image until one can be produced from the final versions of each game. While it is likely that the Wii version does look slightly better (such as widescreen support,) effects like light satuation were not added until late into the game's development, around the time that it was being prepared for Wii. Please understand that representing the game as it is in the final version is more important than making the GCN version look bad. 24.131.157.78 07:16, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you completely mate.  As far as I understand, there are four aesthetic differences between the Wii and GCN version: Wii is in wide-screen, supports 480p, has a different (and I must say, much uglier) HUD and has a fairy cursor.  Firstly, I don't think these differences really merit a comparative picture.  Secondly, there are no comparative screenshots to use, that is there are no screenshots that show the exact same scene on each system.  Wapatista 09:40, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  GCN/Wii comparison pic 

message: I was wondering why the Zelda image was changed from the concept image to the screenshot? The screenshot is small and blurry (especially when compared to Darknut image), whereas the concept image is large and clear, and keeps in line with Link's concept art.  Thoughts? Mintchocolatebear 15:42, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it is because the artwork is over a year old, and the screenshot is reflective of the most recent version of Princess Zelda. I didn't change it, but I agree with the change - though you can get a better quality version from the trailer off GameVideos and taking a screen capture. --TSA 01:13, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the difference may be that the pic that is currently up (which i assume you are talking about) is of zelda in the Twilight Realm, in her funeral robes.  in one video she is seen in her normal pinkish-white dress.Aquilix 03:29, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zelda image 

message: Really huge...really unnecessarily huge.  Is there any reason for ALL those images? 199.126.137.209 05:06, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Those screenshots are the latest batch, that basically show the game as it will be released come Nov. 19th.  Plus, they're beautiful, and informative... and this article has gone way too long without a decent gallery.  I say leave them up. Wapatista 10:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The gallery is huge

message: The weapons section won't show up completely; half of it is missing. But it is there in the editing window. Bly1993 19:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a cache issue. Click here to purge the cache, and check again. -- ReyBrujo 20:14, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I noticed that problem myself and realized for that it started when I tried to add in Nintendo Power References to the article. I have removed them for now and at least on my computer everything it back to normal so I hope it is working fine for you now. I don't know why this caused the information removal so I will not try to add them back in myself because it will likely happen again. This does lead to the probelm of several unreferenced peices of info in the entry though so can someone with more experience try to add them back in a proper manner. --70.48.174.252 02:41, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: somethings wrong

message: According to this interview with George Harrsion the Wii version of the game will have downloadable content such as extra levels. (I'm assuming that means mini-dungeons of some kind.)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Kad-05 (talk • contribs) 
:It's completely taken out of context. There is no downloadable content in the Wii version.  JackSparrow Ninja 03:31, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Downloadable content in Wii version 

message: Can anyone tell me why the Twilight Realm's color style is mentioned under "weapons and items?" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Purplepurplepurple (talk • contribs) .
:There was something wrong with the text and some things were removed and somehow belended with other sections. I believe it was somehow caused  by some refrecnces that I added earler. They have been removed for the time being and it should be back to normal now. --70.48.174.252 03:08, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Twilight realm 

message: Is that most of it has been written from a slow accretion of facts gleamed from interviews and magazines over a very long time.  As such, throughout the article, many facts are corroborated with a statement like "in a recent interview" or "in the latest trailer", and disregarding the puerile nature of the overall effect, many of the implied interviews and trailers et al are actually no longer recent, and completely out of date!  There is also a secondary problem, where entire sections end up reading as short snippets of facts, in the order that they were made public...  Anyway, this article will probably metamorphose once TP finally gets released, but until then, I think someone should clean it up a little.  Someone who isn't avoiding spoilers, like me, and who can no longer read many sections, let alone edit them. Wapatista 10:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Most popular game articles on Wikipedia get an extensive rewrite after the game is actually released. Almost all of the information in the article is based on secondary and tertiary sources, so we can't be sure of anything until the game is out there and Wikipedia editors are playing the game. So, if the page is rewritten using primary sources, it will turn out much better than it is now. The development section of the article will probably be compressed and listed near the bottom of the article, as well. That's just how Wikipedia's editors work. 24.131.157.78 09:32, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  One major problem with this article 

message: OK, check out this bit from the article:
"Link will have three types of bombs available."
Where's the proof? There's a few more examples of this in the Weapons and Items sections, but I won't go into detail. Basically, those bits need some work. Maybe with bullet points. I love you bullet points. Ahem...I didn't state that out loud, did I?--Ninty 19:35, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They're from the latest Nintendo Power, but the reference messed up the page. JackSparrow Ninja 19:38, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proof Needed

message: something about sony and microcap suck i dont think tahts supposed to be there. ima take it off.
:It's a vandal.  The game is not even out yet.  -SaturnYoshi THE VOICES 23:21, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  umm it says something 

message: *Hopefully someone has the article archived.--Biolizard28 02:47, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: That vandal son of a bitch

message: Someone deleted the article please get it back! Waluigi300 23:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion 

message: The caption under the boss picture says Fyrus while the article says Pyrus... Are the two names freely exchangable or is it a simple mistake? 64.13.95.106 18:05, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I overlooked a Pyrus name while changing it then :$ It is Fyrus, as the screenshot in the reference shows. I'll change it now. JackSparrow Ninja 18:08, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was originally "Pyrus" in the NYC build, but has since changed to "Fyrus" in the final build.  To ensure I wasn't going crazy, my Golin/Harris rep confirmed this. Still need to see if it is this way in all versions. --TSA 19:49, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pyrus/Fyrus? 

message: I added a bit about how all/most of the soundtrack will be orchestrated. I cited ign, so it should be alright. Feel free to reword it or whatever. Just 5 more days! -IeditWikipedia 04:29, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I reworded it to be more concise. Good find, nice job. The IGN article is fairly old (June 2005), but, I think, still trustworthy, unless anyone has heard differently ...? --Herald Alberich 06:17, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

text: So it says it doesn't feature all orchestrated music, which should imply only a part of it. I guess that means some of the soundtrack, as opposed to most, will be orchestrated. Just wondering though, is that site trustworthy enough to cite? - IeditWikipedia 12:52, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Considering the fact that in the last year alone, he's been responsible for 4 mayor rumours, the answer to that is quite simply no. JackSparrow Ninja 19:05, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orchestrated Soundtrack 

message: Now Im mad that I know about the zelda and twilight king thing.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Superway25 (talk • contribs) 
:I can't blame you since the game isn't out yet. Once the game does come out, I think the warning should be removed. I feel that if you want to know about the game/move (which includes plot) then you shouldn't be look at an encyclopedia entry for it. TJ Spyke 21:58, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Surely we should keep the spoiler tags even once the game is released? I'm pretty sure they remain on other pages when a game or movie is released. --Zooba 23:42, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And I disagree with spoiler warnings on stuff that is already released. If people don't want to know about a game then they shouldn't be looking it up on a encyclopedia. TJ Spyke 23:45, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps... I suppose I wouldn't be too adverse keeping things that have been officially released as non-spoilers. ie. content revealed in trailers, interviews etc. Agree/disagree? --Zooba 23:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  There's no spoiler warning in front of the story 

message: The following two sentences from the plot section are very confusing:
"After Link enters the Twilight Realm, which, commanded by the Twilight King, reduces people to spirit form. Link, however, is transformed into a wolf instead upon entering, captured and imprisoned in a castle."
I don't know enough about the game to make a full determination as to how it should be worded, but I changed it to:
"After Link enters the Twilight Realm, which normally reduces people to spirit form, he is transformed into a wolf instead. Then he is captured and imprisoned in a castle."
If you disagree, let me know on my talk page.
Also, is it major or mayor in the plot section? And if someone would be so gracious as to archive this page. I would do it myself, but I'm not familiar enough with this talk page.--Farquaadhnchmn(Dungeon) 01:14, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your edit certainly makes it clearer, and is accurate from what I know. I'm fairly certain "major" is a typo; I'll change that, and someone can change it back if, for some reason, "major" is a rank in Kakariko and Ordon. --Herald Alberich 02:39, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar, Spelling, and an Archive request