User talk:Tharthan

Hello

Hi there, Tharthan, and welcome to Zelda Wiki! Why not check out the community hub? To find out what's been going on recently at the wiki and what articles users are editing right now, head to the Recent Changes. For general wiki-related discussion and questions, head over to the Discussion Center. Also, for wiki usage and policy help, check out our Help Guide. We hope you enjoy the wiki. Thanks! — The Zelda Wiki Staff

How's it going?

Hey, its nice to see new faces here! We've been noticing that you've been reverting the edits of administrators here on ZeldaWiki, especially when it comes down to using the names of enemies in The Adventure of Link, many of which have names that are more canonically friendly (i.e. Wizzrobe instead of Wizzar). When it comes down to naming, it is not usually warranted to make/move content to new pages for enemies that are identical, yet with different names. Hence, your edits to the Wizzar, Babs, and Billy were all reverted in order to keep all relevant information all on the mother page, where it not only belongs, but supports all other info on the page. We are in no way attempting to discourage you from editing - we're just trying to keep everything relevant together! If you have any other questions about this, or about anything in general, reply below me here! Hope to see you around =) User:Cipriano 119/sig 23:06, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

They have completely different names though, thus they are different. And did you read the Talk:Wizzrobe section? I was only talking about the "Zelda II: Adventure of Link enemy (Which is called Uizzaru, as opposed to Uizzrobu) Template:Nosig

You are right, they do have different names, and I did see the talk page. However, that is not our policy here at ZW. We try to keep all relevant information, including enemies that have different names but identical behavior on the same page for the sake of consistency and content compliance. I understand where you are coming from, however, this is just how we do things here. For future reference, "demanding" something should happen doesn't mean it should. Truly, future generations of wiki-ers will most likely merge the Wizzar information back into the Wizzrobe article as they are so much the same. User:Cipriano 119/sig 23:30, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the way you organize things on Zelda Wiki, however Wizzars do not have the exact same appearence, name, or weaknesses. I am sure there are a few pages on here that are seperate, that are the exact same way. Tharthan 23:35, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Just my two cents: Wizzars and Wizzrobes have pretty much the exact same appearance, just a different color (at least when compared to their TLoZ version). Name is almost identical, they behave the same way. The only "major" difference is their weakness, but that doesn't really justify the need to make it into its own page. Dany36 23:42, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

They pretty much have the same appearance. If you closely examine the TLoZ art and the TMC art, then of course they're not the same. Sorry, but I'm not gonna look for small details just to say that they're different. Also, when replying in talk pages, it's best to reply in the same talk page where the discussion was started. That way it's easier to keep track of the discussion. ;) Dany36 23:46, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

TMC? I'm talking about TAOL art, dudette. Wizzars didn't appear in TLoZ, that art above the Wizzar, is the art of the Wizzrobe from TLoZ, not a Wizzar! You can't see Wizzars faces (as apposed to Wizzrobes) they have crucifixes in the "face" area (as apposed to Wizzrobes) Wizzars have a flower-shaped mark on their robes. (as opposed to Wizzrobes that wear a medalion) Wizzars also have a distinguishably different shaped head (Wizzars have pointed heads, while Wizzrobes have a relatively circular head.)

Haha it was just an example, relax. ;) But anyway, those differences you're mentioning are still not enough to say that Wizzar should get special treatment and have its own page. Like I've said before, they behave and ATTACK the same way as other Wizzrobes. They have more similarities than differences. Their appearances vary SLIGHTLY. MM's and TWW's Wizzrobes look NOTHING like Wizzrobes from past games, which just goes to show that not all Wizzrobes have to HAVE the same appearance. We're not going to put them in different pages just because of that. Plus, Tatl calls them "Wizrobes", and you don't see that in its own page, do you? Dany36 00:06, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

That was a mistake by the translaters, just like the mistake of them calling Wizzars, Wizzrobes in the American manual. Thus that statement you made is faulty. Plus, in all of those cases you mentioned. They were still called "Uizurobu" in the japanese games, Wizzar was called "Uizuzaru" in the japanese games.

Tharthan, you are the very first person ever to claim such the history of this wiki, so you should not be surprised at all of this opposition. However, you must understand that without evidence, such as a quoted source from Nintendo themselves (i.e. Miyamoto), we cannot even begin to believe such a statement. I advise that before you attempt any more article moves based on the "true" translation, that you submit such claims to a Zelda forum in the community to see the kind of support there is. Without evidence, we cannot believe you - simple as that. I don't understand how you can base the "wrong" translation of Wizzrobes in LoZ, to the allegedly "right" one in AoL, since LoZ is its predecessor. User:Cipriano 119/sig 00:22, 15 March 2010 (UTC)