Zelda Wiki:Discussion Center

This is a talk page. Please respect etiquette and remember to sign your posts using four tildes (~~~~).

Main Page

Guidelines:Getting Started

Getting Involved

Discord

Discord

Zelda Wiki:Knight Challenges

Knight Challenges

Zelda Wiki:Image Requests

Image Requests

https://trello.com/b/ToL30iNx/wiki-projects

Trello

Guidelines:Main

Guidelines

Archives

Discussion Center

• 2018-2019
• 2016 - 2017
• 2015 - 2016
• 2014

Hyrule Castle

• Archive 1
• Archive 2
• Archive 3
• Archive 4
• Archive 5
• Archive 6
• Archive 7
• Archive 8
• Archive 9
• Archive 10
• Archive 11
• Archive 12
• Archive 13
• Archive 14
• Archive 15
• Archive 16

The Heart Container

• Archive 1
• Archive 2
• Archive 3

Milk Bar

• Archive 1
• Archive 2
• Archive 3
• Archive 4
• Archive 5
• Archive 6

Theories

I have two questions about the theories that have been removed. Are they going to be placed on a ZU dedicated topic? All of them or some of them? Thanks in advance! Zeldafan1982 (talk) 04:31, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Various questions + Contacting the Staff/Getting Updated

I was thinking that there should be (if plausible/reasonable, of course) more validation across the Wiki. For example, when uploading files, we could have a Placeholder attribute to example display the format required, or otherwise validation like the Pattern attribute or js validation like this (or the rest of that webpage). The idea is inline/contextual help and/or prompts for when blocks of instructional text or the help guide (of which the relevant sections might be missed, or even missing certain details itself). Some things I'm not sure if in the Help Guide include:

• Using capitalisation of the first letter of a template's name when using that template
• Not using underscores in links
• Using the Standard Initialism for (e.g.) "Cite manual" template
• That NA is preferred over EU version of a game when it differs
• Norms, e.g. User:Tony/Sandbox/ZW Norms

In terms of contacting the staff, what's the best method? I also realise ZUF exists, but doesn't seem frequently consistently used, or I still haven't figured out where all the action is. Segueing, I also notice some "big" things were being discussed, but in the first place, I didn't know about it, though at that time I hadn't realised to use the Forum until recently. I was absent from ZW for a while, and noticed an update to the Wiki software or something, which included a title font change (I think...), Mobile site, and the "Online Users" on the Recent Changes page breaking (it shows {{#currentusers:}})

In summary:

• A question about validation additions, and
• A question of how to best gather information useful for a ZW contributor.

Thanks.

--KokoroSenshi (talk | contribs) 08:52, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

This isn't the first time you've come up with good ideas for custom features for the wiki. The best answer I can give you is that you should join the Zelda Wiki staff as a developer. You would have the support of the Zelda Wiki/Zelda Universe development team and it would put you in direct contact with all the wiki staff. (Not to mention we have quite the backlog of tasks and could use someone with your technical skills.) Short of that, the forums are indeed your best bet.

About the upload form, I'd really like for us to have Extension:UploadWizard. Custom code is the first thing to break when we upgrade (case in point, the "Online Users" thing). If there's a stable MediaWiki extension that could do the job, it's better to start with that. The only thing holding us back is that the extension doesn't currently support generation of custom templates, which we would need for Template:FileInfo. There is an open task for this which I hope to get to in the near future. — Hylian King ^[*] 02:24, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. Thinking about it, joining as a developer sounds like a good idea; though in terms of technical skills (well, knowledge at least) I usually make it up as I go along, Google, etc., but if that's ok, I'd still like to join, or at least give it a try. --KokoroSenshi (talk | contribs) 12:43, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

We're all volunteers doing this for fun. A willingness to try things and learn is all we'd ask for in a developer. I'll send you an email with the details later this week. Is the email address in your preferences up to date? — Hylian King ^[*] 01:43, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Awesome! Yes, I have checked that the email is up to date. --KokoroSenshi (talk | contribs) 12:14, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Sent. — Hylian King ^[*] 14:36, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Userpage Problem

My userpage has external links, so it asks me to check if I'm not a robot. Okay, click save page after that, and it says I've edited my page too many times (once). Thinking nothing of it, I hit save page again anyway... to be brought back to the "I'm not a robot" thing. Save again, says I've edited my page too many times. Infinite loop. Can someone fix this? Alex95 (talk) 05:13, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

EDIT:Also, your {{#currentusers:}} code on the Recent Changes is broken. Been meaning to say something about that for a while now... Alex95 (talk) 05:14, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Hey Alex, thank you for reporting this. We've since disabled the "too many edits" filter due to its bugginess. You should be able to edit your userpage now.

We are aware of the currentusers problem and it's on the to-do list. It's just not very high on the list is all. :P — Hylian King ^[*] 02:28, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

New and unvalidated?

I tried adding a trivia info I came across few days ago, but it was removed. Why did it get removed? When I added the info, I did wonder where can I add my sources, but any other info didn't have sourcing. Just references to game quotes. Template:Nosig

You need a source to validate that trivia point, specifically the part where the Fishmen actually say that word. Without it, there's no way to prove that it's true and not just made up or pure speculation. Also, don't forget to sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). - Chuck * ^(Talk) 08:18, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Judge the notability of this anecdote

I saw a anecdote about an interview with Aonuma on Twitter today and thought I would at least notify it, even though I doubt it's notable enough. The source is here, the tweet is in French and translates as “For the anecdote, I asked [Mr Aonuma] if The Witness could be considered as an “extreme Zelda”, but he didn't know the game :(”. Lunaramethyst (talk) 16:42, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Indeed a completely unrelated game to the series is not notable enough. - Chuck * ^(Talk) 17:47, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

"GNU Free Documentation License" image link broken

At the bottom of every page is the "GNU Free Documentation License" icon (next to the "Powered by MediaWiki" icon), but shows no image.

The image url says the first below, but probably should be the latter:

/common/images/gnu-fdl.png

/skins/common/images/gnu-fdl.png

--KokoroSenshi (talk | contribs) 00:52, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Noted. Thanks! The fix is ready, we're just having some issues deploying right now. It should be up soon. — Hylian King ^[*] 16:34, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Use of § for sections

I have recently noticed § used at Help:Glossary#Edit conflict indicating a section in the following link: Help:Editing Etiquette§Edit Conflicts. Looking it up on ZW with a search, it seems rarely used, and am uncertain as to the policy regarding its usage (as opposed to e.g.Help:Editing Etiquette#Edit Conflicts), and also how many instances of the alternative (with the hash) are currently present on the wiki (or if those in the search are the only instances of links to sections in that manner). --KokoroSenshi (talk | contribs) 11:30, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

That was my doing, although I made one little formatting mistake. We never collectively agreed to use the section sign and it's not widespread on this wiki; I just think it should be. It's used on Wikipedia and as far as I know it's the only correct way to refer to sections, from an editorial standpoint. The hash is a technical detail and it shouldn't be presented to readers in articles.

This is perhaps a matter of discussion for the Zelda Wiki forums... — Hylian King ^[*] 16:57, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Deprecating wiki specific collapse JS

Hello together. I'm the tech guy from the Dota 2 Wiki and wanted to talk about the collapse function. I already pushed some changes which were reverted for now, because they lacked a bit of communication and I rushed things.

To quote MediaWiki:Common.js:

@deprecated Since MediaWiki 1.20: Use class="mw-collapsible" instead which is supported in MediaWiki core.

Would you be fine if I slowly phased out the deprecated functions? This would shrink down the JS by a good chunk and help to speed up the loading times. Molldust (talk) 18:49, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

By all means! As long as you make sure there are no regressions, of course. If you want to use AutoWikiBrowser for that, let me know and I'll add you to the list of authorized bots. HylianKing (talk) 15:56, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

I will not use my bot until I have a bit more overview how the things are structured here. In case you want the Expand/Collapse text to be [show ▼]/[hide ▲], you have to edit MediaWiki:Collapsible-expand and MediaWiki:Collapsible-collapse respectively. Molldust (talk) 06:13, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Both the "collapse" and "NavFrame" sections can now be removed from the JS file: MediaWiki:Common.js -> Pastebin with the removed sections. Molldust (talk) 09:56, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

??? Page - Image Links Broken

There are several images on the character ??? page that are broken. My guess is that it's due to the fact that the image names contain question marks, but I don't know how to fix them. Please look into when someone gets a chance. Thanks. - Protokhal (talk) 19:36, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

This is a known issue that we're trying to work through. Since the move to Gamepedia, we can no longer have question mark symbols or plus signs in file names. Please be patient while we sort out the best solution.Hylian pi (talk) 23:18, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Making Headlines More Readable

Hi everyone! I'm fairly new to editing this wiki but have been an avid user and reader for a long while. Now that I'm also participating I noticed that many of the subheadlines (h3, h4) aren't that easy to read on a PC web browser. They don't really stand out that much from other text and there's no special spacing for them in the layout - it's especially notable when dealing with shorter sections of text. Have you ever considered tweaking them to make them a little more discernible? On mobile view, at least a line is added beneath the length of a subheadline, which is a nice effect and makes sections stand out more. -- Tadayou (talk) 13:58, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey Tadayou, thanks for the feedback! The header styles are something we never got around to improving, but there's no time like the present. :) The staff is on it. We'll try to figure out a decent design and get back to you. HylianKing (talk) 15:51, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up! Looking forward to your solution. -- Tadayou (talk) 10:57, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Hey Tadayou, thanks for bringing this up. I was wondering if you could provide some notable/good examples of pages or sections you thought were hard to read? Thanks! --KokoroSenshi (talk | contribs) 08:56, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Hey there, sure thing: I think Zelda Timeline is a notable example of a page that is very hard to read on a desktop browser. It's really hard to tell where sections begin, which are headlines and which are subheadlines. The |Game Information section of the BotW article page also shows signs of this. In the end all pages seem problematic that feature many sub headlines and short text sections. While this could probably be solved by making vast editorial changes to articles like that, I think it's probably easier to implement a change to heading styles. Whether it's adding spaces, underlines, making them different colors, etc... The amiibo (Rune) is probably one of the more readable examples, but I was also very consciously checking for readability when I edited the page. Maybe as an inspiration let me link to two example pages from STOWiki, which uses different heading styles rather well (for the most part): Star Trek Online Canon and Earth. -- Tadayou (talk) 18:10, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Now that I compare the two wikis, another reason for less-than-optimal readability may be that ZeldaWiki uses the entire width of a page in desktop mode, thus making individual paragraphs also stand out less. Compare this to STOWiki were the design has a fixed width for articles. But I guess this may also boil down to very personal preferences. -- Tadayou (talk) 18:12, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Natie Page

Can somebody please make a Natie page? I have some content to add, but the name is blacklisted. Thank you. - Protokhal (talk) 15:05, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Disregard, the blacklist has been removed. - Protokhal (talk) 15:33, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Setting/Timeline Placement/etc.

I was curious whether an official policy exists for placing the section "Timeline Placement" in game articles? Currently, this information seems to be often (but not always) lumped together with "Game Information", where it exists alongside many and (mostly) unrelated topics, such as "Development", "Limited Editions", "Pre-Order Bonuses", "Speed Run Records" or "amiibo Support". Is it consensus to put this information there or was it placed because no other section was deemed appropriate? I was wondering whether a standardized 'Setting' section might not be more in the interest of presenting information in a coherent, and tracable way? As a rough draft, thi section could give a brief overview over the game's respective version of Hyrule (or other settings, of course), may address references to other games, and present the timeline information. This might actually help to make the large game articles a little more accessible. Of course, a "Setting" section might require a bit of editorial fine-tuning, in order to make its content not too redundant. But it sounds like a fun and interesting project - if the idea finds favor with you. -- Tadayou (talk) 11:51, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Plot of Oracle of Ages

Hi. I apologize for the trouble I caused recently. Indeed, it can be hard to understand why I keep exposing the plot flaws in Oracle of Ages, although I really enjoy the game. Therefore I will stop from now on, lest I get banned. You are the administrators of this website, but I am a professor of physics and mathematics; let us respect each other from now on. Please PROVE ME WRONG if I am, instead of getting mad at me.

It is undeniable that the plot in Oracle of Ages is contradictory: sometimes Ambi's age and Zelda's age are considered as separated by 400 years, and sometimes facts are considered as if they happened at the very same time in two parallel dimensions, instead of two different centuries.

Already the game translation team tried to hide away the plot flaws with expressions like "right now, in the past", that obviously means "right now, 400 years ago" or "in the present, 400 years before the present" (and written these two ways the contradiction becomes apparent), but the official localization sounds as if "the past" was another location instead of anoter time.

Said this, I would like to ask why the policy of this website is to deny any plot flaw in the game. Is it because you think it would be unfair to expose the flaws in a game that is anyway very enjoyable? Or is it because you are unable to see the plot flaws? Or some other reason?

I asked this question already, but all I got were angry answers. Therefore, I ask it again, as politely as I can, hoping for a polite answer. --Abacos (talk) 20:10, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello Abacos. Thank you for your passion for the Oracle Series and your willingness to contribute to Zelda Wiki. Personally, I really appreciate that. However, let me try to explain Zelda Wiki policy and how we try to maintain things around here. We archive the game's information as presented by the game itself. We are an encyclopedia, nothing more nothing less. We also tend to stay away from subjectivity as much as possible. The example that you gave for instance is an assumed conclusion. Is it a valid, logical conclusion? Yes, absolutely. But it is not the only one. This is where personal opinions and arguments determine the facts and not the game itself. For example, one could argue that the past and future may have syncing time-streams. As a work of fiction, there are countless explanations for something unexplained. Therefore, to simplify things, and keep everything as delivered from the game itself, we tend not to cover any speculation or theory. Unfortunately, the Zelda Series doesn't always follow the same rules as reality or may not even be completely logical. This is something that we have to accept and it is not our job to "correct" the series as we see fit. This is best suited for discussion boards or blog posts, not a wiki. If you'd be willing to write about the Oracle Series and its inconsistencies with real life physics on another website, feel free to. (I would love to read it!) Thank you and I hope you understand. -- Hylian pi (talk) 23:41, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the answer. Still, as you wanted, I did stay away from subjectivity as much as possible. I just wrote facts in a different order. How could things that happen today and yesterday be synchronized? "Yesterday" happened strictly before "today". This is not my speculation, it is a fact, but I agree Zelda timeline breaks logic.
The Zelda continuity officially forks in three. See my chronological analysis of Oracle of Ages on a website where I am administrator, and see how I conclude that the chronology of Oracle of Ages alone splits into several branches. I used logic alone, not physics: mixing real-science and fictional-magic is a wrong method indeed! Abacos (talk) 10:19, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi, weighing in with yet another opinion, about presumably the Maku Tree edits:

I don't believe it is a plot hole per se, though maybe it's a matter of perspective. With regard to the apparent contradictions you mention, the issue here is the semantics and terminology. "right now, in the past" makes sense because, from context, "right now" can be interpreted as a point in time in the past, where "the past" is essentially a name for a period of time before the events we treat as the present (not clearly defined, though probably no need to). Your "right now, 400 years ago" also makes sense since it is implicit that "400 years ago" is "400 years ago from the present", where "the present" is understood from context to be a particular point in time that isn't the point in time treated as "right now". Your "in the present, 400 years before the present" can also be understood for the same reasons, with "the present" meaning two different things in the same sentence (and which can lead to confusion, hence why they didn't say it like that).

With regard to the time travel aspect, the first thing I note is that the logic (or rather, rules) behind much fiction involving time travel can be very much different than ours - In a fictional world, the behaviour and characteristics of 'time' can differ greatly than in the real world. For example, in contrast to the real world, there can be made-up constraints that something that affects the Maku tree (perhaps not even necessarily affect people in general) at one point in time must affect the future version of the Maku tree at another point in time. I suppose we should be careful about generalising aspects of the fictional world - If we were to say something is a plot hole, then the creator could simply make up new rules for how the world works, and it would and should be taken as fact, since they are the creator - though with a true plot hole it might be impossible to salvage it. Things we say things are plot holes mainly relate to the suspension of disbelief; if we can identify the rules the creator sets, then they definitively contradict each other, then it's a plot hole - otherwise, I don't think we can firmly conclude as such.

Another thing I note is that the way you rewrote the section on Maku Tree made the text harder to follow.

In case I misunderstand, feel free to rephrase the plot holes or contradictions you were talking about, including some of what you talk about on the page you linked.

--KokoroSenshi (talk | contribs) 12:38, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Abacos, let me be as clear and concise as possible. The only thing that is a "fact" on this wiki is a quote from a piece of Zelda media. We archive that information. If you correct information based on how reality works, you are effectively making our information inaccurate to the series. And you are still editing the Maku Tree with information that is never presented in the game but came from your own speculation. Please stop and only use in-game sources as your references. -- Hylian pi (talk) 21:47, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Kokoro Senshi, I agree with you on two points out of three. The one I disagree is where you say that "right now" does not mean "right now", and so on. That made me laugh, and reminded me that we are talking about fiction, not about saving or killing a thousand people. Thank you. I agree on everything else you wrote. After redefining my perspective, as you allowed me, I felt free to rephrase two lines in the Maku Tree page. Probably I am the one who misunderstood, because Hylian Pi seems unhappy about such edit.

Well then, Hylian Pi, I will quote a piece of Zelda media, the only fact you say you aknowledge. The Maku Tree said: "Four hundred years I waited". Are you saying that writing "almost as soon as" in this wiki is the same as writing "400 years later"? Your English is very different from mine, then. I do not speculate, I am a contributor who sticks here strictly to the basic principles of logic (not physics, not mathematics, just logic) and to the real meaning of words in the English language. In my last edit to the Maku Tree page, which information is my speculation, according to your opinion?

Maybe the fact that I wrote "his present"? The game is seen from the point of view of Link, all this wikipedia follows his point of view. "The present" and "the past" are obviously from Link's point of view, therefore, according to English language, the present in Oracle of Ages is Link's present, it is "his present". The expression "his present" is never used in the game, but neither are the words "entity" or "bright and cheery", used instead in this website to describe the Maku Tree. What makes them less "speculative" than my use of the word "his"? But maybe you were thinking about something else.

Maybe I am wrong where I wrote "the Hero of Time". I just wanted to avoid writing "Link" too many times in few lines. Link is the Hero of Time, right? If I am wrong here, I definitely apologize! Abacos (talk) 02:12, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

P.S.: I checked now, and I found out that the Hero of Time is a different Link. I was even unsure whether a "Hero of Time" wikipage existed: I thought every Link was the Hero of Time. In particular, since so many characters appear in both Ocarina of Time and Oracle of Ages, it came natural to deduct that the two Link's are the same Link. Forgive me for this: it was absolutely unintentional. Abacos (talk) 02:27, 10 May 2017 (UTC)