Talk:Zelda Timeline/Archive 1

This page is an archive of an old Talk Page. The contents have been moved from another page to clear space and to preserve history, so this page is locked from editing. If you wish to ask about the corresponding page, or respond to an earlier message, you may direct any comments to the current talk page. If you wish to refer to a message on this page, link to Talk:Zelda Timeline/Archive 1.

Overhaul

While I'm not going to be posting on the forums much over the next few weeks (possibly the next two months, social life pending), I've been taking the time to overhaul the Wiki to reflect the recent relevations. PIE and I will be sure to keep one another accountable. --Lex

w00t. This is going to go much faster than I originally anticipated. I'm pretty sure DP's entered some sort of drug induced hyper-editor state; he's making updates faster than I can jump from page to page --PIE

That was actually probably me, not logged in. But yeah. Time to go crazy. :D I think we should scrap the "Number of Timelines" page, and focus on the "Hylian Cosmology" page instead, no? --Lex

A number of the "Popular Timeline" variants have grown redundant. I'd like to just cut them completely, but it'd be good to have an all-clear on that. --Lex

Its a weird issue. On the one hand, the wiki is completely open, and I don't want to feel like I'm censoring anybody. At the same time many of the theories added are either redundant or totally undefendable...

Well, If we condence all New Child and New Adult lines into a single entry each, stirke the linear lines out, leave the semi-coherent "other" lines in tact and then, maybe, give credit to the removed names on the split diciplines page I think we'll be OK. Savvy? --PIE

Vandalism

Both this page and the main article were totally removed last night, replaced with "hi". Second time I've fixed vandalism on the page, but I still don't know what to do or how to report it. Help?! --PIE

Well, as for what to do, the most important thing is to fix the vandalism, and you have done that. Fortunately, the Wiki saves all the revisions for us and you didn't lose any work (I know you've spent a ton of time working on this stuff). As for how to report it, I don't believe there is a report feature of any kind. This Talk page is probably the most effective way. I'll talk with Jason about what else can be done. --Yumil 22:59, 5 December 2006 (CST)

Well, we could also protect the page... but if the person is registered, they could edit it. So, you timeline theorists would have to register in order to edit it. - James

What could possibly motivate a person to make 3 consecutive attacks on a page? Meh, fixed this weekend's bit of vandalism, and I'm not keen or doing so again. How do you protect a page on media-wiki? --PIE

Nintendo's Official Timeline

A while back, did not Nintendo release an official timeline in a story form? It was on the official page, but has since vanished due to newer games coming out. I have it saved if anybody wants to see it...

Commonly called the "NoA order" it can be found online at:

http://www.zeldalegends.net/files/articles/article24/oldversion.txt

It is complete up to the release of tWW (which caused a paradine shift in theorising, away from debate on the number of links and towrds debate on the number of timelines) and was quite influential at the time of its release. From a modern perspective, the principles of the theory are solid in every regard except its interesting placement of Link's Awakening, and are listed on the Timeline Principles page. The more creative aspects of the theory (ie the creation of Termina) are cool to read but considered non canonical.--PIE

That Timeline is very much outdated, as it was released that the timeline is a split timeline. I, however, believe that I finally cracked the timeline. I drew up a visual Timeline, so if you want to view it, here is the photobucket link. http://i80.photobucket.com/albums/j161/czarbender/TheLegendofZeldaTimeline.png I also provided a small reason why it should be there. Please look at it, and, if necessary, critique it so that I may make it better if it isn't already. I used two methods to creating it, the split timeline theory, (it was rather hard to know which game went where) and a geographical theory (when the land is the same as in a previous game, but different in another, which is because of the split timeline). If I may explain upon the split timeline, for those who don't know, in the Ocarina of Time, once Ganon was banished to the Dark Realm, Zelda sent Link back in time so he could have a normal childhood, yet the corrupted Hyrule still existed in another timeline. This was officially recognized by Shigeru Miyamoto. Oh, and thank you for taking the time to look this over. Czarbender 00:32, 3 August 2007 (PDT)

Wha?!?!

Could we possibly not abbreviate the game names? Not everyone knows what they mean. I don't know what they mean and I'm a good Zelda Fan. --Dinoshaur 04:40, 24 December 2006 (CST)

Good point, timeline jargon comes easy to some, but the casual reader really should have a guide... O.K., threw up a quick fix. It needs to be wiki'd but I'm out of time. --PIE

I think what he meant was to replace the instances of jargon in the page with the full names. I tried to read it last night, and I was confused nearly the whole time. --74.73.243.146 18:59, 21 January 2007 (CST)

Hmmm, This is a problem. To replace Acronym's with game names causes an insave ammount of clutter in the "popular lines" section. Here's a question: To those who have difficulty with the acronyms, do you actually have a base idea of each game, or are you generally unfamiliar with the early parts of the series? Will "Adventure of Link" truly mean anything more to you than "AoL"?--PIE

Overthinking It

If you ask me, fans are overthinking it. I was only introduced to the idea of the stories actually fitting together in recent years by a friend of mine, who tried to map out some sort of geneology showing that each Link and Zelda were descendants of other Links and Zeldas. It seemed sort of convoluted, unnecessary and a really far stretch to me. I always assumed it was the same deal as Mario (as its the same creator, same company) that the characters are merely re-envisioned and reinvented with each game (except for games that obviously fit together, like say Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask). -- A Passing Gamer.

Sources

I know it might be a hassle, but this is still the current featured article (we need a new one, yeah :P... but no article seems to be good enough), so perhaps it could serve as an examples of how to cite sources and stuff. Start a trend, eh? I finally found the extension that does the ref tags, so if you don't know how to use em, go here. Thanks! --Jase 14:03, 11 March 2007 (CDT)

What are we to cite? Other than the Timeline Quotes section (which I'll fix ASAP) almost all of our concrete info is taken from the games themselves... As for fan created content, like the glossaty terms or conclusions or arguments, that's part of an oral tradition. There is no written resource to cite. --PIE

Oh well, I guess I thought with all the info that made up these articles, there would be stuff that had its roots in something written. You can site the games, too, but I know that's totally unnecessary since this is a wiki ABOUT the games; I'm just using an example to show how far sources can go. Anything is a source if you didn't make it yourself, unless it's just another person. ;) --Jase 15:05, 12 March 2007 (CDT)

Marinko's Questions

Moved from various sections above

I have to agree with you slightly. Indeed there is over thinking that all the games are connected together but its safe to say that several games are connected with each other. Its hard to place Twilight Princess at any other point other then the end of the timeline at this moment. However it seems likely that it will be towards the beginning. Undoubtedly we know that the story goes OoT, MM, TWW, PH since all have concrete evidence (save for the unreleased which is presumed to be a plot sequel to TWW) on the history of events. Neither of the the theories listed make any sense considering TWW is listed in the adult line (apparently I must not know what that means then if it is a popular theory.). --Marinko 00:49, 17 May 2007

The Wind Waker and Phantom Hourglass (atleast) occur after the events seen in the "adult portion" of Ocarina of Time (Link travelling throug the Temnples and eventually sealing Ganon in the sacred realm), thus they are considered to be in the "adult line". Remember that, after sealing Ganon, Link moved through time and changed the past, creating a new future for Hyrule, this "Child Line" contains MM and TP (atleast).

In the words of series producer Eiji Aonuma:

In the last scene of Ocarina of Time, kids Link and Zelda have a little talk, and as a consequence of that talk, their relationship with Ganon takes a whole new direction. In the middle of this game [Twilight Princess], there’s a scene showing Ganon’s execution. Link and Zelda left him be and he then did something outrageous, so it was decided that he should be executed. That scene takes place several years after Ocarina of Time.

There is alot of talk about theorists, but where are their claims? And for the OoT/MM Related Arguments portion, I think we should check that information on the time line again. I'm pretty sure Link's a kid in TWW and I'm pretty sure there is no sizable land for an alternate quest for a parallel world unless Windfall is the new Hyrule revamped.(Sadly to say, I might once again be at fault of a misinterpretation by what has been stated.)--Marinko 00:49, 17 May 2007

Most theorists operate out of online communities. The principle ideals of this wiki series are taken from the three most active theorist bodies; Zelda Universe, Legends Alliance (The Zelda Legends forum), and GameFAQs. Other poitns are answered above. --PIE

Polychrome's Elephant

Now that the scandal has quieted down, I think I can speak up a bit... The weird thing is, and I swear nobody ever brings this up, is that Myamoto confirmed long before Aonuma's quote (At E3 2004 in a roundtable that was recorded and translated by IGN) that Twilight Princess is situated between Ocarina of Time and Wind Waker. So who is to be believed? Aonuma does seem to be the "voice of Zelda" in past years, but at the same time, we're talking about the same guy who dragged the Zelinkers along when there was clearly no Link/Zelda romance in Twilight Princess. He seems to speak more for fanservice than anything else, and if you think abuot it, he's been doing it for years. You'll also notice, a lot of his quotes are surrounded by "Wouldn't it be cool if...?" or "Don't you think...?" The latter was found quite a bit in the initial translations of the Twilight Princess interview. It's a hard fact to consider, especially since the Aonuma quote allowed quite a few people to get very happy revenge against the UWM faction (Heck, I had a good laugh myself... They're the only reason I don't enjoy defending single timeline), but we all must remember that Aonuma is ONE dev out of many, and the series is stuffed with mistakes, the likes of which even Star Trek has not seen. There *are* enough connections between Wind Waker and Twilight Princess (many of which have nothing to do with Ganondorf) that the games can be easily tied together. The best thing to say, at this point, is that the timeline isn't something set in stone, and that really, we can only make up our own minds. I plan on writing a rather large forum post discussing this, just for kicks, and just to get discussion started up again, hopefully without the cliques. --Another Passing Gamer, not to be confused with the previous one.

Noticed your thread on ZU this morning, but didn;t really look into it. If there's anything left to be said, I'll leave my comments there... --PIE

The angry video game nerd has shown a video about how he is very very confused about the Zelda timeline.you can find his videos on game trailers.com

Use Logic People

Everyone should pay close attention to time line given by Czarbender above. Many theorist choose to place most of the Zelda games in the child line. But this makes no sense whatsoever. A Link to the Past refers to Ganon trapped in the Sacred Realm. By that fact alone, ALTTP cannot possibly be in the child line. It then follows that Link's Awakening, The Legend of Zelda, and The Adventure of Link are not in the child line either. To refuse these simple facts is to be incredibly naive. The timeline above needs revisions yes, but it has the right general idea.--Emma 00:21, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Many people fail to realize that the Wind Waker can take place after the Twilight Princess, and still be on a different timeline. It may be as simple as TP happens 100 years after OoT and TWW happens 1000 years after OoT. The order of the games is then OoT/TP/TWW regardless of which timeline the games are in. Those years are just examples, not the actual length of time between games.--Emma 00:29, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Can you (any Zelda fan) think of a way to say the TWW takes place longer after OoT than TP does, in a short simple sentence, and not reveal that they occur on two different time lines? The answer is TP takes place between the TWW and OoT. That's all Myamoto could say without giving away the split timeline.--Emma 00:46, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm naive for putting A link to the past in the child timeline, right? Because "A Link to the Past refers to Ganon trapped in the Sacred Realm." Guess what. At the end of FSA, guess where ganon went.

I apologize for any harshness, but I'm tired right now. In short your argument is false, (use logic people!) QED--Magnus orion 03:17, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I looked at czarbender's timeline, now and I would like to point something out. Among other flaws, it seems to suggest that FS and FSA take place on different timelines, which is sorta odd, considering the FSA backstory talks about the FS story, and practically overtly states them to be the same link and zelda. Also his placement of the Wind Waker is strange because the windwaker refrences points from Ocarina of time as the most recent ganon/link battle, but that timeline has many others in between. --Magnus orion 03:28, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I do apologize for the brutal, but nessisary honesty. I did say that the Czarbender timeline needed revision, but it did have ALTTP, LA, OoA, OoS, LoZ, AoL, & TP in the proper timeline. FSA should be in the Adult line somewhere.--Emma 04:29, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

The legend in the The Wind Waker refers to the Hero of Time. When Ganon was terrorizing Hyrule, the people prayed that the Hero of Time would again come and save them. This implies that they believed that whenever Hyrule is in danger, the Hero of Time would come and save them. The fact that the heroes are not all the same person is lost to legend. The phrase "lost to legend" is actually used in the TWW opening(refering to the details of the Kingdom of Hyrule). The Ganon in the child line was arrested then sent to the Twilight Realm. He did not get out until some time after Zant took over Hyrule Castle. The Triforce of Power then fails to save him and he succums to the wound that was ment to execute him in the first place. Without the aid of the Triforce, there is no coming back from an im paled heart. There is no way around that. He is not sent to the Sacred Realm. There is no Ganon revival game that would fit alone after TP. When ganon "dies" in the games he cannot automaticly be sent to the Sacred Realm. The ingame text in the Ocarina of Time makes a strong point on that issue. Yes I know that FS is directly followed by FSA, that's the reason I said that the Czarbender timeline needed revision in the first place. --Emma 05:12, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Thus enhancing my theory that thinking about the Zelda timeline will make your brain explode. Saibh 13:49, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

That is quite possible. It is not far off from happening.--Emma 00:56, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I apologize for not being blunt on the issue of what I was talking about. I'm against attacking people in general for theories they have on anything. General insults such as naive and talking about how people are stupid because they don't agree with you. If you want to discuss TP's ending with me, use my Talk page, as TP's ending Makes little to no sense. We all understand that there are issues with the timeline. But asserting that your's is better than someone elses purely by speculation is just wrong. My point is that i was insulted that I was being called naive and evidenced a case where your argument was wrong. I am aware that my timeline has flaws (i could point them out to you if you like :P). I just think that in my mind, my way of ordering the games make them all fit cleanest for me. Once again, If you want to talk more about this, simply use my talk page. I'll be happy to debate. I find it quite enjoyable to find new evidence and see things from different persepctives. I like being proven wrong, as it provides me with info so that I may be right in the future. And yes, i did use logic to get to my timeline--Magnus orion 03:14, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Right, enough on that particular subject here. Okay, this next one I don't have much of a clue how to work out. The Wind Waker seems to make a direct reference to Majora's Mask in the story in the Tower of the Gods. However nearly every timeline puts MM with TP. This is definitely how it should be but TWW still makes reference to MM. Is it possible that the timeline split occurs after Majora's Mask instead of after Ocarina of Time? Maybe due to a side effect of all the time travel and in one line Link stays out of history's way and the other he stops Ganon's takeover of Hyrule. I really do not know here. This theory could be entirely wrong or not. Any ideas people?--Emma 03:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Once again, feel free to discuss anything with me on the timelines in my talk page (I mean it! XD). The story in the tower (the one you get with the tingle tuner, i assume is what you are talking about) is actually about Tingle, not Link. Also, Tingle apparently is stated as having the ability to transcend time and space, allowing him the show up in MM, TMC, TWW, FSA and other games. I forget where i saw this on the wiki, but I think it was on the Tingle article. --Magnus orion 03:30, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Like I said, I was not sure of the TWW reference to MM. Oh, the 5:12 4-18 entry was written in a logic-based, non-biased way. I had shown it to some of my friends that held your view. They admitted to being wrong rather than complain of being insulted when no insult was intended. I am merely presenting the facts as they are. But my father would never admit defeat so I can understand why you won't.--Emma 03:34, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Overhaul, part deux

This section is in serious need of more attention. Over the next few days I'm going to be conducting polls across the affiliate sites for the purpose of compiling an encyclopedia of sorts for theorists and theories. --Lex

Arcs

1.) Clearly in a 'timeline' sense of the events from OoS/OoA; events in OoA's past occured first. So you could simplify it by all of OoA occured before OoS, and this makes sense considering the Ambi/Pirates sidestory. Or another split up arc; OoA(past)-OoS-OoA (present). This would mean even if canonly Link started in Holodrum what he does later actually happens before; o.O. 2.) LA also fits after the OoA/OoS arc. I'm not saying it goes there, just that it's not settled within the community. 3.) Personally I think the whole Timeline mess is a loveable quirk of LoZ. It's become a distinguishing feature of the game to keep LoZ interesting and unique in a marketful of bland sameness. But the main article reads like the Timeline mess is a major flaw needing reconcillation.Axiomist 11:17, 4 May 2008 (UTC)