Talk:Link (The Legend of Zelda)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Link (The Legend of Zelda) article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	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. If you can update or improve it, please do.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 19, 2005.
Article Milestones Date Process Result December 29, 2004 Peer review Reviewed January 18, 2005 Featured article candidate Promoted October 12, 2006 Featured article review Kept Current Status: Featured article

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.	CVG Portal
FA	This article has been rated as FA-Class on the assessment scale.
High	This article is on a subject of High priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
	This is a selected article of WikiProject Video games.
CVG To-do: edit  Gaming Collaboration of the week: Kirby Super Star Expand: New CVG Articles, Normality, Pac-Man World 2, Operation Flashpoint: Elite, Call of Juarez, Galactic Civilizations II: Dark Avatar, Ford Street Racing, Betrayal at Krondor CVG Peer Review: List of F-Zero titles, Kya: Dark Lineage, Wii Remote, Dynasty Warriors 4, The Sims 2, The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, Kirby's Dream Land, Electronic sports, Fire Emblem, Dante (Devil May Cry), The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, Final Fantasy XII, Sonic the Hedgehog (16-bit), Classes in World of Warcraft Cleanup: Age of Mythology, Mario Kart: Double Dash!!, Betrayal at Krondor, List of Nintendo trademarks Merge: Deletions / Essential articles / Magazines Assess and Prioritise articles (Log)

	This article is part of WikiProject Nintendo, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Nintendo related merchandise and video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
FA	This article has been rated as FA-Class on the assessment scale.

This article is part of WikiProject The Legend of Zelda series, an attempt to improve Wikipedia's articles related to The Legend of Zelda series. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and the next release version of Wikipedia. This Everydaylife article has been rated FA-Class on the assessment scale.

	To-do list for Link (The Legend of Zelda):	edit  · history  · watch  · refresh
tons of trimming and copyediting, get to 30 references http://books.google.com/books?q=link+zelda&btnG=Search+Books&as_brr=0 http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=link+zelda&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&btnG=Search http://www.gamestudies.org/archive.html http://www.totalvideogames.com/news/The_Miyamoto_Interview_3946_0_1.htm http://www.miyamotoshrine.com/theman/interviews/index.shtml May 21st 2004, Wham! Gaming April 23rd 2003, Superplay Febuary 28th 2003, IGN Febuary 28th 2003, Gamespot Febuary 21st 2003, Virgin Megastore Roundtable August 17 2002, IGN August 9 2002, Nintendo Power July 2002, Nintendo Power May 24 2002, Nintendo Power April 2002, Nintendo Power March 6th 2002, Nintendo Power Source Febuary 19th 2002, Fragzone Febuary 16th 2002, Next Game January 2002, Dengeki GC November 2001, Pikmin Strategy Guide October 27th 2001, Famitsu August 23rd 2001, Spaceworld May 16th 2001, E3 Expo http://www.miyamotoshrine.com/theman/interviews/111998.shtml

Archives
Archive 1 (19 December 2004 → 3 September 2005) Archive 2 (3 September 2005 → 10 September 2006)

Contents 1 Wind Waker Link 2 Revert 3 New edits 4 Article move discussion 5 Age of Link 6 Origin of the name 7 No Dialouge? 8 Article name 9 Ambidexrous 10 Wooohooo, we did it!!!! 11 Split 12 2D ---> 3D 13 Left-Handed/Right-Handed 14 the first line of the article 15 Vandalism 16 Dog or not? 17 Bad footnote in cameo section 18 Video game appearances 19 Apparent Irrelevance 20 page name 21 Twilight Princess Age is 16? That can't be right. 22 Where is it said that his name is actually Link? 23 German for left? 24 Link is NOT ambidextrous! Please stop saying he is! 25 Quirks 26 Skills 27 Inconsistency in Chronology 28 Movie Link 29 news 30 Hero of Twilight 31 Smash Bro or Twighlight Princess 32 Too many images! 33 SSBB image

[edit] Wind Waker Link

If you play through New Game + on Wind Waker, The king of red lions clearly states that this game's Link is NOT a reincarnation of the Hero of Time, or therefore any other legendary heros. As this would seperate his character from Link in the rest of the series, should we make note of it?

Not unless you can find verification for this because it is extremely hard to know if this is true. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 01:15, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Wind Waker is easy and boring. It's a push over. Not an actual Zelda game because he isn't related to Zelda, Hyrule, Master sword or anything. 2-9-07 Electricman —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Elecricman (talk • contribs) 22:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Revert

Okay. I don't know who it is that made the huge, sweeping changes to this page, but they need to stop it. I'll admit that it wasn't perfect, but it was rated highly and got a half-star. That means that while it needs impovment, it is still on the right track. You don't take that and destroy it. The newer form was awful; it had few headlines so it was difficult to find out where you were. In any case, just work off of the current page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.114.111.187 (talk • contribs).

Ummm, No. The article is on its way to being defeatured as we speak, and I am in the middle of fixing it up. There were tons of unjustified, unsourced and un rationaled images that were removed, there was a trivia section that are not up to FA quality that was removed, and the sectioning was horrendous and was simplified, and vital information such as character creation and characteristics didn't even have sections.

True, the article currently looks bad as it is being totally reshaped to meet current Featured Article requirements and requires a massive copyedit, so lets fix up the prose, add more references, and not revert back to the version riven with errors and destined to be de-Featured. Clear enough? Judgesurreal777 03:41, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Not quite clear. This article has been the way it has for months, with minor improvments being added on over time, and now you come in and remodel it in two days? You don't get to chage this article all on your own. The countless others who worked hard on it don't get their stuff thrown in the trash because you, (and you alone, I might add,) don't care for it. It still needs to be changed, but not by the discretion of one individual. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.114.111.187 (talk • contribs).

This is outrageous. This article will be de-featured unless it is brought up to the current FA standards for writing about fiction, and you are attempting to keep it as it is, even if that means that it will LOSE the FA status? Totally outrageous. I have every right to improve any article I wish, and can remodel any article I wish as can anyone else, as long as it follows the guidelines of Wikipedia and is for its betterment. AND the things I have done have been requested at the Featured Article Review. Judgesurreal777 03:53, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

First off, you're making a big assumption in saying that Judge is the only one who thinks the article could use massive improvement. Secondly, large edits are fine on Wikipedia, and there are even entire templates dedicated to it. And third, if you don't want your contributions being changed in later revisions, then don't edit a wiki. That's sort of the essence of the project. --Digital Watches! 15:17, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not telling you not to edit it. I'm just saying don't trash the page. It has a lot of good info in it. Besides, good wikipedia manners would require you to state what you dissapprove of on this talk page before taking things into your own hands and deleting others hard work. Its not just yours. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.114.111.187 (talk • contribs).

Here, take a look at the Featured Article review currently going on now, and you tell me what should happen to the tons of unjustified fair use images, and extranneous gameplay text that belongs in their respective game articles and not here. For example, here is a recently featured fictional character Palpatine. That is what this article needs to look like to stay featured. I am not trying to undo your hardwork, but the article may lose its star to save it. Judgesurreal777 04:01, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

What about WP:Bold? I've never heard of a need to discuss everything in the talk page before making an edit. -- Digital Watches! 15:17, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

You can't talk about Link without mentiong the games that he's been in. How is it unjustified? And, please, be specific so we can be on the same page.

Look at the sword & sheilds section. That article is ridiculously long and does need to be trimmed. It only needs most of the first paragraph and the picture of various swords and shields, not all of the additional, excess stuff. What do you think? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.114.111.187 (talk • contribs).

Your right you must mention the games, but that's the point, the layout should be this:

• Appearances in games
• Characteristics
• Concept and creation

The appearances in games must be concise, but in the old version there are huge paragraphs about his weapons, clothes, all of which belongs in the article, listed in the Featured Article Review that relates to Links weapons and items. That is a start, and you'll hear the FAR reviewers echo that.

Also, there needs to be fewer images, since those multi-game image collages are problematic for multiple reasons. Also many of them are duplicative or have unclear usage in the article, which is why I reduced it down to the lead image, a shot of Link from the original Zelda, and him from Windwaker and its unique art style.

Finally, there needs to be a lot of sourced information added, like who created Link, and why was he named Link, and all the real world information the article needs but doesn't currently have.

There may be other stuff, but those are the main points. Judgesurreal777 04:16, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Here, click on this and read it, these are the reasons, but many people other than me, why this article is being redone. Wikipedia:Featured article review/Link (The Legend of Zelda series) Judgesurreal777 04:18, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Yea, I agree to a point. Look at the sword & sheild section, which I am trying to use as an example. I condensed it down to the more essential info. And, there was a point made about the pictures being collage's. I don't know if the swords picture is, but if it can't be sourced, then how about replacing it with a picture of one Master Sword form a particular game? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.114.111.187 (talk • contribs).

But that section doesn't even belong in this article, it belongs in the weapons and items article. It needs a one Sentence mention, not a section here, it's not the place for it. Judgesurreal777 04:33, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

The mention of his weapons are definatley deserving of a section. Not in the elongated form it has now, but breif mentions of his Master Sword, secondary weapons, and magic. You could put all of that into one fairly short paragraph. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.114.111.187 (talk • contribs).

I'm going to have to agree with Judge on this one, anon editor. Obviously, the need for a major overhaul of the article is not only held by one person and obviously, Judge has been working very hard to keep this article featured. He has cited the current existing featured article review, a process which has the possibility of delisting current featured articles, as his reason for the major edits. On Wikipedia, all older revisions are stored in the page history so if any absolutely vital information is deleted, there is always a record of it in the history where it can be retrieved and rewritten into the article if necessary. Judge's sweeping edits are based on his own (and others') initiative and desire to improve the article and part of the reason he feels so strongly is because all of his edits were casually reverted by an anonymous editor with less than 30 edits to his credit. As it stands, most of the "pre-Judge" version of the article is not vital to the understanding of the topic and also violates the Manual of Style regarding fiction, specifically focusing too much on the in-universe aspect. Much of it already has perfectly suitable destination articles for the excess information (such as the individual game articles, the weapons and items article, the animals article, etc.) which would make the article much more readable because of the shorter length. In a nutshell, the Judge is trying to make the article better and reverting two days of hard work isn't going to help it in any way. Axem Titanium 04:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

• 67.114, please do not disrupt the editing to this page - it is being edited based on comments on a FARC, and this is delaying the work effort. Please stop; if you wish to voice your opinions, please do so on the FARC page (you can click the link at the top). — Deckiller 05:34, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I was also wondering why the article had been completely changed, seemingly for the worse. my comments in the FA review pertained to this version rather than the old. i understand why fair use images were removed, but there was a lot of good info there which just needed sourcing, and the layout was better too.

i tried to edit the current video game section, but realised i was deleting pretty much the whole thing as its all about the storyline. theres less about his character now than there was before. i cant edit it at the moment because i dont know what you're trying to do to it... but we'll see how it is after this major edit anyway. -- jeffthejiff 09:07, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps you should note at which version your comments were directed to on the FA review page, as well, to avoid confusion for people there. I agree with Jeff, the state it's in right now is much worse. I think there's not enough bold text and headings in it's current state. {{inuse}} has been on for a number of hours without any edits so I'm removing it. Feel free to put it back in when you're editing. - Zero1328 _Talk? 12:38, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New edits

I don't like it, but fine. I'll concede the argument. But, I won't, however stop editing and let changes be made that I disagree with. Therefore, I removed the part in the intro where it said 'Link had a close but un-romantic relationship to Princess Zelda' and changed it to 'Link had a close relationship with Princess Zelda'. I did so because you can't say what their relationship is. It is never explicitivley stated, so anything else wouls merely be opinion.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.114.111.187 (talk)

This seems like as good a spot as any to note changes while we're whipping this article back into FA shape, so: I've put the "a peculiarity of the character" paragraph back in the intro with some alterations. We need a cite for Miyamoto confirming the many Links of the series, but I think it's pretty important to esablish that there are several from the start.

Also, I think the games section did better with sections. Right now it's a big old block of text. I also think that the section might be better off titled "Incarnations within the games" or something along those lines to help prevent the "storycruft" from previous versions. --Sparky Lurkdragon 13:05, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Starting to look better with the headings. But, SSB, SSBM and the CD-i games aren't "2002-present". Perhaps a separate heading for non-series games? We still need big cuts/paraphrasing to the video games section, too. Too much game plot. Sraan 05:00, 24 September 2006 (UTC) Sorry, Judge, I sound like a nag. I will help when I have a little more time. Sraan 05:02, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

No worries. This article needs a lot of help, so continuing updates on how it looks are very helpful. Judgesurreal777 05:20, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

It's starting to shape up now. Nice work! Sraan 17:56, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I didn't want to edit this in prior to approval: Regarding the Character Creation entry, it mentions the series' actual chronological order is currently unknown. This interview seems to shed some light on the issue, straight from Miyamoto himself: Miyamoto Shrine, Interview (10-19-98). Is there need for some sort of validation before placing this in the article? 18:34, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Looks good, go ahead and add it :) Judgesurreal777 19:59, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I think it'd be best if someone else did it -- I don't wanna screw up the wording... :P 67.123.110.70 06:31, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

The new article looks fine, but the image at the right looks pixellated. Someone needs to fix that.

[edit] Age of Link

Doesn't Link go between 13 and 20 in the Ocarina of Time? I mention this because the intro says he is protrayed between 7 and 18, which doesn't fit the upper bound. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.98.160.165 (talk • contribs) .

His exact ages are unknown, but that range is where most of the speculation is. Jaxad0127 16:36, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

He is generally thought to be 10 and 17.

Uh, says who? Is this official canon for every game? When is he 10? When is he 17? Has this been stated by an official source? -- Digital Watches! 23:20, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

What is stated in the lead links to a reference where the creature, Shigeru Miyamoto, says he is 7-8 in Ocarina of Time. the uppward bound I did not mention I don't think...Judgesurreal777 00:02, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

The link regarding Link's age is closer to 7-12 is from August 1998! That's before MM, WW, TP, FSA, TMC, and PH. That's 6 games for the average age to change drastically. Scepia 03:18, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Origin of the name

The character we call link is named by the player in every game. This article does not discuss where the name link came from, or how it became the common reference to the character. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ikanreed (talk • contribs) .

You get to name your saved game files, but those names are never used in the games themselves, at least not the early ones. I've read somewhere that Miyamoto chose the name Link because the character was the player's link to the game world. Not sure if this is true or just fan speculation, though. I do think that any official information on this should be added if it exists. — BrianSmithson 22:09, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

So "Rinku" is Japanese for "Link" (as in "connection: something that ties, connects, or relates two or more things")? RobertM525 08:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC) Japanese use English words for names alot. So this IS possible. - FWesley

I hear "link" means "left" in German and the name might have been decided because Link is left-handed, but I don't know whether this is the reason of his name.--203.110.125.215 15:14, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No Dialouge?

I think I distinctly remember Link in my pirated OOA. Early in the game, when asked to push a really big rock aside, Link says something like "I can't do it" or something. Of course I sold the game for LTTP because the damned thing wouldn't actually remember its own save files after five seconds, so I cant confirm... -Purple Pikmin —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Purple Pikmin (talk • contribs) .

I just replayed that part, it's actually Impa who says that. Axem Titanium 23:54, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article name

This article does not have the correct name! The article is about Link in every game in the series, not his role in The Legend of Zelda (the first game). Does it really matter how long it is? Scepia 22:03, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Wow. Um...wow. The series is also collectively referred to "Legend of Zelda" too, just so you know.

...wow.—ウルタプ 22:14, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

The page right now is Link (The Legend of Zelda) not Link (Legend of Zelda). It doesn't matter if people just think it's fine this way, it's incorrect. It's either Legend of Zelda or The Legend of Zelda series. You can't just make an arbitrary name and keep it because it was there. Scepia 03:38, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ambidexrous

In The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess (Wii version only) he is right handed!!!!! Frankyboy5 02:47, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Great. The article already knows. Axem Titanium 02:55, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

And if you go off the almighty "flip the sprite when it faces left" rule, he's right-handed in Zelda II as well. Now I see why people said it wasn't a true Zelda game ^__^ --ReloadPsi 14:01, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wooohooo, we did it!!!!

The article is still FA. Weeeeee! Renmiri 03:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Split

• I suggest that we split the article into Link, Hero of Time, Link, Hero of Winds, and after Twilight Princess comes out, Link, Hero of Twilight. Bly1993 11:48, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

…Why? You gave no reason.—ウルタプ 13:57, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

• Different characters. They have enough backstory to splitBly1993 20:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Except not really. A split for that would imply that we should have splits for every game he's been in, or at least every one that has a significantly different Link. Axem Titanium 22:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I also object; the Links, while technically being several different people, are closely related enough that one article can cover them all quite nicely, especially if we keep complete story summaries out of Link's article - those are better suited for the individual games' articles. Pikachu do just fine with one article, as do the several Princess Zeldas and their alter egos. --Sparky Lurkdragon 02:25, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

And we just renewed our FA status, so I wouldn't mess with what's working. Besides that lots of Links in the series are heroes of None of the Above. Sraan 03:14, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

I mean the major ones with alot of backstory. Even though connected, they are totally different characters. Bly1993 23:26, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

All the Links are major in some way or another; they wouldn't be a Link otherwise.

Like I said, all the Zeldas are completely different but related characters - heck, one is a pirate and one's a ninja, but we don't have a seperate article for Tetra/Wind Waker Zelda or one for Sheik/Ocarina Zelda. All the Pikachu are unique characters as well; you have the Pikachu from Hey You Pikachu!, Ash's Pikachu from the anime, Red's Pikachu from Pokémon Yellow, assorted random wild Pikachu, and so forth, but for obvious reasons they're all lumped together at the Pikachu article.

The Links are in a similar situation. The ones who do have backstories really don't have much more of one besides what's currently described in the article; much else and you get into the overall plot of the games rather than what's directly related to that particular Link himself. A split would get you several articles at lengths not much more than two paragraphs apiece, plus you'd have to duplicate all the stuff about common attributes among the Links to each article. --Sparky Lurkdragon 02:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2D ---> 3D

"The character's first appearance took place in the 1986 video game The Legend of Zelda, where it was portrayed by a two-dimensional sprite; in later releases Link's appearance has been conveyed by a computer-generated image (CGI)."

Wait, in Zelda II and ALttP, not to mention MC, FSA, OoS, and OoA, wasn't Link protrayed by a 2D sprite? And aren't all Links made by CGI? It's not link The Legend of Zelda was drawn on paper. Scepia 19:22, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Left-Handed/Right-Handed

The article states that link is left-handed except in the Wii version of Twillight Princess, which is true EXCEPT for a graphical glitch in the game A Link to the Past, in which he appeared right-handed when facing right. Should that be mentioned?

KLink-NiN10col/Neotendo123 00:27, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure the thing about Link being right handed in the Wii version should be mentioned either since it's so trivial, just like the memory saving technique that they used in ALttP so he would be right-handed when facing a certain direction (they flip the sprite to save space on the cartridge). I think that stuff should just be moved to the individual game articles. Axem Titanium 15:01, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Good point. I'll edit the other articles if it's not already there, but leave the fact in here. Why not. -KLink/NiN10col/Neotendo123 02:15, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm looking for a source for the old in-universe explanation for the sprite flipping, in that Link always keeps his shield towards death mountain and as such swaps hands when facing east. I -think- it was stated in the old Link to the Past players guide, but as I no longer have access to it, can't check. Could someone look for me, if you have it? Fieari 03:30, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

It's not that trivial, really. If you've ever tried to make a game, it's easier to make a sprite facing one way (for instance, left), then simply mirror it. So, if Link was holding his sword in his left hand, and your mirror it, he's suddenly holding it in his right. Hope that helps clear up some of the confusion. Kuro Yoake 02:38, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] the first line of the article

The first sentence in the article states that Link is a flaming homosexual. Why hasn't anyone else addressed this? Where is it written or said that Link is homosexual? Not that I have anything against homosexuals, but the individuals responsible for this article should remove such a remark considering it has no basis for being stated.

signed, Aaron Ni. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.184.116.55 (talk) 23:25, 9 December 2006 (UTC).

It was vandalism by a blocked user. You can fix it yourself by clicking the "edit this page" tab at the top, although it seems to be already done. Axem Titanium 00:40, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

I just had to delete a line of vandalism where someone had added...

== Headline text == LINK IS AWSOME..<ref name="staff">{{cite web | url=http://www.miyamotoshrine.com/theman/interviews/0898.shtml | title=Miyamoto Interview| date=[[1998-08-01]] | publisher=Nintendo Power | author=Nintendo Power Editorial Staff| accessdate=2006-09-23}}</ref>

...in the middle of the Actor portrayal section. Seriously people... Is nothing sacred anymore?

Thanks for your help. Keep up the good work. Unfortunately, there are a lot of lost souls get some sort of sick pleasure from vandalizing Wikipedia. It's the same with telemarketers and people who send spam messages by e-mail. Axem Titanium 20:23, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dog or not?

The wikiproject dogs banner was removed because (rv not a dog?) I belive the person who put it there meant his werewolf form. Should that be placed here or on the TP page? -KLink/NiN10col/Neotendo123 16:27, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

It was removed because his wolf form is so tangentially related to his character that it amounts to nothing at all. Axem Titanium 22:41, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bad footnote in cameo section

The footnote after this text:

Also, some of Link's weapons and items have shown up in different games, such as the Master Sword appearing in Final Fantasy Tactics Advance and Animal Crossing. He is also parodied in World of Warcraft as a gnome named Linken.

is highly unuseful, as it ONLY references Link's appearance in Final Fantasy Tactics Advance. No mention of his appearance in WoW or Animal Crossing is mentioned here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Todfox (talk • contribs) 22:43, 22 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Video game appearances

Wouldn't it make things simpler if this section was divided into the titles themselves rather than the vague time periods in which each one was released? What is it that distinguishes each of these time periods from each other anyway? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by A gx7 (talk • contribs) 05:12, 23 December 2006 (UTC).

It appears to be organized by system. The first section is for NES and SNES (with a little of the Original Game Boy too). The second is for N64 and Game Boy Color. The third is Gamecube and the rest. Axem Titanium 05:42, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Apparent Irrelevance

Could someone please explain how this is irrelevant? Not only is it verifiable, it also aids users with a proper context about this section. Jhamez84 15:02, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

please check out this. thanks! Scepia 21:53, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] page name

what the page name should be is not Link (character) or Link (The Legend of Zelda), but Link (The Legend of Zelda series). with the current name, people may be lead to believe that the page is only about the first game in the series, The Legend of Zelda. in fact, this page encompasses all of Link's appearances, in every game in the SERIES. Scepia 21:49, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Reading the first sentence will tell any reader that this is about a character in a series, not a single game. -SaturnYoshi ^{THE VOICES} 08:01, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it was already discussed earlier (maybe on the Princess Zelda page) that (The Legend of Zelda series) is too long a name to type out. The way that it is now works perfectly, and the article's pretty clear in telling you that this is all the Links in the series, not just one. Kuro Yoake 11:30, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

the page name needs to speak for itself. example: if I sent you a link to railroad, you would expect that the page is about railroads, not frilly pink lampshades. do you see the point? I don't care how long it is... the only name is The Legend of Zelda series. Scepia 05:36, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Most people looking for this character will almost always just type Link, and even the disambiguation page says the name refers to the character in the series. -SaturnYoshi ^{THE VOICES} 09:03, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

so... why should the pagename be inaccurate? it really doesn't matter how long it is. we are an encyclopedia, not a lazy fansite. Scepia 03:56, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

While I think it's fantastic that this featured article has been moved four times without consensus, please do try to fix the many many double redirects that pop up after moving the article. Thanks. --- RockMFR 20:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

We need to get a consensus first, although obviously the correct name has series on it *cough cough*. I'm telling everyone, he did not appear just in the first game, he appeared in every game in the series! Should the pagename be Link (Ocarina of Time), simply because he appeared in that game? Scepia 22:36, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Twilight Princess Age is 16? That can't be right.

We need a reference for that; seeing as how the common belief for OoT is 10 and 17 years old (I SWEAR it said something like that in the Instruction Booklet for OoT), this Twilight Princess Link seems much older. Because we have no proof, I'm going to remove the age. If you can get the proof, put it back in. Kuro Yoake 19:56, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

He barely looks older at all if you ask me. Hell, aside from the different hairstyle (TP Link's is parted more to the side), they seem almost identical in age and height. I'm not insisting to put the 16 back, but it's safe to assume that he's at least that old. And as for OOT Link being ten to seventeen, it was actually stated in an official strategy guide that Link, at the beginning of OOT, was ten years old.

THAT's where it was! I knew it had been stated somewhere. But does an official strategy guide even count for a source? Is it canon? Kuro Yoake^{Speak to me!!} 02:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I would imagine not, simply because the folks at Nintendo Power aren't the Zelda creators. The Japanese official TP guide would be more canon I would think. We can pretty much be sure that the enemy names, etc. are correct, but considering NOA's mis-translation "Gannon", they aren't the best source always. Scepia 22:39, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

True but that was 20 years ago so I don't think that should discount anything NOA says now. Translations have improved greatly since that time. There was also evidence that Gannon was a typo. --67.68.153.6 04:38, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but it wasn't NoA that misspelled Ganon. It was NoJ. The intro screen was in English even in the Japanese version, and the items were subtitled in Japanese. NoA did the manual, where it DID say Ganon properly. In addition, the Japanese version of Zelda II included "Gannon", but NoA noticed that time and corrected it (as well as 'un-Engrish-ifying' the intro text). The last time it was ever Gannon was in Zelda's Adventure, but Nintendo as a whole didn't have a part in it other than licensing. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 208.101.143.63 (talk) 11:53, 29 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Where is it said that his name is actually Link?

Not that I'm argueing the point, we all know it is, but in all of the Zelda games I've played you have the option of setting the character's name to whatever you want. Is it just stated in the manuals? Because I don't think he's ever referred to directly as Link in any of the games. So where is it ever pinned down that his name is Link? --SeizureDog 14:29, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

In all of the games, the default name is "Link," but that wouldn't be a very good source, would it? In the Twilight Princess manual, however (which I have right in front of me), it says this:

"Among the villagers is a boy known as the most skillful rider in all the land. A boy who, it is expected, will one day take over the responsibility of leading Ordon as the village chief. His name is Link..." Throughout the rest of the manual, though, it refers to the character as "you", but it does call him Link, so there ya go. Kuro Yoake^{Speak to me!!} 15:14, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Checking your theory: Legend of Zelda, Ocarina of Time, and Oracle of Ages (the three Zeldas I own) have no default names whatsoever. The name entry starts off blank and you have you type it in from there. In any case, his name had obviously been set by Zelda II: The Adventure of Link, but is his name anywhere for the first Zelda?--SeizureDog 23:03, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Leave the game running at the title screen and it gives you an intro narrative. His name is in there, telling you that it's "up to you, Link, to save her". --ReloadPsi 13:51, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I see. It actually says: Go find the "8" units "Link" to save her. btw. I never knew there was an intro, but it sure is especially poorly translated. Many years ago Prince Darkness "Ganon" stole one of the triforce with power. Ugh. --SeizureDog 00:09, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

He's referred to as Link in the Super Smash Bros. series, too. While it's not technically Zelda canon, the series is closely supervised by Nintendo and generally gets things right about backstories and such. --Sparky Lurkdragon 19:18, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] German for left?

Aside from the pun on his name in "A Link to the Past", I've never seen anything stating what the heck "Link" is actually supposed to mean. I've drawn my own conlusion that, since he's a leftie, it's taken from the German for "left"; "link" is its most basic adjectival form in that language, as opposed to "Links" which means the direction in its noun form. Oh yeah, if "adjectival" isn't actually a word, would someone please alter that in the article? There's also that point further up this discussion page about his Link between the world and the player, but that seems a bit weird: Aren't all video game player characters exactly that? --ReloadPsi 13:53, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, they are, but I seem to recall that being the reason series creator Shigeru Miyamoto gave for the name. Unfortunately, I don't have the interview on me. That's the only real-world explanation we have that I know of. There is no in-universe explanation for it, and while the German coincidence is interesting, to me it really seems to be just that; a coincidence. Unless someone who helped develop the original Legend of Zelda speaks German, I guess.

Does anybody have the interview I remember? If someone can find the source, that would really help the article. --Sparky Lurkdragon 18:05, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't have the interview on me, I've got a link somewhere, but I know that the entire series was started based on Mr. Miyamoto's wanderings in the woods nearby his house. He used to dream up adventures, and I think he called himself Link. Kuro Yoake^{Speak to me!!} 20:39, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I always assumed it was because there are multiple "Links" and they're all links to the Hero of Time. This just might be my wishful thinking, but it sure does make sense to me. DevinOfGreatness 04:55, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll find said interview with Miyamoto, but I know that the reason is that the character is the link between the player and the game. That's the explanation. The German (and Dutch) thing is a coincidence. JackSparrow Ninja 06:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Link is NOT ambidextrous! Please stop saying he is!

Just so no one is confused any farther: Link is not ambidextrous. He's always been left handed. Even in Twilight Princess, he's left handed. They made an exception with the Wii because of the sword swinging, and even then, they just mirrored the whole friggin' game, so he's STILL left handed, it just doesn't look that way. So please, PLEASE, stop listing in ANY article that Link is ambidextrous. Kuro Yoake^{Speak to me!!} 17:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Dude... chill...Justin The Claw 15:45, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

They did what? Are you saying they really reversed the entire game left to right for the Wii? That is insane and also disappointing for several reasons. It would be slightly more sensical for the Gerudos to be in the West, based on Ocarina of Time, for instance. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 22:16, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

They did indeed flip the game map over at the eleventh hour of the Wii version's development. There's a spoiler-free section on it in the Twilight Princess article. --Sparky Lurkdragon 00:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I haven't been changing anything... But I think he's technically ambidextrous. For example, look at the artwork for the original Zelda. In half of them, he's right-handed, in some he's left-handed. Then there's the sprite mirroring. Laziness or not, it's there, it's part of the game, and it shouldn't be ignored... Same with the Wii version of Twilight Princess.

Link is officially depicted as being left-handed. They made the exception for the Wii version because at E3 Nintendo realized that, though Link was swinging his sword with his left hand, most gamers, including lefties, were using the "wiimote" with their right. And yes, they completely mirrored the game. Though I'm not positive about which version is the original, but I'm assuming it's the GameCube version. The animated series shows him as right-handed, but that would be considered a non-canon depiction. Illustrations may show him holding the sword in his right hand, but that's also due to image mirroring, probably by graphic designers who don't consider left- or right- handedness of a fictional character to be all that important in a video game manual or strategy guide.Justin The Claw 15:45, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Twilight Princess was supposed to be a GameCube exclusive long before the news of it getting a Wii version hit. It's obviously the original.--SeizureDog 16:15, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Good pointJustin The Claw 05:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Quirks

I think there should be a section on link's quirks. You know, like never sleeping or using the bathroom, breaking other peoples' pottery, and taking so little damage from fatal situations (ex. falling into a pit or lava, being electrocuted, or being on fire). Armogohma 01:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

...but all video game characters do that. You don't see numbers popping up above your head when someone hits you, do you? Axem Titanium 03:26, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Skills

Okay, who transcribed that ridiculous section concerning Link's skills? I mean, this has a close resemblance to RealUltimatePower, or to Chuch Norris-esque lines of exchange. Can we please modify this passage to be a bit less childish? -EarthRise33 23:02, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction. -EarthRise33 18:01, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Inconsistency in Chronology

Concept and Creation: Character Creation: "Miyamoto has stated that Ocarina of Time is the first story, followed by Majora's Mask, then the original Legend of Zelda, then Zelda II: The Adventure of Link, and finally A Link to the Past, with Link's Awakening falling sometime after Ocarina of Time."

Appearances: Video Games: 1986-1996: "In The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, centuries before the events of The Legend of Zelda..."

Just thought I'd bring this to your attention. 71.195.76.153 20:34, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Movie Link

Apparently there's a live-action movie of Legend of Zelda coming out this autumn. Still don't know who the director is or when the exact date is. It might just be a fan project but just in case it isn't could someone find out who's playing Link.

~~Anon~~ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.145.241.27 (talk • contribs).

Ah yes, looks like a fan project.

Anon

[edit] news

heres some news, Link is for the most time NOT the same person in the games. he is more of a reincarnation of himself again and again and again. zelda appears just as her own decendants/ancestors. Ganon is the only of the three main characters that is the same person in the whole series. however the point is that this article dont seem to mention it any where, neither Zeldas. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.200.164.254 (talk) 22:01, 3 February 2007

Mind giving a source? JackSparrow Ninja 22:15, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

In game dialouge, maybe, and the clear differences in appearence kinda prove the different Links and Zeldas. The closest thing to a different Ganon was either in FSA and(maybe) TP.

[edit] Hero of Twilight

I just KNOW heard it in Twilight Princess somewhere....it sounds so familiar....could someone tell me when he was dubbed the Hero of Twilight? I can't seem to remember what scene it was right now.... --Superbub 01:49, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Alright, now someone says he's the Hero of Light....which is it people? I'm way to confused now.--Superbub 01:49, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

now, all of it's gone except for hero of time. Ladies and gents, we now have an edit war>_>--Superbub 00:54, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Midna says that the Twili's hero is said to appear in the form of a beast. A wolf is often considered a beast. Link is chosen by the gods and transforms into a wolf. So I supose the answer would be YES. He could be considerd "Hero of Twilight". Though I don't remember if that's what it's called... 18:18, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, if we connect a bunch of dots, we can suppose he could be called that. But that's not the same thing as it being true or appropriate for this article. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 04:15, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, yes, now I know...thanks for the verification^_^--Superbub 02:32, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Smash Bro or Twighlight Princess

I don't want to have an edit war, so I am wondering...Is the heading pic for the Link (The Legend of Zelda) article a pic from Super Smash Bros Brawl, or The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess? §†SupaSoldier†§ 16:47, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

It's smash bros. someone has already changed it....--Superbub 01:47, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Too many images!

The number of images this article uses has more than tripled from 8 (when it was featured) to 25. This is unacceptable people; we have to trim this down.--SeizureDog 17:21, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I will take some of them and put them in a image gallery within 3 days if nobody oposses.-Dark Dragon Flame 05:09, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Galleries tend to push the claims of fair use. It'd be better to just lower the number.--SeizureDog 07:16, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I was considering adding the artwork there, then delete some of the screenshots and moving other ones so they don't look cropped. -Dark Dragon Flame 23:28, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I deleted some pictures, moved some and moved character artwork in a new gallery, but I think some images still need to be cutted down. -Dark Dragon Flame 03:22, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

The gallery has to go for obvious reasons: how can we justify the claim to fair use. I say keep the number of images under 10 and no more than one image per game in the franchise. Phils 16:24, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SSBB image

Please replace the SSBB image with the Twilight Princess image. TP is current enough and a good enough depiction of Link that he shouldn't be replaced with a depiction of him outside of the main Zelda universe. - A Link to the Past (talk) 20:04, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

A valid point. The main image should be in-universe. I have changed it to reflect. Brawl image still in article, just moved down.--SeizureDog 06:36, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Just a note- As a hardcore Legend of Zelda fan, I actually believe, as a title picture, the image from Super Smash Brothers Brawl does Link better justice. Besides, it fits better with the image used for the Princess Zelda Article. Please keep in mind that his Brawl appearance IS essentially his Twilight Princess form. -- (visitor)

^You may be forgetting that the picture in the Princess Zelda article is a piece from the actual game's(3D) art.