Talk:Recurring characters in The Legend of Zelda series

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Recurring characters in The Legend of Zelda series article.
Article policies
Archives: 1
Discussions on this page may escalate into heated debate. Please try to keep a cool head when commenting here. See also: Wikipedia:Etiquette.
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.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid This article is on a subject of mid priority within The Legend of Zelda for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
Archive
Archives


Contents

[edit] Archive + Sages

I've gone ahead and archived the page, as two years worth of discussion is pretty crazy. Also, upon stumbling onto this page from the disambiguation article for Seven Sages, I realized that said article links here, but this page actually says little to nothing about them. Does anyone else agree that they should receive a section? Especially now that they've appeared in two different games. Arrow 02:56, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I think they should be given their own section, yes. This should involve any character (or set of) that make a recurring appearance and are not already covered by a specific Zelda character list. Ashnard Talk 10:01, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anju

You guys forgot to add Anju to the list.

Please sign when you edit the discussion page. I don't know who he is by the way. Ashnard Talk 15:55, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I was in a hurry and forgot. Anyway, Anju is the Cucco Lady who appears in several games. She's also Kafei's engaged wife in Majora's Mask. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares
Also, adding on to what I just said, the Sages/Maidens, the Great Fairy, Dark Link, and Skullkid should be on here. The Sages are mentioned in almost every major game (minor ones like the Oracles and the Four Sword and SNES Games don't count) and have a long history and plot role. (Possibly enough for an article) Maidens count as sages. The Great Fairy had an article, so I understand why she is forgotten. Dark Fairy is also recurring majorly. Skullkid counts as recurring, as it is revealed at the ending in Majora's Mask that Skullkid is the same one who Link gave the Skull Mask to in OOT and, although not necessarily the same one, does reappear in Twilight Princess. The last one is questionable, but the other ones aren't. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 8:01 (Eastern Standard Time), 12 June, 2007.

Wow, I see that you've put a lot of effort in to this. It's comprehensive, but one thing: don't edit in too much minutiae. Understand the purpose of what you're writing – it's supposed to be encyclopaedic and not a point-by-point recount of a tale. It must be detailed, but not extraneously. Just look over it and take out what just seems unnecessary. Thanks. Ashnard Talk 15:16, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, some characters have done enough for articles, the most notable being Skullkid. Skullkid has done more than Agahnim and Twinrova have already done, and Skullkid is a commonly recurring character. We could set up some arguments for the larger ones (Sages and Anju, for example) but the only one who outright needs an article is Skullkid. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 15:08 (Eastern Standard Time), 12 June 2007.

Woah, AFKAW, did you even take notice to what I said, What I advised? Ashnard Talk 19:14, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, I was implying giving him an article (because he is one of the much larger parts of the minor character section) to shorten the page (I really have to learn how to emphasize more). We could shorten some of the characters, like the Postman, but some of them are fine as it is (Anju's would have to be long, because she's given alot of history and development). Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 16:18 (Eastern Standard Time); 12 June, 2007.
Okay but remember, it's not just about length, but the content of these articles. In the sense of unnecessary information and the tone of it all. Ashnard Talk 20:22, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
So, that basically means Skullkid is getting an article? (You have to do more than say Okay) Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 4:32 )Eastern Standard time); 12 June 2007.

I see how you have the rights to make that judgement when you are basically ignorant to the correct way of editing on Wikipedia. Go for it, I was trying to help you. Pour countless hours into doing something that will be majorly refined by an experienced editor or deleted. Ashnard Talk 21:22, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Artist_Formerly_Known_As_Whocares/ItachiSandbox
Here, rather than make an article right off the bat, I'd rather have it be seen in my Sandbox before it is agreed on. You can edit it where you see need. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 19:26 (Eastern Standard Time) 12 June, 2007.

[edit] Problem!

Nayru and Nayru

Din and Din

Farore and Farore

Any link aimed at this page with those names will go towards the Oracle, not the Goddess. We could either combine their sections, since they are highly related characters (and, in my own opinion, the oracles are avatars of the goddesses - that's more power than even the sages), or we could have Nayru (Oracle) and Nayru (Goddess).KrytenKoro 07:14, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Either way will be suitable as long as you distinguish between the two forms adequately. Ashnard Talk Contribs 15:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

More important problem: Their Japanese names are needed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.21.221 (talk • contribs)

[edit] Merge

The characters are unlikely to ever obtain more than a few small bits of real world information, so they cannot meet WP:FICT or WP:WAF. It is best to merge them here due to that. Length is not an issue; they can easily be trimmed way down. Importance in the series (Vaati) also doesn't matter if there is nothing to write about. TTN 01:54, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

What are you talking about? What article do you want merging with this one? — I don't think you stated that. Ashnard Talk Contribs 07:56, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Oh, I've seen the tag. Yeah, go for it. Ashnard Talk Contribs 08:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Makes sense. However, for Vaati - if he is notable, then he should get an article - form what I remember, it wasn't that short of one, either, mostly due to TMC.KrytenKoro 16:24, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, if you guys do end up merging these articles, at least make sure it's a true merger. I've noticed a lot of articles on Wikipedia that have been "merged" were, in reality, deleted, and nothing changed on the sections they were being merged with. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.223.30.78 (talk • contribs) 03:08, 22 July 2007 UTC

That's because most of the time, the info on the original article was either minutiae, fancruft, or redundant since it the info was already on the other article. Ashnard Talk Contribs 08:46, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I'll start merging these soon. TTN 17:57, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy Deletion

Many images in the article are nominated for speedy deletion as they have no source or fair use rationale. Please if you want to save this images provide the requested information, or they may get deleted Ejfetters 10:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tingle merge

I've taken it upon myself to begin a merge discussion for this character in particular, as he is definitely more notable than that miniature discussion held here earlier. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:26, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Characters receive articles if they have enough real world information. This character has none that I can find. Any that can be found is likely very obscure, so it will not be helpful in building an article. TTN 18:15, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
  1. Tingle appears in the Balloon Fight series
  2. Tingle is one of the best-known characters in the series (whether he's liked or disliked).
  3. He has appeared in almost every new Zelda since his inception.
  4. Tingle has his own spin-off series.
  5. One of the four characters in the Zelda series to be playable in any form (Link, Zelda, Kafei, Tingle).
  6. Tingle's non-appearance in Zelda TP was a frequently asked question in interviews.

And that's just a quick assessment of his notability. - A Link to the Past (talk) 20:25, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I am not doubting that the character is notable by the standards of game characters. On this site, notability is determined by the use of reliable sources to assert that it is more than just a game character. Being notable in a notable series gives a very good foothold for real world information, but it needs to be shown for the importance in the series to matter. TTN 20:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with A Link to the Past. The Prince of Darkness 21:21, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

So do I. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.27.127.30 (talk • contribs) 21:24, 31 July 2007
If you look at the articles on ign (that's one that I've seen him on - there's surely some on other game sites), creator interviews, or otherwise, it is clear that he is out-of-universe information and is notable.KrytenKoro 00:58, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Please actually show the out of universe information. It actually has to be able to build an article (i.e. more that a few notes). Please toss all notions of notability out the window unless it has to do with WP:N. That is all that matters. If Link were just as notable, but only have in-universe information, he would not have an article. TTN 01:02, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Nonsense. The Prince of Darkness 22:46, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

A quick search, even through the news portion, gives more results than even Ganon gets:
[1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8].
As arguable the second major character after Link, it's obvious that out-of-universe info is going to be easy to find. And seeing as the Ganon and Link articles are nearly total in-universe (which makes the earth-time dating of the sections make no sense whatsoever, since they are describing in-universe events-but that's a discussion for that page), I don't see what the problem is.KrytenKoro 01:16, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
It you believe there is out of universe information, back up the claim. There are plenty of fictional topics that seem like they would be easy to source. But they're not. You shouldn't bother comparing to non-featured quality articles (Link is decent, but it really isn't up to the FA standards). All fiction needs real world information, and this is no exception. TTN 01:25, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
...kweh? I just posted the first seven sites I found! Except for the first one, which on second look is fanart, these are out-of-universe, and come from reliable news sources.I mean, if you're expecting me to rewrite his article using those, I'm sorry, that's not the work I'm doing right now - I was just giving examples of the sources you guys could use.KrytenKoro 02:42, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Those are about the game being released. That isn't the kind of out of universe information that we use (and it isn't really even out of universe). You need development, reception, and second party media attention of the actual character TTN 02:46, 3 August 2007 (UTC).
Here's one: [9]. Here's another: [10]. These are both "out of universe" articles that point to the significance of Tingle the character. It took very little time to find them and a simple search (had you done one) would have found them. Tingle is significant enough as a major supporting and starring character to deserve his own article. Thanks. 24.235.73.86 06:32, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Just merge the Tingle article. I understand he has his own games, but the article has pratically little in it (the headings take up all the space) so until someone can greatly expand the article, he should be merged into Recurring characters in The Legend of Zelda series. There is no point in devoting an article to something if there isn't going to be any substance to it. .:Alex:. 14:20, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
There is substance to it and there will be more. No merge. Rhindle The Red 16:43, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Recently Merged (At least Vaati and Great Fairy)

These sections were recently claimed to be merged - however, it appears that instead, it was an excuse to delete an article, as a lot of the relevant information was dropped completely - for Great Fairy, while a bit of it was gamecruft, the stuff about there roles in the plots was left out of the merge, and instead, its section focused on how they were usually nude - both incorrect (only in 3 games are they even near it), and not a major facet of their character.

For Vaati, the excuse was given to "let the game articles cover it", even though the setup for this is specifically to have the bulk of the information here, and the character lists for the other games be short descriptions with a link to this page. Also, the one bit of out-of-universe information was completely removed.

This seems pretty unacceptable - though I admit that I may easily have missed the discussion behind this where consensus was reached that this was appropriate. However, to my understanding, it looks like relevant information, and even the one compromise to the demand for out-of-universe, was completely sacrificed in the favor of deleting articles under the pretense of merging.

If you want an article deleted, fine, put it up for discussion - but if you're going to claim to merge something, please actually do so.KrytenKoro 01:07, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

As a side note - I have the contents of the "merged" articles saved to a txt document on my computer, and when I get done with the other work I am doing, I will try to re-add the relevant information myself. However, I'm going to be pretty busy for probably a week or so, which is why I'm asking here to see if others (such as the merge requester), will do it now.KrytenKoro 01:09, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Plot information is used to supplement the real world information. The amount incorporated reflects the amount of real world information. If we just have a list entry, we just give the most important details. If we have Vaati, we only need the basic details of how he came to be and what he has done. If we have Link, we can afford to apply more plot. It's basically fair use.
With the Great Fairy, we only need to give a general description. It can be beefed up, but listing every role in every game is completely redundant with the lists. And with the out of universe info, I assume you're talking about the Nintendo Power thing. That is just trivia. Reception needs to reflect a mass amount, not the views of one magazine. TTN 01:27, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Fine, but quite a bit of what you reverted Vaati's mention to is simply incorrect. He was not originally humanoid, nor did he attack Zelda in order to get the Golden Power - she was merely an annoyance. Furthermore, it is never said that the Light Force is the Triforce, and it's properties don't jive with the Triforce's. The "demon" bit is wrong, and being sealed in the Four Sword is OR - we know that he was at some point, but it's not clear that it was then, especially since what the game shows is him exploding, not the sealing animation used in FS and FSA.
Basically, most of the changes I made were not to beef up the Vaati entry, but to correct the false claims made in it. For example, in FSA - Link is not "tricked" into releasing Vaati - he's forced to. He's even asked if he "Knows what is goind to happen", and he says yes. Furthermore, while I agree he was destroyed in FSA, it again has a different animation than what is usually shown - the explosions. And Link defeats him by sealing him each time that he seals him - defeat doesn't imply destruction. I'll try to shorten it as much as I can, but the fact remains that what you reverted it to simply isn't correct, in a lot of places.KrytenKoro 01:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
I'd rather have a few mistakes than a needless article. Please remember not use hyphens to represent dashes. Use —. Ashnard Talk Contribs 10:41, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Where the hell do you get the idea that I suggested re-splitting them? No! The Vaati bit was because he reverted my edits because they were "too specific info", when I was merely correcting the false assertions that were in the merged section.KrytenKoro 09:59, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Do I really have to explain the meaning of my statements? I meant that, even if there are mistakes, they can be fixed and modified easily. I'd much rather have the few mistakes than a botched article; yet you are complaining pofusely about something that can be easily fixed. I was trying to point out your lack of appreciation of the improvement. The only person who raised the notion of re-splitting is you just then — I mentioned nothing of it. Again, I must question your approach on discussion pages. Ashnard Talk Contribs 10:49, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes, because you implied that I was denigrating the fact that the merge happened - I never did. I was merely annoyed that little if any information was actually merged - basically, I was asking that a merge actually be done. Then, the "few mistakes" bit was not actually part of my merge complaint - it was part of my discussion with TTN. So no, I am not complaining about the merge happening - I was complaining about it not being done completely, and complaining because this was done several times - that's why I specifically asked that when it is done in the future, it is done right. That's why I got annoyed when you made that comment, because it was clear that it had completely misinterpreted, if not ignored, the content of my complaint.KrytenKoro 11:36, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
PS: I am sorry for having such an argumentative tone, TTN, it's just that I see stuff like this alot, so it annoys me. However, you were right, after looking at the previous pages it was very difficult to extract relevant information from them.KrytenKoro 11:36, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I never implied anything — if you want to interpret it incorrectly, then that's your problem. I explained my statement. I was talking about your incessant whinging. I wasn't bothered about your argument but about your moaning and lack of appreciation. I didn't imply that you contested the merge; you misinterpreted the statement. If you want a private discussion with TTN, then go to his talk page. Stop using hyphens to represent dashes too. Ashnard Talk Contribs 12:03, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

"I'd rather have a few mistakes than a needless article." — How is this talking about my "whinging"?
"Do I really have to explain the meaning of my statements? I meant that, even if there are mistakes, they can be fixed and modified easily. I'd much rather have the few mistakes than a botched article; yet you are complaining profusely about something that can be easily fixed." — You do mention it here, but again, I am not complaining that the merge occurred — I complained because it seemed to have been done, and continued to be done, incompletely. As said here:

but if you're going to claim to merge something, please actually do so.

So again, either your initial complaint was superfluous, irrelevant, or heavily misinterpreting what I said. I really can't see how the first comment means anything other than "The article shouldn't be separate, so the mistakes are acceptable" — which seems to imply that I'm complaining that they were merged, which I didn't.
For the dashes — I'm sorry, I'm used to MS word, where it automatically converts if you use spaces before and after.KrytenKoro 13:34, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
"I'd rather have a few mistakes than a needless article." — Meaning, yes, the merge wasn't perfect and, eventhough you wanted the merge, there was a remarkable level of criticism since there was an improvement. As for my comment maybe being superfluous, I actually consider your whole discussion on the excessive side since you could have fixed these mistakes as opposed to wasting time talking about it. In a nutshell, my comment meant "be grateful that the article is better". I never actually though that you were challenging the merge itself and did realise that you were talking about the mistakes. Ashnard Talk Contribs 14:45, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Sorry then, for thinking that you were misinterpreting my thoughts regarding the merger.
"there was an improvement" is what I was actually annoyed at - nothing was actually changed on this side of the merge, as far as I can tell. I'm not sure about "Vaati", but "Great Fairy" was the same as it had been weeks prior to the proposal.
And again, I did "fix these mistakes" - I even mentioned that I was doing so. What I was asking was that, in the future, please not to do the same thing again.
Problem solved. Like most disputes, it was a misunderstanding I think. Ashnard Talk Contribs 18:35, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Epona

Animals have no soul.
What I actually mean to say, isn't it somewhat exagerated to call a horse a character? -- 141.84.69.20 02:23, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

As a wolf, Epona physically communicates with Link in Twilight Princess (AKA you can walk up to her, press the Talk button, and get a text box message from her about how she recognizes you and asks you to transform back to Hylian so the two of you can get on your way). It can fly. Arrowned 02:37, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Oh. I'll add this to the article; there are people who haven't played TP. -- 141.84.69.20 13:07, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, if it's true, then we must remove ALL the articles about animal characters in media (like Sonic, Yoshi, Crash;because, despite their humanoid-like appearance, they are animals per se).We don't going too far in the critics (in the constructive sense)?--MRFraga 03:59, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tingle

"He was also elected as Hyrule's sexiest man alive." Is this some kind of joke/vandalism? I haven't really played many games with Tingle in them so I don't know for sure. 75.153.231.20 22:15, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Talon.jpg

Image:Talon.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:22, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Images

I'm not going to tell you to add more or remove several images, but I'm going to warn you that there has been this band of followers lately that have been going around articles about video game, television, book, etc. series and removing images about characters, and thus this is very likely to become a target considering the series' fame. I'm going to warn you to prepare for this, though I won't interfere with any decision you or they make. thank you. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 19:24, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Uh... so who exactly are these people? Haipa Doragon (talk) 20:33, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
That detail doesn't matter exactly, what does matter is eventually they'll come here. Prepare youselves for it and lower the number of images in all of the character articles (including ones for multiple characters) to make them satisfied, as they tend to turn their attention to ones that have a large number of fair-use images. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 15:29, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, it matters, else I'll just delete this. Haipa Doragon (talk) 20:56, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Probably the same sort of people who added the convo immediately above this one about Fair Use Rationale for the Talon image. This conversation may have started off questionable in terms of necessity considering that images that don't work under fair use normally are noted in the article a week in advance before they're taken down... but going ahead and making a editor-wide attempt at making sure all images are fair use would be a good idea anyways. It will only serve to benefit the article in the longrun. Arrowned 21:42, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Betacommand has little to do with them. Betacommand only goes around Wikipedia notifying of fair-use images. These guys simply remove them as a whole with no warning beforehand. I'll say that User:Durin was a former member, though you'll have to look up the others youselves, as I rather respect their right to privacy. (and because I have forgotten who the others are) I also believe that he once had a full-blown list of reasons on User:Durin/Fair use overuse explanation. It's possible he has a list of members lying around somewhere, too. Either way, prepare yourselves, eventually they'll come here. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 22:32, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merging

Hey, the merging simply removed most of the information about the characters Twinrova!In all the case, I put the article back, with information about the copyrighted image.If someone want to change it, please do it with arguments.Thanks!--MRFraga 03:59, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dark Link entry

I've updated the Dark Link entry to include Dark Link from both Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess. I remember them being included in the description before, but somebody had apparently removed them: ironic, someone removing the details of Dark Link from the two most popular Zelda titles he appears in, TP and OOT.

If someone could just add an image to Dark Link from TP or OOT, the entry would be complete.

As it was, the entry for such a popular and mysterious antagonist (the most popular after Ganondorf) was pathetically inadequate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.103.92.192 (talk • contribs)

I have edited your entry and removed a lot of the gamecruft and unnecessary information, now it looks pretty good. Artichoker 02:37, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
..except that it's not a character at all in OoT, and doesn't technically appear in TP. Furthermore, the "side-story" idea is fanwank - all zelda games are "main series games".Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 03:45, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anyone can edit? Yeah right

Apparently the edit I did to Dark Link's entry (that actually pointed out his appearance in Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess, both of which, you know, were the most important sales wise Zelda games in North America and Europe) wasn't good enough for the people who apparently know right from wrong in all subjective matters. So the edits are just deleted.

Congratulations: wikipedia is now banned at every major university in my country as a result of actions of people like yourself. You don't cite anything, you decide what is fact or what is not, and in the end, you turn what could have been a very useful and invaluable resource into a place where people with too much time on their hands control the entries of anything.

Wikipedia carries no weight. Something on a wikipedia article means nothing: you have to check another, more reliable resource to ensure that it is actually true, which in turn beats the ENTIRE point of wikipedia.

Thank God himself that most of wikipedia is not as bad as the zelda controlled part....unsurprising, given the volatile nature of zelda fanboys and videogame fanboys in general. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.103.92.192 (talk • contribs)

From what I see, your edits were largely original research, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. You say unverified things such as "a memorable antagonist", "Dark Link is also one of the most difficult" and in particular the last paragraph, which was completely an unverified definition between Shadow and Dark Link. To make things true on Wikipedia, you need backup via reliable sources, not merely whatever you think is correct. Haipa Doragon (talk) 17:38, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
By the way, if you were actually awake in classes, they would have told you they disliked wikipedia BECAUSE people would use it without verifiable sources. We're trying to make it up to snuff - it's actions like yours that make it unusable.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 15:48, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:TPSages.jpg

Image:TPSages.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:20, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tingle Merge

Tingle does not meet our fiction guidelines. He does not have coverage in reliable sources. A couple of mentions here and there does not mean that he has significant coverage, andF any sort of coverage relating to the character's sexuality needs to be from a serious article on a neutral site (i.e. not a site advertised to gay people). TTN (talk) 23:26, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Tingle's notability has been established. He has coverage in reliable sources, but can use more. If a site advertised to gay people is not to be taken seriously on the issue of a character's gayness, who is? We've been down this road before. This article still needs work, but there is still no reason to merge it, just like there wasn't before. Rhindle The Red (talk) 00:34, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Established? No. Asserted? Yes. That is not enough in order to keep an article. Any site without a point of view that is not going to subjectively judge a character because that is what they usually do would be fine for references to sexuality. 00:38, 30 November 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by TTN (talk • contribs)
See what I've added here? All the talking in the world about notability on a talk page won't save the article. If you want Tingle to have his own article, you need to expand that section I've started, and create a "Character design" or "Character development" section with out-of-universe information. Pagrashtak 01:07, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
Articles need a lot of references to assert a notable article that can begin the process of building to GA and then FA. It appears that Tingle has some notability, so we should be merged into the characters article. If later it is shown he has massive notability, he can have his own article again. Judgesurreal777 04:02, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
I would lean towards yes on merging. Why? Because Malon was already merged into this article, and it would seem that her and Tingle are nearly at the same level of notability in the Zelda universe. Most of his info can be brought here and then we can link to his starring game. There you go. --Bishop2 (talk) 14:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
...except that Tingle has a far greater number of appearances, generally has a more important role, and has two games dedicated to him. Malon isn't even close.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 16:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clarification

Some of these sections could use some clarification. More specifically, their entry should say what game(s) they appear in before giving out specific information. Biggoron and Maple (among others) both start talking about details of the character before they say anything about which "Zelda" game we're talking about. Maple, for example, starts talking about what happens when you crash into her and so on, but it wasn't until halfway through the paragraph that I even knew which game this version of her was from. Zephyrus11 (talk) 09:35, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Anju3.jpg

Image:Anju3.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 18:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:LinkOnHorse.png

Image:LinkOnHorse.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:34, 13 February 2008 (UTC)