On the picture from Hyrule Historia, and splitting the articles.
I see that the picture from Hyrule Historia is important to include, but eventually, it gets outdated fast. I'd suggest recreating the picture with WikiMarkup instead.
Also, would it be a good idea to split the article after the timeline split?–– ♫ Ellie ♫ 09:11, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
- It would be better to use an official image, even if it is getting outdated. About the split, we are currently in the proccess of splitting the timeline page as it is becoming really huge. You can see some of this work here. - Chuck * (Talk) 19:58, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
- The problem currently however, is that the reader can't concretely see the timeline in terms of the games. And Tri Force Heroes shouldn't be italicized.–– ♫ Ellie ♫ 21:58, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
- Tri Force Heroes is the title of a game. All game titles, regardless if they are canon or not (and in Tri Force Heroes' case, it is canon), should be italicized. I fail to see any issue with that. - Midoro (T C) 23:12, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
Theories about a 4th Timeline and Hyrule Warriors
I personally consider Hyrule Warriors and Link's Crossbow Training to be placed in a 4th timeline, where Ganon was sealed after he received the Triforce of Power in Ocarina of Time, scattering his soul and body across Time, Space, and Dimensions. Link's Crossbow Training would be placed in that timeline because Linkle was originally going to be the main character of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Webmetz (talk) 10:25, 28 April 2016
Breath Of The Wild
Rumoured (to be taken with a pinch of salt) after TLOZ: Adventure of Link (most likely), or one of either: after Phantom Hourglass and before Spirit Tracks, or a separate timeline after Phantom Hourglass without Spirit Tracks. Thoughts? I'd go with the former (after Zelda 2). —Preceding unsigned comment added by LukeIMG19 (talk) 15:35, January 16, 2017
In the memory link get from the Sacred Ground Ruins Zelda says "Whether skyward bound, adrift in time, or steeped in the glowing embers of twilight..." making a clear reference to Skyward Sword, Ocarina of Time, and Twilight Princess. Given this reference, and the 10,000+ years between Ganon appearances, I think it's now safe to say this takes place at the end of the Child Timeline, after Four Swords Adventures. Should this be added to the timeline? Or should we wait for Nintendo to officially announce where it goes? D0xis (talk) 05:42, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
- Right now i think we should wait, to me it seems it uses several thinks from other Zelda Games, like the Ritos who don't appear in the Child Time line or were ever mentioned before. It looks to me like this is a new Timeline which somewhat mixed things up (Hylia was never mentioned before or in OoT, now she suddenly is a thing, then the Rito who are supposed to be an Evolution of the Zora (Wind Waker), the Decline of Kingdom Hyrule (due to Link being Defeated).
- I disagree. All of the points you've listed are easily explainable in the 10,000+ year gap. Korok and Rito evolution, TONS of characters we've never seen or heard of... The decline of the kingdom is explained very early on in the game. (trying to avoid spoilers)
- That being said, the other possibility here is that the 3 timelines have (somehow) merged back into one. Unlikely but possible. Either way, I guess we'll just have to wait and find out.
- ~D0xis of the V0id~ (T|C) 02:43, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
- It's not confirmed at all, there's evidence for both child and downfall timelines. There's a plaque talking about Ruto becoming a Sage and helping Zelda and Link fight Ganon in OoT, which never happened in the child timeline. ReignTG (talk) 13:20, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
- I'm going to stop this before the argument starts here too. This debate has been going on in the ZU Discord for some time now. There is evidence that places BotW in ALL the timelines. While the references to the Child Timeline are the most prominent, we can't simply ignore the fact the the other references are present. Quite frankly, there is too much information, and too much debate. We have to wait for Nintendo to tell us.
- ~D0xis of the V0id~(T|C) 14:25, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
It appears that the Hyrule Encyclopedia may have changed the timeline, specifically the location of the Oracle series. Apparently, it places the Oracle Series AFTER Link's Awakening, and that the Link from that game is not the same Link as the one in the Oracle series. Someone should look into this posthaste. Toolen22 (talk) 23:03, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
- Someone should also look into the canonicity of the Hyrule Encyclopedia. Some of it seems contradictory to established canon. Some people are saying that this is because the creators of the franchise may not have played as big a role in its creation as they did with the Hyrule Historia. It's even been said that this is mentioned in the book in a sort of disclaimer. Sadly, I cannot verify this information, as I do not possess a copy of the book. If his is true, then the timeline should probably remain as is. Toolen22 (talk) 05:14, 16 March 2017 (UTC)