December 9, 2018 Super Smash Bros. Ultimate is here!

Interested in helping out? Come join us as we Smash our way through!
Want to contribute for Super Smash Bros. Ultimate outside of The Legend of Zelda? SmashWiki could use some love!

Latest Announcements

User talk:Midoro

From Zelda Wiki, the Zelda encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
TAoL Thunderbird Attacking Link Artwork.png
Midoro
'86 - '93 Zelda enthusiast

TAoL Link Fighting Link's Shadow Artwork.png

TAoL Doll Sprite.png TAoL Key Sprite.png TAoL Magic Jar Blue Sprite.png

User Page

Talk Page

Sandbox


Zwlogo2dlarge.png
  Archives:


You deleted all of my work :(

Dude... I stayed up all night last night (a week or two ago) updating the wiki and creating wanted pages to help everyone out, and instead of a thank you most of my hard work was deleted :(

2 of the 3 "wanted pages" I made got deleted. One of them being Lorulean Knights, wich was understandably merged with Lorule Soldiers... but you cut out everything I wrote on that page. Could you at least preserve the information I spent time to put on that page when you merged it? It wasn't arbitrary stuff. And the Ghost Soldiers page didn't need to be deleted. I think that the ghost variant of soldiers that appear in Twilight Princess (wich are the same as the Hyrule Warriors ones as they are both ghosts of deceased Hyrule Soldiers) was a needed page.

I spent hours and effort making those pages, and within seconds and no effort you deleted them.

I can understand you deleting my stuff if it was vandalism (which it most definitely was not), if it was inaccurate (all the things I posted were accurate to their respective games, look at them again if you don't believe me). But my work was legit. The only reason I see you deleted my stuff is because you felt it was all arbitrary but I have to disagree, I feel alot of people would find my info useful and I helped the Zelda Wiki Comunity out by making "wanted pages".

Kinda hurts :(

I'd appreciate if you could restore some of my hard work so I don't have to feel like I wasted 5 hours of my life staying up late and trying to be a helpful community member. I understand you had to merge Lorule Knights and Soldiers, but at least keep most of my original article present in that merge.

And a 'thank you' once in a while would be nice... :(

Editorguy117 (talk) 23:55, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

First of all, please do not comment back on my talk page archive. That's supposed to be an archive for old talk page messages. Please respond back on this page.
I understand that you're disheartened by the changes. But also keep in mind that this wiki strives for quality work. What I merely did with those edits was to rework them to be more up to date with the wiki's quality standards and kept what would be useful for the wiki. I admit that some edits and pages were removed, but only because they were deemed unnecessary for the wiki. But most of your edits are still technically there, they were not removed. Merely they were updated. If I wanted to actually remove entire changes, I would have undid the edits.
Again, I know you're disheartened by all this. But please also understand that this is the nature of how all wikis work. All pages on the wiki are subjected to change and removal of sections, or sometimes even entire pages. Believe me, I've had work done before in other wikis that would be drastically changed or removed as well. -The Goron Moron (talk) 01:21, 17 November 2014 (UTC)


Please see User talk:Pakkun#Mediation request

KrytenKoro (talk) 16:02, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

For god sake. All I did was ask you to please WAIT for my sandbox work to be FINISHED. Because it obviously wasn't. That was why I reverted it. There is no need to take this all personally. -The Goron Moron (talk) 18:01, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Just as a notice, since you've posted your version I went ahead and corrected some stuff that was from unreliable sources -- the Zelda Amiibo thing has been debunked by KT, and whatever translation of Aonuma's post that said the TP pack would have multiple weapons is incorrect, as the official site specifies only one. I just wanted to make it clear that this isn't meant to be an attack on you, as I realize now that I could have used a more polite tone in my edit comments.KrytenKoro (talk) 02:58, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
the new weapon -could- be zeldas, tho, since there will be a new weapon type, its just not gonna be amiibo based.KrytenKoro (talk) 03:02, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Eh there's also the Zelda facebook page. But I guess it's just better to wait for the pack to come out. -The Goron Moron (talk) 03:22, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I saw that too. Based on the way they worded it, it seems more likely it's the "1 new weapon" that zelda.com talks about -- that might even explain why people thought the Zelda amiibo gave the weapon.KrytenKoro (talk) 04:31, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
It says "a new weapon for Zelda". That implies she will be getting a new weapon. -The Goron Moron (talk) 04:47, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
No, yes, right, that's what I'm saying. It's possible that whoever thought the zelda amiibo gave a unique weapon heard about the new weapon for zelda, and thought they were the same, is what I'm saying. Basically, I agree with you.KrytenKoro (talk) 05:52, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
That Facebook is the official Zelda Facebook page, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't mix that up. The wording, again "for", suggests that this would be a type of weapon for Zelda the character. But it's whatever, it's just better to wait for the actual patch. -The Goron Moron (talk) 07:22, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Oh, wait. Saw this this, pretty sure Zelda is getting a new weapon. -The Goron Moron (talk) 07:27, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Okay, I'm not arguing with you, I'm not disputing the facebook page. I'm saying that it's possible the fansites that reported about the zelda amiibo may have heard fragments of the Dominion Rod thing, and got it confused with the info that the Zelda amiibo would unlock a weapon -- not catching that the amiibo unlocks a random weapon. All I was trying to say is that, yeah, as you just saw, just because the zelda amiibo thing was debunked doesn't mean Zelda's not getting a new weapon, since it could be part of the vanilla DLC. Just trying to mend bridges here and clear things up.KrytenKoro (talk) 14:27, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Reply to Minor Edit on "The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask 3D" from December 3, 2014

[Your message] ".... Great Britain is part of Europe. And I've heard no word of it coming out in America too?"

I have been discussing it with a few friends lately who're usually always up-to-date with stuff like this. It hasn't been announced yet, but from what we know, it's very likely to happen. I'll be looking for further information to see what I can find. I'll be sure to let you know if we find out anything else.

--Devilion (Talk) 18:21, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Unless there is official word regarding an American release, then there is no reason to assume that it will happen. -The Goron Moron (talk) 20:55, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Wizzro

I just wanted to clarify that I wasn't trying to tell the guy that he was wrong, just that the way he went about it (telling us we can't put up a claim because gfaqs disagrees with it) wasn't really valid, especially since we already had started a community discussion about it. I hope that wasn't the wrong thing to say?KrytenKoro (talk) 03:07, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

It's not so much about the debate. When I look at the Wizzro costume, honestly, there is nothing about Freezard that even vaguely comes to mind other than they're both white, and I'm a bit surprised that some people even came to that conclusion. It's much more obviously intended to bare a resemblance to the TP Big Poes. Wizzro's hands and eye are even blue in that, much like the Big Poes. But even then, people are getting a little too caught up over what the costumes /might/ be based on, and in the end, it doesn't really matter. That is why I reverted it. It barely resembles Freezard, and it shouldn't be considered as one. -The Goron Moron (talk) 04:47, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Vandal

Linkfan101 has been vandalizing the Hyrule Warriors page with disingenuous edit comments, indicating that they know what they are doing rather than it being an accident or first experience with a wiki. One of their edits was clearly trolling.KrytenKoro (talk) 00:32, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. He's been already blocked. -The Goron Moron (talk) 18:35, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Edit War

Based on your post on Ixbran's page, I'm not sure we communicated what actually happened correctly.

  1. Ixbran posted the element sourcing a video (which was eventually discovered to be a bad source)
  2. Other editors came in and removed the element without providing sources
  3. I reverted them as Ixbran had provided a source, and asked them for a source
  4. An edit war occurred between me and these other editors (with me ceasing to edit to avoid exacerbating the edit war any further on my part).
  • The other editors provided a source demonstrating that the source Ixbran had used was unreliable.

I want to make it very clear, for the record, that Ixbran did not edit war about Tingle's element. His involvement was only in using an unreliable source, and the only reason I'm mentioning the edit war at all was because it resulted after that unreliable source was used. Ixbran absolutely did not violate the edit war policies. I personally approached edit warring, although I believe I made sure to stop editing when it became clear that conflict was occuring. Does this clarify things?KrytenKoro (talk) 22:39, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

I wasn't just talking about the edit war over Tingle, but other occasions as well. Either way, I do not wish to see further edit wars between any parties, and I would rather that the both of you stop arguing. But I thank you for the clarification. - Midoro (T C) 23:07, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Big Poes

I know for a fact that in Ocarina of Time 3D, they spawn on foot. It is a 30% chance, but I have caught 4 Big Poes on foot, it is not a bug. It is well documented on GameFAQs and elsewhere that they do, in fact, spawn on foot. It takes numerous attempts at moving by the spawn point (and ignoring the regular Poes), but eventually a Big Poe will appear. Once again, this is not a bug, but a documented fact.--I'm just a plain ol' Goron...Darth Nightmaricus (talk) 04:03, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Maybe it's possible to spawn them that way, however I believe as the intention is for them to be hunted on horseback, I would still consider this to be a bug, and glitches aren't really intended to be mentioned in the main body. I have hunted Big Poes before in OoT3D, and I haven't been able to get them to spawn unless I was on horseback. At most this would need further verification before anything could be done with it. - Midoro (T C) 04:08, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Want me to take a screenshot of a Big Poe while on foot? That might help. It's clearly not a bug, it just takes trial and error. --I'm just a plain ol' Goron...Darth Nightmaricus (talk) 04:10, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
I believe you when you say it's possible to exploit. However I do not believe this to be intentionally programmed in the game. It just sounds like a bug that has a chance of occurring through 'tricking'. Also, please try not to repeatedly revert edits if you disagree with something. This would be considered edit warring, which we do not allow on the wiki. - Midoro (T C) 04:20, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Well it's not an exploit. It's happened since the original Ocarina of Time. Most bugs have been fixed between the two versions. However, it isn't an exploit. It's deliberately programmed in. There's no "trick" to it: you just keep passing the spot and hope for it to spawn instead of a regular poe. I just caught the one near the stream by Kakariko Village, actually. That makes 6 Big Poes that I have been able to catch on foot. --I'm just a plain ol' Goron...Darth Nightmaricus (talk) 04:27, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Mainspacing my Great Fairy articles.

Are my sandbox articles on the different Great Fairies up to standard enough that they can be mainspaced? If not, can you help me bring them up to standard? -I'm just a plain ol' Goron...Darth Nightmaricus (talk) 23:57, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

I apologize, but splitting the Great Fairy page is just not going to happen. Nobody agreed that the page should be split, and even then it is incredibly unnecessary to do so. Unlike the Skull Kid character from MM, the Great Fairies are not as notable as individuals, and to split them would mean a lot of needless pages that would force our readers to flip through more pages just to find one thing. It gets in the way of reader-friendliness and accessibility, which is also why people have been opposed to splitting Skull Kid. (More people are likely to search for "Skull Kid", not "Skull Kid (Character)".) With the exception of a very few, nearly all of the Great Fairies are just called that. "Great Fairy". I'm again sorry, but splitting the page is not going happen.
This is also why I suggest that you take split/merge proposals into the article's talk page first, and then determine if everyone thinks it is necessary before going ahead and making sandboxes for it. It would save you and everyone else a lot of time. - Midoro (T C) 00:13, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, I think I'll leave them as tests or in case we ever DO decide to split them. Most of my sandboxes are like that. They're free for anyone to edit, actually, I don't mind if people do that. What do you think of my Majora article?--I'm just a plain ol' Goron...Darth Nightmaricus (talk) 00:19, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Well for starters, I can tell you that Majora's Mask (Object) is also not going to be split, as we barely know anything about the entity itself as the game never fully elaborated on it. I already mentioned this on the forums. And again it also falls under the issue of reader-friendliness and accessibility. To have two separate pages on them would make things harder for users to find.
Aside from that, it is structured very similarly to our mainspaced pages. I will say though that you shouldn't be calling the Moon Child wearing the mask as part of the same entity. It's not stated in-game that the Moon Child is a form of Majora. That would be a theory, and we're taking those out of the wiki. That's also part of the reason why Majora's Mask shouldn't be split, as anything else that could be determined about the entity would just be theory. - Midoro (T C) 00:54, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Most readers who are searching for Skull Kid are probably looking for the character, not the species, in that case, and Majora the entity is probably going to be searched for more often than the mask in certain scenarios. --I'm just a plain ol' Goron...Darth Nightmaricus (talk) 01:00, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Most people looking for Skull Kid the character would just type in "Skull Kid" into the search box. Their first instinct would not be to type in "Skull Kid (Character)", especially if they don't know a page had been split.
At any rate, my talk page is not for debate over this. - Midoro (T C) 01:05, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

My apologies about AST and BSLoZ.

I didn't know that the consensus was non-canon. I kinda figured the only reason it wasn't in the Hyrule Historia was because without emulation, there is no legal way to play it, hence Nintendo didn't include it. If both had gotten Virtual Console releases prior to HH's release, they'd probably be in the timeline. But I guess you're right - if HH doesn't mention it, that may mean it's non-canon. --I'm just a plain ol' Goron...Darth Nightmaricus (talk) 23:06, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Actually I may have been wrong about the consensus about whether they are ambiguously canon or non-canon. I personally don't consider them canon. At any rate, I've already warned you to stop reverting edits in the way you have and to stop responding rudely to the staff. - Midoro (T C) 23:11, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't mean to be rude. I kinda feel that the ambig route is the way to go - Canon people can say "That means it's canon", while the people who think it isn't canon can say "That means it isn't canon" - both interpretations would be valid. It'd be neutral ground, and it'd probably stop a lot of disputes. --I'm just a plain ol' Goron...Darth Nightmaricus (talk) 23:15, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Telling someone they only see in black or white after a disagreement is rude. - Midoro (T C) 23:50, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
My apologies, and the dungeons in AST being the same as the ones in ALttP is not true - I have actually played both games, and the dungeons are not the same. They have different layouts, so it makes sense for them to be split. --I'm just a plain ol' Goron...Darth Nightmaricus (talk) 02:42, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
The Second Quest dungeons in TLoZ also have different layouts and yet still share the same page. Not everything has to be made into its own page. The locations are still identical to those in ALttP, just as the levels in BS TLoZ are still the same as the original TLoZ. If people want to look for these things, they would go to the main article. There is more sense to keeping them there. The only reason we split things (like the Hyrule Warriors stages) is if there is a lot of information that warrants its own page. - Midoro (T C) 02:48, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Uh, the BSTLoZ levels are very different. Bosses changed, items moved, locations moved. It's like comparing the Desert Palace in ALttP to the one in ALBW - they're similar in some ways, but different in others. --I'm just a plain ol' Goron...Darth Nightmaricus (talk) 02:50, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
I know.
Second Quest also had the exact same things you just described. Bosses changed, items moved, locations moved, so on. BS TLoZ is essentially a "third quest". And despite all of the changes Second Quest has, it still shares the same page and is very doable with the rest. Again, not all subjects need their own pages. Please try to understand and respect this. There's reasons the wiki is set up this way. - Midoro (T C) 03:49, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
But can you not merge the dungeon pages, considering I poured a lot of energy into them? The Second Quest is still part of the original game, while BSLoZ is a different game entirely and has a slightly different plot.--I'm just a plain ol' Goron...Darth Nightmaricus (talk) 03:52, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Merging would not mean deleting your work. It would just mean putting your work into a section of a page. It does not have to be rewritten. And no, BSTLoZ and AST are still incredibly similar to the original games. - Midoro (T C) 04:05, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Why you did remove the changes in the article Hyrule Warriors and protect it?

Hello The Goron Moron, why you did remove so much official information in the article Hyrule Warriors? And why you have protect the article so sternly now? The information about the 3DS port with the Japanese title (ゼルダ無双 ハイラルオールスターズ) Zelda Musō: Hyrule All-Stars, is official announced by Koei Tecmo their selves. Times are changing, and we have to keep that.

You even removed my changing from Enemy Characters to Villain Characters. I played the game by myself, and I still have it. The issue between ally- and enemy characters in the game is a is a case that depends from the side that you played on that moment in the game, the same is by the units. By the good characters / units does word hero adjusts the best, the same is does by the word villain for the bad characters / units.

Do you understand my points, The Goron Moron? Tim Auke Kools (talk) 10:03, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Because of policy. This is to respect Nintendo and Koei Tecmo. The game was not officially revealed yet, but was accidentally leaked. The pages will be restored when the game is officially unveiled as intended. These things technically should not have been on the wiki this early.
I can, however, edit HW to change Enemy Characters to Villain Characters. The HW page was also protected so that people won't add leaked information there. This is all precautionary. - Midoro (T C) 16:48, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Oh. So the information about the 3DS port was not completely official yet. Then I understand. But I hope that there will come a day that I and other users can make edits on the article again. And thank you for your last edit in the article, The Goron Moron. Now I feel that the article is perfect for now. Tim Auke Kools (talk) 20:10, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

As I said, the page and edits will be restored once the game is officially revealed. The pages will be unprotected then and all users will be able to edit them again. Thank you for understanding. - Midoro (T C) 20:23, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Tri Force Heroes title image

Hey, do you think it'd be ok to change the Tri Force Heroes image on the front page (File:TFH Tile.png) to something like this, with the background and all? I mean, what I have is not an exact replica since I couldn't replicate the zoom exactly, but I hope I get my point across. -- Zero-ELEC (talk) 02:34, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

I personally don't mind. I was meaning to change it myself actually, but if you already got the updated tile made, then I don't see why not. - Midoro (T C) 02:36, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
Okay, then I'm going to go ahead and upload the updated image (I managed to get the zoom more accurate); thanks for the quick response! -- Zero-ELEC (talk) 02:52, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Guardian of Time

I completely understand the reasons why the Guardian of Time page was unnecessary for it would be unreasonable for the Sorceress’s background story to appear on multiple pages. Though I have one thought: the page Guardian of Time should be completely deleted, and add it to the Guardian (disambiguaition). If you think that would improve the wiki, please go ahead. AwfulFatso (talk) 01:07, 15 October 2015 (UTC)AwfulFatso

Guardian of Time is fine as a disambiguation page though. There's been a lot of confusion regarding Cia's and Lana's previous being, so I don't think having the page would hurt as a means of clarifying. - Midoro (T C) 01:18, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Assuring your Approval

Just to be sure before publishing my edit (since it is a theory of some sort followed by some evidence), can the Sorceress of Light enhance her sorcery?

An example would be in the cutscene after the battle of the tree monster in Valley of Seers. When Cia disrupted space and time, Lana gathered her troops and tossed her Tome within the air, followed by a spell (the shield barrier) which looks beyond her normal attacks?

Sorry – I just realized I am asking you two questions: Should I publish the question I asked above and can Lana advance her magic? Thank you.AwfulFatso (talk) 00:44, 21 October 2015 (UTC)AwfulFatso

I'm not exactly sure what it is you're suggesting with their sorcery. But I'm afraid we no longer accept theories on the wiki anymore. We used to allow that, but that's changed now and we have slowly been removing them. They're too speculative and generally not factual, so that's why we no longer have them. You're welcome to share your theory on the theorizing board on the ZU forums though. - Midoro (T C) 00:49, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

Credits Scenes

I see you removed the images I posted from the credits across various articles. I wasn't exactly sure where to include them, so I apologize for placing them in incorrect spots, but if you don't mind my asking, where should they go instead, if they should be included at all? Kirpow (talk) 23:33, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

I did not remove them. Rather I clarified and simplified their descriptions. Where they are is fine. - Midoro (T C) 23:48, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Ah, my apologies. Glancing at the history, I thought the images were removed entirely. Thank you for clarifying my mistakes, then! Kirpow (talk) 23:51, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Revision History Comments

Hi! Um, I can't find info on the help page and I'm incompetent so I might as well ask. In a page's revision history after the change in bytes, I've noticed comments on some revisions and I would like to know how this is done, if possible, so I can be a bit more helpful in my editing. Thanks and sorry for any troubles... _Blargensnorf (talk) 02:57, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

At the bottom of the editor window, there is a bar next to the word "Summary". That's for adding edit summary comments. - Midoro (T C) 04:09, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
thank you sir I appreciate it Blargensnorf (talk) 14:43, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Breath of the Wild

Though I am positive you are occupied with keeping the wiki up to date due to the Nintendo Direct: 11.12.15, I have a small request for you to include a new reference on the Zelda Wii U page. The reference is the video about the 11.12 direct and can you add the reference to necessary things on the Zelda Wii U page. Thank you for your cooperation.

AwfulFatso (talk) 02:05, 13 November 2015 (UTC)AwfulFatso

Re:File names

Linkle is currently the only HWL character with that file name style. I changed her file names to fit the format of the other characters. I figured it would be easier to do than just go in and re-name everyone else. If your instant to have this naming style, you should also go in and do this for the other characters as well. Otherwise that just means the characters will have file name inconsistencies, hence why I changed Linkles in the first place, so they would have consistency.
Ixbran (talk) 17:46, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't matter that she is the only character under that category (though, Tetra, the King, Toon Link and Skull Kid should all be under that category as well). Our naming convention is already designed in a way to be consistent. We do intend to rename a large bulk of images across the entire wiki to fit this new standard. But until then, all new uploaded images must have the new standard. Renaming a couple files to to remain "consistent" to other files that do not have the right file names only gives us more work to do. So please don't rename them. - Midoro (T C) 18:02, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Recent edits

Usually there is a way to collapse edits to the same page into one line (as on Wikipedia). Pretty sure that's available as a feature in MediaWiki. LightTemple (talk) 01:32, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

We have no such feature for our wiki. Regardless, it still adds up in the patrol backlog. Please remember to preview your edits, and try to keep multiple edits at once to a minimum. - Midoro (T C) 01:40, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
I know how to use the preview feature. And wow, that's very unwelcoming of a newcomer. How about a "thanks" for contributing? I'm done, not going to edit a wiki that doesn't want my help. LightTemple (talk) 01:47, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry that I came across that way. Your contributions ARE greatly appreciated. It's just that we prefer to keep multiple edits to be a minimum as this puts less work on our patrol backlog, which the staff has to look over. My intention was not to be rude but rather explain why we prefer it that way. Your contributions are very much appreciated. Thank you. - Midoro (T C) 01:50, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
I appreciate the response. Sorry, I am a bit touchy about these things because when I edited Wikipedia people were really unwelcoming. I actually did find a way to do this — if you go to Preferences --> Recent changes --> "Group changes by page in recent changes and watchlist (requires JavaScript)" you can do exactly that. It would be great to enable this by default for all users because it keeps things much cleaner and simpler to browse (regardless of how many times I or any other user edits the page); you can quickly see that a given edited a page a given number of times. Additionally, I will be mindful of wrapping edits together. LightTemple (talk) 01:54, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Our wiki is a bit outdated in the software, so I don't know if wrapping edits is a possible feature at this time. Even still, each individual edit has to be looked over by a staff member, so even with a wrapping feature, I believe each edit would still have be checked over. Anyway I apologize if I came off as unfriendly and a bit stern. We're very happy to have you here. - Midoro (T C) 01:59, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Oh, I don't mean actually changing the edits, just combining how they're displayed on "recent changes." The user preference helps with that. And with that user preference you can view the entire diff (all the changes for that page collated together) with one click, rather than peruse each individual edit. For instance, this link allow you to view all edits you and I made to the TP page: [1]. Like I said, I'll work on making single large edits, but the user preference really helps for patrolling. Sorry as well, and thanks for the welcome. LightTemple (talk) 02:19, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

The Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker HD

Look, I know you are not going to be in love with my following question. You're reaction will be, "Really? I work the wiki, not your personal helper!" but I need advice on how to capture a fairy in a bottle in Wind Waker HD. I have to heal Link's grandma but I don't have a fairy in an empty bottle. How do you catch one? When I try to, they float around me and heal me; I try this multiple times and it does not work. Please help.

Also, how do you release a fairy when you capture it; not on Link but on the grandma. Sorry for busying you but you are a trust-worthy friend; plus, the Internet is not being exactly specific with me right now. Thank you for assisting me despite this not being a wiki problem :D AwfulFatso (talk) 04:45, 25 November 2015 (UTC)AwfulFatso

You equip a bottle to any of the available buttons, and press the button when next to a fairy to swing it and capture it inside. You also press the button the bottle is equipped to when next to the grandmother to release the fairy. You can find more info here, and here. - Midoro (T C) 07:06, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

The Super Mario Wiki's 'Shroom cordially invites you...

Hello, I am Tucayo from the Super Mario Wiki's monthly publication, The 'Shroom. As you surely know, this February marks the 30th Anniversary of the Zelda series, and we would like to prepare something special, with your help. As a landmark collaboration between our wikis, we want to invite you to write something for us, it can be a review of a Zelda game, a ranking of your favorite games in the franchise, overall thoughts or memories, or maybe even something telling our users about ZeldaWiki! It could be anything to help us make our February issue Zelda-themed. The issue will be released February 20th, so we would really appreciate if we could have your submissions before February 13th. You can email them to mwshroom@gmail.com. Feel free to contact us for any questions you might have.

Thanks!
--Tucayo (talk) 00:35, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Hey cool, thanks for the invite! I might just consider doing that. - Midoro (T C) 00:51, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Revamping enemy articles

(I tried to initially contact you over Skype, but you were offline; thus I'm using this.) Hey! I've noticed recently that you been updating/revamping the wiki's enemy articles so that the content in each is organized by game appearance, not by things such as characteristics and varieties. It seems to be quite a time consuming task, so I was wondering if you would appreciate some help on getting a few of these done. The Dodongo article has already been copy and pasted into my sandbox as a reminder for me to do it this weekend. Alright, well, let me know. Thank you! --XXSuperXXNintendoXx (talk) 20:17, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Yeah sorry about Skype, I'm not online there as much as I used to. Anyway, yeah I don't mind if you wanted to help with that, and I appreciate it. The more common enemies especially need the most work. It definitely is a very time-consuming task. - Midoro (T C) 21:41, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Um

I noticed that I, a random wikigoer, am capable of editing your, an admin's, user page. You maaaay want to fix that to prevent any vandalism or whatever. Just in case, you know? (Alex95 (talk) 02:53, 28 March 2016 (UTC))

Thanks for the concern, but my user page really isn't something that is likely to be target. If it happens, it can easily be undone. But there's no need to take cautionary measures. - Midoro (T C) 02:57, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

amiibo

It was the drafts you had requested.KrytenKoro (talk) 03:48, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

You mind refreshing my memory cause I honestly don't remember, sorry. Either way, drafts like that do not belong on talk pages. Sandboxes are where they should go. - Midoro (T C) 05:02, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Opinions on a project

So I've started working on something I've been thinking of doing for a while now, a User WIP of a page listing for the various different character portraits in the HW series. Having an opinion on it, as well as getting it up to wiki standard so it can be a mainstay page, could be appreciated. If you have any suggestions please put it here.
Ixbran (talk) 04:40, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Inter wiki links

Why don't we have any inter wiki links at the main page and recent changes? --Raltseye (talk) 22:54, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

If you're referring to wikis like the German Zelda wiki, well, I'm honestly not the person to ask that question. But I suppose it's simply because there aren't that many independent wikis in other languages to warrant that. - Midoro (T C) 01:34, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Okay but then do you happen to know who I should ask that question? --Raltseye (talk) 11:02, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Probably Tony, but right now he is very busy with E3 at the moment. - Midoro (T C) 19:22, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
I've asked him now, thank you for your guidance. --Raltseye (talk) 20:35, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Collectables in Hyrule Warriors Legends

The Collectable u removed are the ones from Hyrule Warriors Legends. Ive put all the collectables from Legends in the scenarios cuz it was needed. Unless u are PLANING to make ANOTHER page on the scenarios which would make no sense cuz Linkle's Scenario of Faron Woods was put under the White Sorceress of the Forest mission by Tony. Wolfgerlion64 (talk) 12:37, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Excuse me? I did not remove any collectibles or content. All I did on the Skyloft page was add a footnote that the collectibles are not available in the Wii U version of that Scenario, because they aren't. I added that note to clarify and to avoid reader confusion. But I did not remove any content. This shows my revision I made. As you can clearly see, I only added to it, not removed. So please do not accuse me of something I never did. - Midoro (T C) 15:56, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

The Old man from Breath of the Wild

It occurred to me from e3 that the Old Man maybe a Main character for he does appear alot to help Link with his quest and even appear all over the place to trade a Spirit Orb for an item.Wolfgerlion64 (talk) 00:33, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

That's great and all. Maybe you could take that discussion to the forums. - Midoro (T C) 01:28, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Isn't Link's Crossbow Training a Non-Canon Game?

I see in other parts of this site that Link's Crossbow Training is a Non-Canon Game, yet the page that explains things about the Crossbow treats it like a Canon game. Shouldn't the WHOLE page say it's Non-Canon? Which can change the pages main image pic can be Linkle wielding the Crossbows? Wolfgerlion64 (talk) 23:07, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

It's ambiguously canon, per our canon policy. - TonyT S C 23:15, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Another Spammer

Spam attack on the pages... Action is required immediately :( Wolfgerlion64 (talk) 19:21, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

How long until protection is lifted?

You have placed complete protection on the following page:

http://zeldawiki.org/100%25_Completion

However, I have found some errors which I have been awaiting for a very long time to have them fixed but, for a whole year now, none is allowed to edit this page, including me...

Since you are the one who has raised the protection level for this page, could you lift it or allow a select few users to edit it? If not, then could you fullfill an edit request in my behalf?

The problem lies in the PHANTOM HOURGLASS section:

Collect all 4 Beedle's Membership Cards.

which needs to be changed into:

Collect all 3 Beedle's Membership Cards and become a VIP member.

Because there is no 4th membership card in this game. Getting VIP rank only causes a Postman to visit you in the nearest Mailbox and congratulate you, but give you nothing. And therefore, the Collect all 4 Beedle's Membership Cards can be misleading. --SilentResident (talk) 20:56, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

Oh jeez, that's from last year. I honestly don't remember why exactly it got protected, but I believe it was because of a lot of dubious edits being added to it and because of the page then being a candidate for revamp. Though that regretfully never happened. I suppose could unprotect it now since I don't believe it's likely to be high-traffic in editing anytime soon. - Midoro (T C) 02:41, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
It is understandable. I made the fixes now, and feel free to raise once again the protection of this page, because this kind of pages often can indeed be target of dubious editors. Have a good day. --SilentResident (talk) 13:30, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

The Table

ARE YOU SERIOUS?! After all that effect i put in that table for the Focus Spirit?! Why remove it?! a Wikipedia is ALL about Information! If it's not needed then what about the table in the Special Attack page?! HUH?! -- Wolfgerlion64 (talk) 23:31, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

The reason why it was removed was already stated in the edit comment; it was deemed unnecessary due to how Focus Spirit produces the same effect for every character. This is different compared to the Special Attacks, which have different target ranges, and occasionally Elemental Effects, per Weapon. But with Focus Spirit, the effect is identical for every character. A listing for descriptions was simply not necessary. It was also something that was brought up with the staff team beforehand, and it was agreed upon. It's possible that the table in the Special Attack page will also be removed. The Focus Spirit and Special Attack descriptions are still on the Weapon pages/sections, and they're fine enough there.
Please also note that all contributions to Zelda Wiki are considered to be released under the GNU Free Documentation License (see Zelda Wiki:Copyrights for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will by anyone, then do not submit it here.
Secondly, please refrain from reacting with hostility and anger. Please refer to Help:Editing Etiquette. - Midoro (T C) 00:35, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Nintendo Switch's page

There are some inaccuracies on the Nintendo Switch page. I was going edit them but I realized you protected the page from editing up until April 17 of the next year! I think that's a bit exaggerated. Anyway, first off, the Switch is NOT the successor to the Wii U (being a hybrid, it is a standalone console, the first of its kind) and second, the codename for the console was just NX, in no way Nintendo ever called it "Nintendo NX". This is just to address some issues.

--Byllant (talk) 21:58, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

The Nintendo Switch page was protected to safe-guard it from rumors back when the console was yet to be announced. The page has only been protected so that autoconfirmed users may be able to edit it; if you're not able to edit it, then it means you're not autoconfirmed yet. Considering that there are still many more rumors about the Switch even after its announcement, I believe it would be wise to keep its protection still.
The Switch is still considered the successor to the Wii U. Nintendo has evidently abandoned the Wii U for the most part and has moved the majority of their game development to the Nintendo Switch. Nintendo also still considers it to be a home console despite it being a hybrid. I can edit a few things such as to clarify the NX codename, but it is still going to be considered the successor to the Wii U since it is obviously intended to be. - Midoro (T C) 22:43, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Maybe you can help me with this.

The info I want on my userpage has external links, so it asks me to check if I'm not a robot. Okay, click save page after that, and it says I've edited my page too many times (once). Thinking nothing of it, I hit save page again anyway... to be brought back to the "I'm not a robot" thing. Save again, says I've edited my page too many times. Infinite loop. If I give you the info I want to put on my page, could you implement it for me? Apparently, I cannot do it myself... Alex95 (talk) 02:27, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

The too many edits notification is unfortunately the result of a bug in a wiki. The notice is normally only supposed to appear to users who have edited multiple times within a very short time, but now it seems to appear on pages that the user has edited multiple times throughout in general. Normally pressing Save Page a second time would bypass the notice and save the edit, but here you're stuck in an infinite loop. I'm afraid that until this bug is fixed, which it hasn't been for awhile now, you won't be able to do anything.
Is it not simply possible to add the info you want without linking to external pages? - Midoro (T C) 02:58, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
I suppose I could. The links go to game projects I'm working on, but I suppose for the time being, I can neglect them for now. Too tired to work on that right now, so I'll see what I can do about that in the morning.
Also, I've been meaning to say that the {{#currentusers:}} code on the Recent Changes isn't working right, either. Alex95 (talk) 06:04, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
We are quite aware of that too. That has been broken for a very long time now ever since a past upgrade to the wiki software. It's more than likely that the currentusers extension will be removed, eventually. It's not quite on our list of priorities. - Midoro (T C) 15:26, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Darknut topics

Here's a cropped picture of the Darknut with undead type units in the official artbook. [2] To explain the appearance thing, the Twilight Princess Darknut in the Temple of Time, actually has a unique appearance with a finned helmet, runed armor, and personal armaments. However in Hyrule Warriors, and Smash Run, all Darknuts look like the Temple of Time Miniboss. Delsait (talk) 06:38, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Query about editorial changes

Dear Midoro,

I am interested as to the reasoning behind the editorial changes made re: the 'cooking pot' page. I assume that they were made according to the current style conventions of the Wiki, but I still feel the need to question their application. Firstly, why would one want to combine sections pertaining to things as disparate as 'location' and 'uses'? Secondly, why would one want to consolidate a section about '(visual) appearance' into the section 'location and uses'? On the page in question, there is now a large, inelegant section called 'location and uses' detailing the appearance and use of the object i.e. the heading and section content do not match up. What's more, a separate section headed 'locations' has been left: surely it would have made more sense to combine this with the passage on usage and left a separate section for 'appearance', as then you would at least have a section that actually talks about 'location and use'? Instead, now there are two separate headers that mention location... Again, I recognise these are all likely due to the style conventions of the Wiki, but in particular situations such as this, it does not seem to improve the page but rather make it more confusing.

Kind regards,

JJ

Edit: Having studied various other pages pertaining to items and objects, I've concluded that a section headed 'characteristics' would be most appropriate for the description of the pot's appearance and the cooking process. I also moved the 'locations' into the 'location and uses' section. Again, I do not really understand why 'location and uses' should be a standardised format for sections seeing as they are quite different aspects of a given thing, but for now I hope this is more acceptable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjgodden (talk) 02:20, December 14, 2016‎

There's no need to have the same conversation in more than one page, so please refer to the Cooking Pot talk page instead. - Chuck * (Talk) 18:34, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Apologies, I wasn't sure if you'd be notified of my comment there. Jjgodden (talk) 20:49, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Mobins, and Rupees

The Moblin pestering Dimitri also talk about making rupees in Oracle of Seasons. Delsait (talk) 07:43, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

That would need a source. Even then, that applies to only one Moblin and not the entire group at large. This isn't like the Mogma where all of them express having greed. - Midoro (T C) 18:02, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
Straight from the script of the game. There were three of them, hence "we're rich." Delsait (talk) 00:18, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
It's still not enough to say that all Moblins are greedy, especially considering those in TLoZ were quite generous in making Link keep their secrets. - Midoro (T C) 00:23, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
I didn't say all were greedy, but it would seem many use rupees as money just like Hylians. Bow Moblin are also mentioned in Minish cap to carry rupees. Delsait (talk) 00:27, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
Here's the Zelda.com archive description. Delsait (talk) 06:29, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. That's very helpful. I'll add it shortly. - Midoro (T C) 06:36, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
Your welcome, tell me if you want me to add it? Delsait (talk) 22:35, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
Actually yeah, go ahead. I forgot to add it. Just use the standard Web Citation template and link to the archived page. - Midoro (T C) 18:06, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Sure, is there a link to all the citation templates I can use? Delsait (talk) 00:15, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
You can access it while editing a page. Just click on the Earth icon at the top. - Midoro (T C) 02:02, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Rupee value

Even though it's "futile", why can't we add a source to add credibility to the Rupee values? MannedTooth (talk) 06:02, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Because it's common knowledge and that info can easily be found in the game. It's also off-looking when one Rupee value is sourced but none of the others. I've already briefly explained in your talk page what generally warrants a source. To say the least, not every last thing on the wiki needs to be sourced. Statements that are seemingly dubious or not widely known generally warrants a source. - Midoro (T C) 06:19, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Gerudo ears

Notice her ears look pointed in the OOT 64 graphics

They've always looked pointed with the 64 models. The Majora's Mask Models are simply re-used directly from Ocarina of Time. Delsait (talk) 01:46, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

You're basing that observation on N64 polygons, which back then could not perfectly draw round shapes like ears. If you watch a playthrough of Ocarina of Time 3D, you'll see that the Gerudo Thieves do have round ears. All of the Gerudo in OoT have round ears, and it is much easier to see that in OoT3D. They do have round ears. - Midoro (T C) 02:38, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
That's not quite the case, I'd say they have pointed ears in N64 versions of OoT/MM as an oversight, but this was corrected in 3D. They gave Kotake/Koume rounded ears in N64, for example. - TonyT S C 02:46, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
The Gerudo pirates have round ears in Majora's Mask 3D. Here's another image of a OOT Gerudo guard, and you'll see the pointy ears. Gerudo guard Aveil in Majoras Mask 3D Delsait (talk) 04:45, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
We don't need any more reference images. We're aware that N64 Gerudo had pointed ears but this was fixed in the 3D versions. - TonyT S C 04:55, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
Plus when you compare the Gerudo's ears with actual Hylians in the game, you'll notice that the Hylians have more clearly defined tall, pointed ears. For example, the Cucco Lady. Hers are significantly more pointed. The Gerudo ears only look pointed because of the polygons. - Midoro (T C) 05:00, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
Point being nothing was changed in the Gerudo model in Majora's Mask, both 64 games had Gerudo ears look pointed, and both 3DS games depicted Gerudo ears as round. Hence saying Gerudo had pointy ears in Majora's Mask is inaccurate. Delsait (talk) 05:20, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

King Rhoam

https://zelda.gamepedia.com/File:BotW_King_Rhoam_Alive.png Ok here's my image for him -- Wolfgerlion64 (talk) 01:29, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

I asked for you to link it in the King Rhoam talk page. For reasons I cannot say, only Tony can edit the page. Midoro (talk) 01:39, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

The Third Party and the Review Period

Hi Midoro, I'm a bit curious as to the who this third party is. General editors don't know who the third party is and the third party seems to be taking a looong time to review the pages. So it's a bit fishy as to what's going on. I think general Zelda wiki editors are left with a rather unfavorable first impression of this third party. I'm curious if we can learn a bit more about them and what's going on? We're all one big team so everyone being on the same page might be helpful. Thanks! Editorguy117 (talk) 21:11, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm afraid I'm not at a liberty to say who they are, but I will assure you that it is only for good things. Please be patient. The King Rhoam page is otherwise in excellent quality. Midoro (talk) 22:21, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Fixing Minor Issues in Nomenclature

Hey Midoro. Sorry to interrupt your time, but I have a question. I've seen pages that have their Nomenclature information in the trivia section instead of Nomenclature, and the Quality Standards specifically state otherwise (As with the case for Yamori). At the same time, some names haven't been cited and the meanings placed happen to be on behindthename.com (Such as the case with Lulu). I have also found a name meaning given by Nintendo. I understand why you told me not to edit the Nomenclature sections, but could I fix these minor issues as long as I don't add new information? I suppose it's not a big deal, as there are much more important things to be done on the ZW, but I felt like I should ask to avoid any mishaps. - Ciela04 (talk) 01:49, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Answering for Midoro, like I've told you before, please discuss Nomenclature on talk pages, especially if you have sources from Nintendo. Nomenclature needs to be evaluated as a group on a case-by-case basis. Hylian pi (talk) 06:53, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
That is, thanks for asking, but bring it up on their Talk pages (i.e. here's some convenient links to making a New Section on their Talk pages: Talk:Yamori and Talk:Lulu respectively). Unfortunately Nomenclature needs to be evaluated case-by-case as Hylian pi says, but we appreciate you finding such issues. Just a personal opinion, but if you notice a certain type of issue on many pages, perhaps bring it up for only one page first that includes a question to confirm that you can Talk-page the others. Another opinion of mine (I don't know about Midoro's opinion), but rather than "A Small Question", I would think that this section should be named something like "Fixing minor issues in Nomenclature" or similar to make it easier when looking for past discussions. --KokoroSenshi (talk | contribs) 08:16, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
The reason I had asked the questions here was because there are multiple pages with these problems, so I was confused on where to ask. Seeing as Midoro had talked to me about similar things, I decided to ask him. I apologize for causing an uproar, I'm trying to be more cautious with my edits. I should have put more thought into this. Sorry. - Ciela04 (talk) 16:11, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
There is no reason to be sorry, you asked a question and we answered. We're always here to help. Hylian pi (talk) 19:03, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
I appreciate it, thank you. - Ciela04 (talk) 18:45, 4 July 2017 (UTC)