May 30, 2020

🖐️ Knight Challenge #9 🖐️

There's something sinister about these Knight Challenges!
From writing, to research, to images, find your preferred way to contribute with our ninth theme: Hands!

Latest Announcements

Zelda Wiki:Discussion Center/Archive 3

From Zelda Wiki, the Zelda encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


I have two questions about the theories that have been removed. Are they going to be placed on a ZU dedicated topic? All of them or some of them? Thanks in advance! Zeldafan1982 (talk) 04:31, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Various questions + Contacting the Staff/Getting Updated

I was thinking that there should be (if plausible/reasonable, of course) more validation across the Wiki. For example, when uploading files, we could have a Placeholder attribute to example display the format required, or otherwise validation like the Pattern attribute or js validation like this (or the rest of that webpage). The idea is inline/contextual help and/or prompts for when blocks of instructional text or the help guide (of which the relevant sections might be missed, or even missing certain details itself). Some things I'm not sure if in the Help Guide include:

  • Using capitalisation of the first letter of a template's name when using that template
  • Not using underscores in links
  • Using the Standard Initialism for (e.g.) "Cite manual" template
  • That NA is preferred over EU version of a game when it differs
  • Norms, e.g. User:Tony/Sandbox/ZW Norms

In terms of contacting the staff, what's the best method? I also realise ZUF exists, but doesn't seem frequently consistently used, or I still haven't figured out where all the action is. Segueing, I also notice some "big" things were being discussed, but in the first place, I didn't know about it, though at that time I hadn't realised to use the Forum until recently. I was absent from ZW for a while, and noticed an update to the Wiki software or something, which included a title font change (I think...), Mobile site, and the "Online Users" on the Recent Changes page breaking (it shows {{#currentusers:}})

In summary:

  • A question about validation additions, and
  • A question of how to best gather information useful for a ZW contributor.


--KokoroSenshi (talk | contribs) 08:52, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

This isn't the first time you've come up with good ideas for custom features for the wiki. The best answer I can give you is that you should join the Zelda Wiki staff as a developer. You would have the support of the Zelda Wiki/Zelda Universe development team and it would put you in direct contact with all the wiki staff. (Not to mention we have quite the backlog of tasks and could use someone with your technical skills.) Short of that, the forums are indeed your best bet.
About the upload form, I'd really like for us to have Extension:UploadWizard. Custom code is the first thing to break when we upgrade (case in point, the "Online Users" thing). If there's a stable MediaWiki extension that could do the job, it's better to start with that. The only thing holding us back is that the extension doesn't currently support generation of custom templates, which we would need for Template:FileInfo. There is an open task for this which I hope to get to in the near future. — Hylian King [*] 02:24, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for replying. Thinking about it, joining as a developer sounds like a good idea; though in terms of technical skills (well, knowledge at least) I usually make it up as I go along, Google, etc., but if that's ok, I'd still like to join, or at least give it a try. --KokoroSenshi (talk | contribs) 12:43, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
We're all volunteers doing this for fun. A willingness to try things and learn is all we'd ask for in a developer. I'll send you an email with the details later this week. Is the email address in your preferences up to date? — Hylian King [*] 01:43, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Awesome! Yes, I have checked that the email is up to date. --KokoroSenshi (talk | contribs) 12:14, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Sent. — Hylian King [*] 14:36, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Userpage Problem

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. Can someone fix this? Alex95 (talk) 05:13, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

EDIT:Also, your {{#currentusers:}} code on the Recent Changes is broken. Been meaning to say something about that for a while now... Alex95 (talk) 05:14, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Hey Alex, thank you for reporting this. We've since disabled the "too many edits" filter due to its bugginess. You should be able to edit your userpage now.
We are aware of the currentusers problem and it's on the to-do list. It's just not very high on the list is all. :P — Hylian King [*] 02:28, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

New and unvalidated?

I tried adding a trivia info I came across few days ago, but it was removed. Why did it get removed? When I added the info, I did wonder where can I add my sources, but any other info didn't have sourcing. Just references to game quotes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EBuddy (talk) 00:29, November 15, 2016‎

You need a source to validate that trivia point, specifically the part where the Fishmen actually say that word. Without it, there's no way to prove that it's true and not just made up or pure speculation. Also, don't forget to sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). - Chuck * (Talk) 08:18, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Judge the notability of this anecdote

I saw a anecdote about an interview with Aonuma on Twitter today and thought I would at least notify it, even though I doubt it's notable enough. The source is here, the tweet is in French and translates as “For the anecdote, I asked [Mr Aonuma] if The Witness could be considered as an “extreme Zelda”, but he didn't know the game :(”. Lunaramethyst (talk) 16:42, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Indeed a completely unrelated game to the series is not notable enough. - Chuck * (Talk) 17:47, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

"GNU Free Documentation License" image link broken

At the bottom of every page is the "GNU Free Documentation License" icon (next to the "Powered by MediaWiki" icon), but shows no image.

The image url says the first below, but probably should be the latter:


--KokoroSenshi (talk | contribs) 00:52, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Noted. Thanks! The fix is ready, we're just having some issues deploying right now. It should be up soon. — Hylian King [*] 16:34, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Use of § for sections

I have recently noticed § used at Help:Glossary#Edit conflict indicating a section in the following link: Help:Editing Etiquette§Edit Conflicts. Looking it up on ZW with a search, it seems rarely used, and am uncertain as to the policy regarding its usage (as opposed to e.g.Help:Editing Etiquette#Edit Conflicts), and also how many instances of the alternative (with the hash) are currently present on the wiki (or if those in the search are the only instances of links to sections in that manner). --KokoroSenshi (talk | contribs) 11:30, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

That was my doing, although I made one little formatting mistake. We never collectively agreed to use the section sign and it's not widespread on this wiki; I just think it should be. It's used on Wikipedia and as far as I know it's the only correct way to refer to sections, from an editorial standpoint. The hash is a technical detail and it shouldn't be presented to readers in articles.
This is perhaps a matter of discussion for the Zelda Wiki forums... — Hylian King [*] 16:57, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Deprecating wiki specific collapse JS

Hello together. I'm the tech guy from the Dota 2 Wiki and wanted to talk about the collapse function. I already pushed some changes which were reverted for now, because they lacked a bit of communication and I rushed things.

To quote MediaWiki:Common.js:

@deprecated Since MediaWiki 1.20: Use class="mw-collapsible" instead which is supported in MediaWiki core.

Would you be fine if I slowly phased out the deprecated functions? This would shrink down the JS by a good chunk and help to speed up the loading times. Molldust (talk) 18:49, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

By all means! As long as you make sure there are no regressions, of course. If you want to use AutoWikiBrowser for that, let me know and I'll add you to the list of authorized bots. HylianKing (talk) 15:56, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
I will not use my bot until I have a bit more overview how the things are structured here. In case you want the Expand/Collapse text to be [show ▼]/[hide ▲], you have to edit MediaWiki:Collapsible-expand and MediaWiki:Collapsible-collapse respectively. Molldust (talk) 06:13, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
Both the "collapse" and "NavFrame" sections can now be removed from the JS file: MediaWiki:Common.js -> Pastebin with the removed sections. Molldust (talk) 09:56, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

??? Page - Image Links Broken

There are several images on the character ??? page that are broken. My guess is that it's due to the fact that the image names contain question marks, but I don't know how to fix them. Please look into when someone gets a chance. Thanks. - Protokhal (talk) 19:36, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

This is a known issue that we're trying to work through. Since the move to Gamepedia, we can no longer have question mark symbols or plus signs in file names. Please be patient while we sort out the best solution.Hylian pi (talk) 23:18, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Making Headlines More Readable

Hi everyone! I'm fairly new to editing this wiki but have been an avid user and reader for a long while. Now that I'm also participating I noticed that many of the subheadlines (h3, h4) aren't that easy to read on a PC web browser. They don't really stand out that much from other text and there's no special spacing for them in the layout - it's especially notable when dealing with shorter sections of text. Have you ever considered tweaking them to make them a little more discernible? On mobile view, at least a line is added beneath the length of a subheadline, which is a nice effect and makes sections stand out more. -- Tadayou (talk) 13:58, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey Tadayou, thanks for the feedback! The header styles are something we never got around to improving, but there's no time like the present. :) The staff is on it. We'll try to figure out a decent design and get back to you. HylianKing (talk) 15:51, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads-up! Looking forward to your solution. -- Tadayou (talk) 10:57, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
Hey Tadayou, thanks for bringing this up. I was wondering if you could provide some notable/good examples of pages or sections you thought were hard to read? Thanks! --KokoroSenshi (talk | contribs) 08:56, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Hey there, sure thing: I think Zelda Timeline is a notable example of a page that is very hard to read on a desktop browser. It's really hard to tell where sections begin, which are headlines and which are subheadlines. The |Game Information section of the BotW article page also shows signs of this. In the end all pages seem problematic that feature many sub headlines and short text sections. While this could probably be solved by making vast editorial changes to articles like that, I think it's probably easier to implement a change to heading styles. Whether it's adding spaces, underlines, making them different colors, etc... The amiibo (Rune) is probably one of the more readable examples, but I was also very consciously checking for readability when I edited the page. Maybe as an inspiration let me link to two example pages from STOWiki, which uses different heading styles rather well (for the most part): Star Trek Online Canon and Earth. -- Tadayou (talk) 18:10, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Now that I compare the two wikis, another reason for less-than-optimal readability may be that ZeldaWiki uses the entire width of a page in desktop mode, thus making individual paragraphs also stand out less. Compare this to STOWiki were the design has a fixed width for articles. But I guess this may also boil down to very personal preferences. -- Tadayou (talk) 18:12, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Natie Page

Can somebody please make a Natie page? I have some content to add, but the name is blacklisted. Thank you. - Protokhal (talk) 15:05, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Disregard, the blacklist has been removed. - Protokhal (talk) 15:33, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Setting/Timeline Placement/etc.

I was curious whether an official policy exists for placing the section "Timeline Placement" in game articles? Currently, this information seems to be often (but not always) lumped together with "Game Information", where it exists alongside many and (mostly) unrelated topics, such as "Development", "Limited Editions", "Pre-Order Bonuses", "Speed Run Records" or "amiibo Support". Is it consensus to put this information there or was it placed because no other section was deemed appropriate? I was wondering whether a standardized 'Setting' section might not be more in the interest of presenting information in a coherent, and tracable way? As a rough draft, thi section could give a brief overview over the game's respective version of Hyrule (or other settings, of course), may address references to other games, and present the timeline information. This might actually help to make the large game articles a little more accessible. Of course, a "Setting" section might require a bit of editorial fine-tuning, in order to make its content not too redundant. But it sounds like a fun and interesting project - if the idea finds favor with you. -- Tadayou (talk) 11:51, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Plot of Oracle of Ages

Hi. I apologize for the trouble I caused recently. Indeed, it can be hard to understand why I keep exposing the plot flaws in Oracle of Ages, although I really enjoy the game. Therefore I will stop from now on, lest I get banned. You are the administrators of this website, but I am a professor of physics and mathematics; let us respect each other from now on. Please PROVE ME WRONG if I am, instead of getting mad at me.

It is undeniable that the plot in Oracle of Ages is contradictory: sometimes Ambi's age and Zelda's age are considered as separated by 400 years, and sometimes facts are considered as if they happened at the very same time in two parallel dimensions, instead of two different centuries.

Already the game translation team tried to hide away the plot flaws with expressions like "right now, in the past", that obviously means "right now, 400 years ago" or "in the present, 400 years before the present" (and written these two ways the contradiction becomes apparent), but the official localization sounds as if "the past" was another location instead of anoter time.

Said this, I would like to ask why the policy of this website is to deny any plot flaw in the game. Is it because you think it would be unfair to expose the flaws in a game that is anyway very enjoyable? Or is it because you are unable to see the plot flaws? Or some other reason?

I asked this question already, but all I got were angry answers. Therefore, I ask it again, as politely as I can, hoping for a polite answer. --Abacos (talk) 20:10, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello Abacos. Thank you for your passion for the Oracle Series and your willingness to contribute to Zelda Wiki. Personally, I really appreciate that. However, let me try to explain Zelda Wiki policy and how we try to maintain things around here. We archive the game's information as presented by the game itself. We are an encyclopedia, nothing more nothing less. We also tend to stay away from subjectivity as much as possible. The example that you gave for instance is an assumed conclusion. Is it a valid, logical conclusion? Yes, absolutely. But it is not the only one. This is where personal opinions and arguments determine the facts and not the game itself. For example, one could argue that the past and future may have syncing time-streams. As a work of fiction, there are countless explanations for something unexplained. Therefore, to simplify things, and keep everything as delivered from the game itself, we tend not to cover any speculation or theory. Unfortunately, the Zelda Series doesn't always follow the same rules as reality or may not even be completely logical. This is something that we have to accept and it is not our job to "correct" the series as we see fit. This is best suited for discussion boards or blog posts, not a wiki. If you'd be willing to write about the Oracle Series and its inconsistencies with real life physics on another website, feel free to. (I would love to read it!) Thank you and I hope you understand. -- Hylian pi (talk) 23:41, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for the answer. Still, as you wanted, I did stay away from subjectivity as much as possible. I just wrote facts in a different order. How could things that happen today and yesterday be synchronized?[1] "Yesterday" happened strictly before "today". This is not my speculation, it is a fact, but I agree Zelda timeline breaks logic.
The Zelda continuity officially forks in three. See my chronological analysis of Oracle of Ages on a website where I am administrator, and see how I conclude that the chronology of Oracle of Ages alone splits into several branches. I used logic alone, not physics: mixing real-science and fictional-magic is a wrong method indeed! Abacos (talk) 10:19, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
  1. From ancient Greek: "syn-" = "same", "chronos" = "time"; "syn-chron-ize" = "put at the same time". If anything, you have to admit that "synchronize" is the wrong word in this context.
Hi, weighing in with yet another opinion, about presumably the Maku Tree edits:
I don't believe it is a plot hole per se, though maybe it's a matter of perspective. With regard to the apparent contradictions you mention, the issue here is the semantics and terminology. "right now, in the past" makes sense because, from context, "right now" can be interpreted as a point in time in the past, where "the past" is essentially a name for a period of time before the events we treat as the present (not clearly defined, though probably no need to). Your "right now, 400 years ago" also makes sense since it is implicit that "400 years ago" is "400 years ago from the present", where "the present" is understood from context to be a particular point in time that isn't the point in time treated as "right now". Your "in the present, 400 years before the present" can also be understood for the same reasons, with "the present" meaning two different things in the same sentence (and which can lead to confusion, hence why they didn't say it like that).
With regard to the time travel aspect, the first thing I note is that the logic (or rather, rules) behind much fiction involving time travel can be very much different than ours - In a fictional world, the behaviour and characteristics of 'time' can differ greatly than in the real world. For example, in contrast to the real world, there can be made-up constraints that something that affects the Maku tree (perhaps not even necessarily affect people in general) at one point in time must affect the future version of the Maku tree at another point in time. I suppose we should be careful about generalising aspects of the fictional world - If we were to say something is a plot hole, then the creator could simply make up new rules for how the world works, and it would and should be taken as fact, since they are the creator - though with a true plot hole it might be impossible to salvage it. Things we say things are plot holes mainly relate to the suspension of disbelief; if we can identify the rules the creator sets, then they definitively contradict each other, then it's a plot hole - otherwise, I don't think we can firmly conclude as such.
Another thing I note is that the way you rewrote the section on Maku Tree made the text harder to follow.
In case I misunderstand, feel free to rephrase the plot holes or contradictions you were talking about, including some of what you talk about on the page you linked.
--KokoroSenshi (talk | contribs) 12:38, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Abacos, let me be as clear and concise as possible. The only thing that is a "fact" on this wiki is a quote from a piece of Zelda media. We archive that information. If you correct information based on how reality works, you are effectively making our information inaccurate to the series. And you are still editing the Maku Tree with information that is never presented in the game but came from your own speculation. Please stop and only use in-game sources as your references. -- Hylian pi (talk) 21:47, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Kokoro Senshi, I agree with you on two points out of three. The one I disagree is where you say that "right now" does not mean "right now", and so on. That made me laugh, and reminded me that we are talking about fiction, not about saving or killing a thousand people. Thank you. I agree on everything else you wrote. After redefining my perspective, as you allowed me, I felt free to rephrase two lines in the Maku Tree page. Probably I am the one who misunderstood, because Hylian Pi seems unhappy about such edit.

Well then, Hylian Pi, I will quote a piece of Zelda media, the only fact you say you aknowledge. The Maku Tree said: "Four hundred years I waited". Are you saying that writing "almost as soon as" in this wiki is the same as writing "400 years later"? Your English is very different from mine, then. I do not speculate, I am a contributor who sticks here strictly to the basic principles of logic (not physics, not mathematics, just logic) and to the real meaning of words in the English language. In my last edit to the Maku Tree page, which information is my speculation, according to your opinion?

Maybe the fact that I wrote "his present"? The game is seen from the point of view of Link, all this wikipedia follows his point of view. "The present" and "the past" are obviously from Link's point of view, therefore, according to English language, the present in Oracle of Ages is Link's present, it is "his present". The expression "his present" is never used in the game, but neither are the words "entity" or "bright and cheery", used instead in this website to describe the Maku Tree. What makes them less "speculative" than my use of the word "his"? But maybe you were thinking about something else.

Maybe I am wrong where I wrote "the Hero of Time". I just wanted to avoid writing "Link" too many times in few lines. Link is the Hero of Time, right? If I am wrong here, I definitely apologize! Abacos (talk) 02:12, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

P.S.: I checked now, and I found out that the Hero of Time is a different Link. I was even unsure whether a "Hero of Time" wikipage existed: I thought every Link was the Hero of Time, and I expected to get redirected to "Link". In particular, since so many characters appear in both Ocarina of Time and Oracle of Ages, it came natural to deduct that the two Link's are the same Link. Forgive me for this: it was absolutely unintentional. Abacos (talk) 02:27, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
I have made a massive revision on the Maku Tree page. Please refer to that to understand what kind of page writing our staff finds acceptable. As for your examples, I have actually removed the word "entity" in my edit because I also don't think it should be used. However, "bright and cheery" is just descriptive language. There's nothing wrong with that, so it was left alone. If the game itself described her personality, it would be better to use that as a reference, but we can use basic adjectives instead.
Saying "his" present is a specific term rather than a general term. It implies that there are many presents for each character. This is not how the game presents its information however, as it refers to the present as a general term which affects everybody. This game functions on a dual world mechanic between the past and the present, to use any other term would be inconsistent and confusing. If you have any more questions feel free to ask. If you would like to discuss this with me in depth, see my contact information on my profile. -- Hylian pi (talk) 08:28, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Let us get back to the original point.

In any work of time-travel fiction, plot coherency can be checked by sorting facts according to the point of view of History (i.e. any character who did not travel in time). This splits all the time-travel fiction in two groups: coherent (e.g. Elnard) or flawed (e.g. Steins Gate). Still, time-travel fiction with plot flaws can be very well done and enjoyable.

Oracle of Ages is a work of time-travel fiction with plot flaws (according to the definition above). It means it is impossible to report the facts in a strict chronological order, that is from the point of view of the many characters who did not travel in time. This is never mentioned on this wiki. Whenever I attempt to point that out, I am told it is speculation. Now I am told that several words and expression use in common language are considered "speculation" here, too.

Hylian Pi wrote: "One could argue that the past and future may have "syncing" [synchronized[1]] time-streams". This is exactly my point! The game shifts continuously between the two paradigms. Sometimes it considers present and past as separate by 400 years, sometimes it considers them as synchronized. This is not speculation, it is a fact about the way information is presented in the game. It is objectively incoherent, therefore I call it "plot flaw"[2]. WHY IS IT FORBIDDEN TO WRITE IT ON THIS WEBSITE? I understand you do it that way. I am asking why you decided to do it that way. Abacos (talk) 12:57, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

  1. Sorry, but I personally dislike acronyms and abbreviations. It is nothing personal against you, it is just the way I like the languages.
  2. If you can think of a better expression that conveys the same information, you are welcome.

I think we agree on all the following points. To make sure, let us check up to which point we agree:

  1. FACT : in a fiction where the plot makes sense from the point of view of some characters only (e.g. Nirvana), there are objective plot flaws (small or big).
  2. FACT : in a time-travel fiction, the plot always makes sense from the point of view of time-travellers (exception: some comedies); it may or may not make sense from the point of view of characters who followed normal time flow.
  3. METHOD: in a time-travel fiction, in order to check whether there are plot flaws or not, it is sufficient to try and write the plot from the point of view of of a character who followed normal time flow (there may be other methods, but this one is the most straightforward, therefore, according to Ockham's razor, the best method until a better one is found).
  4. FACT : in a time-travel fiction with plot flaws, it is impossible to coherently rewrite the plot from the point of view of a character who did not travel in time (unless speculation is added).
  5. FACT : the plot of Oracle of Ages contains plot flaws and/or plot holes.
  6. SPECULATION consists of any attempt to justify plot flaws or plot holes by adding information that was not in the media, despite the likeliness or the logic of the assumptions.

The point where we disagree is: the objective existence of plot flaws in Oracle of Ages should be ignored in this wiki, or should it be written somewhere as a neutral fact (even as a trivial fact)? Abacos (talk) 15:16, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm going to jump in here. No, we do not all agree on your points as the method you have described is speculative. It assumes that those who do not time-travel follow normal time-flow during these events. That is not necessarily the case. In fact, the Maku Tree notes that the flow of time is disrupted in-game. Given this, we simply cannot assume that anyone experienced the normal flow of time after Veran traveled back in time. On the basis that your method is speculative, it is not possible for me to agree in this specific circumstance that Oracle of Ages contains plot holes. User:Link Lab/sig 16:30, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Dear, dear Link Lab, your answer (together with the fact that I just read an article about motion in 4 spatial dimensions) definitely persuaded me. Quoting a good husband talking to his wife: "I am sorry, you were right and I was wrong".
  • During Ambi's age, the Maku Tree is saved by Link.
  • For 400 years, the Maku tree keeps growing.
  • During Zelda's age, the Maku Tree temporarily disappears, not because she was killed 400 years earlier (it is false), but because the flow of time is disrupted!!! This (I suppose) means that the Maku Tree (and/or Link) shifts between different continuities, or the different continuities mix up. With reference to my table, it means that the three continuities are not well separated as I plotted them, but they mix up randomly.
It finally makes sense to me. I am happy this way. Thank you. ---Abacos (talk) 12:56, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

About Zeldapendium

should Zeldapendium be moved to gamepedia too?Clayblockiller (talk) 09:53, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Zelda Wiki has no control over the actions of Zeldapendium so that would be up to the staff at Zeldapendium to decide among themselves. User:Link Lab/sig 16:30, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Difference between "etymology" and "translations"

I noticed a language error that is repeated all over this website. In all the pages I visited, the word "etymology" is used as if it means "translations". Let me explain the difference with two quick examples.

  • Example 1:
ETYMOLOGY of "Wikipedia" TRANSLATIONS of "Wikipedia"
  • "Wiki-" from Hawaiian "wiki", "quick"
  • "-pedia" from English "encyclopedia", that in turn comes...
    • from French "encyclopédie", that in turn comes...
      • "encyclo-": from Greek "enkyklios", "general, circular, all-round"
      • "-pédie": from Greek "paideia", "education, school-learning"

Therefore, the etymology of "wikipedia" is "quick all-round education"

  • Greek: Βικιπαίδεια (bikipaideia)
  • French: Wikipédie, Wikipédia
  • Hawaiian: Wikipikia
  • Cebuano (Philippines): Wikipedya
  • Estonian: Vikipeedia
  • Esperanto: Vikipedio
  • Example 2:
ETYMOLOGY of "mutton" TRANSLATIONS of "mutton"
  • From Old French "moton", meaning "sheep", that in turn comes...
    • from Gallo-Roman "multo", meaning "soft".

Therefore, the word "mutton" comes from a word meaning "soft"

Germanic languages:

  • Dutch: schaapevles (schaap=sheep, vles=flesh)
  • German: Schaffleish (Schaf=sheep, Fleish=flesh)
  • Danish: fårekød (får=sheep, kød=flesh)
  • Swedish: fårkött (får=sheep, kött=flesh)

Latin languages:

  • French: mouton
  • Italian: montone
  • Spanish: cordero
  • Portuguese: carneiro

From the examples above, it should be apparent that "etymology" and "translation" are two completely different things.

The correction of this crazy mistake should be the job for an automated program (a bot) who could automatically replace all instances of ==Etymology== with ==Translations in other languages== (almost one per page = almost 64000). Unfortunately, my knowledge of computer programming is oriented towards different fields. I have to leave the duty of creating the bot and correcting this mistake to Zeldawiki staff (or I can wait for a faraway day when I will feel I might be interested in learning how to make a bot for wikis). ---Abacos (talk) 10:12, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

I think it might've been my idea to employ "etymology" a while back. Not the best idea, I agree.
I'd like to point out that the staff members are also volunteers. Although our contributions are more structured, we're still mostly doing what interests us. So if we go the route that you suggest, it might not happen until a faraway day anyway. It would depend on the dev team's interest in it versus the other things we have on the backlog. HylianKing (talk) 12:07, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
I know that staff members are volunteers. I just hoped that someone by chance knew already how to write a program that automatically browses Zeldawiki and corrects the error. If some hackers create similar programs for vandalism, then a honest contributor who is by chance a computer programmer could do the same for a good purpose. That would have been great, right? ---Abacos (talk) 14:04, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
If it was just a text replacement, it would be incredibly simple for us but we cannot just replace that line of text as the Etymology section does at times contain etymological information, some of which is actually an etymology of a translation. Obviously, it would be wrong to have this in a section called Translations in other languages so the placement of the text would have to be changed if we used the heading you suggest.
Personally, I think the section should be called Etymology and Translations but ultimately, this is something the staff would need to discuss before implementing changes.
One thing I should also mention is that you vastly overestimate the amount of pages needing fixed. Template:Names and Names Table are used on ~4% of the wiki's >65,000 pages and <49% of it's >5,000 content pages (the vast majority of the Wiki's pages are redirects, User/User talk pages and File pages). User:Link Lab/sig 15:52, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

I see. A bot would be unable to do such job automatically. I checked the Template pages and the "What links here", and I concluded there are about 2200 content pages to check. Still too many for a single person. What if all contributors were invited to check and correct a few pages (maybe starting from those that share the first letter of their user name)? It might be bad public relations, though. The title "Etymology and Translations" might be the best idea, and a bot could probably implement it. Anyway, I agree there are more interesting things to do. ---Abacos (talk) 13:42, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

PS: since we are talking about English language, I just noticed someone did a recurring mistake (it allows me to identify native English speakers, as they are the only ones who fall for this error :P ): many people often swap "it's" = "it is" and "its (thing)" = "(thing) belonging to it"; same for "you're/your", "he's/his", "they're/their/there".

After some discussion about this among staff, we have decided that as neither "Etymology" or "Translations" fits, we will be using "Nomenclature" instead. A text replace will take place shortly to fix the section names. TriforceTony (talk) 00:54, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
I like "nomenclature" more than "etymology", but it is still incorrect. I will expand one of the previous examples.
NOMENCLATURE of Wikipedia TRANSLATIONS of "Wikipedia"
  • PAGE: an entry of the "online encyclopedia"
  • CATEGORY: a set of pages related to each other
  • CONTRIBUTOR: anyone who edited any page
  • USER: a registered contributor
  • ADMINISTRATOR: an user with supervision rights and duties
    • ADMIN: abbreviation of "administrator"
  • Greek: Βικιπαίδεια (bikipaideia)
  • French: Wikipédie, Wikipédia
  • Hawaiian: Wikipikia
  • Cebuano (Philippines): Wikipedya
  • Estonian: Vikipeedia
  • Esperanto: Vikipedio
Both translations and nomenclature are list of words indeed, but nomenclature is list of different words (about a common subject) in one single language, while the translations of a term are words with the same meaning in different languages. Anyway, "nomenclature" is better than "etymology". ---Abacos (talk) 02:02, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Nomenclature section of BotW with British English

While I was trudging through the different languages of Breath of the Wild, I couldn't find any differences between the NA English version and the EU English version. No spelling differences occur, even where they should ("armor" vs. "armour", "honor" vs. "honour", "defense" vs. "defence"), so I'm not sure if we should include the UK section in Nomenclature on BotW-specific articles (e.g. Dark Beast Ganon, , especially since the European translation uses solely United States English spelling standards. Langswitch (talk) 21:08, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

We're aware of the fact that there's no difference in localization for the UK version (except for error messages, I believe), so no articles should have the EnBr portion filled for BotW. This is something we'll get around to fixing once we've fully updated the Translations pages for BotW. TriforceTony (talk) 21:15, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Misko's EX Journal Page

Why is making this page banned? If it's banned, there shouldnt be link of it to a page that is waiting to be made. -- Wolfgerlion64 (talk) 02:16, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

That's because "Misko's EX Journal" forms a word banned from the wiki, so we'll see what can we do about that. - Chuck * (Talk) 03:45, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Wow like it's Nintendo's fault they have 3 letters in line of each other. -- Wolfgerlion64 (talk) 03:47, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
In case you misunderstood, it's an automatic filter against spam/vandalism (Extension:TitleBlacklist), which like most filters aren't perfect. --KokoroSenshi (talk | contribs) 15:12, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Boss Pages

For quite some time now the top five wanted pages have been Dodongo (Boss), Gleeok (Boss), Digdogger (Boss), Gohma (Boss), and Manhandla (Boss), each with 200+ links. What confuses me is the fact that each of these five enemies already have pages. After looking into it, I noticed that most (if not all) of the links to these missing pages are in the related-links-type section at the bottom of Zelda enemy pages that talks about bosses. Did these links simply never get updated to the pages, or are the pages missing information that is needed for them to be a "boss" page? In general, how does one tell if a wanted page is actually needed in this situation or how can it be fixed? Nerdyarchimedes (talk) 04:42, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

The wanted pages are for their boss versions, as they usually appear as bosses and then as normal enemies in the origial TLoZ. - Chuck * (Talk) 04:59, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
Since most of the information about the boss versions are already found on the already-existing regular pages, would it mostly be a matter of transferring the boss information to a new page? I'm fairly new to editing, so it may be best for me to leave full-page edits alone for now. - Nerdyarchimedes (talk) 04:45, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
Sorry that's my fault. It's just because of the boss template that uses them. It's a project I started before college started back up and never got around to finishing. So yeah, eventually I'm going to make these pages. I did end up finishing Aquamentus and Aquamentus (Boss) if you want to see what I mean. Our director determined that we cannot consider something a boss unless it is explicitly stated as being a boss. Since every boss in TLoZ also appears in dungeons as regular enemies, we have to make separate pages. I'll just go ahead and change the template back because you are the second person to notice this now, I only did it to update it ahead of time but I'm not sure how soon exactly it'll be done. Sorry for the confusion. Hylian pi (talk) 08:15, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
Nah, it's cool. The idea of giving each boss their own page is very good, I just hadn't thought about how complicated it was. Just looking at Dodongo in particular there are the Dodongo boss used as a boss, Dodongo boss used as a strong enemy, King Dodongo, and varieties of regular Dodongo enemies to account for. I love the variety in Zelda, but categorizing everything effectively seems challenging. - Nerdyarchimedes (talk) 05:05, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Proposal: Why we should change the Canon policy (and Hyrule Warriors' Canon status)

Initially Hyrule Warriors was deemed as non canon. Aonuma said it was not a part of the timeline, thus not a part of the main story. However he said it does exist in the Zelda Universe, albeit in another dimension.[1]

Recently, we have found out that currently, Breath of the Wild does not exist on the Zelda timeline either, thus it's currently not part of the main story until a placement is decided.[2] However, Breath of the Wild is obviously still canon. Aonuma currently does not know where it would fit, that is if he even decides to fit it into the timeline at all. So to be consistent, Hyrule Warriors existing in another dimension should be considered canon too.

Both Hyrule Warriors and Breath of the Wild take place after Ocarina of time. In Hyrule Warriors this is blatantly evident from the plot where portals to the Ocarina of Time Era, Skyward Sword era, and Twilight Princess open up. In Breath of the Wild this is evident from an interview with Aonuma,[3] as well as references to Ganondorf's Gerduo form, the Divine Beasts named after the Sages, Lon Lon Ranch, the Temple of Time and other in game references.

Both Hyrule Warriors and Breath of the Wild follow the events of the main timeline (set after Ocarina of Time), but they are not on the actual timeline themselves. Not being on the timeline used to be enough to deem a game non-canon, however with recent news this should change.

Thus Hyrule Warriors should be considered canon or at least semi-canon, as existing in another dimension, is still existing.[4] Especially since Breath of the Wild retains canon status despite not being on the timeline either.[5]Editorguy117 (talk) 22:20, 16 October 2017 (UTC)


  1. "Within the Zelda canon, there is the timeline, but there has always been the sense of the main story and kind of a side story. Like, Majora's Mask might be considered part of that, though it does exist as part of the timeline. With Hyrule Warriors, there is a link between the two, but it exists as a separate dimension, so it doesn't exist as part of the main canon.", Eiji Aonuma - Eiji Aonuma Addresses Hyrule Warriors Place in the Zelda Timeline
  2. "Actually, those timeline-related questions are difficult because we’ve never designed any Zelda games by saying “hey, we’re going to put that game here, we need to have it fit into this period or that one, etc.” That’s not what comes first for us. But indeed, once the game is released and we’ve been able to develop our story, we can tell each other “oh yes, we can make it fit here”, but that’s not important to us. Especially since there could be contradictions in every new game if we tried to follow the timeline. If we can put a game in the timeline, that’s great, but as for Breath of the Wild, we haven’t really decided where it belongs for now.", Eiji Aonuma - Zelda: Breath of the Wild devs on why Hero’s Path Mode was added as DLC, timeline, more
  3. Ben Reeves: "Does Breath of the Wild take place before or after Ocarina of Time?". Eiji Aonuma: "After." - 51 Questions And Answers About The Legend Of Zelda: Breath Of The Wild
  4. "Within the Zelda canon, there is the timeline, but there has always been the sense of the main story and kind of a side story. Like, Majora's Mask might be considered part of that, though it does exist as part of the timeline. With Hyrule Warriors, there is a link between the two, but it exists as a separate dimension, so it doesn't exist as part of the main canon.", Eiji Aonuma - Eiji Aonuma Addresses Hyrule Warriors Place in the Zelda Timeline
  5. "Actually, those timeline-related questions are difficult because we’ve never designed any Zelda games by saying “hey, we’re going to put that game here, we need to have it fit into this period or that one, etc.” That’s not what comes first for us. But indeed, once the game is released and we’ve been able to develop our story, we can tell each other “oh yes, we can make it fit here”, but that’s not important to us. Especially since there could be contradictions in every new game if we tried to follow the timeline. If we can put a game in the timeline, that’s great, but as for Breath of the Wild, we haven’t really decided where it belongs for now.", Eiji Aonuma - Zelda: Breath of the Wild devs on why Hero’s Path Mode was added as DLC, timeline, more