| Don't like the ads? Then create an account! Users with accounts have more options than anonymous users. |
Talk:The Legend of Zelda: Hyrule Historia
From Triforce Wiki, a The Legend of Zelda wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Based on what LTL told me, should we base the article on this image? It's a fanmade image, so we shouldn't implement it into the article, but it's based on the original Hyrule Hystoria book, which LTL advised to me is the most reliable Results May Vary (talk) 17:02, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
- Should we even make a Zelda Timeline article? It changes often, is confusing, and is not really worty of an article anyways, since it is not in-game, with games often being treated separately with each other except when it is a direct sequel such as with OOT and MM. Doomhiker (talk) 17:43, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
- I mean it's not like we can say the controversy does not exist. How would we go about that? Results May Vary (talk) 17:54, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
- I was thinking either we split the content into two main sections (one for Hyrule Historia and the other for additions and revisions, which would reference Nintendo's Twitter and official website but not the other two books for the reasons I already mentioned) or just move the timeline information into a Hyrule Historia article instead of having it as a separate page. LTL (talk) 17:55, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
- We could make a List of The Legend of Zelda-related controversies page like on the Mario Wiki, or if there are not enough controversies would could put it in a section on the The Legend of Zelda (franchise) page. I also like LTL's idea, especially the first one, as that would explain the timeline without being confusing or speculating. Doomhiker (talk) 17:57, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah I'd go for making a Hyrule Hystoria page and a Zelda controvesy page. However, I do not know much about the former, so if perhaps someone wants to create a Hyrule Hystoria page, feel free to. thanks Results May Vary (talk) 17:59, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
- So should we just rename the Zelda Timeline page to be Hyrule Historia and change around some of the wording? A lot of it is already written out, and I don't want to have to rewrite it. ArchagentEverlasting (talk) 13:25, 17 May 2019 (PST)
- Yeah I'll go do that right now. We can rewrite as a book page Results May Vary (talk) 20:33, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
- Hah, while I was away I had the exact same idea myself. Good show. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 21:16, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah I'll go do that right now. We can rewrite as a book page Results May Vary (talk) 20:33, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
- So should we just rename the Zelda Timeline page to be Hyrule Historia and change around some of the wording? A lot of it is already written out, and I don't want to have to rewrite it. ArchagentEverlasting (talk) 13:25, 17 May 2019 (PST)
- Yeah I'd go for making a Hyrule Hystoria page and a Zelda controvesy page. However, I do not know much about the former, so if perhaps someone wants to create a Hyrule Hystoria page, feel free to. thanks Results May Vary (talk) 17:59, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
- We could make a List of The Legend of Zelda-related controversies page like on the Mario Wiki, or if there are not enough controversies would could put it in a section on the The Legend of Zelda (franchise) page. I also like LTL's idea, especially the first one, as that would explain the timeline without being confusing or speculating. Doomhiker (talk) 17:57, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
- I was thinking either we split the content into two main sections (one for Hyrule Historia and the other for additions and revisions, which would reference Nintendo's Twitter and official website but not the other two books for the reasons I already mentioned) or just move the timeline information into a Hyrule Historia article instead of having it as a separate page. LTL (talk) 17:55, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
- I mean it's not like we can say the controversy does not exist. How would we go about that? Results May Vary (talk) 17:54, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
