Talk:Triforce

Better image
Would it be O.K if we could use this picture for the main pic in this article? Not only dose it look better but it is the one used in the Wikipedia Triforce article and in not copyrighted by Nintendo (or anyone else for that mater).--ShutUpNavi 02:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I disagree, I think the current one looks better, plus this one is only fan art rather than an official picture. Happyjoe5 09:38, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I like Shutupnavi's image more. It's cleaner and more accurately modeled. Plus, it isn't as obnoxiously as the rotating one. Is there any indication the Triforce actually does that? I somehow doubt it, which therefore also makes that image misleading as well. Unless someone can give solid evidence that the Triforce's natural rest-state involves the constant individual rotation of each segment, I vote to replace it with Shutupnavi's image. 75.50.158.60 00:43, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

We also have the SVG version : File:Triforce.svg.--Richard 01:12, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Guys, a picture that actually moves is more eye-catching that a stationary fan-art. The one SUN has is a good one, to be sure, but it's not nearly as eye-catching as the current one. I think the one that's on there now is far superior to either of these stationary pictures. I'm for the one that's going to look the best and attract the most viewers, and that's the one that's on there now. Hero of Time 87 02:00, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

i'm like HOT, the rotating one is kinda neat. the last one's a good image, but it's also a lil dull. ZeldaFanatic98 04:53, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I actually have to say that the rotating one is rather distracting and obnoxious, as well as the annoying play of light that doesn't make sense (over the faces). I'm new and when I first looked at this page I had to say it bugged me. Also, the whole attracting more viewers thing is, I think, unnecessary...I know I don't come here to look at pretty pictures, I come here to update my information and see stuff I missed.User:Light and Shadow Aerwyn Caladhiel Elena Telcontar 18:22, 18 July 2009 (UTC) 18:22, 18 July 2009 (UTC) Which one? File:Triforce1.gif File:Triforce.svg File:Triforce123.png

Zelda
"Zelda does not wish to rule with an iron fist, nor does she have the courage to stand up to Ganondorf, and only fights when Link is doing the main work in the battles against Ganondorf."

This seems to make out that Zelda is some kind of coward, which, as far as I can tell, she is not. Should this sentence be edited? Xykeb Zraliv 18:25, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

In Wind Waker and Twilight Princess she fights Ganondorf along with Link and also helps Link (But does not get fully involved in the battle) in Ocarina of Time. How is that not standing up to Ganondorf. And before you get on me about the whole 'Let Link do the main work' think, I'd like to note that it wouldn't really help to become any more involved in the battle, it's not like she could really do anything to hurt Ganondorf other than fire Light Arrows. Link is the one with the Master Sword, after all. Xykeb Zraliv 18:25, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

She only attacks slowly to balance the game. If she attacked quickly, Ganondorf would have no chance (What with Link attacking him at the same time). And I don't really see why gasping would define her as a coward - If your friend were fighting an all-powerful sorcerer that can transform into a huge, destructive beast and you couldn't help him, and then the sorcerer (Transformed into the beast form) started swiping at him with huge swords, you probably would gasp, exclaim, yell, etc. too. Xykeb Zraliv 03:58, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Triforce reunite in Intro
In the intro section, it mentions that "it seems to be possible" for the Triforce to be reunited. It makes mentions of many different games, but makes no mention at all of Windwaker, where Ganondorf actually does reunite the entire triforce. Should someone add this? because I think it is extremely relevant.-LeoLab 15:54, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Good point. I fixed it. -- Auron  Kaizer Kennedy! 17:38, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Inanimacy
Is that whole section necessary? Shouldn't it be something more like, "Among fans, there is a debate as to whether or not the Triforce is sentient. While its granting of wishes to both good and evil people may seem like a lack of ability to make choices, it may also represent (something something something I hadn't really thought this far ahead)" Or should it be removed entirely? Aeronflux 20:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Majora's Mask Appearance
While playing said game today I noticed that in the beginning after Link turns into a Deku that looking down on that circle of light on the ground there are three gold triangles. Now it isn't fashioned like the triforce, but they are indeed there. Should this be mentioned in the appearences part under Majora's Mask? I don't have a screenshot but if anyone wants to try it out go ahead.
 * You mean this (image on right)? I don't see any resemblance.--Richard 03:49, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

It looks more like a radiation symbol to me. It sparks a theory. Maybe zelda actually takes place in the far off future but due to nuclear war and the colapse of civilization we are sent back into the medieval age. Some people are mutated by the radiation and turn into the gorons, deku, and zora. I stole the whole thing from a book.  Metroidhunter32  13:14, 13 October 2008 (UTC) It looks like a Triforce to me, just the top part is at the bottom instead. It does seem possible, really. midnaslave 17:50, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

i do not have an account on here but perhaps it is meant to show that the triforce has been broken up, meaning Link is no longer in Hyrule

Tri-Force on hand?
Ok, those chosen get the triforce symbol on the back of their hand, which hand... Is it always the left? or is it dependant on wether they are left or right handed? what? Not listed here, so wanted to bring it up? Should this be mentioned here as well, or placed in each related characters descriptions only?

its on gannondorfs right, im not sure about zelda Oni Dark Link

I believe the Triforce Mark can appear on both hands. I mean, when the bearer of a triforce part wants to use its power, he can decide which hand to use. Ganondorf is right-handed so whenever he casts Triforce-magic, like when he transforms in oot he prefers to use his right hand to channel the power. in wind waker he grabed link with his right hand. So he had to use his left hand, since the other was already in use. The triforce doesnt actualy reside in the hand. its in the bearers body. I mean if the ancient sages had cut his right hand off during the execution, he would still be able to use it with his left hand. Or what would happen if someone without hands would use a triforce fragment? Like a regular dekuscrub or a seahorse etc. It would likely apear on its chest, back or forehead or something like that. But that are just my thoughts. --SG-27 (talk) 21:57, November 30, 2011 (UTC)

hacks
i seen a hack of some one obtaining the triforce on you tube (cant remember the exact name and foun it since) and im fairly positive its real. Oni Dark Link
 * Link, Zelda, and Ganondorf already have the triforce—  Triforce   14 ( ... ) 22:01, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I think he refers to another one of these fake videos depicting Link obtaining the Triforce. If one goes through all the source files in the game, you will not find anything about a secret location with the Triforce. Hence, it's not impossible You sir, have been hoodwinked, taken in...AUSTIN 3:16'd. -- Auron  Kaizer ( ...Kaizer! ) 01:36, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

no im fairly sure its real. a portal on hyrule field brings link to a dark room with a chest which he opens and gets the triforce. it even says when he gets it "you found the triforce. you can already feel its power flowing through you". ill try find it again. Oni Dark Link
 * Read my lips. THERE IS NO CHANCE IN HELL THAT IS REAL. Just don't add it to the article or anything dude. -- Auron  Kaizer ( ...Kaizer! ) 01:12, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * how do you know its not real? you havent seen it. and i dont plan on adding it otherwise i already would of Oni Dark Link
 * Because, as I have stated, Link Zelda and Ganondorf ALREADY HAVE THE PIECES OF THE TRIFORCE. Unless the goddesses created a spare, I highly doubt Nintendo would make something in the game, even a removed scene, where Link obtains the Triforce. It's as simple as that. —  Triforce   14 ( ... ) 21:36, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
 * fine believe what you want to believe im merly saying this scene exisits and if you want to disagree then i cant stop you unless i find the proof again Oni Dark Link
 * ok found the video again and discovered you were right. its a texture hack buts its really quite good. i musnt of read the discription the first time. if you want to see it heres the link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8-Y299l7sk&feature=related

hey
the trifforce has already been featured as featured article, so why does it still have the nomination template, and doesn't show that it was a former featured article? User:Ccbermanzzpedia 14:21, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Origins of the symbol
Is there any documentation to back up the idea that the Triforce is based on the symbol/crest of the Shinto goddess Benten? Because it sure would be quite the accidental coincidence if it weren't. If there's any source to back it up - interviews with Zelda creators, etc, it really should be included in this article, don't you think? LordAmeth (talk) 17:09, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * well yes it would, but we do not do citations on any of our articles, so sorry LordAmeth, it's done differently here than where you are. -- C 2  Phantom Zant.png 17:14, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Proposed cleanup initiative
I sincerely mean no offense, but in proportion to this article's importance I find that it is noticeably lacking in quality. There are problems in consistency of link usage, as well as grammar and sentence structure. Also, I propose that some of the theories presented regarding the tetraforce and other highly speculative pieces be reviewed further and at the very least edited for quality assurance, if not nixed entirely. I am quite new here, but I would love to baby this article for a while as a sort of entry project. Anyone else support my move that this article become the site of major cleanup and quality control? Deku Hero (talk) 11:42, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * eh. it needs clean-up. maybe sure.  just dont become like this guy or have huge amount of edits on a single page.  if you want ill make a user sub page for you, so that way you can work on it to your hearts content, without anybody unwantedly bothering you. maybe?-- C  2  Phantom Zant.png 13:00, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Tetraforce
I suppose.-- C  2  / C C  23:15, November 2, 2009 (UTC)

could the tetra force and the goddess of time not be a seperate goddess but the idea of all the goddesses working or being together.--Ironknuckle1 00:32, November 3, 2009 (UTC)

zelda ii
dont know why im asking this since evryone hates zelda ii but who weilds the triforce of power in zelda ii? it appears as if Link keeps it at the end of the first game does this make it a possibilty that he has it in zelda II as well? or did he give it to princess zelda and if so why since he was allowed to have it at the end of the first game and it would be a usefull item in his journey Oni Dark Link 19:37, December 3, 2009 (UTC)

Link didn't probably have the guts to rule as powerful, so the Triforce Of Power couldn't have merged with Link, instead it probably remained where Gannon was defeated. Even if Link would have kept the Triforce, it would have left him as imagining Link as an all-powerful leader is a little exaggerating. SandFlyer83 (Talk) 03:37, February 14, 2010 (UTC)

You see Link obtaining it at the end then giving one triforce piece to zelda and keeping one for himself Oni Dark Link 03:41, February 14, 2010 (UTC)

He probably took the Triforce Of Power, then gave Wisdom back to Zelda. The Triforce Of Power then left Link in between the two games, and the Triforce Of Courage was discovered. SandFlyer83 (Talk) 03:47, February 14, 2010 (UTC)

Their own article
Shouldn't the Triforce of Courage, Triforce of Power, and Triforce of Wisdom have their own article? --Cococrash11 (talk) 07:16, December 14, 2009 (UTC)Cococrash11
 * Eh... not really. There isn't a whole lot of difference between the two, and I think in this case that keeping them the same article is the better option.-- C  2  / C C  13:15, December 14, 2009 (UTC)

They are very diffrent like how they function and alot of diffrent facts about them even in diffrent games. --Cococrash11 (talk) 09:19, December 26, 2009 (UTC)Cococrash11
 * I kinda like the idea and was going to do it myself a long time ago, but I either forgot it or changed my mind. --Auron  Kaizer !  17:22, December 26, 2009 (UTC)
 * AK, if you want to do it, I'm all for it. Just realize how much work this would be. This is one of those few things that pretty much needed to be decided on from the beginning. But if you want to, I have no issues with it. And yes I realize this was from December, but its a major issue and I'm just seeing it now. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 00:13, March 28, 2010 (UTC)

Appearance in spirit tracks!!!!!
Who says it appears in it? I mean if you haven't played it how do you know.— Triforce   14 Triforce4.png 14:48, December 18, 2009 (UTC)

Wish Granting
This is probably a differential in power, as A Link to the Past was probably in a different timeline, and the Triforce of that Timeline could have been altered. The one in Wind Waker was probably different than the one in ALttP. Also, Link's wish would have been one-sided, it would have restored the realm, and would have left it in its position, as Ganon was now defeated. Although you could be right. If ALttP, and WW have the same timeline, it could be a typo. SandFlyer83 (Talk) 03:44, February 14, 2010 (UTC)

I always did lack Common Sense :) SandFlyer83  (Talk) 03:55, February 14, 2010 (UTC)

Tetraforce evidence
Thats hardly evidence or proof. And it was noted long ago hence why other later Zeldas dont have it Oni Dark Link 22:33, February 24, 2010 (UTC)

i don't think there is a fourth piece but you should make a page for it. it is a major theory in zelda. --Red Rider (talk) 00:10, March 28, 2010 (UTC)

Protection
Why is this protected? --A.Burr (talk) 04:58, May 10, 2010 (UTC)

Oh OK then. --A.Burr (talk) 05:35, May 20, 2010 (UTC)

The Triforce In TP and The Timeline Split
First of all I'd like to apologize if there's actual canonical information I'm missing, and I'm getting worked up over nothing. Anyway:

Ok guys, from what I know (and I've played through all the relevant games and re-watched endings and whatnot), the entire section about the Triforce in Twilight Princess is a bunch of groundless theorizing to make an excuse for the Triforce being in possession of Ganon/Link/Zelda during TP. I personally can't actually find proof that the Triforce even is in TP. Even if we assume that the Triforce is in TP (I still find that to be an assumption and not fact, but maybe it's just me), I'm fairly certain the explanations this page has for how it got there are unconfirmed theories. If they are, it needs to say so in this page instead of stating them as facts. I talk at length about this whole issue HERE on my talk page. I'd like to quickly point out here though that the Triforce emblem has been known appear on the hands of people who don't actually have a piece.--Fierce Deku (talk) 01:39, November 17, 2010 (UTC)

This Page is Lying Fixed!
I brought this up in the above topic among other places, but it's gone unnoticed. I think it's a pretty significant thing so I'm making a somewhat more attention grabbing heading. Anyway:

As far as I can tell, pretty much the entire Twilight Princess section of this article is theory, and some pretty out there theories at that. There is a big issue with the Triforce in TP, as it would seem like it shouldn't have been taken from the sacred realm in the child timeline. I personally think that it's a distinct possibility that the Triforce is actually not in TP, with the assumed references to people possessing it actually having other explanations. I talk in detail about the issue >HERE<. I know it's a long thing to read, but I don't know any better way to present all the relevant the information. At the very least we need to mark a lot of this TP Triforce section as theory, unless someone has proof of any of it. I really don't want to mess with something so significantly without some feedback first, but lacking any other information I'll eventually have to assume that what I'm thinking is correct and make some major revisions :\

--Fierce Deku (talk) 21:42, November 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * So you are saying that the Triforce in TP should be a theory based on the Split Timeline Theory? I think you need to consider TP in and of itself and not base it around it's chronological place in the series since only a couple games have a confirmed placement (MM after OoT and ST after PH). --Birdman5589 (talk) 22:09, November 23, 2010 (UTC)


 * 1-The split timeline "theory" is confirmed. It is no more a guess than the theory of gravity. 2-TP is confirmed to be after OoT and MM, and is known to be in the child timeline. 3-The TP sub-section of the Triforce page IS talking about TP based on it's chronological place in the timeline, as opposed to it in and of itself. Read the TP section of the Triforce page yourself and tell me that it isn't theory. If it really isn't than great, that's exactly the kind of information I'm trying to get.--Fierce Deku (talk) 22:22, November 23, 2010 (UTC)

I didn't say this clearly enough before, but even if you believe that it's an absolute fact that the Triforce is in TP, this page is making some huge assumptions about how it got there. Those assumptions at the very least need to be tagged as theories, unless someone can confirm any of them.--Fierce Deku (talk) 02:51, November 24, 2010 (UTC)
 * Look, the whole triforce thing is a bigarse theory. Complaining about not having theory tags is basically getting nowhere. --ϐαςς ᴶαϟϟι Japas Artwork.png 00:57, November 26, 2010 (UTC)

Yeah...I see what you mean *cough*HoT87*cough*. That definitely needs to be rewritten to avoid making timeline references and speculations. Jedimasterlink (talk) 01:01, November 26, 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks you SO MUCH for fixing that article! Those are exactly the changes I've been hoping for, I was just too afraid to make them myself without some support first. It's kind of a major article and I was worried people wouldn't understand why I was messing with it so massively. Yay. Now that that's cleared up I'm going to look for any other related articles that also need clearing up. While I personally think the no-TP-Triforce theory makes more sense, that's just my opinion; you're right that the game "strongly implies" the Triforce's presence, and that's exactly what I intend to say in actual articles.--Fierce Deku (talk) 01:42, November 26, 2010 (UTC)

Bad "Bearers of the Triforce" Section
Everything I see in this section has either been covered already earlier on the page, or is a completely groundless theory that is NOT in a theory section. All the things is says about the holder's characteristics changing with a Triforce piece are completely unsupported. Would anyone object if I just deleted the entire thing?--Fierce Deku (talk) 10:21, December 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Not I. --Auron  Kaizer !  10:23, December 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually it's the only place that mentions the Triforce "resonating" and revealing itself when pieces are near each other. I'm going to look up vids where this happens so I know I'm explain it correctly, then replace the entire "Bearers of the Triforce" section with just that; unless me or someone else can think of a better place to put Triforce resonation information.--Fierce Deku (talk) 10:32, December 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * I've banished the whole bearers section to the Dark World. I changed the title to "Interactions of Triforce Pieces", expanded on the resonating thing, and added a couple other points relating to the subject.--Fierce Deku (talk) 12:03, December 5, 2010 (UTC)

New Pages
Are we ever going to make pages for the Triforce pieces and shards? I was under the impression that everyone agreed on it and it was mean to happen quite a while ago Oni <font color="#7F007F">Dark <font color="#007A00">Link 12:53, December 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, obviously, right now, big editing tasks like this should wait until the whole move situation is decided. Aside from that, it can be chalked up to procrastination, the task being humongous, forgetting it, etc. Take your pick. --<font color="#3ba0c5">Auron  Kaizer <font color="#3ba0c5">!  13:27, December 5, 2010 (UTC)

I just want to make sure its not forgotten about completely due to too much procrastination and forgetting <font color="#66FFFF">Oni <font color="#7F007F">Dark <font color="#007A00">Link 13:49, December 5, 2010 (UTC)


 * What would this entail exactly? Would we move or copy the existing Triforce of P/W/C subsections into their own page, and reorganize them a bit to have separate game sections and an intro? What exactly do we gain by having separate pages? We already have specific Triforce of __ references linking straight to the appropriate subsection, so I'm not sure separate pages would change things much. If there is a consensus on separate pages though, I'd be happy to help make it happen.--Fierce Deku (talk) 22:23, December 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Entirely separate articles, most ideally rewritten from the ground up, considering there are too many conflicts with our markup and phrasing for the current information, which predates mostly any markup rules we've since made, to be of much use. What do we stand to gain? That's somewhat immaterial right now, since the majority decision has been made. I don't recall specifically where the discussion was made, but reading the archive might enlighten you as to this whole deal. --<font color="#3ba0c5">Auron  Kaizer <font color="#3ba0c5">!  15:14, December 6, 2010 (UTC)


 * All I can find discussion wise is this talk page and this forum. There is definitely support for the idea, though the only mention of why exactly is "They are very diffrent like how they function and alot of diffrent facts about them even in diffrent games.". The existing game specific sub-articles cover where it's been, and as far as what the individual pieces do, it's pretty much all speculation, I was just editing about that. The existing page could maybe use a little TLC, but doesn't seem all that bad to me, probably I'm just not familiar enough with these phrasing and markup conventions you're talking about. I could do something to help with this, like write up a draft of an article for one of the pieces, but unless someone explains to me what exactly we're trying to accomplish here I don't know that I'd be much help.--Fierce Deku (talk) 12:17, December 7, 2010 (UTC)

Tetraforce POV
The Topic on Tetraforce is too opinionated. Wikis should be neutral on a topic so people can make their own judgements not be provided with one.


 * What is your point here? I'm sorry you're dissatisfied with our Tetraforce section. If there's something else you're trying to get at please say it because your message seems kind of pointless. -<font color="#B0E0E6">Minish  <font color="#003366">Link  02:48, January 11, 2011 (UTC)


 * The Tetraforce and other theory sections look kind of messy to me ( I might do a re-write of some of them *I've redone a lot of the theory section now), but I don't see how the Tetraforce section is opinionated. It seems to me there is simply more evidence that it does not exist than there is supporting evidence. Can you point out a specific quote that sounds opinionated (*again, I've changed it since this topic came up)?--Fierce Deku (talk) 02:59, January 11, 2011 (UTC)

トライフォース
My account is not old enough to edit this page yet, but I will add that the Japanese name for the triforce is トライフォース (toraifōsu) as shown on the official Japanese website for the 3D remake of LoZ:OoT in the picture with the tree face. http://www.nintendo.co.jp/3ds/aqej/#/story/story02/--Puoukkk (talk) 03:56, June 22, 2011 (UTC)

Triforce Of Life
i think the 4th triforce should be life because power courage and wisdom all are not used for life (exept when zelda gave her life to midna). so i think it should be life.LittleMarioBigWorld (talk)


 * If this is just a random thought about stuff, then hear's a heads up that talk pages are only for discussion about improving the article itself. If you're suggesting this go in the article, then well, there's no supporting evidence for it. The supporting evidence for the Triforce having a fourth piece is week in the first palce, and far more evidence points to it only having three, including in-game evidence and word of god (various people from Nintendo said there are only 3 pieces).--<font color="Green">Fierce <font color="SaddleBrown">Deku 03:10, July 26, 2011 (UTC)

i forgot that. sorry.LittleMarioBigWorld (talk) 21:49, October 4, 2011 (UTC)

tetraforce
should there be an article for the tetraforce in the zelda culture category? Ragin&#39; Bull (talk)
 * I have no idea about that one. While it is a major concept in the Zelda community, it is still just a theory. Then again, we have pages for various Zelda timeline theories. So I don't know. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 21:16, November 2, 2011 (UTC)

Hell no. --<font color="#3ba0c5">Auron  Kaizer <font color="#3ba0c5">!  23:08, November 2, 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree. It seems like a very ZW thing to do. At the most, a theory section on the Triforce page. --EveryDayJoe45 (talk) 00:04, November 3, 2011 (UTC)

Triforce Origins
I know in Ocarina of Time they specify that the three goddesses, or the golden goddesses, created the triforce. However in Skyward Sword Zelda calls its creators "the old gods". I know this doesn't mean it wasn't the three goddesses but I find it strange because they always differentiate between gods and goddesses and since she said "gods", that suggests that the creators were perhaps male deities. I think this peculiarity should be added to the Triforce page under "Skyward Sword" because it's something to be considered.

There is a fourth Goddess!
As a fourth Goddess, Hylia should be mentioned in the Tetraforce section, don't you think?
 * -_- --<font color="#3ba0c5">Auron  Kaizer <font color="#3ba0c5">!  01:03, December 7, 2011 (UTC)
 * Except Hylia isn't one of the Golden Goddesses (they are refered to as the "Old Gods" in Skyward Sword), she is a lesser God who was chosen to guard the Triforce once the Golden Goddesses left Hyrule. Evnyofdeath 01:27, December 7, 2011 (UTC)

Chronology.
Since the timeline has officially been revealed, don't you think we should create a chronological section for the Triforce that depicts its occurances as indicated on the official timeline from the Hyrule Historia? I mean, the appearances section was appropriate when we didn't know the timeline placement of the various games, but we know the timeline placement now, so the appearances section is no longer necessary, I think. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 18:13, December 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * There's no real reason. True Zelda has an overall story but not as much as most series. Each story is pretty much independent of the others. There is no real benefit to putting them into section by timeline. Not only that but I feel the timeline placement will be debated much and even putting it in sequence on a page would be confusing since it has three separate strains <font color="#66FFFF">Oni <font color="#7F007F">Dark <font color="#007A00">Link 18:23, December 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * Wait, I thought the timeline issue was settled upon the mention of Aonuma being the one who wrote the timeline included in the Hyrule Historia. Besides, since there's a timeline, why not add it in. It shouldn't be too hard. All we need to do is make subsections in the history section that relate to the pre-Ocarina of Time events that were mentioned in the respective games, and the three diverging timeline events so it won't have too much trouble. Weedle McHairybug (talk) 18:34, December 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * We always organize things by game sections. We should continue to do so, because official timeline or not, the information is always centered around the stories of individual games, whereas timeline linking events are sort of secondary events and/or stupid nausea-inducing cop outs. That being said, for things like the Triforce which recur throughout the timeline, I believe a separate timeline section should be added, which can explain how it progresses through time. It can gloss over game-specific events but clarify connections between games, which are often not relevant to the individual game sections we currently file all our info under. A paragraph for each segment would do fine (one for SS through OoT and one for each of the two  *sob*  three timeline branches). As much as I personally despise the official timeline, I think a timeline overview for things like the Triforce would be extremely helpful/popular.--<font color="Green">Fierce <font color="SaddleBrown">Deku  01:31, December 27, 2011 (UTC)

Found in...
Should the "Found" section of the infobox include the Silent Realm from Skyward Sword? &mdash;Ceiling Master (talk) 02:53, January 17, 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm not quite that far in the game, but if we're definitely sure the pieces themselves are in the Silent Realm and not the Sky Keep, and that the place is confirmed to be the Silent Realm and not just something that looks similar, then it would presumably be put in the infobox. However, that would also be somewhat of a spoiler, so I'm not sure how we should handle that.--<font color="Green">Fierce <font color="SaddleBrown">Deku 06:34, January 17, 2012 (UTC)

It's not so much similar as it is identical in design. All the same traits of the silent realm are present. I also think it wouldn't be that huge a spoiler since there's no indication that the silent realm is where you'll find it and really it has no effect on the story (Link might as well have just found it in a chest for all it matters. I think they just threw in the Silent Realm there so it would serve as some kind of early Sacred Realm). Seriously I'd consider it more of a spoiler for the info box to say Sky Keep as that rightfully suggests it's in the sky. <font color="#66FFFF">Oni <font color="#7F007F">Dark <font color="#007A00">Link 18:46, January 17, 2012 (UTC)