@DeletedUser41274243 (talk | contribs) m (Adding Etymology section) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | {{Ability |
||
| − | {{Hyrule Castle}} |
||
| + | |name= Urbosa's Fury |
||
| − | <!-- PLEASE EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> |
||
| + | |image= [[File:BotW Urbosa's Fury.jpg|300px]] |
||
| + | |caption= [[Link]] using Urbosa's Fury, with [[Urbosa]]'s spirit briefly appearing |
||
| + | |type= |
||
| + | |game= {{BotW}} |
||
| + | |other= |
||
| + | |req= Any [[Weapons in Breath of the Wild|Weapon]] |
||
| + | |uses= |
||
| + | |comp= |
||
| + | }} |
||
| + | '''Urbosa's Fury''' is an ability in {{BotW}}. |
||
| + | ==Overview== |
||
| − | == Protected Pages Requiring Editing == |
||
| + | [[Link]] receives Urbosa's Fury from [[Urbosa]] after defeating [[Thunderblight Ganon]] and completing the [[Divine Beast Vah Naboris (Dungeon)|Divine Beast Vah Naboris]] [[Dungeon]].<ref>{{Cite|Please accept this gift, which has come to be known as Urbosa's Fury|Urbosa|BotW}}</ref> Urbosa's Fury allows Link to send off a massive radius of electrical damage to all enemies and [[Boss]]es in the vicinity. It is performed by charging a [[Spin Attack]] with any [[Weapons in Breath of the Wild|weapon]] for a certain amount of time and releasing it. With most weapons, Urbosa's Fury will be ready when the charging sound of the Spin Attack is heard twice. No matter what weapon Link is using, it will take about two seconds to charge. This powerful move can defeat many enemies in one strike and will leave them stunned with electricity should they survive. It can be used to deal damage to a large group of enemies. |
||
| − | ::''This section is to be used to request the editing or correcting of a protected page. Requesting this here is faster and more likely to be noticed by an admin.<br>Note to admins: It would be best to never archive this section.'' |
||
| + | Urbosa performs this ability in the sixth [[Recovered Memory]], when [[Princess Zelda]] is asleep in her arms. She snaps her fingers to create lightning and wake the sleeping Princess. |
||
| − | <s>As you may have noticed from the [[Special:Recentchanges|Recent Changes]], I corrected many links linking to the Twilight Princess disambiguation page. I'm sort of a perfectionist, so I like to be thorough. It was already agreed upon that fixing these links on talk pages and user pages will help those users to remember how to correctly link to the respective page. There are still four pages left to be fixed at [[Special:Whatlinkshere/Twilight Princess|Pages that link to Twilight Princess]]. The one on the talk page stays because it is clearly said that that link is a link to the disambiguation page. But the rest are protected news pages.</s>{{:User:Matt/sig|~}} <span style="color:#C0C0C0;">15:15, July 20, 2008 (UTC)</span> |
||
| + | ==Etymology== |
||
| − | :<s>The two pages in the category [[:Category:Wiki Exclusives|Wiki Exclusives]] need their links to "The Legend of Zelda series" corrected to "The Legend of Zelda (Series)".</s>{{:User:Matt/sig|~}} <span style="color:#C0C0C0;">17:39, August 13, 2008 (UTC)</span> |
||
| + | {{Names |
||
| − | <!-- I think that instead of answering every time, I'll just strike out a request once it's completed. Then we don't have "done" clogging up the section. --> |
||
| + | |align= left |
||
| + | |enBr= |
||
| + | |enBrM= |
||
| + | |ja= |
||
| + | |jaM= |
||
| + | |esS= |
||
| + | |esSM= |
||
| + | |esL= |
||
| + | |esLM= |
||
| + | |frF= Colère d'Urbosa |
||
| + | |frFM= Urbosa's anger |
||
| + | |frC= |
||
| + | |frCM= |
||
| + | |de= |
||
| + | |deM= |
||
| + | |it= |
||
| + | |itM= |
||
| + | |ptP= |
||
| + | |ptPM= |
||
| + | |ptB= |
||
| + | |ptBM= |
||
| + | |nl= |
||
| + | |nlM= |
||
| + | |ru= |
||
| + | |ruM= |
||
| + | |ko= |
||
| + | |koM= |
||
| + | |chT= |
||
| + | |chTM= |
||
| + | |chS= |
||
| + | |chSM= }} |
||
| + | {{Ref}} |
||
| − | Too many new users sign their posts wrong. They do something like this: |
||
| − | ::<b><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></b><b><i>Username</i></b><br> |
||
| − | No offense to anyone that has done this, but I'm getting sick of explaining it every time. One solution is to edit this [[MediaWiki:Talkpagetext|page]] and add detail instructions on how not to make this mistake. We could use bold letters, underlining, bright and contrasting colors, etc. to make it impossible not to notice it.{{:User:Matt/sig|~}} <span style="color:#C0C0C0;">22:09, September 21, 2008 (UTC)</span> |
||
| − | |||
| − | :I think the article's '''Talk Page''' is used a lot more then this. {{:User:Austin/sig}} 13:47, 7 April 2009 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | ==Copyright Question== |
||
| − | When looking for pictures, can I just get them off of various sites via google or do I have to ''own'' them by scaninng or etc? [[User:Sephiner Shaeld|Sephiner Shaeld]] 22:43, 11 February 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | :You can get them off of any site you like, provided you license them correctly. Also note that any site with images under the Creative Commons license may not be used, as we are under the GNU Free Document License, and the two licenses are not compatible. Other than that, you're fine. :){{:User:Neo/sig}} 14:55, 12 February 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | ==Definition of 'Race'== |
||
| − | When defining the races of Hyrule, what requirements does a race candidate need to meet. I mean, do they need to be able to speak? If so, the [[Gibdo]]s from [[The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask|''Majora's Mask'']] must be a 'race' as if Link puts on the [[Gibdo Mask]] it is possible to converse with them. {{:User:GerudoValley}} 11:31, Feb 12, 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | == Is there a category on lore? == |
||
| − | At the moment im desperate to find some zelda lore that doesnt involve any information about the gameplay and such, im pretty sure i once was on a lore page on this wiki, but now i cant find it? Please help ^_^ [[User:Tar-kynd|Tar-kynd]] 22:29, 5 March 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | :Not sure what exactly you mean, is there any thing you can think of that would be an example? {{:User:Axiomist/sig}} 20:43, 6 March 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | ==***The Fate of the Theory Sections in Articles***== |
||
| − | This could potentially be the largest project to face the wiki in some time. There has been conversation off-wiki between myself and a bunch of other users, including admins, about how to more beneficially present the theory portions of articles to the average viewer on the wiki, as in their present form, they are all scattered on the individual articles they relate to and nothing more. While this current system does keep relevant theory on each page, it hardly aids in connecting related theories together in one place in the way forums and other avenues of conversation do - creating a linear progression of such a theory so that one can follow the length and proof from beginning to end, instead of in useless, unsupported fragments as we currently have. |
||
| − | |||
| − | '''The proposal is to create a "theory portal" of sorts similar to ZeldaWiki.org's Help Guide, with a nav, in which one can not only locate an individual theory going from general categories to specific ones, but it interlocks all theory into one area, keeping it all centralized and interconnected, as theory should be.''' |
||
| − | |||
| − | For example: '''Theories Portal (the main page) >>> Race-Specific Theories (subpage) >>> Zora (heading) >>> Rito/Zora Evolution in TWW''' |
||
| − | |||
| − | It would be highly organized, keep theories off of factual wiki main pages, and provide a central source for the Mastermind sites and users to circulate popular theories, as this wiki for a long time has been the central hub of popular, referenced postulates - our theory pages are amongst the highest-viewed on the site. Take the [[Zelda Timeline]] sub-series of articles for example. It is a small, similar version of what this plan will aim to accomplish. While the consolidation of theory across the wiki may appear to be a daunting task, I believe we will be able to pull a project such as this off. |
||
| − | |||
| − | Secondly, if this proposal is to go through, it would be best to move this to the '''Community Namespace''', as theory in particular is quite possibly the most definitive aspect of The Legend of Zelda to fans in the community, aside from actually playing the games. Not only would this move generate a traffic boost to the Mastermind sites and respective pages here on ZW.org (as they make up the community), these pages can link to the forums on those sites in order to provide the most encompassing look on Zelda theorizing possible - an aspect of the current setup that is not possible/reasonable given the amount of theory scatter across the wiki. |
||
| − | |||
| − | All in all, centralizing theory on the wiki would not only keep theory off the factual mainspace and into its own, focused portal, but keep it organized and provide easy navigation to related and interconnected elements. As we are still discussing this proposal, we'd like to see discussion below. Cheers! {{:User:Cipriano 119/sig}} 19:45, 18 April 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | :I came up with this idea a few days ago after we had difficulty with the way theories are organized. Cip's organization of it seems far better than the way I was thinking, though, and I really must applaud this. What do you guys all think about it? The logic of course is that since theories are the most controversial of topics, they cause the most edit wars. If we do this, it will at least keep the theories off of our high-traffic pages such as the game pages, so that way readers won't end up confused by constant reverts which make the articles change every minute. This way will at least provide us with pages which will be less-viewed, so that we don't look indecisive and change our main pages constantly. All in all, it's the concern for our readers which drove me to seek this out. While this won't get rid of edit wars, it will still allow us to organize the theories in a better manner and deal with complications as they arise. In addition, it could also stop them, as they would describe the theories themselves, and with theories off of the main articles, no one can argue over what theory is more plausible for the page. I hope you all seriously consider this before shooting it down, because it's had a lot of thought put into it. I'm eager to hear your opinions!{{:User:Neo/sig}} 20:09, 18 April 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | ::Sad but true, this isn't up to the regular editors discretion. The last time the staff took a vote we didn't reach a majority decision, so the theories stayed. This was before getting a massive public endorsement specifically related to theories. Adding "See Also" is what you do when sections aren't able to present other related details to the subject matter. The precedent that removing the theories could apply to any other populist choices such as collapsing spoilers, removing references, etc. Let's face it more people come around to add theories than references. So by that logic we could eliminate the reference sections. As far as changes on Mainspace pages, well it's a wiki, not a static article site. The problem begins with edit wars and the spectators jumping in-circling the same facts over and over and little to no mediating being done. Disputes are going to happen- wikis are projects aiming for an end result. Forums and the like can frown on disputes because they are conversation and community gathering places. The disputes on wikis need to be settled and compromised on to reach a satisfactory conclusion to all parties. Sorry, but that's just how it is. The wiki might be the wrong place for those who think otherwise. {{:User:Axiomist/sig}} 22:53, 18 April 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | :::I feel you're missing the point, Ax. It's not about total elimination of theory. We're just moving it to a theory-inclusive area, where it is all centralized, relevant, but yet still on the wiki for all to see. In truth, the reason for this is not to stop edit wars and not to eliminate indecisiveness, as that stuff is going to happen regardless, but to get the theory into an easily navigable area of ''only theory'' so that the facutal portion and the speculative portion of this wiki stays separate, as I believe it should be. I think that's a more realsitic proposal. {{:User:Cipriano 119/sig}} 04:47, 19 April 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | == Real World Weapons == |
||
| − | |||
| − | Where was the page on the Zelda weapons used in the real world? Thank you. [[User:WolfLink|WolfLink]] 18:31, 23 April 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | :I believe you mean this page: |
||
| − | [[Zelda Wiki.org:Zelda Weapons in the Middle Ages|Zelda Weapons in the Middle Ages]]. |
||
| − | |||
| − | Other wiki exclusives can be found here: |
||
| − | |||
| − | http://zeldawiki.org/Category:Wiki_Exclusives |
||
| − | |||
| − | Hope that was helpful. :) [[User:Dany36|Dany36]] 19:35, 23 April 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | == Featured Voting Reform! == |
||
| − | |||
| − | Alright guys, well, I'm not sure if users get a say in big changes such as these in the wiki, but I figured it was worth a shot. We tried to change it before, but we only got as far as allowing ANYONE with an account to vote, so why not try again? |
||
| − | |||
| − | The thing is that Featured Voting for both Featured Articles and Featured Pictures has become stagnant, and I, along with several other users and admins, feel that a change in the Featured Voting rules is much needed. I mean, we have vague statements in the Featured Content Disqualification pages stating that "if something has had a score of -3 for a '''sufficient amount of time''', it will be replaced with the new content. If something has had a score of +4 for '''at least a week''', it will be considered a Failed Disqualification." Just what exactly is "sufficient amount of time" is left up for much debate, and the fact that the next sentence states that only a week is needed for something to be classified as a failed disqualification isn't very consistent at all. It is also very worrisome that some pictures, such as [[:File:TRR_Art.png|this]], and some articles, such as [[Twinrova]], have been sitting in the featured nomination pages for OVER A YEAR. |
||
| − | |||
| − | So pretty much the major change we're asking for is a TIME LIMIT. If a nominated article has more supportive votes than opposed votes for at least 6 months, it will become featured. If a nominated picture has more supportive votes than opposed votes for at least 3 months, it will become featured. We feel that having a time limit might promote users to vote. Say something gets featured that they don't like, they'll oppose it so that it won't get featured just because it's been sitting there with all supportive votes. |
||
| − | |||
| − | Of course, this is just a rough draft of what we thought up, and it's obvious that it's subject to change if other users feel that the proposed time limit is insufficient or not to their liking. It's simple: the more input we get, the more polished these new policy/policies will be. So let's see what we can do about this, and let's not let this one die like other proposals, folks! (That is, if users get to have a say in this at all, which I think they should because it's THEIR wiki ;) [[User:Dany36|Dany36]] 04:16, 10 May 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | :Considering the Featured Nomination pages have become solemn graveyards for good articles lately, this is a breath of fresh air. Thing is, I'm not convinced that even a time limit will encourage users to vote more. The only thing I can see happening is more and more articles not having enough votes at the end of a "time limit", and then what? The majority of support and opposition determines what is featured and what is not? What if there is 2 support and 2 opposing, what makes or breaks the deal at the end of the time period? It's still a bit fuzzy to me. |
||
| − | :The only thing that I can see working to get Featured Nominations voted for successfully and frequently is ''some sort of incentive for doing so on the part of the user''. I know we had considered the '''Barnstar award system''' that Wikipedia uses for user involvement and accomplishments, but I don't know what happened with that; I could see that as viable. Maybe '''restricting the types of pages a user can edit until they've voted''', such as the more heavily visited pages like [[Hyrule]] or [[Ganon]]? I think the answer here lies outside of time limits and such, as that seems like an avenue that may fall apart just as the way we are currently doing things is. {{:User:Cipriano 119/sig}} 05:03, 10 May 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | ::Well, Cip, I'm afraid that restricting page editing with voting is a little extreme. Incentives should be something positive, not a lifted restriction. That goes against the wiki philosophy, in my opinion.{{:User:Justin/sig}} 22:02, 12 May 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | == Founder == |
||
| − | So who made the wiki? {{User:Minda of Darkness/sig}} |
||
| − | |||
| − | Nevermind. [[User:Jason|Found it.]] {{User:Minda of Darkness/sig}} |
||
| − | |||
| − | == Japanese names == |
||
| − | |||
| − | Alright, it's time to settle this once and for all. The guidelines in Zelda Wiki.org's Quality Standards state the following: |
||
| − | |||
| − | :''Zelda Wiki.org is an '''English-language wiki, based in the United States of America,''' which sets a few standards for language:'' |
||
| − | |||
| − | :''All content is to be written in formal American English, not British English, Australian English or any other variation of the English language. |
||
| − | |||
| − | :Even though the games of the Zelda series are originally published in Japanese, '''the translations and localizations of Nintendo of America are taken to be canon at Zelda Wiki.org.''' |
||
| − | |||
| − | :'''''Articles are to be named''' and written, and games quoted, '''using Nintendo of America’s translations.''''' |
||
| − | |||
| − | :''Although the original Japanese can greatly differ from the English translations, '''these differences are not to be mentioned or noted in the main body of the article, however, significant differences can be mentioned in the trivia section of the article.''''' |
||
| − | |||
| − | Having said that, let me bring up some articles that have been merged with the basis that Nintendo of America made some "translation mistakes", specifically, saying that "Volvagia" was "Barba". This lead to the merger of those two pages into one page: [[Volvagia]], with the relevant talk page discussion found [[Talk:Volvagia#Merge Discussion|here]]. Note that at the bottom of that discussion, Steve said that the merger contradicted our policy, and that if this was to be ignored, then a change in the policy was needed. But no one replied to Steve's claim and well, here we are almost a year later after the merge has been done so that we can actually discussing this matter. |
||
| − | |||
| − | Now, I supported the merger because...ahem...I didn't know the above policy existed. More recently another page has been merged in the same sort of basis: that Wart is the Japanese name for [[Arrghus]]. So what I'm pretty much asking is...are these merges going to be allowed despite that they go against our policy? Or are we going to change the policy to go along with the above merges? [[User:Dany36|Dany36]] 20:42, 30 June 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | :I have no problem using Japanese titles/quotes over the English translations. However, many other pages follow the policy we have in place, and more pages will need merging, splitting and moving, especially ''A Link to the Past'', which will need to be moved to the original Japanese title: ''Triforce of the Gods''.{{:User:Steven/sig}} 20:45, 30 June 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | ::We have a mostly English audience, and most of them from North America. Most of our audience is only going to be aware of the NoA versions of the games. Mixing up with too much of the original Japanese is just going to confuse the readers and hurt our search results. We should stay with the original policy.{{:User:Matt/sig|~}} 20:50, June 30, 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | :::Matt makes a good point. It really doesn't matter to me, but as Steve said, we need to keep things consistent, not have some merged by the Japanese and others separate by the English. {{:User:Triforce of the Gods/sig}} 20:56, 30 June 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | ::::Yeah, I say we go for consistency. We shouldn't have some articles using the Japanese names and others using the American names. That's rather confusing. So, we should probably just stick with the current policy. {{:User:Mandi/sig}} 21:04, June 30, 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | :The aim should only be to prevent info about a same character or item to be scattered around different articles. For cases like the name of ''Triforce of the Gods'', as it has been adaptated for the non-Japanese version as ''A Link to the Past'' and hasn't appear under a different name yet for those areas, the name should remain ''A Link to the Past'' in accordance with the current policy. Now from one game to another, translators choose either to adapt names, to translate them, or to stick with the original ones: I think that if an item is the same but only its adaptation name change, the most commonly used name in the American version should be used to name the article about this item instead of having it split into different pages for each of its name. [[User:Jeangabin|Jeangabin]] 08:20, 1 July 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | ::I'd really like it if we could come to a conclusion about this. So far, Matt and Mandi would like to stay with the original policy (which is also my view on this), Steve and Triforce are just asking for consistency, and Jeangabin's stance is sort of...split. Any more comments or suggestions are appreciated, guys! [[User:Dany36|Dany36]] 22:29, 5 July 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | :::Gonna have to agree with Dany. These merges are a little strange and contradictory to policy. I personally support upholding the current policy, as it is tailored towards our main audience and has been in existence for some time.{{:User:Justin/sig}} 04:54, 7 July 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | :The problem is that a lot of "english" names are not official. A lot of them, mainly those from the earliest games in the series (AoL, ALttP), are fanon comming from popular websites. [[User:Jeangabin|Jeangabin]] 09:04, 11 July 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | ::Same for ''Phantom Hourglass'' and ''Spirit Tracks''. [[User:Jeangabin|Jeangabin]] 12:04, 12 July 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | :::This is a tricky one. =\ But if I could add my two cents, I'd say this: We merged a page because Wart is the Japanese name for Arrghus-- who cares if that's the Japanese name? It's not the ''English'' name, and it's an English wiki. I understand what Jeangabin is saying, about unofficial English names from fansites, and that's problematic, too. Because we can say, "Hey, this name isn't official, so we shouldn't have it," but if everyone is ''used'' to that name, despite the fact that it's unofficial, it's going to damage search results and confuse some people. So... I guess what I'm saying is that I think, if it's officially a different name in-game in English than it is in Japanese, we need to leave it the way it is in English. Trivia sections can mention differences (like the policy stated in the first place) but the fact is NoA represents Nintendo here in the states and we just have to put up with their "errors." As far as fansite names... that one is a little trickier. {{:User:Embyr 75/sig}} 14:34, 12 July 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | ==Italian Names== |
||
| − | Good evening! I'm an Italian guy. I can contribute to Zelda Wiki, if you want, by adding the Italian versions of the names of characters and places. I've done it already with Anjean, but I figured out some characters (such as Rutela and Impaz, for example) don't have the proper name translations' box in their page. Any suggestion? Thanks. {{:user:PrinceDesiré}} 19:30, 2 July 2010 |
||
| − | |||
| − | :Suggestions? Just be bold when editing pages. Most of them have a template where foreign names can be deposited. Look for the ''Italian'' field and put the name there. Cheers. --[[User:K2L|K2L]] 23:54, 2 July 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | ::Yes, I know. I was referring to those pages which don't have the template you mentioned at all. {{:user:PrinceDesiré}} 12:11, 3 July 2010 |
||
| − | |||
| − | :::All pages should have the template. If one doesn't, then just add it.{{:User:Matt/sig|~}} 15:23, July 3, 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | ::::Just in case, if you don't know how to add the template to pages, just paste the blank code found on this page: |
||
| − | |||
| − | ::::http://zeldawiki.org/Template:Names |
||
| − | |||
| − | ::::at the bottom of the pages, below the references but above the rest of the templates. And of COURSE we want you to help! :) Any help is appreciated, whether it's adding names in other regions or making small fixes to pages. Happy editing! :D [[User:Dany36|Dany36]] 22:25, 5 July 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | == My custom monobook isn't working == |
||
| − | |||
| − | So, today I made my own monobook (well, not on my own), but I saved the page and all I'm seeing is the standard skin. I even previewed it to make sure I did everything right. Anyone know what went wrong? My monobook is [[User:Minda of Darkness/monobook.css|here]] and it looks like [http://i31.tinypic.com/vg0rc6.png this]. Can anybody tell me what went wrong? {{User:Minda of Darkness/sig|pretty please?}} |
||
| − | :Uhm...that looks like it's working. The normal skin looks NOTHING like that :P{{:User:Justin/sig}} 00:23, 26 July 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | ::But when I save, it changes back to the normal skin. {{User:Minda of Darkness/sig|graaaar.}} |
||
| − | |||
| − | == Spirit Temple Boss Key == |
||
| − | |||
| − | Do you even use the Boss Key collected in the [[Spirit Temple]]? |
||
| − | --[[User:DBekuFcrub999|Dekus Rule]] 23:01, 28 July 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | ==Question for WZMR Radio== |
||
| − | |||
| − | idk who to contact for a request on different zelda songs or how to enter one of the contests or how {{{nosig|Vampireangels|19:33, July 30, 2010}} |
||
| − | |||
| − | :I believe that the e-mail address you'd wish to write to is '''''alpha_link@wzmrradio.com'''''. In the future, I recommend that you direct your inquiries regarding this topip to the actual WZMR staff members. You can find their site [http://wzmrradio.com/ here], but I should warn you that it's currently being rebuilt. {{:User:Alter/sig}} <span style="color: #FFFFFF;">03:51, July 31, 2010 (UTC)</span> |
||
| − | |||
| − | == Possessive Form of Proper Nouns That Already Have an S at the End == |
||
| − | |||
| − | I just edited a page to say "Gor Liggs's son" instead of "Gor Link's son," as "Gor Link" is not the name of the character being referenced. I was wondering if ZW had a standard convention to follow in the case of a proper noun that ends with an S. Whether to add an apostrophe followed by an S or to add only the apostrophe is a stylistic decision for the one writing it, and both meathods are accepted. As such, I was wondering if ZW, in standard practice, would write it as "Gor Liggs's son" or just "Gor Liggs' son." |
||
| − | |||
| − | I personally tend to add both the apostrophe and the S, but if that goes against the standard here, I'll gladly refrain from doing so here on the wiki. --[[User:Nosh|Nosh]] 01:29, 10 August 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | |||
| − | :I do not believe that there is currently a policy regarding that matter. At Zelda Wiki, we usually tend to make these sorts of policy decisions at times like this; as the need arises. I do agree that a conclusion here needs to be drawn in order for the Wiki to remain consistent with itself. In all honesty, I have no personal preference. I usually go with adding the apostrophe to the end of the "S", without adding in another "S", as to cut down the size; it doesn't doesn't really strike me either way. However, I'm sure some of the people here will have '''very''' strong opinions. What saith the others here, hmm? {{:User:Alter/sig}} <span style="color: #FFFFFF;">06:10, August 10, 2010 (UTC)</span> |
||
| − | ::I usually add the apostrophe without adding another "S". Some users prefer to add an "S". [[User:Jeangabin|Jeangabin]] 07:59, 10 August 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | :::My only worry is that, given the oddity of the names seen in the Zelda universe, something like Gor Liggs could be confused with a pluralised surname, especially if it ends with only the apostrophe. Adding the apostrophe as well as the S clarifies that Gor Liggs is singular, and that it isn't referencing an entire family named "Gor Ligg." --[[User:Nosh|Nosh]] 17:28, 10 August 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | |||
| − | ==Game Review Placements== |
||
| − | Is there a place where I can place a review for any of the games? I wanna write one for Spirit Tracks. If not, could you direct me to a site that will? ---F4{[Domino29]} 21:39, 12 August 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | |||
| − | :Zelda Wiki isn't the place for game reviews seeing as we are not a forum. However, you are welcomed to write a review on your userpage.{{:User:Mandi/sig}} 02:10, August 13, 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | |||
| − | :In the future, be sure to click the little plus sign at the top of the page to add a new section for your question. What you've done is posted in a section I created for a different question. {{:User:Nosh/sig}} 23:20, 12 August 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | |||
| − | ::Whoopsies. Thanks tho :P ---F4{[Domino29]} 00:05, 13 August 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | |||
| − | :::Or, Nosh, you could have created the section yourself... Anyway, done. :) {{:User:Alter/sig}} <span style="color: #FFFFFF;">04:36, August 13, 2010 (UTC)</span> |
||
| − | ::::I'll keep that in mind for the future. I wasn't sure if that would be overstepping my bounds or something. I only joined about 2 days ago, so I wasn't sure. Thanks. {{:User:Nosh/sig}} 00:45, 13 August 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | |||
| − | == Wiki Exclusive Articles == |
||
| − | |||
| − | How and where do I go about submitting a Wiki Exclusive article? Do I just create a page, or does it need to be peer reviewed before it becomes official? The latest draft of my article is near the top of my user page, if you need it. Thanks! [[User:Bpenguin17|Bpenguin17]] 20:06, 21 August 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | :Hi Bpenguin! Everything you need to know on how to submit Wiki Exclusives can be found [[Help:WikiExclusives|here]]. Hope that helps! =) {{:User:Embyr 75/sig}} 23:26, 21 August 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | |||
| − | == Polls == |
||
| − | |||
| − | Where can I find the poll section on this wiki? [[User:Link1017|Link1017]]--[[User:Link1017|Link1017]] 19:16, 22 August 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | :Um...we don't have polls. The closest thing we have to that is our [[Zelda Wiki.org:Featured Article Nomination|featured article]] and [[Zelda Wiki.org:Featured Picture Nomination|featured picture]] nominations. Sorry!{{:User:Justin/sig}} 13:47, 23 August 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | ::If you are looking for some poll action, hit up any of the forums of the sites listed in '''the masterminds''' section of the toolbar on the left side of the screen. These sites are connected to the wiki through their webmasters, and believe me, there's a thick bath of polls and forum topics to swim through on those sites! {{:User:Cipriano 119/sig}} 16:45, 23 August 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | |||
| − | == Locating Pages that Need Attention == |
||
| − | |||
| − | I was wondering if there was a way to quickly get a list of all pages that are flagged as "Need Attention" or are otherwise flagged as needing content updates? I want to be able to help expand, edit, and rewrite pages that need help with content, not technical issues. I'm not comfortable enough with Wiki editing yet to tackle those yet. Is it under one of the catagories in Special Pages? None of those jumped out at me as what I was looking for. Thanks! |
||
| − | :Take a look at this [http://zeldawiki.org/Category:Articles_needing_attention category]. I think it will have what you're looking for and more. Whenever someone tags a page with the Improve, stub, or any other "needs attention" template, the article is herded into this category for easy navigation. {{:User:Cipriano 119/sig}} 08:54, 24 August 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | ::Ahh, perfect! Thanks. Now to see if I can get some of these fixed. [[User:Tbiz|Tbiz]] 15:59, 24 August 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | |||
| − | == Email Update Notifications == |
||
| − | |||
| − | Hello, sorry if I'm doing this wrong I never planned on posting! I would like to know if there is a way to get an email update every time there is a new article featured on the home page. Since this site collects information from many others, it would give us a one-stop-shop sort of way to receive news from the websites you collaborate with! If there is not a feature such as this, and I have looked and not found it, can you please enable email update notifications for just the front page? Thank you! --lozhealmysoul 22:39, 27 August 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | |||
| − | == SSBB userbox == |
||
| − | |||
| − | Hi! Just wanted to let you know, that Pit, my favorite character, is missing from the "This user likes to play as..." userbox. I noticed that R.O.B., Zero Suit Samus, Snake, and Pokémon Trainer are missing, too. [[User:Bpenguin17|Bpenguin17]] 12:57, 30 August 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | |||
| − | == Templates == |
||
| − | There's a couple of templates, like the spoiler and non-canon ones, that, imo, fail to perform their function. They are not clear enough to not be missed upon page scanning, but they are clear enough to make the page look sloppy. I have a very limited knowledge of wiki programming, but I was wondering if it is possible to design templates to look like an in-game sign by throwing in a gamerip image or so. I think that would make the template much more noticeable (not to mention, fitting). |
||
| − | |||
| − | Another thing I've noticed in regards to templates is the randomness of the spoiler template, and I would like to see a unified system for it. My proposal is this: Since this is a wiki, a place of information, it should be assumed people come here to get information. If they don't want to find spoilers, the responsibility to avoid them (i.e., quit reading) lies with them and shouldn't go at the cost of the pages' layout. That said, a little consideration is to be expected from a fan community project. Hence, my proposal is that every page that needs to be updated because of a new game receives a spoiler template atop the page (stating which game) that stays there for the duration of half a year after the last original release (a game's European release most likely. A rerelease won't reinforce/bring back the template. A remake would only get a template on the pages containing changed content). I figure that by half a year, those who care about not being spoiled will have either already bought and played the game or gotten their info from the many fan communities, if they frequent the interwebs for TLOZ at all. Thoughts? [[User:IfIHaveTo|IfIHaveTo]] 07:06, 2 September 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | :I thought the same thing about the spoilers: if someone doesn't want to find spoilers about something, it is his responsibility to not go on the subject's wiki page. [[User:Jeangabin|Jeangabin]] 07:43, 2 September 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | ::That format is what all other wikis use. So obviously it works well enough. HOWEVER, I'm all for us being unique rather than following the pack. So I've made a new layout for such notices, found [[Template:Notice|here]]. Being obtrusive is kind of the idea with these templates, they're supposed to be. I think this way is considerably more noticeable than the old way. I'll apply it to three of the big notices right now.{{:User:Matt/sig|~}} 23:38, September 2, 2010 (UTC) |
||
| − | :::I am aware of the usage of the templates' old form on other wikis, and I'm not a fan of them there either. Your new design is much, much better. Thanks! [[User:IfIHaveTo|IfIHaveTo]] 01:40, 3 September 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | :Holy crap, I'm loving the new templates!! They are so roundy and awesome. :') [[User:Dany36|Dany36]] 11:54, 3 September 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | |||
| − | == Disambiguation rules == |
||
| − | Apparently I have caused some... consternation by moving "King Zora" to "King Zora (Ocarina Of Time)". I haven't been able to locate any disambiguation rules on this wiki, so assuming they don't exist (and if they do exist, this is still gonna be relevant), I'd like to discuss our options for the best possible system. What I think will work best is if disambiguation titles are going to be about the first appearance of the subject. |
||
| − | |||
| − | The advantages are that there is virtually no chance the first choice disamb titles won't do, as I don't recall an instance in which one game introduced two things with the same name. Nor do I ever expect this to happen. Secondly, a chosen disamb title has no chance of ever needing revising. For instance, I wouldn't be surprised if TWW Missy or TP Fado would return in the series. If disamb'ed by first appearance, nothing has to be moved. |
||
| − | |||
| − | I'm guessing some people might object to this because they feel it might be confusing for the visitors that they have to look for "King Zora (Ocarina Of Time)" to find the guy from OOA. True, but how much more easy would it be for them to do guess work as to where the page they are looking for could be located? I'm not much for making problems look larger than they are: if "King Zora (Ocarina Of Time)" were to be moved to, say, "King Zora (sea Zora)", it would be one of the very few cases in which disambs have to get creative. It is also not as if people won't be able to find the page at all, since "King Zora" itself should provide the proper redirects anyway. But my belief is that this is overcomplicating matters. Disamb'ing by initial appearance provides a clear, almost flawless answer to any disamb case. For that matter, I'd also like to point out it's a mistake to believe a disamb title has to be informative, as some people think. If all is coded well, only the page itself should display the disamb title, which should only be chosen on practical grounds to provide the most consistency. |
||
| − | |||
| − | The only page I could think of right now that, while it'd work, should arguably not be disamb'ed this way is Link (Goron), because the difference in the levels of fame among the fandom between him and the Hero of Time is rather huge. [[User:IfIHaveTo|IfIHaveTo]] 10:54, 4 September 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | |||
| − | :No one seems to be commenting on this, so I will. Personally, I think things were fine the way they were. I don't like the idea simply because the title contradicts the content of the page. But hey, what do I know? Maybe the Quality Standards page should be updated? Try writing something on [[User:Adam|Adam]]'s or [[User:Jason|Jason]]'s talk page, since it seems they do most of the editing around the Quality Standards. [[User:Hylian King|Hylian King]] 07:31, 7 September 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | |||
| − | ==Bunch of questions== |
||
| − | As the header says: |
||
| − | |||
| − | # The above "disambiguation rules" matter. Any has an opinion? |
||
| − | # Can anyone tell how to get an image to function as a link to a page? |
||
| − | # I've noticed a lot of pages have trivia items that mention a likeness between two subjects that I find highly... nonexistent. Either because the likeness is not there or because there is no reason at all to assume the subjects have anything to do with each other (like the Garo and the Subrosians). Are there any quality standards for adding such content? |
||
| − | # In the same vein, a good number of pages have items in the trivia section such as "this is the only out of three that does..." How relevant is such information? What value has the observation that dungeon X is the only dungeon that cannot by entered before doing Y or is one out of only two dungeons that has the entrance on the left or some such details? |
||
| − | # The canon policy of the wiki... It's unclear, its consequences are unclear and its reasons are unclear. Anybody'd feel insulted if I'd try to work out a new policy and present it for consideration instead of discussing a new one? [[User:IfIHaveTo|IfIHaveTo]] 16:08, 15 September 2010 (EDT) |
||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | ::Well.... First off, I edited your post there so it would have proper line breaks and formatting so people can read it. Here's what I have to say: |
||
| − | ::# Not currently my place. Someone will get to it. |
||
| − | ::# You're looking for [[Template:ImageLink]]. |
||
| − | ::# It sort of says it in [[Zelda Wiki.org:Quality Standards#Theories in Articles|Theories in Articles]], but it's not clearly clarified that Trivia is not a place for theories. We may need to make a separate set of standards just for trivia. |
||
| − | ::# See #3. |
||
| − | ::# Can't see how more clarification can hurt. It was put together in a short time frame. But we can't get too specific if we are to remain in a neutral point of view. |
||
| − | ::There's what I can say on that so far.{{:User:Matt/sig|~}} 21:41, September 15, 2010 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 22:09, 21 April 2017
Template:Ability Urbosa's Fury is an ability in Breath of the Wild.
Overview
Link receives Urbosa's Fury from Urbosa after defeating Thunderblight Ganon and completing the Divine Beast Vah Naboris Dungeon.[1] Urbosa's Fury allows Link to send off a massive radius of electrical damage to all enemies and Bosses in the vicinity. It is performed by charging a Spin Attack with any weapon for a certain amount of time and releasing it. With most weapons, Urbosa's Fury will be ready when the charging sound of the Spin Attack is heard twice. No matter what weapon Link is using, it will take about two seconds to charge. This powerful move can defeat many enemies in one strike and will leave them stunned with electricity should they survive. It can be used to deal damage to a large group of enemies.
Urbosa performs this ability in the sixth Recovered Memory, when Princess Zelda is asleep in her arms. She snaps her fingers to create lightning and wake the sleeping Princess.
Etymology
 Names in Other Regions 
| |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Language | Name | Meaning | |
 |
FrenchEU | Colère d'Urbosa | Urbosa's anger |
References
- ↑ "Please accept this gift, which has come to be known as Urbosa's Fury" — Urbosa (Breath of the Wild)