Isn't the Crimson Loftwing a species of Loftwings? I mean, I know it is, so why do we have it written as if it is a character? Soldier Flame 16:21, November 27, 2011 (UTC)

Should this page have a theories section. I know a lot of people, myself included, who believe this Loftwing to be the red bird depicted on the Hylian Shield's version of the royal crest. --My function is not my purpose. My purpose is to complete my function. ~Xi 04:06, December 27, 2011 (UTC)

I think that this bird is the red king... like the boat in windwaker it looks exactly the same i mean com'on and its also used for transportation!

Hey, Soldier Flame this is a comment to ur comment. It is the only Crmson Loftwing in the game, so it wouldn't be neccessary to write it as a race. --Spirit Zelda (talk) Ghost Zelda 18:05, October 25, 2013 (UTC)

Relation to Hylian Shield

So people note that Link's Loftwing may have been the basis for the Hylian Shield's design, but if the design already existed in Skyward Sword, then that would mean the theory is wrong, isn't it?--Zakitaro (talk) 05:11, August 21, 2015 (UTC)

No it does not the only time the shield is seen in the game is when you get it from an OPTIONAL mini-game that is run by a powerful dragon in an area where localized time travel is a thing. He very well could have copied the shield from the future or the shield was added as an optional item because Skyward Sword is the 25th anniversary of the series and the Hylain Shield is Link's most iconic and famous shield. Sonamyfan666 a Amy Rose Expert and fan (talk) 05:16, August 21, 2015 (UTC)

That's not consistent in the game. Is there a quote that even hints that? Even if it is optional, the plot does count those things as canon. It's the same thing with other stuff like the leveled up Master Sword or the Fierce Deity Mask. The item itself is in the game, so it's part of that world.--Zakitaro (talk) 05:21, August 21, 2015 (UTC)

Where did you hear them say that it's canon for it being in the game the only one that you have anyground on is the Fierce Deity Mask as their are ending scenes in Majora's Mask for every mask but that one. Just because something COULD exist doesn't mean it DOSE exist. That's a big problem with optional stuff in games the canonicty of it is heavily in question unless someone in charge says yes that actually happened in the series or a later game brings it up as being canon. Sonamyfan666 a Amy Rose Expert and fan (talk) 05:26, August 21, 2015 (UTC)

By being in the game, it already is canon. If it wasn't canon, then why would they even add it in the first place? For example, you don't encounter some person because you didn't do a side quest. Does that make them non canon to the story?--Zakitaro (talk) 05:29, August 21, 2015 (UTC)

No being in a game doesn't make it canon take games with multiply-endings but sequels some choices or paths aren't canon to the later canon games as such those events while in the game didn't actually happen. A good example is Resident Evil 2 Leon A and Claire B is non-canon but is in the game while Claire A and Leon B is the canon events. Just because an event or item is in the game doesn't mean it happens. Sonamyfan666 a Amy Rose Expert and fan (talk) 05:32, August 21, 2015 (UTC)

Why are you comparing it with something like that? It's not even a Nintendo thing. This is not coming together. Would someone help out with this talk?--Zakitaro (talk) 05:38, August 21, 2015 (UTC)

To show you that just because something is in the game doesn't make it canon doesn't matter if it's a different company that made it it's still a video game. Sonamyfan666 a Amy Rose Expert and fan (talk) 05:41, August 21, 2015 (UTC)

I'm putting this conversation on hold before this becomes basic bickering. The wiki itself takes an event in the game as canon generally unless something contradicts it later on. As the Hylian Shield is non-contradictory, we tend to take that Link receiving it as canon to the story. As for the Loftwing side of this, I'd venture that the shield's inclusion in the game is directly influenced by the Crimson Loftwing being in the game. They made a new shield that would be the most ornate (the Sacred Shield) of the shield for sale, but they decided to put the Hylian Shield in the game anyways. It's a clear design choice and most artists are generally aware of the fact of implying through design.
On the other hand, there is a choice quote by sifting through a text dump that reads: "This dragon possesses a legendary shield. It is truly one of its most prized treasures. It is said that the Thunder Dragon delights in testing those with promise in the hopes of someday finding a worthy recipient for the shield. But the dragon is a wily one. And his test is not as simple as it may appear!" I'm not sure who said this (it's under a section called "MountainF3", I'd venture a guess and say it's Eldin). This quote seems to support the argument that an absurdly sturdy shield (as Lanayru refers to it) existed prior to the events of the game. It should be noted that the quote does not imply what the shield looks like or that if it's designs existed when the shield did. Designs of the all the shield are altered over the course of the game (through upgrading at the Scrap Shop), so it's not like the concept of altering a shield's design doesn't exist in-universe.
I'd say it's worthy of at least a theory section with everything I've noted really (excluding the real life design choice stuff, not really a part of theories in general). Although, it is wrong to assume that it being in the game makes it canonical of existing prior. The theory goes off the fact that a bird of similar design appears in its earliest incarnation. As far as theories on this wiki go, this is one of the more solid ones. - McGillivray227 05:54, August 21, 2015 (UTC)
That's the reason why I asked for someone else to join this talk page, as I have written above. Anyways though, I'm not really sure I understand what your trying to tell us about Lanayru and his former shield. The shield itself is quite likely referring to the Hylian Shield, which existed before the events of Skyward Sword (in a manner of speaking), so how is it a solid theory?--Zakitaro (talk) 09:32, August 21, 2015 (UTC)
The point I was trying to make is that an absurdly sturdy shield did exist prior to the game's start. This would be factual. It could be posed, however, that the absurdly sturdy shield was designless and that the Hylian Shield's design (Triforce + Red Bird) was not on the shield using the Scrap Shop's example of shields' designs altering over the course of the game (see Sacred Shield -> Divine Shield -> Goddess Shield). All theories are going have to hiccups. The quote in this context is one of them. Also, most likely misinterpreted that last bit. Personally, one factual error with a lot of conjecture wouldn't make a theory, in my opinion. As far as wiki theories go, we have some really bad ones (see Stone Tower) that I think are rightly embarrassing as most of the theories boil down to pure conjecture. In comparison, it's more solid that that.
It's also worth noting that when I said we would note everything excluding the real life design choices, I was including the quote (most likely not written out, but referred to). Again, theories have issues all the time and we should point those issues out otherwise it would like a bias towards it. - McGillivray227 12:48, August 21, 2015 (UTC)
Well, wasn't Link's Loftwing just a Crimson Loftwing? Surely there were more before the game's events, and the Hylian Shield was probably designed after them (in-universe). —Ceiling Master 12:59, August 21, 2015 (UTC)
I could get behind this. I'm pretty neutral on the idea of including this, but I'd be okay with it because it seems like an argument could be made. ~Minish (talk) 14:19, August 21, 2015 (UTC)
I didn't really see how that has to do with Link's Loftwing, but if it's based on the species itself, then I suppose it makes sense. If the theory is going to stay, then we should probably note it to be the species rather than just Link's Loftwing.--Zakitaro (talk) 15:47, August 21, 2015 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.