Talk:The Legend of Zelda: Phantom Hourglass/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Setting section in plot

As one that feels this section is not appropriate but won't delete until we talk about it, here's why I think it shouldn't be part of the article. First, there's no evidence that this is the Great Sea. It's a "sea" for sure, but I don't recall any reference to it. Secondly, the parts of the setting that compare how many parts and islands there are is just a bit too much detail for WP; it is important to note that it based on WW, it has small islands in a vast body of water, but this is already covered by other parts of the article. --MASEM 01:59, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

If it's too detailed mabey you should go over to Great Sea (The Legend of Zelda series) and take it up with them (seriously, I want that article deleted too). And there is no evidence that it isn't the great, at the ending linebecks ship was still sailing around. Saying it is or it is not the Great Sea for now is still speculation. Mabey we could just mention in the section that the setting is possibly not the Great Sea.→041744 13:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I saw what you mentioned in the WW talk page about the Great Sea article, and frankly, that article needs to be deleted - there's nothing notable about the Great Sea outside the game to require its own article (and as it is, it's a game guide about what islands can be found there). A subsection in the WW article that the Great Sea sits atop ex-Hyrule is appropriate and other "historical" notes like that, but specific geography info is too much. --MASEM 13:36, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Then tell them not me, I'll back you up if you do.→041744 22:38, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I've put it up for AFD. If anything, the info could be merged to Hyrule or the Wind Waker article, but it can't stand alone. --MASEM 03:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Plot section spoiler tags

I think that some are needed, the plot does have spoilers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.179.19.237 (talk) 04:09, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Plot sections carry implicit spoilers warnings per WP:SPOILER. --MASEM 04:23, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I think we might should remove the section (or put a spoiler warning) on the part where it mentions closing the DS to create the map imprint. That part of the game has been mentioned on several gaming websites as one of the most difficult parts to figure out, and it is reqarding to figure it out on one's own, not because you read the right section on Wikipedia. 71.81.40.16 16:11, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

That, I think, is reasonable - unless you've played a couple other games that use that (Trace Memory, Hotel Dusk) its not obvious and its not in the plot section - its more a puzzle solution than anything else, and (best I could tell) was the only non-standard use of the DS in the game. I've removed it. --MASEM 16:25, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Having examined the removed phrase, it seems to me that it's a description of an innovative game feature and as such should appear in the article. It isn't appropriate to remove such information from articles just because they give the solution or ending away. --Tony Sidaway 16:38, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, the other point that I made is that this is only used once in the game, and compared to the number of other game features that it has, stating that one single puzzle could be seen as undue weight. If unique DS use was more frequent as it was in Tracy Memory and where other type of gameplay modes were not as great, then its mention is appropriate. I don't think it changes the impression of the gameplay section in either way (the DS is being used more than just a d-pad and buttons). --MASEM 16:49, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Box art

Please don't put the European box art back into the article. It makes no sense, we don't have a single other article (at least that I can see) that does that. Knowitall 20:09, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

There's a clear difference between the NA/AUS and Japan/EU versions; neither version is more "official", really, than the other. We can't have all this editing between the two though, there needs to be a consensus before any more edits are made. Haipa Doragon (talk) 20:42, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I think that because for 99% of our articles we use only the US box art, I think we should do the same for this one. The only reason it keeps getting added in is because people think it looks better (it does) but that isn't a valid reason. Knowitall 23:57, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Two examples: Colin McRae: Dirt (different EU and NA box covers) and Guitar Hero II different covers for different systems. I can argue against not having the EU version, but I see no harm in having both. --MASEM 01:09, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Hm. That would be awkward though, two box arts should only be added in the case of two similar games (Oracle series or even Pokemon is a good example of this) or if the box arts differ between multiple platforms. Otherwise it just gets confusing. We must reach consensus on which one to use. I really don't mind which one we use and have no strong argument for either. The US one is a resonable choice because most of the other boxarts in article on this series are US versions. But the EU version is also the same one used for the JP version, meaning that it is "used" more, if that makes sense. - .:Alex:. 19:58, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Alex, Knowitall's argument fails - because other articles have US box art doesn't imply all should have US box art. --Soetermans (talk) 19:05, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Multiplayer

The multiplayer section says that Wind Waker was multiplayer. I'm pretty sure that's not the case. Hikikomorix (talk) 01:38, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

I imagine that's talking about the Tingle Tuner? Axem Titanium (talk) 01:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

As of September 30th?

This article states that over 900000 copies of the game had been sold as of Semptember 30, 2007 with 'most of them being sold in Japan'. But this article also states that as of September 30th, Phantom Hourglass was only being sold in Japan. This is not only completely redundant, but entirely outdated seeing as the North American, Australian, and UK release dates are 2 months past. Can anyone come with some more recent figures? --Marshmello 19:58, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

The "as of September 30, 2007" sales figure from [1] is probably the number of copies shipped. --Silver Edge (talk) 07:09, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Linebeck Article

Maybe we could set up an article for Linebeck. Possibly Oshus. Jimblack (talk) 16:16, 4 January 2008 (UTC)Jimblack

Characters that make an appearance in a single game need to show much more notability before we can make articles about them. --MASEM 16:18, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. There's no need for separate articles for either of those characters. Pagrashtak 16:48, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Categorization in both DS and DS-only games

I will note that both based on WP:SUBCAT: When an article is put into a subcategory based on an attribute that is not the first thing most people would think of to categorise it, it should be left in the parent category as well. and discussion at Category talk:Nintendo DS-only games, this game should be both in the DS and the DS-only category. (This is true for nearly all the other -only category, I just haven't processed them all yet). --MASEM 23:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Aha, I see it's been noted already. Neeevermind. --MASEM 23:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Toon/Windwaker Link in Brawl

We know its true check Smashwiki so whys there not a section on him. BaconBoy914 (talk) 13:26, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

...because the Phantom Hourglass article is very much not the place to say that a certain Link who's been in five games already is in Brawl.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 19:07, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Merge in character article here

Lets be honest; the characters from the game are not that notable on their own, and the main characters already have their own article. This article can cover the characters just fine without a whole article devoted to every minor enemy. Better to have one really good article than two partially full articles. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:49, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

..."every minor enemy"? Can you at least portray the situation honestly? The guidelines on fiction and notability allow for split articles to over important parts of a subject in order to keep size from overwhelming the parent article.

Fine, here's some articles with a little commentary on reception and creation for the characters. (Not much, but enough for a lead section)

• [2]
• [3]
• [4]
• [5]

That's from GoogleNews only, so I think we could find some good info through a normal search.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 01:56, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Geez, just using hyperbole. I trust you got the thrust of what I was saying though. I'll try to add some stuff to the article today if I get the chance. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 22:43, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Oppose My initial impression is to oppose this. The article is fine as a separate one and should stay that way. This one should summarize the important, secondary characters, at the most. Gary King (talk) 02:10, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

But it would help us create a featured topic; merging the article here has many advantages; it creates a character section for this article, it eliminates a stubby article that shows no sign of any notability independent of this game, meaning there isn't nearly enough information on how they created or designed the characters to constitute a separate article from this one. It would make a stronger article and be a step toward a featured topic, and we would just have to trim it down. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:52, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Parody in Superhero Movie?

I found in the Superhero Movie article that the film was making a parody of this game,any confirmation of this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.235.144.148 (talk) 17:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

No,wait.It`s gone now.A possible mistake? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.235.144.148 (talk) 17:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Things to Expand

The sales and setting sections need expansion. I suggest they are expanded before someone reviews this article for GA and fails it. Epass (talk) 10:54, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

Ok, lets get started. The article has no edit wars, it has some images but no excess of them, it is neutral point of view, prose is ok

• Reference 33 is broken
• Wikilink all the publishers in the articles references
• There should be an image demonstrating the gameplay not just battle mode. Also, there should be a sailing image that would both demonstrates the plot and sailing which is notable since you do it so much in the game and it is different from Wind Waker.
• all images need very specific rationales as to exactly what they demonstrate and why; general descriptions like "illustrates the subject" don't work
• Make sure there is a reference next to each score in the video game score box.
• The Development section talks about development, but doesn't really say anything about what were the inspirations, or how they responded to criticisms of Windwaker and its excessive sailing and lack of dungeons. Add even more when you go for FA.
• You will probably be asked to expand the setting section, so perhaps (I just finished the game an hour ago) mention it is in a parallel world in that section.
• It is a large gameplay section, and it might be good to break it up like Final Fantasy VI does.
• The lead should have a sentence of what the actual plot is, and could even have a reference to how well the game sold (not specific numbers but generally)
• Once you do those minor fixes, copyediting and trimming will be the main task of getting this to FA, especially with the Gameplay section. Copyediting should also focus on making the text flow through paragraphs and cut down on the number of two-three sentence paragraphs.
  • all of the above are done Gary King (talk) 19:09, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

And that's my review! Message me when its complete :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 18:49, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Excellent job! It's passed, and with a good copyedit, it will be an extremely strong FA candidate. Congratulations! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:17, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

White Whale

Should some mention be made of the fact that Oshus turns into a White Whale, and the aim of Link's Awakening is to wake the wind fish, also a white whale? This is surely at least a reference to a past Zelda game, if not a blatant recycling of characters (as happens er... all the time!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.94.232.85 (talk) 12:05, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Twilight Princess....2?

Wasn't this going to be a sequel to twilight princess because Nintendo announced a sequel Before Phantom Hourglass. Did they change it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.123.140.61 (talk) 15:31, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

From what I recall it was meant to be a sequal to the Wind Waker which makes more sense since it takes place in that timeframe. --76.71.208.246 (talk) 02:40, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Correction

Hi. I just wanted to say that your translation of "Mugen no Sunadokei" is wrong. "Mugen" could mean "fantasy," "illusion," or "dream." Maybe "The Hourglass of Illusions" is a better translation? Or maybe "The Hourglass of Dreams"

Raho615 (talk) 22:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

It can also mean "Phantom", and the specific connation of the kanji is not nighttime hallucinations (dreams), but seeing things that aren't really there, or not truly existent (Bellum and his Phantoms, which are only illusions of life).98.223.107.158 (talk) 00:59, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

"Parallel World"

Just thought I'd clarify - only the final battle is confirmed to appear in a parallel world. It is made clear during the prologue and by Linebeck's appearance during the epilogue that the Great Sea in which you spent most of the game is still part of the normal Great Sea.

To be perfectly frank, though, I think the line is meant more to be a distinction of the surface world and the world below the sea, similar to the TWW Great Sea/Hyrule thing. After all, the Ocean King is a whale. I think the best term would be to call it a "separate world".98.223.107.158 (talk) 00:59, 12 August 2008 (UTC)