Talk:The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past

Article merged: See old talk page here.

That just redirects right back here. Rather than just delete it, I'll mention it in case the old page still exists and can be linked by someone who knows where it is. If not, someone who knows for sure can delete.76.226.200.238 (talk) 00:35, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

GA review

• The lead section needs to summarize the whole article, so it needs at least a sentence explaining the plot, I mean is it a sequel to the other Zeldas? is it the first? the last? you could also add the release dates on the lead
• However Link could hold his sword in front of him whilst charging his sword and could "poke" his foes. this phrase at the end of the paragraph doesn't make much sense, are you referring to the 3D incarnations or to this game? If it's the first then it should go.
• The Game Over paragraph on the Development section is original research and it says nothing about the development of the game. Do you really need to have a whole paragraph describing a glitch?
• The last paragraph on Development could use a source, but because it is comparing plots I guess I could do without
• Roam bears a very strong resemblance to Jet Link, AKA Cyborg 002, of Ishinomori's classic manga Cyborg 009. - depends on the point of view, needs a source
• I'm not convinced by the whole Chris Houlihan room section, it needs to be more consistent, shorter and sourced
• The music section obviously needs as much clean up as Chris Houlihan
• I read both sources listed for the first sentence on the Critical reception section and neither says "excellent graphics and complex, well-engineered, intriguing gameplay", this sentence needs be rewritten, it's too weasely
• no {{fact}} tags please

On hold for seven days, then I will take another look.--Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 22:19, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I cleaned up the article. The original nominator has retired from Wikipedia so I have taken the reigns. Gary King (talk) 00:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Done, thanks a good work! --Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 08:49, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Merge in Characters article

Please actually look at the article before voicing an opinion List of characters in The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past As you can see, if trimmed down slightly, it would fit as a characters section, a totally appropriate section for this article and eliminate a stubby article with basically no notability. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 18:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough, but I'd prefer that it be trimmed down before merging. I don't want to see it merged in its current state. Gary King (talk) 18:52, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Very true. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 18:53, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Good trim, though I do think that since there is no article on the manga Link to the Past, and this covers that comic, we should probably mention its plot and characters somewhere in the article. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:50, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I trimmed that paragraph because I cannot find references mentioning the characters. Just searching for the character name alone only returns 500 hits on Google, with no relation to Zelda. Gary King (talk) 21:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Four Swords merger

I used to think an original game warranted being separate, but FS is definitely of lesser importance than ALttP on the cartridge. I think that the GBA re-release could be summed up quite easily in this article, with a couple paragraphs for gameplay, a paragraph for the significant differences in ALttP GBA, a paragraph for development, and a couple paragraphs for critical and consumer reception. - A Link to the Past (talk) 07:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly agree. I have been struggling endlessly to figure out how I can expand this article to Featured Article status. The fact is, I don't think I can, and this merger would work quite nicely for everyone. Gary King (talk) 07:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad the importance and beauty of mergers is finally sinking in :) Totally agree. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 15:11, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Someone do it please, so I can get this article off my mind :) Gary King (talk) 19:18, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I wouldnt know where to begin or what to include. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:01, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, can I see hands for people whose names are named after this game?

Anyone?

...Oh, hey, a hand! Mine. :D I think I'll give it a shot. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:49, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

FA nom

This article seems very close, with lots of good work done. If we just add references to the scores in the score box, it looks like it will be ready. Thoughts? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 06:07, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Peer review

I think this article calls for a Peer review. It has been over a year since it was assessed. Alot has changed. We need to see what stands in our way from this being a FA. I think it looks amazing. Lets see what others say. Who will start the review? I am not good at doing that sort of stuff, and I think someone who has actualy worked on the article should. --Blake (talk) 14:29, 20 May 2009 (UTC)