Talk:Vaati

Vaati was in Link's Awakening??

Maybe I'm just totally off base on this one, but I'm almost reasonably sure that the final boss of Link's Awakening is not Vaati. The official strategy guide of the game, made by Nintendo of America, lists the final boss as "The Shadow Nightmares" and describes the very final form of the boss as "Dethl." The Missing Link 01:02, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

I think it should at least be mentioned that the final boss looks similar to Vaati, if nothing else. Personally, I wouldn't consider evidence from a guide that old as wholly definitive in the case of this relatively recently-introduced character anyway.~e.o.t.d~ 08:59, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, the nightmares are the nightmares of the Wind Fish, if Vaati is the Wind Mage, it is possible that the two know each other, and so the Wind Fish, logically has nightmares about him. Both their final forms look very similar, so that could be the inspiration for Vaati, no?

Vaati had not been created by Nintendo at the time of the release of Link's Awakaning, and I doubt Dethl served as Vaati's inspiration. BassxForte 23:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Quotes

Quotes: There are too many of them. They belong on wikiquotes. If someone can choose one or two to remain here, please do so. Otherwise I will do it in a day or two. It would be of interest for someone with more knowledge on the subject to do it however, because if I do it I'll just take the top 2 and leave them, if that. --Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 04:24, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

I wouldn't object if you removed them all. --Pagrashtak 04:34, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

I Would suggest we bring back 2 or 3 of his more importent quotes. BassxForte 00:18, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Sheikah

Is It worth mentioning that Vaati transfigured has the sheikah eye on it. If so what section should it go under. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.42.2.173 (talk • contribs)

• It's a different eye. Vaati may have pale skin and red eyes, but he's not a Shiekah.--Saetch 05:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

You sure? Looks exactly like the Sheikah eye to me. BassxForte 03:40, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

He's a Picori. Not a Shiekah.

I wasn't saying he wasn't Picori, simply that I think that the form in question has the Sheikah eye on it Mr. "I don't sign my own comments". BassxForte 04:16, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

It's a red eye - not the Shiekah eye. If you mean the god-form one, then he's missing the spikes and the teardrop - the things that actually make it the sheikah eye.KrytenKoro 23:19, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Controversy

This whole section is relatively unsourced and vague, also it is riddled with weasel words. If these can't be fixed, it would be best to remove all of these assertations and I will see to it that it gets taken care of. --Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 04:53, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Found sources for everything except the stuff about Flagship and Nintendo... A simple search of almost any videogame Forum will find what you need...—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.39.132.78 (talk • contribs)

Those simple searches mean nothing, as you can't just tell a reader that there is a source, and that they need to find it. That is unnaceptable. Unfortunately so is using forums as references in most cases. Also, blogs are useless as citable sources. They are at best unreliable. Anyone can post anything they want with no review on a blog, and wikipedia guidelines generally prohibit their use a citeable resources, unless that blog is being used to show a specific person's opinion on an issue (for example, quoting a person's blog in an article about that very person, or about a company/band/etc that they are the head of). Also, I changed the link formatting a little. It is generally best to let the wiki number the reference links as it can then respond dynamically to a change in the number of refs. The video I also removed as it really serves no purpose. It is clear what happens in the game. The citation needed tag more or less refers to the lack of sources on people interpreting it in a certain way. I also removed the last line in the first paragraph. Making such assertions over the magnitude and implications is not quite within the scope of an encyclopedia, and in fact, is not entirely true. Zelda games have never been 100% continuous. Sometimes almost not at all.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 11:54, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Doah! I wasnt logged in >.> That last edit (the unsigned one) was me. anyway, I'm kinda confused. if you can't use blogs, forums, boards ETC. for peoples opinions, then what sources do you use? you cant find peoples theories in games. The fact is, Sections about user theorys like this are found in many other articals as well. For example, the Metroid (species) artical has many different theories. On the removal of the Video- It did kinda have a purpose, it was the basis of one of the theories. >.>

Heres what I'm thinking: 1. Add a note at the end, reminding people that nintendo has said nothing on the matter (like the Metroid artical) 2. Try to find images, movies, articals, etc. that are the basis of these theorys. For example that video showed the basis of two, if not all three, of the theories involving his death in FSA. A picture of Vaati in MC and a picture of the Sheikah (or whatever) eye would show the weird basis of the connection theory, and a picture of the stain glass panel would support the first one I guess. Evil Bob 22:58, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Spoilers needed?

After just reading through his history, it ruined a rather crucial part of the plot for Four Swords Adventures for me. Does the entire "History" section deserved to be marked for spoilers? Guest 23:44, 23 September 2006 (GMT)

Romanization of Gufū

The Japanese name of Vaati is "グフー" (gufū). As Vaati is the "Wind Mage", I started thinking his name might be meant to be Chinese—"フー" (fū) is used to Japanese to represent the Chinese "風" (feng), for "wind." The only kanji I can find for a so-called "Chinese-style" Japanese reading (on'yomi) is "具" (Pinyin jù) among its meanings "tool," "untensil," "means (of)," "possess," and "ingredients."

The point is, should we mention Jù-feng or similar as a Romanization of his name?—ウルタプ 05:24, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

"Death"

Is it worth mentioning that when Vaati is defeated in FSA, after the smoke clears you can see the same shockwave-thingies that appear when the Dark World is entered? You have no proof it was me. 16:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

No, of course not. By the way, the same shockwave style is used by the Magic Hammer's charge attack. --220.237.67.125 15:26, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Reused sound file

If my audio receptors are serving me well, I believe the laugh associated with Vaati is none other than the Happy Mask Salesman's chuckle. Interesting Trivia tid-bit, perhaps? Commander Regulus 08:07, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Vaati's "Appearance" in Oot

Alright, who took down the trivia tid-bit concerning Vaati's "cameo" in Oot? That was presented rather neutrally in my opinion. It wasn't the ravings of some conspiracy theorist. I think there is no reason to take that down. Commander Regulus 04:45, 10 January 2007 (UTC) I've put the controversial pic back in. I'd like someone to actually give a plausible reason for why this picture should be taken down before doing so. I see no problem with this picture as long as both sides of the controversy are represented, which I think I have done tastefully. Commander Regulus 05:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Prove it's notable or else don't put it in. If you can find some official source which speculates on this, then it's noteworthy. If not, it's cruft. 199.126.137.209 10:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

You mean like the fact that the picture is a screenshot directly taken from Ocarina of Time? Doesn't get more official than the game. Commander Regulus 14:44, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Abuse of trivia section

For some reason, people seem to think that the trivia section is a dumping ground for anything that 1 random Zelda fan can think of. Saying things like how Vaati has more earth based attacks despite being a wind mage is not noteworthy and is not trivia. Saying some image from a wall from OoT looks like Vaati is not important or interesting to anyone other than a few fans. Keep these things in the forums on GameFaqs where people actually care. 199.126.137.209 10:25, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I think you forget what the point of a trivia section is all about. It's a section where people present seemingly TRIVIAL information that make people think, "Wow, that's neat." I looked at that picture of "Vaati" in the Oot shooting gallery and thought, "Wow, maybe that is Vaati." That is something Legend of Zelda fans would find interesting. The trivia section isn't supposed to be host to important information, otherwise it would cease to be TRIVIAL. Might I add that Vaati being listed as no. 2 to Ganon is a trivial tid-bit that's apt to gain even less attention than the "Vaati Picture." Commander Regulus 14:43, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

How intesting, I believe that the whole picture of Vaati in oot isn't intresting enough to be put in the trivia section, however the part about Vaati somehow having earth based powers in The Minish Cap even though he's been confirmed to specilize in wind based powers in his other apperances has enough merit to get on the page. BassxForte 18:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

But there is no real reason to keep the picture out. If we based everything off of how interesting it is, there would not be an article on "War and Peace." It's backed by official pictures from the game, so I don't see any reason why it should be withheld other than some people don't believe it and want to stamp out any attempt to associate the image with Vaati. Commander Regulus 03:46, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

If something is put into a trivia section it has to be either...

A. Something minor but noticeable about the character.

B. Something that dosen't fit into either of the sections.

The whole thing about Vaati's sudden use of earth based powers to me seems to fit into the first thing I detailed. BassxForte 06:15, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, you just described to me where that shooting gallery image falls in for the page. It really belongs in the Trivia section. I don't see why people are being so bull-headed about this. Next time, give a valid reason before taking it down, or don't take it down at all, because I'll just put it back up again, especially the generous donor with no name. Commander Regulus 01:24, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... ok, i'll let the oot picture and piece of trivia about it continue to be up there, I guess it is noticeable enough to be on the page. BassxForte 05:42, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Personally I think it's a picture of a tektite but... BassxForte 22:27, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Removed. WP:TRIV, WP:V, WP:NOR. ' ^{(Feeling chatty? ) (Edits!)} 21:17, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

The OoT pic should not be included because we have no way of knowing it's Vaati. That's the plain and simple of it. If it was trivia about VAATI, we could put it in - but as it is, it's trivia that MIGHT be about Vaati. There is a huge difference there - the earth-based thing we can confirm (though that's only really there in TMC - in both FS games, he uses tornadoes and everything), since WE KNOW THAT IT IS VAATI. The OoT thing is highly unlikely (FS wasn't even in planning then - why would they already have Vaati's design done? If it's not a Tektite or something similar, it's probably a doodle of Dethl, the final boss of the game released RIGHT BEFORE OoT, or, maybe, JUST A DOODLE OR FALSE POSITIVE!KrytenKoro 23:24, 23 May 2007 (UTC)