Talk:Ilia

Love interest
I'm actually having a similar disagreement at Wikipedia at the moment. Please note that, since nothing IS ever explicitly stated, and everything is interpretable, it really only deserves a brief mention. The reasons listed in that paragraph are another thing that requires "extra" to make it work.

"At the end of twilight princess, it seems as if Ilia is the girl that Link ends up with."

Er...if that isn't sheer shipping, I don't know what is. There's not even proof that Link even stays at Ordon. He's still in his Hero's garb, riding off to Hyrule Field.

Ilia is one of three possible love interests for Link in the game. [...] Having never developed a strong relationship with Zelda, and Midna had gone back to her home in the Twilight Realm, Link seems to go back to the girl he was with from the beginning.

Elsewhere, I've said that it's ridiculous that everyone seems to think that Link MUST end up with someone. Now, if another Relationship section wants to be developed, I'm all for it--but, please, regard canon first.


 * P We don't seem to agree often. Saibh 14:43, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

Well, because this "ship" isn't as well-known as MidnaxLink, would you agree on adding a trivia section to the article and puting something like this in it:

Ilia is one of the three possible love interests for Link, the others being Midna and Zelda.--Link hero of light 19:37, 20 March 2008 (EDT)
 * I suppose it's hard to argue, but I'm not sure about it being less "known". Maybe less supported, but if an average gamer can't come up with connotations for all three, than she's definitely not a love interest. Besides that, "love interest" implies that Ilia, Midna, and Zelda are all sources of romance and possible love later in Link's life (making Midna sort of a former love interest, by that sense). It's not indicated he ends up with anyone at all...huh.


 * I'm just loathe to add something just to appease shippers...I don't know if you noticed, but I added a line saying "It is possible that Link and Ilia share a romantic bond, although nothing is ever explicitly stated or hinted" in the first paragraph. I think that suffices better than a trivia section. And besides, trivia sections are, by definition "matters or things that are very unimportant, inconsequential, or nonessential; trifles; trivialities". That's why encyclopedias don't have them. If it's not notable enough to have it's own section, than it shouldn't be notable enough to be in the article. People just add articles when they think something is interesting to know, but can't fit it elsewhere. Saibh 20:48, 20 March 2008 (EDT)