Talk:Pendant of Virtue

Master Sword items
No more speculation that the pendants and jewels could be the same items. There have been more items like this that were required to get the Master Sword and unless one comes up with a plausible theory that includes all of them, no speculation.IfIHaveTo 07:13, 19 December 2007 (EST)


 * It's called "imagination" man. I said it's "possible" and it's under "theories" just like you said.  Really, you should let others share their theories on things too and not solely the hum-drum minimal information you keep putting things back to.  Yes, it is a theory, but it is just that, a theory.  And it's made clear it's a theory.  So no more arguing about "theories."  It wasn't a crime the last time I checked to post some facts and possibilities when it's made clear that it's not the 100% certain truth.  Link87 10:45, 19 December 2007 (EST)


 * I also once removed a theory in Mido's article about him becoming King Moblin (Oracle games) based on pathetic evidence (something along the ways of both sayin "Grmbl grmbl"). I don't mind properly sourced theories. In fact, I love them. But, how shuld I say this,......there are theories that are just.... kinda dumb. Like the earlier mentioned theory (which at least was sourced), I think this one is odd. First off all, the items compared don't even look like each other. The pendants becoming/having been the pearls makes far more sense, but I don't see the pearls mentioned in the theory. Like I said, come up with a theory to incorporate all in a way that it makes sense and you can keep it for all I am concerned. But this is just silly right now. IfIHaveTo 10:58, 19 December 2007 (EST)


 * I completely understand what you said about stupid theories based on poor evidence, but mine have been researched for years, and I have presented what I feel to be some compelling evidence. In fact, you just gave me a new idea:  the Pearls could be from the other timeline.  The Stones could have become the Pendants in one timeline and the Pearls in the other.  Thank you for presenting that new idea to me.  That would make sense, and it would incorporate all three as you said.  Thanks again.  Link87 11:21, 19 December 2007 (EST)


 * I've rewritten this point with a more neutral point of view here. --Adam 16:01, 19 December 2007 (EST)