User talk:Emma


 * Hi! I'm Matt — one of your local sysops. If you have a question for me, ask it here. I like to keep conversations in one place. If you ask a question here, I will respond here. If I tell or ask you something on another page, please respond on that page! . Trust me, I'll be able to see that you responded just fine. In fact, it is actually fairly hard for me not to notice as I put those pages in my watch list.
 * Note: The above notice displays as a rectangle in most browsers. But in Firefox it has smooth, rounded edges, as shown here.

For comments, questions, or discussions relating to Mozilla Firefox, please go here.

Editting issue?
My User talk page. Apparantly this person had an issue editing the Shadow Temple page to fix something?? I changed it for him though. 11:09, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

How to Lock Pages
I hate vandalism. How do you lock others from editing your user page, like you have? --The Keeper of Majora&#39;s Mask 23:19, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * It is not exactly a lock. It is more of a trick. Clever programming. It is not exactly easy to explain. For now you will not need it. Unless you really want it. We will not allow people to vandalize your page, or any other page. Any that to are punished. 23:33, March 3, 2009 (UTC)

Leaving For A Bit
I will not beable to post on Zelda Universe, Zelda Wiki, and the internet itself for a little bit. So, if you have any ideas of me ditching ZW, please remember this. I have not been active as I usually am latly. But, I wanted to tell you this now so you will know, and not try to delete my account, or something. I'll be back in a few weeks or so, but... keep editing! :P 19:32, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Something similar has happened to me, and I hope to be back no later than April. 15:52, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Hmm?
How come I put something in this wiki, and then someone has to either erase it, or change it????


 * 1.) Sign your post like this:




 * That will take care of everything. It is all you need to sign.


 * 2.) If an edit is reverted or altered, that means it is not up to our quality standards, or is complete nonsense. 00:47, 13 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Mandi basically said it. Just remember that no one here is "out to get you". We have a core team of sysops and patrollers that monitor the wiki and look at every edit. We make sure that everything added is of quality. If it is not and we think it just cannot be improved, we remove it. Make sure are aware of what it says at the bottom of a page when editing:
 * "If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here."
 * Also be aware of all of our quality standards. Always check your work for accuracy, typos, etc. before submitting it. 04:42, February 13, 2009 (UTC)


 * Yup yup. Every piece of information added is checked against our notability standards (which, granted, they're not written-and-set-in-stone quality standards, but anyone who's been around the wiki a while typically gets pretty good at determining whether or not something is notable for the wiki) by the person who checks the edit. I mean, something like "Link has 5 fingers" doesn't exactly seem notable enough to include in his article, right? So that could be a factor.
 * Another factor might be redundancy -- sometimes people add information that's already been stated within the article. It happens quite often. So someone may have noticed that and then decides to remove the redundant information.
 * So yeah, following Matt's tips there (always checking your work before submitting) along with maybe spending a bit just browsing and checking out some of the better articles and getting used to the general wiki standards (it's what I did before I started editing, anyway) will definitely help in allowing you to have edits that are much less likely to be undone or reverted. 07:15, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes sir. I just liked how the symbol looks, but I will find another one to use :) By the way, is this how we're supposed to respond to talk page things?  Or do I edit my talk page/your talk page?  Right now I'm using the little plus by the edit button.   05:23, 1 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I'd just click the edit button. And as it says at the top of this page I prefer to keep it all in one place. 05:39, March 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry I'm failing so much to read. I see it now.  Anyways, that's all on that.  06:07, 1 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm still glad you like the symbol. That means I did a good job on it. But it is sort of my avatar. I'm known for it. I would rather not have confusion. 07:47, March 1, 2009 (UTC)

Templates
Where did you get the Template for "Fan of Spiritual Stone"? Thanks.


 * Well, if you would like to use that particular template, you just type: . Aside from that, the list of userboxes can be found here ;) 22:55, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Help Guide - Theories
I've noticed this morning more and more people are wanting to know if their theory can be put on the page. It's made me think that a Help Page on Theory Standards would be a good idea, to refer people there. 19:59, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

'You' Epidemic
Many pages have the word 'you' instead of 'Link', or the character. We need to stop this before it spreads throughout the entire Wiki. Wait, it already has! Grab your mouse, and powercord... this will be a long day. :P 16:51, 7 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, isn't it kinda sad that mostly everything on this wiki is written as if it really did happen in history, or like a story book or something...? RupeeLord 17:32, 7 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah. Writing articles in second person perspective is really not recommended. So replacing "you" with "Link" is a good idea. 21:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

RupeeLord: that is called in-universe style. It is how it is supposed to be. 22:14, March 7, 2009 (UTC)

Search By Date
I could of sworn there was a way to search pages by date of last edit, or something like that. I went to Google, all of the options I can reach with this account, and Media Wiki itself but found nothing. I think I might of done it once, but I don't know. 19:51, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm back (again)
If you do remember me, it would be a miracle (I changed my sig but if you can read katakana, you should be fine) I'm back to haunt help ZW. I'm also here to find help with my dilema (I did find a Zelda "_______" name, but the name is taken on webs.com and I can't afford a domain yet so currently I can't create it. The website of the same name hasn't even been updated for years. At least what I can tell). Anyway, I don't think I can contribute much so I will probably only be a WikiGnome... *puts on cap* 20:19, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah. I remember. I actually made my own site in the time since. It is just a forum now. But perhaps one day I'll get my own domain and it will be bigger. The site is The Triforce . It is still not quite done. A lot of work left to do. 20:38, March 17, 2009 (UTC)
 * Cool. I hope you have luck with it! A bold approach going the forum route. I'm just going to do some news and game coverage and maybe have a proboards forum to entertain the fans (all 1 of them XD). Maybe you could help me deciding a name for my website (I have the name, just the "www" part). Because I don't want it stolen, I put the name on my User Page. If you think it needs a different name, we can work on it. 21:00, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry for double-posting. Although the name I would like is taken, I can settle for a hyphen in it. I'll set it up later and 'open' it sometime soon. It's best to get this done before news of Spirit Tracks develops more. 03:07, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Protecting Important Achive Pages
Important achives pages like this one should be protected to insure that nothing new is added. Even if nothing new is added, why leave it open to edit? I say that admins should protect such pages. You protected pages like this one, so it should not be any different. 04:13, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * The template thing should work out. We will look into protecting this page. 02:37, April 7, 2009 (UTC)

News
New zelda game  Source:Hyrule.net  there's also a Youtube vid


 * This is old news. We already have it mentioned on the main page and an article on it, Spirit Tracks. 07:02, April 7, 2009 (UTC)

Um... sure lets go with that RupeeLord 04:58, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Featured Picture nomination
Hi Matt. I'd suggest that maybe you should withdraw your nomination of the Morpheel picture; it's been up for around 5 months and doesn't look likely to succeed any time soon... 08:32, 18 April 2009 (UTC)


 * No. All voting has slowed down considerably. If we start pulling things just because it is going slow we'll never get something new in again. Besides, six people were interested in it. That's not bad. 17:55, April 18, 2009 (UTC)

Participaton
I want to help edit this site, but I'm fairly new to the Wiki-community and all the pages I visit have nothing to edit.

Could you tell me what to do?

-Wolf O'donnell


 * Everyone was new once. Start by going here. Read up on some things there. You can try some things in the sandbox. The guides are extensive. But there are likely things missing here and there. You can ask me, or any of the active admins listed here, for more help. 00:31, May 14, 2009 (UTC)

Transparency
Can you make the following image transparent. Keep the pink ground, Toon Link, and Kirby. As for everything else, make it transparent. (If you could also make the area pink cloud struture on the middle right side transparent, but keep the pink cloud itself... I would be even more greatful. Thanks,  19:14, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * A tad bit beyond my skills. I suggest putting the request here in the last section. I'm more for total background removal. Steve is the one to go to to have certain things in the background left over. 19:31, May 28, 2009 (UTC)


 * What if I say just keep Toon Link and Kirby. Perhaps even the thing they are sleepin in, or you could just remove that too.  I don't really care. :)  I would of put it in that section, but the section is more for images that will stay on the wiki.  This image, and the copy (with the removed background) will be deleted.  Unless ofcourse, you upload the copy to Photobucket, or something.  19:41, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank You!!
Thank you so much for protecting the Great Cataclysm page! Ganondorfdude11 has continuously tried to remove the theory section of the article b/c it does not conform to his own views. I tried to talk to him about it but he refused to compromise. I also tried to report the edit war to another admin. I'm glad you saw it. Thanks again. I hope you will talk to Ganondorfdude11 and tell him to be respectful of others' views. Can you please explain to him that a theory section, if conforming to the specifications and beneath a theory banner, is legal? Link87 04:32, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Resolving Editing War?
The page for Great Cataclysm has gone through something of an edit war, with user Link87 constantly deleting references that contradicted the theory posted in the Theory section. I deleted the theory for not following guidelines, and the user flamed my talk page for posting contradictory evidence. The theory in question was based on a non-canonical manga, but because the user believed it was "widely accepted," it was grounds for being mentioned in the article. I noticed that you locked the page to temporarily cool down the flame war, but what would be the best way to resolve this? Should I bring up the theory in the talk page, as the guidelines suggest?Ganondorfdude11 04:39, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, Ganondorfdude11 has been vandalizing the Great Cataclysm article by stating that any theory that's not his is "wrong," and is trying to wipe out the entire theory section b/c it does not conform to his views. I even stated that I never said he was wrong, but that he should be respectful of others' views and to live and let live. I posted more than enough evidence to support the theory in question and it was in a legitimate theory section. Ganondorfdude11 has been trying to remove it simply b/c it does not conform to his standards of what theory is right or wrong, and his talk page proves it. And just for the record, he erased his talk page so that what he said could not be visible. I suggest that you look into his page's history and see the kind of comments he was making not only about other theories besides his own but about other Zelda fans as well. Link87 04:43, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Why not calm down for a while before continuing arguing with each other. Give yourselves time to cool down. And the staff will talk this through. 04:47, June 5, 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it's essential that some of you see some of what was said:


 * "This is not Zeldapedia, which prints fan theories as articles. Using a non-canon source for a theory is immediate grounds for discrediting it. Facts first, not theories. This is an encyclopedia, not a forum.Ganondorfdude11 04:13, 5 June 2009 (UTC)"


 * "What evidence besides a non-canon manga? I might as well go around claiming that the cartoon is canon. Said other community is a laughable mockery of a wiki. I suggest you go there and put theories everywhere. At least cite some sources and don't delete perfectly legitimate ones I cited.Ganondorfdude11 04:18, 5 June 2009 (UTC)"


 * "If a theory is wrong, it shouldn't be on the page. It is not your personal theorizing page. Bring it up on the talk page before posting it. That's what the guidelines say to do.Ganondorfdude11 04:25, 5 June 2009 (UTC)"


 * Link87 04:55, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Hello.

We have decided that, as the Wiki is not a forum, theories are in a bit of a tough spot as far as discernment goes. However, according to Quality Standards on Theories in an Article, it clearly states a few things:


 *  "Theories are to be reputable, show evidence to support them [...], and have a reasonable amount of support or acceptance within the community. That is, they are not merely personal theories."  We have decided that based on this, since a non-canon source would obviously not affect the future storylines of any games, they are irrelevant to theory because a later game could simply refute that theory because its developers would not pay heed to the original source of the theory. We have also decided that whatever theories are on the page now, if they are supported and sourced by games or game manuals or any official Nintendo endorsed, sponsored, or released material, then they are acceptable theories.
 *  "If an administrator determines that a theory does not meet the specified criteria, it may be removed from the article."  We use this as the basis on which we make this decision.

We hope that this is satisfactory to all parties. If editing continues to be out of control, the page will be protected and the users involved may face consequences. -- Xizor 05:42, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Sacred Realm
Hey Matt, I have something to ask you: Can you unlock the Sacred Realm page so I can continue the work I was doing to rewrite and reinvent it? I was in the middle of working on it when Adam mistakenly thought there was an edit war over the page and there really wasn't, and he locked the page, reverting everything that had been done to it. When I asked him about it, he seemed to act like it was a personal matter b/c of an old edit war that has since been resolved for a different page. I'd like to continue work on it, b/c I wasn't completely done paring down what I'd written or adding everything I had intended to add yet. I hadn't gotten a chance to respond to Dany's comments to state that I was in agreement with him before Adam took it upon himself to lock the page either, so there was really no disagreement about it at all. I agreed that the two sections in question could be pared down and made more specific, and I was going to do that today. But I need the lock removed from the page if Adam himself is unwilling to do it himself. So can you please remove the lock? If you could help out with this, it'd be greatly appreciated. Thanks man! Link87 12:58, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot Matt, I appreciate your help and if you'd like to give any input on how you'd like to see the Sacred Realm article in the final product, it'd be greatly appreciated and most welcome. Link87 16:54, 10 June 2009 (UTC)