Talk:Great Sea

Move
Why are we moving this to "Great Sea"? 19:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * It seems to be the dominant opinion of a great many users. That is why. 19:09, July 21, 2008 (UTC)


 * I say that we need to run a vote on this. I personally don't see the gain in this. 19:16, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The gain? Vote? Hold on one second. If it is called the "Great Sea" in the game and not "The Great Sea", then a move is required. I already have the disk in my GameCube now. I'll load it up and check. 19:19, July 21, 2008 (UTC)


 * By the way. The gain is that we would not have to fix redirects in nearly one hundred articles. That is the gain. Far more pages link to the "Great Sea" than "The Great Sea". Okay, to the game I go. 19:21, July 21, 2008 (UTC)

Oooooh... That was beyond lucky. I just happened to have a save file at exactly the correct moment in the game. Okay, give me a minute to type in this quote on the article page. 19:24, July 21, 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, proof added. Time to move this article. 19:29, July 21, 2008 (UTC)


 * Alright, this proof I can accept, but not the proof for The King of Red Lions article, which I guess I'll go discuss there... 19:31, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Split
Both sections could use major expansions. But as Terminia and Koholint are not in Hyrule, the World of the Ocean King isn't quite in the Great Sea. Opinions? 15:27, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Merging
Good evening. I apologize if I'm writing this in an inappropiate moment, but considering your participation on merging some of the articles regarding The Wind Waker's isles, I was wondering if it would be necessary to merge these three articles into one as well; the information on each one is nearly null, and the archipelagoes themselves are of extremely little value in terms of in-game notability. Just asking, if you're too busy or my proposal is unnecessary, then just ignore me. --K2L 00:15, 14 November 2009 (UTC)