Category talk:Races

Page or List??
Personley, I would like it if this was a page itself, merging all of the other pages. What do you guys think??? GFlame 00:27, 30 September 2010 (EDT)
 * Normally, I wouldn't reply at this hour since I'm at part-time work, but while nobody sees me, here's my suggestion =)
 * Read carefully: Write Races in the Search field; you'll be redirected here, of course, but you'll also see Redirected from Races below the article's title. Click the link and you'll enter the actual Races page. Click the Edit button, delete the redirect template and start building the article. Please don't tell anyone I told you this. --K2L (Interrogatory) 15:06, 30 September 2010 (EDT)


 * Or just go here . Go ahead and clear it out and start building the page. Don't worry too much about your work being sloppy. Usually several people like to start working on new articles when they pop up. 19:31, September 30, 2010 (UTC)

Dwarves
Should Dwarves be added as a race? I mean there is the Dwarven Blacksmith in Alttp but I recently saw that there is the Pot Dwarves from Ancient Stone Tablets as well. Ideas, opinions? --Shadow Reaper 20:17, 14 June 2012 (EDT)


 * I see what you mean, but if there's only two instances of dwarves in the entire series, it's not really worth mentioning them as being their own race. 20:46, 14 June 2012 (EDT)
 * Yeah I didn't think it would fly but it was worth asking. Anyway thanks Hylian King --Shadow Reaper 20:59, 14 June 2012 (EDT)

Dragons
Shouldn't we add dragons as a race? They make several appearances, and at least four of them (Faron, Eldin, Lanayru, and Valoo) are peaceful and sentient. And on the topic of sentience, why do we have Remlits, Dogs, etc. as races? They can't speak or reason logically. I don't think they should be races anymore than Like Likes or Real Bombchus should. Nare 12:37, 21 October 2012 (UTC)


 * If you look at the list of subcategories you'll see that the Dragons are already listed as a race (see Category:Dragons).
 * It is true that Dogs and Remlits are a species rather than a race (although, as a side note, using the Mask of Truth reveals that Dogs are capable of coherent thought). However, pages about certain species, namely Dog and Remlit, and pages about races, such as Goron, contain information of a similar nature. For example, both Dogs and Gorons are groups of beings; for the most part, you can't tell them apart, but there are a few of them that are special (like Barkle the dog or the Goron Elder). These pages use the same infobox template, Template:Species, because the fields can apply to both races and species (for example, you can have a "notable member" of a race and a "notable member" of a species). The Species infobox automatically adds any page it's used on to the Race category, which is why Dog and Remlit are seen in this category. 14:27, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

You're right. Thanks for clearing that up for me! Nare 15:38, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
 * There are some beings (i.e crabs, cuccos, remlits, ringers, pigs, bomblings and perhaps a couple more) that don't really belong here as noted above. They can be removed if we replaced the species infobox with the general infobox and change the template for the races so that only the rest are put under this category (via transclusion). There are not many and if we decide so I could help of course with the infoboxes. Opinions? Zeldafan1982 (talk) 23:28, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I think the general infobox should be avoided if we can help it. I would suggest either renaming the category "Species" or creating a new infobox for animals. At very least we could add a parameter to the species infobox that allows for .  14:44, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm in favor of having an infobox for animals. If the category is renamed to species the problem is that the animals would still be listed under People. Also, I just noticed that the races template does not include any animal so apparently we are ok with that. Zeldafan1982 (talk) 20:28, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
 * On second thought, the Races navigation template already adds the race category. We can just remove the category from the infobox and that'll solve the problem. 12:19, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * True :D The only problem left then is that the Character template is used for animals which are not enemies. Category suppression or a new infobox both solve the problem. Since there are animals like Christine which can be considered "people", I'm now thinking that maybe we could just use the former option. Epona, Walrus, Crimson Loftwing etc. should be suppressed. Edit: On a second thought the character template uses the races field, while a species field would be more appropriate. The infobox could be changed of course but maybe a template for the animals would be better. Anyway, I'll bring it to Hyrule Castle since it is difficult to be noticed here. Zeldafan1982 (talk) 15:07, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Rename to "Tribe"
Not only does "Race" kind of have a...bad history, but "Tribe" is consistently used throughout the series in all games but OoT. I feel like we should move the title, and possibly tighten up our requirements for what's included to something like "Multiple sentient members or otherwise explicitly called a tribe in-game, not including deities". For example, "Keaton", "Dragons", and "Sword Spirit" should not be included as tribes/races, because they clearly aren't part of a species, and are basically treated as nature spirits/gods with a totally different origin.KrytenKoro (talk) 16:37, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The word "race" (or subspecies) isn't a bad word or anything, but: individuals of different races but from the same species can mate (e.g. dogs of different races can mate with each other, and humans of different races can mate with each other); individuals of different species can't mate (e.g. a dog with a human). Nintendo most likely has not said, whether e.g. Zoras and Gorons can mate or not, so it is not known whether they are races from the same species or part of different species. Well, they could be races, though sometimes from different species, but then just calling it race is misleading as it looks like "different races from the same species". tribe could sometimes be wrong too (e.g. if Ganondorf, born as a Gerudo, would be banned/expelled from the Gerudo tribe), but still might be better. Maybe "races, species and tribes" could be more fitting, as it does not say e.g. Zora are a race (of which species?) or Zora are a species or Zora are a tribe.
 * On the other hand, English-speakers, maybe especially US-Americans, often do not corretly distinguish between terms, like they quite often incorrectly use song (which needs lyrics/singing) instead of musical piece. -Bernd (talk) 22:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
 * "Race" as a concept is pretty much discredited, scientifically, and is not really equivalent with dog breeds. As for "tribe" -- it can't be inaccurate in any usage, because it's the English word for "-zoku" that the Japanese games have consistently used. "Zora tribe" is a term that has appeared in the games, and as said earlier, "tribe" is the word used in every game that mentions non-Hylian characters other than OoT.
 * As far as interbreeding goes, the games have included Gerudo, Sheikah, and I think stuff like Wind Tribe (<===) as "Humans".KrytenKoro (talk) 14:29, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Monsters as a race
Have you we considered monsters as a race? Listing the times where they're clearly sentient, or friendly? Or is the term too vague, or already covered by Demon? Come to think of it, what makes a demon anyhow, Ghirahim calls Bokoblins, and stuff members of the Demon tribe? Delsait (talk) 21:16, 7 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I believe that yes, the different types of sentient monsters could be considered races. Moblins, Bokoblins, Miniblins, and such could be considered sub-races of a Goblin race. Similarly Lizalfos and Dinofols could be treated as close relatives of the same race. This is of course we use a similar definition of Race as is used by D&D and such. Astroninja1 (talk) 16:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)