User talk:Vaati The Wind Demon@legacy41963446

Link
The point of the link was that "dogpiling" onto trivia notes like that simply isn't professional. It's done on trvtropes, and it really shouldn't be done anywhere else.

"I only added to it because part of it was already there in the trivia and it seemed to pertain to that trivia's part. " --this is what the other editor was criticizing. If you just keep adding onto a badly written trivia note with "well not quite!" and stuff like that, it makes the page look like it was written by a schizophrenic chipmunk. When you see stuff that needs to be corrected, correct it. Don't add to it in a way that makes it look like the authors are arguing on the page itself.

Basically, try to keep in mind whether what you're adding is actually informative, or just..."similar".KrytenKoro 23:40, 9 January 2012 (EST)
 * Just to point out that, recently, TV Tropes is strongly discouraging this type of text as well. So yeah, follow the suggestions of KrystenKoro and don't do it at all. It's not a very good formatting style to begin with, really =/. -- 02:28, 10 January 2012 (EST)

Translations
Did you do a lot of edits like this? I hope this doesn't offend, but that's not a more accurate translation, and if you've been modifying a lot of these I'd like to know so I can check them.KrytenKoro (talk) 13:43, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * "Devil" is a pretty standard and accurate translation for any sort of significant, evil, supernatural entity. There's no specific characteristics required beyond that.
 * Ex: 魔神 【まじん; ましん】 (n) devil; evil spirit; genie [Edit][L][G][GI][S][A][W] [JW]
 * (From WWWJDIC).
 * devil (plural devils)
 * 1.(theology) A creature of hell.
 * 4.A wicked or naughty person, or one who harbors reckless, spirited energy, especially in a mischievous way; usually said of a young child.
 * 9.(religion, Christian Science) An evil or erring entity.
 * (From wiktionary)
 * Also see: Digital Devil Saga, Devil May Cry's Devil Arms, etc. for other non-Christian uses of "Devil".KrytenKoro (talk) 15:55, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I still don't see why it would be considered inaccurate; devils are "powerful evil demons with a destructive purpose for disasters", the terms are basically synonymous. For example, google gives 2,430,000 results for "devil" and only 76,300 results for "demon god". "Devil" is thirty times more likely to be used as a translation, and while there are connotations that would be inaccurate, there are also connotations that would be perfectly accurate, and less awkwardly worded. Bellum is a "devil", even if he isn't Satan himself; even the Christian Science definition allows for "devil" to be a general noun for a type of thing, rather than a specific entity.KrytenKoro (talk) 21:09, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Literally a demonic god, yes. "Devil" is an accurate translation for that, and is the most-used translation of that kanji compound to boot.
 * I'm not misunderstanding, I just don't agree that there's a distinction between "devil" and "demonic god". The term "devil", especially as a general rather than proper noun, is very often used for a demonic god. Furthermore, even in Christianity, the devil is treated and often seen as part of a dualistic system, an evil (though usually lesser) counterpart to Yahweh, what many belief systems would still term a god. If absolutely necessary, we could put a note explaining that the Zelda series isn't calling Bellum a form of the Christian Satan, but the word "devil" is an accurate and preferable translation for that word and that title.KrytenKoro (talk) 21:53, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh aye, I can vouch that even from a Catholic perspective, when performing an exorcism you're supposed to treat any unclean spirit as "a devil", and not humor any of their claptrap about being a fifth-highest Duke of Pandaemonium or any nonsense. Even in Christianity, "devil" has ample usage as a "type" of entity. As for perspectives outside of Christianity, Satan is very often interpreted as a sort of Anti-Yahweh, and demonic god entities in folklore and fiction are often just called devils. "Maou" (demon kings/lords) are also frequently translated as "devil", but on the whole, translating "majin" as "devil" is accepted and accurate.KrytenKoro (talk) 22:14, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, no ones ever clearly explained those, not even in most of the translations websites either, they just slap on the word and expect an immediate understanding. How would we use the terms Akujin/悪神 and 邪神/Jashin, both have very similar meanings, but is there anything different. The word devil and demon have so many words in Japanese, similar and unique ones, it's hard to choose context since the Zelda series always switches around words, like Debiru/デビル, Akuma/悪魔, Akujin/悪神, and Mao/魔王, all I can do when translating them for a specific character is these three rules I go by.

1. How they look, their appearance, and their traits.

2. What's their backstory, what we know about them, and where did they come from.

3. What is their personality, their character, and what they act like in every situation.

4. What's the right words to choose to prevent a confusion from ever happening.

--Vaati The Wind Demon (talk) 22:50, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I've not heard of Akujin before, but I've seen Jashin, and it is usually translated as "Wicked God" or "Evil God" -- something not specifically demonic, but still evil, like Loki or Ares.
 * Mao is generally either "Demon Lord", as it's analagous to how a lot of medieval grimoires organized demons into hierarchies. Akuma, though, is just a generic minor demon, something weak but evil.KrytenKoro (talk) 00:09, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Translating 魔神 (majin) as devil is reasonable, but it must be done universally throughout the wiki (so you cannot translate it as "demonic spirit" in one place and "devil" in another). Also, if that is done, an alternate translation for 悪魔 (akuma) must be used (I suppose "demon" could work, or even "evil demon"). -- Snorlax Monster  02:41, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't see what the problem is with varying a translation, it doesn't actually have to be the same everyway and/or everywhere or else that will dull everything and make it one sided. Demon, Devil, Fiend, Evil Spirit, they are the same kinds of beings, so what's wrong with adding a little variety, we want people to know that there are many ways of translating a single Japanese Word. Besides, I'l get more into this discussion tomorrow, G'Night! --Vaati The Wind Demon (talk) 02:49, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
 * "or else that will dull everything and make it one sided" - That is unimportant. Keeping translations consistent is vital to ensuring they are accurate and that people understand which particular word is being used in which particular circumstance; the point is that Vaati is the same kind of demon as Bellum, but a different kind to Vire, and if you vary translations it becomes extremely difficult for someone who doesn't look very carefully to notice this. Consistency among pages also allows information to be taken in much easier. The point that there are many English words and many Japanese words for things which are very similar but subtly different is important, and translating the same word in different ways on different pages does not alleviate this at all; all it does is spread misconceptions that two different demons are being referred to in different ways. -- Snorlax Monster  03:12, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
 * No Vaati is not the same kind of Demon as Bellum, Vaati wasn't even originally a Demon to begin with, he was a Minish, then a Hylian Sorcerer, then a Demonic Spirit due to his body constantly changing since he lost his Original. Yes it is important because the translation has to match the *Specific Character*, changing everything to match one word will only complicate things because it implies that they all have something in common in everyway.  --Vaati The Wind Demon (talk) 07:52, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
 * But they are the same kind of demon, because the same word is used. That's why it is critical to use the same translations universally, to make it clear that that is the case. You're also assuming that Bellum has always been a demon, which we do not know; even if we did, non-demons who turn into demons could certainly become the same kind of demon as those that have always been, since it has never been stated otherwise. You're looking at two different characters that feel different and trying to translate the same word different ways to suit them, but it's the same word with the same meaning in both cases. -- Snorlax Monster  12:29, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
 * If they were the same kind of Demon then they would have the same kind of evil powers and species origins, but such is not the case. Just because something uses the same word does not make them the same, I can cite various examples of Demons that use the same Japanese words, but are exactly different in many ways.  Bellum has always been a type of Demon, there's no denying it, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN91GKmzNx8, as you can see, Bellum looks exactly like he does in this Legend as he does now.  Lets get KrytenKoro's opinion on this.  --Vaati The Wind Demon (talk) 12:46, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I have to say that I think it's a ridiculous notion to try to assume what "sort" or "kind" of demon one character is or is not. We can't possibly begin to objectively categorize characters based on how much of or what kind a demon they are. Take humans, for example. "Human" applies to many species and subspecies in the series, so we can only agree upon very loose guidelines, ignoring ear shapes, habitat, propensity for magic, etc. Luckily in our language, there's not many words you could interchange with "human," but it's the same situation for demon/devil. We shouldn't try to discern which is/isn't in our subjective view for different kinds of demon/devil. We're given it at face value by the series. Batreaux, Vaati and Bellum are all demons of "varying qualities." What kind is hardly any of our business, as it's all speculative to assume that there's even a distinction to be made.
 * Because of this, I support using a single translation of demon or devil. Whichever term we decide upon should be universal (I believe demon is more prevalent in the English localizations, so I would lean towards that). 21:37, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
 * So does that mean Vaati's current translation 魔神グフー/Demonic Spirit Gufuu can stay, it uses the term *Demonic* in it and a Demon is basically an Evil Spirit and the translation has remained the same for years. Our very own Admin Abdulluh himself was the one who added the translation and I don't see any reason to change it seeing how it's already accurate and clearly already states he's a Demon anyways.  --Vaati The Wind Demon (talk) 00:12, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I've posted my comments on Snorlax's table -- for Vaati, the way that word is used throughout fiction, "Devil" would probably be best; the kanji are specifically referring to a godlike entity of dark power, not simply an evil spirit. Translating it as "Demonic Spirit" is actually pretty inaccurate, since the connotation is that Vaati is much weaker than he actually is.KrytenKoro (talk) 15:10, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually, translating it as Demonic Spirit is accurate, both a devil and a demon are types of Evil Spirits. In the sense, Malevolent Deity, Demonic Spirit, or Evil Spirit would be a better translation for a character like Vaati.  魔神 as Demon God/Devil for Vaati will only imply that Vaati is stronger than Ganon or Ganondorf and that him obtaining the Light Force turning him into a 魔神 gave him more power than Ganon obtaining the Triforce of Power turing him into a 魔王.  I'd say leave Demonic Spirit as it is because 魔神 doesn't always refer to a devil, it refers to any powerful evil spirit that causes misfortune and disaster, http://ejje.weblio.jp/content/%E9%AD%94%E7%A5%9E, http://www.wordsense.eu/魔神/, http://www.wordsense.eu/majin/, a genie, demon, fiend, devil, and wizard.  Seeing as how Vaati wasn't always a Demon and the power portion he obtained wasn't Triforce power-like, I'd say, leave it as Demonic Spirit or Evil Spirit.  --Vaati The Wind Demon (talk) 16:14, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Palace of Winds
Would you mind if I use the Palace of Winds as an example for my Game: proposal at Hyrule Castle? I plan to separate the articles into four portions -- three for each of the dungeon incarnations, and one for the fiction. These will be created at:


 * User:KrytenKoro/Palace of Winds
 * User:KrytenKoro/Game:Four Swords/Palace of Winds
 * Alternatively, User:KrytenKoro/Game:Palace of Winds (FS)
 * User:KrytenKoro/Game:Four Swords Adventures/Palace of Winds
 * Alternatively, User:KrytenKoro/Game:Palace of Winds (FSA)
 * User:KrytenKoro/Game:The Minish Cap/Palace of Winds
 * Alternatively, User:KrytenKoro/Game:Palace of Winds (TMC)

Would you like to assist with these? I'll let you choose whether the articles are filed by game (default) or just topic (alternative).KrytenKoro (talk) 20:30, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Absolutely go right ahead, TBH, that Palace of Winds (Four Swords) article was my very first page I ever created on Zelda Wiki! --Vaati The Wind Demon (talk) 20:34, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Speaking of the Palace of Winds, the article was split into 3 pages without any apparent discussion. It's a rather large change, so can you tell me what exactly led to the decision to split? Otherwise, I'm compelled to revert the change. 16:20, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Well according to this Wiki's rules, they have to have their own pages by game, even Pakkun suggested it was a good idea to split the page by game, http://zeldawiki.org/User_talk:Pakkun#A_Request.21. This was the page that started it all, http://zeldawiki.org/Palace_of_Winds_(The_Minish_Cap).  TBH when the MC page was made, I was against splitting it at first, but rules are rules.  --Vaati The Wind Demon (talk) 17:01, 20 February 2014 (UTC)