User talk:Dragonstetraforce@legacy41959011

my timeline

any opinions?Dragonstetraforce 20:12, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Erm, I can't exactly read it... when it's all on one line like that, it's pretty jumbled up. :/ Might I suggest splitting it amongst several lines? User:Ando/sig 20:59, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

no sorry. i found a way to put it all in one timeline. but i can sort it for you :)Dragonstetraforce 18:34, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Right, right! That's what I meant. By "several lines" I meant "several lines of text", not "several timelines". Sorry about the confusion there! User:Ando/sig 18:38, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

ok done. what do you think!Dragonstetraforce 18:53, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

It looks good, though I'm a little confused about the whole "FS happened, then TMC and THEN FSA". After all, Vaati went into his eyeball form at the end of TMC... yet he was already in it in FS and FSA. But hey, I'm not a timeline theorist, so maybe I'm wrong? :P User:Ando/sig 02:48, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

its simple really. vaati was not properly sealed in fs. causeing him to revert back to human form. he then needed an energy force powerful enough to regain his power. just like ganon.Dragonstetraforce 20:36, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry friend, but I disagree with ANY timeline which suggests the child part of OoT happened, then MM, then the adult half of OoT. That's the thing in your timeline which caught my eye. --Felicia's Champion 23:18, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

• sigh* everyone knows thats what happend already.Dragonstetraforce 19:25, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Aye, but with the linear timeline you're implying that Link got the spiritual stones, THEN went to Termina and did that whole deal, THEN went back to Hyrule to pull out the Master Sword. I realize what you're trying to say, but the way the timeline's organized it implies that MM happened right in the middle of OOT, which... it didn't. User:Ando/sig 20:02, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. --Felicia's Champion 04:44, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

The Ocarina of Time. Zelda gives it to you in two completely different ways.User:Matt/sig 04:46, October 17, 2008 (UTC)

Which is a little difficult to do on the same timeline.

Linear timelines have always confused me for several reasons. One is that the creators themselves have consistently said that the split exists. Two is, well, Twilight Princess. It tells what happens in the child timeline. Link went back in time from being an adult, and with his knowledge, tells Zelda about Ganondorf before he can come to any agreement with the King or anything. Eventually he's proven guilty and executed. Kind of hard for him to have been proven guilty, executed, and then still the whole adult portion of Ocarina of Time take place, don't you think? :/

Don't think I'm just trying to completely destroy your theory here or anything, I just like debating. :P User:Ando/sig 05:33, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

no prob. the idea behind my theroy is a paradox,provided by oox. after all my point is that when gen 3 link and gen 4 link switch, that means both links are in about 100 differnt places at once. the "flashbacks" in tp can take place 2 or 3 gens in the past. heck, flashbacks can take place anytime in the past if said by the right person (seeing as ganon is one entity; the sages are ghosts; tingle is 35 in every game; thousnds of characters are ageless; ect.) Dragonstetraforce 20:43, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, based on the story hidden in the Tower of the Gods in 'The Wind Waker, each Tingle is a different incarnation.User:Matt/sig 20:48, October 17, 2008 (UTC)

my bad. freaky how hes always 35 though.Dragonstetraforce 20:58, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

wait hold on... what dont you get about it being a paradox? in a paradox you dont have to worry about "oot gives it to you in 2 different ways". Dragonstetraforce 20:33, 24 February 2009 (UTC)