Talk:Enemies in The Legend of Zelda series/Archive 1

Re-organize article

Hey,

I am looking over this article, I think it should be reorganized by Zelda game. What do you guys think -- ZeWrestler 3:28 May 9 2005

It's a thought, but many enemies tend to reappear in many games, so organizing them in this way could become confusing (unless each appeared in multiple sections). We could have a section for enemies appearing in multiple games and a section for each game for enemies appearing primarily in that game instead (much as we have The Legend of Zelda series characters and The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time characters, etc. Deco 04:48, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

Originally this page was for Zelda 1 bosses, but as I went through I found that all of them appeared in other games. So dividing by game isn't really very possible. But I like what Deco suggests, that could work too.

Or maybe by chronological order of invention? So it starts with the enemies introduced in Z1, and then goes on down the scale adding all the rest in order. Master Thief Garrett 05:27, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

Alternate proposal: Perhaps add "Enemies by game" type sections, each with links to the appropriate subsections listing each enemy. --Stratadrake 05:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Why not just A-K and L-Z system it'll cut down the file size greatly? 60.241.126.129 00:15, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I think the article should be broken down into subsections, sorted alphabetically. As user 60.blahblahblah wrote, have a A-K... system, or even have a page for individual letters if necessary. Stovetopcookies 19:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

As most of the enemies appear in several games and aren't worth an entire article, it would be silly to organize them by game. As this article is meant to be a list, probably alphabetical is the way to go. Similarly, a list could be added to sort the enemies by their in-game appearances, linking to places at the bottom of the page where the reader could find the information on each enemy; yet, probably the best thing overall would be just to unhide all the games each enemy is found in—they're all there already.Cocoapropo 23:42, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Subject Matter

We need to make a decision. Do we cover all the enemies in the series, or just the ones we can write about with a significant amount of detail? For instance, there are small enemies in Twilight Princess' Hyrule Field that are similar to flightless birds and lay exploding eggs. That is all the information there is on them. Does that belong on Wikipedia? Armogohma 00:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd say yes. Especially because their name isn't mentioned in the game or manual, so if Nintendo decidedes to tell us what they are called (which I hope they will, like they already did with the Hebi Babas and Bulblins) isn't this the place to write about it? I have heard that killing them creates a digging spot (where they died) where you can find worms (I never bothered about fishing, so I can't confirm it). Anyway, I don't see why an enemy would be insignifacant, just because it only appeared once. The important enemies usually have their own pages, which is too much for the minor enemies. So they should be listed here.DreamingLady 11:02, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I see. The fact that information is hard to find makes it more deserving to be here, not less. I was only thinking from the writer's point of veiw, not the reader's. Also, I found out more about the enemy I used as an example. It's called a bombskit, and it is mentioned in the bombchu section. Armogohma 03:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed them too. I wonder where people get it's name from. I don't recall having heard it anywhere in the game. But I wonder, is it handy to put two rather unrelated (wow, they both blow up!) in the same article, without any way of knowing it can be found there? Anyway, this page still has a lot of enemies left to cover (keatons, daira, those cyclop-things from FSA and ALTTP etc.), all of which don't have a lot of info (I think).DreamingLady 07:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I have actually made a HUGE list of little-known enemies, but I think that belongs under a different topic. Armogohma 18:07, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I have info on the minor enemies and I'll be filling it in day-by-day. I do need some pictures, though. I also made the bomskit article and several other ones already. If people could find the pictures for me, it would be a really big help. Just don't add info to some of the incomplete articles because it'll take me a few days to get it all done. Just leave it to me. Pokemon Guy 17:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

It's "Bomskit", and the people who claim that name say that they got it either from Nintendo documents or from game code - it wasn't clear what they were saying. There were a few names that they were out and out wrong on, though, such as all of the Shadow enemies (they called the Shadow Beast Twilit Messengers and the Shadow Insects Twilit Parasites, whereas the official English and Japanese sites disagree), so they may not be as reliable as they claimed.KrytenKoro 18:17, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I only have one thing to add. The article is called "Enemies in the Legend of Zelda Series". It isn't called "Significant Enemies in the Legend of Zelda Series" or "Recurring Enemies in the Legend of Zelda Series". So unless you're going to write a whole new article on one of these or other similar topics, you might as well add them all in here.Cocoapropo 23:55, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Enemies

I think we should experiment with improving sections of Enemies to the point of quality that the Goomba page has. Anyone want to help?--A Link to the Past 03:13, May 21, 2005 (UTC)

This seems feasible for some enemies (like maybe Stalfos) but not for all of them. Many have only one form in one game and we know almost nothing about them other than their bitmap and attack behaviour. Certainly improving any sections as much as possible is great, though — just avoid ungrounded speculation. Deco 23:37, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, actually Moblin looks quite good. I'm continually surprised. Maybe a number of these could be expanded. Deco 23:39, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. Guess we just need to start hitting those edit links now, huh? I'm still looking at getting the list complete, myself. Evan L. Kester 22:28, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Bosses and enemies

I've been looking at the layout here, and I can't help but notice that there are a lot of bosses to list, and even more enemies. Should we look at splitting it before the article gets too huge, or is it OK to just let it get that long? Ideas? Evan L. Kester 22:31, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps make a separate bosses page? I agree it's getting far too long. Master Thief Garrett^Talk 04:11, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

What do you do for enemies who were bosses in one level, and a common foe in another? --ZeWrestler 16:01, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

I was waiting for someone to bring that up! Well, my idea was to have a "master list" of bosses, like this.

Dodongo

full description here of it and its changing functions/abilities/uses/appearance/etc.

appeared in (link to game pages here)

and then later on down the page you have...

game here a bosses

• dodongo, description of its function in *this* game, and link to above master description of *all* games

game here b bosses

• dodongo, description of its function in *this* game, and link to above master description of *all* games

And so on. Master Thief Garrett^Talk 16:51, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

It might also help if we describe them on both pages. The boss version being described on the boss page, and the enemy version on the enemies page.

But to be safe: I'd say any enemy that appeared specifically as the guardian at the end of a dungeon, and rewards Link with a Heart Container after its defeat is a boss and should at least have a reference link on the boss page. Same for any encounter with a major character. If they're mostly encountered as regular enemies, (as in, you encounter more of them as regular enemies than as bosses), then they should be described on the enemies page, and at most have a brief mention on the boss page and a link to the enemies page. Bah. I talk too much. Evan L. Kester 23:57, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Merging of The LoZ Bosses and The LoZ Series Enemies

In my opion I believe we should merge The Legend of Zelda Bosses and the The Legend of Zelda series enemies. Or at least improve on The Legend of Zelda Bosses. I mean that The Legend of Zelda Bosses page is sorry. Post your opions here. January 06 2006 I will be posting more on this page throughout the month."Timetraveler" Zelda Fan :)

It would make the list too big. The enemies list is already 54 sections long, and I know we're missing some enemies like the Kargaroc. I'm starting to improve the bosses section, so I don't think a merging of the sections is necessary. Mystlord; February 21 2006

Redundancy of Link to the Past bosses

There's a great deal of redundancy between the boss list recently added to the The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past page and the list here for bosses from that game. What to do? Deco 00:49, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps move it to a new Bosses page as per my suggestion above? Master Thief Garrett^Talk 03:34, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Actually, keeping the bosses on the game pages looks like a better idea to me. Let's just remove the bosses from the enemy article and add boss lists to the game pages. It's a little cleaner, and leaves more room on the enemy page for the actual topic. I'll remove my boss list right now, in fact.. Evan L. Kester 00:42, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Images

A couple of the mosnters could really use some images, or at least a better description. Which creatures were the anti-fairies, for example? I think I vaugely remember them, but a picture would help... Fieari July 5, 2005 04:29 (UTC)

Cleanup

It seems to me like this article needs major cleanup.

First, I have some questions about some statements. For instance, where does that so-called "fictional proverb" about Like Likes come from? And, how were Deku Babas suggested in Link's Awakening? Octogons (is that even the official name?) are related to Octoroks? According to what source? Also, Anti-fairies are a subset of Bubbles, Bubbles being the more common name and Anti-fairies referring to a specific type, the article should reflect this. Plus, I can think of a dozen enemies missing from this list just off the top of my head.

Second, do Keese/Vires and Octoroks really deserve their own pages? Moblins might, but I propose improving the other pages or merging them back into this one.

Third, since some bosses do recur during the series, or have relationships to lesser enemies, I'd like to revisit Garret's suggestion of a bosses page.

-- WikidSmaht 22:12, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

Actually I think Moblins definitely deserve their own page, as much as any of the other enemies that currently have pages. They, along with Octocks, are one of the few constants in every game. - Kevingarcia 03:21, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

What, exactly, makes you think that Keese and Octoroks don't deserve their own article? Do they not have enough content? - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:33, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

Not enough meaningful content. I used to think I was inclusionist, but I'm noticing more and more mergist tendencies... Moblins do actually differ enough from game to game that I can accept the validity of a separate page(, particularly since some Moblins have names, speeches, and character developement), though it could use some cleanup as well. But Keese and Octoroks always fall within two or three close variations on a theme. And Keese includes the related Vires in what appears to me to be an attempt to lengthen the page. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 05:43, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

Adding content is an attempt to increase the length of the page, too! Vires ARE Keese. This is undeniable.

And what do you call sea Octoroks? Or the fact that every Zelda game has Octoroks in it? Or the Big Octo, or the Big Octorok (which can turn from regular to an ice Octorok)? Or the change in appearance from the first two, to LttP, to OoT, to TWW? Or the fact that in TWW, some Octoroks shoot bombs and live only in the Great Sea? I'd really like to see you explain how Moblins are all that different... They barely changed until TWW came along. - A Link to the Past (talk) 06:14, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

Iron Knuckle?

I notice the Iron Knuckle article is suggested for a merger with this one. While I could see the merit of that, I think the information could also be put in the Armos page since the Iron Knuckle serves both the Darknut and Armos roles in the Adventure of Link. - Kevingarcia 03:13, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I disagree - Adventure of Link didn't really have an equivalent to the Armos. Or it could be argued that the "Hammer Knight" (I don't know the name of this creature, sorry) was intended to replace Armos. Though Darknuts and Ironknuckles are definitely similar. McJeff, 01:45, 17 March 2006 (EST)

I changed the Armos article slightly (feel free to change it back) to acknowledge that no Armos appears in Adventure of Link but the knight statues that come to life when hit, a move used by Armos in most other appearances. What do you think? - Kevingarcia 05:23, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm disagreeing with the descriptions of darknuts/iron knuckles. Please someone research the differences between the two as I don't believe that the picture (from twilight princess) is of a darknut, rather an iron knuckle as it is much more heavily armored than traditional darknuts, slower, is more humanoid and certainly slower up to the point where you remove its armor. At least find out what the official nintendo name is 04:27, 05 march 2008

...the official Nintendo website for TP (both eng and jap) call it a Dark Nut in TP. Have you played TWW? They're basically the same, with animal heads.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 06:28, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

List of Enemies sill left to be put on this page

• Ghini
• Gohma
• Gekko
• Kargaroc
• Magtail
• Morth
• Flare Dancer
• Vitreous

Don't forget the Daira, the alligator guy that appeared in Link's Adventure. ...He was an NPC, not an enemy.KrytenKoro

Huh?

Can someone explain what is going on in this sentence:

Like Likes appear in later versions of The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past in only one room in the Palace of the Four Swords. As in other Zelda games, the Like Likes in A Link to the Past steal your shield. Like Likes do not normally appear anywhere in this game.

Answer to Huh?

I think he screwed up when he wrote it. I changed it to:

Like Likes do not normally appear anywhere else in this game.

Iron Knuckle

The Iron Knuckle article has expanded a lot since its initial creation, thus I have removed the merge tag. If anyone objects, feel free to comment and/or add the tag back.--☆TBC☆ (aka Tree Biting Conspiracy) 01:55, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Not neccesarily true...

"[Mothula] was vulnerable to several weapons but could be most easily defeated by using the Fire Rod"

While it is true that the developers most likely intended for the player to use a fire rod to destroy this boss, it is much easier to use 3-4 bees to destroy it as the player has to do nothing other than release the bees, and they dispatch it in 2-3 seconds.

-Golden Bees aren't a weapon though, they are an item, and they can kill things, but you can't controll them, and they do not count as a weapon, they are creatures.

Green ChuChus

In the ChuChu section one sentence reads:

"Green Chu-Chus are sometimes able to damage Link from a distance in what seems to be a psychic attack."

I've never seen or heard of any sort of ChuChu doing anything like this, and I've asked around a bit on a gaming message board and no-one else has either. I think this should be removed, unless the person who wrote it can explain what they mean? Happyjoe5 09:12, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree; this is false & should be removed. --Tryforceful 14:19, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Split

1. Dark Link
2. Dodongo

Opinions? Bly1993 14:08, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

• Well, I'm splittin' Dark Link. He's becoming a main villain. Bly1993 14:12, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

ChuChu or Chu-Chu?

It's ChuChu, is it not? According to the official Zelda Encyclopedia it is. I'm changing it.

--Tryforceful 04:10, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Dark Link

Since Dark Link is a major enemy, shouldn't he get a seperate article?

Probably not, because not much info is really known about him. He's only appeared in two Zelda games, not counting the "Shadow Links" from Four Sword Adventure.

Now I have another question. Wouldn't it be better to have "real" screen-shots of Dark Link in the article as opposed to ones created with the help of a cheating device? Readers who haven't played those games may get the wrong impression that Dark Link can be playable by normal means. -SaturnYoshi 14:19, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I think we should definately create a page for Dark Link. He's a returning boss character and quite popular at that. We could make a differentiation between "Dark Link" (the powerful entity equal with Link) and "Shadow Link" (The lesser, mass produced copies).

I actually agree with whoever nameless person is above me. If Deku Babas, a fairly insignificant enemy, and Onox/Veran, both one-shot bosses, deserve a separate page, I think that Dark/Shadow Link(s) should be considered candidates for a seperate page too. I'd be willing to help scrounge up more information for him/them if someone would be willing to start up a Dark Link/Shadow Link page. -Lord Zymeth 20:17, 12/30/2006

I am already taking care of that, I have all the info copied, to tell me, please, how to make a seperate page so I can paste all this info.

It may say "Main article: Dark Link" but that simply links back to this page. BassxForte 06:02, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

They also appear as optional final bosses in Link to the Past.KrytenKoro 05:16, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Stalfos, Stalchildren, and Skull Kids

If I remember correctly, humans are transformed into Stalchildren, Hylians are transformed into Stalfos, and Kokiri are transformed into Skull Kids. So, shouldn't it be changed? Totema1 17:36, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

No? Vitriol 16:16, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Hylians are a subgroup,humans. Anyway acording to the kokiri girl who stands in the forest humans do get transformed into stalfos when lost in the Kokiri forest. Delsait Plus, no humans appear in OoT or MM, so that theory in regards to humans can't be right. Plus, the game itself seems to prove the theory wrong - nothing happens to Link, Fado, or Saria, and it seems a lot like the "Kokiri will die if they leave the Woods" urban legend.128.211.254.142 06:13, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Humans are in the OoT and MM, they are the ones WITHOUT the pointed ears, making up the majority of the population. The Hylians seem to be a special subrace, chosen by the gods, as mentioned by the guy standing on the balcony early in the game in OoT.

I'm pretty sure the kokiri girl didn't specify that it was humans who get transformed, I think she just said grown-ups...though i may be wrong, i can check though.

...no, all characters have pointed ears in OoT and MM, unless they are non-humanoid, like the Gorons or Deku.KrytenKoro 18:15, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't Stalfos have their own article?

Seriously, they have been in almost every Zelda game to date. You can't give Deku Baba an article and not give Stalfos an article. Dementus 15:47, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree their also one of the few enemies to be given speaking roles and even have friendly examples like the king of Ilkana and the captain from Holdrum. Delsait

Cleanup

I have added the Cleanup Templatebecause this article needs to be either split into separate articles, or separated into different subcategories. Please discuss your views here.Joh777nny 03:19, 6 November 2006 (UTC) (oops, I hadn't realized that there was already talks about this issue)Joh777nny 03:20, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I made a Stalfos article

You can find it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalfos but it isn't complete, so could someone help me edit it? I am not at all used to the Wikipedia, and I don't know how to add images, so someone PLEASE help! I'm begging you! Dementus 15:32, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Ummm, I don't know how to add images either, but I think it's a great article! ganonman123

Gomess and the Addams family?

I think this name sounds very similar to the name Gomez, the father in the Addams family. Think about how similar they are already. They're both fictional horror characters, right?

I seriously doubt it. While possible, it's likely just a coincidence. SixteenBitJorge 22:01, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe Nintendo wanted to make a strange reference? Yeah, you're right. Probably not.

Well, they actually do make those kinds of vague-ish references (the Super Mushroom is a reference to Alice in Wonderland). I'm just doubtful because of the lack of resemblence. SixteenBitJorge 03:46, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I See, what you're saying, but I don't necessarily agree. But, it doesn't matter to me.

Gomez is a very common Spanish last name, and it's quite obvious Gomess is centered around the Grim Reaper as opposed to a well-dressed horror-film suave guy. Nice thinking outside the box though, I would have never made that connection. Commander Regulus 04:11, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Noble Cucco?

The way this section is written implies the that some vandal pulled it out of his ass in an obnoxious attempt to glorify the Cucco. I could be wrong, but if so, the prose is horribly unencyclopedic and in no way informative. SixteenBitJorge 20:49, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Individual Pages

This article is over 95 kilobytes long (as of 22:23, 12 December 2006 (UTC)). To fix that, I suggest that we create more pages for individual enemies who have had numerous appearences (like Keese and Octorok). A few to consider:

• Dodongo-at least 8, multiple variations
• Gohma-boss in 6 games, different every time
• Peahat-6 games, multiple variations
• Poe-5 games, big Poes, possibly add ghinis
• Skulltula-4 games, many variations
• ChuChu-only four games, but many variations
• Dark Link-6 games (7 with SSBM), recurring boss

These also have many appearences, but may be too similar in each game to merit their own page:

• Bubble-7 appearences
• Like Like-9 appearances (10 with SSBM)

SixteenBitJorge 22:23, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I think Dark Link should definately get his own page. He is the ONLY final boss character without a seperate page. He's in 6 other games besides his first as well. Also, the fact that there is obvious distinction between Dark and Shadow Link should give a good amount of info as well. I mean, even the Wind Fish's Nightmares have their own page, and they don't have nearly as much info or games as Dark Link! 71.213.187.182 04:09, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Pronunciation of "Skulltula"

To pronounce "Skulltula", it's (skul-too-luh). --PJ Pete

Okay... and...? -SaturnYoshi ^{THE VOICES} 08:11, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

I prefer to pronounce it more like "tarantula", which is "SKUL-choo-la". --Buddy13 15:19, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Since it's a combination of "skull" and "tarantula", I've always pronounced it "choo-la" as well. Though I'm not sure what the point is since the article has no pronunciation guides. Corbo 13:07, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I kind of pronounce it skull-TYU-la, but I guess that "tyu" and "choo" sound enough alike to not create any problems. Anyway, this user always seems to post comments that don't really go anywhere. -SaturnYoshi ^{THE VOICES} 08:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Use the Japanese names. I believe that'd be Sutarutsura... Stal-2-la. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.122.208.51 (talk) 16:43, 5 February 2007 (UTC).

Oh, actually it's SUTARUCHURA .. so yeah, staltyula. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.73.49.11 (talk) 03:21, 6 February 2007 (UTC).

When it comes to articles such as this one, just leave the pronunciations out unless they come from "official" sources. Probably better just to leave them out altogether, because everyone makes up their own pronunciations.Cocoapropo 01:39, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

The little dudes with the helmets

The ones that can only be attacked from behind, and are in LttP, Minish Cap, and Twilight Princess... What are they? Vitriol 16:29, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Helmasaurs Armogohma 00:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Lizalfos Article

Seeing as how there is enough data to make a Lizalfos page, I did. They are noteable enough as a species to merit their own page. If anyone has anything to add please do. Also, if anyone could find some good Twilight princess Lizalfos and Aeralfos, OoT Dinolfos, and some LA lizalfos and Daria sprites that would be wonderful. Lord Zymeth 20:09, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Problem making a New Page

Ok, I've learned the hard way that you cannot move one sub-title in a page without moving the whole entire article (I was trying to move Dark Link and made a mistake as a result). I feel like an idiot and I don't want to touch this again because I apparently can't even move a page right. Could someone please fix my error? Sorry for the problem. Commander Regulus 01:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I moved it back. For the record, I don't think Dark Link deserves his own page - he has no notable prominence outside of the primary source materials. Deco 03:31, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh, thank you so much. I felt like such an idiot messing up that page. Commander Regulus 04:08, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Would you be willing to submit to Dark Link/Shadow Link? I think between the two types, there might be enough for an article that is all their own. Commander Regulus 04:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Twilight Enemies

I'm trying to add the enemies off Twilight Princess to the list because I know tons about them, but I could use some help, especially with the pictures. If anyone is willing to help, I could really use a hand. Pokemon Guy 17:07, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Could you tell me which enemies you are looking for? I can get on it if you tell me which ones to get. Commander Regulus 04:07, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I need some pics for the bomb-related enemies, Twilit Messenger and Vermin pics(Shadowlings real name is Twilit Vermin), and I need info on the Deku Like. Oh, and you are an exception to the message I put at the enemies part of this page. Pokemon Guy 17:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Where are you getting their names from? I can't find anything on them!

By the way, I think the bulblins are mislabled. Aren't the bulblins the big green guys, while the smaller ones with big ears are bokoblins? Also, I really think we ought to use or at least LIST the real (Japanese) names of the monsters, especially for cases like 'helmethead' and 'horsehead' which have no official name in the american version of the game (the names here are fan-created). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.73.48.43 (talk) 01:57, 13 January 2007 (UTC).

I have a guide that has a beastry with the enemies' names. I have somewhat good info on them, but not too much. A bokoblin is a purple-blue monster that is not even related to the bulblin. And no, I did not mislable the bulblins; there are three different types. I also need help finding the Japanese names for them. Pokemon Guy 13:21, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

A question on the Bulbins, how are "Bulbin Warriors" and "Bulbin Infantry" any different? They behave in the same way, and the section of Infantry even says this! Aren't they just the same thing? Mr. Mittens

You're right, I fudged up on that. I'll fix the articles so that they are just one. Sorry 'bout that. I also need some help deciding where to put Phantom Zant; with the P's or with the other Zant enemies? It makes more sense to put it with the Zant enemies, but I need an opinion. Pokemon Guy 14:10, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

There you go, I merged the Bulblin articles into one main article. Pokemon Guy 14:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Is anybody gonna answer me? I've been a little busy lately, so I haven't added anything. Does that mean that everyone wants to stop talking to me? I just need an opinion before I can start editing. Pokemon Guy 16:06, 02 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, wow. I don't see anything I added... Well, I guess I was a little wrong on a bit of stuff, but otherwise, good job cleaning up! Pokemon Guy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pokemon Guy (talk • contribs) 13:25, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

You could probably add "Shadow Beasts" or just "Shadow Enemies" as a group, because though they only appear in the one game, they are an important part of that game - most enemies are just there to be enemies, but Shadow enemies are actually plottish.KrytenKoro 14:48, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

"Doomknocker"

Where the heck did this name come from?! It's not in the English or Japanese manuals, or the Player's Guides.

I call citation needed! --210.49.99.248 04:32, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Diababa problem

Why doesn't the Diababa have it's own page? Its a boss so it deserves its own page! Who put it on the enemies page? I'm having enough of a fit dealing with the enemies and then this shows up. Not funny. Could someone make it its own page? I have to deal with the enemies. Pokemon Guy 16:25, 02 February 2007 (UTC)

How do you make Dark Link its own page like the Darknut or Iron Knuckle?

I already have half of that done, all I want to do now is add all the main info on its own page, but how do I do that?

First, you sign your posts with four tildes (~ x 4). Then, you start the article. If the page exists as a redirect, you edit the page, remove the redirect code, and paste your own contents there. Stovetopcookies 19:05, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Twilit Messenger?

Where did this name come from? The japanese website says Shadow Assassin, so Twilit Assassin might make sense for the American version, and the game says Shadow Beast.

The Nintendo Guide doesn't say Twilit Messenger either - it also says Shadow Beast/monster.

If Nintendo of America and Nintendo of Japan can't be expected to know the names of their characters, than why are we expecting third-parties like (presumably) Prima and co. to know?

I'm changing it to Twilit Assassin, as per http://www.nintendo.co.jp/wii/rzdj/index.html If anyone can provide a NoA source that gives a different name, then change it back, but I put my money on the game and the makers.128.211.254.142 06:06, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Zant's Hand

Two Points on Zant's Hand:
A) Is there actual confirmation from any reliable source that these statues are actually called Zant's Hands? Any references I have seen outside of Wikipedia so far have been personal accounts and game sites. It should be noted that these constructs do not have the same art style as Zant, being more similar to Twili achitecture.
B) Zant's Hand is under the Wolfos heading. I'm moving it to a more suitable location, under the Zant Heading.

The heading thing was my fault, a little mistake from when I split the bosses. But I'd also like some confirmation on this "Zant's Hand". Gurko 18:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Dodongo

The dodongo section is basicly it's own article, complete with baby dodongos and King Dodongo, and it even has it's own notes section! I say that there should be an article dedicated to dodongos! - ~VNinja~ 16:48, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

About five one-sentence paragraphs detailing minor appearances, one note that's actually related that can be easily fused into the main paragraphs, and two completely unrelated trivia?

No. It would be completely ridiculous to create their own article - they are not a main character, and any article we attempted to make would be entirely crufty and non-encyclopedic. All of that information can actually be reduced to a paragraph or two.KrytenKoro 17:04, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Wrong, your just wrong. Dodongos have appeared in many games, have a younger version, unique weaknesses, and even a King that acts as a boss! Besides, your only judging by the information that's in the section now, I bet I can dig up more information from just playing MM and OOT! - ~VNinja~ 17:08, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

P.S. There was a previous idea to make the dodongo section it's own article...

Again - mere frequency does not make something notable. Now if something is very infrequent, it could be argued it is non-notable, but the same does not apply in reverse. Having a younger version does not make something notable either - what about the Blue Stalfos mini-boss in Oracle of Ages? Does it deserve its own article?

Yes, you could probably get more info from playing MM and OoT - and that info would almost certainly be game-guide, non-encyclopedic information. Pretty much everything usable from the games has been used here. I think the kind of thing you're trying to do would be more appropriate for http://zelda.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page, where it would actually be welcomed. As it is (and I'm not saying this as a threat - I like this article), this article is on thin ice for being unencyclopedic as it is. Pushing it over the edge won't help anything.

PS - then you should probably look at why that was shot down last time, as that speaks more than it being suggested does.KrytenKoro 18:24, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

References

I recently cleaned up the Dodongo section, but the refs aren't showing up. Does anyone know why?KrytenKoro 20:12, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

You didn't do it right, see you put the references, then at the bottom of the page you make a section for the references, and place <references/> there. It should look a little something like this:

- ~VNinja~ 23:45, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, usually that's not required - most of the pages that I add references to don't have that at the bottom.KrytenKoro 00:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

That's required if you're the first to put references on the page. If not, then it's probably already set up. - ~VNinja~ 03:48, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Splitting this article

This article is very long. It should be split up into several smaller articles; this page has 115 sections in over 100 kilobytes. It should be split up, and not just removing one or two enemies to make an article. Several articles should be made such as "Insect Enemies in the Legend of Zelda series", "Bosses in The Legend of Zelda series", or "Undead Enemies in The Legend of Zelda series" (these are just examples, as they may not be the best candidates). There should also be more pictues, as the descriptions may not be exact. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.3.22.2 (talk) 00:01, 1 March 2007 (UTC).

I agree. The bosses would be the easiest for now. 83.255.67.167 20:13, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... Perhaps an alphabetical system might work best. I dunno. A-G, H-M, N-S, T-Z? --Zooba 13:45, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

All bosses have been split off into Bosses in The Legend of Zelda series. This might mess up some other article links to Dark Link and Volvagia and such, but it's better this way. Gurko 23:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree that bosses should be split off, since they're almost always a completely different type of thing from regular enemies. However - the glut of new pages made for enemies that only appear in three or four (or less) games should be reversed - that's excessive. If you need to do the alphabet thing, do that, but having a seperate page for Chuchus and Skulltula is ridiculous.KrytenKoro 05:18, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I really thing we should set out to divide this article up alphebetically very soon, it's huge, it's sprawling, and the massive amount of OR will be far easier to remove if split into smaller chunks. I'd lie to get a consensus going to that affect, if possible. DurinsBane87 05:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

A-L, M-Z splits it 59-54.KrytenKoro

Sounds good to me, maybe split into a few smaller articles. regardless, we should make the decision soon, and implement it immidiatly upon consensus. DurinsBane87 06:48, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

We should also focus on the zelda pedia, the official site profiles, and the manuals for info. Try to keep as much OR out of it as we can.

Though, if you find anything in out-of-universe sources, that is always preferable.KrytenKoro 07:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

59-54 doesn't exactly give much room to expand before the articles grow too large again. The sizes might not be as close to each other as your example, but perhaps we should make three pages: A-H, I-P, and Q-Z. The smaller it is, the more information we can add to each creature without worry of needing more article splits. --Superneoking 19:06, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd vote for the three way split. I think we should get as much consensus as possible, and if there are no objections, we should split it within a few days from now. DurinsBane87 22:44, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Support - Three-way split

• Write your name underneath here if you support the decision of the article being split into 3 pages (A-H, I-P and Q-Z)

• Support - I think it's the best way to do it .:Alex:. 19:22, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
• Support with reservations - I want to know what the actual numbers are, and we need to make sure we put in a header a la List of Ultimate Digimon (Part 1)KrytenKoro 19:36, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
• Support - Once the tally is finished, we should start a new topic so we can be clear on how we'll be splitting it (article names, etc.)
• Comment - The tally I got was; A-H: 51, I-P: 27, Q-Z: 34. I did not count sub-headings as they seem to be part of certain enemies and I think we need to do a major cleanup and restructure of the whole thing anyway once it's split. So it might even out a bit then. .:Alex:. 18:05, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
• Support - Probably the best way to do it, although I was thinking A-M, N-Z might be simpler. I don't know, I'm not sure how long the articles would get, especially after an extended length of time. Haipa Doragon (talk) 19:26, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

A-L, M-Z splits it nearly halfway. I'll check to see what exactly splits it into thirds.KrytenKoro 20:35, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Since the split articles don't look like they would really solve the problems (though they're only supposed to be part of the solution, not the solution itself), does anybody want to userfy this to my space, and we can work on it there? I mean, let's finish this vote first, but if it fails, who wants to do that?KrytenKoro 20:36, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Since apparently the result of the vote was not waited for, I went ahead and userfied it to my userspace so we could work on it there - that way, they can have their nice "official" article, and we can do what we were planning to do and then remerge the important stuff later.KrytenKoro 20:42, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Oppose - Three-way split

• Write your name underneath here if you oppose the decision of the article being split into 3 pages (A-H, I-P and Q-Z)
• Instead of writing listy articles of Zelda enemies, it is best to write an encyclopedia article that discusses the main enemies from the perspective of the real world; such an article would give a brief description of major enemies, their creation (developers interviews are good for this), and cultural impact. Citing minor enemies for examples might also be appropriate. However, having a three-way bestiary database is not. Creatures of Final Fantasy is the best working example. — Deckiller 19:35, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
• Yeah, this is not a good idea. Most of these need to be cut due to being trivial bits that only amount to game guide material. It should start off being formatted like List of Mario series enemies (which gives only the more major enemies), and then move on to the above example after being worked on. TTN 20:11, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

In that case, how can we determine which ones are trivial and which are not? How many games do they need to appear in, how prominent do they need to be? As for the FF comparison - I'm not sure that really applies, as in FF, almost all enemies are just "there", whereas in Zelda, they often, if not almost always, play a part in the puzzles and gameplay - they have more presence in the game.

Also, part of the reason behind this split is to make them more manageable so that we can trim them down - it's nearly impossible to deal with this whole list all at once, whereas with smaller lists, we can keep track of what we're doing better.

However, besides the ones who already have split articles, I'm not sure really anything here has "development" information, and few have reception or criticism. Then again, I don't see nearly any of that on the FF page, besides a sentence about how Cactuars were developed from a doodle.

As a second suggestion - as we're likely to not be able to satisfy the bureaucrats in nearly any way on this page, who votes for transwikiing this to the Zelda wikia and working on it there?KrytenKoro 20:34, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Staple enemies

OK, there are probably between ten and twenty enemies that actually mean something to the series. As I haven't really gotten way too involved with this series, can people list some of them? I assume most of the ones that have not been merged are included in this. TTN 20:56, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Pretty much anything that appeared in LoZ and then in other games. Let's see...Like Like, Gibdo, Dodongo, Armos, Keese, Darknut, Beamos, Beetle family, Bubbles, Floormaster/Wallmaster, Gel/Zol, Poe, Gohmas, the Moblin family, Mold- family, Lynel, Octorok family, Poe family, Stal- family, Tektites, Wizzrobe family, and Zola (which are in the races article anyway, so not needed here). Anything else hasn't appeared in enough games to "mean something", no matter what the OoT fanboys say.KrytenKoro 21:10, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

The first step is to establish notability among the Zelda enemies as a whole; for fiction, this is done by including significant real-world information (creation, cultural impact/merchandise/reception).

I’m sure the creators have described their influences, and I’m sure certain staple enemies have won polls and contests. Plus, there is plenty of critical reaction on these monsters.

After this, the key is to determine which monsters to discuss. The best way to cover this is, again, notability (sections for monsters with the most real-world info). If that is difficult, then go by in-game appearance (4+ games probably). — Deckiller 21:01, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

"I’m sure the creators have described their influences, and I’m sure certain staple enemies have won polls and contests. Plus, there is plenty of critical reaction on these monsters." - not really, They save that for the bosses, since the whole game is so integrated into itself - monsters are part of the puzzles and gameplay, not a side-item like in FF.KrytenKoro 21:10, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Right now I'm just trying to merge the rest of the enemies and get a decent base going for future improvement. I don't really have way too much interest in actually bringing the page up to a really good standard. So, I'm just looking for the most important enemies at this point. TTN 21:09, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Also Pols Voice and Ropes.KrytenKoro

I'm adding staple enemies with short descriptions. I've been a fan since the beginning and have played every game. I'm adding only the very familiar ones that appeared numerous times. Just a starting point - someone else can add all the games they appear in and cite sources, etc.Rglong 00:40, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

By the way I see some people thinking if enemies are listed in other articles, they don't have to be listed here. But you can't assume people will go to other articles, especially casual readers. This page is its own page and still needs the complete list of notable Zelda enemies.Rglong 01:02, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

...but those enemies are listed in an infobox right at the bottom of this now-short page. We could even mention them in the starting paragraph, if we must. However, if this is the state that is truly going to be required, I doubt those articles are going to stay split for very long.KrytenKoro 01:59, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Stop Deleting Enemies!!

This is about the SERIES, not just the original game! Enemies like Redeads and Deku Baba reappear in three, four or more games, and spinoffs. They are not "minor".Rglong 16:58, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the series. As you said, both appear in only three games. Everything else hear has appeared at least since ALttP, if not LoZ, and has upwards of 9 or 10 appearances.KrytenKoro

So who made you the authority on how many appearances an enemy has to have had? 9 or 10? Where'd you pull those numbers out of? These enemies are recurring in the Zelda games. If you want to start an article about "enemies that appear in almost all the games" then go right ahead. Stop deleting information other people might find useful.Rglong 19:02, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

And learn how to spell "here", it might make your written opinions more convincing.Rglong 19:04, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Stop it with the personal attacks, he is entitled to as much of an opinion as you are. Deletion is not a reason to harmfully criticize someone's editing decisions, as long as it has good intent behind it. And if you are that bothered about someone's spelling, at least tell them about it in a non-sarcastic way; patronising doesn't help. Haipa Doragon (talk) 20:17, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

First off, my keyboard bugs out a lot - if you'd notice, e isn't that far from a. I'm surprised it works as well as it does. Second off, I didn't decide it - the admins who gutted the article and demanded that we either conform to wiki guidelines or face deletion did. If you want to be helpful on the kind of stuff you're asking for, work on the user draft I linked above. If you want to instead complain about how your favorite trivial enemies don't actually count as news-worthy, don't complain to me when you get the page deleted.KrytenKoro 00:27, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

No admins gutted the article, just TTN who's been criticised all over the place for deleting stuff everywhere. Can we go back to an old version, or at least bring back a bit more of a comprehensive list? SouperAwesome 12:22, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the first post. Those types of enemies are still being used today and merit there own section. ReDead and Deku Baba are now accepted enemies like Keese. 216.24.111.242 01:34, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I also agree with the first post. ReDead's are incredibly notable enemies and so are Deku Babu's.

It's incredibly irritating to type in an enemies name and be redirected to this article and THEN THERE IS NOTHING THERE. There really was no reason to delete those sections. They were well written enough and provided info. Knowitall 03:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

That's great and all, but there are criteria for inclusion that aren't determined by YOUR opinion of notability. Being well written and informative are not all that is needed for inclusion in Wikipedia. DurinsBane87 17:19, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

If Deku Babas and ReDead are so popular, how come the only games they've appeared in since MM were TWW and TP? There's been FS, FSA, TMC, PH, and both Oracle games, and they weren't included. Keese and most of the others on this list were. ReDeads and Deku Babas are minor enemies that are only remembered for being introduced in a game that wasn't even the best of the series. Get over it.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 22:17, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Deku Baba's are notable, they have appeared in all 4 3D Zelda titles. ReDead's are also very infamous enemies. Maybe you shouldn't put Deku Baba's in, but Redead's DEFINITELY deserve to make an appearance. Practically every enemy on this list was in the original game. I guess if the enemy isn't 20 years old it's not notable enough? -_-

Hey, why do we still have "Gel" in this? It only appears in THREE games! Delete it! Skulltula has only appeared in 3 games! (Redead and Deku Baba also appear in the same games AND in Wind Waker) And we have Pol's Voice, an obscure enemy that only appears TWICE! If "Gel" (which last appeared in a Zelda game 13 years ago) and "Pol's Voice" (which has only appeared in the original and Phantom Hourglass, and only appears like 5 times in each) are notable enough, then certainly Deku Baba and Redead are.

Knowitall 22:33, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Deku Babas have only appeared in 3 of the 3D games. ReDeads have only appeared in three, are merely a Gibdo recolor, and are not nearly as famous as you suppose - no google news hits at all. Gel - OoA, OoS, PH, FS, LA, and are closely related to the ChuChus, which have mostly taken their place, or Zols, which also appear in most of the games. Also, they were a boss thrice. Pol's Voice - OoA, OoS, LA, and PH. And that's just the more recent games (okay, LA isn't that new, but still...).

If you really want to fight, you can argue for Pols Voice being removed. However, ReDead and Skulltula are hardly "recurring" beyond the very barest of its meaning, and are mainstays of the series by no means, while nearly everything currently on the list is.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 23:10, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Recurring enemies in The Legend of Zelda series

Seeing as this seems to be what the article is about now, wouldn't it be more appropriate for it to be called this instead? With its current title, it is implying that every enemy should be listed here, which is obviously not what we want here due to notability reasons, anyway. Haipa Doragon (talk) 13:33, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm with you on that. As I mentioned above, if you're going to have an article like this one that lists something, you should list it all. Or retitle the article. It doesn't say "Recurring Enemies in the Legend of Zelda Series" or "Legend of Zelda Series Enemies of Significance". The title is "Enemies in the Legend of Zelda Series", so that's what it should include.Cocoapropo 02:22, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

"Recurring enemies in The Legend of Zelda series" would be most appropriate, to stay in conformance with other article titles pertaining to the Zelda series. Haipa Doragon (talk) 10:13, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree. It'll be easier to mantain that way, anyway. DurinsBane87 13:15, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Redead

Redead redirects here, to the Gidbo article, which then says "See redeads below" but there's never a redead section!

Please add one, also, this article is extremely incomplete. Knowitall 02:14, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

That's because ReDeads are a type of Gibdo, and there used to be a section on the ReDeads in the Gibdo section, but it and most of the page was gutted for notability reasons.KrytenKoro 05:52, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Except for the fact that in Wind Waker there are no Gibdos, and strictly Redeads. Also, in OoT Redeads are far more prominent than Gibdos. Redeads may be a similar monster to the Gibdo, but the fact still stands that they are completely separate. - Anonymous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.247.240.181 (talk) 22:38, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

....no. Except for TWW, in which Gibdos do not appear, ReDeads are merely a recolor of the more common Gibdo. Furthermore, ReDeads are only barely more populous - to my recollection, they only appear in Dark Hyrule Town and Ganon's Castle, while Gibdo's appear beneath the Well and in the Shadow Temple. The behaviors for which both are known are also seen in other games in which Gibdo appear - in TMC, for example, Gibdos behave exactly like both species do in MM and OoT. Furthermore, "ReDead Knights", enemies in TP, are in fact hybrids of both species - showing the qualities of a ReDead and Gibdo, along with a sword. A ReDead is essentially an unwrapped Gibdo, or one who was never wrapped at all.

Oh! Another thing - OoT and MM explicitly claim they are the same thing - because burning a Gibdo's bandages reveals a ReDead. End game.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 04:14, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Can we at least mention Redeads in the Gidbo section? Even just a short sentence such as "Gidbo's sometimes appear unwrapped, and that form is known as a Redead" Knowitall (talk) 05:17, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

ReDeads are already mentioned in the Gibdo section, if you go and read it now. Artichoker (Discussion) 14:08, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but it doesn't say what the Redead is. The sentence "In Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask, they behave identically to ReDeads." is frustrating, and leaves the reader wondering what a Redead is. Knowitall (talk) 14:04, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

No, since it says they behave identically, its implying that they are very similar. Artichoker (Discussion) 17:37, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Thwomp

I disagree with his removal. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Enemies_in_The_Legend_of_Zelda_series&diff=169002752&oldid=168984959 Although being (relatively) minor enemies, it does not change the fact that they are enemies in multiple games. They play a good-sized role in these games, and I don't see why we need to deprive the article of actual information. Not to get too far off track, but one of the reasons I'm not a regular editor is because of the pick-and-choosiness of these articles. We've got good information, but it has to be omitted because someone somewhere doesn't think it is "worthy" to be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.65.42.5 (talk) 20:09, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

If Thwomps are minor (since they only appear in two games) they shouldn't be listed in this article. This article is for the major and common enemies in Zelda. If all enemies were listed, this article would be huge. Also their role in OoA and OoS isn't very significant, since they only appear about once every couple of dungeoens. Artichoker 23:34, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

According to the Five Pillars, these articles must be beneficial to the readers, and if including al lthe enemies in is beneficial, then so be it. The beauty of the Internet and Wikipedia is that size is not often the limit, especially with articles. There are several anchors in the page to find what you need, so there really is no downside besides the article being a couple kilobytes larger. Wikipedia exists for the benefit of the users, and it is not beneficial to them to withhold information. Chugger1992 19:57, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Ok, then you might want to check out this link. You can add Thwomp to the list. Artichoker 20:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

ReDead

I've added this back. It's appeared in all four 3D Zelda games, that's plenty notable. I'm also thinking of adding in Deku Baba as well for the same reasons. It's obvious they're both going to be in future 3D titles. Knowitall (talk) 05:17, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Except....they haven't. Deku Baba did not appear in TWW, and neither appeared in PH. As far as "appeared in all four zelda games" - what the hell kind of reasoning is this? STICKS appeared in all four zelda games - are we giving them a section on "recurring items"? ReDeads weren't even notable within the games they appeared in - they held no role beyond "Infrequently appearing, somewhat annoying, meaningless obstacle". Everything else here has appeared many times throughout the series, and has usually held some kind of important role - for example, Skulltulas are allowed to be here because they were a major sidequest, and ChuChus have similar evidence. ReDeads are merely a Gibdo recolor that have NOT been brought to any but the first three games after they were introduced, and referenced in a much later one. Many games have been released since OoT that did not contain EITHER of these enemies - using your logic, wouldn't that argue against mentioning ReDeads? They're already mentioned in the Gibdo section, anyway.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 08:03, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmph, fine. You can reduce pretty much everything in here to "annoying, meaningless obstacle". And Skulltulas are really not very notable, they're just spiders. Whoop de doo.

And they did NOT appear once in PH, at least I don't remember seeing them. If they did, please tell me where they made an appearance? Wikipedia is on it's downfall. Do you know how frustrating it is to be redirected to something you're not looking for? (Redead to 'Gibdo' which is something different) Also, the Gidbo section references Redeads as if you would expect to read about them below, but no, they don't ever appear again and you're left wondering what it is. Wiki has been deleting a lot of good information for no reason and deleting practically every article, and something has to appear in every game in the series to get a short blurb on a list. (I cannot believe they reduced the article of one of the most notable enemies in video gaming history, perhaps the first enemy many gamers have ever encountered, into a three paragraph mention)

Yep, I'm just going to have to stop editing here. It gets more and more idiotic every day.

P.S. By the way, have you ever even played TWW? It's got more Deku Baba's then any other game in the series. Knowitall (talk) 16:52, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Skulltulas are notable because, like KrytenKoro said, they were in a major side quest. And Gibdos are very similar to ReDeads, so there is no need for a separate section for them, a redirect to Gibdo will work fine.

Whenever we delete information (or at least whenever I do), we always give a reason for it. The reason your section on ReDeads was deleted is listed above. Artichoker (Talk | Contributions) 17:24, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

They should mention Redeads shortly in the Gidbo section then. They're not the same.

And wow, one major sidequest. I don't think that's good enough. One game out of 14? Maybe one and a half if you count the brief appearance in MM? Nah. I'm taking that section out. 3 games is not good enough. Knowitall (talk) 17:27, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

First of all, Skulltulas appear in 4 games. (They appear in Phantom Hourglass as residents of the Ghost Ship.) They deserve to stay as mentioned above. Artichoker (Talk | Contributions) 17:33, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I still do not see much notability from one side quest (why not include the golden bugs from TP as a enemy then?). It seems like it's (and Pols Voice) are getting excused for some reason, and allowed to stay on this page when everything else has been deleted if it's appeared in under 8 games. Maybe Skulltula can stay for a little longer, but Pols voice is definitely going. Knowitall (talk) 17:37, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, I can't argue with that, because they have only appeared in 4 games, and aren't very notable. They are, however, very unique (unlike ReDeads), but I will accept its removal. Artichoker (Talk | Contributions) 17:42, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Deku Babas did not appear in TWW. Revisit the figurine gallery for confirmation if you wish. Skulltulas were major sidequests in OoT and MM, and were a major part of the Ghost Ship dungeon in PH. The Shadow Insects from TP - we could, though its probably already covered as part of the storyline section for that game. And again, ReDeads are just recolors of Gibdos, in each of the games in which they appear (except for TWW, in which there are no Gibdos).Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 02:05, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Also, Pols Voice appeared in five games.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 02:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Which five? And I guess you're right about Deku Baba, I was thinking of Boko Baba (which is basically a Deku Baba with a different name), so still around four gamess. Knowitall (talk) 03:34, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Pols Voice appear in TLoZ, LA, OoA, OoS, and PH. Deku Baba appear in OoT, MM, and TP. ReDead appear in OoT, MM, and TWW.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 03:50, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Merges

Per recent AfD discussions (ex. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wizzrobe - links to others branch off from there), several articles have been merged into this one. As it was time consuming and not in an area that I'm particularly knowledgeable in, I didn't spend long on the merges, so other editors may want to revise my changes. Also, I'm willing to provide copies of material from the deleted articles where the merges came from for the purposes of rewriting the material here - just contact me on my talk page. Tijuana Brass (talk) 08:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Minor Enemies Article

I have an idea. Why not make an article for minor enemies that only appear in one or two games? It would settle this deleting argument... Just consider it. Pokemon Guy 14:15, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

We can't consider it because it violates wikipedia's policies. DurinsBane87 16:50, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I see that now... Well, this does create a bit of a problem. Pokemon Guy 13:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

US Article?

Is it color or colour in this article? Being British I'd go for the latter but... _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN} ^{aka john lennon} 10:14, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I think the manual of style suggests using american spelling, but I usually just leave British spellings alone.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 01:19, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Still lousy

I think I might nominate this for AfD again, it hasn't improved at all since the last time. Knowitall (talk) 21:51, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. I suggest you go ahead and nominate it, as many people who voted to keep the article did so on the grounds that the article would be improved. It hasn't improved much and is still a complete mess. Unless someone wants to clean it up properly and give proper citations, then it should be deleted. .:Alex:. 22:06, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

What do you guys think of User:KrytenKoro/Enemies in The Legend of Zelda series? Do you think we should replace this article's current text with that? Artichoker (Discussion) 23:10, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

It will need a lot more citations, but it definitely is better. .:Alex:. 17:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Uh...I'm a little confused, how do I set up an AfD on an article that's already had one? :( Knowitall (talk) 18:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Why don't we just replace it with the copy in my sandbox? Seems like less work, for a similar outcome.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 18:58, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

I went ahead and replaced it. Everyone please help me clean the article up a bit. Artichoker (Discussion) 20:21, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, we should archive the old topics.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 01:32, 14 June 2008 (UTC)