Zelda Wiki:Failed Nominations

This would be an informing and new article for newcomers. --Eponasowner 19:18, 30 November 2007 (EST)

1. It's the newest Zelda game so I think people should know about it. --Bigrageous 15:35, 22 December 2007 (EST)

1. Other than the fact that this has had only one vote in almost 3 months, I think the quality of the article is somewhat lacking (there are other better game articles), and it shouldn't be featured merely by virtue of PH being the newest game in the series. —Adam ^(talk) 13:11, 23 February 2008 (EST)
2. I would have thought a more interesting article for newcomers would be something like A Link to the Past or Ocarina of Time. --AmrasCalmacil 15:56, 24 February 2008 (EST)
3. I agree, though Phantom Hourglass is a great game for Zelda newcomers, the article lacks interesting content. Ika5263 23:57, 28 February 2008 (EST)

A main part of the Zelda games, with a nicely set-out page and appropriate graphics. Should deserve a Feature. --Beanie 23:47, 23 February 2008 (EST)

1. I love Epona, but in my opinion, this article isn't very well written. It doesn't deserve to be featured untill it get a good rewrite.--Link hero of light 10:16, 24 February 2008 (EST)
2. It's a good article, but not great. And it doesn't cite any sources. —Adam ^(talk) 16:13, 29 February 2008 (EST)
3. I love Epona as well, but as you said it is not very well written. --Claire 16:53, 29 February 2008 (EST)

Cool boss should be featured --Trogdor 3:49 19 February 2008 (EST)

1. Is that really a good reason to be featured? (Unsigned vote by AmrasCalmacil - see rule 6 above)
2. Short answer; no it's not! The article is average at best, and cites no sources. —Adam ^(talk) 11:20, 8 March 2008 (EST)
3. Uhh...yeaah....nowhere near as cool as most other bosses AND you didn't give a very good reason to why it should be featured. --ShadowLink45
4. Well, no? It's a good length, but links to almost nothing else in the Wiki, needs quite a bit of re-writing, and, as mentioned, cites no sources. --Ando (Talk) 18:38, 10 March 2008 (EDT)

The ReDead are classic "zombies" if you will. They have appeared in most games and are probably one of the creepiest creatures I've ever seen. --Zeldagirl93 19:55, 1 March 2008 (EST)

1. I like these enemies for years the redeads are a cool zombies (Unsigned vote by Lightningtom - see rule 6 above)
2. Me too. These enemys are CREEPY as heck, yet so awesome. --ShadowLink45

1. I'm torn here, because the article is a very good article, but does not meet all the criteria for featured article status (namely, citing no sources). --Ando (Talk) 18:38, 10 March 2008 (EDT)
2. I like the article, but I have to oppose because I HATE these enemies! Their screams freak me out completely! Ika5263 11:36, 20 March 2008 (EDT)
3. Just not quite good enough yet, I'm afraid. —Adam ^(talk) 14:19, 20 March 2008 (EDT)

Mainly for previously holding the perfect attendence award, pre-Twilight Princess. --AmrasCalmacil 15:53, 24 February 2008 (EST)

1. Great enemy, not-so-great article. To me, it's messy, disorganized, information-lite, and cites no sources. —Adam ^(talk) 11:20, 8 March 2008 (EST)
2. Has very little information and could be organized better. And no sources cited. --Ando (Talk) 18:38, 10 March 2008 (EDT)
3. This article is definitely not up to standards yet - and appearing in a Zelda game is not criteria... this is a Zelda wiki, of course it was in a bunch of Zelda games. --Jase 07:51, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

Definitely the best boss of the best game I've ever played. It's a very descriptive article of the whack-a-mole dragon. --Sk8torchic 4:21 7 March 2008 (EST)

1. I think it is a good article because this is a boss that people may be starting to forget about. Good t bring it back into memory. --Bigrageous 23:45, 26 March 2008 (EDT)

1. I like this boss too, but the article's not up to scratch. Too short, and Volvagia features in only one game out of dozens! —Adam ^(talk) 11:20, 8 March 2008 (EST)
2. Well, the article's writing is a little weird to me, and the format's a little weird. Needs re-writing. --Ando (Talk) 18:38, 10 March 2008 (EDT)
3. Waaaaaay too short. I know we want quality over quantity, but this article's only got a couple paragraphs. ;) --Jase 07:49, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

Just because it's a very interesting article, full of facts, different types of the enemy (example: Great Darknut), and very good and interesting info! It also talks about this enemy's past future, origin, and it gives just about every example about this enemy that there is, especially in the Twilight Princess paragraph. --Ika5263 18:14, 26 February 2008 (EST)

1. decent enough (Unsigned vote by Zoralink64 - see rule 6 above)

1. This is a strange article for me, because the first half has very little info, whereas the second half is pretty good. Still needs link fixes, sources, amongst other small fixes --Ando (Talk) 18:38, 10 March 2008 (EDT)
2. If the first half was anywhere near as good as the second half, this would be featured article material. --Jase 07:51, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
3. Great in parts, but there are just too many incomplete sections for this to qualify for featured status. —Adam ^(talk) 12:23, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

One of the coolest and most unique items in the whole franchise. A descriptive article of my favorite incarnation of my favorite item, the hookshot. --Nittles 17:15, 4 March 2008 (EST)

1. Cool item, but unfortunately the article is too short and cites no sources. Also, in the same way as Boomerang (a past featured article) this would need to be merged with all other variations (Hookshot, Longshot, Grappling Hook etc.) in order to qualify, and I don't feel that would be appropriate. —Adam ^(talk) 11:20, 8 March 2008 (EST)
2. While I'm not sure about the article being too short, I will say that I agree with the problem of the article citing no sources, and I don't agree with some of the writing (inappropriate contractions, etc.). --Ando (Talk) 18:38, 10 March 2008 (EDT)
3. I agree with Adam, it needs to be merged with the other variations if it is to be featured. The opening statements could be flushed out a little more as well (unfortunately, I'm not much of an expert on TP). --Guy ^(T|C) 13:08, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Has been in the zelda series from the beginning so yeah--Lom678 6:54 16 February 2008 (EST)

1. For quite a while when I played Ocarina of Time, Gohma was my favourite boss. That may no longer be the case, but I do believe it deserves to be featured. --Yuvorias 12:48, 19 March 2008 (EST)
2. This is a great article with lots of good info about a classic Zelda boss. --Seraphim 20:16, 23 March 2008 (EST)
3. This article tells you about all the different Gohma's through the games and she is the most recurring boss and one of the coolest at that (OOT's Gohma being my favourite)--Kresh64 16:44, 2 April 2008 (EDT)
4. A cool boss that's been featured and changed enough, and the article covers each form pretty well --Emeryn 14:54, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
5. Gohma is one crazy boss. I really like her in Twilight Princess and she's been featured in the game since the very beginning. Gohmas' got my vote! --Zeldagirl93 17:13 6 April 2008 (EST)

1. While it is a decent article, it fails to cite sources and is a little sloppy in some places. Adzma 03:09, 20 March 2008 (EDT)
2. Like Adzma said, its organization could use work here and there. I'm fairly certain some of those sections (LA, FSA) could use a little more detail too. I wouldn't call it bad, but I wouldn't say it's worthy of being featured either. --Guy ^(T|C) 13:08, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
3. It's okay, yet dosen't cite sources and some of it could use more detail. --David ^{(T : C)} 23:06, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

This race is one of the most important and reacurring LoZ races. They control the water that goes through Hyrule. They are also some of the most interesting characters in the game. They are very important if you ask me. I love the Zora. They are so important to the LoZ series it isn't even funny. They carry the most mystery and their forms are so awesome that I would love to learn more about them. They deserve their limelight moment. Zane ^(talk) 17:19, 14 April

1. I just think that Zoras are cool, they look so proud. --Olle93 22:35, 19 April
2. The Zora are a sophisticated cool looking race, In Ocarina of Time you help them and they help backso you can get the water spiritual stone. That's my vote. --Maggalo 19:22, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

1. I think it needs a bit more information about the Zola from the original Legend of Zelda. There could be more information for the specific game descriptions. More about the possibly Rito theory with sources would be much better. (The Rito page has an entire section about the evolution theory yet the Zora page has a simple sentence). This is a decent article, but I think the standard for a featured article needs to be raised and I don't think this is quite, 'complete' for it to be available. Mases 16:13, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
2. The article is too brief. It should be expanded. It just skims over the material without giving enough information. There is much more information that can be added. As it is, this article is incomplete. Not up to the standards of a featured article.--Matt 17:45, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
3. They're an awesome race, Zoras. Still, we need more information in some of the sections before it can be featured. --Yuvorias, 11:02, 3 May 2008 (EST)

A very simple enemy with detailed descriptions. Article has several official sources as well artwork and screenshots. Something different than the more known typical featured items. Mases 19:27, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

1. Although your improvements to this article are impressive, I have to say no. This article could serve as a model for improving articles about similar enemies. Then it will be only one out of many. This has happened with other featured articles before. Also, it is still quite brief by featured article standards. There is not a whole lot more information that can be put into it.--Matt 20:27, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
2. It's a little bit short. Gels really don't really have much to speak for. I want the little, unknown things of the Zelda universe to become featured articles, yes, but there isn't enough info about these.--Rdnckj258 20:33, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
3. I have to agree with Matt on this one. Usually, we don't feature articles that are 1 of many. (P.S. I'm not putting you down or anything, keep up the good work, man!) --Seablue254 20:38, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

1. Bleargh...pretty average, I have to say. Plus, no references, just a references category... --Yuvorias, 16:09, 28 June 2008 (EST)
2. Yeah, pretty average, but longer than most. Again, no references,and it's not quite organized right.--Rdnckj258 16:09, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
3. Too short by far and is mainly composed of images. Also, when nominating, could we please at least add a signature and date stamp? Thanks. —Adam ^{[ talk ]}16:11, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

This article thoroughly explains Twilight and it's many facets. --User:Pawtamus, 10:00, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

1. I really like this article. Since I've been here, this article has caught my I the most. --Gluemann267
2. It may not have references and it may be quite short, but I believe that this mystical Twilight Realm is a key point in Twilight Princess and their would be no storyine without Twilight. This article is short, sweet, and to the point, and yet, it is very informative. --weyes Ise

1. Not long enough. Not enough sources. Not that interesting. Not formated correctly. Not that important. Not a chance of being featured.Matt ^(Talk) 06:57, July 16, 2008 (UTC)
2. No sources. —Seablue 12:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
3. Not a single reference, it's all one big section, and despite that it's short. —Ando (talk) 13:12, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

A really good article with lots of refrences.--Link hero of light 17:46, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

1. This article has lot of references and it deserves the place. (Unsigned vote by Molgeratwinmold99 — see rule 6.)
2. Alright, fine. I'm not going to waste my July vote, so I'll cast it for Medli. It's about as long as it's going to get without becoming tedious. --Felicia's Champion, 16:29, 16 July 2008 (EST)

1. Hmm... This article doesn't have a lot of references. It is mostly references. It is much too short to be a featured article.--Matt 13:20, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
2. I agree, the article is short and not very detailed and a ton of referencesPoe 23:21, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
3. Yeah, I'm afraid this doesn't really cut it. And with only one valid (but half-hearted) positive vote in it's favour in more than three months, it's clearly never going to make it! —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 20:49, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

i know its non-canon but its such a good article. well written and overall a perfect article. best on this whole site! remember the whole idea is to pick a well written article. it never said it was canon-exclusive. even fallen sage if its written well. some of you may be missing the point. NOBODY said it had to be canon. forget canon. this is a great article. im suprised im the only one who picked this.Dragonstetraforce 23:10, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

1. No, its fan-made, a rumor theory thing. i dont think it should be nominated. Luroberto
2. I concur, the Tetraforce theory is non-canon and should therefore not be a main article. Even though it is well written and all, there are still other articles that should get first priority. Angmar
3. The fact of the matter is, that this theory has no place in Zelda, other than fan-made rumours. According to Shigeru and Nintendo, it does not exist, so why feature something that doesn't exist? And if you want another reason, some of the sections are very short, three lines or less. No sources either, which immediately prevents it from being featured. Plus, it's just not appealing to look at, with a single tiny image of the Hylian Shield. At best, we should give this a mention on the Triforce page, which is already featured. --Felicia's Champion 21:52, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Link's trademark Tunic has stayed with him for ages, and there are many variations that are stated clearly here. --Ingo 07:36, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

1. The tunic is his main clothing were would he be without it, and the different colors are an added bonus.--HeroOfTime6 10:00, 1 November 2008
2. The tunic was used in ALL of the video games. It is something new and would be a good choice.--HeroOfTheWinds10 19:43, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
3. The Tunic would make a very interesting subject, because it never has the same explanation in any two games. Since I've only played A Link to the Past and Twilight Princess, I'd like to know the other ways Link aquires the Tunic.--Marbro 22:38, 9 November 2008

1. Each of the sections are too brief. There is a great deal of information that could be added to it. It needs some expansion before it can be featured.Matt ^(Talk) 03:09, November 2, 2008 (UTC)
2. An interesting nomination, but as Matt says, it would need great expansion before it could be considered feature-worthy. Also, the dreaded "you" appears in this article... --Felicia's Champion 03:33, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
3. I don't see how this article would be even interesting to feature. But, that is beside the point. The article is too brief (I see I'm not the first to point this out), I just can't see a whole article on this. Mandi ^Talk 05:56, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

what would hyrule be without its castle?Dragonstetraforce 16:02, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

1. I agree, Hyrule Castle has been in many of the games and is where you face off with Ganondorf at the end of some games. The article is well written and lengthy and it would make a great featured article. --Kresh64 22:42, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
2. So do I, Hyrule Castle is the very symbol of Castle Town, like the Clock Tower to Clock Town.-Jedi 10:34, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
3. Definitely. I always liked Hyrule Castle because you did something really cool there - i.e, sneaking past the guards in OOT; fighting the Moblins and Darknuts in Wind Waker; and it was the final dungeon in Twilight Princess. -Zelda45 17:50, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
4. Second, It is the shiz! zacharyk88 21:14, 17 November 2008

1. Uhh... What? The only votes so far seem to be about Hyrule Castle itself, not this article. Though a couple sections are impressively written, others almost seem like stubs. It's missing citations in important places as well. --Douken 05:47, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
2. Yep. This article could be featured. But not now. It needs more expansion. And, above all else, sources! We can't feature something with only one source.Matt ^(Talk) 05:52, November 19, 2008 (UTC)
3. The one source this article has isn't even about Hyrule Castle directly...it's about Link's destiny. Sources before any featuring, I say! --Felicia's Champion 05:55, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

This awesome spectacle should be featured. Its really important to Zelda game history. Especially in Ocarina of Time. I think the informational sections are long enough, and it has great pictures of the outside and inside of the Temple itself. The Temple of Time needs its time to shine.--HeroOfTime6 23:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

1. Agreed. It was really incredible in both Ocarina of Time, where Link made his long sleep; and Twilight Princess, where it was a really good dungeon and the first place Darknuts appeared. -Zelda45 15:24, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
2. I agree as well. very nice place, link is hotttttt--ILoVeSaSuSkE 15:54, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
3. The Temple of Time is a really good level. In OoT, it was a place of epicness. Two huge rooms ensure that this is a sacred place. A large praising room (It would appear) and the huge room that houses the Master Sword through an indestructable door. The Twilight Princess temple looks like an actual dungeon, not a place of worship. Petman1325 19:59, 24 November 2008
4. The Temple of Time is not only a very important place in OoT and TP but is also very cool. It has my vote.--HeroOfTheWinds10 19:43, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
5. This article has a great spread I would be proud to have this be my first vote on ZW.--Makar11 20:03, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
6. A well organized and descriptive page, very hard to come by. It's a very important landmark of the series and definitely important enough to be featured— Steve 20:49, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
7. The Temple of Time is probably the most important Temple in the Zelda series, there is always something important there when it is featured in a game. So it wins my vote this time and I loved the music there in OOT, so mysterious.--Kresh64 22:57, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
8. Yes, it is very descriptive and it does have a important part in two games. And as the article says "one of Hyrule's most ancient edifices." Defiantly should be featured--SenselessAura 03:01, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
9. The article is simple, but well written. It is interesting to look at the differences between the temple in Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess. There is a good combination of the old and the new and I think it is worthy of being featured. DawnPrincess 15:36, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

1. It doesn't have enough sources for me to vote for it. It's a fairly decent article otherwise, but I cannot vote for an article without proper citations.--Rdnckj258 17:36, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
   • Vote retracted by voter. —Ando (talk) 01:58, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
2. People have a tendency to study what they already know, and the temple of time is known to pretty much any Zelda fan. However, a less well-known subject would be more informing. --Claire 22:55, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
3. Yes the Temple of Time itself is awesome. But we're not voting on the Temple of Time. We're voting on the article. The article is not impressive at all. It just seems mediocre and average. Nothing in it stands out. It is small and not even close to most of out other featured articles.Matt ^(Talk) 10:46, December 14, 2008 (UTC)
4. Despite that fact that it is a very informative topic, it is to well known. No doubt people already know a lot about this topic, and there is no need to feature it. --Prince Deity 21:12, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

• Okey, I really can't go either way with this one. That's not the point, how is voter 2 valid? If anyone has a good reason, I'll totally lay off. Mandi ^Talk 14:21, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Ando and I talked a bit about it. It is valid from what I gathered. But his closing sentence was not appropriate. So he should not randomly insert it anymore.Matt ^(Talk) 15:40, November 30, 2008 (UTC)
• What about opposition 1 does the article really not have enough sources?--HeroOfTime6 17:39, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • We've already asked Rdnckj258 about that. We're waiting for a response.Matt ^(Talk) 18:45, November 30, 2008 (UTC)
    • Okey, I'll lay off :P Mandi ^Talk 18:11, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
• The opposition regarding the lack of sources was added when there was only about two references on the entire page. The reference list has expanded since. I've contacted the user about possibly retracting the vote now, but I haven't gotten a response back. If we hit three oppositions with no response, I'll likely just negate the vote anyway as there really isn't much more to be added. —Ando (talk) 18:50, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
• I've rescinded my opposition, but I'm not really openly supporting it. The citation additions made it a better article than it was when I added my opposition (there were a total of 3 citations at that time, not nearly enough to warrant FA status.)--Rdnckj258 23:00, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Votes 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7 all seem to be voting for the Temple itself, and not the article. Didn't we agree that this is not allowed? Or did I miss something? --Felicia's Champion 08:09, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
    • It peeves me too. But we do not have any guidelines set up here. So we technically can't do anything.Matt ^(Talk) 08:13, December 5, 2008 (UTC)
      • I'm beginning to think that we need to add guidelines for EVERYTHING - support / opposition, article / picture. We'll discuss this and hopefully have something up by tonight. —Ando (talk) 17:49, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

At first, mysterious, masked child. Possessing the strength of a man(see manga). Way faster than Normal Link. Tragic story and a main part of the best side-quest ever. Features of a Shiekah. A subtle cameo in Animal Crossing. A playable character!!!

Kafei needs to be featured, he is, while small to the Zelda universe in general, a large part of Majora's Mask. Zapdemon 01:24, 5 November 2008 (UTC) @

1. Amazing side-quest with romantic and courageous storyline (Unsigned vote by Dekuta — see rule 6.)
2. Kafei is a less-known character, so reading about him would interest visitors. On the other hand, any Zelda player who has picked up a controller already knows at least enough about the temple of time to at least search for it.--Claire 22:50, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
3. The article meets the criteria -- it is lengthy, yet detailed, containing all information available on Kafei from the one game in which he was found. There is nothing wrong with the article itself. Ancblue52 15:53, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
4. In a word, yes. This character is not only little known about, but the page has a lot of information. I'm all for making this the featured article. --Prince Deity 21:11, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
5. Yes, this is definitely good content to feature. He is home to one of Zelda's greatest sidequests, so many people would read it for the sake of nostalgia. And the actual article is very nice, even if there are a few slightly weak areas. Twilight Wolfo 13:55, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
6. It is just a great side-quset, and I think it deserves notoriety.TheOracle 18:49, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

1. Though the character would make a great featured article, I find the content lacking. Some sections are only a sentence long, such as the Sun Mask says see Couples Mask. I think the page needs to be elaborated on before obtaining featured status. It should be almost complete within itself, and though giving links to other pages, it should give details to suffice in relation to Kafei. I don't see this yet! - M E L C H I Z E D E K  (TALK) 11:12, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
2. i) The article is actually really quite short, just with a lot of padding. ii) Most of the sections are stubs, other than the intro and "Daily Schedule" (which overlaps too much with the content in Reuniting Kafei and Anju) iii) NO REFERENCES - seriously, we cannot feature something without a single reference (I'd say this makes vote 3 above invalid) iv) Another invalid, subject-based nomination - seriously, we need to get some detailed guidelines up at Help:Featured Content. —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 09:18, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
3. Too short, no references (unless you count those two sites as references). This article needs much more work before it's worthy of being featured. --Felicia's Champion 08:57, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I guess that's 3 opposition votes. Too bad. —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 18:48, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I believe that Rauru is very worthy of receiving featured article status. Although it is a bit short, it is very well-written and thorough. It properly sources it's information, and the images are of high-quality. This page needs your vote! —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 21:23, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

1. I think that Rauru is great he helps link. --Link6767 23:31, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

1. This is very small page. The references alone make up nearly a third of the page. It is way too brief to be featured.Matt ^(Talk) 23:34, March 28, 2009 (UTC)
2. Yes. It is quite short. Reference section is longer than the actual page. Not long enough to be featured.Mandi ^Talk 23:50, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
3. The page is rather short. I don't think something this short on information should be featured. →Kochjr 21:03, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

This article is very lengthy and well-written, and has plenty of images, all of which are nicely placed. There are also several sources. I think this would make a great featured article, seeing as how many people have contributed to (and vandalized) it. —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 03:18, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

1. Nothing against Tingle, I love the guy. I think the article overall just isn't as informative as it could be. There is very little information on the Tingle's own games, which to me isn't acceptable even though they never made it stateside. Not only that, I can't help but feel certain areas of the article are underwritten, and it may be do to the general distaste for the character (that is, people not really wanting to work on this article as much as others). I may need to give this piece some personal loving, but I just don't think it's ready. Maybe next month. Nathanial Rumphol-Janc 07:12, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
2. I believe Nathan has voiced my opinion, as well.—Justin^(Talk) 21:17, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
3. To me, what is presented in this article is written well, but it is lacking. Many points are skimmed over, and as has been mentioned, it has significant holes in the sections on Tingle specific games. There are subtitled sections with barely one or two lines, and some single sentence paragraphs. The overall formatting is not yet worthy of featuring yet, with much blank space. It isn't ready yet. - M E L C H I Z E D E K  (TALK) 11:13, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

1. I agree with you all. When I nominated it, I just looked at the amount of content, how well-written it was, the refs, and the images, but not how much it covered in total. I'll work on it some more at a later time. —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 19:09, December 18, 2009 (UTC)

The Sheikah article is one of the crown jewels of the Zelda Wiki. Not only is almost every sentence properly referenced, the article's flow is suave and it covers all its bases - from theories to in-game detail. The enticing placement of pictures (and there are a good bunch of them), and the article's easy-to-follow structure make it an role model for all other race articles. This article is fantastic! — cipriano^talk 09:15, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

1. We put in a lot of time and effort on it, but it did turn out very nice in the end. We also had contributions from several editors, and that made the project all the more fruitful. Link87 16:48, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
2. I might be a bit biased because I worked on this one, but it is a very high-quality article. Ganondorfdude11 19:16, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
3. Looks good to me. The writing style actually made the page interesting. I like the big words here and there. +1 —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 00:27, November 19, 2009 (UTC)
4. As I was working on some of the references, I noticed that pretty much every single sentence has something to do with the Sheikah, and it is written very nicely. Really great article! Dany36 06:01, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
5. After the recent work done to this page, I fully give my support. --Xizor 13:37, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

1. This article might look good because of the overall arrangement of images and content however, the writing style is not appropriate for an encyclopedia. It is...more reminiscent of fan fiction. When I read this article, I feel like I'm reading the same thing over and over again. It's somewhat redundant. It could be cut down considerably just by taking out the redundancies.Mandi ^Talk 06:42, December 29, 2009 (UTC)
2. Even with all the reductions and cuts the article reads way too much like a story. With overly elaborate wording, unnecessary statements and phrases, over-dramatization. This article needs a total rewrite before it could really be featured.Matt ^(Talk) 18:37, February 14, 2010 (UTC)
3. I'm not sure this article is ready for Featured status yet. While it's apparent a lot of effort and hard work has been put into the article, it feels longwinded and there are some basic writing errors that inhibit it's flow (3 sentences starting with the word "after" in a 5 sentence paragraph, for example). There's also some assumptions made about the entire race based on the few people we meet who represent them (The Sheikah are a warrior race? All of them? Really? Where did it say that?). It just... while all the information inside is cool, now that all the contributions have been made it needs to be rewritten, it needs to be polished. It's too storylike, and not encyclopedic enough, as has been pointed out. I think that's the major flaw. —Embyr 75  ^--Talk-- 02:25, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

1. I must say Alter, that's the most supportive sounding opposition vote I've ever seen. I suggest you either reword it to make workable opposing points, or consider if you placed that in the right section ;) Axiomist (talk) 00:47, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
2. Fixed it for him. ;) Link87 01:41, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
3. Heh heh... I meant to do that... PUT IT BACK!!! lol Good catch. I mighta killed that nomination or something. —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 02:39, November 19, 2009 (UTC)

• I take offense at the criticisms levied by the opposition, as it was carefully written and has been edited by other editors to remove "redundancies". The page took a lot of work and effort to create and was a team effort, and there is nothing wrong with the writing style according to others who have read it. However, considering the critic, bias is not to be unexpected as the critic has a history of unwarranted criticism. Link87 06:49, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Firstly it was only one opposition vote. It was my opinion to which I am freely entitled to. I apologize that you take offense over my criticism of this article, however, I cannot help that it, in my opinion, is not up to feature status. As for your claim of "bias", I am sorry to inform you that there was no bias in my decision to oppose this article. My vote was decided after reading the article in its entirety.Mandi ^Talk 18:05, December 29, 2009 (UTC)

Oh, right, and the unwarranted block of last night was so indicative of no bias?? The real intent is obvious here. However, it's as you say one negative vote that is untrue in its accusations in my view. And if you read it you would have given examples to show that, and none appeared. So sorry, but I'm not buying if that's what you were hoping. Still, I will let others that have more relevance judge the article's merit for themselves. Link87 18:19, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

• The block was due to your harassment in the chat and your failure to ever compromise with anyone ;)Mandi ^Talk 18:49, December 29, 2009 (UTC)

Actually, if memory serves me right, you were the one harassing me when I stated my disagreement with you here, calling names and such. It's there for all to see. And obviously it was not in your authority to block for things unrelated to the wiki ;) Link87 18:56, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

This argument stops here. Everyone is entitled to their own vote, and Mandi's opposing vote is as per the guidelines. It should not concern you so deeply Chris. The article is not your personal project and it still has a fair shot at a featured article. The featured system is made to be fair, and if one negative vote is made for smite, that will not affect its chances. It is best just to leave it and see how it goes. - M E L C H I Z E D E K  (TALK) 23:06, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Nobody, not me or anybody, said it was my "personal project", it was a team effort that is being falsely besmirched as "fan fiction", and I will not stand by and let all of our efforts be smeared without a proper defense. I agree the argument ends here, but we're all entitled to our opinions as I said and my opinion of said opposing vote is it is based in ulterior motives. End of story. Link87 23:10, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

This article is very well written. It's extremely informative, and I feel that it does its job very well. I Think that we can definitely proudly display this article. It's really a great article, and I feel that we'd be doing a great disservice by leaving it in obscurity. Let's show it off to the world, eh?—Justin^(Talk) 03:52, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

1. My vote is no. Upon first glance at the contents table, I thought it was a lengthy article, upon closer inspection I've found that it is actually quite small (the numerous sections seem to give it a larger feel). And it doesn't have any references at all. What information is there isn't bad, but it's not really feature worthy. Mandi ^Talk 19:27, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
2. I also vote no. It has no citations/references at all, which, in my book, disqualifies it from earning a distinguished status. In fact, shouldn't pages citing zero sources be tagged for revision? Hmm... Embyr 75 14:20, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
3. Upon looking at this article again, I've smacked myself and wondered what exactly I was thinking. It's nowhere near ready for featured status. My bad :P—Justin^(Talk) 01:38, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I think it needs for info in some parts. It feels more like a "listing", rather than an informative page. The Freshly-Picked Tingle's Rosy Rupeeland section also needs some more work. *Everyone looks at me* —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 20:33, December 29, 2009 (UTC)

It's a bit listy for me as well, the amount of actual written article content is small. If every section had a legitimate amount of written info (explaining ways to collect, the different wallets, most expensive purchases, etc... you get the idea) it would secure my vote.— cipriano^talk 06:14, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Matt pointed this one out to me recently, and now that it's complete with full references, I think it definitely meets (or exceeds) all the requirements. A very well put together article about one of my favourite bosses of OOT! —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 18:32, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

1. Well, the article is well written and organized, and has lots of references. It looks interesting enough to be featured. RupeeLord (EDN) 19:37, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
2. This is another one that was basically a stub when I got here. Now it is so much bigger, better. And with cool pictures we didn't have we back when. A very good article indeed. Plenty of references now. That's good. Must be featured.Matt ^(Talk) 20:01, May 2, 2009 (UTC)
3. Very well written, very well laid out, and plenty of references. It is very well sized and has great pictures. This one is a must-feature in my opinion. Shnappy 15:06, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
4. It is well written and has good pictures. It has references and is looks very interesting. It is 'featured worthy'. Well done to everyone who wrote it. - ShellShocker 09:46, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
5. I vote this gets up. There doesn't seem to be an issue about the section and it gives a lot of info about Twinrova. - AtrumLevis  (My Talk Page) (My Contributions) 23:09, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
6. Well organized, has enough references. Needs to be featured.Mandi ^Talk 06:26, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
7. Very well organized, plenty of images while not overboard, enough references, I see no reason why to not reference it. —ZENOX ^T C 19:54, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
8. Great organization, good images and references, and a good article to look at on the wiki. - Josh 01:30, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
9. This is a great article. A good amount of length and detail, as well as enough refernces and pictures to easily allow it to be published. Two thumbs up. Psychoboo13 11:50, 18 September 2010 (EDT)

1. Hmmm...I finally decided to read this article, and the first thing I noticed is that it needs to be better organized. Pretty much what Cip said: some of the sections get horribly redundant, like Koume and Kotake's MM sections, and later on, "Twinrova's" MM section. While it has all the references it could ever need, I just simply cannot vote in favor of this article until its get reorganized. :( Or at least, the Majora's Mask sections, which is what a few people seem to complain about the most in the comments section below. I'll put up a talk page today to try and see how we can improve this article even more. Edit: It seems that the redundancy has been a problem for a while now and nothing has been done. I checked the Twinrova talk page and there are two sections about it: "Separate sections" and "Majora's Mask." So yes, something NEEDS to be done about the redundancy before this gets featured! Dany36 13:45, 18 September 2010 (EDT)
2. After reading this article, I have decided that more detail should've been given. The OoX section isn't even filled in. Pokemainiac 04:49, 27 October 2010 (EDT)
3. Took a look at the article and the first thing I noted were several wording errors, grammar mistakes, and other such faux pas. I was willing to overlook these mistakes until I saw the empty sections where the Oracle games should be. That's a complete red flag in my book. We simply cannot feature an incomplete article, no matter how great the rest of it looks.—Justin^(Talk) 04:05, 31 October 2010 (EDT)

1. I think it is a GOOD passage but cloud need more detail about them...--Link6767 19:02, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
2. I think the page needs just a little bit more work before becoming featured, although it's well on its way. A little bit more info for MM and OoX will earn my vote. —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 06:53, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
3. I feel some of the things are a little... off. Take the Majora's Mask section. It's rather small, and a little bit misguided. Maybe I am being a stickler with these featured articles, but if a article is to be featured it should be pretty much 100% true to the facts. They played a pretty big role in MM, yet are barely mentioned in passing. Nathanial Rumphol-Janc 07:49, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
4. Upon closer inspection, while the article is informative, well sourced, and nicely written, the Ocarina of Time subsection of appearances is very cluttered with images and video, and is actually a bit redundant between talking about the individual witches and their appearances in the games, in respect to the whole page. A simple reorganization should do the trick, then this article'll be hot. — cipriano^talk 05:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
5. It is really good except that some sections, especially the Majora's Mask section. 68071 21:42, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Twinrova is sooooo easy. I hate her! Gammadiologist 20:00, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

• Vote negated due to opposition guidelines at the top of the pageMandi ^Talk 22:02, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Hey, it's a great and detailed article. The Earth Temple is a great and detailed article, but it is constantly overlooked. Give the Wind Waker some appreciation! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zelda nexgen (talk) 19:35, June 30, 2010

1. This article is beautifully written, complete with maps, info, and plenty of pics! --Linkdude101 6:39, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

1. I'm going to have to oppose this one for a number of reasons. First is the length; I actually think this article is both too long AND too short! By "too long", I mean that there's redundant information (things like the general storyline detail) and the content carries a lot of unnecessary padding. It's already been cut down a lot, but I think there's more work that needs to be done in distilling the content down. But even at its current length, to me there's too little relevant information contained in the text to warrant it being featured. Secondly, I don't think it's especially well structured or laid out, and the section headers seem a little odd. And the third issue I have is the actual subject itself. While that's not normally of much relevance, I do have reservations about featuring a page about one dungeon in TWW over any of the other dungeon articles. For example, the Wind Temple article could be nominated on the exact same basis; it's written in exactly the same style and has all the same merits (and problems) as the Earth Temple article. For me, it just doesn't tick the box of being unique, or even exceptional for that matter. —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 16:30, 4 August 2010 (EDT)
2. Gonna agree with Adam here. It wouldn't really make sense to feature the Earth Temple and not the Wind Temple. It could also use some cleaning up. Dany36 19:04, 31 October 2010 (EDT)
3. Pretty much what Dany and Adam said. It has a lot of rather redundant and irrelevant information. Not exactly feature-worthy.Mandi ^Talk 21:10, November 17, 2010 (UTC)

The Great Flood is one of the most important events in the Zelda Universe. Though somewhat short, this article does a fantastic job of describing it. Furthermore, every reference in this article is taken directly from the games themselves making this article very reliable and feature worthy. Zelda4life 20:46, 18 March 2011 (EDT)

1. I'm gonna have to say no here. First off, the importance of the subject does not automatically make it worthy of featuring. The article is very short and there really isn't any material that could even be added. In fact some of it has to be removed. A lot of the text is overly elaborate and dramatized as if it was for story telling. Very unencyclopedic. It used to have a lot of speculation in it, though most has been removed already. But still the wording is excessive and drawn out with a slow pace and it dances around the point. Encyclopedias aren't for story-telling, they're for the facts. I'd say it has to be completely rewritten before even considering featuring it.Matt ^(Talk) 00:41, March 31, 2011 (UTC)
2. I agree with what Matt said, however, I think that there is room for improvement. I'll see what I can do with it later. But for now, at least, no. —ZENOX ^T C 16:44, 6 April 2011 (EDT)
3. I agree with the users above me. --Masked Kafei 06:05, 4 May 2011 (EDT)

As I've voted for Hyrule Castle, I can atleast have some say into this article. It's rather nice, but it's one of the few articles that are big, but the information is rather short. As Matt said, it's really basically too short of an article, and it's literally like a story or a tall-tale, as he said. But in honesty, it can be literally redone, as Zenox has said, and it could be much better then what it is now. But I'm not taking any sides, I'm simply stating that this isn't bad, but it isn't good, either. It has much more work to be done, heck, even potential, but little at the most. Hylian Historic 16:05, 30 May 2011 (EDT)

I really like THE WIND WAKER. So this is a great story. (Negated due to rule 5)Mandi ^Talk 17:18, April 6, 2011 (UTC)

One of the greatest enemies in the Zelda series. The article is neat, detailed, descriptive, and not one chuchu is discluded. It encourages you to read the whole article. Very cute, and it deserves to be featured. --Masked Kafei 20:31, 3 May 2011 (EDT)

1. This article is lacking in references, and therefore, I do not think it is worthy of the title "featured". --TheHK ^{(T) (C)} 17:42, 11 October 2011 (EDT)
2. No references. No not one. Zelda4life 18:13, 7 November 2011 (EST)
3. OK, nobody's addressed the issue of missing references, so until that's been corrected this can't be featured. —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 02:32, 28 February 2012 (EST)

1. Me like chuchu. --Toon Link Guy 00:40, 21 June 2011 (EDT)

Liking the subject of the article is not a valid vote. Dany36 21:27, 22 June 2011 (EDT)

As one of the usual handful of items and equipment in the Zelda series, and to Link, as he almost and always has in his inventory, this item is rather important as a tool and weapon throughout all of his adventure, as this article is very nicely detailed and described rather throughly, maybe short, but it's to the point of what it's to be and of it's use in the series with its upgrades. ~ Hylian Historic ~ 02:18, 10 June 2011 (EDT)

1. The article is alright, but isn't outstanding like a Featured Article should be. The article somewhat lacks neutrality. Although it may have potential, I think I can quite definitely say that it doesn't belong up there with the Featured Articles yet. — Hylian King ^[*] 20:43, 12 June 2011 (EDT)
2. It's a decent enough item-based article, but nothing special or particualrly engaging, and the layout seems kinf of chaotic to me. —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 02:32, 28 February 2012 (EST)
3. First thing I noticed was the lack of references, which is something that a featured article must have. --Dany36 14:54, 15 April 2012 (EDT)

1. I think the point of Featured Articles is being missed. Correct me if I'm wrong, but what makes an article feature worthy doesn't come from its importance to the series. There are better ones that should be featured *cough* Hyrule Castle *cough* but I'm staying neutral. Zelda4life 23:17, 24 June 2011 (EDT)

1. this article should be the fetured article because not only in almost every game but it's effective against most enimies --Ruchq 17:43, 24 June 2011 (EDT)ruchq

Has nothing to do with the content of the article, rather the subject.—ZENOX ^T C 01:42, 25 June 2011 (EDT)

This page was refreshing for me. It's an older enemy that got limited exposure in the series. I thought the article was well-fleshed out and in-depth for such unpopular enemy. It has plenty of references, lots of details, a pleasing layout, everything you'd want in an article.Matt ^(Talk) 02:33, February 16, 2011 (UTC)

1. Definitely one of the best enemy pages on the site, its got quite a nice layout without losing vital information, and doesn't confuse details across games unlike many other enemy articles. If it has any faults, its that it probably has a few too many images at the moment of writing, but it has a lot of accurate information and is presented in a good manner. Fizzle 14:58, 24 October 2011 (EDT)

1. The article may be well written, but it's lengthy, and the theory section needs to be cut. With a bit of work, it'll be perfect for featuring. —Darkness^(Talk) 01:38, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
2. I agree with Darkness. It is lengthy, and with some cuts here and there, it would be great! Ankazar 23:12, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

1. I don't really know, it looks pretty messy to me. The page certainly has enough information, and quite a few references, but image usage especially makes the page seem just ... I don't know, umm ... messy is still the best term I can think of. Especially the trivia section. Just a bit of cleaning and it has my vote. —ZENOX ^T C 22:16, 17 February 2011 (EST)
2. As I have already voted "for" Hyrule Castle this month, I'll just say that it is a good article, but I would recommend losing the trivia section if you wish it to have a real chance at being featured. Vyselink
3. The article is well written, and well-sourced. My only gripe is that it is perhaps the longest "common enemy" article, and it is not yet harmonized with the other "common enemy" articles that have, for the most part, taken on a similar layout. Once this is done, I think this'll be prime for featuring. — cipriano^talk 00:13, 14 March 2011 (EDT)

1. This picture just does not look good. I agree with Zenox. It is really messy. I hate that enemy anyway(Not that my opinion on the enemy itself matters.). TriforceSlash 12:24, 19 April 2011 (EDT) (this is about an article not a picture)'Mandi ^Talk 19:40, April 19, 2011 (UTC)

This article is full of knowledge, without excess or repeated information. I think it has amazing detail, especially on the Appearances and Strategy section, and just shocked me when I first saw it. Including the figurine template and plenty of resources, I believe this article has the potential to be featured. --TheHK ^{(T) (C)} 18:05, 11 October 2011 (EDT)

1. Agreed, for all the reasons stated in the nomination. --Xizor 18:38, 6 December 2011 (EST)
2. I read this article, and was surprised by the detail it held. When I played Wind Waker, I had no idea this character had this much history in the Zelda series. I thought it was just for that game. This and more I learned from this article. Good nomination, General Tarken. Ankazar 23:09, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

1. In my opinion, unless the Helmaroc King makes a few more appearances in future titles, there won't ever be enough content in this article for it to deserve a special mention. It's well-written, to be sure, but there isn't enough variety to make it outstanding. Some articles just aren't meant to become Featured, unless Nintendo decides to give us more to work with! — Hylian King ^[*]

I agree for this article to be nominated because, when I first played Wind Waker, the Helmaroc King really struck me as amazing. -- Shyla12323 15:24, 17 December 2012 (EST)

Negated because liking the subject is not a valid point to support a nomination.—Justin^(Talk) 01:32, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

I'd love to see this article featured because of how amazing this boss battle was as well as how impressed I was when I saw this boss for the first time. — GeneralTarken ^[*] 03:19, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Same reason as previous. — Hylian King ^[*] 13:54, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

An amazing picture that to me, shows the true potential of the Master Sword. --Seablue254 17:25, 2 April 2008 (EDT)

1. Its a bit to fuzzy--Zanramon ( ' .' ) look its kirby ['_>'] 17:42, 2 April 2008 (EDT)
2. Zanramons right, it's too fuzy. --Link hero of light 21:06, 2 April 2008 (EDT)
3. I also agree. It's incredibly low-resolution as well. --Jase 07:45, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
4. It's too fizy.--Article and Picture Voter 11:25, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

Clear picture and as far as I know, ZW.org is the only zelda wiki that has a picture of zelda action figures.--Link hero of light 17:55, 24 March 2008 (EDT)

1. I think it'd be fun to have a picture of the toy Zant up. (Unsigned vote by Blood Rayne - see rule 6 above)

1. Not one for me, I'm afraid. Neither the image or the figure itself are particularly good. —Adam ^(talk) 15:19, 26 March 2008 (EDT)
2. No this picture aint that great —lom678
3. It's not necessarily a bad or incredibly common image, but it doesn't quite seem worthy of being featured to me. --Douken 20:11, 4 April 2008 (EDT)

Cool picture from a cool game.--Article and Picture Voter 11:37, 3 April 2008 (EDT)

1. Interesting. I think the Wind Waker graphics could use a bit of Twilight Princess dust, but 3D 'Toon Link looks rather cute. --Emeryn 19:41, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
2. My little sister is one who nominated this, but sibling rivalry aside :), this is a pretty good picture.--Link hero of light 19:47, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
3. I agree. this is a cool picture from a cool game! Let's feature it! --Seablue254 15:23, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
4. Appart from this person being my username. This picture is clear and just awesome.--Toon Link 21:01, 4 April 2008 (EDT)
5. One pick that definetly deserves to be featured.--The Legend of Zelda 00:34, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
6. this picture should without a doubt be featured.--User:Gillispie 15:52, 14 April
7. Toon link is cool and Wind waker is one of my favourite zelda games.--Olle93 20:51, 15 April
8. He's my best Brawl character and my favorite Link incarnation--IceySheegoth11:24,28 April 2008 (PT)

1. I really like this picture and think that it should eventually be a featured picture. But Brawl has been out for less than a month and I don't think we should have spoilers of this level on the main page. --Hisak 21:24, 3 April 2008 (EDT)
2. I agree with Hisak. At this point of time, this is still spoiler worthy for those few Zelda fans who don't know about it.Mases 16:51, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
3. Truthfully, I don't see the difference between any of the Smash Bros. pictures on this Wiki, besides the character standing in them. They're pretty standard pictures. I also agree with Hisak and Mases. At least feature it later on... --Yuvorias 12:57, 29 April 2008 (EST)

The picture quality isn't the best, but I think the pure coolness (My opinion) makes up for it. --AmrasCalmacil 17:13, 5 April 2008 (EDT) P.S. - Sorry that the bottom of the picture juts slightly into the nomination below.

1. i love Zant! He is probably one of the coolest bosses. And Twilight Princess was my first Zelda game. I love his story he tells you. --TwilightKing2
2. As he recently became my favourite boss, I'll give my month's vote to Zant. It is an awesome picture. From the Wii, I notice. --Yuvorias

1. The pictures a little too fuzzy --David ^{(T : C)} 21:12, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
2. It's not a bad picture, but the quality could be a little better if it's to be featured... --Douken 22:04, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
3. Yeah, although the quality is ok as screenshots go, it's still not really good enough for featured status. Plus, Zant is already a featured article, so I don't really think he qualifies as a featured picture nominee as well. --Adam 05:31, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

One of the more epic Ocarina of Time pictures and one of Link's signiture attacks--Magnus orion 17:25, 26 March 2008 (EDT)

1. This is a cool picture, and Deku Babas are so cool.--Article and Picture Voter 19:44, 1 April 2008 (EDT)

1. Maybe if it was the original picture, but as this is a wallpaper made from the art, no TheManInTheMoon 07:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
2. I'm with ManInTheMoon on this. --Douken 22:04, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
3. Yeah, to be honest, the version which was initially nominated made me think immediately "no way". Then I reverted it to it's first and current version, and thought I'd leave it to others to make opinions first. However, I'm in agreement that in it's current form this image doesn't cut it.--Adam 05:33, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

This picture of the Master Sword is breathtakingly beautiful, in my opinion. It deserves this status. --Mr. Mystery, 12:13, 9 May 2008 (EST)

1. Yeah, I have to oppose this one. The article Master Sword is also nominated, and it looks like it'll pretty soon end up being featured. That being the case, this image will already be on the main page anyway! (Oh yeah, and also this image has already been featured pretty recently too! Need I go on?) --Adam 21:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
2. I have to agree with Adam on this. And apart from that, the is not all that great.--Link hero of light 22:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
3. This image is not that good in quality. The only good thing in the image is the Master Sword. The quality of the sword in the March 24, 2008 image in much better.--Matt 04:03, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Love it. --The Legend of Zelda 00:49, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

1. I like the subject matter, and there really should be a featured pic of the final epic duel between Link and Ganondorf, but when I take a look at the full-sized image, it's just too blurry. When I played the game, I was fairly sure that I could make out more of Ganondorf's facial features than a couple of dots and a curved line for his eyes and mouth. For the time being, it's a no. If you could find a cleaned up version of it, I would certainly vote for it.
2. I agree, it's definately more clear on the game. As soon as it's cleared up, it'll have my vote. --Mr. Mystery, 11:17, 11 May 2008 (EST)
3. I don't think it should ever be featured, clear or not.--Link hero of light 02:03, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

At the core of Zelda gameplay there are battles. This image perfectly captures that element in all games.--041744 04:16, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

1. More duplicates? We've already very recently featured a picture of Link fighting Darknuts. While this is a nice image, it would have to wait until the other had been disqualified before a nomination would get anywhere. We have thousands of images here at ZW, surely we don't need to have repeats within a selection of the 16 best ones? --Adam 07:21, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
2. This should not have even been nominated. It does not have any templates. Also, there was already four images up for voting - at the time of its nomination. We don't need featured images similar to ones we already have.--Matt 08:52, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

This is a cool picture.--Article and Picture Voter 18:32, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

1. I'm going to have to say no on this one. This image is too small. Also, there already is a featured picture with the King of Red Lions in it. In fact, the pose looks almost identical in both. and the other image is much larger.--Matt 22:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
2. I'm saying no to it as well for all of the above reasons, plus the fact that there seems to be little to the picture itself. Okay, it's the KoRL in a generic pose, so what? A featured picture should capture the essence of the moment, like reuniting Anju and Kafei or link claiming the master sword, etc..--Rdnckj258 23:18, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
3. Yeah, I find it kind of funny that almost directly below this image is an identical version of it included in another featured picture :) --Adam 07:21, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

This picture was cool before, but now that it has been cleared up, it's just amazing! This really deserves a feature.--Link hero of light 21:03, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

1. It's official. This picture is so awesome it owns all the haters out there. --Seablue254 12:21, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
2. Yeah, it took me soooooooo long to mess about with the wing edges adding transparency - It'd be nice to see this one featured ;) --Adam 21:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
3. I'll give it my vote. It is a nice picture. --Yuvorias, 9:52, 30 May 2008 (EST)
4. Even before the image was touched up it seemed feature-worthy, so it definitely has my vote now. --Douken 19:56, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
5. This picture is so detailed, and the beast is at an angle that perfectly reveals all of its best features. ^_^ --Fairy Boy, 10:06, 20 June 2008 (CST)

1. try again. --The Legend of Zelda 02:50, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
2. the thing is creepy and unusally is hard to beat it after you beat the a lot of times --Lightningtom 19:47, June 8, 2008 (UTC)
3. I think it's pretty cool and very nice graphics but I don't know...--ZeldaGirl96 17:53, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
4. If nominated, this would have been a "one out of many" image. We can't have that.--Matt 17:56, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Though not obvious or straightforward, the Desert Colossus seems to have a majestic yet subtle beauty breaking through the limitations of a Nintendo 64's specs. The goddess receives little attention, and I barely even noticed it on my first playthrough of Ocarina of Time, but this image perfectly captures a grace which so many eyes seem to miss... and for that, I believe it deserves to be featured. --Douken 19:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

1. If it wasn't for the texturing on the cliff's I'd swear this was from a newer game, especially since I've missed it every time I've gone through OoT. This has my vote. (Unsigned vote by AmrasCalmacil — see rule 6.)

1. Even though the image is large, I not comfortable with featuring a screenshot from a game with such primitive graphics. I'm not seeing any of this beauty you speak of. I'm sure that others won't either. I am also uncomfortable with us featuring an image portraying a statue of a goddess that isn't even confirmed to exist in the "The Legend of Zelda universe." So I'm saying no. Matt ^(Talk) 20:33, June 24, 2008 (UTC)
2. I'd been meaning to voice my opinion on this for a while. Don't get me wrong, I really like the image (I did upload it after all!). However, it's not actually an official image. As you'll see from the source link I added to the image page, it's from a fan-made high-res texture mod. In the light of the recent conflagratory mega-debate over fan-made content, I'm not about to base my objection solely on this fact. My problem is that the image is misleading; the actual in-game visual is more like this. —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 15:52, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
3. I've also missed that in my first play through as well. The only problem with the picture is that it has been edited with federilli's (excuse me if I'm spelling this wrong) high resolution texture pack. Therefore it's treated as fan art and, as Adam has said, can be misleading.— Steve

A very cool and good sized picture depicting changes in how Link looks through the years —Seablue 13:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

1. Good! This is an excellent picture that shows Link's aspect in almost all of its games. It looks interesting and deserves the place. Molgeratwinmold55 13:10, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

1. It’s a good picture, but I personally don’t think fan art should be used for the main page image. --Paulreilly86 14:11, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
2. Sorry, Sea, but I've gotta oppose this. It's kind of neat to see the "progression" of Link, so to speak, but the picture itself isn't very cool-looking. Just a few pictures of Link pasted together. Kind of boring if you ask me. —Ando (talk) 15:58, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
3. As Ando said: "Sorry, Sea". I have to oppose this too. It is a neat image in that it compares the differences of Link in the games. But a collage of images isn't exactly outstanding. It isn't what we are looking for in a featured picture.Matt ^(Talk) 16:10, July 6, 2008 (UTC)

This form of Ganon is really cool and fearsome--Magnus orion 23:32, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

1. 2 words Ganondorf rules. He is the coolest character in Zelda and Smash Bros. He rules.--Chaosmaster03, 11:50 4 June 2008 (EST)
2. I'd like to see this one featured. IMO probably the best Ganon character design to date. —Adam ^{[ talk ]}15:52, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
3. I'd also like to see this one featured. Fairly large, high quality, and we need at least one featured picture of Ganon.--Rdnckj258 14:13, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
4. Ganon is amazing. One of the baddest video game villans, if not, THE baddest video game villan ever.--Zeldagirl93 17:00, 1 July 2008 (EST)
5. This picture is the awesomest! Just gives you the feel of Ganon being one of the baddest villains in Nintendo. You've gotta admit, Ganon is kinda cool!--Akki 23:54, 8 July 2008 (EST)
6. I prefer this picture compared to the other one and since no-one's voted on either for a while. . . --AmrasCalmacil 11:04, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
7. This would look nice on the main page, yes I could see this as a featured picture, and the art looks really nice, Zelda renders and hi-res photos always have the sparkle that catches my attention everytime. GunMetal Angel

1. --Article and Picture Voter 18:32, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
2. While this is a good picture, along with the one of Fyrus, and many similar Twilight Princess images; this is one of a set that is only set apart by the character in them, also there are two similar pictures already featured of Midna and Faron--Gillispie 7:41, 1 August 2008
3. I really don't like how Gannon hands look that is my only fault with this picture but it puts me off the rest of it.Garadex 11:59, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

This picture was taken from The Minish Cap. The picture shows Link battling against a Darknut in Dark Hyrule Castle. I chose this picture because I like to fight against Darknuts because they look cool! --Draonjioel 20:35, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Invalid nomination. Already failed just a few months ago (see above) —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 17:11, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Since we are going for more of the out-of-the-ordinary featured images. I thought I'd nominate this one. It is a very large and detailed image of the Master Sword from A Link to the Past. This image is very beautiful and is quite breath-taking. It is a great image. It deserves to be featured.Matt ^(Talk) 22:59, August 16, 2008 (UTC)

1. I think it is a beautiful picture, The Master Sword is something that draws my interest, it should be featured.-The Sage of Cosmos

1. I'm afraid that I have to oppose this one. We have already Featured both the Master Sword article, and an image featuring the sword prominently. Adding this one would, in my view, put too much emphasis one one subject. I don't think we can really justify featuring an article and picture of the same subject under any circumstance. I would suggest that this image be used to replace the current one shown Template:FA/33

Yes, it's simple. That's why I like it. It's also highly representative of the artistic style of The Wind Waker, as well as featuring one of the most sought after and valuable items in the Zelda series. Let's feature something a little unusual! (P.S. Thanks to Steven for the great render ;) —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 11:42, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

1. I have to agree. Wind Waker does have great artwork. I love it. And bottles are a neccesity. I do like Twilight Princess and have never played Phantom Hourglass. But this bottle looks cool.CoreyPotter 00:59, 11 August 2008 (UTC)CoreyPotter
2. Well.. yeah... it is a simple but beautiful image and i like it.Olle93 22:54, 11 August 2008

1. While it is a high quality picture, I find that it is too boring to be featured. Other people would laugh when they saw that we featured an empty bottle.--Article and Picture Voter 20:04, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
2. For the above reasons exactly. It's high quality, large, and representative of WW's style, but it's so simple that it's boring. When I think of a featured picture, I think of something that's interesting and captures the essence of a moment, like a big, scary boss that's screaming its head off. So, for me, it's a no.--Rdnckj258 18:00, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
3. It's very high quality. It show's wind waker's cartoon touch, but it's just to boring. --Link hero of light 17:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

This picture failed before, but only because it is a spoiler. I think that Super Smash Bros. Brawl has been out long enough and most people have unlocked Toon Link by now.--Link hero of light 21:52, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

1. Sorry, I have to oppose this again. Like I said last time, I find this picture very plain... --Felicia's Champion 09:07, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
2. There's already a picture of him in the featured image "Link's Piggy Pals". I don't exactly think we need another one. —Seablue 00:50, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
3. Didn't we already feature a picture of Shiek that was almost exactly the same as this? It would just seem repetative.--Corey Lord of Tacos! 13:38, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

In the interest of having at least something available to be voted on, I'm gonna suggest this image. To me, it's a visually interesting and dramatic composition that nicely shows off the graphical aspects of Twilight. —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 17:20, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

1. I love it. It shows twilight princess' dark side.--Link hero of light 19:52, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
2. It's gloomy, it's almost depressing, and it shows the most exciting thing about twilight princess the darkness in hyrule, I LOVE IT!--Onox13 21:27, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
3. It's a very good picture, showing one of the many faces of Twilight Princess. As said above, it's a very dramatic scene and worthy of being featured. --Emeryn 18:54, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
4. I think it's awesome. It shows how the Zelda series has steadily gotten more mature. Yay! --Hylian Wannabe 11:44, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
5. I think it explains the plot of Twilight PrincessTalorules 01:08, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

1. It just doesn't show Twilight Princess' awsomeness. Also it is kind of boring.CoreyPotter 20:02, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
2. The picture doesn't really say anything about Twilight Princess. It's just too plain. Angmar 07:03, 5 September 2008 (UTC)Angmar
3. It's a screenshot... and not even a good/rare/interesting one. It isn't featured on a page, not even a gallery or a user page, so that defeats the purpose of even having it here if you ask me. --Douken 18:39, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

this is a beta version of gohma in tp. i love beta pictures but i never see them get featured. so to add some verity i nominate this awesome gohma beta model. imageine how hard it must be to get this stuff!!!!Dragonstetraforce 21:08, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

1. As much as it is rare and interesting, it's also small and fairly low resolution.--Rdnckj258 18:45, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
2. It's a little blurry too. There are several shots of "Beta TP" like this, so it would seem odd to just feature one anyway. --Douken 20:33, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
3. Yes, it is interesting. But look at our previous featured images. Now look at this one. There is no comparison. The quality of this is image is far too poor to ever be featured. The quality is so bad, that I highly doubt that either Steven or myself could improve the quality of this image to acceptable levels. This image also was not given a source.Matt ^(Talk) 00:55, October 3, 2008 (UTC)

This is the miniboss Death Sword. This a great image, made transparent by Steven. Awesome work. Much easier to see than the old version that is currently featured.Matt ^(Talk) 01:12, October 3, 2008 (UTC)

Important Notice:

This nomination is an experiment in a new policy. It is intended as a replacement for the existing image Deathhh.jpg. If this image is voted in, the old one will automatically be disqualified and the new one will replace it on every single page that the old one was on, save for this one.

ALSO NOTE:
The subject of this image is black. The old background is black. This image has NO BACKGROUND!!!!!!!. It is transparent. The page background is normal blue. So in no way is this harder to see than the old one. It is a physical impossibility. The contrast is greater for the new one. The ease of seeing it is due to contrast.
To clarify this, go here.

1. You can't see it as good without the background.--Article and Picture Voter 01:19, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
2. The background on the old picture was half the reason I liked the old picture. With this one, half the reason I liked it is gone. That's why my vote is here, and not in "support". --Felicia's Champion 09:24, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
3. a trasparent charater on no background is inpossible to see.Dragonstetraforce 20:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
4. It just isn't the same without the background. Also, it is very hard to see and a featured picture should be easy to see.--Link hero of light 18:54, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
5. I have to say, regardless of issues such as clarity or contrast, my problem with the new image is the lack of background. Yes, it was fairly plain, but it wasn't just black. See the purple bit? That cleverly adds both interest and atmosphere to an otherwise slightly plain image. As a (slightly exaggerated) analogy, imagine a film such as The Matrix, shot almost entirely against green-screen. Should they have released that film with just the actors jumping around in front of a green backdrop, instead of adding the CG environments? —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 05:59, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
6. To me, the background of the old version and the bluish glow added to some of the spookyness that Death Sword has.--bolter1

A nicely sized picture of the Dekus, which I think are probably the most interesting race in the Zelda world. It really shows the artistic style of Majora's Mask.Corey Lord of Tacos! 19:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

1. A very interesting nomination! I have to agree, I would like to see this featured. Thus far, we have no pictures depicting Deku Scrubs primarially, and the only picture that does feature one is Deku Link, hiding in the background for the MM picture. So, first vote! --Felicia's Champion 23:57, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
2. Great nomination! I've always liked these characters and this image, and with a some work by Steven and myself, it's now of the best quality possible! —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 11:30, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
3. I've always loved this image. It's about time it got nominated. User:Twili Goddess/sig
4. Deku Scrubs have always been cool in my book and Majora's Mask really did good for them, giving them a castle and royal family and even letting you play as one, so this gets my vote --Kresh64 19:06, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
5. Deku Scrubs are cute and one of my favorite enemys.--Article and Picture Voter 01:19, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

1. I don't really see what is so impressive about this image. It is rather bland and not particularly interesting. It doesn't really stand out among the vast number of images on this site. It is no more interesting than most others. Too simple to be featured.Matt ^(Talk) 03:17, September 27, 2008 (UTC)
2. This picture does show anything particuarly interesting. It does not show you you something important. The image leaves something to be desired, and is also simple to the point where the larger portion of the pictures on this web address are more interesting. the flaws are too great for it to be featured.Kingbulbin 11:41, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
3. I find this picture to be very bland. Its color is not good. It shouldnt be featured--HeroOfTime6 13:28, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

There is only one other image of Link's Awakening featured. That one is small and doesn't actually have a moment from the game. This one does. It is of Link struggling to keep his boat afloat as seen in the game's opening. This image came from the Nintendo Guide for the game. It was monochrome, except for the lamp glow. I colored it based on the colors of those objects in the game. It took a lot of work to fix up this image. It looks good and it was worked into the Link's Awakening page very well. There is a lot of drama in the image. Good to feature.Matt ^(Talk) 07:28, October 19, 2008 (UTC)

1. . I would support this because it's interesting, nice colors, lot of drama. It's unique because of the action being portrayed, a good image. Aye, I'm in favorThe Sage of Cosmos 13:01, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
2. I'm supporting this. You can really tell that a lot of work has gone into this picture. --HylianWannabe 13:01, 7 November 2008(UTC)
3. I want this picture to be featured because its very unique, and because we dont have alot of art like this featured. Its a very good and well done picture and deserves to be featured. --Kresh64 21:08, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
4. This picture's great. Link's struggle, trying to hang on for dear life really sets the mood for not only the picture, but the whole game as well. I also agree with Kresh, we definitely need some more official artwork.— Steve 19:44, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

1. I oppose this because when i look at it i can't make out what it is, its just not interesting.HeroOfTime6 10:05, 1 November 2008
2. I had to click on the picture to see what it actually was. I thought the lantern was Navi. My interest is also not sparked. --HeroOfTheWinds10 19:50, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
   • Vote nullified by a consensus of three.
3. This picture would have been cooler in monochrome, also this picture doesn't have Link's face and his face is pretty.--ILoVeSaSuSkE 19:30, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
   • Vote nullified by a consensus of three.
4. You can barely tell that it's Link on the boat and it's too difficult to tell what going on. Makes me dizy.--Article and Picture Voter 01:43, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
5. Though I sympathize with the effort, I don't believe this should be featured. (A) When zooming in, parts of it are actually very blurry--especially around Link and parts of the waves, (B) frankly I just don't find it that well-drawn, especially compared with other official Zelda art, (C) least important of my reasons: though it was just the coloring, this is inevitably makes me think "fanart", which drives me away from it being featured. --Douken 05:14, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments

---

• Can we really count the third vote? Monocrome? No one would ever let a monocrome one be featured. Besides the original version from the book wasn't monocrome. Also, not showing Link's face because his face is pretty? I didn't draw this! We'd never let fan art be featured. This isn't a matter of whether Link's face is pretty or not! I think that this vote should be nullified too.Matt ^(Talk) 21:34, November 14, 2008 (UTC)
• Get rid of that Links face is pretty vote thats just crazy, it makes us look unprofessional.--HeroOfTime6 22:23, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

---

• This is getting old. Anyone who has actually played the games can tell it is Link. It is a wave: a six year old could tell you that. The Article and Picture Voter one has to go too.Matt ^(Talk) 01:54, November 16, 2008 (UTC)
  • Plus I think that Article and Picture Voter's policy of jumping on the wiki just to vote is abuse of a Zelda Wiki account. If it were only up to me, (s)he would be blocked indefinitely from editing.Matt ^(Talk) 02:06, November 16, 2008 (UTC)

• It seems to me that some people have been pretty thick in making sure that this image is disqualified. We have reasons like: "I can't see Link's face, and his face is pretty" "It makes me seasick." What the....heck.....is this? I realize everyone has to have an opinion, else the world would be a sad place, but this is ridiculous. I can see the image crystal clear. There is nothing that I'm unsure of. Mandi ^Talk 03:03, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Fortunately, it is not up to you to decide. My little sister is too young to make any real edits so I thought see could just vote. Also, if you had looked through her contributions, you would have seen that voting is not the only thing she had done. I thought/hoped you were done accusing people's opposing votes. Apparently, I was wrong :(.--Link hero of light 02:45, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

• The world isn't fair. Sadly, if she can't do anything but vote, then she'll have to wait until she can do other things. Because voting on things is not what this Wiki is about. It is about trying to contain all the knowledge in the Zelda universe. Featured articles and pictures are a way to motivate improvement. So unless the person is making valid edits, they should not vote. Because only people that know the ins and outs of the wiki can know what is truly acceptable. It is that simple. We are not voting on how we'd feel in the situation that the pictures depict. Even though you're most likely telling the truth, we technically have no proof that it is your sister and not you. That is why it is best not to run two accounts from the same household. If you guys did that on Wikipedia, you'd likely be blocked right off. There is a reason that many countries have a minimum voting age. We also cannot be sure if you are not influencing her votes. I can't make exceptions. That's the way the world works.Matt ^(Talk) 03:14, November 16, 2008 (UTC)
  • We're going to set up guidelines for voting. From what we have so far, this would fall under what isn't acceptable. So it wouldn't matter who's nomination it is. It could be against something I voted against. If someone votes like that, I still have to oppose it. It is that simple. I've told you that multiple times and you still can't understand that.Matt ^(Talk) 03:17, November 16, 2008 (UTC)
    • I'm also afraid that three main namespace edits doesn't really count for doing something other than voting.Matt ^(Talk) 03:25, November 16, 2008 (UTC)

• • Edit conflicts combined with "Internet explorer cannot display the webpage" WOO HOO! Fun times!! But, that's nobodys fault so I'll shut up :P Guidelines, yes! We need them, that is the only way we will get anythin accomplished in a case like this. Mandi ^Talk 03:39, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

You're exactly right, the world isn't fair. So why don't you stop trying to make people's votes invalid. However, if no one agrees with me, I'm willing to make a compromise. My sister can vote on my account, we can take turns each month. Considering I'm coming out worse on this compromise, you should be happy.--Link hero of light 05:08, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

• I won't stop. They are invalid. It is that simple. I don't want to have to say this again: It doesn't matter who's nomination it is or how I feel about it. If the votes are irrational or are not about the quality of the image or article itself, we will invalidate them. Once the guidelines are up, there will be no more arguing on that point.Matt ^(Talk) 05:14, November 16, 2008 (UTC)

But it was about the quality of the image. "You can barely tell that it's Link on the boat and it's too difficult to tell what going on.". If that isn't complaining about the quality of the image than what is? Please tell me exactly what it is.--Link hero of light 05:30, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

• For now it's just my opinion. But don't worry. Once the guideline's are up, I'll stick by them. Even if I still think something is not right. This system now is shaky. So wait until then.Matt ^(Talk) 05:41, November 16, 2008 (UTC)

And so will I. One thing I want to ask you is can you show me what the oringinal picture looked like?--Link hero of light 00:48, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

These votes are opinions of why people think pictures should or should not be featured. If your own opinion conflicts with the opinion of someone else... does that mean they're wrong? If someone feels strongly enough about a reason to deny an image to be featured they should at least be given a chance to have their votes counted. It isn't like people are trying to hurt the website by voting against an image. They are just trying to help it by giving a certain reason why they think it shouldn't be featured. (I understand that my vote was with good reason denied)--HeroOfTheWinds10 04:27, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

That is what the guidelines will be for. Right now it is basically hit-or-miss. So it'll be messy until then. Once they're up, things will be much better for everyone. And it will making voting easier too.Matt ^(Talk) 04:38, November 17, 2008 (UTC)

I think we definitely need a featured image from the most recent game in the series, and I really like this one. Having said that, I couldn't decide which version to choose, so I've decided to leave the decision up to you! When voting in support, please start votes with A: or B: to indicate your preference. —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 18:09, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

1. A. I think it's a pretty cool picture and there hasn't been too many featured PH nominations yet!ZeldaGirl96 20:06, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
2. A: I gotta admit, I like this image a lot. —Ando (talk) 21:27, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
3. I love option A, its faded borders zooming in on the main characters is simply epic. — Steve 17:30, 16 August 2008 (EST)
4. A, I have only played Phantom Hourglass at Best Buy but I think we need a picture from the most recennt game. I also appreciate that Link's shield has the crayfish/lobster on it like his pajamas in Wind Waker.CoreyPotter 19:58, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
5. Option B would be a good picture to display. The cover of PH is quite nice, giving a good first impression of what to expect of the game. Angmar 07:10, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
6. Option A is really awesome. I was gonna accept with Angmar but then again out of five people only one person chose for the other picture (sorry Angmar). That is why I checked Option A and it did look much better. That is why I vote for Option A. Akki 18:05, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
7. A. It not only is cool, but who wants a huge logo to break the scene?Dekuta 15:26, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

1. I don't like either one. A is too zoomed in, and B has a logo. There needs to be a different Phantom Hourglass picture featured.--HeroOfTime6 19:47, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
2. Actually... yeah, I agree with HeroOfTime on this. --Douken 22:05, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Why only one The Minish Cap choice? Why not three?! Let the battle begin!Matt ^(Talk) 22:51, November 15, 2008 (UTC)

1. I like the art style, and this is definitely a good image, but far from a featured image. --Douken 05:14, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
2. I think Douken is right, its a good picture and all but I think there are much better Minish Cap pictures than this one to be featured. Its just them floating around. --Kresh64 21:31, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
3. This is a good picture, but there isn't enough excitement . Unlike "Big Chu" and "Link and Big Key" this just doesn't deserve to be featured.--Link hero of light 15:50, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

This is an amazing, beautiful, wonderful, awesome picture. This is one of Steve's best picture I've ever seen. I have no idea how he managed to get this picture! This is a rare shot!--Link hero of light 01:11, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

1. Wow I've never seen this picture before, only on the game.--Lt. Hammerspace 03:37, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
2. I dont know why but I love this sword.It just looks so crazy how each part of the sword is different,and the eye on the hilt is cool aswell. It may be a bit on the small side but its still big enough and the quality of the image is very good. --Kresh64 18:01, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
3. Hallelulja-moment! --Olle93 17:01, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
4. It's a very nice picture, and it's rare; I've never seen such a clear picture of the sword before. I think the good people of the Zelda Wiki deserve to see it. Let's give this gem the Featured Picture Status!- Mariofan9 18:19, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

1. I dunno, it's kind of small. Also, we already have a featured sword image that's quite a bit larger.--Rdnckj258 16:33, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
2. Mmmm... it's a bit small, and there are several sword images that appear to be more interesting and of higher quality. I understand that there isn't much that can be done with it but... —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 19:43, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
3. It is a good picture. But it's rather on the small side. And not really an important thing.Corey Lord of Tacos! 18:09, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

• Yeah. It is good. But from the size, I can't really go either way here.Matt ^(Talk) 22:34, February 1, 2009 (UTC)

I guess that's three opposition votes. —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 20:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

For such a major charcter, it's surprising there isn't a featured picture of him. I really like this picture. The look on Tingle's face is...weird.--Link hero of light 23:39, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

1. The Picture in question is not suitable to be featured, if Tingle does get a featured picture it should have a better style and be more interesting.--Gillispie 01:33, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
2. Wow this picture is stupid. Im sure you guys could find a better tingle image.--Lt. Hammerspace 21:05, 19

February 2009 (UTC)

• Above vote negated per opposition guidelines at the top of the page. —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 08:28, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

1. I was unable to find anything on whether or not I can nominate and vote during the same month, so I'll assume that I can for now. Frankly, I think this picture is quite boring. It's about the most common image of Tingle that's out there, and there are several images of him that appear to be larger and more interesting than this one. Come on, vote for something more original, people! —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 18:55, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
2. There is not that much that is interesting in this image. It is kind of bland. And it is much too small to be featured. Far too small.Matt ^(Talk) 02:16, March 11, 2009 (UTC)

• Well, if we should have featured picture of Tingle, I personally would like a art work from wind wake more because I like that style better, but that´s just me...--Olle93 19:10, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
• I'd like to see a featured picture of Tingle, but if I had the choice it wouldn't be this one. It's not the most interesting picture of Tingle nor is it the highest quality one. In my opinion there are better pictures of Tingle which would be more deserving of a feautured picture, not least the picture of Tingle taken from the game's box art. -- User: Tingle :)
• So, Adam you don't think this picture is stupid...I mean come on its horrible. At least find a more classic picture.--Lt. Hammerspace 02:01, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
  • That may be. But an invalid vote is still an invalid vote. There was nothing personal about it. it had nothing to do with what Adam thought of the image. The guidelines are clearly defined above and your vote is in violation of those guidelines.Matt ^(Talk) 02:16, March 11, 2009 (UTC)

I was looking at the bosses of Zelda the other day, and this image caught my eye above a lot of other images. It's a really good image done (edited) by Markol, and one of few MM pictures I've seen which are truly awesome. --Felicia's Champion 05:42, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

1. I really like this picture. There's something about Majora's Mask artwork for the characters and monsters that I really liked, and still do to this day. Ancblue52 05:01, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

1. This picture has too much shadow and is too hard to see. It also doesn't have very good perspective making the giant Twinmold look small.--Link hero of light 01:51, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
2. In almost 5 months, this image has gained one vote in support. It's clear that this is never going to reach featured status, and with that kind of overwhelming clamor of support it's clear that it doesn't deserve to. To me, the image is mediocre; I have no strong feelings either way about the style or content. Maybe that's why it's been here so long, and why it has to go. —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 21:30, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
3. The image looks very shadowed, and it's relatively boring. And I agree- no one is in support of this picture, so it's obviously not going get FS anytime soon. I guess that's three votes. —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 01:14, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Well... Majoras mask artwork tend to have a little to much shadows and this picture is not an exception. But it doesn´t feel right to oppose it because it isn´t a bad picture... Well... Just wanted to say it... Wait, I change my mind. This, of all the MM -artwork, does not have too much shadows, it is great. So come on everyone vote for this picture now... -Olle93 20:21, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

The image has been tweaked to fix the problem with the shadows.Matt ^(Talk) 06:56, December 15, 2008 (UTC)

Now it's worse! I liked it much better with the shadows!--Link hero of light 01:05, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, then. Don't complain about it then. You can either like it with shadows or without. Not both.Matt ^(Talk) 00:15, December 30, 2008 (UTC)

I don't like it either way, but I prefer the it with shadows.--Link hero of light 06:56, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

The shadow style is just a part of Majora's Mask art style. Nothing wrong with that. Although I don't really like Twinmold, and the image is kinda small I think. The Goron Moron 07:04, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

If it didn't have the shadows, it wouldn't be Majora's Mask ;)--Mandi ^Talk 07:06, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

...I haven't checked this out since I nominated it. It's much...brighter than I remember it. I preferred the previous darker version, and so am very tempted to oppose my own nomination. But, there's probably something in the rules against that. So I won't. --Felicia's Champion 06:37, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

This picture is from the ending sequence of Phantom Hourglass. I think it's style is pretty neat.--Link hero of light 16:26, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

1. This is a great picture showcasing the artstyle of Phantom Hourglass's cutscenes. I major Yes. -ATRUEZELDAFAN 13:32, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
2. PH has no featured pictures yet, this is worthy on it it's own, it reflects the action and style of the game very nicely. Much more than being a nice image, it's the perfect example of what can be expected from Ph's innocent appearance and fearsome phantoms. Axiomist (talk) 06:44, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
3. An awesome picture, very stylish and cool looking. Also, a nice action scene. Axle the Beast 04:10, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
4. I love this style and tried to do something like that, too. And therefore I can say that this picture is one of the best from the cutscences and not as simple, as it may seem. And also, if PH doesn't have any featured pictures yet, this is another point for it. --Nelde 18:39, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
5. This is a really good picture from what is perhaps one of the best portable games ever. It shows all the dynamic emotion and styles that were used in the game, as well as how the boss is fought, in a sort of vauge way.--Petman1325 20:14, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
6. The Phantom Hourglass cut out style is so unique!Corey Lord of Tacos! 02:02, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

1. This image is incredibly small. It is much smaller than most of our currently featured images. Plus it is one image out of many that are very similar to it. Doesn't really strike me as awesome. Not compared to what we have.Matt ^(Talk) 21:47, April 15, 2009 (UTC)
2. I agree with Matt. Although Bellumbeck is awesome, this cutout doesn't stand out from the others in my opinion and doesn't really seem like much compared to other nominees. Kind of droll really. Then there's the size. - M E L C H I Z E D E K  (TALK) 04:12, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
3. Bellumbeck would have made a good featured picture however, this image is incredibly small. Hardly eye catching or even interesting. Not really feature worthy.Mandi ^Talk 02:21, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Size is reason enough to not vote for it, but hardly justifiable to Oppose an image. The Images above are all great but Opposition votes with the reason of "We already have several very similar images featured." would fit in the rules as stated above. Just bear that in mind before Failing this image. Axiomist (talk) 04:23, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

I as well, will not oppose this image, we have had Phantom Hourglass nominations before. I'd hate to see this one fail because of my vote, but it's certainly not featured material. First of all, Link hero of light, when Matt and Mel told you the image is too small, they meant the image itself; increasing the thumbnail size will do no good. Also by "large", they mean LARGE at least 900px in height, and size of an image does matter (large images give the "wow factor"). Even in the guidelines it states "it's too low resolution" as one of the examples as a justifiable opposition.— Steve 20:31, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

This is a very cool image that needs to be featured. There are not very many Epona pictures but I think this one is the best. It really captures the image of Ocarina of Time. It is very nicely drawn and old school. It needs to be featured.--Lt. Hammerspace 03:30, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

1. Eh...my first and real gripe with this image is the quality. It seems choppy and the transparency job is rather poor. It's also rather uninteresting.Mandi ^Talk 04:39, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
2. The transparency job is done badly, but the image also offers nothing special. It is rather stock-standard, not encapsulating any mood or interest. It doesn't draw people in. - M E L C H I Z E D E K  (TALK) 04:11, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
3. There are several visible leftovers from a quick and somewhat sloppy transparency job. The tail seems a little choppy and it looks like the sword is missing a few pixels. The tail and mane also look like parts are missing as well as having some background left over. As far as I'm concerned this isn't the highest of quality.Matt ^(Talk) 04:32, October 1, 2009 (UTC)

1. I absolutely love it. Great image. —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 05:37, 29 September 2009 (UTC) Vote withdrawn. —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 18:14, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

1. Clean it up, and then we'll talk. Also, doesn't Link know it's dangerous to lean back on a horse while it's rearing? Noble Wrot 05:41, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

1. The image doesn't look that great now that I know what it is. It's not bad, but not featured quality. —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 18:14, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Boy do we love The Minish Cap here at ZW! This image brilliantly captures the relationship between Link and Ezlo, reminiscent of Link and Navi from Ocarina of Time - Ezlo always tries to provide Link advice and "get through to Link's head", literally! With it's expertly done transparency, cartoony, yet vivid contrast, and nice size, this image is definitely overqualified for the Featured Pictures category! — cipriano^talk 21:32, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

I like it. :) Very defining, and an somewhat unfamiliar piece of work. +1 —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 22:39, April 25, 2010 (UTC)

1. Wow, my b. I did not realize that this image was one in a series of similar images, all depicting Ezlo and Link in a similar manner. :( — cipriano^talk 21:35, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
2. I vote against for the same reason as Cip, here. It's one of a series of similar images. Nothing unique about it.—Justin^(Talk) 03:26, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
3. Yeah, sorry Cip! It's a funny image but you make a good point. :P Dany36 03:27, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

This image is interesting and has great quality. Definitely sums up the awesomeness of Spirit Tracks.Mandi ^Talk 07:17, December 30, 2009 (UTC)

1. Well I think it's a good image, despite what Alter said. It has much more positive things to be a Featured Image instead of that one fault. It has nice colors and perspective. It shows fierceness in Link... Etc. - AtrumLevis  (My Talk Page) (My Contributions) 23:05, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

1. Oppose per opposition guideline part "E". Several variations of the images make for an unimpressive Featured Image. —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 18:18, December 30, 2009 (UTC)
2. I have to agree with Alter. It's not terribly unique, really. It's the same sort of thing we've seen in the artworks from PH and TMC, which make for a generally bland feel. We've got much better ST images than just this, so why settle? :P—Justin^(Talk) 21:48, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
3. I agree as well. The image is generic, rather uninteresting, and really no different than the hundreds of other, similar images of Link, the Phantom, and the Spirit Train. 1337star 21:03, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure what it is that caused me to look at this picture and think "Oh, boy! I think I'll nominate this for a Featured Image!". For some reason, it just struck as interesting, in a good sort of way. I love the image as a whole; it feels reminiscent of Hansel and Gretel in both theme and art (though Impa hardly fulfills the role of the witch). The piece of art itself is rare, having been scanned from an original Japanese guide for The Legend of Zelda, and is of good quality and size. And the transparency job's not too bad, either. I should know, as I took care of that myself ;) —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 04:22, July 17, 2010 (UTC)

1. I like the art style, and it has pretty good transparency.Ottobot 23:19, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

1. Uh... the quality of this image is very poor. The edges are ugly: It looks like a Cucco pecked a keyboard to do the transparency. And it looks like it's a low-quality scan that was blown up to size, so it's all pixelated. Frankly I'd be embarrassed to have something with such low quality featured.Matt ^(Talk) 04:27, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
2. The quality isn't very good, and the transparency is bad considering there's a white line around the whole thing. Mandi ^Talk 04:47, September 13, 2010 (UTC)
3. I'm not a fan of the style, mainly because it makes the image appear blotty and horrible. We're really looking for some higher quality images to feature, not ones that make people look and think "Ew, that's messed up." I know it's really supposed to look that way, but it just isn't presentable. Sorry, but I gotta oppose.—Justin^(Talk) 20:55, 13 September 2010 (EDT)

• First off, I mistakenly uploaded the wrong file. :P I just replaced it with the most recent one, so the transparency problem's fixed. Also, artwork of that style is usually similar in "quality". That's not a quality issue, I don't believe, but a style issue. —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 23:22, September 13, 2010 (UTC)

This image really sums up the awesomeness of the Valiant Comics. Whether you're a fan or not, this is a fun, high-quality image (as high as it can get), which 99% of the Zelda population has never seen before now. Cast your vote below, and remember- drink responsibly. —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 05:46, December 16, 2009 (UTC)

1. I don't know why, but I really like this image. Like Alter mentioned, it's not a well-known image, and the details are pretty amazing. Definitely should be featured! Dany36 05:52, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
2. This is a great image. Good quality considering it's from the comics, and while some people may wonder why an image like this could be featured, I think that the curiosity raised is a nice opportunity for Zelda fans to learn about the comics. Given their age, there's a good chance that later-generation fans may have never even heard of them before. Lysia 09:11, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
3. Definitely. I still need to get those comics, anyway it'll be good to raise awareness the comics and the older games. PureLocke 22:08, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
4. Wow, totally unique, and the quality is surprisingly good. I say we have more obscure pics like this in the future! Pyrobomber^(T)(C) 02:23, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

1. To me, this seems like a rather small part of Zelda and Valiant Comics. It is deatiled, but there's nothing special about it. --F4{[Domino29]} 21:17, 12 August 2010 (EDT)
2. Am I allowed to re-add and re-phrase my vote if it got negated, especially if I feel the negater misunderstood me? Because I wasn't saying that the subject of the picture was bad, I was saying that the picture itself doesn't deserve to be featured. It just looks like a normal picture; nothing special about it. Minda ^of Darkness
3. Although this technically meets all of the criteria, I feel that the image is a little small in terms of resolution. Also, it doesn't really have the visual impact I'm looking for in something that's going on the main page. Aside from that this was nominated 10 months ago and has only gained four supporting votes; that's enough to convince me that it's never going to make it to featured status. —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 07:59, 7 October 2010 (EDT)

#Guys, it's not even that detailed. Minda ^of Darkness08:38, 14 September 2010 (EDT) Negated per opposition guideline # 2.Mandi ^Talk 02:16, September 17, 2010 (UTC)

When I first saw this image, I was just... wow. The detail is stunning, with the light coming through the leaves and and the shading on the Great Deku Tree himself. It captures the intensity of a new adventure, with Link staring timidly into his darkened mouth. I think it truly is feature-worthy. Rambo Zelda 15:39, 29 October 2010 (EST)

1. This image...it's so opaque, but the thing about it that caught my eye is the shadows. They contrast with the rest of the image so well I want to get my controller and make a new file just so I can compare the image to the tree in the game.--TheHK ^{(T) (C)} 09:33, 2 November 2010 (EDT)

1. This image isn't that high of quality. It looks rather pixeled and low quality, something you'd see from a crappy scanner.Mandi ^Talk 21:03, November 17, 2010 (UTC)
2. I'm going to have to say no here, too. It's way too small and pixelated. It looks like it was scanned out of the Nintendo Power guide, as it's about that size and it's has artifact lines running back and forth on it that look like it's from light leaking into the scanner, like you get when scanning something from a book or magazine. Unless a better version can be found, I don't think this should be featured.Matt ^(Talk) 02:07, February 16, 2011 (UTC)
3. Yep, unfortunately the size and quality are too limited for this to be used. Maybe if an improved version can be found this could be nominated again. —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 08:02, 25 February 2011 (EST)

Good picture, but please try to find a better, higher-quality version of it for a featured picture. —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 19:03, November 25, 2010 (UTC)

A big image with fantastic quality, also it shows the three main characters of Spirit Tracks. If viewed at full size, you can see that it is perfectly cropped and not messy. It shows that even the train is an important character in the game. This picture has every right to be featured. --Masked Kafei 06:29, 4 May 2011 (EDT)

1. I agree. Even zooming in all the way, the picture is not pixely. It is very HQ and shows the "characters" of the game.  :3 LegendOfHyrule31 21:00, 5 May 2011 (EDT)

1. While there's nothing particularly wrong with this image, I'm not wowed by it at all. There's no weight to it - it's three rather plain, if accurate, renders in one picture. It needs something more notable to qualify for featured status... something that makes me say to myself, "How have I never seen this amazing picture before?!" —Embyr 75  ^--Talk-- 00:53, 6 May 2011 (EDT)
2. I absolutely agree. There's really nothing that special to me about this picture. If this deserves to be featured, then so does pretty much every other high quality Spirit Tracks artwork we have. There are plenty of amazing, high quality renders around the Wiki. That doesn't mean they all deserve to be featured. — Hylian King ^[*] 08:15, 6 May 2011 (EDT)
3. While this image is fantastic in the respect that it really showcases some of the characters of Spirit Tracks, however it's rather bland, and there's nothing extraordinary considering we have much more interesting images from Spirit Tracks.Mandi ^Talk 18:16, May 6, 2011 (UTC)

The Mirror of Twilight is a very beautiful work of art yes. Vastly unique. But the back side of the Mirror is just as beautiful and is even more obscure and rarely appreciated. Very few people stop to take a look at the back of the mirror. It is surprisingly intricate and detailed. So I'm choosing to nominate them both at once. This one is for the back of the mirror. Scroll up the page for the front! GO VOTE!Matt ^(Talk) 01:51, March 30, 2011 (UTC)

1. The quality here is horrible, and really, who wants to have the back of something as featured?—★Chip²⁰⁰ 14:57, 11 May 2011 (EDT)
2. This image looks spectacular in its thumbnail version, however upon viewing full size... not so much. Not only does the resolution seem to be low, but the transparency is choppy and not to mention the black lines are rather obnoxious looking. It's a beautiful image, just not feature quality. Mandi ^Talk 23:04, June 30, 2011 (UTC)
3. Yeah, it's interesting in terms of something to have in the article, but the image doesn't stand on its own merits. The black lines look weird, and the pixels are all quite visible. Also, it's a circular object, but this image isn't even round; it's a regular icosagon! (yes, I had to look the name up) —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 16:01, 10 July 2011 (EDT)

1. I'd nominate this one because it's just so cool, but my only critique would be that it is a bit blurry at full size. I believe that making this image smaller (maybe around 20% smaller) may fix a large percentage of the blurriness; across the wiki in thumbnail form, this image looks highly awe-inspiring! — cipriano^talk 09:16, 6 May 2011 (EDT)
2. Ditto Cip's sentiments. I love how this is one of those things you don't see often but just looks so cool... if the blurriness can be dealt with, it will have my vote. —Embyr 75  ^--Talk-- 12:52, 11 May 2011 (EDT)

Came across this ages ago, and I've finally got around to nominating it. Sure, it's a minor item gameplay-wise, and only appeared in one game in the series. But does that matter? I never imagined we'd have such a high-quality image of a treasure sphere; I love how it's got the little puff of smoke, and the colour is so eye-popping. I think it's fun and unique, anyone agree? —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 15:36, 11 May 2011 (EDT)

1. Brilliant quality and an interesting image. Featuring this image would be a good way to introduce people to an obscure item that they have not seen before. The curling smoke just makes it that much more interesting--Fierce diety 00:23, 12 May 2011 (EDT)
2. Amazing coloring. Not only is the item itself pretty cool, but I've always thought those treasure orbs looked epic. The smoke at the bottom gives it a very mysterious vibe, too. The Reject Phoenix 03:59, 12 May 2011 (EDT)
3. Whoa, that looks awesome. The smoke looks like a Floormaster a bit AND my favorite color is purple. I never knew they were called Treasure Spheres either. Epicly voting for this.- TriforceSlash 18:19, 12 May 2011 (EDT)
4. Sheesh, man. I always see these and I have to slash at these whenever they appear from any enemies, it's just so surreal and beautiful looking, plus, you really and honestly don't know what will appear in the mystical/mysterious sphere, really. I vote for this, very, very much. Hylian Historic 14:48, 3 June 2011 (EDT)

1. The quality isn't the best, and I think the picture is kind of odd. The smoke seems to have been taken from another shot. TriforcePieceofWisdom 13:04, 22 June 2011 (EDT)
2. The quality seems quite poor. The smoke does stand out quite a bit more than it ought to, it isn't the same quality as the rest of the image. It looks like it was just pasted over it, just tacked on after the fact, poorly. Several parts of the image are very blurry, which makes an unpleasant contrast with the parts that are very sharp. I just don't see how it stands out.Matt ^(Talk) 05:23, July 21, 2011 (UTC)
3. Now that I've taken a closer look, I'll retract my vote of support for this image. The smoke does indeed look unnatural. — Hylian King ^[*] 18:06, 5 September 2011 (EDT)

1. What an excellent render! I could stare at this image for hours on end... If only we could have a looping animated image of this quality that would feature all the colors! A man can always dream! What an amazing picture, though. Definitely has my vote. — Hylian King ^[*] 08:17, 12 May 2011 (EDT)

This picture is very interesting as it is one of the stroybook like scenes from Phantom Hourglasshese kind of scenes are rarely seen so I think this picture deserves to be featured. VOTE!!! Sammoldy 04:20, 3 November 2011 (EDT)

1. Though small, this image still pulls off the look of a traditionally made collage flawlessly, with crisp colours and textures which really gives off that traditional storybook feel, brimming with legends to tell. Even with the restraints of the small "canvas", every detail has been carefully added and placed; you can still tell what story is being told. With an artistic flair, you cannot deny, this charming piece deserves a feature. Ochibi 06:16, 7 November 2011 (EST)

1. It's a good picture—one that certainly speaks volumes—but I don't think it's so special as to be worth featuring. Generally, when I look at any of our current featured pictures, I could stare at them for hours on end. This one is not particularly dazzling; one quick glance and you've seen all there is to see. — Hylian King ^[*] 07:25, 8 November 2011 (EST)
2. I have to agree with Hylian King here. I do not see anything particularly iconic about this image. It seems the moment is not very memorable compared to other events in the game. There are better images represented in the same style as this one, too. It is not a bad image, but it is not Featured Picture worthy either. Noble Wrot 12:51, 17 December 2011 (EST)
3. Not only is this just one of a series of similar images, it's also way too small to feature (I'm certainly not convinced that it meets criteria 3 or 4 of the guidelines above). —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 02:27, 28 February 2012 (EST)

The Mirror of Twilight is a very beautiful work of art that is rarely seen in the series. Vastly unique. But the problem is that arguably the back side of the Mirror is just as beautiful and is even more obscure and rarely appreciated. It's appearance is so intricate and alluring on either side that you can't stop staring at it. (Now we now why Yeta couldn't stop looking at it!) So I'm choosing to nominate them both at once. This one is for the front of the mirror. Scroll down the page for the back! GO VOTE!Matt ^(Talk) 01:51, March 30, 2011 (UTC)

1. This image is wonderful. it really displays the great detail that went into Twilight Princess. it's a fairly high-quality image and does include one of the Legend of Zelda series basic icons, the legendary Triforce.Vulpix001 19:46, 20 July 2011 (EDT)

1. This is image is supported by me because i think the Mirror Of Twilight is a very cool item also if you look at this picture it gives off kind of a rotating illusion.Sammoldy 04:20, 3 November 2011 (EDT)
2. This is a very beautiful image, and it is not blurry or dark. Also, the main focus of the picture is the mirror, because there is no background to get in the way. --12:36, 23 October 2011 (EDT)Person777 12:36, 23 October 2011 (EDT)

1. While it looks OK in thumbnail view, I have to say I don't think the image quality is good enough to feature it. There's that weird black line around the inner edge. And the fact that it's angular instead of circular... Also, as a unique magical object, to me it's much more epic when it's actually doing it's thing than just sitting there as a flat surface. EDIT: Plus, this version is significantly better! —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 02:27, 28 February 2012 (EST)
2. it's really blurry in the full view, plus the edges are a bit jagged--Themudkipman 12:42, 22 May 2012 (EDT)
3. Agreed on what the previous two comments have said...the image in full view is not as pleasant as the thumbnail view: blurry and rough edges are not qualities of a featured picture. --Dany36 13:57, 12 July 2012 (EDT)

1. This image seems to be of mediocre quality. While viewing the image in full size, i noticed that the black line around the edge of the mirror seemed jagged in some places. I also noticed this with the edges of the image itself. In addition, the entire image appears a little blurry, as if it was scaled up from a smaller image. --TheHK ^{(T) (C)} 13:13, 27 August 2011 (EDT)

• Newer version is much better --TheHK ^{(T) (C)} 21:46, 15 December 2011 (EST)

Nintendo has described the graphical style of this game as "a painting coming to life", and who could argue? With its great quality and breathtaking view, this image deserves to be featured. Minda ^of Darkness 23:35, 22 August 2010

1. I support it. It'sa really good image to add and I like the art style. - AtrumLevis  (My Talk Page) (My Contributions) 14:53, 5 September 2010 (EDT)
2. Ooh... pretty. Nice, well-drawn image. I think it seems to do a nice job of representing what we've seen of Skyward Sword thus far. However, the image is somewhat bland, and seems to not have any actual focus. The reason I'm OK with that is because there are no other featured images of just scenery. —Alter  ^{{T C B H }} 19:21, September 5, 2010 (UTC)
3. I like how the picture is high quality. This deserves to be featured! --Zeldarules8 19:56, 28 December 2010 (EST)
4. Yes. Yes. Like Alter stated, we don't have a lot of pictures of just scenery. It's very high quality, and reminds us of the joy of Skyward Sword we are to enjoy. This deserves to be featured! PreludeOfHeroes 21:47, 25 January 2011 (EST)
5. I quite enjoy this image. Miyamoto-San's choice of graphic style is of course well made. The nostalgia I felt two years ago when watching 2 years ago are all the more real when I stare into this wonderful image. Steahl 07:59, 10 November 2011 (EST)
6. (I love the style of skyward sword and it is a great representation of the new wave of nintendo games. This also reminds me of the W.W. storyline as I am playing, All the same it is a great image and a great way to bring zelda into the relm of the 21st century Gannondorf111 08:08, 21 November 2011 (EST)

1. As Cip predicted, there are now other similar images of Faron Woods, so nothing to really set this one apart. Also, there are plenty of other, arguably more interesting landscape shots from SS. I feel like the first image we feature from the game should be something more engaging and representative. —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 02:27, 28 February 2012 (EST)
2. Indeed. As beautiful as this picture is, I don't find it stands out from the many other awesome Skyward Sword landscapes. Lake Floria, Eldin Volcano, the Ancient Cistern, and the Fire Sanctuary are just a few examples. I wish we could just feature all of them! — Hylian King ^[*] 07:15, 29 February 2012 (EST)
3. The image isn't even sharp, it is dull, and there are already tons of images like this. Why this one? This is one image in a group of many, and it's not that good anyway. I love Skyward Sword and I love Faron Woods, but I don't love this image. —Darkness^(Talk) 00:15, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

1. I have a strong feeling this image is going to end up being "one in a series", given the Cezanne-like landscape artstyle of Skyward Sword. It wouldn't make any sense if this was the only landscape-like piece Nintendo cranks out in the Skyward Sword era because the image work is so brilliant. I'd just rather wait and see than to vote now. — cipriano^talk 19:06, 3 January 2011 (EST)

1. This image just makes me think about how much I am going to LOVE Skyward Sword. It's a pleasant reminder each time :D (Unsigned vote - see rule 6 above)
2. I am looking forward to september for skywar sword's release and think that this should be featured. (Unsigned vote - see rule 6 above)

Very detailed, high-resolution image. Meets featured image criteria, as well as image quality standards. The image is also quite sharp. It also (of course) covers a Zelda-related subject, the Triforce. -Cuddles ^{(Sit next door)} 22:56, 11 July 2012 (EDT)

1. A lot of compression artifacts on this one. Out of all the images on the wiki, I don't think this one's in the top percentiles in terms of quality. --TheHK ^{(T) (C)} 21:47, 2 August 2012 (EDT)
2. Definitely not an amazing image. Fine, yes, but not perfect quality and size... it also seems kind of dull. —Darkness^(Talk) 21:46, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
3. I've always liked this image, something about the strange pseudo-religious quality and the colours. But unfortunately the quality of this scan just isn't good enough for me. And I fear that the original (wherever it was printed) is also of low enough quality that it'd be difficult to make anything that looks good enough. —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 10:40, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

1. It's definitely an interesting image, buuuut I'm not so sure about the quality of it... I doubt there is one with better quality floating around the internet, but if there is, I'd be more than glad to give this my support! --Dany36 13:55, 12 July 2012 (EDT)

This image really shows the high quality of Nintendo's Japanese video game boxart. This boxart is much more detailed than the American and European boxarts, and includes iridescent foil for a colorful effect. The newsprint-like effect on Link is pretty nice. Wwtoonlinkfan 23:45, 16 October 2011 (EDT)

1. The iridescent effect is quite striking, and as a whole is visually intriguing. Miles (talk) 16:33, 23 January 2012 (EST)
2. There is a lot of detail in the image, and the colors look nice.--Player1won 22:14, 18 May 2012 (EDT)
3. Once again we get the short end of the stick. The box art here is stunning and is, (in my opinion) better than the North Amarican box art. --Shyla12323 15:30 17 December 2012 (EST)

1. It's kind of interesting looking, I suppose, but I can't say I'm really happy with the idea of prominently showing high-resolution product images like this (since it's something other wikis specifically tend to steer away from for legal reasons). Aside from that vague concern, we already have quite a few WW images featured, two of which have Link and KoRL as their subject matter, so I don't really feel it helps the overall diversity. —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 03:05, 29 February 2012 (EST)
2. Adam's hit the nail on the head yet again. It does look cool, but we've got much better stuff than this.—Justin^(Talk) 19:16, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
3. The picture itself is okay, but the brand name and text detracts from the picture. It would look less cluttered if the text wasn't there,but the image itself is also messy. —Darkness^(Talk) 19:03, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
4. I'm with Darkness. It has a pretty cool effect, but the text and branding make it look messy.— Abdullah ^{[T] [C] [S]}  16:06, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
5. I also have to unfortunately for the above reasons, and also I'd like to repeat what Adam said, we have quite a large number of Wind Waker artworks in the featured section already. We need more from other games, particularly earlier ones. ※Fizzle 10:37, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
6. As has been said before, legal reasons, image messiness. A good photo, but with adjustments I don't know how to do, it would be a great photo.Ankazar 20:23, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

*Score: -3

I felt that this photo would be an okay nomination, because it shows of the mysteriousness and the power of the Master sword. Vote as you see fit.Ankazar 19:47, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

1. I'm sorry, but this looks like it's fan art. It shouldn't be used on this wiki except for user pages without the creator's permission. It's fine to keep it on your userpage, though. —Darkness^(Talk) 15:21, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
2. Darkness is right. We really haven't allowed fan art to be featured in the past, and I really don't think it's something we should start doing. - Ｐａｋｋｕｎ^{T S C} 15:24, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
3. Agreed for reasons already stated. --Dany36 15:59, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I thought that this would be a great nomination because this is the first glimpse of Link in the upcoming WiiU Zelda game! Again, vote as you see fit. Ankazar 01:28, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

• Score: -3

1. While I think it's an impressive and beautiful image, I don't think it quite captures the state of grandeur typical to Feautured Pictures. - Ｐａｋｋｕｎ^{T S C} 06:36, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
2. If we had an image from the HD Experience demo, it'd be much better to include the one of Link fighting Armogohma. While I love Link's model in this, it is essentially just an HD version of his Twilight Princess and Brawl appearance, and not really that worthy of a featured image, although it does have nice lighting. ※Fizzle 18:25, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
3. This image doesn't seem very impressive to me. The lighting is quite nice, but that's about it. There isn't really anything about this image that's particularly amazing or notable; it's just Link standing there, and it's slightly blurry too. I agree with Fizzle; it'd be far better if we were to feature one of the images of Link fighting Armogohma. Furthermore, we're likely to see much better images in the future when Zelda Wii U is actually released, so we might as well wait until then before we take any action. Dannyboy601^Talk 21:09, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

1. This image does appear slightly blurry and small. However, the style of the game/demo does make this image stand out. The graphical style, which resembles a mix of Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword has both dimension and beauty. While I don't think this image is worth being featured, it's still amazing. —Darkness^(Talk) 14:22, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I did my best to make this picture look sharp; it was blurry when I took it. I thought this would be a great nomination because it shows Link fighting a Iconic boss in the new WiiU game demo! Vote as you see fit! Ankazar 20:12, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

1. This image is too low-quality. If we had a high resolution version of this image, I would be all for it. Also, your description seems to imply that you've edited it. It's no secret that I'm deftly against editing images for the wiki beyond making them transparent, so that another resolute "no" from me. - Ｐａｋｋｕｎ^{T S C} 20:45, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
2. I have to agree with Pakkun, here. The image is way too low-res for me to give my support. After all, it's supposed to be a game with HD visuals (that was the whole point of the demo), and a pixellated, low-res image is not a good way to depict that.—Justin^(Talk) 21:20, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
3. I agree with everything else that's been said. The image is way too low res to pass as a featured image and it's also small and blurry. The colors blend In some areas, making the image look more like a gray splotch. I think that this image is a much better choice as a featured image featuring the same subject. —Darkness^(Talk) 00:48, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Photo credits to Dany36. I thought this was great, considering that it is unedited, and of a high quality. It is also symbolic, in that this is the opening of a new Zelda era. Vote as you see fit. Ankazar 20:19, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

• Final Score: -3

1. While the picture is definitely impressive and detailed, the problem is that we don't have any information yet about the graphical style of the game, so I think it is a bit premature to include it at this point. Zeldafan1982 22:54, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
2. I agree with Zeldafan. It's a cool picture, but it doesn't really strike me as "interesting," considering that we know nothing about the game. Hey, as far we know, this might not even be in the game. Tech demos have a fun way of just throwing together something for the sake of showcasing new stuff. It would be more prudent to wait for actual information about the game.—Justin^(Talk) 12:55, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
3. Yeah I agree that it's a bad idea to include beta and preview images; plenty of examples here of the kind of stuff that doesn't make it into final releases, so not the ideal thing to be featuring. —Adam ^{[ talk ]} 14:24, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

1. Well, I personally don't think that this is "symbolic". The new HD Zelda we know nothing about, so it might be much less realistic. It does, however, show the Wii U's potential, and the image itself is high-quality. Every tiny detail, from the patterns on the torches to the markings on Armogohma's legs, adds contrast to this image. There is an amazing use of shadow and dimension in this image, with every aspect of it standing clearly on a different layer. It's also extremely high resolution. —Darkness^(Talk) 12:30, 22 March 2013 (UTC)