Talk:The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker

The main article has been dumped on
When editing the main article, please bear in mind the suggestions made in the review.

Hi-larious! --L 15:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

From Pee Review

The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker

Not really mine, but I did help work on it. I'm asking for some help and guiding points regarding the Gameplay section. Wolf ODonnell 09:59, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

EDIT - Forgot to mention that in order to give us a better overview of what people think, I would appreciate it if more than two separate people review this article. Wolf ODonnell 09:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Humour:	9	Good appropriate funnies. like how you raised comment on the things wrong with this game.
Concept:	8	This game needed a bit of slating, nice someone had the balls to do it.
Prose and formatting:	7	Easy enough to read and understand, could perhaps do with being broken into a few smaller chunks.
Images:	9	Nice thumbs, like the comments especially the "fairy eating" one.
Miscellaneous:	10	10 out of 10 for having a go at a thoroughly dull "sailing" game.
Final Score:	43	Nice piece, well laid out. subject matter maybe a little dated but a good few chuckles. Thumbs up.
Reviewer:	--Notoriusben 09:28, 20 September 2007 (UTC)NotoriusBEN 20/09/07

And now, as requested, presenting the counterpoint!

Humour:	4	This feels like a rant. By someone who didn't like the game and thought it had too much sailing in. There's not much that's subtle on display.
Concept:	4	Complaining that Wind Waker had too much sailing in. Because no-one's ever done that before!
Prose and formatting:	5	Not too bad. The formatting is ok, but it could be broken up a bit more, needs some selective pruning, and would benefit at some point from a proofread to tidy up spelling and grammar.
Images:	7	There are some, and they're appropriate.
Miscellaneous:	4	This needs work, in my opinion. Plenty of it. But it can be saved!
Final Score:	24	Honestly, this feels like every other anti-WW rant out there. Seriously consider a new direction for this article. I'm not saying don't slag it off - do what you will, but try and make it more creative, and less like a simple attack on a game you didn't like.
Reviewer:	--Sir Under User (Hi, How Are You?) VFH KUN 13:16, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Further comments: It depends what you're after, really. I don't think this would get deleted, it's not that bad, but in this state, I don't see it getting near highlight either. It feels like a rant by a disappointed fanboy. Maybe if it was teased into a parody of a rant by a disappointed fanboy it would be more fun...

I'd personally recommend a re-think on this, drag it away from being such an attack on the game, remove some of the more juvenile content, be ruthless and hone this into something more coherent. Have a(nother?) look at HTBFANJS and see how it goes. You don't need to jettison the whole lot, some of it's not bad ("Five minutes later, a huge red fucking Dragon burned Ganondorf's home for personal enjoyment, and perhaps for a bit of stress-relief." I kind of liked that).

Oh yeah, and from the history, I can see you've tried to make this more like the Wikipedia article. That's not obligatory!

Having said all that, some balance: it's not random, like many articles of this type. You have focussed on the game, and you obviously know it well. As I say, with ruthless editing and a bit more thought, this could end up as a decent little article.

However, that's just my opinion. As evidenced above, other opinions are available, and it's up to you what you do. Don't take any of this personally, and good luck! --Sir Under User (Hi, How Are You?) VFH KUN 13:16, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Um, I actually liked the game, but found it a bit on the easy side and the sailing boring. They were the only things I remembered about the game, so I took the piss out of these aspects. Wolf ODonnell 15:48, 20 September 2007 (UTC)