This post is regarding the timeline section in the page for this franchise.

I was looking at this page, and the timeline section could use some major revisions. Should that section even be kept, or should it just go through a complete rewrite? Thought I would bring this up for discussion, because I really can't decide.

I think no matter how much you edit the Zelda timeline, it will always conclude as a clusterfuck of confusion.

Needs to be deleted, there's no set timeline.

A favorite post of mine from the PA forums sums this up nicely:

Arguing over the Zelda timeline is Sisyphean in a way that shocks other things that are Sisyphean. Sisyphus is all rolling that boulder up the hill in Tartarus, looks over and sees two dudes who have to come to an agreement on the Zelda timeline and thinks "Man, those poor fuckers."

There is a timeline, particularly for the post Ocarina games.

Eiji Aonuma conformed the split timeline after that game. Wind Waker - Phantom Hourglass - Spirit Tracks follow on from the Adult Link ending. Majoras Mask - Twilight Princess follow on from the Child Link ending. (with TP being set at the same time as WW).

Slyward Sword of course precedes them all. But where the 2D Zeldas fit in is a mystery.

I suggest removing it, since it's based mostly on hearsay, with a handful of random quotes from Aonuma/Miyamoto interviews where they briefly act like they give any serious thought to how the Zelda games interconnect. There are occasionally pairs of Zeldas that directly relate to each other (Majora's Mask directly following the events of Ocarina of Time, for example), but that's about all that's worth mentioning.

Hearsay no more...

This is based on a translation of the Official Zelda Timeline, taken from the Book Hyrule Historia. Translated by Glitterberri

A sample of Eiji Aonuma's closing words in the Hyrule Historia book, again translated by Glitterberri:

Chapter 2, “The Full History of Hyrule,” arranges the series in
chronological order so it’s easier to understand, but from the very
beginning, Zelda games have been developed with the top priority of
focusing on the game mechanics rather than the story. For example, in
Ocarina of Time, the first installment of the series I was involved
in, the main theme was how to create a game with pleasant controls in
a 3D world. Or in the DS game, Phantom Hourglass, the focus was having
comfortable stylus controls. Finally, in the most recent game, Skyward
Sword, we focused on an easy way to swing the sword using the Wii
motion plus.

Thinking of that way of developing the games, it may be correct to
say that the story is an appendix to that. I even think that setting
Skyward Sword as the “first story,” was merely a coincidence.

While reading over “The Full History of Hyrule,” it’s possible that
some parts may look contradictory. For instance, the Mogma race or the
beetle item that appear on the very first story do not appear on any
other game that takes place in the future. I’d like to ask everyone
just to enjoy the book and to be broad-minded, and to think that those
parts are the way they are because of the way Zelda games are
developed.