Yup, I admit it, I am the author of said article. I'd like to say that, although I'm 18, I missed all manner of videogaming during the 80's. In fact, the first Zelda game I ever played was Ocarina of Time. Since then, I've built my knowledge about the older games by playing their ROMS and such.

Anyway, onto your comments. Your theory could be valid except for one MAJOR point: the validity of a source. While all my theories are based only on the sources I feel are accurate and can be trusted (i.e. the games and their instruction manuals), AKA canon sources, you would like to include Zelda cartoons and comics into the mix (sources I consider to be non-canon).

Consider my arguments for the non-canonity of the old cartoons and comics.

First of all, many Zelda comics and cartoons were not made or directed by Nintendo (even though Nintendo endorsed them), but by professional artists who had no involvement in the making of the games. I believe that this lowers them to fanfic status, and of course solid theories cannot be based on fanfic.

Secondly, many cartoons and comics contain material that is COMPLETELY and UTTERLY inconsistent and/or contradictory to material in the official games and their instruction manuals. For example, in "Molblin's Magic Spear," Link is the same age as he is in AoL (teenager), although the book follows the storyline of LoZ (where Link is a kid). Another example: if you have the book that has all the comics that were serialized in NP Magazine, it says in the back that "the story loosely follows the plot of... A Link to the Past," and that "some new twists and characters were added." This definitely reduces these sources to fanfic or legendary status (legendary meaning that made-up stories were added to the canon stories).

In short, I'm in very strong disagreement with you, and I would encourage you to take what comics and cartoons say with a grain, no, a big 'ol chunk, of salt. The old comics and cartoons, like any fanfic/fanart, are only good for entertainment purposes.

By the way, RaysDaMan, the mere fact that Miyamoto states an order for the games implies that he meant to connect them in some way. The storylines of the games are all connected, if you read enough into it.

--------------

I disagree with you about official guides being canon. If we allow such "official" products as guides, zelda64.com, and zelda.com to be included, inconsistencies creep in.

Here's an analogy: would you rather use an historical account written by a contemporary historian of that time period, or would you put as much trust in a report written by a high school student centuries later?

Another analogy: The Christian Bible is a compilation of writings, letters, and historical accounts that are canon, or trustworthy and authoritative. Some writings that cropped up centuries later, the apocrypha, contain legendary and/or mystic additions to the canon accounts, so they aren't considered canon.

Do you see what I'm driving at? The only accurate and authoritative accounts we can use are the games and manuals, since these are first-hand accounts. Anything else is simply fan fiction, apocrypha, or someone else's interpretation of the facts.