Talk:Super transformation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Super transformation article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Article policies
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 24 March 2007. The result of the discussion was no consensus.
Famicom style controller This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Portal:CVG
 CVG Portal
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of low priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
This article is supported by the Sega task force.
This article has an archived CVG peer review that may contain ideas for improvement.
CVG To-do:
Archive
Archives
  1. /Archive 1

Contents

[edit] Suggestion

Guys, if you're going to delete this article, let me make a suggestion. How about we move all the Super transformation information about particular characters to the articles of those characters and just be done with it? User:Denjo

I've suggested that myself, but it seems that that's the way things USED to be which ultimately led to the creation of this article. Super Sonic's section and the overall Knuckles page, it seems, were just getting too damn long and eventually got separated out into this one. I'm not sure why this isn't merged with "Super transformation (other media)" though. At any rate, if you have an opinion on the deletion, you should go to the discussion page and vote on Keep, Delete, etc. So far the "Keep" arguments are in the lead. --Bishop2 15:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
They were going to be one originally however, it was way too long so I decided to cut them in two. Especially since I'm not qualified to edit the Sonic the Comic info and I haven't until recently been following Sonic the Hedgehog issue by issue. I also haven't seen the JPN episode 67 of Sonic X so I can't say much about DSS except for what's in the 4kids edit. :/GrandMasterGalvatron 16:01, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Super Tails in Sonic 3 vs. Super Tails in Sonic Heroes = Retcon?

User Grandmastergalvatron seems adamant that the super form of Tails in Sonic Heroes is a retcon. I fail to see how this is the case, and would like to know of precisely how this would be so.

There's nothing in the game which says "This is Tails NEW and ONLY form of transformation, which you'll note contains no swarming flickies of any kind and therefore the previous transformation doesn't count anymore." Until there's some evidence specifically for that, it can't be labeled a retcon. Maybe Tails transforms differently when around other transformed heroes like Sonic and Knuckles. Maybe he transforms differently with or without the Super Emeralds on top of the Chaos Emeralds. There's no evidence arguing it's a retcon, and until we can prove that or see something in the games specifically telling us that, we shouldn't be calling it as such.

Contrary arguments, however? --Bishop2 19:45, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I was gonna take it here sooner or later. If you recall in the Gen. games, Tails couldn't transform at all with the Chaos Emeralds (without cheating). His first transformation was with the Super Emeralds. Now it's been said far and wide that the Super Emeralds were only a non-canon gimmick which was the product of Sonic 3 and Knuckles being split into two games. This in turn would render Hyper Sonic, Super Tails, and Hyper Knuckles as having never existed.
As to how you can tell they were a gimmick, it's too big of a plot point to be conspicuously absent all this time. There have been plenty of end of the world situations, and the idea of magnifying the Chaos Emeralds' energy to make the super emeralds has not once been brought up as a solution. It's the end of the world, I'd certainly pull out all the stops amirite? *shot*
That said, story wise, this is Tails first transformation at all, and it just happens to be with the Chaos Emeralds. Add that latter bit to the points that the animation pack calls it super, Cream calls it super, other characters using the same method to transform were also labeled super, and Tails shows that he has no idea what the hell he's doing and voila! You have a first time super mode which cements that the old one was a bonus and nothing more. If that's not good enough, the use of a Sonic Adventure aura renders it as a design retcon at the very least.
I'd say more but I gotta go X_X GrandMasterGalvatron 20:02, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Just because it was a "bonus" doesn't mean it didn't happen. In fact, just because the Super Emeralds haven't been seen since Sonic 3 & Knuckles doesn't mean they're out of continuity either. They're still in the game and the game is still part of continuity. I'm not going to argue whether the designers just tossed the super emeralds in as a lock-on game extension gimmick, because I'm sure that's probably the case - but it has no bearing on whether or not it happened. The game is canon, it's in there, and there's nothing that ACTIVELY states that they don't exist or that the chaos emeralds and master emerald are the only emeralds at this time. Ergo they're still canon.
Same goes for Tails' transformation as well as Hyper Sonic and Knuckles. Until something clearly says that the old transformation doesn't count, it can't be cited as a retcon. "Retcons by implication" are not valid, alas. --Bishop2 20:16, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


It's common Sonic knowledge that the Super Emeralds are only gameplay elements, and that Sonic 3 & Knuckles is not canon, but Sonic 3 and Sonic & Knuckles separated are canon. That means that Super Knuckles had already appeared, but not Super Tails, and Hyper forms never appeared... -User:Eriorguez

"Common knowledge" with who? Is there some source you can cite? This is Wikipedia we're talking about here. Generalized "common knowledge" doesn't go very far. --Bishop2 21:13, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


Bishop has a point :/ I have never physically seen a hard citation for the statement, but I've heard it was said by one of the developers. I am currently searching for a hard citation to this. ^^GrandMasterGalvatron 21:46, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Must I check this place twice a day? >.> Okay, first, Tails was a lot younger than Sonic and Knuckles, so age probably has a greater deal to do with it than anything else. Tails is no longer as short as the others, for instance. Second, the Master and Chaos Emeralds are all there are, because the Super Emeralds are the Chaos Emeralds. Just charged by the Master Emerald. Third, Bishop might have a point of being surrounded by friends. Just the flickies instead of Sonic and Knux. In fact, for all we know, the only reason Tails couldn't go Super was because he didn't save any animals at the start of the game, but by the time he got to the second half, he befriended the flickies. Also, GMG, what about Sonic isn't a gameplay element? Everything seems to be followed up by a zone or boss fight, in which you control whatever you just saw a cutscene about. Next, for all we know, the Chaos Emeralds may have become Super Emeralds through the Master Emerald's stored energy. Remember, up to the point of entering Hidden Palace, nothing has been done with the Master Emerald besides capturing Chaos and Tikal. Jon166 03:12, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

In the Sonic & Knuckles manual, it states that locking onto Sonic the Hedgehog 3 puts you on the mission to rescue "fourteen" Emeralds, meaning the Chaos and Super Emeralds are separate. Just my input. Also, Tails has always been listed as the age of eight, unlike some more inconsistent ages for other characters. But otherwise, yeah, I agree. 208.101.145.224 02:20, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, first, manuals aren't canon. Take the Sonic CD manual for instance. Sonic loses the Chaos Emeralds, and then the Super Emeralds appear. You have to collect all of them, though, as you have to do the Super Emerald stages to connect their energies to Sonic. However, as far as the age goes, we seem to be relying on the Japanese website for official canonicity. Does someone want to try to get Tails' age from Sonicteam's site? He may be 8 now, or was when the game originally came out. And even if age wasn't a factor, he's grown in strength and courage. Jon166 04:25, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notability tag?

When did that go up? There's no discussion or anything in here about... it just seems to have randomly cropped up, should we remove it? --Zikar 00:32, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah...I was there when A man In Black added it. I really don't know what to say. Anyone who's played Sonic knows about Super Sonic. The Super Sonic article's been up for deletion numerous times and it failed each and every time. It also failed the merge votes until I FINALLY took action and combined all of the Super/Hyper/Burning forms myself. I guess I'll remove it for the simple fact that it has survived numerous Afds in the past.GrandMasterGalvatron 15:46, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Also, to A Man in Black, the original research idea is really debatable at this point. You could effectively tag every Sonic article with it because only the fans care enough to add all of this data. Look at the Sonic hacking scene. The fans have disassembled most of the Genesis games, and have written numerous utilities to do all but create an entirely new game from an existing one. Hell, I'm working on a Sonic 1 hack right now and it already has two playable characters instead of one.

The whole debate is the reason the Concept Mobius references die hard...no one but the fans cares enough about it, and the articles ALWAYS fail afd. I really don't know what I can say about it. I've seen to it that every statement here is cited in some form. There's really nothing more I can do. There are no sources outside of the games themselves and official websites. If you want to tag the entire Sonic series of articles for deletion then go right ahead ^^.GrandMasterGalvatron 15:54, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

So, um, where are the non-trivial references in publications independent of Sega? "Important in the series" or "important to fans of such-and-such series" doesn't necessarily translate into "important in general." - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:22, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

You really think so? Then send the article up for deletion and watch it fail AGAIN. This article's been up at least THREE times for Afd and it always survives. Always. Go on...tag the entire staple of articles til there's only Sonic, and then tag him too. Then go tag about 90% of all of the articles on this site. The Wikipedia intro already said that the content of this site reflects the concerns of it's readers. You can trim the hell out of all of the sonic articles and they'll all come right back. Gonna protect them all from re-creation? Go ahead, be my guest. No character has any real world notability outside of Sonic himself. Believe me, I was actually trying to whip these articles into shape but I see it's truly a waste of time. My greatest contribution here was the reformatting of this very article. I've trimmed, and cleaned, and out of universed, and it's still not enough so just fuck it all. Delete the whole damn series. I've done all I can >>GrandMasterGalvatron 04:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unattributed Claims, Original Research?

Putting this tag at the very top of the page doesn't tell us WHERE in the article someone believes there is unattributed claims or research that is not straight from the games themselves. We need to be more specific about where the problem area lies. Can someone move this tag to the proper part of the article, and maybe add some "citation needed" notes to the problematic claims? If no problematic claims can be identified, we'll have to remove the note. --Bishop2 19:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

The entire article is the problem. The problem is that people are playing the games, then drawing their own conclusions based on that personal observation. That's original research. This entire article reads like a fansite, because of this. What we need are attributions to reliable publications independent of the games themselves, and, ideally, independent of Sega or Sonic Team. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:20, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I told you already, THERE ARE NONE! I think you need to scroll up a bit because I'm not repeating all that again >>. Also, there is no original research, the article calls what goes on in the games exactly the way they go on in the games. Only off thing is Darkspine Sonic but that's expected as he was just released. (I'm staying out of that one) Good luck challenging the entire series of Sonic articles, because this is really one of the better ones of the lot.GrandMasterGalvatron 04:24, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, we tend to delete articles on subjects about which no citable publications have been written. Playing the game then summarizing that experience is itself original research. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:33, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Scroll up some GrandMasterGalvatron 04:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
You're brandishing the Super Sonic AFD as though it were some sort of shield against the problems with this article. It isn't.
Now, this is overly specific, in-universe original research. If the only way to resolve this problem is to throw up our hands and say "Well, there aren't any sources!" then we either need to merge this, in vastly reduced form, or delete it. It cannot persist in its current form, as it violates WP:ATT and doesn't follow WP:FICT, WP:N, or WP:WAF. I'm open to suggestions on what form it should take, before doing anything as confrontational as an AFD. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:44, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
So wait, you're saying that something that comes directly from the game itself can't be allowed because it's "original research"? I mean, most of the articles about movies on Wikipedia contain a summary of the movie. That's exactly the same thing - watching the movie, then providing information on it. The movie IS the source - and according to you, that constitutes "original research" and all of those summaries should be removed?
I'm not saying that I think there's a really good reason for an entire article on super transformations, because if it were up to me, I'd put all of this info into the pages for the individual characters (Sonic, Tails, Shadow, Knuckles, Blaze, whatever). But your logic seems highly suspect. If we can only cite reliable WRITTEN materials, we might as well delete more than half of Wikipedia right now, because let's face it: Most video games, movies, comics and other pop culture haven't been written about in a text format. Their existence IS the evidence for their articles. --Bishop2 13:28, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

You're right, we do allow brief, simple summaries of the plot of a film, book, or game, in the article about that fictional work. This is far beyond a brief, simple summary of the plot of a film, book, or game. This is a detailed analysis of several games, often drawing novel conclusions and making highly debarable assumptions.

This is original research, and I'd really like to avoid having to go through the exact same "Playing the game and then drawing novel conclusions isn't original research!" argument that has been had on a million talk pages and has almost always resulted in said original research being deleted, either by the article being deleted or the article being rewritten.

Personally, I'd rather identify some way this article could be rewritten to conform to Wikipedia's policies. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 14:28, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

It's worth a shot, but there's a very good chance a bunch of people re-edit any changes we make we to reinsert anything we delete. It's the same logic behind why this article's failed multiple deletion attempts - there are way too many users protecting its content. I'm willing to try and go through and see if I can come up with a severely scaled-down version of the article that drops most of the extra fat, at least, but I doubt it'll survive long. --Bishop2 17:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

MIB, why don't you stop being so cloudy and cite specific examples. I sure as hell don't see any of the points you're making. The Super Sonic afd is not a shield, but a reminder of sorts. (can't think of the term). It went up like ten thousand times until all the super articles were merged into two. This was because they seriously inflated the articles, especially Sonic's. Right now, I really think you're talking out of your ass. The article simply lists the main features of the move, the characters that use it, and the differences between. I don't know what novel conclusions you're blathering about. There's already 18 refs and footnotes on the page. You want every sentence cited or something? There are no plot summaries, and most likely the only one guilty of in-universe anything is Sonic with his Darkspine mode. Again, that game and form just came out so that's expected. In fact, it's at the point where every super form name needs a hard citation (whichy is why Super Tails, Super Knuckles, and Super Silver are all nameless. Their names only exist in data uncovered by hacking)

How about you be bold and do it yourself?GrandMasterGalvatron 18:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Search this article for "primary," "defin" (to catch "defining," "definitive," etc.), "noteworthy," "commonly believed," "seemingly," and "possib" (to catch "possibility," "possibly", or "possible"). Each of those claims is original research, since the answer of "According to whom?" is unanswered.
The second paragraph of Super transformation#Knuckles the Echidna is pure OR; it's a description of an experiment and how to reproduce it, with no source other than performing the experiment.
According to whom are the strategy guide names errors?
These are a handful of examples, and "the consensus of the Sonic fan community" is insufficient answer for "According to whom". - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 19:01, 22 March 2007 (UTC)


1. You're whining about sentence structure and wording? Quit being a lazy ass and fix it yourself!
2. Let's take a look at said paragraph:
"Knuckles gained the traditional gameplay enhancements of a super transformation, but had a significant enhancement to his strength. In addition to being able to access areas that even Super Sonic could not, he was also the only super transformation to possess true "invincibility". This is best shown against the final boss of the "Launch Base Zone" in Sonic the Hedgehog 3 and Knuckles. Here, Super Knuckles is able to withstand the slamming attack the boss uses while Super Sonic loses all of his Rings (and his super form as a result.)"
First sentence says Super Knuckles is the strongest transformation. Second sentence says that he's the only one to truly be "invincible" and not just able to take more hits. In all actuality, the second sentence isn't true as Super Knuckles has since been retconned to be like the others, but there's no citation for that so we have this instead. Third sentence gives and example from the games as to why the second sentence was true. (again, it's not now but can't be cited).

Overall, the paragraph is saying he's the strongest of them all, and citing the games in the process. (some newer fans think Sonic's the strongest, I've seen it on boards)

Anywho, I'm getting the impression that you have poor reading skills to make that "Or" statement.
3."According to whom are the strategy guide names errors?" According to the games themselves as well as Sonic Team and Sega. Sonic doesn't transform into Gold Sonic or Darkspines Sonic. It's Super Sonic and Darkspine Sonic, and there are hard citations for those. Also, Shadow doesn't transform into Hyper Shadow. He becomes "Super Shadow" and there's several citations for that too (only one is listed). Hell, even the cartoons and comics call him Super Shadow, and they're the ones responsible for the whole "Hyper" snafu.


I'm of the opinion that while your intentions are well, that you're very uninformed of the subject matter (hence why you tag and don't fix the errors yourself). As with any game, this article's jargon heavy so I'd suggest you verse yourself on the subject material before making such outlandish claims.GrandMasterGalvatron 19:19, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I am not "whining" about sentence structure. I am pointing out the sort of weasel words that often accompany original claims.

"In addition to being able to access areas that even Super Sonic could not, he was also the only super transformation to possess true 'invincibility'."

Is there a source for this claim other than direct observation of the games? Cheese is not sourced by going to the store and perusing the selection, grass is not sourced to looking at grass, and World War II is not sourced by having the article be written by people who were there. This article is held to the same standard of verifiability.

"According to the games themselves as well as Sonic Team and Sega."

Okay. Cite some publications, then. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 19:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

That's called observation and that particular one can be verified by just playing the game. It's pretty cut and dry too. Knuckles can bust through that underwater section of Launch base, Sonic can't. Nothing there that could be possibly speculated about. Also, said statements are already cited in the respective sections. There are references pointing to the official names.GrandMasterGalvatron 20:14, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Observation of the games isn't a source. Reliable publications are sources. I'm not sure how I can make this clearer. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
And I don't know how I can make it clearer that THERE ARE NONE. No one but the fans really gives a flying fuck about Sonic the Hedgehog and his Super form. With Sega turning out one shit game after another, I don't blame them either. Sonic's not the force he was in the early 90s. However, those fans are great in number and facing them is gonna be a hell of a task. I repeat you need to stop whining, be bold and make some changes yourself. Again, search for the relevant data and tailor the article as you see fit. I tried to push it towards GA status, I really did, but my edits have been undone time and time again and it only shows one thing: The Sonic fanbase is incapable of making good articles for Wikipedia. Myself included since I can't devote the necessary time involved anymore. I've got other things to handle. :/GrandMasterGalvatron 20:40, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

The article has been edited..are you happy now? Also, it's your ass I'm coming after if the article doesn't make GA status.GrandMasterGalvatron 15:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I've only done a first pass. It'll probably take a couple more looks and more work. And what is this "GA status"? --Bishop2 15:41, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
"Good Article". It's a step toward becoming a "Featured Article" which would place it on the main page for a day. Twas my intention from the very beginning. I think it's safe to say I've become massively discouraged since then with it basically being a one man job.GrandMasterGalvatron 15:50, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Darkspine and the World Rings

Alright people...have it out here. Ya'll have been going back and forth and it's time to settle it.

Now I don't have the game, but from what I've seen, three rings enter him. I understand why it could be thought to be all of them though. Now I'm personally staying out of this one so you guys are gonna have to reach a consensus here.GrandMasterGalvatron 20:34, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, we should start by consulting the reliable sources that have seen fit to comment on this subject. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
There are none. So where does that leave us?GrandMasterGalvatron 20:40, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
If there are no sources, then the information is not included. It's that simple. ' 23:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Have fun putting up the entire series for Afd thenGrandMasterGalvatron 12:34, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Must you use the "then delete everything" reasoning every time? I think I've seen it three times since A Man in Black first arrived. Gurko 11:55, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes because it makes no sense to slag one article when they all suffer the same problem!GrandMasterGalvatron 18:37, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Getting back on topic, I'd like to address the "three of the World Rings" thing that people keep inserting into the text. I just had to revert this yet again, and here's the problem - there's no actual FLUID cut scene showing his transformation. It's just a series of framed, stylized still images. Which means that we have no damn clue how many rings flow into his person, becauase we don't see it happen and have no idea what's being kept off-screen. This is part of the problem, obviously.--Bishop2 02:03, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Name change

The name of this article should be changed to Super Transformation in Sonic Media so we don't have to delete this article.

Well, it was gonna be that way at first, but the article was split in two because there was a great load of information in it from the comics and Sonic X.:/GrandMasterGalvatron 19:31, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External Links...NOW

This is not a request...it is a demand to add external links to compensate for the ridicluous loss of data from this recent retardation. In addtion, I expect nothing short of this article reaching GA status and beyond. That's been the intent of this article since day one and I'll be damned if some random passerbys fuck that over. That is all.GrandMasterGalvatron 15:31, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

If you want external links THAT badly and THAT quickly, you could always, y'know, add them yourself? --Bishop2 15:42, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes I could, but then someone's gonna find a bullshit reason to delete them, so I'm gonna make them do it. It's one thing to clean up and article, but to remove sources and make it less informative is a whole 'nother can of worms altogether. GrandMasterGalvatron 15:48, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Who removed any sources? If sources were removed, put them back. I'm the one who did the two big cleanup posts, and I'm pretty sure I didn't remove any sources that are actually relevant to anything. --Bishop2 16:08, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
You realize most of those sources were pointless, right? Why the hell does anyone care if the three Super forms give them same height and weight? Nemu 17:25, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] True necessity of this article

What's the point of this? Besides with Sonic, how will merging any of these sections actually doing anything to the articles besides make them slightly larger and more informative? At this point, we're just telling people to come here to see the what the forms look like, and what they can do, and giving them a description of the power that can easily be found here.

It seems like this will survive the AfD, but I do think we should consider merging the sections to their articles (Sonic may take a hit, but I'm sure it could be trimmed a bit), and redirecting this to the link above. Nemu 17:25, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

They were there before, and inflated the articles. This article was originally just Super Sonic. It went up for countless afds and merge requests with Sonic and survived each and every one until the decision was finally made to split all of the super forms into this article and treat it as a gameplay feature. With that in mind, I'd say that the super form section should be removed from that original page and left here. Especially since all super form names redirect here. Sonic and Knuckles were the biggest offenders in that regard and Knuckles took the biggest hit as he was under roast from Something Awful for his article length (Ironically, Sonic's article is three times as long).
Since the time of it's creation, the article gave in depth information about the feature itself, who can use it, the differences between it's users, and the differences in it's own self. As the deus ex machina of the series since 1992, it at least deserves that much.

Before your edits, nearly every questionable fact was sourced and there were many more sources to come. It was to the point where each and every super form name needed a hard citation (thus why the second Super Tails and SUper Knuckles remain nameless as well as Super Silver. ) There's more I have to say but I'll have to do it later.GrandMasterGalvatron 17:37, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok..I'm also gonna tackle the above issue. The only sources I'm concered about are the DBZ claim (that was commentary from Yuji Naka and is a common criticism of Super mode), and the names. As said, we do have random editors who wanna call Super Shadow "Hyper Shadow", and Burning Blaze "Super Blaze". There's also been major beef with Super Tails and Super Knuckles's returns (lots of fans just refuse to accept it). It was thusly deemed that every Super form name had to be cited and futhermore, game decomplies could not be used as a source. The reason being though they prove the names of 3 of the un-named four, two of them were implied and some stubborn dudes just couldn't accept it. Likewise, Super Silver's only name confirmation lies within game decompiles so he kinda got screwed there. Th rest of the trivia...whatever I can do without it.
This article was to be much more in-depth than any other mentions, and I've worked pretty hard to make it as out of universe as possible. In fact, the only thing stopping from reaching GA is wording IIRC. (that and random vandals). Take that as you will.GrandMasterGalvatron 17:55, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
They may have been bloated in the past, but are they now? That's the issue. I don't see why they cannot be merged at this point. Why can't they just be merged, and given a link to the separate section on the series article? They make up the bulk of this article, but there is no true reason for them to be here besides keeping the article in existence.
None of those pictures are sources (they weren't even cited properly). I have no problem with sourcing the names, but they should use actual written sources. The DBZ thing was being used improperly in an OR paragraph. It can easily be readded next to something like "the forms are similar to the Super Saiyan transformation from Dragon Ball." Nemu 18:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
The thing against re-merging is because the article isn't about the super forms as characters because they are not. It is about super transformation itself as a gameplay feature. It's why Super Sonic was taken off the character template and this article is on the features template. Also Sonic's article is 3x bigger now than it was then and Knuckles was eventually split off into two articles, however, the main article continues to grow with each game release. Also, we're having a really bad vandal problem with it right now so the less it's touched, the better. In addtion, there seems to be a new super form with each release and it seems better to keep all the info here, on this smaller article, than to inflate the already large character articles. Plus, it's much more organized to have all the information about super mode (personal term, does not appear on page) into one solid article than to have it spread across seven articles.GrandMasterGalvatron 19:09, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Instant Death from De-Super

Running out of Rings in a final boss battle results in an instant loss of a life regardless of the battlefield.

Not quite true. If you are standing on a piece of debris in Sonic Adventure when you run out of rings, you stay alive until you touch the water. It's a small little thing, but it contradicts this line. Masterotenko 17:46, 26 March 2007 (UTC)MasterOtenko

Now this I can testify to. I've actually done that and though I never touched the water, I just randomnly collapsed and died. I even got a ring and they still killed me off XD. Meh..it'll probably end up deleted :/GrandMasterGalvatron 17:47, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Hmm? Yes, it will. In that case, it's me, Heavy, from Sonic Stadium! I sent you the PM of fandom yesterday. Also, I swear I've ran around as regular Sonic at some point. Perhaps I was on DX? Masterotenko 17:52, 26 March 2007 (UTC)MasterOtenko
I've only been able to play DX. However, it looks like we'll have to alter the statement. (then again, I'm fairly sure Super Sonic was mentioned in EGM's review of SA:DX. I'll have to look it up)GrandMasterGalvatron 17:56, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
I did that too (in DX) to see what happened. For me, Sonic stayed alive for five seconds or so, and then died anyway. Gurko 08:31, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possible merge with Super transformation in other media?

Editing the article down to only its citable factual information has left us with a shorter piece, and I'm wondering now if we might merge it with the "Super transformation in other media" article. Mind you, that article may also need to undergo some editing... --Bishop2 18:36, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

At this point, probably not, if only due to "Sonic the Comic"'s evil Super Sonic. There's simply too much data within the comics for the articles to be one. Believe me, I was going to at first, but it was just too long X_X. Not to mention the game and comic versions of Super Knuckles are completely different..as well as Super Tails and Turbo Tails.GrandMasterGalvatron 04:50, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Good gravy, what's with the desire to merge all this stuff? There's nothing wrong with linking articles to one another. Soon we'll have one long page called "Sonic" with one sentence describing each little topic... Paul Haymon 05:21, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] So......Chaos is In?

Wasn't he debatable? Oh well.... ChromeWulf ZX 02:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

According to the current definition of Super Transformation in the article, Chaos should not be included. Paul Haymon 08:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../s/u/p/Talk%7ESuper_transformation_77f1.html"