Talk:List of Crash Bandicoot characters/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Kanji names?

Why does this article list the Japanese versions of the characters' names? This is a western game series, out in tons of other languages. Why not list the German, Italian or Spanish versions of their names? That's right, it's pointless.

This is like a whole new level of japanophilia.

Most likely, people do this because the publisher is located in Japan. - A Link to the Past (talk) 15:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

It's all because that having all thosse languages would be too much if you no what I mean. ADBandicoot (talk) 18:58, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Penta

Penta penguin redirects here, but there's no info bout it Kiran 12:32, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

New Character Pages

Can't we give some of these characters their own pages? I mean, some of them them have been in 4 or 5 games and they have 3 sentences of writing on them. If not, I seriously gotta add more information. Especially to N. Trance, his paragraph is somewhat embarrasing.

Nope. Only characters that have appeared in at least four games in the main series can be given their own pages. So far there is six games in the main series, and those are Crash Bandicoot, Cortex Strikes Back, Warped, The Wrath of Cortex, Twinsanity, and Titans. So don't even think of giving N. Trance, Ebeneezer Von Clutch, or any other useless minor characters their own pages, because they don't even appear in the main series. The only characters that should have their own articles right now are Crash, Coco, Aku Aku, Doctor Cortex, N. Gin, Tiny, Dingodile, and Uka Uka. Cat's Tuxedo 14:31, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
I don't know where that rule came from, but fine. But I am rewriting the character paragraphs, there's no excuse for 2 sentence paragraphs on characters. Kobb 00:46, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
There, I rewrote most of the character paragraphs, which now look more proffessional.

Kobb 15:02, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Just one question though, can I create a page for Nina? I know she hasn't been in 4 canon games, but she's definately a main character. In fact, she may be a lead villian in CotT. Not to mention there is quite a lot to write about her. Kobb 05:56, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, considering Crunch and N Brio both have an article, and they only appear in three of the games (one short of the guide), although both with major roles within that, I suppose Nina could be done. CBFan 08:10, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, I'd make it, but I don't know how to make Nina Cortex NOT redirect to this page. Kobb 00:49, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

There wasnt six games. Dont forget to mention Crash bash,Crash team racing,Crash Xs,Crash N Trance,Crash Purple,Crash nitro cart,Crash boom bang and Crash tag team racing. N Tropy deffinatly should have his own page!!!! DeadWood 19:48, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Nice try, but there is only six main games in the series. What you mentioned were just stupid spinoff games that don't affect the overall plot of the series in any way. Tropy will have to wait until he appears in either Titans or a future major platformer. Cat's Tuxedo 19:58, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Spin offs Yes. But it still counts. Now lets not get into a argument here but i think that N tropy should be added. hes been in roughly the same amount as times as N Gin. DeadWood 10:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
All right then. Let's see here...
  • Crash Bandicoot: 14 games (6 in the main series)
  • Aku Aku: 14 games (6 in the main series)
  • Doctor Neo Cortex: 13 games (6 in the main series)
  • Coco Bandicoot: 13 games (5 in the main series)
  • Doctor N. Gin: 11 games (5 in the main series)
  • Tiny Tiger: 11 games (5 in the main series)
  • Uka Uka: 10 games (4 in the main series)
  • Dingodile: 8 games (4 in the main series)
  • Crunch Bandicoot: 8 games (3 in the main series)
  • Polar: 8 games (3 in the main series)
  • Doctor Nefarious Tropy: 7 games (3 in the main series)
  • Fake Crash: 7 games (1 in the main series)
  • Ripper Roo: 5 games (3 in the main series)
  • Nitros Oxide: 5 games (2 in the main series)
  • Komodo Brothers: 5 games (2 in the main series)
  • Pura: 5 games (2 in the main series)
  • Doctor Nitrus Brio: 4 games (3 in the main series)
  • Nina Cortex: 4 games (2 in the main series)
  • Pinstripe Potoroo: 4 games (2 in the main series)
  • Papu Papu: 4 games (2 in the main series)
  • Tawna: 3 games (2 in the main series)
  • Koala Kong: 3 games (2 in the main series)
  • Penta Penguin: 3 games (2 in the main series)
  • Spyro the Dragon: 3 games (1 in the main series)
  • Tribesmen: 2 games (2 in the main series)
  • Evil Crash: 2 games (1 in the main series)
  • Evil Twins: 1 game (1 in the main series)
  • Elementals: 1 game (1 in the main series)
  • Madame Amberly: 1 game (1 in the main series)
  • Tikimon: 1 game (1 in the main series)
  • Ants: 1 game (1 in the main series)
  • Rusty Walrus: 1 game (1 in the main series)
  • Baby T-Rex: 1 game (1 in the main series)
  • Farmer Ernest: 1 game (1 in the main series)

On the contrary, Tropy appeared in four less games than N. Gin. So far, I think the Crunch Bandicoot, Nitrus Brio, Evil Twins, and Emperor Velo XXVII pages should be merged. Cat's Tuxedo 16:29, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Crunch No. Brio No. Evil twins and Velo,Yes. Crunch and Brio are main characters in the series. Crunch is more of a main character but the brio page still should stay. Now do we come to an agreement? i still think we should add the Tropy page. DeadWood 08:33, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Well, I'm still not sure about Brio. He might have contributed a little to the series' initial storyline, but he only appeared in four games out of all of the 14 in the entire series. But I suppose we could keep Crunch if he's really that important. And I guess there is a slim chance for Tropy, too. But we'll have to consult the other Wikipedians and see what they think. Cat's Tuxedo 14:06, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Hmm well Brio should stay and so should crunch. But now i have thought about it we shouldnt do a tropy page. Do me and you come to an agreement? DeadWood 20:45, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
All right. Cat's Tuxedo 21:03, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Brio does not have enough to work with to have his own article. In contrast to the other 9 characters to have articles, who have appeared in at least over half of the games (both within and not within the Main series), Brio has not. He has only appeared in four games (three of them within the Main series, as shown above) and has not had a speaking role since Game 2. As a result, he has very little material to work with. In contrast, Nina has a lot of material to work with (considering how late in the series she appeared), but she does not have an article. Tropy has appeared many more times than Brio has (and, unlike him, has had a speaking role in every game), but likewise, he doesn't get an article. Brio, therefore, should not, because it is otherwise being biased towards him and against characters like those two. In my opinion, a character warrants an article is he/she has appeared in half or more of the CB games (so 7 or more), half or more being of the main series (3 or more) and has enough material to work with. Crunch fulfills these criteria (just about), which is why he has an article. Brio does not.

P.S. Your tables not exactly correct Cat's Tuxedo. Penta has had three appearances, maybe, but only one of them was in a Main game (unless you'd like to correct me). CBFan 15:24, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

That's because I counted the penguins in Cortex Strikes Back, which look exactly like Penta. And I'd better get to merging that Brio page then if you don't mind. Cat's Tuxedo 16:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I personally consider them to be regular penguins (it's hard to put a name to just one of them if there are many of them). Penta's appearances, as I believe them to be, are Warped (his only MG appearance), Team Racing (no denying that) and Bash...purely because there is only one of him in each game. But never mind. CBFan 19:09, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Still trying to add a Nina page.... 69.24.125.178 23:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Crunch barely fits the criteria you guys claim these characters to have, and he has his own article, correct? Why does he barely fit in the category? He has little to work with, perhaps less than Brio. With Crash of the Titans only coming out, we have yet to find out whether or not he has more stuff to work with. Methinks we should wait on the Crunch article until one person has played the entire game and has studied Crunch's behavior and actions in said game. 65.30.24.3 16:33, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
You sound to me like a Brio fanboy, and the only reason you think Brio should have an article is because you WANT him to have an article. That does NOT allow him the right to have one. If you ask me, Tropy and Nina have much more material to work with. If they don't have articles, why should Brio? Crunch may have appeared in the same amount of canon-games as Brio, but he's appeared in more games than him overall, and as a result of this, has a pretty extensive personality. Of the four games Brio appears in (Three canon), he only really 'shines' in two of them. I can't really see where you're coming from with your claim, as Brio always came across as 'monochromatic' in personality terms, but Crunch is far from it (at least three styles). CBFan 20:28, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Aside from The Huge Adventure, Crunch has practically been in EVERY single Crash game since The Wrath of Cortex, including three of the main ones. The barely part comes from him only having a significant role in his aforementioned debut, but that shouldn't change the fact that he is a significant character.
Still, yeah, I too am curious over what his role is in Titans. It won't be long until it comes out, so I'm sure the potential of a full-blown Crunch article could wait til then. Freqrexy 21:32, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to butt in to just say that although N. Tropy hasn't appeared in the last 4 canon Crash game, he has been in the last 3. Adding to that, he has had a much more prominent role in his first appearence than in Dingodile's. Speaking canon-wise, Dingodile shouldn't even really have a page. Technically he didn't appear in the main canon version of the "big 4" Crash games, AND he has little to no information on his appearence. Not to sound Tropy fanboyish, but it seems to me that Tropy and Dingodile are on equal footing when it comes to canonicity. Neither has been in the main console version of all of the last 4 Crash games, but both have had acceptable appearences in recent non-canon games. N. Tropy is pretty much the main antagonist for the non canon N.-Tranced game, and he speaks more lines in Twinsanity than Dingodile.

That's just my opinion though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.77.225.79 (talk) 03:15, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Ripper Roo's Laugh

Dudes, can I ask a Q? Why does it say Ripper Roo's laughter is a clip from Lady and The Tramp? It say's 'hyena's laughter' from L&T. Can someone fix that? There's no hyena in L&T. I think whoever wrote that might have meant 'Lion King.' Can somebody check that??? Thanks.Coco 05:30, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Next time, please make a new bulletin and don't merge with other comments.
Anyway, there IS a hyena in Lady and the Tramp, and it's at the zoo scene; they were there to find a way to remove Lady's muzzle, and the hyena's distinctive laughter comes in after a failed attempt with the teeth of an aligator. Freqrexy 09:58, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't Spyro be added.

I'm just wondering. I mean, he's made a cameo in Twinsanity as technically a main role when he attacked the three thieves.--Kingdom of crash and spyro 14:59, 6 September 2007 (UTC).

A cameo is just that - not a main role. Just because there are a few silly interchanges between Crash and Spyro doesn't mean they are main characters in each others' game series. I mean, do we really consider Ratchet as an Ape Escape character due to the monkey Ratchet appearance in the third game of the series? Do we consider Priere from La Pucelle a major Disgaea character for being a secret boss? And do we consider Nikki from Pandemonium a Gex character due to her cameo at the ending of Enter the Gecko?
My point is proven. Spyro is not a main Crash character, so therefore, he and various characters in the series should not be added to the article. Freqrexy 16:04, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
And even if we DID except he was a Crash character (which he isn't), we wouldn't let you with your previous vandalism with it. CBFan 18:24, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Spyro only appeared in three games in the entire 14-game series; one in the main six-game series. That's hardly enough for an out-of-universe character to even earn a spot in the list of other characters. If Spyro appears in three more games in the main series, only then will he be considered a Crash character. Cat's Tuxedo 20:21, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:TwinsanityBrio.PNG

Image:TwinsanityBrio.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:33, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:TwinsanityBrio.PNG

Image:TwinsanityBrio.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 07:11, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Titans page

I made a titan page, but it needs some working up. I was suprised there wasn't one yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kobb (talk • contribs) 02:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure the Titans need their own article? I mean they've only appeared in one game. Cat's Tuxedo 10:54, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, because of the fact that there are 15 of them. And they may appear in future games. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kobb (talk • contribs) 23:47, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Whoever removed the titans page, it IS necessary. People can't find the page without it being here. Kobb 00:49, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Nina

I removed the line about how she dramatically changed in CotT. She acted and behaved almost exactly the same as in CTTR. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kobb (talk • contribs) 00:57, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Nina's own page

Shouldn't we add a page for Nina? She seems to be getting more and more major with every passing game.ADBandicoot (talk) 19:43, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

She's only been in two games in the main platformer series, plus two spin-offs. We'll wait for two more platformers. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 21:56, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I got that idea from the fact that Uka Uka replaced Cortex with her in Titans and that she has a larger section than everyone else. ADBandicoot (talk) 13:40, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Merge of Uka Uka

I've tagged Uka Uka to be merged into this list. Uka Uka is a single character in the game series with no notability outside of the game. Individual game character articles like this usually fail notability requirements. The bulk of the article is game guide and plot type stuff. The "Conception and creation" seems to attempt to provide some real world context, but it still isn't very notable and can be covered easily in the respective game articles. Collectonian (talk) 10:40, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

What are you talking about? He makes appearances in, last I checked, 10 games in the series, of which four of those were in the main series, meaning he is not "A single character in the game series"...plus it is waaay over the required amount needed. Not only that, but we know a lot about him. There's no reason whatsoever why his article needs to be removed. CBFan (talk) 16:45, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Since you refuse to allow a merge discussion and improperly removed my tagging as vandalism, the article has been sent to AfD. Collectonian (talk) 20:05, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
What, just because you hate Uka Uka, or you've never played the Crash series (as you seem to think he's a "single" character, when he's had 10 or so appearances) you don't think he deserves an article? I see no logic in that, I'm sorry. If it had some proper reasons, then I'd understand. But there isn't. The absance of any that make sense only suggest the two I mentioned. CBFan (talk) 21:37, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia is NOT a a game guide. I've already given you one of the most important reasons for his not needing a separate article: he is a video game character with no REAL WORLD notability. Being in 10 games doesn't make him anymore notable than being in one. He is still a video game character and the article makes no assertion of notability that meets the Wikipedia notability guidelines. The same criteria applies to all fictional characters, including show characters. Your presumption that I must hate Uka Uka or have never played the Crash is a red herring argument and one I find ironic since I'm currently playing Crash 3. Love/Hate has nothing to do with it, its application of the policy in a neutral fashion. Collectonian (talk) 23:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Read the rest of the topic. He clearly IS legimate. And, once again, your reasons for deletion make no sense. Of course he has no real world notability... he's a video game character. By your logic, Crash Bandicoot himself would not be allowed to have his own article. Mario would not be allowed to have his own article. Heck, even Darth Vader would not be allowed to have his own article. By your (flawed) logic, no fictional character would be allowed to have his/her own article. You need to think of some PROPER reasons, because you're not providing any. CBFan (talk) 11:06, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Crash Bandicoot, Mario, and Darh Vader have articles because they have had a number of appearances and parodies outside their respective series. Uka Uka hasn't appeared anywhere outside the Crash Bandicoot series. Outside the Crash Bandicoot series, Uka Uka is barely notable. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 18:52, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I've expanded the merge suggestion to include other characters from the series that have their own articles but whose articles do not meet the Wikipedia notability requirements, having no real world notability and being almost entirely in-universe, game plot regurgitation and original research. For now, I've left Crash's article out of the merge list as I believe real world notability should be establishable for him. The current article fails to do this, however, so I have tagged for the issues I noted and will give time for improvement. Collectonian (talk) 19:41, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Now that we've actually come up with an acceptable compromise, I don't have any problems with this. CBFan (talk) 19:43, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Yuktopus

My article that I created for the Yuktopus has been deleted and the search now redirected here. And the post I made here on the Yuktopus has since disappeared as has my bit on Baby-T. Has someone deleted this or what? Can someone help? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk • contribs) 11:02, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Individual character articles are generally discouraged as they fail the notability requirements for fictional articles. Someone removed your article and redirected it here because it the character is unnotable and an individual article should not have been created. If you feel that particular character is somehow notable to the series as a whole, feel free to post your argument here for discussion. Your additions to this page were removed by another editor, and again by me, as unnecessary game guide level information, which Wikipedia is not (see WP:NOT Collectonian (talk) 12:09, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
I originally did the redirect, but I see that the Yuktopus section was removed from the page... — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 16:08, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Yuktopus already has information on the titans page. 69.24.125.144 (talk) 22:00, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I shall have a look at the Titans page now, but I think that the Yuktopus should have a small section of its own, seeing as other characters have similar sections and an arguably smaller part in the Crash Bandicoot series. --MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 11:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

He does, he has his own article on the Titans page, yet he isn't important enough to the series to get his own page, nor does he meet the requirement of 3 (or was it 4) canon appearances. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kobb (talk • contribs) 21:11, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Split proposal

Since it has become apparent that the characters of Crash Bandicoot have no real-world notability by themselves, I have a proposal. Since the list of characters is becoming rather long, let's split the list into two articles, catering to major and minor characters in the series respectively. Characters that have appeared in at least four of the six main games (i.e. Crash Bandicoot, Aku Aku, Coco Bandicoot, Doctor Neo Cortex, Doctor N. Gin, Tiny Tiger, Uka Uka, and Dingodile) will be put in the major characters article. The rest will go into the minor characters page. How about that? Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 21:01, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I suggest trimming the longer sections in this article down before bothering to split it. Just by indiscriminately cutting paragraphs, I was able to get it down to thirty kilobytes. I imagine if done correctly, thirty five to forty kilobytes wouldn't be too hard. TTN (talk) 21:08, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. I'm cleaning up in the spin off character list now and was both shocked and amused to realize that the same paragraph was being repeated three times in that section. :P Collectonian (talk) 22:04, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Oppose. Very minor characters should be removed. If they are not notable in the game or are just generic/common enemies, there is no need to list them and their inclusion heads towards game guide material. For the rest, clean up and cut down to focus on voices, basic description of character personality and appearance, and game appearances and basic role. 3-4 paragraphs are not needed to cover this. For most characters, this should be coverable in just 1 paragraph, while more major characters may need 2-3. We don't want or need to give a blow-by-blow of every thing they did in the game, just a short summary. For more characters, 1 sentence per game is more than enough to summarize their role for each game appearance, at most.Collectonian (talk) 21:36, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
How about "No", that is blatant biasey AND it defeats the whole logic (of which yours is heavily flawed) of having a "List for (video game) characters", especially when you take the other great gaming legends into account. CBFan (talk) 21:03, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Clean-ups

In preparation for the merges, I have started doing some clean up in the article. I started with the Spin Off characters. I removed those characters that seem minor, reformatted the kept entries to be in keeping with a more standard character list format, and replaced references with a general cite video game for each game being referenced. I renamed the header to be a little more specific, and I also cleaned up the writing for kept entries (at least three had the same stuff repeating 3 times in three paragraphs, maybe left overs from an earlier merge?), and to try to improve the readability and make each entry more succinct. Before going on to the other sections, I wanted to get thoughts on these changes and see if they are approved or disapproved.

If I removed a character as minor who you feel is notable, please bring them up for discussion here (or add them back rather than just reverting everything). I tried to evaluate each character based on the descriptions I saw, with the main protagonists and bosses automatically kept. Those who seems to just be helper characters or "screen decoration" (like the trophy girls) were removed. Collectonian (talk) 22:38, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Your murdering of the page made the article look less like an encyclopedia and more like IMDB. Furthermore, it showed blatant biasey against the spin-off characters and a COMPLETE lack of logic. How you could POSSIBLY remove Pasadena Opossum, who has a very well-constructed personality, yet keep the Komodo Bros (who have little if nothing in comparison) is beyond me. Besides, the article is "List of Crash Bandicoot characters". You just removed Crash Bandicoot characters from the only area they were meant to be in. Look at the character articles for Mario, Sonic and Spyro in comparison, and maybe you'll understand how you destroyed the page. CBFan (talk) 21:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
I asked very politely above that if I misinterpreted a character as minor to please just put them back as I am not familiar with every game in the series. Their summaries made them sound minor. All you had to do was go to the old version, copy and paste them back into the article. Instead, you did the very thing I very politely asked you not to do, which was just plain revert. I did NOT just remove the minor characters, but also edited a bunch of sections that literally contained the exact same paragraph three times! I also added more citations and cleaned up many of them to more properly use the cite video game articles. I did not show bias against the spin-off characters, I started there to get the ball rolling with the intention of doing the rest of the sections after getting feedback on the changes in layout to bring the article more in-line with a character list and with the rewrites to tighten up the summaries.
I only dropped the ANI against you because you agreed to be more cooperative, discuss the changes in this article rather than getting into a revert war again (and referring to a very good faith attempt to do what no one else has been willing to for a month now effort as vandalism), and to work to actually improve it. Instead, you are doing exactly what you promised not to do. If you disagreed with the rewrite, discuss the issues here. If you think a character was improperly removed, lets DISCUSS and then we can add it back if others agree. Collectonian (talk) 21:24, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
And, once again, you refuse to accept that you are to blame, instead blaming the situation on me. Since you're not really understanding anything, I'll go through it one step at a time.
First of all, this is the "List of Crash Bandicoot characters" thread. As it currently stands, it contains all the characters of the Crash series. However, your edits are blatantly removing over half of them, some more relevent than others. Why you're removing Pasadena but not Penta Penguin is beyond me. Also, how about taking a look at similar "List of <video game> characters" articles. It doesn't matter how minor a character is...as long as he or she is a character by his or her own right, he or she still gets included. It shows with Mario, it shows with Sonic, it even shows with Spyro. Therefore, it should show with Crash.
Secondly, "All you had to do was go to the old version, copy and paste them back into the article. Instead, you did the very thing I very politely asked you not to do, which was just plain revert." Which, of course, is a blatant lie and EXACTLY what you are doing. If you'd even bothered to check, I was actually removing as much stuff as seemed irrelevant (you should have noticed that whole chunks in Oxide and Velo's articles were missing). Instead, you keep reverting back to the IMDB-equse way you had it. Heck, why don't we remove EVERY single character, relevant or otherwise?
Basically, this is meant to be an encyclopediac article. Your edits did not even remotely feel like one. If you want to improve this article, and I'd like to think you do, you have to listen to other people, not accuse them of vandalising the way you did to me. I'm trying to improve the article as well, and just randomly removing characters is not the answer. You're the one not discussing, not me (tell me, did you get ANY replies for your idea before mine giving you the go-ahead or not?). CBFan (talk) 21:37, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
I do not get your IMDB references at all. That section was brought more in-line with the standard format of a character article. How is that IMDB like? As I said above, I may have misinterpreted which characters were minor and which were not. I did not randomly remove characters. I carefuly read everything written in their descriptions and used those descriptions to evaluate if they were important to the game or just a "random repeating generic monster" type character. If the descriptions were lacking the information to better assert their importance to their respective game(s) then those descriptions obviously need rewriting.
Editors do not need permission to do clean up work, and I explained what I did and why above. All you had to do was say "hey, these characters need to be added back because they are important: X, Y, X" and I'd have even added them back myself. Instead, you just reverted my hours worth of work to do what you claim you want to do, improve the article. And now you see why I did not go ahead and do them all...I suspected this would be the real response despite your earlier claims in the Uka Uka AfD. Collectonian (talk) 22:05, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Well then, why not visit IMDB? Because it's obvious to me that your articles were way too like their pages, and IMDB is not an encyclopedia. And, furthermore, once again, stop blaming me for things that YOU did. If you had bothered to look, you would have seen that I HAD improved the article. I'd even incorporated your comments into the new edits, until you blatantly insisted that your way HAD to be the correct way. Of course, with your refusal to accept anyone's ideas other than your own, I really doubt we'll get anywhere...ESPECIALLY if you keep telling blatant lies about me such as "I suspected this would be the real response despite your earlier claims in the Uka Uka AfD." This obviously has nothing to do with the Uka Uka AfD and you know it. Seriously, stop it. You're obviously only here to attempt to get me banned, when it is obvious that all that will be achieved is BOTH of us getting banned. CBFan (talk) 22:17, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

At this point, I'm beginning to reconsider my "Major/Minor characters in Crash Bandicoot" split idea from the last section. Arguing over this like a couple of paranoid-schizophrenic dinner children isn't going to solve anything fast, so why not? Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 23:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

My apologies for letting CBFan cause me to lose my temper and get into an edit war. Who'd have thought this game could inspired such heated debate, eh?  :-P
Since the page is currently protected and none of us can edit it anyway, shall we engage in the discussion I hoped to start with my first bit of work regarding a clean up of the list before the merge happens? Since I seem to have badly judged which characters are minor, are there in any list which are minor enough that they aren't notable within the game series and really don't need to be in the list and could/should be removed? Do you approve or disapprove of the actual rewrites to the character sections for Spin-off characters that were done (which removed some OR, removed multiple instances of duplicated sentences and paragraphs in the same character section, and cleaned up the references to use the cite video game template (which would be a requirement before this list could be an FLC). How about the formatting change, which I did feeling it would better reflect the most common formatting seen in high quality character articles? (To see the edits I did, see this diff[1]
Also, something I didn't do but thought about, should we have we regroup a bit to have a hierarchy like:
Main series
list of which series are in main
  • Protagonists
  • Antagonists
  • Others
Spin-off series
list of spin-off series and what determines if a game is a spin-off
  • Protagonists
  • Antagonists
  • Others
Collectonian (talk) 01:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

So far, I think the characters that should've been kept are Ebeneezer Von Clutch, Pasadena O'Possum, and Willie Wumpa Cheeks. They are all important to the plot of Crash Tag Team Racing, and are therefore notable. As for your hierarchy format, I suppose we could go with that, except probably replace 'Others' with 'Neutral' for those characters with an undefinable morality.

As for which games are in the main series, we generally consider the six console platformers (Crash 1, 2, 3, Wrath of Cortex, Twinsanity, and Titans) as part of that series, and while it is debatable, Crash Team Racing and Crash Tag Team Racing could also be a part of the series because each have affected the main series in some way; Nitros Oxide from Team Racing went on to appear in Wrath of Cortex and Twinsanity, and Tiny complains in Titans about not appearing in the last game. To confirm that this "last game" was Tag Team Racing, Titans producer Kirsten Forbes humorously stated in this interview that Tiny was sad about not being in the last Radical-produced game (Crash Boom Bang!, in which Tiny does appear, was developed by Dimps). The rest of the games are not considered part of the canonical universe because they would conflict with the main storyline. Crash Bash's endings don't make sense if inserted into the main storyline. The Huge Adventure, N-Tranced, and Nitro Kart contain exclusive characters and don't have a clear place in the Crash chronology. And finally, Crash Boom Bang!, a Japanese-developed game, is completely different in style and general ambient.

I guess that pretty much sums it up. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 02:51, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

You forgot to mention "Purple/Fusion", which isn't canon either because, like Boom Bang, it is different in general ambient. 79.74.103.32 (talk) 20:12, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. I've started working on this at User:Collectonian/WIP5. I started with the article before I did any editing, then put back in the character section rewrites I did. So far, the only character I removed in this version was the park drones. I made an attempt at sorting the spin-off characters, but could use some feedback to make sure I got every one right. I also incorporated some of the changes CBFan did during the edit warring, though some with editing. (compare) Collectonian (talk) 10:20, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
All you did was include the characters that you removed, and even then you failed to do so properly (Seriously, how is Wille neutral in any sense of the word?). I've been fixing your version, so it now actually looks like it came from Wikipedia and not from IMDB (floating fragments are not recommended and they disrupted the flow of the article anyway), fixed Oxide's profile as it had false information and also changed the "Neutral" section in the "Main Series Characters" to "Others", because Neutral doesn't really work. 79.74.13.75 (talk) 17:51, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
CBFan, you were blocked. Have you not learned yet? You didn't "fix" anything, you just changed it to be back to what you want it to be. I've undone what you did. If you can discuss the article in a civil tone, do so here, but stop trying to bully and force your view on the article and everyone else. We work on consensus, not CBFan says so and everyone else must listen. Its no wonder work never gets done in this articles, because you won't let it happen. Collectonian (talk) 21:12, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
And there we have it, folks. Proof that Collectonian wants SOLELY what he wants and refuses to accept other people's thoughts on the subject. The explaination was civil. Your version was awkwardly constructed. It was set out more like IMDB rather than Wikipedia. Your attempts of listing the voice actors shows this. It also makes the sentence "fragmented" and "free flowing", something that Wikipedia does not recommend. Willie Wumpa Cheeks is not a neutral character, he is an evil character. Anyone who has played Tag Team Racing will know that. Thus your version of the article gave false information. It also gave similar mis-information in Oxide's area...you claim he disappeared after his unicycle accident, but he returned in the very next game. Some disappearance. Basically, you need to keep things consistant with the rest of the article, and you're not doing it. No nonsense, no misinformation, no free-flowing sentences. If you ask me, you're the one who isn't learning and there's no point telling me about consensus if you refuse to work by it yourself. It's no wonder work never gets done in this article, because you won't let it happen. And for the record, yes I learned LONG ago. You're the only one who's continually been trying to get into trouble. For once, why not compare your version with my version and see how different they are? Or better yet, work my version (which has characters in the right place and does not have fragments) to your likings. Just don't edit them back SOLELY because "I edited them" or "You MUST have your way." 79.74.122.255 (talk) 22:51, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Due the continuous arguing over the clean up this article and the merging, I have put in a request at the video game project to let them handle it. Hopefully CBFan will be more excepting of their work. Collectonian (talk) 01:26, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

That's right... blame me for something you started. I tried to be more civil and I even did the copy'n'paste thing you said rather than just edit back, but you STILL insist that it is vandalism even though it's a benefit. I removed sentence fragments, and you called it vandalism. I put Willie Wumpa Cheeks in his proper section (he is an antagonist, he ISN'T neutral), you call it vandalism. I remove the incorrect information in N Oxide's article, you call it vandalism. I renamed the "Neutral" section to "Others" because it was more accurate, and you call that vandalism as well. If you wish to get anywhere in life, you have to accept that you can't get your own way all the time. This is not about you, this is about everyone and it really isn't my fault that you can't take constructive criticism. It really isn't. Think about it for once. 79.74.59.168 (talk) 09:08, 12 January 2008 (UTC)79.74.59.168 (talk) 09:03, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Maybe if you guys were not three year olds crying over this like a broken toy, things would get -done- on this article(s), instead, this happens, and this is a perfect example of why people can never get along, even with the same interests. --Ihsbislns (talk) 13:44, 17 January 2008 (UTC)Ihsbislns
Now that the page has been unprotected, I've been assisting with the re-design, using the design Collectonian used whilst keeping all the characters in their relevant position. 79.74.88.105 (talk) 12:41, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm beginning to have second thoughts about this whole merging thing; since images aren't allowed in lists (namely this one), it might give the viewers a harder time picturing what the characters, particularly the major ones, look like, slightly affecting readability. Does anyone have any opinions on this? Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 17:39, 20 January 2008 (UTC)