Talk:Sonic the Hedgehog (character)/Archive 2

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

Japanese Name

Add in the Japanese text for Sonic The Hedgehog. --ZachKudrna18@yahoo.com

Can anyone confirm the Japanese name, Sonikku Harinezumi? That means Sonic Hedgehog in Japanese, but I believe they borrowed hedgehog from English, resulting in Sonikku za Hejjihoggu. Does anyone know for sure? -- ChessManXI 10:38, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

I can't find no fool's name by Sonikku Harinezumi >x<ino 11:28, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

The Official Name used in Japanese is "Sonikku za Hejjihoggu", in relation to the name used with the rest of the world. - Judacris 08:42, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

I believe some Japanese people or fans refer to him as Sonikku Harinezumi (like for example, Rad Red is a nickname for Knuckles, or Shad is a nickname for Shadow in the English fanbase) though Sega officially refers to him as Sonikku za Hejjihoggu.

Yes, i do know that and most people do know that. If you play Sonic Adventure, and set the Voice/Language to Japanese, when a characters calls out's SOnic's name, in the subtitle it will be spelled out "Soniku"

But this is Wiki, not many people know about Shad or Rad Red, because we do not know most of the fans speak

>x<ino 17:38, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I was going to change the wording, since the difference between the two versions is not "romanisation" at all, but since there is no reference for the second name anyway, I removed it. JPD (talk) 18:35, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

I've just edited a load of links and references to "Sonic the Retard", "Stupid Sonic", "Sonic the Fast Person" and "Sonic Advent". Is this the first time such edits have been made necessary on this page? --L T Dangerous 16:53, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Hm, perhaps I needn't have asked- upon checking the history, it seems this is something that's happened a couple of times. Might I suggest locking the page for a short while? Unless there's anything from Rush or Shadow that needs adding, it's probably safe to say there won't be much new information to go here for a while, so it's not like a lock would be preventing anything much. --L T Dangerous 16:57, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

More vandals, a user of 68.195.8.254 changed the entire article to "All wrong shadow can totaly destroy sonic" recently. Is there any way to block such direspect of Wikipedia? chess.and.cookies@gmail.com 04:14, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

The page can be protected by an admin, but the level of vandalism hasn't reached a suitable level for this page. --Jtalledo (talk) 04:31, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

In other news, I did notice somebody's up and trying to start up the image war again. *grumble* --Shadow Hog 05:59, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Baka ni gaijo! [This was where Darth Katana X mistakenly accused Yeltensic42 of vandalism; this note is here so that readers won't be completely confused by the following discussion]

Please don't make a mountain out of a molehill. There was a little misunderstanding, that's all. See my post on User talk:Darth Katana X. To make it clear to anyone reading this who didn't see what he was talking about, I did not commit any vandalism. Yeltensic42.618 14:55, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

LOL, Yeltensic42.618 you also did an edit, on Sonic the Hedgehog characters who have died, knowly stating Shadow may have fallen to his death. Which it isn't true

P

>x<ino 00:51, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Well I haven't played the Shadow game yet, so I was under the impression that whether or not he died was uncertain, but apparently it gets cleared up then. Well, thanks for correcting it, but no thanks for calling me a fool in your edit summary, that was pretty unneccesary, but why did you mention it here on this Vandalism thread? It wasn't vandalism. You seem to be following Darth's lead, why? Yeltensic42.618 17:10, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Never mind, I did some minimal research and apparently you call everyone fools. No offense taken (and none meant, I hope). Yeltensic42.618 17:29, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

LOL, sorry for calling you fool i know it wasn't neccessary, but i like that word, thanks to MR T:P

i mentioned it here, ok..then do you want me to delete it...do it just for you:P

Darth's Lead:O, no i am not.. i hate following evil way,... it's like Dark Vadal:P

lol, you did some research:P yea i do call everyone fool, BUT not everyone, only those fools that are not register to wiki:P

>x<ino 21:48, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Darth Katana X is evil? How is that? I think he just misunderstood me and overreacted. Yeltensic42.618 22:55, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

You might want to keep this personal discussion to your user talk pages. Thanks. --Jtalledo (talk) 23:43, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Well, it was here because it was all set off by Darth Katana X accusing me of "mass vandalism" (there must have been a misunderstanding, but I'm not sure exactly how he made that leap). Yeltensic42.618 20:23, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

like i said before..."EVIL!"

joking,lol...no one is evil:P

yea, they may be some misunderstanding...or They could be an misundertstanding >x<ino 20:50, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
by the way...

Jtalledo is now the evil one!...EVIL! EVIL!:P

>x<ino

pics

can some one tell me why this is here? has seen in the manual...we dont need that

because that image is the same has the first image appearing only in black & white

>x<ino

It doesn't need to be there - I removed all references to it and will put it up for ifd. --Jtalledo (talk) 19:27, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Mario VS Sonic End

When Mario won and Sonic lost, what did AMY ROSE do? --User:ZachKudrna18@yahoo.com

What are you talking about? ChessManXI 06:51, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Are you talking about the Sonic vs Mario end? i don't know what Amy the hoe did to Sonic...you know what she did:P >x<ino 08:44, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, after Sega left the console Market, AMY ROSE felt sad that Sonic lost. --ZachKudrna18@yahoo.com

Please stop wasting our time with this drivel. This Talk page concerns the Sonic the Hedgehog article on Wikipedia, not nonsensical reactions of fictional characters to real-life events, or any particular discussion unrelated to Wikipedia as this discussion is. --Shadow Hog 17:57, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Sonic dose,nt lose he stupidly(Funny,and vulgarly) wins as Super Sonic in the the lost ending haven,t you seen it try typing in on Yahoo or Google Sonic Vs Mario--??? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.192.201.154 (talk • contribs) .

You people are off-topic!! This is a flash you are talking about!! - 70.241.64.243 08:01, 13 June 2006 (UTC) Evil Sonic

Featured Article

The edit wars seem sufficiently over and the article seems to be very thourough, so, maybe it's time to nomintate it for featured article status. Does anyone else agree or am I totally mistaken? --ChessAndCookies 01:24, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

We should probably fix clean-up the templates at the bottom of the page soon (The list of games and characters) --ChessAndCookies 22:29, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

I'd agree. It it Time. --Judacris 09:45, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

I was planning to add more pics to make it visually more attractive. Right now it's a whole lot of text. I've got some ideas what to put here and there but I'm still researching pictures. --Steerpike 11:30, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

what do you mean nomintate? you mean, it will be nominated for better improvements? like from before to after!?:P >x<ino 14:24, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Noooo, he means to nominate it for a chance to be on the front page. --Shadow Hog 16:37, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

It's almost ready. Just move all the crap on the non-canon Sonic's love life to a different article. I also think we should focus on Sonic X a little more. After all, that's a lot closer to the "real" Sonic universe than the comics. -- Darth Katana X

It still needs to citations as well. --Jtalledo (talk)
Agreed, we need cititions, everything we have now is based on what we know, but could be unreliable. chess.and.cookies@gmail.com 05:58, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I like the current condition of the page (without the vandalism, of course). The images I find we needed are all there. --Judacris 06:53, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

I actually think the Archie part should stay. It's verifiable and doesn't need to be erased. And Sonic X isn't very real, to tell the truth (especially since characters like Chris will not be in the games). And, if you haven't noticed, Sonic is less decisive and hardly talks, which is very different from the game. --anon —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 2005 71.105.0.87 (talk • contribs) 00:37, 12 December.

Differences aside, the character designs and plot lines are heavily influenced by the current line of Sonic games. Plus, like it or not, the voice actors from Sonic X are the voice actors in the current crop of Sonic games as well. Which is more than can be said for the Archive comics, which has branched way off from the games. --Jtalledo (talk) 04:49, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
Shouldn't we have both in the article? Yeltensic42.618 14:34, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Yep, there's no doubt that it should be mentioned, but probably as alternate representations of the character. The games and to a lesser extent, the Sonic X series should be the focus of the character description. --Jtalledo (talk) 17:28, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Let's not be biased here. There is no "canon" in the Sonic world. All of these different continuities hold equal validity and all deserve to be mentioned in the article. They all come from Sega approved sources (i.e. they are all official), and this article is about the character, not the games, specifically (There is another article for that). Focusing everything on the Sonic X and current games continuity rather than the other sources and history of the character is biased and misleading. I think that the balance in the article is very good right now. PorpoiseMuffins 17:54, 15 December 2005 (UTC) 17:51, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
It's not about being biased. Lest we forget, Sonic is first and foremost a video game character. There would be no Sonic comics or television programs if he wasn't in video games. The article on Link is a featured article and it focuses on Link's characteristics in the games and underscores the television series and comics as alternative interpretations of the character. --Jtalledo (talk) 17:57, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Nevertheless, this is a very disputed subject. For a while, America, Japan, and Europe all had separate Sonic storylines, and their respective game manuals were written to reflect this. So, by saying that the article should focus on Sonic's characteristics in the games, which interperatation, and which timeframe, are you referring to? I think we should do whatever we can to avoid using words like "canon" in the article, as that shows favoritism towards one continuity over the other, unless you say "canon to a certain continuity," in which case that is being fair to everyone. PorpoiseMuffins 18:23, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
If you look at that article on Link, it deals very nicely with the very confusing "canon" of the Zelda series. We should model this article on that, since there's an issue regarding the non-existent continuity of the character. There really hasn't been as much discrepancy with the Sonic character as there has been with the link character, since only the more recent Sonic Adventure titles have showed his personality. --Jtalledo (talk) 18:28, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, I agree. They did a nice job, there. The Zelda series is very confusing, but at least Nintendo doesn't try and pretend that it all strictly fits together. Each game tends to have its own story somehow related to the plot of the original game, but somtimes it takes place in a whole other century with different people going by the same names. I'll be happy with this StH article as long as all of the official continuities are mentioned in it (as they are already) and no single continuity is singled out as being more cononical or "real" than the others. In fact, it might be good to include a sentence or two that briefly mentions this controversy from an unbiased standpoint. I'm pretty happy with most of what is said in the article right now and the time given to each of the continuities. Of course, it could always be improved here and there. If someone has more to say about Sonic's character in the games or Sonic X, then, by all means, add it! But I don't think we should be removing information from other sections of the article because we like one continuity more than the others or think it deserves more attention. Sonic's character has been fleshed out more in the comics and cartoons than it has in the games, which I think is the reason why this article doesn't talk as much about the games as some would like it to. What do you think? 67.163.142.44 02:18, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
Yep. I think the comics and cartoons should definitely be mentioned, but the only thing is the game continuities should be mentioned first in their own section, just because Sonic is a video game character. There's no doubt that the cartoons and comics provided a more rich character description for Sonic, even during his initial run on the Sega Genesis/Megadrive. --Jtalledo (talk) 04:37, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Pictures

What's the deal with all the archaic Sonic the Hedgehog pictures? This guide needs more pictures from Heroes, yo! -- Darth Katana X

Actually, the article doesn't need many pictures. Only pictures that are used to illustrate important points in the article can qualify for fair use. --Jtalledo (talk) 01:02, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, that makes sense. But I think we could replace just a couple of those old illustrations with new renders. -- Darth Katana X

Why replace them? Why not add? The old pics and the new pics both serve a purpose...the old pics illustrate the information on the old games, and the new pics illustrate the new games. Yeltensic42.618 00:58, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
Adding too many pictures might not be covered under fair use. The individual game pages do an adequate job of illustrating the games. --Jtalledo (talk) 01:01, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
This article needs one or two examples of old as well as new, yo! Yeltensic42.618 20:10, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm trying to add as much relevant pictures to this page as possible without swamping the text. --Steerpike 22:18, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

The issue isn't so much about swamping the text as it is about relevance. There was a discussion about which pictures were relevant here before. Unless a picture is absolutely critical to supplementing the text, it's not necessary and it actually may not be fair use to include it. Also keep in mind that resizing pictures could be tasking on the servers. --Jtalledo (talk) 00:47, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
That's what *I* said: "relevant pictures". And common, there are many featured articles literally engulfed in pictures. This one isn't too bad. Quite the contrary I'd say. For the most part this page is one big block of text. It could definitely use some visual improvement. Take a look at "Super Mario" for reference. That Super Sonic image you removed actually *was* relevant because that's what that section was about. Btw, aformentioned discussion actually was about which picture to put at the top of the article.--Steerpike 01:34, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm actually referring to the discussion where there were votes to Keep or not to keep certain pictures. The criteria for featured articles doesn't require pictures at all. As a matter of fact, pictures that are used outside the scope of fair or free use may actually be detrimental to an article being made a featured article. Putting pictures just to make an article look pretty may not be covered under fair use. There's already a whole slew of pictures of Super Sonic in the relevant article. What's really important is the text. --Jtalledo (talk) 01:40, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

South Island

The article says that the games take place on the South Island in the Pacific (I'll assume that means New Zealand) and that Sonic was born on Christmas Island (presumably Australia), but what is the source for that? I haven't seen that anywhere else, eg in canonical sources (I hope this doesn't sound like I'm accusing others of making things up). Yeltensic42.618 07:29, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the bit about him being born on Christmas Island, but the GHZ article on the first game says that the game takes place on South Island. The GHZ is a pretty reliable source about the Sonic games, drawing information from both the Japanese and American versions of the games. --Jtalledo (talk) 13:09, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
Thanks, I went and saw that...I also saw where they mentioned the Pacific, but they didn't say where they got that from (eg games, manuals)...probably Sonic Adventure or SA2, but they didn't say. Does anyone know where? And since it is in the Pacific, I would assume that it's the South Island of New Zealand, but does anyone know if Sega has explicitly said that? Yeltensic42.618 21:33, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
Not sure about the specifics for South Island, but IIRC Christmas Island was brought up in the limited edition for SA2. Whether that was Japanese only or US too, I don't know either. --Shadow Hog 22:18, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

In the anime, which is generally considered canon, Sonic lives on South Island, but probably not the same South Island, seeing as it's set on Planet Freedom. Gives you something to think about. -- Darth Katana X

I was under the impression that the anime is canon, but only for its own continuity, not for the games...is that right? If they mentioned South Island and Christmas Island, that probably means the games are in the Pacific (a big coincidence otherwise), even if Sega hasn't said they're in the Pacific (which they probably have, since Green Hill Zone mentions it)...assuming they're on Earth. Has Sega specified that the games are on Earth (unless they've mentioned the Pacific, which would make it obvious), and not just a planet similar to Earth? I seem to recall it being on future Earth (maybe when hedgehogs et al have evolved to the point of human-level intelligence?), but I'm not sure where that was, or if it was in a canonical source. Yeltensic42.618 00:14, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
The games do take place on Earth, although the manuals in the American releases of the Sega Genesis titles claim they take place on Planet Mobius. Evidence for the games taking place on Earth can be seen in the later games, in which the cut scenes leave little doubt that the games take place on Earth. Sonic X and has its own canon and tries to bridge the gap between the two storylines by making Sonic and friends come from another world and being transported to Earth. The anime movie from a while back has its own canon entirely. --Jtalledo (talk) 00:42, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Do you mean seeing the Earth from orbit? The only recent game I've played is Heroes (in fact, that was the first Sonic game I ever played...I was always a Nintendo-ite in the rivalry era, and by age missed the original craze anyway). As for the Genesis manuals, I think Mobius was an invention of the Western comics, and was mentioned games like Mean Bean Machine that were intended to promote the comics, but not in the main games. Was there also a source (non-canon) that had Eggman coming to Mobius from Earth? Yeltensic42.618 01:07, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't see why we have to believe that Sonic is from Earth. I understand that Prof. Gerald knows of the chaos emeralds, but this could be that Gerald had a portal to Sonic's planet (possibly Mobius). This could explain the reason why Robotnik is the only human in the old sonic series that he used Gerald's portal (sorry for the fanfic), but please don't write this on the main page. I'm sorry if I have have offended anyone who has researched this more than me, I have also added discussion on E-series. (I don't have a user name). But please add more theories underneath this.


Besides perhaps a few fanfics, I'd say no. -- Darth Katana X

I don't think I've ever bothered reading Sonic fanfic...I used to read Zelda fanfic now and then, but then it hit me how stupid most of it was....so I don't think it was fanfic, unless maybe it was fanfic cited on Wikipedia (maybe someone wrote Sonic fanfic that involved Eggman from Earth, then mentioned it on Wikipedia, and then it was deleted as vanity after I saw it). Yeltensic42.618 23:49, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
Incidentally, speaking of Eggman, I think it's odd that a series of E-rated games has a character named after a guy whose nickname was related to his egg fetish. Yeltensic42.618 23:49, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Response to comment involving Prof. Gerald's portal: The Sonic X TV show is not part of the SegaSonic canon and has nothing to do with the games. The facts that comes directly from Sega are the true facts and Sonic being from Earth is proven by the game manuals begining with the first game.

How would we know that South Island is still Sonic's home and that the games made after Sonic 1 take place there if they take place in other locations like Westside Island (Sonic 2) and Angel Island (Sonic 3 & Knuckles)? He seems to have been moving around all over the place after the first game, and not just the Pacific Ocean.

Theme Songs?

Is the "Theme Songs" section really necessary? I Mean, it's not as if the song's there for download. --Judacris 08:24, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Yea that is i am saying, all information enterd in Sonic game's and related, the similar information should be inputted

If they input a Song section, it means other Sonic titles article should have a song Section

>x<ino 14:59, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

They certainly didn't deserve their own section, so I've removed them. If you must include them, add the titles to the trivia section, or (preferably) to the individual games' articles. --Nick R 15:17, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Sonic's Love Life

To avoid flooding this page with discussion of Sonic's love life, at Darth Katana X's suggestion I have set up User talk:Yeltensic42/Sonic Love Life. Please discuss it there, not here. Yeltensic42.618 22:45, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Good Article

I've added this article to the list of good articles, hoping to get this article more attention so it will hopefully eventually become a featured article. Does any agree/disagree? chess.and.cookies@gmail.com 05:57, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Agree. Yeltensic42.618 13:52, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Disagree. There aren't any references - which is one of the criteria for a good article. A suggestion was made on the discussion page for the references criteria to be weakened, but that was largely disagreed with. List references for all the content and tag the images properly (one of them is tagged with No source and the other is tagged as a screenshot when it really isn't) and then it will be a good article. --Jtalledo (talk) 15:43, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, good point, we should do that first. Yeltensic42.618 15:49, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
I tagged one image, but two of the other ones need source information. --Jtalledo (talk) 16:15, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Good point, Delisted Sonic as a good article. Hopefully we can get sources and citations soon. ChessManXI 00:33, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
[[ Sonic is the 1st article i went to on wikipedia it used to be on my favorites list but my brother erased it —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.192.201.154 (talk • contribs) .
Some images lack license, and others sources. That should also be fixed to be considered a good article. -- ReyBrujo 21:02, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

References

I've started the References section using the source for the "Christmas Island" and "South Island" notes. Incidentally, the website (created by The GHZ member, big smile) should prove a valuable source for, well, sourcing all this stuff we need sourced before this can become a FA, or even a GA. --Shadow Hog 17:57, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

what's with all the Angel Island and South Island:P >x<ino
Links explain it. --Shadow Hog 20:22, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Books (books and fools):P

I check the "Books" section, for this article

seems usless

I am sorry to say this, but it is
The Comic Books was alright,

The Gamebooks, was useless, why can't they just put, From Book 1-6, instead of listing the books and name of em

Also for the novels It's also like encouraging people to buy/search and buy the book


Anyway, we will sort that sh@t out later:P

Now i am saying about Sonic Games!

Because most visitors that come in, will apperciate the article, but will still wonder how many games has been produced for Sonic
So...i am say,

  • is there an article listing, Sonic titles?
  • If not, i will be friendly to make one
  • Or put the listing of Sonic Titles under the "Games" section in this article, because it only has information of Some Sonic games, but not the full titles

>x<ino 21:41, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

No point, i found the link [[1]] >x<ino 21:55, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Sonic's Internet Fanbase

I removed the section of the intro referring to a Sonic website and his various presence online. It was pretty out-of-place in the intro, especially with s seemingly random list of characters. I mention this here onle because the concept of Sonic's online presence has the potential for a proper section within the article - as far as I've seen, quite a bit could be said about it if one were to do proper research. I'm certainly not going to, but it'd be interesting to see what someone could come up with. That aside, the removed section just didn't fit into the article by itself, especially in the intro.
SonOfNothing 03:16, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Lots of things have fanbases. The rule of thumb is, if X exists, there is somewhere on the internet a picture of someone having sex with X. It's never worth documenting. --Darksasami 20:08, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

You mean Megaman X?

But i like X:P

>x<ino 01:53, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Page Over 30kb? Is that a Problem?

I noticed, as I did an edit, that there's something that says the Sonic Page is 30kb. Which, as the Wiki Page regarding Article size says that a page over 32kb may lead to division. I dunno, I'm just concerned. - Judacris 03:00, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Not really, but your computer will take longer to save the page on the article. So you should separate some stuff to different pages. --anon

Or remove unnecessary information. I wouldn't worry about the size, though. -- ReyBrujo 12:56, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, actually, you should, cause I wouldn't like to wait a long time or have a "page cannot be displayed...". --anon

Sonic the Hedgehog Portal?

We seem to have a lot of information of Sonic, the sonic games, comic books, and other characters. So, couldn't we make a portal like the Warcraft Portal? I'd start it myself, but I'm bad at tables in Wikipedia format. -- ChessManXI 10:22, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Sounds fun, but I can't see it happening. There are a lot of videogame characters that have even bigger pages - Mario and Mega Man come to mind. Neither of them have portals. If the material for Sonic validats a portal, than there are possibly hundreds of other articles that will deserve one. SonOfNothing 15:18, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Focus on the games/Reverting edits

This page, I think, should focus on the character of the games, and aspects of Sonic common to all versions. Other information should be moved to the relevant page (info specific on the Archie comic character, for example, should go on that page - some of the information on relationships could do with being moved). The reason for this is that otherwise, we might end up with a structure where each section goes: "In the games... in the Archie comics... in the Fleetway comics... in Adventures of Sonic the Hedgehog..."

Recently, I've had to keep reverting edits which add something about Sonic's speed coming from his shoes in the Fleetway comics. This is:

  • Incorrect (in STC, his speed came from Kintobor's treadmill, like in Stay Sonic)
  • Speculation ("which may be true in the games,but never confirmed")
  • Irrelevent (as I said, if it was correct - which it isn't - it should be added to the Fleetway page. It also keeps getting added to the intro, which is a terrible place to put it. At least this time it's been moved to the "abilities" section!)
  • Badly-punctuated. :)

So first, will anyone help keep that bit of text out of the article, and second, does anyone agree that this page should focus on the games' character and general features common to all versions of Sonic? --Nick RTalk 13:58, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Yep. I agree with the reasoning. I'll help keep it out. --Jtalledo (talk) 15:59, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
I wholeheartedly agree. Right now, the Sonic article is a hodgepodge of different variations and continuities. Those different variations are wonderful but we need a strong, consistent, focused article if we want our blue buddy to have a featured article on Wikipedia. I say, if it's not about Sonic The Hedgehog, the videogame character, it ought to go in little notes at the end of the section with links to the articles in question (i.e. "Fleetway gives its own origin for Sonic's speed, see 'Sonic The Comic'"). Right now the article is just an impenetrable soup of competing Sonics. Even the main picture has two versions of Sonic! So I wanted to stand by what Nick R is saying. He's the man with the master plan. Cherry Cotton 09:42, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
As a big fan of all of Sonic's continuities, I would have to disagree with this. I would hate to see any of the comic or cartoon portayals of Sonic left out of the article. A focus on Sonic in the video games is not a bad idea, but Sonic's character and storyline within the games themselves has changed and evolved quite a bit over time, and there are quite a few discrepencies between different regions (and even within regions) over the game story, itself. Even several of the games are based off of the cartoon series. I just think that, bearing all of this in mind, we should be careful not to push this article too far in one way or another. I know that when I first visited this article I found all of the information about the different continuities and conflicting versions very informative and helpful. The article has changed a lot since then, in many ways for the worse, and some for the better. At any rate, I do agree that there are some places where things need to be adjusted and I am always willing to compromise, but I definately don't want to see this article infected with the "SegaSonic" syndrome. PorpoiseMuffins 18:59, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
This issue came up in the "Featured article" discussion earlier. I've got no problem with other continuities being represented, but they should really be pointed out as alternate explanations. The featured article Link (Legend of Zelda) draws mainly on the games and pools some of the common attributes of the character in its various incarnations, while pointing out his representations in other media as alternate versions. While all official Sonic continuities should be valued, preference should be given to the video game continuities, since in the end, Sonic is a video game character. ;) --Jtalledo (talk) 20:51, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Yes, actually, I was the one involved in that dicussion before :) Focusing on the elements common to all continuities sounds alright to me, kind of like the way that I reworked the first paragraph of the personality section to make it more universal to all the Sonic portrayals (the paragraph following it about Sonic's personality in Sonic the Comic is kind of random and would probably be eliminated, though). Again, I just don't want to see this article become biased. That is my only concern with this line of thinking, but I do think that I understand where you guys are trying to go with this. There are a lot of separate articles for each continuity, already. PorpoiseMuffins 06:16, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm no big fan of all the continuities. And with how the recent games have been, I don't even like the game continuity that much either. Ha ha. Being "SegaSonic" biased isn't good for the article either though. --Jtalledo (talk) 20:22, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm not saying we should eliminate mention of Archie and Fleetway and the riveting series of Sonic four-panel comics found on various soup cans in eastern Columbia which portrays Sonic as a traveling treasure hunter in search of gold and the mighty elephant muskrat mutant. I just feel like the article reads, right now, like "an impenetrable soup of competing Sonics." If we're going to cover the other versions of Sonic, we ought to put them in their own sections of the article, like "Archie comics," "Fleetway comics," "Sonic X," etc. That would be a good way to do it. Right now it reads more like, "Sonic's Hobbies: In the game, he likes to play marbles. However, in the Adventures TV show he rather enjoys wood carving. But, in Sonic X, he enjoys a good game of croquet..." Cherry Cotton 09:12, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Sonic's Age

Okay, so there's been a bit of an edit war going on over Sonic's age. I tried to settle it by changing "15" or "16" to just "teenage," but people apparently aren't interested in the compromise. I realize that Sonic's current age in the games has been recently stated as 15, but this page is not just limited to Sonic's character in recent games, it's about Sonic's character in general. Sonic has been stated as being 16 years old by several other official sources in the past, so would it be so difficult to make a compromise on this? Besides, I don't think that Sonic is a character who is completely incapable of aging. Surely all of the adventures he has been on wouldn't fit into one 365 day period ;)

If someone agrees with me, go ahead and make the edit. If not, I guess I'll survive...

PorpoiseMuffins 18:02, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

You have a good point, he was 16 in the older games, and is now 15. Many of the characters have aged, or lost age. Since 15 is the current official age though, it is my thought that it should be stated. Flailing Breegull 18:32, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
Indeed, and he is also 16 in SatAM and several other sources, if I'm not mistaken. I reincorporated the section on how his age and physical characteristics vary depending on which continuity is referenced into the character design section, so I'm okay with keeping 15 in the first paragraph as long as that stays in there as well.
Also, I aplogize for not giving a summary when I made the edit to "teenage" before. I was planning on explaining myself, but I saved the page before I got to it. Whoops... PorpoiseMuffins 19:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
I may be wrong but if I recall only the USA gave his age 16... Japan used 15-16... so if you wanna go by Japan, then it's 15 --FlareNUKE 01:59, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
You may very well be correct, but Japanese sources shouldn't hold anymore "credibility" in this matter than any other source approved by Sega. PorpoiseMuffins 04:27, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
The two official sources, from Sega games, that I know of for Sonic's age are Sonic Jam and the manual to Sonic Heroes. Sonic Jam, in Japan, gave his age as "15~16." In the US version, it became "16." In the manual to Sonic Heroes (US version, I don't know what it says in Japan) it says "15." Absent any other data, I'd peg Sonic's age as 15, US and Japan. Sonic Jam was before Sonic's character was standardized throughout the world, after all.
In fact, originally, in the Sonic comics, his age was given as 15. Sometime in the mid-to-late nineties they had a "Sonic's 16th birthday" story, and I would imagine that was in reaction to his age being listed as 16 in Sonic Jam when Sega had previously told them his age was 15. Now that his age has been once more officially listed as 15, poor Archie Comics is kind of up a creek as far as Sonic's age is concerned.
We could confuse new readers (the entire purpose of this article, after all, is to educate those ignorant to the Sonic character) by saying, "Sonic's age is 15, or 16 if you're going by Sonic Jam, or 15~16 if you're going by the Japanese version of Sonic Jam, except after C, or when sounded by A..." but there's enough conflict in the Sonic article already. You can argue all you want, but the evidence overwhelmingly supports Sonic being 15, unless you know something I don't, which is quite possible. Otherwise, I say change it to 15 and maybe put some footnote waaaay waaaay at the bottom that he was once listed as 16 and then never again. Cherry Cotton 09:27, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
I'm fine with it. PorpoiseMuffins 18:23, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
I see nothing wrong with that, sounds like a great solution. Flailing Breegull 18:34, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
It's changed. Thanks! And if you think it should be changed back or expanded, please say; like everything on Wikipedia, this article is a work in progress. Cherry Cotton 22:20, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
User:Shadow Hog changed it to "Sonic is a teenage (sources conflict on whether he is 15 or 16) hedgehog..." which I think is too complicated for the introductory paragraph. I reckon "teenage" is fine for that part of the article, the comment about differing sources can be moved to the paragraph in "Design" about Sonic's characteristics varying, and the comments about the Archie comic having a 16th birthday issue can be placed in that article.
And as a side-comment, just because I want to confuse the issue further (ha ha): in one issue of the Official UK Dreamcast magazine some bloke from Sega Europe said that Sonic had matured from a 5-year-old in Sonic 1 to a 15-year-old in Sonic Adventure 2. But that's probably not canonical. ;) --Nick RTalk 20:58, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
The problem is, Sonic is fifteen everywhere but the English version of Sonic Jam. That's hardly a differing source... more like a typo. Cherry Cotton 09:01, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I've changed it to a footnote to keep the "controversy" :) out of the introduction. Is the wording correct? --Nick RTalk 16:07, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

His official character profile says he is 15. This suggests that Sonic's age has been retconned to be 15 years. See Amy's article for how we treated her age dispute. I suggest adding a similar second paragraph to the lead-in section, yet formatted like the one in Knuckles' article.

Sonic is a blue anthropomorphic hedgehog with the ability to run at the speed of sound. He is 15 years old, 110cm (~3'7") tall, and weighs 35kg (77 lbs)[1]. Some antiquitated sources[2] state that Sonic is 16 years old, however his official profile[1] suggests that Sonic's age has been retconned and that on these earlier occaisions he was actually 15 years old in the continuity.
  1. ^ a b Sega.jp. Sonic's official character profile. URL accessed on April 12, 2006.
  2. ^ His exact age varies in the game manuals, but is usually given as 15, most recently in the English language instruction manual for Sonic Heroes. In contrast, Sonic Jam and certain issues of the Archie Sonic the Hedgehog comic state that he is 16 years old.

I'll add it in a few days if no one objects, and if no one adds it before me. --DavidHOzAu 02:36, 12 April 2006 (UTC) [[Sonic is 16 because of 2006

Move

OK, moving to (character) was nice, but the pages are still linked to Sonic the Hedgehog! We should, I don't know, use a bot and put all those links right? igordebraga ≠ 17:22, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Someone could use AWB. --Jtalledo (talk) 21:16, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Transformations

Moved the discussion about Super Sonic (and Hyper Sonic) out of abilties to its own section. My reasoning was that Sonic's Super forms enhances his existing abiilties rather than giving him new ones: all of his 'super' abilities he has done to a limited extent while in normal form. (Flying = Jump, Swimming = Holding breath, Invulnerability = Invincibility powerup, etc.) Besides, Super Sonic really deserves its own section. --DavidHOzAu 03:47, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Unwieldy sectioning

The subsections jump from one thing to the next without adaquete subtitles. I've fixed up the relationships section, but the others seriously need some work. --DavidHOzAu 05:18, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Compare how untidy Sonic's abilities section is to Amy's corresponding section. I think Amy's article is pretty tidy compared to Sonic's, and its formatting should be taken as a reference if possible. I for one will welcome those brave enough to make the needed revisions. --DavidHOzAu 05:53, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I also noticed that the Character section was way too big and made a new section called Abilities. I also placed "Home Planet" before Abilities to make the flow more logical. --DavidHOzAu 05:18, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Images on other Sonic-related pages keep getting altered

Rather annoying quibble and not one I anticipate much can be done about, but one I felt like voicing anyway: why is there some sudden obsession to replace images with valid captions on most Sonic character pages with atrociously large pictures with no captions? I know this page tends to have that reverted rather quickly (since it's a continuation of one of the lamest edit wars ever), but I've found that some of these other pages tend to go days without any notice whatsoever... what's up with it? --Shadow Hog 04:01, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

What pages have done that so far? BTW, in the picture with the old style Sonic and Shadow-style Sonic, shouldn't we replace the Shadow-style Sonic with the Sonic-Riders-style Sonic? Sonic Riders is the most recent game Sonic has been in. --71.104.176.253 06:14, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

I know ShAd0w- h0g,...before I used to do most of the reverting on them. Like I said before...I will soon keep an eye for I.P's...when I supect same I.P i am forwarding it to the upper Wiki Users. And get them suspended for some days!

>x<ino 09:00, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

So shouldn't we replace the Shadow-style Sonic with the Sonic-Riders-style Sonic? Sonic Riders is the most recent game Sonic has been in. --71.104.187.145 20:09, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm inclined to say that none of the Sonic Riders images should become the main images for any character (save the Babylon Rouges for obvious reasons) as there is no evidence that these images will become the new standard for the characters. The Sonic 2006 game shows Sonic without the glasses, so I'm thinking this appearance is limited solely to Riders. -- VederJuda 20:19, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I see. --71.104.181.162 01:28, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Good article

This is article still isn't ready to be a good article because:

  • Needs a brief overview.
  • Still not enough references and notes.
  • The word "trivia" isn't encyclopedia. Needs to be somehow worked into the article.

I would like to help, but this article is so long, I'm not sure where to place the notes or how to put the trivia into the article. BTW, getting another peer review might help, but I noticed in the last review, nobody replied to the comment, so we need to respond or at least say, "Thanks!" --anon


Why don't we change it to, "Trivia & Notes"...instead of Trivia

>x<ino 12:17, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

The word trivia is still there, but we should have "References and notes" somewhere. Perhaps we should change "Trivia" to "Facts"? Or "Other information" or something. --anon

Will do!

>x<ino 20:58, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


External Links?

The notes for the external links say it would be better to have links to sites about Sonic as a character, and not the games in general. How do we define this? Sonic-Cult, for instance, is extremely focused on the games (ROM hacking, etc.). The same goes for the Mobygames link. Shouldn't they get removed? BlazeHedgehog 13:38, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey, is Sonic-Cult an actual cult? Cause if it is, we should really remove the link. --anon

Well, not really. There's a very long history to the Sonic Cult, but basically it was started by a really nasty guy (who eventually got arrested for molesting a 14 year old girl) as a place where "mature" Sonic fans could go. Think of it like... the Sonic the Hedgehog version of SomethingAwful.com. Lots of piracy, lots of nudity, lots of pissing everybody else off - basically, uncontrolled chaos, which attracted even more bad people. They also gained a reputation for bullying certain communities with Denial of Service tactics among other less-savory methods of attacks (the exploitation of security holes in forum software, for example). They've also been known to steal content from other websites in the past and re-brand it as their own. Several Cult-ers have even defaced a few Wikipedia articles. Unfortunately, they are also one of the largest and most well-known Sonic fansites because of all this. But all that is moot; There is very little on Sonic as a character at the Sonic-Cult, and as such, the link should probably be removed from this article. -BlazeHedgehog 02:16, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Wow, then, isn't that an awful site to even put as an external link? I mean, the guy molested someone and there's a bunch of bad people at that site!! --anon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.105.10.103 (talk • contribs)

It looks like a pretty normal and informative (if incomplete) site to me, but it's not related to Sonic the Hedgehog as a character, so I removed the link. However, looking at the other external links, doesn't that apply to them too? They all seem to be a lot more about the game than the character. –Tifego(t) 00:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

That's why I was asking how we define that. I mean, with certain links I can see it - SonicHQ, for example, has a MASSIVE collection of profiles for pretty much every Sonic character ever to exist in any universe. Linking the various Sega regional Sonic sites makes sense, too, because they're Sega. But when you start talking Mobygames, Sonic Stadium, Sonic-Cult, and The Green Hill Zone, things start getting iffy. As for the content of the Cult, didn't the warning label displayed when you first visit the website tip you off to anything? Or the random header images, featuring such lovely imagry as a cross-dressing Tails and a prostitute Amy Rose? Or the "boobpixplz" section? The Sonic Hentai Manga hosting? The list goes on; and the less said about the forums the better. BlazeHedgehog 14:25, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Sonic Ultimate has character profiles, though. Well, I didn't really want to click on te website of Sonic-Cult because I wasn't sure if I was entering a cult or not (which I don't want to enter one). --71.105.14.51 20:34, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Sonic Cult's main content seemed to be stuff about the Sonic games, especially about things cut from their development and occasionally other hacking-related things. The images were mostly humorous. I didn't notice those sections you mentioned, but they don't prevent the rest of the site from being interesting as relates to the Sonic games. But, again, nothing directly relevant to Sonic as a character. If those other sites have a section on Sonic the (hedgehog) character, shouldn't the external links on this article be changed to link directly to those sections on the sites instead of to the main page which appears unrelated to the article's subject? –Tifego(t) 00:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I guess my... first hand experiences with the Sonic-Cult may skew my opinion of them somewhat. Infact, I'm a little worried about continually discussing them like this, for fear one of them will actually see it and try to come after me, as they know who I am. Wouldn't be the first time. Let's just say that... although they may appear to be a fairly normal Sonic site on the surface, much of the community there is very troublesome. Many Sonic fans liken the Sonic-Cult to that of The Mafia. Cement shoes and all that nonsense. Back on subject, yeah - I guess I could see linking to the profile pages instead of the main sites. BlazeHedgehog 02:58, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Relationship section

Okay, I don't want to start any arguments, but this part of the relationship section really needs to be cleaned up!

I agree partially, see my comments below. --DavidHOzAu 03:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm bolding the really wrong ones:

"Perhaps Sonic's greatest rival can be said to be Shadow the Hedgehog, the "Ultimate Lifeform". They have fought and argued with each other in every Sonic game in which they've met since Sonic Adventure 2. Sonic finds Shadow to be violent, humourless, and arrogant, while Shadow finds Sonic to be foolhardy, arrogant, and irritating. However, near the end of Sonic Adventure 2, Shadow willingly fought the Biolizard while Sonic went off to stop the Chaos Emeralds, showing that they wouldn't hesistate to work together.

Before Shadow's introduction, Metal Sonic was Sonic's toughest rival. During the older days, Eggman tried to beat Sonic at his own game by creating numerous Sonic robots to destroy his nemesis. Though they all tried and failed, Metal Sonic was by far Eggman's greatest creation, having the same abilities as his counterpart. Even with Shadow in the spotlight now, Metal Sonic is still one of Sonic's most powerful and dangerous foes.

Another one of Sonic's toughest rivals is Jet the Hawk from Sonic Riders. Jet mocks him for being inexperienced with Extreme Gear, and doesn't consider Sonic to be the "fastest thing alive", sparking a rivalry between them. Later, after Sonic beats Jet in a race, they became more of friendly, yet still fierce racing rivals. Jet finally admits that Sonic is the fastest, but warns him to be ready the next time they meet."

This is why it's wrong:

  • "Perhaps Sonic's greatest rival can be said to be Shadow the Hedgehog, the "Ultimate Lifeform". They have fought and argued with each other in every Sonic game in which they've met since Sonic Adventure 2. Sonic finds Shadow to be violent, humourless, and arrogant, while Shadow finds Sonic to be foolhardy, arrogant, and irritating." Perhaps is an opinion, and saying that Shadow is Sonic's greatest rival is an opinion. So how to we know that Sonic considers Shadow to be his greatest rival? And just because it looks like it, doesn't mean it is. And the two fight and argue for a reason. In Sonic Heroes, Rouge thought they would be getting in their way, while in Sonic Battle, Shadow wanted Emerl. In Shadow the Hedeghog, Sonic works with Shadow even though Shadow doesn't want it. And how do we now Sonic finds Shadow to be "violent, humourless, and arrogant" while Shadow finds Sonic as "foolhardy, arrogant, and irritating"? Did they ever say it or explicitly imply it? I don't see it anywhere. It seems as if Shadow doesn't care about Sonic, and Sonic just sees him as a somewhat friendly rival. Or just a rival. Of course, this is just an opinion, and should be written like, "Shadow is one of Sonic's rivals..." Something along those lines.
It would be better to write, "the visual text in Sonic Adventure 2 indicates that Sonic finds Shadow to be violent, humourless, and arrogant, while Shadow finds Sonic to be foolhardy, arrogant, and irritating." Literary scholars (professionals) make comparisons like this all the time. --DavidHOzAu 03:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • "Before Shadow's introduction, Metal Sonic was Sonic's toughest rival." I don't think Sonic would actually find Metal Sonic to be tough. But see, it's more opinions! It's better to be neutral and write something along the lines of, "Metal Sonic is another one of Sonic's rivals."
    No, it said he was Sonic's toughest rival before Shadow's introduction. That is accurate because Metal was Sonic's ONLY recurring rival at the said time. --DavidHOzAu 03:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • "Though they all tried and failed, Metal Sonic was by far Eggman's greatest creation, having the same abilities as his counterpart. Even with Shadow in the spotlight now, Metal Sonic is still one of Sonic's most powerful and dangerous foes." For one thing, it's not written encyclopedic. Second, Eggman nor Sonic may not consider Metal Sonic to be his greatest creation. Third, it's talking too much about Metal Sonic! We're straying off from the article's subject, Sonic! And lastly, Sonic may not see Metal Sonic as his "most powerful and dangerous" foe. Opinions!! :)
    This part of the article is talking about how Sonic relates to Metal, so it is not outside the scope this article's subject. Furthermore, the article said "Metal Sonic is still one of Sonic's most powerful and dangerous foes." Also, it was comparing how hard Sonic finds it to defeat say, a buzzbomber, to defeating a recurring boss in the Sonic series. --DavidHOzAu 03:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • "Another one of Sonic's toughest rivals..." The word "toughest" is opinionated. Sonic may not see him as tough, although it's more likely than the others cause Sonic actually said something like, "He's not all talk you know." But it's another opinion to write the word toughest.
    See above. --DavidHOzAu 03:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)Sorry, got paragraphs mixed up. See next comment below. --DavidHOzAu 03:49, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
  • "...yet still fierce..." Um, fierce is quite a harsh word to use for their rivalry. It's not that harsh.
    I agree; Jet isn't that bad. However be careful with your synonyms. --DavidHOzAu 03:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I would change this, but the last time I did, someone reverted it. So please discuss it here before we change anything else! BTW, I'm sorry if my complaining is stirring up any heated arguments! :( --71.105.4.113 19:08, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

For the record, that wasn't me. (I have only ever added information to Wikipedia.) However, since so much of Sonic's history with Metal has been removed in comparison to Shadow's entry, it no longer follows NPOV. My advice for resolving NPOV disputes is that instead of deleting the entire sentences in question, which may be considered vandalism, that you restore the previous entry and edit the wording to be nuetral, or add more information to balance it out. --DavidHOzAu 03:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

What visual text? Also, Sonic may not find Shadow to be humourless because Shadow said, "It'll be a date to die for!" Sonic says, "Hey, that's my line!" Meaning Sonic was about to say it and meaning that Shadow must not be all that humourless.

Next, Sonic might not see Metal Sonic as "tough". It might be just a rival and that's it. Cause tough means, "Very difficult." And Sonic may not see it that way.

As for Metal Sonic, something about it was going out of subject and from Sonic's point of view, he may not see Metal Sonic as being that strong or tough.

Also, I deleted it because no one said anything, so I presumed that nobody objected to me removing it. Also, I'm trying to have a neutral point of view of how Sonic would see things. --71.105.1.23 21:54, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Never mind. It looks good at the moment, but think I'll edit the wording a little to restore some of the valid ancilliary information that got wiped out in the crossfire. --DavidHOzAu 09:27, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Ashura the Hedgehog

Does this part under "Outside the Games" really need to be said? It's a fan-dubbed character that is merely a glitch of Sonic used in only 1 zone. It's not like Ashura is a real character. - "Tails Ohki" from GameFAQs 67.173.62.22 22:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Failed GA

This article needs much more than 4 references, especially for a video game character article and the lead needs to be longer. Thanks --Jaranda wat's sup 19:35, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Never mind that the article was added out of turn without addressing previous complaints. Nifboy 19:41, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Including the leading image not have a fair use rationale and source Highway Rainbow Sneakers 23:43, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I think the trivia by definition isn't exactly encyclopedic. It should be worked into the article! --71.105.1.23 22:00, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Reference Got Deleted

I noticed that an external reference got lost in the crossfire way back. After much searching, it appears that this edit is responsible.

At time of writing, the reference is still referred to in abilities section, resulting in a dead link. I'll restore it using the new reference system. If anyone knows why it was removed, take it down and post the reason here. --DavidHOzAu 05:38, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I see no reason as to why it was removed. Look at the edits of the anon who did that, he didn't seem to know what he was doing. Good work on noticing the reference problem. -- RattleMan 05:56, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Concept: Mobius

I also noticed that this other guy has twice deleted the external link to Sonic's character profile at Concept: Mobius, once even immediately after I removed/reverted his edit. Worse, this link looks like a completely pertinent external link that we got some information from. I'll restore the link, but if it goes down again we may have to take more drastic action. Note: he signs his posts with "Tails Ohki" from GameFAQs. Does anyone have any experience with this guy? --DavidHOzAu 00:05, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Drastic action, eh? Now I'm being threatened because I don't feel that Concept: Mobius is a good site to link to? This is a site anyone can edit, is it not? Concept: Mobius combines all continuities into one massive mixed up universe. It is not helpful at all. Take all the drastic action you want, but I will continue removing that link until it's gone for good. - "Tails Ohki" from GameFAQs. 67.173.62.22 00:56, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Look, give me good reason to believe that Concept: Mobius has accurate information regardless of the fact that it combines all the continuities into one and I'll leave it alone. Instead of making threats, you could supply proof. - "Tails Ohki" again. 67.173.62.22 02:49, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Calm down, man! Firstly, All I wanted to know was why on earth it got deleted after I restored it: I was searching for rationale, or as you say, proof, because your edit summaries didn't give any. I apologise if I sounded like I was threatening you. (At least I got a response! :grin:) Second, because you don't like the information on a page does not qualify for removal rationale, notably from a WP:CITE and WP:NPOV standpoint. (see below.) Third, the linked-to page is Sonic's character profile, not its page about the continuities. However, as you said, if there is accurate information [about Sonic's character] on it, let's keep it up. I believe it contains accurate information, and I am sure that many others here would concur. Besides, even if it was wrong from our own point of view, we'd still have to keep it up, (again, see below.) In summary, it only matters if it is directly related to the subject or not, and anything more is original research.

My rationale for keeping it is this:

  • The link is to a character profile on Sonic. This page is based on research, with rationale, and it is made by a largely respected member of the community who has been around for a while to collect all that information.
  • The link has been used as a source.
  • The reason behind providing a variety of relevant external links (in this case to profiles) is also part of maintaining a NPOV: let the reader reach their own conclusion instead of pre-empting them. Indeed, it would be okay to have an external link that is highly critical of Sonic, because that would maintain NPOV when it is balanced by a link to a positive review. In this respect, a link may be negative of a subject, or even outright wrong from our own point of view, but we must still include it because this is Wikipedia, the Free Encylopedia which anyone can read. --DavidHOzAu 12:04, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Fine... It can stay. I still disagree with it being there, but your points make it sound like it makes sense for it to remain. - "Tails Ohki" from GameFAQs 67.173.62.22 14:27, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

New template added to the category

{{SonicFeatures}} because there wasn't anything like it. Posted here because no one seems to visit the series talk page. --DavidHOzAu 04:49, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

pics

Can you put a Sonic underground or AoSth or satam tv show picture on here? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.11.131.241 (talk • contribs) .

What do you mean a picture? Of the title screen? -- RattleMan 22:21, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup or remove recent edits

I almost had a heart attack when I saw the state the article was in today. 95% of edits that have gone on in the last week only serve to add fancruft.
  • Primary Reason "Love Life" section is unnecessary because the information was there already. This section just adds to the fancruft factor and duplication across pages. We already decided not to put it in; if people want to know more about how Sonic fits into those series, they should go to that series' page. Uncyclopedic Sonadow is on this page. (this title for a section will always be is prone to vandalism.)
  • Secondary Reason There is a plea for people to sign a petition in "Voices". This does not belong on Wikipedia.
  • Additional reason Two references need to go.
    • The additional "Yuji Naka profile" reference is a "quote of quote". At the moment the linked-to page does not show the quote in context or contain any link to the full interview.
    • The existing "Sega Visions Interview with Yuji Naka" reference links to a search portal.

I suggest the following:

  • sophisticated revert of the entire thing to this edition with the exception of Nick R's edited lead-in section
  • remove the above two references
  • unrelated trace information from the article that is encyclopaedic and on topic be incorporated inside the existing (earlier) article structure if they were not already. (expected to be rare) Otherwise, relocate this to the article on the series' in question to highlight how that particular series is 'special'. --DavidHOzAu 07:31, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

EDIT: Removed. The content has been fixed up now due to sub-sectioning labelling, although we should still be careful about adding so much information to a section in one sitting without considering the possibility that the article's structure could break. --DavidHOzAu 01:10, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Next Gen pic

I have been looking at the other video game protagonist pages, and each one of them has the latest version of their respective characters on the top of the page. How does everyone feel about putting this pic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Sonik.jpg) from Sonic the Hedgehog (2006 game) at the top of the page and moving the current double pic of Sonic just a bit lower to the "design" section to highlight the changes in Sonic? --Helmandsare May 1, 2006 00:49 (UTC)

For the time being, rather strongly against. That picture highlights the game it comes from more than it does the character - and there haven't been many good shots that fufill that just yet.
Speaking of the double pic, though, somebody had better source that thing soon; both its parent pictures were OrphanBotted a while ago, and are probably done for if they aren't sourced. And when they're gone, that double-picture is gonna follow shortly... --Shadow Hog 05:24, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
What about the wallpaper of Sonic on this page that corresponds this picture? That's the most recent official render of Sonic. (someone will have to photoshop out the background.) --DavidHOzAu 01:17, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
You can't modify the image if it is not free. -- ReyBrujo 03:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Okay then, I suppose we'll have to wait another six months, when the next game is released, for a good shot to come out. It is not like we can email Sega for a public copy of that art with a white background. --DavidHOzAu 12:19, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
I have a copy with a white background posted here. I would definitely be in favor of replacing the current image with this one. I severely dislike the Sonic art from Shadow the Hedgehog. PorpoiseMuffins 01:52, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
I have uploaded it. (see below right) I don't think we'll have an edit war over this like last time, but just in case I think it would be good if we discussed it here (below) before we change it in the article. --DavidHOzAu 06:00, 6 May 2006 (UTC)


Proposal  : Should we use the image you can see to right at the top of the article?
Rationale :   I have been looking at the other video game protagonist pages, and each one of them has the latest version of their respective characters on the top of the page.
Proposer : Helmandsare (original proposal) and DavidHOzAu (updated wording)

Survey and discussion

Please add  * Support  or  * Oppose  followed by a brief explanation, then sign your vote using "--~~~~".

  • Support. I like the art and I agree with the rationale. PorpoiseMuffins 15:44, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Agree; content should be updated as more information becomes available. --DavidHOzAu 01:10, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Result of discussion

Accepted No objections, survey closed. --DavidHOzAu 08:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


Proposal : Move the current double picture of Sonic just a bit lower to the "design" section to highlight the changes in Sonic
Rationale :   According to the discussion above.
Proposer : Helmandsare (original proposal) and DavidHOzAu (updated wording)

Survey and discussion

Please add  * Support  or  * Oppose  followed by a brief explanation, then sign your vote using "--~~~~".

  • Support. I also agree that the "classic" picture of Sonic should be included in the article further down. PorpoiseMuffins 15:48, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment: if the image is to be moved down, then it really shouldn't be that far down. Next section, I say. --Shadow Hog 00:00, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
      • Comment: Yeah, that's what I meant. I agree with you. PorpoiseMuffins 02:34, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Support As above. --DavidHOzAu 01:11, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Support As above. Sonic3KMaster (talk) 09:00, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Result of discussion

Accepted No objections, survey closed. --DavidHOzAu 08:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Voices

I feel that the voice controversy in that some (or rather, a vast majority) fans want Ryan Drummond back as Sonic should be mentioned in SOME form.

That's fancruft, and might be WP:NPOV#undue weight. --DavidHOzAu 01:54, 6 May 2006 (UTC)