Talk:Sonic the Hedgehog

Template:Segaproject

Secret Rings

Just curious, by why is Sonic & the Secret Rings under "spin-offs" and not part of the main series?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.210.91.70 (talk) 00:13, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Because it is a spin-off and doesn't progress the main story at all.

Is the Chronology original research?

I'm suddenly reminded of the Legend of Zelda timeline attempt on Wikipedia... 208.101.152.167 14:44, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

The information is based highly on fan based theories. Nothing in the chrono is officially stated to take place in the aforementioned article. Currently i've tried convincing them to remove the article until we have official (which would be never) and further prevent misleading fans into believing fan written nonsense (people get the idea that Wiki = reliable) but that hasn't occured so........I wouldn't take this page's word of it.

You're right, Neofcon, the entire thing is original research...then the entire section should be deleted. Really, I don't know why I didn't mention this fact before when arguing with another user over whether Sonic Rush was canon or not, an arguement caused by the simple reason that the entire article is made of original research, and thus, that there is no definative answer to what is and is not canon. It should be deleted, no, must be deleted. Michael Mad 16:38, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Well when you think about it, people are trying to justify Sonic Advance being "canon" simply because the red tornado is in the game. Wasn't the point of Sonic advance supposed to be "nostalgia" for sonic fans and thus justify the usage of the red tornado? That right there tells you that sonic fans abuse wikipedia to justify their theories and make "them" right. The zelda timeline I think is much more difficult to figure out because virtually all the games have little to no connection to any game besides some cameos or references. Sonic has more connections and is based in the same exact time period with no alternating characters in different timelines but even then, nothing has been stated to be official in the series chronology and cannot be explained because there are so many contradictions in many theories, such as what superbub stated earlier about sonic cd with the metal sonic vs Tails theory, why would Robotnik use a complete model and then go with inferior models and then go straight back to an old plan that failed? Usually Robotnik isn't the type to repeat plans, but if he does, he throws a certain twist in there. Even then Sonic CD's placement can't be determined just upon that logic because that is "still just a theory" because thus far Robotnik hasn't been stated to not repeat plans and it shows with Sonic Battle and his "death Egg 2", but even in that game people question if it's legit, considering that it's more likely a spinoff, contradicts the storyline of Sonic Adventure 2, and doesn't affect any other games in the series besides Sonic Advance 3 which has a different version of Emerl and most likely takes place after Sonic Advance two and people takes that game into consideration with the inclusion for Cream who has appeared in Sonic Heroes and that game affects the other games with shadow's appearance. But even then, Sonic Heroes and the weakest storyline out of all the games and Cream's role has not affected the other characters in any way and has been the most insignificant character since then, having no importance in shadow the hedgehog or an appearance in 06 and I heard somewhere that cream was originally supposed to be just a character for Sonic X (which shows since her role in that show is much bigger than in the games) But even then Sonic Rush includes Cream and Blaze, and Cream had a decently sized role in that game and it affected Blaze, and with her appearance in 06, we COULD'VE said it was legit, but any connection found would be demolished with the inclusion of Silver and the "future" aspect and blaze having no interaction (or EVER being stated to be a queen/princess as in rush) leads to a huge issue, but here comes Rivals with Nega stating to also be from the future and knows silver as well, and silver is stated to be looking for blaze. Confused? I know, all these inconsistencies lead to a huge issue with chronology and therefore no amount of fanon theories can patch it up. Sonic team has butchered the story so much that it has thrown any logic it had out of the window (then again what is logical in a world of talking animals with xmen-like powers?) so its virtually IMPOSSIBLE to detail what takes place when and what actually COUNTS because each connection is contradicted with another connection and the cycle goes on with EVERY sonic game that gets released. Neofcon

The whole thing is original research by default - it doesn't have any sources, and I doubt there exists any (except for the obvious things like Sonic 2 being after Sonic 1). It's mostly patched together by fan view. Gurko 22:06, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Thus, it should be deleted. It has no sources, and probably never will. It is made up of original research. If nobody has any objections, I will be deleting it, today if possible. Michael Mad 10:18, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay then, nobody has objected, but since my preceding comment was only posted five hours ago, I'll wait a little longer. If nobody has made any reasonable objections by 12:00 (GMT) tommorrow(or the section hasn't been deleted already), I will delete the section. Michael Mad 17:15, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

As much as I dont object, Tails0600 might. Neofcon

Well, I hate to be cruel, but it's gone twelve and nobody has made a reasonable objection. It will be deleted, now! Michael Mad 12:49, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

It actually doesn't look half bad. The article is much shorter, something that is good. And everyone is right, there were no sources or anything. Sorry I didn't see the revisions for a while. Anyway, it looks much better now, that's the point. By the way, was this article ever nominated to be in the Wikipedia Release 0.7? Tails0600 04:05, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

reboot

didn't Sonic next gen serve as a reboot because Elise erased everything

.......yes, you can read about it on that page--Neofcon 16:06, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

God no, not a reboot. Only the events of that game were erased, not of prior Sonic games. Michael Mad 19:23, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh he meant the series? Hard to tell w/o the specifics and all..--Neofcon 21:52, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I can only imagine that he meant the series. His comment really wouldn't make sense otherwise. Michael Mad 11:09, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Well from a technical standpoint, sonic team DID say they wanted a "new beggining" or something of that nature, right? And considering 06 is hardly connected to previous games (no actual details that reference past games) i'd say it pretty much is a reboot. Not like it matters considering HALF the franchise is practically disconnected from each other anyways. --Neofcon 03:27, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

It is not a reboot or Sonic would not know Tails Knuckles Amy Blaze Shadow Omega or Eggman and Shadow would not have his memory and Omega would not be bulitedMountainD 13:44, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

A reboot doesn't usually mean removing any and all information that the characters know. The devilman series is proof of this. The thing about 06 is that there are no references to past games (none, zip, nadda) so it could mean that they were serious and removed any continuity from past games and decided to make a story that isn't screwed up. Also note that before Sonic 3, there is no detailed information (from games, not manuals) of how each character has met each other so the same could be said for 06.--Neofcon 12:58, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Sonic Next gen technically never happened since ONLY THE EVENTS OF THAT GAME were erased. No other sonic game was(All though I do wish Shadow the hedgehog never happened. I dont hate shadow but that game ruined his past. I think it shouldve stayed a mystery.) Fwooshlewooshle (talk) 01:47, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Do you think Sonic Cult should be an external link?

I mean with all the research they provide, I think they could be good for references.--Neofcon 22:20, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure. It is a fansite, is it not? Then again, numerous Crash Bandicoot articles use Crash Mania, a fansite, as a source, while Tekken 6 uses SDTekken, another fansite, as a source. Unless there are any objections, or more reliable sources are available, you can go ahead and use Sonic Cult. Michael Mad 18:28, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes and no. The information there is great, but linking it here will expose the site to many immature people that Sonic CulT shun's apon, and absolutely hates. I would know since I am a member there. 阿修羅96 18:57, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Well michael mad, the GHZ is a fansite if im not mistaken....but (insert translated name of above person) I guess makes sense, despite the darn good info.--Neofcon 23:21, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Then again, thats only the forums--Neofcon 18:38, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Sonic's Speed

If they say that Sonic can run at the speed of sound, How can an orca(sonic Adventure),or a car for that matter keep up? It dosen't even look he is going that fast.Aiden M 21:54, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Simple. Game mechanics =/= Actual power. If that were true Cream really is strong enough to lift big the cat in Sonic Heroes.--Neofcon 00:17, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

also maybe in game that isn't his full speed —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonicflames (talk • contribs) 01:38, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Characters section proposition

I propose that the main characters' sections be fleshed out, and have minor characters deleted from this article. As it stands, a major character like Tails has as much detail as any of the Sonic Riders characters; this shouldn't be. My suggestions for characters to be kept and expanded upon are: Sonic, Tails, Knuckles, Amy Rose, Eggman, Shadow, Metal Sonic and possibly Silver. Get rid of the others.

What should happen:

• Give each character a paragraph or two (or three)
  • Describe their basic roles in the games
  • A sentence or two about their basic personalities (stuff like favourite foods and perfect days doesn't fall into this category)
• Who designed the characters would be good
• Give the characters their own headings (you know, with the = signs)
• Get rid of stuff like "However, Sonic and his friends always stand in his way. In many cases, his own plans ironically outdo himself." and "She is quite strong and smashes enemy forces down with her trusty Piko Piko Hammer."; remember this is an encyclopedia, not a cutsey write-up for your website.

I've tonight gotten rid of numerous gender-specific terms (such as "if the player loses a life, he starts again...") and converted the list of items obtainable from the boxes into prose, as is recommended. If a few people can get together and try to make this a well-written article with plenty of references, there's no reason this can't be featured in a month.

Come on, Sonic deserves it! ~~ Gromreaper^(Talk)/_(Cont) 15:01, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Nah, the characters have their own pages to describe their roles and such. It's not really necessary to give more in-depth info when it's already there on seperate pages. Besides that, saying "minor" character in the sonic franchise has no baring these days, as such characters like Tails and knuckles have as big a role as simple chao do in these games. Mostly they have been moved down to "minor" status if you ask me.--Neofcon 00:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I think you may have missed my point. If you really want this article to be featured (you should, as every Wikipedia editor should feel about the articles they maintain), you're going to have to implement at least some of the suggestions I outlined above. Submit it at WP:FAC and it'll get shot down for lack of references and excessive character descriptions. The to-do list gives the already-featured Avatar: The Last Airbender as an example of what a featured article's "Characters" section should look like. It gives info about voice actors, a brief but well-written description of each character's personality and roles in the show. Naturally, their individual articles go into much greater detail, but a brief description is provided. We shouldn't expect people to click on Silver's article when they just want to know why he wants to kill Sonic. It should be said here, with a longer and more detailed description on his page. ~~ Gromreaper^(Talk)/_(Cont) 01:21, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Avatar is a tv show. It's SUPPOSED to describe characters as they are what make the story as story is what makes the show. Sonic games are just that. Video games. Articles explaining video game related information has to be more in-depth about video game details. Do you see street Fighter with detailed character descriptions? Oh wait they dont even HAVE a section about that. They leave those to their individual articles, just as with the sonic franchise and Mario franchise. The character section in the main article already gives a brief description about the characters in general but at least goes into further detail in their own articles, which is why it is not necessary to go any further in detail on the main article. You also have to realize that sonic characters are not anywhere NEAR as deep as "avatar" characters considering their plot statuses are extremely short and the majority of their roles in recent games are at best un-important, considering most of the games in the series is considered to have the least amount of impact in the overrall series, which means less character development (just about all sonic characters have little to no character development at best) and lesser over all impact on the series. --Neofcon 03:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Wow, ok. Don't be a dick and be civil. I came here offering suggestions to improve the article, not asking to be patronised ("Oh wait they dont even HAVE a section about that). If you're so opposed to even the idea of a "characters" section, why haven't you deleted it from the article? Why is the Avatar series listed as an example to follow in the "to-do" list if you think it's a bad example to follow? I want to help make this a featured article, and I came here armed with the page as it stands the to-do list and very little else. Help me clean up the characters section or delete it entirely. ~~ Gromreaper^(Talk)/_(Cont) 06:04, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I apologize if I came off rude. Wiki users tend to put me off when it comes to sonic. Anywho, to answer your question, deleting the character's section would lead to future edit wars which is a waste of everyone's time, despite the fact that if individual character pages exist already, there is simply no need to be overly descriptive about it on the main game page (in reading some of your suggestions, they seemed a bit unnecessary, come on, individual headers along with the voice actor information all on one page? At most people would try to tink of ways of cleaning it up anyway) Anywho at most, the characters section already contains some of your suggestions anyway if you haven't seen it. May not be a long paragraph but hey, it still details it. Some of the characters dont have what you suggested such as personalities, but at most roles and personalities should really be all it contains. You can go ahead if you want, but other information like who designed them or who voices them, really just leave that to their character info pages. The portions where like say "she is quite strong and yadda yadda" describes their own natural abilities in games (which I believe is more than enough). But if you want, you can go ahead and add more personalities to those that dont already have them if you wish, or roles in games, or abilties, but the other bits I would suggest you leave out. Putting out that info and even more would lead to their own pages being useless in themselves or have people delete extra information which has been occuring lately (such as knuckles's appearances in other media)--Neofcon 15:40, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, looks like I misjudged my free time and I won't be able to work on this article right away, maybe in a month or two when things settle down a bit, I'll knuckle down and try to do my part to improve the article. And props to you, Neofcon, for being a decent guy once we worked out our differences. See you round sooner or later. ~~ Gromreaper^(Talk)/_(Cont) 02:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Meh I decided to shorten it a bit. --Neofcon 22:54, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Sonic the Hedgehog article?

It strikes me that when people search for Sonic the Hedgehog, they are either looking for the character or the series. I purpose we change one of these to Sonic the Hedgehog (with nothing in parenthesis). Of course, this would require a massive change in many articles. We could still keep the information on the current Sonic the Hedgehog article, but it would be renamed Sonic the Hedgehog (disambiguation). Any thoughts on this? Has anybody suggested this before? Is it at all doable, or am I just being silly?

This idea is discussed under the same heading on Talk:Sonic the Hedgehog. Joiz ^A. Shmo 03:38, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sonic the hedgehog 2006 game.png

Image:Sonic the hedgehog 2006 game.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 03:44, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Spin-offs & main games?

Why is Sonic and the Secret Rings, which was developed by Sonic Team too, listed as a "spin-off" title while Shadow the Hedgehog is listed in the "main series"? Does that make any sense? I'll move Secret Rings to the main series list if there are no complaints. --Marcg106 04:09, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Most people are confused about Canonity of sonic, besides that how many times I keep trying to explain it, THERE IS NONE! Sega does not (and will not) explain which games are and are not true to what occurs in sonic's world. So I dont care what you do as long as you recognize there are NO OFFICIAL STATEMENTS WHATSOEVER.--Neofcon 13:02, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Major/Minor Characters

Listen. DO NOT START going around editing the character section to fit "Major/Minor" statuses. I have shortened it to include ONLY A FEW CHARACTERS! If a character is not listed, it does NOT mean that they are not major, as I have taken that piece out to avoid this kind of cruft. Lets TRY to keep that section brief and not go on a full scale edit war.--Neofcon 20:24, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Well even if there are only to be "a few" characters on the list, then what says it should be these particular characters? After all, Shadow is (like it or not, i know i dont) a much more significant character in the series as a whole than, for instance, Metal Sonic. I personaly feel that if we only included Shadow to the current list then it would be perfectly acceptable. But, if others insist that Shadow should not be included, i think that it would actually be more appropriate to delete Amy and Metal Sonic as well, since that would leave the list with only the four true main characters from the Mega Drive games. The way the list is now, it includes a few "somewhat-major" characters (Amy and Metal) but not another equally "Somewhat-major" character (Shadow), which just seems unfitting. Rattis1 22:13, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I didn't say he shouldn't be on the list, but I dont want to see constant bickering about whether or not he should, or any other character. If you want, just add him back in, but please keep this to a minimum. Im not saying he's main or not, im trying to prevent further edit wars. --Neofcon 23:08, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Fine. Now that Shadow is back on the list were he belongs, we should just try to keep the list the way it is. Rattis1 23:49, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok...this isn't working. This guy keeps editing it back and forth and he's not gonna come to a compromise. --Neofcon 17:48, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok screw it. Rattis, you're on your own about that guy.--Neofcon 19:19, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Edits regarding DBZ

If anyone finds any edits comparing any sort of element of the sonic universe to the manga and anime television series Dragon Ball Z, you need to take them out. They are un-resourced original research and bare no importance to the articles rather than make the sonic franchise out to be a ripoff of this particular franchise.--Neofcon (talk) 00:16, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Sonic Rivals/Rush seprate stories

Eggman Nega's attitude toward Eggman was different than the same. I mean in Rush he was very friendly towards Eggman and works together but in Sonic Rivals he captured Eggman and in Rush he comes from a dimension but in Rivals he comes from the future. Does it mean that the Rival and Rush stories are seprate stories that don't relate? Oscar22 12:47, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Who knows, who really cares... Sega's not very good at this sort of thing if ya hadn't noticed. User:Radman622 07:50, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Sonic is Fast!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I wish I could run like Sonic!!!!!! 67.79.111.70 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 23:49, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Where are the handheld Sonic games?

This is the main page for Sonic, yet there isn't any mentioning about the handheld games at all. I understand you can't put every game in the article, but you can at least put a link to the handheld games in the article. Since the handhelds are the place where the new 2d Sonic games being released. They hold a certain importance due new characters like Cream or new gameplay elements like the Tension or Tag Team. So I find it strange they are omitted from the text.84.30.180.198 (talk) 15:59, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Why not add every single game? We are talking about the video game series after all! I also think YOU should add the handheld games since you brought it up! If its that important to you then do it, I wont stop you and I'm sure no one else will either! Wiki Curse (talk) 01:12, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Sonic adventure 3

Is this really in development —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.141.26.151 (talk) 02:37, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

NO! Sonic 06 WAS Sonic Adventure 3. What would it matter by it's name anyways? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.207.77.245 (talk) 17:44, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually it's 4 Heroes was 3 and secret rings in 5 and that new Sonic unleashed game in development is 6 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.90.175.29 (talk) 01:26, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

That makes no sense, by that logic Sonic Adventure should be called Sonic World 2 because it's in 3D. You're an idiot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.207.117.248 (talk) 12:28, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Sonic Unleashed

Has no one heard of the new game? There's even screenshots... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.109.5.209 (talk) 21:12, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

At least this one list

Hi. I know that we are trying to get the minimum on lists possible as well as much concise as possible too, but I was looking to find out what sonic games are part of the series and lookning at those paragraphs are really confusing. I think that turning that into a lint would be a much better way, and less confusing, to present. Can it be done? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soleaxes (talk • contribs) 00:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Sonic war

There are several things wrong with that paragraph, so I am going to remove it. It is obviously not appropriate for Wikipedia, as it is completely unnotable. It may have to do with Sonic, but it is more important to the actors. If you disagree, please say something on the talk page, don't just revert my edit. Mynameisnotpj (talk) 23:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Sonic attitude?

on Sonic stadium it says that there is a new game called sonic attitude for the DS? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.21.23.165 (talk) 03:46, 20 June 2008 (UTC)