Talk:Sonic the Hedgehog (series) Information & Talk:Sonic the Hedgehog (series) Links at HealthHaven.com
advertise
add site
services
publishers
database
health videos
Bookmark and Share

search wiki for    ?
web dir firms image gallery news pdf wiki shop video 
about
toolbar
stats
live show
health store
more stuff
JOIN/LOGIN
Featured Results:
Sonic Game, Hedgehog Game
Sonic Game, Hedgehog Game
scientificpsychic.com
 Hernia Surgeon Website | Sonic hedgehog gene expression in nitrofen...
Hernia Surgeon Website | Sonic hedgehog gene expression in nitrofen...
herniasurgeon.org.uk
 Sonic Hedgehog (Shh) - R&D Systems
Sonic Hedgehog (Shh) - R&D Systems
rndsystems.com
 Man to Man Series: Talking with your Doctor - Calendar of Events
Man to Man Series: Talking with your Doctor - Calendar of Events
lafayettegeneral.org
 
WikiProject Video games (Rated C-Class, High-importance)
Gamepad.svg This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
TSPGaogierNonTransparentLogo.svg
This article is supported by the Sega task force.
edit · history · watch · refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Sonic the Hedgehog (series):
Crystal Clear app clock.png Expansion Status

To do:

  • Overview should be more comprehensive.
  • Try to keep the amount of lists in the article to a minumum.

Contents

[edit] Spin-off and main series

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.

I think it's still part of the main series. It keeps getting switched between spin-off and main series. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hawkfrost18 (talkcontribs) 20:47, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I have an issue with it being considered a spin-off, because to me, that conintates that the gameplay is completely diffrent compaired to the main series, while Secret Rings is very simular to the main series in that respect. The only thing that makes it spin-offish is it's story, which I believe isn't enough to denote it as a spin-off. It sould be considered part of the main series. A spin-off series is good enough for me. LightningLuigi (talk) 03:39, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

See {{Sonic games}} for the criteria. « ₣M₣ » 16:11, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] 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. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neofcon (talkcontribs)
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)

[edit] 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)

Well, the name of the video game DOSE give it away that it is a reboot. I mean, the first sonic the headghog game ever was called (you guessed it!) Sonic the hedgehog. Theirfore, the new Sonic the headghog is like the first game in the 2nd generation of sonic the headghog. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saprissy (talkcontribs) 16:46, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

I honestly don't know where you all are getting your information but your all wrong. They didn't reboot the series. The reason the game is called "Sonic the Hedgehog" is because they wanted to make a tribute, due to it being Sonic's 15th Anniversary. Though the story doesn't tie in with previous games, there is still one thing that does. The fact that Shadow works for GUN now. At the end of the game, only the events of the game are erased. Everything else remains the same. This is also mentioned in the Sonic Rival games, where the Sonic characters don't know who Silver is. And one more thing. Wikipedia is not a forum. --Ryu (Talk | Contributions) 16:50, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Add as an external link?

[edit] Sonic Cult

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)
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)
Check WP:EL to see if the site meets its criteria.« ₣M₣ » 16:30, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Green Hill Zone.com

There's a site called www.theghz.com and part of the site is the museum. The museum shows pretty much the full history of the Sonic Series. Here is the cite[1] Unknown the Hedgehog 14:51, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Concept: Mobius

This site (http://concept-mobius.technoguild.com/) goes into quite considerable detail about the Sonic universe, including the games and characters, and attepts to place the games in a chronology. It may be worth checking out. RaceProUK (talk) 23:51, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] 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)

Shadow, Rouge and especially the Chaotix are not even in that many games. Only Sonic, Tails, Knuckles, Amy and Eggman are the main characters. pls to fix it

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] Sonic Adventure 3

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

Sonic Unleashed was originally intended to be Sonic Adventure 3 early in its development. « ₣M₣ » 16:11, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] 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 (talkcontribs) 00:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes it can be done! So why not do it!No ones stoping you!Wiki Curse (talk) 01:18, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 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)

I think its highly unlikely,but if you can site a source thats relavent I'll back you up!Wiki Curse (talk) 01:21, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Series?

The video games section on the bottom of the article is all wrong. Two games isn't a series. I think it would be best if the Advance and Rush games were bundled together (as they are all developed by DIMPS, it could be named "DIMPS developed games"), all of the racing games should be bundled together (R, Rivals, Riders), the Game Gear games should have their own spot (12 games is a lot), and another for "Other". Right now everything is just way too confusing.

Oh yeah, and Waku Waku isn't an Edutainment game by really any stretch. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.207.117.248 (talk) 07:14, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

mabye it is. It depends on your point of view. It's good though that you gave people something to think about.Reddashz (talk) 14:45, 25 October 2008 (UTC)Reddashz

[edit] Quick notice....

I was thinking of completely revamping all pages related to Sonic the hedgehog, the format and structure of most of the pages are quite messy and are in need of a clean up. I'm not going to delete any vital information, and I may move or create some new pages. Jezstar (talk) 06:43, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] birthplace

I was wondering: what happened to the info stating Sonic's birthplace as Christmas Island?74.193.217.105 (talk) 02:53, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Does Amy have a Super Transformation?

I really don't know if she does, some web sites have her in super form, but I don't know for real.Reddashz (talk) 14:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)Reddashz

Nope, probably some fan fiction there. Bottomlivefan95 (talk) 12:56, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Not in any sonic game I've ever played "Section Proposed for deletion" subject out of date by 1 year!Fakecatholic (talk) 20:41, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Sonic 3D?

I'm confused as to why Sonic 3D is listed under spin-offs? IIRC the game was always marketed as a legitimate Sonic sequel and it features the traditional Sonic gameplay (albeit from an isometric 3D perspective). AFAIK the only reason not to include it as part of the main series is that it was developed by Traveller's Tales not Sonic Team, but that shouldn't be the only consideration surely? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.8.48.47 (talk) 08:50, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Co mingling stories...

The plotlines from the Archie Sonic Comics are inserted several times throughout this article. The sudden shift in topic is both confusing and irrelevant as it mixes narrative details from two separate media plotlines (the video game and the comic/cartoon mashup). I would suggest either removing these references entirely as the main focus of this article ought to be the main video game series and not various spinoff franchises, which already have their own articles. The comics and video games are two separate entities. --GeoVII (talk) 16:40, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Sonic & Knuckles is Sonic 4?

I would to question this part of the article:

Also, Sonic Crackers, a prototype of Knuckles' Chaotix, is an unfinished game concept demo for the Mega Drive/Genesis produced by Sega. It is available only as a ROM image which was released with or without the approval of Sega and can be found on the Internet. (As a ROM image, it can only be played on an emulator or on a real Mega Drive/Genesis with special third-party cartridge hardware. Therefore, it is clearly not a "regular" game, even if its incompleteness is overlooked.) Some people have identified Sonic Crackers as Sonic 4; however, it is generally recognized that Sonic & Knuckles is Sonic 4.

I have never heard someone try call 'Sonic Crackers' 'Sonic 4', same goes for S&K. I have usually seen S&K referred to as part of Sonic 3, since it was all one game to begin with and was later split. Also, citation needed here. Sonicjosh (talk) 15:38, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Removed the line about calling either game "Sonic 4". It's original research, or just wishful thinking. No Sonic game was officially titled Sonic 4 (beyond the walls of the Sega Megafortress, perhaps), it does not need to be mentioned. I would like to see the "Sonic Crackers" section cleaned up a little, though. Gpia7r (talk) 19:45, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV

The reception section has a real pro-sonic attitude. I know of many people who dislike the new sonic games such as http://www.screwattack.com/node/6715 75.72.25.219 (talk) 01:23, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree! I suggest you make required changes if needed!Fakecatholic (talk) 20:43, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Okay! i'll get started 75.72.25.219 (talk) 00:24, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

so um (same guy) was that enough? 75.72.25.219 (talk) 23:50, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Tighter Restrictions needed!

Do to the fact the sonic series article has been divided into to many sections I propose placing the following restrictions on this article:

1.Block IP addresses with a history of vandalism from making changes to the discussion page and keep sonic articles in general on a permanent watch list for possible vandalism.

2.Require anyone new who has an account to be temporaily restrained from editing the sonic series article for no less then one week to give them time to study and learn wikipedia's requirments.

So let us put it to a vote. If in favor say below this section "In Favor" if not say "Not in Favor".Fakecatholic (talk) 20:38, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

What is the matter with all of you? Would you prefer that people abuse this article and make it out to be a joke or do you actually want improvements! The Choice is yours!Fakecatholic (talk) 16:52, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

It seems that you're new to Wikipedia so I have to explain that Wikipedia doesn't work like that. First Wikipedia is not a democracy running off majority voting, we work by consensus building (read Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion). Second your proposals run contrary to Wikipedia being the "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit", are against its Blocking Policy and are impossible to do anyway since the ability to block IPs and editing accounts from individual pages doesn't exist - blocks are all or nothing. Also every registered editing account has its own watchlist that the editor maintains. I posted essentially the same thing on your Restrictions Needed on Sonic Articles! on Talk:Sonic the Hedgehog (character) with only a few differences. Thanks. CIGraphix (talk) 18:59, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Chaos Emeralds

Since The Chaos Emeralds Play a Major part in Sonic the Headghog games(and also in some other games), I think it is a good idea that the Chaos Emeralds has it's own page. Their is so much information about the Chaos Emeralds, one paragraph is just too much! All in favor click Talk.(talk) 17:14, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Not at all. Chaos Emeralds exist in Sonic Games. This is a Sonic series page. It has a section, and there's little to no more information needed to be said about them outside of their respective game pages. Gpia7r (talk) 17:17, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but the Chaos Emeralds are in more than just Sonic the Headghog is the main point I tring to come out with.

They are? Mokoniki | talk 17:27, 19 October 2009 (UTC)



Product Results (view all...)

search wiki for    ?
web dir firms image gallery news pdf wiki shop video 



↑ top of page ↑about thumbshots