Talk:List of Sonic the Hedgehog characters/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

What page shoudld there be for important characters that DON'T reoccur?

Void, Black Doom, Mephiles, etc Titan50 (talk) 15:17, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

They are put in the article about the only game in which they occur: Void goes in Sonic Shuffle, Doom in Shadow the Hedgehog (game), Mephiles in Sonic the Hedgehog (2006 video game) CIGraphix (talk) 15:23, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

==The article mentions Metal Sonic's debut being in Sonic CD, but I distinctly remember him from Sonic the Hedgehog 2 as the last boss before Dr Robotnik and again in Sonic & Knuckles as the final boss for Knuckle's storyline. 69.136.11.33 (talk) 18:00, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

That was a different Sonic robot, known as either 'Mecha Sonic' or 'Silver Sonic'. A different Mecha Sonic has been featured in several games, it might not be in this article because each version is so different that it might be considered a different character in each game. CIGraphix (talk) 18:20, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Sonic CD actually came out before Sonic tH2, at least in Japan. In America, it came out afterward. That's why there's all this confusion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.65.34.106 (talk) 23:21, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Cream not a major character?

Honestly, I don't see why she isn't. Of course, she hasn't been in the last few games, (The exception is Sonic Chronicles and Secret Rings) but she should still be important enough to have a page.

Take it to the others. Go here, talk to them about it, not us. We ge no say in it anymore. They do. _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^Soulsor 03:18, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Everyone gets a say in it, so don't make up things SLJ. Also, who is "we"? If you are referring to regular editors: they have a say in it, but it doesn't mean they control the article completely. RobJ1981 (talk) 06:20, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Calm down Rob. I simply meant that you guys at VG get more of a say as to what happens with articles. _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^Soulsor 14:15, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

This article is for recurring characters. Cream is a recurring character so she deserves a section here. Simple as that.Fairfieldfencer FFF 07:45, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Don't tell me to calm down, I'm perfectly calm. RobJ1981 (talk) 22:14, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Adding A Few More Characters?

Thanks to Chronicles, I was wondering, should we add Pachacamac? He does serve a minor role, and the games events role back on his doings. As well as adding Gizoids? Though, only Emerl has made multiple appearances (In the form of G-Mel in Advance 3) --_Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^Soulsor 03:51, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Gemerl's / G-Mel's / G-Merl's only appearance was in Sonic Advance 3. It is NOT a rebuilt Emerl - it is rather an entirely new robot based on Emerl's design, Eggman's ultimate battle robot that could interface with his machines. It's basically an update of Eggman's Phi robots. 156.12.150.206 (talk) 16:47, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Bzzt! Incorrect. Advance 3 clearly stated that Eggman rebuilt, and reprogramed the remains of Emerl, so, technically, it's the same character, just a different memory, and personally, just like Shadow. _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^Soulsor 21:46, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

remaining merges

I support the existing merges up until now, including Babylon Rouges. It's led to a large good article, rather than a lot of articles that fail our policies and guidelines. There are only a few remaining merge proposals outstanding. The main question we should as is if there is significant coverage of the following characters in reliable third-party sources for any of the following topics:

• Chaotix
• E-Series (Sonic the Hedgehog)

If the answer to that is no, then a merge might be appropriate, if not deletion. Another article that's on the fence is Chao (Sonic the Hedgehog), which was previously nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed with no consensus because people weren't sure if it could be improved. But so far, nothing has happened. Can people find appropriate sources for this one?

Let's try to settle these last few merges, one way or the other. After a discussion, we should work removing the tags. The great news after all these merges is that we have one article with a lot of verified information, rather than a bunch of articles with speculation and original research. I think this could even be awarded a good article status in the long run, and work towards B-status in the short term. Randomran (talk) 22:36, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

I already know for a FACT, that very little can be found for E-Series. I fully support a merge there. As for Chaotix, I believe a good amount can be found, though, I'm not too sure if it'll still be good enough. Chao, I believe, could also be merged. The article is absolutley disgusting, and can easily be covered in this one article. _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^Soulsor 22:49, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and merged the E-Series robots. When removing the speculation, OR, etc. there was little left to warrant an article. « ₣M₣ » 23:04, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Good call on the e-series. We still have to figure out what to do with Chaotix and Chao (Sonic the Hedgehog) though. These articles have been around for a while and nobody has turned up reliable third-party sources. I'm not trying to rush you, but at the same time, you have to conclude that some articles just can't meet our standards right now. What do you think? Randomran (talk) 00:46, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I've just added a third-party for the Chaotix.Fairfieldfencer FFF 09:29, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

A comic book is a primary source. A third-party source would be a reliable secondary source, like a journal, textbook, news report, review, preview ... etc. Randomran (talk) 19:47, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I thought that since the article focused on the game versions, a reference from an appearance in another universe would count as third-party.Fairfieldfencer FFF 20:07, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

People sometimes use "third-party" as shorthand for "reliable secondary source that's independent of the subject". A secondary source is something that analyzes a primary source. (e.g.: how a scholar analyzes a movie, or how a journalist analyzes a speech from the President.) And the source has to be reliable (not just a random fan). And it has to be independent (e.g.: not some kind of officially commissioned report or press release or advertisement). Read WP:SECONDARY, and WP:SOURCES if you need more clarification. Randomran (talk) 20:53, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I think the article of the Chaotix is too large to merge with the list of characters. It would make the article too lengthy. (talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.192.57.114 (talk) 15:43, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

WP:SS comes to mind, will the Chaotix article be too big to merge in the list? As for Chao, perhaps a series merge would be best. « ₣M₣ » 19:37, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Are you saying we should merge Chao to a target other than this page? Randomran (talk) 19:47, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

No. I believe Chao should be merged here, while info about Chao Gardens, to the series. Chao have been recurring crwatures throughout the series, and have had a large part in some games, and one Chao (Cheese), has appeared in many games, and has had a bit of an impact on things. Chaotix will be difficult. I'm barely having time to even go online anymore if I had more time, I'd help. But, likely, a merge is needed. Out of curiosity, would it b good if we mentioned that Vector was actually a prototype character for Sonic 1, and Carmy was inspiried by a character in the Sonic manga? Outside info that Mighty has can help alot. But, I don't think it's enough to hold the article... _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^Soulsor 23:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

re: Chaotix, out of universe information would be really helpful. It would get you halfway to meriting a stand-alone article, for sure. The other half is if this information came from reliable third-party sources: some kind of review or preview that mentions the Chaotix. Really, you need a development and reception section that comes from reliable third-party sources. Randomran (talk) 23:49, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Metal Sonic Debut

Technically, if I'm not mistaken, Metal Sonic was also the mini boss you fight at the end of Sonic 2, right before the final robotnik confrontation in the Death Egg. This would make his debut not of Sonic CD, but Sonic 2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.97.118.51 (talk) 07:20, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

I think (and I can't believe I know this, shows how much I've been around this contentious article) that version was termed "Mecha Sonic". I'd thought it had its own section, actually, though I can't see it; might be in the history for someone to check. SynergyBlades (talk) 07:38, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Sonic 2 had Silver. CD had Metal. 3&K had Mecha. _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^Soulsor 02:38, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

In the american and european manual. It is known as Metal Sonic in Japan, atleast i have heard so. NeoDoubleGames bla bla bla (talk) 16:07, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

E-Series Edit

Zero from the game Sonic Adventure was not named E-100 Alpha. In the begining of Gamma's story, Eggman refers to Gamma as the second model in the E-Series. The first being E-101 Beta. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chaos2000 (talk • contribs) 04:15, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Why the removal?

A few months ago, I considered Wikipedia my "go to" place for reading up on information about the characters of the Sonic the Hedgehog games. Now? It's a joke. So much information was just ripped apart, pages for certain characters destroyed (instead they get a paragraph or two on this "recurring characters" page), and for what? What purpose is there to get RID of information? Isn't this supposed to be a website where we, oh I don't know, come to be informed? It wasn't as if any of the facts were wrong, on the contrary, the facts were right on. And for that matter, why have the comic book characters' pages not been torn apart like this? There's just as much information on them as there are the game characters, so why aren't they suffering like the characters in the games have?

Wikipedia, for whatever reason, has lost any value it once had with me and everyone I know. It's not just on these articles, but this was just awful. It's one thing to (pointlessly, I might add, but that's another argument) take down images, it's another to take down pages and pages worth of information because someone's deemed it unimportant.

Anyway, so this just doesn't seem like "forum post" or whatever the losers in charge think, I think, if possible, the old pages (such as Blaze's and Silver's, to name a few) be brought back to the way they were before they got trashed. ----Thousandsevens (talk) 01:04, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, if this helps, you can still find info about their roles in each game in that games specific article. (EX: Amy's role in SA) For a certain character, place, etc. to warrant an article, their must be a sufficent amount of "relevant, outside information". Meaning, what inspired their creation, who specifically came up with them, etc. If you'd like to learn more about the situation, check out the previous archive of this talk, VG project, and several others. _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^Soulsor 01:42, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

The articles lacked both reliable, third-party sources (mostly because there isn't much commentary by reliable sites), and failed to assert their notability, per Wikipedia's guidelines on fictional characters. Because Wikipedia is supposed to an encyclopedia and provide a general overview for a general audience, detailed fan information is not appropriate. That is what Wikia was set up for, because its guidelines are more relaxed in that respect. So why not check out the Sonic Wikia at http://sonic.wikia.com, where you can read about how Blaze began to bond with Cream the rabbit, coming to think of her as her little sister after initially being a little hostile, or the heated debate amongst fans regarding Silver's higher-pitched voice actor which is regarded canon, even though some fans would prefer a deeper voice. SynergyBlades (talk) 01:43, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

What is the definition of "fan information" exactly? Because it wasn't like any of the information was false, it had all been said or shown in the various games. Just because they didn't quote every line and every event in the game doesn't mean they made it up or anything. Summaries of what happened in the game, their role in it (no, that's not really here anymore except for saying they were in it), that kind of thing; it's all gone. Changing the articles did NO ONE any good. --Thousandsevens (talk) 02:10, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Fan information is the extreme details that only fans are interested in, Wikipedia is about general overview rather than turning everyone into scholars on each subject - such overload would overwhelm the reader. And yes the information wasn't false, but if you read Wikipedia's rule that everything must be verified you would understand that Wikipedia is not about truth, it is about what can be verified with reliable 3rd party sources (reliable 3rd party sources meaning sources that are not 1st party - like Sega is a 1st party source for all things Sonic; sources that are reliable - writings by independent websites with editorial boards - like GameSpot, but not fansites or forums). It is okay to use 1st party sources to a certain extent in a topic (as long as it doesn't start violating What Wikipedia Is Not), but only 3rd party sources can assert notablity of that topic. CIGraphix (talk) 02:47, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Just to echo what people are saying here, a lot of those articles were unverified, or at best original research based on someone playing the game and then compiling it into a single article. So merging everything here was the best middle ground, between deleting the information outright, and keeping articles that really went into what Wikipedia is not. Randomran (talk) 03:20, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Blaze's own page

Blaze has appeared as a focal character in the Sonic Rush games, and is appearing more and more. Soon, she will be included in Sonic and the Black Knight as a Knight of the Round Table. I think this will be enough to secure her importance as a Sonic character, moreso than even Amy Rose. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.194.123.128 (talk) 00:56, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Well then, we'll just have to wait and see won't we? Kuro ♪

lol. You expect Blaze, a character we hardly know (Relevant-outside-info-wise) to have a better article than Amy (Who, has a decent amount of relevant-outside-info)? lol _Skeletal SLJCOAAATR ^Soulsor 06:48, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Blaze appeared first 2005 and Amy appeared first 1993 plus Amy have a fairly large role while Blaze have an minor role in the most games except Sonic Rush and its sequel. And Blaze isn't included in Chronicles while Amy is the second character in SC.--NeoDoubleGames (talk) 13:42, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Except you forget that Blaze has had a significant role in ALL games she appeared in, unlike Amy who serves as a foil or damsel in distress. I believe Blaze is hands-down worthy of taking her place alongside Shadow with her own page. --74.194.33.161 (talk) 10:39, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Well she appears more often in future games, like Sonic Generations for instance. I think she should have her own arcticle. 50.46.237.146 (talk) 00:03, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

"Appearing in games" is not a determining factor in whether something should get an article. It comes down to coverage in reliable third party sources, in order to establish notability. As far as I know, there aren't many articles on Blaze by herself...She once had her own page, and it was gotten rid of because of that very reason. Sergecross73 msg me 00:18, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Tails Doll redirecting here but no info about Tails Dolls on here

... How strange. --Youtuber Mangoman34:-D (talk) 22:19, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

It is because Tails Doll only appeared in Sonic R, so he is not really a recurring or relevant character. Evilgidgit (talk) 10:19, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Spooky, isn't it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.65.34.106 (talk) 23:18, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

E-Series

The section on the E-Series robots, a group of minor characters, has been spun off into its own article. I'm not entirely sure why. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 21:44, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Why does it even need to be merged? There's enough information at the recurring characters article, and this is just superfluous in-universe information. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 23:23, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, because it should be redirected, and while we're at it any good from it could be imported over here. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire - past ops) 23:48, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Well I'm the one who made that page, because 1. The Chaotix group have their own page aswell, 2. Though most of them are minor characters, the group itself is recurring, and 3. It's only a part of the series. No big deal right? User:Looney Guy —Preceding undated comment added 17:04, 30 May 2009 (UTC).

The problem is that the E-100 Series article lacks the necessary secondary sourcing to establish notability. The Chaotix are completely irrelevant, nor are the facts that they're recurring or part of a series going to help that article. The fundamental point is, unless the article can gain reliable, independent sources, i.e. not those from things such as the developers, it is unsuitable for inclusion on Wikipedia. Haipa Doragon (talk • contributions) 17:27, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, what kind of secondary sources are there? User:Looney Guy —Preceding undated comment added 18:25, 1 June 2009 (UTC).

For the E-Series? None of the top of my head, which is why the article should be merged into here. You might be able to get one, or two decent bits of reliable secondary sources off something like IGN, but not enough to warrant an article. SLJCOAAATR ^{4 6 8 15 16 23 42 108 305 316} 22:07, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Not even born yet.

Personally, I don't think Silver should have an age. He was born in the future, theirfore, he is going to be born. So, right now, he dosen't have an age. Saprissy (talk) 17:08, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Blaze has an age and isn't she from the future? There's nothing wrong with it. Mokoniki | talk 17:27, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Light Gaia

I put an Artical about Light Gaia (AKA: Chip) but it was deleted.Dosen't he play a major roll at the end of Sonic Unleash? He is also a playable character (as Gaia Colossus). Saprissy (talk • contribs) 17:20, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

A character having a major role in a game doesn't justify it being able to have an article. As much as I would love for Chip to have an article, he will probably never get an article, as he is a one-time only character, and will probably never be seen again. Which means that all of what we know about him, is on Sonic Unleashed, which is very little information, which wouldn't be enough to let him have his own article. It would also need reliable sources. Mokoniki | talk 17:40, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

True but does that mean that Mighty the Armadillo should be kicked from the article? I hardly ever heard of him. Saprissy (talk) 17:14, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

True, I hardly hear about Mighty as well, but there are some reliable sources provided for the information given for him. Mokoniki | talk 17:32, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually Mighty should be featured on this page since he is present as a cameo in Sonic Generations as well as being one of the main characters in Knuckles Chaotix, unless Cameos do not count towards the two games in which case I doubt he will get into the article. MIVP - Allow us to be of assistance to you. (Maybe a bit of tea for thought?) 22:38, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

An extremely small, trivial, cameo, like Mighty in Generations, would not count, no. Sergecross73 msg me 02:04, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

E-123 Gamma

This article lists E-123 Gamma's first appearance as Sonic Heroes. However, I distinctly remember him being a playable character in Sonic Adventure, which came five years earlier. Tezero (talk) 15:09, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

You're mixing up two different characters: E-102 Gamma (first game Sonic Adventure) and E-123 Omega (first game Sonic Heroes) CIGraphix (talk) 16:01, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

You're right; I often get them confused. Thanks. Tezero (talk) 22:04, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Proposed page move to List of Sonic the Hedgehog characters

The current name is awkward, especially with "games" in parentheses, and the name I propose corresponds to other series-wide character lists such as that of The Legend of Zelda. Tezero (talk) 22:03, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

It sounds good and better than the current title.Tintor2 (talk) 21:32, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm fine with that. Mokoniki | talk 23:20, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't think thats a good idea, the list should not be fully comprehensive list of all characters from all media - a page like that would be huge, image adding all of List of characters in Sonic the Hedgehog (comic book) to this list - and the list must be recurring characters only because others lack notability to be on anything other than the individual game's page in which they appeared. Check out the archives of this page for more. CIGraphix (talk) 23:24, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah, I see, well, could we add games onto the end of it or does what you say still apply? Mokoniki | talk 00:41, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Why would "recurring" be necessary? The individual characters won't still be added since the article should cover the recurring characters anyway.Tintor2 (talk) 14:51, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not really attached to "recurring" being in the page title, I'm just concerned that some editors unfamiliar with WP:N would try to use the lack of it as an arguement to make the list into an exhaustively comprehensive one. CIGraphix (talk) 16:58, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree with that. Possibly, "recurring" could be used in the lead to clarify.Tintor2 (talk) 22:24, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

How about this title: Characters in the Sonic the Hedgehog video games, or Recurring characters in the Sonic the Hedgehog video games if deemed necessary. Tezero (talk) 19:22, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

What Happened to Amy's Page?

Was it deleted or something? Isn't Amy one of the main characters of the games? She's been in most of the games, and is even older than Knuckles. Why shouldn't she keep her own page? Lamb84 (talk • contribs) 03:37, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

What's going on?

Blaze and Metal Sonic's articles have been remade. I thought it was decided that they were not notable to get their own articles and were moved into here. Do their articles stay, do they go? Will this be resolved quickly or will we have another edit war here? Evilgidgit (talk) 23:31, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

The Metal Sonic page is mostly just a resurrection of the old page by Shockmetric. I created the Blaze article from scratch, though, and since it has development info (the fire thing at the start of "Design and characteristics") and reception info, I think it should stay. I'm pretty sure the two incidents are unrelated. Tezero (talk) 01:41, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Merge with Amy Rose and Vector the Crocodile

Several of the characters in this franchise are sufficiently notable to justify their own articles, but Amy Rose and Vector the Crocodile are not. As such, the Amy Rose and Vector the Crocodile articles should be merged here. Neelix (talk) 14:04, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Notability goes mainly by critical reception. I'm sure there's a fair amount of it to be found out there (I found all the reception on Vector, for example); I just don't have time to do anything right now. Tezero (talk) 15:05, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I haven't been able to find enough secondary sources to demonstrate these two characters' notability. If no one else can either, the merge should take place. Neelix (talk) 15:58, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

They both have secondary sources (several from IGN, Games Radar, Xbox World) that demonstrate the reasonable possiblity of finding more - remember in WP, There is no deadline. CIGraphix (talk) 02:56, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I added a couple more reception bits for Amy. Tezero (talk) 18:34, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for adding some sourcing, Tezero! That's needed even on the list. At this point, I am not convinced that there exists sufficient sourcing to justify individual articles for these two characters. "There is no deadline" is an essay, not a guideline. If you eventually find sufficient sourcing, you can always start another discussion to split the articles off again. Neelix (talk) 19:01, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I added another thing for Vector. That makes four for each, which should be enough to at least justify notability. Tezero (talk) 02:50, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Notability is demonstrated by secondary sources, not primary ones. The only reliable secondary source used on Vector the Crocodile is IGN while Amy Rose has only IGN and GamesRadar. I still do not see that these characters are notable apart from the series. Neelix (talk) 13:59, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

How are Sega Magazine and Xbox World primary sources? Tezero (talk) 18:23, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

If Sega Magazine is owned by Sega (which it probably is), I could see that as a primary source - but Xbox World is a secondary source not owned or affiliated with Sega. CIGraphix (talk) 18:50, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Sega Magazine is published by EMAP, not Sega. This means both Sega Magazine and Xbox World are secondary sources that can demonstrate the characters' notability. Tezero (talk) 18:56, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure what happened to Vector the Crocodile's page on this website, since Espio the chameleon's page is on this page, so should Vector's page. Maxitotal (talk) 10:15, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Dan Green As Omega

Where's confirmation of this? I realise there isn't really any confirmation for Blaustien doing Omega's voice either, but she was his last voice actor and was in Winter Games's credits. She hasn't voiced anyone else in that game, so why would she be there if she didn't voice Omega? Here is the original edit. [1]. The editor who added this seems unreliable. If no one can prove Green did the voice tomorrow morning, I'll revert the edit.Fairfieldfencer FFF 20:29, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

chao forcefully mated?

part of the chao section claims that a chao being mated unwillingly will shorten its life. how can you force it to mate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scholarofalbany (talk • contribs) 14:33, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

The image in the page isn't an official image and doesn't look very professional. Shouldn't it be this?: http://www.gbposters.com/images/gbposters-com/lightbox/b7f7/MP1261-SONIC-cast.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thekeyboardman (talk • contribs) 17:36, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Glitches

Should the glitch characters be here,like a "Other" selection?

• Honey the Cat

• Ashura the Hedgehog

• Wecidna or Wechidna

Can we at least have a "List Of Glitches In Sonic Games"page?

Only if these characters are covered by some kind of third-party source and they appear in more than one game. I'm sure they're covered on the Sonic wiki, so maybe we could provide a link to that in the external links. Glitch characters are generally not notable. About the list page, I really doubt it, the most I would expect would be a section about glitches on the main Sonic series page, similar to what you'd find on the Gameplay of Pokémon page. Tezero (talk) 20:32, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Tezero is right, that type of info isn't really appropriate for wikipedia. That's the kind of stuff that belongs on hardcore fansites. Most general audiences (i.e. the type of crowd wikipedia articles are supposed to cater to.) probably wouldn't care about that. Sergecross73 msg me 13:17, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

So no Gameplay of Sonic the Hedgehog page or a Glitches selection on the Sonic the Hedgehog Series page. 98.71.47.212 (talk) 19:45, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Definitely no on the "glitches" one. As far as the gameplay one, I'd say probably not. It's probably covered good enough in various other Sonic articles. I love Sonic but...the game can pretty much be summed up as "fast-paced platforming". Not sure it warrants a whole article for it... Sergecross73 msg me 20:01, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

How about Tails Adventures,it's not a "fast-paced platforming" and Sonic Labyrinth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.47.212 (talk) 20:14, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Please look at Sonic the Hedgehog (series) article. It covers a lot of that kind of stuff. In short, I think the article you want to create, already exists, but is named something else. Feel free to add to that though! Sergecross73 msg me 20:28, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

So I can add and edit Sonic the Hedgehog (series)? 98.71.47.212 (talk) 01:57, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Wecidna and Ashura would automatically fail inclusion criteria since they've both been in only one game no? (I've never even heard of Wechidna) Fine and dandy but is there a suggestion here that Honey was in a second game? MM (Report findings) ^{(Past espionage)} 15:36, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

I think Wechidna is the fan-coined name for a glitchy Tails/Knuckles character only obtainable by hacking Knuckles Chaotix. Not a real character.Sonic fansites document it, but its far from something that belongs on Wikipedia. Same with Ashura, which is the same kind of thing. Honey was only in Sonic the Fighters, she was based off of a character of the same name from Fighting Vipers, but that's not actually here and wouldn't count as a "second appearance". Sergecross73 msg me 15:49, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

I thought as much, just bringing this conversation in case someone has similar thoughts in the future. MM (Report findings) ^{(Past espionage)} 18:41, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Character age

I'm thinking of removing the bits that describe how old the character is (in-universe age, not in, how long ago they were created). Not only do they a constant source of vandalism, but their ages have absolutely no effect on the gameplay or storyline on any of the games. It may be mentioned in-game, but only in passing, but it's not like they have "school-day", "coming of age", or "becoming working class/adults", type scenarios or plotlines that relates to that. They're just anthormorphic animals fighting to save a fantasy world... Sergecross73 msg me 12:58, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I made this change because no one objected over the course of a week. Please discuss here before reverting in the future. Sergecross73 msg me 13:34, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Ray the Flying Squirrel

Where is Ray the Flying squirrel's seletion?! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.62.95 (talk) 18:57, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Please, take the time to bother to read the articles very basic concept. This is for reoccurring characters. He only appeared in one game. Info on him should be relegated to the game's respective article, not here. Sergecross73 msg me 19:26, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

He is reoccurring,he also appeared in Sonic Fighters and in Sonic Generations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.44.144.215 (talk) 19:46, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I don't believe he's in Sonic the Fighters. If he's in Generations you'd need a source because that game isn't out yet. (Also, if he's like only on a poster on a level or something, that's probably not noteworthy...) Sergecross73 msg me 17:12, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.44.144.215 (talk) 03:03, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

He is right,Ray is cool. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.48.207 (talk) 14:57, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Organizing List

I think we should organize this list not by alphabetical order but by role. Such as having three sections which would be one for main, secondary/supporting and minor recurring characters. So that the list is organized by the characters importance to the series rather than its currently messy alphabetical organization. - SuperTiencha (talk) 03:42, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

• Strongly Oppose - All of those terms are extremely subjective, and would lead to all sorts of arguments, edit wars, etc. Alphabetical is objective and hard to argue about much. I think it should stay this way. Sergecross73 msg me 04:04, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
• Support i dont think its good to do per alphabetical order, because the main character is at the very bottom. Its definitely easy to oppose because for a series with reoccuring characters and certain ones having more bigger role. That and some might find it etremely odd to have Amy at the top of the list while having Sonic nearly at the bottom. I say this would be easier to do by introduction into the series. That way the older characters go on top, and the newer characters go at the bottom.Lucia Black (talk) 07:27, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
  • I would be more okay with that approach, as "chronological" would be another objective way of organizing. I'm mainly against the subjective ways, like declaring who's major/minor characters, etc. Sergecross73 msg me 14:04, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
    • I just moved the article around. I didnt want to put chronology because then certain characters might make it before sonic. If i made a mistake let me know. However, im not so sure names suuch Miles "Tails" Prowers is correct when it comes to WP:COMMONNAME. Im sure we should go with the common name (tails) and mention that his real name is Miles Prower. Also some characters such as, froggy, cheese the chao and maybe Vanilla the Rabbit might not be relevant enough to have their own section.Lucia Black (talk) 02:23, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
      • It all looks fine to me. I'm not technically against removing the characters you mentioned above, as many characters such as "Orbot" or "Vanilla" are largely irrelevant to the series, but if seriously challenged, it'd be hard to argue against the challenge, since the only real criteria for the page is "more than 1 appearance". I don't feel strongly either way on how to portray Tails, either way is fine with me. Sergecross73 msg me 03:24, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Recent changes to article

So I've reverted a bunch of recent edits for a number of reasons, and figured I'd discuss it further here:

• A ton of reliably sourced information was removed, and in exchange, replaced with unsourced information. Shortening information is fine, but sources are most important, so the process shouldn't start be removing a ton of them.
• When making large changes to pages, you should discuss changes on the articles talk page first. This definitely should have happened in this case, because just recently editors were discussing how to reorganize the article, and the approach in these recent editso are different than what had been agreed upon. Discuss first, come to consensus, and then make changes. If you want to start adding to that discussion, it is at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_Sonic_the_Hedgehog_video_game_characters#Organizing_List
• In general, characters were rearranged into categories such as "Major" and "Minor". That too is frowned upon, because such classifications are very subjective, and based purely on personal judgement, also known as original research. Please try to stay away from such classifications.
• If you have any questions or want to discuss this further, please discuss here on the talk page, and/or my talk page. Thanks! Sergecross73 msg me 13:43, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

A "Reception" section

I'm suggesting making a character section to separate "reception" away from the characters. And maybe characters in groups not have their own specific subsection as it would make things more complicated.Lucia Black (talk) 20:18, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Well, the reason I hadn't done something like that is because these "List of X Characters Lists" are supposed to be written in a "real-world context", not an "in universe context". If you move all the reception to one area, you're mostly left with plot summary type information for the rest of the article. I kinda feel like that would be moving in the wrong direction, bringing more attention to the articles current faults... Sergecross73 msg me 13:25, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

sorry i got lost. I meant to say reference list. Make character section to separate from reference section.Lucia Black (talk) 01:54, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

One-time characters

I know it says "two games or more" up here, but does it HAVE to have that restriction on it? Cubot only appears in one mainstream game and yet he's on here either coz of briefly appearing in a flashback in Sonic Generations, or appearing in games like Mario and Sonic Olympic Games, or both. Some of the characters on here only got on here by counting games like Mario and Sonic, or multiplayer modes of other games, as appearances. Which is fine with me, but some characters on here play less significant roles than antagonists Black Doom, Captain Whisker, and Mephiles the Dark, or guest stars Marine the Raccoon, Princess Elise, and Chip/Light Gaia.

Would it be unreasonable to ask for a section of the article (or even an article itself) about significant one-time characters? Why is it restricted to characters appearing in more than one game? I'm guessing it's because recurring characters are considered more notable and significant, but there are several guest stars and main villains that deserve mention more than some of the characters on here. (And don't use this as an excuse to take them off). If not, then this is the last I'll say on the matter coz wikipedia can be so stubborn sometimes. (no offense admins) 24.65.99.129 (talk) 23:31, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose - I'm against changing it because it clutters the list with a lot of non-notable, trivial characters. If anything, I'd prefer removing Orbit/Cubot because you're right, they are trivial, but happen to fit the current criteria... Sergecross73 msg me 23:51, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Major character pages

Metal Sonic is one of the main cast members, alongside the likes of Sonic and Shadow, shouldnt he have his own page?--DrNefarious25 (talk) 11:37, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

The standard is that a topic have coverage in multiple, third party reliable sources to establish the notability standard. The last time the article existed, it didn't meet that criteria, and thus it was merged back into this one. Sergecross73 msg me 12:58, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

No Voice Actors list on this page

Me and Sergecross73 had a discussion and we decited not to have a list of the characters voice actors on this page. Because the list of there voice actors are already listed on there pages. Supermariokart64 (talk) 16:23, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I think the current voice actor for each character is worth briefly mentioning. I believe the purpose of this page is to put the most important information about the most important characters into one list. The voice actor of each character is one of such important information we should include. Per Wikipedia's guidelines on fiction, we ought to write this article in the perspective of the real world. I can think of no better example of an important real world element than the voice actor of each character. The information is important to the average reader interested in information about the characters of this series. Its inclusion will not distract the reader from other aspects of the character's description, and moreover adds to their understanding of the character. Respectfully, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 02:46, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

A note to editors for this page

Wikipedia is meant to be for general audiences who aren't especially knowledgable on the topic. With that in mind, please don't include such excessive, minute details, or excessive plot details. I've recently scaled down the page a ton because so much of the information is either:

1. Overwhelming to anyone who hasn't played every single game and remembered every single plot point. Many times there were references to things like "Solaris" that wasn't covered in the article or linked, and made no sense in the context of teh article.
2. Simply not interesting or important. It's not important to note every time characters shook hands or walked away from each other or something. Overall, that's not important or interesting to mention. Listing off every Voice Actor falls in this category too. The average reader doesn't care unless it someone of special note, and no one in the Sonic series especially is. (By Wikipedia standards, I know the Sonic fandom has different standards for that.)

Anyways, I'm just saying, excessive detail type additions will likely be reverted in the future. Sergecross73 msg me 18:36, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Image please

This article needs illustration. Because character designs are likely to be copyrighted, there is no free alternative to non-free images. So, if anyone can find a screenshot of a video game that is essentially a group shot of most of the characters on this list (in a manner similar to "File:My little pony friendship is magic group shot r.png"), its inclusion would greatly benefit the reader's scope of the article. It's inclusion would satisfy all prongs of WP:NFCC too. Respectfully, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 02:36, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Eventually got around to adding an image. Thanks for bringing this up! Tezero (talk) 23:20, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

Nice! Mz7 (talk) 21:25, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

An individual article for Metal Sonic

It was one thing when only about five characters had their own articles, but now that even Gamma and Omega have their own, Metal Sonic is pretty much required to get one. He has been in way more games and is more well known than both of those two.Rattis1 (talk) 16:33, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

"How many games they appear in" isn't a criteria for whether or not a fictional character has a Wikipedia article on it. It's based on meetin Wikipedia's standard for notability, which is basically having plenty of coverage in reliable, third party sources. The last version of the article didn't meet those requirements, so it got merge/redirected back here. That being said, Tezero has been working on Sonic character articles lately, so maybe he can dig up more sources for it. Sergecross73 msg me 16:45, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

It's unlikely that there's gonna be a lot of coverage from reliable sources for Metal Sonic. While he's been in a number of games, he's only served as a major character in CD, which was an obscure release at the time, and in a couple of others as a final boss after plot twists. (I feel like reviewers don't usually get to the ends of games, so their reviews naturally wouldn't mention him.) I'll look through reviews and previews of these games, as well as Sonic 4 Episode 2, just to be sure, but don't count on Metal Sonic getting an article. (I'm not a huge fan of this standard for inclusion, but it's there and we have to obey it.) Tezero (talk) 16:59, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

RfC: Do the characters discussed here meet WP:N such that they should be allowed to keep their articles?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Do the following characters meet WP:N such that they should be allowed to keep their articles? This has been discussed rather tensely, without so much as a consensus of whether there's a consensus.

• Amy Rose
• Babylon Rogues
• Big the Cat
• Blaze the Cat
• Chao (Sonic)
• Cream the Rabbit
• E-102 Gamma
• E-123 Omega
• Rouge the Bat
• Shadow the Hedgehog
• Silver the Hedgehog
• Wisp (Sonic)

Tezero (talk) 03:34, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

I think a key question here isn't just WP:N; if they weren't notable, they wouldn't be worth a mention on the encyclopedia at all, and that's clearly not the case. Other keys we have to look at are WP:NOPAGE and WP:UNDUE: Do these warrant individual articles versus a mention in a list article, and are they projecting a due weight in relation to each other? In other words, is there enough content and notability for separate pages, or are they best covered as part of a larger article? Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...} 03:56, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

• Agreed, which is why I would say Speedy Close because this is essentially a rehash/rewording of an RFC that closed less than 24 hours ago, and one that is still currently running. You can start up more discussions on notability and whatnot, but you can't just redo an RFC right away like this...Sergecross73 msg me 10:28, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

• Which was "speedy closed" itself, huh? "WP:UNDUE" - I see someone didn't even read their own link. --Niemti (talk) 12:49, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
• I didn't realize either of those was an RfC, as they weren't phrased as such. Regardless, neither one has yet received comments from outside the project, and—as I too feel the first closed too hastily (not least because of the lack of external comments)—I feel it's better that they be grouped together. As for notability, well, per the very beginning of WP:N, "notability is a test used by editors to decide whether a topic can have its own article." I would still contend that there's too much information about these subjects (most of them, anyway) to adequately cover in a list [mainly because of just how many recurring Sonic characters there are and just how many games most of them have been in], but regardless, that's different from "notability" in the context in which I brought it up (especially since I very clearly talked about having their own articles...). Tezero (talk) 17:05, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

• Im sorry you weren't happy with the results, but you can't just keep on spamming the same question, with no time elapsing and nothing changing, until you you get the results you want. That's called WP:FORUMSHOPPING, and it's not allowed. Sergecross73 msg me 17:33, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

• It'd be different if I'd just been going for the results I want in terms of getting articles kept. If you notice, I listed Chao here, as well as all of the current ones (which all seem likely to be kept). Again, it's that I didn't realize the first two were formal RfCs, so I wanted to form one that encompasses all the characters whose pages' continued existence is under debate because we need some freaking actual input from outside the project. To that end, I've notified the Comics project. Tezero (talk) 18:11, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

• Youre either spamming the same RFC after no time elapsing, or you're forumshopping if the past ones weren't/arent "official". If you want to start some sort of generalized discussion about character notability between projects, like Sven suggested, fine. But this is far too obvious that you're just fishing to overturn a decision that just happened and didn't go your way. Sergecross73 msg me 18:19, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

• A general discussion is what I want this to be; I've already said I want some kind of precedent that can be referenced later. And... well, yes, I wasn't satisfied with the last discussion, but not because a most of the articles closed as "merge" - or else I wouldn't have put Chao and the rest of these on the line, so to speak; I'd just leave them alone. It really is about getting outside opinions, which was supposed to be the point of RfCing in the first place. Tezero (talk) 18:37, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Are you kidding me? You started off with Do the following characters... And ended with listing most of the Sonic characters in debate. That's pretty much the opposite of "general". You're very clearly discussing particular characters, not the general prospect of character notability as a concept. Sergecross73 msg me 18:47, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

It's all of the characters in debate—it's supposed to be, anyway; tell me if I missed any. (Again, I really am not trying to cherry-pick the ones whose independence is the least well-esteemed. I'd add Sonic, Tails, Knuckles, and Eggman to the discussion if there was any disagreement over them.) Yes, this discussion specifically is focusing on these characters, but part of the reason I brought it up was to form a clear precedent that can be used elsewhere, so we don't run into discussions like this over and over. You know, the same reason I asked about quote citations in character articles here—which eventually led to WP:WISP, although editors began having second thoughts soon after. TL;DR: It's a specific discussion I want to have wider influence. Tezero (talk) 21:15, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Tezero: This discussion isn't going to go anywhere since we just talked about these characters. I tried to do the same thing as you (bringing up specific characters as a base to discuss notability in general) with Pokémon articles, but I got stopped by Sven who said that we needed a large-scale general discussion on character notability first. We should probably get one started once the current extended Sonic discussion is over, it's obvious that people have very different views on notability. Jucchan (talk) 21:33, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

@Jucchan: how narrowly tailored, so to speak, should the discussion be if it's to hold up? I think RfCs have to stand fairly far in that direction. Tezero (talk) 22:00, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

@Tezero: what I would prefer and what was suggested by Sven and Supernerd11 is that the community create a subpage under WP:VG specifically to discuss the numerous issues about citations and their use to indicate notability, especially those brought up in the Sonic Characters discussion, then list the discussion in Wikipedia:Centralized discussion to attract users from others scopes such as WP:CHAR. Jucchan (talk) 01:13, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

• Tezero This is highly inappropriate. I realize that the outcome of the merge discussions above did not go in your favor, but just restarting the discussion to try to get it reversed like this isn't productive, it's disruptive. Sven Manguard Wha? 23:12, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

• *sigh* I've tried to explain why this isn't just restarting the discussion to get it reversed. Tezero (talk) 00:49, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

• Right, and it's being explained to you that, regardless of intention, you're not doing it right.

• Correct - Something along the lines of "What are the current standards for fiction characters to have their own articles, and how can we better standardize and define these requirements?"
• Incorrect - Any mention of any specific Sonic characters at all.

Does that clear things up for you at all? Sergecross73 msg me 02:00, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Clearer than ever: when we say we want outside comments, what we really mean is that we're good at pretending to want outside comments so we can dispatch of that nasty cruft as quickly as possible in case adults start reading. Tezero (talk) 03:33, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Metal Sonic

If the Metal Sonic debut in Sonic CD, who's that metal hedgehog who appears as the penultimate boss in Sonic the Hedgehog 2? 208.54.39.190 (talk) 16:14, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

He was named either "Mecha Sonic" or "Silver Sonic", differing by region. Sergecross73 msg me 18:22, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Maria

Im puzzled by edits like this. She was playable, so I don't see the problem. (To be clear, the "assistant" secondary characters can be controlled by the second player in this game.) Sergecross73 msg me 01:12, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Just noticed this, but I reverted the edit because it said that she was playable in a multiplayer mode, which isn't technically accurate; she's playable in the single-player campaign of Shadow the Hedgehog as a partner character, but she is not playable in that game's multiplayer mode (only Shadow and variants of him are). Saying she's playable in the multiplayer mode isn't accurate, and the edit itself was vague in structure. She's not playable in Sonic Adventure 2 or Shadow The Hedgehog's multiplayer modes, so it's not correct to say she is. Unless I somehow missed this fact, Maria has never been playable in a dedicated multiplayer mode in any Sonic game. Raptormimus456 (talk) 00:31, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Why not reword it to be accurate rather that outright removal though? Sergecross73 msg me 00:42, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Because if we mention it for Maria, than we'd probably need to mention it for all the other guys, too. Besides, that sort of thing is really more suited to the game's article and not the character list. At least, IMO. Raptormimus456 (talk) 01:05, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

If she only has one playable instance for all time, it's okay to mention it without adding every playable instance for every other character... Sergecross73 msg me 01:16, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Again, it's not really something I find is required for the character article. Maybe the game article, but not the one for the characters. It's not really notable for Maria specifically, it's just a mechanic of the game itself. So again, why make a note about it for Maria, but then not bring it up for, say, Charmy or Knuckles? It's a thing that belongs over on the game article and not here, at least in my own opinion. Raptormimus456 (talk) 14:33, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

^ Ironically, Charmy is one of the only characters the second player CAN'T control in that game. Anyway, I honestly don't see the problem with it, and it's not the type of thing we'd have to list for every character; the only reason it's notable in this context is that it's the only time she appears as a playable character in the entire franchise. Something simple like "Maria's only playable appearance is in Shadow the Hedgehog, where she can be controlled by a second player during specific in-game missions." should suffice. -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) 15:11, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

That's a lot better, yeah. Removes the ambiguity from the situation. I'll add that to the article. Raptormimus456 (talk) 15:18, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Metal Sonic as Metal

The Hedgehog, Sonic. "It Wasn't Me, It Was the One-Armed Hedgehog". Sonic Boom. 9 minutes in. I guess when you get tired, you can just recharge. That's the difference between you and me, Metal. I don't get tired.

This ep cite should support our inclusion of "Metal" as an abbreviation of Metal Sonic's name. Anyone want to add? 184.145.18.50 (talk) 18:39, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Is is really necessary to note? Its not very common its used as a name by itself, and its not like we mention or cite that "Knuckles the Echidna" also just goes by "Knuckles"... Sergecross73 msg me 19:26, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Sticks the Badger

Should Sticks be integrated into this page? While she's primarily associated with the Sonic Boom brand (appearing in all four Boom games, 3 of which were playable appearances), Sega's been integrating her into the main series as of late; she's got an official profile on the Japanese "Sonic Channel" website (which focuses almost entirely on the main series), and she's now playable in both Runners and the new Mario & Sonic game. It might not be a bad idea to write up a brief blurb with her basic personality traits, game appearances, and some details on her creation and the comparatively unusual means by which she became part of the franchise. -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) 15:03, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't see why she can't, honestly; the article covers other pieces of Sonic Boom media, so Sticks should be fine to include here. Raptormimus456 (talk) 15:09, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Yup, she's fine to go in now. The main inclusion criteria for the article is for a character to appear in more than one game, which she has, so she's good. If she's ever been removed, it was from back before the Boom games were out, or due to it being a poorly written or unsourced entry. Sergecross73 msg me 15:33, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Cool. I'll leave it to someone else to type something up, since being an anon, I'm not exactly in a position to edit the page. While on the subject of re-adding characters, what's the stance on the Deadly Six? Their primary appearance is Lost World, of course, but we've also had members, if not the whole group, making appearances in other titles. All six made non-playable story appearances in Runners and as a trophy in Smash Bros Wii U, Zavok and Zazz are playable in Rio, and Zazz has been a boss in Dash and Runners. Notable enough for addition, or should we keep them off? -- 136.181.195.25 (talk) 18:23, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

I have no problem with their inclusion either. Really, even both Sonic Lost World iterations are separate games really... Sergecross73 msg me 19:25, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure, since that other editor didn't leave an edit summary, but your additions are supposed to be sourced. That could be why you're facing opposition. Sergecross73 msg me 02:51, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

It seems to have died down at this point, at least; it was only one person reverting the edit, and they seem to have decided not to pursue the matter any longer. I'd source it, but of course I'm not quite sure what we should source here; the Sonic Channel entry, maybe? Raptormimus456 (talk) 22:09, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Well, you're kinda doing it backwards, you should start with what sources say, and write around that. I'm sure there's some Boom previews/reviews that mention her... Sergecross73 msg me 23:37, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

I took a shot at expanding it a bit, using a Sega blog primary source and a few of the critical reviews for Shattered Crystal. Mz7 (talk) 06:13, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Very nice, thank you. Sergecross73 msg me 15:15, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Sonic the Hedgehog characters. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.officialnintendomagazine.co.uk/50022/features/the-best-and-worst-sonic-characters/?page=6

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:57, 1 April 2016 (UTC)