Talk:Sonic the Hedgehog (film)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 March 2019 and 10 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Dhruswicki.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Considered

Only just recently an editor asked if film articles should include details about actors who auditioned for roles they did not get. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film#Should_we_mention_actor_auditions? The discussion essentially said it depends. A good questions was asked "what was the level of consideration?" and that should be asked here in this article.

This article claims that many actors were "considered" for the role of Tom and the Voice of Sonic. Considered by whom? What level of consideration?

The Newsweek article points to a Twitter picture of a what was claimed to be an internal document from Sony that includes a list of names. Newsweek does not independently verify the source or say anything about its authenticity, and they only say that it was a "wishlist" it does not say that any of these people were ever seriously considered (not that they were asked to audition or offered the part or anything like that). Newsweek then clearly states "so ignore headlines describing how so-and-so was "almost cast."" To ignore this warning and then to casually rephrases this and to claim these people were all "considered" is misleading.

Remember WP:RSPS WP:NEWSWEEK is not considered to be a generally reliable source, and even they are saying to treat this with scepticism. This is no better than rumor but someone decided to include it in the article anyway like as if it was fact. I have thought about if there was some way to word this more cautiously but this is merely speculation about things that did not happen and and should not be included at all. -- 109.77.197.226 (talk) 15:39, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't think it helps your argument to claim the content is not supported by the sources, as that is obviously not true. The Newsweek source describes a "wishlist" and the CinemaBlend source says "were being considered for the role". The issue here is whether the content is WP:DUE. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 16:59, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

None of this is reliably sourced to begin with, both Newsweek and Cinemablend make it clear that they are working from the image posted on Twitter (in the Cinemablend article you can see from the text "a prospect on the short list" which links to the Twitter post. Even if you accept the Twitter picture as a legitimate internal document from Sony and not a fake someone knocked together, you still cannot be sure that it represents anything more than fan-casting by the art department who needed to create mockups. This is some weak sauce. -- 109.77.197.226 (talk) 18:53, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Doniago (talk · contribs) raised the issue of trivial casting and "consideration" details, so I'd ask if he thinks this one passes the sniff test? It's based on a Twitter picture. Sure smells off to me. -- 109.78.198.204 (talk) 19:52, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

109.78.198.204, unless Doniago objects, given that no one else has responded here to your concerns, I think it would be reasonable for you to just remove the content. If someone has a concern with the removal, then they can comment here on why they think it should be included despite the reasons you have provided. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 21:26, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for commenting. WP:CYCLE says I can delete again if I don't get any discussion but I thought you wallyfromdilbert or maybe TheJoebro64 disagreed. It did seem a lot more like a good faith effort to preserve minor details. Either way I was waiting to find out more. I'll remove it now but if anyone has a problem we can discuss it further. -- 109.78.198.204 (talk) 21:38, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I just wanted to clear this up and explain myself. I was the original one that added that source in there, I wanted to let you two know that I’m deeply sorry. I thought it was a reliable source and I originally thought I can be used. I was originally gonna restore it back at first, but after reading the talk page here on you two discussing this issue, I now know that it’s not a reliable source and it can not be used. Again, I am very sorry. 2600:1000:B034:F19A:102A:62E5:3180:45EC (talk) 15:42, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for you comment. There is no need to apologize so profusely. It is understandable to want to add information you find interesting to a film that you you enjoyed. It is not necessarily something I would have thought as much about if there hadn't been a discussion about actors being "considered" so recently. This is an encyclopedia so we have to try and hold our sources to higher standards and not risk including information that could be fake or to put undue emphasis on information that is weak or to otherwise speculate. If we cross check each other hopefully things will continue to get better. Thanks again. -- 109.76.201.155 (talk) 12:24, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Sonic film is considered to be a genre superhero film

Who can't we add to the genre of this article computer animated superhero comedy film? Aaeliaba (talk) 22:48, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia film articles are supposed to add the primary genre. Not every possible genre is included, so while some people may include this film in the superhero genre that might not be what reliable sources are suggesting is the primary genre. -- 109.76.139.121 (talk) 18:04, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Mid-credits scene

Including the mid-scene in the plot is currently being discussed over at Sonic2 - Sonic 2 talkpage - what applies there, would logically apply here as well. I think it better to discuss and have consistency, rather than have either the scene included in one film, but not the other, especially without consensus which will only lead to future edit warring.

For the record, I think that WP:FILMPLOT needs revisiting and clarifying, as some mid-credit scenes are more relevant than others, (as my example for Avengers), but filmplot isn't conducive to this as it stands. However - WP:IGNORE can always be invoked - provided a consensus is made over it... Chaheel Riens (talk) 17:04, 20 October 2022 (UTC)

It is easy to forget but this is supposed to be an encyclopedia. The plot section is supposed to be concise and contain important plot details, needed to support the rest of the article (see WP:FILMPLOT). The mid credits sequence is nice to know but it is an extra non-essential detail, not an important plot point that an encyclopedia article needs to include. I hope editors will take a moment to carefully consider it and try to understand the guideline, we don't have to like Wikipedia guidelines to understand why they are there. If there's WP:LOCALCONSENSUS to include it anyway that would also settle the issue. -- 109.79.66.165 (talk) 19:34, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Editors have strange understanding of the word "relevance", as the appearance of Tails is of zero relevance to the plot of this film. There is not a good reason to include it in the plot section of this article because of the characters appearance in this film. That he briefly appeared at the end of this film is at best a footnote to the plot section of the second film, and does not belong in this article. -- 109.255.172.191 (talk) 14:36, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

The mid-credits scene belongs on this article specifically because it not only sets up the sequel, but literally the exact scene is in the sequel, and it shouldn't be held to a different standard just because it's placed in the middle of credits. It's relevant to the film series as a whole. Please stop removing it without discussing. Unnamed anon (talk) 20:26, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Billing Block

I would like to gain a consensus to add Ben Schwartz and Tika Sumpter to the starring section in the infobox. They were not only listed in the billing block, but also had single-screen billing in the end credits. Plus, Schwartz plays the main character, he should deserve at least some credit. Loservilleas (talk) 08:26, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Oppose. That's what the cast section is for. Barry Wom (talk) 11:55, 6 February 2024 (UTC)