Jump to content

Talk:Sonic Underground

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Show origins?

[edit]

I was told that Underground was a work of the French, not Americans. Any truth to this? Claude 05:16, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had also heard this - Brooza 20:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, if you look at the UK DVD, the last shot of the credits say something about being made in Luxemberg or something. - Shadow the Hedgehog 7:54, 10/27/2007

Show Still Running Re-peats

[edit]

Is this show still running repeats the article says at 8:oo in the morning is this true.Themasterofwiki 13:20, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

no it's not, my UPN affiliate shows informercials at 8:00am-ViacomMania

Didn't UPN get sold last year? I think it depends where in the U.S. you live. We should add that. Shadow the Hedgehog 16:16, June 19, 2007

Run Time

[edit]

The show may have been put in a thirty minute slot, but each episode only lasted a little over 20 minutes, including introduction and end credits. You just have to watch any episode on DVD. So I changed it. Harley Quinn hyenaholic 16:15, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Volume 2

[edit]

Sonic underground v2 is listed on shout factories site, the Release Date says 6/17/2008; so it is confirmed for june 17 volume 2 (sorry about grammar) Sonicjosh (talk) 22:46, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arson Underground

[edit]

what's that? The guy who wrote it didn't write it properly and I don't understand what he was talking about could that be vandalism? =S

75.191.176.246 (talk) 22:49, 10 October 2011 (UTC) Yes.[reply]

Recycled Video Game appearance

[edit]

I find the whole "Recycled Video Game appearance" to be speculation. Stuff like that has a place, but it's not Wikipedia. It's just plain orgiinal research, which is specifically banned by Wikipedia policy. It COULD be true, but unless an authority actually says that it's true, it can't be put on Wikipedia. That's just the way it works. If someone can find an reliable, official authority who says that this is the case, be my guest and put it back in! But as for now, I'm removing it. --StoryMakerEchidna (talk) 21:11, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Other Sonic Series

[edit]

There are three Western Sonic cartoons:

The Adventures of Sonic the Hedgehog Sonic the Hedgehog: The Animated Series And Sonic Underground

There are two Japanese Sonic Anime:

The O.V.A. And Sonic_X

I don't think they are all equally represented: the Western cartoons are wildly different from one another, and from the games, while the Japanese Anime are closer to the videogame style. All were influential in shaping the Sonic franchise, but they are only loosely related and the Western cartoons, although they shaped more of Sonic (all the way up to Sonic and the Black Knight) They are declared unfit for reference material, other Sonic "reference" sites refuse to reference them appropriately. Sonic Underground and The Adventures of Sonic need some TLC, Sonic: the Animated Series needs more recognition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.85.210.203 (talk) 13:10, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is coming on Disney XD

[edit]

Sonic Underground comes to Disney XD on June 9th i,think

Correction by editor (ERROR)

[edit]

Sonia the hegehog is no played by Jaeel White, he is played by normal and musics by Louise Vallance. Sonia is a woman NO MALE

Manic the Hedgehog is no played by Jaeel White AGAIN, he is played by normal and musics by Tyley Ross. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arthur Garbuio (talk • contribs) 22:27, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give any reference for that? As far as I know, and all sourced say the same, White voice all three of the main characters, despite one of them being female. He is a professional voice actor, he can do a female voice. Gial Ackbar (talk) 09:53, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
yeah having a guy voicing a female character is weird, but i just checked the credits in the show itself, and hes credited as all 3 2804:14C:65D0:8274:859D:9C1E:2F57:2DF6 (talk) 00:32, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reception section

[edit]

It seens like the Reception section is more of a list of negitive reviews than a summary of both negative and positive reviews. Shouldn't we include both, as per Wikipedia's neutral point lf view policy? --Proud User (talk) 14:00, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you find positive reviews the meets the notability requirements, you may add them. Gial Ackbar (talk) 15:51, 5 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hoax

[edit]

I wasn't sure how to report this, but someone who uses an IP adress repeatedly created hoaxes about when the series aired and who created it. As this article grows, I had to revert all of his/her edits by hand.--Proud User (talk) 14:14, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Part of your revert was definitely wrong, especially in the categories. The Series did air in the 1990s. Gial Ackbar (talk) 14:35, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why I find info on fan activity appropriate for this article

[edit]
  1. The top paragraph cited an independent 3rd party source which the the Verifiability guideline defenetly recommends.
  2. The bottom paragraph cites the website itself, which is also okay according to the Verifiability guideline only if you are talking about the website itself (in this case I was).

"Notability" is a policy that applies to articles themselves, not facts in the articles.--Proud User (talk) 11:40, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proud User Thank you for opening the discussion. A poor choice of wording on my part, as it's difficult to avoid using "notable" and "noteworthy" interchangeably, what with them being so closely related. That said, all content needs to be attributable to reliable published sources with reputations for fact-checking and clear editorial oversight. The blogs and forums you've cited do not qualify. In terms of content, neither the TV nor film communities indicate in their MOSes an interest in fan responses or reactions, what with "fans" always liking the thing they're "fans" of. An exception is that film articles sometimes contain CinemaScore audience ratings, but CinemaScore is considered a reliable source that tracks such things academically, thus the "reliable" switch is tripped, and the content can be considered for inclusion. Another exception might be if fans of Star Wars hated the upcoming film. We don't care about forum posts and snipes from pissy Star Wars fan blogs, we care only if the media has picked up on the rage, which trips that switch again and makes the content notable...er, noteworthy. Similarly, I don't see how the establishment of fan websites, which are inevitable for just about any series these days, is noteworthy. I also don't understand why we're focusing on these websites in particular as opposed to any other fan website created for Sonic. That said, I will not take action on the content in the article so long as you float a query at WikiProject Television and get some input on inclusion. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:38, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Sonic Underground. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 23:22, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Sonic Underground. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:46, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Sonic Underground. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:57, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Episode List Order

[edit]

Hey, There seems to be a lot of inconsistencies with the episode list. For starters, the there "origin story" episodes are 26, 28, and 30, respectively. I wasn't alive when the show aired, but I feel like there is no way these episodes are in the correct order. Somebody should look into the correct ordering of the episodes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattchelldavis (talk • contribs) 02:44, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the episodes aired out of order, and this article is making the mistake of listing them by airdate, rather than official order. Bluest Bird (talk) 08:57, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think I'm going to change the episode list to go by production code, which is the actual order. Anyone opposed? --Bluest Bird (talk) 19:00, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sonic_Underground&oldid=1255175130"