Talk:Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 video game)

Platforms

Shouldn't the only platforms cited in the infobox be the Genesis and arcade like in Super Mario Bros.? Redjedi23 (talk) 21:06, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Hatnote

@Sergecross73: I have restored the previous hatnote linking only to Sonic the Hedgehog (8-bit video game) and not the greater Sonic the Hedgehog dab page, as you were previously reverted at least twice on this by myself today and by Loytra in July. The only part of the current article title that is ambiguous is that there is another Sonic game that was released in 1991 (the Master System game). Your argument that the article title could spark confusion with the 2006 game would made sense if the title was "Sonic the Hedgehog (video game)," but I fail to understand it as is. Why would a reader search "Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 video game)", or select it from the drop-down search menu, and expect the '06 game? Chase (talk | contributions) 14:01, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

I've reverted in the past because there hasn't been any consensus to change it. You are the one who has failed to follow WP:BRD. I'm not guilty of anything besides disagreeing with you. I think it's important to mention when two very separate games have the exact same name as each other across many years. If there's a consensus against that here, then we'll change it. It's not that serious. Let's see what others say. Sergecross73 msg me 17:39, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

I think the hatnote should only list the 8-bit game because that's the only realistic confusion that could arise from the title. Nobody is going to confuse the Sonic 1/Sonic '06 articles because they're properly disambiguated. This and the 8-bit game are an unusual case where they can't really be disambiguated by platform (the 8-bit game came out on two platforms, and people are going to argue over whether we should use "Sega Genesis" or "Mega Drive" in the title here) and this is clearly the primary topic for 1991 Sonic games, so the hatnote is the best way to handle it. JOEBRO⁶⁴ 18:29, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

I think Joe's logic is sound — the article titles (1991 and 2006) provide the disambiguation. Popcornfud (talk) 19:17, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Sales Data

https://www.segasammy.co.jp/cms/wp-content/uploads/pdf/en/ir/ir_2023_web_all_e.pdf

Page 18, says Sonic 1 sold 4 million? Maybe the 15 million is combining all Sonic MD SKUs then? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.187.151 (talk) 04:21, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 4 April 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Lightoil (talk) 20:34, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

---

• Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 video game) → Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 16-bit video game)
• Sonic the Hedgehog (8-bit video game) → Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 8-bit video game)

– As both of these games were released the same year, it would make sense if they were properly split per WP:NCVGDAB. Being how there was disagreement to move these articles to specific gaming consoles, 16-bit and 8-bit are a fairer way to disambiguate these articles. JE98 (talk) 22:22, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose - combining both year and bits as disambiguation concurrently is not the standard in the subject area. Not a great option per WP:PRECISION either. Sergecross73 msg me 00:16, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
• Move the first to Sonic the Hedgehog (16-bit video game) and Keep the second one as it is. The disambiguation situation here has no precedent elsewhere that I can see, but the WP:PDAB of the first entry versus the second does not meet the general standards for partial disambiguation so we have to give both titles that cannot apply to other video games and this does that and nothing else. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:48, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Support this alternate proposal. Sonic the Hedgehog (1991 video game) should be retargeted to Sonic the Hedgehog#Video games, incomplete disambiguation. 162 etc. (talk) 01:58, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Just an FYI - the "16 bit" disambiguation has been rejected in the past for not being a widely understood term outside of the video game industry. It's not really used outside of 20-40 year old enthusiasts. I oppose 16-bit as well. Sergecross73 msg me 12:06, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose. Although I'd previously said I'd support "16-bit video game", this was before WP:PDAB became a prominent thing, and this page is already listed as a case of partial disambiguation. The page view ratio is 6:1, which is more than some other PDAB-ed pages. O.N.R. ^(talk) 11:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

  FYI a page being listed there means nothing other than that someone has noticed the PDAB existed. It's not an endorsement of the current status. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:01, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

• Move the first, keep the second per Pppery. 6:1 is not enough for a PDAB. If there are a few PDAB ratios that low, it is because there are other complications that confound the title selection or simply a symptom of the randomness of Wikipedia, not because there is a generally accepted ratio that low. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 15:00, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

  • Oppose per WP:PDAB, the view ratio is 6:1.

  SuperMarioRPGfan (talk) 09:37, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:SLOP, WP:AINT, and WP:STICK. Why the hell do we keep having this same discussion over and over again? The consensus for the past few years has been abundantly clear that the way we have it set up is fine and every proposed "solution" makes things worse. If I'm being honest, I'm starting to find these repeated move requests more disruptive than anything else. JOEBRO⁶⁴ 12:43, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

  I see only two previous RMs here, and neither of them proposed the same thing this one is proposing. The two articles have been on Wikipedia for more than 20 years. You may not like discussing these titles, but if others see a problem they are free to bring it up. Years have gone by since the last RM, which considered a different proposal, and consensus can change. I suggest to go see Talk:Bangalore, which has had about 15 so far and will surely have more in the future. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 15:40, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

  There's also been a lot of similar ones at the series and Sonic 2 article, included 1 similar one that was just rejected there. He's probably referring to those too. You're right that people are free to propose these sorts of things, but I also sympathize with Joe too - we both maintain a lot of Sonic and Sega articles, and it is tiring to see these same sorts of flawed proposals arise. Sergecross73 msg me 16:26, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

  One person's perception that a pattern of similar "flawed proposals" has been showing up for a group of articles is another person's perception that some specialist corner of Wikipedia may have drifted away from the broader project consensus. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:43, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

  After a look at the Sonic 2 discussion, it was a somewhat different perceived issue – a regular WP:PRIMARYTOPIC question rather than a WP:INCDAB / WP:PDAB one. I suppose that's not so different from some people's perspective, but it is for others. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:20, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose - What’s the problem here? There’s hardly any confusion - most people looking for the video game coming from 1991 are looking here because this was the true original. On the second, 8-bit is not a disambiguation I favor but I accept it as not having a viable alternative, and I reject the notion of using more disambiguators in a article title than absolutely necessary. Calling the original the “16-bit” as well, while technically true, is also pretty unnecessary as there’s not really equal footing here - it would be a different story if the Master System and Genesis versions carried equal weight, but they don’t, by a long shot. Red Phoenix ^talk 16:45, 6 April 2024 (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.

Release date

It seems the release date of June 23 may be wrong, though I don't think there's anything we can do about it on Wikipedia right now: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:5xjxj3nn5qtj6ajeyypogfk2/post/3lcwv27mqbk27 Popcornfud (talk) 23:34, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

An interesting read, but "Whatever the case, both articles mention the May date only in passing and should probably be taken with a grain of salt" is probably my stance on it too. Sergecross73 msg me 00:58, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

It was most likely just sold early in certain stores/regions. It's been 33 years and I don't recall this ever really being up for debate. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 16:02, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, ultimately, I think breaking street dates just wasn't as big of a deal back then. There was no digital distribution for leaks, no social media to create a big buzz/controversy, no friend lists to show someone was online playing it early, etc. It would just be some person playing a game early in their room, with no one really knowing outside of some buddies or something.

It does seem like its come up before with some old Sonic/Sega/Nintendo type game, where some editor notices some archaic, archived message board conversation where someone is talking about a game days/weeks before the release date. And it's...mildly interesting, but nothing to change the official release date over, in my opinion. Sergecross73 msg me 16:58, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Yep, naturally we'd need good juicy sources to update the article with anything different. But I see this info as useful context to keep in mind, and it might mean that eventually more concrete detail emerges that we do end up being able to use. Popcornfud (talk) 17:01, 11 December 2024 (UTC)