Talk:Unreleased Sonic the Hedgehog games

This article is a current featured article candidate. A featured article should exemplify Wikipedia's best work, and is therefore expected to meet the criteria.
Please feel free to leave comments.
After one of the FAC coordinators promotes the article or archives the nomination, a bot will update the nomination page and article talk page. Do not manually update the {{Article history}} template when the FAC closes.

Unreleased Sonic the Hedgehog games has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: March 27, 2025. (Reviewed version).

Video games: Sega Low‑importance

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.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the Sega task force.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

GA review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Unreleased Sonic the Hedgehog games/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: TheJoebro64 (talk · contribs) 18:07, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Pokelego999 (talk · contribs) 22:44, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Saw you post this in the Discord and saw it was up for GAN. I'm a pretty decently big fan of Sonic, so this one looks fun to take on. Will take this on sometime in the next week or so. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 22:44, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Any progress on this? @Pokelego999 Tarlby ^{(t) (c)} 20:36, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TheJoebro64: Sorry for the lateness on this! Getting into the review now.

Six GA Criteria

1. Article is well-written. Very minimal mistakes if any at all.

2. No OR, all info is cited in the article.

3. Coverage is broad in depth and focus. Shows multiple aspects of the subject.

4. Article appears neutral, and does not appear to hold a significantly negative nor positive stance on the subject.

5. Article appears stable. Does not appear to have had any major vandalism occur.

6. Article uses one fair use image with proper rationale.

Lead

-"Builds of unreleased Sonic games have leaked online." Not sure how relevant this so early into the lead is given it's before any of the actual games have been discussed yet. Maybe place this at the end?

Early projects

-No issues

Sega Genesis

-No issues

Sega Saturn and Dreamcast

-No issues

Third-party

-No issues

Spotcheck

Random Source Selection: 21, 36, 46, 44, 5, 27, 59, 43, 57, 69, 38, 31, 14, 17, 70. Unable to access 36, 27, 57, 43 but I assume good faith with that source's contents. The rest of the sources check out.

Overall

No other source issues, prose is solid. Definitely one of the highest quality GANs I've read, period. I have very little more to say other than that you've done an incredible job with this. Given the only critique I have is a minor nitpick, I can trust this will be accomplished, so I'm willing to pass this as is. Fantastic work and happy editing! Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 01:52, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sonic Sports

See source - News Chatter - Top Secret. Game Players. No. 69. Imagine Publishing. March 1995. p. 30. (Sonic Sports)

An editor has added this source to the talk page in good faith. If it shouldn't be added to the article, that's fine, but that should be a discussion in itself, not something argued through edit summaries. This is basic conduct, we need to do better. Sergecross73 msg me 12:35, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just don't see why you reverted the removal of a refidea if another editor reviewed the suggested reference, did additional research to see if there was anything else on it, and determined that it wasn't going to be anything particularly useful. Trust me, I looked through RetroCDN, Internet Archive, Sega Retro to see if I could find anything else on Sonic Sports and came up dry. I think we should only be including games here if there's no reason to doubt they existed, and I definitely feel like there's reason to doubt Sonic Sports existed given there's nothing in the way of corroborating coverage. I just felt my explanation for removing the reference was adequate enough. JOE BRO ⁶⁴ 00:27, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure you're following me here. I'm not arguing for inclusion, I'm arguing against its complete erasure from the talk page. If you're opposed to inclusion, that's all the more reason it should be documented on the talk page through talk page discussion. Sergecross73 msg me 00:32, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]