Talk:Sister Sonic

Title
Same thing as this one.  Salvidrim!   03:29, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Pay attention
"Platform(s) Sega CD" "Distribution Cartridge" Oho I see what you did there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.113.189 (talk) 14:03, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I've removed that error...I think that's what you're getting at here...? Sergecross73   msg me   19:09, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Merge into Popful Mail
This article seems pretty bare. Is this all the info out there on this game? Sounds like it wasn't much more than a sprite swap of Popful Mail, akin to SMB2 and Doki Doki Panic, which share a page. Maybe it's better to merge into Popful Mail. TarkusAB talk 20:49, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose - I felt like it was an WP:UNDUE issue when I created it to put at PM, and felt a separate article was appropriate considering it's virtually entire dev info about Sister Sonic, and not redundant gameplay regurgitation like most similar splits of alternate versions of games articles. Sergecross73   msg me  21:15, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I think the article can be worked into PM/Development. I don't think it is too undue considering it is the history behind Popful Mail's only English release. But you bring valid concerns. I am going to ping WP:VG for more opinions. TarkusAB talk 21:52, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Weak support. I was actually pondering the possibilities of bringing this up to GA-status but I looked and the sourcing's limited. There's virtually no online sources I know of, and there are only a few print ones as well. JOE  BRO  64  21:23, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Indeed, similar to SegaSonic, it was possible to get out of stub status, but not a whole lot more. Sergecross73   msg me  21:41, 31 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I suggest doing the content merge first (if the info should be in the article anyway) and then we can discuss whether to redirect (not watching, please ping ) czar  23:50, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * OK I have performed the content merge. It's all in the first paragraph at Popful_Mail. What does everyone think? I also have some development info for PM in a book I can add to make the development less lopsided if that's a concern. -- TarkusAB talk 20:00, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's an improvement from the stand-alone article, but if there ends up being consensus for merging, at least this faithfully covers it. As Czar mentions below, perhaps if some old sources are dug up, or if a website does some sort of big blow-out, expose on it, it could be expanded and split back out in the future someday. Sergecross73   msg me  20:15, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * In that case, a "redirect with possibilities" sounds good to me. JOE  BRO  64  20:30, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree that if we get a new trove of information one day, I'm all for re-instating the page. I'll leave the request open for a couple more days to give a chance for other folks to respond, then I'll redirect seeing as we have a 3-1 vote in favor of merging. TarkusAB talk 23:38, 2 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Support. If someone were to find enough sources to expand this into a full-blown article, there wouldn't be much of a contest, but in this case, all useful material pertaining to this canceled release has been faithfully covered in its parent article. czar  20:09, 2 November 2017 (UTC)