Template talk:Crash series

Um... Question. Since when were Spyro characters now just sub-characters of Crash Bandicoot? It was a ONE-TIME CROSSOVER. Tom Temprotran 02:21, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Characters?
This last has obviously changed to include things other than characters, so I'm going to change the title of the template to Crash Bandicoot characters, items and places. Sam 21:27, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Most of these should be merged. There's no need to have indiviudal articles for every minor character. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 21:29, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Spyro
I think Spyro should be included in the "Good" section, as he's appeared as an ally in a number of Crash games. Just Spyro himself, mind. Thoughts? (Person 1)

By that logic we should add all the other Spyro characters as well. He ISN'T a Crash character, period.(Klaus Kratchet)

No we shouldn't, because they've either never featured in Crash, or only in the one-time crossover. Spyro's been in a good three Crash games now, so he very much is a character. (Person 1)

We should list the cast of Phantasy Star Online as Sonic characters then since they made many cameos together if you believe that. (Klaus Krachet)

I don't know anything about that, but I do know that the Spyro character does exist in the Crash universe, and appears fairly often, so he should be added to the template.

He is NOT a Crash character though.

He obviously exists in the Crash world, he's appeared in several games. He may not be a Crash character in origin, but I think he should have a place on the template, since he appears in so many games.

But he is NOT a Crash Bandicoot character. Besides, why should we listen to you, Mr Speculator? Seeing as you think he was brainwashed in Nitro Kart, and now you've caused the thread to be blocked and the lies left there?

Can we please have this discussion without all the straw men? I think since he appears in several Crash games, he should appear in the template, even in the neutral section. He exists in the Crash universe, he is a crash character too.

He is a SPYRO character.

He's also a Crash character. He can be both.

Technically, he can't. We've had this discussion before many a time, and all previous comments had been rejected. I'm sorry, but it's unlikely to work.

Why can't he be? Obviously, he's a Spyro character fist and foremost, but if he exists in Crash's universe, and makes several appearances, why can't he also be a Crash character?


 * Because he ISN'T. He's just a CAMEO. That's like stating that the MegaMan characters in the series before Battle Network deserve to be characters because of the many cameos they have, but they are NOT Battle Network characters. (Klaus Kratchet)


 * Can we please have this discussion without using the Straw Man fallacy? Spyro is a character in the Crash series. The characters in the Crash universe are aware of him. He exists. He is very much a Crash character.


 * But he is a SPYRO character. First and foremost.


 * Right. But he's also a Crash character.


 * He can't be two things at once. If he started out life in the Crash series, then he would be a Crash character. As he didn't, he isn't. Regardless of how many games he's made an appearance in.


 * Of course he can be two things at once. Why can't he? Maybe if he was portrayed as a completely different character in Crash, you'd have a point, but he's not, he's the same character he is in the Spyro series.


 * Many people have tried to get Spyro in the Crash characters template. They've all been rejected. It's not going to work.


 * I don't think it's fair to reject this on the basis that's it's been rejected before.

'''*Do you count NiGHTS as a Sonic the Hedgehog character? The've made more cameos than Spyro did with Crash and nobody does that.'''

I'm not familiar with that. Spyro, on the other hand, appears in the Crash universe in a way that does not contradict the Spyro story, so it's the same character. He's even been playable in a Crash game. Therefore, he is, among other things, a Crash character.

'''*Same thing with NiGHTS and Sonic. Spyro just didn't come from the Crash Bandicoot Series so he ISN'T a Crash Bandicoot character.'''

A character doesn't have to originate in the universe to become part of the continuity. Surely Spyro deserves a place in the template. He's even been a playable character. He's a Spyro character in origin, and also a Crash character.

'''*I'll repeat this again... Same thing with NiGHTS and Sonic. Spyro just didn't come from the Crash Bandicoot Series so he ISN'T a Crash Bandicoot character.'''

How is he not? He exists in the Crash series. He's appeared numerous times. He's even been playable in the Crash series. Just because he didn't originate in the Crash universe doesn't mean he can't be a Crash character.

*So why can't NiGHTS or Billy Hatcher be a Sonic character?

I didn't say anything like that. In fact, I didn't say anything about that. What place does it have in this discussion anyway? This is about Crash and Spyro, nothing else is relevant.


 * See, you're doing it again. The connection between the two is EXACTLY the same, so therefore it would be unfair to treat Spyro as a Crash character when the other characters shown here are not treated as Sonic characters. You can be real stubborn, you know.


 * I'm not familiar with the other games, so it's not my concern whether they're treated as Sonic characters or not. Treat them as Sonic characters if you wish, I don't care. That's not what this discussion is about. Since Spyro appears in several Crash games, as the same character he's always been in Spyro games, and is even a playable character at one point, he should be in the template.


 * They're the same thing. If they are not, Spyro isn't. End of story.


 * Then treat them as if they are, I don't care. I don't know enough about those games to make a judgment on whether it's the same thing or not. Your argument is ridiculous. This discussion is about Spyro in the Crash series, which is a unique and individual case. Nothing else is relevant.


 * You have PROOF that it is NOT a unique and individual case, and if they don't, Spyro doesn't. You're, once again, trying to prove that your "opinions" are correct. Spyro is a character from another series, that is a fact. He has appeared in Crash games, that is also a fact. Saying he is a Crash character is an opinion, which has largely been outweighed. It's like you saying that the "Official Statement" for Crash Bandicoot did not exist, that is your opinion (and wrong at that).


 * And you're not trying to prove your opinions are correct? Like I've said before, stop dragging old arguments into every discussion, it's getting tiring. As for the ACTUAL discussion, I have no idea whether this other case is exactly similar to Spyro, but even if it is, 100% exactly the same situation, which I doubt it is, that just means it's a flaw that needs to be corrected, and I'd argue for it to be changed too. Even if Spyro isn't a Crash character by your standards, don't you think he deserves a place in the template due to the fact that he exists in the universe and is even playable in a Crash game?


 * Look, just because he makes cameo appearances doesn't mean he is a Crash character. He simply is an ongoing cameo as Sonic is to Billy Hatcher and NiGHTS. They have the exact same connection to Sonic as Spyro does to Crash, but they aren't listed as Sonic characters because they didn't COME FROM IT. You are forcing your opinions into people that Spyro is a Crash character without having anything that could be used as evidence. CBFan went to the original website as most of us have that indicated that the WoC continued from Warped and makes the most sense. I even pointed out that only the villains from Warped appeared in that game yet you made it a forced opinion that Koala Kong, Rilla Roo, Ripper Roo, and all the other villains having "stopped working for Cortex" with no evidence other than unprovable assumptions.


 * But Sonic, from what I've gathered, doesn't actually exist in those worlds. That's a cameo. Spyro, on the other hand does exist in the universe, his appearances don't contradict the Spyro games, but are rather a complement to it, and he's even a playable character. That is not a cameo. And if you want to discuss WoC, do it on that article's page. This is not the place for it.


 * Wrong. NiGHTS actually IS a playable character in Sonic Riders and the characters know of his existence, as is Spyro.


 * Okay. Again, I say, I haven't played the game. Maybe NIGHTS should be considered a Sonic character, I really don't care. That's not what this is about. It's about Spyro, and why he is a Crash character for all the reasons stated above. If you feel that badly about it, go change the NIGHTS thing. And like I said before, even if Spyro isn't a Crash character by your standards, surely he deserves a place in the template due to the fact that he exists in the universe, Crash has been to his universe, and Spyro is even a playable character in a Crash game?


 * But, if we were to do that, we'd be going by YOUR standards, which, just like the Official Statement thing, is ONLY your opinion. The official statement is not my opinion, it is a FACT! So is the Spyro thing. You're forcing us all to say that your opinion is correct and ONLY your opinion is correct, exactly the same thing as you did with Cortex's page, which, I may add, I am not happy about you editing it with your opinions before the matter had been discussed!. It is NOT. You're outnumbered here, and you're clearly not reading what has already been written...you're saying "That game doesn't count as I've never played it".


 * Look, maybe you should be more concerned about improving Wikipedia then winning the argument. I'm saying the game doesn't count because it has nothing to do with this. I'm not forcing anyone to say anything. This is a discussion page. Guess what we do here? If the NIGHTs thing is exactly the same, which I doubt it is, then I'd argue for that to be changed to, but to deny this change on the basis that that article hasn't been improved yet is ludicrous.

Just to let you know, you are the only person trying to win any argument as only you are arguing about it, an I am improving Wikipedia by removing your opinions. Seconly, you have MORE than enough proof that the two are the same. I don't care if Spyro has appeared in the Crash series, he is technically NOT a Crash character. Ask the other guys who have previously turned down the offer.

First of all, anything pertaining to this matter is an opinion. Secondly, I don't have prof that they are the same, because I haven't played all the Sonic games. Lastly, even if Spyro isn't a Crash character by your standards, don't you think he should be in the template simply due to the number of times he's appeared, and the fact that he's even been playable?


 * Oh? Then why don't we have Conker and Banjo listed as Donkey Kong characters seeing as though they both first appeared in a Donkey Kong game, hm? Spyro simply is NOT a Crash character, as he has his own series and only makes a few cameos. He doesn't play much of a role.


 * I don't know, I don't play Donkey Kong. This discussion is about Spyro in the Crash series, not Donkey Kong, and not Sonic. Spyro. Being a playable character, and having a game set in the Crash universe is hardly a cameo. Again, I say, even if he's not a Crash character by your standards, don't you think he should be in the template due to the sheer number of times he's appeared, and the fact that he's even been playable?


 * Golly, what series DO you play then? I'm just making a comparison and showing that there are characters like Spyro in other games but have an even bigger role than him yet aren't counted as the character. Spyro might have appeared many times in the Crash Bandicoot games, but that doesn't rid the fact that he is just a big cameo.


 * Listen Mr Editer, they are the SAME THING! If they don't get counted, Spyro doesn't get counted, and your pathetic excuse of "They're not the same because I have not played them" is just as sad as your "The official statement can't exist because I haven't seen it". Really sad.


 * For the last time, they are not the same thing. They are very, very different. Maybe in this discussion of Spyro and the Crash series, we could just discuss Spyro and the Crash series, hmm? I think that adding Spyro to the template in some form would be an improvement, and to deny it on the basis that the same improvement hasn't been made to a barely related page is ridiculous. And again I say, stopping dragging our old disagreements into this. This is not the place for it. As a side-note, "Mr. Editer"? Is that supposed to be some sort of insult? Seriously...


 * Look, this is what I understand from what you say, "Despite not actually being a Crash character and just a large cameo, I believe that he deserves to have himslef in this list because my opinion is a fact, and everybody else's opinion is an opinion." Other series don't count characters like Spyro as actual characters in their articles and I don't see anyone else complain. The reason I discuss other series is because their articles remain UNCHANGED despite some having a much larger role than Spyro has with Crash, while you tell me that we shouldn't discuss that for not having anything to do with Crash, even though I am talking about the ARTICLE ITSELF.


 * Oh, great, you've resorted to childish taunts, that gives your argument much more credibility. If you look closely, you'll notice how the only person here who said his opinion was fact was CBFan. Notice how I didn't just add this to the article, but brought it to the discussion page first? Notice how I replied to each of your messages with a counter-argument? Maybe you could do me the same basic courtesy? There are no characters exactly 100% like Spyro is in the Crash series, which is why it should be discussed on his own merits. I think this would be an improvement, and to deny it on the basis that the same improvement hasn't been made to another page is ridiculous. All that attitude does is keep Wikipedia in a state of stagnentation. As for the actual discussion, take the fact that pirahna plants are listed in the template, despite the fact that they come from another series. Why can't Spyro be listed in the same way?


 * You've been the ONLY person who has EVER insisted that his opinion is factual, as opposed to myself, who has meerly been going by the games/manuals/statements/whatever. It was your opinion that Brio created Dingodile (despite him clearly working with Cortex on day one), that Wrath Of Cortex didn't follow Warped (despite what the statement said) and that Spyro was brainwashed by N Trance (despite the lack of a helmet)...but you posted them as blatant fact. And you're doing it again here. Also, the Piranha Plants are in the template because they ARE from this series.


 * I never stated my opinion was factual. You, on the other hand, after putting forward your opinion on this matter, said "it is not my opinion, it is a FACT". And, for the last time, stop bringing old disagreements into this. If you really feel the need to argue, take it to those pages. Try clicking on the Pirahna Plants link. They're not from Crash, yet they're in the template. Why can't Spyro be?


 * Only YOU ever did that. Only YOU. Only YOU ever stated "This is my opinion, thereby, it is officially factual". If you even TRIED to look, everything I was posting WAS factual, based on research and the like. But, of course, you refused to believe that the official statement existed. And, as previously stated, the Pirahna Plants ARE from Crash, as they are SPECIFIC Pirahna Plants. Did you not read what Klaus Kratchet wrote? Of course you didn't, because you think "Only My opinions are correct". Spyro is NOT a Crash character, regardless. End. Of. Story. Stop vandalising constant pages posting your opinion as fact. Do some research for once. CBFan 09:29, 21 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I never said that. You, however, said what I quoted. Verbatim. On this page. The Pirahna Plants link goes to a Mario page, so they're obviously not Crash-created, yet they're still included. Spyro should be too. And, uh, posting on talk pages is hardly vandalism.


 * You know, you're the typical vandal...never accepts when he did wrong. You continually presented your opinion as fact. WHEN did I EVER say that MY opinion was Fact? I think you'll find that the answer is "Never". Also, The Pirahna Plants in Crash are NOT the same as the ones in Mario. Thereby, Spyro does not get included. Open your blinking eyes!
 * You said it on this page. I quoted you. Seriously, just scroll up a bit, it's right there. I'll even quote it again for you. ""it is not my opinion, it is a FACT". See? It's right there. If they're not the same, why do they link to the Mario page, then? The Pirahna Plants discussed in that article didn't originate with Crash, so you can't keep Spyro out on that merit.


 * That's because it IS a fact! The official statement is, was, and always will be, factual! Can you not get that into that head of yours? Also, as has been said NUMEROUS times now, the Pirahna plants shown in Crash are NOT the same as in Mario. They're different. As is Spyro. So shut up and take your speculative ways off Wikipedia. We're all sick of you CBFan 14:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Your opinion on this matter isn't a fact though, contrary to what you claim. If the Pirahana Plants are the same as Spyro, why are they included and he isn't? That doesn't seem right. Also, please refrain from personal attacks.
 * I noticed you changed your account AGAIN. Also, how can you NOT understand what I'm saying? The Mario Pirahna Plants are not Crash related, and thereby Spyro is not Crash related. And, with your arrogant behaviour, you're only tempting me to personally attack you.
 * Then why are they in the template and Spyro isn't? Do you understand that? You say they're not Crash-related, yet they're in the template. You say Spyro isn't Crash-related, and he isn't in the template? That doesn't seem right.
 * That's because, as has already been said, the Pirahna Plants in Mario are NOT Crash related, the Piranha Plants in Crash ARE Crash related. They're NOT the same. Does that make sense? Also, for the final time, stop changing accounts. You're wasting our time.

P.S. Could you all start signing your posts from now on? That's make this less confusing. Thank you. Cat&#39;s Tuxedo 00:28, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Y'now, for once, I agree with Mister Official Statement Guy here. Spyro was more than just a cameo in Twinsanity. He was a full-blown character in Purple, and the Crash characters actually acknowledge his existence in their universe as an important character. I say put him on the template.

Klaus Kratchet
 * But he simply ISN'T a Crash character. He is no more than just a large cameo. The reason Pirhana plants are listed in the template is because the Crash series has their own version of them and aren't the same exact ones. I KNOW he was a full-blown character in Purple, but that was just a one-time crossover, which logically, was when they acknowledged his existance as well as in his two-second appearance in Twinsanity. It was just one-crossover people, which was the only time he wasn't merely a cameo. Other series have one-time crossovers as well, for example. His inclusion as a character in Nitro Kart means nothing, for he was silent and nobody acknowledged him, making it a cameo. His appearance in Twinsanity was for only two-seconds, making that a cameo as well. If we put Spyro here, we logically should put everybody from Purple as well seeing as though that was the only time they were acknowledged for an appearance longer than two seconds. The Professor from what I know, played a large role and Ripto did as well, so they should be included if you want Spyro to be.


 * But they've only appeared once. Spyro has appeared multiple times, and has even been playable. He was acknowledged in Twinsanity, and in Purple, so it's npt just a cameo. He should be feaured in the template.

Klaus Kratchet
 * Spyro appeared in Twinsanity for TWO SECONDS. The rest appeared and had a much larger role than he did in that game in Purple, so why not put them in as well?


 * Because they've only appeared once. Spyro's appeared at least three times. He had a large role in Purple too, plus he was playable in a game, and appeared in another. The others only appeared once. If they appear again, maybe we can put them in, but for now, only Spyro has appeared enough to be notable.


 * Well then, if they don't get in, neither does Spyro. It's not fair and you know it.

Klaus Kratchet
 * Oh, so despite having a large role like Spyro, you think The Proffesor and Blink can't be put in the template because they only appeared in one game? Sounds like you are forcing your opinion


 * No, I'm putting forward my opinion. I'm not forcing anything. The reason I think the Spyro characters shouldn't be in the template is because their only appearance was in a crossover special. Spyro himself, however, has appeared in numerous Crash games, so he is a part of the Crash universe, while the other characters were simply part of the Spyro universe that happened to be there when it crossed over with the Crash universe. Spyro exists in the Crash universe outside of the whole Spyro universe, if you understand me.  Besides, leaving them out is unfair to who? The characters? They're fictional, I doubt they'd be bothered.


 * So is Spyro, but you keep insisting that it is unfair not to include him. Spyro is NOT part of the Crash universe, he is part of the SPYRO universe, and has had no major roles within the Crash games besides the crossover. Many other people have suggested this idea already, and all have been turned down. Do you really think they'll listen to someone who MUST change his account every 2 seconds?


 * I didn't say it was unfair to Spyro. I didn't say that at all. Spyro is also part of the Crash universe, as evidenced by his appearances outside of the crossover. He was playable in a game, that's pretty major.


 * It's NOT going to happen, so I suggest you give up. He is part of the SPYRO universe, and random appearances in other games mean NOTHING, as shown above.

Klaus Kratchet
 * If we got Garfield the Cat and had him make a short crossover series with Charlie Brown, along with cameos in some comics, Garfield WOULD NOT be a Charlie Brown character. Spyro didn't even HAVE a speaking role in Nitro Kart to begin with and his other non-major appearance was for two seconds.


 * If after the crossover, he kept making appearances in Charlie Brown comics, I'd consider him a part of the continuity, and thus a Charlie Brown character. Besides, that's comics, it's a different situation. Spyro was playable in a Crash game, that's hardly a cameo. His appearances in other games make him a part of the Crash continuity. The Crash characters acknowledge him, he exists in their universe. And, again, my question which you haven't answered, even if you two don't consider him a character, don't you think that he should be in the template, simply due to the fact that he appears in a number of Crash games? The Pirahna Plants are, and they link to a Mario page, not a Crash page. Why can't Spyro be featured in the same capacity?


 * We've told you numerous times, but you refused to (and I'm starting to believe you CAN'T) read the facts...they are NOT the same ruddy plant! And, for heaven's sakes, STOP TWISTING INFORMATION TO SUIT YOUR PURPOSES! The scenario KK gave you is EXACTLY the same thing as the Spyro thing...he is NOT a Crash character, he is a Spyro character. We try telling you that, you say "omg, but hes palyable in a Carsh game so he most be a carsh caracter!!!!1111!!"...SO WHAT? Did you not see the bit about Donkey Kong at the beginning of the post? Or the other bit about Sonic? You're really taking the P here.


 * Calm down, kid. As I've explained numerous times, those situations are not the same. And if they were, I'd argue for them to be changed too. As for the Pirahna Plants, why do they link to a Mario page? Because they're Mario in origin. Just like Spyro is, well, Spyro in origin. Doesn't mean he shouldn't be noted on the template. He features in a number of Crash games, therefore he's part of the Crash "universe", therefore he should be in the template. It's that simple.


 * And, as WE'VE (all three of us) have explained to you (or tried to), the situations ARE the same, you're just insisting that they aren't the same so your opinion can, once again, be portrayed as fact. And the plants in Crash are NOT Mario in origin, they're a totally different plant. Spyro IS Spyro in original, so he is NOT a Crash character. Yes, we KNOW he's been IN several Crash games, but that does NOT make him a Crash character. He is STILL a Spyro character. Will you give it up already?


 * All three of you? The only person to comment here (other then you, myself and Klaus Kratchet) agreed with me. As I've said, those situations are not the same, with the possible exception of Nights and Sonic, and if that's the case, I think that should be changed too. What's your point?If the Pirahana Plants are not taken from Mario, why does the link go to a Mario page? Obviously they're considered to be a 'cameo" or a reference to Mario, or whatever. The point is, they appear in several games, like Spyro, they're recognised as coming from another series, like Spyro, and they should be in the template, like Spyro.


 * Further proof that you ae incapable of reading. We've repeated this information numerous times...they are NOT the same flipping plant! Sheesh! You're a rock, you know that? It's impossile to get blood out of you.

The Pirahna Plants are NOT from Mario! They look nothing alike! They are not considered to be a reference to Mario in ANY way! Spyro only deserves to be in this template if he is a CRASH CHARACTER. PERIOD. If you think the situation is the same with NiGHTS and Sonic, why not go ahead and do that? Go see if anyone other than Cat's Tuxedo agrees with you. Klaus Kratchet

Then why do they link to a Mario page? Well? You've yet to answer that question. Obviously, it is considered to be the same as the one in Mario, because it links to a Mario page. If they're not the same, why did the link go to a Mario page? Why are they even called Pirahna Plants? Because they originate in Mario and they're considered to be taken from Mario (except by you two for the purposes of this debate).Spyro deserves to be in this template becaue he appears in a number of Crash games, and is therefore a character. Why is that hard to understand? He's even a playable character at one point. He doesn't ahev to originate in the series to be a character. All he has to do is appear a number of times. Being playable helps too.


 * WE DON'T BLOODY WELL KNOW WHY THEY LINK TO THE MARIO PAGE, AND IT IS ONLY CONSIDERED THAT WAY TO MARIO FANBOYS AND/OR IDIOTS, LIKE YOURSELF! SPYRO IS NOT A FLAMMING CRASH BANDICOOT CHARACTER, HE IS RATHER A CROSSOVER CAMEO...REGARDLESS!! NOW SHUT UP, AND STOP VANDALISING!!

I must further apologise for bursting out like that, but that guy's constant vandalism and incapability to accept that he is wrong is getting on my nerves. Besides, that page is currently being fixed.


 * For the record, I don't even like Mario. Also, don't edit the page to make it fit your argument. I haven't done that here. Now, as I haven't vandalised at all, under any Wiki definition, please refrain from personal attacks. How you about you actually discuss this and counter my points instead of sitting there with your fingers in your ears, repeating the same line over and over? Figuratively speaking of course. Try actually forming a counter-argument, as opposed to "he's not a Crash character, regardless!" Why is that? Because you say so? Sorry, no dice. Try again.


 * Oh, and I suppose it's OK for you to say "He IS a Crash character because I say so!"? Well, it isn't. And we've told you, many a time, WHY he is not a Crash character. But, as you say, you refuse to actually discuss this and counter our points, instead choosing to just sit there (THERE, not THEIR) with your fingers in your ears, repeating the same line over and over. Figuratively speaking, of course. Maybe, if you tried forming a counter-argument, like myself and KK have done, rather than just saying "He's a Crash character because I say so", we'd listen to you. Also, don't edit the page to make it fit for your argument, as I haven't done it there. I didn't even MAKE the page.


 * Okay, if you want to counter my message, don't just Copy-paste and edit it, because half of that makes no sense. I've given you reason after reason after reason as to why he should be considered a character, and all you've said was "he's not a crash character because he's not". You haven't given me one single, logical reason. Any points you have made I've counter, but you continue to state them anyway, as if the fact that you said them means you've won. Try actually arguing the point, instead of using my own exact words to try and debate me, because all that proves is that you've got nothing to say.


 * Well then, why don't you stop assuming I did all the things you seem obsessed in thinking I did, because I didn't. You seem obsessed in thinking that every time someone, aside you, put Spyro up in the character template, I removed it, when, if you were to check through the "History" section, this is blatantly not the case. You also seem obsessed in thinking that I have failed to explain why Spyro isn't a Crash character, but we've explained it to you numerous times...he is from a different universe. You also, for some silly reason, seem obsessed into thinking I copied and pasted your exact words, when it's obvious I didn't.


 * But he's also part of the Crash universe. Get it? Before you say, there is no reason he can't exist in both, so don't use that line. I said "copy-paste" to point out that you simply took my words and edited them to turn the argument I made against me. Which you did. Now, let me get this straight: You say the Pirahna Plants aren't from Mario (despite them being labelled as that by people who weren't me), so you change that, but when I do the same thing with Spyro, I've vandalising? If you can change that, you've got no argument against me adding Spyro.


 * Because, as we've said many times before, and you said so yourself, the Pirahna Plants in Crash are unique to that game series, but Spyro is from a different series altogether. Plain and Simple.


 * I never said that. I don't believe they are. There is still a Spyro the Dragon who appears in Crash games, so he should be on the template. If we haven't sorted this out, you shouldn't edit the page, but since you have, I'm going to do the same.


 * But you said yourself, he is part of a different universe. We have sorted it out, but you refuse to accept the facts. Thereby, what you're doing is vandalism, and is not tolerated.


 * We clearly haven't sorted it out. How about this? We've sorted out that he is a character, but you refuse to accept it. Therefore, what you're doing is vandalism.


 * No, we have accepted that he is a character, but we have also been SHOWN that he is NOT the right character, and YOU are the one refusing to accept it, making you the only vandal. Check the History before trying again.


 * No, you're the one refusing to accept it, that makes you a vandal.


 * No, you're the one refusing to accept it, making you the vandal...especially as I have actually read the history page, witnessed for myself Spyro being put there AND getting removed, AND furthermore having back up that he is not, first and foremost, a Crash character. Just accept it, and stop telling lies.


 * You edited the bit about the Pirahana Plants before we resolved it, so I'm doing the same with Spyro. If you delete him, you're just a hypocrite.


 * See? You're doing it AGAIN! You're blaming me for something I didn't do. Resorting to lies is childish, you know.


 * But you did do it. I removed it, because it's hadn't been resolved, and you put it back in. If you did that, there's no reason I can't put in Spyro.


 * OK, I have no idea what you're talking about now, so you must be lying about me.


 * If you can't even follow the debate, stay out of it. We don't need you here making personal attacks and assuming everyone is lying about you, just because you can't understand their argument.


 * But you ARE lying about me. I did not create the Pirahna Plants page, but you seem obsessed into thinking that I did. We don't need people like you who think their way is right and everyone else's is wrong. You vandalised the Wrath Of Cortex page, the Dingodile page, the Nitro Kart page, you're currently still vandalising the N Oxide page, and you're vandalising this page. You're also wasting our time.


 * No, but you did put it back in the template, after I removed it. Hey, it was Cat's Tuxedo who added Spyro in, I just put him back after YOU deleted it. I'm not vadalising anything, and I certainly don't think everyone else is wrong. Just you, on this matter.


 * You've been the only person to vandalise in these last few days. Blaming them on other people will get no one to accept you. You wonder why KK is on MY side and not YOURS? Maybe he thinks I have a point. Maybe he realises that Spyro is a character in his own universe. Vandalising and blaming them on other people is not the answer.


 * I haven't vandalised, I just did the same as you. Hey, Cat's Tuxedo agrees with me and thinks I have a point. But, hey, you'll just ignore that and claim it's only me, right? Because you don't have a leg to stand on, and "It's only you who thinks that" is the only defence you can muster. Sorry, it's not good enough.


 * Yes, but KK thinks I have a point, and judging by what's gone on in the history section, he's not the only one. But, hey, you'll just ignore that and all other warnings and blame it on me. Because you don't have a ground (let alone a leg) to stand on, and "I M WRIT AND UR RON BECUS I NO EVRTHIN!" is all you try to come up with. Sorry, it isn't good enough. And the main reason for me writing this is to get you to see how you really sound.


 * Oh, I haven't ignored it. I know KK disagrees with me too. He just hasn't said anything in a while. I didn't say I was right because I know everything. I don't recall saying that at all. In fact, I recall giving several reasons as to why I felt the way I do about this particular issue. Why, it almost seems like you're resorting to childish taunts because you don't actually have a proper argument, and it's all you can do to try and save face.


 * And it appears that you seem to be telling lies about me again. Are you actually aware that we've BOTH got ANOTHER 3RR warning? And yet, you still continue editing. That means "stop".


 * You haven't stopped, so don't be a hypocrite. I'm not telling any lies, so if you can't hold a proper conversation without resorting to ridiculous personal attacks, stay out of it.

Klaus Kratchet
 * Look, Spyro come from a different universe than Crash. He may have appeared in the same universe, but he COMES from a different one. Why don't you do as I suggested and go ahead and try to force NiGHTS as a Sonic character and see if anyone agrees?


 * It doesn't matter that he comes from a different universe. What matters is that he often appears in the Crash universe. That makes him a Crash character. The reason I don't edit Nights in Sonic is because I don't know or care enough about the matter. Why don't you stay on topic? If Spyro appears in the Crash universe, is acknowledged by the characters, and, hell, is even playable, he's a Crash character

Klaus Kratchet
 * He only appeared in the Crash universe TWICE. Though his first appearance was in Crash Nitro Kart, it was the GBA version, where he didn't affect the storyline and was completely silent. He only appeared in Twinsanity for what, two seconds? Purple was just a one-time crossover as well.


 * He appeared in Nitro Kart as a playable character. That's a big plus right there. It doesn't matter that he was silent, I can't see how that affects his status as a character at all. It also doesn't matter how long he appeared for, because he was acknowledged by the characters, and actually had a part to play. Purple was a one-time crossover, but Spyro continues to appear, which means he's not just part of the Spyro universe, but part of the Crash universe aswell. And since he's a character, he belongs in the template with the other characters.


 * People have tried to add Spyro before. It failed. As you noticed yourself, adding Spyro quickly gets people adding OTHER Spyro characters, it goes out of control, and we have a whole host of Spyro characters in the Crash Bandicoot template. It didn't work then, and it won't work now just because you want it to.


 * Only Ripto was added, if I recall, and he was easily deleted. We shouldn't leave out information from Wikipedia just because somebody might add info that doesn't belong, a situation In feel you're blowing out of proportion anyway. It's a simple matter to delete any characters that haven't appeared in Crash games. If that's your only remaining objection, then I think we can go ahead and add him, don't you? Mr. Account Swapper 18:42, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * We can't JUST do what YOU want to do. That defeats the whole purpose of Wikipedia. The fact that you kept adding Spyro long before we'd even finished the discussion (and thus getting us both banned) was completely out of order. It HAS to be a team decision, and one needs to know when to except defeat. CBFan 19:40, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Right. So since I've resolved all your points, do you agree that we can add Spyro? Mr. Account Swapper 21:31, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, for heaven's sakes. Do you know what you're saying? In English, you're saying "Alright, the argument is over because I say so, we can add Spyro to the list...because I say so!" Can't you come up with a better excuse than "Spyro should be in the template because I say so!"? Sheesh. CBFan 22:45, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * But you're not even arguing any more. You're saying we shouldn't put Spyro in just because I say so, but you're not giving any reason as to why we shouldn't put him in anymore. I'm resolved all your points, so what's your problem? You're just arguing for the sake of it now. You're barely arguing at all, in fact. Mr. Account Swapper 23:15, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, for the love of...are you incapable of understanding the English language!? OK, I'll say this again...we can NOT simply put down something that YOU (or me, for that matter) want there, it HAS to be a team decision. We have to resolve OUR differences/problems and come to an agreement. You saying "I've resolved all your points," is simply saying "NO! I WANT SPYRO TO BE UP THERE BECAUSE I MUST BE RIGHT! HU-WHA! HU-WHA!" We need, to repeat myself one more time, to work this out together without insistance as to "I am right, you are wrong", for both of us. CBFan 18:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You keep saying it can't be in there until we've agreed. Agreed on what? I've resolved all your points, and you're not even arguing them any more. You're saying we need to resolve our differences. What differences? You're not making any argument against it anymore. I've made plenty of points as to why he should be included. I've resolved all your points as to why you think he shouldn't. The only remaining point you have is that you simply don't want Spyro in the template, and I don't think I can resolve that, nor do I need to. So, unless you have any actual argument, I'm going to add Spyro in. Thank you. Mr. Account Swapper 23:39, 5 March 2007 (UTC)


 * There you go again! Saying "SPYRO MUST BE IN THERE BECAUSE I MUST BE RIGHT! HU-WHA! HU-WHA!" You're missing the point of EVERYTHING I've told you about resolving our differences, but yet you still insist on adding Spyro because you must be right. We NEED to resolve our differences and come to an agreement. You're just adding Spyro because you must be right, which is the direct impression we're getting right now. Until we can resolve our differences, and come to a sensible agreement, Spyro stays OFF the template, because he can not simply go on there because you want him to (which is the only reason, really) and that you must be right


 * You're not even making an argument anymore. Are you even reading what I say? We don't have to resolove anything because there's nothing to resolve. You're not arguing the point at all, so no, I don't have to resolve the fact that you simply don't want Sypro added in. If you have an actual objection, then I'll remove him and we can discuss it. Until then, he stays in.


 * Nope, you're right...YOU'RE trying to make the argument. Are you not reading what I am saying? We have to come to an agreement over the benefits/disadvantages of Spyro being up there, but you are, once again, going "HU-WHA!" and putting Spyro in there for no reason other than you must be right, and nobody else can be, and thus refusing to resolve any differences we (quite clearly) have by reverting what I say into what you want (as usual). Unless you actually have a good reason as to why Spyro should be included, which has NOT already been covered here (because we've answered all your questions), we NEED to discuss it here, WITHOUT you going "HU-WHA!", putting him back and thus vandalising. Until we resolve this, adding him in is vandalism and thus not on, so he STAYS out of the template until we come to an agreement.


 * Why do you keep saying "hu-wha!" Seriously, are you drunk or something? Or is that you just can't hold a proper discussion without resorting to childish taunts? I'm putting Spyro in because I've given several reasons as to why he should be in there, and you are not giving any reason as to why he shouldn't other than "Everyone has to agree!" Well, sorry to burst your bubble, but unless you have an actual reason as to why Spyro shouldn't be in here, then, no, we don't have to agree. If I said "I don't want Cortex in the template!", would you take him out because not everyone agrees on it? No, you wouldn't. When you come up with an ACTUAL reason you don't want Spyro in the template, then I'll take him out and we'll talk, but until you have an ACTUAl REASON, he stays in. Mr. Account Swapper 18:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Once again, you are going "SPYRO MUST BE IN BECAUSE I WANT HIM IN THERE AND I MUST BE RIGHT, HU-WHA!" But, then, of course, you wouldn't understand. I never drink, which you obviously have been. Yes, you CLAIM to have given several reasons as to why he should be in there...BUT, in practise, MOST of them are the same reason over and over and over again. I, and Klaus Kratchet (mostly him) have counter-acted these reasons as to why Spyro shouldn't be in the template, with multiple examples, but, as clearly shown by your above post, you ignore these posts and write "THEY DON'T COUNT BECAUSE I SAY SO! HU-WHA!" You've posted the same excuse time and time again, and, really, it is YOU who needs to come up with an ACTUAL reason as to why Spyro should be in the template. I have, quite kindly, offered to talk this over sensibly, but you just go "NO, YOU'RE STUPID, I MUST BE RIGHT, HU-WHA!" and vandalise the template. UNTIL you come up with an ACTUAL excuse AND allow us to come to a conclusion WITHOUT going "HU-WHA!" and vandalising the template, he stays out. To put him in at this stage defeats the whole point of the topic.

And, if you must know (although you won't understand), the reason I'm making you say "HU-WHA!" is an attempt to make you realise how immature you're sounding at the moment, but it's obviously not working, as you're still saying it. CBFan 18:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * No, Spyro should be in there because you haven't given a single reason as to why he shouldn't. I didn't ignore your post, in fact, I rebutted every single one (most of them didn't even make sense). Spyro should be in the template because he appears in a number of Crash games, is acknowledged by the characters, exists in the Crash universe, and has even been playable. There's my reasons. You haven't been talking it over at all. You've been saying "We need to resolve this" but you haven't tried. You haven't even discussed the matter in your last five messages. You haven't even rebutted my points, you've written nonsense, acted like I said it, and then claimed victory because of this. So if you can't handle a serious discussion without acting like a child, stay out of it. Now, until you have any real objections, Spyro stays in. And stop with this "huwha!" stuff, because you're just making yourself look stupider and stupider. Mr. Account Swapper 18:43, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, I'm sorry...I could have sworn that YOU were the only one vandalising by adding Spyro into the template when the discussion was far from over. But that's not what makes me laugh. Do you know what makes me laugh? What makes me laugh is your insistance that "You haven't been talking it over at all", when it's clearly obvious that we have done. Try reading up the rest of the page (if you can), and you'll see that all your reasons have been combated or rendered questionable. I can't believe I'm actually saying this, but I pity you. I really do. Not only have you ignored everything that has been written about Spyro not being up there, but you also then choose to go your own way and add him anyway, even when there's no reason for you to do so. If you can come up with a good reason for Spyro to be up there which has NOT, I repeat, has NOT, already been dealt with here, THEN (and only then) can we add Spyro. Otherwise, you're just vandalising.


 * Maybe you should read the page. After I dealt with all your points, you stopped even arguing them, but still insisted we have to agree. However, since you weren't making any points, there was nothing we needed to resolve, except that you simply didn't want Spyro in. Now, Klaus Kratchet is actually making points, so I'll leave Spyro out and discuss it with him. So, if you could stop with your nonsensical ranting while we do, that'd be great. 86.42.91.59 12:06, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah that's right. It just seems that you're arguing based on your (CBFan) own rules at this point. Besides, this discussion page is getting long. Cat&#39;s Tuxedo 00:00, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Now see here, Mr. "I'm always right," I have shown you other examples to prove you wrong, and you simply say "I don't want to discuss that point because I don't know anything about it and don't care, so I'm automatically correct!" as a counter-argument! Spyro only had a major role in a crossover. The other appearance was for TWO SECONDS and if Spyro only appeared in CNK as a guest character. It DOES matter that he doesn't talk because that shows how much of a "Crash Bandicoot character" he really is. Why don't you go ahead and try to get NiGHTS counted as a Sonic character as I said instead of saying "Oh, I know it wouldn't work, but I don't care about that, ha!" Klaus Kratchet


 * Whether I try and push Nights as a Sonic character on that page is unrelated to this discussion, so please drop that as an argument. Now, it doesn't matter how long his appearence was for, because he was acknowledged in it. If it was just a background appearance or something, I could see your point, but he actually had a role in the story, defeating the three doctors, and he was acknowledged by the characters. Even if he was a "guest character" in CNK, how does that make any difference? He should still be the template, simply due to the fact that he appears a number of times. Him being silent doesn't have any bearing, because if it did, Koala Kong wouldn't be in the template. It doesn't mean anything at all. And again, whether or not I make a change to an unrelated page has no bearing on this discussion. 86.42.91.59 12:06, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Which just goes to show how much you really know about Crash Bandicoot, doesn't it? As we've previously stated, Nights and Sonic are not in each other's template because they are meerly "guests", even if they are playable. Whilst Spyro HAS been in, and indeed been playable in, some Crash games, he is still meerly a guest character, and thereby should not be in the template just because someone wants him in the template. I mean, if I wanted...say...Homer Simpson in the template, you wouldn't put him there, would you? We can't, to repeat, simply do what one person wants. Also, may I say that your comment about Spyro and Koala Kong is COMPLETELY stupid because, even if being silent was a bearing, Kong would STILL be in the template because he is not silent (he roars, laughs and groans in Crash Bash), but I suppose, since you hate Crash, you wouldn't care. CBFan 15:24, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Then I think NIGHTs should be in the Sonic template. However, I'm not going to push for it, because I don't have enough information about it to do so. Spyro appears ina number of Crash games, therefore he should be in the template. It doesn't matter if he's a 'guest' character. What does Homer Simpson have to do with Crash. I don't recall him ever appearing in a game. And I hate Crash? Yeah, that's why I spend so much time working on the wiki articles. If you can't forma proper argument, at least refrain from ridiculous personal attacks. 86.42.76.107 15:33, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * You know, your vandalising, arrogance and account swapping is getting old. And a little bit boring. Why not try to formulate a proper reason as to why Spyro should be up there. CBFan 15:45, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Why don't you try reading my posts, instead of ignoring all my reasons you can't form an argument againt, and stop resorting to pathetic personal attacks? And I am not swapping accounts. 86.42.83.140 15:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes you are, you've swapped it right now. Maybe if you stuck to one account and stopped insisting on having your own way, people would listen to you. CBFan 16:03, 7 March 2007 (UTC)


 * ...that's my IP, kid, not an account. And I am not insisting on having my own way. Hence, the discussion.


 * Yes you are. You've done it constantly with Dingodile, Aku Aku, Crash Nitro Kart, Wrath Of Cortex and here. Thereby, you are vandalising, genius.


 * Yeah, I seem to recall discussing all those. In fact, aren't we discussing two of them right now? At least, I'm trying to, you're avoiding it and shooting embarrassing personal attacks every chance you get.


 * No, you're telling lies about me, and now refusing to drop it. It's over.

Klaus Kratchet
 * But you see, based on the way he appears in the game is just like the way "cameos" would appear in TV series. In the GBA, he ONLY appeared outside of the Story Mode, and was speechless. In Twinsanity, Cortex talked as if presenting a guest character (But I think HE, would like his gems back).


 * I'm growing tired of this. Let's just finish this the neutral non-fanboy way and just include Spyro in the template for god sake. I mean, this page is over 49 freaking kilobytes long. Cat&#39;s Tuxedo 18:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)


 * If you do that, you're not being neutral.


 * Holy heck. From one nerd to another This is the nerdiest discussion ever. I mean i thought people discussion the speed of the Death Star were nerds, but you rewrote the book on nerddom. Wow. Doc Strange 13:16, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


 * The argument is OVER! Why did you add to it? Seeing as you're now just trying to start arguments, you must be the nerd.


 * Hey, no it isn't, but let's finish it now. Bottom line: there is a section on Spyro's page that discusses his appearances in Crash. There should be a link to that in the template. Why? Becuase it's about Crash. Articles or sections about Crash should be linked in the template. Period.


 * If you haven't noticed, you're hopelessly behind yourself. The template now covers only the major Crash characters. Even if Spyro IS considered a Crash character (which he isn't), he does not have enough roles to fully justify being in there. Thereby, he can not, and will not, be put up there.


 * The template only covers the major Crash characters because they're the only ones with articles. Every article to do with Crash should be linked in the template.


 * How about keeping with the times? Do you not remember the time when ALL the characters had articles? Now, only the main ones do. Spyro is not going to be included because, even if he IS considered a Crash character, he is not a major character.

Deal. Now can someone delete this whole discussion? It's a waste of space. Cat&#39;s Tuxedo 14:40, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah but why not just have Crash and Spyro in the SAME universe? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.76.37.223 (talk) 17:06, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

(To 81.76.37.223) Do'nt even think about starting the argument up again! ADBandicoot 17:35, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I Googled my username for fun to see what would pop up, and this discussion was one of the search results. I skimmed through some of the messages I posted in this discussion, and I am absolutely appalled at what I wrote 14 years ago. If it helps to explain my behavior back then, I was in middle school at the time. I apologize for being such a childish jerk. Klaus Kratchet (talk) 08:16, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Piranha Plant
I don't think the Piranha Plants from Crash Bandicoot really deserve their own article, given their extremely minor status. I think we should create a 'List of enemies in the Crash Bandicoot series' and merge the Piranha Plant article (and the other enemy articles) with that list. Cat&#39;s Tuxedo 19:03, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

If you would actually click on the link it goes to the very large Mario Piranaha Plants article which has a section on the ones in Crash Bandicoot. Sam 05:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh wait somebody changed it. Well I'll change it back. Sorry. Sam 05:27, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Signing
Is it possible that anyone here could sign their posts using four tildes? Like this: ~

This is standard procedure for all talk pages, and right now it's almost impossible to follow who's saying what. Grand master  ka  21:42, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe the system should be fixed. There's no such thing has "signing". This is the internet and when you log in to the site, it knows your identity and appends it to all your comments--that's how it's supposed to work. Who ever came up with the idea of manually filling in for the computer?

Tiny Tiger
It appears as though Tiny Tiger no longer has an article. The question is... why? And furthermore, why do such characters as the Komodo Bros and the Elementals actually HAVE articles? These have not appeared in the Crash games even close to as much as Tiny did.

It's because fanboys have been keeping much of these articles in a stubby state. The articles didn't really look into the character as much as the Emperor Velo XXVII and Evil Twins do now. Thanks to my edits, those two pages quickly went from stubs to B-Class articles, and were thus saved from being merged into the list. Everyone else was too busy spectaculating on crap like "Who really invented Dingodile" or "Spyro shouldn't be in the template" like this was some kind of fansite or something. That's really sad, actually, because it's people like those that give Crash fans like me a bad name. Besides, a majority of the pages on the template would've been stubs even if I improved on them, because they barely served any purpose in the storyline. I hope I answered your question. Cat&#39;s Tuxedo 22:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Are you saying Tiny isn't a major character? He's been in over 3/4 of the Crash games, played an important role in most of these (either as a boss or as a playable character) AND he has quite a bit of history to tell as well (considering his achievement at the end of Nitro Kart, for example). I don't call that 'not major'. He needs his own article, because he is NOT 'just another Crash Bandicoot character'.

Alright, alright. I'll try and see what I can do about the Tiny article. I hope. Cat&#39;s Tuxedo 14:46, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay. I expanded the article so that it isn't a stub anymore. Looks like out Tiny problem is solved. Cat&#39;s Tuxedo 17:26, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

How many of the left over characters actually need articles?
Besides Crash and Cortex, do any of the left over characters really need articles? The ones I looked at seemed to be in only one game, minor in general, or only have small supporting roles. Nemu 12:59, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I think Coco should remain. She is kind of a primary character. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:50, 23 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Aside from Crash and Cortex, I think that Aku Aku, Uka Uka, Coco, Crunch, N Gin, Tiny, Dingodile, N Tropy, N Brio and Nina should at least still be kept in there, as they are essentially major characters. N Oxide, Velo and the Evil Twins could, I suppose, be questionable, but they do have a lot of info on them.


 * I thought the issue was that they were stubs, not that they were unimportant. Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia, there's no reason we can't have an article for every character. If the articles are well written and have plenty of information, there's no reason to delete them.
 * To have an article, a character should have many different qualities (notable in and out of series, has out of universe information, can have secondary sources, etc). The fact that they have info does not earn them an automatic spot. Most of these seem to be well referenced, but I see no reason to leave them if they're still minor. If all but the three or four main characters are merged, and it's worked on for a while, the list could possibly reach the level of quality of Characters of Final Fantasy VIII (which is most likely going to pass its FAC). Nemu 15:43, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Anyway, Crash, Coco, Cortex, Aku Aku, and Uka Uka are the only ones of those I would consider to deserve articles. - A Link to the Past (talk) 17:46, 25 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I think that a character can have his/her own article if the character has appeared in at least four of the main games (there are seven main games counting Crash Bandicoot: Mind Over Mutant). Here's a list I made up.

Elementals
What happened to the Elemental's article? I think it should have been kept.
 * The Elementals aren't major enough characters in the entire series to have their own articles. Cat&#39;s Tuxedo 01:50, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Then why did they have their own articles in the first place?

Unneeded articles
Shouldn't the Evil Twin's and Emperor Velo's articles be removed seeing as how they aren't major characters?
 * A wise man once said, "Compared to cleanliness and reliability, notability is meaningless". Cat&#39;s Tuxedo 15:47, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

No offense, but I don't know what that means. Can't yoy be more specific?

Articles
Shouldn't N. Oxide and N. Trophy have their own articles?

Not yet. N. Tropy needs to appear in one more game in the main series to have one, and Nitros Oxide needs to appear in two more (see "How many of the left over characters actually need articles?" above). Cat&#39;s Tuxedo 16:20, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Technicly, Oxide shouldn't be there anyway, as he is a non-canon character forced into a canon world CBFan 21:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)