Talk:List of Sonic X characters

Scarlet Garcia

Shouldn't there be a section on Scarlet Garcia.Fairfieldfencer (talk) 18:52, 12 December 2007 (UTC)Fairfieldfencer

Cosmo's link

why does cosmos link now redirect to this page? that makes no sense —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.119.244 (talk) 21:05, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Because the Cosmo page has been deleted.Fairfieldfencer (talk) 22:47, 22 December 2007 (UTC)Fairfieldfencer

Yes, and I am the culprit responsible. Gotta follow the rules man. Peace! X3. 23:12, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

that makes sense. next time inform us. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.119.244 (talk) 00:59, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I proposed it for deletion, and it was up for 5 days. (The timespan before something gets deleted with that method) Why the hell you guys didn't something about it OR complain about it until it was too late is beyond me. (Shurgs) -- ZeroGiga 23:33, 26 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.109.246.254 (talk)

Regardless of the fact we were late - would it have really hurt to wait while the entry on this page was sorted. As much as I admire your zeal, you'll notice there's now less here written on Cosmo than there is on Mr. Tanaka, and which character played the bigger part? --Danish Ranger 00:46, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Plus, added on top of that, Cosmo had a full-fledged article, not a tiny stub. Now she has a teeny paragraph that's smaller than even Bokkun's section. Plus, COSMO HAD AN ENTIRE SEASON OF THE SHOW REVOLVING AROUND HER, and her article is replaced with a tiny stub of a section. She's a major character in Sonic X and deserves her own article again. Plus, that was the quickest deletion process I ever saw. I'm not sure if 5 days is enough, as more time would've allowed the people/fans to count in their opinions instead of quickly deleting it. Thank you. 68.197.90.193 (talk) 03:05, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree Cosmo deserves her own article again.Fairfieldfencer (talk) 17:07, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Fairfieldfencer

Now that's settled - any volunteers?--Danish Ranger 19:11, 7 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danish Ranger (talk • contribs)

I have contacted ZeroGiga and he has been very helpful he showed me a place where all the old info was and here it is.Fairfieldfencer (talk) 10:29, 9 February 2008 (UTC)Fairfieldfencer

I'll do it. I'm on my way. --Luigifan (talk) 16:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I finished restoring the content of the article, but I haven't been able to restore the pictures. I'll leave that to somebody else. --Luigifan (talk) 16:49, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou very much its greatly apprecieted.Fairfieldfencer (talk) 17:06, 9 February 2008 (UTC)Fairfieldfencer

Nice work, fellas. --Danish Ranger 22:08, 9 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danish Ranger (talk • contribs)

You're welcome. --Luigifan (talk) 02:22, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Chris, Cosmo, and Metarex do not have enough nobility to stand along as articles

Chris Thorndyke does not have enough nobility to pass WP:FICTION, nor does Cosmo and Metarex. Especially Metarex, it has the least nobility of the three. Cosmo has some fancruft which the article can be trimmed. Unless the nobility can asserted, the articles will be merged. Magiciandude (talk) 13:07, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Hey hey. Are you threating to merge the articles? Using threats to make something work out is not a way to do things. Merge results are about CONSENSUS. To start things up, I agree. They don't need to be stand alone. See if anyone else agrees with you on this, okay? ZeroGiga (talk) 21:12, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Nobody's making threats. He's just saying that the articles are not notable enough individual articles. As for this merge proposal, I agree and {{support}} merger. (→Zachary) 03:19, 8 July 2008 (UTC)