# Talk:Crash Tag Team Racing

Seeing as no rationale has been placed for the cleanup, I thought I might explain.  Many of the links in The vehicles section are not pertaining to the game, rather, they are related to other articles, such as the album Bone Machine, So I'm pretty sure we could make a seperate article about the vehicles of Crash Tag Team Racing. I'm sure that the rest of the problems with this article are obvious.  Taylor 03:28, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Seriously needs a good cleanup now. --Thorpe | talk 19:36, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
Why?
Cleanup tag removed. I have removed all questionable links, reordered the content, and deleted redundant information. --Cornflake pirate 02:12, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Well done.  The article is great now, very easy to read through, not a noobfest per-se.  5 stars. Tayloranyone up for a challenge? come back here from this week and next week i am from aus so i hope you are to

I had added a lot more plot holes to the article that were perfectly relevant and very true. However some idiot has deleted my totally genuine information, I just hope that when I add the information back on, there will not be the same outcome.

Some idiot has really screwed this website up, a lot the decent crash information that has been added, has now been deleted and i guess im just not going to bother helping wikpedia anymore with information because it always gets deleted.

Stop removing the fact that critics stated this. Many have stated that the game is a clone of MKDD, including big-name reviewers. And you're not really one to talk, considering you are an admitted Crash Bandicoot fanboy. You're removing any hint that anyone considers it a clone of MKDD, and for the reason that you don't like it. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:23, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
I am a Crash Bandicoot FAN, not a Crash Bandicoot FANBOY. No Crash fan should EVER try to be a fanboy, and you're really being quite insultive for calling me something I'm not. You wouldn't like it if I called you a Mario fanboy, would you? - CBFan
You're trying to fight the inclusion of the comparison. - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:01, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
So were you, and you were not being neutral about it. As it currently stands, it is neutral. Even so, that does NOT make anyone a fanboy. Fan, maybe, but not fanboy.

After you had lost a fight that you had fought hard for to make it say that "others disagree" to try to limit the truthfulness of that criticism. That is how a fanboy acts, not a fan. - A Link to the Past (talk) 08:54, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
And only a fanboy would be so naive and stupid. I was neutralizing the whole topic, it was blindingly obvious I was doing so. I never said it WASN'T a clone, I said that some people thought it was a clone and some didn't. That's not picking sides. You, of course, ranted on that it WAS DEFINATELY a clone, making you more the fanboy. And besides, you're incapable of dropping arguments. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by CBFan (talk • contribs) 14:58, 9 December 2006 (UTC).

I don't think these plotholes are really true.
Crash and his friends have no apparent reason for collecting the Power Gems, let alone caring for Von Clutch's situation. 
-Besides the fact that crash is good and usually tries to help those in need, he needed to stop Cortex or he would've been able to "plant a new seed of evil"
Von Clutch is shown being able to survive for a short period of time after his Black Power Gem is stolen for the first time, but he "breaks down" immediately after he loses it the second time (when Crash knocks it out by accident) 
-Maybe the power gem recharges him, or he was already so weak that having it in for a couple of seconds had no effect and he immediately shut down.
Willie Wumpa Cheeks has absolutely no motive for stealing the Black Power Gem. 
-If you pay attention to the park drones in the game, you'll get this. They suffer horrible working conditions, and many are in need of money (crystal sellers) One could only imagine what a park mascot has to do. He probaly wanted to pay Von Clutch back for doing sorts of ridiculous things.
There is no official indication of how Chick, Stew, or Pasadena came into existence.
-They work for Von Clutch.
--This doesn't answer the question. HOW did they come to exist? Who created them? Saying 'They work for Von Clutch' does nothing to answer the question at all.
I don't understand you. Crash just came in the games, and the same is for Chick, Stew, and Pasadena. Pasadena needed to race for Von Clutch, because she obviously is some sort of friend or such of him. Chick and Stew just had to work for Von Clutch. I don't understand the question still. They came into existance by being born. I don't get it.
How can you NOT understand what I'm saying? There is no explanation of how Chick, Stew and Pasadena came into existance and your 'claims' do NOTHING to explain how they did. They only say why they are there, not how they came into existance. Also, NEVER compare Crash with those three because we DO know how he came into existance...he was an ordinary bandicoot that was evolved by Dr Cortex using an evolvo ray, and thus making the Crash we know today. Crash has a reason for being there. Pasadena, Chick and Stew do not have that. The likeliest scenario (if you ask me) is that Von Clutch created them, but that's only speculation. 
P.S. So what about the other plotholes? I think I've covered them most, except for the last one. So I don't know why we need an entire section for one plothole. Perhaps we could put one or two of them under Trivia.
Also, isn't it possible that Chick, Stew, and Pasadena were born like actual animals and worked for Von Clutch for any reason whatsoever?

That doesn't solve the reasons as to how they became Anthros. That's the mystery. CBFan 21:53, 10 January 2007 (UTC) CBFan
Since only one of these is actually a plot hole, I went ahead and deleted the section and moved the one true plot-hole to the trivia section.

A lot of the information in this article does not comply with Wikipedia's standards. Sorry for the work that was done, but expect to see information removed. Please discuss this issue here. Knuckles sonic8 23:20, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the page finally looks good, so no major edits should be made.
Kobb 23:20, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I have a few questions concerning the covers of the classical music found in this song. In the List of video games with classical music, it says that "With Cat-Like Tread" from Pirates of Penzance was included in the game. What I need to know is where it is in the game. Secondly, I'd like to know what part of Rite of Spring was used in "La Brea Car Pits" (Rite was made up of many parts). Lastly, I'm sure there's a classical piece of music played in "Once Upon a Tire" when the player is losing on the final lap (like in seventh or eigth place). Does anyone know what that is? Thank you. Cat's Tuxedo 00:20, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Look, I just want people to stop bickering about subjects - this is an encyclopedia, not a boxing rink. We really don't need it, so for your fellow Wikipedians, do stop. Coco 03:32, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Most of these arguments are pretty old. It's nothing new. Cat's Tuxedo 04:40, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I know, but every Crash and Spyro page I visit, people just FIGHT over all this Fanboy crap. But I'm glad you stopped it. Man, I remember when I was like that, don't you? Coco 03:20, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Crash Tag Team Racing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071014235043/http://media.ps2.ign.com/media/737/737026/img_2705125.html to http://media.ps2.ign.com/media/737/737026/img_2705125.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:32, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Crash Tag Team Racing/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Cat's Tuxedo (talk · contribs) 14:24, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 23:28, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Will make a start soon. Jaguar (talk) 23:28, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Lead
I view the lead a little on the short side. There should be a token mention of development, and the reception part should be towards the end of the second paragraph rather than the beginning
Body
"In the game's single-player campaign, the player controls Crash on foot in a theme park hub," - link hub world
"To recover them, Von Clutch announces a no-holds-barred race" - I'm unfamiliar with this term, perhaps no restrictions race is better?
"Crash Tag Team Racing was in development by Radical Entertainment at the time" - sounds like it was in development by them, then handed over to someone else. Try was developed
While I wish my reviews could be longer of late, there is no need. Although I find the lead rather short, it still summarises the article, given its lack of development coverage. I would recommend a mention of it regardless, and rearranging the second paragraph somewhat. In any case, it's comprehensive and well written, so it meets the GA criteria as it is.  Jaguar (talk) 21:58, 22 June 2025 (UTC)