Talk:Spyro

message: I just got the page started with what I remember from the games. Expand the info on the games and include a list of characters.- B-101 12:47, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Started

message: I made a revert to this page, since the anon seemed to remove a lot of info and ruin the formatting.  I encourage him to add to the article instead of course.  —siroχo
:Hi there. I hope I did an adaquate job adding more info to the article. I have no info on the GBA games (never played them before), and will eventually add info on the GC/PS2 game (I own the GC version). I hope I didn't make anyone feel bad by out-shining them. I'm a Spyro fanatic. I've beaten the games many times, gotten every little secret, and often dream about the games. Maybe it's just me. o_0 --SilverFyre (e-mail silverdragon706@yahoo.com)
:Don't forget to inlcude a character list. I'll get one started- B-101 15:21, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I just semi-wikified the article, rephrased some sections substantially and removed some subjective comments. I think the entire writing is too focused on superfluous plot details, considering Spyro is after all a pretty popular and influencial series it deserves better coverage. I'm keeping it on watch but leaving it as is and on cleanup for now. --Phils 21:44, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Reverted

message: Would a list of the eggs in Spyro Three be a welcome addition or an unwelcome annoyance? Would it be suitable as a separate article? I'm ready to add it if it would be desirable. Mikereichold 19:43, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That kind of information might be more suitable for Wikibooks than Wikipedia. Stratadrake 05:20, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

text: That would be a good idea. I personaly wouldn't have a problem with that. --Sango4ever 22:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

text: What is a wikibook anyway? If anyone likes, they can make a page of The List of Eggs in Spyro 3 then link it to the Spyro 3 page. User:Crasnex 23 December 2007  —Preceding comment was added at 06:29, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: List of Eggs

message: The The Legend of Spyro: A New Beginning section needs to be made more encyclopedaic. A quote from the publisher's website is an easy start, but we need more info than just that -- including citations. Stratadrake 05:32, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikispam?

message: I really don't think each character in the game needs their own pages. At the very least, they should be merged into one page for heroes and one for villians. Most of the pages have one or two sentences at most. --Awiseman 20:55, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say we need to expand the pages instead of merge them all. The sub-bosses, of course, I think deserve to all be merged under their main villain master page, as subsections. But as for the main characters of the game, like Hunter, Elora, Ember, Flame, and especially Spyro himself, need to be kept separate and then expand. Personally, I've tried to set up the pags so that others could come by and help me by adding more information. I don't have all the time in the world to write just about Spyro characters. Tom Temprotran 19:23, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe so, but I really don't think the minor characters deserve their own pages. Maybe do it like the Simpsons, where the main characters have their own, but the minor ones are on a "minor characters" pages. --Awiseman 19:32, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree with both of your suggestions. Major main characters would have their own pages, and maybe with subsections, like "Ripto's Rage" to show their personalities in each of the seperate games. You guys pretty much took the words out fo my mouth. 
Say, do we have the right pictures? And appropriate ones? Ones with the actual polygon selves and then maybe a picture of them drawn? Do you guys think we should ahve a "Protagonists" and "Antagonists" page? Yes, I added those subsections to get everything more organized, but it seems it just made the article more listy... any thoughts?Abby724 00:42, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

text: If they're minor characters, I'd say just have one minor characters page divided into Protagonists and Antagonists. --Awiseman 15:24, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  Most of Spyro's antagonists were nothing more than level bosses; no overall signficance to the game's plot, or the series as a whole.  I've tagged a few of the articles with  to help. --Stratadrake 06:13, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Combine character pages

message: Every so often my mind goes to features that were in the first Spyro that I liked that were removed in the later series. In the first you could have much the same experience of going through the level by the fact that the killed-again creatures gave up a silver gem in the same way that they gave up the original gem. Collecting this gems also provided an extra man feature. Thus you could earn extra men by doing things that were skill improving. It also occaisionally coughed up little 1-up statues, artwork missing in later games. The new games use a kill the dragonfly fodder and one up flies extra man method that I don't like as much. On the plus side later games used Spyro's head as the 1-up head for current lives. Also, the original game allowed Spyro to roll using L1 and R1 that made him more manuverable and made Spyro more lifelike. User:Hackwrench 22:39, 31 May 2006
:I agree, they should have kept those features. ANd maybe, once we have seperate game pages, we might add that to the "Trivia" category. Abby724 22:44, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of features

message: Well, someone here is sort of "unwikifying" it, as in messing up the categories, page format, and also, someone has been putting their own grammatical errors and childish things in it. If anyone finds the person who keeps on doing this, someone give 'em a good old lecture, okay? They've been adding info about upcoming games without citations, and putting POVs on here. Abby724 22:44, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Someone is messing up the article

message: Merge the characters and provide an overview of them here. Split the game titles to individual articles. I.e. actually make this page about the series as a whole. I think even separate summaries for each title are unnecessary - they can be introduced inline into a summary of the series. After all, a clear list can also be provided in a series box (and if minor characters are merged, the current series box can be cleaned up). zoney  ♣ talk 10:25, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, that's the idea (at least in part) for this article's cleanup.  Been doing some of that already.  --Stratadrake 16:46, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Change content

message: Quick question.  What exactly is a "Riptoc" and how verifiable/notable is the term?  I've yet to see this term actually used in a Spyro game (though I haven't touched Spyro Orange or Shadow Legacy), and a quick Google test resulted in about 900 items (by comparison, Rhynoc = 9,000 and Gnorc = 15,000), the top results of which were based on Wikipedia.
Maybe I have a hyperactive fancruft sensor, but... I have to challenge it.  Ripto didn't have any minions in Ripto's Rage! besides Crush and Gulp (all other enemies were level-specific), and he definitely used Rhynocs in Attack of the Rhynocs.  (I don't recall the Enter the Dragonfly or Season of Flame enemies too well at the moment....)
Info? --Stratadrake 07:26, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Riptocs were the creatures used by Ripto in Enter the Dragonfly. An example of the name being used is for the first dragonfly entry in Thieves Den which is "Wizard Riptocs". Dark52 22:17, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Riptocs were a species of dinosaur cretures that served under Ripto, pretty much, they are his footsoldiers when he wasn't using the Rhynocs. The Riptocs only appeared in three games, Enter the Dragonfly and in the two Crash+Spyro games.Unknown Dragon 06:15, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Riptoc is one of the one-hit enimies from the Spyro games. I think that was the unofficial name for most enimies in RR (there were Earthshapers in Fracture Hills and Magma Cone,; Breezebuilders were in Zypher for a counter-attack, Land Blubbers were invading Breeze Harbour). It was official in SO:TCC, where the first 'cutscene' (and by that I mean poor-drawn moving pics) showed Neo Cortex talking to Ripto about how he disguesed the quote "Riptocs" to look like Crash in Dragon Castles, and like Spyro in Crash's first level. And they were a low-level trading card in the game also, along with Rhynocs and Gnorcs. -Mace  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.27.231.237 (talk) 20:52, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: "Riptoc"?

message: I heard that the GBA game was called Spyro: Season of Fire. 67.188.172.165 19:54, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No. It's Flame. The sequel to Season of Ice. --Sango4ever 23:01, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Why don't the Gameboy games have articles of their own, they ARE notable enough. Sonicfan122 (talk) 23:19, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Season of Flame

message: I have asked my favourite Spyro guide writer if I can use his guides for articles. If he says yes, some of you may be happy. If no, then just no. Don't guarentee he will say yes, this may be risky. --Rossage Sausage 21:35, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, actually not. He said no. --Rossage Sausage 09:18, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Guides coming... or not

message: Sorry if this seems prudish, but the following paragraph, taken from the introduction, appears badly phrased and informal to me:
:"It was making excellent progress with positive reviews until Insomniac Games stopped making anymore Spyro games after Year of the Dragon and started creating the Ratchet & Clank series. Spyro could not make much success without Insomniac Games."
I propose that it is rewritten in a more formal style. My suggestion would be something like:
:"The series made excellent progress, garnering positive reviews and mainstream popularity. However, following the departure of developer Insomniac Games from the franchise (after the third instalment, Spyro 3: Year of the Dragon), critical and popular opinions on the series began to deteriorate."
I would also add that there should probably be a source for mentioning the 'positive reviews', and a small section at the end about Vivendi's mostly negatively received takes on the series. Any opinions? Dragonfly888 19:48, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I agree, but I don't think some new Spyro fanboys can handle it. User:Crasnex 23 December 2007  —Preceding comment was added at 06:36, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite of introduction?

message: In the introduction, there is a link to a Spyro the Dragon television series. Also, part of the page is used to list episodes of this series. After checking on the Internet Movie Database for this series, I found nothing on it and have come to a conclusion that it does not exist. I advise that everything related to this non-existing series be deleted at once. Michael Mad 19:19, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then you should have tagged it as a .  This is all work done by one user, clearly a Spyro fanatic.  I've listed the corresponding article for AFD.  --Stratadrake 17:39, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't think there is a TV series. --Sango4ever 23:03, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Nope, never heard of one. User:Crasnex 23 December 2007  —Preceding comment was added at 06:35, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

text: If there was a T.V. series, I would have heard about it. I've been a Spyro fan since I was 10. I actually started playing when I was 7, but I got scared when a Stone Hill Ram made me lose a hit. And my dad never told me the controller would vibrate if that happend. But who cares about a series? The Legend of Spyro 3D will be out by Christmas!!! YAY!!! :D  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.27.231.237 (talk) 20:57, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Television series

message: :Image:Spyro DS.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:58, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Spyro DS.jpg

message: (Time for my daily rant.) This needs to be cleaned up. Most of them are a short plot synopsis, with "It's up to Spyro and his friends to _____." Well, that's what I think. ~Crowstar~crow calls 22:10, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ahem

message: I saw that someone was puzzled over a link to Uncharted: Drake's Fortune in the main article. Since there's no way I could start a talk page with an unanimous account, I'll just say that it was there due to relationships between Naughty Dog (Uncharted's developer) and Insomniac. Though now that we think of it, neither Crash (outside the Fusion mention), Jak, Resistance or Ratchet & Clank barely got a mention either.
I don't know if this will be worth the debate, but we could do with clarifying what kind of "see also" links at the bottom of the page would work out for the article, with reasonings added when on provision. Freqrexy 15:29, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: That link to Uncharted

message: Can this be cited please? The way I remember it, Insomniac had split with Universal who took the rights to Spyro along with them, they did not sell it on.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.219.254.158 (talk) 15:12, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed this entry until this can be properly cited as its quite a major issue to get wrong. RadRick (talk) 07:21, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I sent an e-mail to insomniac a long time ago (post-split) regarding something about Spyro, and they did state in their response: Actually, Insomniac Games didn't sell the license.  When we separated from Universal, they retained the license. - so that pretty much proves that they did not sell the licence. HarukoBass (talk) 15:15, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: "...Insomniac which sold the concept of Spyro to other game developers"

message: :Image:SpyrotheDragon.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 05:47, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:SpyrotheDragon.jpg

message: Has someone made an article for the upcoming CG movie? According to this film sales site, the title of the movie is called The Legend of Spyro. Of course, this could be merely a working title, but some (confirmed) information has already begun to leak in. Xlittlecloudx (talk) 06:01, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: TLoS Movie

message: "The main planet that the Realms are set on is Earth, in a supposedly undiscovered part." Okay what? This screams for a citation. It NEEDS one! Could someone turn something up on this? Wise dude321 (talk) 01:27, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Seriously?

message: After some cleanup I am ready to suggest the removal of the cleanup tag. If it is not agreed upon, I move that we compile a to-do list. Wise dude321 (talk) 01:43, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The Health and Magic Crystals first appeared in A New Beginning, not in Dawn of the Dragon, as it says in the article.  75.157.110.77 (talk) 09:26, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup

message: Will there be a new Spyro game in the original series coming this year, apart from the film in the Legend of Spyro series? BulsaraAndDeacon (talk) 02:12, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Spyro 2009

message: What happened to the character articles, at least keep Spyro! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.25.130.155 (talk) 10:04, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Why is Wikipedia merging every article they see?

message: Someone needs to change an act of vandalism back. I was looking at this article, I wanted to know about the film. So I went to the film section--
--and saw the words "Tis a sham!" in place of whatever was there first.
I don't know what was, but someone please change it back to what it originally was. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.94.90.185 (talk) 00:30, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed.--Tsb505 (talk) 00:48, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: Does anyone know if any collections have been sold combining any of the original 10 Spyro (not newest 3 'Legend of' ones)? I've never run into any of the original ones as most game stores don't carry PS1 games any more. Sometimes old games get sold in anthologies and it could be interesting to list existing ones here. Tyciol (talk) 02:48, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Collections

message: I've read the article, but I haven't seen any mention of the movie (or any link to an article for the movie). Why? Was the movie cancelled? 92.50.121.46 (talk) 20:30, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Upcoming Movie

message: Someone should update this section with information on the new Spyro game Activision has leaked out. It is called "Spyro's Kingdom".  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.225.35.194 (talk) 00:24, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The only confirmation is leaks, leaks, and more leaks. Leaks are not reliable sources. I just did a quick search, and no good sources came up. Without them, that is original research, and it can't be added into the article. Blake (Talk·Edits) 01:13, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Spyro Game 

message: User:173.162.247.129 has been repeatedly putting false information on the cancelled Spyro Movie, despite being warned, thinking it's confirmed and repeatedly add false information back in (even though the source doesn't mention any Legend of Spyro movie, but possibilities of a Skylanders TV series and movie. -- Aura24 (talk) 23:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Persistent Legend of Spyro Vandal 

message: Did Activision really sell the rights to Sony? I don't think this is right. Can someone find a source, maybe?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.190.133.97 (talk) 06:24, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyone still watching this page and want to weigh in on this? I keep reverting the edits to the publisher dates whenever I see them, but it would be nice to know why this is being done and what reason they have for doing it. Trolling attempts, maybe? Sfstormy (talk) 01:06, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Publishers: Sony Computer Entertainment America (2014 - present)" 

message: This needs to be on the page somewhere, seirra and activision own the rights  on it , and its a remaking of the broken " official website" thats posted on here now.  it at least needs to be an external site.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Quinten Armijo (talk • contribs) 04:43, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Why would Activision use a free forum hosting service to host their Spyro forum (which is actually located at http://tlos.openu2.com/ once you get past the iframe)? GSK ● ✉ ✓ 19:47, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

text: Activision is well-funded. They are not going to use a free forum host as their official messaging board. I think you need to understand how copyrights work on Wikipedia. Claiming to be part of Activision and speaking on their behalf is not going to fly here. See WP:COPYVIO. GSK ● ✉ ✓ 20:02, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

text: Tell you what, feel free to add it back in, but only if there's a reliable source confirming Activision is behind it. If you need to brush up on what a reliable source is, see WP:RS. GSK ● ✉ ✓ 20:08, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

text: After spending time for whatever reason, I (and probably others) would say this would be the official forum: http://www.insomniacgames.com/community/forumdisplay.php?17-Spyro-the-Dragon-Series&s=62f1319183d17d94bde9e2f52b4f45f6 GSK ● ✉ ✓ 20:11, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

text: As this dispute appears to have been ongoing for several months (possibly a year or more), it would certainly be beneficial to get outside input on the appropriateness of the link. Please see WP:Dispute resolution for options on developing a consensus. For issues specific to an external link, a discussion could also be started at WP:External links/Noticeboard to discuss the disputed link. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 00:17, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: Reverting the removal of the link dozens of times hardly qualifies as "neutral". §FreeRangeFrogcroak 01:07, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: Correction, you added it back over 20 times today. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 01:22, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: You realize that all your edits are logged, right? §FreeRangeFrogcroak 01:23, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: What we need are reasons for why this external link is within Wikipedia guidelines, and opinions from neutral parties. Please make your case in the section I linked above (and Barek linked below). Sfstormy (talk) 01:51, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: You are not fooling anyone. Sfstormy (talk) 04:49, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

text: Thank you for all your help. I want to apologize for the edit warring earlier as well.... Not to make excuses, but I haven't spent much time on Wikipedia before, and I didn't know it wasn't allowed (although in hindsight that should have been fairly obvious). Sfstormy (talk) 01:59, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia pages are always being edited and improved. Being up for a long time doesn't automatically give something credibility; it just means no one caught it sooner, which happens sometimes. Also, this is not entirely accurate as there has been controversy about this link on the page for at least a few months now. Sfstormy (talk) 02:11, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: Again, it's irrelevant how long the link was on the page or who was removing it. That doesn't make the link valuable for research on this topic. You've also basically just admitted that you wanted the link on Wikipedia so you could get pageviews and Facebook likes, so this seems pretty clear to me that you only want it there for advertising purposes and not for anything informational. Sfstormy (talk) 03:04, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: None of that matters at all; it seems like you're just trying to brag about your site's successs. I don't know how you're not understanding the actual point: that it doesn't relate to Wikipedia. It's related to Spyro, but it's not a source of information about Spyro. It's just a forum. Check the EL/N section - forums are not qualified as external links, period. Sfstormy (talk) 12:11, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: That's... not really how it works. Random forum users aren't reliable sources. Maybe someone else can explain this better than I can.... Sfstormy (talk) 20:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: Just read this and this. They explain the guidelines for external links and should explain why this site shouldn't be allowed. I'm getting tired of arguing about this; it should really be common sense in my opinion....  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sfstormy (talk • contribs) 20:18, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: ...Forget the word "random" then - forum users are not considered a reliable source for Wikipedia. Sfstormy (talk) 03:09, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

text: You do need to prove it if you're going to use that as your defense for relevance on Wikipedia. You can't just expect people to take your word for it. Again, forums are not listed as an exception to rule 11, regardless of the source. Since you have failed to gather consensus in favor of your link in the time that the page was locked, I have removed the link. You will be warned if you add it again and reported if you continue to do so. Sfstormy (talk) 00:01, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

text: Anyone can issue warnings. Anyone can report. You are still not providing proof of notability. A neutral user has, in fact, requested that the link be removed, here. Sfstormy (talk) 04:10, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

text: It quite clearly says "Please remove the link." Please read it again. Wikipedia pages have no need for a "Spyro-related sites" section. The so-called "neutral user" was you. Sfstormy (talk) 04:18, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

text: Even if that somehow wasn't you, that user is not neutral. Check the contributions - all of them were adding the link back in. Clearly not neutral. 
This is not a vote. Two other people besides me are removing your edits. You have not gained consensus. Sfstormy (talk) 04:36, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  SpyroDragon.com 

message: I've protected the article for 2 days. This is so you can both/all continue to work on achieving consensus without the temptation of edit warring over whatever it is that you disagree about. The worst thing you can do is to go quiet here, and start edit warring again when the protection expires. For the record, I have no interest in the topic, I just want to ensure that we do things according to our policies, guidelines, and common sense.  —SMALLJIM  00:02, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: As this dispute appears to have been ongoing for several months (possibly a year or more), it would certainly be beneficial to get outside input on the appropriateness of the link. Please see WP:Dispute resolution for options on developing a consensus. For issues specific to an external link, a discussion could also be started at WP:External links/Noticeboard to discuss the disputed link. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 00:17, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: Reverting the removal of the link dozens of times hardly qualifies as "neutral". §FreeRangeFrogcroak 01:07, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: Correction, you added it back over 20 times today. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 01:22, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: You realize that all your edits are logged, right? §FreeRangeFrogcroak 01:23, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: What we need are reasons for why this external link is within Wikipedia guidelines, and opinions from neutral parties. Please make your case in the section I linked above (and Barek linked below). Sfstormy (talk) 01:51, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: You are not fooling anyone. Sfstormy (talk) 04:49, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Page protected, please continue discussion here

message: See WP:External links/Noticeboard#Dispute on Spyro (series) external link for the discussion started by Sfstormy, which they referenced above. I have also notified a relevant WikiProject of the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 01:21, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for all your help. I want to apologize for the edit warring earlier as well.... Not to make excuses, but I haven't spent much time on Wikipedia before, and I didn't know it wasn't allowed (although in hindsight that should have been fairly obvious). Sfstormy (talk) 01:59, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia pages are always being edited and improved. Being up for a long time doesn't automatically give something credibility; it just means no one caught it sooner, which happens sometimes. Also, this is not entirely accurate as there has been controversy about this link on the page for at least a few months now. Sfstormy (talk) 02:11, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: Again, it's irrelevant how long the link was on the page or who was removing it. That doesn't make the link valuable for research on this topic. You've also basically just admitted that you wanted the link on Wikipedia so you could get pageviews and Facebook likes, so this seems pretty clear to me that you only want it there for advertising purposes and not for anything informational. Sfstormy (talk) 03:04, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: None of that matters at all; it seems like you're just trying to brag about your site's successs. I don't know how you're not understanding the actual point: that it doesn't relate to Wikipedia. It's related to Spyro, but it's not a source of information about Spyro. It's just a forum. Check the EL/N section - forums are not qualified as external links, period. Sfstormy (talk) 12:11, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: That's... not really how it works. Random forum users aren't reliable sources. Maybe someone else can explain this better than I can.... Sfstormy (talk) 20:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: Just read this and this. They explain the guidelines for external links and should explain why this site shouldn't be allowed. I'm getting tired of arguing about this; it should really be common sense in my opinion....  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sfstormy (talk • contribs) 20:18, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

text: ...Forget the word "random" then - forum users are not considered a reliable source for Wikipedia. Sfstormy (talk) 03:09, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

text: You do need to prove it if you're going to use that as your defense for relevance on Wikipedia. You can't just expect people to take your word for it. Again, forums are not listed as an exception to rule 11, regardless of the source. Since you have failed to gather consensus in favor of your link in the time that the page was locked, I have removed the link. You will be warned if you add it again and reported if you continue to do so. Sfstormy (talk) 00:01, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

text: Anyone can issue warnings. Anyone can report. You are still not providing proof of notability. A neutral user has, in fact, requested that the link be removed, here. Sfstormy (talk) 04:10, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

text: It quite clearly says "Please remove the link." Please read it again. Wikipedia pages have no need for a "Spyro-related sites" section. The so-called "neutral user" was you. Sfstormy (talk) 04:18, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

text: Even if that somehow wasn't you, that user is not neutral. Check the contributions - all of them were adding the link back in. Clearly not neutral. 
This is not a vote. Two other people besides me are removing your edits. You have not gained consensus. Sfstormy (talk) 04:36, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  EL/N discussion 

message: Hey guys (if anyone ever checks this page...), can we talk about why people are adding "Legend of Spyro and" before "Skylanders" in the film section? If you are someone who has been doing this, can you provide a citation that proves Activision has interest in a Legend of Spyro movie? I have been removing it because I've heard nothing about this at all, and it seems like either wishful thinking or attempted trolling, especially when accompanied with no source. I believe it was also marked with "citation needed" before, but someone removed the tag and reverted it back. Sfstormy (talk) 17:06, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The IP user who keeps adding this false detail is notorious for changing the Movie Date pages with false information on the cancelled Legend of Spyro movie being "confirmed", until the articles were locked. He's going to keep doing this until an admin intervenes. -- Aura24 (talk) 06:14, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Legend of Spyro and Skylanders Movie" 

message: I think that List of Spyro characters should be split up and then merged to Spyro (series) as well as The Legend of Spyro. The list does not have any real world information, and there are only three sources. Also, someone said that it may not meet WP:GNG. DJ Autagirl (talk) 17:04, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: I just went on the Spyro series page to see all the changes, but you listed TLOS series as a spin-off along with Skylanders, but it is a reboot, not a spin-off. Skylanders is a Spin-off, but not TLOS. So I think it would be necessary remake this, to make TLOS as a reboot and Skylanders as a Spin-off
However, I just now made some alterations to the spyro page that I hope everyone will find agreeable.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.154.67.7 (talk) 18:49, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  TLOS is not a spin-off 

message: There is NO DOUBT that Spyro is coming to a remaster.
https://twitter.com/SpyroTheDragon/status/981578215029264384
Everybody chant his name and try to summon ActiVision! /s
---
seriously though, i'm super excited. hoping it's as good as the crash trilogy
 CrashRocks1419 (talk) 19:02, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  IT'S HAPPENING 

message: it just leaked CrashRocks1419 (talk) 11:52, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  yep 

message: Someone should edit all the spin-offs games in the timeline, I mean all Skylanders and those almost unknown minor Spyro games, also we need clear official statements about what is a spin-off and what is a reboot. 
--Metbert (talk) 19:39, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The Legend of Spyro trilogy and Skylanders: Spyro's Adventure are both reboots. In the case of Skylanders, they pivoted away from that idea by the time the sequel came out and it has become a franchise in its own right. Essentially, it is the only official Spyro game in the series. I updated the page with the needed information as well as sources. Paul Reiche's original interviews are included, as well as the complete 180 Alex Ness did the following year. ConspiracyStuff (talk) 14:58, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spin-offs\reboot 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Spyro the Dragon (video game) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. Andrewa (talk) 17:07, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress