Talk:Ramjet (Animated)

Rimmer theme captions

Does anyone have any idea what a good quote for this page would be, to keep the Rimmer theme?KrytenKoro 09:54, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's not Rimmerific, but I was thinking it would be good to use some play on the "no clone army...definitely no clone army...absolutely no clone army in this show" line from BotCon. After all, what better sums up a clone of Starscream that always lies? (and yes, I know it was sarcasm in the first place, thenkyew - that doesn't make it thematically inappropriate) Buttbutt 04:19, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

That would be awesome. Could you upload a picture for that?KrytenKoro 01:42, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

All the Starscream clones' main pictures (plus a relevant picture on the Starscream (Animated) page) are Rimmer-captioned. Therefore, this one should be too. - SanityOrMadness talk page 16:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Colour Scheme Thoughts

Could it be possible that this Screamer is a nod to the Shattered Glass Starscream? Granted, the colours are slightly different; but when watching the episode that was the first thing that popped to this user's mind. Lunarius 07:42, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Lack of real visual similarity say no. —Interrobang 07:49, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Hrm, alright. Thanks :D Lunarius 07:54, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

No Clone Army/Judas-Jonathan

Amusing as it has been to see these captions ping-pong for the last week or so, I grow weary of it. I take it there's some merit to either caption, so I'm polling for consensus; the loser gets to be the caption of the inevitable toy recolor or subsequent fiction re-appearance.I vote for "No Clone Army." -Derik 01:58, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a good compromise. I also vote "no clone army" as well. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SFH (talk • contribs).

I have no idea what that Judas-Jonathan one is about. All I know is it sucks, and the "No clone army" thing is incredibly funny and totally works with the overall tone of Liar Starscream's page. So yeah. To hell with the Judas thing. --Detour 02:04, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I think it's a Red Dwarf reference, but that's just been the impression I picked up, it could be wrong. -Derik 02:06, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Never heard of it, and whatever it is, it's not as clever or appropriate as "no clone army." --Thylacine 2000 02:07, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Google, people, sheesh! It's a Red Dwarf quote, apparently part of a long rant describing how slimey a particular character is. While I appreciate the obliquity of the quote's appropriateness, I think the "no clone army" one wins for sheer comprehensibility. That said, I think it'd be much more fitting on the main image for Starscream clone. -- Repowers 02:13, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Repowers speaks the truth. The 'Judas-Jonathan' quote comes from a speech by Lister on Rimmer's character. I think the Rimmer captions suit the Starscream clones, because RImmer himself exhibited those same characteristics - cowardice, megalomania, lying and bootlicking. And the quote for the Female Starscream comes from a Red Dwarf ep which featured a female Rimmer. I think the Rimmer captions should stay. The 'no clone army' works much better for the Starscream clone article.

Besides, just because you don't get a caption doesn't mean you have to remove it. I don't get the 'goth talk' bit from Blackarachnia's article, but am I complaining? Bring back the Rimmer captions! It's the highlight of my week to see them there. Bobpiecheese 02:23, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the speaking-truth-by-blatantly-lying "No clone army" (which is apparently a quote from the Botcon 2008 panels) certainly fits the liar better- and while I can see why it'd make sense on the Starscream Clone article- I think it's just about perfect here. I prefer that quote (I might prefer the RD one if I'd seen RD... but I haven't...) and I think its connection to TF gives it an edge. -Derik 02:47, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Let it be known that I support discarding "Rimmer", whatever the hell it is, and keeping the "clone-army" quote. Galvanisation 10:05, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Shhh... nerds are supposed to be ashamed of not having seen Red Dwarf or Blakes 7. It's like not having seen Babylon 5! Do not advertise your nerdy deficiencies! -Derik 10:44, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

You forgot failing to read/listen to that utterly remarkable book, the Hitchhikers' Guide to the Galaxy :) - SanityOrMadness talk page 21:15, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for that explanation; I was originally against the Rimmer ref, but that was before I knew that it was a running gag throughout the clone articles. I think it's kind of amazing that the single rant (plus a female-Rimmer line) can apply so aptly, and it fits with our spirit of multi-article jokes, so I vote for that.... as long as all the main-pic captions are Rimmer. Lose one, and the whole gag falls apart, as far as I'm concerned. - Jackpot 15:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

As might be expected since I'm one of the ones who reverted, I'm wih Bobpiecheese. Keep the Rimmer theme going - the "Clone Army" one should go on the main Clones page with the picture of the hundreds of clones. - Reboot 16:35, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

While I generally approve of having Rimmer captions, for this particular character I think "No clone army" is the ideal quote. It does screw up the theme, but them's the breaks. -- Greenygal 13:49, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Fairly obviously, keep the Rimmer theme going. - SanityOrMadness talk page 21:15, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I LIKE Red Dwarf, but I vote against it in the Liar's case. The "no clone army" is way, way, way, way, WAY more fitting. --M Sipher 21:32, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

How about a compromise: we keep the 'no clone army' for the main image, but the next image that's added to the article should have a Rimmer-related caption. How about that?

I believe that's exactly what we're weighing our votes for. Liar is sure to either reappear or get a toy eventually. -Derik 12:07, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity, is the second caption in the article also a Rimmer quote? --Professor Icepick 15:13, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

No, it's a Monty Python quote (actually, the wording there is slightly different - but the Pythons have rerecorded most of their popular sketches at least once, so the wording in the quote's probably been used at some point). - SanityOrMadness talk page 17:18, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for the clarification. I thought it seemed like it came out of some British comedy. --Professor Icepick 17:21, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

"Fiction Area"

Maybe you should change the "fiction" header to read "fact" instead. After all, we all know what the opposite of fiction is! 67.160.126.166 04:19, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

And I'm certainly not suggesting we change the Trivia section to Vital Information as well. Felancer Prime 11:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I feel like there's a point at which the joke annihilates the usefulness of the article. This one's gimmick happens to straightforward, so it's not very hard to parse... but it's balancing right on the edge of being in need of the seldom used de-snarking template. I don't think you can burden it with any more snark without rendering it incoherent. -Derik 13:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I happen to agree with this Derik fellow. (is Derik a real word?) We need to keep the titles of sections as they normally would be, and just have the text written in lie-format. And to keep it all understandable, let's stop putting our comments here in lie-form. I realize I did this before, but it might get kinda tricky to understand when we're lying and when we're not. Not Steve ^{complain here}_{The Big Book} 19:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

"Animated Cartoon"

Could we change 'Animated cartoon' to 'not-Animated movie'?

In theory, yes, we could, but we won't be doing that. --M Sipher 02:36, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Why do these pages keep getting hammered by edits? Everything there was to be said about the clones was said in the first day or so. Is the finale still premiering some places? And why this one in particular singled out for attention? :~( -Derik 02:39, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Because it's the most boring character and gimmick on the entire wiki.KrytenKoro 02:44, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Because dogpiling a joke into a fine powder is easier than actually CONTRIBUTING. This is one of the reasons I like the humor here. It's a nice measuring stick to see who's going to be worth a fuck to us... plus helps prove why there won't be much competition once we move. --M Sipher 02:47, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

I didn't say it was a good idea to do it - just why people are doing it.KrytenKoro 05:08, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Ramjet

The new interview with Wyatt basically says the Liar is known as Ramjet, but I'm not sure if what the status of those image captions were - I mean, were those written by the interviewer, does Wyatt approve of them, whatever? In any case, would that be acceptable basis to move the page to Ramjet (Animated) (along with everything else so far, like the conehead, etc.), or do we still have to wait until Wyatt or Hasbro explicitly say the Liar is Ramjet?KrytenKoro 22:59, 14 May 2009 (EDT)

Those captions seem to have been written by the interviewer. --ItsWalky 23:04, 14 May 2009 (EDT)

So, his name [i]is[/i] Ramjet?

The interviewer is the guy in no way affiliated with Hasbro or the Cartoon Network in any way. Information he provides personally is in no way official. - Cattleprod 23:00, 18 May 2009 (EDT)

With the addition of his conehead it might be safe to give him a Ramjet {{noname-unconfirmed}}. - Starfield 17:21, 30 May 2009 (EDT)

That doesn't work when there is an official name, and that is "Liar Starscream". —Interrobang 17:40, 30 May 2009 (EDT)

According to Jim Sorenson, Ramjet is going to be the Liar's official name in the Almanac.

Of course, it's not like it was our decision. It all started when Bill and I were brainstorming with Derrick Wyatt about the almanac. I mentioned that we needed a name for her, since everyone else had names (I know that there hasn't been an official toy with the name Ramjet on it, but that'll be in the book too).

Can we move the page now? It's kind of been beaten over our heads for quite a while now, and we were completely willing to make pages for Carrera and Searchlight before getting official confirmation.KrytenKoro 17:53, 1 June 2009 (EDT)

Carrera and Searchlight had their names on their character model sheets. Ramjet's said "Liar Starscream." --ItsWalky 09:13, 16 July 2009 (EDT)

Their leaked model sheets, admittedly, but that was more a case of the sheets confirming the nicknames we'd already decided to give them. I think some of the article still have the nickname template on them. As the Almanac is not going to include season 3 stuff, I'm wondering if this isn't one of those times where we throw our hands up and say "okay, it was leaked, but we're now at the point where it doesn't matter." - Chris McFeely 09:27, 16 July 2009 (EDT)

Leaked model sheets? No. Derrick Wyatt, like, told us himself what it said on the model sheets. And by "us" I mean "Monzo." --ItsWalky 11:40, 16 July 2009 (EDT)

Oh, right! Well, I need to go around taking that template and all the inverted commas off their articles, then... - Chris McFeely 11:46, 16 July 2009 (EDT)

The Almanac, volume 1, doesn't contain S3 material, true. We're hoping to put out a volume 2, though, that covers s3 and much more. --Jimsorenson 10:13, 16 July 2009 (EDT)

Much more like a special story covering some of the loose ends or something?Dead Metal 10:39, 16 July 2009 (EDT)

I don't know if it's my place to be writing new stories like that. Much more will probably include more of a focus on the toys and perhaps the behind-the-scenes aspects. --Jimsorenson 11:19, 16 July 2009 (EDT)

Sounds interesting but I meant Eisenberg could write the story even if it'S just a short little one. It would be cool if you could include scenes that have been cut out as a bonus on a CD rom or the scrips for them as a chapter. Dead Metal 11:24, 16 July 2009 (EDT)

I don't know if this is the right forum for this discussion - maybe over on the talk page for the book itself? - but I was definitely planning to have some storyboard sequences for cut scenes in II, like the Dinobots from Megatron Rising or Wreck-Gar and the Constructicons from Endgame. --Jimsorenson 12:52, 16 July 2009 (EDT)

We can move it once the book comes out. I'm so gonna buy that book! Dead Metal 09:01, 16 July 2009 (EDT)

On Sunstorm's model sheet, he is "Sycophant Starscream", yet he is still credited on this wiki as Sunstorm. Since the Liar is the only Starscream clone not to be named on this wiki, I feel Ramjet is his appropriate name. My head hurts.. Kit 08:12, 3 August 2009 (EDT)

Yeah, but "Sycophant Starscream" has a toy that's called Sunstorm. Liar Starscream doesn't have a toy. -Mazenoise 08:22, 3 August 2009 (EDT)

Is he, like, still not Ramjet? - Starfield 22:51, 20 August 2009 (EDT)

He is now Ramjet! --ItsWalky 00:10, 21 August 2009 (EDT)

Something the show itself supports. In addition to his colour scheme, he is eventually given a cone-shaped helmet by Swindle. Ramjet's colours + cone head = might as well. ZeldaTheSwordsman 17:29, 26 August 2009 (EDT)

Disambig tag

Shouldn't here be a disambig3 tag? Or it will ruin the joke? Just ask in case I miss something. :) --TX55^TALK 08:28, 21 August 2009 (EDT)

Activator

Does anyone have a toy of this we can put up? --Thylacine 2000 16:42, 23 September 2010 (EDT)

Featured?

I'm new(ish) here and I'm not quite certain what a "featured" article is, but if it's just an article that is considered one of the wiki's finest, then I think this should surely be noted as such. I applaud all who were involved in writing it (that being said, it seems most of Screamer's clones get such articles).
- ¡Usa El Queso! 9:48 PM, 15 February 2011 A.D.

Lies

I know the article was written with purposes of being Sarcastic, but I think that anyone who has never saw the cartoon before would think of us as the liars, not the character itself

--Metroplex 15:46, 20 May 2011 (EDT)

Even without context, if someone gets through this page and they don't pick up on the joke, they're too too dumb to live. --ItsWalky 16:16, 20 May 2011 (EDT)

Even the children that the cartoon is theoretically for?24.13.125.86 19:18, 28 July 2011 (EDT)

Kids aren't dumb. The joke isn't exactly a subtle one. They'll be fine. --Detour 19:26, 28 July 2011 (EDT)

Autobot

Since this article is full of lies, don't you think we should replace the Decepticon logo at the top of the page with an Autobot logo that links to the Decepticon page?71.255.172.248 14:19, 21 April 2012 (EDT)

Well, the character has the Decepticon symbol on him anyway, so you could say it's the one thing he doesn't lie about. Or that it's only what he says that's a lie, not what he displays. Either way, it wouldn't really be that good a gag. --Flicky1991 14:56, 20 January 2013 (EST)

Removing all "no and not"

There are a lot of sentences using not such as: Ramjet can't transform, and is not redecoed to..., is not a Decepticons and many others. It can make readers confused although it's meant to be humourous. Should it be removed?

No. First, it IS funny. Second, any confusion about this reflects the English comprehension skills of the reader. --Khajidha (talk) 08:30, 4 March 2015 (EST)