Talk:Scarlett (G.I. Joe)

what was the title of the bokk scarlet is reading whilst on the treadmil?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.74.204.247 (talk) 00:19, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Canon

I don't see how the comics are any more canon than anything else. If there's anything from Hasbro stating that the comics are more canon than the cartoons, the filecards, or anything else, I'd like to see it. Until then, there's no reason to say the comics are canon.

The comic books were originally written by the same guy who wrote the filecards. As such the two are inter-linked. For example, when Storm Shadow became a Joe in the comic books this was reflected in action figure line. But when something such as Grunt being left in an alternate dimension in the cartoons happened it was ignored by the action figure line. The comics are clearly cannon (especially over the cartoons). 24.178.211.155 17:48, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

One of the ways of determining canon, in any literature, is by asking "which came first?" The comic began being published a full year before the cartoon and Larry Hama has mentioned that the "real" story is what he was lisenced to tell via Marvel comics. A couple years ago, I met one of the editors from the Marvel days who told me that Marvel was licensed first, then Sunbow. He said that the cartoon was pitched as a half hour toy commercial, whereas the comic was to be the "story." These items of data sway me towards saying the comics are canon and the cartoon, while entertaining and fun, was fodder.Medleystudios72 (talk) 02:23, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

As much as I would like to think the original cartoon's continuity takes precedence over the comics, the real canon lies with the action figures and they reflect the comic continuity-- when a character died in the comic he died in the toys and he/she was not brought back in later sets...

Snake-Eyes & Scarlett

I think we should at least tell the story of how Snake-Eyes and Scarlett fell in love in the comic book story. It's a very touching story.

• Indeed, go for it! BD2412 T 19:36, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

I just wonder what makes Herb Trimpe's story in the last paragraph noteworthy. If any, I think the lack of romantic relationship in Sigma 6 is more noteable! --SCSI Commando 04:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I agree! I'm pretty surprised somebody keeps criticizing Sunbow. --Destron Commander 04:22, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I edited a bunch, keeping in references to SE, but acknowledging the fact that different sources of canon show different pairings. Per Hasbro, they are all considered canon sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.60.214.85 (talk) 04:53, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Rank

An "E-5" is a "Sergeant", not a "Master Sergeant" which is "E-8". Which is she?

I'm afraid rank has become less of an issue as the series went further on. --Destron Commander 05:35, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

E-8 Master Sergeant, I remember correcting it in two places a few months ago, someone must have reverted. She is senior to Snake-Eyes. Nicht Nein! 06:03, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Sigmascarlett.JPG

Image:Sigmascarlett.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) 12:01, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Reloaded2.jpg

Image:Reloaded2.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) 04:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Scarletdc.jpg

Image:Scarletdc.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) 05:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Scarletgijdc.jpg

Image:Scarletgijdc.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) 05:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Lucidity, precision, and comprehensibility

Regarding Snake Eyes: "he has never met Scarlett, but he is in love with her" It is difficult to claim the accuracy of both of these statements simultaneously. Perhaps someone could rewrite and re-frame this information in a manner that is not inherently contradictory. Alternatively, perhaps someone could explain to the reader, who does not already possess in depth knowledge of the storyline and esoteric thematic development, the metaphysical justification behind such a paradox. Either course of action would be enlightening. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pseudobadger (talk • contribs) 18:57, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I took it out in my edit as it was extraneous and confusing to begin with. It is enough to say that in many sources of canon, he is in love with her. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.60.214.85 (talk) 04:57, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Siblings

So Devil's Due's "Scarlett Declassified" finally confirmed that the 3 brothers exist in the comics, making them official in both licenses. But what of Scarlett's sister, Siobhan? She showed up in the Marvel comics after the Baroness injured Scarlett. Shouldn't the sister be named among the family? Medleystudios72 (talk) 02:26, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Do you know what issue she was shown in? If you can find that, then add and cite it. Sgetz (talk) 16:43, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Relationship - This article may contain original research or unverified claims

I removed this tag because it was not posted here why it was added. If someone wants to talk about it, post here before posting the tag again. 72.237.4.150 (talk) 12:58, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I've restored it. The opening clause -- "A debate rages" -- is unsubstantiated. The entire section lacks references to the existence of any sort of "debate" (i.e. evidence any cares about plot conflicts to offer commentary on them), or that any such debate is "raging". Rinse and repeat for the rest of the section. --EEMIV (talk) 17:22, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Understood, how does it seem now? What further should be added to help make it more clear? Sgetz (talk) 16:55, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

• I would like to know why such information as this is irrelevant and not important enough to be listed here?

The MASS Device, Snake Eyes sacrifices himself to save the team and he and Scarlett touch palms while separated by a plexiglass wall, which brings Scarlett to tears. When Snake Eyes returns to headquarters alive, Scarlett throws herself into his arms.

Duke however kissed the character Selena in episode The MASS Device. Duke was also seen with Cover Girl as the two kissed in Cobra Claws Are Coming to Town.

It's just being accurate to what happen. I fail to see how just saying implied is allowed. That sounds more like the perfect excuse to never naming any episodes or writing out any scenes to prove this so-called implied thing. Also, why is the info on G.I. Joe vs. Transformers being deleted? That has a source. Alert01 (talk) 02:50, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Unsourced editing

I don't know where this implied thing comes from, but if it was then there needs to be more of a written explanation to that since one has been written out for Snake Eyes and Scarlett (The MASS Device) and another for Duke and two other women (once again The MASS Device and Cobra Claws Are Coming to Town). 75.60.208.208 (talk) 10:28, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

If an episode or episodes can be listed and a scene or scenes are written out describing this implied thing with Scarlett and Duke in the cartoon that doesn't exaggerate or speculate... then I wouldn't have a problem with it.NamelessConsular (talk) 01:51, 13 May 2010 (UTC)