Talk:Armus

Armus History
You know, I disagree with the author's interruption on Armus' history. I kind of think that he spawn a race of demons who "grew" a second skin and left him. BigGator5
 * Armus displays Q like powers, is it possible that he himself is a by product of the Q's evolution. The Q most likely limited his powers and left him immortal to punish him for his wickedness. Armus stated himself he was left behind by a race of titans whom cast off their evil?. The Q never display evil intentions only Playful, Curious, and sometimes even Helpful to an extent. It is more than likely Armus was stranded there by the Q to Punish Him.
 * There is no information to support this. Cannon or otherwise. (Vince 21:30, 2 March 2008 (UTC))
 * I always thought the titans in question were the Vulcans -- weren't they said to have cast their emotions onto the rock or something?
 * I just watched, and there is no reference to the backstory given on this page. All that is given of Armus' history is that some long-past civilization created him as the concentration of all the evil in themselves, then left the planet, leaving him alone. There is no reference to Armus having destroyed his makers. 67.188.212.34 00:53, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Nor, to be clear, is there any reference to Armus' being directly responsible for his makers' voluntary departure, or for the condition that the Enterprise crew finds Vagra II in. 67.188.212.34 00:55, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * You are right. I am in fact in the process of rewriting this page to remove the innacurate speculation, add details, and add background information on the armus-costume. --Pseudohuman 04:56, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Done. :) --Pseudohuman 06:33, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I remember seeing a documentary that said the black stuff Armus is made of was Petroleum (crude oil) not black printer ink. And that Jonathan Frakes did in fact immerse himself in it, over his head. And an elevator pushed him up when Armus expelled him. Wish I could remember the name of it. Would you submerge yourself in crude oil? LeVar Burton told Jonathan Frakes he would never ever do it. 66.189.37.204 13:45, March 28, 2010 (UTC)

Confused
I just watched Yesterday's Enterprise. What I find confusing is that this page says that Armus was probably never encountered due to the Federation Klingon war, but remember- that was only a temporary alternate timeline. As soon as Lieutenant Yar went back in time with the Enterprise C that timeline would have ceased to exist and the war never happened. Thus, they probably would have encountered Armus and she would have been killed. Which means that she couldn't have gone back with the E-C when it appeared from the past, Predestination Paradox.

Also, couldn't the Photon Torpedo have killed Armus. It was meant just to destroy the shuttle, but a PT contains a kilogram of anti-matter. It would have made an explosion much bigger than Hiroshima or Nagasaki, we could even see the explosion from Orbit! 66.189.37.204 17:45, April 5, 2010 (UTC)
 * Closed timelines are simply referred to as alternate timelines in MA. Photon torpedoes are variable yield weapons. Presumably the torpedo was set to such a level that it did not annihilate Armus. Why would have they quarantined the planet if the torp had disintigrated Armus. Special effects in Star Trek are frequently faulty, and it is considered nitpicking to point out such things. --Pseudohuman 23:35, April 5, 2010 (UTC)

Well, not always. For example, remember in the DS9 The Die is Cast, we are told that something like 40% of the crust was destroyed on the opening volley, when the computer simulation said it would take an hour? They can't both be right, and since we didn't see the underlying mantle (and the computer simulation can't be that far off.) We should conclude it wasn't destroyed that quickly. 66.189.37.204 14:47, April 7, 2010 (UTC)

They don't really know, even if it was a low yield torpedo, he could have been in the shuttle when it hit, trying to make it fly again. 66.189.37.204 14:49, April 7, 2010 (UTC)


 * I would assume since that since Armus absorbed the energy when they shot the phasers at him that it would have a similer effect with the torpeo, it might of destroyed the shuttle but any of the blast that went his way would have been absorbed.

I think the point of Quarantining the planet was simply that the Enterprise crew did not have enough data on what effect the photon torpedo would have on Armus. They might not even had known if Armus was anywhere near the shuttle at the time of its destruction. Armus, to my knowledge does not appear anywhere else in Star Trek, canon or otherwise. We simply do not know his fate. Period. Its shame. I'd had like to see something more developed with this extremely interesting being. 65.92.111.53 00:11, March 6, 2011 (UTC)

Removed
So far, speculation:
 * The entity might have been named for TNG writer Burton Armus. Tom 18:30, June 6, 2011 (UTC)

"Unknown race"
Armus refers to the race that created him as:
 * A race of titans. So they thought. Together, they perfected a method of bringing to the surface all that was evil and negative within them.

An anon added in a link to "titan" on the race this morning -- is this something really suitable, especially as Armus used the word in something of a sarcastic sense, or should we create a page for the "Armus titans"? -- sulfur 12:36, September 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * We have no valid name - and no content besides the fact that they somehow created Armus. I don't think that's enough for a separate article. -- Cid Highwind 12:42, September 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Agreed. The name is not capitalized in the script, so there's an absence of a proper name. Titans are also apparently mentioned in (or at least in that episode's script) in an extremely different context (or so it seems). --Defiant 13:42, September 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * I have to say that this wasn't necessarily a bad addition, though. Even if just used descriptively, the term "titan" was used to describe that species. -- Cid Highwind 15:09, September 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * I suspect I've been thinking along similar lines, Cid. Maybe we could have a page about titans (for the references in and ), moving the current article in that namespace to Titan (moon)(?) --Defiant 15:23, September 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * That's not what I had in mind. Such page would probably just contain a dictionary-style definition of the word "titan", which is not what we want to have here. What I had in mind was to discuss whether that sort of mentioning a term on a disambiguation page perhaps should be allowed, so that people searching for the term ("titan") are lead to the page where its use is explained (Armus). This is an open question - there are pros and cons about allowing it, and at the moment I'm not sure which one outweighs the other. :) -- Cid Highwind 16:02, September 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, just forget my suggestion, then, as you seem dead-set against giving it any sort of approval. Even if you don't approve of the idea, you could still have acknowledged/welcomed the fact that I contributed by making a suggestion. The fact that you didn't is typical of the attitude adopted by MA's admins nowadays, if you ask me! --Defiant 16:34, September 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not seeing where Cid said he was "dead-set against" any ideas of yours- He said that your idea was not what he was thinking of, and correctly pointed out that we are not a dictionary. There was no attitude or insult towards you at all.--31dot 16:43, September 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * I didn't mean to imply that there was an attitude "against" me, per se. But one can have all sorts of "attitude," such as a pleasant one. I just meant it would have been nice to hear some slightly more positive feedback from Cid. It was a nitpick, that's all. However, I think we should all be endeavoring to include something sort of "nice to say" in each post we make. I, for one, appreciated Cid's insightful response; I tend to agree that my suggestion may have the danger of crossing the line of being too much like a dictionary definition, but I wasn't really thinking about that, so I highly value the input you just gave, Cid. :) --Defiant 16:51, September 25, 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd like to clarify here that I didn't take any of this post personally (though others seem to be interpreting the opposite somewhat, ignoring the "assume good faith" guideline). I have been assuming good faith, myself, and never interpreted Cid's response to be anything other than on-topic and well-meant (I can hardly believe my intent here has been questioned, but these things happen). --Defiant 17:51, September 25, 2011 (UTC)


 * Back to the topic, the disambig link was readded by the same anon today. Like Cid, I'm not entirely sure if it is a good or bad idea.--31dot 10:58, September 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for returning this to the topic, 31dot (apologies for drifting off of it). Personally, I agree with the anon(s) that its use on the disambig is a good idea. --Defiant 11:15, September 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * I just have to wonder what kind of precedent it sets(or if there is precedent on this).--31dot 11:20, September 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * We do have (and I created, it seems ;) ) Hot dog on the Frank disambiguation page, although in that case it is an alternate name and not descriptive as this case is. Just a thought.--31dot 17:56, September 26, 2011 (UTC)
 * "Hot dog"? Food for thought, so it seems! ;) Great find, 31dot. I also believe we should avoid this if it's an "opening a can of worms" situation. --Defiant 18:34, September 26, 2011 (UTC)

Selevian?
Possibility; Could the beautiful race that Armus spoke of be the Selelvians (from the Star Trek TNG novels)? We know that they are considered one of the most beautiful races and they have telepathic abilities of a sort, and Armus has some sort of telepathic skills himself. Just a possibility, this Rot disease the Selelvians are troubled by may indeed be the result of getting rid of Armus. Maybe reuniting with Armus would be the unknown cure? (For more info on this, read the TNG novel Strike Zone). This is just a thought. Strangeseraph 00:53, March 24, 2012 (UTC)


 * While an interesting idea, that sort of speculation is not permitted in articles. --31dot 01:14, March 24, 2012 (UTC)