MediaWiki - User contributions [en]

Talk:Blackarachnia (Animated)

2012-02-13T03:24:22Z

71.162.106.213: /* Elita 1 toy */

Ep 9 summary

Needs serious work

==New pics and Edits==

I'm uploaded some fine pics of the prototype, and made some minor edits... and it may look good on the page, but the edit page is a mess. Somebody, please, fix it! --[[User:Hepathos|Hepathos]] 21:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

==Caption==

In response to ItsWalky on 1/8/07, the problem with the caption is that if you don't know what "Goth Talk" is, then you have to read about it to understand the caption, and that kinda kills any momentum the joke might have going for it.
Also the fact that she doesn't really even look goth. Just spikey and purple.
: And the problem with the replacement caption is that if you don't know what "Come into my parlor etc" references, then you'd have to read about it to understand the caption! What is the difference? They are both references to things. The previous one was nice enough to provide a link, for those who don't know the reference. I don't see why that should be penalized. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 22:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
::Its all a matter of obscurity. Sometimes something that may be funny to you is not understood by the majority of viewers because of unfamiliarity of what it is a reference too.--[[User:Skyglide|Skyglide]] 23:18, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

== Added her backstory ==

So, what do you guys think?

[[User:Dynamus Prime|Dynamus Prime]] 16:24, 16 February 2008 (UTC)Dynamus Prime
: I think you probably ruined the episode for a lot of people, since it aired not a few minutes on the east coast before you threw spoilers everywhere. Please use better judgment in the future. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
::And the fact that you expect kudos for it is more than a little odd. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 19:51, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
: I think you're a butthole. Is that inappropriate flaming? If so, I redact it, and I think that that kind of behavior might be interpreted as having butthole tendencies. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 02:12, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::''"I think you're a butthole"''...yeah, that's flaming. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 21:27, 16 February 2008 (EST)

=== Beast Mode ===
I'm guessing what's needed is a cleaner shot of ''Blackarachnia''<nowiki>'</nowiki>s beast mode, since we don't know what Elita-1's alt mode was...--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 20:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
:Yeah. That's why I put a comma after Elita-1. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 20:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
::I get it now, thanks. My at-a-glance parsing needs work.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 23:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

== Spoilers ==
I question the use of bold text for "Elita-1" in the summary, considering it is the line immediately after the spoiler tag. The theory behind the tag is that it will catch a person's attention before they begin reading the following text, and that it will thus be processed first so the person can turn away if they do not wish to be spoiled.
But the bold text for that name, I think, has the same attention-capture effect as the spoiler tag. Even though it's only a name, and bolding it might fit with the style guide (hm), I think some discretion might be in order here. --[[User:Sntint|Sntint]] 04:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

== Quick Toy Question ==
I'm looking at the Hasbro stock photo and the exposed portion of her face looks rather deeply recessed compared to the rest. Is the helmet removable or did the picture get overly Photoshopped?--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] 04:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
:Scratch that, ASM pictures cleared it up.--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] 04:46, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

== Yes, She is an Homage ==

On reflection, do we really need a bit in the Trivia section about how she looks like the previous character of the same name? I mean, that's true for most of the Animated characters. Should we have a trivia point on [[Ratchet (Animated)]]'s page about how he looks like the original Ratchet? [[User:JW|JW]] 14:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
:Nah,only for characters that are a visual homage to a character they're ''not'' named after. Like Bulkhead's Hound-inspired colors.[[Special:Contributions/86.87.28.191|86.87.28.191]] 17:24, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
::Would it be worth mentioning that her robot mode design seems to be specifically inspired by the unreleased [[:Image:Blackwidowwildrider.jpg|Binaltech Blackwidow]]? That doesn't seem like it would be as obvious to the average fan as the fact that Ratchet et al are inspired by their G1 incarnations or that Waspinator is inspired by his BW incarnation. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 21:01, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
:::Not really. Every single visual cue she got from Binaltech Blackwidow had originally shown up on Transmetal 2 Blackarachnia. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 21:17, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
The original question of this section baffles me. Of course we should a note on this page that she was based on Beast Wars Blackarachnia! And yes, we damn sure should also have a note on Ani. Racthet's page that he homages G1 Ratchet. How is this even a ''question''? It doesn't matter how "obvious" this stuff seems to us, if you're a fan who's only ever watched Animated, it's not at all obvious to you which characters were based on the previous incarnations of Transformers you're not familiar with. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 22:38, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
:I have to agree with JW, for the uninitiated the idea that [[Blackarachnia (BW)|Blackarachnia]] and [[Blackarachnia (Animated)|Blackarachnia]] are different characters is not one that immediately springs to mind. Therefore a note that this BA is an homage to a previous BA is a bit like saying "she is designed to look like herself". It's a "well, duh" moment. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 10:48, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
: If we decide to note when a character resembles an earlier character of the same name, we'll have to add notes to ''hundreds'' of pages on this wiki. "Optimus Prime (Animated) looks like Optimus Prime (Movie) looks like Optimus Prime (Armada) looks like Optimus Prime (RID) looks like Optimus Prime (G1)." "Bumblebee (Animated) looks like Bumblebee (Movie) looks like Bumblebee (G1)." And so on and so on and so on. It's ''normal'' for this to happen. (Heck, I'd be ''far'' more inclined to add notes when the characters are notably ''different,'' like all the Scourges.) For people who have seen only Animated, once they click on the disambig link, it'll all be obvious. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:02, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:: So, I favor cutting the "Blackarachnia is based on the original Blackarachnia, who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise," trivia note, lest we also add "Optimus Prime is based on the original Optimus Prime, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Bumblebee is based on the original Bumblebee, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Ratchet is based on the original Ratchet, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Waspinator is based on the original Waspinator, who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise," to their pages, et cetera, ad nauseum. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:08, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: And I favor adding such notes. To me, this is a no-brainer. People who have only ever seen Animated, and no nothing at all about previous iterations of TFs, have no way of knowing if characters in the show they like were based on older versions. New fans come into Transformers all the time. This wiki should be for them too! Before I added that note, there was no link on this page to [[Blackarachnia (BW)]]. ''That's crazy.'' --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 11:56, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: Oh, and I completely disagree that the disambig link is enough. They're not really there to convey information about the character. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 11:59, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::To people who have only ever seen Animated, it would be most logical for them to think that any previous TF with the same name as an Animated TF was the SAME CHARACTER as that Animated TF. For a newbie, it's all Transformers and Optimus is Optimus is Optimus, Megatron is Megatron is Megatron, and Blackarachnia is Blackarachnia is Blackarachnia. It is logical that if there was a Transformer named X before the X you are familiar with that it is the same, and that there probably is a similarity of appearance. It is only when the canon goes explicitly against this trend that we need to call it out (for example BW Inferno is completely different from previous and subsequent Infernoes)> To me, THAT is the no brainer. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 12:04, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::: I don't understand what point you're making. The point I'm making boils down to this this: Animated Blackarachnia was based on Beast Wars Blackarachnia. This is a fundamental fact about the character, thus it should be stated in this article. The same holds true for every other article about a character who has based on an earlier charcter. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 12:11, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::I don't know how I can make it any clearer. To an outsider the two Blackarachnias would seem like the same character, and would thus need no more explicit note of the connection than does the Superman of today need a note explaining that he is based on the Superman of 1938. Same name, within the same brand is expected to be the same character. To say that a character looks like itself is rather silly. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 12:33, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::You assume outsiders even ''know'' there was another Blackarachnia before ''Animated''. The note is for those who do ''not'' know, and expands their knowledge base by explaining to them where the idea for the character they've only just discovered came from. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 13:03, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::I'm assuming that when they find out that there was a Blackarachnia before ''Animated'' that they would expect the more recent one to have been inspired by its predecessor. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 13:21, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::Incidentally, someone who comes to this wiki knowing ''only'' about Animated Blackarachnia, and enters "Blackarachnia" in the search box, is going to be sent to the disambiguation page ''before'' they come to ''this'' page. [[User:JW|JW]] 13:38, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
(Exdenting for readability.) [[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] said, above, "And I favor adding such notes [of the form ''Optimus Blackarachnia (Animated) is based on the original Blackarachnia (BW), who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise'']." KMMC, if you genuinely believe we should add such notes wiki-wide, I recommend you propose it on the Community Portal. [[User:JW|JW]] 13:31, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:I'm pretty sure most articles about homage characters ''already'' note who they're an homage to, as is just common sense. I didn't think I was proposing some change in policy or anything. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 16:03, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::It's a mistake to confuse "what makes sense to you" with "common sense". Of the six "main" Animated characters who are clearly based on G1 counterparts:
::* Optimus: His only link to Op (G1) is hidden in a discussion of his ears.
::* Bumblebee: Contains a few links to BB (G1), one of them hidden, one of them about the "Legacy of Bumblebee" 3-pack, and one of them about a toy's deco.
::* Ratchet: An incidental link about a toy's redeco.
::* Blitzwing: No link to his G1 counterpart at all.
::* Starscream: Only in the discussion of his voice.
::* Megatron: Does have a note about how he looks like Megatron (G1)'s Battlestars body, and how his cannon makes a similar noise.
::So, for six characters, none of them contain anything like "Foo (Animated) is based on the original Foo (G1), who first appeared...", one has ''no'' link to his predecessor, most have only incidental links, and only one really has a link that says, "And he's based on this guy." I welcome counterexamples. Your idea, if implemented, would require additions to scores of pages, and thus ''is'' a policy change. Please propose it on the Community Portal if you're serious about it. [[User:JW|JW]] 16:25, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: ....I certainly don't consider "homage characters should note whom they're homaging" to be "my idea." And I don't think the particular form of the notation is what's important. Counterexamples? Any and all pages where homages are already noted. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 17:23, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:::: Please point me to examples. I found none to speak of. [[User:JW|JW]] 19:11, 26 August 2010 (EDT)

==Opposite Sex==
''"Blackarachnia acts differently around robots of the 'opposite sex' depending on faction; "'' 
I point out that we have no frickin' clue how she acts around robots of the ''same'' sex, since no such meetings have been chronicled. This sentence probably needs rephrasing. [[User:JW|JW]] 14:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

==Transformation==
Do we need a mention of this in trivia? She's hardly the only spinny transformer there. We've seen BB and Prime do it a few times. Ratchet..Bulkhead..Prowl..list goes on.[[User:GWolfv2]]
:Yes, but she's the only one that we haven't seen a full transformation for, unlike all the others. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 20:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
::Yeah, so why make a huge rigmerole of it. Why not have one line. "Thus far, we have yet to see BA have anything but a spinning transformation" or such?

==non-final character model==
[[Image:AniBlackarachniaPromoModel.jpg | thumb | left | "A non-final character model for Blackarachnia was included in the initial Transformers Animated press kit from Cartoon Network. Her toy appears to follow this one more closely in relation to the spider legs positioning in robot mode than the final model." ]]

Shouldn't we note that that version of the character model WAS used in the first episode? you know, coz it was. --[[User:Skyglide|Skyglide]] 23:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
: When? I'm watching through right now on Youtube, and I've seen no occurrence of it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 00:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[[Image:Proto_ba_anim.jpg|thumb|right]]

:: Took a gander myself, and yep, there it is. Leggy-thingies behind the arms, little triangles on the collar... - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 00:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
:::Ah! I misread it as "HER first episode," so I was checking out "Along Came a Spider." That explains it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 00:19, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

{{-}}
==Elita-1 vs. Blackarachnia==
I think ''Animated'' Elita-1 deserves her own page. --[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 01:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:Uh, why? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 01:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:: Why indeed? I disagree. We give a page to each character, and she's the same as another character. She deserves a page no more than Orion Pax or the original [[Ariel]] do. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 01:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:I think that the current redirect is okay, but time will tell on the sad fate on Elita-1...-- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 01:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:::I'm obviously in the minority here, and I don't know the history behind the majority opinion. What criteria is required for a character to have their own page?--[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 01:57, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::::They need to be a distinct character. The ''Animated'' Elita-1 is the same character as the ''Animated'' Blackarachnia. They aren't two different people. They're one person who went by two different names at different points in her life, like G1 Bumblebee and G1 Goldbug. --[[User:Steve-o|Steve-o]] 02:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:Though it does get a little tricky with [[Megatron (G1)|Megatron]] and [[Galvatron (G1)|Galvatron]]...-- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 02:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::Galvatron has unique circumstances. The comic version pulled alternate Galvatrons out of everywhere and even had one or two meet Megatron, plus the fact IDW made him a distinct character. It's a complicated mess better served by two pages. (And Megatron's page is ungodly long as is already.) Elita-1 and Blackarachnia, along with most name changes, is just one straight line. She was Elita-1, but is now Blackarachnia. That's it. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 02:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Gotcha. Suggestion cheerfully withdrawn.--[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 02:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

== Hit her with a shovel joke. ==

Seriously, why are you deleting it? It's humorous enough, it fills in a picture caption, so why do you insist on not allowing it put up, the set up was already there! - Karhukjnsi
:Because it's a horrible joke? Because it was added by a non-contributor? --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:33, 6 January 2010 (EST)
:''I'' '''was''' that non-contributor. It is a humorous joke to those without an overtly snide sense of humor. "I'd hit it..." That's it? That's what we need on this site, even more references to people who love TF Hentai with a passion, adding the "with a shovel" bit at least helps balance it out to relatively socialable people. --[[User:Karhukjnsi|The Beerclaw]] 02:37, 6 January 2010 (EST)
::Obviously the actual joke flew right over your head. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:39, 6 January 2010 (EST)
::and you replace it with '''that''' crap?!, I should take up praying for you. --[[User:Karhukjnsi|The Beerclaw]] 02:40, 6 January 2010 (EST)

== Beast Wars toy reference ==

I think her faceplate is a homage to Blackarachnia's Beast Wars toy robot head.[[User:ACIDSTORM92|ACIDSTORM92]] 17:51, 30 June 2010 (EDT)
: Uh. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:35, 25 August 2010 (EDT)

== Elita 1 toy ==

Doesn't Elita-1 have a toy? I looked up Elita One on Google images and an ''Animated'' Elita-1 toy and box appear in some pictures. Is that a real toy, another japsnese bootleg, or a fan made toy?[[Special:Contributions/71.162.106.213|71.162.106.213]] 21:23, 12 February 2012 (EST)
:No, she does not have a toy. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] 21:27, 12 February 2012 (EST)
::See: [http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s28/MadKilla25/customs/elita1.jpg][[Special:Contributions/71.162.106.213|71.162.106.213]] 21:48, 12 February 2012 (EST)
:::Did you even pay attention to the URL? It's clearly put in the guy's customs subfolder. It's a custom toy. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 21:57, 12 February 2012 (EST)
::::I also saw a picture with some little girl holding it?[[Special:Contributions/71.162.106.213|71.162.106.213]] 22:01, 12 February 2012 (EST)
:::::A custom toy can still be held by a little girl. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 22:04, 12 February 2012 (EST)
::::::What is a custom toy? Something not sold in stores?[[Special:Contributions/71.162.106.213|71.162.106.213]] 22:07, 12 February 2012 (EST)
:::::::It is fan made. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 22:20, 12 February 2012 (EST)
::::::::I should have known. But I just have one more question. Aren't those types of toys listed here?[[Special:Contributions/71.162.106.213|71.162.106.213]] 22:24, 12 February 2012 (EST)

Talk:Blackarachnia (Animated)

2012-02-13T03:07:19Z

71.162.106.213: /* Elita 1 toy */

Talk:Blackarachnia (Animated)

2012-02-13T03:04:23Z

71.162.106.213: /* Elita 1 toy */

Ep 9 summary

Needs serious work

==New pics and Edits==

I'm uploaded some fine pics of the prototype, and made some minor edits... and it may look good on the page, but the edit page is a mess. Somebody, please, fix it! --[[User:Hepathos|Hepathos]] 21:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

==Caption==

In response to ItsWalky on 1/8/07, the problem with the caption is that if you don't know what "Goth Talk" is, then you have to read about it to understand the caption, and that kinda kills any momentum the joke might have going for it.
Also the fact that she doesn't really even look goth. Just spikey and purple.
: And the problem with the replacement caption is that if you don't know what "Come into my parlor etc" references, then you'd have to read about it to understand the caption! What is the difference? They are both references to things. The previous one was nice enough to provide a link, for those who don't know the reference. I don't see why that should be penalized. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 22:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
::Its all a matter of obscurity. Sometimes something that may be funny to you is not understood by the majority of viewers because of unfamiliarity of what it is a reference too.--[[User:Skyglide|Skyglide]] 23:18, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

== Added her backstory ==

So, what do you guys think?

[[User:Dynamus Prime|Dynamus Prime]] 16:24, 16 February 2008 (UTC)Dynamus Prime
: I think you probably ruined the episode for a lot of people, since it aired not a few minutes on the east coast before you threw spoilers everywhere. Please use better judgment in the future. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
::And the fact that you expect kudos for it is more than a little odd. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 19:51, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
: I think you're a butthole. Is that inappropriate flaming? If so, I redact it, and I think that that kind of behavior might be interpreted as having butthole tendencies. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 02:12, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::''"I think you're a butthole"''...yeah, that's flaming. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 21:27, 16 February 2008 (EST)

=== Beast Mode ===
I'm guessing what's needed is a cleaner shot of ''Blackarachnia''<nowiki>'</nowiki>s beast mode, since we don't know what Elita-1's alt mode was...--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 20:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
:Yeah. That's why I put a comma after Elita-1. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 20:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
::I get it now, thanks. My at-a-glance parsing needs work.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 23:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

== Spoilers ==
I question the use of bold text for "Elita-1" in the summary, considering it is the line immediately after the spoiler tag. The theory behind the tag is that it will catch a person's attention before they begin reading the following text, and that it will thus be processed first so the person can turn away if they do not wish to be spoiled.
But the bold text for that name, I think, has the same attention-capture effect as the spoiler tag. Even though it's only a name, and bolding it might fit with the style guide (hm), I think some discretion might be in order here. --[[User:Sntint|Sntint]] 04:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

== Quick Toy Question ==
I'm looking at the Hasbro stock photo and the exposed portion of her face looks rather deeply recessed compared to the rest. Is the helmet removable or did the picture get overly Photoshopped?--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] 04:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
:Scratch that, ASM pictures cleared it up.--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] 04:46, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

== Yes, She is an Homage ==

On reflection, do we really need a bit in the Trivia section about how she looks like the previous character of the same name? I mean, that's true for most of the Animated characters. Should we have a trivia point on [[Ratchet (Animated)]]'s page about how he looks like the original Ratchet? [[User:JW|JW]] 14:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
:Nah,only for characters that are a visual homage to a character they're ''not'' named after. Like Bulkhead's Hound-inspired colors.[[Special:Contributions/86.87.28.191|86.87.28.191]] 17:24, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
::Would it be worth mentioning that her robot mode design seems to be specifically inspired by the unreleased [[:Image:Blackwidowwildrider.jpg|Binaltech Blackwidow]]? That doesn't seem like it would be as obvious to the average fan as the fact that Ratchet et al are inspired by their G1 incarnations or that Waspinator is inspired by his BW incarnation. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 21:01, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
:::Not really. Every single visual cue she got from Binaltech Blackwidow had originally shown up on Transmetal 2 Blackarachnia. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 21:17, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
The original question of this section baffles me. Of course we should a note on this page that she was based on Beast Wars Blackarachnia! And yes, we damn sure should also have a note on Ani. Racthet's page that he homages G1 Ratchet. How is this even a ''question''? It doesn't matter how "obvious" this stuff seems to us, if you're a fan who's only ever watched Animated, it's not at all obvious to you which characters were based on the previous incarnations of Transformers you're not familiar with. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 22:38, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
:I have to agree with JW, for the uninitiated the idea that [[Blackarachnia (BW)|Blackarachnia]] and [[Blackarachnia (Animated)|Blackarachnia]] are different characters is not one that immediately springs to mind. Therefore a note that this BA is an homage to a previous BA is a bit like saying "she is designed to look like herself". It's a "well, duh" moment. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 10:48, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
: If we decide to note when a character resembles an earlier character of the same name, we'll have to add notes to ''hundreds'' of pages on this wiki. "Optimus Prime (Animated) looks like Optimus Prime (Movie) looks like Optimus Prime (Armada) looks like Optimus Prime (RID) looks like Optimus Prime (G1)." "Bumblebee (Animated) looks like Bumblebee (Movie) looks like Bumblebee (G1)." And so on and so on and so on. It's ''normal'' for this to happen. (Heck, I'd be ''far'' more inclined to add notes when the characters are notably ''different,'' like all the Scourges.) For people who have seen only Animated, once they click on the disambig link, it'll all be obvious. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:02, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:: So, I favor cutting the "Blackarachnia is based on the original Blackarachnia, who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise," trivia note, lest we also add "Optimus Prime is based on the original Optimus Prime, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Bumblebee is based on the original Bumblebee, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Ratchet is based on the original Ratchet, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Waspinator is based on the original Waspinator, who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise," to their pages, et cetera, ad nauseum. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:08, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: And I favor adding such notes. To me, this is a no-brainer. People who have only ever seen Animated, and no nothing at all about previous iterations of TFs, have no way of knowing if characters in the show they like were based on older versions. New fans come into Transformers all the time. This wiki should be for them too! Before I added that note, there was no link on this page to [[Blackarachnia (BW)]]. ''That's crazy.'' --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 11:56, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: Oh, and I completely disagree that the disambig link is enough. They're not really there to convey information about the character. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 11:59, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::To people who have only ever seen Animated, it would be most logical for them to think that any previous TF with the same name as an Animated TF was the SAME CHARACTER as that Animated TF. For a newbie, it's all Transformers and Optimus is Optimus is Optimus, Megatron is Megatron is Megatron, and Blackarachnia is Blackarachnia is Blackarachnia. It is logical that if there was a Transformer named X before the X you are familiar with that it is the same, and that there probably is a similarity of appearance. It is only when the canon goes explicitly against this trend that we need to call it out (for example BW Inferno is completely different from previous and subsequent Infernoes)> To me, THAT is the no brainer. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 12:04, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::: I don't understand what point you're making. The point I'm making boils down to this this: Animated Blackarachnia was based on Beast Wars Blackarachnia. This is a fundamental fact about the character, thus it should be stated in this article. The same holds true for every other article about a character who has based on an earlier charcter. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 12:11, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::I don't know how I can make it any clearer. To an outsider the two Blackarachnias would seem like the same character, and would thus need no more explicit note of the connection than does the Superman of today need a note explaining that he is based on the Superman of 1938. Same name, within the same brand is expected to be the same character. To say that a character looks like itself is rather silly. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 12:33, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::You assume outsiders even ''know'' there was another Blackarachnia before ''Animated''. The note is for those who do ''not'' know, and expands their knowledge base by explaining to them where the idea for the character they've only just discovered came from. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 13:03, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::I'm assuming that when they find out that there was a Blackarachnia before ''Animated'' that they would expect the more recent one to have been inspired by its predecessor. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 13:21, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::Incidentally, someone who comes to this wiki knowing ''only'' about Animated Blackarachnia, and enters "Blackarachnia" in the search box, is going to be sent to the disambiguation page ''before'' they come to ''this'' page. [[User:JW|JW]] 13:38, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
(Exdenting for readability.) [[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] said, above, "And I favor adding such notes [of the form ''Optimus Blackarachnia (Animated) is based on the original Blackarachnia (BW), who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise'']." KMMC, if you genuinely believe we should add such notes wiki-wide, I recommend you propose it on the Community Portal. [[User:JW|JW]] 13:31, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:I'm pretty sure most articles about homage characters ''already'' note who they're an homage to, as is just common sense. I didn't think I was proposing some change in policy or anything. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 16:03, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::It's a mistake to confuse "what makes sense to you" with "common sense". Of the six "main" Animated characters who are clearly based on G1 counterparts:
::* Optimus: His only link to Op (G1) is hidden in a discussion of his ears.
::* Bumblebee: Contains a few links to BB (G1), one of them hidden, one of them about the "Legacy of Bumblebee" 3-pack, and one of them about a toy's deco.
::* Ratchet: An incidental link about a toy's redeco.
::* Blitzwing: No link to his G1 counterpart at all.
::* Starscream: Only in the discussion of his voice.
::* Megatron: Does have a note about how he looks like Megatron (G1)'s Battlestars body, and how his cannon makes a similar noise.
::So, for six characters, none of them contain anything like "Foo (Animated) is based on the original Foo (G1), who first appeared...", one has ''no'' link to his predecessor, most have only incidental links, and only one really has a link that says, "And he's based on this guy." I welcome counterexamples. Your idea, if implemented, would require additions to scores of pages, and thus ''is'' a policy change. Please propose it on the Community Portal if you're serious about it. [[User:JW|JW]] 16:25, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: ....I certainly don't consider "homage characters should note whom they're homaging" to be "my idea." And I don't think the particular form of the notation is what's important. Counterexamples? Any and all pages where homages are already noted. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 17:23, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:::: Please point me to examples. I found none to speak of. [[User:JW|JW]] 19:11, 26 August 2010 (EDT)

==Opposite Sex==
''"Blackarachnia acts differently around robots of the 'opposite sex' depending on faction; "'' 
I point out that we have no frickin' clue how she acts around robots of the ''same'' sex, since no such meetings have been chronicled. This sentence probably needs rephrasing. [[User:JW|JW]] 14:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

==Transformation==
Do we need a mention of this in trivia? She's hardly the only spinny transformer there. We've seen BB and Prime do it a few times. Ratchet..Bulkhead..Prowl..list goes on.[[User:GWolfv2]]
:Yes, but she's the only one that we haven't seen a full transformation for, unlike all the others. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 20:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
::Yeah, so why make a huge rigmerole of it. Why not have one line. "Thus far, we have yet to see BA have anything but a spinning transformation" or such?

==non-final character model==
[[Image:AniBlackarachniaPromoModel.jpg | thumb | left | "A non-final character model for Blackarachnia was included in the initial Transformers Animated press kit from Cartoon Network. Her toy appears to follow this one more closely in relation to the spider legs positioning in robot mode than the final model." ]]

Shouldn't we note that that version of the character model WAS used in the first episode? you know, coz it was. --[[User:Skyglide|Skyglide]] 23:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
: When? I'm watching through right now on Youtube, and I've seen no occurrence of it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 00:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[[Image:Proto_ba_anim.jpg|thumb|right]]

:: Took a gander myself, and yep, there it is. Leggy-thingies behind the arms, little triangles on the collar... - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 00:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
:::Ah! I misread it as "HER first episode," so I was checking out "Along Came a Spider." That explains it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 00:19, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

{{-}}
==Elita-1 vs. Blackarachnia==
I think ''Animated'' Elita-1 deserves her own page. --[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 01:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:Uh, why? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 01:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:: Why indeed? I disagree. We give a page to each character, and she's the same as another character. She deserves a page no more than Orion Pax or the original [[Ariel]] do. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 01:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:I think that the current redirect is okay, but time will tell on the sad fate on Elita-1...-- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 01:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:::I'm obviously in the minority here, and I don't know the history behind the majority opinion. What criteria is required for a character to have their own page?--[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 01:57, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::::They need to be a distinct character. The ''Animated'' Elita-1 is the same character as the ''Animated'' Blackarachnia. They aren't two different people. They're one person who went by two different names at different points in her life, like G1 Bumblebee and G1 Goldbug. --[[User:Steve-o|Steve-o]] 02:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:Though it does get a little tricky with [[Megatron (G1)|Megatron]] and [[Galvatron (G1)|Galvatron]]...-- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 02:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::Galvatron has unique circumstances. The comic version pulled alternate Galvatrons out of everywhere and even had one or two meet Megatron, plus the fact IDW made him a distinct character. It's a complicated mess better served by two pages. (And Megatron's page is ungodly long as is already.) Elita-1 and Blackarachnia, along with most name changes, is just one straight line. She was Elita-1, but is now Blackarachnia. That's it. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 02:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Gotcha. Suggestion cheerfully withdrawn.--[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 02:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

== Hit her with a shovel joke. ==

Seriously, why are you deleting it? It's humorous enough, it fills in a picture caption, so why do you insist on not allowing it put up, the set up was already there! - Karhukjnsi
:Because it's a horrible joke? Because it was added by a non-contributor? --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:33, 6 January 2010 (EST)
:''I'' '''was''' that non-contributor. It is a humorous joke to those without an overtly snide sense of humor. "I'd hit it..." That's it? That's what we need on this site, even more references to people who love TF Hentai with a passion, adding the "with a shovel" bit at least helps balance it out to relatively socialable people. --[[User:Karhukjnsi|The Beerclaw]] 02:37, 6 January 2010 (EST)
::Obviously the actual joke flew right over your head. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:39, 6 January 2010 (EST)
::and you replace it with '''that''' crap?!, I should take up praying for you. --[[User:Karhukjnsi|The Beerclaw]] 02:40, 6 January 2010 (EST)

== Beast Wars toy reference ==

I think her faceplate is a homage to Blackarachnia's Beast Wars toy robot head.[[User:ACIDSTORM92|ACIDSTORM92]] 17:51, 30 June 2010 (EDT)
: Uh. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:35, 25 August 2010 (EDT)

== Elita 1 toy ==

Doesn't Elita-1 have a toy?. I looked up Elita One on Google images and an ''Animated'' Elita-1 toy and box appear in some pictures. Is that a real toy, another japsnese bootleg, or a fan made toy?[[Special:Contributions/71.162.106.213|71.162.106.213]] 21:23, 12 February 2012 (EST)
:No, she does not have a toy. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] 21:27, 12 February 2012 (EST)
::See: [http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s28/MadKilla25/customs/elita1.jpg][[Special:Contributions/71.162.106.213|71.162.106.213]] 21:48, 12 February 2012 (EST)
:::Did you even pay attention to the URL? It's clearly put in the guy's customs subfolder. It's a custom toy. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 21:57, 12 February 2012 (EST)
::::I also saw a picture with some little girl holding it?[[Special:Contributions/71.162.106.213|71.162.106.213]] 22:01, 12 February 2012 (EST)

Talk:Blackarachnia (Animated)

2012-02-13T03:03:15Z

71.162.106.213: /* Elita 1 toy */

Ep 9 summary

Needs serious work

==New pics and Edits==

I'm uploaded some fine pics of the prototype, and made some minor edits... and it may look good on the page, but the edit page is a mess. Somebody, please, fix it! --[[User:Hepathos|Hepathos]] 21:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

==Caption==

In response to ItsWalky on 1/8/07, the problem with the caption is that if you don't know what "Goth Talk" is, then you have to read about it to understand the caption, and that kinda kills any momentum the joke might have going for it.
Also the fact that she doesn't really even look goth. Just spikey and purple.
: And the problem with the replacement caption is that if you don't know what "Come into my parlor etc" references, then you'd have to read about it to understand the caption! What is the difference? They are both references to things. The previous one was nice enough to provide a link, for those who don't know the reference. I don't see why that should be penalized. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 22:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
::Its all a matter of obscurity. Sometimes something that may be funny to you is not understood by the majority of viewers because of unfamiliarity of what it is a reference too.--[[User:Skyglide|Skyglide]] 23:18, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

== Added her backstory ==

So, what do you guys think?

[[User:Dynamus Prime|Dynamus Prime]] 16:24, 16 February 2008 (UTC)Dynamus Prime
: I think you probably ruined the episode for a lot of people, since it aired not a few minutes on the east coast before you threw spoilers everywhere. Please use better judgment in the future. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
::And the fact that you expect kudos for it is more than a little odd. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 19:51, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
: I think you're a butthole. Is that inappropriate flaming? If so, I redact it, and I think that that kind of behavior might be interpreted as having butthole tendencies. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 02:12, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::''"I think you're a butthole"''...yeah, that's flaming. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 21:27, 16 February 2008 (EST)

=== Beast Mode ===
I'm guessing what's needed is a cleaner shot of ''Blackarachnia''<nowiki>'</nowiki>s beast mode, since we don't know what Elita-1's alt mode was...--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 20:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
:Yeah. That's why I put a comma after Elita-1. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 20:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
::I get it now, thanks. My at-a-glance parsing needs work.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 23:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

== Spoilers ==
I question the use of bold text for "Elita-1" in the summary, considering it is the line immediately after the spoiler tag. The theory behind the tag is that it will catch a person's attention before they begin reading the following text, and that it will thus be processed first so the person can turn away if they do not wish to be spoiled.
But the bold text for that name, I think, has the same attention-capture effect as the spoiler tag. Even though it's only a name, and bolding it might fit with the style guide (hm), I think some discretion might be in order here. --[[User:Sntint|Sntint]] 04:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

== Quick Toy Question ==
I'm looking at the Hasbro stock photo and the exposed portion of her face looks rather deeply recessed compared to the rest. Is the helmet removable or did the picture get overly Photoshopped?--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] 04:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
:Scratch that, ASM pictures cleared it up.--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] 04:46, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

== Yes, She is an Homage ==

On reflection, do we really need a bit in the Trivia section about how she looks like the previous character of the same name? I mean, that's true for most of the Animated characters. Should we have a trivia point on [[Ratchet (Animated)]]'s page about how he looks like the original Ratchet? [[User:JW|JW]] 14:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
:Nah,only for characters that are a visual homage to a character they're ''not'' named after. Like Bulkhead's Hound-inspired colors.[[Special:Contributions/86.87.28.191|86.87.28.191]] 17:24, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
::Would it be worth mentioning that her robot mode design seems to be specifically inspired by the unreleased [[:Image:Blackwidowwildrider.jpg|Binaltech Blackwidow]]? That doesn't seem like it would be as obvious to the average fan as the fact that Ratchet et al are inspired by their G1 incarnations or that Waspinator is inspired by his BW incarnation. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 21:01, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
:::Not really. Every single visual cue she got from Binaltech Blackwidow had originally shown up on Transmetal 2 Blackarachnia. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 21:17, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
The original question of this section baffles me. Of course we should a note on this page that she was based on Beast Wars Blackarachnia! And yes, we damn sure should also have a note on Ani. Racthet's page that he homages G1 Ratchet. How is this even a ''question''? It doesn't matter how "obvious" this stuff seems to us, if you're a fan who's only ever watched Animated, it's not at all obvious to you which characters were based on the previous incarnations of Transformers you're not familiar with. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 22:38, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
:I have to agree with JW, for the uninitiated the idea that [[Blackarachnia (BW)|Blackarachnia]] and [[Blackarachnia (Animated)|Blackarachnia]] are different characters is not one that immediately springs to mind. Therefore a note that this BA is an homage to a previous BA is a bit like saying "she is designed to look like herself". It's a "well, duh" moment. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 10:48, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
: If we decide to note when a character resembles an earlier character of the same name, we'll have to add notes to ''hundreds'' of pages on this wiki. "Optimus Prime (Animated) looks like Optimus Prime (Movie) looks like Optimus Prime (Armada) looks like Optimus Prime (RID) looks like Optimus Prime (G1)." "Bumblebee (Animated) looks like Bumblebee (Movie) looks like Bumblebee (G1)." And so on and so on and so on. It's ''normal'' for this to happen. (Heck, I'd be ''far'' more inclined to add notes when the characters are notably ''different,'' like all the Scourges.) For people who have seen only Animated, once they click on the disambig link, it'll all be obvious. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:02, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:: So, I favor cutting the "Blackarachnia is based on the original Blackarachnia, who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise," trivia note, lest we also add "Optimus Prime is based on the original Optimus Prime, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Bumblebee is based on the original Bumblebee, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Ratchet is based on the original Ratchet, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Waspinator is based on the original Waspinator, who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise," to their pages, et cetera, ad nauseum. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:08, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: And I favor adding such notes. To me, this is a no-brainer. People who have only ever seen Animated, and no nothing at all about previous iterations of TFs, have no way of knowing if characters in the show they like were based on older versions. New fans come into Transformers all the time. This wiki should be for them too! Before I added that note, there was no link on this page to [[Blackarachnia (BW)]]. ''That's crazy.'' --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 11:56, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: Oh, and I completely disagree that the disambig link is enough. They're not really there to convey information about the character. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 11:59, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::To people who have only ever seen Animated, it would be most logical for them to think that any previous TF with the same name as an Animated TF was the SAME CHARACTER as that Animated TF. For a newbie, it's all Transformers and Optimus is Optimus is Optimus, Megatron is Megatron is Megatron, and Blackarachnia is Blackarachnia is Blackarachnia. It is logical that if there was a Transformer named X before the X you are familiar with that it is the same, and that there probably is a similarity of appearance. It is only when the canon goes explicitly against this trend that we need to call it out (for example BW Inferno is completely different from previous and subsequent Infernoes)> To me, THAT is the no brainer. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 12:04, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::: I don't understand what point you're making. The point I'm making boils down to this this: Animated Blackarachnia was based on Beast Wars Blackarachnia. This is a fundamental fact about the character, thus it should be stated in this article. The same holds true for every other article about a character who has based on an earlier charcter. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 12:11, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::I don't know how I can make it any clearer. To an outsider the two Blackarachnias would seem like the same character, and would thus need no more explicit note of the connection than does the Superman of today need a note explaining that he is based on the Superman of 1938. Same name, within the same brand is expected to be the same character. To say that a character looks like itself is rather silly. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 12:33, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::You assume outsiders even ''know'' there was another Blackarachnia before ''Animated''. The note is for those who do ''not'' know, and expands their knowledge base by explaining to them where the idea for the character they've only just discovered came from. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 13:03, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::I'm assuming that when they find out that there was a Blackarachnia before ''Animated'' that they would expect the more recent one to have been inspired by its predecessor. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 13:21, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::Incidentally, someone who comes to this wiki knowing ''only'' about Animated Blackarachnia, and enters "Blackarachnia" in the search box, is going to be sent to the disambiguation page ''before'' they come to ''this'' page. [[User:JW|JW]] 13:38, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
(Exdenting for readability.) [[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] said, above, "And I favor adding such notes [of the form ''Optimus Blackarachnia (Animated) is based on the original Blackarachnia (BW), who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise'']." KMMC, if you genuinely believe we should add such notes wiki-wide, I recommend you propose it on the Community Portal. [[User:JW|JW]] 13:31, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:I'm pretty sure most articles about homage characters ''already'' note who they're an homage to, as is just common sense. I didn't think I was proposing some change in policy or anything. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 16:03, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::It's a mistake to confuse "what makes sense to you" with "common sense". Of the six "main" Animated characters who are clearly based on G1 counterparts:
::* Optimus: His only link to Op (G1) is hidden in a discussion of his ears.
::* Bumblebee: Contains a few links to BB (G1), one of them hidden, one of them about the "Legacy of Bumblebee" 3-pack, and one of them about a toy's deco.
::* Ratchet: An incidental link about a toy's redeco.
::* Blitzwing: No link to his G1 counterpart at all.
::* Starscream: Only in the discussion of his voice.
::* Megatron: Does have a note about how he looks like Megatron (G1)'s Battlestars body, and how his cannon makes a similar noise.
::So, for six characters, none of them contain anything like "Foo (Animated) is based on the original Foo (G1), who first appeared...", one has ''no'' link to his predecessor, most have only incidental links, and only one really has a link that says, "And he's based on this guy." I welcome counterexamples. Your idea, if implemented, would require additions to scores of pages, and thus ''is'' a policy change. Please propose it on the Community Portal if you're serious about it. [[User:JW|JW]] 16:25, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: ....I certainly don't consider "homage characters should note whom they're homaging" to be "my idea." And I don't think the particular form of the notation is what's important. Counterexamples? Any and all pages where homages are already noted. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 17:23, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:::: Please point me to examples. I found none to speak of. [[User:JW|JW]] 19:11, 26 August 2010 (EDT)

==Opposite Sex==
''"Blackarachnia acts differently around robots of the 'opposite sex' depending on faction; "'' 
I point out that we have no frickin' clue how she acts around robots of the ''same'' sex, since no such meetings have been chronicled. This sentence probably needs rephrasing. [[User:JW|JW]] 14:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

==Transformation==
Do we need a mention of this in trivia? She's hardly the only spinny transformer there. We've seen BB and Prime do it a few times. Ratchet..Bulkhead..Prowl..list goes on.[[User:GWolfv2]]
:Yes, but she's the only one that we haven't seen a full transformation for, unlike all the others. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 20:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
::Yeah, so why make a huge rigmerole of it. Why not have one line. "Thus far, we have yet to see BA have anything but a spinning transformation" or such?

==non-final character model==
[[Image:AniBlackarachniaPromoModel.jpg | thumb | left | "A non-final character model for Blackarachnia was included in the initial Transformers Animated press kit from Cartoon Network. Her toy appears to follow this one more closely in relation to the spider legs positioning in robot mode than the final model." ]]

Shouldn't we note that that version of the character model WAS used in the first episode? you know, coz it was. --[[User:Skyglide|Skyglide]] 23:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
: When? I'm watching through right now on Youtube, and I've seen no occurrence of it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 00:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[[Image:Proto_ba_anim.jpg|thumb|right]]

:: Took a gander myself, and yep, there it is. Leggy-thingies behind the arms, little triangles on the collar... - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 00:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
:::Ah! I misread it as "HER first episode," so I was checking out "Along Came a Spider." That explains it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 00:19, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

{{-}}
==Elita-1 vs. Blackarachnia==
I think ''Animated'' Elita-1 deserves her own page. --[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 01:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:Uh, why? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 01:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:: Why indeed? I disagree. We give a page to each character, and she's the same as another character. She deserves a page no more than Orion Pax or the original [[Ariel]] do. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 01:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:I think that the current redirect is okay, but time will tell on the sad fate on Elita-1...-- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 01:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:::I'm obviously in the minority here, and I don't know the history behind the majority opinion. What criteria is required for a character to have their own page?--[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 01:57, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::::They need to be a distinct character. The ''Animated'' Elita-1 is the same character as the ''Animated'' Blackarachnia. They aren't two different people. They're one person who went by two different names at different points in her life, like G1 Bumblebee and G1 Goldbug. --[[User:Steve-o|Steve-o]] 02:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:Though it does get a little tricky with [[Megatron (G1)|Megatron]] and [[Galvatron (G1)|Galvatron]]...-- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 02:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::Galvatron has unique circumstances. The comic version pulled alternate Galvatrons out of everywhere and even had one or two meet Megatron, plus the fact IDW made him a distinct character. It's a complicated mess better served by two pages. (And Megatron's page is ungodly long as is already.) Elita-1 and Blackarachnia, along with most name changes, is just one straight line. She was Elita-1, but is now Blackarachnia. That's it. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 02:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Gotcha. Suggestion cheerfully withdrawn.--[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 02:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

== Hit her with a shovel joke. ==

Seriously, why are you deleting it? It's humorous enough, it fills in a picture caption, so why do you insist on not allowing it put up, the set up was already there! - Karhukjnsi
:Because it's a horrible joke? Because it was added by a non-contributor? --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:33, 6 January 2010 (EST)
:''I'' '''was''' that non-contributor. It is a humorous joke to those without an overtly snide sense of humor. "I'd hit it..." That's it? That's what we need on this site, even more references to people who love TF Hentai with a passion, adding the "with a shovel" bit at least helps balance it out to relatively socialable people. --[[User:Karhukjnsi|The Beerclaw]] 02:37, 6 January 2010 (EST)
::Obviously the actual joke flew right over your head. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:39, 6 January 2010 (EST)
::and you replace it with '''that''' crap?!, I should take up praying for you. --[[User:Karhukjnsi|The Beerclaw]] 02:40, 6 January 2010 (EST)

== Beast Wars toy reference ==

I think her faceplate is a homage to Blackarachnia's Beast Wars toy robot head.[[User:ACIDSTORM92|ACIDSTORM92]] 17:51, 30 June 2010 (EDT)
: Uh. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:35, 25 August 2010 (EDT)

== Elita 1 toy ==

Doesn't Elita-1 have a toy. I looked up Elita One on Google images and an ''Animated'' Elita-1 toy and box appear in some pictures. Is that a real toy, another japsnese bootleg, or a fan made toy?[[Special:Contributions/71.162.106.213|71.162.106.213]] 21:23, 12 February 2012 (EST)
:No, she does not have a toy. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] 21:27, 12 February 2012 (EST)
::See: [http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s28/MadKilla25/customs/elita1.jpg][[Special:Contributions/71.162.106.213|71.162.106.213]] 21:48, 12 February 2012 (EST)
:::Did you even pay attention to the URL? It's clearly put in the guy's customs subfolder. It's a custom toy. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 21:57, 12 February 2012 (EST)
::::I also saw a picture with some little girl holding it?[[Special:Contributions/71.162.106.213|71.162.106.213]] 22:01, 12 February 2012 (EST)

Talk:Blackarachnia (Animated)

2012-02-13T03:01:47Z

71.162.106.213: /* Elita 1 toy */

Ep 9 summary

Needs serious work

==New pics and Edits==

I'm uploaded some fine pics of the prototype, and made some minor edits... and it may look good on the page, but the edit page is a mess. Somebody, please, fix it! --[[User:Hepathos|Hepathos]] 21:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

==Caption==

In response to ItsWalky on 1/8/07, the problem with the caption is that if you don't know what "Goth Talk" is, then you have to read about it to understand the caption, and that kinda kills any momentum the joke might have going for it.
Also the fact that she doesn't really even look goth. Just spikey and purple.
: And the problem with the replacement caption is that if you don't know what "Come into my parlor etc" references, then you'd have to read about it to understand the caption! What is the difference? They are both references to things. The previous one was nice enough to provide a link, for those who don't know the reference. I don't see why that should be penalized. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 22:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
::Its all a matter of obscurity. Sometimes something that may be funny to you is not understood by the majority of viewers because of unfamiliarity of what it is a reference too.--[[User:Skyglide|Skyglide]] 23:18, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

== Added her backstory ==

So, what do you guys think?

[[User:Dynamus Prime|Dynamus Prime]] 16:24, 16 February 2008 (UTC)Dynamus Prime
: I think you probably ruined the episode for a lot of people, since it aired not a few minutes on the east coast before you threw spoilers everywhere. Please use better judgment in the future. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
::And the fact that you expect kudos for it is more than a little odd. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 19:51, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
: I think you're a butthole. Is that inappropriate flaming? If so, I redact it, and I think that that kind of behavior might be interpreted as having butthole tendencies. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 02:12, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::''"I think you're a butthole"''...yeah, that's flaming. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 21:27, 16 February 2008 (EST)

=== Beast Mode ===
I'm guessing what's needed is a cleaner shot of ''Blackarachnia''<nowiki>'</nowiki>s beast mode, since we don't know what Elita-1's alt mode was...--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 20:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
:Yeah. That's why I put a comma after Elita-1. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 20:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
::I get it now, thanks. My at-a-glance parsing needs work.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 23:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

== Spoilers ==
I question the use of bold text for "Elita-1" in the summary, considering it is the line immediately after the spoiler tag. The theory behind the tag is that it will catch a person's attention before they begin reading the following text, and that it will thus be processed first so the person can turn away if they do not wish to be spoiled.
But the bold text for that name, I think, has the same attention-capture effect as the spoiler tag. Even though it's only a name, and bolding it might fit with the style guide (hm), I think some discretion might be in order here. --[[User:Sntint|Sntint]] 04:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

== Quick Toy Question ==
I'm looking at the Hasbro stock photo and the exposed portion of her face looks rather deeply recessed compared to the rest. Is the helmet removable or did the picture get overly Photoshopped?--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] 04:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
:Scratch that, ASM pictures cleared it up.--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] 04:46, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

== Yes, She is an Homage ==

On reflection, do we really need a bit in the Trivia section about how she looks like the previous character of the same name? I mean, that's true for most of the Animated characters. Should we have a trivia point on [[Ratchet (Animated)]]'s page about how he looks like the original Ratchet? [[User:JW|JW]] 14:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
:Nah,only for characters that are a visual homage to a character they're ''not'' named after. Like Bulkhead's Hound-inspired colors.[[Special:Contributions/86.87.28.191|86.87.28.191]] 17:24, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
::Would it be worth mentioning that her robot mode design seems to be specifically inspired by the unreleased [[:Image:Blackwidowwildrider.jpg|Binaltech Blackwidow]]? That doesn't seem like it would be as obvious to the average fan as the fact that Ratchet et al are inspired by their G1 incarnations or that Waspinator is inspired by his BW incarnation. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 21:01, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
:::Not really. Every single visual cue she got from Binaltech Blackwidow had originally shown up on Transmetal 2 Blackarachnia. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 21:17, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
The original question of this section baffles me. Of course we should a note on this page that she was based on Beast Wars Blackarachnia! And yes, we damn sure should also have a note on Ani. Racthet's page that he homages G1 Ratchet. How is this even a ''question''? It doesn't matter how "obvious" this stuff seems to us, if you're a fan who's only ever watched Animated, it's not at all obvious to you which characters were based on the previous incarnations of Transformers you're not familiar with. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 22:38, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
:I have to agree with JW, for the uninitiated the idea that [[Blackarachnia (BW)|Blackarachnia]] and [[Blackarachnia (Animated)|Blackarachnia]] are different characters is not one that immediately springs to mind. Therefore a note that this BA is an homage to a previous BA is a bit like saying "she is designed to look like herself". It's a "well, duh" moment. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 10:48, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
: If we decide to note when a character resembles an earlier character of the same name, we'll have to add notes to ''hundreds'' of pages on this wiki. "Optimus Prime (Animated) looks like Optimus Prime (Movie) looks like Optimus Prime (Armada) looks like Optimus Prime (RID) looks like Optimus Prime (G1)." "Bumblebee (Animated) looks like Bumblebee (Movie) looks like Bumblebee (G1)." And so on and so on and so on. It's ''normal'' for this to happen. (Heck, I'd be ''far'' more inclined to add notes when the characters are notably ''different,'' like all the Scourges.) For people who have seen only Animated, once they click on the disambig link, it'll all be obvious. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:02, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:: So, I favor cutting the "Blackarachnia is based on the original Blackarachnia, who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise," trivia note, lest we also add "Optimus Prime is based on the original Optimus Prime, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Bumblebee is based on the original Bumblebee, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Ratchet is based on the original Ratchet, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Waspinator is based on the original Waspinator, who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise," to their pages, et cetera, ad nauseum. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:08, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: And I favor adding such notes. To me, this is a no-brainer. People who have only ever seen Animated, and no nothing at all about previous iterations of TFs, have no way of knowing if characters in the show they like were based on older versions. New fans come into Transformers all the time. This wiki should be for them too! Before I added that note, there was no link on this page to [[Blackarachnia (BW)]]. ''That's crazy.'' --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 11:56, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: Oh, and I completely disagree that the disambig link is enough. They're not really there to convey information about the character. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 11:59, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::To people who have only ever seen Animated, it would be most logical for them to think that any previous TF with the same name as an Animated TF was the SAME CHARACTER as that Animated TF. For a newbie, it's all Transformers and Optimus is Optimus is Optimus, Megatron is Megatron is Megatron, and Blackarachnia is Blackarachnia is Blackarachnia. It is logical that if there was a Transformer named X before the X you are familiar with that it is the same, and that there probably is a similarity of appearance. It is only when the canon goes explicitly against this trend that we need to call it out (for example BW Inferno is completely different from previous and subsequent Infernoes)> To me, THAT is the no brainer. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 12:04, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::: I don't understand what point you're making. The point I'm making boils down to this this: Animated Blackarachnia was based on Beast Wars Blackarachnia. This is a fundamental fact about the character, thus it should be stated in this article. The same holds true for every other article about a character who has based on an earlier charcter. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 12:11, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::I don't know how I can make it any clearer. To an outsider the two Blackarachnias would seem like the same character, and would thus need no more explicit note of the connection than does the Superman of today need a note explaining that he is based on the Superman of 1938. Same name, within the same brand is expected to be the same character. To say that a character looks like itself is rather silly. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 12:33, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::You assume outsiders even ''know'' there was another Blackarachnia before ''Animated''. The note is for those who do ''not'' know, and expands their knowledge base by explaining to them where the idea for the character they've only just discovered came from. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 13:03, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::I'm assuming that when they find out that there was a Blackarachnia before ''Animated'' that they would expect the more recent one to have been inspired by its predecessor. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 13:21, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::Incidentally, someone who comes to this wiki knowing ''only'' about Animated Blackarachnia, and enters "Blackarachnia" in the search box, is going to be sent to the disambiguation page ''before'' they come to ''this'' page. [[User:JW|JW]] 13:38, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
(Exdenting for readability.) [[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] said, above, "And I favor adding such notes [of the form ''Optimus Blackarachnia (Animated) is based on the original Blackarachnia (BW), who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise'']." KMMC, if you genuinely believe we should add such notes wiki-wide, I recommend you propose it on the Community Portal. [[User:JW|JW]] 13:31, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:I'm pretty sure most articles about homage characters ''already'' note who they're an homage to, as is just common sense. I didn't think I was proposing some change in policy or anything. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 16:03, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::It's a mistake to confuse "what makes sense to you" with "common sense". Of the six "main" Animated characters who are clearly based on G1 counterparts:
::* Optimus: His only link to Op (G1) is hidden in a discussion of his ears.
::* Bumblebee: Contains a few links to BB (G1), one of them hidden, one of them about the "Legacy of Bumblebee" 3-pack, and one of them about a toy's deco.
::* Ratchet: An incidental link about a toy's redeco.
::* Blitzwing: No link to his G1 counterpart at all.
::* Starscream: Only in the discussion of his voice.
::* Megatron: Does have a note about how he looks like Megatron (G1)'s Battlestars body, and how his cannon makes a similar noise.
::So, for six characters, none of them contain anything like "Foo (Animated) is based on the original Foo (G1), who first appeared...", one has ''no'' link to his predecessor, most have only incidental links, and only one really has a link that says, "And he's based on this guy." I welcome counterexamples. Your idea, if implemented, would require additions to scores of pages, and thus ''is'' a policy change. Please propose it on the Community Portal if you're serious about it. [[User:JW|JW]] 16:25, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: ....I certainly don't consider "homage characters should note whom they're homaging" to be "my idea." And I don't think the particular form of the notation is what's important. Counterexamples? Any and all pages where homages are already noted. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 17:23, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:::: Please point me to examples. I found none to speak of. [[User:JW|JW]] 19:11, 26 August 2010 (EDT)

==Opposite Sex==
''"Blackarachnia acts differently around robots of the 'opposite sex' depending on faction; "'' 
I point out that we have no frickin' clue how she acts around robots of the ''same'' sex, since no such meetings have been chronicled. This sentence probably needs rephrasing. [[User:JW|JW]] 14:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

==Transformation==
Do we need a mention of this in trivia? She's hardly the only spinny transformer there. We've seen BB and Prime do it a few times. Ratchet..Bulkhead..Prowl..list goes on.[[User:GWolfv2]]
:Yes, but she's the only one that we haven't seen a full transformation for, unlike all the others. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 20:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
::Yeah, so why make a huge rigmerole of it. Why not have one line. "Thus far, we have yet to see BA have anything but a spinning transformation" or such?

==non-final character model==
[[Image:AniBlackarachniaPromoModel.jpg | thumb | left | "A non-final character model for Blackarachnia was included in the initial Transformers Animated press kit from Cartoon Network. Her toy appears to follow this one more closely in relation to the spider legs positioning in robot mode than the final model." ]]

Shouldn't we note that that version of the character model WAS used in the first episode? you know, coz it was. --[[User:Skyglide|Skyglide]] 23:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
: When? I'm watching through right now on Youtube, and I've seen no occurrence of it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 00:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[[Image:Proto_ba_anim.jpg|thumb|right]]

:: Took a gander myself, and yep, there it is. Leggy-thingies behind the arms, little triangles on the collar... - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 00:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
:::Ah! I misread it as "HER first episode," so I was checking out "Along Came a Spider." That explains it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 00:19, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

{{-}}
==Elita-1 vs. Blackarachnia==
I think ''Animated'' Elita-1 deserves her own page. --[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 01:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:Uh, why? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 01:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:: Why indeed? I disagree. We give a page to each character, and she's the same as another character. She deserves a page no more than Orion Pax or the original [[Ariel]] do. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 01:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:I think that the current redirect is okay, but time will tell on the sad fate on Elita-1...-- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 01:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:::I'm obviously in the minority here, and I don't know the history behind the majority opinion. What criteria is required for a character to have their own page?--[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 01:57, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::::They need to be a distinct character. The ''Animated'' Elita-1 is the same character as the ''Animated'' Blackarachnia. They aren't two different people. They're one person who went by two different names at different points in her life, like G1 Bumblebee and G1 Goldbug. --[[User:Steve-o|Steve-o]] 02:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:Though it does get a little tricky with [[Megatron (G1)|Megatron]] and [[Galvatron (G1)|Galvatron]]...-- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 02:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::Galvatron has unique circumstances. The comic version pulled alternate Galvatrons out of everywhere and even had one or two meet Megatron, plus the fact IDW made him a distinct character. It's a complicated mess better served by two pages. (And Megatron's page is ungodly long as is already.) Elita-1 and Blackarachnia, along with most name changes, is just one straight line. She was Elita-1, but is now Blackarachnia. That's it. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 02:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Gotcha. Suggestion cheerfully withdrawn.--[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 02:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

== Hit her with a shovel joke. ==

Seriously, why are you deleting it? It's humorous enough, it fills in a picture caption, so why do you insist on not allowing it put up, the set up was already there! - Karhukjnsi
:Because it's a horrible joke? Because it was added by a non-contributor? --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:33, 6 January 2010 (EST)
:''I'' '''was''' that non-contributor. It is a humorous joke to those without an overtly snide sense of humor. "I'd hit it..." That's it? That's what we need on this site, even more references to people who love TF Hentai with a passion, adding the "with a shovel" bit at least helps balance it out to relatively socialable people. --[[User:Karhukjnsi|The Beerclaw]] 02:37, 6 January 2010 (EST)
::Obviously the actual joke flew right over your head. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:39, 6 January 2010 (EST)
::and you replace it with '''that''' crap?!, I should take up praying for you. --[[User:Karhukjnsi|The Beerclaw]] 02:40, 6 January 2010 (EST)

== Beast Wars toy reference ==

I think her faceplate is a homage to Blackarachnia's Beast Wars toy robot head.[[User:ACIDSTORM92|ACIDSTORM92]] 17:51, 30 June 2010 (EDT)
: Uh. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:35, 25 August 2010 (EDT)

== Elita 1 toy ==

Doesn't Elita-1 have a toy. I looked up Elita One on Google images and an ''Animated'' Elita-1 toy and box appear in some pictures. Is that a real toy, another japsnese bootleg, or a fan made toy?[[Special:Contributions/71.162.106.213|71.162.106.213]] 21:23, 12 February 2012 (EST)
:No, she does not have a toy. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] 21:27, 12 February 2012 (EST)
::See: [http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s28/MadKilla25/customs/elita1.jpg][[Special:Contributions/71.162.106.213|71.162.106.213]] 21:48, 12 February 2012 (EST)
:::Did you even pay attention to the URL? It's clearly put in the guy's customs subfolder. It's a custom toy. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 21:57, 12 February 2012 (EST)
::::I also saw a picture with some little girls holding it?[[Special:Contributions/71.162.106.213|71.162.106.213]] 22:01, 12 February 2012 (EST)

Talk:Blackarachnia (Animated)

2012-02-13T02:48:32Z

71.162.106.213: /* Elita 1 toy */

Ep 9 summary

Needs serious work

==New pics and Edits==

I'm uploaded some fine pics of the prototype, and made some minor edits... and it may look good on the page, but the edit page is a mess. Somebody, please, fix it! --[[User:Hepathos|Hepathos]] 21:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

==Caption==

In response to ItsWalky on 1/8/07, the problem with the caption is that if you don't know what "Goth Talk" is, then you have to read about it to understand the caption, and that kinda kills any momentum the joke might have going for it.
Also the fact that she doesn't really even look goth. Just spikey and purple.
: And the problem with the replacement caption is that if you don't know what "Come into my parlor etc" references, then you'd have to read about it to understand the caption! What is the difference? They are both references to things. The previous one was nice enough to provide a link, for those who don't know the reference. I don't see why that should be penalized. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 22:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
::Its all a matter of obscurity. Sometimes something that may be funny to you is not understood by the majority of viewers because of unfamiliarity of what it is a reference too.--[[User:Skyglide|Skyglide]] 23:18, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

== Added her backstory ==

So, what do you guys think?

[[User:Dynamus Prime|Dynamus Prime]] 16:24, 16 February 2008 (UTC)Dynamus Prime
: I think you probably ruined the episode for a lot of people, since it aired not a few minutes on the east coast before you threw spoilers everywhere. Please use better judgment in the future. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
::And the fact that you expect kudos for it is more than a little odd. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 19:51, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
: I think you're a butthole. Is that inappropriate flaming? If so, I redact it, and I think that that kind of behavior might be interpreted as having butthole tendencies. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 02:12, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::''"I think you're a butthole"''...yeah, that's flaming. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 21:27, 16 February 2008 (EST)

=== Beast Mode ===
I'm guessing what's needed is a cleaner shot of ''Blackarachnia''<nowiki>'</nowiki>s beast mode, since we don't know what Elita-1's alt mode was...--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 20:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
:Yeah. That's why I put a comma after Elita-1. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 20:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
::I get it now, thanks. My at-a-glance parsing needs work.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 23:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

== Spoilers ==
I question the use of bold text for "Elita-1" in the summary, considering it is the line immediately after the spoiler tag. The theory behind the tag is that it will catch a person's attention before they begin reading the following text, and that it will thus be processed first so the person can turn away if they do not wish to be spoiled.
But the bold text for that name, I think, has the same attention-capture effect as the spoiler tag. Even though it's only a name, and bolding it might fit with the style guide (hm), I think some discretion might be in order here. --[[User:Sntint|Sntint]] 04:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

== Quick Toy Question ==
I'm looking at the Hasbro stock photo and the exposed portion of her face looks rather deeply recessed compared to the rest. Is the helmet removable or did the picture get overly Photoshopped?--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] 04:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
:Scratch that, ASM pictures cleared it up.--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] 04:46, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

== Yes, She is an Homage ==

On reflection, do we really need a bit in the Trivia section about how she looks like the previous character of the same name? I mean, that's true for most of the Animated characters. Should we have a trivia point on [[Ratchet (Animated)]]'s page about how he looks like the original Ratchet? [[User:JW|JW]] 14:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
:Nah,only for characters that are a visual homage to a character they're ''not'' named after. Like Bulkhead's Hound-inspired colors.[[Special:Contributions/86.87.28.191|86.87.28.191]] 17:24, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
::Would it be worth mentioning that her robot mode design seems to be specifically inspired by the unreleased [[:Image:Blackwidowwildrider.jpg|Binaltech Blackwidow]]? That doesn't seem like it would be as obvious to the average fan as the fact that Ratchet et al are inspired by their G1 incarnations or that Waspinator is inspired by his BW incarnation. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 21:01, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
:::Not really. Every single visual cue she got from Binaltech Blackwidow had originally shown up on Transmetal 2 Blackarachnia. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 21:17, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
The original question of this section baffles me. Of course we should a note on this page that she was based on Beast Wars Blackarachnia! And yes, we damn sure should also have a note on Ani. Racthet's page that he homages G1 Ratchet. How is this even a ''question''? It doesn't matter how "obvious" this stuff seems to us, if you're a fan who's only ever watched Animated, it's not at all obvious to you which characters were based on the previous incarnations of Transformers you're not familiar with. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 22:38, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
:I have to agree with JW, for the uninitiated the idea that [[Blackarachnia (BW)|Blackarachnia]] and [[Blackarachnia (Animated)|Blackarachnia]] are different characters is not one that immediately springs to mind. Therefore a note that this BA is an homage to a previous BA is a bit like saying "she is designed to look like herself". It's a "well, duh" moment. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 10:48, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
: If we decide to note when a character resembles an earlier character of the same name, we'll have to add notes to ''hundreds'' of pages on this wiki. "Optimus Prime (Animated) looks like Optimus Prime (Movie) looks like Optimus Prime (Armada) looks like Optimus Prime (RID) looks like Optimus Prime (G1)." "Bumblebee (Animated) looks like Bumblebee (Movie) looks like Bumblebee (G1)." And so on and so on and so on. It's ''normal'' for this to happen. (Heck, I'd be ''far'' more inclined to add notes when the characters are notably ''different,'' like all the Scourges.) For people who have seen only Animated, once they click on the disambig link, it'll all be obvious. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:02, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:: So, I favor cutting the "Blackarachnia is based on the original Blackarachnia, who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise," trivia note, lest we also add "Optimus Prime is based on the original Optimus Prime, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Bumblebee is based on the original Bumblebee, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Ratchet is based on the original Ratchet, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Waspinator is based on the original Waspinator, who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise," to their pages, et cetera, ad nauseum. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:08, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: And I favor adding such notes. To me, this is a no-brainer. People who have only ever seen Animated, and no nothing at all about previous iterations of TFs, have no way of knowing if characters in the show they like were based on older versions. New fans come into Transformers all the time. This wiki should be for them too! Before I added that note, there was no link on this page to [[Blackarachnia (BW)]]. ''That's crazy.'' --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 11:56, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: Oh, and I completely disagree that the disambig link is enough. They're not really there to convey information about the character. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 11:59, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::To people who have only ever seen Animated, it would be most logical for them to think that any previous TF with the same name as an Animated TF was the SAME CHARACTER as that Animated TF. For a newbie, it's all Transformers and Optimus is Optimus is Optimus, Megatron is Megatron is Megatron, and Blackarachnia is Blackarachnia is Blackarachnia. It is logical that if there was a Transformer named X before the X you are familiar with that it is the same, and that there probably is a similarity of appearance. It is only when the canon goes explicitly against this trend that we need to call it out (for example BW Inferno is completely different from previous and subsequent Infernoes)> To me, THAT is the no brainer. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 12:04, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::: I don't understand what point you're making. The point I'm making boils down to this this: Animated Blackarachnia was based on Beast Wars Blackarachnia. This is a fundamental fact about the character, thus it should be stated in this article. The same holds true for every other article about a character who has based on an earlier charcter. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 12:11, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::I don't know how I can make it any clearer. To an outsider the two Blackarachnias would seem like the same character, and would thus need no more explicit note of the connection than does the Superman of today need a note explaining that he is based on the Superman of 1938. Same name, within the same brand is expected to be the same character. To say that a character looks like itself is rather silly. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 12:33, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::You assume outsiders even ''know'' there was another Blackarachnia before ''Animated''. The note is for those who do ''not'' know, and expands their knowledge base by explaining to them where the idea for the character they've only just discovered came from. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 13:03, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::I'm assuming that when they find out that there was a Blackarachnia before ''Animated'' that they would expect the more recent one to have been inspired by its predecessor. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 13:21, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::Incidentally, someone who comes to this wiki knowing ''only'' about Animated Blackarachnia, and enters "Blackarachnia" in the search box, is going to be sent to the disambiguation page ''before'' they come to ''this'' page. [[User:JW|JW]] 13:38, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
(Exdenting for readability.) [[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] said, above, "And I favor adding such notes [of the form ''Optimus Blackarachnia (Animated) is based on the original Blackarachnia (BW), who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise'']." KMMC, if you genuinely believe we should add such notes wiki-wide, I recommend you propose it on the Community Portal. [[User:JW|JW]] 13:31, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:I'm pretty sure most articles about homage characters ''already'' note who they're an homage to, as is just common sense. I didn't think I was proposing some change in policy or anything. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 16:03, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::It's a mistake to confuse "what makes sense to you" with "common sense". Of the six "main" Animated characters who are clearly based on G1 counterparts:
::* Optimus: His only link to Op (G1) is hidden in a discussion of his ears.
::* Bumblebee: Contains a few links to BB (G1), one of them hidden, one of them about the "Legacy of Bumblebee" 3-pack, and one of them about a toy's deco.
::* Ratchet: An incidental link about a toy's redeco.
::* Blitzwing: No link to his G1 counterpart at all.
::* Starscream: Only in the discussion of his voice.
::* Megatron: Does have a note about how he looks like Megatron (G1)'s Battlestars body, and how his cannon makes a similar noise.
::So, for six characters, none of them contain anything like "Foo (Animated) is based on the original Foo (G1), who first appeared...", one has ''no'' link to his predecessor, most have only incidental links, and only one really has a link that says, "And he's based on this guy." I welcome counterexamples. Your idea, if implemented, would require additions to scores of pages, and thus ''is'' a policy change. Please propose it on the Community Portal if you're serious about it. [[User:JW|JW]] 16:25, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: ....I certainly don't consider "homage characters should note whom they're homaging" to be "my idea." And I don't think the particular form of the notation is what's important. Counterexamples? Any and all pages where homages are already noted. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 17:23, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:::: Please point me to examples. I found none to speak of. [[User:JW|JW]] 19:11, 26 August 2010 (EDT)

==Opposite Sex==
''"Blackarachnia acts differently around robots of the 'opposite sex' depending on faction; "'' 
I point out that we have no frickin' clue how she acts around robots of the ''same'' sex, since no such meetings have been chronicled. This sentence probably needs rephrasing. [[User:JW|JW]] 14:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

==Transformation==
Do we need a mention of this in trivia? She's hardly the only spinny transformer there. We've seen BB and Prime do it a few times. Ratchet..Bulkhead..Prowl..list goes on.[[User:GWolfv2]]
:Yes, but she's the only one that we haven't seen a full transformation for, unlike all the others. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 20:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
::Yeah, so why make a huge rigmerole of it. Why not have one line. "Thus far, we have yet to see BA have anything but a spinning transformation" or such?

==non-final character model==
[[Image:AniBlackarachniaPromoModel.jpg | thumb | left | "A non-final character model for Blackarachnia was included in the initial Transformers Animated press kit from Cartoon Network. Her toy appears to follow this one more closely in relation to the spider legs positioning in robot mode than the final model." ]]

Shouldn't we note that that version of the character model WAS used in the first episode? you know, coz it was. --[[User:Skyglide|Skyglide]] 23:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
: When? I'm watching through right now on Youtube, and I've seen no occurrence of it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 00:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[[Image:Proto_ba_anim.jpg|thumb|right]]

:: Took a gander myself, and yep, there it is. Leggy-thingies behind the arms, little triangles on the collar... - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 00:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
:::Ah! I misread it as "HER first episode," so I was checking out "Along Came a Spider." That explains it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 00:19, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

{{-}}
==Elita-1 vs. Blackarachnia==
I think ''Animated'' Elita-1 deserves her own page. --[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 01:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:Uh, why? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 01:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:: Why indeed? I disagree. We give a page to each character, and she's the same as another character. She deserves a page no more than Orion Pax or the original [[Ariel]] do. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 01:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:I think that the current redirect is okay, but time will tell on the sad fate on Elita-1...-- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 01:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:::I'm obviously in the minority here, and I don't know the history behind the majority opinion. What criteria is required for a character to have their own page?--[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 01:57, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::::They need to be a distinct character. The ''Animated'' Elita-1 is the same character as the ''Animated'' Blackarachnia. They aren't two different people. They're one person who went by two different names at different points in her life, like G1 Bumblebee and G1 Goldbug. --[[User:Steve-o|Steve-o]] 02:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:Though it does get a little tricky with [[Megatron (G1)|Megatron]] and [[Galvatron (G1)|Galvatron]]...-- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 02:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::Galvatron has unique circumstances. The comic version pulled alternate Galvatrons out of everywhere and even had one or two meet Megatron, plus the fact IDW made him a distinct character. It's a complicated mess better served by two pages. (And Megatron's page is ungodly long as is already.) Elita-1 and Blackarachnia, along with most name changes, is just one straight line. She was Elita-1, but is now Blackarachnia. That's it. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 02:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Gotcha. Suggestion cheerfully withdrawn.--[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 02:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

== Hit her with a shovel joke. ==

Seriously, why are you deleting it? It's humorous enough, it fills in a picture caption, so why do you insist on not allowing it put up, the set up was already there! - Karhukjnsi
:Because it's a horrible joke? Because it was added by a non-contributor? --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:33, 6 January 2010 (EST)
:''I'' '''was''' that non-contributor. It is a humorous joke to those without an overtly snide sense of humor. "I'd hit it..." That's it? That's what we need on this site, even more references to people who love TF Hentai with a passion, adding the "with a shovel" bit at least helps balance it out to relatively socialable people. --[[User:Karhukjnsi|The Beerclaw]] 02:37, 6 January 2010 (EST)
::Obviously the actual joke flew right over your head. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:39, 6 January 2010 (EST)
::and you replace it with '''that''' crap?!, I should take up praying for you. --[[User:Karhukjnsi|The Beerclaw]] 02:40, 6 January 2010 (EST)

== Beast Wars toy reference ==

I think her faceplate is a homage to Blackarachnia's Beast Wars toy robot head.[[User:ACIDSTORM92|ACIDSTORM92]] 17:51, 30 June 2010 (EDT)
: Uh. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:35, 25 August 2010 (EDT)

== Elita 1 toy ==

Doesn't Elita-1 have a toy. I looked up Elita One on Google images and an ''Animated'' Elita-1 toy and box appear in some pictures. Is that a real toy, another japsnese bootleg, or a fan made toy?[[Special:Contributions/71.162.106.213|71.162.106.213]] 21:23, 12 February 2012 (EST)
:No, she does not have a toy. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] 21:27, 12 February 2012 (EST)
::See: [http://i148.photobucket.com/albums/s28/MadKilla25/customs/elita1.jpg][[Special:Contributions/71.162.106.213|71.162.106.213]] 21:48, 12 February 2012 (EST)

Talk:Blackarachnia (Animated)

2012-02-13T02:26:23Z

71.162.106.213: /* Elita 1 toy */

Ep 9 summary

Needs serious work

==New pics and Edits==

I'm uploaded some fine pics of the prototype, and made some minor edits... and it may look good on the page, but the edit page is a mess. Somebody, please, fix it! --[[User:Hepathos|Hepathos]] 21:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

==Caption==

In response to ItsWalky on 1/8/07, the problem with the caption is that if you don't know what "Goth Talk" is, then you have to read about it to understand the caption, and that kinda kills any momentum the joke might have going for it.
Also the fact that she doesn't really even look goth. Just spikey and purple.
: And the problem with the replacement caption is that if you don't know what "Come into my parlor etc" references, then you'd have to read about it to understand the caption! What is the difference? They are both references to things. The previous one was nice enough to provide a link, for those who don't know the reference. I don't see why that should be penalized. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 22:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
::Its all a matter of obscurity. Sometimes something that may be funny to you is not understood by the majority of viewers because of unfamiliarity of what it is a reference too.--[[User:Skyglide|Skyglide]] 23:18, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

== Added her backstory ==

So, what do you guys think?

[[User:Dynamus Prime|Dynamus Prime]] 16:24, 16 February 2008 (UTC)Dynamus Prime
: I think you probably ruined the episode for a lot of people, since it aired not a few minutes on the east coast before you threw spoilers everywhere. Please use better judgment in the future. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
::And the fact that you expect kudos for it is more than a little odd. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 19:51, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
: I think you're a butthole. Is that inappropriate flaming? If so, I redact it, and I think that that kind of behavior might be interpreted as having butthole tendencies. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 02:12, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::''"I think you're a butthole"''...yeah, that's flaming. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 21:27, 16 February 2008 (EST)

=== Beast Mode ===
I'm guessing what's needed is a cleaner shot of ''Blackarachnia''<nowiki>'</nowiki>s beast mode, since we don't know what Elita-1's alt mode was...--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 20:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
:Yeah. That's why I put a comma after Elita-1. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 20:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
::I get it now, thanks. My at-a-glance parsing needs work.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 23:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

== Spoilers ==
I question the use of bold text for "Elita-1" in the summary, considering it is the line immediately after the spoiler tag. The theory behind the tag is that it will catch a person's attention before they begin reading the following text, and that it will thus be processed first so the person can turn away if they do not wish to be spoiled.
But the bold text for that name, I think, has the same attention-capture effect as the spoiler tag. Even though it's only a name, and bolding it might fit with the style guide (hm), I think some discretion might be in order here. --[[User:Sntint|Sntint]] 04:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

== Quick Toy Question ==
I'm looking at the Hasbro stock photo and the exposed portion of her face looks rather deeply recessed compared to the rest. Is the helmet removable or did the picture get overly Photoshopped?--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] 04:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
:Scratch that, ASM pictures cleared it up.--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] 04:46, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

== Yes, She is an Homage ==

On reflection, do we really need a bit in the Trivia section about how she looks like the previous character of the same name? I mean, that's true for most of the Animated characters. Should we have a trivia point on [[Ratchet (Animated)]]'s page about how he looks like the original Ratchet? [[User:JW|JW]] 14:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
:Nah,only for characters that are a visual homage to a character they're ''not'' named after. Like Bulkhead's Hound-inspired colors.[[Special:Contributions/86.87.28.191|86.87.28.191]] 17:24, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
::Would it be worth mentioning that her robot mode design seems to be specifically inspired by the unreleased [[:Image:Blackwidowwildrider.jpg|Binaltech Blackwidow]]? That doesn't seem like it would be as obvious to the average fan as the fact that Ratchet et al are inspired by their G1 incarnations or that Waspinator is inspired by his BW incarnation. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 21:01, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
:::Not really. Every single visual cue she got from Binaltech Blackwidow had originally shown up on Transmetal 2 Blackarachnia. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 21:17, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
The original question of this section baffles me. Of course we should a note on this page that she was based on Beast Wars Blackarachnia! And yes, we damn sure should also have a note on Ani. Racthet's page that he homages G1 Ratchet. How is this even a ''question''? It doesn't matter how "obvious" this stuff seems to us, if you're a fan who's only ever watched Animated, it's not at all obvious to you which characters were based on the previous incarnations of Transformers you're not familiar with. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 22:38, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
:I have to agree with JW, for the uninitiated the idea that [[Blackarachnia (BW)|Blackarachnia]] and [[Blackarachnia (Animated)|Blackarachnia]] are different characters is not one that immediately springs to mind. Therefore a note that this BA is an homage to a previous BA is a bit like saying "she is designed to look like herself". It's a "well, duh" moment. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 10:48, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
: If we decide to note when a character resembles an earlier character of the same name, we'll have to add notes to ''hundreds'' of pages on this wiki. "Optimus Prime (Animated) looks like Optimus Prime (Movie) looks like Optimus Prime (Armada) looks like Optimus Prime (RID) looks like Optimus Prime (G1)." "Bumblebee (Animated) looks like Bumblebee (Movie) looks like Bumblebee (G1)." And so on and so on and so on. It's ''normal'' for this to happen. (Heck, I'd be ''far'' more inclined to add notes when the characters are notably ''different,'' like all the Scourges.) For people who have seen only Animated, once they click on the disambig link, it'll all be obvious. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:02, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:: So, I favor cutting the "Blackarachnia is based on the original Blackarachnia, who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise," trivia note, lest we also add "Optimus Prime is based on the original Optimus Prime, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Bumblebee is based on the original Bumblebee, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Ratchet is based on the original Ratchet, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Waspinator is based on the original Waspinator, who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise," to their pages, et cetera, ad nauseum. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:08, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: And I favor adding such notes. To me, this is a no-brainer. People who have only ever seen Animated, and no nothing at all about previous iterations of TFs, have no way of knowing if characters in the show they like were based on older versions. New fans come into Transformers all the time. This wiki should be for them too! Before I added that note, there was no link on this page to [[Blackarachnia (BW)]]. ''That's crazy.'' --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 11:56, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: Oh, and I completely disagree that the disambig link is enough. They're not really there to convey information about the character. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 11:59, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::To people who have only ever seen Animated, it would be most logical for them to think that any previous TF with the same name as an Animated TF was the SAME CHARACTER as that Animated TF. For a newbie, it's all Transformers and Optimus is Optimus is Optimus, Megatron is Megatron is Megatron, and Blackarachnia is Blackarachnia is Blackarachnia. It is logical that if there was a Transformer named X before the X you are familiar with that it is the same, and that there probably is a similarity of appearance. It is only when the canon goes explicitly against this trend that we need to call it out (for example BW Inferno is completely different from previous and subsequent Infernoes)> To me, THAT is the no brainer. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 12:04, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::: I don't understand what point you're making. The point I'm making boils down to this this: Animated Blackarachnia was based on Beast Wars Blackarachnia. This is a fundamental fact about the character, thus it should be stated in this article. The same holds true for every other article about a character who has based on an earlier charcter. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 12:11, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::I don't know how I can make it any clearer. To an outsider the two Blackarachnias would seem like the same character, and would thus need no more explicit note of the connection than does the Superman of today need a note explaining that he is based on the Superman of 1938. Same name, within the same brand is expected to be the same character. To say that a character looks like itself is rather silly. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 12:33, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::You assume outsiders even ''know'' there was another Blackarachnia before ''Animated''. The note is for those who do ''not'' know, and expands their knowledge base by explaining to them where the idea for the character they've only just discovered came from. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 13:03, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::I'm assuming that when they find out that there was a Blackarachnia before ''Animated'' that they would expect the more recent one to have been inspired by its predecessor. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 13:21, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::Incidentally, someone who comes to this wiki knowing ''only'' about Animated Blackarachnia, and enters "Blackarachnia" in the search box, is going to be sent to the disambiguation page ''before'' they come to ''this'' page. [[User:JW|JW]] 13:38, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
(Exdenting for readability.) [[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] said, above, "And I favor adding such notes [of the form ''Optimus Blackarachnia (Animated) is based on the original Blackarachnia (BW), who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise'']." KMMC, if you genuinely believe we should add such notes wiki-wide, I recommend you propose it on the Community Portal. [[User:JW|JW]] 13:31, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:I'm pretty sure most articles about homage characters ''already'' note who they're an homage to, as is just common sense. I didn't think I was proposing some change in policy or anything. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 16:03, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::It's a mistake to confuse "what makes sense to you" with "common sense". Of the six "main" Animated characters who are clearly based on G1 counterparts:
::* Optimus: His only link to Op (G1) is hidden in a discussion of his ears.
::* Bumblebee: Contains a few links to BB (G1), one of them hidden, one of them about the "Legacy of Bumblebee" 3-pack, and one of them about a toy's deco.
::* Ratchet: An incidental link about a toy's redeco.
::* Blitzwing: No link to his G1 counterpart at all.
::* Starscream: Only in the discussion of his voice.
::* Megatron: Does have a note about how he looks like Megatron (G1)'s Battlestars body, and how his cannon makes a similar noise.
::So, for six characters, none of them contain anything like "Foo (Animated) is based on the original Foo (G1), who first appeared...", one has ''no'' link to his predecessor, most have only incidental links, and only one really has a link that says, "And he's based on this guy." I welcome counterexamples. Your idea, if implemented, would require additions to scores of pages, and thus ''is'' a policy change. Please propose it on the Community Portal if you're serious about it. [[User:JW|JW]] 16:25, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: ....I certainly don't consider "homage characters should note whom they're homaging" to be "my idea." And I don't think the particular form of the notation is what's important. Counterexamples? Any and all pages where homages are already noted. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 17:23, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:::: Please point me to examples. I found none to speak of. [[User:JW|JW]] 19:11, 26 August 2010 (EDT)

==Opposite Sex==
''"Blackarachnia acts differently around robots of the 'opposite sex' depending on faction; "'' 
I point out that we have no frickin' clue how she acts around robots of the ''same'' sex, since no such meetings have been chronicled. This sentence probably needs rephrasing. [[User:JW|JW]] 14:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

==Transformation==
Do we need a mention of this in trivia? She's hardly the only spinny transformer there. We've seen BB and Prime do it a few times. Ratchet..Bulkhead..Prowl..list goes on.[[User:GWolfv2]]
:Yes, but she's the only one that we haven't seen a full transformation for, unlike all the others. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 20:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
::Yeah, so why make a huge rigmerole of it. Why not have one line. "Thus far, we have yet to see BA have anything but a spinning transformation" or such?

==non-final character model==
[[Image:AniBlackarachniaPromoModel.jpg | thumb | left | "A non-final character model for Blackarachnia was included in the initial Transformers Animated press kit from Cartoon Network. Her toy appears to follow this one more closely in relation to the spider legs positioning in robot mode than the final model." ]]

Shouldn't we note that that version of the character model WAS used in the first episode? you know, coz it was. --[[User:Skyglide|Skyglide]] 23:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
: When? I'm watching through right now on Youtube, and I've seen no occurrence of it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 00:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[[Image:Proto_ba_anim.jpg|thumb|right]]

:: Took a gander myself, and yep, there it is. Leggy-thingies behind the arms, little triangles on the collar... - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 00:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
:::Ah! I misread it as "HER first episode," so I was checking out "Along Came a Spider." That explains it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 00:19, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

{{-}}
==Elita-1 vs. Blackarachnia==
I think ''Animated'' Elita-1 deserves her own page. --[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 01:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:Uh, why? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 01:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:: Why indeed? I disagree. We give a page to each character, and she's the same as another character. She deserves a page no more than Orion Pax or the original [[Ariel]] do. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 01:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:I think that the current redirect is okay, but time will tell on the sad fate on Elita-1...-- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 01:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:::I'm obviously in the minority here, and I don't know the history behind the majority opinion. What criteria is required for a character to have their own page?--[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 01:57, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::::They need to be a distinct character. The ''Animated'' Elita-1 is the same character as the ''Animated'' Blackarachnia. They aren't two different people. They're one person who went by two different names at different points in her life, like G1 Bumblebee and G1 Goldbug. --[[User:Steve-o|Steve-o]] 02:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:Though it does get a little tricky with [[Megatron (G1)|Megatron]] and [[Galvatron (G1)|Galvatron]]...-- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 02:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::Galvatron has unique circumstances. The comic version pulled alternate Galvatrons out of everywhere and even had one or two meet Megatron, plus the fact IDW made him a distinct character. It's a complicated mess better served by two pages. (And Megatron's page is ungodly long as is already.) Elita-1 and Blackarachnia, along with most name changes, is just one straight line. She was Elita-1, but is now Blackarachnia. That's it. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 02:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Gotcha. Suggestion cheerfully withdrawn.--[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 02:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

== Hit her with a shovel joke. ==

Seriously, why are you deleting it? It's humorous enough, it fills in a picture caption, so why do you insist on not allowing it put up, the set up was already there! - Karhukjnsi
:Because it's a horrible joke? Because it was added by a non-contributor? --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:33, 6 January 2010 (EST)
:''I'' '''was''' that non-contributor. It is a humorous joke to those without an overtly snide sense of humor. "I'd hit it..." That's it? That's what we need on this site, even more references to people who love TF Hentai with a passion, adding the "with a shovel" bit at least helps balance it out to relatively socialable people. --[[User:Karhukjnsi|The Beerclaw]] 02:37, 6 January 2010 (EST)
::Obviously the actual joke flew right over your head. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:39, 6 January 2010 (EST)
::and you replace it with '''that''' crap?!, I should take up praying for you. --[[User:Karhukjnsi|The Beerclaw]] 02:40, 6 January 2010 (EST)

== Beast Wars toy reference ==

I think her faceplate is a homage to Blackarachnia's Beast Wars toy robot head.[[User:ACIDSTORM92|ACIDSTORM92]] 17:51, 30 June 2010 (EDT)
: Uh. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:35, 25 August 2010 (EDT)

== Elita 1 toy ==

Doesn't Elita-1 have a toy. I looked up Elita One on Google images and an ''Animated'' Elita-1 toy and box appear in some pictures. Is that a real toy, another japsnese bootleg, or a fan made toy?[[Special:Contributions/71.162.106.213|71.162.106.213]] 21:23, 12 February 2012 (EST)

Talk:Blackarachnia (Animated)

2012-02-13T02:25:03Z

71.162.106.213: /* Elita 1 toy */

Ep 9 summary

Needs serious work

==New pics and Edits==

I'm uploaded some fine pics of the prototype, and made some minor edits... and it may look good on the page, but the edit page is a mess. Somebody, please, fix it! --[[User:Hepathos|Hepathos]] 21:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

==Caption==

In response to ItsWalky on 1/8/07, the problem with the caption is that if you don't know what "Goth Talk" is, then you have to read about it to understand the caption, and that kinda kills any momentum the joke might have going for it.
Also the fact that she doesn't really even look goth. Just spikey and purple.
: And the problem with the replacement caption is that if you don't know what "Come into my parlor etc" references, then you'd have to read about it to understand the caption! What is the difference? They are both references to things. The previous one was nice enough to provide a link, for those who don't know the reference. I don't see why that should be penalized. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 22:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
::Its all a matter of obscurity. Sometimes something that may be funny to you is not understood by the majority of viewers because of unfamiliarity of what it is a reference too.--[[User:Skyglide|Skyglide]] 23:18, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

== Added her backstory ==

So, what do you guys think?

[[User:Dynamus Prime|Dynamus Prime]] 16:24, 16 February 2008 (UTC)Dynamus Prime
: I think you probably ruined the episode for a lot of people, since it aired not a few minutes on the east coast before you threw spoilers everywhere. Please use better judgment in the future. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
::And the fact that you expect kudos for it is more than a little odd. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 19:51, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
: I think you're a butthole. Is that inappropriate flaming? If so, I redact it, and I think that that kind of behavior might be interpreted as having butthole tendencies. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 02:12, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::''"I think you're a butthole"''...yeah, that's flaming. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 21:27, 16 February 2008 (EST)

=== Beast Mode ===
I'm guessing what's needed is a cleaner shot of ''Blackarachnia''<nowiki>'</nowiki>s beast mode, since we don't know what Elita-1's alt mode was...--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 20:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
:Yeah. That's why I put a comma after Elita-1. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 20:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
::I get it now, thanks. My at-a-glance parsing needs work.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 23:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

== Spoilers ==
I question the use of bold text for "Elita-1" in the summary, considering it is the line immediately after the spoiler tag. The theory behind the tag is that it will catch a person's attention before they begin reading the following text, and that it will thus be processed first so the person can turn away if they do not wish to be spoiled.
But the bold text for that name, I think, has the same attention-capture effect as the spoiler tag. Even though it's only a name, and bolding it might fit with the style guide (hm), I think some discretion might be in order here. --[[User:Sntint|Sntint]] 04:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

== Quick Toy Question ==
I'm looking at the Hasbro stock photo and the exposed portion of her face looks rather deeply recessed compared to the rest. Is the helmet removable or did the picture get overly Photoshopped?--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] 04:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
:Scratch that, ASM pictures cleared it up.--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] 04:46, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

== Yes, She is an Homage ==

On reflection, do we really need a bit in the Trivia section about how she looks like the previous character of the same name? I mean, that's true for most of the Animated characters. Should we have a trivia point on [[Ratchet (Animated)]]'s page about how he looks like the original Ratchet? [[User:JW|JW]] 14:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
:Nah,only for characters that are a visual homage to a character they're ''not'' named after. Like Bulkhead's Hound-inspired colors.[[Special:Contributions/86.87.28.191|86.87.28.191]] 17:24, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
::Would it be worth mentioning that her robot mode design seems to be specifically inspired by the unreleased [[:Image:Blackwidowwildrider.jpg|Binaltech Blackwidow]]? That doesn't seem like it would be as obvious to the average fan as the fact that Ratchet et al are inspired by their G1 incarnations or that Waspinator is inspired by his BW incarnation. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 21:01, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
:::Not really. Every single visual cue she got from Binaltech Blackwidow had originally shown up on Transmetal 2 Blackarachnia. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 21:17, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
The original question of this section baffles me. Of course we should a note on this page that she was based on Beast Wars Blackarachnia! And yes, we damn sure should also have a note on Ani. Racthet's page that he homages G1 Ratchet. How is this even a ''question''? It doesn't matter how "obvious" this stuff seems to us, if you're a fan who's only ever watched Animated, it's not at all obvious to you which characters were based on the previous incarnations of Transformers you're not familiar with. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 22:38, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
:I have to agree with JW, for the uninitiated the idea that [[Blackarachnia (BW)|Blackarachnia]] and [[Blackarachnia (Animated)|Blackarachnia]] are different characters is not one that immediately springs to mind. Therefore a note that this BA is an homage to a previous BA is a bit like saying "she is designed to look like herself". It's a "well, duh" moment. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 10:48, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
: If we decide to note when a character resembles an earlier character of the same name, we'll have to add notes to ''hundreds'' of pages on this wiki. "Optimus Prime (Animated) looks like Optimus Prime (Movie) looks like Optimus Prime (Armada) looks like Optimus Prime (RID) looks like Optimus Prime (G1)." "Bumblebee (Animated) looks like Bumblebee (Movie) looks like Bumblebee (G1)." And so on and so on and so on. It's ''normal'' for this to happen. (Heck, I'd be ''far'' more inclined to add notes when the characters are notably ''different,'' like all the Scourges.) For people who have seen only Animated, once they click on the disambig link, it'll all be obvious. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:02, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:: So, I favor cutting the "Blackarachnia is based on the original Blackarachnia, who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise," trivia note, lest we also add "Optimus Prime is based on the original Optimus Prime, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Bumblebee is based on the original Bumblebee, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Ratchet is based on the original Ratchet, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Waspinator is based on the original Waspinator, who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise," to their pages, et cetera, ad nauseum. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:08, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: And I favor adding such notes. To me, this is a no-brainer. People who have only ever seen Animated, and no nothing at all about previous iterations of TFs, have no way of knowing if characters in the show they like were based on older versions. New fans come into Transformers all the time. This wiki should be for them too! Before I added that note, there was no link on this page to [[Blackarachnia (BW)]]. ''That's crazy.'' --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 11:56, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: Oh, and I completely disagree that the disambig link is enough. They're not really there to convey information about the character. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 11:59, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::To people who have only ever seen Animated, it would be most logical for them to think that any previous TF with the same name as an Animated TF was the SAME CHARACTER as that Animated TF. For a newbie, it's all Transformers and Optimus is Optimus is Optimus, Megatron is Megatron is Megatron, and Blackarachnia is Blackarachnia is Blackarachnia. It is logical that if there was a Transformer named X before the X you are familiar with that it is the same, and that there probably is a similarity of appearance. It is only when the canon goes explicitly against this trend that we need to call it out (for example BW Inferno is completely different from previous and subsequent Infernoes)> To me, THAT is the no brainer. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 12:04, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::: I don't understand what point you're making. The point I'm making boils down to this this: Animated Blackarachnia was based on Beast Wars Blackarachnia. This is a fundamental fact about the character, thus it should be stated in this article. The same holds true for every other article about a character who has based on an earlier charcter. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 12:11, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::I don't know how I can make it any clearer. To an outsider the two Blackarachnias would seem like the same character, and would thus need no more explicit note of the connection than does the Superman of today need a note explaining that he is based on the Superman of 1938. Same name, within the same brand is expected to be the same character. To say that a character looks like itself is rather silly. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 12:33, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::You assume outsiders even ''know'' there was another Blackarachnia before ''Animated''. The note is for those who do ''not'' know, and expands their knowledge base by explaining to them where the idea for the character they've only just discovered came from. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 13:03, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::I'm assuming that when they find out that there was a Blackarachnia before ''Animated'' that they would expect the more recent one to have been inspired by its predecessor. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 13:21, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::Incidentally, someone who comes to this wiki knowing ''only'' about Animated Blackarachnia, and enters "Blackarachnia" in the search box, is going to be sent to the disambiguation page ''before'' they come to ''this'' page. [[User:JW|JW]] 13:38, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
(Exdenting for readability.) [[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] said, above, "And I favor adding such notes [of the form ''Optimus Blackarachnia (Animated) is based on the original Blackarachnia (BW), who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise'']." KMMC, if you genuinely believe we should add such notes wiki-wide, I recommend you propose it on the Community Portal. [[User:JW|JW]] 13:31, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:I'm pretty sure most articles about homage characters ''already'' note who they're an homage to, as is just common sense. I didn't think I was proposing some change in policy or anything. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 16:03, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::It's a mistake to confuse "what makes sense to you" with "common sense". Of the six "main" Animated characters who are clearly based on G1 counterparts:
::* Optimus: His only link to Op (G1) is hidden in a discussion of his ears.
::* Bumblebee: Contains a few links to BB (G1), one of them hidden, one of them about the "Legacy of Bumblebee" 3-pack, and one of them about a toy's deco.
::* Ratchet: An incidental link about a toy's redeco.
::* Blitzwing: No link to his G1 counterpart at all.
::* Starscream: Only in the discussion of his voice.
::* Megatron: Does have a note about how he looks like Megatron (G1)'s Battlestars body, and how his cannon makes a similar noise.
::So, for six characters, none of them contain anything like "Foo (Animated) is based on the original Foo (G1), who first appeared...", one has ''no'' link to his predecessor, most have only incidental links, and only one really has a link that says, "And he's based on this guy." I welcome counterexamples. Your idea, if implemented, would require additions to scores of pages, and thus ''is'' a policy change. Please propose it on the Community Portal if you're serious about it. [[User:JW|JW]] 16:25, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: ....I certainly don't consider "homage characters should note whom they're homaging" to be "my idea." And I don't think the particular form of the notation is what's important. Counterexamples? Any and all pages where homages are already noted. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 17:23, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:::: Please point me to examples. I found none to speak of. [[User:JW|JW]] 19:11, 26 August 2010 (EDT)

==Opposite Sex==
''"Blackarachnia acts differently around robots of the 'opposite sex' depending on faction; "'' 
I point out that we have no frickin' clue how she acts around robots of the ''same'' sex, since no such meetings have been chronicled. This sentence probably needs rephrasing. [[User:JW|JW]] 14:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

==Transformation==
Do we need a mention of this in trivia? She's hardly the only spinny transformer there. We've seen BB and Prime do it a few times. Ratchet..Bulkhead..Prowl..list goes on.[[User:GWolfv2]]
:Yes, but she's the only one that we haven't seen a full transformation for, unlike all the others. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 20:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
::Yeah, so why make a huge rigmerole of it. Why not have one line. "Thus far, we have yet to see BA have anything but a spinning transformation" or such?

==non-final character model==
[[Image:AniBlackarachniaPromoModel.jpg | thumb | left | "A non-final character model for Blackarachnia was included in the initial Transformers Animated press kit from Cartoon Network. Her toy appears to follow this one more closely in relation to the spider legs positioning in robot mode than the final model." ]]

Shouldn't we note that that version of the character model WAS used in the first episode? you know, coz it was. --[[User:Skyglide|Skyglide]] 23:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
: When? I'm watching through right now on Youtube, and I've seen no occurrence of it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 00:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[[Image:Proto_ba_anim.jpg|thumb|right]]

:: Took a gander myself, and yep, there it is. Leggy-thingies behind the arms, little triangles on the collar... - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 00:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
:::Ah! I misread it as "HER first episode," so I was checking out "Along Came a Spider." That explains it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 00:19, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

{{-}}
==Elita-1 vs. Blackarachnia==
I think ''Animated'' Elita-1 deserves her own page. --[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 01:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:Uh, why? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 01:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:: Why indeed? I disagree. We give a page to each character, and she's the same as another character. She deserves a page no more than Orion Pax or the original [[Ariel]] do. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 01:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:I think that the current redirect is okay, but time will tell on the sad fate on Elita-1...-- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 01:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:::I'm obviously in the minority here, and I don't know the history behind the majority opinion. What criteria is required for a character to have their own page?--[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 01:57, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::::They need to be a distinct character. The ''Animated'' Elita-1 is the same character as the ''Animated'' Blackarachnia. They aren't two different people. They're one person who went by two different names at different points in her life, like G1 Bumblebee and G1 Goldbug. --[[User:Steve-o|Steve-o]] 02:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:Though it does get a little tricky with [[Megatron (G1)|Megatron]] and [[Galvatron (G1)|Galvatron]]...-- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 02:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::Galvatron has unique circumstances. The comic version pulled alternate Galvatrons out of everywhere and even had one or two meet Megatron, plus the fact IDW made him a distinct character. It's a complicated mess better served by two pages. (And Megatron's page is ungodly long as is already.) Elita-1 and Blackarachnia, along with most name changes, is just one straight line. She was Elita-1, but is now Blackarachnia. That's it. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 02:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Gotcha. Suggestion cheerfully withdrawn.--[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 02:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

== Hit her with a shovel joke. ==

Seriously, why are you deleting it? It's humorous enough, it fills in a picture caption, so why do you insist on not allowing it put up, the set up was already there! - Karhukjnsi
:Because it's a horrible joke? Because it was added by a non-contributor? --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:33, 6 January 2010 (EST)
:''I'' '''was''' that non-contributor. It is a humorous joke to those without an overtly snide sense of humor. "I'd hit it..." That's it? That's what we need on this site, even more references to people who love TF Hentai with a passion, adding the "with a shovel" bit at least helps balance it out to relatively socialable people. --[[User:Karhukjnsi|The Beerclaw]] 02:37, 6 January 2010 (EST)
::Obviously the actual joke flew right over your head. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:39, 6 January 2010 (EST)
::and you replace it with '''that''' crap?!, I should take up praying for you. --[[User:Karhukjnsi|The Beerclaw]] 02:40, 6 January 2010 (EST)

== Beast Wars toy reference ==

I think her faceplate is a homage to Blackarachnia's Beast Wars toy robot head.[[User:ACIDSTORM92|ACIDSTORM92]] 17:51, 30 June 2010 (EDT)
: Uh. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:35, 25 August 2010 (EDT)

== Elita 1 toy ==

Doesn't Elita-1 have a toy. I looked up Elita One on Google and an ''Animated'' Elita-1 toy and box appear in some pictures. Is that a real toy, another japsnese bbootleg, or a fan made toy?[[Special:Contributions/71.162.106.213|71.162.106.213]] 21:23, 12 February 2012 (EST)

Talk:Blackarachnia (Animated)

2012-02-13T02:23:43Z

71.162.106.213: /* Elita 1 toy */ new section

Ep 9 summary

Needs serious work

==New pics and Edits==

I'm uploaded some fine pics of the prototype, and made some minor edits... and it may look good on the page, but the edit page is a mess. Somebody, please, fix it! --[[User:Hepathos|Hepathos]] 21:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

==Caption==

In response to ItsWalky on 1/8/07, the problem with the caption is that if you don't know what "Goth Talk" is, then you have to read about it to understand the caption, and that kinda kills any momentum the joke might have going for it.
Also the fact that she doesn't really even look goth. Just spikey and purple.
: And the problem with the replacement caption is that if you don't know what "Come into my parlor etc" references, then you'd have to read about it to understand the caption! What is the difference? They are both references to things. The previous one was nice enough to provide a link, for those who don't know the reference. I don't see why that should be penalized. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 22:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
::Its all a matter of obscurity. Sometimes something that may be funny to you is not understood by the majority of viewers because of unfamiliarity of what it is a reference too.--[[User:Skyglide|Skyglide]] 23:18, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

== Added her backstory ==

So, what do you guys think?

[[User:Dynamus Prime|Dynamus Prime]] 16:24, 16 February 2008 (UTC)Dynamus Prime
: I think you probably ruined the episode for a lot of people, since it aired not a few minutes on the east coast before you threw spoilers everywhere. Please use better judgment in the future. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
::And the fact that you expect kudos for it is more than a little odd. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 19:51, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
: I think you're a butthole. Is that inappropriate flaming? If so, I redact it, and I think that that kind of behavior might be interpreted as having butthole tendencies. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 02:12, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::''"I think you're a butthole"''...yeah, that's flaming. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 21:27, 16 February 2008 (EST)

=== Beast Mode ===
I'm guessing what's needed is a cleaner shot of ''Blackarachnia''<nowiki>'</nowiki>s beast mode, since we don't know what Elita-1's alt mode was...--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 20:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
:Yeah. That's why I put a comma after Elita-1. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 20:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
::I get it now, thanks. My at-a-glance parsing needs work.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 23:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

== Spoilers ==
I question the use of bold text for "Elita-1" in the summary, considering it is the line immediately after the spoiler tag. The theory behind the tag is that it will catch a person's attention before they begin reading the following text, and that it will thus be processed first so the person can turn away if they do not wish to be spoiled.
But the bold text for that name, I think, has the same attention-capture effect as the spoiler tag. Even though it's only a name, and bolding it might fit with the style guide (hm), I think some discretion might be in order here. --[[User:Sntint|Sntint]] 04:24, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

== Quick Toy Question ==
I'm looking at the Hasbro stock photo and the exposed portion of her face looks rather deeply recessed compared to the rest. Is the helmet removable or did the picture get overly Photoshopped?--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] 04:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
:Scratch that, ASM pictures cleared it up.--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] 04:46, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

== Yes, She is an Homage ==

On reflection, do we really need a bit in the Trivia section about how she looks like the previous character of the same name? I mean, that's true for most of the Animated characters. Should we have a trivia point on [[Ratchet (Animated)]]'s page about how he looks like the original Ratchet? [[User:JW|JW]] 14:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
:Nah,only for characters that are a visual homage to a character they're ''not'' named after. Like Bulkhead's Hound-inspired colors.[[Special:Contributions/86.87.28.191|86.87.28.191]] 17:24, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
::Would it be worth mentioning that her robot mode design seems to be specifically inspired by the unreleased [[:Image:Blackwidowwildrider.jpg|Binaltech Blackwidow]]? That doesn't seem like it would be as obvious to the average fan as the fact that Ratchet et al are inspired by their G1 incarnations or that Waspinator is inspired by his BW incarnation. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 21:01, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
:::Not really. Every single visual cue she got from Binaltech Blackwidow had originally shown up on Transmetal 2 Blackarachnia. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 21:17, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
The original question of this section baffles me. Of course we should a note on this page that she was based on Beast Wars Blackarachnia! And yes, we damn sure should also have a note on Ani. Racthet's page that he homages G1 Ratchet. How is this even a ''question''? It doesn't matter how "obvious" this stuff seems to us, if you're a fan who's only ever watched Animated, it's not at all obvious to you which characters were based on the previous incarnations of Transformers you're not familiar with. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 22:38, 25 August 2010 (EDT)
:I have to agree with JW, for the uninitiated the idea that [[Blackarachnia (BW)|Blackarachnia]] and [[Blackarachnia (Animated)|Blackarachnia]] are different characters is not one that immediately springs to mind. Therefore a note that this BA is an homage to a previous BA is a bit like saying "she is designed to look like herself". It's a "well, duh" moment. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 10:48, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
: If we decide to note when a character resembles an earlier character of the same name, we'll have to add notes to ''hundreds'' of pages on this wiki. "Optimus Prime (Animated) looks like Optimus Prime (Movie) looks like Optimus Prime (Armada) looks like Optimus Prime (RID) looks like Optimus Prime (G1)." "Bumblebee (Animated) looks like Bumblebee (Movie) looks like Bumblebee (G1)." And so on and so on and so on. It's ''normal'' for this to happen. (Heck, I'd be ''far'' more inclined to add notes when the characters are notably ''different,'' like all the Scourges.) For people who have seen only Animated, once they click on the disambig link, it'll all be obvious. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:02, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:: So, I favor cutting the "Blackarachnia is based on the original Blackarachnia, who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise," trivia note, lest we also add "Optimus Prime is based on the original Optimus Prime, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Bumblebee is based on the original Bumblebee, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Ratchet is based on the original Ratchet, who first appeared in the G1 franchise," "Waspinator is based on the original Waspinator, who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise," to their pages, et cetera, ad nauseum. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:08, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: And I favor adding such notes. To me, this is a no-brainer. People who have only ever seen Animated, and no nothing at all about previous iterations of TFs, have no way of knowing if characters in the show they like were based on older versions. New fans come into Transformers all the time. This wiki should be for them too! Before I added that note, there was no link on this page to [[Blackarachnia (BW)]]. ''That's crazy.'' --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 11:56, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: Oh, and I completely disagree that the disambig link is enough. They're not really there to convey information about the character. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 11:59, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::To people who have only ever seen Animated, it would be most logical for them to think that any previous TF with the same name as an Animated TF was the SAME CHARACTER as that Animated TF. For a newbie, it's all Transformers and Optimus is Optimus is Optimus, Megatron is Megatron is Megatron, and Blackarachnia is Blackarachnia is Blackarachnia. It is logical that if there was a Transformer named X before the X you are familiar with that it is the same, and that there probably is a similarity of appearance. It is only when the canon goes explicitly against this trend that we need to call it out (for example BW Inferno is completely different from previous and subsequent Infernoes)> To me, THAT is the no brainer. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 12:04, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::: I don't understand what point you're making. The point I'm making boils down to this this: Animated Blackarachnia was based on Beast Wars Blackarachnia. This is a fundamental fact about the character, thus it should be stated in this article. The same holds true for every other article about a character who has based on an earlier charcter. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 12:11, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::I don't know how I can make it any clearer. To an outsider the two Blackarachnias would seem like the same character, and would thus need no more explicit note of the connection than does the Superman of today need a note explaining that he is based on the Superman of 1938. Same name, within the same brand is expected to be the same character. To say that a character looks like itself is rather silly. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 12:33, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:::::::You assume outsiders even ''know'' there was another Blackarachnia before ''Animated''. The note is for those who do ''not'' know, and expands their knowledge base by explaining to them where the idea for the character they've only just discovered came from. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 13:03, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::I'm assuming that when they find out that there was a Blackarachnia before ''Animated'' that they would expect the more recent one to have been inspired by its predecessor. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 13:21, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::::::::Incidentally, someone who comes to this wiki knowing ''only'' about Animated Blackarachnia, and enters "Blackarachnia" in the search box, is going to be sent to the disambiguation page ''before'' they come to ''this'' page. [[User:JW|JW]] 13:38, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
(Exdenting for readability.) [[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] said, above, "And I favor adding such notes [of the form ''Optimus Blackarachnia (Animated) is based on the original Blackarachnia (BW), who first appeared in the Beast Wars franchise'']." KMMC, if you genuinely believe we should add such notes wiki-wide, I recommend you propose it on the Community Portal. [[User:JW|JW]] 13:31, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:I'm pretty sure most articles about homage characters ''already'' note who they're an homage to, as is just common sense. I didn't think I was proposing some change in policy or anything. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 16:03, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::It's a mistake to confuse "what makes sense to you" with "common sense". Of the six "main" Animated characters who are clearly based on G1 counterparts:
::* Optimus: His only link to Op (G1) is hidden in a discussion of his ears.
::* Bumblebee: Contains a few links to BB (G1), one of them hidden, one of them about the "Legacy of Bumblebee" 3-pack, and one of them about a toy's deco.
::* Ratchet: An incidental link about a toy's redeco.
::* Blitzwing: No link to his G1 counterpart at all.
::* Starscream: Only in the discussion of his voice.
::* Megatron: Does have a note about how he looks like Megatron (G1)'s Battlestars body, and how his cannon makes a similar noise.
::So, for six characters, none of them contain anything like "Foo (Animated) is based on the original Foo (G1), who first appeared...", one has ''no'' link to his predecessor, most have only incidental links, and only one really has a link that says, "And he's based on this guy." I welcome counterexamples. Your idea, if implemented, would require additions to scores of pages, and thus ''is'' a policy change. Please propose it on the Community Portal if you're serious about it. [[User:JW|JW]] 16:25, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
::: ....I certainly don't consider "homage characters should note whom they're homaging" to be "my idea." And I don't think the particular form of the notation is what's important. Counterexamples? Any and all pages where homages are already noted. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 17:23, 26 August 2010 (EDT)
:::: Please point me to examples. I found none to speak of. [[User:JW|JW]] 19:11, 26 August 2010 (EDT)

==Opposite Sex==
''"Blackarachnia acts differently around robots of the 'opposite sex' depending on faction; "'' 
I point out that we have no frickin' clue how she acts around robots of the ''same'' sex, since no such meetings have been chronicled. This sentence probably needs rephrasing. [[User:JW|JW]] 14:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

==Transformation==
Do we need a mention of this in trivia? She's hardly the only spinny transformer there. We've seen BB and Prime do it a few times. Ratchet..Bulkhead..Prowl..list goes on.[[User:GWolfv2]]
:Yes, but she's the only one that we haven't seen a full transformation for, unlike all the others. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 20:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
::Yeah, so why make a huge rigmerole of it. Why not have one line. "Thus far, we have yet to see BA have anything but a spinning transformation" or such?

==non-final character model==
[[Image:AniBlackarachniaPromoModel.jpg | thumb | left | "A non-final character model for Blackarachnia was included in the initial Transformers Animated press kit from Cartoon Network. Her toy appears to follow this one more closely in relation to the spider legs positioning in robot mode than the final model." ]]

Shouldn't we note that that version of the character model WAS used in the first episode? you know, coz it was. --[[User:Skyglide|Skyglide]] 23:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
: When? I'm watching through right now on Youtube, and I've seen no occurrence of it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 00:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[[Image:Proto_ba_anim.jpg|thumb|right]]

:: Took a gander myself, and yep, there it is. Leggy-thingies behind the arms, little triangles on the collar... - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 00:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
:::Ah! I misread it as "HER first episode," so I was checking out "Along Came a Spider." That explains it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 00:19, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

{{-}}
==Elita-1 vs. Blackarachnia==
I think ''Animated'' Elita-1 deserves her own page. --[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 01:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:Uh, why? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 01:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:: Why indeed? I disagree. We give a page to each character, and she's the same as another character. She deserves a page no more than Orion Pax or the original [[Ariel]] do. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 01:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:I think that the current redirect is okay, but time will tell on the sad fate on Elita-1...-- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 01:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:::I'm obviously in the minority here, and I don't know the history behind the majority opinion. What criteria is required for a character to have their own page?--[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 01:57, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::::They need to be a distinct character. The ''Animated'' Elita-1 is the same character as the ''Animated'' Blackarachnia. They aren't two different people. They're one person who went by two different names at different points in her life, like G1 Bumblebee and G1 Goldbug. --[[User:Steve-o|Steve-o]] 02:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
:Though it does get a little tricky with [[Megatron (G1)|Megatron]] and [[Galvatron (G1)|Galvatron]]...-- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 02:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
::Galvatron has unique circumstances. The comic version pulled alternate Galvatrons out of everywhere and even had one or two meet Megatron, plus the fact IDW made him a distinct character. It's a complicated mess better served by two pages. (And Megatron's page is ungodly long as is already.) Elita-1 and Blackarachnia, along with most name changes, is just one straight line. She was Elita-1, but is now Blackarachnia. That's it. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 02:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
Gotcha. Suggestion cheerfully withdrawn.--[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 02:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

== Hit her with a shovel joke. ==

Seriously, why are you deleting it? It's humorous enough, it fills in a picture caption, so why do you insist on not allowing it put up, the set up was already there! - Karhukjnsi
:Because it's a horrible joke? Because it was added by a non-contributor? --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:33, 6 January 2010 (EST)
:''I'' '''was''' that non-contributor. It is a humorous joke to those without an overtly snide sense of humor. "I'd hit it..." That's it? That's what we need on this site, even more references to people who love TF Hentai with a passion, adding the "with a shovel" bit at least helps balance it out to relatively socialable people. --[[User:Karhukjnsi|The Beerclaw]] 02:37, 6 January 2010 (EST)
::Obviously the actual joke flew right over your head. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:39, 6 January 2010 (EST)
::and you replace it with '''that''' crap?!, I should take up praying for you. --[[User:Karhukjnsi|The Beerclaw]] 02:40, 6 January 2010 (EST)

== Beast Wars toy reference ==

I think her faceplate is a homage to Blackarachnia's Beast Wars toy robot head.[[User:ACIDSTORM92|ACIDSTORM92]] 17:51, 30 June 2010 (EDT)
: Uh. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:35, 25 August 2010 (EDT)

== Elita 1 toy ==

Doesn't Elita-1 have a toy. I look up Elita One on Google and an ''Animated'' Elita-1 toy and box appear in some pictures. Is that a real toy, or a bootleg or a fan made toy?[[Special:Contributions/71.162.106.213|71.162.106.213]] 21:23, 12 February 2012 (EST)

Silverbolt Major

2012-02-12T02:57:29Z

71.162.106.213: /* Notes */

{{factions|autobot}}
{{disambig3|Silverbolt}}
:''Silverbolt Major is an [[Autobot]] from the [[Transformers Animated (franchise)|Animated]] continuity family.''
[[Image:Silverbolt_by_BillForster.jpg|right|thumb|300px|I shoulda been a [[Silverbolt (BW)|''Beast Wars'' homage]].]]
'''Silverbolt Major''' was the Autobot bonded to [[Delta Supreme]].

==Fiction==
===''Transformers Animated''===
Silverbolt's connection to Delta Supreme was presumably lost when Delta blew up, assuming he was not on board his ship when it was destroyed. {{storylink|Transformers Animated: The AllSpark Almanac II}}

==Notes==
* His appearance is based off the [[Generation 1]] character [[Silverbolt (G1)|Silverbolt]].
* Though not much is known about him, since Autobots can't fly, we do know he does not transform into a plane.
[[Category:Almanac-only characters]]
[[Category:Animated Autobots]]

Silverbolt Major

2012-02-12T02:56:49Z

71.162.106.213: /* Transformers Animated */

{{factions|autobot}}
{{disambig3|Silverbolt}}
:''Silverbolt Major is an [[Autobot]] from the [[Transformers Animated (franchise)|Animated]] continuity family.''
[[Image:Silverbolt_by_BillForster.jpg|right|thumb|300px|I shoulda been a [[Silverbolt (BW)|''Beast Wars'' homage]].]]
'''Silverbolt Major''' was the Autobot bonded to [[Delta Supreme]].

==Fiction==
===''Transformers Animated''===
Silverbolt's connection to Delta Supreme was presumably lost when Delta blew up, assuming he was not on board his ship when it was destroyed. {{storylink|Transformers Animated: The AllSpark Almanac II}}

==Notes==
* His appearance is based off the [[Generation 1]] character [[Silverbolt (G1)|Silverbolt]].
* Though not much is known about him, since Autobots can't fly, we do known he did not transform into a plane.
[[Category:Almanac-only characters]]
[[Category:Animated Autobots]]

Orion Pax (disambiguation)

2012-02-12T00:28:33Z

71.162.106.213:

The name '''Orion Pax''' has been applied to multiple characters or concepts within the [[Transformers brand|''Transformers'' brand]].

{{disamb|y=1985|[[Orion Pax (G1)|Orion Pax]], the pre-[[Prime (rank)|Prime]] identity of the [[Autobot]] [[Optimus Prime (G1)|Optimus Prime]] from [[Generation 1 (franchise)|Generation 1]].}}
{{disamb|y=2010|[[Orion Pax (Prime)|Orion Pax]], the pre-Prime identity of the Autobot [[Optimus Prime (Prime)|Optimus Prime]] from ''[[Transformers: Prime (franchise)|Prime]]''.}}
{{disamb|y=2012|"[[Orion Pax (episode)|Orion Pax]]", the three-part premiere of the second season of ''[[Transformers: Prime (cartoon)|Prime]]'':
**[[Orion Pax, Part 1|Part 1]]
**[[Orion Pax, Part 2|Part 2]]
**[[Orion Pax, Part 3|Part 3]]}}

See also: [[Optimus Prime (disambiguation)]].

Orion Pax should not be confused with:

*[[Optronix (disambiguation)|Optronix]]
*[[Orion (disambiguation)]]

{{disambig}}

Orion Pax (disambiguation)

2012-02-12T00:22:48Z

71.162.106.213:

The name '''Orion Pax''' has been applied to multiple characters or concepts within the [[Transformers brand|''Transformers'' brand]].

{{disamb|y=1985|Orion Pax, the pre-[[Prime (rank)|Prime]] identity of the [[Autobot]] [[Optimus Prime (G1)|Optimus Prime]] from [[Generation 1 (franchise)|Generation 1]].}}
{{disamb|y=2010|Orion Pax, the pre-Prime identity of the Autobot [[Optimus Prime (Prime)|Optimus Prime]] from ''[[Transformers: Prime (franchise)|Prime]]''.}}
{{disamb|y=2012|"[[Orion Pax (episode)|Orion Pax]]", the three-part premiere of the second season of ''[[Transformers: Prime (cartoon)|Prime]]'':
**[[Orion Pax, Part 1|Part 1]]
**[[Orion Pax, Part 2|Part 2]]
**[[Orion Pax, Part 3|Part 3]]}}

See also: [[Optimus Prime (disambiguation)]].

Orion Pax should not be confused with:

*[[Optronix (disambiguation)|Optronix]]
*[[Orion (disambiguation)]]

{{disambig}}

Orion Pax

2012-02-11T23:49:53Z

71.162.106.213:

{{Disambig3|Orion Pax}}
The first episode of Season 2 will air on February 18, 2012.

{{chapters
|title=''Orion Pax'' parts
|prev=One Shall Rise, Part 3
|next=
|content=* [[Orion Pax, Part 1|1]]
* [[Orion Pax, Part 2|2]]
* [[Orion Pax, Part 3|3]]
}}

[[Category:Prime episodes]]

Orion Pax

2012-02-11T23:48:59Z

71.162.106.213:

The first episode of Season 2 will air on February 18, 2012.

{{chapters
|title=''Orion Pax'' parts
|prev=One Shall Rise, Part 3
|next=
|content=* [[Orion Pax, Part 1|1]]
* [[Orion Pax, Part 2|2]]
* [[Orion Pax, Part 3|3]]
}}

[[Category:Prime episodes]]