Talk:Blackarachnia (Animated)

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! --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. --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.--Skyglide 23:18, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Added her backstory

So, what do you guys think?

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. --ItsWalky 19:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

And the fact that you expect kudos for it is more than a little odd. -- 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. -hx 02:12, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

"I think you're a butthole"...yeah, that's flaming. -- SFH 21:27, 16 February 2008 (EST)

Beast Mode

I'm guessing what's needed is a cleaner shot of Blackarachnia's beast mode, since we don't know what Elita-1's alt mode was...--Apcog 20:54, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. That's why I put a comma after Elita-1. -- SFH 20:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I get it now, thanks. My at-a-glance parsing needs work.--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. --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?--MCRG 04:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Scratch that, ASM pictures cleared it up.--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? 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.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 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. --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. --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. --KilMichaelMcC 22:38, 25 August 2010 (EDT)

I have to agree with JW, for the uninitiated the idea that Blackarachnia and 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. --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. 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. 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. --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. --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. --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. --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. --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. - 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. --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. JW 13:38, 26 August 2010 (EDT)

(Exdenting for readability.) 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. 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. --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. 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. --KilMichaelMcC 17:23, 26 August 2010 (EDT)

Please point me to examples. I found none to speak of. 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. 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. -- 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

"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. --Skyglide 23:16, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

When? I'm watching through right now on Youtube, and I've seen no occurrence of it. --ItsWalky 00:08, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Took a gander myself, and yep, there it is. Leggy-thingies behind the arms, little triangles on the collar... - 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. --ItsWalky 00:19, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Elita-1 vs. Blackarachnia

I think Animated Elita-1 deserves her own page. --Suzyprime 01:28, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Uh, why? —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. --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...-- 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?--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. --Steve-o 02:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Though it does get a little tricky with Megatron and Galvatron...-- 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. —Interrobang 02:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Gotcha. Suggestion cheerfully withdrawn.--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? --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. --The Beerclaw 02:37, 6 January 2010 (EST)

Obviously the actual joke flew right over your head. --Detour 02:39, 6 January 2010 (EST)

and you replace it with that crap?!, I should take up praying for you. --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.ACIDSTORM92 17:51, 30 June 2010 (EDT)

Uh. --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?71.162.106.213 21:23, 12 February 2012 (EST)

No, she does not have a toy. --Sabrblade 21:27, 12 February 2012 (EST)

See: [1]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. --Detour 21:57, 12 February 2012 (EST)

I also saw a picture with some little girl holding it?71.162.106.213 22:01, 12 February 2012 (EST)

A custom toy can still be held by a little girl. --Detour 22:04, 12 February 2012 (EST)

What is a custom toy? Something not sold in stores?71.162.106.213 22:07, 12 February 2012 (EST)

It is fan made. --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?71.162.106.213 22:24, 12 February 2012 (EST)

No, we only list official product. --abates 22:28, 12 February 2012 (EST)

How do I make a toy of my own and where would find a toy like this anyway?71.162.102.55 20:32, 13 February 2012 (EST)

First you must find a little girl to hold it. -Derik 22:04, 13 February 2012 (EST)

Maybe I didn't ask that the right way. Where would I find a toy like this? And how would I be able to make one of my own? Your a Transfan, don't you know where and how?71.255.160.246 20:53, 15 February 2012 (EST)

This is not a message board. Ask elsewhere. --ItsWalky 21:04, 15 February 2012 (EST)