Talk:Black Widow

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Spiders

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Spiders, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spiders on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpidersWikipedia:WikiProject SpidersTemplate:WikiProject SpidersSpiders articles

Different topics[edit]

Looking at what links here, "Black Widow" links to a good many different things. I made this page in response to a page about 1987 referring to the movie, which I have never watched. However, the article is a substub (and would make the B-movie bandit proud), referes to a lot of things besides this old movie, and definitely needs to be expanded. Samboy 22:51, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I've now expanded it a little; there are three different references to "Black Widow", each with a different meaning. This page may eventually become a disambiguation page. Until then, we have this "red link disambiguation" page, warning people who want to make a longer page on the movie or what not that the term means a lot of things. Samboy 00:21, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

human "black widows" named after the spider? I think the other way around is more likely.

(I came here looking for information about the band "black window" but I didn't find any.)

I think that "Black Widow" should redirect to the article about the spider since this is most likely the primary target of said search. Any thoughts?

Everyone in the U.S. has heard of a black widow spider, while maybe .05% have heard of this comic book series/character.

As an encyclopedia I think it would be beneficial to direct traffic to the page with the most relevance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.112.82.134 (talk) 03:03, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

new film?[edit]

I know gossip blogs aren't enough to go on, but its a start. http://www.bastardly.com/2008-rihanna-bets-106-park-0620 Can't be the 2007 film, that's a casting detail, posted in 2008. 86.139.47.135 (talk) 14:38, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Button spiders[edit]

Ad something about button spiders. Common in South Africa. I would also like it if you could insert pictures of Black Widow eggs. Have a look at the article regarding Button spiders on wiki. They have a few pictures that include eggs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.160.124.40 (talk) 10:24, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

JHunterJ & Cygnis insignis recent edits[edit]

Could somebody explain to me what this issue is about. It seemed like the options for various black widow spider links that Cygnis insignis were of value. I don't understand why they were undone. I tried to understand what the issues are here and I didn't succeed. I did look at the DAB style page linked to and I wasn't quite sure how it applied to what the issue was between JHunterJ & Cygnis insignis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davefoc (talk • contribs) 03:41, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly I'm biased to my version, but I spent a long time thinking about. Thanks for appreciating the large amount of work I did on this page and the dozen or so articles that previously formed a web as tangled as these spiders. WP:MOSDAB states,

...piping or redirects should not be used in disambiguation pages. This is to make it clear to the reader which article is being suggested, so that the reader remains in control of the choice of article...

I'm unclear why JHunterJ has made the changes, and I'm unconvinced that s/he understands the issues. The user appears to be applying an erroneous interpretation of guidelines, instead of providing the readers with a clear path to the desired articles. cygnis insignis 04:59, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like JHunterJ wants to create a link based on the common name to a redirect for the common name to the actual article that is titled based on the scientific name.

Cygnis insignis prefers a style where the link is based on the article's actual title preceded by a description based on a common name.

Cygnis insignis feels that JHunterJ's idea is in violation of Wikipedia style guidelines that recommend against DAB's that use links that require redirections to work.

Assuming I understand the issue correctly and pending a response from JHunterJ, I favor Cygnis insignis's approach. I am not sure I understood this Wikipedia style recommendation but based just on my own thoughts it seems like Cygnis insignis's approach is a little neater and more straightforward. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davefoc (talk • contribs) 05:36, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see that Cygnis insignis unilaterally restored his original edits. I was happy to see that. I liked his approach and didn't see the justification for changing it. It might have been nicer if there had been some sort of discussion where a consensus could have been reached, but JHunterJ didn't post on the discussion page and given that I appreciated Cynis' unilateral action and I hope this ends the editing conflict on this issue.--Davefoc (talk) 18:23, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List Genus and three species?[edit]

Hi, I just edited the page to list with three Latrodectus species with the common name "_____ black widow". I thought it would help because people will be looking for one of these three species based on their location or be interested in all three.

I Forgot to sign. Weebro55 (talk) 05:02, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was No Consensus due to unclear scope of "Black Widow" (potentially refers to 3 different species). Kaldari (talk) 03:56, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Black Widow → Black Widow (disambiguation) – Request made by user:Hutcher on 14 May 2012 using template:movenotice on the article page. Reason given "The spider is absolutely iconic and will be notable long after the rock band and comic book characters named after this spider are not" -- PBS (talk) 14:22, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The spider is absolutely iconic and will be notable long after the rock band and comic book characters named after this spider are not. I've examined the history of this article and it's a history people trying to make the spider the WP:Primary because it's natural for it to be. The current edit of the article is completely against MOS:DAB because it contains an opening sentence for a Primary without there being a Primary. It's then followed by a malformed "may also refer". To clean this up here's my plan:

Delete Black Widow (disambiguation)
Move Black Widow to Black Widow (disambiguation)
Redirect Black Widow to Latrodectus mactans

For or against? --Hutcher (talk) 05:07, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why redirect Black Widow with two capitals? My target page intention was the character, Black Widow or some other group using proper nouns. If people want to look up the black widow spider, they would and should use the lowercase, common name for the spiders in the Latrodectus genus, not proper nouns which are intentionally used to refer to specific named groups and characters. The link redirect is unnecessary. - M0rphzone (talk) 05:33, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Update:But since the link redirects to this page, there is the problem. The black widow link should be redirecting to the Latrodectus genus article with additional disambig links pointing to specific species, or it should be its own article with this disambig page kept. Redirecting the lowercase "black widow" to here is not a good idea. I think black widow (lowercase title) should be a separate article that provides general content about the spider (and possibly distinguishing different species). The title "Black Widow" (with the capitalized proper noun) should be kept for the characters/band. - M0rphzone (talk) 05:36, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Black widow should not redirect to Latrodectus mactans. Black widow is the common name of at least the North American Latrodectus species that are listed. Redirecting black widow to Latrodectus may not be best either. There are many species in the latrodectus genus that are not commonly referred to as black widows. I think the current approach may be the best compromise between the various approaches that have been used since I've been watching this page except the disambiguation page should be named Black widow.--Davefoc (talk) 10:34, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support move as proposed, except redirect to Latrodectus. Nobody is arguing that the spider is the clear primary topic, it's just a matter of which spider. Not all Latrodectus spiders are black widows, but those are certainly its most famous members, and it is the least surprising landing site for readers without being overly-specific. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 06:17, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support moving the disambiguation page to a "(disambiguation)" page, and having the main page be the spider, but I'm indifferent about which spider. The genus page is probably fine. If the genus page is the target, it will need a dab hat note too. Shadowjams (talk) 21:31, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I'm not opposed to either the status quo or the proposal, but I believe the editors of the genus and other articles listed on this page need to be notified. Redirecting the common name to a broad genus may put more pressure on the article to be a black widow spider article than a genus article. I will do that now. Weebro55 (talk) 03:46, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. There is no good redirect. Lactrodectus is too broad, and Lactrodectus mactans too narrow. The status quo is a reasonable compromise. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:10, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Exactly for the reasons put forth by Clarityfiend above.

Support Yes I think it should be done. 'Black Widow is now a more broad term. It refers to murderers, athletes, famous people, super heroes, movies, video games, aircraft, songs, fish, plants, stars, books, amusement park rides, and, of course, spiders. In addition, the nickname for some of the members of the Lactrodectus genus is black widow. However as it is only a nickname, and not the official name, it is my vote that the page for the spider be changed to lowercase while the super hero is changed to uppercase. Gartonia (talk) 20:31, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. If there were only one black widow species then I'd support, but with three species commonly and equally referred to as black widow, redirecting to mactans seems arbitrary. --Brycehughes (talk) 22:01, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Cocktail[edit]

Isn't there a mixed drink called a "Black Widow?": some combo of Drambuie & whiskey? 138.162.128.54 (talk) 15:03, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]