Talk:Episode 2 (Primeval)

Was the giant centipede an Arthropleura?

This animal is clearly not the same as the Arthropleura seen in Walking with Monsters and Prehistoric Park. The only original evidence that it is intended as Arthropleura and not another genus is references in http://primeval.itv.com . It seems less likely to me that the producers would make such a gross palaeontological error. In the story Cutter guesses from reports before seeing it that it was Arthropleura, followed by discussion about the differences, and that is the only mention in episode 2 of the name Arthropleura. It seems likelier to me that whoever set up the web site http://primeval.itv.com made a mistake. I feel that we better call this animal merely "giant centipede" until we have more information. Anthony Appleyard 21:55, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was called Arthropleura on the official website and in the Episode (if memory serves and correct me if I'm wrong, but a picture of it was also briefly seen on his computer screen) so that's what it is, no matter how much you prefer it to be otherwise. Nubula 12:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can we avoid referencing the talk page in the article? I can see there's a potential debate, but there are thousands of talk page debates on WP that aren't linked from their respective articles. (Excluding linking from meta-tags.) See Wikipedia:Avoid self-references. Jihg 11:36, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see why not. There are already commonly used types of "please comment at this link" insertions including AfD's and suchlike.

Editorial tags like AfD are different from referring to the talk page in the article text - its a question of good style. I've added a disputed section tag. I think the best way forward is to briefly summarise both sides in the section from a NPOV. Jihg 12:48, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When I was younger, I always thought that Arthropleura looked more like a giant centipede than a millipede (flatness). But, on the primeval website, it has a downloadable screensaver that showed Nick and Abby being suffocated, in the format of a python, by a giant millipede. I dont think this is from a later episode as there are no more giant BUGS!! As Arthropleura and its relatives are not in groups Chilopoda nor Diplopoda but in a group in between with creatures like both groups. So there are a few different species of Arthropleura, with different diets. Situation ended!!!!!

08:30, 20 February 2007 user:86.134.200.57 BOB

Well, Artropleura IS flat but it does not have such huge mandibles. Besides, there is no proof Arthropleura is poisonous.

Important points. No species of Arthropleura had a poisonous bite. No species of Arthropleura had huge mandibles (though they coud still deliver a nasty bite). No species of Arthropleura was very aggresive. No species of Arthropleura ate large prey.

1:30, 24 February 207 Di-ragons *Suppose so...yea! Primeval producers should go to palaeontology lessons(YAY!At last some people who notice me!)17:05, 28 February 2007 BOB

I think we have to remember that the show is supposed to be fiction (unlike the Walking with...s which were presented in a documentary format). There's no proof that there wasn't ever a species of Arthropleura like the one shown, so the producers have every right to invent one, like they did with the Parasite in Episode Four. The fact remains, they say it's an arthropleura (both in the episode and on their website), so it's an Arthropleura. Scientific accuracy doesn't come into this.

That said, how do we know Arthropleura didn't have a poisonous bite anyway? That kind of this doesn't fossilise, so paleantologists have to make educated guesses. RobbieG 16:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see how this is even being disputed. RobbieG has hit the nail right on the head. Personaly I think that to try and say that it was anything other than Arthropleura smacks of denial. Nubula 15:20, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly right, Nubula this is a FICTIONAL programme, and it is likely its not set in the same universe as ours. For all we know t-rexes could have eleven heads there. Whats wrong with dramatising something to add more action. If i saw a centipede like the one in this episode, I wouldn't be moaning about how innacurate it was to real life, even if it was as harmless as a duck.

The giant spiders

Episode Two (Primeval) said "Giant spiders, most likely Mesothelae as Mesothelae featured in Walking With Monsters and these spiders are of the same design. (A colony came through the anomaly, returned home.)."
List of creatures in Primeval#G says that they are Solifugae.
Mesothelae says that no such giant spider is known; the animal in Walking with Monsters was originally Megarachne, which was thought to be a spider, but (too late for it to be left out of Walking with Monsters) it was found to be a eurypterid.

Anthony Appleyard 22:11, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need to debate this. The official site says their related to the camel spider, a Solifugae. It was mentioned in the episode that they had pincers instead of fangs, they where even shown to have pincers in one scene, a Solifugae trait and the spider shown in Walking With Monsters is a different design and never really existed. Nubula 13:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK. They were giant Solifugae. I have edited Episode Two (Primeval) accordingly. Anthony Appleyard 16:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The spiders are supposed to the Mesothelae from Walking with Monsters, but, Stephen says the Solifugae-like creatures are technicaly scorpions, so maybe these creatures are an unknown species of camel spider that has become extinct (OF COURSE !!!!!) BOB 10:00, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The spiders are supposed to the Mesothelae from Walking with Monsters - I don't know how you can say that given that they look nothing alike. Nubula 15:53, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See User talk:86.134.200.57. Anthony Appleyard 17:03, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OK,Nubula. I'm sorry. I dont know alot (I'm sorry I made out that I did). I'm only 10. I looked at Episode Two of Primeval Before Anthony had changed it. Sorry. Freinds ??????????????????????????????????????????????? BOB 17:17 28 February 2007

Of course we are. Nubula 15:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Parsons Green

"A train on the London Underground stops in a tunnel between stations because of signalling problems at Parsons Green station (which does not exist in the real world)." Sorry, what doesn't exist in the real world: the tunnel, Parsons Green or the signalling problems? Suggest removing the parenthesised expression. --Cedders^tk 13:59, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Parsons Green, obviously. That is the antecedent, i.e. the noun just before the relative pronoun. Anthony Appleyard 14:26, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But does that make any sense? Parsons Green tube station station does exist in the real world. I haven't actually seen the episode, but gather there was reference to being in the underground but near Parsons Green, which is overground.
Also use of the phrase 'the real world' in a describing the plot of a SF TV series, makes me wonder (a) is this a fictional 'real world' as distinct from a metafictional world; and (b) how it is best to clarify this. I think commentary on flaws in the plot or research should appear as separate footnotes. --Cedders^tk 19:48, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Think I've fixed it. --Cedders^tk 01:16, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The term real world means a fictional event set in a real place, an example would be War of the Worlds which features an alien invasion of Earth which is described exactly as it is in real life. Primeval, however, is what's called an Alternate universe, where a fictional event is set in a world which is also fictional, eg Utaraptors in the Jurassic, Arthroplura being carnivores, building being in different locations (such as parsons green which is below ground in this world) ect. metafiction has nothing to do with it. This needs to be clarified within the article, which you have not done, or the last episode, which made a big deal out of the fact that the world was altering, won't make sense. Nubula 02:54, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]