Talk:Amazons Attack!

Mythological Creatures Inquiry
I know that Diana has already battled and aided some of the mythological creatures shown in Amazons Attack. I believe she killed the last of the three Cyclops during Perez's run (which confuses me as to why all three have returned), battled the hydra in both Perez's run as well as Simonson's run, and became friends with Pegasus during Rucka's run. Does anyone have issue numbers for these appearances? Very disappointing that, yet again, doing one's homework before creating a storyline seems to be unimportant in regards to Wonder Woman. Artemisboy 17:00, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I think it's fair to say DC isn't known for its solid continuity. After all, there's a perfectly reasonable explanation for inconsistencies between Wonder Woman's history and Amazons Attack: its called Infinite Crisis. What's more disturbing to me is the Amazons' blind loyalty to Circe, despite her history.

Bee ?
What kind of "Bee" ? Was it a Wasp, also a poisonous insect ? Possibilities are endless, such as this thing being a technological construct, as are "nanites", and/or it is a genetically engineered creature, created as some kind of weapon. 205.240.144.225 08:33, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

After all, all Comics have had "Mad Scientists", meglomaniacs, secret govt. agencies, some billionaires building weapons and the like. 205.240.144.225 08:36, 29 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The entry says it all: they are giant, venomous bees native to Paradise Island.--Galliaz 12:58, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Found Reason
It seems the US Govt got caught in a "black ops" kind of thing. They wanted the Purple Ray to use as a weapon, so they got Wonder Woman, and this is why the US was attacked. Am I correct ? 205.240.144.225 00:29, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


 * That's part of it; as the entry also explains, Circe was working with a shapeshifter to infiltrate the Dept. of Meta Human Affairs for her own reasons.--Galliaz 00:43, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Recent edits
I reverted a series of recent edits, which were a step backwards in making the plot description less clear and less direct. (There were also formatting errors that had been introduced.) In addition, several problematic critical assessments, attributed to unnamed/uncited "fans," were added, and reqired deletion.--Galliaz 00:45, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Controversy over Linkara
I know this is pretty late, but having only today seen this article, I feel that this needs to be discussed. I've seen this a lot in many articles, where someone feels that Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw needs to be cited in the critical reception for a video game, or that the critical reception for a movie needs to include a citation to a Nostalgia Critic video. And neither feel right in these articles, because while they do make great video reviews, they are unprofessional, and shouldn't be taken as legit. This directly implies to Linkara. While his videos are hilarious, he shouldn't be creditted as though he were professional, because in truth, he isn't. 74.101.112.177 (talk) 22:43, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If Linkara isn't professional, I don't know what is. What part of...displaying direct quotes from the issue, and pointing out that it lacked a large degree of internal consistency, was not "professional"?  The fact that he was angry when he said it?  Heaven forbid that a "reviewer" provide anything but an unfiltered "description" of a comic but an actual "review".  I.e. when Linkara pointed out that the deadline Hippolyta set for her ultimatum doesn't match up any time its mentioned.  (Bees...my God.) Please explicitly explain, in exacting detail, why Linkara or Nostalgia Critic are not "professional", and define the specific parameters for "professional" you have established.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.87.123.56 (talk) 09:07, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

typical
portray american realistivally in media and they throw massive hissy fits haha — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.180.44.133 (talk) 03:18, 22 May 2013 (UTC)