Deletion of Spells in Harry Potter (3rd nomination)

Comment: and improve.  As noted in the first deletion debate, there are secondary sources which can (and should) be cited.  But even if there weren't, I think the primary sources would be sufficient. To quote from : "...there are rare occasions when they may rely on primary sources. An article or section of an article that relies on a primary source should (1) only make descriptive claims, the accuracy of which is easily verifiable by any reasonable, educated person without specialist knowledge, and (2) make no analytic, synthetic, interpretive, explanatory, or evaluative claims. Contributors drawing on primary sources should be careful to comply with both conditions." I think this applies
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:PSTS)