Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spells in Harry Potter (2nd nomination)
Wow, have any of you people voting delete read the last AfD? Evidently not, so I'm going to copy and paste my last response here: what about ? On another note, yes, Wikipedia articles ought to have third-party sources, but have you tried Wikipedia:Use common sense|using common sense? Articles need third-party sources when, for example, they need proof that they even exist (like the Apollo Moon Landing hoax accusations|moon landing hoax). However, I think that in this particular sense there are some pretty reputable sources, like, oh, I don't know...the books that they appeared in, maybe? What about books that have been previously mentioned, ''The Sorcerer's Companion: A Guide to the Magical World of Harry Potter'' by Allan Zola Kronzek and Elizabeth Kronzek or ''Magical Worlds of Harry Potter'' by David Colbert? I remember people complaining about the etymology sections about , but seriously, some of the spells are just plain made up! Only the author knows how she made them, and to get in a twist about that is straight up anal. Get your heads out of your asses, guys, and use your energy to argue about articles that actually cause problems
— User:GlassCobra, 02:00, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:IDONTLIKEIT||WP:OR (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)