Talk:Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows/Archive 12

message: The article states that the US version will be released at 00:01 local time. This is incorrect. The reference to Rowling's site only states British Standard Time for the UK and other English speaking countries in the world. It does not specify the time for the USA. This might be a simple omission but in any case the release time cannot unambiguously be derived from that source. However, Bloomsbury's site does state that "Sale of the book in all time zones is embargoed until 00:01 BST (British Summer Time) on Saturday 21st July 2007."  (Click on "News" then "Publication announcement" and scroll to the bottom). This means that the book is released at the exact same moment all over the world, including the USA. AberforthD 22:27, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The info comes from Rowlings own website. It says Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows will be published on Saturday 21st July 2007 at 00:01 BST in the UK and at 00:01 in the USA. It will also be released at 00:01 BST on Saturday 21st July in other English speaking countries around the world. I agree this is perhaps not as clear as it might be, but it says in the USA it will be released at 00.01. I take it this means local time, since it takes the trouble to say that elsewhere it will be released at 00.:01 UK time. I don't know quite what that means for Canada? Sandpiper 23:03, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But have you checked out the reference I gave above to Bloomsbury's site? It is as clear as it can be.AberforthD 23:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I checked the reference. This may just be referring to the Bloomsbury edition of the book, which is not published in America. I can't imagine that they'll break the tradition of a midnight party just for the last book, where people in Los Angeles would be lining up to get the book at 5pm and people in New York at 8 pm. The last three books have had midnight parties, seems weird to change it for this one. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 00:40, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it will definitely be released at midnight here in America.  I checked here and on several other reputable websites.  All sources say that Deathly Hallows will released one minute after midnight in America and all english-speaking countries. Arwen undomiel 00:59, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I was forgetting that the USA is so big. Yes, multiple time zones woiuld account for the slightly odd way the US entry is phrased by Rowling. I agree that Bloomsbury are not likely to talk about when a different company is publishuing a book. Sandpiper 07:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm guessing that JKR doesn't want to release the book before it's been released in England anywhere, meaning places like Australia. But after it's been released there, I assume that it will be released at 12:01 everywhere else. Just a guess. Tuvas 17:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well you have to admit that it would be a tad unfair if her own home country didn't get the final book first. I would imagine that the books will be released at midnight all over the world, so some countrys will get it before others (just like the previous releases). Wild ste 13:12, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time of release for the US is incorrect 

message: Opinions on including references to titles registered containing the word Hallow
#Daggoth | Talk 05:14, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment: how do you know it's really the author who previously used the term ? Folken de Fanel 11:29, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Include Hallows Titles

message: Voting for both of the above.
# I know I'm in the minority, but if the titles can be properly sourced, and relevance proven then go ahead and add them. But only then. Quatreryukami 02:36, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Include other titles and Hallows titles

message: Don't mention any other titles by name
#Tuvas 22:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can I please point out that the only person claiming that these are 'possible titles' is Folken de Fanel. As it stands in the article, all that is being said is that there were two titles registered a few years ago containing the little-used word 'Hallows' - which is relevant to this article. That is not remotely speculative. Michael  Sanders 00:59, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If the registered titles are mentioned right after the mention of JKR's 2 other titles, it's obvious the aim is to imply the registered titles are the ones. So please stop with your bad-faith and your false accusations. Folken de Fanel 08:57, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Include none of the above

message: In order to read the first chapter click here   it is a great refernce and a big surprise I think it is seriously the real chapter --Mamamia2 16:01, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I don't think that is the first chapter.  Not only is the entire "chapter" filled with typos, it is not JKR's style.  She is capable of better writing than that.  Even if you ignored the style, the characters' attitudes in that chapter are contradictory to their attitudes in the book.  Draco seems too defiant and over-confident, and I can't imagine Bellatrix caring about her family.  On pg 35 of US version of HBP, she says, "If I had sons, I would be glad to give them up to the service of the Dark Lord!"  Oh well, this is not the first "sneak peak" to have surfaced, and it won't be the last.  Everything else is probably fake too.  Arwen undomiel 01:36, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Its the title chapter from a fanfic titled "Harry Potter and the Secret Horcrux" (or sth). Its been around for almost a year now! --soum (0_o) 07:51, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  sneak peak of the first chapter of the deathly hallows 

message: Should we have the enitre epigraph that was in the book quotes directly in the article? I'd be willing to type it up, but I just didn't know if we wanted the whole thing quoted or not. ~ Bella Swan? 13:41, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good heavens no.  A short summary of important takes will suffice in my view - perhaps re-organized as bullet points.  Quoting the whole thing without really really good cause would be hard to defend, since it is copyrighted material.  --T-dot ( Talk/contribs ) 20:23, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright. I was just wondering since the reviewer for the GA listed that we should have it there. Thanks. ~ Bella Swan? 21:08, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh wait - I thought you meant the epilogue Nineteen Years Later - which is several pages long.  I now see the "epigraph" being referred to is a 13-stanza verse and a 78-word narrative paragraph.  Still it seems a bit much to quote, and I am not sure why it is needed to achieve good article status.  Perhaps the "most poignant parts" of each, those which are especially relevant to the Story Line (or perhaps the subtext message that Rowling is presenting), can be quoted without appearing too "gauche".  I still think quoting the entire thing is a bit much, but PLEASE feel free to be BOLD and come up with a nice way to include at least the soul of the material.  --T-dot ( Talk/contribs ) 00:37, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

text: This article isn't simple enough. it reveals too much information. people don't need to buy it when the whole story is here. i will delete most of the too much information.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.212.202.45 (talk) 19:41, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Epigraph