Talk:Harry Potter/Archive 4

message: This page is locked so i can't edit it. I find the part which it states Rowling "moved back to England in Edinburgh" to be frightfully wrong and even gramatically. Edinburgh is in Scotland.
-----
I also notice a discrepancy. In the intro section, the article states, "The majority of the series' action takes place between 1991–1998..." But the first line of the Overview begins, "The story opens on the morning of November 1, 1981..."
Which is correct? Egthegreat 19:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: note to editors

message: On the subject of the vandalism, I suggest that we implement a spoiler somewhere in the page, so those who want to see the 'X kills Y' thing can see it if they want to, and those who dont want to see it don't have to, if they stumble on  it. Voporak 12:43, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it would be best to protect it but have an editable subpage e.g. Harry Potter/e, that the protected page is updated from (like Wikipedia:Copyrights. --ßjweþþ (talk) 20:22, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not entirley sure what page protection is but my guess is it would be a good idea this constant vandalism is quite annoying Shimonnyman 09:17, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have another idea couldnt we get a sysop to block the IP of the person who had vandalised it over and over? also block all the vandalised content from history so the spoilers or inappropriate launguage wont show up in history?Shimonnyman 11:37, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, that's a good idea, should we block the person for the article or from wikipedia itself? Zhanster 00:32, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

text: I am and admin, am watching the article, and the article has been added to the WP:CVU watchlist. Any vandalism to the article will result in the swiftest and severest consequences possible. Cheers! Ëvilphoenix Burn! 01:32, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent vandalism

message: Should we have worldwide for release dates? I think that is a bit snoby as some countries have gotten books much later I believe for instance some countries still dont have Half-Blood Prince yet so to say worldwide is misinforming or if fewer countries didnt get them we should list the release dates for those. I'm not worried about the techical detail that some countries probably dont get it at all but JK Rowling did say that if we did a worldwide release the books would take years longer to publish wich shows it isnt worldwide. anyways thats my two cents.. --Shimonnyman 09:32, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it is the worldwide release date for the English-language version. The delays are for translations, which are a different matter. Carter 17:18, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes but we nowhere in the article said we're talking exclusivly about the English version and you can't argue that as even the english version is not translated as such but modified region to region so it is not as if the English translation is even a specific one.If we want to specify somewhere this article is concerened with English versions only then we can talk about English versions only but when I look up Harry Potter sometimes im thinking of translated editions and such.--Shimonnyman 21:30, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sending out the books and whatnot takes time after all the translation. I'm just happy to get the books when i do. Luna Lovegood 20:53, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  release dates 

message: The six articles relating to each of the six released books seem to rather incongruous. For example, the first two show the main Bloomsbury cover medium-sized, the third, fourth and fifth have a full edition list and list of cover thumbnails; the sixth has a picture of people queuing to buy the book. I think it would make sense to choose a common format for the articles, at least in this respect if not others, and this would also make them more navigable for readers who were comparing the books.
Given this, does anyone have any suggestions as to the preferred approach for the articles?
Bigbluefish 19:13, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, spread the pictures through the article as it looks better that way Sandpiper 01:03, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Individual Book Articles 

message: You could've fooled me. In the 4th book, Harry mentions a PlayStation that Dudley threw out the window. The PlayStation came out in Europe in late 1995, but the book's story line started in 1994.
:Mmm…see, that's part of why nobody really knows when the books are set. The 1991 date for the first book comes from Nearly Headless Nick's Deathday cake, which says he died in 1492, IIRC, 500 years ago, which would set Chamber of Secrets in 1992-1993. Of course, we can't reconcile the PlayStation with that, and we can't reconcile the birth date of Nicolas Flamel with that, but it's the most concrete thing we have. I think I remember an alternate timeline setting book 1 in 1996 or something, but I don't recall exactly what that was. I think there's an explanation of this over at Dates in Harry Potter — if there's not, there should be. The dates are mostly an attempt to ground the story into "reality" and don't mean much outside that. Hermione1980 23:13, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Deathday cake, anyone? That's the most verifiable source we have. Might I also point out that Fantastic Beasts and Quidditch are not part of the series, and that book seven is almost certainly not called "Mirror of Fulmat" (I think Rowling has even said as much on her website). Perhaps you're getting the dates the story is set in confused with the dates when she wrote them? Hermione1980 22:15, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the actual dates in the book are a source of discussion and there's not really any way to know with certainty, however the system that has been adopted for Wikipedia articles is to set Harry's birthyear in 1980 and go from there. There's been a spat of people changing those around lately, and we generally discourage making such changes without establishing a consensus for it. Thanks. Ëvilphoenix Burn! 03:14, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Harry Potter set in 1991????? 

message: What was the point of removing the book sales statistics? When I first read this page I found them interesting. Admittedly, their list was a bit repetitious of other lists here already, so I have restored them but included them into the list of editions, where they just take one line per book. Sandpiper 07:45, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Book Sales 

message: Should we include the numbers of cinema visits/ticket sales with the film titles list, complimenting the number of sales for each book? Sandpiper 07:47, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Film Visits

message: i removed the CHEAPIPODSHERE.com spam edit but why malo reverted it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.156.6.54 (talk • contribs) 10:21, 23 November 2005.
:I think you are slightly confused, here was your edit and I reverted your changes because you removed a warning not to add spoilers.  There is no mention of cheapipodshere.com spam link on this page.  Did you mean a different page?  -- malo (talk)/(contribs) 10:29, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  reverted spamming 

message: I remove the following paragraph from the "Other Analogous Works" section, because it is obviously reaching, baseless speculation, stuck in here by some overeager Naruto fan. The "connections" between the two series are so broad as to eliminate any real similarity (and even if they were similar, what does it matter? I've never liked these types of sections). And I don't think I need to point out that Sasuke "resembling" HP is pure rubbish.
Frankly, this is the sort of stuff I loathe to come across in Wikipedia. --Marcg106 05:16, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed Naruto fan speculation 

message: # Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
    * Release: Expected Early Summer 2007
    * Director: David Yates
# Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince
    * Release: Expected  2008-2009
    * Director: Unknown
# Harry Potter and the _______________
    * Release: Projected 2009-2010
    * Director: Unknown
Query: How can the 6th movie be expected to be released before the 5th? Is this an error?
:Most likely it is an error.  Its predicted the movie will be released sometime in 2008. — Sarz 03:27, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in release dates? 

message: I'm removing a bit of uncited material from the article. I'll list what I remove here, please assist by locating evidence that verifies these assertions. Thanks. Ëvilphoenix Burn! 22:05, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed material 

message: This section has seen some additions as of late, including similarities to X-Men and other stuff. I think we gotta nip this sort of thing in the bud before it gets out of hand. I'm reverting some of the more recent edits. The premise behind Harry Potter is actually very common among several works (especially fantasy and manga/anime): we don't need a mention of every single little show that vaguely resembles Harry Potter, which in itself, closely resembles a fairly common theme in stories. I've removed them here, but I was a little cautious with the ones I left in. There's some tenous connection, such as being directed by Chris Columbus, or that Rowling was questioned about the similarities. I want to remove tenuous information, but I don't want to go overboard, so I decided to err on the side of caution here. --Deathphoenix 14:03, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other analogous works 

message: a news report about harry potter books being burned in america, because the pope says there saying magic is a good thing, what happened?
This is covered in the conterversy section Hagamaba 05:56, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  was there 

message: I am trying to find the sales figures for the soundtracks for the HP in popular music section that I started. I've looked at soundscan but I'm not wanting to pay for this info. Some help in this matter .
I also am hoping to find more information on HP "inspried" or named music for this section.
Also I am wondering if any of the mods for HP thinks that Music should have it's own page given it's role in the pages, on the screen and elsewhere....thanks for your help everyone. Hagamaba 05:56, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Music 

message: I'd like to know if they are either Atheist or agnostic like.Answer in time Please.Thanks.
Witches and wizards appear to have no formal religious structure, although they do celebrate Christmas in a non-religious manner. However, it is clear that many of them are spiritual, and that they believe in souls. 216.108.172.249 04:37, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The existence of the Fat Friar is about the only direct instance of the real world's organised religions in the stories. Basically, Rowling avoids including any detail on religions, without actually precluding any of them (allowing for a little suspension of disbelief, of course). So if you want to believe there's a chapel or meditation room at Hogwarts, you can do so without contradicting the stories; and if you feel that the existence of magic totally invalidates Religion X, you can read it that way too. -- Perey 16:08, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Rowling skirts around religion for a very good reason. Can you imagine the minefield she'd have to cross in dealing with the religious beliefs of the Malfoys or the House of Black? Serendipodous 08:15, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

text: If wizards and witches believe in Gods, then they will be celebrating Christmas the religous way, and there will not be so much spirits. --Terence Ong Talk 05:16, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Believing in God wouldn't make the ghosts go away. Serendipodous 08:15, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Many religious people I know say "Oh my god." While I doubt witches and wizards are particularly relgious, there's not much evidence either way. 18:00, 6 July 2006
Harry was christened, and Sirius Black is his Godfather... Yiggdilobith 18:46, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Don't take this too seriously. The whole setting of the books is, as with similar Boarding School Novels, essentially within a cosy English cultural setting which includes elements of the church, "christians with a small c", christmas, carols, chapel etc, but no prayer or Christ. I grew up on such stories as did many others in far-flug parts of the remains British Empire, but until HP they'd been out of vogue for a generation, and were never read in the US of A. --Snori 20:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Do wizards and witchs in Harry Potter believe in God(s)?

message: I know it clearly states in Sorcerer's Stone that Harry is right handed.
   "Hmmm," said Mr. Ollivander, giving Hagrid a piercing     
   look. "Well, now- Mr. Potter. Let me see." He pulled a long      
   measure tape with silver markings out of his pocket. "Which is 
   your wand arm?"(Pg.83 SS)
   "Er- well, I'm right-handed," said Harry.(Pg.83 SS)
But in the American covers it shows him left handed. 
*Sorcerer's Stone he's about to catch the Golden Snitch with his left hand.
*In Chamber of Secrets he grabs Fawkes with both hands.
*Goblet of Fire, Order of the Phoenix, and Half-Blood Prince he is holding his wand with his left hand.
And on the chapter pictures you will also see him doing left-handed stuff. 
:Harry states that he's right-handed. The two examples (I assume you have another one coming) don't necessarily mean that he's left-handed. There's nothing wrong with a right-handed person grabbing something with his left hand. However, if the American version states one thing that's contrary with the other versions, I say the U.K. version overrides all others in terms of "levels of canon". --Deathphoenix 18:53, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is your fourth point from the movies? If so, the books override the movies in terms of canon. Also, illustrations in the books are not explicitly canon either. Hope this helps, Deathphoenix 19:05, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Yeah, but Harry explicitly states that he's right handed. I think Harry himself knows more about whether he's right-handed than a few illustrations. Also, regardless of whether the American version is better or not, I think the British versions would be higher level in canon because the British versions are closest to J.K. Rowling's original versions, since she herself is British. --Deathphoenix 19:56, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Ah, this web site. I'm somewhat familiar with it. Its whole premise is to try and prove that Dumbledore isn't dead. I don't have the US edition, nor do I have the actual UK version, so I can't compare these things for myself. In general, regardless of any missing test, the UK versions still supercede the US versions. --Deathphoenix 08:42, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

text: No problems. Thanks for discussing it. :-) --Deathphoenix 18:40, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Even if it were relevant, there is text in both that isn't in the other. eg,
British - 146-147 His eyes lingered for a moment upon Harry's trainers. 'That was you blocking the door when Zabini came back in, I suppose?' 
He considered Harry for a moment. 
'You didn't hear  
US - 153 His eyes lingered for a moment upon Harry's trainers. 
"You didn't hear 
Skittle 20:29, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

text:  About the 'Is Harry left-handed' issue: the cover illustrations for a novel are usually drawn by an independant artist, and the author has relatively little input, other than those (rare) cases where an illustration clearly doesn't match the intentions of the author.  IIRC, the generally-applied 'rule' is that the written text takes precedence over the illustrations in matters of 'canon'. DarkMasterBob 21:34, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Harry Potter Right-Handed or Left-Handed? 

message: See: Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%29/Archive V#How_about:_Sectioning_off_of.2Fpossible_banning_of_Fictional_Universe_articles.  I hope I am not in violation of WP:SPAM by informing talk pages of some Fictional Universes about this thread.  Perhaps some other fan can pass the word to other relevant interests, or perhaps there ought to be some NPOV template at top of the talk pages. User:AlMac|(talk) 14:49, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fictional Universes not belong in Wikipedia? 

message: The Harry Potter community has rumoured and theorised the release date of book 7 as being 07/07/2007. One article in particular,, gives comprehensive details as to why this might be true. I have edited the release date of book 7 to "rumoured July 7, 2007" while leaving the officially unannounced message there. I also provided the same citation alongside. TydeNet, 21 Jan 2006.
::This is complete fan speculation based on nothing but perceived symmetry, so I personally don't think it belongs in an encyclopedic article. For accuracy's sake, the release date should be listed as unknown. —simpatico hi 08:39, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That, I highly doubt. I don't think she's ever finished a book in less than a year, and on her website she implies that she only started writing it in January. That would mean the book would be written, edited, and published in less than 12 months. Also, all the books have had summer release dates, why would she break that pattern now? IIRC, from interviews books where she was rushed (CoS, PoA) were extremely stressful for her, which is why she now takes her time writing them. This is the last book in the series, I think she's going to take the time to make sure it's right. —simpatico hi 20:05, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm sorry but I really do disagree.  This information is unverifiable, and complete speculation.  I am removing this information, and it should not be re-added unless official citations can be provided. --DDG 19:25, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Also STRONGLY disagree.  "Some Fans Speculate" is not encyclopedic, nor authoritative, and not particularly interesting or significant.  OK wait - so I speculate that it will be released on Harry's Birthday - July 31 2007.  NO WAIT - I just found out she will be good enough to release it on MY Birthday since that date adds up to some Numerologically significant number - the number of letters in the last Chapter, which also has my initials in the Chapter name that I read somewhere it was - and I know this is true cuz I also heard it from someone that knows someone that talked to Rowling's nanny and besides she likes me cuz I am such a Superfan.  OK then I'll put My Birthday up!  BS.  If and when J.K. Rowling produces a target completion date in a verifiable documented interview, or on her web site, then that belongs (with a proper source citation). -- T-dot 20:08, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I certainly understand your points, and I will not put it up again. We could put something along the lines of "based on typical writing time, etc.", but the readers can deduce that on their own based on all the other release dates. Until we get any kind of official word from Rowling, I'll keep an eye on the "Unannounced" tag. Thanks for your comments, and I'm glad we could have further discussion about this point. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 23:31, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Book 7 Release date 

message: The German sentence attributed to the pope says dies (this). It is referred to as "they" in the article and "those" in some translation on the web. But dies is singular. Hence, it can refer only indirectly to the books, if at all.
*Thank you for your suggestion regarding : regarding :! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make whatever changes you feel are needed.  Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the  link at the top. You don't even need to log in! (Although there are some reasons why you might like to…) The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome. —simpatico hi 18:00, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accusations of promoting the occult 

message: Okay, maybe I am just being picky or overly detail-oriented, but I think something needs to be done about capitalization of words like Muggle.  I think that if J.K. Rowling capitalized a word, then we should too.  I've changed some articles to be consistent with JKR, such as the one on Blood purity, but I keep seeing more instances with lower-case letters.  So I thought I'd mention it here.  I guess I partly wanted to see if there was another view on the subject, or if I could just freely make changes as I see fit. Kam Tonnes 01:10, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Go right ahead. I'd do it myself if I had the time. I'm very picky on this capitalisation stuff too. Hermione1980 18:44, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd been wondering this as well, because when the need for fixing Blood purity links in character infoboxes came up (something that took some time to fix), I noticed a huge inconsistency in the way Mud Blood, Pure-blood, and half blood were written (just a few examples). Trying to get a consistent way of writing these types of words is important. Cybertooth85 06:31, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Capitalization

message: I was thinking: It might be good to have a themes section.  I know that "racism, genocide, anti-establishment and prejudice" are discussed shortly, but there is also the "things-are-not-as-they-seem" theme (ex. Snape turns out to be OK at least in Philospher's/Sorceror's Stone despite seeming bad throughout, Moody/imposter Moody, etc.), and the "choice between what is right and what is easy" theme.  What do people think?  Olin
:We used to have one, I actually contributed about two paragraphs to it, or something like that. It was deleted though, not sure why.  I think a whole article could be written on "Themes within Harry Potter," or something to that effect. --Ariadoss 23:29, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Themes section 

message: Who put that nasty image here? Whoever did that shall be blocked for sure. User:KinseyLOL
what image?
What image? 68.95.141.158 04:49, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ewww... 

message: For the "Harry Potter" logo at the top of the article, someone keeps changing the size from 150 to 250. I have no problem viewing this on Firefox, but in Internet Explorer the image is placed on top of some of the text and I can't read it all. Does anyone else experience formatting problems like this? EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 02:28, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pictures

message: I've culled out some information in the article that was uncited. Please feel free to help research this material. Rather than posting it to the Talk page where it may get lost in Archives, I've created a seperate archive for text removed from the article, that can be re-added once verification can be established. The archive is : Talk:Harry Potter/Uncited Thanks! Ëvilphoenix Burn! 23:22, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced information 

message: Could somebody please have a look at the character boxes? Someone seemed to have trolled them (I suppose) and I cannot undo it. Look here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissa_Malfoy for example. That was done to every character box, at least everyone I looked at. Neville Longbottom 10:52, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CHaracter information boxes

message: The text I removed was:
:Simply stated, this project like others such as "Lord of the Rings", "The Chronicles of Narnia" and the wonderfully up and coming project "The Ancestral Trail" are all seemingly mythologically based. This means a fear of old wives tales and bestiary figures tend to scare those believers that these works could be occult or satanist driven. Dark arts have always been at the heart of christianity and other religions because this has always been a sure way of attracting the simple minded puritans to the side of good fellowship.
This seemed frightfully biased/poorly written to me and, since I couldn't figure out a way to reword it without just repeating what had been said earlier, I figured it was probably unnecessary. Feel free to disagree, though. Cantara 18:39, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You rock my world. Ëvilphoenix Burn! 04:34, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: promoting the occult section edit

message: The supposedly "confirmed" release date of the next film (OOTP) is neither authentic nor authoritative.  All links trace back to gossip, rumors, and speculation on the HPANA, with absolutely nothing that can be attributed to anyone at Warner Brothers.  The only sources for a "confirmed" release date are the HPANA itself, and other HP and entertainment fan sites.  What we have here is such a vast amount of fan and entertainment world speculation that is reinforcing itself, that it has reached critical mass, which makes it "self confirming".  This is not encyclopedic.  This is speculation.  The Wikipedia's standards for authenticity are supposed to be higher than the fanatical "first one to post a date wins" web sites.  Here are the exact quotes from HPANA:  
*Earlier, sources told us the date was targeted but that Warner Bros. had not absolutely committed to it. Targeting a release date is not uncommon, as it gives the studios and their competitors a chance to stake a claim for opening weekends (and who wants to go up against a Harry Potter movie?). In many cases, a targeted date becomes the official date.
*Please note that Warner Bros. has made no official announcement, so please treat this as a rumor till confirmed.
*It would seem that many entertainment sites, including Rope of Silcon are jumping on the bandwagon and announcing the release date for Order of the Phoenix as July 13, 2007. Again, we are still awaiting confirmation about this and will be sure to let you know once we have found out anything.
It may well be that the movie will be released on July 13th, give or take a week or two, but since Warner Brothers has NOT announced a release date, we are depending on fan speculation and rumors as the basis for fact.  This is not encyclopedic, and is not proper for the Wikipedia.  I think we are going to need a discussion and ruling on this.  My view is that the Wikipedia can only post "2007", until Warner Brothers officially and publically anounces a release date.  If they indeed announced a "target date" of July 13, 2007, then let's have a link to that press release, and post it as a "Target Release Date" - and not "Confirmed" as everyone seems to believe. --T-dot 12:20, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I also find it interesting that IMDb, which is arguably more reliable than fan sites, posts an entirely different release date altogether. It's still not an official release date, though. I'd like to know what IMDb's source is. --Deathphoenix ? 13:20, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I know of Leaky Cauldron's claims; however, I have yet to see such an announcement from from Warner Brothers themselves. The only confirmation I've seen (such as from here) is that the movie will be released in 2007. I have yet to see an official date. --Deathphoenix ? 18:52, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release Date 

message: This main Harry Potter article needs to be shorter. It covers many seperate aspects of the Harry Potter world, and as a result is very, very long. The article titles "Harry Potter" should be a basic plot summary, some info on the author, and some info on the actual books. The rest of it can be put in seperate articles elsewhere on the portal.
:Yep. I'm working on improving the summarization of the article and all that. Also, you can sign your comments to Talk pages by typing four tildes, like so: ~~~~. That way we know who made comments on the Talk page, and when. Thanks! Ëvilphoenix Burn! 04:23, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shorter Article 

message: What fantasy genre does HP belong to? Not high fantasy for sure (?) What is the genre called when you mix a fantasy world with our world (like Narnia)? And I wouldn't call the Hogwarts world advanced and "fantasy" as e.g. Tolkien's world.... --Shandris 12:15, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fantasy genre 

message: I removed these sentences:
: "There has been no proven statistic of higher rates of practicing witchcraft in children; on the contrary, many children indulge in the fantasy of it. With the succesful releases of each book and movie has spawned many websites and fan sites of groups around the world ranging in age from 11 to even 25. So it is probably safe to assume that these books will cause little harm to children, unless they do not know the difference betwen real life and make-believe and attempt to mimic these actions. There have many other books dealing with witchcraft and they have not been show to harm children."
They were in the wrong criticism sub-section (in "Injuctions" instead of "Occult"), but I didn't move them up to the appropriate section because they seem unencyclopedic. The "indulge in the fantasy of it" sentence just reads funny. But the sentence "So it is probably safe to assume that these books will cause little harm to children, unless they do not know the difference betwen real life and make-believe and attempt to mimic these actions." is even worse, because even if children were to attempt to mimic the magical actions in the book, no harm would come to them, because attempting to cast the spells described in the Harry Potter books would do absolutely nothing. So that sentence is unnecessary, and the whole paragraph doesn't add much to the article. thx1138 11:26, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Response to witchcraft based criticisms 

message: So does anyone object to any of the stuff I've done the past day? TonyJoe 19:32, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Crap load of edits

message: Why is this semi-protected? Shouldn't the reason be stated somewhere? pfctdayelise (translate?) 03:21, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: there should have been but it's unprotected now. Sasquatch  t|c 05:28, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi protection 

message: I've been looking back at some of the old versions of the article and I was a little shocked at the level of content that was deleted. Sections on plagiarism and the style and content of the series would make the article a whole lot better; does anyone remember why it was deleted? TonyJoe 00:37, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Deleted Content

message: For more comments see Wikipedia talk:Good_articles/Nominations#Harry_Potter where a fellow GA nominator/wikipedian gave more insight in what could be added to the article. I agree totally with his comments, I was also opting for that. Lincher 03:11, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The stability of the article is a problem... plus see Wikipedia talk:Good articles/Nominations#Harry Potter, it fails criterias 1a through 1d. Lincher 17:53, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The GA will be removed for now

message: In addition to my thoughts on the GA talk page, please consider the following:
* Synopses of the plot and major characters are needed, a few paragraphs each should do it. (See WP:FICTION)
* Regarding "Reception": "Literary Criticism" could be spun into its own "Criticsm" section, followed by "Controversies," which would include the "Injuction..." (title shortened to "Canadian injunction" or some such). A personal peeve of mine is the use of section headers for small sections, so consider using definition lists or just simple paragraphs to make a long section. The plagarism section could be cut down to two or three sentences and put in the controversy.
* The "Other analagous works" section is of dubious value for its length, and the dearth of inline citations makes it vulnerable to charges of original research. Remember: "any material that is challenged and has no source may be removed by any editor."
* "See Also": either make the formatting more consistent (and filming locations should not be its own subsection), or simply remove them all and refer to the category. You might also want to consider expanding the navigation box for this purpose.
* "Releases": What about the movies and games? What were their rankings and revenue?
* "Series" should be prosified or moved to the bottom of the page. Better yet would be to simply use  (I'm not sure on my coding there), or to generate a comprehensive list of HP media and make an article called "List of Harry Potter media."
* "The Future": "The" generally should not go in headings (per the MOS), and this section should arguably go under "Overview."
* "Harry Potter the Brand": also per the MOS, the article name shouldn't be repeated. Something like "Commericial success" would be better. Perhaps you could list how many books, DVDs, games, soundtracks, etc. have been sold.
Good luck. I might be back. :) --Monocrat 04:10, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like your suggestions and have already begun working on the ones on the GAnomination page, mainly concerning the publishing history (as I'll hope you might have noticed), although I do kind of take issue with needing a synopsis of major characters. I don't quite see the need to talk about the characters hereTonyJoe 06:18, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ultimately, the inclusion of a character synopsis is up to the community of editors (as are all my thoughts!), but I make it based on WP:FICTION as well as :Category:Wikipedia 1.0 assessments, since the characters are a major part of the topic. I haven't read the books, so there's no chance I can put one in. I'm not a Potter fan (or hater) myself, but I think the topic is certainly worth of FA status, hence some of my nitpicky thoughts.--Monocrat 13:35, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions 

message: There's almost no reedeming qualitiy to the Anit HP community article and most of its content has already been included here. It would probably be best to just get rid of it or turn it into a redirect. TonyJoe 02:26, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merger

message: In the second sentence of this article it mentions that Harry Potter has "been a lightning rod for criticism, both literary and otherwise".  While it maybe has been criticized, and this deserves mention, I'm not sure it has exactly been a "lightning rod" (I would conisder 'The Da Vinci Code' a lightning rod).  Also, this isn't one of the first things that comes to mind when one brings up the subject of Harry Potter so I think this line should be moved to a more appropriate place within the article and rephrased from 'lightning rod' to something more moderate.
: I agree. The non-literary criticism mostly comes from one small segment of the American population. thx1138 11:50, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree too - I thought I'd missed something when I saw 'lightning rod'.  It does seem a little over the top. Libatius 12:47, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Lightning Rod?

message: I removed the following sentence, added by User:OrangUtanUK to the Prejudice & Discrimination section, as minor edit:
 However, it is worth noting that Rowling herself exhibits a little prejudice in her treatment of overweight people. Without exception, all her overweight
 characters are negative.
I feel quite strongly that that sentence is not true; see for instance  for an argument. If we are going to include something on overweight people in Harry Potter, there should be a reference, and it should be phrased in a less objectionable way. Pruneau 16:40, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Overweight people

message: Does anyone else think that it might be a good idea to rename this section "influences" and then just list some of the works that predate Rowling whose influences can be seen in the series? That way we can shorten the section and discourage people from adding any minor manga in print and make the section slightly more encyclopedic? TonyJoe 21:21, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm all for it. We need a section with mythological references and the like, not a list of unknown books portaying an orphan or a wizard. Pruneau 22:07, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Scrapped and started anew, though more is needed on the general familiarity of the plot. TonyJoe 05:59, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Other analogous works

message: How exactly did Harry gain his powers from Voldemoprt? I swear all it says in the books are that he was saved by an ancient powerful protection spell but somehow the powers transferred to him.  How?  Was it diliberate or accident?  
Simply south 19:09, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Briefly: Voldemort transferred some of his power to Harry when tried to kill him.  However, Wikipedia talk pages are for discussing Wikipedia articles only; if you want to discuss the story, there are dozens, if not thousands, of forums online.  Exploding Boy 19:28, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Big Question 

message: There is a part in the article which seems to be unfinished:
:"Please note, most links lead to spoilers. Those that are noted will carry the following tag:"
The tag is not given. Will anyone insert it or shall we delete this message? Adam78 21:59, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing tag 

message: I'm concerned about the stability of this article. The average day does not see less than 20 edits and I see many reverts. But I'll leave this for the next reviewer to decide. --SeizureDog 12:15, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *comment: Well for what it's worth, reverts aside, many of the edits of the past few days have been in an concious effort to improve the article to good article status, before and after the last failing with many if not all of Monocrat's suggestions being implemented and it would be a bit ironic if it failed due to those edits. As for vandals and reverts... it obviously happens but with the edits being reverted relatively quickly it hasn't since it's recent unprotection interfered with the article significantly. 151.198.139.166 12:40, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Ok, after two weeks of reworking the article to address these concerns, I think we're ready for another go.TonyJoe 19:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Good Article nominee

message: Hi, there! I've come to darken your door again, unfortunately. And I've had to fail your GA nomination, although the article is in considerably better shape than last time! I would be happy to pass it but for two major concerns. The first is that the "Content and writing styles" section mostly lacks secondary sources, so subsections 3.1 through 3.5 are all vulnerable to WP:OR. Moreover, it seems to have some POV issues (GA criterion 4). The following sentences are examples that leap off the page in this respect: "her masterful use of the red herring to subtly introduce planned characters" and "The series is lent further credibility in Rowling's portrayal of adolescence." Even if you can find sources for all of this, and you probably can!, it might be better to just move the subsections to a separate article (delete or comment-out if you can't find secondary sources), make the remaining, reduced text a subsection of "Overview." My second major concern is that the lack of any real information on the films clearly violates GA criterion 3. These warrant a proper section complete with directors, major cast, and (if you can find them) box-office figures, and (if relevant) brief discussions of how they differ from the source novels. 
For GA-status, the last two aren't really necessary, and this putative section can be in list form, but for FA-status, all of it needs to be in prose, or the list has to be defensible. Keep up the good work! I'm sorry to ride you guys so hard! --Monocrat 03:13, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, after two weeks of reworking the article to address these concerns, I think we're ready for another go.TonyJoe 19:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yet more suggestions 

message: I've been studying the Harry Potter novels at a London university and I just wanted to use some of the points of literary criticism I found during my study to help benefit the article. I had to study the novels from various different critical approaches: Marxist literary criticism, post-structuralist criticism, psychoanalytical criticism and feminist criticism. Since there is a section of the Harry Potter article called "Criticism" I thought I'd mention the aspect of feminist criticism of Harry Potter I had read about. I was bearing in mind that this article may be used as a point of reference for other students and school kids who may want academic information that could help them create an insightful essay or project for school. I do think it can only be a help to hear different aspects and points of view on a subject, and I was not personally criticising the novels, only relating the academic literary criticism I had encountered during my university studies, which I thought was helpful and fascinating. 
Also, on the official J.K. Rowling website she herself stated that her books had been criticised for being "chauvinistic" as well as satanic, occultist etc. etc.
:Academic literary criticism from various schools would be a stupendous contribution, but you can only quote other sources. As I recall, there were no citations in "Feminist criticsm", so it was open to deletion per WP:OR. If you can find articles discussing Potter from feminist or another perspective, please mention and cite them. --Monocrat 16:51, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You've attempted to cite your sources, but we need to have a direct link to the actual transcript of the interview where J.K. Rowling acknowledges the feminist criticism. Without that, your edits are pretty much unsourced. Can you find a direct link to the transcripts? Thanks, Deathphoenix ? 17:20, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know that a direct link is necessary per se, although if one exists, by all means it should be used. WP seems to favor the "hard" type of sources whenever possible, so provided it's fully cited, I don't see a problem.--Monocrat 17:35, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've honestly don't remember reading anything on Jo's site about the feminist criticism, though I distinctly remember the article on positive and negative perceptions of the female body... *goes to look some more* TonyJoe 17:40, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The whole feminist criticism thing

message: I dont think having the American logo as the article's main image is a good idea, instead one of the book covers should be used (probably "Philosopher's Stone" as its the first one). Nothing agaisnt americans but the books ARE British. --Plough | talk to me 10:21, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main Image 

message: Perhaps this isn't the most appropriate place to mention this, but it's the only article with Harry Potter as a whole.
I thought it interesting to note that in the back cover for all the 2-disc DVDs, Harry is seen flying by one means or another:
-Philosopher's Stone: Chasing a Snitch on his Nimbus 2000
-Chamber of Secrets: With Ron on the flying Ford Anglia
-Prisoner of Azkaban: Riding Buckbeak
-Goblet of Fire: On the Firebolt, being chased by the dragon.
might add that to the Trivia section?
:I'm not sure it warrants inclusion in the trivia section - surely they were just looking for exciting pictures...? Libatius 14:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that most of us want to see the article eventually reach Featured Article status but the problem is that they frown on trivia sections in applicants so that's probably why its a good idea to stay away from a trivia section. TonyJoe 20:37, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interesting fact for the DVD 

message: Two things:
1. The subsection on security under the release section needs to be updated; it has been almost a year since the release of the sixth book.  I'd do it myself, but I think that some of the numbers (release parties and pre-orders) should be double-checked post-release.
2. I added a spoiler warning around the future section after being annoyed at having details revealed to me that I didn' want to know.Btwied 17:42, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tense and spoiler

message: Phi*n!x has just posted a comment on the talk pages of all of the first six books about this. If all six articles have a problem then surely it should be discussed here. Only on Talk:Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince#Images does he explain it properly and I agree with him, but I think we should form a consensus here. Brian Jason Drake 04:41, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea putting the discussion here. I would also like everyone to note my suggestions regarding the  book template. Perhaps it would be best to discuss that here, also. -Phi*n!x 01:49, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Foreign language cover images 

message: There is a lot of information duplication between this article and JK Rowling article. Perhaps we could examine both articles to determine which information belongs here and which information belongs on her page. I was thinking that the beginning of the origins section, with the information about the girl at Bloomsbury, would be better at her page, while a lot of the information about the books and movies would be better here. Serendipodous 11:04, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ==[[Harry Potter]] and [[JK Rowling]]==