Talk:Severus Snape/Archive 4

message: There is some overlapping between "role in series" and 'Half-blood Prince" sections Luckyz21 23:19, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge?

message: Is there any reason we changed the infobox picture? Frankly I'm not too keen on a pic dominated by a grossly enlarged hand.Sandpiper 23:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was probably changed because the current one is newer.  I think I preferred the old one (I'm not sure I remember what it looked like).  I'll go look around and see if it's better. John Reaves (talk) 23:52, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, never mind, it's been deleted. John Reaves (talk) 23:54, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, I noticed it had gone. It was a film shot so it could easily be put back. Fair use images get auto deleted if no one is using them. It was a similar head, though the colour was better and it was closer up, and no hand waving about in the foreground. Sandpiper 14:04, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

text: On a similar note, why isn't there any pictures of Snape as portrayed in the books?  I think that there should be at least one.  Mbatman72 02:44, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening Picture 

message: The Loyalty section says that, when Harry performed the Sectusempra curse on Malfoy that Snape did not expel him, however in the Chamber of Secrets doesn't it say that only the headmaster or the head of house can expel people? Pyreforge 02:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think the point is about exactly who can expel someone. I imagine any master could make a case for someone to be expelled if they had done something bad enough. The point really is that Snape keeps making the threat, but it never happens. So it may sound bad, but for whatever reason it is just empty words. Sandpiper 20:32, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, thanks. Pyreforge 00:12, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

text: As a teacher and not a headteacher, Snape would not have had the authority to expel anyone.  He tried to argue for Harry's expulsion once before but was overruled by Dumbledore.  So any remarks about Snape not expelling Harry are redundant.  Exploding Boy 15:23, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: On expulsion

message: Someone posted a link under "Half-Blood Prince," that leads to -- you guessed it, a blog -- that apparently tells who dies in Deathly Hallows. Some guy got a hold of the book very recently and put all the information on characters who die in Deathly Hallows in his blog. What do you know -- it's a reprise of "OMG Snape kills Dumbledore!" I edited the link out to prevent massive spoilage, whether the guy was telling the truth or not. Teamrocketspy621 00:51, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brilliant... A reprise... 

message: It is made very clear in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows that Snape was always loyal to Dumbledore, and in fact killed Dumbledore under Dumbledore's orders, as Dumbledore knew he was going to die anyway and it was a good way to show that Snape was loyal to Voldemort. Ever since he switched sides in order to protect Lily, he has always been on Dumbledore's side, and was angry that Harry would ultimately have to die. Titanium Dragon 23:27, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Large edit needed 

message: :: Dumbledore's greed? he was only trying to stop voldemort, i don't see how that is greedy (ReshenKusaga 22:23, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Dubledore's greed mentions to his greed and foolishness in trying to see his dead family by the use of the resurrection stone. (Korn22x 2:37, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  But "Greed"? It sounds weird saying "due to Dumbledore's momentary greed" in the article. It was obviously a lot more complicated than basic "greed", even if Dumbledore used the term. The spirit of the incident isn't adequately described by the word "greed" here - I would go with "weakness". 70.189.213.149 23:39, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

text: "Greed" is not the right term here.  Exploding Boy 15:23, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've amended greed to 'guilt over Ariana's death'. I think that's closer to what JKR is saying.Mercury543210 20:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Dumbledore's greed?

message: Please sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes (~) after your comments.  Please keep discussion here strictly to article-related matters.  Off-topic and incivil remarks will be removed.  Exploding Boy 15:23, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Talk page guidelines

message: I don't remember whether Sirius mistook Harry for James in OthP, as it happened in the film. Did it happen? It would seem a notable slip. Comments? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 19:55, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I remember it, when they're dueling together in the Department of Mysteries. It happens in the movie. --VorangorTheDemon 07:39, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was asking as to whether it occurs in the book as well. If it doesn't, its a notable difference betwixt the film and book. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 09:33, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't happen in the book, I was surprised that it was included in the film. Though Mrs. Weasley and Hermoine make a few references to the fact that Sirius seems to confuse Harry with James, it's never factually states that was the case. In the fighting scene in the book Sirius is very clear that he's talking to Harry. 68.43.205.143 03:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: James or Harry?

message: I have (again) removed spoliers from the character info box.  ... Deathly Hallows was only released very recently, and it is not until then that it is revealed that Snape was on the side of the angels all along.  It will become appropriate to have this information in the info box, but it is not yet. GideonF 12:23, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Gideon, what specific style policy or guideline are you citing in regards to removing spoilers? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 09:36, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  WP:IAR.  The information is in the article for anyone who wants to find out, but the first thing someone sees when looking at the page shouldn't be a spoiler for the latest book.GideonF 12:17, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I guess I can understand and support that for a month or so. Maybe you can keep an eye on it, too, and when the time feels right, go ahead and move it back. Seem fair? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:29, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine by me.GideonF 22:05, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Spoliers in Infobox

message: There is an active proposal to delete the article Half-Blood Prince (character). That article largely duplicates information from both this article and from Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. Marc Shepherd 22:27, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Half-Blood Prince (character)]] 

message: *Judas
*The Gospel of Judas
* The Last Temptation of Christ
:No. Faithlessthewonderboy 01:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not relevant to this article, especially since Snape didn't betray anyone.  And please sign your name.Nightscream 19:57, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: (Case for the ammendation of a few)See also(s)

message: As it has come up more than once, we should probably discuss the merits and demerits of using succession boxes in the article. Faithlessthewonderboy has pointed out that they aren't supposed to be used for this purpose. Comments? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 15:18, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As you have said, I believe they aren't appropriate. The Manual of Style says, "Another common type of template, succession boxes, should not be used to describe in-universe relationships in articles about fictional entities." WP:WAF I think this is pretty clear. Faithlessthewonderboy 15:39, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Personally, I don't think they belong; creating succession boxes entitled "Head of Slytherin House Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry" just invites more succession boxes of similar nonsense. All this violates WP:NOT which states 'Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information' and it is also worth noting that these boxes provide limited information anyway as most of them seem to list three or four people at most.On an aesthetic note, if they must be kept, please change the way they are presented; at the moment the Snape's collection are quite displeasing to the eye. The One 16:22, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Furthermore, do we know that Sluhorn immediately preceded Snape as potions professor and Head of Slytherin? I don't recall that being stated in the books, though I could be wrong. And then there's the question of the headmaster box; since McGonagall was acting headmaster after Dumbledore's death, should that be noted? And do we know for a fact that she took over after Snape was killed? IMO, not only are the boxes completely inappropriate, but we simply don't know enough to make them accurate. Faithlessthewonderboy 16:59, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm not familiar with Kings of Gondor, so I can't comment, but you bring up a good point: In this case, the verifiable line of succession is only two or three people long. It's completely unnecessary and just plain doesn't look good on the page. Faithlessthewonderboy 02:27, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

text: I already brought that up in this discussion, three posts up. I agree with you. But most importantly, the boxes have to go. They don't belong. Faithlessthewonderboy 03:16, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Succession Boxes

message: In this section, it talks briefly about that the loyalty was questioned and then launches into the answer in Deathly Hallows. Couldn't there be more information on where he was loyal to both sides throughout the series, thus getting the discussion on? Then people's speculation on the answer and then finally the answer in Deathly Hallows? Or at least move some of the info from the sections above. Simply south 13:08, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Even though it was true that people didn't know until book 7, it was all speculation, and can't be added to the article. --VorangorTheDemon 20:21, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Loyalty 

message: Snape gets angry at Dumbledore for saying that Harry will be like a pig for the slaughter and that he used him. Therefore does Dumbledore also tell Snape that Harry will not die due to the blood links but Harry must think that he will die, and that part of the conversation was not included in the memory? Otherwise there would be no reason for Snape to continue helping him as he would know he would soon die anyway.
:First, please sign your posts.  Second, no, Dumbledore does not tell him about the blood link; This is why Harry himself is also initially angry at Dumbledore for executing these plans, at least until he gets to that purgatory way station, and Dumbledore then tells him about the blood link.  Nightscream 18:00, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Third, please confine your comments to the article at hand. We are not here to interpret the plot - there are innumerable fan forums for that. :) - Arcayne (cast a spell) 20:23, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did he know that Harry would survive? 

message: With the name Severus being similar to the name Severinus I wonder whether some of the inspiration for Snape was taken from The Name of the Rose, especially given that Severinus was the herbalist in the Eco novel, a position much akin to be Potions Master. Velkyal 13:17, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm, very interesting. Do you have a citation for this comparison? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 14:56, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Unfortunately, we cannot include observations in the article (unless they are properly cited, from notable sources). As well, the Discussion area is for discussion about the article, and not speculation. Your point is a good one; I just don't want things to turn into a fan forum debate. That is one thing WP is certainly not supposed to be. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:08, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Such an article would likely consist soley of OR, otherwise the information would be included in the appropriate article. Faithlessthewonderboy 07:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inspired by Eco? 

message: I note that Snape is described as an antagonist, although technically speaking he is actually a protagonist, even though this fact is deliberately kept ambiguous until the seventh book... Jamyskis Whisper, Contribs 15:53, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it is because the 7th book is rather new, and doesn't need to be spilling the beans about Snape. As well, he has been an antagonist to potter throughout the previous six books, so that he is secretly on the side of the White Hats doesn't necessarily remove him from the list of antagonists. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 17:45, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd call him an anti-hero or anti-villain. It seems more fitting to me. --VorangorTheDemon 20:11, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Within your post lies the problem, Vorangor: "seems more fitting to me". What seems one thing to you might seem quite another to someone else. I think it puts us onto a slippery slope into speculation. However, if you can find a reasonable citation that calls him an anti-hero, then its worth considering. Without it, leaving Snape as an antagonist seems prudent. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 20:27, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well even though it's quite obvious that he is an antagonist, is there anything that states he is actually one? You find a citation for me stating that he's an antagonist. When it all boils down to it, it's opinion either way. I just find anti-hero more fitting because of the fact that Snape is later revealed to have been a hero all along, even though his actions in the series suggest otherwise (as in anti-hero). And this isn't a fan page, it's a wikipedia article. Therefor tip-toeing around the subject of him being revealed as a a hero in Book 7 should have no relevence when writing the article. It needs to report it as it is, not by what we don't want people to see.--VorangorTheDemon 20:40, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Problem solved. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 20:45, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. Problem mostly solved, I'm probably just being picky now, but now the article looks a tad bland. I'm not entirely against keeping him as an antagonist, because come to think of it, he is an antagonist, and an antagonist isn't always evil. They simply oppose the protagonists. Sigh. Dear Lord, I don't know what to call him. He's a mix of many... :) --VorangorTheDemon 09:45, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I kinda agree with you. It is a bit bland. But by removing all the fat and dirt form the meat that is the article, we can now work at spicing it up using just the meat (and I just used up most of my cooking metaphors there - time for lunch). - Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:12, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I fixed it to mention that at his introduction he was an antagonist, but his true status as protagonist or antagonsit wasn't revealed until the seventh book. I didn't state what he was though, it's probably a better thing to not spoil readers. --VorangorTheDemon 18:16, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Antagonist? 

message: Arcayne, on the matter of Snape and Lily's, falling out, I reviewed Chapter 23, and indeed, Lily referenced both the epithet that Snape hurled toward her, and Snape's consorting with wannabe Death Eaters as her reasons for the breakdown of their friendship.  I apologize for insisting without first reviewing the passage.  I've incorporated both reasons into the article.
As for the section title, there are two types of section titles used for articles on fictional characters.  The first is "Character biography" or "Fictional character biography".  This title, or some variation of it, is the standard used in the articles on the Weasley twins, Dumbldore, Sirius Black, etc., as well as articles on other long-running fictional characters like Batman, Spider-Man, Superman (Kal-L), Captain Kirk, Benjamin Sisko, Brooke English, Roland Deschain, etc. The other title, which I've only seen in the Harry Potter articles, is "In the Books", which is used in the Ron Weasley, Hermione Granger, Hagrid, and Draco Malfoy articles.  Either would be an appropriate section title in this article.  Remus Lupin's article actually uses both.  The only one I've ever seen that uses "Appearances", is the Voldemort article, but that article does not present his life in an in-universe, chronological order, and lumps his movie appearances in the same main section with his depictions in the book. Since Snape's article indeed presents his biography as such, I think it's more appropriate, and would bring it in line with the vast majority of other Harry Potter articles in particular, and fictional character articles in general.  Thanks. Nightscream 06:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that you and User:Asyndeton should discuss this matter before making changes. I think he is of another opinion on this matter, and once you guys find common ground, present a coordinated idea. Sound fair? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 04:42, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't recall seeing anyone by that name in the History list, but if he wants to participate here, I encourage it. :-) Nightscream 14:27, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Take a look at his contributions; he is working some of the other Potter pages, and you might be working at odds. I'd thought I'd help avoid the eventual fender-bender. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 20:10, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Section title and Snape & Lily's falling out

message: This line of the article 
"Dumbledore decides that Snape will kill him, both an act of euthanasia, as a testament of his apparent loyalty to Voldemort, and as a way to fulfill the Unbreakable Vow."
implies that Snape did not know that Dumbledore wanted Snape to kill him.  However, the timing of Dumbledore's request and the Unbreakable Vow are not clear in the books.   Both events happen in the summer well before school starts (since Dumbledore already has the wound when he picks up Harry, and since Snape is at Spinner's End when he gets the visit from Narcissa).   In my reading of the Spinner's End chapter in the book, Snape knew Dumbledore's wish and made a mental calculation that that was probably what Draco was assigned to do.
In anycase, the timing of events is not clear, so that line "as a way to fulfill the Unbreakable Vow" should be changed.
168.103.162.222 17:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Though the timing is not made explicit, I think you are right. We are to surmise that Snape swears the Unbreakable Vow after agreeing to help Dumbledore and prevent Malfoy from committing the murder. I've changed the text a bit there. Magidin 18:51, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timing of the Unbreakable Vow? 

message: :I think another re-write is called for, as I edited the article as it was, and not conforming it to some of the since-GA-level articles of Hermione Granger and Lord Voldemort. A question had come up as to berb tense, and I had learned (or rather, had forgotten) that if constructed as a biography (as Snape's article is), the past tense would be utilized. this is incorrect. As Granger's and Voldie's articles are constructed, they are re-telling the matter in the forms that follow the books, and utilize the infinitive present tense. 
:Now, before people fall asleep from the grammar lesson, I think that i could use a hand to restructure the article more in line with the aforementioned GA-article styles.
:Lastly, I am kinda concerned by this edit regarding Potter's training with Snape with Occlumency (or whatever), which has gone backand forth a bit. My knowledge of the event is admittedly imperfect, but was the Pensieve even part of the training? As well, was Harry "doing something he wasn't supposed to" when he picked up one of Snape's memories? I don't want to edit it back to what I think, until I've talked to you folks about it. Your input would be helpful. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 14:41, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, he sure did, and it turns out I was wrong. Thanks for setting me straight and being a good joe about it. :) - Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:56, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Snape, revisited