Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels/Harry Potter task force/Style guidelines

message: There's something wrong with a lot of the Harry Potter articles, e.g.
Harry Potter (born July 31 1980) is a fictional character...
is wrong.  Fictional characters can't be born, and it makes it read as if they're real life people.  So these need to go, but be mentioned later in the body of the text.  But it's wrong with all of them. — Dunc|☺ 13:41, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fictional characters and dates of birth 

message: First off, who decided this page was an official guideline extension of the MoS? ANd more importantly, much of the info in here conflicts with global guidelines. For instance, as per WP:SPOILER, articles should not be segregated into spoiler-free and spoiler sections (in other words, you can't say that you don't want spoilers in the lead). Admittedly, the guideline is still occasionally disputed, however you are degrading article quality by specifying that content must be segregated in violation of Wikipedia's disclaimer. I'm removing the guideline template. David Fuchs (talk) 01:15, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The MoS question has been resolved, as this page has now been moved to a subpage of  Wikipedia:WikiProject Harry Potter and is now proposed as a style guide for articles that are part of that project.  --Parsifal Hello 03:36, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Harry Potter discussion on WP:SPOILER talk page. 
Interested editors are welcome to join the conversation.  --Parsifal Hello 04:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course, the page does appear to be dead, so we don't appear to be in any serious rush... David Fuchs (talk) 13:33, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Serious Issues with "Guideline"

message: I've added a new section about the formatting of the book titles, which I think reflects current practice.  However, I've somewhat inadvertently added a fairly sweeping clause extending this to the games and sountracks.  I'm sure that italics are appropriate for the films, but not so sure about games and soundtracks.  What does everyone else think?  Happy-melon 13:22, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Games, definitely. But as for soundtracks, I'm not sure... I don't think anyone would hate you for italicising them as well. David Fuchs (talk) 14:17, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Italics

message: I personally think that the inclusion of the article in the shortened version is better style and sounds better; hence me initially writing the policy as such.  Fbv65edel clearly disagrees, hence him changing it in his rewrite.  So, let us form consensus: which is the preferred style?  "Philosopher's Stone" or "The Philosopher's Stone"?  One thing I'm sure we can agree on is that it should be standardised.  Personally, my vote is for The.  Happy-melon 17:04, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Goblet of Fire" or "''The'' Goblet of Fire"?

message: : Did I actually read that part correctly? 
:::"Rowling has stated[3] that she regrets allowing the name to be changed. All articles within the scope of the Harry Potter WikiProject should therefore use the title Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone in all instances."
: Are we actually conceding tio the wishes of JKR's regret? Sorry, but that isn't an encyclopedic view to take in this instance. As the book was in fact published in an alternate form (different title with illustrations), it should be noted at the first instance of mentioning. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 23:01, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sorceror's Stone Question