Talk:Albus Dumbledore/Archive 2

message: >As J.K. Rowling confirmed, Grindelwald and his followers are meant to be the magical-world analogues of Adolf Hitler and the Nazis.
Is there any confirmation of this. I think a reference would be unseful as this is a pretty significant social action for Dumbledore to have taken.
:Someone asked her if it was a coincidence that Grindelwald was defeated in 1945. She said no. That's as good as a confirmation. Twilight Realm 05:00, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: She never explained further, but I think it's a good enough confirmation that Grindelwald is at least partially associated with the Third Reich (and likely much, much more). --Deathphoenix 13:40, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: An interesting tie-in to the Real World is that Hitler would often check his room to see if "he" was there, and was known to be interested in the occult.  This could have been the inspiration for that idea.  (my own thought - I haven't seen any official word of its inspiration). --Tim4christ17 12:17, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grindelwald as the Third Reich 

message: I thought of this theory several days ago and shared it with a few friends.
Could Dumbledore have put himself up as a sacrifice for Harry, just as his mother had?  Could Harry receive the same protection from Dumbledore as from his own mother by the same, or different old magic?
:Those are interesting theories. You might want to bring it up on one of the fan forums and see what those folks think. --Deathphoenix 14:48, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That is a very plausible theory - nice! (Oli 22:02, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dumbledore Sacrifice 

message: When and where did Jo say "A wizard is very hard to kill. For example, if you threw him off the top of the Astronomy Tower, he would not die." I havn't been able to find this quote anywhere except on this page.--Thesparrows 20:44, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hard to Kill 

message: if dumbledore is over 100 years old,he would have been the previous triwizard champ.Batzarro 10:35, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  tournament champ 

message: I remember that interview. It was from before Order of the Phoenix and refers to Sirius, not Dumbledore. I have removed it. 68.192.117.112 01:10, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of the character death interview 

message: I was just looking at the picture of Dumbledore and noticed that it's a pic of him at the Pensieve. While people who remember the movie would know what that is, other readers might assume something strange. Since a wand is a weapon not unlike a gun, he actually more looks like he's trying to commit suicide. Umm...does that sound rather odd to anyone?
Uhm...why would readers think that? Dumbledore never tried to commit suicide in the books, and readers would know, if they read parts where memories were extracted, that he's actually trying to retrieve a memory... --Thrashmeister 19:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suicidumbledore

message: I think that after the events of HBP we should consider adding Harry Potter as one of Dumbledore's loyalties along with OoTP and Hogwarts. What say you?Phnx2ashes 17:15, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the priority and precedence is given to organisations. If there is no loyalty to any group, but there is loyalty for a particular individual, then it should be fine to list loyalty for an individual. Since Dumbledore clearly has loyalty towards to Order of the Phoenix, I would consider that loyalty to have precedence over loyalty for Harry Potter. --Deathphoenix ʕ 17:33, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I think this brings up an interesting, more general point. I assume the intent of the "loyalty" part of the infobox was primarily an attempt to show which side of the war each of these characters is on. However, it has become practice to add more than just organizations to this list; for example, Harry Potter (character) now has 6 characters/organizations listed under loyalty. Should these boxes have everyone that a particular character is loyal to, or just the basics? If we decide to keep the larger lists, I agree with Phnx2ashes that HBP showed that Dumbledore has/had significant loyalty to Harry Potter and should probably be added. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 17:43, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, good lord, I just took a look and you're right, there's tonnes of entries under "Loyalty". That is simply too much to put in a Loyalty field. I think we need to be a little more ruthless with how these are used. I think it would benefit if we had some consistency in how this is used. I'll post on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Harry Potter and see what we can do about standardising this. --Deathphoenix ʕ 17:53, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes I would hve to agree with all of you, we should trim down the loyalties to organizations only, but I also think that the Dumbledore/Harry bond is very significant to the plot and deserves to be the exception to the rule or at least make another section to both the Dumbledore article and Harry Potter that emphisizes their relationship. Phnx2ashes 22:22, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add loyalty to Harry Potter 

message: This may seem like nagging at little things, but don't you think we should have at least one picture of Dumbledore from the books? He is first and foremost a literary character after all. Your opinion?Phnx2ashes 22:31, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No part of this publication may be reproduced, or stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without written permission of the publisher.
The movie screenshots and publicity photos of the actors have traditionally been allowed as "promotional" in nature, since they don't really take anything away from the movie, and in fact may help promote it.  The images in the Books however provide a source of income for Mary GrandPré  - she gets a royalty for every copy sold, and posters of them could be available for sale, so if "pirate" copies are in circulation, then she loses income.  The book covers have been permitted however, on the same "promotional" basis as the movie PR photos. --T-dot 23:11, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point.  Death Eater Dan    (Muahaha) 16:50, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Book picture 

message: There seems to be some confusion about the speculation section. I made two changes there. One, I removed unnecessary refrences to specific spells in order to explain how Snape could have possibly faked Dumbeldore's death, as the ability of powerfull wizards to invent arbitrary spells is well established in the HP series (See book six and Snape's invented spells in his old potions book). Someone removed this change, I put it back as I can see nothing wrong with it. The other change I made was more speculation, and while it is not as discussed as other theories, is no more or less likely than any other speculation in this article. Simply put, if there is going to be a speculation section, it should include not distinguish between theories as all are speculative. Either the section should be removed or editors should not arbitrarily decide whats valid and what's not.--Jake11 17:55, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I reversed your change to speculation because some of it was just grasping at air such as: "For example, it would not be inventive to expect Dumbeldore to store an 'emergency wand' that would place itself quickly in Dumbeldore's hand at the utterence of a secret keyword, thus allowing Dumbeldore to break free of Malfoy's control.", although the rest of it was better than the previous version. I think that the Dumbledore page should be locked so that one person can't just put up their theoies. We should then have a peer reviewed speculation section. By the way sign your aurguments next time Jake11.Phnx2ashes 15:59, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have read your revised speculation section and am glad to see that you toned it down a little. I like this one better. There needs to be a mention that Dumbledore may have orcastrated his actual death, though.Phnx2ashes 16:13, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am curious though what is grasping at air about the theory I added. Think about it. Dumbeldore is a genius wizard who probably has battled dark wizards dozens of times. What is the most powerfull tool in a duel? A wand. What happens to your ability to fight a duel if you happen to lose a wand? It disapears drastically. Thefore, based on those assumptions, and the assumption that Dumbeldore, being around 150 years old, would have at one previous point thought "Hmm, I suppose I should have a mechanism to protect myself against the random expelliarmus charm and/or when I lose my wand in a dual and am too weak to retrieve it". << exactly the situation he faced with malfoy in book six. Perhaps this should be a peer reviewed theory as you mention?--Jake11 17:55, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, Deathphoenix is correct. NO fan speculation should be used. Sorry. --LV (Dark Mark) 19:41, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I hate to spoil the fun, but that is nonsense, and a misleading link. The argument you are making is that nothing can be reported about tony Blair, unless it comes from the labour party press office. websites officially sanctioned by warner brothers or JKR's publishers are not the only source of what is or is not a commonly held view about the books. Rather, in fact, they represent a biased source with a very pronounced vested interest, which might well encourage them not to be accurate. Try The Harry Potter Lexicon, Mugglenet, or The Leaky Cauldron, all of which are sufficiently regarded to have wiki articles. Sandpiper 00:25, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I think this is probably the best approach, if it can be maintained, for the time being.  I originally "created" the Speculation... section (about Dumbledore's Death) several weeks ago, to serve as a "corral" to contain all the incessant and rampant fan speculation, in a section carefully and specifically labeled as such.  The title was supposed to serve sort of like a "spoiler" warning - except to alert the visitors that the following is speculation.  At the time, the fanatics were very persistent about littering the rest of the article with their pet speculation and theories, so I figured the best thing to do at the time was to give them a small "sandbox" to play in, and clean out the "turds" from time to time, in order to preserve the integrity of rest of the article.  The sandbox seemed to work pretty well while it lasted.  My last attempt to make a "high quality" fan Speculation... section was this version - which I thought was a reasonable compromise, which presented the theories, and some refutation, as appropriate for encyclopedic use.  It did seem to calm most of the Dumbledore is not Dead and Dumbledore asked Snape to kill him fanatics, but the purists still didn't like the idea of allowing ANY speculation, so the "sandbox corral" concept collapsed from aggressive editing.  Wikipedia does not prohibit speculation issues to be addressed - and balanced viewpoints in controversial issues are encouraged.  If addressed, speculation should be presented in a balanced, professional, and neutral tone, not favoring either side of the argument, and allowing the speculation to stand on its own merit, or collapse from its own contradictions and absurdity.  Nevertheless if the "sandbox" has outlived it's usefulness, then so be it.  I would predict though that the fanatics will soon return, and once again litter the rest of the article with new speculations and theories, which will eventually tire out us "regulars", and perhaps then again the "Speculation sandbox" will need to be re-established.  --T-dot 00:52, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll be making an attempt to check up on the article once a day and I advise others to do as well.--Phnx2ashes 01:26, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I understand your motives, and even applaud it. Fan speculation's been a problem we've had to deal with for a while. I'll be cheering when Harry Potter and the Scar is a Horcrux, if for no other reason than the fact that there will no longer be any speculation to be had. I think the best way to deal with speculation is to remove any and all of it that appears unless there is a specific citation for it in a peer-reviewed journal or official web site. If we consistently apply that, a lot of idle fan speculation will be gone from this and other articles (like the speculation-rampant R.A.B.). --Deathphoenix ʕ 03:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As I just mentioned, that is rather missing the point of what caused people to seek out and read this article in the first place. People want to know what other people are thinking. Wiki has been criticised for writing literary articles which frankly tell you nothing about the characters, just re-tell the book. Sandpiper 00:25, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speculation Trouble 

message: I removed the speculation section and some of the more specific fan theories, though I left in the fact that fans believe he isn't dead, and have left in a link to the "Dumbledore isn't dead" web site. We don't need specific fan theories, but perhaps mentioning that there are some fans who believe he's still alive may be appropriate. I have no prejudice against other people removing link or the speculation, though. Remember, the death of a mentor character is a common literary theme to contribute to the growth of a young protagonist. It's unlikely the author will resurrect this mentor character. --Deathphoenix ʕ 20:52, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is probably the best approach, if it can be maintained, for the time being.  I originally "created" the Speculation... section (about Dumbledore's Death) several weeks ago, to serve as a "corral" to contain all the incessant and rampant fan speculation, in a section carefully and specifically labeled as such.  The title was supposed to serve sort of like a "spoiler" warning - except to alert the visitors that the following is speculation.  At the time, the fanatics were very persistent about littering the rest of the article with their pet speculation and theories, so I figured the best thing to do at the time was to give them a small "sandbox" to play in, and clean out the "turds" from time to time, in order to preserve the integrity of rest of the article.  The sandbox seemed to work pretty well while it lasted.  My last attempt to make a "high quality" fan Speculation... section was this version - which I thought was a reasonable compromise, which presented the theories, and some refutation, as appropriate for encyclopedic use.  It did seem to calm most of the Dumbledore is not Dead and Dumbledore asked Snape to kill him fanatics, but the purists still didn't like the idea of allowing ANY speculation, so the "sandbox corral" concept collapsed from aggressive editing.  Wikipedia does not prohibit speculation issues to be addressed - and balanced viewpoints in controversial issues are encouraged.  If addressed, speculation should be presented in a balanced, professional, and neutral tone, not favoring either side of the argument, and allowing the speculation to stand on its own merit, or collapse from its own contradictions and absurdity.  Nevertheless if the "sandbox" has outlived it's usefulness, then so be it.  I would predict though that the fanatics will soon return, and once again litter the rest of the article with new speculations and theories, which will eventually tire out us "regulars", and perhaps then again the "Speculation sandbox" will need to be re-established.  --T-dot 00:52, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll be making an attempt to check up on the article once a day and I advise others to do as well.--Phnx2ashes 01:26, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

text: I understand your motives, and even applaud it. Fan speculation's been a problem we've had to deal with for a while. I'll be cheering when Harry Potter and the Scar is a Horcrux, if for no other reason than the fact that there will no longer be any speculation to be had. I think the best way to deal with speculation is to remove any and all of it that appears unless there is a specific citation for it in a peer-reviewed journal or official web site. If we consistently apply that, a lot of idle fan speculation will be gone from this and other articles (like the speculation-rampant R.A.B.). --Deathphoenix ʕ 03:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As I just mentioned, that is rather missing the point of what caused people to seek out and read this article in the first place. People want to know what other people are thinking. Wiki has been criticised for writing literary articles which frankly tell you nothing about the characters, just re-tell the book. Sandpiper 00:25, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed speculation section

message: I have removed the symbolism section to this talk page (below). I do not think it has any place in an encyclopedic article, it is entirly comprised of POV and OR. I mean........ Yoda??  please!
Albus Dumbledore does have seemingly strong similarities with other characters from books or movies. Some notable examples would be Jedi Masters Yoda and Obi-Wan Kenobi from Star Wars and the wizard Gandalf from The Lord of the Rings. Though J.K. Rowling has never admitted to which characters or persons from history have influenced Dumbledore inside of the books, it is apparent that he has much in common with all well-written mentors of literature - an excellent example of the Jungian, 'Wise Old Man' archetype.
However I will bow to consensus and if there are any objection to its removal please discuss your opinion for reintegration here, thanks.  Death Eater Dan    (Muahaha) 16:50, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Symbolism

message: I've taken this bit of advice out of a comment in the article, and placed it here.  Consider it policy on this article for now.
PLEASE DO NOT ADD ANY MENTION of Dumbledore's Death, or his Death Date, in the character description summary. This is considered a crucial plot spoiler, and must be preceeded by a spoiler warning to meet Wikipedia standards. Dumbledore's death is described fully later on in the main body of the article, following an appropriate plot spoiler warning, for the benefit of those who have not read the entire Harry Potter series.
~ Booya Bazooka 22:50, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that this could be a problem because his death is important to the books and deserves its own section because it was such an important event. As for the character summary, it really should be there too. Otherwise, it suggests that he is still alive. I think that anybody who is reading the article would realise that there would be spoilers on this page. Also, 99% of readers of this article would know the ending anyway, so I don't think that we should change these sections. Oli 10:02, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Avoiding spoilers

message: This article mentions that Ginny uses Voldemort's name when speaking about him.  I don't remember that ever happening, could someone please remind me (or remove it if it's untrue)? Emmett5 20:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Chapter 20 - At the end of the Funeral when Harry and Ginny discuss the future of their relationship.  "Well ... I can't say I'm surprised.  I knew this would happen in the end.  I knew you would not be happy unless you were hunting Voldemort.  Maybe that's why I like you so much."     --T-dot 22:09, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

text: People seem to gradually get used to saying his name. Later!!! Chili14 (Talk) 03:24, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speaking Voldemort's name 

message: The article makes mention that Dumbledore "may able to understand Parseltongue, the language of snakes".  Can we get a citation for this?  I believe something this major (and an ability this rare) would have been made more clear.  It is certainly likely that Dumbledore (and many other wizards) could recognize Parseltongue, however, I highly doubt he could speak it. fruitofwisdom 03:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought I saw somewhere that Dumbledore understood 100 languages, but I do not recall it specifically mentioning parseltongue. It has been suggested that he might have got morphin to translate the memories he saved which had interesting coments in parceltongue, but again I don't know where that came from. Sandpiper 08:29, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Parseltongue

message: Has anybody else noticed that Professor Dumbledore has a portrait in his office? I was not aware that a Headmaster or Headmistress had a portrait magically administered on the wall unless loss  of life occurred. Twice, Dumbledore ran, and twice, the portrait had an opportunity to show, since he had an option of never coming back to Hogwarts. But, when loss of life does supposedly occur, the portrait does appear. Both Harry and Professor McGonagall saw and acknowledged it. You can't just write that away.--70.124.132.176 03:21, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: people have suggested that if he was devious enough to fake his own death, he might be devious enough to hang up a portrait of himself before going out. But we are going to have to wait and see, because the portrait wasn't talking. Sandpiper 23:33, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portrait in his office 

message: I'm not entirely sure, but I thought I saw that McGonagall was to be the next headmaster? (It seems logical as she was deputy headmistress, but I'm basing this on something I thought I saw.) Can someone confirm this? Sykil 06:40, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: specifically, I recall she was acting headmistress, but any new appointment would be subject to the governors decision and hasn't happened yet. Sandpiper 23:30, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A lot of it depends on whether the school is open in book seven but the staff meeting shows that McGonagall will take the role unless there is a plot twist. --Sonic Mew 21:20, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Successor 

message: Where was it said that he was ever head of Gryffindor? Seems like speculation to me.
Also, there's way too much trivia (ten-pin bowling, Bertie Botts etc) in the opening paragraph. I believe most of it should be done away with entirely - this is not a fansite, and what we need is an analysis of DD's character as it appears in the story. A reader not knowing much of HP will assume that Albus is frequently seen listening to chamber music.
Rain74 15:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe the conclusion of the discussion at the time of my reinstatement was to KEEP it for the time being, and not arbitrarily delete information that is still under discussion. You first deleted it, without regard to that consensus, and then deleted it again after reinstatement, after adding your own "consensus" decision. My function is to work with the consensus, on behalf of the Wikipedia, and to fight unauthorized "blanking" of useful information - which constitutes vandalism. Nevertheless, I do not have a poker in this particular fire, so feel free to do as you wish, and perhaps others will correct your changes, if it is required for the benefit of the Wikipedia. --T-dot 23:50, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I certainly don't see any such consensus on this page.  In fact, if you look earler on this talk page, you'll see that a user claimed that it's even unconfirmed that he was ever a head of house.  That, plus the question just above this, which received no answer at all (and, you'd figure someone could answer his/her question pretty easily if it *were* ever said anywhere that Dumbledore was head of Gryffindor).  This is certainly not a consensus that him being head of Gryffindor should stay on this page.   If anyone can point to a particular part of the books or movies from which one can conclusively say that Dumbledore was head of Gryffindor (and I've read and seen all of the ones that have come out multiple times so far, and remember no such evidence), then I will not object to it being put back here.  Until then, as best as I can tell, it's speculation, and is therefore not, IMO, "useful information", until such time as is proven otherwise.   I do apologize for not putting a summary in my original edit -- I must have forgotten to do so.  Venknat 09:13, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Head of Gryffindor, Trivia