Talk:Harry Potter/Archive 2

message: How did you get the dates? I've been reading all the books, but I cannot find any mention of the year.Andre Wong 18:21, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timeline 

message: There seem to be many places where the plot is retold with varying accuracy and fullness.
I think we need to pull them all together in one place.
Would Harry Potter (plot) be the most suitable place?
This would certainly simplfy the spoiler problem :-)
--Phil | Talk 13:12, Jun 9, 2004 (UTC)
:I'd vote for making Harry Potter into an article about the series, and Harry Potter (character) about the character. Or maybe the first should be Harry Potter (plot), with Harry Potter as a disambiguation. Because it's really two different things, and smushing them together on the main Harry Potter page has lead to smushy results. Also, Magic (Harry Potter) is somewhat messy. It needs to be split up where there's enough information to split something up, using the Main article: Foo convention under the section headers, for the larger topics. grendel|khan 16:13, 2004 Jun 11 (UTC)
: Here's my proposal: Harry Potter should be about the series in general, but without plot spoilers. Harry Potter (plot) is the logical place for that. Harry Potter (character) should be about Harry himself as a character. My justification is that when people say "Harry Potter" in conversation, they're more likely to be referring to the book and/or movie series overall than to Harry in particular, as in when someone asks, "What do you think of Harry Potter?" Wesley 16:38, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agreed. HappyDog took care of making the plot synopsis link to Harry Potter (plot). Now, if everyone wants to do this, we just need to seperate Harry Potter's bio off to Harry Potter (character), and point to that at the top of the article. Who feels adventurous? - Eisnel 00:15, 15 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot unification 

message: I have a page on my site concerning 'Harry Potter and the Ci Wa Wa', an unauthorised Chinese book featuring Harry Potter. Would Wikipedia be interested in linking? The URL is:
http://www.cjvlang.com/Hpotter/ciwawa.html
Webmaster, cjvlang.com
: This article does have a lot of external links on the bottom, it's getting a bit cluttered. The "Ci Wa Wa" unauthorized book is such a specific subject that it might be better to make an article about it that is referenced from the Unauthorized books featuring Harry Potter section, like someone did with Harry Potter and Leopard-Walk-Up-to-Dragon. Then that article could have an external link at the end (note: articles that just exist to guide people to a website are discouraged). Of course, such an article couldn't contain the internal pages from the book, because even though the book is a rip off, I think it's still copyrighted. =o) I also think that a seperate article just on the subject of Harry Potter plagiarism would be nice... who knows, there might already be one. - Eisnel 01:47, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Added to the Unauthorized books section (along with other Chinese HP ripoffs) with a footnote-style link to the page in question. Carter 00:12, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unauthorised Harry Potter book - suggested link 

message: I added house after people started adding the character's house to the affliation and I realized I needed to list their house. Obviously, we don't know that Lucius Malfoy, but it very likely so we say, "Slytherin(?)."
Didn't Ron say that Draco claimed that his family had all been Slytherins? I think this was in Chamber of secrets when they were discussing who the heir was
-Actually Draco tells Harry in the first book that he is going to be a Slytherin, because he couldnt abide being something other, like a Hufflepuff-
:The actual quote is as follows: "I know I'll be in Slytherin, all our family have been - imagine being in Hufflepuff, I think I'd leave, wouldn't you?" (emphasis mine) Sinistro 21:45, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: House

message: I removed this recently added text:
*TheErised.com: A fantastic, new Harry Potter super site. Forums, News, Fan Submissions, Staff openings, and more!
It looks like a new site, next to nothing on Google, and looks like self-promotion to me. If anyone disagrees, feel free to add it back in. (But really, someone with more knowledge of the subject needs to weed out most of those links. There are way too many of them.) Aranel 16:19, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: How about moving most of the external links, and the sections Fan Art and Fan Fiction to a separate article Harry Potter fandom? -- Pjacobi 17:13, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good to me. There are precedents (see articles for Tolkien and Star Trek fans). I'd like to see some material added about the reaction of Warner Brothers to fan sites, as that story is an interesting chapter in fan site history, so to speak. Are you volunteering? (I'm not really familiar with the fan community, alas.) Aranel 17:37, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Trying to be a good WikiGnome, I always volunteer for cleanup work, but I won't be able to make big contributions to the content, only split as outlined above. Anyway, I would wait for some more comments. -- Pjacobi 14:32, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I definitely think that the content of the Harry Potter series (basically the first half of the article) should remain while the rest—fans' and critics' reactions to the series (the Harry Potter phenomenon and fan fiction/art/websites/role-playing/video games/trading cards)—should be moved to a separate article. Maybe content should be classified based on whether it comes directly from J.K. Rowling/the Warner Bros. films or from the general public. neatnate 18:50, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

text: The external unofficial links are sorted by their Alexa traffic rankings, so if you remove any it should be the lowest ones. The top two or three should definitely stay on this article, though. - Mark 07:15, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

text: Thanks for your work! Does anyone think that Parodies or Unauthorised Books belong on the fandom page? --neatnate 19:25, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: You could make a case for the parodies to be on a separate page (but I'm not sure the fandom page is the right place), but unauthorized books should stay on the main page. --Carter 21:25, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted link 

message: The section explaining the title change was just changed to say "in North America". Is it true that the version published in Canada used Sorceror? (I picked up a copy with the original titled while visiting in Quebec. Did it just depend on where you found yours?) I am, of course, not an expert on book titles in Canada. --Aranel 21:59, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Checking Amazon.ca, it looks like Philosopher's Stone is much more common, but some Sorceror's Stone versions pop up, too. Carter 22:07, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The Canadian publisher listed on J.K. Rowling's website is Raincoast Books, which lists it as Philosopher's Stone on their website. However, I have seen Canadian websites that refer to it as Sorcer's Stone (presumably some Canadians have the Scholastic version of the book). neatnate 22:28, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

text: I have changed the article back to its original state to reflect this. If any Canadians wish to come forward now and tell us what their book is called, please speak now, or forever hold your peace. - Mark 00:55, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Mark, I changed it to North American specifically because a Canadian friend in the UK bought HP and the Soceror's stone in Toronto.  I am prepared to accept that both versions were available, although I would suspect that logically for linguistic asnd marketing reasons, there would be one standard version for the US and Canada.  However, I also acknowledge one could equally suspect that if Canada had the philosopher's stone then US books woould still be sold there.  I will try to contact them to find out whether the book was a Canadian publication in which case I will revert it to North America, but until such an event, I will leave things alone! Dainamo 01:17, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sorceror's/Philosopher's Stone 

message: It has been said in the books that Dumbledore dicovered the 12 uses for dragon's blood.
So far we see that dragon blood has healing proerties (i.e.) Hagrid's steak for his eye
and J.K. has made several jokes about Mrs. Weasely claiming it works great as a cleaning solution (especially for ovens), so that's 2 uses.  What are the other 10?  
Anyone figure some more out?
Gnrlotto 03:02, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  12 uses of dragon's blood 

message: Seeing that Harry Potter is a very broad and popular subject I don’t think just any link should be added to the “Unofficial Links” category.  This is the reason I removed Harry Potter Fan Zone link, if you check its Alexa.com traffic rating it is not even top 400,000 (I think links should at least be top 200,000) and its Google page rank isn’t too great either.  CoSForums is the lowest ranked (traffic wise) in the list and is almost in the top 100,000 on Alexa.com.  I think certain requirements should be set forth and other popular sites that do not quite meet those standards should be added to the fandom links.  These are my proposed requirements:
*Minimum100, 000 unique hits a day
*Must be in top 200,000 on Alexa.com
*Must have a Google page rank of 3 or more
--Ariadoss|Talk ,  ,  (UTC)
:I think there are too many.  WP is not a links directory.  I'd go through right now and delete them down but I don't visit the sites to know.  If anything, we should have a link to google for something like "Harry Potter fan site" and let that be the only link. Same goes for all the other HP articles. Cburnett 04:44, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have already sorted through the Harry Potter external links several times and ranked them by Alexa Traffic Rank, and dropped off the sites that have so little traffic their listings here would appear to be mere advertising to a wider audience. At some stage, somebody broke off all but the most highly-trafficked links to Harry Potter fandom, and you can now find an extensive link list there. So if you fancy moving any newly added links to there, it would be acceptable. But I agree, only the top-ranked unofficial sites should be here, say the top 6 or something. Maybe we should also include sites that J.K. Rowling herself has given the fan site award, if they don't fit in the top 6 by traffic ranking. - Mark 02:06, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links