Talk:Regulus Black/Archive 1

message: *The Argument that R.A.B. is not Regulus Black section needs to be rewritten very badly. It's written in first person essay format, which is not even close to how it should be written. I Tried to change what i could but gave up because it is all bad. I recommend the whole thing should be deleted and completely rewritten by someone else.--Nicarmour 01:02, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree. I find this section pretty bad as well. To begin with, Sirius' obviously biased opinion about Regulus is stated as if it were fact, which I find very problematic. Also, the fact that the locket found in GP12 isn't described as gold is hardly an argument against the Regulus theory. It still is a heavy locket and therefore fits the description of the one from the Pensieve scenes. The Kreacher argument is IMO pretty weak as well. First of all, fifteen years have passed and Kreacher could have been in better conditions at the time R.A.B. stole the locket. And second, even if not, Regulus could have gotten help from someone else. His accomplice doesn't have to be Kreacher. Neville Longbottom 13:11, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Anyone can edit the page, even you! Go right ahead and fix anything that's wrong. -- Nunh-huh 03:22, 22 May 2004 (UTC)

text: I would say, not, since it would seem that leaky is no longer supporting the story except for a cryptic comment about how interesting the last few days have been. It may be that further facts will emerge. However....if they have discovered they were mistaken, I would have thought they would have printed a retraction rather than the cryptic comment. That suggests conflict. Maybe solicitors letters? Sandpiper 22:25, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

text: I think it should, although carefully referencing it as a rumor. Being forced to back off his information because of an uproar does not mean it should be tossed completely from this article. --cpu111, 3:57, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

text: I saw that too, and thought it was taking it a bit far to change the info box. Though, for whatever reason, when the original newsflash was removed from the website, they also neglected to revise the changes they had made to his biography name.Sandpiper 20:38, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: R.A.B. not Regulus Black

message: A popular fansite claimed to have been informed by a reliable source that Regulus' middle name is Arcturus. 
The fansite claim that Regulus' second name is Arcturus has since been withdrawn without explanation. However, one of the editors of that fansite has stated that he stands behind this information. He posted the following on another site (The Leaky Cauldron):
Obviously, Jo is the source of this information. When have you ever known me to post rumors as facts? It's from Jo. That doesn't mean she talked to me directly, of course, but I do know that it came from Jo.
I honestly think that Jo figures she's already told us that it's Regulus. Read the Melissa/Emerson interview. I think she would be surprised that this is even an issue. 
I have asked permission to reveal who told me. If they say I can, I'll let you all know. Otherwise, feel free to take this with whatever grain of salt you need to.
Steve 
—Comment posted at The Leaky Cauldron.org
It has also been noted from the books that Regulus had a rich uncle whose name was Alphard.
*I removed this section as speculation and unencylopedic. Tedernst 15:51, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Middle Name

message: Where exactly did all that info come from? Dont you need sources for that kind of thing? I know some of it was from the book, the lestranges and molfoys and tonks etc, but where did longbottoms and potters come from? Raemie 21:20, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's from the family tree that Jo put up for donation. Some of it was published in a newspaper and the other half was written down by fans, who went to the auction to look for the whole tree. Which brings me to my question. Where do you edit the tree to put in missing things like the names of Sirius' and Regulus' parents (Orion and Walburga). Neville Longbottom 23:29, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Family Tree

message: Who keeps deleting the mention that a basilisk egg must be incubated under the Dog Star? Noneofyourbusiness 20:15, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm the one who removed it from this article and moved it to Sirius Black (under Name etymology) instead. I think it belongs there rather than here because this article is about Regulus Black, not Sirius Black, and the basilisk egg being laid under Sirius is more appropriate there. --Deathphoenix ʕ 20:23, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But it's a connection. Noneofyourbusiness 03:05, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It IS a connection, but Sirius black is a connection to a lot of things in Harry Potter, and it's not necessary to put that information on every page.--Nnythm 14:29, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Regulus, Sirius, and Basilisks

message: The name can also be connected to Marcus Atilius Regulus, a famous Roman martyr. This might be a clue from Rowling, saying he died as a martyr. In his story, Regulus claimed to have been given a slow-acting poison in order to help Rome. This was a lie, but it served his purpose. Of course, this does not tell fans if Regulus Black drank a slow-acting poison in the cave, or if this is once again a lie.  
Hmm, I looked at the wikipedia page for Marcus Atilius Regulus, and there's no slow acting poison.  Can we get a citation for this?
--Nnythm 14:27, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Marcus Atilius Regulus supposedly died a martyr, but he did nothing to serve his purpose - rather, he is the archetypal 'moral Roman', caring more for honour than life. So, since the reference in this article appears flawed, and the real person appears to have little to do with Regulus Black (even St Regulus would be a better fit - stealing St Andrew's relics from unworthy Constantine and hiding them in Scotland...), I am removing the reference. Michaelsanders 20:21, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, if Rowling was thinking of Atilius at all, it was in an ironic sense. He was supposedly a brave man who resolutely kept his word, at the cost of his life. Regulus Black was a coward who broke his word and was killed because of it. Michaelsanders 20:43, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marcus Atilius Regulus 

message: This whole section of theory and speculation is entirely nonsense and goes against all the rules. Thus I wonder why this keeps staying here. PeaceNT (Talk | contribs) 06:02, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would say that the two subsections for and against R.A.B=Regulus should go. However, the part about the middle name is encyclopedic, and at least a sentence or two stating that Regulus is the only character in the series known to have the initials R. and B. (besides those two which Hermione mentions at the end of HBP) and JKR saying that Regulus would be "a fine guess." It looks like most of that section was written in one sitting by an anon and just went unnoticed until now. --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 06:35, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just had another look, it seems I had carelessly jumped into conclusions to disregard the whole section. You're right. The part Regulus Black's middle name and JKR words can be secure, but the rest should be deleted.PeaceNT (Talk | contribs) 06:49, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I got rid of the two arguments anyway PeaceNT (Talk | contribs) 11:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well that was certainly a bold move.  But I wonder if somehow we could salvage the "translations of the Black name" information, which provides some pretty strong "proof" that Regulus (or at least someone with the last name of Black) is R.A.B.  Actually, come to think of it, that is covered in the R.A.B. article.  Still...  --T-dot (Talk | contribs) 13:46, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't work that way, keeping those things (which you mistakenly regard as "strong proof") in R.A.B article doesn't create a precedent for this article. The translations stuff is unnecessary information and only serves the purpose of messing up the article. Hence there's no need to move it back PeaceNT (Talk | contribs) 14:12, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Surely you miss the point. Other people regard the correlated translation information as strong proof. Thus it belongs in an encyclopedia which reports facts existeng in the real world. Sandpiper 19:42, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever. I hold my ground. The information is already covered in R.A.B. and should only be included there, for it's irrelevant to this article. PeaceNT 14:27, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Search for R.A.B.

message: Hello, I came upon this article recently, and feel it could use improvement.
First of all, I think that there should be no question that the Regulus / R. A. B. issue should be mentioned in this article, seeing as though it is one of the main reasons that people are interested in the character. However, the main encyclopedic documentation should be *that* this is the case, not *whether* the theories are correct or not. Also, the main article is actually R. A. B., so I feel that the corresponding section should be short.
Overall, I would suggest a slight re-write of the article, as follows.
* The opening paragraph should contain some reference to why this minor character is of interest (and hence received his own page). Something along the lines of "He is a minor characters in the first six books of the series. However, he has received much attention in the fan community due to speculations that he is to play an important role in the final installment (see below)." (Or something more refined to this effect.) Also, I think the second paragraph should be cut almost completely. There is more information here than is really relevant to the top matter of the article. The main thing is probably that he is the brother of Sirius Black; anything else can be covered in the "Role in the series" section.
* The "role in the series" section could probably streamlined a bit. In particular, having a single subsection for "Death" seems a little bit strange.
* The "meaning of the name" section is a little bit rambling, and could probably use some cleaning-up and references. Also, I feel that it is the least important section, and could well be moved to the end of the article.
* The "R. A. B." section should refer to R. A. B. as the main article. It could then be reduced rather a lot. Mainly, there should be a note of the fact that it is a popular theory that Regulus is R. A. B., and that his middle name has been reported to be "Arcturus". Any more detailed information should really be on the R. A. B. page (which may be merged into this page if it *does* turn out that Regulus = R. A. B.). 
* The "family tree" section seems to be completely superfluous. I suggest removing it. 
If I get around to it, I may start to make some of these pages, though I'm neither a frequent Wikipedia editor nor an "expert" on Harry Potter, so may need some help with suitable references etc. Please post any comments / opinions on these suggested changes, as I don't want to waste my time making edits which people are then going to reverse. LR 20:17, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  R. A. B. / slight article rewrite suggested 

message: There should be a reference to the fact that Regulus has become the subject of much interest due to widespread speculation in the fan community that he will have an important role to play in this opening paragraph. This is the main reason why people are interested in Regulus Black, compared to many other minor characters, so it's important enough to be here. (It is also a fact, whether or not these theories are true.) 
On the other hand, there is a lot in here that is not of sufficient interest to be in such a prominent place. The most important fact, namely that he is Sirius Black's brother, is almost buried in the second paragraph. The other information belongs properly in the section on "role in the series". (It is not clear to me that the bit about Sirius being burnt off the tapestry belongs in an encyclopedic entry on Regulus at all; certainly not in the top matter.) LR 01:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Opening paragraphs

message: My main problem with this is section is that it is extremely difficult to read and just not well-organized. At many points, it is not clear where the information comes from etc. A number of things is repeated for no apparent reason (e.g. that Sirius thinks Regulus was not killed by Voldemort himself).
This section should contain the information which is currently known about Regulus from canon, which is exactly what I tried to do in my edit. I think all the relevant information was there, and much better organized than in the current version. 
The fact that Regulus's father and uncle apparently died in the same year as him does not, as it currently stands, seem to have much relevance to the topic of the article. If there is some way to make this relevant, it can be included, otherwise it should be removed. LR 01:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Role in the stories

message: "Many character names" being related to astronomy seems like original research to me. My impression is that it is mainly the names in the Black family having that distinction. Names often coming from Latin can hardly be disputed, but it seems to be a bit of a truism to me, so it's not clear that it's worth mentioning here.
The order of explanations of the name seems to be mixed up. Regulus is, first and foremost, a star. Other meanings of the name can be mentioned shortly, but unless we can make them relevant without conjecture or original research, we should keep those short, and mainly have a reference to Regulus (disambiguation). The comment about "the great diamond of spring" seems cryptic, it is not clear why it should be relevant, and I am not even sure it is factually accurate. (See http://www.astro.uiuc.edu/~kaler/sow/diamond.html .) Sirius is definitely a star of the winter sky, not of spring. 
Also, this section should be moved to the end of the article imho, as it is less relevant than the following section. LR 01:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Meaning of the name

message: There is an article already on R.A.B., which contains reasons for the widespread belief that Regulus Black is R.A.B. It is not encyclopedic to repeat parts of that argument here in great detail, while others are left out (e.g. the evidence provided by translations). The main relevance for an article on Regulus Black is that there *is* such belief. Also the purported middle name as Arcturus should be mentioned. Other than this, I feel that this section should mainly refer to the "main article" on R.A.B., which is exactly what this macro is meant for. One can argue about how much detail there should be in this section; I tend to think that a small amount is sufficient, as in my proposed edit. To me, the important bit is that the information is accurate, and that it is not just a copy of the detailed description on the R.A.B. page, which would not be suitable for an encyclopedia. LR 01:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: R.A.B.

message: This section is completely superfluous. There is no new information in here compared to the previous parts of the article, so it should just be removed. LR 01:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Family tree