Talk:Tom Riddle


 * Archive 1
 * Archive 2
 * Archive 3

Name Change
I think that the name of this article should be changed to Voldemort. This is because that he is more commonly known as Voldemort rather than Tom Riddle. He tossed aside his birth name for a new one. Therefore wouldn't it be more suitable to use the name he goes by rather than a name he doesn't use anymore? Weirdo Guy (talk ) 23:23, September 26, 2013 (UTC)


 * It is the policy of this wiki to use a character's legal first and last name. Voldemort was merely a title Tom Riddle took in his adult years. Changing this article's name would be a manner of changing policy, and thus a wider discussion than just this one article. -- 1337star (Drop me a line!) 23:49, September 26, 2013 (UTC)

Technically Voldemort is an alias rather than a title. Dark Lord, Chief Death Eater, Heir of Slytherin: those are titles.

Jdogno7 (talk) 04:23, March 28, 2014 (UTC)

anais&gumball55 wouldnt tom actually be thomas?Anais&#38;gumball55 (talk) 02:34, November 15, 2014 (UTC)Anais&Gumball55Anais&#38;gumball55 (talk) 02:34, November 15, 2014 (UTC)

Voldemort/Lord Voldemort
Actually "Lord Voldemort" is better grounded in canon than just "Voldemort" - CoS movie level or higher. During the confrontation in the Chamber of Secrets, the sentence "I am Lord Voldemort" is shown to be the anagram of "Tom Marvolo Riddle". MinorStoop  07:45, March 8, 2014 (UTC)


 * Agreed. Even Dumbledore, who pretty much hated him, called him "Lord Voldemort". Hunnie Bunn (talk) 01:16, March 26, 2014 (UTC)

Voldemort only calls himself a Lord to make himself appear to be an aristocratic elitist. He doesn't have aristocratic heritage on either side of his family not as far back as his grandparents at least.

Jdogno7 (talk) 04:08, March 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * Irrelevant. The fact the people use the title to refer to him is all that matters. This is about what he is called, not what he would write on a government form. Remember that he never got a legal name change to Voldemort either, so you could just as easily complain about calling him Voldemort as you could about calling him Lord. Snorlax  Monster  04:10, March 28, 2014 (UTC)

Not always. Albus Dumbledore has also referred to him as simply Voldemort as well. He doesn't hate him, he pities him, knowing his past: his mother dying after giving birth, being abandoned by his father before birth, being conceived under the effects of a love potion. That doesn't meant that Dumbledore will stand idly by when he can stop Voldemort's evil actions however.

Jdogno7 (talk) 04:49, March 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * The fact that Dumbledore doesn't use his full name in every single instance doesn't make it not his name. Nor do I see how Dumbledore's opinions on Voldemort are relevant. Snorlax  Monster  04:19, March 28, 2014 (UTC)

Well people can give themselves names without being accused of self-aggrandizing. Titles are different: there is nothing to support his proclamation of him being a Lord.

Jdogno7 (talk) 05:29, March 28, 2014 (UTC)

What are you saying in the response above? I'm a little confused. Are you referring to Dumbledore or Riddle/Voldemort?

Jdogno7 (talk) 05:32, March 28, 2014 (UTC)


 * In response to your first comment, he is not claiming to be a "Lord" in the official sense. This is about what he is called, and he is called "Lord Voldemort". Also, yes, Voldemort is self-aggrandizing; it doesn't make it any less of his name though. He is not a Lord in the way you are thinking of, but it is still a part of his name.
 * In response to your second comment, I was saying that Dumbledore calling Voldemort simply "Voldemort" in some instances has no bearing on what his complete name is (which is "Lord Voldemort"). Snorlax  Monster  05:38, March 28, 2014 (UTC)

Voldemort IS HIS chosen NAME. LORD is merely HIS CHOSEN TITLE. He refers to himself as Lord to make himself sound to be of aristocratic heritage. He IS referring to himself as a Lord in the official sense but in reality he is not. It's a façade of elitism. Titles and names are different things.

Jdogno7 (talk) 05:54, March 28, 2014 (UTC)

"Lord Voldemort" is grounded in the books canon, Jdogno; your opinions are not. MinorStoop  06:33, March 28, 2014 (UTC)

Not explicitly at least. Well we can refer to him as Lord Voldemort in some instances and simply Voldemort in others, both are correct.

Jdogno7 (talk) 07:22, March 28, 2014 (UTC)

Only Dumbledore and Harry - who are not frightened of him - call him Voldemort. Everyone is "My Lord", "He who must not be named"/"You-know-who", "The Dark Lord" or "Lord Voldemort". --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 04:38, June 19, 2014 (UTC)

Also, we do not know if Voldemort's ancestors are nobility or aristocratic. The second (and latter) sons of anything lower than a Duke - Earl, Viscount, Baron, etc. - are, according to Debrett's (which would apply to Voldemort's paternal ancestry), only known as "Mr", which Thomas Riddle is. Thus, the family could be aristocratic, just not the first in line.--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 20:02, June 27, 2014 (UTC)

My Lord Voldemort Nightmare (Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone
I'm not sure what it was but there was something about him that gave me nightmares in 2004 (the first number of times I watched the film) and again in 2007 (when I went back and unsuccessfully tried to overcome the thing about him that gave me the nightmares). I didn't bother watching that scene again until 2008 when I found I'd overcome this sort of nightmare.

In 2004 I actually saw Voldemort lying in a chair (his eyes were open but he wasn't moving - so he wasn't awake). Of course he wasn't really there - I must have just been seeing things.

The Voldemort in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire obviously lacked the "scary" thing about the first one because I never got nightmares from that version.  C.Syde  ( talk &#124;  contribs ) 04:34, May 13, 2014 (UTC)

Anais&#38;gumball55 (talk) 01:44, December 3, 2014 (UTC)Anais&gumball55Anais&#38;gumball55 (talk) 01:44, December 3, 2014 (UTC) i  thought he was ugly as Filch is instaed of freaky. but he was freakishly UGLY

Garbagets advocates for a less cluttered Personality and Traits section
I did an edit of April 21 in which I reorganized the "Personality and traits" section into four subheadings, "Personality and psychology", "Social situation", "Ideology", and "Throughout his lifetime".

I submit that the way the section is currently laid out is so disorganized and rambling that the reader's eyes would glaze over. If you don't like my headings, then fine, but use *some* means of organization or the thing keels under its own weight. Speaking of which, my revisions sought to include all material from the previous text that was relevant and correct, and I don't see the need to have crammed all the old text, even the redundant parts, back in. All in all, I find the old text poor in style, quality, and comprehensibility, and advise that it be done away with entirely. If you feel there is information missed in my April 21 revision, feel free to add it under the correct heading.

Also, someone deleted two of my claims. My evidence that Voldemort was not ashamed of his half-blood origins and even wore it as a badge of pride is derived from the fourth book, when Voldemort gave his followers assembled in the graveyard a true account of who his father had been, all without a trace of shame or self-conflict over his half-blood status. My evidence that Voldemort merely used, and was truly apathetic towards, the cause of pure-blood supremacy abounds in all the books. I think that's a deeply important point about Voldemort. *He wasn't a true believer in the ideology that coalesced around him*. He was a cynic who couldn't care less about the 'cause', he only saw its usefulness to himself.

Sincerely,

Garbage3ts (talk) 21:20, June 23, 2014 (UTC)

Sr. Jr.
Voldemort's father is Tom Riddle Sr. How come we have Sr. but no Jr.? It's ridiculous. AB Ng   Talk   04:35, July 13, 2014 (UTC)
 * If I remember correctly, Voldemort was never directly referred to as "Tom Riddle Jr", so the suffix is unnecessary when referring to him; 'Tom Riddle' is sufficient. -- Cubs Fan (Talk to me)  19:20, July 14, 2014 (UTC)
 * There is a pretty simple reason for this.  During the time Voldemort used the name "Tom Riddle", hardly anyone knew that there was a "Tom Riddle, Sr."  The matron of the orphanage knew roughly the father's name, but since it was an orphanage almost certainly assumed the father was dead.  Dumbledore was told the story of this birth, but again, at that time, almost certainly did not know the father was still alive, thus there was no need to introduce him to the magical world as "Tom Riddle, Jr."  Voldemort himself did not know his father was alive until he visited the Gaunt shack - and according to what he said in the Chamber of Secrets, he took the name Voldemort immediately after this.  So, essentially, no one ever knew there was a living "Tom Riddle, Sr." which would cause them to even consider calling him "Tom Riddle, Jr." Wva (talk) 17:42, July 30, 2014 (UTC)

Move to Voldemort?
I know this topic has probably been brought up an exhausting number of times, but it's been about a year, so hey, why not revisit it? Moving this page to Voldemort makes a lot of sense. I'm aware that this wiki's article-naming policy dictates that first and last names should be used instead of nicknames, but "Voldemort" is definitely more than a nickname. Voldemort completely dropped the name "Tom Riddle" in his youth, and was only ever well-known in the Wizarding World as Voldemort. He never signed any papers in a court, but I don't think that's necessary to say that his name change was, for all intents and purposes, official. People who knew of Voldemort's past, such as Albus Dumbledore, may have referred to Voldemort as "Tom" from time to time, but this usage was hardly ever used, and even when it was, it was made in reference to Voldemort's past, before he had any real significance. Titling this article as "Tom Riddle" is also at odds with the fact that the majority of the content in the article uses the name "Voldemort" instead. I'm not advocating for a site-wide policy change or anything; in fact, a move in this instance would be compatible with the existing policies. Food for thought. 08:08, July 30, 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, so one year has passed! I still stand by this above statement. Bump. 00:25, July 31, 2015 (UTC)
 * It's pointless to revive a discussion that hasn't been active for an entire year, especially one that's been revisited numerous times. Since all these revisits of the same suggestion have been turned down, it's best to just accept that the majority of the community doesn't support the move. I personally don't support the move, and I'm sure many others don't either. ―  C.Syde  ( talk &#124;  contribs ) 08:28, July 31, 2015 (UTC)

Suggestion:
The personality and traits sections needs to be proof read, and allready stated things removed. Zane T 69 (talk) 04:26, November 17, 2014 (UTC)

"Rather limited" knowledge outside of magic?
I am going to remove the line "'It should also be noted that his knowledge on other subjects apart from magic seemed to be rather limited". Due to his excellent marks in school, the job at Borgin & Burkes, traveling, possession of animals, and interaction with people - charming and persuading them - he probably knew a fair amount about some other subjects, even if we don't necessarily read about it. We don't read about him using a toilet or bathing, but lack of mention doesn't mean that he is not doing those things. UnicornWolf (talk) 18:56, December 17, 2014 (UTC)

Can someone please edit down and revise the "Personality and traits" section? It is way too long, riddled with unverified and un-cited information, and contains grammar mistakes.

PhoenicisLunae (talk) 22:59, September 20, 2015 (UTC)