User talk:RedWizard98

Bullies
Hi there! Category:Inquisitorial Squad is under Category:Bullies - that is, all members of the Inquisitorial Squad are Bullies by definition. The Category system is a hierarchy like a series of folders within one another, not a word tagging system, so only the most specific category needs to be applied, a rule that the bot will enforce automatically. Hope this helps --Ironyak1 (talk) 22:33, December 23, 2018 (UTC)

Thank you Ironyak1 for replying, but your bot has made a few errors with categorisation rules that do not exist. Happy editing. RedWizard98 (talk) 02:01, December 24, 2018 (UTC)


 * If you want to make sure I see your reply, you should post in on my talk page. What are the categorisation errors you believe the bot is making? Again, articles should not have higher-level redundant categories applied which seems to cover most of the changes you seem to take issue with. Other "problems" you note, like the UK spelling of biassed can be confirmed via a dictionary e.g. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/biassed


 * Let me know of any other questions that may need explanation. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 06:56, December 31, 2018 (UTC)

Images
Please make sure to add a description for any image uploaded that provides the source for the image as only JKR related sources should be used. Without such information, the image, such as File:Hellebore.png, will likely be deleted. Thanks --Ironyak1 (talk) 07:03, December 31, 2018 (UTC)


 * Again, only images from a JK Rowling related source are allowed on articles. Any images uploaded without a Description that provides the Rowling-related source will be deleted. Thanks --Ironyak1 (talk) 06:00, January 2, 2019 (UTC)

Okay thanks I will take note. Such images were just extracted from the Harry Potter lexicon to try to give them pictures. RedWizard98 (talk) 22:29, January 2, 2019 (UTC)

RE bot errors
To reiterate: biassed is from the Cambridge Dictionary as the UK form of biased. Pottermore does not follow UK spelling so the spelling here and there are often not going to agree. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/biassed

In looking through the Categories, Category:Azkaban convicts is a child of Category:Death Eaters along this path: Azkaban convicts -> Dementor_victims -> Dementor_attacks -> Dementors -> Death_Eater_allies -> Death_Eaters

While this logic clearly does not work, the fault is in the categorization system, not the bot's changes. These odd categorization loops are often caused by people adding new categories to one another without understanding the overall hierarchy. I've broken this category chain at Dementors so that this inheritance logic no long applies and will not be enforced by the bot in the future.

Similarly, Category:Blood is in Category:Body fluids which is in Category:Creature products. As such When you add an an article to Category:Blood it is by definition a Body Fluid and a Creature product. This logic does make sense so there is no need to add the Creature products category to any article with the Blood category as it is redundant (and will be removed by the bot).

I would suggest you spend more time exploring and working through the Categorization system if you are going to apply and extend it - this probably would lead to less frustration and a better understanding of its structure and rules. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 04:16, January 1, 2019 (UTC)

Well thank you at least for breaking the neccessary chain for your bot to operate well. Although I did just check both the Cambridge and Oxford dictionaries and biased is not spelt "biassed", in either American or British English. I don't know where "biassed" could of came from, as it is not a word. RedWizard98 (talk) 08:11, January 1, 2019 (UTC)

The link again is here for the third time: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/biassed

Cambridge shows all the examples uses of biassed in the in English language:

''In these days few are so biassed by party or sectarian bitterness as to grudge an epitaph to virtue and calamity in times gone by. - From Cambridge English Corpus''

''The paper was notorious for biassed reporting. - From Cambridge English Corpus''

''With the measurement of 'knowledge', for instance, the mixture of recall type knowledge questions with recognition type questions seems very likely to have biassed their results systematically. - From Cambridge English Corpus'' ''The argument ad hominem is always dangerous, is generally fallacious, and is very often biassed. - From the Hansard archive''

etc, etc, etc, etc...

From your own link - https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/biased biased - adjective also biassed UK

While usage may have shifted towards "biased" in World English, to claim that biassed is not a valid UK English is to repeatedly ignore the evidence in front of you, which may result in said annoyance. Probably better ways to spend your time than arguing against the dictionary? Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 03:50, January 2, 2019 (UTC)

Well no offense towards said dictionaries, but "biassed" is still not a usual way of spelling said word. By the way, I don't need my literacy skills being commented on, thank you; they are better than many others. I have no interest in yours. RedWizard98 (talk) 04:05, January 2, 2019 (UTC)

RE:Cool new category creations
That would be super, thank you for the help! --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 03:30, January 3, 2019 (UTC)

I will do. RedWizard98 (talk) 03:31, January 3, 2019 (UTC)

RE:Picture deletions
You can't; you need special Administrator or Content Moderator rights to delete images or articles. Point me to the picture in question and I'll get rid of it. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 03:51, January 3, 2019 (UTC)

Okay thanks, delete this. This is just sickening, especially since children and young people also read this wikia. Filth. RedWizard98 (talk) 03:54, January 3, 2019 (UTC)

[//harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/User:Albus_Percivel_Dumbledore https://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/User:Albus_Percivel_Dumbledore]


 * Oh, that's unfortunate. That's the user's Wikia-wide avatar picture, which means I can't remove it myself (as it's not been uploaded to the Harry Potter Wiki per se, it's part of the user's Wikia account). I've messaged the Wikia Support Staff to see if they can take care of it. Thanks for reporting it!
 * (I suggest that, in future, you reply to my on my user talk page -- that way, whenever you reply, I get notified that you did!) --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 04:07, January 3, 2019 (UTC)


 * You'll find that the issue has been dealt with. Cheers. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 16:13, January 3, 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks Seth. Our wikia deserves to free of such filth and kept clean. Great work. RedWizard98 (talk) 05:06, January 4, 2019 (UTC)

Order of Merlin
Cheers. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 04:10, January 3, 2019 (UTC)

Oerk (talk) 04:25, February 3, 2019 (UTC) Thank you, Oerk!RedWizard98 (talk) 04:28, February 3, 2019 (UTC)

Here you go. Oerk (talk) 19:53, March 6, 2019 (UTC) Thank you very much Oerk, have a wonderful day!RedWizard98 (talk) 00:30, March 7, 2019 (UTC)

Categories
Categories are not word tags - they are a hierarchical system of collections. As such, any article must belong under the entire tree of categories you add it to. Spells involving snakes do not belong under the "... Individuals - Individuals_by_species - Non-Humans - Creatures - Creatures_by_taxonomical_group - Vertebrates - Reptiles - Snakes" category, which is what you are saying when you add the "Snakes" category. Please take the time to understand the category system instead of arguing if want to continue to work with it extensively. Thanks --Ironyak1 (talk) 07:00, January 3, 2019 (UTC)

I do understand how categories work, without being patronised. That specific category stated in writing before I edited it, it allowed snake related articles in it. It currently contains a few snake related articles still, like Parseltongue and the Snake Summons spell. If you don't like things maybe you should bother to change things yourself. If you want I can create an category on articles related to snakes; there are enough articles thematically to create it, like with articles related to dragons. You can't moan at someone for wanting to have a good go at being an editor and being interested. RedWizard98 (talk) 07:08, January 3, 2019 (UTC)

Linking to wikipedia pages
Hi there, just fyi, the quickest way to link pages to Wikipedia, is with, that ways, within the article it won't be generated as external links.

As for "a person from Iceland", :

"Icelander can refer to:


 * A person from the country of Iceland, see ."



See also


 * Icelanders, the Icelandic people.

It's quite confusing with the fact that there's the "Icelandic people" part lol. There's but there's also ... So I'm assuming when saying an actress from Iceland, Icelandic actress is probably the way to go, so I kept your adjustment; the nationality parameter though, I mean, unless that ref was unfortunately a wrong usage lol. -- S a m m m ✦✧ (talk) 06:52, January 9, 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you Sammm, I will use this method in future editing. Happy new year. RedWizard98 (talk) 07:27, January 9, 2019 (UTC)

Re: Duplicate
I'm assuming you meant duplicate "article"? lol Thanks for bringing this to my attention, unfortunately I'm really not all that familiar with the film adaptations to have the instinct to immediately confirm the situation. (I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm saying it's always good to be absolutely certain, which I myself am not lol) Just to make sure I get this right, was there only a total of 5 individuals featured in Skirmish at the Quad battlements? As in, the killed dude¹, the killer² of the dude (the one who seemed to have duplicated pages), who also battled against Arthur Weasley³, Kingsley Shacklebolt⁴, and another dude⁵ that Apparated but was blasted back out by Shacklebolt? No other people? Just checking to be sure Arthur didn't engaged anyone else (even though the description does feel like they are about the same person. I simply don't remember much of this scene to be sure.)

In any case, I'll place the merge template as how duplicated pages are officially processed. I don't think I'll wait for over a week to process it, unless there are people actually objecting the notion. I suppose it's just giving it one last chance for people to defend it. lol If you're lucky, maybe a surer Admin would take notice and beat me to it within the timeframe.

Again, thanks for letting me know about the matter! Well-spotted! =D -- S a m m m ✦✧ (talk) 01:56, February 2, 2019 (UTC)


 * That is good to know Sammm, I have a very keen eye when it comes to detail, so I will let you know of any other issues or errors I spot on this wikia. The duplicate category, is described as being the same Death Eater to the original article, who killed another wizard and duelled Arthur Weasley, and only one wizard is shown doing this. Cheers and happy wizarding and witching. RedWizard98 (talk) 02:48, February 2, 2019 (UTC)

Past-tense
The Policy is that all in-universe articles should be written in the past-tense:

"Articles should be written in the past tense, as if the editor is writing from a point in the future after the events in the series have taken place. This is to maintain a consistent and uniform feel to the articles, and to eliminate ambiguity by switching tenses in the middle of an article."

Please do not continue to change articles to present tense, especially after they had just been corrected. Thanks --Ironyak1 (talk) 00:05, February 15, 2019 (UTC)

Feedback
Thanks for noting the fanon page - it has been deleted. In the future, it's best to add on an article to suggest it is deleted, as more people tend to check this than my talk page.

Also, your image uploads such as needs information about its source, copyright information, and categorization. Images without this information may end up deleted (see Harry Potter Wiki:Image policy). Please Edit each file and paste this in and add the relevant info.

Thanks --Ironyak1 (talk) 17:03, February 15, 2019 (UTC)


 * That is very good to hear then, and should I come across any more unwanted fandom articles, I will definitely use the delete template on them. Thanks RedWizard98 (talk) 17:18, February 15, 2019 (UTC).

Re: Potential fandom/Junk writing AND other stuff
In addition to what Ironyak1 mentioned above, you could probably benefit from browsing Category:Maintenance templates to see what other templates there are for different situations, such as in a previous issue you brought to me. =D

Also, I'm assuming you aren't intentionally ignoring the second part of Ironyak1's message, so I'd like to emphasize that part to be read and digested and hope you'd performed the action that was asked of you.

Lastly, since you were able to identify dupe articles of a minor character last time, can you take a look at Talk: Unidentified Hufflepuff girl (II) and see if you can help determine the situation? (If you have input, please reply it there, thanks!)

Happy editing! =D -- S a m m m ✦✧ (talk) 23:31, February 15, 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi Sammm, personally I thought it would be a good idea to message you both, just in case one of you took a long time to read it. Personally I have had a good look at those images you sent me, and I definitely think that the girl on the right is Gwendoline Hedgeflower. The reason behind this, is that her eyebrows look almost identical, and eyebrows are unique features that usually stand out from others. I would say in my opinion, it would be a good idea to merge them both together. You could maybe ask a few others though, just to be completely sure. Good luck RedWizard98 (talk) 05:05, February 16, 2019 (UTC).


 * Again, you seem to be very conveniently skipping over the second part I blatantly emphasized for attention, so I'm addressing it first this time around in the hopes you will actually read it and take action: While you haven't been mass-uploading and causing mass amount of damage as some currently-blocked and some recently-was-blocked Users had, your licensing selection is questionable as most of them aren't likely to be in Public domain; that, and your non-existing image categorization will accumulate harm that will get you temporarily blocked. It is undeniable that you do participate in categorizing stuff, so please, do the same for the images you yourself uploaded.


 * Now, onto your most recent message on my talk page (if you choose to reply to this and not take any action described in the above, something you are now warned for the 3rd time, please don't take offense if you are blocked without any more warnings should you choose to upload more images without taking care of them), you've literally provided no links, so I have no idea what you are referring to. Also based on previous conversation, where you've used "category" to describe an "article", I'm just really not sure what I should be checking in order to check for an apparent duplicate you found. I want to help, I just really don't know what you are talking about unless you are more specific. Thanks. -- S a m m m ✦✧ (talk) 20:54, March 2, 2019 (UTC)

Well, that sure is riveting. RedWizard98 (talk) 20:58, March 2, 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

I'm  new here, and I would like to thank you very much for your contributions as well as other Potter's fans to this world.

I've misposted elsewhere my question, so I'm putting it back here :

I've juste read the latest contribution on the phoenix's tears, thank you very much! I then thought : if theses tears can heal just about anything: " It is also capable of reviving a person from any injury, even if the person is at the brink of death ", I wonder why is it that they were not used to heal Dumbledore's cursed hand, no mention of phoenix tears in Snape's potion.

I'm new here, and I would like to express my awe: Potter's fandom is just fantastic, you have put so much work in this, and thanks to you all, I've just realized the depth of J.K. Rowling's universe!

Libelluleargentee (talk) 13:07, March 15, 2019 (UTC)



Fire-based magic
What was wrong with my edits to have them reverted? Those are fire-based magic and every spell, charm and etc. that conjured fire didn't really need to be on the Fire category. Fire-based magic has fire in it which is why I added it to the Fire category and left the enchanted fire already on there. IlvermornyWizard (talk) 21:00, March 17, 2019 (UTC) IlvermornyWizard

Merlin's eye color
How can you possibly what his eye color based on his Frog Card. It's too pixelated to make out any color on it? Also first it was stated to be green. Now it's blue?StargateFanBB (talk) 14:34, April 17, 2019 (UTC)

I got your reply. I've already tried to see a color in his eyes myself. I couldn't see any. It's too hard to make out any if there even is any. Same with Morgana. I think we should just leave his and Morgana's eye color as unknown until we actually get images of them with clear eye colors in them.StargateFanBB (talk) 00:00, April 18, 2019 (UTC)

Warning
Consider this your only warning regarding edit-warning and tossing insults and snark toward other editors. This is not the first time someone has had to call out your poor attitude. If you cannot remain civil toward others then your account will be blocked or banned. Thanks --Ironyak1 (talk) 04:58, April 25, 2019 (UTC)

Have a nice day. RedWizard98 (talk) 04:59, April 25, 2019 (UTC)


 * I appreciate your reply. You have done a lot a quality work that is appreciated; just don't let that be undermined by a dismissive or demeaning attitude or a willingness to war with other editors. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 17:24, April 25, 2019 (UTC)

RE Wizards Unite
The extra Weakening hex article has been removed. As linked to in many of the refs, the info is coming from various playthroughs by Youtubers in New Zealand where they are getting to beta test it. Looks promising! Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 06:00, April 26, 2019 (UTC)

Disappearing categories
FYI, it was your own edit that removed all those categories, as clearly seen here: [//harrypotter.fandom.com/index.php?title=Ernest_Macmillan&diff=1218035&oldid=1214922 https://harrypotter.fandom.com/index.php?title=Ernest_Macmillan&diff=1218035&oldid=1214922] (Line 194: where yours removed all;) so next time, please consider looking through editing history and compare revisions to locate odd occurrences, instead of reverting edits (that for some reason was mine) that literally has nothing to do with the problem. Thanks. -- S a m m m ✦✧ (talk) 13:51, May 1, 2019 (UTC)


 * It's great that you've noticed the problem, however, I was pointing out that your attempt of resolving the issue, itself, has room of improvement. If anything disappeared, the bytesize of the page would decrease, not increase, yet, you picked to revert edits that were increasing bytesize, when yours was the obvious one that had a decrease to it. I am not saying you did it (made the category disappear) on purpose, because I fully believe it can be Wikia/Fandom's issue, as I have encountered odd things, such as disappearing  s when publishing, something I would never intend to remove. When things like this happened, there's not much anyone can do short of going back editing, but if you choose to help fix the problem, like I said, the bytesize decrease/increase and revision comparison are accurate pointers to locate which revision to recover. -- S a m m m ✦✧ (talk) 14:12, May 1, 2019 (UTC)


 * I can't tell if you were being sarcastic so I'm going to assume you are not. Good day (it's nighttime where I am.) =] -- S a m m m ✦✧ (talk) 14:20, May 1, 2019 (UTC)

RE Administrative issues
The trouble of having parts of the article go missing is often caused by using the VisualEditor on very large pages. It's best to use the Source Editor.

Looking at the history for Ernest Macmillan, the categories were lost on this edit which you performed, so not sure if you might have any insights as to how you went about editing it then.

I'll take a look at the duplicate categories you mentioned. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 16:47, May 1, 2019 (UTC)