User talk:MinorStoop

Redirect pages
Thank you for your concern regarding our redirects. However, the pages in question have been around for years, so I see no pressing reason to delete them at this time. ProfessorTofty (talk) 20:38, January 17, 2013 (UTC)
 * You have a point about the fake sword. As such, I have turned the page for Sword into a disambiguation page with a brief description of both. ProfessorTofty (talk) 23:04, January 17, 2013 (UTC)

Capitalisation
We don't normally capitalise a term unless it's normally capitalised when you read it in the book. So good call on removing it from "witch" and if you see it on any others where it normally isn't in the book, other than at the start of sentence, then feel free to fix it. ProfessorTofty (talk) 17:55, January 18, 2013 (UTC)

Category structure
The category structure is such that if a category is a subcategory of a particular category, then the article should be categorised into only the subcategory. For example, that Banshee thing you were talking about, if "Banshees" is a category, and it's within the "Creatures" category, then a page should not display both the Banshees and Creatures categories, it should only have the Banshees category. If you see any like this, then feel free to remove the offending category. You may want to leave an edit note, and if anyone calls you on it, please let me know, so I can set things straight. We get people who add rogue categories all the time, and unfortunately it doesn't always get caught right away. ProfessorTofty (talk) 17:17, January 19, 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, but as far as I know, there isn't really any big category problem. Maybe a few here or there that have categories that they shouldn't, but I don't think there's any major overhaul needed. A while back, somebody listed a bunch of pages as both "Wizards" and "Humans" when "Wizards" is a subcategory and therefore "Humans" shouldn't have been on the pages, but as far as I know, I zapped all those. ProfessorTofty (talk) 18:22, January 19, 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello! I should add though, that there are some categories that is common practice to cross-list even though that might be seen as redundant (i.e., we cross-list a character in both Category:Hogwarts students and a House sub-category, for better reference -- read Starstuff's comment here). Such categories are usually restricted to things like Category:Wizards, Category:Hogwarts students and Category:Hogwarts locations, as they are quite large categories in which people are very likely to search for an article given their prominence in the series (and the lack of that cross-listing would make searching a bit more difficult). --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 17:13, January 20, 2013 (UTC)


 * Most redundant categories are supposed to be unsdesirable and duly removed (for instance, if I spotted an article with both the "English individuals" and the "British individuals" categories, I'd get rid of the latter without a second thought, because it's an implication that everyone can understand -- that all English individuals are British). But when we are talking about the casual visitor, who is looking for a specific character without knowing much about them, it is likely they will search on "hub" categories such as "Wizards", or "Hogwarts students" for a familiar name. To have no "list of wizards" would make searching harder, I think, for those who cannot distinguish between a Gryffindor and a Slytherin, or between a Squib and a Pure-blood. Those few categories would be the only exceptions to the "no redundant categories" rule (or, at least, that's been the unspoken convention in effect ever since I joined the wiki). --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 19:55, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Concerning Vampires
I'm Belac Reteet. Please stop removing Vampire from the Undead category page. Vampires are almost always classified as undead and certanley fit the discription in the Harry Potter franchise. Catch ya later!belacreteet (talk) 23:19, January 20, 2013 (UTC)
 * No, just ignore the above, per our previous discussions. ProfessorTofty (talk) 23:22, January 20, 2013 (UTC)

Undead
I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with the subtractions you made from the Undead category page. Unless you can explain to me how ghosts, dementors, inferi, charmed skeletons, and whatever else you took from that category doesn't fit the description; "Beings and/or entities that are not proper life forms but are not truly dead", I see no reason why I shouldn't put all the pages formentioned back on the category formentioned.

Sorry if I sounded snippy. It's just that I've had this argument so many times before. I'll wait until we've settled this before I go slapping Undead on all those pages. Catch ya later!

PS I'm Belac Reteet.

PPS I have no official status, so I'm not threaten you. We can work this out between the 2 of us.belacreteet (talk) 02:52, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

Living Dead
I have already read the living dead page, and yes, I know what it says about the only confirmed members of this family being Vampires and Zombies, but you don't have to be a genius to see that ghosts and inferi are undead beings. Besides, zombies, inferi, and charmed skeletons are supposedly related to eachother any. Remember; "Creatures and/or entities that are not proper life forms (such as the Living Dead) can be listed here.  I still don't see how that description dosn't encompase ghosts, dementors, Death (The Tale of the Three Brothers), or any of the other things you removed don't fit that discription.  I'm Belac Reteet, by the way.  Catch ya later.

I have already read the living dead page, and yes, I know what it says about the only confirmed members of this family being Vampires and Zombies, but you don't have to be a genius to see that ghosts and inferi are undead beings. Besides, zombies, inferi, and charmed skeletons are supposedly related to eachother any. Remember; "Creatures and/or entities that are not proper life forms (such as the Living Dead) can be listed here.  I still don't see how that description dosn't encompase ghosts, dementors, Death (The Tale of the Three Brothers), or any of the other things you removed don't fit that discription.  I'm Belac Reteet, by the way.  Catch ya later!belacreteet (talk) 18:33, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

RE: Non-beings as creatures
Sorry about not replying sooner. The term "non-being" comes from Pottermore, under the entry for Boggarts:


 * Like a poltergeist, a Boggart is not and never has been truly alive. It is one of the strange non-beings that populate the magical world, for which there is no equivalent in the Muggle realm.

However, that same entry refers to a Boggart as "a shape-shifting creature". The "Creatures" category encompasses Beasts, Beings, Spirits, as well as other uncertain classifications, so it pretty much covers everything related.

Hope this explains it. If you still have questions, feel free to ask. - Nick O'Demus 06:49, January 30, 2013 (UTC)

Mortals
Hey MinorStoop, remember me? I'm Belac Reteet. Just wanted to let you know that I'm getting some trouble for an administrator named Professor Tofty. I made a category page for Mortals, but he deleted it on the ground of it being "too broad for practical use". Personaly I think he doesn't like me (do to a falling out we had over category additions). If you'd back me up I'd really appreciate it. Catch ya later!belacreteet (talk) 18:34, March 10, 2013 (UTC)

RE: Redirects to talk pages
Yes. It's really only necessary to keep the article redirects. Talk page redirects aren't needed. - Nick O'Demus 21:54, April 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * However, before marking them for deletion, please check the "What links here" first. If there are still other user talk pages linking to it, then I'd prefer to just leave it alone. Otherwise, it's fine. ProfessorTofty (talk) 16:23, April 26, 2013 (UTC)

Marriage
Hi. Sorry to interrupt, but I saw your message on 's talk page and figured I'd provide my opinion as well. Yes, they were only married for a few pages throughout the book series, but since JKR makes various comments about their marriages throughout interviews and such, wouldn't it still count? --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 11:06, April 21, 2013 (UTC)

RE:Two questions.

 * 1) I hadn't noticed that particular message before, although I can answer you now: the beginning of an article (what we call, the "lead paragraph" or, in case it's larger than a single paragraph, just the "lead") is supposed not to have a header; its header is the title of the article itself, because the lead provides a general, simplified overview of the subject. It'd be alright to have both the lead and a "Description" section -- mind, the former shouldn't be redundant, and it should provide additional, more detailed, info. As for the "practicioner" thing, you are correct, it is a misspelling. I am correcting some of the articles in which the misspelling appears at the moment.
 * 2) We have a general rule around here that conjectural titles (i.e. provisory names we give articles, when there is no name attributed to that subject in canon) are always lower-case. Only titles using terms appearing in canon should be capitalised (and, of course, the term is capitalised in canon) -- that's why Avifors Spell is capitalised (it is capitalised so, I think, in the video games) and Cornflake skin spell is not (it's only mentioned in passing in Order of the Phoenix, and its proper canonical name is never introduced).
 * Sorry if I sounded too harsh when I starting reverting your edits. I should've left you a message here, explaining why I was doing it. Cheers.

Hey, sorry to interrupt, but I saw you asking how to bring notice to your questions should they go unanswered or something similar, on Seth's talk page. You can use the template at the top of a new post on a talk page to produce an Active Talk Page header, with a category for questions to be answered that your question will be sorted into. Just a tip :) --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 22:33, April 26, 2013 (UTC)


 * It's not a bad idea to do that; you couldn't go wrong with calling some people to the discussion, although most of the times it doesn't get to that. You can use the template Hunnie Bunn referred to, or you can use good old-fashioned bumping, so the discussion is thrown to the "Recent Activity" page again. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:47, April 26, 2013 (UTC)


 * Seth had reverted it because nobody had answered yet, presumably because not a lot of people had seen by the time you'd made the edits. Therefore, it's recommended every few days (or every day) to put the "bumping" tag on a question even with the "talk" template. As for user-talk pages using the "talk" template, that generally isn't necessary as that user will receive a notification letting them know they have a message (as you'll probably know by now) :) --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 23:22, April 26, 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh... it isn't really a tag, you just write "Bumping" and then sign it, it lets users know that there's a question to be answered by floating it into the recent activity feed again. --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 12:10, April 27, 2013 (UTC)

Hogwarts Governors page
I agree. A third opinion is best. This is beginning to get out of hand. And we are both in trouble if we keep up the edit warring. --DCLM (talk) 12:37, June 18, 2013 (UTC)
 * Replied on the talk page for the article in question. ProfessorTofty (talk) 19:17, June 18, 2013 (UTC)

Re: Order of Merlin
I am curious as to why you have chosen to remove the Order of Merlin. While I suppose I'm not aware of any official rule that requires you to accept it, I've never known anyone to remove it. ProfessorTofty (talk) 23:47, July 6, 2013 (UTC)

RE:Sam Child
I added the "Verify" tag to the article. If nobody finds a valid source for it in one week, it'll be deleted. - Nick O'Demus 15:40, October 6, 2013 (UTC)

Why
WHY DID YOU UNDO MY EDIT TO THE QUIDDITCH WORLD CUP? THE ROBERTSONS WERE CUT FROM THE  FILM!

If you're going to shout at me for misbehaving on wikia, then atleast get my name right, it's heLgen not heNgen

Talk-pages
I'm slightly embarrassed to say that I don't recall us meeting... Was it on the True Blood Wiki? Although I'm aware of the distinction between message walls and talk-pages I have to say, I generally prefer replying on my own page, and for those I message to reply on their's, as it helps keep the conversation together. That's the way we do it on the Game of Thrones Wiki, my main home. I understand that this can be jarring, though, so I'll try and adjust. Thanks:)-- 12:33, October 20, 2013 (UTC)

A question
What does Unproductive Edits Mean??

To be honest, I dont know what you mean by formatting code, but I don't really care about the warnings, or bad messages. Helgen (talk) 18:46, October 22, 2013 (UTC)

Myself
Look, I mean no harm and I do not intend to be un-helpful on the wiki, I'm just doing corrections that I think are right. I do not mean to be a vandal, unlike what many think. I don't know what your problems are with me. Helgen.Helgen (talk) 18:47, October 22, 2013 (UTC)

Look, why can't we move on and make this a thing of the past?Helgen (talk) 19:02, October 22, 2013 (UTC)

RE: Publicity stunt
✅ - Nick O'Demus 07:58, October 23, 2013 (UTC)

RE:Deletion templates
As far as I'm aware, there are only three. The standard deletion template you're already familiar with, this one for use on categories, and this one for use on templates. The only real difference is that it adds the page to this category or this category instead of this category. For some strange reason, the category one needs to be substituted (that is, type rather than  ).

As for the present matter, since the page is going to be speedy deleted anyway, and isn't really being used as a category, I will concede that leaving the standard deletion template on it is sufficient. -- 1337star (Drop me a line!) 16:39, October 27, 2013 (UTC)

RE: Petunia Dursley
Also pointed this out to, but I HAVE replied on the talk page. There are around at least a hundred pages on this wiki that use a floruit. It IS the correct notation in this case. - Nick O'Demus 20:19, October 28, 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry ... I guess I did kind of overreact earlier. Not that it's an excuse, but floruit is such a regular part of this wiki (having been used since I started here last year and even before then, back when I was just reading it unregistered) that I automatically assumed it ought to stay. --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 20:35, October 28, 2013 (UTC)


 * Lmao :) --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 23:04, October 28, 2013 (UTC)

Rowling's old website
The old version of JKR's website can still be accessed by using the Internet Archive. Just enter the original web address you want to look up. For example, the section about squibs on JKR's old site can be seen at http://web.archive.org/web/20120208051328/http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/extrastuff_view.cfm?id=19 - Nick O'Demus 10:36, October 29, 2013 (UTC)

Simen Johannes Fagerli
While I agree this user is getitng somewhat out-of-hand with seemingly no contributions but speculation, the "behind the scenes" section is the place to put reasonably argued possibilities, and the fact that Nobby Leach was ousted just four years after Voldemort's obsessive quest began, coupled with the fact that Abraxas's son Lucius was a well-connected Death Eater and that Slughorn didn't care about the name Abraxas Malfoy because he didn't want to associate with any Death Eaters, might suggest the possibility. Therefore, I think it might be worth keeping if others agree. --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 14:23, November 16, 2013 (UTC)


 * Always glad to be of help :)
 * I've been thinking on it, and I wondered what you would think of a "user's council" of sorts, which is what I was going to suggest to one of the admins to make. It would be a place where all users could feel welcome to discuss topics that would greatly affect the wiki, kind of like a cross between requests for admin help and requests for rights. I know it'd essentially be pointless because we have two separate pages that are cluttered enough as is and it would be extremely large, but at the same time, it'd be one place to go for all the major topics.
 * Things like users who other users think are causing problems, users who would like to request promotions, change in policies, name-changes that would affect the wiki on a grand scale, all in one place. --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 14:42, November 16, 2013 (UTC)

lol shame!

we are anonymous

ban meSamkenway2 (talk) 18:48, November 22, 2013 (UTC)

RE:Templates
"FA" puts a little picture of a painted snitch in the top-right corner of the article, to show it's been a Featured Article. "Pottermoreold" sorts the article into the category for pages with content from Pottermore (see here). --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 00:02, November 28, 2013 (UTC)

RE: Lucius Malfoy's templates
Well the FA template is for Features Articles. It appears as a small Golden Snitch in the upper right corner of the page.

The Pottermore template is used to indicate an article has new, recently released information from Pottermore, and there may be spoilers. After a while that template gets replaced with the Pottermoreold template, which removes the spoiler warning, but keeps the page in the Articles with information from Pottermore category.

Hope this explains things. - Nick O'Demus 00:07, November 28, 2013 (UTC)

Snape's wand length
Per canon policy it is correct.

Nothing in the books, films, games, trading card, or Pottermore say anything about it and nor does J.K. Rowling, so by that the Noble Collection - as per canon policy - is next in line and is used as the references.

YOU stop it. Ok? --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 04:49, December 9, 2013 (UTC)

HarryPotterRules1
Was that comment directed toward me or HarryPotterRules1? Zacharyalllen (talk) 07:01, December 9, 2013 (UTC)

Speculation
You think its specualtion? lol Dr. Galenos (talk) 21:56, December 9, 2013 (UTC)


 * I think you missunderstand. I was joking at how you said you thought it was speculation. It was just a bit ironic. I totally agree with the edit, I just find the choice of words amusing. Dr. Galenos (talk) 22:02, December 9, 2013 (UTC)

Do you need permission to post quotes?
Okay, I wasn't sure if the wiki was just focusing on present tense (as in what happened during the series) or if it went beyond that, that's why I asked about the Auror skills, thanks. To add qoutes to a page is there a certain process you have to go through. Do you need premission from someone to add them? I tryed adding the compliment that McGonagall payed Harry regarding his O.W.l. result. The "I was pleased with your Transfiguraton mark, potter, very pleased"  but, it was undone.

I also noticed some of the pages are locked has something been going on for them to be locked?

The post I deleted of your talk page was mine I keep forgeting to headline my posts.

Please resond on your talk page.

Misskatniss1546 (talk) 20:02, December 17, 2013 (UTC)Misskatniss1546

RE:Username
It's not against any policy I know of to ask. I took my username from the character Nicodemus from the Don Bluth movie . It was one of my favorite movies when I was a kid. I just gave the name a little bit of an Irish twist, since I'm part Scots-Irish. - Nick O'Demus 05:09, December 18, 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

 * --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 22:25, December 24, 2013 (UTC)

Lavender Brown
Do you think that magiclal abilities and skills should be added to Lavender Brown's page. She attened N.E.W.T.-level Transfiguration classes and it was implied that she was good at Divination. She was also a member of Dumbledore's Army so it's likely she had some skill in defensive magic.

Misskatniss1546 (talk) 18:00, December 25, 2013 (UTC)Misskatniss1546

Luna- Care of Magical Creatures
Do you think that Care of Magical Creatures should be added to Luna's magical abilities and skills? She later became a Magizoologist so to become a wizarding naturalist she had to have achieved an O.W.L. and a N.E.W.T. in Care of Magical Creatures.

Please respond on my page, thank you.

Misskatniss1546 (talk) 22:15, December 30, 2013 (UTC)Misskatniss1546

I just edited Lavender Brown's & Luna's page.

Misskatniss1546 (talk) 01:07, December 31, 2013 (UTC)Misskatniss1546

Resourcefulness a skill
Do you think that resourcefulness is a skill. I think it is in the same way that creativity and bravery is. I was thinking about adding it to Harry Potter's page but, wasn't sure. What I was going to add was this;

"He's got padfoot at the place where it's hidden"- Harry's coded message to Snape

<p class="MsoNormal">Resourcefulness: Harry shows resourcefulness in many different situations. In his first year Harry impersonated the Bloody Baron, warning Peeves to stay away from the third floor that night so he wouldn't inconvenience the Trio on their quest to save thePhilosopher's Stone. In his second year when encountering Professor McGonagall on his and Ron's way to Moaning Myrtle's Bathroomhe lied and said that that they were on their way to see Hermione in the Hospital Wing also in his second year he used a Basiliskfang to destroy Tom Riddle's Diary. In his fifth year while under interrogation form Umbridge he relayed a coded message to Professor Snape in an attempt to warn him and by extension the Order that Voldemort has Sirius. In the same year while surrounded by Death EatersHarry came up with the idea to smash the shelves in the Hall of Prophecy as a distraction so that he and the D.A. could try and escape. During the hunt for Horcruxes he used the Sword of Gryffindor as a way of retrieving Hufflepuff's Cup from the mounds of burning treasure and used the half bling Dragon as a means to escape from Gringotts Bank.

<p class="MsoNormal">So what do you think? please resond, thank you

<p class="MsoNormal">Misskatniss1546 (talk) 22:37, January 2, 2014 (UTC)Misskatniss1546

Cite error
Hey I was just on the HP page again to re-read the bravery section and his possessions, relationships, and so forth aren't there. It's Cite error type of thing.

I didn't do anything to cause and I don't know how to fix it.

Misskatniss1546 (talk) 04:08, January 9, 2014 (UTC)Misskatniss1546