Please discuss candidates for deletion here
Archived discussions
Lists of archived discussions and their results. Sorted by year in which the discussion started.

Human hair

The appearance section is so ridiculously long that it can only be based on every single time that human hair appears or is mentioned, which, given that baldness is an exceptional trait, applies to pretty much every character. Starstuff (Owl me!) 04:40, March 9, 2017 (UTC)

That's right. We also have articles on other kinds of hair and its magical uses though. Cat hair, Veela hair, Puffskein hair which alsi etail on the tole of hair in magic. Shouldn't we delete them all then?--Rodolphus (talk) 08:17, March 9, 2017 (UTC)

We could shrink the appearance section down to only include the appearances involving hair-related magic.--Rodolphus (talk) 08:37, March 9, 2017 (UTC)

The difference is that Veela hair etc. are only referenced within canon in a magical context. Thus, information on them is relevant to the plot or world of the Potter series, not merely incidental trivia. Human hair is visible in every scene in the films featuring a person, and implicitly present in every scene in the books if it's not directly mentioned, so it's incidental in the same way as eyes, skin, air, and sunlight.
The article, as it stands, is in dire need of clean-up. The appearances section needs to be streamlined along the lines you've suggested, because the current indiscriminate laundry list, at best, is unhelpful and cluttering, and, at worst, is inviting crufty or trolling additions to the article.
There also needs to be a structure. A bunch of single-sentence paragraphs is messy and unhelpful. There should probably be a section on the use of human hair in potions, a section on spells and magical products used to style hair, etc. Maybe a section of listing characters by hair colour, which, yes, is trivial, but it would also be useful (from a HP fan perspective) and interesting in the same way as the list of characters who wear spectacles or characters by zodiac signs are. Starstuff (Owl me!) 09:21, March 9, 2017 (UTC)

I agree with you on all off these points. Sorry for my bad English. Maybe someone could help structure it?--Rodolphus (talk) 09:35, March 9, 2017 (UTC)

It's okay. There's always plenty of tasks to do on a wiki if creating articles isn't one's strong point. For now trimming down the "Appearances" section is probably a good place to start. I might give fleshing out the article a go at some point, but unfortunately my backlog for this site is huge, and I don't have as much free time as I once did. Starstuff (Owl me!) 09:40, March 9, 2017 (UTC)


Do we really need an article on the concept of fining someone? I could vaguely see it being a list of times people have been fined and the amounts and such, but we could have similar lists for any number of things. And we don't have articles on imprisonment or loss of privileges or any other similar topics. Even Hogwarts detentions, a subject which gets far more coverage and is fairly different than at your average Muggle school, just rates a section at Discipline at Hogwarts. Surely in its current state, at least, the article is not really anything worthwhile. -- 1337star (Drop me a line!) 19:41, August 27, 2017 (UTC)

The idea of deleting this article is fine by me (sorry;)) — evilquoll (talk) 20:37, September 11, 2017 (UTC)
We have articles on far more incidental subjects. Any discrete subject potentially warrants its own article. I don't see this article's subject as being too trivial/incidental to warrant independent coverage. I just think that this article needs some work to expand it into something more in line with our mission. Adding a list of all fines issued within the course of the books, films, etc. would be a good place to start. Starstuff (Owl me!) 20:12, October 8, 2017 (UTC)

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1/Gallery

  • Why not keep it, if the images in this gallery are on-topic and within the rules? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:29, September 15, 2018 (UTC)

File:Tumblr ligf2gllfD1qzkg9eo1 500.png

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Anthony Appleyard (talkcontribs) 05:27, January 8, 2019 (UTC).

Image of a type which is against this wiki's policies, uploaded by a user who had already been warned and then blocked for uploading this type of image, and likely in defiance of the warning. If this image had been spotted at the time it would have resulted in a longer, perhaps permanent, block. As it is, this wiki is long overdue for a mass purge of images which have never been used, and are never likely to be useful. — evilquoll (talk) 23:36, January 8, 2019 (UTC)

Shoyab Shaik

The page contains a character that appears to not exist. The user who created it, User: ShoyabShaik3567, appeared to cite Scene 60 Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them for a dialogue exchange from an Indian wizard of the International Confederation of Wizards present at the Pentragram Meeting in the film. No such exchange exists. IMDB does not credit an actor named, "Bay Ohshishak" for the alleged role of this character. Also, no such character was credited as existing according to IMDB.  Midnight-Mint01 (talk) 03:30, January 30, 2019 (UTC)

Or just delete, as it's clearly a common type of fanon, that of an egotistical user trying to insert themselves into the Potterverse. — evilquoll (talk) 11:22, January 30, 2019 (UTC)
I have just read Scene 60. It mentions Newt, Tina and Jacob, Madame Picquery, the Swiss ICW delegate (Heinrich Eberstadt), the British envoy, and nobody else. Hence Delete this page. — evilquoll (talk) 11:34, January 30, 2019 (UTC)
Yes check Done --Ironyak1 (talk) 16:41, January 30, 2019 (UTC)

Fungus-covered peanuts

Boy of Card Trading Club and Wizard Card Collectors' Club boy

These are both broken redirects of long standing (at least 6 years), and there is no longer any point in keeping them as any pages which once pointed to the first (there were never any which pointed to the second) have long since been pointed to the proper target. If deleting them turns out not to solve the problem with the Broken Redirects page (it may take several hours for the change to ripple through), it would probably be best to contact Wikia staff rather than undelete or recreate these pages. — evilquoll (talk) 10:31, February 17, 2019 (UTC)