|
Rename suggestion[]
I don't think this rename is necessary. I think the current one is a very reasonable name and it is clear on what the category is for. I don't think every single category has to match the exact article name. It's not really a problem which needs to be fixed. The books are always calling them patronuses. - Kates39 (talk) 11:42, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- I concur with this. - MrSiriusBlack Talk 12:15, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- It's just sometimes the Patronus is incorporeal, and while an incorporeal Patronus can still technically be called "a Patronus", it would just feel more natural to describe it as "the casting of the Patronus Charm", since the incorporeal Patronus doesn't have a shape and so it would be grammatically awkward to use the plural "Patronuses" on them as if the wisps of smoke can somehow be quantified. MalchonC (talk) 12:35, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- Agreeing with the first two points, I don't think a rename is really necessary either. RedWizard98 (talk) 22:52, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- Two years and more later I still stand by this rename suggestion. Take File:Harry Potter casting the Patronus Charm POAG PC.png for example, if I only sort it in Category:Images of spells, it's not specific enough, as it's identified to be the Patronus Charm, but calling it an "image of a Patronus"? There's no Patronus conjured yet, not even an incorporeal one. It's images like this that need to be in a category called "Images of the Patronus Charm". MalchonC (talk) 08:50, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
