Since it has now become a subject for discussion thanks to StarStuff -- who is refusing to allow a page on Johnny Depp (stating that he can merely have a mention on the Fantastic Beasts Film Page but not an actual page himself) -- should we create a page for him when/if he is officially announced or the film lists him in the credits?
Starstuff says No as an "accused abuser will not have a page on this wiki on my watch". Which, to me, seems an abuse of admin rights as they're denying the wiki information because they disapprove personally as the person.
Do we make a page or not? My thought is Yes, because the wiki is for all information on Harry Potter, which his page will be when it is finished.
I agree because everyone who was involved in the franchise should deserve a page on this wiki, as I tried to make a page for Depp, but StarStuff kept me from doing so. (Hobbiton777 (talk) 19:57, November 2, 2016 (UTC))
Can I ask from which source you have it that Depp has been casted? One would tink everybody would know if Johnny Depp of all people had been casted for such a big movie, even if it were only for a small scene? Ninclow (talk) 20:04, November 2, 2016 (UTC)
- Melissa Anelli of the The Harry Potter Alliance has a good article summarizing the issue. --Ironyak1 (talk) 21:07, November 2, 2016 (UTC)
- Our mandate is indeed to provide as complete of coverage of all things Potter as is possible. However, we are under no obligation to cover a subject if its coverage has, in some way, been deemed problematic. We have selectively deleted at least one article on an actor who met our notability guidelines because coverage of him presented issues that could not be resolved.
- It is important to remember that we are not Wikipedia. Our bar of notability has been set lower, which, of course, frees us to cover Potter-related minutiae that would never pass muster on Wikipedia (such as every canonical appearance/mention of bananas and actors who had tiny extra roles). But, at the same time, the fact that Potter and Beasts are children's series means that our primary readership skews younger. This brings a unique set of responsibilities that don't come into play when writing for a general audience. It's also reflected in policy, specifically HPW:USER, which stipulates that "user pages and images within must be 'safe for work': no content which is unsuitable for a family audience or would be likely to disturb or offend other users." This policy, in the eight years I've been here, has been interpreted to apply to mainspace. In other words, content in articles should be kept to a PG-13 level.
- I judged the potential risk of giving the individual in question separate coverage (namely, sending a harmful message about the acceptability of domestic violence to young, vulnerable readers and triggering young, vulnerable abuse survivors) to outweigh the benefits of coverage and acted in what I see as the best interests of this wiki by deleting his article. I will not be party to the culture that re-victimizes survivors of abuse and trivializes/minimizes their experiences. It goes against every lesson that Harry Potter teaches us. Harry Potter Wiki must remain a safe space for survivors. ★ Starstuff (Owl me!) 21:36, November 2, 2016 (UTC)
- You do know that you don't have to mention the abuse in the article, right? Just who he is, where he was born, film roles and the role he plays in Fantastic Beasts. If the abuse is the problem, if keeping the wiki clean is the problem, then avoid the topic of the abuse on here and let Wikipedia deal with all that. As for going against everything Harry Potter teaches us -- no, utter rubbish. Harry Potter teaches us not to run away from our fears/dislikes but to conquer them. By refusing the page, you are running away from your fear/dislike which is exactly what the book did not teach us to do. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 01:39, November 3, 2016 (UTC)
- It seems that Starstuff has already decided to leave, but just for my two cents if she's reading, I too believe that any such issue is irrelevant to whether or not a page would be created on here. Depp certainly wouldn't be the only individual listed on here with something unsavory in his/her past, and that's even assuming the claims against him or true. (You know, here in the U.S. we have a thing called "innocent until proven guilty.") For example, Jamie Waylett (who incidentally stated that Depp was his favorite actor) was sentenced to community service for drug possession and was later sentenced to two years in prison for participation in a riot. My point is that what you are stating is against policy and also flies in the face of it says on Harry Potter Wiki:Administrators regarding administrators acting in a neutral role. To act in such a unilateral way is completely against any sort of consensus we normally establish here. Your reason for leaving states that you're doing so because of people being "more interested in keeping abusers on pedestals," but I hope one you've had a chance to cool down, you'll realise that that is hardly the case. You've been a valuable contributor for eight years and I hope you won't discard that so easily. But if you do decide you can't say, I wish you well. ProfessorTofty (talk) 03:12, November 3, 2016 (UTC)
- Whether or not you agree with keeping or deleting the Depp page, I would hope everyone would have taken the time to think through the issue and discuss options on how best to resolve. The badgering seen here and on Starstuff's talk page was unnecessary, trollish, and ugly. Clearly this was a major issue for her and for many HP fans, without a simple solution. While we work to document and explore this fictional world we all love, hopefully we can do a better job of supporting and understanding the real people and real issues that come with it. --Ironyak1 (talk) 08:25, November 3, 2016 (UTC)