Talk: American Auror Office

Separate division?

How is the American Auror Office separate to the MACUSA Department of Aurors? I think it's the same thing, like how the British Auror Office is also called the Auror Department/Auror Headquarters. These pages say they do the same thing. - Kates39 (talk) 10:42, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

There is a difference between a governmental office, though, which is a the locale of a division, and a Department. The Auror Office at the Ministry isn't a Department, it's a department, with the difference between the capital D and the lowercase one being that a Department is a major section of a given government, and a department is a subdivision of it. And obviously it would do the same thing, because Aurors are Aurors no matter where in the hierarchy they can be found. Think of it this way: The Department of Aurors is an umbrella term that encapsulates the American Auror Office and the US Auror Divisions, and the US Auror Divisions are to the American Auror Office what the Goblin Liaison Office are to the Being Division, which again is part of a bigger Department.

We also know that Newt and Tina was in correspondence, so if she informed him that she was Head of the American Auror Office like he said she had been, then she was promoted to Head of the American Auror Office. If she was promoted to the Head of the Department of Aurors as a whole, then Tina would have said that. WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 11:05, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

For clarity for readers of this, this discussion is continued at Category talk:Articles to be merged/MACUSA Department of Aurors and American Auror Office. -  MrSiriusBlack  Talk  17:04, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Screenplay

Out of curiosity, how exactly does the official screenplay confirm this's existence? -  MrSiriusBlack  Talk  23:44, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

By how it contradicts the prior majority assumption that it was "a colloquialism". During the previous discussion on the matter, it was pointed out that Newt had talked to Tina, and that he informed the assembly of what Tina's new position was. I don't recall if I was the one who pointed this out or somebody else, but the counter-arguments I was given was as follows:

a) Theseus had just introduced himself as the Head of the British Auror Office, giving Newt a parallel to draw from due to their shared familiarity with the British Ministry, so Newt was "probably" saying "American Auror Office" as a bit of a colloquialism.

b) why, we don't even know if it was capitalised or not! How can we then know if it is an "official" department at MACUSA?

Well, as it turned out, it was Lally Hicks who informed the assembly of what Tina's position is, not Newt. Lally, by contrast, wouldn't have drawn the same parallels that Newt would have done, because she's a New Yorker with an entirely different frame of reference to the Brit Newt Scamander. What possible reason could she have to say that MACUSA had an Auror Office was if they didn't had one? She didn't strike me as particularly deceptive. The script also capitalises it. She is describing Tina's position at MACUSA, just like Theseus was describing his at the Ministry. He is the Head of the British Auror Office, and Tina is the Head of the American Auror Office, making the question of capitalisation a moot point. WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 00:22, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

My argument was it is unknown whether the American Auror Office and the MACUSA Department of Aurors are two separate things. What functional difference is there between these? - Kates39 (talk) 14:06, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

The functional difference would be the very same distinction that you would draw between let's say the FBI and the FBI Headquarters located between 9th and 10th Streets in northwest Washington, D.C. The MACUSA Department of Aurors is a government organisation, and the American Auror Office and US Auror Divisions are (some of -?) the divisions that makes up the organisation. The distinction is roughly equivalent to that of the British Auror Office and its investigative subdivision. WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 14:38, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

The British Auror Office is the headquarters of British aurors and is within the british Ministry's Department of Magical Law Enforcement. It thus stands to reason that the MACUSA Department of Aurors, within the MACUSA Department of Magical Law Enforcement, is the headquarters of American aurors. So what is the American Auror Office supposed to be? -  MrSiriusBlack  Talk  14:45, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

The American Auror Office is supposed to be roughly the same as the British Auror Office. Roughly, - but not quite. You see, while it is the headquarters of the American Aurors, and it is at MACUSA, it's not a single division given an allotted workspace with every Auror on staff working out of it like in Britain, it's where the more important decisions are made. What you must remember is that the territory over which the British Ministry of Magic holds jurisdiction is positively miniscule when compared to the one MACUSA has to govern. What you need to remember is that USA is about forty times bigger than all of the UK put together, and judging by the virtually self-contained state of wizarding New York in Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (film), it would appear that even though the wizarding population in any given country is tiny next to the non-magical one, the number of wizards in a country is proportionate to the number of Muggles. MACUSA, therefore, has vastly more ground to cover, and people to govern, than the British Ministry of Magic does.

Canonically, apparition also becomes increasingly difficult, not to mention dangerous, the further you travel. Not to forget the fact that it takes a certain level of familiarity with the place you want to go to as well, so there's that too. In other words, lest you expect every Auror who works for MACUSA to know the 3.797 million square miles of their country like the back of their hand and has the ability to traverse it safely by apparating, it wouldn't be feasible for NACUSA Aurors to work out of a single location like the Brits do. Depending on what state you're in, crossing the length of a single state on a broom would take too long to get anything done. As such, a bigger wizarding population means more Aurors, and more Aurors + more grounds to cover = a larger organisation that's spread out. It's not complicated: The MACUSA Department of Aurors is the name of said organisation, and every Auror in the entirety of the US works for it. The American Auror Office is their headquarters, it's also where the Aurors who works specifically in New York work, and it serves as the command post for the lesser outposts known as the US Auror Divisions. WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 17:18, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

And we get all that information from one single mention of the term 'American Auror Office' how exactly?

Also yes the USA is too large for brooms and apparition, but what about portkeys? -  MrSiriusBlack  Talk  17:33, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

I second everything MrSiriusBlack says. This is a very confusing, speculative take on what the American Auror Office is. It is unsupported by a canon source. This is just something that you've put together, which doesn't make it true. Lally saying Tina is the Head of the American Auror Office doesn't prove any of this.

Theseus is the Head of the British Auror Office. Tina is the Head of the American Auror Office. The British Auror Office is the Auror Headquarters/Department of Aurors. There isn't a reason to think the US is different and that Tina isn't doing the same job Theseus is. If the American Auror Office is the headquarters of the MACUSA Department of Aurors, then why can't they just be the same thing? The US Auror Divisions are the field offices. What is Tina doing?

Distance shouldn't even be a problem. A portkey doesn't appear to have a distance limit, and like in Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore, can take travellers from New York to Europe, and Scotland to Bhutan, so why not across the US. - Kates39 (talk) 18:56, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Kates39

You've right. The fact that the above description of the American Auror Office is something that I put together doesn't make it true. The fact that the above description is has been put together from bits and pieces of canon information provided over the course of five films, however, does. So you're actually wrong in saying that it is 2speculative" in any way. As for "confusing", I can't help you there. The fact that you find the distinction between a government organisation as a whole, and the physical headquarters used by more high-ranking members of that organisation so confoundedly difficult to grasp isn't something I can do anything about. I've tried to explain it, and I don't know how to explain it any better.

Now, if you have any specific contentions about my statements above, such as when I described wizarding New York as being "self-contained", or if you want to know where I got this "larger organisation" from, I could certainly explain that. And, I think, pretty much any other such question that comes to mind. As for your contention about the limitless distance for portkeys travel, where they can travel to isn't the problem. I will explain it in my reply to Sirius below.

MrSiriusBlack

As it happens, we don't get all that information from one single mention of the term 'American Auror Office'. I got it from an accumulation of in-universe titbits obtained through a meticulous search for and (an acute attention to) details found throughout five scripts and associated films, whether we were provided with them through scripted lines of dialogue or movie props. The term in question simply reconfirmed and elaborated a bit on what had already been established as early as the first film.

Bringing the law of supply and demand into this opens a whole new can of worms, but fine, let's ignore the logistical challenge this undertaking would be, and let's say for the sake of argument that the American equivalent to the Portkey Office were able to provide American Aurors with the portkeys needed this way or that way. Now what?

Granted, they're fast creatures, owls; gracefully gliding through the air as fast as 40 miles per hour depending on the species, but suppose some whacky warlock goes on a killing spree in Utah, for example. The magical community in Utah will have to send an owl that are going to alert the Aurors at MACUSA about what's going on, thus giving them a clue as to where their next portkey is supposed to take them to, that's still a 1,955 miles long trip. If we're generous, one of the faster owls would have made it in north of 48 hours, but that is only if we assume there are ideal weather conditions for the owl to fly in, and it does not stop to hunt and eat, rest or sleep on the way at all. And what if they get a dozens or more eye-witness reports of alleged wrongdoing in off-state? The Aurors would have to read through them all and prioritize some over others, which would take more time. Then they would have to mobilise, obtain a portkey, dispatch... Now, the existence of US Auror Divisions negate any need to ponder the question of how this logistical problem might be handled, as every state would have a given number of Auror Divisions in cities with a heavy magical population so that local witches and wizards have local Aurors to rely on, but I trust you agree that even with portkeys, that would only solve half a problem. WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 19:59, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

No-one is questioning the existence of those Auror divisions scattered throughout the country. That is not really relevant to this discussion. -  MrSiriusBlack  Talk  20:12, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

They are, actually, since they're part of the larger organisation just like the American Auror Office is. But I see your point; Kates39's question - which to me came off as questioning why the MACUSA Department of Aurors would be any different to the British Auror Office, and I think that because your questions were similar, my reply to the two of you bled into one another just a bit. I had just finished my response to you when I realized K. had posted here in the meantime, so I think I got a bit carried away trying to reply adequately to both of you. WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 20:20, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

I reasoned that the MACUSA Department of Aurors is the headquarters of Aurors and all the countrywide Auror Divisions, which would explain why it is within the MACUSA Department of Magical Law Enforcement. You are saying that the American Auror Office is the headquarters of the MACUSA Department of Aurors. Why would a headquarters need a headquarters? -  MrSiriusBlack  Talk  21:31, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

And I understand your reasoning. I agree, it makes sense intuitively for the MACUSA Department of the Aurors to be the HQ, being a Department and all; but as I mentioned earlier, the functional difference between it and the American Auror Office is the same that you would draw between the FBI and the FBI Headquarters located between 9th and 10th Streets in northwest Washington, D.C. I've checked the revision history, and I know that the article has said that the MACUSA Department of Aurors is the headquarters for the American Aurors, but I read the Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them: The Original Screenplay, and in it Rowling offers a description of the Investigative Team:

"SCENE 22

INT. MAJOR INVESTIGATION DEPARTMENT—DAY

CLOSE ON A NEWSPAPER—The New York Ghost, with the headline MAGICAL DISTURBANCES RISK

WIZARDING EXPOSURE.

A group of the highest-level Aurors in the organization are gathered together in serious discussion."

And what is this organization called? It's not mentioned in the script, but in the film itself, but we still got the name off Newt's wanted poster after "Graves" found and Obscurus in his case and implicated him in the Obscurial attack on New York, thereby linking him directly to an ongoing investigation that the highest-level Aurors in the organisation was involved in, prompting them to pursue him - and they did.

So it's not a question of why a headquarters would need a headquarters, the question is "would a government organisation need a headquarters?" The obvious answer is yes. WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 22:34, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

"And what is this organization called?"

...the Major Investigation Department. -  MrSiriusBlack  Talk  22:49, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

According to The Case of Beasts: Explore the Film Wizardry of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, the "Major Investigation Department" is simply the name of the office they were in at the time. What is more, the Aurors that made up the Investigative Team were already the "highest-level Aurors in the organisation", so if they were there and they made up the organisation in and by themselves, there would be no other Aurors for them to outrank to make them highest-level Aurors in the organisation, because they were the sum total. WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 23:40, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Right. I've not read that book. Well then the word 'organization' in that sentence was likely referring to MACUSA as a whole. -  MrSiriusBlack  Talk  15:12, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

The only time the American Auror Office is spoken of in canon is when Lally says Tina is the Head of the American Auror Office. She says it in response to Theseus having the same job. There isn't a reason given in canon to presume they function in a different way. To say the functional difference is the same between the FBI and the FBI Headquarters is wholly speculative and arbitrary. Unless a canon source ever says this, it is not a fact. Also, please remember the wiki doesn't use the real-world to draw conclusions about in-universe topics. Rowling does not line everything up with the real-world. Our understanding should always be in line with established canon. - Kates39 (talk) 09:54, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

MrSiriusBlack

You are really bending over backwards over this, aren't you? MACUSA isn't an "organisation", it is a government.

Kates39:

1) I think you need to re-watch the scene, K. Lally Hicks did not say that Tina is the Head of the American Auror Office "in response to Theseus having the same job", she was elaborating on the promotion that Newt is telling Jacob about that Tina got, which happens well after Lally was introduced to Theseus. In fact, she only explained what Tina's new job was after Newt held the speech about Grindelwald's abilities as a Seer and Dumbledore's plans to use counter-sight to undermine it.

2) To say the functional difference is the same between the FBI and the FBI Headquarters is not "arbitrary", it's pragmatism. You see, it's common for most people to describe the unknown in terms of the known when they explain something. It's for this reason that if you asked me what the word "kendo" referred to, I would have drawn a comparison between it and the sport of fencing. Or, let's say, that we were hanging out somewhere, and then you happen upon a group of people seated around a table playing this colorful card game. You spot this downturned pile of cards next to where they play, and glean the name of the game on them. But - you have never seen the game before, so you tap me on the shoulder and ask me what the game uno is all about. I can tell you that I, and probably most people in that situation, would have likened it to Crazy Eights.

3) How is it "speculative", exactly? You yourself pointed out that if Theseus is Head of the British Auror Office, and Tina is the Head of the American Auror Office, then obviously they have pretty much the same job. And if you look at the articles for each, and on what I wrote above, at no point have I said anything different. All I have said is that since MACUSA is established to encompass both a Department of Aurors and several US Auror Divisions in addition to the aforementioned Auror Office, then clearly, even though the American Auror Office is the headquarter of the American Aurors just like the British Auror Office is the headquarters of the British ones, there is more to the American Aurors than just that one workspace. That's all I said.

4) Correction: Rowling does not always line everything up with the real-world. This is either when she gets a real-life fact wrong or mess up mathematically, but in nine times out of ten, then yes, she absolutely does line up details of the magical world with the real world. If you don't believe me, then please show me where in canon Harry has ever been asked to sit down in a chair in the wizarding world, and what they gestured at did not line up with what a "Muggle" would consider a chair.

The only arbitrary thing I can see is the counterproductive denialism concerning the subject of this article. I don't know why so many of my fellow editors seem so content with the "MACUSA Department of Aurors" that they don't want there to be an American Auror Office as well, but according to a Tier-One source, such is the case. WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 21:33, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

"MACUSA isn't an "organisation", it is a government."

It is no less an organisation than its departments are. -  MrSiriusBlack  Talk  22:44, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Even if that had been the case, and not simply an instance of somebody using the word 'organisation' both so broadly as to render it effectively meaningless and in a way nobody else would, why don't you want there to be an American Auror Office, Sirius? WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 23:58, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

"Even if that had been the case, and not simply an instance of somebody using the word 'organisation' both so broadly as to render it effectively meaningless and in a way nobody else would"

The word 'organisation' is defined as "an organized group of people with a particular purpose, such as a business or government department.". I did not use it incorrectly. Stop getting so hung up on semantics, my god.

"why don't you want there to be an American Auror Office, Sirius?"

It's not that I don't want there to be one, in fact at no point did any of us say there isn't one. All we are saying is that there is insufficient evidence, besides your speculation, to definitely say for certain without ambiguity that the American Auror Office and MACUSA Auror Department are not one and the same. -  MrSiriusBlack  Talk  11:12, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

MrSiriusBlack

The word 'organisation' is defined as "an organized group of people with a particular purpose, such as a business or government department." I did not use it incorrectly. Stop getting so hung up on semantics, my god.

First the word "organisation" meant "Major Investigation Department", then that turned out to be wrong, so you insisted that the word 'organisation' in that case probably meant MACUSA; how can you sit there and just throw everything at the wall to see what sticks, and then accuse me of getting hung up on semantics?

Moreover, your own definition of organisation actually works against your own argument: An organisation is "an organized group of people with a particular purpose, such as a business or government department." Not a government as a whole, but a government department. The reason for this, you see, is that a governing body is not reducible to the concept of an 'organisation'. The word refers to the system and institution of governing and managing a certain society or country, and though it may make sense intuitively to call MACUSA an organisation because it is organised and have a leader with people reporting to them, an organisation is a systematic collection of people who work together for achieving the desired end, and under a common identity. Conversely, an institution is an establishment. In other words, the main difference between an institution and an organisation is that while a institution refers to both the abstract and physical entity of the establishment, the word organisation refers strictly refers to a physical entity. So a government is not an organisation, it is an establishment that encompass and regulate organisations.

That, and the contextual meaning of the word "organisation" as used in Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them: The Original Screenplay excludes MACUSA as a governing body in any case, as the word "organisation" is used in the context of Aurors and how high-ranking they are, meaning we're talking about a government organisation of Aurors in which they are some of the highest-level ones.

There is insufficient evidence, besides your speculation, to definitely say for certain without ambiguity that the American Auror Office and MACUSA Auror Department are not one and the same.

This perceived "speculation" don't actually exist, my edit is based solely off the accumulated writings of J. K. Rowling and the prop department, and your objection against it constitutes an argument from personal incredulity. The interpretation that the two refer to the same thing is also one for which there are no evidence at all, made based solely on a misunderstanding of the source material. So now what? WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 12:32, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Oh my god. You're still going on about the word 'organisation'. It is barely even relevant, just drop it.

"This perceived "speculation" don't actually exist"

That is your opinion, and yours alone.

"based solely on a misunderstanding of the source material"

That is your opinion, and yours alone. Stop disrespecting other people's. -  MrSiriusBlack  Talk  15:30, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Within the Harry Potter books, there is an Auror Office. It is also called an Auror Department and Auror Headquarters. This is the only canon framework to base our understanding of what an Auror Office is. In the same scene of Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore, Newt and Lally say "British Auror Office" and "American Auror Office", and that Theseus and Tina are the Head of these. There is absolutely no indication that there are differences with what they do, who they report to, their hierarchy.

Until a source is provided that actually says what you are saying, the information on these pages is going to change. Do not change it back without a clear source which says "MACUSA Department of Aurors is a government organisation, and the American Auror Office and US Auror Divisions are (some of -?) the divisions that makes up the organisation". This is not a fact, it is not stated by Rowling or anyone other than you. The difference between the way the American wizarding world operates and the British wizarding world is not up to you to put together. - Kates39 (talk) 09:39, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

MriSiriusBlack

Yes, Sirius, I'm still on about the word 'organisation' because you've been taking it out of context and trying to make it mean everything other then what the context of its use dictates it to be.

And what did I "disrespect", Sirius? I pointed out earlier that Kates39, who was under the impression that Eulalie Hicks used the wording "American Auror Office" in response to how Theseus introduced himself as the Head of the British Auror Office, was incorrect. I then clarified where in the text Lally said what she said, and in what context. If people are going to take offense to corrections when they're wrong about something, then perhaps the world wide web is not the right place for them? Kates39 hasn't really responded to my correction, but at the very least she didn't get upset about it because I "disrespected" an opinion.

Kates39

Why you lot seem to resent it so much when I actually pay attention to what's going on on screen, I will never understand. Luckily, your continued appeal to personal incredulity doesn't actually dictate what does or does not constitute a fact in canon, so I can take some solace in that, if nothing else. I won't change your preferred edit, Kate, but I will advise you to look up the word "subtext" one of these days. Cheers. WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 17:20, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Round 2

First of all: User:Kates39 and User:MrSiriusBlack - I know our last exchange exhausted you, so please feel free to sit this one out and leave it to somebody else if you like. As promised, I won't restore or force my previous edit, and while I am going to mention your names, I am merely recapitulating our prior exchange before any other editors throw their ten cents in to to save them some time: This will not be an attack on you, and it will be perfectly all right to ignore the rest of this post if you're so inclined. I will not say an ill word about you.

I made an edit to the MACUSA Department of Aurors, where I described it as a "government organisation" because the Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them: The Original Screenplay described it as such. The first-tier source in question, which was written by Rowling herself, mind you, described the Aurors in the Investigative Team that had assembled in the office known as the Major Investigation Department as "a group of the highest-level Aurors in the organization gathered together in serious discussion". The organisation, though not mentioned by name in the script, is identified on Newt's Scamander's wanted poster. Likening the British and American Auror Offices, I also described the latter as the physical headquarters/head office of the organisation in question, with the smaller US Auror Divisions reporting to it. The first objection I got to this came from User:MrSiriusBlack, who insisted that 'organization' was "just a word", and could mean anything.

Objection 1

Spitballing, Sirius proposed that what the word could actually be referring to was the Major Investigation Department itself.

Rebuttal 1

I contested this interpretation, however, as "Major Investigation Department", had been officially established to the name given to the physical office the Investigative Team had gathered in.

Objection 2

He then suggested that it might have referred to MACUSA as a whole.

Rebuttal 2

At this, I referenced the screenplay again, pointing out that if we look at the word "organization" in the context of the rest of the sentence, it is clear that we have to do with an organization of Aurors that these Aurors were among the highest-level members of, not the government they worked for through the parts they played as employees of the governing body. Further on, I also pointed out that governing bodies are not reducible to the definition of an organisation, as they are instructions, and explained the difference.

Nobody responded to this.

Objection 3

At this point, however, he had seemingly ran out of ideas and therefore unable to offer up a counter-argument capable of bringing the validity to my refutation into question, Sirius began accusing me of "speculating" instead, and simply handwaved the issue away without actually contending with any of my prior arguments by insisting that "organisation" "was just a word".

Refutation 4

I tried to circle back to the context in which the word is used, which fell on deaf ears.

Objection 5

Kates39 concurred with him, and maintained that the Department of Aurors were presumably the same thing.

Refutation 5

Not only did nobody address my contention that this assumption was utterly unsubstantiated in and evidently contradicted by canon, in virtue of what we know about the structure of MACUSA and the differing names on these two, but nor did either party actually explain how I was supposed to have been "speculating". All right, they made some vague mentions of "insufficient evidence", but at no point did they actually get as far as accounting for what made the evidence insufficient, or refute my arguments concerning the context in which the word "organisation" appeared in the script.

Objection 6

After the discussion was moved here, SeichanGrey pointed out that "Looking at the sources and references", the Department of Aurors and the American Auror Office appeared to be the same thing.

Refutation 6

This one is easily answered: The Department of Aurors article was made well before the release of Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore, so the conclusion that the Department of Aurors was the name of said headquarters was formed on the basis of incomplete information, as the existence of the American Auror Office hadn't been revealed yet.

Objection 7

It was pointed out by Kates39 that MACUSA was modelled after the British Ministry of Magic, which she felt lent credence to the idea that there was no "Auror organisation" the way I argued that the script established.

Refutation 7

The obvious problem with this is that MACUSA was not modelled after the British Ministry of Magic, but rather the deliberative assembly that was the Wizards' Council and evolved thereafter, and thus differed in how it was structured and did things.

Objection 8

Despite all of the cited sources I presented, Kates39 STILL insisted there was no evidence that the Department of Aurors and the American Auror Office wasn't one and the same and wanted to merge them.

Refutation 8

I pointed out that this was incorrect. Rowling has gone on record saying that wizarding society would, (though it rarely admit,) take ideas from the Muggle world. And the hierarchy and structure of the MACUSA Department of Aurors are evidently among the ones MACUSA took. So far, we have been given three titles for high-ranking Aurors:

• Auror Commissioner
• Chief Auror
• Captain of Aurors

Then, we got three different parts of the organization, the highest-level members of which makes up the Investigative Team of the Major Investigation Department, as verified in the script.

• MACUSA Department of Aurors
• American Auror Office
• US Auror Divisions

These ranks corresponds directly with the real life hierarchy of the police in the US, and these three parts of the "organization" corresponds directly with how the police force is organized. This isn't random. There are two ways that the audience is given information in fictional storytelling, whether it is written down on the pages of a book or shown to us visually on a screen: Exposition and "show don't tell". Any happenstance people might want to allude to are utterly illusory, because the storyteller has all the cards. Coincidences doesn't exist in fiction, and consequently, these parallels aren't coincidental either.

In the US, the Police Commissioner is an appointed civilian overseeing a police organization, and appoints and oversee a chief of police, to whom is delegated the day-to-day operations of the police headquarters. Rowling has always drawn parallells between the magical and Muggle-worlds, so it is evidently the case that the wizarding "police organization" as a whole would be what we call the "MACUSA Department of Aurors", and the police headquarters are the equivalent of the "American Auror Office".

And the Police Chief, of course, corresponds to the Chief Auror. Their relationship would be roughly analogous to that of navy admiral commanding a fleet of ships, and the captains of the ships in the fleet. The admiral makes the strategic decisions and decides where the ships will go, but the captains are in control of the ships themselves and make the tactical decisions.

A Police Captain is often the officer in charge of a division or unit, which would be the equivalent of a Captain of the Aurors and a US Auror Division, respectively. So yes, they "all do the same thing" because we're still talking about Aurors, but we're also talking about a hierarchy. So based on what we know of the US government and the fact that from both an in- and out-of-universe perspective, MACUSA is modelled more on its No-Maj counterpart than anything else, right down to being headed by a President and having a National Security Advisor, albeit with a slightly different title.

• The Auror Commissioner is the designated head of the Department of Aurors.
• The Chief Auror is in charge of the Auror Headquarters/American Auror Office.
• The Captain of the Aurors is in charge of a designated Auror Division.

By all accounts, I would say that while they did not talk down to us or hold our hand through it, we have been given every piece of information necessary to piece together how it all works.

Objection 9

MrSiriusBlack was presented the above argument and replied that I was "asserting that the person in charge of the american Department of Aurors and the person in charge of all American Aurors are two different people. I mean, for crying out loud. I don't even know what to say to you any more.

Refutation 9

I then tried to explain to him that he misunderstood my argument, as when I said that Tina was in charge of the American Aurors, what I meant was that she was in charge of the American Aurors in the same sense that Theseus was. As Head of the Auror Office, she's the most senior Auror, and all other Aurors reported to her. That's the equivalent to Theseus' job, and would correspond roughly to what the position of Chief Auror seems to be. Tina can't very well be the Auror Commissioner if she is a sworn member and not the leader of a uniformed law enforcement service, and the role apparently denotes an elected civilian manager of the organization as a whole, now can she? The Chief Auror is in charge of the Aurors, and the Auror Commissioner are in charge of the administrative oversight of the organization as a whole, including the personnel at the Department and the relevant divisions that is not made up of trained Aurors, which includes Tina, the Head of the Auror Office.

Now granted, this isn't exactly explicitly confirmed, but the rules of visual storytelling and contradictions of the two being the same from canon sources both dictate that said idea cannot be presupposed, and that the above description of the hierarchy of employees and designated areas of responsibility merits a BTS section as being ostensibly the case, at the very least.

In conclusion, I met a wall because there were "three vs one", so the majority opinion was asserted as the consensus. My problem with this is that whereas the wiki is a community that "runs by consensus", I feel like this is being misinterpreted. We're a fandom-based encyclopaedia, and canon sources ought to dictate what goes and does not go in the articles here, not an appeal to majority based on little more than personal incredulity. (Which, I would argue this qualifies as, since part of the reason why Kates39 and MrSiriusBlack has contested my edits on these articles is because they found my arguments "convoluted".) Consensus, meanwhile, should be the tool we use to resolve editorial questions, like what infobox image to use, etc. If, however, we must make content based on consensus, I would be partial to a proper consensus through votes for or against, if that is really what it takes to resolve this differing of opinions. WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 13:04, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

The wiki is run by community consensus, whether that is established through discussion or through a formal vote. There are elements of the content that I disagree with, but several others thought otherwise, so it remains. If you have an article revision you want voted on, please identify it, because few if any editors are going to review the multiple rounds of arguments above. I can hold a vote as needed to help resolve this. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 18:03, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

1) Out of interest, what elements of the content? And whose content, for that matter?

2) Regardless of whether or not "several others thought otherwise", surely, canon is canon regardless of whether they like it or not, or to what extent they can wrap their heads around it? It just makes no sense for me to say that "it's three vs one, so this fallacious appeal to majority is going to dictate what's going on the page", as that implies that community consensus is treated as a substitute for canon and not as a way in which to work with canon. Perhaps you can explain it in some way others haven't? It might come off as a bit of a surprise, but I'm not actually looking for conflict, but this logic is just greek to me. WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 23:21, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

The entire wiki is based on community consensus built up over the years - using past-tense, UK English, the canon hierarchy, etc, are all decisions made over time and reinforced by the community. Some wikis & users only see the books as canon, and feel the movies and games are garbage, or disagree on various textual interpretations, so yes, canon itself is often up for debate. None of this HAS to be done this way, it's just what many editors over time agreed to and became codified in local policies and procedures.

As for my personal disagreements, I remember watching the snarky argument JKR was having on Twitter about inserting the mark of the beast in her writing, which lead to her stating Kreacher was 666 years old when he died. This was pretty clearly JKR trolling some of her Christian critics, but she said it and per our canon policy her word is law, so others felt it had to be added to the article. Despite our disagreement, we ultimately collectively decided the best course was to record the info and add a note about the context in which it was provided - community consensus in action. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 18:01, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

That sounds about right. Using past-tense, UK English, the canon hierarchy, etc, are all the sort of editorial issues that might just require a consensus, but if canon says that there is a MACUSA Department of Aurors and there is an American Auror Office, and a vast minority of editors on this wiki that makes up the tiny majority of participants on a talk page discussion on this wiki goes "they're the same thing", what is it that determines whether the articles should be merged and/or threated like they're one and the same or not? Canon, or a "consensus"? WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 20:35, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald opens with a shot of the Woolworth Building and calls it the "American Ministry for Magic". Does this mean there is some distinct organization or location separate from Magical Congress of the United States of America and we need another article? Best I can tell from the discussion above and on the Suggested Merge page, everyone (?) but you sees the "American Auror Office" as being the same as MACUSA Department of Aurors?

More generally to your question, yes, canon interpretation is occasionally up for debate because some interpretation is often necessary, and ultimately the wiki is driven by community consensus because it is a community project. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 17:38, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

That is a fallacy of false equivalence: The MACUSA Department of Aurors and the American Auror Office are introduced in-universe as part of the story; the designation "American Ministry of Magic", clarifies a fact for the benefit of the audience and is given out-of-universe, so the two is not comparable.

The problem is that we aren't talking about an "interpretation" here. We are talking about me pointing out that "canon says unambiguously that X is the case", and the "consensus" is basically going "but Y makes more sense to us, so we will stick with that anyway". WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 20:36, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

It's that in-universe mention that leads to this article existing as IMO we don't know for certain the relationship between the American Auror Office and the MACUSA Department of Aurors - they could be entirely synonymous, they could be some differentiation that is never explained. This is what is open to interpretation, which is why some interpret them as meaning the same thing, and I think we just don't know either way. Regardless, all we are given in canon is that there is an American Auror Office and that Porpentina Goldstein becomes the Head of this thing by 1932 in Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore. Anything else is just conjecture and speculation as to how this named thing relates to every other named thing, with those unknowns and possibilities are given in the article's BTS section already. As such, the article seems complete to me, but am willing to offer up another revision so others can vote on it and put this matter to rest. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 18:26, 25 October 2022 (UTC)