FANDOM


Article name

I would suggest renaming this to "Sleeping Charm", a name given in the Wizard's Challenge capitalised like so, and thus a canon name for the charm. --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 02:35, January 2, 2014 (UTC)

  • For those who wondering: This article is about bewitched sleeping in general rather than about one specific spell. --RogueOwner (talk) 18:14, April 28, 2020 (UTC)

This article is not about magically induced sleep in general, but a specific charm with this name. It is clearly depicted as a separate spell in Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery, so this article should be written as such. --RedWizard98 (talk) 17:00, May 13, 2020 (UTC)

The separate spell in Hogwarts Mystery is called the Sleeping Charm, with its own separate article. This article is about magically induced sleep in general, an effect that can be caused by the specific Sleeping Charm depicted in HM, but also by other magical means. Sirius (talk) 21:24, June 19, 2020 (UTC)

Well put, Sirius. :-) Tfoc (talk) 21:35, June 19, 2020 (UTC)

The icon for this spell (as shown on this page) is not the Sleeping Charm, it is a specifically named spell called "Bewitched Sleep" which can be learned in the game, and used in duelling for example. If this article should be about magical sleep in general, why does it have a spell infobox, and a specific hand movement shown which is also different to the one for the sleeping charm. The statements above ignore this is in fact an individual charm, which is very similar to but different from other sleeping spells. This is a big confusion, as this is not how spell articles are written. --RedWizard98 (talk) 01:22, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

Good point. I removed the spell infobox. Tfoc (talk) 02:52, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

Do not remove infoboxes on your own liking, as that is actually vandalism.--RedWizard98 (talk) 04:27, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

I don't play the game, but if the bewitched sleep indeed has a sperate wand movement etc, I'd definetely consider it a seperate spell. --Rodolphus (talk) 06:05, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

I also don't play the game, but the Sleeping Charm article describes the Sleeping Charm as the spell used in the game; surely there aren't two different spells in the same game that do the exact same thing? Sirius (talk) 09:55, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

This article was once written as being the spell that Dumbledore used to knock out Hermione, Ron, Cho and Gabrielle in order to place them at the bottom of the Black Lake for the second triwizard task. From what I know so far, the Sleeping Charm is exclusive to Hogwarts Mystery, but 'bewitched sleep' is not. Sirius (talk) 10:04, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

First off, I didn't remove the infobox "on my own liking", I removed it as not to mislead those who read the article. With all due respect, RedWizard, you were the one who said "if bewitched sleep isn't a spell, why is the infobox there?", I simply edited it in accordance with the point you made. If you believe that is vandalism, I don't know what to tell you, except perhaps that you should look up the actual definition for "vandalism", look at my edit and fact-check how the two corresponds to one another.  Also, Sirius, the term "bewitched sleep" appears exactly two times in the fourh book.

One of the best things about the aftermath of the second task was that everybody was very keen to hear details of what had happened down in the lake, which meant that Ron was getting to share Harry's limelight for once. Harry noticed that Ron's version of events changed subtly with every retelling. At first,  he gave what seemed to be the truth; it tallied with Hermione's story, anyway - Dumbledore 'had put all the hostages into a bewitched sleep in Professor McGonagall's office, first assuring them that they would be quite safe, and would awake when they were back above the water. One week later, however, Ron was telling a thrilling tale of kidnap in which he struggled single-handedly against fifty heavily armed merpeople who had to beat him into submission before tying him up. "But I had my wand hidden up my sleeve," he assured Padma Patil, who seemed to be a lot keener on Ron now that he was getting so much attention and was making a point of talking to him every time they passed in the corridors. "I could've taken those mer-idiots any time I wanted." "What were you going to do, snore at them?" said Hermione waspishly. People had been teasing her so much about being the thing that Viktor Krum would most miss that she was in a rather tetchy mood. Ron's ears went red, and thereafter, he reverted to the bewitched sleep version of events.

It's not a specific spell, that's a misconception. And book four outrank Hogwarts Mystery. Tfoc (talk) 14:09, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

RedWizard - you seem to be in the habit of labelling any edit you disagree with as "vandalism" as a means of shouting down the opposition. This needs to stop.--Xanderen signature 15:36, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

Removing infoboxes, I'm sorry to say is vandalism, so I shall restore them. --RedWizard98 (talk) 16:04, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

A well meaning edit (of any nature) is never vandalism. You both disagree on what information the article should present so you should discuss it. Calling someone a vandal because they've done something you disagree with is not okay. - Xanderen signature 16:09, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

I think we need a source provided for the hand movement image in the infobox, as it would seem to imply that this is a specific spell. Sirius (talk) 15:37, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

I can't say I have looked deep into the subject, but if the above excerpt from Goblet of Fire is all evidence there is to say this isn't a specific spell, it is very flimsy. Calling it "a bewitched sleep" does not imply it's not a specific spell. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 15:41, June 20, 2020 (UTC)
The hand movement image comes from Hogwarts Mystery, as seen here. --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 15:43, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire might not explicitly say this is an individual spell, but Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery does, which is a credible source. The spell can be learned in a special Charms event, which is stated in the HM article. It is also worth nothing the wand movement is clearly different from the one given for the Sleeping Charm. --RedWizard98 (talk) 16:04, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

Again, why would there be two different spells in the same game that do the exact same thing? Sirius (talk) 16:27, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

Well spells can have very similar effects to each other and still be separate.--RedWizard98 (talk) 16:31, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

First off, I'd like to extend my graditude towards our diligent wiki staff for their swift action in helping us resolve this. :-) That said, I think it might be my explanation that was flimsy, not the point I am trying to make in and by itself. I am not saying that Dumbledore did not use a specific spell to put Ron and Hermione to sleep, I am saying that the title of this article, "bewitched sleep," were in fact denoting the effect of an unidentified spell from the fourth book, not the spell itself. Also, the writers of HM is pretty lazy; there are whole sentences and bits of paragraphs taken word for word from this wikia and just inserted into character dialogue when summerising or describing canon information becomes necessary for the narrative, so regardless of whatever wand movement they made for some "Bewitched Sleep" spell they made in the game, the point is that they simply included a misconception we made into the game, making it invalid. The term "bewitched sleep", as used in tier-one canon, does not refer to a spell, but it's usage. It is sort of like when Ted Lupin found out from Harry that the Death Eaters knew he was being moved: Ted Tonks looked up at the ceiling as though he could see through it to the sky above. "Well, we know our protective charms hold, then, don't we? They shouldn't be able to get within a hundred yards of the place in any direction." When Ted says "protective charms", he does not identify the spells used, he identified what the spells used was for. So bewitched sleep isn't spell, it's the result of a spell, and there are about a handful like the one he used on Ron and Hermione, making the term "bewitched sleep" equivalent to the term "protective enchantments." I suggest that we make a whole new article specifically for Dumbledore's spell, whether we call it "Sleeping spell" or "Albus Dumbledore's (unidentified) sleeping spell" and add it to the list I compiled on the page. Tfoc (talk) 16:21, June 20, 2020 (UTC) 

That is all fair, but the game does provide a different icon, name and wand movement for what is called the "Bewitched Sleep". It doesn't matter if this spell is similar to other sleeping spells (Gormlaith's curse and the "Sleeping Charm), many spells are extremely similar to each other based on their effects.--RedWizard98 (talk) 16:31, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

And as I have said, I think, perhaps thrice now, based on the age of the article "Bewitched sleep", and based on when the game HM introduced "Bewitched Sleep" as a spell, it would appear they simply looked up the term on this wiki and simply added the misconception in the article to their game. And apparently, they realized their blunder and is trying to rectify it, because now they introduced the "Sleeping Charm" with the exact same effect, right? Tfoc (talk) 16:38, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

But do you have evidence (a source) for that the game developers dropped this spell completely and instead renamed it as something else? --RedWizard98 (talk) 16:41, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

(Edit conflict.) I can see the argument, but I don't think there's a need to distinguish between the spell seen in Hogwarts Mystery and the one mentioned in Goblet of Fire. Since they use the exact same term and seemingly have the same effect, it's pretty reasonable to assume they are meant to be the same. That said, I agree that some other instances of sleeping spells seem to be subtly different than this, and probably should be considered different spells (i.e. Gormlaith's spell is described as "a powerful curse", which makes it seem a tad different). :I wouldn't oppose to create a umbrella article covering this and all other spells that seem to produce magical sleep very much like the "protective enchantments" one Tfoc mentioned (something along the lines of "magically-induced sleep" or something). --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 16:44, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

Several spells (and not to forget potions) can magically induce sleep, but there isn't a given name for a branch of magic that revolves around sleep, although there probably might be one. I don't think articles should be speculative but instead focus on the subject at hand. The name "Bewitched sleep" might seem generic in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, but HM does depict as its own spell and not an umbrella term for sleep magic. --RedWizard98 (talk) 16:48, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

Is there any way to retrieve posts in editing? I spend like fifteen minutes trying to respond here, and when I FINALLY get to click "Publish", someone posted in the meantime, and I lose all of it. That's happened TWICE now.  Red, again, for the last time, because I get tired of repeating myself: It DOES - NOT - MATTER if HM depict it as its own spell and not an umbrella term for sleep magic, because a higher source of canon DOES, and HM just repeated a misconception that WE published on this wiki in the first place. Also - it isn't speculation, it's categorisation. Just like calling a grouping of defensive spells "protective enchantments" is a categorisation. There's no "official name" for the "branch of magic" - and I would contend that making people fall asleep isn't a branch of magic, it's a usage of magic that can fit into different branches of magic, like sleepwalking curse and Gormlaith's curse both falling under the branch of magic called Dark Magic, and the Sleeping Charm falling into the branch of magic known Charms - it's just a grouping of spells categorised by virtue of common characteristics. Mr. Cooper: I think we can safely dismiss the "Bewitched Sleep" as a spell in HM. I just found out that apparently it was put into the game just to add greater variety to the game mechanics of the dueling club, but within the actual narrative itself, we never put anyone to sleep by wand and incantation before a year 6 SQ, which is when we learn to do it. That's when the Sleeping Charm was introduced. I believe we ought to seperate game mechanics from the story as much as possible in the interest of maintaining the prevailing, in-universe perspective on the wiki's articles. Also, the "Bewitched Spell" momentarily puts the opponent in a short-lived slumber that they wake up from almost immediately, whereas Dumbledore's spell renders the subject in a state almost like suspended animation, and they do not breathe for the duration of the spell, allowing them to be in water without drowning. Sounds a tad bit more complex that whichever spell the Main Character use, I think. Also - "Magically-indiced sleep?" I mean - that's for the staff to decide, I suppose, but I can't say I understand why we should have to make up a term when we have one from canon to use.. Tfoc (talk) 17:29, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

The exact effects of the spell in HM duels can be different in length (as with the Full-Body Bind Curse and Stunning Spell) but that does not mean they are different spells. Game-play mechanics often have their own rules. But still, where is the official source which states that this spell is not specific in HM? --RedWizard98 (talk) 18:30, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

If there isn't any official evidence from the game that this spell is not specific, I really think this article should be reverted to its old form because I see no official source which states that bewitched sleep is an umbrella term. This is all purely speculative. --RedWizard98 (talk) 19:28, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

Did you scroll down? When a person publishes while your editing, you should scroll down the page that pops up and you will find your edit to copy and paste.
Since the books are highest canon and they used the uncapitalised words "bewitched sleep", then it shouldn't be changed by the wiki. So, the name shouldn't be changed. It can't be proven that the Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery version of the spell was the exact one used in the book, even if a person thought it appears to be and changed the article to say so. Like Tfoc stated above, they do appear to have differences.
Could we not have a new, capitalised page, Bewitched Sleep? And keep "Bewitched sleep" solely about the book version to avoid any confusion? You could note any connections and differences in Behind the Scenes. - Kates39 (talk) 17:50, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

Why is it that when I am explaining something to you, Red, it goes in one ear and out the other? As I believe I've said at least twice, maybe thrice now, Jam City is copying wiki content for HM, so because we got it wrong, HM got it wrong. Now, for the fifth time, STOP appealing to HM or asking for HM-related sources. The books outrank HM, and HM and the fourth book are in conflict about what the concept of "bewitched sleep" refers to, so guess which one comes out on top? I would still like to try and persaude Seth Cooper and the other admins to let me make the necessary changes to the page for it to describe "bewitched sleep" as a concept/umbrella term before we go ahead making a whole new page for magically-induced sleep when this one would do just fine, since in the book, it just denoted the act of being put to sleep with a spell as opposed to referencing to the spell that did it in the first place. If I made a new page called "Albus Dumbledore's sleeping spell", or "Unidentified sleeping spell", why would that be so horrible?  Also, hello, Kates, sorry, didn't see you there. Forgot to say hello earlier. ^^' Tfoc (talk) 20:29, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

I have read your points, I just personally disagree with them, as I think they are pure speculation. You haven't given a source which states that this isn't a specific spell, and nor for one that there is a defined branch of magic dedicated to sleep. Article pages are not pages in which numerous different opinions and contradictory evidence are presented as "ideas", but where precise sources are used to define things, sources I have yet to see. A source also isn't an idea or assumption, it comes from a canon source itself, whether it be a book, film, video game or other published material. --RedWizard98 (talk) 20:36, June 20, 2020 (UTC) "Pure speculation" - I made an edit you disagreed with, I'm a vandal, I point out that Jam City is actually copying material from the wikia and using it in the game, and therefore, I reject your usage of the game as a source on this specific issue, and it is "speculation," and now here am, wondering if you even know what those words mean? But to address what you said here: At no point, and in no way, shape or form, did I even remotely say that bewitched sleep was "a branch of magic", because it isn't. It's the effect of a unindentified spell Dumbledore performed in the fourth book. As, however, we now have a handful of different spells, all of which places the victim in a magically-induced sleep, I simply grouped them all together, I categorised them based on the characteristics they shared. That's not me being 'speculative', that's me desperately trying to do my part to keep the wiki neat and organised, and you, for some reason that is entirely beyond the scope of my understanding, seem determined to not let that happen. Tfoc (talk) 22:50, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

Goblet of Fire does not use the term "bewitched sleep" as an umbrella term for sleep magic, though, mind, so it is inaccurate to say it does. My suggestion to keep such a hub-article about sleep-related magic under a different, conjectural name, was meant precisely to keep it from being misleading (as if we knew they're all the same thing; when presumably they aren't at all).
Call me slow, but I still haven't understood why you think the appearance of this "bewitched sleep" in Hogwarts Mystery is contradictory with higher-tier canon? --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 23:04, June 20, 2020 (UTC)

True, Goblet of Fire does not use the term "bewitched sleep" as an umbrella term, but it does use it to denote the act of placing someone in a sleep by using a spell, and it did so without using the term to refer to the spell with which this was accomplished, which means that it can be. It's a subtle but significant distinction, in my eyes. Don't quote me on this, but I think we have two instances of this happening in canon. The first, in the fourth book, where Ron mentions that Dumbledore places him and Hermione in a bewitched sleep, which was true, but not all true. The Sleeping Charm in HM, for example, appears to be a spell that simply makes someone fall asleep, whereupon you can clearly see the dragon breathing/it's chest/belly raising and falling after it falls asleep, whereas Dumbledore's leaves the ones its used on in a state similar to suspended animation, wherein they notably don't breathe. The second time is on Pottermore, on the Ilvermorny page, where the spell Gormaith Gaunt use on the two Heads of Ilvermorny is described as an enchanted slumber. This too, does not actually describe the specific spell she used, but rather how she committed the act of putting Isolt and James by magical means, whereas the description of the spell itself being that it was "a powerful curse" that included in its incantation the names of the intended victims. So where, then, does this leave us, exactly?

Well... we have the Sleeping Charm, Dumbledore's spell on the contestants, Gormaith's curse and the Sleepwalking curse, all of which are four distinct spells, but all of which, by definition, place those subjected to them in a "bewitched sleep," because based on its usage in the fourth book, and based on the Pottermore article, "bewitched sleep" and "enchanted slumber" are both no more than a rewording of "magically-induced sleep." Long story short, if we are to get such a hub-article, it should, in my opinion, be either called "bewitched sleep" or "enchanted slumber", and then Dumbledore's spell on Ron and Hermione gets its own page. Tfoc (talk) 00:05, June 21, 2020 (UTC)

But where is your exact source? If there is no precise proof that this isn't an exact charm, it should be brought back to its old form and style, with all the information about other sleep spells (all of which have adequate articles) removing. This is its own spell in HM (which is an acceptable source), so whatever people think about HM or anything else does not matter. Blending definitions together is also very confusing and inaccurate; what matters is precise words and terms, and their usage. This debate is getting tiresome over such a small issue.--RedWizard98 (talk) 02:14, June 21, 2020 (UTC)
Tfoc, the point remains that Dumbledore's spell and the spell used in Hogwarts Mystery are the only ones referred to as "bewitched sleep". So why not refer to those as bewitched sleep and use a conjectural term for a conjectural hub article on possible alternative forms of magically-induced sleep? --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 02:32, June 21, 2020 (UTC)

That is very true Seth. Perhaps a disambiguation page might also be a good idea?--RedWizard98 (talk) 02:38, June 21, 2020 (UTC)

That's it. RedWizard98, I will no longer indulge your pont of view on this subject. Your question is malformed. And it's malformed because your objection(s) have no relevance to what I'm actually saying. It's like I'm pointing out that the postal service have been slow on delivering letters lately, and you go; "But the colour on the mailbox is really nice, prove me wrong then! Where in the books does it say the colour of the mailbox isn't nice?!" And I have, by ny interactions with you, Seth Cooper, Kates39, and my post on your talk page now explained it and repeated myself at least six times. I'm not doing it a seventh.. If my point hasn't gotten through to you yet, I'm not sure it ever will. 

Seth Cooper: Because Dumbledore's spell wasn't referred to as 'bewitched sleep,' that's the point. "Bewitched sleep" was a description Ron gave of something Dumbledore did magically, but not what that something was. Perhaps I can make my point more plainly with a comparison: So imagine if you will that we take a spell such as this one. Let's ignore "Take Root" as a specific spell on the trading card for a moment, and let's say that for the sake of argument, we have two very simillar spells. Both a rooted, ligneous plant from the limbs up, the key difference being that one is temporary and wears off after a while, and one is, unless reversed with the proper counter-spell, permanent. If either of those spells were used on me, and you found me, reversed the spell - this is on the assumption that both spells can be reversed with the same counter-spell, but that at the end of the day, only one would have to be reversed - and then asked me; "what happened?" and I replied; "Someone cast a spell, and suddenly I just took root."

Or imagine if you will that you find me knocked unconscious, and you manage to wake me up. You asked me what on Earth happened, and I told you that person A cast a spell that sent me flying into a wall so that I hit my head and was knocked out. What spell was it? That's not specified. Could've been FlipendoEverte StatumDepulso, but the point is, when I said the spell sent me flying into a wall and knocked me out, or when Ron said Dumbledore used a spell that placed him and Hermione in a bewitched sleep, neither of us would have said anything about the spell, this is what it did to me when it hit the target. "Bewitched sleep" didn't refer to the spell Dumbledore used, it referred to the effect of spell that was used, which just so happens to be more or less the same effect of other spells has, be they classified as charms or curses. All of them are, by definition, placing the target in a bewitched sleep, and neither of them are identified by someone going "I was put in a bewitched sleep." When this article was made back in 2010, however, the person who made it was under the misconception that "bewitched sleep" referred to a spell as opposed to the usage of a spell, and wrote that, and then HM came a long, copying wiki content and inserting it into their game before the mistake was noticed and corrected, leading to it being inaccurately portrayed as a spell in the game, too. 

Long story short, I am objecting to, from my perspective, that is, the idea of using a conjectural term for a hub article that we do in fact have a canon term for that we can use. Because you could refer to all three instances of magically induced sleep that I mentioned above, the Sleeping Charm, Dumbledore's spell on the contestants, Gormaith's curse and the Sleepwalking spells, and if either one was cast on a human being, saying that they were "put in a bewitched sleep" would be both factually and categorically accurate. Tfoc (talk) 10:11, June 21, 2020 (UTC)

But as Seth Cooper says, "Bewitched sleep" has only been used in canon twice to refer to the spell used by Dumbledore in GOF and the spell in HM. "Bewitched sleep" might be seen as a generic term to describe magically-induced sleep, but such the usage of terms and phrases to describe things that are similar is so commonplace. I just don't think saying Bewitched sleep is an umbrella term is canonical or accurate. I don't see what the issue really is, surely this debate has now gone on too long? --RedWizard98 (talk) 01:49, June 22, 2020 (UTC)

All right, so you have simply stopped reading my posts, is that it, Red? Seth Cooper was wrong about that, "bewitched sleep" has - and please, try to take note of it, this time ---> NOT <--- been used twice in canon to refer to a spell. It has been used once in canon to refer to the usage of a spell, as in, the used once to denote that it is possible to put someone to sleep with some spell, but whoever added the term to the wiki mistook it as the name of a specific spell and wrote it as such, and then Jam City basically copied and pasted the content of the article where the misconception had been documented and went; "Yeah, this is that sleeping spell, the one from the HP wiki! See what attention to detail we have, we are using canon spells and everything!" By copying a misconception from the wikia, the HM has, in this instance, disqualified itself as a canonical source for what "bewitched sleep" refers to. So any "source" you bring up from the game is, I'm sorry to say, invalid. And... Yeah... I agree. The debate has gone on too long, and that's mainly because I have to keep repeating myself every time you regurgitate the same objections because you, apparently, at least, can't be bothered to read what I'm actually saying. Tfoc (talk) 13:19, June 22, 2020 (UTC)

Seth Cooper it is worth noting is an experienced bureaucrat, who is very knowledgeable of this wiki and its content, who has been around for 12 years, so I think it is fair to say he knows what he is talking about. Often what people wish to write is different from what actually should be written. There has been no proof provided for any points made in these statements, this is pure speculation and it is getting really tiresome. I think this type of article, to be honest would be better placed in the Harry Potter fandom wiki, as it is not canon. Sorry to sound harsh, but Seth is right. --RedWizard98 (talk) 17:18, June 22, 2020 (UTC)

We need to determine if the spell in the book behaved in the same way in HM, and I don't think it does. The effect of a "Bewitched Sleep" wears off way sooner and in a different way. In the book, the effect continued up to an hour. So, I don't think we can just say it was the same thing.
The book just says twice that they had been put into "a bewitched sleep". I took that to be a description of what it does, rather than what that specific spell had been named. The book doesn't capitalise it like it was an official spell. I think what little things we know does contradict the book. I get people have took it in another way and it's vague, but we should acknowledge that possibility instead of putting the two together.
Could we not put in Behind the Scenes that the spell in HM "could" be the one in the book? And put the wand photo beside it and say, if so that was how it was performed? Let people decide what perspective they see. - Kates39 (talk) 18:49, June 22, 2020 (UTC)

RedWizard98: And while I am certain Seth Cooper is an excellent moderator, (which is, I assume, what being a "bureaucrat" refers to,) and even though I do indeed take my hat off to him if I had been wearing one for such long and faithful service to this project, that is neither here nor there. His admirable committment to the wiki is not the issue, the issue is that as big of a fan as I am of the Harry Potter franchise, I don't actually believe in magic. And here you are, effectively saying that every edit you happen to find somehow disagreeable magically becomes vandalism and fanon. And then, you eve have the nerve to project your own beliefs onto others that do not share them. Seth Cooper didn't agree with you, he agreed with my suggestion that we should have a hub-article for sleep-related spells, he just didn't know if calling it "bewitched sleep" was the right thing to do. You and I, on the other hand, is at a complete impass until further notice, until you learn to read what people write to you.

Kate39:  Sound advice. Though as I mentioned above, I'd sat we can safely dismiss the "Bewitched Sleep" as a spell in HM. Not only was it basically stolen from the wiki while the article in question was depicting a misconception, but as previously stated, ​​it was just put into the game to add greater variety to the mechanics of the dueling club. Within the actual narrative itself, we never put anyone to sleep by wand and incantation before a year 6 SQ, which is when we learn to do it. That's when the Sleeping Charm was introduced, which,​​​ definitionally speaking, puts the victim, in this case the dragon, in a bewitched sleep, lending further credence to what I've been saying all along. The way I see it, we ought to seperate game mechanics from the story as much as possible in the interest of maintaining the prevailing, in-universe perspective on the wiki's articles. If I had my way, we'd have the "bewitched sleep" page changed to a hub-article describing the concept of magically-induced sleep, and add a list consisting of the Sleeping Charm, Albus Dumbledore's unidentified spell, (new article), the sleepwaking curse and Gormaith's curse, and then - indeed - put the HM version of the spell in the Behind the Scenes. That, however, will ultimately have to be up to you and the other bureaucrats to decide.

Tfoc (talk) 19:08, June 22, 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Kates earlier disambiguate suggestion, and Rodolphus, and Seth. There is given the concept of "a bewitched sleep" mentioned directly (Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, Chapter 27 (Padfoot Returns)) and a proper spell in Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery (see video) and so a hub page about the concept with links to the known spells makes the most sense. This avoids trying to speculate on how Jam City came up with their spell titles or what spell exactly Dumbledore used and just states in simple terms what the sources give us. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 19:10, June 22, 2020 (UTC)

Nowhere states that this is an umbrella term. The exact usage of the term in GOF matches the spell name given in HM, so they are by rule the same thing.--RedWizard98 (talk) 19:50, June 22, 2020 (UTC)

The text says "Dumbledore had put all the hostages into a bewitched sleep in Professor McGonagall’s office" - the spell is not capitalized (unlike say the "Bubble-Head Charm" mentioned shortly before this) and has the article "a" before it. This is clearly a general term and not a specific spell, much like "bewitched ceiling", "bewitched birds" and numerous other examples given in text. --Ironyak1 (talk) 20:00, June 22, 2020 (UTC)
I would like to apologize for losing my temper earlier, everyone. Got a bit defensive, I guess. Also - Ironyak1, is that to mean I can go ahead and make an article for the spell Dumbledore used in the fourth book?  :/ Tfoc (talk) 09:54, June 23, 2020 (UTC)
As we know next to nothing about what spell Dumbledore used, it's probably be better to include that use, along with Gormaith's spell and other relevant unnamed examples, on the "Bewitched sleep" hub article as a way of gathering up all the one-offs of such related magic. These really don't have enough information for a separate article and no easy way to distinguish them from each other as distinct spells. However, there is clearly a need for a "Bewitched Sleep (spell)" article as Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery lists this as a titled spell (but which should also be added to the hub along with Sleeping Charm and other named examples). Anyone see a reason why this approach wouldn't work? --Ironyak1 (talk) 19:58, June 23, 2020 (UTC)

Oh, see - you reverted it back to my attempt at making the page into a hub article and then locked it, so I thought we, you know, with some tweaking here and there, already had one. That aside... Do we need a "Bewitched Sleep (spell)"  page? As mentioned above, it isn't part of the actual narrative, it's part of the game mechanics, and shouldn't we separate the two? I Magic Awakened, our First Year students can summon trolls and even Hagrid to attack foes, and so can they, with multiple Hagrids present, and we can even cast the Killing Curse. That's added solely to the game mechanics to flesh out the gaming experience, but nothing in the narrative, which is to say, the dialouge or the cutscenes, even remotely implies the MC is either capable or willing to murder someone, and largely sticks to First Year spells within the confines of the actual story being told. And as mentioned before, "Bewitched Sleep", as in the "spell", have never been part of the narrative within HM, it's just part of the game mechanics. It's only in year 6 that we learn to put people to sleep by spell, with the Sleeping Charm. Tfoc (talk) 22:30, June 23, 2020 (UTC)

Bewitched Sleep is a clearly identified unique spell in Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery with a unique wand motion and other such identifiers - it makes no difference if it is part of the narrative or not, anymore than trying to say Sleeping Potion isn't a canon item because it is just part of the game mechanics for Harry Potter Trading Card Game. The spell needs an article, although if its existence somehow contradictions higher canon, it can be tagged as non-canon such as with Bem. Thanks --Ironyak1 (talk) 22:40, June 23, 2020 (UTC)

In the context of this specific spell, I suppose that's fair enough. :-) Tfoc (talk) 22:44, June 23, 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I think we should do what Ironyak has suggested too. It clearly distinguishes the differences in how the spells have been described, and I can't find reason why a hub and a "Bewitched Sleep (spell)" page couldn't work. So, I think we could go ahead and set one up. - Kates39 (talk) 14:26, June 24, 2020 (UTC)
I've unlocked the page so it can be edited. It seems the spell infobox needs to be moved to a new Bewitched Sleep spell page based on the information from Harry Potter: Hogwarts Mystery and this article can be cleaned up to include "enchanted slumber" as named in Writing by J.K. Rowling: "Ilvermorny School of Witchcraft and Wizardry" at Pottermore and other unnamed instances of this type of magic. Cheers --Ironyak1 (talk) 20:52, June 24, 2020 (UTC)

I have to say in my opinion this is one of the most inaccurate and fanciful articles I have came across on this wiki. The whole premise of it is pure speculation, terms such as "enchanted slumber" as simply used descriptively (not to identify an actual concept) and I really did not think this wiki was the website for speculation and unsourced content.--RedWizard98 (talk) 10:30, July 3, 2020 (UTC)

*Disclosure: Some of the links above are affiliate links, meaning, at no additional cost to you, Fandom will earn a commission if you click through and make a purchase. Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Stream the best stories.

Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.

Get Disney+