Harry Potter Wiki
Harry Potter Wiki
No edit summary
 
(170 intermediate revisions by 31 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{Failedfeatured}}
 
{{Failedfeatured}}
   
  +
<table class="made-dark" style="padding:0.3em; float:right; margin-left:15px; margin-bottom:8px; border:1px solid #d1d1d1; background:#f2f2f2; text-align:left; font-size:95%; line-height:1.5em; width:25%;"><tr>
==Love==
 
  +
<th style="padding:0.3em; font-size:1.1em;"><center>Archive</center></th></tr><tr><td><center>[[File:File-manager.png|80px]]</center>The talk page has the following archives:
I think it should be mentioned that him and Dumbledore were in love somewhere, but everytime I try and slip it in it gets deleted. It's not very important, but I think it makes the fact that he killed Arianna and that Dumbledore ended up having to duel him magnified by the fact that the person Dumbledore loved injured him so much. ~ [[User:Nevar00|Nevar00]]
 
  +
*[[Talk:Gellert Grindelwald/Archive 1|Archive 1]]
:Nevar, Dumbledore was in love with him, but Gellert was not in love with Dumbledore. What JKR said was Dumbledore's '''great tragedy''' was his '''unrequited''' love for GG. GG never returned Dumbledore's affections. They were not lovers. If you're going to put it into the article you have to word it properly. [[User:Mafalda Hopkirk|Mafalda Hopkirk]] 18:44, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 
  +
</td></tr></table>
::It keeps getting deleted for one reason; JK Rowling has only stated that Dumbledore was gay and in love with Grindelwald, but hasn't mentioned anything about Grindelwald's sexuality, whether or not he returned the feelings, or was even aware of them. Without direct evidence (such as interview comments from Rowling), the addition of them being in love is supposition. If you can provide links to any interview where it is explicitly stated that Grindelwald was gay as well, and returned Dumbledore's feelings, then of course it should be added back in.
 
::Until then, it should only be mentioned that Dumbledore was in love with him, but it is unknown what shape their relationship took, if any. - [[User:Cavalier One|<span style="color#AA0000">'''Cavalier One'''</span>]]<sup>([[User talk:Cavalier One|<span style="color#DDAA00">''Wizarding Wireless Network''</span>]])</sup> 18:56, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 
::I never even realised that. I just assumed they were both in love. Sorry then. ~ [[User:Nevar00|Nevar00]]
 
   
  +
== Seer in i infobox ==
Trying to read reference 9 and can't get into it - what '''exactly''' did JKR say? Or how do you get to it? ([[User:Vaudree|Vaudree]] ([[User talk:Vaudree|talk]]) 07:11, December 13, 2015 (UTC))
 
   
  +
I had removed the Seer from infobox because it was discussed on [[Talk: Seer]], and the point was that seer is not a species, it's a genetic trait like the haor colours and based on this, I suggest it should be removed from all species fields.[[User:Rodolphus|Rodolphus]] ([[User talk:Rodolphus|talk]]) 17:33, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
She never said that. This person is just spouting gay propaganda crap. ([[User:Bruss|Bruss]] ([[User talk:Bruss|talk]])
 
   
  +
::Yeah, we agreed that whilst being a Seer is an inherited magical talent, it is not related to physical biology. This tradition has followed suit on all other articles for Seer wizardkind. [[User:RedWizard98|RedWizard98]] ([[User talk:RedWizard98|talk]]) 06:13, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
== Pronunciation ==
 
   
  +
==Infobox image (new discussion)==
It says, "pr. Grindelvald". But if this is true, for what reason is Viktor Krum transcribed as making his usual "w" to "v" substitution when saying that name ("Grindelvald")?
 
  +
Hello, as typically the infobox images for popular characters can sometimes result in disagreements and debates over which image to best use, should the changing of the old one (which was Depp as Grindelwald) be definitely changed to one of Mikkelsen as Grindelwald (the current actor who replaced Depp)? I can definitely understand that seen as though Depp has left the project and Mikkelsen has taken over the role of the character, that the infobox image should likely reflect this, although the old image was similarly high quality and was changed without a prior discussion. What do people think about it? [[User:RedWizard98|RedWizard98]] ([[User talk:RedWizard98|talk]]) 15:52, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
   
  +
::All I have to say is I'm sad, like I knew that the image would be changed but I just- LIKE OMG WHYYYYYYYYY. I would also like to add that I think that it should've been put to a vote or something to change the image. [[User:I need to learn human interaction|User:I need to learn human interaction]] ([[User talk:I need to learn human interaction|talk]]) 01:48, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
The answer to that question is, I believe, that Grindelwald was of Eastern European descent, and his name is pronounced ""Grindelvald"" in his native language. So, basically, Victor Krum was the only one who pronounced it properly.
 
   
  +
::I see. Maybe a vote regarding the infobox image is in order then, if people desire one. [[User:RedWizard98|RedWizard98]] ([[User talk:RedWizard98|talk]]) 06:37, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
== Mastership of the Elder Wand ==
 
   
  +
::: I agree it had to be changed to one of Mikkelsen because he will be the face of Grindelwald going forward. However, the image it changed to should have been decided by the community instead of just being updated. I do like the one it has right now, and hopefully the wiki will gain better images, like an official one, in the future.
Since Grindelwald simply stole the wand from Gregorovitch without harming him, much like Voldemort did to Dumbledore, could Grindelwald ever be called the master of the elder wand, as opposed to merely its wielder? --[[User:Draco Bonfoy|Draco Bonfoy]] 13:47, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 
:Yes, he would be the master. By stealing the wand, he defeated Gregorovitch. {{User:Freakatone/sig_include}} 13:50, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 
::So all that matters is defeating the former wizard by any means conceivable? I thought a violent defeat (as in the case of Antioch Peverell himself) was necessary. And if Grindelwald was the true Master of the Elder Wand, which is supposed to win any duel, how is it Albus Dumbledore managed to defeat Grindelwald in a duel in 1945? --[[User:Draco Bonfoy|Draco Bonfoy]] 14:09, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 
:::To become the Master of the Elder Wand you only have to defeat the previous Master. For example, Draco Malfoy became Master of the Wand, only by disarming Albus Dumbledore. Grindelwald stunned Gregorovitch after stealing the Wand. If he didn't stun Gregorovitch, Grindelwald would only become Owner (Owner is not the same of being Master) of the Wand. How Dumbledore defeated Gindelwald is unknown. Maybe Dumbledore Disarmed him when he was not expecting? [[User:Seth Cooper|Seth Cooper]] 15:13, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 
::::Ah, I see! Thanks. Yet another reminder not to overlook even the slightest detail in those books. Voldemort is in the details... --[[User:Draco Bonfoy|Draco Bonfoy]] 16:47, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 
   
  +
::: It could be rather difficult however because the change of actor has caused controversy. Depp has lots of support, I loved that he was finally part of the Harry Potter universe and I am very perplexed by the choice to get rid of Depp because whyyyy! It's rather frustrating to have two different actors for the same character too. However, I do concede it does need to be updated.
== Johnny Depp ==
 
   
  +
::: If enough people want a vote for Depp or Mikkelsen, or for a new one of Grindelwald in {{SOD}}, then it should happen. But until then, I think it's best to just keep everything the same. - [[User:Kates39|Kates39]] ([[User talk:Kates39|talk]]) 17:31, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
Is it true that Johnny Depp will portay Gellert Grindelwald in the Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows movies? [[User:Harrypotterfreak|Harrypotterfreak]] 20:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 
:Where did you here that?--{{User:Matoro183/sig2}} 20:33, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 
::On flixter.com. It said that Johnny was in California while he filming and he met up with the director of the 7th Harry Potter movie and signed onto the cast list as Gellert Grindewald. [[User:Harrypotterfreak|Harrypotterfreak]] 20:41, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 
:::I found this at flixter.com:<br />
 
   
  +
::: While I wish Depp hadn't been fired under the circumstances he was, I feel it would be a poor decision to allow Depp's portrayal of Grindelwald be ''the'' infobox image if Mikkelsen replaces him for the rest of the series. If anything, I'd vote for incorporating what other wikis use and add a tabbed gallery function to the infobox images so that both Depp's and Mikkelse's portrayals could be used simultaneously. [[User:Garr9988|Garr9988]] ([[User talk:Garr9988|talk]]) 17:37, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
''We have just heard the news from an inside source (who we cannot reveal) that Johnny will be in the upcoming Harry Potter movie "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows" (2010) - a series his daughter is fan of. He signed contracts with Warner Bros. in early March when he still was in L.A.''
 
   
  +
::Since Mikkelsen has replaced Depp in the role, I too agree that an image of him should be used instead, as the wiki has to use up to date portrayals of characters, regardless of what people think about the casting controversy. [[User:RedWizard98|RedWizard98]] ([[User talk:RedWizard98|talk]]) 18:19, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
''Johnny is set to play Gellert Grindelwald, a dark wizard, once a friend but later dueling Albus Dumbledore, said to be the greatest duel ever fought between wizards, and then put into prison. He shall appear in flashbacks through different ages (but I'm sure, they'll take another actor for the earliest ages).''
 
   
  +
==Opening quotation==
''Johnny will be the third non-british actor in the Harry Potter series and it'll be the 4th collaboration with Helena Bonham-Carter.''
 
  +
What should the opening quotation be for this article, below the infobox? Often there is disagreement with what one to use, which is the Severus Snape article uses a custom display template which contains several different quotes which change each time the page is opened fresh. I don't think however we should discard any quotes from old sources in the process of adding new ones from {{SOD}}, that isn't needed or desirable in my opinion, since we would be discarding perfectly good content on the wiki and losing information, instead of simply adding information to it.
   
  +
I personally like the current quotation from {{COG|S}}, since it explains his extreme wizarding supremacy ideology, and also because I think {{COG|S}} had the most focus on Grindelwald as a story. What do others think? [[User:RedWizard98|RedWizard98]] ([[User talk:RedWizard98|talk]]) 18:32, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
I don't think it's true, but it would be cool. -- [[User:Seth Cooper|Seth Cooper]] 20:56, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 
   
  +
: I like the opening quotation too. I think {{COG|S}} has a better one. I like the one where he says: "Magic blooms only in rare souls. It is granted to those who live for higher things. Oh, and what a world we could make, for all for humanity. We who live for freedom, for truth - and for love". I think having a custom template for the opening quote so it will change each time you click on the page could be a good solution. - [[User:Kates39|Kates39]] ([[User talk:Kates39|talk]]) 18:45, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
I'm doubtful Johnny Depp will play him as Johnny Depp is American. --[[User:RandomEnigma|RandomEnigma]] 22:12, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 
   
  +
== New main image ==
I don't think Johnny Depp would be good in a Harry Potter movie...I don't know why, I just don't. And as JK Rowling said, Dumbledore was in love with GG... so Dumbledore in love with Johnny Depp? O.o [[User:Elite-Nachos|Elite-Nachos]] 21:37, October 28, 2009 (UTC)
 
   
  +
Any objections to changing the main image to this one? - {{Xanderen/signature}} 10:51, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
I don't know something about Johnny Depp being a part of HP, but the younger Gellert will be played by Jamie Campbell Bower. {{unsigned|79.211.254.178}}
 
  +
[[File:Grindelwald-SoD-Profile.png|thumb|right|250px]]
   
  +
:Hmm. If there was a version of that with no background at all, rather than a white background, it could be good. Right now it looks like the background is halfway through swallowing him lol. - <span style="border:2px solid #ff0000;">[[User:MrSiriusBlack|<font style="background:#FFff00;color:#ff0000;">&nbsp;'''MrSiriusBlack'''&nbsp;</font>]][[User talk:MrSiriusBlack|<font style="background:#ff0000;color:#ffff00;">&nbsp;'''Talk'''&nbsp;</font>]]</span> 12:29, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
: Okay so… was there any muddled truth to those old rumors, or was it just a crazy, crazy coincidence? [[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] ([[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|talk]]) 16:17, January 21, 2018 (UTC)
 
   
  +
:question. Did you get a pdf version of the book? Can I get a copy? [[User:SeichanGrey|SeichanGrey]] ([[User talk:SeichanGrey|talk]]) 14:03, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
== To Play Him ==
 
   
  +
::Personally I don't like images with their backgrounds removed and I don't think this to images is particularly necessary, as I don't think they look natural since their original backgrounds have been removed. I would much prefer an actual film screenshot like the one being used now or even one with an original background (without any OOU logos). I personally am voting against this proposed image being used in the infobox. [[User:RedWizard98|RedWizard98]] ([[User talk:RedWizard98|talk]]) 18:01, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Jamie Campbell Blower {{unsigned|125.255.3.112|03:03, 14 July 2009}}
 
   
  +
::: I prefer images which have a background too. I don't think it's necessary to erase it. I prefer the one being used now, which I think has higher quality and a better background. I would consider a high standard image if it had an original background like described above. - [[User:Kates39|Kates39]] ([[User talk:Kates39|talk]]) 22:04, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
== Older Grindelwald ==
 
   
  +
::::so "higher" quality = image with background, and "inferior quality" is an image without it? correct me if I'm wrong. [[User:SeichanGrey|SeichanGrey]] ([[User talk:SeichanGrey|talk]]) 22:21, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Who is the actor in the photo? He looks so familiar but I can't place him.
 
   
  +
::::: Not necessarily. There are plenty of high quality images without a background. I just think the one of Grindelwald with a background looks better than the one proposed. - [[User:Kates39|Kates39]] ([[User talk:Kates39|talk]]) 22:34, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
== GG a Nazi? ==
 
   
  +
Seconded. [[User:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|WeaseleyIsOurKing89]] ([[User talk:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|talk]]) 18:46, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
Very tempting to postulate an alignment of Grindelwald with Hitler, especially considering that a department called Ahnenerbe within the Nazi government dealt with "dark arts" among many other things. [[User:Knoodelhed|knoodelhed]] 15:18, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 
   
  +
==Pure-blood just wizarding supremacy==
While obviously this never happened in real life, and that is just a coincedence, it could very well be said that he might have been an ally of Hitler. Just look at him... the guy looks the sterotypical Aryan of the Nazi racial ideology. It's kinda creepy. But if it is true, if he truly was an ally of Hitler, than his imprisonment certainly did mirror that of the people that Hitler killed.
 
  +
Hi, following his comments in {{SOD}}, would anyone here consider him also a pure-blood supremacist, or just a wizarding supremacist? I'm torn; for example in the film, he acknowledges Kama's pure-blood heritage as being a good qualification for his movement, and denounces the relationship between Queenie and Jacob as causing bloodline pollution, and even seems to imply Muggles reeked a "stench". However, this could all just be standard anti-Muggle sentiment, as he never expressed any exact beliefs about blood purity, nor has he not yet denounced Muggle-borns. Thoughts? [[User:RedWizard98|RedWizard98]] ([[User talk:RedWizard98|talk]]) 17:56, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
  +
*It's also a bit confusing since he had previously advocated for free love to get Queenie on his side. I think some of that sudden change was from Jacob's attempt on his life and Queenie turning on him.--[[User:WarGrowlmon18|WarGrowlmon18]] ([[User talk:WarGrowlmon18|talk]]) 18:00, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
   
  +
::Should we keep the category then? Personally I think he just hated Muggles, which is odd, considering he preached he did not actually hate them in {{COG}}. He probably feared Muggles and wizards breeding would make less wizards. [[User:RedWizard98|RedWizard98]] ([[User talk:RedWizard98|talk]]) 18:01, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
== Sexuality ==
 
   
  +
:::{{Quote|This is the muggle that tried to kill me. A muggle who would marry a witch... A blasphemous union, that only serves to '''dilute our bloodlines'''. Make us weaker, make us '''lesser'''. Like his kind.|Gellert Grindelwald|Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore}}
In an interview Jamie Campbell Bower has said he considers Grindelwald to be gay, and that, onscreen he and Toby Regbo acted as if they were lovers. Canon? [[User:Jayden Matthews|Jayden Matthews]] 19:57, January 14, 2010 (UTC)
 
  +
:
 
  +
:::Seems pretty clear to me. He considers wizards with mixed muggle-magic parentage to be "lesser". - {{Xanderen/signature}} 18:05, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
:As I understand Rowling said that Dumbledore had attractions to Grindelwald not the other way around.
 
:
 
:yes JK Rowling said that dumbledore had feelings for Grinelwald but she didnt say about him having feelings for dumbledore [[User:Shephard123|Minister for Magic]] 17:01, July 11, 2010 (UTC)
 
:*He says in an interview. "there's meant to be.. or possibly.. a thing between them. ... It may be there in subtext." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9cDt5BNDAs
 
So was Gellert Grindelwald homosexual? And did he fall in love with Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore? [[User:Cedricdoodlehopper|Cedricdoodlehopper]] 03:17, December 21, 2010 (UTC)
 
:JKR said that Grindelwald never had any feelings for Dumbeldore, but we have no idea about his actual sexuality. --[[User:Hcoknhoj|<font face="Times" size="4" color="Black" >JKoch</font>]][[File:Ravenclawcrest.jpg|20px]]<sup>([[User talk:Hcoknhoj|<font face="Monotype Corsiva" size="1" color="Red">Owl Me!</font>]])</sup> 03:36, December 21, 2010 (UTC)
 
   
  +
Since Rowling has somehow managed to get the character motivations of one of the fictional persons she herself created wrong, I suggest we keep it the way it is for the time being, as the movie is in direct conflict with pretty much every and all depictions of Gellert Grindelwald and/or his ideology ever. He literally said in the last movie that Muggles were NOT lesser, so I for one is inclined to think he was just having a bad day or something. [[User:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|WeaseleyIsOurKing89]] ([[User talk:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|talk]]) 18:12, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
== Pure-blood supremist? ==
 
   
  +
::He was just playing Queenie. He wanted her on his side, so he made out that he was pro-muggle. He admitted in private (in the same movie) that the only muggles that will survive his takeover of the world will be slaves (beasts of burden). His thoughts about blood purity have never been stated before now so there is no contradiction. - {{Xanderen/signature}} 18:17, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
Does anyone know what Grindelwald's policy on blood purity was? Was he a pure-blood supremist like Voldemort? {{Unsigned|86.171.137.190}}
 
   
  +
Actually, that ''is'' the contradiction. The reason why Grindelwald's thoughts about blood purity have never been stated before is because he's never ''had'' any thoughts on blood purity before, because he's a wizarding supremacist. The words Mikkelsen was scripted to recite, comes completely out of nowhere and is not consistent with how Grindelwald has been presented anywhere in canon before this point, so I repeat, we should swait with changing too much until we know more. [[User:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|WeaseleyIsOurKing89]] ([[User talk:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|talk]]) 18:51, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
:I don't think it's ever been mentioned, but given that his best friend was a half-blood, probably not. All that's stated is that he favored wizarding dominance over Muggles. [[Special:Contributions/70.249.155.182|70.249.155.182]] 18:50, March 17, 2010 (UTC)
 
::Agreed. Grindelwald strikes me as being considerably more intelligent than Voldemort. He would want powerful witches and wizards in his army, regardless of their blood status. Wheras Voldemort's ranks were filled with weak cowardley individuals. Bellatrix and Snape were the only truly exceptional Death Eaters that I can think of. [[User:Jayce Carver|<font face="Comic Sans MS" color="#406B2E">J</font><font face="Microsoft Sans Serif"><font color="#8DB87A">a</font><font color="#406B2E">y</font><font color="#8DB87A">c</font><font color="#406B2E">e</font></font>]] <sup><font face="Arial" style="font-family:Arial;font-size:8;">[[File:Darkmark.png|25px]]•[[User_Talk:Jayce Carver|<font color="#406B2E">Avada Kedavra</font>]]•[[Special:Contributions/Jayce Carver|<font color="#8DB87A">Crucio</font>]]•[[Special:Emailuser/Jayce Carver|<font color="#406B2E">Imperio</font>]]•</font></sup> 19:05, March 17, 2010 (UTC)
 
::
 
::Not true, Voldemort was willing to let Lily Evans join him because she was a talented witch... No, I don't think he was much smarter than Voldemort. Voldemort overlooked the purity factor again when he chose Harry. His whole blood supremacy thing was probably a way to get followers.
 
   
  +
::Who says he's never had any thoughts on blood purity before? I think you're imposing your own, somewhat rose-tinted view of the character into canon. Grindelwald's words in SoD are consistent with his depiction in CoG - a master manipulator, and seasoned liar. - {{Xanderen/signature}} 19:01, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
== Undead... ==
 
   
  +
:::Per [[Canon]], "if J.K. Rowling contradicts herself, '''the newest source is to be taken as the "most" canon'''". - <span style="border:2px solid #ff0000;">[[User:MrSiriusBlack|<font style="background:#FFff00;color:#ff0000;">&nbsp;'''MrSiriusBlack'''&nbsp;</font>]][[User talk:MrSiriusBlack|<font style="background:#ff0000;color:#ffff00;">&nbsp;'''Talk'''&nbsp;</font>]]</span> 23:13, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
Is it just me, or did Rowling say Grindelwald died in 1945, here: http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli-3.htm (JKR: I'm going to tell you as much as I told someone earlier who asked me. You know Owen who won the [UK television] competition to interview me? He asked about Grindelwald [pronounced "Grindelvald" HMM…]. He said, “Is it coincidence that he died in 1945,” and I said no. It amuses me to make allusions to things that were happening in the Muggle world, so my feeling would be that while there's a global Muggle war going on, there's also a global wizarding war going on)...?--[[User:EmmyG|<span style="font-family:Century Gothic; color:#a46582;">Emmy</span>]] ([[User talk:EmmyG|★]]) 16:02, November 2, 2010 (UTC)
 
   
  +
'''Xanderen:'''
:I'd say it's likely she either misspoke, or that this was a misconception on the part of the fan she was quoting that she neglected to correct. Every other canonical reference only says he was "defeated" in 1945. - [[User:Nick O'Demus|<font face="Monotype Corsiva" size="4" color="FF8000">Nick O'Demus</font>]] 22:19, November 2, 2010 (UTC)
 
  +
:That wouldn't be a who, that would be a what. And what that is would be any and all depictions of Gellert Grindelwald given to date. Fictional characters don't actually exist and consequently ''cannot'' think and feel anything; they're abstract concepts that exists in the mind and on the pages on a screenplay people has been paid to act out. Unless Grindelwald has been previously depicted to have thoughts on pure-blood supremacy, he hasn't had any previously, that is how storytelling works. So no, it's not a matter of "my view" on Grindelwald, "rose-tinted" or otherwise, it's a matter of how the character has been objectively presented from 2007 onwards.
   
  +
:The main distinction between Grindelwald and Voldemort has always been that whilst The Dark Lord had ventured beyond the realms of what we might call 'usual evil', Grindelwald hadn't. By contrast, he was supposed to actually believe in his own cause and have thought that what he did was in fact for The Greater Good, but taken his ideologies too far. Look at when he "broke character" as Graves and spoke to the Aurors in the first movie. THAT is Grindelwald. A man who sounded perfectly reasonable on paper, but whose means were so unreasonable that he faced opposition from his own kind. He was never supposed to be this irredeemable piece of garbage that killed indiscriminately and completely lacked the degree of conscience ''required'' to feel subsequent remorse whilst locked up in Nurmengard. He was meant to be a man whom Albus Dumbledore could actually fall in love with. If we disregard Grindelwald's previously established character traits and motivations, we are effectively saying that Dumbledore fell in love with Voldemort.
::Yeah, the whole thing is kind of ambiguous, because earlier in that interview, a fan asks if he's dead, and she she says yes. This was in 2005, so technically, if he died in 1998, yeah, he was already dead, though he wasn't dead "in" HBP, which came out the same days as that interview. Not that it's a big deal either way, I was just wondering. --[[User:EmmyG|<span style="font-family:Century Gothic; color:#a46582;">Emmy</span>]] ([[User talk:EmmyG|★]]) 22:25, November 2, 2010 (UTC)
 
   
  +
'''Sirius:'''
:::Oh, you're right, she did say he was dead there at the beginning. Well, this would probably be another instance of Rowling changing her mind (like killing off Arthur Weasley). Anyway, canon policy is to go with most recent, and he was still alive in ''Deathly Hallows''. Could be worth a BTS mention, though. - [[User:Nick O'Demus|<font face="Monotype Corsiva" size="4" color="FF8000">Nick O'Demus</font>]] 22:29, November 2, 2010 (UTC)
 
  +
:Unless Rowling comes out with an actual statement, at best, you could say that ''Grindelwald'' has contradicted himself on paper/screen. The prudent thing to do would be not to jump to conclusions until we know how all of this actually pans out. For all we know, it could be revealed in the next movie that Grindelwald described Muggles as "lesser" in this context because he happened to know there were more pure-blood supremacists among those of his followers present in Buhtan than it had been in Paris, and that he was merely catering to the crowds to muster support for the election. [[User:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|WeaseleyIsOurKing89]] ([[User talk:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|talk]]) 07:55, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
   
  +
[[User:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|WeaseleyIsOurKing89]] ([[User talk:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|talk]]) 07:55, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
== Voldemort's visit to Gellert ==
 
   
  +
::I think you're confusing who Grindelwald really is with who '''''you've''' decided he is''. He's not Voldemort, that's true. There was more humanity in him than that (Rowling still acknowledges that he was a sociopath, however). He never ventured into the most unnatural realms of dark magic to create a Horcrux, although he certainly killed enough people. And there are times when he seems unnerved by his own actions; the murder of the baby seems to rattle him, and he's visibly upset when he kills the Qilin... however he still ''goes through'' with these deeds... as Dumbledore himself once put it ''"It is our '''choices''' that determine who we truly are"''.
In the article it says that Grindelwald refused to give up information to Voldemort. This is incorrect. Grindelwald tells Voldemort that the Elder Wand lies with Dumbeldore.
 
:Read the book, rather than just watching the film. [[Special:Contributions/86.145.92.21|86.145.92.21]] 14:53, December 8, 2010 (UTC)
 
   
  +
::Grindelwald has been committing acts of ''mass slaughter'' since before the first FB film, so yes he does kill indiscriminately. In CoG he refers to muggles as "beasts of burden", in SoD he calls them "animals". In both films he makes comments about "muggle stench". In CoG Theseus says that Grindelwald has been ''"rallying the pure-bloods"''. None of this is inconsistent with what Grindelwald says in SoD, so there is no contradiction.
:Probably the first one who ever trolled Voldemort. RIP Grindelwald
 
   
  +
::As you say, he's a fictional character, and it's for Rowling to decide what his thoughts/feelings/motivations are, not us. She's made it very clear that he ''does'' hold pure-blood supremist views.. whether he would imprison/kill muggleborns or not is another question (probably not), but he ''did'' believe in the superiority of pure-bloods. And that is the crux of the matter. - {{Xanderen/signature}} 09:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
== Nationality? ==
 
   
  +
And I think, with all due respect, that you have not been paying proper attention. And I think that if the community wants to act on this out-of-nowhere and out-of-character declaration on Grindelwald's part in isolation of everything else, then go ahead, I can't stop you. [[User:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|WeaseleyIsOurKing89]] ([[User talk:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|talk]]) 11:41, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
The article states that he was likely from Germany or Austria/Hungary. The source for this being the fact that he took a portkey home after Arianna's death. Am I missing something? How in any way does this tell us anything about his homeland? [[User:Jayden Matthews|Jayden Matthews]] 11:30, December 30, 2010 (UTC)
 
   
  +
:::{{Quote|Did I know, in my heart of hearts, what Gellert Grindelwald was? I think I did, but '''I closed my eyes'''.|Albus Dumbledore|Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows}}
:I agree. That proves nothing. -- <small><span style="border:2px solid #333333;">[[User:Seth Cooper|<font style="color:#333333;">&nbsp;'''Seth Cooper'''&nbsp;</font>]][[User talk:Seth Cooper|<font style="background:#333333;color:white;">&nbsp;'''owl&nbsp;post!'''</font>]]</span></small> 13:21, December 30, 2010 (UTC)
 
   
  +
:::I'm afraid you're the one who hasn't been paying proper attention. You've bought into the lie that Grindelwald was some sort of misunderstood anti-hero, trying to create a better world using extreme/misguided methods. Dumbledore fell for it, Queenie fell for it, Credence fell for it... but they ''all woke up, and realised that they been deceived''. - {{Xanderen/signature}} 12:35, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
: ::I think Aberforth's comments about Gellert having a ''"bit of a track record already, back in his own country"'' seems to imply his homeland was the same as the country he recieved his education in, Norway or Sweden. If he was from Germany or anywhere else in Europe, it seems unlikely that people from his homeland would have heard of him, or would know that he had been explelled from Durmstrang. [[User:Jayden Matthews|Jayden Matthews]] 11:07, January 2, 2011 (UTC)
 
:::He is infact from either Germany or the Austrian Empire (Austria/Hungary) because besides the fact that "Nurmengrad" means the same thing as "Nürnberg", his name is pronounced Gellert "Grindel'''''v'''''ald" while it is written'' ''"Grindelwald" and according to what I know, German is the only language there is in which they pronounce the "W a "V" such as the car brand "Volkswagen" which is pronounced "Volks'''''V'''''agen" becaues it is German. <sub>—</sub>[[File:German eagle logo.Png|31px]] [[User:Firefox1095|<font face="Vivaldi" size="4" color="Black">&nbsp;Firefox1095&nbsp;</font>]] [[File:German eagle logo.Png|31px]]<sub>—</sub> 00:34, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
 
::Oh and that's according to the deathly hallows Part 1 fim when Voldemort goes to Grindelwald to ask him about the Elder wand. <sub>—</sub>[[File:German eagle logo.Png|31px]] [[User:Firefox1095|<font face="Vivaldi" size="4" color="Black">&nbsp;Firefox1095&nbsp;</font>]] [[File:German eagle logo.Png|31px]]<sub>—</sub> 00:34, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
::::''"Unless Rowling comes out with an actual statement, at best, you could say that Grindelwald has contradicted himself on paper/screen."''
== Main image ==
 
  +
::::I mean you can say that all you want but that's not how the canon policy works lmao. Rowling wrote both films. Rowling contradicted herself. - <span style="border:2px solid #ff0000;">[[User:MrSiriusBlack|<font style="background:#FFff00;color:#ff0000;">&nbsp;'''MrSiriusBlack'''&nbsp;</font>]][[User talk:MrSiriusBlack|<font style="background:#ff0000;color:#ffff00;">&nbsp;'''Talk'''&nbsp;</font>]]</span> 18:47, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
{{archive
 
|result=Proposed image (I) is the winner
 
|sig=[[User:Nick O'Demus|<font face="Monotype Corsiva" size="4" color="FF8000">Nick O'Demus</font>]] 08:05, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
 
|discussion=
 
Voting for a new infobox image is now open. Normal [[Harry Potter Wiki:Voting policy|voting policy]] applies. Voting will be open for one week or until a clear consensus is reached, whichever comes first. New candidates may continue to be submitted, but the current voting deadline will stand. Voting will close at 08:00 wiki-time on April 30th. - [[User:Nick O'Demus|<font face="Monotype Corsiva" size="4" color="FF8000">Nick O'Demus</font>]] 08:30, April 20, 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
::::: I don't think Rowling has necessarily contradicted herself. She has portrayed Grindelwald like a skilled manipulator who knows how to hoodwink people, and he tells people what they want to hear so they will offer their support to him. It does make sense that a man who thinks wizardkind are better than the non-magic could put those with less muggle blood in higher esteem. I will admit to being surprised when he started showing clear blood prejudice. However, he knows how to deceive people and until Rowling says he's lying, Grindelwald has shown that he favours pure-bloods. - [[User:Kates39|Kates39]] ([[User talk:Kates39|talk]]) 19:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
===Candidates===
 
<gallery>
 
GellertDH.jpg|Current main image
 
Young Grindelwald.JPG|Proposed image (I)
 
Gellert cropped.JPG|Proposed image (II)
 
Gellert Grindelwald school portrait.JPG|Proposed image (III)
 
565px-Grindelwald image-modified.png|Proposed image (IV)
 
</gallery>
 
   
  +
'''Xanderen:'''
====For current main image (+2)====
 
  +
:Way to take Dumbledore's quote out of context, X.
#--[[User:Rodolphus|Rodolphus]] 09:18, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
 
#--[[User:Head.Boy.Hog|<font face="Segoe Script" size="3" color="#7ACAFF" >Head.Boy.Hog</font>]] [[User talk:Head.Boy.Hog|<font face="Currier" size="2" color="#7ACAFF">(Talk To Me)</font>]] 22:07, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
'''MrSiriusBlack:'''
====For proposed image (I) (+7)====
 
  +
Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat?
#[[User:Jayden Matthews|Jayden Matthews]] 08:40, April 20, 2011 (UTC)
 
#-- <small><span style="border:2px solid #333333;">[[User:Seth Cooper|<font style="color:#333333;">&nbsp;'''Seth Cooper'''&nbsp;</font>]][[User talk:Seth Cooper|<font style="background:#333333;color:white;">&nbsp;'''owl&nbsp;post!'''</font>]]</span></small> 14:26, April 20, 2011 (UTC)
 
#--[[User:BachLynn23|<font face="Vivaldi" size="5" color="Purple" >BachLynn</font>]]<sup>([[User talk:BachLynn23|<font face="Monotype Corsiva" size="2" color="Purple">Send an Owl!</font>]])</sup> 10:29, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
 
#--<span style="border: 2px blue solid; background-color: blue;">[[User:Cubs Fan2007|<font face="Gisha" color="red">'''Cubs Fan'''</font>]] [[User talk:Cubs Fan2007|<font face="Gisha" color="white">'''(Talk to me)'''</font>]]</span> 17:36, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
 
#--[[User:You-Know-Who|<font face="Monotype Corsiva" size="4" color="darkblue">ÈnŔîčö DC</font>]][[Image:Ravenclawcrest.jpg|25px]]<sup>([[User talk:You-Know-Who|<font face="Times" color="brown">Send me an Owl!</font>]])</sup> 21:13, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
 
#<sub>—</sub>[[File:German eagle logo.Png|31px]] [[User:Firefox1095|<font face="Vivaldi" size="4" color="Black">&nbsp;Firefox1095&nbsp;</font>]] [[File:German eagle logo.Png|31px]]<sub>—</sub> 00:36, April 28, 2011 (UTC)
 
#[[User:Nick O'Demus|<font face="Monotype Corsiva" size="4" color="FF8000">Nick O'Demus</font>]] 06:10, April 30, 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
'''Kates39:'''
====For proposed image (II) (+0)====
 
  +
If Grindelwald is a skilled manipulator who knows how to hoodwink people, and who tells people what they want to hear so they will offer their support to him, then why are you saying that Grindelwald has shown that he favours pure-bloods? Wouldn't it in that case be more accurate to say that he ''claimed'' to favour pure-blood in the present company? [[User:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|WeaseleyIsOurKing89]] ([[User talk:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|talk]]) 22:33, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
   
  +
This is my first time commenting on the Harry Potter talk page. I just wanted to add on Grindelwald's wizarding supremacy. In the movie "Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald" after Grindelwald takes over the house on Boulevard Haussmann Les Grand Magasins De Paris, Vinda Rosier comments about killing all the non-magical people, muggles, in the world to which Grindelwald replies, "Not all of them, not all. We're not merciless. The beasts of burden will always be necessary." This demonstrates that Grindelwald is condescending towards non-magical people and looks down on them, viewing them to be subservient to wizards and witches. [[User:Zachary1969|Zachary1969]] ([[User talk:Zachary1969|talk]]) 09:51, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
====For proposed image (III) (+0)====
 
   
  +
==Quotation template==
====For proposed image (IV) (+2)====
 
  +
Going to strongly suggest using a template which contains a randomised opening quotation for the this article. There was no justification or logical reason to remove the old opening quotation from {{COG|S}} by in my view quite recklessly and carelessly removing encyclopaedic, tier-one canon content from the article just to replace it with a new one from {{SOD}}, which is also technically only tier-two at this point, without the screenplay. The Snape one uses a template which shows a randomised template and I see that as a useful method of avoiding edit warring and future changes to his quotation without any actual discussion being made. Thanks. [[User:RedWizard98|RedWizard98]] ([[User talk:RedWizard98|talk]]) 18:39, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
#-- [[User:Butterfly the rabbit|<font face="Times" size="4" color="Blue" >Bee T. Are</font>]][[File:Btr icon.png |50px]]<sup>([[User talk:Butterfly the rabbit|<font face="Monotype Corsiva" size="1" color="Red">Call me!!</font>]])</sup> 16:33, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
 
#-- [[User:Harry granger|Harry granger]] 18:17, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
: I agree. I will try to set one up tonight or tomorrow. I think it has been talked in the past too. There are lots of acceptable quotes for Grindelwald. I think it could be good to have a few possible quotes for the page to show. - [[User:Kates39|Kates39]] ([[User talk:Kates39|talk]]) 19:49, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
===Discussion===
 
OK, now I'm normaly a strong proponent of the "most recent in the infobox" precedent. In this case, however, I think we should make an exception. And no, it has nothing to ageism, or the fact that I'm in love with Jamie Campbell Bower. I just really dislike the current main image. His eyes appear to be twitching and bulging at the same time, and the general toothieness of it is incredible disturbing. Plus the proportions are all wrong for a profile image. Firefox1095 has uploaded a new one, but has confirmed there are no shots in the movie where his skull is fully visable except from the side. I think we should use Bathilda's photograph for the infobox. I know the quality's not great, but that's because I had to enlarge it for it to fit in the infobox. If someone is able to uploaded a higher resoloution version then awesome. So, does anyone else agree? [[User:Jayden Matthews|Jayden Matthews]] 23:25, April 9, 2011 (UTC)
 
:Yeah, I've got to say the proposed image's quality is a bit low for an infobox pic. Now if you CAN get a higher resolution version, I'd be more willing to support that. - [[User:Nick O'Demus|<font face="Monotype Corsiva" size="4" color="FF8000">Nick O'Demus</font>]] 08:56, April 10, 2011 (UTC)
 
::Yeah, I asked Enrico a few days ago if he could upload one, and his images are very good quality. I noticed Firefox uploading DH images, so I asked him for one just to see if it would work. I think it will if we can get a better resoloution. [[User:Jayden Matthews|Jayden Matthews]] 09:04, April 10, 2011 (UTC)
 
:::Try previewing the new image in the infobox. It's not...terrible. It's not great either, but it's better than the current one. Although my haterd of Michael Byrne's incisors may be clouding my judgement on that matter. [[User:Jayden Matthews|Jayden Matthews]] 09:29, April 10, 2011 (UTC)
 
'''UPDATE''':Firefox has uploaded a slightly better quality version. It's not a huge improvement, but it's still better than the current image. [[User:Jayden Matthews|Jayden Matthews]] 17:18, April 10, 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
:: I've created the template {{tlx|GrindelwaldRandomQuote}} if anyone would like to add to it. - [[User:Kates39|Kates39]] ([[User talk:Kates39|talk]]) 20:36, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
I agree with Jayden. You don't have to use my picture but you do have to change that current image. It gives me the chills...Grindelwald looks like he is half paralized, half mental.—[[User:Firefox1095|<font face="Vivaldi" size="4" color="Black" >Firefox1095</font>]][[File:Gryffindorcrest.jpg|31px]] 21:44, April 10, 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
::That's amazing! We should probably make more of them. [[User:RedWizard98|RedWizard98]] ([[User talk:RedWizard98|talk]]) 21:17, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
::I don't like either one, sorry. If we are to use a picture of young Grindelwald, couldn't we use [[:File:Gellert Grindelwald school portrait.JPG|this picture]], or a cropped version of [[:File:Gellert Grindelwald and Albus Dumbledore.JPG|this one]]? -- <small><span style="border:2px solid #333333;">[[User:Seth Cooper|<font style="color:#333333;">&nbsp;'''Seth Cooper'''&nbsp;</font>]][[User talk:Seth Cooper|<font style="background:#333333;color:white;">&nbsp;'''owl&nbsp;post!'''</font>]]</span></small> 21:49, April 10, 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
== Information image ==
:::Absoloutley! ''Anything'' other than the current one. [[User:Jayden Matthews|Jayden Matthews]] 21:54, April 10, 2011 (UTC)
 
::::I uploaded a crop of the photo for consideration, but the quality is even worse than the proposed image. [[User:Jayden Matthews|Jayden Matthews]] 22:05, April 10, 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
What do you say about the attached image as an information image?
:::::I've added the other picture I proposed to consideration. It's a shame we don't have any ''decent'' pictures of Michael Byrne's Grindelwald; I'm normally a supporter of the most chronologically recent picture available. -- <small><span style="border:2px solid #333333;">[[User:Seth Cooper|<font style="color:#333333;">&nbsp;'''Seth Cooper'''&nbsp;</font>]][[User talk:Seth Cooper|<font style="background:#333333;color:white;">&nbsp;'''owl&nbsp;post!'''</font>]]</span></small> 22:07, April 10, 2011 (UTC)
 
  +
Please reply quickly :)[[File:Gellert Grindelwald1.jpeg|thumb]]
::::::I give my vote to the last one "Possible candidate (II)". It has the best quality and is better than the current one that gives me the chills. I think this article should be modified and we should make it as good as possible so it becomes featured. I mean this article has a nice bit of information and is worth being featured. —[[User:Firefox1095|<font face="Vivaldi" size="4" color="Black" >Firefox1095</font>]][[File:Gryffindorcrest.jpg|31px]] 22:28, April 10, 2011 (UTC)
 
  +
[[User:Talisrael|Talisrael]] ([[User talk:Talisrael|talk]]) 21:05, 14 July 2022 (UTC)talisrael[[User:Talisrael|Talisrael]] ([[User talk:Talisrael|talk]]) 21:05, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
   
  +
I would support changing the image to this one, as the current one constantly gives me the feeling that Grindelwald was amputated (arm sticked out but no hand shown)… no offense. [[User:MalchonC|MalchonC]] ([[User talk:MalchonC|talk]]) 16:39, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
::::::Whoa, that's loads better. Thanks Enrico, and Seth! I'm not opposed to the school photo, but I think Bathilda's portrait is more appropriate, as Grindelwald is consistently described as having long hair. Plus the school portrait would be more usefull in the early life section. So, can we put it to a vote? I don't think the third image is a serious contender, it was just a failed experiment, and can be removed if anyone whishes. [[User:Jayden Matthews|Jayden Matthews]] 08:19, April 20, 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
I support changing the photo, a photo that was "taken in a studio" is better in my opinion than a photo cut from the film.
I don't think that Image 3 should be removed. I like it the most. You can see the whole man and he looks more pleasant than in the other photos. If you don't want the old man then I would prefer Image 3. [[User:Harry granger|Harry granger]]
 
   
:Feel free to vote for it then. It's dreadfull quality, though. [[User:Jayden Matthews|Jayden Matthews]] 12:24, April 21, 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
[[User:Talisrael|Talisrael]] ([[User talk:Talisrael|talk]]) 20:40, 23 August 2022 (UTC)talisrael[[User:Talisrael|Talisrael]] ([[User talk:Talisrael|talk]]) 20:40, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
I don't think that the quality is bad but everyone has his own preferences. I put the vote on "+ 1" then. I hope that it is the right course of action. [[User:Harry granger|Harry granger]] 18:26, April 21, 2011 (UTC)
 
   
Sorry, I thought you meant the third image in the selection, not the third ''proposed image''. [[User:Jayden Matthews|Jayden Matthews]] 12:19, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
+
::Personally I would not support changing the image, and what you are referring to is an "infobox". [[User:RedWizard98|RedWizard98]] ([[User talk:RedWizard98|talk]]) 21:09, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
   
  +
:::I support changing the image to the one proposed here. It was always my view that the current one was only ever a provisional one anyway, while we awaited official promo images such as this. - <span style="border:2px solid #ff0000;">[[User:MrSiriusBlack|<font style="background:#FFff00;color:#ff0000;">&nbsp;'''MrSiriusBlack'''&nbsp;</font>]][[User talk:MrSiriusBlack|<font style="background:#ff0000;color:#ffff00;">&nbsp;'''Talk'''&nbsp;</font>]]</span> 21:11, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
No problem! I had better written the word "proposed" but I didn't thought of the possibility of a misunderstanding with the selection of the pictures. [[User:Harry granger|Harry granger]] 18:59, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
::Although I would say the current one is far superior to a generic promo image on a grey background. [[User:RedWizard98|RedWizard98]] ([[User talk:RedWizard98|talk]]) 07:55, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
===Another image?===
 
[[File:Grindelwald image.png|250px]]
 
   
  +
I support switching the image as well. [[User:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|WeaseleyIsOurKing89]] ([[User talk:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|talk]]) 09:09, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Screenshot taken from DH:P1. -- [[User:Butterfly the rabbit|<font face="Times" size="4" color="Blue" >Bee T. Are</font>]][[File:Btr icon.png |50px]]<sup>([[User talk:Butterfly the rabbit|<font face="Monotype Corsiva" size="1" color="Red">Call me!!</font>]])</sup> 19:58, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
What do you say about replacing the current image with the [[:File:Gellert Grindelwald SODM 2.webp|attached image]]? The proposed image is of higher quality and in my opinion also more beautiful, what do you think?
The best image for the article would be one of the current age. In this image he doesn't show his teeth. Some people didn't like the image with the "teeth smiling". So I think this would be the best. [[User:Harry granger|Harry granger]] 20:15, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
 
:Can I add it to the gallery, then? Since I ''do'' believe that the image should be chronologically the most recent and the current image is <s>demented</s> unsatisfactory to many. -- [[User:Butterfly the rabbit|<font face="Times" size="4" color="Blue" >Bee T. Are</font>]][[File:Btr icon.png |50px]]<sup>([[User talk:Butterfly the rabbit|<font face="Monotype Corsiva" size="1" color="Red">Call me!!</font>]])</sup> 21:49, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
[[User:Talisrael|Talisrael]] ([[User talk:Talisrael|talk]]) 09:37, 28 September 2022 (UTC)talisrael[[User:Talisrael|Talisrael]] ([[User talk:Talisrael|talk]]) 09:37, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
:Perhaps we should make another vote after this one closes to decide between the winner of the first vote and this image (given the short time in which voting closes). -- <small><span style="border:2px solid #333333;">[[User:Seth Cooper|<font style="color:#333333;">&nbsp;'''Seth Cooper'''&nbsp;</font>]][[User talk:Seth Cooper|<font style="background:#333333;color:white;">&nbsp;'''owl&nbsp;post!'''</font>]]</span></small> 22:11, April 25, 2011 (UTC)
 
::This one is nice but a bit dim. I will modify the lighting a bit, if you please. <sub>—</sub>[[File:German eagle logo.Png|31px]] [[User:Firefox1095|<font face="Vivaldi" size="4" color="Black">&nbsp;Firefox1095&nbsp;</font>]] [[File:German eagle logo.Png|31px]]<sub>—</sub> 00:28, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
 
::
 
::Okay so I've modified the lighting of the one posted and here it is.
 
::<gallery captionalign="left" widths="310">
 
565px-Grindelwald image-modified.png
 
</gallery>But I still think Proposed Image one is better because this one only shows a portion of his face plus he still looks a bit mad because of his imprisonment in Nurmengard. <sub>—</sub>[[File:German eagle logo.Png|31px]] [[User:Firefox1095|<font face="Vivaldi" size="4" color="Black">&nbsp;Firefox1095&nbsp;</font>]] [[File:German eagle logo.Png|31px]]<sub>—</sub> 00:33, April 26, 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
== Main Image Vote post SOD ==
:I'll add this one to candidates and extend the current vote by 3 more days. - [[User:Nick O'Demus|<font face="Monotype Corsiva" size="4" color="FF8000">Nick O'Demus</font>]]
 
  +
{{archive
}}
 
  +
|result=Candidate image 3 is the winner
  +
|sig=[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 18:31, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
  +
|discussion=
  +
As this article's main image was voted in [[Talk:Gellert_Grindelwald/Archive_1#Main_Image_Vote|here]], there needs to be a new vote in order to change it. Please let me know if there are additional candidate images to consider.
   
  +
<gallery position="center" spacing="small" captionalign="center">
== Cruciatus? ==
 
  +
Gellert Grindelwald publicity still.jpg | Candidate 1
 
  +
Fantastic Beasts- The Secrets of Dumbledore - Gellert Grindelwald .png | Candidate 2
When does it state that Grendelwald uses the Cruciatus Curse against Aberforth (I thought it just simply said they fought).[[User:Pack Alpha of Europe|Pack Alpha of Europe]] 05:47, August 26, 2011 (UTC)
 
  +
Gellert Grindelwald SODM.jpeg | Candidate 3
 
  +
Gellert Grindelwald SODM 2.png | Candidate 4
Aberforth himself says so. Chapter 28, page 457. [[User:Jayden Matthews|Jayden Matthews]] 09:07, August 26, 2011 (UTC)
 
 
Yeah, sorry. I went and re-read it and realised it said so. [[User:Pack Alpha of Europe|Pack Alpha of Europe]] 20:37, August 26, 2011 (UTC)
 
 
== Better main image. ==
 
 
I'm not sure if this needs a consensus or not, as it's technically just a better quality version of the same image, but I thought I'd better post it here first. Credit to Starstuff for the original upload (I assumed you'd want to keep the full version seperate.) [[User:Jayden Matthews|Jayden Matthews]] 09:06, October 27, 2011 (UTC)
 
<gallery>
 
File:GellertGrindelwaldHarryPotterPagetoScreen.JPG
 
 
</gallery>
 
</gallery>
   
  +
I'll give this about a week for discussion and to make sure all possible candidates are included and then proceed with voting. Thanks --[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 18:20, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
:I definitely support adding this image to the infobox. It's the highest quality image we have the character. I'm not sure that a formal vote on the matter is necessary, but we may want to err on the side of caution. <font color="Green">★</font> [[User:Starstuff|<font face="Times" color="green">S</font><font face="Times" color="dimgrey">t</font><font face="Times" color="green">a</font><font face="Times" color="dimgrey">r</font><font face="Times" color="green">s</font><font face="Times" color="dimgrey">t</font><font face="Times" color="green">u</font><font face="Times" color="dimgrey">f</font><font face="Times" color="green">f</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Starstuff|<font face="Times" color="darkgreen">(Owl me!)</font>]]</sup> 10:28, October 27, 2011 (UTC)
 
::I'll leave it up to you. To be honest, I don't think it's necessary either. As I said earlier, it's just a better quality version of the current main image. Does the new book have any of the other Grindelwald pics in it? The Durmstrang portrait, and the Albus/Gellert photo? [[User:Jayden Matthews|Jayden Matthews]] 16:50, October 27, 2011 (UTC)
 
:::Any objections? [[User:Jayden Matthews|Jayden Matthews]] 09:00, October 28, 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
I vote for Candidate 3. [[User:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|WeaseleyIsOurKing89]] ([[User talk:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|talk]]) 18:26, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
== So... ==
 
   
  +
:To clarify, this isn't voting time yet, just a chance to discuss the merits of the possible options and make sure any other images that may be worth considering are added to the candidate list. Everyone will need to actually cast their vote once it is opened next week to have it counted. Thanks --[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 18:31, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Is Grindalwald the wizarding world version of Hitler? I note that Hitler was born in 1885, and Grindlwald is listed as being born '''around''' 1882 (3 years of difference). Hitler was defeated (died, fled; depends on who you talk to) in 1945, Grindelwald was defeated in 1945. Imprisioned in '''his own''' prison at Nürnburg (a concentration camp had a componet here along with Nürnburg being used for mass Nazi conventions/rallies, and was later used for the famous Nürnburg Trials). Grindelwald is described as spreading terror around the continent (I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure Hitler spread terror around continental Europe-Ja?). He [Grindelwald] also appears to have favored a version of the (so-called) "Aryan race" (i.e. Wizards). Dumbledore's apparent feelings for <s>Hitl</s> Grindelwald parallels Hitler's early homosexual Nazi party leader-friends (appologizes for the awkward wording). Ariana's death and Grindelwald's emotional (though it can be argued this was a case of him fleeing the scene) can be played to reflect Hitler's feelings at the death of his niece.--[[User:Necro Shea mo|Necro Shea mo]] 05:06, December 6, 2011 (UTC)
 
:This is already noted in the article. See the "Behind the scenes" section. -- [[User:1337star|1337star]] ([[User_talk:1337star|talk]]) 05:14, December 6, 2011 (UTC)
 
::I seem to have missed this-sorry.--[[Special:Contributions/98.220.196.71|98.220.196.71]] 05:19, December 6, 2011 (UTC)
 
   
  +
My apology, I misread your first post. I support Candidate 3. It's sort of a simple, straight forward image of Grindelwald that got me to think about Snape's infobox image. The other ones seem a bit too showcasy/theatrical in an OOU sort of way to me. [[User:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|WeaseleyIsOurKing89]] ([[User talk:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|talk]]) 19:12, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
==Protect the article?==
 
   
  +
:I also support Candidate 3. The edges of Grindelwald's hair in Candidate 4 looks strange. Candidate 1 is too outdated and I just don't like the way he looks or was cropped in Candidate 2. - [[User:Kates39|Kates39]] ([[User talk:Kates39|talk]]) 20:21, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Obviously this article is rife with potential homophobic vandalizers. It's been seen on Dumbledore's article and that's protected, so I think to prevent further vandalism it should be blocked to unregistered users. Anyone agree?
 
   
  +
Candidate 3 has my preference as well. - <span style="border:2px solid #ff0000;">[[User:MrSiriusBlack|<font style="background:#FFff00;color:#ff0000;">&nbsp;'''MrSiriusBlack'''&nbsp;</font>]][[User talk:MrSiriusBlack|<font style="background:#ff0000;color:#ffff00;">&nbsp;'''Talk'''&nbsp;</font>]]</span> 23:41, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
-[[User: HoboHunter28|HoboHunter28]]- ([[User_Talk: HoboHunter28|Leave me an owl!]]) 22:41, May 21, 2012 (UTC)
 
   
  +
I support the fourth picture because it is of the highest quality and is really more beautiful, the third picture does not seem to be of high quality and does not really have the details in the face
[[User:Garbage3ts|Garbage3ts]] ([[User talk:Garbage3ts|talk]]) 05:20, November 11, 2013 (UTC)
 
   
  +
[[User:Talisrael|Talisrael]] ([[User talk:Talisrael|talk]]) 05:53, 30 September 2022 (UTC)talisrael[[User:Talisrael|Talisrael]] ([[User talk:Talisrael|talk]]) 05:53, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
Edited because I believe this page missed the point of Grindelwald entirely. It presented him as something of a Voldemort-before-Voldemort, but it always seemed clear to me he was much more human, more of a corrupted knight archetype. The reasons are that Dumbledore would not have found him a worthy friend if he were not a complex person whose fundamental purpose, however awry it went, was to do good, as well as his decision to stun rather than kill Gregorovitch when the prevailing wandlore at the time implied the need to kill the previous owner to take control of the Elder Wand, as well as his final words to Voldemort and Dumbledore-esque enthusiasm for death. 
 
   
  +
I support Candidate 3. Candidate 1 is outdated and not liking how he looks in Candidate 2 either. Like how in Candidate 3, he is facing forward, so you can see the details in his appearance and not to the side. [[User:Andrewh7|Andrewh7]] ([[User talk:Andrewh7|talk]]) 06:12, 30 September 2022 (UTC) Andrewh7
=="Deceased" category==
 
If there was a Deceased category, this page should definitely be on it. Which really makes me wonder, why don't we have a general Deceased category for characters? I think we should have one. Most Wikis do. They're quite useful. I don't think having "Killed by" categories is all we have use for.  Anyone agree? Or disagree? Can you elaborate on why you agree or disagree? '''[[User:Luka1184|Luka1184]] ([[User talk:Luka1184|talk]]) 19:54, November 20, 2014 (UTC)'''
 
   
  +
I fixed Grindelwald's hair in the fourth picture and even now you can see more of his body, I think it's the ideal picture for an information box picture, the third picture (that I uploaded) is not good in my opinion because the picture doesn't look that sharp, his eyes aren't very sharp and his suit isn't sharp either Especially in contrast to the fourth photo where every detail is sharp, you can see his entire face really well and clearly and you can really see the stubble of his beard, I hope I changed your mind (next time I will upload only the photo I think is the best;) and I also had the fourth photo harder to get)
== Grindelwald's Wand ==
 
   
  +
Sincerely
It looks like [[The Making of Harry Potter]] has started displaying some new items ([https://twitter.com/MuggleNetLive/status/730103037654663168 Twitter]). It's not a great shot, but wanted to give a heads up in case anyone runs across it on other images sharing sites for starting a new article here. --[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 15:57, May 12, 2016 (UTC)
 
   
  +
[[User:Talisrael|Talisrael]] ([[User talk:Talisrael|talk]]) 14:43, 2 October 2022 (UTC)talisrael[[User:Talisrael|Talisrael]] ([[User talk:Talisrael|talk]]) 14:43, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
What exactly do you mean? Starting articles on which topics? Pages on Grindelwald's wand and on Gregorovitch's wand do already exist.--[[User:Rodolphus|Rodolphus]] ([[User talk:Rodolphus|talk]]) 16:03, May 12, 2016 (UTC)
 
   
  +
----
:Doh! So they do, although the naming conventions are all a bit scattered (which is why I might have missed them...twice... or I need more coffee). Carry on, nothing to see here ;) --[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 16:39, May 12, 2016 (UTC)
 
   
  +
In order to determine a new community consensus on the preferred infobox image, a vote will now be held.
==Source?==
 
I'm thinking of the [http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/harrypotter/images/8/86/Grindelwald%3F.png image] that was added to the page. Do we know for ''certain'' this is Grindelwald? Look at the hairstyle, it looks like you are looking at Percival Graves from behind whose hair has merely been victimized of a colour-changing charm. Kind of joking there, though, but not really. Where does it say that guy is ''Grindelwald''? [[User:Ninclow|Ninclow]] ([[User talk:Ninclow|talk]]) 16:57, November 2, 2016 (UTC)
 
   
  +
{{U|Ironyak1}} will administrate this vote. It will remain open for 7 full days and then be closed and tallied. The [[Harry Potter Wiki:Voting policy]] applies.
:[http://www.hypable.com/new-fantastic-beasts-sizzle-reel/ Hypable] has said they have confirmation from someone working on the film that it is Grindelwald. --[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 17:22, November 2, 2016 (UTC)
 
   
  +
User should sign under the preferred Candidate section with four tildes like so: <nowiki># ~~~~</nowiki>. A comment can also be included with their vote if a user wishes. The admin will handle validating and counting the votes as needed. Thanks --[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 18:22, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
:And Hypable's creditability for this claim, where does that comes from? I see how I might come off as rude, but when I ask this, I'm genuinely curious, what evidence is there that Hypable actually has spokem to someone worknig on the film? Not saying he ''lies'' or anything, but it could be incorrect. [[User:Ninclow|Ninclow]] ([[User talk:Ninclow|talk]]) 18:05, November 2, 2016 (UTC)
 
   
:   Anyone who is familiar with Johnny Depp's profile will be able to correctly identify that from-behind profile shot (which comes from a new          BtS featurette for Fantastic Beasts) as being him, as he has a very distinctly shaped noggin.[[User:Daveyelmer|Daveyelmer]] ([[User talk:Daveyelmer|talk]]) 16:00, November 3, 2016 (UTC)
+
:Voting closed - enough total votes and margin of victory for Candidate image 3 to be the new infobox image. Please do not change the image without a new vote as it may be considered vandalism going against community consensus. Cheers --[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 18:31, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
  +
{{Vote
  +
|admin={{U|Ironyak1}}
  +
|date=18:22, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
  +
|status=closed
  +
}}
   
  +
===Candidate 1 (0)===
==Origin==
 
I've added that he's from Switzerland based on this:
 
[[Seraphina Picquery]] mentioned in [[Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (film)]] film that [[Heinrich Eberstadt]] (who is from Switzerland) let Grindelwald escape. It can be concluded that Grindelwald is from Switzerland as well.
 
-[[User:Alaric Saltzman]]
 
   
  +
===Candidate 2 (0)===
:Grindelwald was wreaking havoc across Europe. The Swiss authorities came close to capturing him, but failed. That's all we know. - {{Xanderen/signature}} 11:01, November 20, 2016 (UTC)
 
   
  +
===Candidate 3 (+6)===
== Eye color ==
 
  +
#This image shows the most recent portrayal of the character and in my opinion, it works in an information box better than the other options of the same portrayal. [[User:Roger Murtaugh|Roger Murtaugh]] ([[User talk:Roger Murtaugh|talk]]) 18:54, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
  +
#<span style="border:2px solid #ff0000;">[[User:MrSiriusBlack|<font style="background:#FFff00;color:#ff0000;">&nbsp;'''MrSiriusBlack'''&nbsp;</font>]][[User talk:MrSiriusBlack|<font style="background:#ff0000;color:#ffff00;">&nbsp;'''Talk'''&nbsp;</font>]]</span> 19:01, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
  +
#I vote for number three. [[User:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|WeaseleyIsOurKing89]] ([[User talk:WeaseleyIsOurKing89|talk]]) 20:29, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
  +
#The third one shows Grindelwald very nicely, and the style of it is most consistent with other articles. [[User:MalchonC|MalchonC]] ([[User talk:MalchonC|talk]]) 00:49, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
  +
#The third one is the best quality and style. - [[User:Kates39|Kates39]] ([[User talk:Kates39|talk]]) 13:05, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
  +
# [[User:SeichanGrey|SeichanGrey]] ([[User talk:SeichanGrey|talk]]) 17:02, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
   
  +
===Candidate 4 (+2)===
As far as I could tell, his right eye is pale gray and his left eye is dark brown or black. Of course, the subway scene is very dimly lit, so it's hard to say for sure... I certainly didn't get the impression that one of his eyes was yellow, though... And I don't think we should be using terms like "hetrachromia", just yet. For all we know one of his eyes may be glass. - {{Xanderen/signature}} 08:42, November 21, 2016 (UTC)
 
  +
# I support candidate number 4 [[User:Talisrael|Talisrael]] ([[User talk:Talisrael|talk]]) 18:29, 5 October 2022 (UTC)talisrael[[User:Talisrael|Talisrael]] ([[User talk:Talisrael|talk]]) 18:29, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
  +
# I support Option 4 [[User:Cheerful Clatter|Cheerful Clatter]] ([[User talk:Cheerful Clatter|talk]]) 04:36, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
   
  +
----
:The screenplay describees Grindelwald as blue-eyed in one of the last scenes. JKR doesn't write about different colours in that scene. And it also describes his Graves form as dark-haired, not gray. The script is the highest canon source, being written by JKR herself, so it should be changed, shouldn't it?--[[User:Rodolphus|Rodolphus]] ([[User talk:Rodolphus|talk]]) 16:32, May 13, 2017 (UTC)
 
 
::Agreed - nice find, it's been changed. --[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 16:43, May 13, 2017 (UTC)
 
 
==Infobox image==
 
Should the infobox image be changed to one of Grindelwald in ''Fantastic Beasts''? -- [[User:Jack "BtR" Saxon|Saxon]] 17:18, December 9, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
:I agree, but there's a legal issue with using images from pirated copies of the film, as it doesn't qualify as "fair use". Having said that, no one's made any move to remove such images from other parts of the site, so I'm not sure how significant it really is. - {{Xanderen/signature}} 18:07, December 9, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
==Magical Abilities and Skills==
 
Have it become a hobby of sorts to downgrade the magical skills and abiliites of Grindelwald as much as possible? 
 
-.-' [[User:Ninclow|Ninclow]] ([[User talk:Ninclow|talk]]) 17:41, December 15, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
: Many of the entries here are quite wordy and somewhat overlapping so there is editing needed. Perhaps we should try to break them down and discuss how to handle one at a time? I've seen the discussion between [[User_talk:Ninclow#Magical_abilities_and_skills|Ninclow]] and [[User_talk:Xanderen#Response|Xanderen]] as well as Seth's couple edits on this but clearly it's not resolved.
 
: I agree that "Wand versitility" should be removed as no one can force a wand to work well for them and the amount of wandless magic performed by GrindelGraves may indicate that Grave's wand was not reliable for him.
 
: "Magical Dexterity" also seems odd as it amounts to simply not performing too much magic - more part of the "Acting Skills" to successfully impersonate someone I would say.
 
:Which of the remaining magical skills and abilities are most problematic? --[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 19:04, December 15, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
::I would say that divination is factually incorrect, as the film itself demonstrates that Grindelwald was lying about this.
 
 
::Rowling has confirmed that he was an Occlumens, but the stuff about him shielding his mind from Voldemort is still unsubstantiated
 
 
::Acting skills... we don't know how long he was impersonating Graves for so we can't really make any assertions about how good an actor he was. Also, he didn't "hide his true nature from Dumbledore" - Albus himself says that he always knew what Grindelwald was, but turned a blind eye due to his infatuation with him.
 
 
::Considering how little we know about GG's powers I'd say it's fine to include stuff like apparition just to flesh things out... but embellishing by saying he could apparate faster and with more precision than anyone else is not.
 
 
::There's a lot of repetition... many unsubstantiated statements peppered throughout the entire article - "''had mastered every aspect of dark magic''"... stuff like that needs to go. That's what I can think of off the top of my head. - {{Xanderen/signature}} 20:18, December 15, 2016 (UTC)
 
::------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
::First of - Grindelgraves. Ingenious! :-D
 
 
::'''"Wand versitility" should be removed as no one can force a wand to work well for them and the amount of wandless magic performed by GrindelGraves may indicate that Grave's wand was not reliable for him.'''
 
 
::It could also indicate that Graves was good with wandless magic as well, if not necessarily in actuality as good as Grindelwald. After all, while the British deem wandless magic to be highly complex, using magic without wands is commonplace in South America, and due to its approximity to North America, even though they have wands there, wandless magic may is likely to be, if not a common, still more widely practiced than in the wizarding community of Great Birtain. Or - you could be right, though I daresay excessive use of wandless magic if the real Graves exclusively uses magic with his wand would be a dead give away that something didn't seem quite right. I think co-workers would find it suspicious.
 
 
::'''"Magical Dexterity" also seems odd as it amounts to simply not performing too much magic - more part of the "Acting Skills" to successfully impersonate someone I would say.'''
 
 
::In retrospect, agreed.
 
 
::'''Rowling has confirmed that he was an Occlumens, but the stuff about him shielding his mind from Voldemort is still unsubstantiated.'''
 
 
::I disagree without on that. As Snape said in the fifth book:
 
::"''The Dark Lord, for instance, almost always knows when somebody is lying to him. Only those skilled at Occlumency are able to shut down those feelings and memories that contra-dict the lie, and so can utter falsehoods in his presence without detection.''"
 
 
::Voldemort asked Grindelwald where the wand was, and Grindelwald denied ever having had it, right? But he did not put any effort into making it a ''convincing'' lie, so Voldemort knew he was lying because GG's mockery was obvious. Voldemort knew Grindelwald was defeated and put two and two together shortly thereafter, but he did not successfully find out where he could find it by interrogating Grindelwald, despite the fact the two men had eye contact. So Occlumency is not an unreasonable explonation. 
 
 
::Where did Rowling confirm he could use Occlumency, by the way? 
 
 
::'''Acting skills... we don't know how long he was impersonating Graves for so we can't really make any assertions about how good an actor he was. Also, he didn't "hide his true nature from Dumbledore" - Albus himself says that he always knew what Grindelwald was, but turned a blind eye due to his infatuation with him.'''
 
 
::The "hiding his ture nature" was added by someone else after I added the "acting skills" to the list. But does it matter how long it was? It was long enough and well enough acted that none of Grave's colleagues or co-workers became suspicious of him, people he have been around daily on the workplace for years, making his skill at improvisational acting at least on pair with those of Crouch Jr. 
 
 
::'''Considering how little we know about GG's powers I'd say it's fine to include stuff like apparition just to flesh things out... but embellishing by saying he could apparate faster and with more precision than anyone else is not.'''
 
 
::No, but we could mention how he was quick enough to apparate and disapparate at a moment's notice in very difficult situations, such as when being attacked by an Obscurus? 
 
 
::'''<span style="font-weight:normal;">There's a lot of repetition... many unsubstantiated statements peppered throughout the entire article - "</span>''had mastered every aspect of dark magic''<span style="font-weight:normal;">"... stuff like that needs to go. That's what I can think of off the top of my head. </span> '''
 
 
::<span style="font-weight:normal;">Why? Grindelwald was as brilliant as Dumbledore and magically on pair with Voldemort. What evidence is there that Grindelwald had any less skill in Dark Magic than Voldemort? He had the common sense not to make Horcruxes, I suppose, but he experimented with Dark Magic, so obviously he, like Voldemort, knew so much that they sought to push the bounderies of what a suffienctly powerful wizard can accomplish through the Dark Arts, so the "had master nearly every aspect", seem reasonable to me. </span>
 
::[[User:Ninclow|Ninclow]] ([[User talk:Ninclow|talk]]) 22:55, December 15, 2016 (UTC)
 
::<span style="font-weight:normal;">-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</span>
 
 
::: Rowling confirmed on Twitter today that Grindelwald was an Occlumens in response to a question on why Queenie, a Legilimens, did not see into Graves mind and realise that he was really Grindelwald in disguise.
 
 
::: My take on this is that none of the skills noted above is really needed on the page. Grindelwald actually has a very lengthy list compared to many other characters already. Wand versitility is mainly speculation. The same goes to him knowing "every aspect" of dark magic. I agree he should have extensive knowledge but we don't know exactly how much.
 
 
::: Acting skills seems the silliest one to me. Anyone can pretend to be someone else when they look exactly like them. It seems out of place to me for some reason. --[[User:Kates39|Kates39]] ([[User talk:Kates39]]) 22:15, December 15, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
:::: <span style="font-weight:normal;">-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</span>
 
 
:::: The section is there to highlight the '''magical abilities''' and '''skills '''of the character in question, how lengthy it seem is irrelevant. Also, true, anyone can pretend to be someone else if they look like them, but not anyone can pretend to be someone else for a lenghty period of time without being exposed.
 
:::: 23:59, December 15, 2016 (UTC)[[User:Ninclow|Ninclow]] ([[User talk:Ninclow|talk]])
 
 
:::::Forgive me but I'm going reset the indent and create subsections to better track the pros and cons for each entry. Please add/edit as needed --[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 00:04, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
===Divination===
 
I don't see how to explain how GrindelGraves has tracked the Obscurus phenonmenon to the children surrounding Mary Lou without some form of divination. If the only explanation given is that he had a vision, what is there to contradict that? --[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 00:04, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
:Mary Lou - and the fact that her adopted children were witches and wizards - was well known to MACUSA due to Tina's attack on her in defense of Credence. - {{Xanderen/signature}} 10:19, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
::MACUSA wasn't aware that Mary Lou had wizarding children,they were however very aware of how Tina attacked Mary Lou in defense of Credence because she considered physical abuse deplorable, and thought morally her actions were commendable, but legally, not so much. If MACUSA had as much as suspected Lou's children to be magical, they would have taken the opportunity when they erased the memories of Mary Lou and those witnessing the attack to make them forget the former ever had any children and brought them into the custody and protection of MACUSA, to prevent potential breaches of the Statute of Secrecy by having wizarding children be around No-Majes. MACUSA HQ has at least two hundred floors, so one of them ought to have some kind of isolation room where they could have learned to harness and control their powers without endangering anyone in the process. [[User:Ninclow|Ninclow]] ([[User talk:Ninclow|talk]]) 17:00, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
:::Given the strict segregation laws between magical and non-magical communities, I can't imagine under what circumstances MACUSA would knowingly let an anti-witchcraft No-Maj raise one or more wizarding children. What evidence is there that MACUSA knew the children were magical? --[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 18:32, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
::::I thought that was the reason Tina attacked her but what you said makes more sense. Rowling has confirmed he was a seer, anyway so no complaints about that. -
 
 
===Occlumency===
 
We know now that Grindelwald is a talented Occlumens as Queenie herself is said to be a talented Legilimens. Given the HBP quote above and Voldemort's determination to find the Elder Wand, it makes sense that Occlumency would play a role. However, it should probably be stated that "Occlumency may have played a role..." as it not a clear fact. --[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 00:04, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
:I'll concede that Voldemort was almost definitely using Occlumency on Gellert during their meeting... I had overlooked the Snape quote that Ninclow pointed out. That still means Rowling doesn't properly explain how Voldemort discovered the Elder Wand's location... but I guess that's her problem. - {{Xanderen/signature}} 10:19, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
 
===Dark Arts===
 
I had already removed the notion that he had mastered all the Dark Arts. We have no idea what the boundaries of the Dark Arts are so we are in no position to state that he mastered most of them. I would be surprised if we are not treated to some new Dark Magic throughout the FB series. --[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 00:04, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
:Agreed. No arguments there. Ninclow - it's never "reasonable" to just assume things like this, or to make unsubstantiated claims just because we think it's likely. - {{Xanderen/signature}} 10:19, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
::As long as it is not made out that he somehow knows less about Dark Magic than the Death Eaters, I can live with that. :p [[User:Ninclow|Ninclow]] ([[User talk:Ninclow|talk]]) 17:03, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
:::I think it should just be stated what we know about him and the Dark Arts without making comparisons - I'll give it a go shortly. --18:32, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
===Apparition===
 
I had already changed this to simply state the fact that he can apparate at high speed and with precision, but without trying to make a comparison. (Just as good as Newt but clearly better than Ron ? ;) --[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 00:04, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
:I would just stick to the fact that he ''could'' apparate. I may be wrong, but isn't apparition instantaneous? You disappear, and ''immediately'' reappear somewhere else... there are no varying degrees of speed. The only exception to this is when you splinch yourself and appear in two places at once. The way apparition is portrayed in the films is just a stylistic choice. - {{Xanderen/signature}} 10:19, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
::In the books, it is stated how flashes and bangs is often a sign of ineptitude rather than aptitude, so Dumbledore can apparate and disapparate without making a sound. I guess Grindelwald can do that too, but as you said, the films use that stylistic variant, which is accompanied by sound regardless of how good the wizard in question are. So... I guess you're right and wrong at the same time, however slightly. [[User:Ninclow|Ninclow]] ([[User talk:Ninclow|talk]]) 17:08, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
:::I think the idea is how he was able to apparate in rapid succession with precision under duress. This is one of the few times we've seen apparition in a combat setting so it appears to be quicker and more skilful than the previous Three D's, "just getting-around" examples of apparition. However, the film depiction of the Battle at the Ministry at the Veil does have examples of more rapid combat apparition - have to take a look there to compare perhaps. --[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 18:32, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
===Acting===
 
It's funny Kates39, as this one seems the clearest to me to be a skill :) Just because you look and sound like someone (finally film polyjuice works like book polyjuice :) doesn't mean you would have the same mannerisms or know co-workers' names & roles, or have the expected understanding that comes with work relationships. Compared say to Hermione's terrible attempt at impersonating Bellatrix to gain entry to Gringotts, we can at least say that Grindelwald was able to successfully impersonate Graves for two days without raising any suspicions from those around him that would know Graves well. I agree that "hiding his nature from Dumbledore" is pure speculation to be removed. --[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 01:01, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
:I would still argue against this for the time being. We can't see into the minds of other characters (unfortunately) so we can't really say for any certainty that nobody was suspicious of him. He may well have been living as Graves for ''two days only''. Kate is right, people at MACUSA had no reason to be suspicious of him because he looked and sounded like Graves. That's all we know for now. - {{Xanderen/signature}} 10:19, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
::We also know we have no means to assume the appearance of another person in real life, yet in the wizarding world, to alter one's appearance is easily achieved by drinking a potion (that is admittedly not that easy to brew), or by spell and incantation, which is common knowledge for the average adult wizard. Also, remember Grindelgraves was around Aurors, presumably trained in concealment and disguise in similar manner to those in UK, so if he did step over the line and said or did something the real Graves wouldn't or couldn't do, the alarm bells would ring much quicker than in a real life "Face Off" situation. [[User:Ninclow|Ninclow]] ([[User talk:Ninclow|talk]]) 17:15, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
::I guess I compare it to the trio's lack of ability to deceive the Ministry even for an hour or Hermione's inability to get past the lobby of Gringotts as Bellatrix. As Ninclow said, given that Grindelwald was working closely with those that knew Graves, and are trained investigators for major crimes, the fact that no one suspected him enough to take any action against him shows that there is some skill here beyond just the polyjuice IMO. --[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 18:32, December 16, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
 
===Transfiguration===
 
Rowling officially overruled that movie creator. It was Transfiguration, not Polyjuice Potion. The source is Rowling's new website. [[User:Ninclow|Ninclow]] ([[User talk:Ninclow|talk]]) 03:12, December 22, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
== Seer ==
 
 
JKR just tweeted that Grindelwald was a Seer. Source: https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/810753569808875520
 
 
[[User:Eggy2504|Eggy2504]] ([[User talk:Eggy2504|talk]]) 08:23, December 19, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
:Good stuff. What was he lying about though? - {{Xanderen/signature}} 09:30, December 19, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
== Awaare Seer ==
 
 
Currently, the articke states:
 
 
Seer: While in disguise as Officer Percival Graves in 1926, he claimed to have seen visions of a child with great power he had hoped to wield and manipulate. While traditionally, Seers have no recollection of their visions after they're made, but interestingly, Grindelwald did. It is unknown if Grindelwald entered into a trance as Seers typically do.
 
 
Is it ever stated in canon that it is typical for Seers to have no recallation of what they saw? I always thought that Professor Trelawney, who indeed does not recall it, was an exception, and that more gifted Seers like both Cassandras, Mopsus and probably Grindelwald can be fully aware of their visions and prophecies.
 
--[[User:Rodolphus|Rodolphus]] ([[User talk:Rodolphus|talk]]) 18:53, December 21, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
: I don't think it was ever stated that every Seer has no recollection of their visions. I always thought Trelawney never remembered because even though she had the talent, she had very little of it and therefore it wasn't an accomplished one. I think it is speculation to say every Seer is the same.
 
 
: I have one question though. Why did Rowling say that he was lying about the vision? Did she mean that she was lying about recieving it or that he was lying about it being the only thing he saw, because the person who asked "Is he a Seer or was he lying?" when Grindelwald said "vision showed <i><b>only</b></i> the child's immense power”?" --[[User:Kates39|Kates39]] ([[User talk:Kates39|talk]]) 18:29, December 21, 2016
 
 
:"Seer" doesn't need to be listed as well as Divination. - {{Xanderen/signature}} 10:22, December 22, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
Does anyone actually have any reference to 3 hours being the length of the duel because it just sounds like a misconception.[[User:Freddy1428|Freddy1428]] ([[User talk:Freddy1428|talk]]) 19:18, December 30, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
My memory my be wrong, but wasn't it mentioned by Rita Skeeter at a point in DH, probably either in the second chapter or in the "life and lioes" chapter?--[[User:Rodolphus|Rodolphus]] ([[User talk:Rodolphus|talk]]) 19:22, December 30, 2016 (UTC)
 
 
I've checked both chapters I even did a search but I can't find it. If it's not in the books, movies or in an interview by JK Rowling (that I Know of) it just sounds like someone put it there be mistake and now it seems to have spread like wildfire.
 
 
== Main Image Vote==
 
{{archive
 
|result=[[:File:Grindelwald-Profile.jpg]] new main image.
 
|sig=-- <small><span style="border:2px solid #333333;">[[User:Seth Cooper|<font style="background:#FFFFFF;color:#333333;">&nbsp;'''Seth Cooper'''&nbsp;</font>]][[User talk:Seth Cooper|<font style="background:#333333;color:white;">&nbsp;'''owl&nbsp;post!'''</font>]]</span></small> 06:55, January 20, 2017 (UTC)
 
|discussion=
 
I feel that the main image is in dire need of updating... unfortunately viable replacements are few and far between! After scouring the web, I think that this image is the best we're going to get for the time being. - {{Xanderen/signature}} 10:09, January 12, 2017 (UTC)
 
<gallery>
 
GellertGrindelwaldHarryPotterPagetoScreen.JPG|Current Main Image.
 
Grindelwald-Profile.jpg|Proposed Main Image
 
</gallery>
 
===Current Main Image===
 
===Proposed Main Image===
 
#{{Xanderen/signature}} 15:40, January 12, 2017 (UTC)
 
#<s>[[User:Juraj103|Juraj103]] ([[User talk:Juraj103|talk]]) 20:32, January 12, 2017 (UTC)</s>
 
#[[User:Flabshoe1|Flabshoe1]] ([[User talk:Flabshoe1|talk]]) 03:04, January 14, 2017 (UTC)
 
#[[User:Zane T 69|Zane T 69]] ([[User talk:Zane T 69|talk]]) 03:30, January 14, 2017 (UTC)
 
#[[User:ProfessorTofty|ProfessorTofty]] ([[User talk:ProfessorTofty|talk]]) 04:15, January 14, 2017 (UTC)
 
#--[[User:Rodolphus|Rodolphus]] ([[User talk:Rodolphus|talk]]) 13:21, January 19, 2017 (UTC)
 
#-- [[User:Jack "BtR" Saxon|Saxon]] 02:25, January 20, 2017 (UTC)
 
 
===Comments===
 
Can an administrator please officiate? - {{Xanderen/signature}} 09:29, January 19, 2017 (UTC)
 
 
}}
 
}}
   
==New Main Image Vote==
+
== New article image ==
Since I uploaded HQ version of images for Grindelwald, I'm suggesting them as I think it is always better than a LQ one ^^ I'm also about to check LQ pics on multiple pages to put HQ ones so if someone has some suggestions [[User:Lady_Junky|Lady]] [[Message Wall:Lady_Junky|Junky]] 00:09, February 26, 2017 (UTC)
 
 
<gallery>
 
Grindelwald-Profile.jpg|Current image
 
Gellert_Grindelwald_FB1.png|Proposed image 1
 
Gellert Grindelwald 2 FB1.png|Proposed image 2
 
</gallery>
 
 
===Current image===
 
===Proposed image 1===
 
#[[User:Lady_Junky|Lady]] [[Message Wall:Lady_Junky|Junky]] 09:24, February 26, 2017 (UTC)
 
 
===Proposed image 2===
 
#[[User:Jack "BtR" Saxon|Saxon]] 11:34, February 26, 2017 (UTC)
 
#-- <small><span style="border:2px solid #333333;">[[User:Seth Cooper|<font style="background:#FFFFFF;color:#333333;">&nbsp;'''Seth Cooper'''&nbsp;</font>]][[User talk:Seth Cooper|<font style="background:#333333;color:white;">&nbsp;'''owl&nbsp;post!'''</font>]]</span></small> 20:30, March 1, 2017 (UTC)
 
 
===Comments===
 
We need more opinions please :) [[User:Lady_Junky|Lady]] [[Message Wall:Lady_Junky|Junky]] 12:48, March 3, 2017 (UTC)
 
 
==Is Grindelwald an Legilimens?==
 
I remember from the movie, Grindelgraves takes Credence into this dark alley, and goes like: "You’re upset. It’s your mother again. Somebody’s said something—what did they say? Tell me."
 
 
While obviously not the first time they meet, Gellert would've been aware he's mistreated by his mother, so that's not a big leap. But the way he says it - it doesn't sound as if he is ASKING if his mother has been upset with him or ASKING if anyone said something, it looks to me as if they got eye contact and Grindelgraves started to instantly spilling facts, listing the worries on Credence's mind. Grindelwald is certainly powerful enough to be as accomplished an Legilimens as he is an Occlumens, and as we said with Snape, Dumbledore, Voldemort - those skills, when honed like Snape did as opposed to be a natural gift like Queenie's skill, seems to kind of go hand in hand? Legilimency also is something that would be very useful for a wizard of Grindelwald's position and intent too. But - I don't know, what do you think? [[User:Ninclow|Ninclow]] ([[User talk:Ninclow|talk]]) 00:23, April 10, 2017 (UTC)
 
 
== Occupation ==
 
 
Should we really list all of Graves occupations? Identity theft does not make him something. For examle, pretending to be an Auror does not make him an Auror. This should be applied to Barty as well.--[[User:Rodolphus|Rodolphus]] ([[User talk:Rodolphus|talk]]) 13:24, April 20, 2017 (UTC)
 
 
:But during his time impersonating Graves he had to do the tasks for those jobs - attending meetings, carrying out orders, giving directives, etc. So for a short while wasn't he the Head of Magical Law Enforcement? For Barty, he spent an entire year teaching DADA to all grade-levels so that seems to me to clearly have been an occupation. Cheers --[[User:Ironyak1|Ironyak1]] ([[User talk:Ironyak1|talk]]) 14:55, April 21, 2017 (UTC)
 
 
==Grindelwald's duelling:==
 
Were Grindelgraves showing off when he fought those nineteen Aurors? I were just re-watching Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, and it struck me that - yeah, if Grindelwald could fend off nineteen Aurors like that, he probably could have defeated them quicker, seen how he dispatched of five Aurors with a single powerful curse. Here he was merely deflecting their spells, knocking one and one to the ground without even fatally injuring them. I got the impression that when he decided to engage them, he also decided to show off how much better he was than them, either waiting until he had closed in on them to really take in their shock and awe before delivering the coup de grace or possibly wanting to showcase his skills in the hopes that some MACUSA Aurors might be so amazed with the immensity of his powers that they decided they'd rather stand behind him than against him. I mean, look at that gif on the page.
 
 
The glee when he got the upper hand within seconds. We saw in the beginning of the movie he had no problem dispatching five Aurors with a single curse, and now he is taking them down one at the time. If he could shield himself from all the attackers and get in a spell to put any one of them out of the field of battle, logic dictates he should be equally able to get in a curse that would do a lot more damage. None of the Aurors he struck down were killed, he merely put them out of the fight. (Or, so it appeared on screen at least). If so, he decided not to kill. It looks like he is (possibly with some slight difficulty) toying with them. This is just an observation I made, but depending on what we see of Grindelwald's duels in the future, it might be relevant to the article later. What do you think? [[User:Ninclow|Ninclow]] ([[User talk:Ninclow|talk]]) 23:25, April 22, 2017 (UTC)
 
 
:Might be. Then again, the circumstances are entirely different so they might not be comparable: in the opening scene, he blasts the Aurors who are caught off-guard and instantly killed; in the movie's climax it's an actual duel, he is both attacking and parrying the Aurors' spells at the same time. While he might be toying the Aurors, he might just not be able to do both things at once (just like, probably, an expert fencer wouldn't be able to throw a grenade while facing 19 adversaries -- though he would have no problem throwing that same grenade if the adversaries didn't know where he was hiding). -- <small><span style="border:2px solid #333333;">[[User:Seth Cooper|<font style="background:#FFFFFF;color:#333333;">&nbsp;'''Seth Cooper'''&nbsp;</font>]][[User talk:Seth Cooper|<font style="background:#333333;color:white;">&nbsp;'''owl&nbsp;post!'''</font>]]</span></small> 18:45, January 21, 2018 (UTC)
 
 
:The way I remember it, he merely did the same thing as he did with Tina in ''their'' duel while holding back significantly more; namely walking purposefully towards his adversaries and deflecting their spells with ease as to cause them to doubt their ability to best him. It seems like elementary psychological warfare to me, a power play where Grindelwald apparently enjoys asserting his position of superior ability for his enemies to see before crushing them. Also, if Grindelwald could get in hits at one Auror at a time, what would've prevented him from summoning Fiendfyre against the Aurors long enough to cast a more destructive curse? (Like the one used to dispatch those five Aurors).
 
 
:Also, I think it was "strength in number" in the amount of spells thrown his way that would've potentially caused some difficulty deflecting them, rather than prevent him from "throwing a granade". After all, in fencing, people are swaggering back and forth, and the master fencer would've been surrounded and have to twist and turn to deflect the thrusts and jabs of his opponents from different directions, like Voldemort had to do when dueling McGonagall, Kignsley and Slughorn, all of whom were said to circle around him, requiring him to keep moving. Grindelwald faced off against many more adversaries, but all of them stood still and faced him, so I think that waving the wand in front of him to deflect their spells as he walked would've demanded less effort on his part than if his enemies had been moving targets. So I think that he ''could'' have cast a more destructive curse if he wanted to. [[User:Ninclow|Ninclow]] ([[User talk:Ninclow|talk]]) 07:58, January 22, 2018 (UTC)
 
 
==Wording==
 
So there have been a lot of talks about the "most powerful dark wizard" designation and not everybody is happy with current wording (its also not know if that's completely true as Rita Skeeter is a very sensational person) how about using something like "most powerful dark wizard of the early 20th century" for Gellert and "... of the late 20th century" for Tom? Its already like this on Dark Wizard page so I think it could be a solution until proper source showing who was more powerful appears. Thoughts? — [[User:Juraj103|Juraj103]] ([[User talk:Juraj103|talk]]) 08:56, March 17, 2018 (UTC)
 
 
 
 
The problem is that both Voldemort and Grindelwald is on pair with Dumbledore, meaning both of them wield magical ability comparable with one another. And if both Dark Wizards are equally powerful, even if there were to be "a shade" difference between them, the simplest thing would be to say that they both are, overall, held to be ''arguably'' the most powerful Dark Wizard of all time, and on the part of the articles covering their repective uprisings, denote that ''at that time'', they were considered as ''the'' most powerful. [[User:Ninclow|Ninclow]] ([[User talk:Ninclow|talk]]) 09:45, March 17, 2018 (UTC)
 
   
  +
[[File:Gellertgrindelwaldfortalk.png|thumb]]
==Duration of Grindelwald's friendship with Dumbledore==
 
I think someone should double-check the exact timepoint when Grindelwald met Dumbledore for the first time. If the duration of their friendship was for only one summer (AKA a couple months), that length seems remarkably short considering the depth of their friendship, and the magnitude of the impact that Grindelwald would have on Dumbledore for the rest of his life. [[User:AsianAvatar101|AsianAvatar101]] ([[User talk:AsianAvatar101|talk]]) 00:11, November 15, 2018 (UTC)
 
   
  +
I believe this image should be used for the page. Why? Because Johnny Depp portrayed Grindelwald in 2 of the 3 movies, whereas Mads only portrayed him in 1. Also, considering Johnny Depp was declared innocent in his trial against Amber Heard, there is no controversy surrounding him. {{unsigned|Trident0101|15:51, 25 February 2023 (UTC)}}
== Voldemort vs Grindelwald ==
 
   
  +
:As you can see above, the Mads Mikkelsen image was voted in by the community. It is for this reason that the image cannot be changed again without a new vote, opened by an administrator. But generally, we go with the most recent portrayal of a character for their infobox (or merely the best-known portrayal, as in Albus and Aberforth Dumbledore's cases). - <span style="border:2px solid #ff0000;">[[User:MrSiriusBlack|<font style="background:#FFff00;color:#ff0000;">&nbsp;'''MrSiriusBlack'''&nbsp;</font>]][[User talk:MrSiriusBlack|<font style="background:#ff0000;color:#ffff00;">&nbsp;'''Talk'''&nbsp;</font>]]</span> 18:26, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
No way is Voldemort superior than gellert Grindelwald
 
   
  +
::This is a very long issue, so I will be short. I believe there is nothing wrong with the current image of Grindelwald as portrayed by [[Mads Mikkelsen]] in {{SOD}}, since it is the most recent depiction of Grindelwald, without bias. We should be careful as not to display bias regarding Johnny Depp's personal life whilst editing the wiki. [[User:RedWizard98|RedWizard98]] ([[User talk:RedWizard98|talk]]) 18:30, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
[[User:-MissColeen-|-MissColeen-]] ([[User talk:-MissColeen-|talk]]) 14:58, May 8, 2019 (UTC)
 
   
  +
== Main Gellert Grindelwald Article Photo ==
   
  +
[[File:Gellert Grindelwald SODM 2.png|250px|thumb|right]]
  +
By all means, even though there was already a full poll and a new picture of Gellert Grindelwald chosen in October of 2022. I believe that, unless we can get a higher quality picture of the chosen, then I say for the sake of the quality and look of the article, this one should be the prodescssor as it is the finest, clearest picture. {{Unsigned|ShawONWIKI}}
   
  +
:::This may be only my opinion but debates over Grindelwald's profile image I find incredibly tiresome; the current one is acceptable so it can be kept. This could just open another can of worms over people's preferred depiction of Grindelwald. Also by now, you should sign all your talk page messages. [[User:RedWizard98|RedWizard98]] ([[User talk:RedWizard98|talk]]) 22:38, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
You're gonna need to give reasons to support that arguement if your gonna make it and you'll have to clarify what you mean by "superior".
 
   
  +
:As this was already one of the candidates in the last poll and didn't get chosen, I don't see the point of continuing this discussion, sorry. [[User:MalchonC|MalchonC]] ([[User talk:MalchonC|talk]]) 04:09, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
[[User:StargateFanBB|StargateFanBB]] ([[User talk:StargateFanBB|talk]]) 16:26, May 8, 2019 (UTC)
 
   
  +
::The vote above is fairly recent. There doesn't appear to be a change of opinion within the community, so there is no need to open a new vote. Best to leave this the way it is for now. - [[User:Kates39|Kates39]] ([[User talk:Kates39|talk]]) 17:07, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
==Re:Speculation==
 
Okay, so what specifically is the issue with my edit this time? [[User:Maester Martin|Maester Martin]] ([[User talk:Maester Martin|talk]]) 11:51, August 18, 2019 (UTC)
 

Latest revision as of 17:08, 13 July 2023

Archive
File-manager
The talk page has the following archives:

Seer in i infobox

I had removed the Seer from infobox because it was discussed on Talk: Seer, and the point was that seer is not a species, it's a genetic trait like the haor colours and based on this, I suggest it should be removed from all species fields.Rodolphus (talk) 17:33, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, we agreed that whilst being a Seer is an inherited magical talent, it is not related to physical biology. This tradition has followed suit on all other articles for Seer wizardkind. RedWizard98 (talk) 06:13, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Infobox image (new discussion)

Hello, as typically the infobox images for popular characters can sometimes result in disagreements and debates over which image to best use, should the changing of the old one (which was Depp as Grindelwald) be definitely changed to one of Mikkelsen as Grindelwald (the current actor who replaced Depp)? I can definitely understand that seen as though Depp has left the project and Mikkelsen has taken over the role of the character, that the infobox image should likely reflect this, although the old image was similarly high quality and was changed without a prior discussion. What do people think about it? RedWizard98 (talk) 15:52, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

All I have to say is I'm sad, like I knew that the image would be changed but I just- LIKE OMG WHYYYYYYYYY. I would also like to add that I think that it should've been put to a vote or something to change the image. User:I need to learn human interaction (talk) 01:48, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
I see. Maybe a vote regarding the infobox image is in order then, if people desire one. RedWizard98 (talk) 06:37, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
I agree it had to be changed to one of Mikkelsen because he will be the face of Grindelwald going forward. However, the image it changed to should have been decided by the community instead of just being updated. I do like the one it has right now, and hopefully the wiki will gain better images, like an official one, in the future.
It could be rather difficult however because the change of actor has caused controversy. Depp has lots of support, I loved that he was finally part of the Harry Potter universe and I am very perplexed by the choice to get rid of Depp because whyyyy! It's rather frustrating to have two different actors for the same character too. However, I do concede it does need to be updated.
If enough people want a vote for Depp or Mikkelsen, or for a new one of Grindelwald in Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore, then it should happen. But until then, I think it's best to just keep everything the same. - Kates39 (talk) 17:31, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
While I wish Depp hadn't been fired under the circumstances he was, I feel it would be a poor decision to allow Depp's portrayal of Grindelwald be the infobox image if Mikkelsen replaces him for the rest of the series. If anything, I'd vote for incorporating what other wikis use and add a tabbed gallery function to the infobox images so that both Depp's and Mikkelse's portrayals could be used simultaneously. Garr9988 (talk) 17:37, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
Since Mikkelsen has replaced Depp in the role, I too agree that an image of him should be used instead, as the wiki has to use up to date portrayals of characters, regardless of what people think about the casting controversy. RedWizard98 (talk) 18:19, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Opening quotation

What should the opening quotation be for this article, below the infobox? Often there is disagreement with what one to use, which is the Severus Snape article uses a custom display template which contains several different quotes which change each time the page is opened fresh. I don't think however we should discard any quotes from old sources in the process of adding new ones from Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore, that isn't needed or desirable in my opinion, since we would be discarding perfectly good content on the wiki and losing information, instead of simply adding information to it.

I personally like the current quotation from Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald - The Original Screenplay, since it explains his extreme wizarding supremacy ideology, and also because I think Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald - The Original Screenplay had the most focus on Grindelwald as a story. What do others think? RedWizard98 (talk) 18:32, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

I like the opening quotation too. I think Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald - The Original Screenplay has a better one. I like the one where he says: "Magic blooms only in rare souls. It is granted to those who live for higher things. Oh, and what a world we could make, for all for humanity. We who live for freedom, for truth - and for love". I think having a custom template for the opening quote so it will change each time you click on the page could be a good solution. - Kates39 (talk) 18:45, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

New main image

Any objections to changing the main image to this one? - Xanderen signature 10:51, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Grindelwald-SoD-Profile
Hmm. If there was a version of that with no background at all, rather than a white background, it could be good. Right now it looks like the background is halfway through swallowing him lol. -  MrSiriusBlack  Talk  12:29, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
question. Did you get a pdf version of the book? Can I get a copy? SeichanGrey (talk) 14:03, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Personally I don't like images with their backgrounds removed and I don't think this to images is particularly necessary, as I don't think they look natural since their original backgrounds have been removed. I would much prefer an actual film screenshot like the one being used now or even one with an original background (without any OOU logos). I personally am voting against this proposed image being used in the infobox. RedWizard98 (talk) 18:01, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
I prefer images which have a background too. I don't think it's necessary to erase it. I prefer the one being used now, which I think has higher quality and a better background. I would consider a high standard image if it had an original background like described above. - Kates39 (talk) 22:04, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
so "higher" quality = image with background, and "inferior quality" is an image without it? correct me if I'm wrong. SeichanGrey (talk) 22:21, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
Not necessarily. There are plenty of high quality images without a background. I just think the one of Grindelwald with a background looks better than the one proposed. - Kates39 (talk) 22:34, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Seconded. WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 18:46, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Pure-blood just wizarding supremacy

Hi, following his comments in Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore, would anyone here consider him also a pure-blood supremacist, or just a wizarding supremacist? I'm torn; for example in the film, he acknowledges Kama's pure-blood heritage as being a good qualification for his movement, and denounces the relationship between Queenie and Jacob as causing bloodline pollution, and even seems to imply Muggles reeked a "stench". However, this could all just be standard anti-Muggle sentiment, as he never expressed any exact beliefs about blood purity, nor has he not yet denounced Muggle-borns. Thoughts? RedWizard98 (talk) 17:56, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

  • It's also a bit confusing since he had previously advocated for free love to get Queenie on his side. I think some of that sudden change was from Jacob's attempt on his life and Queenie turning on him.--WarGrowlmon18 (talk) 18:00, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
Should we keep the category then? Personally I think he just hated Muggles, which is odd, considering he preached he did not actually hate them in Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald. He probably feared Muggles and wizards breeding would make less wizards. RedWizard98 (talk) 18:01, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
"This is the muggle that tried to kill me. A muggle who would marry a witch... A blasphemous union, that only serves to dilute our bloodlines. Make us weaker, make us lesser. Like his kind."
— Gellert Grindelwald[src]
Seems pretty clear to me. He considers wizards with mixed muggle-magic parentage to be "lesser". - Xanderen signature 18:05, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Since Rowling has somehow managed to get the character motivations of one of the fictional persons she herself created wrong, I suggest we keep it the way it is for the time being, as the movie is in direct conflict with pretty much every and all depictions of Gellert Grindelwald and/or his ideology ever. He literally said in the last movie that Muggles were NOT lesser, so I for one is inclined to think he was just having a bad day or something. WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 18:12, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

He was just playing Queenie. He wanted her on his side, so he made out that he was pro-muggle. He admitted in private (in the same movie) that the only muggles that will survive his takeover of the world will be slaves (beasts of burden). His thoughts about blood purity have never been stated before now so there is no contradiction. - Xanderen signature 18:17, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Actually, that is the contradiction. The reason why Grindelwald's thoughts about blood purity have never been stated before is because he's never had any thoughts on blood purity before, because he's a wizarding supremacist. The words Mikkelsen was scripted to recite, comes completely out of nowhere and is not consistent with how Grindelwald has been presented anywhere in canon before this point, so I repeat, we should swait with changing too much until we know more. WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 18:51, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Who says he's never had any thoughts on blood purity before? I think you're imposing your own, somewhat rose-tinted view of the character into canon. Grindelwald's words in SoD are consistent with his depiction in CoG - a master manipulator, and seasoned liar. - Xanderen signature 19:01, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
Per Canon, "if J.K. Rowling contradicts herself, the newest source is to be taken as the "most" canon". -  MrSiriusBlack  Talk  23:13, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Xanderen:

That wouldn't be a who, that would be a what. And what that is would be any and all depictions of Gellert Grindelwald given to date. Fictional characters don't actually exist and consequently cannot think and feel anything; they're abstract concepts that exists in the mind and on the pages on a screenplay people has been paid to act out. Unless Grindelwald has been previously depicted to have thoughts on pure-blood supremacy, he hasn't had any previously, that is how storytelling works. So no, it's not a matter of "my view" on Grindelwald, "rose-tinted" or otherwise, it's a matter of how the character has been objectively presented from 2007 onwards.
The main distinction between Grindelwald and Voldemort has always been that whilst The Dark Lord had ventured beyond the realms of what we might call 'usual evil', Grindelwald hadn't. By contrast, he was supposed to actually believe in his own cause and have thought that what he did was in fact for The Greater Good, but taken his ideologies too far. Look at when he "broke character" as Graves and spoke to the Aurors in the first movie. THAT is Grindelwald. A man who sounded perfectly reasonable on paper, but whose means were so unreasonable that he faced opposition from his own kind. He was never supposed to be this irredeemable piece of garbage that killed indiscriminately and completely lacked the degree of conscience required to feel subsequent remorse whilst locked up in Nurmengard. He was meant to be a man whom Albus Dumbledore could actually fall in love with. If we disregard Grindelwald's previously established character traits and motivations, we are effectively saying that Dumbledore fell in love with Voldemort.

Sirius:

Unless Rowling comes out with an actual statement, at best, you could say that Grindelwald has contradicted himself on paper/screen. The prudent thing to do would be not to jump to conclusions until we know how all of this actually pans out. For all we know, it could be revealed in the next movie that Grindelwald described Muggles as "lesser" in this context because he happened to know there were more pure-blood supremacists among those of his followers present in Buhtan than it had been in Paris, and that he was merely catering to the crowds to muster support for the election. WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 07:55, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 07:55, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
I think you're confusing who Grindelwald really is with who you've decided he is. He's not Voldemort, that's true. There was more humanity in him than that (Rowling still acknowledges that he was a sociopath, however). He never ventured into the most unnatural realms of dark magic to create a Horcrux, although he certainly killed enough people. And there are times when he seems unnerved by his own actions; the murder of the baby seems to rattle him, and he's visibly upset when he kills the Qilin... however he still goes through with these deeds... as Dumbledore himself once put it "It is our choices that determine who we truly are".
Grindelwald has been committing acts of mass slaughter since before the first FB film, so yes he does kill indiscriminately. In CoG he refers to muggles as "beasts of burden", in SoD he calls them "animals". In both films he makes comments about "muggle stench". In CoG Theseus says that Grindelwald has been "rallying the pure-bloods". None of this is inconsistent with what Grindelwald says in SoD, so there is no contradiction.
As you say, he's a fictional character, and it's for Rowling to decide what his thoughts/feelings/motivations are, not us. She's made it very clear that he does hold pure-blood supremist views.. whether he would imprison/kill muggleborns or not is another question (probably not), but he did believe in the superiority of pure-bloods. And that is the crux of the matter. - Xanderen signature 09:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

And I think, with all due respect, that you have not been paying proper attention. And I think that if the community wants to act on this out-of-nowhere and out-of-character declaration on Grindelwald's part in isolation of everything else, then go ahead, I can't stop you. WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 11:41, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

"Did I know, in my heart of hearts, what Gellert Grindelwald was? I think I did, but I closed my eyes."
— Albus Dumbledore[src]
I'm afraid you're the one who hasn't been paying proper attention. You've bought into the lie that Grindelwald was some sort of misunderstood anti-hero, trying to create a better world using extreme/misguided methods. Dumbledore fell for it, Queenie fell for it, Credence fell for it... but they all woke up, and realised that they been deceived. - Xanderen signature 12:35, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
"Unless Rowling comes out with an actual statement, at best, you could say that Grindelwald has contradicted himself on paper/screen."
I mean you can say that all you want but that's not how the canon policy works lmao. Rowling wrote both films. Rowling contradicted herself. -  MrSiriusBlack  Talk  18:47, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
I don't think Rowling has necessarily contradicted herself. She has portrayed Grindelwald like a skilled manipulator who knows how to hoodwink people, and he tells people what they want to hear so they will offer their support to him. It does make sense that a man who thinks wizardkind are better than the non-magic could put those with less muggle blood in higher esteem. I will admit to being surprised when he started showing clear blood prejudice. However, he knows how to deceive people and until Rowling says he's lying, Grindelwald has shown that he favours pure-bloods. - Kates39 (talk) 19:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Xanderen:

Way to take Dumbledore's quote out of context, X.

MrSiriusBlack: Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat?

Kates39: If Grindelwald is a skilled manipulator who knows how to hoodwink people, and who tells people what they want to hear so they will offer their support to him, then why are you saying that Grindelwald has shown that he favours pure-bloods? Wouldn't it in that case be more accurate to say that he claimed to favour pure-blood in the present company? WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 22:33, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

This is my first time commenting on the Harry Potter talk page. I just wanted to add on Grindelwald's wizarding supremacy. In the movie "Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald" after Grindelwald takes over the house on Boulevard Haussmann Les Grand Magasins De Paris, Vinda Rosier comments about killing all the non-magical people, muggles, in the world to which Grindelwald replies, "Not all of them, not all. We're not merciless. The beasts of burden will always be necessary." This demonstrates that Grindelwald is condescending towards non-magical people and looks down on them, viewing them to be subservient to wizards and witches. Zachary1969 (talk) 09:51, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Quotation template

Going to strongly suggest using a template which contains a randomised opening quotation for the this article. There was no justification or logical reason to remove the old opening quotation from Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald - The Original Screenplay by in my view quite recklessly and carelessly removing encyclopaedic, tier-one canon content from the article just to replace it with a new one from Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore, which is also technically only tier-two at this point, without the screenplay. The Snape one uses a template which shows a randomised template and I see that as a useful method of avoiding edit warring and future changes to his quotation without any actual discussion being made. Thanks. RedWizard98 (talk) 18:39, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

I agree. I will try to set one up tonight or tomorrow. I think it has been talked in the past too. There are lots of acceptable quotes for Grindelwald. I think it could be good to have a few possible quotes for the page to show. - Kates39 (talk) 19:49, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
I've created the template {{GrindelwaldRandomQuote}} if anyone would like to add to it. - Kates39 (talk) 20:36, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
That's amazing! We should probably make more of them. RedWizard98 (talk) 21:17, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Information image

What do you say about the attached image as an information image?

Please reply quickly :)

Gellert Grindelwald1

Talisrael (talk) 21:05, 14 July 2022 (UTC)talisraelTalisrael (talk) 21:05, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

I would support changing the image to this one, as the current one constantly gives me the feeling that Grindelwald was amputated (arm sticked out but no hand shown)… no offense. MalchonC (talk) 16:39, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

I support changing the photo, a photo that was "taken in a studio" is better in my opinion than a photo cut from the film.


Talisrael (talk) 20:40, 23 August 2022 (UTC)talisraelTalisrael (talk) 20:40, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Personally I would not support changing the image, and what you are referring to is an "infobox". RedWizard98 (talk) 21:09, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
I support changing the image to the one proposed here. It was always my view that the current one was only ever a provisional one anyway, while we awaited official promo images such as this. -  MrSiriusBlack  Talk  21:11, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Although I would say the current one is far superior to a generic promo image on a grey background. RedWizard98 (talk) 07:55, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

I support switching the image as well. WeaseleyIsOurKing89 (talk) 09:09, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

What do you say about replacing the current image with the attached image? The proposed image is of higher quality and in my opinion also more beautiful, what do you think?

Talisrael (talk) 09:37, 28 September 2022 (UTC)talisraelTalisrael (talk) 09:37, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Main Image Vote post SOD

New article image

Gellertgrindelwaldfortalk

I believe this image should be used for the page. Why? Because Johnny Depp portrayed Grindelwald in 2 of the 3 movies, whereas Mads only portrayed him in 1. Also, considering Johnny Depp was declared innocent in his trial against Amber Heard, there is no controversy surrounding him. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Trident0101 (talkcontribs) 15:51, 25 February 2023 (UTC).

As you can see above, the Mads Mikkelsen image was voted in by the community. It is for this reason that the image cannot be changed again without a new vote, opened by an administrator. But generally, we go with the most recent portrayal of a character for their infobox (or merely the best-known portrayal, as in Albus and Aberforth Dumbledore's cases). -  MrSiriusBlack  Talk  18:26, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
This is a very long issue, so I will be short. I believe there is nothing wrong with the current image of Grindelwald as portrayed by Mads Mikkelsen in Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore, since it is the most recent depiction of Grindelwald, without bias. We should be careful as not to display bias regarding Johnny Depp's personal life whilst editing the wiki. RedWizard98 (talk) 18:30, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Main Gellert Grindelwald Article Photo

Gellert Grindelwald SODM 2

By all means, even though there was already a full poll and a new picture of Gellert Grindelwald chosen in October of 2022. I believe that, unless we can get a higher quality picture of the chosen, then I say for the sake of the quality and look of the article, this one should be the prodescssor as it is the finest, clearest picture. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ShawONWIKI (talkcontribs).

This may be only my opinion but debates over Grindelwald's profile image I find incredibly tiresome; the current one is acceptable so it can be kept. This could just open another can of worms over people's preferred depiction of Grindelwald. Also by now, you should sign all your talk page messages. RedWizard98 (talk) 22:38, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
As this was already one of the candidates in the last poll and didn't get chosen, I don't see the point of continuing this discussion, sorry. MalchonC (talk) 04:09, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
The vote above is fairly recent. There doesn't appear to be a change of opinion within the community, so there is no need to open a new vote. Best to leave this the way it is for now. - Kates39 (talk) 17:07, 13 July 2023 (UTC)