Candidates for deletion discussion
The only reason that someone haven't bothered to make an article for the two articles you mentioned is - well, because no one have bothered too. I mean, what is the more relevant article, thinking big scale on a Harry Potter Directory? The Head of MLE, or the Head of MLE's Office? I think we have the latter. :P Maester Martin (talk) 10:01, June 9, 2018 (UTC)
- You've made your point, now we just need to wait for to other editors to settle it.
- --Sammm✦✧(talk) 10:17, June 9, 2018 (UTC)
- Response retrieved from Category talk:Candidates for deletion#Head Curse-Breaker discussion
- Hi there! I want to first apologize because I full-heartedly agreed that "we don't have a page for Head Auror" should be used as an acceptable argument. That was actually not the main reason I disagreed with the page creation, but as an add-on, and somehow, please really excuse me that during the moment of addle-brain, with the lack off sleep, for some reason my speech seemed to keep going back to where it wasn't important. For that, I really am sorry!
- Moving on. I need to thank you for bringing up the MACUSA in the last sentence. While I'm not uninterested, sans HM, I don't constantly keep track of the newer content of the wizarding world, so again, thank you, thank you, THANK YOU! I am now sold on keeping the page. Since User evilquoll did not state to vote for, and I was the only one against, I'll remove the tag.
- Before that, I do want to explain a little more; as of HMy4 middle of ch2, the only known fact about Head Curse-Breaker, is that it is a position in Gringotts Wizarding Bank, and at least by 1987, the position is held by Patricia Rakepick. I did not think the above, which could barely be counted as a short paragraph, warrants its own page. But as I said, you've brought a valid point about short pages. Chief of Staff, Captain of Aurors, and Chief Auror are some good example of keeping the speculation to the minimum, as in within one sentence in a fairly short paragraph.
- I also want to clarify, personally, when I say "speculate", I have no negative connotation attached to it, and I'm sorry if it comes across that way. I use that word as a synonym for assume, presume, and surmise, and anything that's in theory and has not been outright confirmed. Speculations could eventually turn out to be correct, if factual source is ever revealed, but until then, they are just speculations, not confirmed fact. I didn't say they are wrong; they could be right (just as easily as they could be wrong) but they aren't confirmed.--Sammm✦✧(talk) 03:08, June 10, 2018 (UTC)
Hello! First off, there is no need to apologize. We're good. ^^
That being said, I believe we must reach some kind of consensus on the use of the word "speculation". I have browsed the wiki, and on some discussion pages, it sounds like speculation is "the self-evident is not accepted as being the case lest Rowling or other liabe canon sources." It's almost as if someone said they were a waiter at a wizarding resturant, we can't say for sure if they are taking orders and serving food to people because we haven't seen it or it haven't been mentioned by anyone. And I am not pinning this on you, Sammm, at all, but we know what a Curse-Breaker is, and Head, in this context, it means to be "be in the leading position on" something. So - yeah, Head Curse-Breaker is definitively the one the Curse-Breakers reports to. Maester Martin (talk) 11:12, June 11, 2018 (UTC)
- Retrieved from edit summary
You've removed actual article format that is needed (most importantly, the spoiler tag, appearance and notes and references sections. please do not do it again. I've added some of the phrases that you seemed to really wanted to keep.--Sammm✦✧
Sorry about that. I had two windows open, and I modified my original version of the article and copied and pasted it into the new version, but I must have saved the wrong one. Then RL caught up to me, and I had to close the laptop before I could notice the blunder. ^^' Maester Martin (talk) 18:19, June 11, 2018 (UTC)
- No worries. Although I'ma go in and do some minor tweaks... mainly the "who enjoys" part. To my embarrassment, I actually had to double check. I'm assuming you used the word "enjoy" with the meaning of "possess and benefit from." But upon the first couple of reads, I keep on thinking about "take delight or pleasure in;" I hope it's okay for me rephrase it in a way to avoid misleading people who (like me Orz) don't have a broad vocabulary. Hope that's acceptable D;
- Also, I hope moving some observation to a BTS section could be considered. I love how you provided the info on Rakepick's last location, but we don't know if she's doing it on her own? It's a possibility, but who knows? She could have been there on Gringotts' behalf, just the same as she could have not.--Sammm✦✧(talk) 18:49, June 11, 2018 (UTC)
First off, yes, I mean it as "possess or benefit from", but to be fair, I copied and pasted that from the Head of Herbology article out of laziness. :P
And yes, I mean - if you feel like "enjoy" is too dubious a description, feel free to tweak it. ;-)
Dumbledore said that she was exploring the ruins, not "her team". Most likely, she either she examined them herself, just like she deals with the Cursed Vaults on her own, or she had a team and spearheaded the operation. Regardless, from what we see from her character, I can't imagine Rakepick would be content merely delegating such work to a subordinate and watch them have all the fun. Remember when she taught Jacob's sibling the Shield Charm in Year 4, Chapter 2? "You should know this about me that unless it is deadly, it simply does not hold my interest". In addittion to coming off as the sort of person who gives every impression of preferring to be in the thick of the action while bossing people around toppled with the fact that being a Curse-Breaker is a very active and 'physical' profession, with much spellwork and little paperwork, I believe I stand on reasonably solid ground, logically speaking. Maester Martin (talk) 19:05, June 11, 2018 (UTC)