According to the Chocolate Frog Cards page, his name is "Auroleus Phillipus Theophrastus Bombastus von Hohenheim"; should this page be renamed or that unsourced fact be removed? --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 04:32, May 28, 2013 (UTC)

If the name is given on a canon Harry Potter-related site then it's a canon name. But I think the article overall-name should only be called "Auroleus von Hohenheim" as we go for using only first- and surnames in article-names.
Or is it "Phillipus von Hohenheim"? --DCLM (talk) 17:21, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
Since Paracelsis is a real historical figure, whose birth name can be verified with historians, which I just did by going to the site for the European Graduate School to check, his correct name should be: "Theophrastus Phillippus Aureolus Bombastus von Hohenheim." A link to article can be found [here] I would have used my own college campuses articles database as a reference, as those always have full bibliographies, but unfortunately that database is password protected to an extent that I can't simply link its articles unless the person I am linking them to has a password for the database as well. Cledwin83 (talk) 01:41, April 4, 2015 (UTC)

Just checked the site. It appears to both have minor spelling-mistakes here and there, and to be American-based. Furthermore, I don't actually think it's run by canon sources. Also the piece with Paracelsus says: "A wizard depicted on a wizard trading card . His real name was Theophrastus Bombastus von Hohenheim." No "Phillipus" or "Aureolus" was mentioned. If a real person is mentioned in Harry Potter-universe we usually go by the characters name inside the universe, no matter what his real name is. We also, as mentioned before, usually only go for first name and surname as main article-name. --DCLM (talk) 17:42, June 9, 2013 (UTC)

Well, all I did was add the "Phillipus Auroleus" and that's only because this page says so; never having seen the Paracelsus card myself, I wasn't able to verify it. However, two trusted users use the site as canon, with 1337star changing the name of this article to "Theophrastus Bombastus von Hohenheim" due to it. --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 18:00, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
Just saying what my experience is. But I can say this; other articles cannot be used to canonicate some articles, having argued about this before myself. --DCLM (talk) 18:44, June 9, 2013 (UTC)
You raise valid points; thanks for the help. --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 18:49, June 9, 2013 (UTC)

Discovered Parseltongue?

Paracelsus is known to have been born in the year 1493. This is a historical FACT. According to what I have read in the novels, Salazar Slytherin was born sometime before the year 1000 because Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry was known to have been founded at that point. It is also a known fact, according to the lore of this series that Salazar Slytherin was a Parseltongue. It was also my understanding that Parseltongue was a primarily inherited trait, meaning that it was something that ones genes determined if you had the ability to use or not. Thus it seems unlikely that some Witch or Wizard could simply "discover" it. It also appears that the reference to Paracelsus discovering Parseltongue was made in the Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone Video Game (PC Version). Thus I am wondering exactly how canonical that reference actually is? Cledwin83 (talk) 01:35, April 4, 2015 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.