|
Deleted twice as "too generic"... but why so? We have pages for fire and such, and I think "water" is even mentioned as an ingredient in potions. Thoughts? ProfessorTofty (talk) 23:21, February 2, 2013 (UTC)
- I agree, water should definitely be included for the reasoning listed above. I would have made the page but I'm worried I'll do a lousy job of it. --Hunnie Bunn (Owl me!) 23:36, February 2, 2013 (UTC)
- Argument is correct. I agree with a page about "Water". Harry granger Talk contribs 23:54, February 2, 2013 (UTC)
Done ProfessorTofty (talk) 02:32, February 4, 2013 (UTC)
I don't agree with this page[]
Master kitty rules! 00:39, July 5, 2020 (UTC)
- What do you mean? Is there something you find to be incorrect? -- Harrypotterexpert101 Talk
00:48, July 5, 2020 (UTC) - i mean whats the point of this page? I think it's very dumb.
- Masterkitty5450 23:43, July 11, 2020 (UTC)
- This article is in itself notable, despite your objection, because water does have some significance in the HP universe. They are spells and other forms of magic which involve around water, along with its general usage in potions, water borne magical creatures, notable bodies of water, etc. Is there anything in particular you dislike about this article, rather than simply dismissing it as "dumb"?--RedWizard98 (talk) 01:27, July 12, 2020 (UTC)