I'm pretty much inactive right now. I'll still respond to messages though.
Hello. I'm Oerk. Yes it's a terrible name. No I don't know where I got it. I am an avid Harry Potter fan if for some reason you haven't figured that out yet. I very much enjoy the books the most, and I long for a very well polished Hogwarts-based video game that is actually fun. Also, I would absolutely love for a video game that would include every single spell imaginable, and interact in unique ways that no other game has and not just be static effects or beams connecting. Imagine it. Imagine the strategies It would be incredible. Alas, that is still only a pipe dream. In the meantime, this wiki will do nicely.
What are some interesting things? Bluebell Flames of course. Verdimillious. The Laws of Magic as we know it. And of course, who could forget the Confuse Lunch combo? The answer is everyone. Everyone could forgot about the Confuse Lunch combo. Worst combo ever.
Forum:Verb tense policy -- Right now, the verb tense policy is being sorely abused. That policy was made it so that the biographies of characters and histories of events would be read like a historical account, which is reasonable. However, now it's mistakenly being applied to every in-universe article without any justification except for "the policy says so." That is not a good reason. This is not a long time ago in a galaxy far far away. In-universe, magic things are still happening. Events or people that have occurred previously in the time line, may be described as happening in the past. It should not apply to things like spells, potions, creatures that still exist, etc. In-universe, magic things still exist. Want more proof? Fantastic Beasts (the book) and Writing by JK Rowling on Pottermore, AND Wonderbook, AND Book of Potions use present tense, except for historical accounts. Past tense should be used on articles for characters' biographies, and past events only.
This user has made 8,240 edits on the Harry Potter Wiki.
I created the Ingredient Infobox to organize the plethora of articles on potion ingredients that tend to follow patterns. Here's how to apply the infobox:
Is the object ONLY a potion ingredient? If so, then use.
Is the object a potion ingredient, but also used in non-foodstuffs? (e.g. bezoars, unicorn hair) Then use.
Is the object consumed or used like a potion but not explicitly a potion? (e.g. Re'em blood) Then use.
Is the object a plant? Don't use
Is the object an animal? Don't use
Is the object DERIVED from a plant or animal? Then use.
Is the object used in foodstuffs, and isn't a plant or animal? I suppose it depends on whether or not it is used primarily in foodstuffs. If there are 5 potion articles that use, say for example, butterscotch, but only 1 foodstuff article that uses butterscotch, then I would use the ingredient infobox. If there are 5 foodstuff articles that used butterscotch, but only 1 potion article that uses butterscotch, I would use the food infobox.
Lastly, don't put "potion-making" under uses. If the infobox is being used, it's already assumed to be used in potions. Usage is for the SPECIFIC potions it is used in, or any other use if it has been mentioned in canon.
Removed the generic terms that used the Real World Subject Template, otherwise literally everything that isn't unique to the Harry Potter universe would fall under it. It should be used for real world proper nouns that exist in-universe
What is the incantation for Bluebell flames? I'd love need to know. It's made further messier, because J.K. Rowling on her old site that Lacarnum Inflamari was used to replace Incendio, which is odd, because Lacarnum Inflamari was used to light Snape's robe on fire in the film, and Bluebell flames was used in the books. This seems to confirm that Incendio is the incantation for Bluebell flames. The same thing happens in the video games; Incendio is the incantation for Bluebell flames for many of the games. However, it's all really unclear.
Wiggenweld potion is just Moly, Dittany, Wiggentree bark, and Flobberworm Mucus. Other ingredients are bogus. Here's why: "Wiggen" is in the name, hence Wiggentree bark. Moly and Dittany are used for stopping dark enchantments and healing. Flobberworm mucus is just a potion thickener. Ok, you know what, this is starting to sound like less and less I have no proof. Maybe someday I'll squeeze it into the article. Edit; done. That page is so messy that I can just add them into the list with no problem, because there's already so many conflicting things in all the potion articles.
Protego Diabolica is a curse. I don't know why it's up in the air, it's so ridiculously obvious. It murders multiple people. It matches Rowling's definition perfectly. Things have been inferred from existing evidence without being explicitly said when there's no other option on this wiki before. It's the same for Wikipedia.
The Duo, Tria, and Maxima modified versions of spells don't deserve their own articles. They're just specifying the power of the spell. They're not separate. Ideally, there would be sections for each variation. This one is probably the stretchiest of them all. I say this because there exist too many orphaned articles that are Uno or Duo variations, and they are just plain sad to read.
Steleus is actually Steneus. This aligns with the etymology.
Cave inimicum merely alerts the caster when they are alerted of another's presence. This is supplanted by the quote, and the etymology.
The unresolved capitalisation of Tracking Spell. I can't even say anything that adequately demonstrates my disappointment about this.
Titling. Why have an article titled "Arthur" when literally everyone knows them as "King Arthur"? There's no point. On Wikipedia they use the article title that it is most often known by. Why is the Sir left out of knight's names? Why is the full name given when they are more commonly known by their nickname? It's high time this gets addressed (and fixed). Want proof? Wikipedia uses it, because it's easier to find subjects that way.
Undetectable Extension Charm should be renamed to Extension Charm. It's referred to in Pottermore, and Undectable was just descriptive word for the Extension Charm, as in, "this Extension Charm can't be found out." Edit; done
Add more creatures to the countries, (e.g. European creatures to the corresponding regions)
Overeager use of past-tense. I will not rest until it is made more reasonable.
The Gilderoy Lockhart Skills & Abilities nonsense. Pottermore and the books literally state that "The only spell for which he had real ability was the Memory Charm," which is as unambigious as you can get. This is a case of people being stubborn and resistant to change, holding onto the old ways and wanting their work to be noticed, when they can't accept the fact that they're only polishing falsehoods, and need to be restarted from scratch. I can't stand when bureaucracy gets in the way of the facts, especially when they are so clear cut as this.
*Disclosure: Some of the links above are affiliate links, meaning, at no additional cost to you, Fandom will earn a commission if you click through and make a purchase. Community content is available under CC-BY-SA
unless otherwise noted.
Fandom may earn an affiliate commission on sales made from links on this page.